Is Gen Z really as committed to sustainability as we think?

Does Generation Z really have a ‘greener’ consciousness than previous generations, as is often assumed? Or does the simple financial reality of everyday life also play a decisive role for the new generation? We looked into this.

‘Snowflakes’ and ‘cocooned kids’, full of intentions to be more sustainable, armed with vegan lunchboxes filled with avocado toast, sipping oat lattes. If you’re fond of clichés, ‘woke’ Generation Z is a prime example. But does that clichéd image match reality? Is the younger generation really so much more focused on sustainability than the generations before them? Do they really differ so much from the other generations now in the labour market? A brief study, based on 3 questions.

#1. Is Generation Z the most concerned with sustainability?

Yes, themes such as the environment and sustainability are important for the career decisions of Dutch Gen Zers, according to a Deloitte study. But remarkably, that applies even more to the people in the generation before them, the millennials. In the same study, this generation is also slightly more likely to ban fast fashion (30 versus 26 per cent), say they are less inclined to travel by plane (29 versus 26 per cent), and are more often willing to follow a vegetarian or vegan diet (37 versus 35 per cent). The cost of living? Both groups are approximately equally concerned about this.

According to Ipsos I&O’s fifth annual ‘Sustainable Thinking, Sustainable Action’ survey, it is not so much that Generation Z no longer cares about the environment, but rather that, in recent years, they are faced with a variety of other problems. According to the researchers, the current generation is more likely to experience ‘climate paralysis’: they feel overwhelmed by systemic barriers, rarely see the value of sustainable choices, and therefore often do not see themselves as the first to take action towards a sustainable world. ‘Consciousness yes, action no,’ the researchers conclude. In other words: the new generation does value sustainability, but is unwilling to make too many personal sacrifices for it. Basically, just like the generations before them.

#2. How big are the real differences between generations?

Is Generation Z really so different from previous generations? That remains to be seen. It’s a very human tendency to think that certain generations share certain characteristics. However, research often shows that the age and zeitgeist effect is usually stronger. For example, does Generation Z have lower work motivation than previous generations? Nonsense, says UvA professor Ruben van Gaalen. Young people have long regarded work as less important than older generations, according to the sociologist and demographer—including previous generations of young people. In other words, this is more of an age effect than a generation effect. Moreover, people of all ages have, on average, come to regard work as somewhat less important over time, he says, based also on recent research. In other words, a zeitgeist effect is also at play here.

A TNO study into generational differences in mental health at work shows a similar pattern. Yes, there are relatively many people who develop burnout symptoms around the age of thirty. But that’s actually always been the case. Moreover, in recent years, pressure in the workplace has increased for every generation, and employees of all ages have placed greater value on, for example, a permanent contract.

In addition, the differences between people of the same generation still turn out to be much greater than the differences between the ‘generations’, according to the TNO researchers. This is also confirmed in a recent meta-analysis of 143 studies, including data on more than 158,000 employees. The differences between generations turn out to be actually negligible here (between 0.1 and 0.2). Therefore, do not exaggerate the alleged generation effects, this study says.

#3: Is Gen Z willing to sacrifice more for a better environment?

They are seen as prioritising their ideals over their material interests; this is the persistent image that clings to Generation Z. Is an organisation’s purpose inconsistent with their own beliefs? Then the employer in question can forget about it, as you often read. But is that true? As is often the case: here, too, the reality seems to be slightly different. Even for Gen Z—perhaps especially for them—charity begins at home.

Take a look at recent research by ABN Amro among a large number of organisations and almost 2,000 people with a practical education of the new generation. This shows that Generation Z is not enticed by office ping-pong tables and trendy matcha lattes; for most of them, more traditional benefits such as a permanent contract, a fair salary, and clear expectations take priority. Basically, just like the generations before them.

However, the 2022 Stanford University study paints a different picture: when it comes to matters such as investments or their pension, today’s people in their twenties and thirties turn out to have a greater focus on the long-term future and are indeed more willing to make concessions. The older generations mainly let the financial return prevail here, but the young people appear to be prepared to settle for up to 10% less return on their investments if companies demonstrably improve their environmental policies.

This also ties in with the aforementioned Ipsos survey: Generation Z is still climate-conscious in this regard, but at the same time they are facing financial uncertainty. It is precisely when it comes to their pension provision that these two areas can overlap: people do not feel they should sacrifice much in this regard, while at the same time investing in a world that remains liveable for them in the future.

There is an important lesson here for employers: young professionals are indeed willing to make sustainable choices, but on their own terms. By linking pension accrual to socially responsible investing (SRI), you engage the new generation on both their financial security and their commitment to climate action. This not only makes a ‘green’ pension scheme more attractive, but also more relevant to their future prospects.