The dynamics between preference for carbon-neutral children and climate change mitigation: a systematic review

While climate change and global warming are two of the most evident global issues caused by humans’ carbon footprint, having carbon-neutral children can be a way to mitigate climate change. Based on a thorough review of existing literature, this systematic review aims to explore how people view carbon-neutral children as a means of mitigating climate change, using the PRISMA guideline. Based on the results of various relevant studies, the present study reveals that having carbon-neutral children is a beneficial strategy for neutralizing the carbon footprint that children leave throughout their lives. Having carbon-neutral children contributes to climate change mitigation by balancing the carbon emissions from children with an eco-friendly dietary plan; educating them on sustainable consumption practices, such as using eco-friendly clothing, transportation, and play; planting a significant number of trees for each child; and even reducing the number of children born. Moreover, socio-demographic characteristics such as gender, age, education, income, religion, marital status, and culture were also found to be important factors that can influence parents’ intentions to have carbon-neutral children. Findings suggest that married people, women, young people, more educated people, wealthier people and religious people are more likely to have carbon-neutral children than older people, less educated people, less wealthy people, non-religious people and single people, which varies from developed nations based on the socio-cultural contexts of developing nations. It is unambiguous that parents’ desire for carbon-neutral offspring presents both possibilities and difficulties for mitigating climate change. However, it is believed that one of the approaches for lowering the carbon footprint will be the thorough investigation on how carbon-neutral children interact with climate change mitigation in the future. However, promoting the notion of carbon-neutral parents for all births necessitates integrated climate change and population policy, especially in developing countries.

Climate change and global warming are the key concerns of twenty-first century for their negative effects on environment and people throughout the world (Cannon and Müller-Mahn, 2010). Both are mostly caused by the increase in greenhouse gas emissions from the entire world (Tan and Wang, 2021). Greenhouse gases trap heat close to the Earth's surface, cover the earth like a blanket, letting in sunlight while keeping part of the heat from escaping back into space (Misni et al., 2015). The most common greenhouse gas, accounting for around three-quarters of all emissions, is carbon dioxide (CO₂) (Olivier et al., 2005).

However, increased greenhouse gas emissions, especially CO₂ emissions, are brought on by human activities (USEPA, 2022) which result in environmental deterioration (Solomon et al., 2007). From birth to death, people utilize energy, produce trash, consume food and water, and travel, among other activities that increase greenhouse gas emissions (Bhoyar et al., 2014; Druckman and Jackson, 2016). Moreover, the human body emits carbon dioxide (CO₂) naturally as a byproduct of metabolism (Cai et al., 2022). The total quantity of greenhouse gases in the form of CO₂ and other gases with a similar impact that human activities emit into the atmosphere is called their carbon footprint (Karim et al., 2024). The lifetime carbon footprint of an individual, family, or home is a significant component of carbon emissions (Wu et al., 2026). Consequently, when the number of human populations increases, demand for energy, resources, and infrastructure also expands (Balatsky et al., 2015), leading to higher carbon releases and accelerating climatic change (Wu et al., 2026).

Therefore, lowering household and individual carbon footprints or being carbon neutral has currently emerged as one of the strategies of climate change mitigation (Chen et al., 2022). For lowering individual carbon footprints, the practice of having carbon-neutral children can be a groundbreaking strategy. According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, being carbon neutral is defined as calculating how much of a person's carbon emissions harm the climate, reducing them as much as possible, subsequently balancing the remaining emissions, usually by buying a carbon offset, such as paying to plant new trees or investing in “green” technologies like solar and wind power (Alexander et al., 2007). A new life is referred to as a “carbon neutral child” when efforts are undertaken to neutralize its carbon footprint. ‘Having carbon neutral child’ and ‘carbon neutral parenting’ represent two sides of a single academic coin. “Having carbon neutral child” usually refers to attempts to reduce and balance out the carbon effect associated with having a child (Philip, 2025). To make children carbon neutral, parents should adopt ecofriendly practices to rais up their children. According to Stumbitz and Orzanna (2025), it covers a number of aspects of a child's life, including as transportation, such as making children use public transportations instead of private transportation (Logan et al., 2024); energy use, such as using energy-saving devices (Siddiqui et al., 2014), using renewable energy (Chen, 2024); food selections, such as selecting local and ecofriendly diets for children (Logan et al., 2024); trash management, other consumer behaviors, and overall lifestyle, such as growing children's sustainable consumption habits (Lawson et al., 2019); use intergenerational learning to promote more extensive family climate action; and offset carbon (Alexander, Hope and Degg, 2007) such as planting trees (Suryawan et al., 2026), and even sometimes have fewer children, because of the fair of children's future wellbeing in this world of climate crisis (Schneider-Mayerson and Leong, 2020), and to reduce the future environmental impacts by their children, because a person is ultimately responsible for a portion of the emissions of their descendants (Murtaugh and Schlax, 2009). The idea of carbon neutral children includes a lot of different activities and products that are meant to lower the greenhouse gas emissions generated from childcare activities, goods, and services (Philip, 2025).

But how can having carbon-neutral children be a strategy of climate change mitigation? Will all parents be willing to have carbon-neutral children? Based on these questions, this study aims to explore how the intention for having carbon-neutral children can be a strategy of climate change mitigation and how the preference for carbon-neutral children can be among the parents of developing countries.

The study explores the probability of carbon-neutral children as a strategy in enhancing climate change mitigation. Many of the existing studies have discussed the carbon reduction strategies at the industrial and policy levels, but contributions of the individual towards carbon neutrality remain underexplored. This review shows how individual action like having carbon-neutral children can contribute to climate change mitigation. Besides showing the role of carbon-neutral children in climate change mitigation, this review also shows how individuals’ sociodemographic characteristics can influence their preference for carbon-neutral children in developing nations’ contexts. To explain the connection between socio-demographic traits and the preference for carbon-neutral children, this review uses the Value-Belief-Norm theory (VBN), which suggests that people's values, beliefs, and personal norms are connected to pro-environmental behavior (Torres-Antonini et al., 2012); the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), which suggests that subjective norms, attitudes, and perceived behavioral controls shape humans’ intentions and behavior (Ajzen, 1991); and the Green Parenthood Effect framework, which suggests that through a variety of psychological processes, such as legacy, generativity, and perceived obligation to future generations, parenthood might encourage environmentally conscious behavior (Shrum et al., 2023). Based on these theories, this study particularly draws a picture of how microlevel sociodemographic characteristics can shape individuals’ preference for carbon-neutral children, which further contributes to climate change mitigation at the macro level. Moreover, this review can advance the existing Theory of Pro-Environmental Behavior (PEB), which emphasizes the liberty of actors and reduces harm to the environment by minimizing the negative consequences of one's own actions (Tian and Liu, 2022), because perhaps the most significant environmental decision a person can make in their lifetime is to choose to have fewer children or to raise them in a strictly carbon-neutral way. ‘Carbon-neutral children’ is a novel theoretical extension of intergenerational PEB, in which an actor tries to control the lifetime consumption of another human being. This review also advances climate adaptation frameworks. It focuses on psychological and reproductive adaptation, whereas climate adaptation is typically seen through an external structural lens, such as land use planning (Berke and Stevens, 2016), transportation planning (Dowds and Aultman-Hall, 2015), etc. This review also advances the Population-Environmental Interactions (IPAT) model, which emphasizes macro-level data and is presented by the equation I (Environmental Impact) = P (Population) × A (Affluence) × T (Technology), where population is a static independent driver (Chertow, 2000). This review treats “population” as dynamic. Parents’ carbon-neutral activities in childrearing and reproductive decisions modify ‘affluence,’ effectively neutralizing population growth. Furthermore, it advances TPB and VBN theory from individual-centric, short-term actions to a long-term, intergenerational PEB. Therefore, by linking individual reproductive choices and child-rearing practices to carbon neutrality, this review advances relevant classic frameworks by addressing their macro-micro and static-dynamic limitations. Furthermore, this review addresses factors affecting the acceptance of the concept ‘carbon-neutral children’ in developing countries, where environmental issues often intertwine with economic and social challenges. The study identifies potential barriers such as lack of awareness, religious beliefs, economic priorities, and infrastructural limits. Additionally, it examines the collaboration between global initiatives and local policies to foster sustainable child-rearing practices and promote individual carbon neutrality.

By analyzing preferences for carbon-neutral children, the study aims to inform policymakers, environmental organizations, and individuals about how personal actions can contribute to broader climate mitigation efforts. Moreover, in developing countries where population growth is a pressing issue, understanding the feasibility and implications of this concept could provide valuable insights into sustainable development strategies.

The literature review process is systematically structured using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework (Moher et al., 2010), which offers a formal protocol for documenting each stage of the review - from the development of the search strategy to the final synthesis of the evidence.

Article searching process

The purpose of this study is to explore how the intention for having carbon-neutral children can be a strategy of climate change resilience and how the preference for carbon-neutral children can be among the parents of developing countries. To develop this review article, relevant articles were searched utilizing different reputed databases, such as Google Scholar, Science Direct, Springer Link, and different official websites, which are used in various previously published researches (Ahmed et al., 2024; Haq et al., 2021; Wan et al., 2021). To retrieve the articles, a structured search strategy was applied using three combined term sets. The first set captured carbon-neutral children and carbon-footprint concepts (“carbon neutral child” OR “children's carbon footprint” OR “carbon-neutral parenting” OR “carbon footprint” OR “carbon neutrality”). The second set focused on climate-related environmental behavior (“climate change mitigation” OR “climate change adaptation” OR “environmental sustainability” OR “pro-environmental behavior” OR “environmental attitudes”). The third set addressed socio-demographic and cultural factors (“gender and climate change” OR “gender roles and carbon neutrality” OR “green parenting” OR “education and carbon-neutral behavior” OR “income and environmental preferences”). These sets were combined using AND/OR operators to retrieve studies aligned with the research focus. A simple sensitivity check was performed by examining alternate keyword combinations to guarantee consistency of the retrieved literature across different search formulations. Articles and reports that were published between 2000 and 2025 have been retrieved to review, because of the growing prominence of low-carbon living and climate-related fertility concerns in the 21st century. This approach allows the review to remain sufficiently broad while still precisely targeting studies that explore the relationship between carbon-neutral child preferences and climate change mitigation. The authors set English-language articles as the primary criteria for selecting studies. Restricting the review to English-language sources may introduce language-related bias, as non-English research with relevant contributions might have been overlooked.

Article eligibility criteria

Authors have retrieved articles to review from various databases relevant to carbon-neutral children and climate change mitigation. In the final stage, a total of 103 articles and reports were retained for review. Besides establishing English-language publications as the initial inclusion parameters, studies focusing on the following areas were identified as the basis for determining the final set of papers: (i) the emerging discourse on reducing environmental degradation, (ii) carbon-neutral children's role in climate change resilience, (iii) behavioral and attitudinal factors shaping climate-conscious reproductive decision-making, and (iv) socio-demographic dimensions impacting the preference for carbon-neutral children such as gender, age, education, income, religion, and marital status. Screening proceeded in three stages: (i) title and abstract screening against broad relevance criteria, (ii) selection based on four above mentioned eligibility criteria, (iii) full-text screening for conceptual and empirical alignment with the review aims. Preference was given to empirically grounded work (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods) and conceptually aligned contributions addressing environmental degradation, intergenerational climate responsibility, or socio-demographic determinants of climate-related preferences. In addition to the selection and screening procedure of studies, a simple quality assessment of the included studies was performed, where each study was assessed by the clarity of its methodology, the effectiveness of its research plan, and the transparency of its results. To increase the reliability of the overall synthesis, any studies that did not provide sufficient methodological information or did not adequately describe their analytical methodologies were excluded.

Final article selection process

To finalize the articles, several inclusion and exclusion criteria have been specified. We selected articles that are relevant to the topic, and these articles were evaluated for research questions, suitable methods, and insightful results supported by evidence. A few non-academic sources, like newspaper reports and LinkedIn posts were also used limitedly, as they helped capture new ideas, their implication, and public perspectives about carbon-neutral children that academics have not yet fully explored. Initially, 472 articles were identified, employing the search terms. Duplicates were removed after that, accounting for approximately 89 papers. The screening stage started by reviewing titles and abstracts, which led to the exclusion of 241 articles. Afterwards, these were screened against eligibility criteria mentioned before (removing 9 articles). A full-text review was then carried out to decide which studies should be included. At this stage, 30 articled were eliminated, leaving 103 for in-depth analysis. Once the selection was complete, a first draft of the paper was written by all authors. The authors then went through the manuscript several times, making revisions and improving it for submission. The study selection process is shown in the PRISMA flow diagram in Figure 1.

Having carbon-neutral children and its role in climate change mitigation

Climate change presents a significant danger to contemporary societies, threatening ecosystems, physical structures, and human well-being (Goldberg et al., 2025). Within these alarming issues, carbon neutrality represents a transformative industrial shift that humanity is confronting, steering us toward a sustainable, carbon-free future. This movement will significantly impact the environment, society, and the economy (Chen et al., 2022). While the addition of new lives must bring carbon emissions with it, the emitted carbon should be neutralized to reduce its harmful impacts on the environment. Thus, carbon-neutral children can contribute to climate change mitigation strategy. Children's emitted carbon can be neutralized in various ways.

An eco-friendly baby diet contributes to reducing emission

A person's dietary preferences contribute to carbon dioxide emissions (Gilbert et al., 2017; Murtaugh and Schlax, 2009). People who have children emit the majority of carbon dioxide from their children's food. Parents can contribute to neutralizing their children's carbon emissions by including foods that produce minimal carbon, such as vegetables and fish, in their diet chart (Nordström et al., 2020). Adopting healthy diets with minimal environmental impact has been widely advocated as a crucial strategy for mitigating climate change. Typically, these diets are rich in plant-based food and low in animal-based and processed foods. Although their environmental benefits differ, they are commonly referred to as ’sustainable diets. Sustainable dietary choices for children can help mitigate climate change (Jarmul et al., 2020). Moreover, parents can include locally sourced foods for their children to reduce their climate effects. Locally produced foods help to mitigate climate change by shortening “food miles,” which reduces carbon dioxide emissions from international shipping, long-distance domestic transport, and multi-stage cold-chain refrigeration (Li et al., 2022).

Teaching kids sustainable consumption reduces environmental degradation

An individual's daily habits, including household energy consumption and transportation, contribute to carbon dioxide emissions and, in turn, global warming (Gilbert et al., 2017; Murtaugh and Schlax, 2009). When a high-carbon-emitting couple has a child, it is likely that the child will adopt similar high-emission habits. Moreover, this child may eventually have children of their own, who could follow the same patterns of consumption. In terms of transportation, driving private cars or traveling by air causes greater carbon emissions (Pinkert and Sticker, 2021). According to Din et al. (2023) and Nordström et al. (2020), transportation is one of the major sources of consumption by children, which causes higher carbon emissions. Therefore, instead of private cars or air transport, children should be familiarized with public transportation such as trains and buses (Masanobu and Hanaoka, 2003; Shapiro et al., 2016). In terms of children's clothing, for the first few years of their lives, infants and children need a variety of clothing sizes. As a result, parents should think about selecting environmentally friendly baby clothing (Komara and Yuliati, 2023). Clothing made of sustainable elements such as bamboo fiber (Cebeci, 2019), Merino fiber, linen, etc. should be used for children to reduce their carbon footprints by wearing clothes. Besides, renewable and biodegradable clothes have lower environmental impact (Danila and Curteza, 2021). For carbon-neutral children, families use napkins, pitchers, or clouts made from muslin, flannel, wool, and linen fabrics instead of a one-time-use diaper, which is not biodegradable (Sachidhanandham and Priyanka, 2020). Moreover, toys made with plastic are harmful for the environment. They are non-biodegradable and have the risk to impact children's health (Ramesh and Devi, 2021). To neutralize children's emissions, toys made with ecofriendly materials should be used by parents. According to, toys made with filaments or bamboo products are ecofriendly and biodegradable (Das and Kalita, 2023; Ramalakshmi et al., 2023).

Tree plantation on the occasion of childbirth and climate change mitigation

Global deforestation is one of the main reasons for increasing the primary greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (Nowak and Crane, 2002). The annual increase in atmospheric carbon is estimated to be around 2.6 billion metric tons. Particularly deforestation, contribute to about 25% of global greenhouse gas emissions (Paquette and Messier, 2010). On the other hand, afforestation and reforestation are the approaches used to reduce the effects of climate change and balancing CO₂ levels (Osman et al., 2023; Kabir et al., 2023). Because, trees actively filter out pollutant gases such as CO, NOx, O₃, and SO₂, mainly through their leaf stomata (Akbari, 2002). According to Kabir et al. (2023), plants act as natural filters for the environment, absorbing pollutants and contributing to a cooler, cleaner, and greener ecosystem. If forests covered one-third of the planet, it would help stabilize CO₂ and lower global temperatures. Because trees serve as carbon sinks (Nowak and Crane, 2002) by absorbing carbon dioxide (CO₂) during photosynthesis from the atmosphere, which makes forestation a method for reducing emissions (Alelweet, 2025; Osman et al., 2023). Since degraded lands have the capacity to store more carbon than the yearly emissions from human activities, climate-resilient strategies such as tree plantation can further enhance their impact on maintaining carbon balance worldwide (Brahma et al., 2018; Kumar et al., 2020). The accumulation of carbon in forests through tree growth offsets 25% of annual human-induced emissions, contributing to climate change mitigation (Yao et al., 2023). Tree planting is a form of ongoing charity and an obligation to protect and preserve the environment's health and vitality (Kabir et al., 2023). Notably, Aadavi, a two-year-old girl, has been recognized as the first carbon-neutral child, set to maintain a zero-carbon footprint throughout her life (The Daily Star, 2024). Her parents, by planting 6,000 fruit trees around their home in Tamil Nadu, India, have ensured that her carbon emissions will be entirely offset as she grows alongside the flourishing trees.

Reduction in procreation for lowering the emission

According to Kabir et al. (2023), a growing population without adequate afforestation will severely impact the quality of life and pose major obstacles to society in the future. Given the unpredictability of the future, climate change poses important considerations about whether or not people choose to have children (Blanton, 2025). The decision to have children adds to future environmental effects, with each child generating an impact throughout their lifetime. For a descendant n generations away from an individual, their environmental impact is weighted as (1/2)ⁿ. This means parents each account for half of their child's emissions and one-fourth of their grandchildren's emissions. In a scenario where emissions remain constant, the additional carbon emissions from having one child vary significantly by country, from 56 metric tons in Bangladesh to 9,441 metric tons in the United States (Murtaugh and Schlax, 2009). Burkett (2021) mentioned in his study that during the period of severe climate change, having a child is the worst decision. It is a moral obligation of people that they should not have children for reducing the emission of carbon dioxide. Some climate ethicists have recently contended that bringing children into the world is comparable to excessive consumption and significantly increases the carbon footprint of parents. In several countries, it appears that young individuals are increasingly linking climate change to their decisions about having children. For instance, a public survey in 2018 in the USA revealed that 11% of individuals aged 20 to 45, who either chose not to have children or were uncertain about having them, listed “concern about climate change” as one of their reasons. A study by Blanton (2025) suggests that in Salt Lake City, Utah, in the USA, there are a significant number of people planning not to have children because of their environmental concerns. Some individuals plan a smaller family size due to climate concerns. Again, a poll of 2020 revealed that 14.3% of Americans aged 18 to 44 who did not have children considered climate change a “major reason” for not having children, while 20.7% viewed it as a “minor reason” for their decision. They focused primarily on environmental issues regarding the decision to have a child (Schneider-Mayerson and Leong, 2020). But Pinkert and Sticker (2021) suggested that instead of attributing children's emissions to their parents’ carbon footprints, these emissions should be viewed as part of the parents’ overall carbon impact—reflecting the effect of their decisions on global carbon emissions. They emphasized the ethics of procreation in the context of climate change by focusing on the impact it has on the environment. However, the study findings by Nordström et al. (2020) indicate that parents or couples who have children are less eco-friendly than non-parents because their CO₂ emissions are 26% more than those of persons without children.

In this era of climate change, though the issue regarding carbon-neutral children is significantly under review, most of the existing articles argue whether the parents or the child are responsible for increasing carbon emission and how a child's existence contributes to global warming. Despite all the arguments, this paper highlights the potential of a child to achieve carbon neutrality and thus offset their total carbon emissions throughout their lifetime. By attaining carbon neutrality, children might be able to play a significant role in climate change mitigation.

Sociodemographic dimensions and preference for carbon-neutral children

Existing literature highlights significant influences of gender, age, education, socio-economic factors, and cultural context on preferences for adopting carbon-neutral lifestyles, especially regarding the decision to raise environmentally conscious or carbon-neutral children, particularly in developing countries.

Theoretical and conceptual foundation of carbon neutral parenting

This review draws upon three major theoretical perspectives to explain the relationship between sociodemographic characteristics and preference for carbon-neutral children: (1) Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), (2) the Value-Belief-Norm theory (VBN), and (3) the Green Parenthood Effect framework.

First, the Theory of Planned Behavior explained that human behavior is influenced by attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, which together shape behavioral intention and actual behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Therefore, an individual who has a positive attitude towards reducing their carbon footprint, feels social pressure to adopt environmentally friendly behaviors, and believes that they can control their actions are more likely to develop intentions to reduce carbon emissions and engage in low carbon behaviors (Ahakwa et al., 2023).

Second, Stern et al.’s (1999) Value-Belief-Norms (VBN) theory explains that there is a connected chain between people's values, beliefs, personal norms and pro-environmental behaviors (Torres-Antonini et al., 2012). According to the theory, individuals are more likely to engage in environmentally significant behaviors when they believe that environmental problems threaten other people, other species or the biosphere. These behaviors can include environmental activism, influencing public policies, environmentally responsible purchasing and consumption or encouraging sustainable actions within organizations.

Third, the concept of the “Green Parenthood Effect” posits that parenthood can promote environmentally responsible behavior via various psychological mechanisms including legacy, generativity and perceived responsibility to future generations (Shrum et al., 2023). Each of these factors represents a distinct and identifiable pathway toward pro-environmental decision-making. The focus of legacy motives is on how people might accept their own mortality and deal with it in a way that is prosocial and beneficial to (future) others. Concern for the welfare of future generations and a sense of moral obligation to preserve the environment for them are both reflected in generativity and the definition of perceived responsibility is “a sense of (moral) obligation towards future generations” (Shrum et al., 2023).

Based on these theoretical perspectives, this review conceptualizes sociodemographic variables such as gender, age, education, income, religion and marital status as micro-level sociodemographic determinants that indirectly influence an individual's preference for carbon-neutral children (Figure 2). Their effects operate through a set of intermediate mechanisms derived from the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Value-Belief-Norm (VBN) theory as well as the Green Parenthood Effect framework, including environmental knowledge, environmental values and beliefs, environmental concern, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, legacy motives and generativity and perceived responsibility to future generations. The framework further proposes that a strong preference for carbon-neutral children may encourage pro-environmental parental choices such as conscious family planning, reproductive carbon budgeting, sustainable child-rearing practices, environmentally responsible parenting. These behaviors can collectively contribute to broader climate change mitigation outcomes. Therefore, the framework emphasizes that preferences for carbon-neutral children emerge through interconnected psychological and structural pathways rather than through direct sociodemographic effects alone.

Gender and probable preference for carbon-neutral children

Gender-based social roles, household responsibility, and resource access play an important role in shaping environmental behavior and sustainability-oriented family practice. Women and men differ in their environmental concerns, consumption behaviors, and climate-related experiences, which may also influence their preferences for carbon-neutral children. In research from the Global North, women have been frequently portrayed as being environmentally conscious, whereas literature from the Global South has highlighted women as being commonly represented as disproportionately vulnerable to climate change due to poverty and high mortality rates during climate calamities (Arora-Jonsson, 2011). The study by Jamaludin et al., (2026) suggests further studies on gender as a factor that can influence the acceptance of carbon-neutral lifestyle. These differences show that carbon-neutral child preference is shaped differently in various socio-economic realities.

In developed countries, environmentally responsible parenting is more related to an ethical lifestyle and environmental values, for example, clothing reuse (Ritch, 2019). In developing-country context, women's daily household responsibilities further strengthen their environmental concerns. Since women are primarily responsible for tasks such as water collection, cooking, fuel collection, and childcare, they directly experience the effects of water scarcity, energy poverty, and food insecurity and are also more involved with indoor pollution, malnutrition, and climate-related health risks (Denton, 2002). These lived experiences can increase concerns about children's health, nutrition, and future security, which can encourage environmentally responsible childrearing and resource-conscious household practices.

Literature also suggests that environmental concern alone cannot sustain sustainability-oriented parenting practices. Structural factors such as class, livelihood structure, and resource access significantly shape climate vulnerability and adaptive capacity. For example, in an agrarian society, the vulnerability of a wealthy woman's livelihoods to climate variability may have more in common with that of a wealthy man than it does with the vulnerability of a poor woman's livelihoods (Carr and Thompson, 2014). Similarly, in Northern Mali, although women develop various adaptive strategies that utilize forest resources, their efforts are constrained by limited financial resources, restricted decision-making power, and weak market access (Djoudi and Brockhaus, 2011). Consequently, while women advocate for environmentally sustainable parenting, they often lack the capacity to sustain a consistently low-carbon family daily life.

Gender differences in household labor distribution and consumption behavior also influence sustainability practices. According to Druckman et al., (2012), socially constructed gender norms shape carbon consumption patterns. While leisure and recreational activities account for the majority of men's carbon emissions, women frequently devote more time to household tasks including cooking, shopping, cleaning, and childcare. Women can have a substantially bigger influence on children's eating habits, waste management, and fundamental environmental behavior since they are more likely to be active in households management and caregiving. Cross-national evidence also shows that women are more likely than males to engage in private environmental practices including recycling, purchasing organic products, and using fewer cars (Hunter et al., 2004). Similarly, environmental concern, perceived environmental responsibility, and green purchasing behavior have also been found to be significantly greater among female teenagers (Lee, 2009). This stronger environmental attitude can generate support for sustainability-oriented parenting and environmentally conscious childrearing in the future.

There is also a significant gap between attitude and actual behavior. A study in Australia found that although women showed a higher willingness to pay for aviation carbon offsetting, there was no significant relationship between gender and actual offsetting behavior (Choi and Ritchie, 2014). Similarly, a study conducted in South Korea revealed that while women had a higher intention to participate in carbon-neutral practices, the influence of perceived necessity was stronger in men (Lee and Roh, 2024). Another study findings by Hatamifar and Prokkola (2026) suggest that an attitude-behavior gap is present in both male and female travelers of Finland. According to the research, perceived responsibility can be considered a kind of behavioral modification meant to reduce the gap between passengers’ attitudes and behaviors. These findings suggest that preference for carbon neutral children can be shaped in men and women through different motivational pathways, and environmental awareness alone does not ensure consistent low-carbon family behavior.

The importance of women's involvement in environmental governance is also emphasized in the literature. Countries with higher levels of female political representation tend to have relatively smaller climatic footprints (Mckinney and Fulkerson, 2015). This suggests that women's involvement in environmental decision-making might bolster more general sustainability-focused laws and ecologically conscious social norms, which can eventually foster an atmosphere that is conducive to raising children who are carbon neutral.

Accordingly, the preference for carbon-neutral children is influenced by factors such as gender, caregiving role, household responsibility, environmental exposure, consumption behavior and resource access. This relationship is not straightforward, though, as sustainability-oriented parenting practices are influenced by broader socio-economic and structural factors in addition to environmental concerns. The VBN theory explains how gender variations in developing nations influence the preference for carbon-neutral children. The socialization process frequently makes women play the role of carer of the family, household resources and food manager (Denton, 2002) and shapes their consumption patterns (Druckman et al., 2012; Hunter et al., 2004). These lived experiences activate their deep-seated values about awareness of consequences. These also activate a strong personal moral norm to adopt pro-environmental parenting techniques (Stern et al., 1999). Consequently, women can show a higher preference for carbon-neutral children for their perceived moral responsibility.

Age and probable preference for carbon-neutral children

The relationship between age and preference for a carbon-neutral child is quite complex and, in many cases, controversial in the sustainability literature. In general, younger individuals are perceived as being more environmentally conscious and sustainability-oriented compared to older people. However, current research indicates that a desire for a carbon-neutral child or sustainability-oriented parenting are not usually the results of merely being environmentally conscious.

The younger generation has grown up during a period when environmental activism, climate change, and climate related calamities became major global concerns (Gutterman, 2022). As a result, they tend to demonstrate stronger awareness regarding environmental preservation and future sustainability. This climate awareness may strengthen one's sense of obligation to future generations, which promotes a positive attitude towards environmentally conscious childrearing. Nevertheless, awareness alone is often insufficient to sustain a low carbon lifestyle. For instance, a study conducted in Turkey found that while Generation Z showed comparatively higher sustainability awareness, their actual sustainable healthy eating (SHE) behavior was inadequate due to in practice, influenced by limitations in affordability, accessibility, and practical adoption. These results imply that although the younger generation has a positive attitude toward sustainability-oriented parenting, actual financial and lifestyle constraints may hinder the development of consistent low-carbon parenting practices. Moreover, peer groups and digital culture also shape sustainability-related attitudes among younger individual (Öner et al., 2024), which can in turn affect parenting values.

In contrast, older generations often demonstrate more stable and practice-based sustainability habits within household life, which can be important for raising children in an environmentally conscious manner. According to Öner et al., (2024), participants in Generation X were more aware of the need to reduce food waste and gave greater weight to local and seasonal food. Such everyday household practices help in forming a resource-conscious family lifestyle and can instill environmentally responsible values in children. Similarly, study conducted in UK shows that older people supported social changes for environmental protection just like the younger population, especially when those changes were practical and financially feasible (Gutterman, 2022). Some studies have even identified Baby Boomers as one of the most environmentally conscious generations (Gutterman, 2022), which challenges the notion that older generations are less interested in sustainable family practices.

There are differences between the Global North and Global South in the relationship between age and carbon-neutral child preference. Research conducted in the Global North usually uses political participation, environmental consciousness, and sustainable lifestyle choices to explain generational variations (Gutterman, 2022; Lee, 2024). In these contexts, younger generations are often perceived as more supportive of future-oriented sustainability values, which can foster a favorable attitude towards environmentally conscious parenting. However, the sustainability attitude of the older generation in many cases depend on political ideology (Lee, 2024). Conversely, research in the Global South has prioritized topics such as livelihood conditions and affordability. Research conducted in Turkey and South Africa reveal that although younger generation often expresses strong sustainability awareness, the financial ability and willingness to pay more for environmentally friendly products play a crucial role in forming sustainability-oriented household behavior (Kgomo and Modley, 2022; Öner et al., 2024). For instances, a South African study revealed that while numerous Gen Z respondents engage in discussions about global warming less frequently, over fifty percent expressed a willingness to pay a premium for eco-friendly products (Kgomo and Modley, 2022). Therefore, in a developing-country context, carbon-neutral child preference does not solely depend on environmental concern; rather, it is also deeply related to how capable a family is of maintaining sustainable household practices in the long term. Recent literature has therefore criticized the simplistic notion of intergenerational climate conflict. Framing climate change solely as a generational struggle between youth and elders conceals the wider economic and structural realities that shape family-based sustainability behaviors (Gutterman, 2022).

This study shows that age does not directly influence the desire to raise children with a carbon-neutral lifestyle. Instead, factors such as environmental awareness, family lifestyle, consumer behaviors, peer influence, and a sense of responsibility for future generations play a role. The younger generation generally supports the idea of raising children in a more sustainable and eco-friendly way due to their understanding and awareness of climate change. According to VBN theory, the younger generation's direct visual experiences of the climate crisis shape their perceptions of climate change as a serious, immediate threat (Gutterman, 2022), leading them to feel a sense of moral obligation to the future (Stern et al., 1999). However, it can be difficult for many families to develop habits for an eco-friendly and low-carbon lifestyle. On the other hand, the older generation's comparatively stable sustainability practices can provide a relatively strong foundation for raising children in an environmentally conscious lifestyle. According to TPB, the older generation shows long-standing practice-based household habits, such as reducing waste, saving energy, which refers high perceived behavioral control. Therefore, preferences for carbon-neutral children are shaped not only by environmental concern but also by broader social, economic, and structural conditions.

Education and probable preference for carbon-neutral children

Education is considered one of the most important components in developing environmental awareness and sustainable behavior. Education influences preferences for carbon-neutral children not only through the level of formal education, but also through environmental knowledge, sustainability values, behavioral intentions, and the ability to maintain an environmentally responsible lifestyle.

In Global North-focused studies, education is generally associated with environmental literacy and sustainability-oriented value formation. For example, China-based research has found that environmental higher education (EHE) has a positive effect on the increase of renewable energy consumption (REC) (Jiali et al., 2023). Similarly, research in Brazil shows that with higher levels of education, pro-environmental orientation increases (Aklin et al., 2013). Nonetheless, the study also shows that the main change begins at the secondary education level, whereas tertiary education does not yield a significantly additional effect. These findings suggest that not only higher education, but effective environmental literacy may be more important in shaping a sustainability-oriented parenting attitude.

The studies further show that education influences eco-friendly parenting practices through environmental values and sustainability-oriented decision-making. Torres-Antonini and Vatralova (2012) have shown that parents with higher pro-environmental values, belief, and green-design knowledge show greater interest in environmentally friendly childcare environments. These parents prioritize recycling initiatives, environmental education, energy-efficient equipment, natural ventilation and nature-focused childcare facilities. Many participants also expressed willingness to pay additional tuition fees for environmentally friendly childcare facilities. These findings indicate that environmental awareness can directly influence parenting preferences and that interest in eco-friendly childcare environments reflects a positive attitude toward carbon-neutral childrearing. Cross-national studies also show that education and sustainability behavior operate differently across countries and institutional contexts. Rydzewski (2013) has shown that in countries like Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, Taiwan, and South Korea, pro-environmental behavior is comparatively higher, whereas in Latvia, Bulgaria, Russia, and Slovakia this tendency is lower.

Environmental knowledge does not always translate into actual behavior. Zhao et al., (2022) have shown that Carbon-neutral Behavioral Intention (CBI) is the strongest direct predictor of low-carbon behavior (LCB). The study found that environmental values, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control indirectly influence low-carbon behavior through behavioral intention. In particular, the impact of perceived behavioral control was the most significant. That is, people are more likely to engage in pro-environmental behavior not only when they are aware of environmental issues, but also when they believe that they have sufficient capability, resources, and opportunities to implement those behaviors. Consequently, education alone does not dictate behavior; instead, it enhances behavioral confidence and environmental responsibility.

Research in the Global South shows that the relationship between education and sustainability-oriented parenting practices is closely linked with environmental literacy, and household-level environmental practices. For instances, a study based in India found that most mothers had insufficient knowledge about eco-friendly toys and comparatively weak environmentally responsible practices. However, the study indicated a significant relationship between mothers’ educational status and knowledge related to eco-friendly products. A positive relationship has also been found between environmental knowledge and eco-friendly practices (Ramesh and Devi, 2021).

These findings suggest that parental education can influence environmentally friendly childrearing decisions and sustainability-oriented household practices. However, the study also indicates that even with environmental knowledge, actual environmentally responsible practices are not always strong. Current study suggest that education indirectly influences the preferences for carbon-neutral children through environmental literacy, sustainability values, behavioral intention, and perceived behavioral capability. However, environmental awareness alone cannot ensure sustainability-oriented parenting practices. Rather, the ability to translate environmental knowledge into practical behavior and the tendency to consistently maintain an environmentally responsible lifestyle play a significant role in shaping low-carbon childrearing behavior. Education in developing nations influences carbon-neutral parenting preferences through a mechanism rooted in the expansion of environmental literacy. Within the TPB framework, it directly reduces the perceived challenges of sustainable living and grows highly educated parents’ confidence and capability required for executing carbon-neutral parenting.

Income and probable preference for carbon-neutral children

Income plays a complex and often contradictory role in shaping carbon-neutral parenting preferences. However, the relationship between income and sustainability-oriented parenting is not simple. In Ireland-based research, Ferreira and Moro (2013) showed that high-income individuals were comparatively more willing to spend money on environmental improvement, which primarily reflected their higher ability to pay. In contrast, although low-income individuals expressed more concern about environmental pollution, they could not spend an equivalent amount of money on environmental improvement due to economic constraints. The data suggest that environmental concern does not consistently result in sustainability-oriented behavior; instead, perceived financial capacity is a significant factor. A contradiction is also observed between income and sustainability behavior in research related to household consumption. In a Japan-based study, Huang (2023) showed that income level plays an important role in determining the household carbon footprint, as it directly affects the amount and type of household consumption. In particular, high-income families had relatively higher indirect carbon emissions, which are associated with a more consumption-intensive lifestyle (Huang, 2023). Although these results do not directly explain parenting preferences, they suggest high income can sometimes create a lifestyle that is not entirely consistent with low-carbon household practices.

The relationship between income and environmental attitude is not straightforward even in the Global South context. A Brazil-based study by Aklin et al., (2013) showed that income did not directly determine environmental orientation. Rather, the lower-middle-income group showed comparatively more support for environmental regulation. The livelihoods of some wealthy groups depended on environmentally harmful activities such as ranching and industrial production (Aklin et al., 2013). These findings indicate that livelihood structure and economic interest can, in many cases, influence sustainability-oriented values. Therefore, the assumption that higher income groups will always exhibit environmentally responsible parenting attitudes is not always supported by empirical evidence.

The studies further show that income, education, carbon literacy, and environmental preference together influence sustainability-oriented behavioral intention. Schleich and Alsheimer (2024) have shown that willingness to pay for carbon offsetting is positively associated with income, education, carbon literacy, and environmental preference. However, the same study found that many participants perceived their carbon footprint to be lower than it actually was. In other words, despite having an environmentally responsible attitude, some households may inadvertently maintain a comparatively high-carbon lifestyle. On the other hand, Elom et al., (2024) have shown that carbon emissions have decreased with the growth of renewable energy, education investment, employment, and national income. Although this study did not directly discuss parenting practice, it suggests that broader economic development and sustainability-oriented infrastructure can help families maintain environmentally responsible household practices.

The current evidence suggests that income affects the preference for a carbon-neutral child not directly, but indirectly through environmental concern, perceived behavioral capability, consumption pattern, and sustainability-oriented household behavior. However, studies also show that higher income can on one hand increase the capacity to support sustainability-oriented parenting practices, while on the other hand, it can create a larger carbon footprint through a consumption-intensive lifestyle. Therefore, it is more appropriate to understand the relationship between income and the preference for a carbon-neutral child as a context-dependent and behaviorally mediated relationship. The way in which income influences the preference for carbon-neutral children is a complex mechanism. According to TPB, higher income people have the ability to spend for carbon-neutral parenting, it means they have high Perceived Behavioral Control because they feel that they actually have the power and resources to rear carbon-neutral children, where low-income parents may only intend to have carbon-neutral children but the execution is limited by their budget. On the other hand, according to IPAT model, higher income people face challenges to reduce their children's emission because of their high consumption lifestyle.

Religion and probable preference for carbon-neutral children

Religion strongly influences people's environmental orientations and can affect preferences for carbon neutral children in a number of ways. Religious beliefs often include moral values, norms of stewardship, and values of the community. They offer a moral framework for people to consider their stewardship role in the natural world.

The threats to sustainability of nature have grown over the years from being a local issue to become a global issue of immediate concern. In addition, it is worth emphasizing that a lot of the environment's problems that are threatening human lives are due to human activities. To a great extent, these activities are shaped and driven by different factors such as religion or spiritual beliefs (Omoyajowo et al., 2023). Therefore, adopting climate-friendly practices is important not only for the health of the planet but also for building a robust economy and a just society worldwide (Zhao, 2024). Research previously has shown that religious affiliation is an influential factor in the development of basic value orientations, which in turn influence consumer perceptions and behavioral tendencies (Minton et al., 2015). The irresponsible use of the environment is strictly forbidden in Islam, Buddhism, Christians and Hinduism. The religious teachings that stress the need for humans to be stewards of the Earth and its people. Furthermore, these religions are believed to play a role in inspiring environmental protection and that they can be used to effectively promote pro-environmental behavior (Abdullah and Keshminder, 2020).

Western religions (mainly Christianity) are referred to as anthropocentric in the North, based on White's argument (1967) that these religions’ beliefs focus on human supremacy over nature. Higher involvement in sustainable behaviors among Christians in the United States is associated with doctrinal framing (Minton et al., 2015). Furnham et al. (2025) found that nonreligious individuals were more concerned about forest preservation and less concerned about farming and nuclear energy. But Eastern religions, which are more prevalent in many areas of the Global South are based on pantheistic concepts, where harming nature is perceived as harming the divine, and empirical studies indicate that adherents of these religions engage more in sustainable and environmentally friendly practices (Hunt and Penwell, 2008). Putting these findings together, it is clear that there is a pattern: Western religious worldviews increase environmental disengagement, and Eastern religious worldviews increase sustainable behavior.

Religious institutions have been acknowledged as significant authorities and powerful actors in shaping social and moral values (Benjamin et al., 2016; Feldhaus et al., 2022; Zhao, 2024). Many studies of theological and prescriptive texts have shown that religious beliefs have a significant influence on people's attitudes and behaviors about climate issues (Zhao, 2024). The research findings of Shah and Asghar (2024) reveal that religious engagement plays an important role in individuals’ environmental choices, implying that active engagement in religious communities generates religion-based social capital that encourages sustainable living. The study results reveal the significance of institutional and policy trust in facilitating digital advancement and sustainability of the community. Conversely, the absence of trust leads to skepticism, thus limiting the practice of sustainable measures. This study will be helpful in developing policies for the relevant stakeholders who are policymakers, religious organizations, and environmental organizations towards sustainable consumption practices and collective actions leading to a sustainable future (Shah and Asghar, 2024). Madura, which is a cultural center of several regions in East Java has very high socio-cultural values that are deeply connected with religious values of Islam (Fitriyah et al., 2022). The Madurese have several rain-calling rituals to cope with climate change especially in the times of drought. Other Indonesian communities have different cultural backgrounds, and ceremonies similar to that of the Madurese are also performed. Consequently, rain-calling practices are used as an alternative means to achieve environmental balance.

In the above context, teachings of faith highlight aspects of care for creation, moderation, and intergenerational responsibility that can enhance pro environmental attitudes and assist in sustainable parenting decisions. Religious groups may be able to shape subjective norms, via reinforcing family norms, ecological ethics, and moral obligations to the future. Such mechanisms may result in indirect impacts of religion on willingness to engage in carbon neutral child rearing and engage in environmentally friendly behaviors in the household. Religious beliefs work as a powerful socio-psychological factor that can influence people's preference for carbon-neutral children. According to VBN theory, religiosity shapes people's cultural values and personal norms, which shapes their intentions to have carbon-neutral children for the sake of protecting nature.

Marital status and probable preference for carbon-neutral children

Marital status is an important sociodemographic factor to consider, as may differ in how people organize responsibilities, resources and daily life according to the type of household. These differences can affect how people perform their environmental actions and the types of parenting options they choose to make. In this context, marital status may have an impact on family thinking about sustainability and the potential value they may give to carbon neutral children

Matsumoto (2014). suggests that many pro-environmental behaviors are done as a joint effort among members of the same family. An ecofeminist view of green consumption emerges through the literature and increases with marriage status, but empirical studies on the linkage between gender, marital status and pro-ecological behavior are still scarce (Patel et al., 2017). As for the private sphere, there are differences between the two genders regarding the distribution of their time allocation, and occupation (individual and spousal) and family composition determine their involvement in environmentally friendly activities (Matsumoto, 2014). A study conducted by Tong et al. (2025) shows that demographic features including age, sex, marital status, and occupation of the household head were influential on environmental awareness. Moreover, electricity and water use per capita per month increased by 53% and 42%, respectively, for households whose household head was divorced. Such increases were very large compared with those in households with married household heads (Whitmarsh et al., 2025). However, Longhi (2013) suggests that the partner's preferences may affect one's own environmental preferences, and both parties’ actions are important determinants for household environmental decisions.

Having children has a major effect on climate change attitudes and behaviors. The first is that, as opposed to consumer choices, the birth of a child is a fundamental change in the lives of individuals, impacting their “core preferences” (Nordström et al., 2020; Paul, 2015) and therefore their environmental attitudes. Parenthood is epistemically and personally transformative, fundamentally changing one's perspective (Paul, 2015). Secondly, as most people will become parents, any changes in green behavior of parents will have a significant impact on overall CO₂ emissions. The evidence indicates that there is a two-way street between parents and children, and parents are important transmitters of pro-environmental values. Though the literature is limited in this area, the present study on ‘green parenthood effect’ can be a basis for future studies (Shrum et al., 2023). However, according to a study conducted by Hunter et al. (2004) involving 22 countries, it was found that women showed greater concern for the environment and performed daily environmental activities more than men did. They point to a clear difference in values and beliefs driving environmental engagement between men and women. The differences between male and female environmental behaviors have been associated with differences in altruistic orientations due to social roles. Women tend to care more about the environmental aspects that will affect the family, along with the surrounding family environment, whereas men care more about the financial expenses resulting from consumption (Jabin and Haq, 2025). The different roles and experiences in which men and women work and live can affect their priorities and actions with respect to the environment, especially in relation to children and the household. Wynes and Nicholas (2017) have found that there are four actions that are especially effective in reducing a person's greenhouse gas emissions. These are having one less child, not owning a car, avoiding air travel and eating a plant-based diet. As parents constitute a large share of the global adult population, targeted outreach could reinforce the green parenthood effect and increase public activity on climate change (Shrum et al., 2023). Rise in awareness and action is needed to face climate change impacts. Research indicates children can play key roles in driving change both now and in the future (Lawson et al., 2019).

The cultural context of marriage also provides examples of how marriage unions can have environmental significance in various contexts. For example, in Sarawak's Iban tribe, wedding rituals such as “jadi mali” symbolize the creation of a new family and the reaffirmation of social values ensuring the stability of marriage (Rozaimie et al., 2023). On the other hand, in places such as Gunungkidul in Indonesia, traditional marriage involves the use of locally available resources that help promote local sustainability and conservation of biodiversity (Sulistiyowati et al., 2022). The examples reveal that marriage can contain expectations of responsibility, resource consumption and environmental care, with the implication that the meanings of marriage can have an indirect impact on family thinking around sustainability.

These dynamics suggest the social and behavioral ecology of negotiations of environmental values in households is shaped by marital status. Thus, family role organization and decision making offer a credible pathway by which marital status could influence the evaluation of and commitment to carbon neutral parenting. Therefore, the organization of family roles and decisions offers a credible pathway by which marital status may influence the assessment and/or commitment to carbon neutral parenting. TPB explains how marital status influences the preference for carbon-neutral children. When the closest person to an individual behaves eco-friendly in child-rearing, he or she may feel peer pressure to do the same. Moreover, according to the green parenthood effect, when individuals become parents, their likelihood of becoming eco-friendly increases. Thus, married people are more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children.

Climate change and the increase of carbon emissions are still major global issues, but to make children carbon neutral is one of the effective ways to reduce future carbon emissions and mitigate climate change. In this systematic review, we review the existing literature to emphasize the importance of carbon-neutral children for emissions reduction and climate change mitigation and to explore the preferences for such initiatives among various sociodemographic groups, especially in developing countries. This review paper synthesizes the relevant literature published between 2000 and 2026 using the systematic literature review based on the PRISMA guideline. This systematic review shifts the focus from macro-level industrial adaptation strategies to individual reproductive and intergenerational adaptation strategies in climate change mitigation. It emphasizes how reproductive and early childhood decisions can help reduce future carbon emissions in developing nations. The concepts of “carbon-neutral children” and “carbon-neutral parenting” enhance existing theories such as Pro-Environmental Behavior, the Value-Belief-Norm theory, the Theory of Planned Behavior, the Green Parenthood Impact framework, and the Population-Environmental Interactions model, addressing their macro-micro and static-dynamic limitations.

The study findings suggest that children can become carbon-neutral in various ways. It includes encouraging them to adopt eco-friendly food habits, such as eating low-carbon and locally sourced food items; teaching them sustainable consumption practices, such as using eco-friendly clothes, toys and public transportation; planting an extensive number of trees to actively neutralize their carbon emissions; and considering limiting family size to reduce emissions. Moreover, this study also finds that in developing nations’ contexts, people's preference for carbon-neutral children can vary across various socio-demographic characteristics. For example, the female gender is more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children due to their household responsibilities related to childrearing and climate change adaptation, which shape their deep-state values about awareness of consequence; younger generations are more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children due to their lived experience of climate crises, which shape their perceptions about climate change and grow the sense of moral obligation to the future; educated people are more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children because of their environmental literacy, which reduces their perceived challenges of sustainable parenting; high-income people are more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children because they have the resources for carbon-neutral parenting; religious individuals are more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children because religiosity shapes their cultural values and personal norms to protect the environment; and people who have the support of a marital partner are more likely to prefer carbon-neutral children because becoming parents encourages them to be environmentally aware, and they feel peer pressure to act eco-friendly during child rearing. But there is still an “attitude-behavior gap” because structure constraints, financial constraints, and specialized family responsibilities lead to it being challenging for people who care about the environment to consistently adopt low-carbon behaviors.

Particularly, the findings of this study provide governments, environmental organizations, and policymakers with a framework to design initiatives that encourage people to prefer carbon-neutral choices by highlighting the importance of such choices for their children's better future. In the context of developing nations, implementing green birth certificates will effectively encourage environmentally responsible parenting. During the registration of a birth certificate, parents could be given the option to plant a certain number of trees to help neutralize their children's emissions. Besides, the government should waive the taxes for eco-friendly baby products and ensure the availability and access of these products to people of all economic classes. Moreover, the government can use the community clinics and maternal healthcare centers to promote the concept of carbon-neutral children during counseling with parents. They can form partnerships with environmentally conscious parents, which will serve as a model for the general public. Another effective initiative to promote the concept of ‘carbon-neutral children’ will be to include the concept in the textbooks of primary and secondary level students. It will also teach children eco-friendly behaviors outside of the home.

Despite these insights, several limitations of this review must be acknowledged. Firstly, this study presents the general probable intentions of parents in developing countries. Future research should explore the real scenario using primary data. Besides, longitudinal studies should be conducted to see whether children raised with environmentally conscious values carry such behaviors into adulthood. Second, having carbon-neutral children is a complicated process. Its feasibility, social acceptance and ethical implications are still uncertain. It will not be feasible for people all over the world to adopt this practice. Economic and development considerations also need to be considered since sustainable parenting practices may not be equally accessible to all. Sustainable goods, clean power, and environmental education should always be a fundamental right. Therefore, besides root-level initiatives, structural reformation is also necessary for the effective application of this strategy. Furthermore, technological innovations need to be affordable to the majority and at acceptable prices to have significant impacts on diverse economic and social strata. Thirdly, although this study introduces a novel strategy—‘having carbon-neutral children’—to mitigate climate change, parents’ desire for carbon-neutral children presents both possibilities and difficulties for mitigating climate change. Implementing this strategy may have some socio-ethical risks, as limiting procreation to mitigate climate change hampers general people's reproductive freedom. In future studies, ethical concerns also need to be considered, particularly on social justice and reproductive rights. Follow-up studies need to examine public attitudes and opinions towards carbon-neutral parenting within the cultural, religious, and economic contexts that influence views on climate-driven family planning. Furthermore, studies should explore how media narratives, green campaigns, and social movements influence public attitudes towards sustainable parenting. Fourthly, as having a carbon-neutral child is a personal choice, this strategy individualizes a public problem: ‘climate change.’ Therefore, big industries, infrastructures, corporations and political organizations get the space to neglect their environmental responsibilities. Ultimately, future studies should identify how this personal goal of having carbon-neutral children can collaborate with government actions to achieve climate justice.