In a study of households living in mid-size cities in France, Germany, Norway and Sweden we assessed preferences (among 65 possible actions) for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Each GHG reduction action was compared in terms of three objective criteria – CO2e emissions, health impact and cost – using scores which gave alternative priority weightings to each. The multi-criteria scores were then compared with the proportion of respondents declaring their willingness to implement each action. Actions that respondents were often willing to implement and scored highly on the three assessment criteria included measures with likely ancillary benefits for health such as eating 30% more vegetarian food, walking and cycling instead of using public transport, and improvements of roof and window insulation. Although most householders appeared willing to make appreciable changes to their lifestyle and home in order to help achieve GHG emissions reductions, relatively few signaled their willingness to adopt major changes, such as becoming entirely vegetarian or giving up use of the car, even if there were appreciable health benefits. The evidence of these analyses provides insights into household preferences for actions that may help achieve important mitigation and health benefits.