TY - JOUR

T1 - A Meta-Analysis of Workplace Interventions for Pro-Environmental Behaviour

AU - Brack, Franziska

AU - Petrowsky, Hannes

AU - Hörisch, Jacob

AU - Loschelder, David D.

PY - 2025/6/17

Y1 - 2025/6/17

N2 - Objective: This meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness of workplace interventions in promoting pro-environmental behaviour and examines potential moderating factors.Methods: We synthesises 308 effects from 45 studies using random-effects meta-analytic models, with robust variance estimation to account for dependencies and high heterogeneity. Moderation analyses were conducted to assess the influence of intervention types (e.g., information provision, personalised intervention, collective framing).Results: Workplace interventions demonstrated a significant small-to-moderate positive effect on pr-environmental behaviour (Hedges´g=0.347, p<.001). No evidence of publication bias was found, and the effect remained robust after bias-correction and outlier exclusion. However, no significant moderation effects were detected, and substantial heterogeneity indicates considerable variability across studies.Conclusion: While this meta-analysis provides robust evidence for the effectiveness of workplace interventions, the variability in outcomes calls for further investigation into potential moderators. A detailed discussion of these findings and their implications for theory and practice will follow.

AB - Objective: This meta-analysis evaluates the effectiveness of workplace interventions in promoting pro-environmental behaviour and examines potential moderating factors.Methods: We synthesises 308 effects from 45 studies using random-effects meta-analytic models, with robust variance estimation to account for dependencies and high heterogeneity. Moderation analyses were conducted to assess the influence of intervention types (e.g., information provision, personalised intervention, collective framing).Results: Workplace interventions demonstrated a significant small-to-moderate positive effect on pr-environmental behaviour (Hedges´g=0.347, p<.001). No evidence of publication bias was found, and the effect remained robust after bias-correction and outlier exclusion. However, no significant moderation effects were detected, and substantial heterogeneity indicates considerable variability across studies.Conclusion: While this meta-analysis provides robust evidence for the effectiveness of workplace interventions, the variability in outcomes calls for further investigation into potential moderators. A detailed discussion of these findings and their implications for theory and practice will follow.

U2 - 10.5465/AMPRQC.2025.24077abstract

DO - 10.5465/AMPRQC.2025.24077abstract

M3 - Conference article in journal

VL - 2025

SP - 24087

JO - Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings

JF - Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings

SN - 0065-0668

IS - 1

ER -