Anthropogenic climate change currently threatens existing systems of human societies, and psychology has a significant role in exploring and untangling the predictors of sustainable behaviors and environmental concern. The present research identifies several individual demographic factors (age, education, and political ideology) as well as various attitudinal and social factors, such as ecological worldview, social identity, and place attachment, and explores their relationship with pro-environmental concern and behavior. The results of this synthesis indicate that there are complex and dynamic associations between these demographic, attitudinal, and social factors, and environmental variables. Several relevant theoretical models are discussed (e.g., Value Belief Norm theory and the Theory of Planned Behavior), a summative model of behavioral predictors is introduced, and implications for community education and policy support are considered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbrahamseW., and StegL. (2013). Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(6), 1773–1785.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
3.
BergerI. E. (1997). The demographics of recycling and the structure of environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 29(4), 515–531.
4.
BriegerS. A. (2019). Social identity and environmental concern: The importance of contextual effects. Environment and Behavior, 51(7), 828–855.
5.
ButtelF. H. (1979). Age and environmental concern: A multivariate analysis. Youth & Society, 10(3), 237–256.
6.
CialdiniR. B., RenoR. R., and KallgrenC. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026.
7.
ClaytonS., and BrookA. (2005). Can psychology help save the world? A model for conservation psychology. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 5(1), 87–102.
8.
CruzS. M. (2017). The relationships of political ideology and party affiliation with environmental concern: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 53, 81–91.
9.
DietzT., SternP. C., and GuagnanoG. A. (1998). Social structural and social psychological bases of environmental concern. Environment and Behavior, 30(4), 450–471.
10.
FieldingK. S., and HornseyM. J. (2016). A social identity analysis of climate change and environmental attitudes and behaviors: Insights and opportunities. Frontiers in Psychology, 7.
11.
GiffordR., and NilssonA. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology,49(3), 141–157.
12.
GuagnanoG. A., SternP. C., and DietzT. (1995). Influences of attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environment and Behavior, 27(5), 699–718.
13.
HarlandP., StaatsH., and WilkeH. A. M. (1999). Explaining pro-environmental intention and behavior by personal norms and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(12), 2505–2528.
14.
HinesJ. M., HungerfordH. R., and TomeraA. N. (1986). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8.
15.
LiereK. D. V., and DunlapR. E. (1980). The social bases of environmental concern: A Review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 44(2), 181–197.
16.
McCrightA. M. (2011). Political orientation moderates Americans' beliefs and concern about climate change: An editorial comment. Climatic Change, 104(2), 243–253.
17.
OregS., and Katz-GerroT. (2006). Predicting pro-environmental behavior cross-nationally: Values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory. Environment and Behavior, 38(4), 462–483.
18.
ReesJ. H., and BambergS. (2014). Climate protection needs societal change: Determinants of intention to participate in collective climate action: Collective climate action intention. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(5), 466–473.
19.
SternP. C. (2000). New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.
20.
van ZomerenM., PostmesT., and SpearsR. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535.
21.
van ZomerenM., PostmesT., SpearsR., and BettacheK. (2011). Can moral convictions motivate the advantaged to challenge social inequality? Extending the social identity model of collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(5), 735–753.
22.
WiernikB. S., OnesD., and DilchertS. (2013). Age and environmental sustainability: A meta-analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(7/8), 826–856.
