Cross-sectional survey explores how carbon anxiety and regulatory pressure influence green behavior in employees, suggesting enhanced environmental commitments can drive action.
The low-carbon transition depends not only on technologies and regulation, but also on how employees interpret and enact organizational environmental commitments. This study examines whether carbon anxiety—employees’ perception of organization-focused uncertainty and insufficient preparedness regarding carbon accounting, emissions reduction, reporting, and operational adaptation—and perceived regulatory pressure are associated with employee green behavior (EGB) through psychological contract fulfillment for the environment (PCFE), and whether pro-environmental consciousness strengthens the PCFE–EGB association. Using a cross-sectional computer-assisted web interview survey of 857 employees in Poland’s energy sector, the proposed second-stage moderated mediation model was tested with structural equation modeling and bootstrap analysis. Carbon anxiety and regulatory pressure were positively associated with psychological contract fulfillment for the environment, which was positively associated with employee green behavior. Pro-environmental consciousness strengthened the psychological contract fulfillment for the environment–behavior relationship, and both conditional indirect associations increased at higher pro-environmental consciousness levels. The model explained 33.2% of the variance in psychological contract fulfillment for the environment and 37.1% in employee green behavior; the main pattern remained stable across robustness and subsector analyses. The observed associations support psychological contract fulfillment for the environment as a theoretically specified relational mechanism linking transition pressures with the employee-level implementation of decarbonization. Given the cross-sectional design, the results indicate associations rather than causal effects. Organizations should translate transition pressures into credible environmental commitments, workforce capabilities, transparent communication, and meaningful employee participation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rogozińska‐Pawełczyk et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: