|
The Role of Psychology in Achieving Attitude and
Behavior Change to Mitigate the Effects of Climate
Change: An Overview
As
global temperatures rise, a historic shift in the
public’s awareness of our interdependence and of our
relationship to the environment is taking place.
The need for a re-orientation in attitudes and
behavior for decision makers in every sector of
society, and for all 6.6 billion of us, in our
communities, has become increasingly apparent.
“Environmental issues are best handled with the
participation of all concerned citizens, at the
relevant level.” (UN General Assembly, 1992).
UNESCO’s Constitution states: “Since wars begin in
the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the
defences of peace must be constructed.” This
appears to be also true in the case of responding to
climate change. As climate change is largely the
result of human action, conservation must start
with a re-orientation of attitudes and behaviors in
order to achieve sustainability. Sustainable
development has been defined as “development which
meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs.” (WCED, 1987). This is echoed by the UN’s
Millennium Development Goal Number 7, “Ensure
Environmental Sustainability,” which includes as
Target 9 of the MDGs: “Integrate the principles of
sustainable development into country policies and
programs and reverse the loss of environmental
resources.”
In this
overview chapter on the Role of Psychology in
Achieving Attitude and Behavior Change to Mitigate
the Effects of Climate Change, before delving into
the two components of mitigation – attitude change
and behavior change – and the part they can play in
the development of a culture of environmental care
and responsibility, let us first outline some of the
myriad activities which psychology and the other
social sciences can contribute to the
multidisciplinary dialogue in addressing climate
change, such as:
-
Sharing research results;
-
Proposing empirically based policies and
programs;
-
Conducting evaluation research to determine what
works;
-
Serving as catalysts in formulating
community-based responses to the challenge of
addressing current urgent day-to-day needs
without compromising the future;
-
Facilitating education related to skills and
attitudes compatible with sustainable patterns
of production and consumption.
-
Helping to shift attention from the “here and
now” to the “then and there”; and
-
Assisting us to translate the idea of “think
globally, act locally” into action.
As early
as a decade ago, psychologists have studied the
antecedents of pro-environmental attitudes and
behavior; they have conducted research on energy and
water conservation, recycling, composting, the use
of environmentally responsible shopping, and the use
of alternative transportation, among other
variables. Pioneering work on environmentally
relevant decision making, and the related
environmental and moral dilemmas, has been
initiated. Environmental degradation is often cited
as a stellar example of a “commons dilemma” – “a
situation where a collective cost or risk is
incurred……..through the combined negative external
effects of various individuals who act (relatively)
independently from one another.” (Vlek, 2000).
Hypotheses regarding the importance of commitment,
social support, the nature of the message, and many
other variables have been proposed (McKenzie-Mohr
and Oskamp, 1995; Vlek and Steg, 2007).
The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change notes that
“Many impacts [of climate change] can be reduced,
delayed or avoided by mitigation.” (IPCC, 2007). As
mitigation of climate change is a problem that can
be addressed effectively only through co-operative
effort on a large scale, psychologists can share
lessons learned in the areas of interdependence,
cooperation and conflict resolution, leadership,
organizational change, and other related fields.
They can facilitate education related to skills and
attitudes relevant to conservation and can help
communities formulate their unique responses.
Now to
the part played by Attitude Change and Behavior
Change.
First,
what is an Attitude?
The term
“attitude” refers to the predisposition to respond
favorably or unfavorably to a person, object or
event. Attitudes are assumed to direct behavior in
one of two ways: they can trigger consistent
behavior immediately and directly with little
thought, or they can lead to thoughts that result in
intentions to act. (Myers, 2008)
Intentions are the strongest predictors of
behaviors. A person’s intention becomes the basis
for deciding how and where one will work, live,
engage in recreation, vote, etc. Behavior will
result from intention which developed from
attitude. An attitude about the importance of
mitigating climate change may also lead to the
conscious development of a set of behaviors. Each
potential behavior could be evaluated as to its
effect on climate change.
The
Three Components of Attitude
It has
been suggested that we hold particular attitudes
because those attitudes serve a function for us.
The functions have been categorized as:
instrumental, knowledge, value-expressive and ego
defensive. (Katz and Kahn, 1978)
Instrumental Function: We hold favorable attitudes
toward those things that are instrumental in
bringing us reward, satisfaction and take us closer
to our goals. For example, currently many of the
necessities and pleasures of our lives are
associated with the use of fossil fuel. To change
from energy overuse to conservation may mean giving
up pleasurable but unsustainable lifestyles. To
achieve this change would involve understanding that
there is more to gain from conservation than from
overuse. This requires a new definition of what
constitutes “quality of life”: conservation mush
becme the instrumental means of striving for a
sustainable quality of life.
Knowledge Function: Attitudes that serve a
knowledge function help to make our complex world
easier to understand; they also make it easier to
reach decisions about new events and ideas we
encounter.
Value-Expressive Function: Some attitudes are
expressions of our values. We develop our values
from our families, religion, education, work, and
culture. Some cultures have a deeper respect for and
connection to nature than others. It is difficult to
change attitudes that derive from long-held values
and beliefs; however, many dedicated individuals and
organizations are currently striving to change these
values.
Ego-Defensive Function: Some attitudes are related
to one’s sense of personal value; they serve to
protect our self-identity and are particularly
resistant to change. Defensive resistance to
changing an attitude occurs when a person identifies
so closely with their attitude that to have it
challenged is threatening to his/her value as a
person.
Closely
related to “attitudes” are of course values. In
relation to the environment, some researchers have
found it useful to classify values into three
categories: egoistic values, focused on oneself and
self-oriented goals; altruistic values, reflecting
concern for other people, including family, friends,
community, humanity; and biospheric values,
reflecting concern for the well-being of all living
things, including plants, trees, and animals (Stern,
2000).
Behaving
Counter to Attitudes
When
people engage in behavior that goes counter to their
attitudes, the attitudes will gradually change to
conform to the behavior. In most cases, the
attitudes will persist as long as the behavior
remains, especially if the new behavior becomes
rewarding. For example, we are forced to obey
traffic rules or we will be fined. We cannot pass
stop signs, drive on the wrong side of the road,
etc. However, even when a policeman is not visible,
we continue to obey the laws because we realize it
prevents chaos and accidents. Our attitudes have
changed as a result of the change in behavior and
the realization that the behavior is beneficial.
It is
possible to act in ways to change behavior directly
without first changing attitudes. Changing behavior
before changing attitudes works effectively when
there is some external motivation for the behavioral
change. This external motivation can range from
coercion through persuasion. Once the motivator is
present, the desired behavior must be modeled for
the individual. The person copies the behavior and
is rewarded in some desirable way. The reinforcing
nature of the behavior will increase the probability
that the behavior will persist. Psychologists have
developed procedures for controlling and adjusting
motivation, modeling and reinforcing techniques to
promote the continuation of the desired behavior. In
the present context, “The critical challenge is to
help people get so personally committed to
environmental protection that they would use
self-management techniques to increase their
pro-environment behavior.” (Geller, 2000).
Behavior
change can be brought about incrementally, in small
steps toward the desired goal, or by transformation,
a sudden inspirational shift. We need to support
both incremental changes as well as fostering the
more dramatic transformational change – the kind of
change that is difficult to achieve without
internalizing a superordinate goal.
The
Concept of the Superordinate Goal
A
superordinate goal is defined as a goal that must be
achieved in order for the planet and its peoples to
survive, but which cannot be achieved by any one
individual or group; it can only be achieved by
cooperation and coordination – indeed, partnership –
among many groups (Sherif, 1961). Many people
recognize that the enormity and complexity of
climate change will demand cooperation among
individuals, communities, regions, and nations.
Psychological research on cooperation and conflict
resolution, with its emphasis on interdependence,
can help to foster behaviors that will mitigate the
effects of climate change; we may be initially
annoyed at conservation regulations and required
changes in behavior – until we recognize that they
may save our lives, the lives of generations to
come, and the life of our planet. “We should view
the achievement of sustainable living patterns as a
superordinate goal – a war against the common enemy
of an uninhabitable world.” (Oskamp, 2000).
Involvement in the Required Changes: Developing
Networks
Social
scientists have demonstrated that the broader the
involvement in a decision-making process, the
greater the likelihood of participation in the
decisions and the greater the likelihood of carrying
out those decisions. Oskamp (2000) champions the
“Use of carefully organized group activity, which
can help to build what Bandura (2000) has termed a
sense of collective efficacy.” The optimal formation
of groups involve members who have a common interest
and concern for climate change, along with other
members who have other interests and are involved
with other constituencies; these people will return
to their other affiliations and spread the word
about mitigating climate change to them. The idea
is to spread a series of networks that can influence
an ever wider cross-section of people about the
issue and the need to change attitudes and
behavior.
In
Closing:
The
following words were spoken regarding world peace,
but resonate well regarding the mitigation of the
effects of climate change:
“We have
no more urgent task……..So, let us not be blind to
our differences – but let us also direct attention
to our common interests and to the means by which
those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot
end now our differences, at least we can help make
the world safe for diversity. For, in the final
analysis, our most basic common link is that we all
inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same
air. We all cherish our children’s future. And we
are all mortal.”
John F.
Kennedy, “Peace Speech” – Commencement Address at
American University, June 10, 1963.
“In the
end, we only conserve what we love; we will only
love what we understand; we will only understand
what we are taught.”
Baba
Dioum, Senegalese Poet.
|