Writing

Pro-environmental Attitudes and Behavioral Change Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology To understand pro-environmental behavior and be able to influence it, it is essential to apply knowledge from attitude-behavior theories. However, the central characteristic of pro-environmental behavior can be understood only if knowledge from social dilemma theory is applied simultaneously. GLOSSARY attitude The general evaluation of an object; in the theories described in the this article, it refers to the general evaluation of a behavior. intervention technique A method to change behavior in a certain direction; in this article, it refers to a method to change antenvironmental behavior to pro-environmental behavior. pro-environmental behavior Behavior that is relatively favorable for the environment in comparison with behavior that serves the same primary function (e.g., using public transportation instead of driving a car). Social dilemma The tension between individual interests and collective interests. INTRODUCTION Large-scale environmental problems have been on the political agenda for more than 30 years but continue to threaten the earth's inhabitants. Clearly, some of the problems are particularly stubborn and defy easy solutions. Basic to an understanding of environmental problems is the fact that they are ultimately phenomena created by human behavior and, thus, are to be solved by human behavior. Gradually, this has become recognized in a field that was traditionally dominated by experts from the physical sciences such as chemists, biologists, and ecologies. This article gives an overview of contributions from social/environmental psychology that deepen insights into the human dimension of environmental problems and that are helpful in designing interventions that change behavior in a pro-environmental direction. First, the article describes a number of research traditions that are highly relevant for understanding behavior that affects the environment. These deal with altitude-behavior relations, moral considerations, and habits. Overarching these perspectives is the conceptual framework of social dilemmas, a paradigm that is essential for understanding the nature of environmental problems. The article then describes what psychology has to contribute when considering ways of changing behavior in a pro-environmental direction. ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS AS SOCIAL DILEMMAS Essential in thinking about the origin of many environmental problems is their social nature, originating from a fundamental tension between acting in the service of direct individual interests and acting in the service of long-term community interests. Many societal issues have this structure, and it is almost essential to an organized collective that individuals sacrifice, to some degree, their individual interests in favor of the interests of the community. Consider, for example, the principle of paying tax to finance collective institutions and services such as police, health care, and infrastructure for transportation. From an individual perspective, it would be profitable to evade the obligation of paying taxes. But when everyone would succeed in doing this, no public good would become available and everybody would be worse off. This is the core of the social dilemma that lies at the heart of many environmental problems. It was described in 1968 by Hardin as “The Tragedy of the Commons.” That publication has become emblematic for the analysis of environmental problems. Different in comparison with the taxpayers' dilemma is that environmental problems are often delayed in time and that effects are not necessarily manifest at the place where the problem is created. Consider the greenhouse effect, one of the most serious environmental problems of our time. One reason why the greenhouse effect is difficult to solve is that effects are expected to be delayed some 50 years. Also, it will become most threatening in parts of the world that have hardly contributed to the problem but that will be most vulnerable to the expected rise in sea level. The social dilemma paradigm has proven to be a fruitful area of social-psychological experimental research, providing information about which factors are likely to influence the trade-off between choosing for the private interest and choosing for the collective. Important factors include the payoff structure (i.e., how much the individual loses by acting in the collective's interest), communication about the decision among group members, expectations about the others' cooperation, perceived efficacy (i.e., how important the individual contribution is in determining the outcome of the group), and identifiability (i.e., the degree to which a person is known to have decided in favor of individual interests vs collective interests). THE RELATION BETWEEN ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR The social dilemma framework helps one to understand how behavior can be differentially driven toward individually valued outcomes or collectively valued outcomes such as the quality of the environment. However, it gives only a limited account of how behavior results from cognitive and motivational processes. Three theories are specifically important in the context of environmental behavior. Theory of Reasoned Action One of the most influential models in the social-psychological literature is the theory of reasoned action (TRA) developed by Fishbein and Ajzen. The TRA postulates that behavior is the result of three main factors: attitude toward behavior, subjective norm, and behavioral intention. Attitude and subjective norm are postulated to cause behavioral intention, which in turn causes behavior. In the TRA, Fishbein and Ajzen confined the attitude concept to the general evaluation of a behavior. Other theories have no restrictions as to the nature of the attitude object and, thus, may consider ideas, persons, things, issues, ideas, or other entities. However, these more general theories have fared less well when it was important to understand and predict behavior. Therefore, at the time, Fishbein and Ajzen's theory came as a much-needed innovation in the domain of altitude theories. The attitude is measured with a number of adjectives (e.g., good-bad, pleasant-unpleasant, positive-negative) that are generally statistically combined to obtain a general judgment of the performance of a certain act. Subjective norm is the perception of the individual that, in general, other people who are important to the individual want him or her to perform, or not to perform, that behavior. Who is important may vary across behaviors, but often this will include family, friends, and neighbors. Other influences may stem from a religious institution to which a person feels attached, a political party, and the environmental movement. It is the individual's overall impression of how to behave, according to this collective of reference persons and groups, that is defined as the subjective norm. The third concept is behavioral intention, that is, the deliberate plan to perform the behavior. According to the theory, the intention is the result of a decision process based on the attitude and the subjective norm, and it is the best predictor of behavior. Finally, behavior is the performance of a certain act, In the TRA, behavior is usually confined to acts that are observable by others such as separating garbage and buying ecological food. The Backgrounds of Attitude and Subjective Norm In the TRA, the concepts of attitude and subjective norm both are explained by a combination of two elementary concepts. The attitude toward a behavior is caused by beliefs about the likelihood of salient outcomes of performing a behavior, weighted by the evaluation of each of those outcomes. Salient outcomes are the outcomes that immediately come to the mind of the individual when thinking of the behavior. This combination of belief strength and evaluation of each outcome was formalized by Fishbein and Ajzen in the following formula: Aact = ∑B × E. The formula stales that the attitude toward a certain behavior (Aact) is the sum of the products of beliefs (subjective estimate of likelihood of occurrence) and evaluations (valence) of all the behavioral outcomes that are considered by the individual. Subjective norm, like the altitude concept, is composed of two subconcepts that explain which persons and groups are responsible for the normative pressure to perform, or not to perform, a certain behavior. The first concept is that of normative belief. A normative belief indicates the extent to which a person thinks that a specific referent person or group wants him or her to perform a behavior. Usually, with each behavior, the individual holds a number of normative beliefs. Referent persons will be family members (e.g., spouse, children, parents) who are important for many behaviors, whereas the influence of other persons or groups may vary more strongly with the behavior. For some behaviors, such as recycling of organic waste, the opinion of an environmental organization may be quite influential, whereas the opinion attributed to this group will be irrelevant when deciding whether to make a visit to one's parents' house over the weekend. Each normative belief (NB) is weighted for the so-called motivation to comply (MC), that is, the degree to which an individual allows this referent person or group to exert influence on him or her. Subjective norm (SN) is the sum of the products of all normative beliefs and the corresponding motivation to comply. Expressed as a formula, SN = ∑NB × MC. Correspondence: A Major Condition for Application of the TRA Correspondence entails that all of the components of the model are measured at the same level of specificity. Correspondence must exist on four criteria: action, target, context, and time. Action refers to the behavior itself. For example, if the behavior that is being investigated is recycling, all concepts of the theory must be specified as recycling and not as recycling in the measure of behavioral intention and as pro-environmental behavior in the measurement of the attitude. Similarly, one should specify the target (also called object some-times) consistently. If one is interested in predicting the recycling of organic waste and not of used paper, aluminum cans, or glass, one should specify each component of the model as pertaining to the recycling of organic waste. And again, concerning context, one should decide whether one wants to investigate people's recycling behavior of organic waste in their homes, in their workplaces, or perhaps in all of the places where they spend time. Finally, concerning lime, one must decide whether one wants to investigate people's recycling of organic waste next week (e.g., because there will be a special organic waste recycling drive organized by an environmental organization), the coming year, or forever from now on. Note that it is a mailer of choice by the investigator at which level of specificity all of the components of the model are measured. Note also that the often used concept of environmental concern can be considered to be a very general altitude that is not correspondent with specific behavioral measures. Therefore, relationships between environmental concern and specific behaviors will necessarily be weak. The Theory of Planned Behavior The TRA assumes that the behavior under investigation is under volitional control, that is, that people believe that they can execute the behavior whenever they are willing to do so. Gradually, the TRA was used more often for the study of behaviors for which control was a variable factor. For that purpose, the TRA was complemented by a component that was named perceived behavioral control. This concept represents the extent to which people believe they are able to perform the behavior because they have adequate capabilities and/or opportunities or are lacking in these. It is very easy to see that this factor can substantially improve the generality of application of the model because there are many behaviors that need specific skills or external facilities. For example, recycling is virtually impossible if no collection system is available, and abandoning private cars is often impractical, at the least, when public transportation functions poorly. The successor of the TRA that incorporates volitional control is the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Similar to attitude and subjective norm, the joint effects of two subconcepts determine behavioral control. The first subconcept consists of so-called control beliefs, that is, the estimated likelihood that each of a number of specific factors will facilitate or impede execution of the behavior. An example might be the following control belief: “I can go to my office by bus given the distance from the bus stop to my home.” The second factor is called perceived power, that is, a judgment of the degree of facilitation or impediment that each specific control belief represents. An example might be the following: “The distance from the bus stop to my home makes it very easy/very difficult to go to my office by bus.” The formula combining the two subconcepts of likelihood of control and perceived power is identical to that of the attitude and subjective norm concepts: PBC = ∑C × P. Both the TRA and the TPB have been used repeatedly for investigating specific environmental behaviors such as changing travel mode, water conservation, recycling, and green consumerism. In general, the models have proven to be useful in understanding the behavior, with important contributions of perceived behavioral control. Norm Activation Theory The attitude concept, as used in the TPB, is meant to be a general evaluation of a behavior. This implies that al! of the specific evaluative criteria that guide a decision to adopt, or not to adopt, that behavior should determine the attitude score. This does not seem to be the case given that research has shown repeatedly that moral considerations are not effectively covered by the attitude concept. Environmental behavior, because of its social dilemma character, clearly has a moral dimension in that acting in favor of the environment/community is generally perceived as morally superior to acting out of self-interest. The development of moral considerations and their relation to behavior is described in Schwartz's norm activation theory (NAT). The central concept is personal norm, defined as intrinsically motivated self-expectations regarding morally appropriate behaviors. Norm activation generates a feeling of personal obligation to perform a specific behavior. According to the NAT, norm activation occurs under the influence of four situational activators and two personality trait activators. Norm activation starts with the awareness of need. It involves the extent to which a person's attention is focused on the existence of a person or a more abstract entity (e.g., the environment) in need. Apart from being aware of need, the potential actor must define the situation at hand as one in which he or she feels some responsibility for the consequences of the needy party's welfare. Norm activation is further enhanced by efficacy, 'hat is, the extent to which a person recognizes actions that might alleviate the need. The actions that are recognized as such determine which specific norms are activated. Finally, ability refers to the actor's perception about whether he or she possesses the resources or capabilities needed to perform the local behavior. In addition, the NAT proposes that two personality trails influence activation of personal norm: awareness of consequences and denial of responsibility. Awareness of consequences refers to a person's receptivity to situational cues of need. Denial of responsibility refers to a person's inclination to deny responsibility for the consequences of his or her behavioral choices for the welfare of others. The four situational activators and the two personality traits determine whether or not a behaviorally specific personal norm becomes activated. Specific behaviors, such as burning garden waste, recycling, buying lead-free gasoline, using off-road vehicles in the environment, energy conservation, and littering, have been studied by means of the NAT. In general, just parts of the whole model have been used. Most studies show that personal norms significantly influence pro-environmental behavior, whereas there is less agreement about the predictors of personal norms and the exact process through which personal norms become activated. Habits All of the approaches to understanding environmental behavior described in this section assume that people process relevant information to decide to perform an environmentally relevant behavior in a pro- or antienvironmental manner. However, people often rely on behavioral routines or habits. Habits are especially likely to develop when behaviors are displayed frequently and in a stable context. Habitual behavior is defined as behavior that is displayed automatically on the presence of a goal, that is, a direct goal-action link that is not preceded by consciously developed intentions. Automatically executed behavior has three main characteristics in that (a) it can be executed fast, (b) its execution cannot be controlled, and (c) it is very efficient (i.e., it allows other cognitive processes to be executed simultaneously). Care should be taken not to equate habitually performed behavior with all behaviors that are performed in the past, even when the conditions of high frequency and context stability are met. Behavior executed in the past can influence future behavior through its effect on intentions, and in that case it is unlikely that the behavior is a habit. However, some studies have shown that the strength of intentions to influence behavior depends on the degree to which behavior has been performed in the past. When behavior has been frequently performed in the past, the effect of intentions on behavior is smaller. In such cases, where past behavior changes the intention-behavior relationship, it is very likely that past behavior indicates that habits play a role. Clearly, the automatic execution of behavior has important advantages. But it has drawbacks as well in that people who have established habits pay less attention to information that might be important for changing behavior. For example, the information that is issued by a railway company about improved services is likely to be ignored by people with strong car travel habits, even though it might be very advantageous for them. Given that people with strong habits cannot easily be influenced by information, an important question then becomes how to change habitual antienvironmental behavior. HOW TO EFFECT PRO-ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIOR CHANGE: THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGY Applied psychology can play a role in establishing more environmentally sound living patterns. This section gives a summary of the potential contribution of psychology for the development of intervention methods. The methods range from obligatory to voluntary systems, but all need the application of psychological knowledge to understand and optimize effects. Laws, Rules, and Regulations It seems to be a straightforward solution to communal problems to implement rules, regulations, or laws that prohibit the actions that cause the problem. However, from a psychological perspective, there are several issues that need mentioning. First, regulations will fail when the targeted population is not convinced of the necessity of the policy measure. In that case, strict enforcement will be necessary and costly. If strict enforcement is not applied, the targeted population will not adhere to the regulation. In both cases, the measure will not have the favorable effects that are desired. Second, a policy measure will be accepted according to its perceived fairness. Fairness means that people will realize that the policy measure targets the right actions and punishes offenders according to the severity of their offenses. Third, from these characteristics and based on laboratory research on social dilemmas, it can be predicted that people will be most willing to endorse policy measures when they are in favor of the proposed measure but are very uncertain what other people's attitudes and behavior will be. These psychological effects of perceptions, attitudes, and uncertainties and their relationships were formalized in the structural goal expectation theory developed by Yamagishi in 1986. Fourth, implementation of policy measures, even if they are successful, is not an easy way out of the social dilemma. To develop legislation, political support for measures protecting the environment is necessary. To create political support, environmental awareness and concern among voters, and willingness to sacrifice personal advantages for long-term collective benefits are necessary. Changes in the Physical Environment Measures that are generally less dependent on political approval are changes in the physical environment that facilitate pro-environmental behavior or impede antienvironmental behavior. These kinds of measures can work in three different ways. Direct Influence on Behavior Changing the layout of a road (e.g., by creating additional curves or narrowing lanes) will reduce automobile speed and emissions directly. Influence on Habits That Control Behavior Many environmental behaviors are habitually performed. Changing the physical context of the behavior means that these habits no longer apply and information must be sought about how to achieve the behavior's goal in these changed circumstances. This renewed need for information creates possibilities for pro-environmental behavior change, for example, by showing that the daily commute to work can now be completed faster by public transportation than was the case during the period when the car commute habit was developed. Influence on the Convenience of Performing Pro-environmental Behavior In many cases, pro-environmental behavior is impeded not by negative attitudes but rather by weak positive attitudes combined with a lack of perceived behavioral control. For example, most people are in favor of recycling garbage but are discouraged by the lime and effort it takes to bring their recyclable garbage to a recycling station. Creating drop-off facilities for recycling paper, bottles, and other recyclables at close range from home may strongly increase the volume of recyclable materials. Monetary Incentives It might seem as though the most straightforward way in which to solve environmental problems is to let polluters pay for the damage they do to the environment. In general, this may be an effective strategy that eliminates the social dilemma structure of environmental problems. Research has shown that people are indeed sensitive to changes in the payoffs and that the number of egoistic choices (as compared with choices for the collectivity) is reduced when egoistic choices are less profitable. However, the following subsections review n number of complicating factors pertaining to the psychology of justice, the perception of monetary changes, and the dependence of monetary incentives on Information to accomplish the desired effect. Moreover, financial measures run the risk of weakening intrinsic motivation, that is, the motivation to act in a pro-environmental manner out of deeply felt concern for the state of the environment. Policy Measures Financial measures, in particular, can be evaluated differently depending on the fairness principle that is considered appropriate. Three principles are applied: those of equity, equality, and need. Equity implies that the damage is compensated by the actor in proportion to the damage that he or she causes. Equality implies that people contribute to the same extent, for example, that they pay the same amount for having their houses connected to the city's sewer system regardless of the amount of polluted water they produce. Need implies that people with more financial resources assume a larger share of the financial burden. It is not always clear which principle should apply in a specific situation. This political disagreement constitutes a reason for the absence or delay of appropriate measures. Price Perception Price perception is subject to many different influences that can substantially change the relation between actual costs and willingness to take pro-environmental action. A finding that is at the core of Tversky and Kahneman's prospect theory is that people are more sensitive to potential losses than to potential gains. For that reason, it is advised to frame financial consequences of antienvironmental behavior as a potential loss instead of framing financial consequences of pro-environmental behavior as a potential gain. The complexity of consequences of financial measures may cause the use of heuristics. For example, the calculations necessary to decide whether it is cost-efficient to install double-glazing are difficult because it is necessary to simultaneously consider changing consumption, changing energy prices, costs of a loan, and/or lack of profit from a different investment. Consumers, and even entrepreneurs, are rarely able to take all of the relevant factors into account and may simply evaluate a decision on the basis of nominal costs before and after installment. Financial Measures Measures such as subsidies, loans, discounts, and other price changes do not automatically lead to changes in behavior. Being aware of those price changes is crucial, and this implies the importance of informational interventions that precede or accompany the introduction of financial measures. Several experiments have demonstrated that attractive financial propositions are successfully implemented only when sufficient attention is given to making the programs known. To increase participation, it is often more prudent to spend money on information campaigns than to further increase the financial attractiveness of propositions. Target Recurring Behavior When preparing financial measures that target recurring behavior, one should bear in mind that the motivation to perform pro-environmental behavior is changed from intrinsic (out of concern for the environment) to extrinsic (for the monetary advantage). For one-time decisions, this might not be an issue. However, for recurring behavior, a relapse to antienvironmental behavior might occur once the financial gain from acting in a pro-environmental manner is removed. Pro-environmental behavioral maintenance then becomes problematic. Another unwanted effect that may stem from financially favorable energy-saving devices is the rebound effect. The knowledge that energy, or water, is so sparsely used due to new efficient devices might invite people to be less careful in their use of these devices. Having lights on throughout the night and showering longer might be invited by the installment of energy-saving lamps and water-saving showerheads, respectively. This phenomenon helps to explain why reductions in energy use through new efficient devices are generally not as favorable as foreseen in the calculations of technicians. Information Strategies As has now become clear, information is indispensable for implementing other interventions. It is helpful in increasing acceptance for policy measures, in announcing that physical changes in the environment are forthcoming, in announcing that financial support can be received for the implementation of energy-saving measures, and so on. Apart from supporting other measures, information can be used on its own for a large number of purposes, all ultimately intended to change behavior in a pro-environmental direction. Prominent functions of information include the following: Information may create insight into the structure of the dilemma of environmental behavior. Laboratory research on social dilemmas has pointed out that people are more willing to cooperate when they are made aware of the dilemma structure of environmental problems. Information may increase problem awareness and emotional concern. Both are important, but they are important to different degrees for different target groups. Groups of people who are motivated and capable of processing information thoroughly are better served by more factual information. Knowledge about the environmental problem — its nature, causes, and consequences — is an important condition to induce pro-environmental behavior, according to Schwarz's norm activation theory. For people who are relatively lacking in ability and motivation to process information, messages that stress the affective consequences of environmental degradation may be more influential. Information can teach people relevant skills that facilitate the performance of pro-environmental behavior. People should learn how to dispose of chemical waste and how to compost organic waste before such pro-environmental behavior is applied. Many studies point out that the relative case of performance is a crucial factor in pro-environmental behavior. Information may tackle antienvironmental habits by reminding people of their pro-environmental attitudes. Using prompts to remind people not to drive fast, to lower thermostat settings well before going to bed, and so on can be successful in that these prompts encourage behaviors with which people agree. Information may be used to address possible personal benefits of pro-environmental behavior. Sometimes, wrong estimates are made regarding the costs and benefits of pro-environmental behavior. This may occur, for example, when someone estimates the financial consequences of home insulation. Wrong estimates can be caused by outdated information (among other reasons), and this is especially likely in the case of habitual behavior when less attention is given to new information. This neglect of information may, for example, impede a choice for public transport even though travel conditions have improved greatly compared with the past when the choice to drive private automobiles was made. Communication can reduce social uncertainty Knowing that others are also willing to incur the costs of pro-environmental behavior convinces people that their efforts will not be in vain. This confidence in the efficacy of shared efforts will increase people's willingness to behave in a pro-environmental manner. It should be noted, of course, that this mechanism works only when others (are willing to) behave proenvironmentally. If this is not the case, communication strategies should focus on other determinants such as knowledge, concern, and ability. CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF INTERVENTIONS FOR PRO-ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIOR CHANGE Changing behavior is sometimes a difficult task, and this certainly applies to changing environmental behavior in a pro-environmental direction. The social dilemma nature of environmental problems makes personal benefits of change, and thus of pro-environmental change, less likely. Nevertheless, people are willing to change to some extent. The categories of instruments described in the previous section may be effective in inducing change. Bui what does effectiveness actually mean? Contrary to what one would think intuitively, effectiveness is not a unitary concept. In what follows, this section adheres to the evaluation system proposed by De Young in 1993. According to DC Young, effectiveness must be broken down into five dimensions: Reliability. Is an intervention able to effect the desired change in the target group? Moreover, is it able to do this every time? This criterion comes closest to what one would ask of an intervention program. However, an answer may be subtler than the questions imply. For example, the technique may be able to change individual behavior to some extent and may be more successful with some individuals than with others. The question about repeated use implies that the technique is not expected to create a lasting change that is exhibited each time the behavior can be displayed. Speed of change. How fast are changes in behavior accomplished? Of course, the sooner, the more impact (aggregated over time). However, some interventions can be expected to have their effect only after some time. The installation of expensive energy-saving equipment, such as a new central heating furnace, will usually be done when the old equipment is worn out. For research on effectiveness of intervention programs, it constitutes a challenge to be able to discover changes initiated by the program but effected over a longer term. However, this would be desirable to know so as to be able to give a good estimate of the value of an intervention program. Particularism. This is the degree to which an intervention must be tailored to the characteristics of a target group. This ranges from an intervention that is universally applicable to an intervention that is uniquely designed for an individual. Money is an example of a motivator that is considered to be generally applicable because it retains its value regardless of the person intervening, whereas personal attention seems to be at the other extreme because it clearly matters who is giving personal attention. An intervention that is universally applicable and effective is, of course, a great tool because it can be administered much more efficiently. However, in general, a degree of tailoring to characteristics of the target group is necessary to increase the effect of an intervention. Favorable in that respect is a recent development that allows messages to be tailored to the target person or group in an automatized process by which personalized information is sent to individuals whose characteristics have been inventoried earlier by means of a questionnaire and stored in an electronic database. Based on this information, a computer program automatically compiles an informative message that is closely tuned to the receiver. This technique combines the reach of mass media with the advantages of personalized advice; therefore, it seems promising. Generality. To what extent does an intervention technique influence behaviors that are not directly targeted but are conceptually related? And how closely related should they be to be influenced by the intervention? In general, it has proven to be difficult to create a degree of transfer from one behavior to the next. This is considered one of the two main challenges for an environmental psychology that aims to contribute to substantial changes in environmental behavior. Durability. To what degree are effects of intervention techniques lasting? Achieving durability of pro-environmental change constitutes the second main challenge. Especially with intervention techniques that focus on voluntary participation, it has been difficult to create substantial effects that last beyond the period when the intervention is executed. Examples of long-lasting changes are scarce. However, it seems that some techniques are more promising in this respect than are others. Especially explicit commitment (e.g., by a pledge done in public to adhere to the goals of the intervention) seems to offer possibilities of behavioral maintenance after the intervention has expired. CONCLUSIONS Environmental problems are essentially problems of human behavior. Psychology can help one to understand behavior and propose ways of changing behavior. These are the main tenets of environmental psychology. This article has given a brief overview of influential theoretical perspectives and of the way in which psychology can help to create or improve pro-environmental behavior. It seems that a considerable knowledge base has been built over the past 30 years but that much more scientific attention, creativity, and persistence are needed, especially in developing interventions that change behavior. The rate of pro-environmental changes, and especially the durability of changes, is problematic. This is very understandable when considered from the perspective of social dilemmas. Given the existing structures in society, it is difficult to forgo individual interests for environmental improvements that are uncertain, may take a long lime to come about, and may even be mainly beneficial to others. Possibly, psychology must dedicate more attention to the key actors in society — politicians, managers, and people who lead and represent large organizations. To this point, most attention has been on understanding and influencing people as consumers and citizens. For the most part, interventions have aimed at influencing people in their homes and sometimes in the workplace. In general, no attempts have been made to influence decisions made at city halls, in the boardrooms of multinational companies, or in the courts. Nevertheless, the bottom-up strategy of influencing people as consumers and citizens may profitably be complemented by attempts to understand people in specific, rare, and influential roles. This might help to bring about structural changes in society that would make it easier for everyone to behave in accordance with the needs and demands of the environment. See Also the Following Articles Attitude Measurement ▪ Attitudes ▪ Conservation Behavior ▪ Environmental Design and Planning, Public Participation in ▪ Restorative Environments Further Reading Ajzen, I. (2001). Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 28-58. Dawes, R. M. (1980). Social dilemmas. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 169-193. De Young, R. (1993). Changing behavior and making it stick. The conceptualization and management of conservation behavior. Environment and Behavior, 25, 485-505. Geller, E. S. (2002). The challenge of increasing proenvironment behavior. In Bechtel, R. B.Churchman, A. Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 525-540). New York: John Wiley. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243-1248. Kahneman, D.; Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47, 262-291. Manstead, A. S. R.Parker, D. (1995). Evaluating and extending the theory of planned behavior. In Stroebe, W.Hewstone, M. European review of social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 69-96). Chichester, , UK: Wiley. Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In Berkowitz, L. Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221-279). New York: Academic Press. Staats, H. (2003). Understanding pro-environmental attitudes and behavior: An analysis and review of research based on the theory of planned behavior. In Bonnes, M., Lee, T.Bonaiuto, M. Psychological theories for environmental issues (pp. 171-201). Aldershot, , UK: Ashgate. Stern, P. C. (2000). Psychology and the science of humanenvironment interactions. American Psychologist, 55, 523-530. Stern, P. C.; Oskamp, S. (1987). Managing scarce environmental resources. In Stokols, D.Altman, I. Handbook of environmental psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1043-1088). New York: John Wiley. Verplanken, B.; Aarts, H. (1999). Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: Is habit an empty construct or an interesting case of goal-directed automaticity? In Stroebe, W.Hewstone, M. European review of social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 101-134). Chichester, , UK: Wiley. Henk StaatsLeiden UniversityLeiden, The Netherlands © 2004 Elsevier Inc. APA citation: Staats, H. (2004). Pro Environmental attitudes and behavioral change. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied psychology. Elsevier Science & Technology. Credo Reference: https://ezproxy.gardner-webb.edu/login?url=https://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/estappliedpsyc/pro_environmental_attitudes_and_behavioral_change/0?institutionId=5562 Need a different citation style? Find it on Credo Online Reference Service