How Voters Handle Trade-Offs: The Issue of Climate in the Wealthy Norway

Politics involves navigating trade-offs between competing objectives on complex issues, with climate change being a prominent example. Often, climate policy entails a trade-off between pursuing a green transition and maintaining economic growth and welfare. For voters, such trade-offs pose a challenge of political representation, as party choices require selecting representatives who bundle and prioritise competing objectives. This study examines how voters experience and handle such trade-offs, focusing on attitudinal and voting ambivalence, and on responses through prioritisation, information-seeking, or withdrawal. Drawing on qualitative data from open-ended election diaries collected during the 2021 Norwegian parliamentary campaign, the analysis provides insight into voters’ reflections before voting. The findings show that while some voters hold settled positions, many recognise competing considerations and experience ambivalence. Voters respond in different ways: some resolve it by prioritising one concern over another, others engage in information-seeking and reflection, while a smaller group remains unable to reach a clear decision. These findings suggest that ambivalence does not necessarily lead to disengagement. Rather, it may stimulate engagement and deliberation, contributing to reflective decision-making. The study offers a nuanced understanding of how voters navigate issue trade-offs and highlights the importance of integrating attitudinal and behavioural dimensions of voter behaviour.