Psychology of environmentally and
socially sustainable behavior
ENS291
18th April 2016
Contact info: gunne.grankvist@hil.no or gunne.grankvist@hv.se
On today´s agenda
• What is Sustainable development?
• Some examples of psychological studies related to sustainable
development
Environmentally and socially sustainable
behavior
Sustainable development is defined in the Brundtland
Report as
“development that meets the needs and aspirations of the
present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs”.
Butlin, John (1989-04-01). "Our common future. By World commission on environment and development. (London, Oxford
University Press, 1987, pp.383 £5.95.)". Journal of International Development 1 (2): 284–
287.doi:10.1002/jid.3380010208. ISSN 1099-1328.
Environmentally and socially sustainable
behavior
Overview – trends in sustainable
development
• Leiserowitz, A. A., Kates, R. W., & Parris, T. M. (2006). Sustainability values, attitudes, and behaviors: A review of
multinational and global trends. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 31, 413-444.
• Lots of statistics and information about international trends
related to sustainable development
• Dont memorize all this information
Sustainable development values
• Shepherd, D. A., Kuskova, V., & Patzelt, H. (2009). Measuring the values that underlie sustainable development: The
development of a valid scale. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(2), 246-256.
• See Table 1 for a definition of such values
• See Table 2 for survey questions used to measure importance attached
to such values
• E.g. the value ”Respect for Nature”. That is ”to strive to respect
Nature”
Sustainable development values
• E.g. Respect for Nature
• People need only make minor changes to their current consumption out
of respect for nature (1)
• …..
• People must make major changes to their current consumption out
their respect for nature (7)
Sustainable development values
• E.g. Respect for Nature
• Well, - - - do we really measure importance attached to sustainable
development values with this kind of questions?
• Comments? Thoughts?
• Results presented by e.g. Leiserowitz, A. A., Kates, R. W., & Parris, T. M. (2006). Sustainability values,
attitudes, and behaviors: A review of multinational and global trends. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 31, 413-444. are,
partially, based on these kinds of survey questions….
Environmentally and socially sustainable
behavior
• Idea: You can support sustainable development by choosing
product options with different types of environmental or social
labels
• E.g.
Fairtrade
• Is the dominant label associated with socially sustainable
development
• Fairtrade is about better prices, decent working conditions and
fair terms of trade for farmers and workers in developing
countries
Environmentally sustainable behavior
• There are a number of product labels…
• E.g.
Wait!
• Are choices of products with these labels really a way to support
environmentally and socially sustainable behavior?
• Well, I am into psychology….
• My interest is in why some people are more positive towards
products with environmentally friendly or Fairtrade labels
• More positive towards, and willing to pay (WTP) more …
• Can psychology explain differences in attitudes towards, and
willingness-to-pay extra (WTP) for
• products with labels that presumably are associated with being
more eco-friendly or more supportive of social aspects such as
“better prices, decent working conditions and fair terms of trade
for farmers and workers in developing countries”
• That's what this course is all about
And now
• Some examples of psychological studies related to sustainable
development
Some research findings
• “Traits refer to what people are like, values to what people
consider important” (this is true by definition)
• A trait is a tendency to show consistent patterns of thought,
feelings and actions. E.g. extraversion (warmth, activity,
excitement seeking, positive emotions) or on the opposite
introversion.
• A value is a desirable guiding principle, e.g. to strive for power
(social status and prestige, control or dominance over people
and resources)
• Grankvist, G., & Kajonius, P. (2015). Personality traits and values: A replication with a Swedish sample. International Journal of Personality
Psychology, 1(1), 8-14.
Some research findings
• Preference for Fairtrade labelled products have been shown
associated with values, but not with traits.
• Especially; not to strive for the power value, e.g. social status
and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources,
have been found associated with a stronger preference for
Fairtrade labelled products.
• So those who more strongly support socially sustainable
development seems to strive less for the power value
• Grankvist, G., & Kajonius, P. (2015). Personality traits and values: A replication with a Swedish sample. International Journal of Personality
Psychology, 1(1), 8-14.
Some research findings
• I.e., if you have more or less of the traits extraversion or
neuroticism doesn’t seems to be associated with preference for
Fairtrade-labelled alternatives
• If you strive less for the power value (social status and prestige,
control or dominance over people and resources) your are
however more likely to support, and WTP more for, Fairtrade-
alternatives
• Grankvist, G., & Kajonius, P. (2015). Personality traits and values: A replication with a Swedish sample. International Journal of Personality
Psychology, 1(1), 8-14.
Some research findings
Figure 1. The Schwartz´s (1992) value model
Some research findings
Power: Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources
Universalism: Understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection, for the welfare of all people and
for nature
Benevolence: Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in frequent
personal contact
Some research findings
Power: Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources. NOT
positive towards FairTrade/socially sust dev
Universalism: Understanding, appreciation, tolerance, and protection, for the welfare of all
people and for nature. YES, clearly positive towards FairTrade/soc sust dev
Benevolence: Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in
frequent personal contact. Somewhat positive towards FairTrade/soc sust dev
Reference: Doran, C. J. (2009). The role of personal values in fair trade consumption. Journal of Business
Ethics, 84(4), 549-563. and Grankvist, G., & Kajonius, P. (2015). Personality traits and values: A replication with a
Swedish sample. International Journal of Personality Psychology, 1(1), 8-14.
Gender and age?
• Research results….
• In some studies - no gender differences, in other studies women
have been found more positive towards
activities/alternatives associated with sustainable development,
e.g. eco-labeled or Fairtrade-labeled alternatives
• Age; mixed results. No clear trend is visible
• Grankvist, G. (2012). ”Consumer attitudes to ethically labelled products”. Research report. University West, Sweden
(www.hv.se). Available at http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-5126
Doomsday Prophecies?
• How vulnerable is nature? There are different opinions on this
issue
• Oskamp, S. (2000). A sustainable future for humanity? How can
psychology help?. American Psychologist, 55(5), 496
• In this paper psychology professor Stuart Oskamp paints a
picture of acute threats of ecological disasters, and urgent and
large changes in our lifestyle is required!
• Does he exaggerate and dramatize?
• (I don´t know)
Positive and negative labels?
• Grankvist, G., Dahlstrand, U., & Biel, A. (2004). The impact of environmental labelling on consumer preference:
Negative versus positive labels. Journal of Consumer Policy, 27, 213-230.
• Today product-labelling is entirely voluntary, and actually
involves an additional cost.
• As a consequence only positive labels are used. ”Choose this
product, it is more ”ethical” than the average product.
Positive and negative labels?
• Grankvist, G., Dahlstrand, U., & Biel, A. (2004). The impact of environmental labelling on consumer preference:
Negative versus positive labels. Journal of Consumer Policy, 27, 213-230.
• In this study it was found that to avoid negative outcomes was
more important than to achieve positive outcomes. That is,
negative labels were more ”effective”
• Consequences? Thoughts? Ideas? Comments?
Positive and negative labels?
• In an evolutionary perspective…
• To avoid dangerous animals
Positive and negative labels?
• Or to find advantageous outcomes
Positive and negative labels?
• It was probably more important to avoid negative outcomes
• And, as a consequence, we are ”programmed” to avoid negative
outcomes (e.g. close contact with Lions)
• To avoid the negative is more important than to accive the
positive
• And, today almost all labels are ”positive” labels…. Comments?
Religiosity
• Are religious people more positive towards activities associated
with sustainable development?
• In a study from USA. Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Catholics,
Jews and non-religious. …. Almost no differences between
these groups
• In a study from UK. Being Cristian was weakly, and positively,
related to preference for Fairtrade-alternatives
• Grankvist, G. (2012). ”Consumer attitudes to ethically labelled products”. Research report. University West, Sweden (www.hv.se). Available
at http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-5126
Religiosity
• In the study UK study. If God was viewed as …
Antiques