Memorandum submitted by Dr Tracey Bedford
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Tracey Bedford is an academic researcher
specialising in understanding environmental decision-making and
behaviour. She has worked for the Environment and Society Research
Unit, UCL and the Centre for Sustainable Development at the University
of Westminster. Her research has focused on the barriers and motivators
for ethical consumerism and sustainable lifestyles. Recently she
has completed research for the Department for Transport "New
Horizons Research Programme" examining the changes necessary
to facilitate sustainable lifestyles and the public acceptability
of lifestyle change. A more detailed explanation and justification
of many of the points contained within this memorandum can be
found in the report produced for the New Horizons Research Programme
entitled "Barriers and motivators for sustainable lifestyles:
an exploratory analysis".
2. ENVIRONMENTALLY
SUSTAINABLE BEHAVIOUR
AS A
SPECIAL CASE
2.1 All behaviour change programmes are
challenging. However, education for sustainable development has
some specific difficulties relating to the complexity of environmental
issues. Work with ethical consumers revealed that those committed
to undertaking fair trade, animal welfare and environmental actions
found the environment the hardest area to address effectively
(Bedford, 1999). This is because the information surrounding environmental
issues tends to be contested and dependent on science. Consumers
do not know whom to trust on issues such as organic agriculture,
genetically modified foods and the scale of climate change. At
times those wishing to live more sustainably find themselves acting
against Government advice, and the public are becoming concerned
that the Government is not committed to sustainability when this
interferes with corporate freedom and profit making. Focus group
work has shown that the public would be more likely to trust information
about environmental actions if it came from an agency which has
no political or profit making motivation (Bedford, 2002). As the
institutions of government and the scientific community have lost
consumer confidence, there is a lack of credible environmental
leadership, and therefore a corresponding lack of willingness
to undertake lifestyle change.
2.2 Animal welfare and fair trade issues
have clear patterns of effective action, with the consumer being
able to understand the effects of changing their behaviour. However,
the relationships between environmental damage and individual
actions tend to be complex. For example, climate change is created
by a series of actions; the problems caused by climate change
are mostly theoretical and disputed. Additionally, one individual
changing their behaviour will have little impact on the overall
problem, which needs to be addressed globally by all sections
of society. Hence, an individual changing their lifestyle to be
more environmentally friendly does not feel the same level of
efficacy felt by those becoming vegetarian or buying a fair trade
product. Environmental campaigns which target health risks or
particular species of animals tend to be the most successful in
stimulating public action, as they offer an understanding of the
environmental problem and the difference that action will make
on something solid or sensate. This makes behaviour change more
meaningful, understandable and rational.
2.3 Focus group work suggests that the general
public is overwhelmed by the number of sustainability issues needing
to be addressed (Bedford, 2002). As well as public information
campaigns, the public gain their knowledge of social and environmental
problems from the media and pressure groups. Health scares are
not fully separated from social and environmental issues in many
cases, thus people complain about BSE, foot and mouth, cancer
scares, labour conditions in the Third World, the ozone layer
and congestion charging as though they were related. With little
feedback about positive achievements in addressing sustainability
issues, the public have begun to feel that there are too many
issues to deal with. Individuals are quite open about the fact
that they will "do their bit", but will "only do
so much". As the number of things the individual feels they
have to do increases, the willingness to do anything decreases.
The consumer begins to feel any one action will make little difference,
and therefore is not worth undertaking. There is a growing feeling
that the environment has become such a problem that "we are
all doomed" and so should get on with life regardless (Bedford,
2002).
3. UNDERSTANDING
THE DECISION
MAKING ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Campaigns such as "are you doing
your bit?" use small-scale programmes of advertising to promote
a wide range of behaviour changes necessary to live more sustainably.
However, changing the general public's behaviour to incorporate
more environmentally benign forms of action and consumption requires
more than a programme of awareness raising and attitude change.
It is well known that knowledge and beliefs do not straightforwardly
determine the intention to act in an environmentally appropriate
manner: all behaviour is based on social expectations and norms.
Thus education for sustainable development needs to normalise
behaviour, as well as giving unambiguous information about the
necessity for, and impact of, lifestyle change.
3.2 The last two decades have seen a significant
shift in public attitudes towards the environment. It is now usual
for an individual to express a level of concern about sustainability
issues. However, it is not yet normal for an individual to change
their lifestyle to be in keeping with their environmental values.
This is due to the complex relationship between attitudes and
actions known as the "value-action gap". Every individual
holds a multitude of values, many of which conflict with each
other. Which value will be acted upon at any moment of time is
largely determined by social expectations of "normal behaviour"
(Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980).
3.3 At present in this country, a normal
lifestyle is a consumer led lifestyle. This lifestyle has developed
over centuries, with hundreds of billions of pounds of investment
in product design and promotion to encourage individuals to consume
goods at the current level of consumption. What is regarded as
a normal lifestyle involves owning a house, a car, a range of
electrical goods, and holidaying abroad. It is expected that any
individual will consume the maximum levels of goods and services
affordable in order to achieve the highest possible quality of
life. Consumer choices and individual actions have not previously
involved environmental considerations and corresponding voluntary
lifestyle constraints. Moreover, the highly desirable lifestyles
of the "rich and famous" are seen as be facilitated
by large houses with swimming pools and luxury sports cars. The
National Lottery game encourages the public to dream about "jet
set" lifestyles. Notions of successful, desirable and enjoyable
lifestyles do not, therefore, involve travelling on public transport
or worrying about personal levels of energy or water use.
3.4 Thus, whilst the public may care about
the environment, voluntarily denying oneself wanted goods and
services, and reducing personal choice, is perceived as being
irrational and old-fashioned. Moreover, research shows that those
who do undertake even limited lifestyle change are viewed as being
"over-emotional", "hair-shirted" and "pious
hippies" (Bedford, 1999). In short, changing ingrained and
desirable lifestyle practices will involve a much larger project
of promotion than a few ad hoc "are you doing your bit?"
adverts. Whilst environmental education in schools does help to
normalise environmental values, children will take their cues
for appropriate behaviour from the media, their peer group and
society as a whole. It is therefore necessary for environmental
education to understand the relationship between values and actions,
and to promote the actions as desirable, modern and forward-thinking.
3.5 The social psychologist Michael Billig
(1989) suggests that an individual will not undertake an undesirable
action if they can justify inaction. This would imply that in
order to ensure a shift towards sustainable living one of three
conditions must be met:
(i) Environmental choices and actions must
be perceived as desirable.
(ii) Environmental choices and actions must
be perceived as so normal that to not undertake them would be
considered unusual.
(iii) The social, legal or financial costs
of not undertaking environmental actions must be so great that
inaction cannot be personally justified.
3.6 At present schemes for the promotion
of lifestyle change for sustainability tend to promote win-win
solutions for the environment as cost effective and therefore
desirable. However, for those who perceive cost savings as negligible,
understanding the justifications for inaction may well prove to
be more successful. Each area of behaviour is likely to have a
different set of justifications for inaction. For example, saving
water involves very little cost in terms of behaviour change or
social acceptance if it simply involves turning off taps whilst
tooth brushing, peeling vegetables etc. Yet some consumers are
unwilling to undertake this behaviour change because unfavourable
reports on "fat cat" water company bosses lead the individual
to feel that they are having to pick up the costs of the industry's
irresponsibility and greed. Hence, promoting behaviour change
for water saving must be seen to have a corresponding drive to
improve the environmental responsibility of the water companies
involved.
3.7 It is known that in the presence of
uncertainty, where there is a choice of different actions that
can be justified using differing information from a range of interested
parties, the individual will choose to perform the action they
view as being the most desirable (Ungar, 1994; Lidskog, 1996).
In other words, as long as scientific debate leaves the individual
with room to argue that undertaking sustainable actions might
not have a positive effect, the individual is likely to continue
with their current habitual or enjoyable practices. Hence environmental
education programmes must offer strong leadership in reducing
the uncertainty of effective actions for sustainability if they
are to succeed in behaviour change. Other justifications for inaction
include: premium pricing for socially and environmentally friendly
products and public transport; the loss of choice and novelty
involved in adopting more sustainable behaviours; and difficulties
in conducting consistent patterns of sustainable behaviours in
the home, at school, at work and in public spaces. This latter
justification could be met by education programmes for sustainable
development being introduced into schools, the workplace, and
the home simultaneously, and should be backed with appropriate
infrastructure. For example, recycling schemes should exist for
domestic waste, corporate waste and by introducing separate bins
in public spaces.
4. STARTING POINTS
FOR EDUCATION
FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
4.1 Efforts to educate the public about
the changes necessary for sustainable living should situate individual
actions within the broader picture. There have been substantial
changes in international and national policy to address sustainability
issues; many production techniques have been overhauled in response
to environmental concerns. Environmental successes should be promoted
to offer positive feedback about the effects of changing actions
for more sustainable living. The level of social and environmental
responsibilities undertaken within both the public sector and
private industry should be highlighted, so that the public become
aware of the scale of change currently in process. This would
encourage the understanding that lifestyle change is part of the
general pattern of ecological modernisation being undertaken by
all sectors of society, and reduce concerns that the public are
being asked to pick up the costs of environmentally damaging business
practices.
4.2 The "are you doing your bit?"
behaviour change campaign was very naive in its approach to the
promotion of sustainable actions. If the Government is committed
to sustainable lifestyles then it is necessary to understand that
changing ingrained and desirable actions is a massive undertaking,
which will require substantial resources and a long-term and consistent
programme of promotion. It is not sufficient to understand which
actions facilitate more sustainable lifestyles and then to promote
the easiest and cheapest lifestyle solutions. Campaigns must start
from understanding current lifestyles, and the barriers to lifestyle
change for EACH particular area of lifestyle change, in order
to promote each lifestyle change appropriately.
4.3 Environmental concern and willingness
to act tend to follow high-profile media reporting on particular
issues. For example, in the 1980's this was the ozone layer, more
recently there has been widespread concern surrounding genetically
modified products. These areas of concern represent moments of
potential for lifestyle change campaigns, if the campaign can
be organised quickly enough to be responsive to the publics' own
concerns. The more familiar a risk becomes, the less concern it
elicits, and eventually the public learn to live with a particular
risk.
4.4 If the Government wishes to win back
public trust in relation to the environment, it will be necessary
for it to start by understanding the consumer's world, and occasionally
championing their concerns as they occur. Currently there is a
climate in which the concerns of the public are ignored whilst
the concerns of the Government are promoted. Recycling is a popular
concern for the public, as are food related issues. Environmental
education and behaviour change campaigns should begin by engaging
with the public through the areas that are of interest to the
public. Public education programmes should concentrate on a limited
number of areas and actions at any one time. This will help to
reduce the feeling that there are an unmanageable number of issues
that need to be addressed to live more sustainably.
4.5 One of the areas which offers strong
potential for expanding the acceptability of lifestyle change
is the comparison of Britain to other countries. For example,
focus group work has revealed that the public are aware that other
countries are ahead of the UK in terms of implementing recycling
schemes (Bedford, 2002). The perception that the Britain has fallen
behind our major European counterparts has helped aid positive
reactions to recycling schemes. This eases the path for recycling
to be promoted as normal, desirable, forward thinking and inevitable.
February 2003
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I and Fishbein, M (1980) Understanding
attitudes and predicting social behaviour Prentice Hall: New
Jersey.
Bedford, T (1999) Ethical consumerism: everyday
negotiations in the construction of an ethical self Unpublished
PhD: University of London.
Bedford, T (2002) Barriers and motivators
for sustainable lifestyles: an exploratory analysis Unpublished
report for the New Horizons Research Programme. Available from
the Department for Transport.
Billig, M (1989) Arguing and thinking: a
rhetorical approach to social psychology Cambridge University
Press: Cambridge.
Lidskog, O (1996) "In science we trust:
on the relation between scientific knowledge, risk consciousness
and public trust" Acta Sociologica vol 39 no 1 pp
31-56.
Ungar, S (1994) "Apples and oranges: probing
the attitude-behaviour relationship for the environment"
Canadian review of sociology and anthropology vol 31 no
3 pp 288-304.
| 
