The rapidly worsening climate crisis, deforestation, and biodiversity loss threaten our 21st century business model. These developments also reverberate within organizations, carrying important implications for leadership and everyday work practices (see also APA Task Force on Climate Change, 2022; Ones & Delchert, Reference Ones and Dilchert2012). In this commentary on Kühner et al. (Reference Kühner, Hüffmeier and Zacher2025), we argue that having I-O psychology researchers more explicitly integrate environmental sustainability implications in their publications would support efforts to address the climate crisis and enhance the practical relevance and societal impact of our field. To that end, we propose a thought-provoking initiative to enhance the visibility of environmental sustainability by introducing dedicated environmental impact sections in our field’s literature, even when the primary focus of the research is not on pro-environmental behavior or sustainability-related outcomes. With this initiative, we aim to underscore that the climate and environmental crises constitute a cross-cutting concern for all scientific disciplines.
Implications for environmental sustainability can arise from unexpected sources
Kühner et al.’s framework focuses on environmental sustainability. Yet, their working definition relies on abstract constructs (“enhancing human well-being while keeping resource use within the regenerative limits of ecosystems to meet the resource and service needs of present and future generations,” p. 3) that may be difficult for I-O psychologists to operationalize (for reviews, see Ones & Dilchert, Reference Ones and Dilchert2012; Zacher et al., Reference Zacher, Rudolph and Katz2023; Reference Zacher, Kühner, Katz and Rudolph2024). Further, this ambiguity risks a jingle-jangle problem over what counts as green, distracting from the urgent need for impact. Building on Kühner et al.’s impact-first rationale, we, therefore, argue that I-O psychology should broaden its scope: Nearly any empirical insight—whether on remote work, AI adoption, team dynamics, or performance appraisal—may carry implications for environmental sustainability and climate action, even if such outcomes are not the study’s primary focus.
There are many instances of potential environmental impact in general I-O psychology research, even when green behavior is not the primary outcome of interest. For example, recent research has demonstrated that employees’ well-being and recovery experiences can be enhanced by exposure to natural environments (Hilbert et al., Reference Hilbert, Finke, Küpper, Binnewies, Berkemeyer and Maunz2025), and these findings, when translated into practice, support arguments for preserving forests and protecting biodiversity. As another example, although research on green leadership has grown substantially (e.g., Robertson & Barling, Reference Robertson and Barling2013; Schäpers et al., Reference Schäpers, Guntermann, Heinemann and Mönke2024; Zacher et al., Reference Zacher, Rudolph and Katz2023; Reference Zacher, Kühner, Katz and Rudolph2024), insights from classical leadership theories have informed these developments. For example, environmentally specific transformational leadership builds directly on traditional transformational leadership frameworks (e.g., Robertson & Barling, Reference Robertson and Barling2013). Further, research on classical transformational leadership may also offer valuable insights into the predictors of sustainability-related outcomes. For instance, high-quality leader–follower relationships may reduce employee skepticism and foster greater commitment toward sustainability initiatives (e.g., Hu et al., Reference Hu, Ghardallou, Dong, Li and Nazeer2025; Lee, Reference Lee2020; Xiao et al., Reference Xiao, Yan, Li and Liu2024).
Likewise, research on digitization in organizations may focus on activities that indirectly reduce carbon emissions. Here, implementations like hybrid work arrangements, virtual teams (Dulebohn & Hoch, Reference Dulebohn and Hoch2017; Gilson et al., Reference Gilson, Maynard, Jones Young, Vartiainen and Hakonen2015; Handke et al., Reference Handke, Costa and O’Neill2024; Raghuram et al., Reference Raghuram, Hill, Gibbs and Maruping2019), and digitally supported hiring decisions with, for example, asynchronous video interviews (Basch et al., Reference Basch, Melchers and Büttner2022; Dunlop et al., Reference Dunlop, Holtrop and Wee2022; Reference Dunlop, Hickman, Holtrop and Powell2025; Lukacik et al., Reference Lukacik, Bourdage and Roulin2022) or social media screenings (Mönke, Roulin, et al., Reference Mönke, Roulin, Lievens, Bartossek and Schäpers2024; Roth et al., Reference Roth, Bobko, Van Iddekinge and Thatcher2016) may partially substitute for travel- and resource-intensive practices like in-person meetings, printed application materials, or on-site job interviews. Yet, analogous to current discussions about AI adoption in organizations, it is important to discuss environmental trade-offs. Although technological advancements and AI tools can streamline processes and improve efficiency (e.g., Andrews et al., Reference Andrews, Klein, Forsman, Sachau, Huffman and Klein2013; Bankins et al., Reference Bankins, Ocampo, Marrone, Restubog and Woo2024; Krumm et al., Reference Krumm, Thiel, Reznik, Freudenstein, Schäpers and Mussel2024), the substantial energy demands of large-scale data centers may impede decarbonization efforts (e.g., OECD, 2022). However, in the studies we have highlighted, environmental sustainability and the climate crisis typically receive no substantive attention.
Thus, we call on all I-O psychology researchers to more explicitly consider and discuss the environmental implications of their findings. Environmental sustainability is a cross-cutting issue for humanity, and our field could reflect this by routinely asking, how might these results contribute to—or hinder—organizational environmental sustainability? We think that such reflection would spur novel solutions for organizations facing the climate crisis. Meaningful impact may emerge in I-O psychology domains where it is not typically expected, and we cannot afford to leave this potential untapped.
Remember the planet and institutionalize it: How impact sections can mainstream environmental sustainability in I-O psychology research
As a concrete, thought-provoking step to institutionalize such reflections and to mainstream environmental sustainability across I-O psychology, we propose that journals and authors consider adopting a brief environmental impact discussion as a standard section in empirical articles. Inspired by the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act, such sections would require authors to reflect on both the positive and negative environmental implications of their findings and, if they deem it necessary, to suggest more sustainable alternatives (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2025). The content of these sections could be structured around the logic of the triple bottom line, that is, considering implications for people, the planet, and the long-term profit of the organization (Elkington, Reference Elkington1998). This would ensure a holistic assessment of impact that aligns with ecological, social, and economic dimensions of sustainability. Importantly, such sections should be grounded in the article’s empirical data and methodological rigor, with minimal influence from the authors’ ideologies—a standard of quality that can be upheld through editorial and peer review processes.
Much like diversity statements in job posts and recruitment (Alahakoon et al., Reference Alahakoon, Beatson, Keating, Mathmann, Mortimer and Worsteling2024; Schmaling et al., Reference Schmaling, Trevino, Lind, Blume and Baker2015) or mandatory open science declarations in outlets such as the Journal of Applied Psychology (Eby, Reference Eby2025) or Psychological Science (Vazire, Reference Vazire2024), we think that an environmental impact section would normalize environmental considerations in I-O psychology and reveal synergies across subdisciplines. Thereby, even scholars whose work does not focus explicitly on green topics would be prompted to outline potential applications for organizational sustainability, estimate environmental benefits where data allow, and identify gaps for future research. By doing so, environmental sustainability would cease to be a niche and instead become an integral element of mainstream I-O research. This could amplify I-O psychology’s collective impact on the global transition to carbon-neutral business models, in line with Kühner et al. call for impact-driven research. Hence, we encourage authors and journal editors to consider incorporating environmental impact sections into publications.
Beyond research manuscripts: institutionalizing sustainability in academia may normalize its adoption in organizational practice and reduce polarization
Although such environmental impact sections will primarily serve to normalize sustainability issues in research, they may also carry practical value. That is, by institutionalizing sustainability considerations at the level of research communication, we can lay the groundwork for organizations to view these considerations as inherent to their operations. We posit that including environmental impact sections in research manuscripts will also have a downstream effect on organizational practice. This is important because in high-emission contexts such as the United States or parts of Europe, the climate crisis has become a cultural flashpoint, with partisan divides influencing voting patterns, everyday behavior, organizational decision-making, and workplace norms. Too often, environmental sustainability is associated with political ideology and, thus, is a polarizing topic in organizations (see Iyengar & Westwood, Reference Iyengar and Westwood2015; Javidan et al., Reference Javidan, Cotton, Kar, Kumar and Dorfman2023; McCright & Dunlap, Reference McCright and Dunlap2011; Mönke et al., Reference Mönke, Lievens, Hess and Schäpers2024; Pew Research Center, 2014; Roth et al., Reference Roth, Goldberg and Thatcher2017; Swigart et al., Reference Swigart, Anantharaman, Williamson and Grandey2020; Talaifar et al., Reference Talaifar, Jordan, Gosling and Harari2025). By consistently linking sustainability to broadly discussed topics in the I-O psychology literature and widely recognized organizational priorities, such as employee health, well-being, performance, and fiscal responsibility, our field can contribute to normalizing and depoliticizing sustainability as a core consideration in organizational decision-making. This may reduce ideological resistance, shield sustainability initiatives from the swings of political tides, and foster an organizational culture in which environmental sustainability becomes a noncontroversial part of how we do business.
Conclusion
Kühner et al.’s call for I-O psychology to move from analysis to impact is both timely and urgent. For the field to engage more strongly in macrolevel conversations, such as those concerning organizational strategy, business models, and corporate social responsibility, as well as debates on economic policy and regulatory frameworks, the untapped potential of I-O psychology research must be unlocked.
Hence, here we argue that empirical findings, even those seemingly unrelated to environmental sustainability, whether in the domains of leadership, job crafting, remote work, AI implementation, or employee well-being, can nonetheless have meaningful environmental implications. Accordingly, we propose that I-O psychology research institutionalizes environmental sustainability as a cross-cutting issue by encouraging researchers to include brief environmental impact sections in their manuscripts. This practice would encourage I-O psychologists to reflect on how their findings might advance or impede organizational environmental sustainability. Thereby, environmental sustainability can be shifted from a niche topic to a normative consideration in organizational research and practice. By doing so, we are convinced that I-O psychology will meaningfully expand the repertoire of actionable solutions to address the pressing climate and environmental crises.
Open access
