APPENDIX 41
Memorandum from Professor David Uzzell
(University of Surrey)
I write as Head of the Environmental Psychology
Research Group (EPRG) in the Department of Psychology at the University
of Surrey. This group, specializing in the application of psychological
theories and methodologies to understanding environment-behaviour
relationships, has an international reputation in the area of
applied and policy-oriented research, particularly in the areas
of sustainability. This evidence draws upon national and international
research undertaken for local authorities, the UK government,
the EU, the Research Councils and the private sector over the
past 15 years.
1. Is a lack of public engagement and understanding
a real obstacle to the Government's progress on its sustainable
development agenda? Have there been any studies to show this?
Please refer to practical examples where possible.
Despite the fact that "sustainability"
has been in the public vocabulary for more than ten years this
term and that of "sustainable development" are not well
understood, and there is a great deal of confusion as to their
meaning. Many people do not understanding the term at all, and
for those who do have some understanding it is assumed that sustainable
development is largely concerned with the environment, green issues
or the countryside—the social and economic dimensions of
sustainability are rarely appreciated, understood nor seen to
connect with environmental issues. This suggests that raising
awareness is insufficient in itself as a strategy for enhancing
the public's understanding and adoption of sustainable practices.
The barriers to achieving progress on the Government's sustainable
development agenda are many, and range from the personal and cultural
through to the institutional.
If the public neither understand nor actively
engage and support the Government's sustainable development agenda
then the prospects for its success are uncertain. For example,
despite years of campaigning, public understanding of the need
for waste minimization is poor. A recently completed survey of
the attitudes of over 15,000 Surrey residents towards waste minimisation
(Lyons, Uzzell, and Storey, 2001) found that people were largely
poorly informed and confused about how they could reduce waste,
and had a relatively poor understanding of how their waste is
disposed of, the costs associated with waste management, waste
recycling, and local waste management. Furthermore, although they
understood recycling, they had very vague ideas about what re-use
and reducing waste involves.
The attitudes of socially excluded groups to
sustainability (eg ethnic minorities, the elderly, SE Groups D/E)
suggest that different approaches to sustainability education
are required (Uzzell and Leach, 2001; Uzzell, Leach and Hunt,
2002). Burningham and Thrush (2000) have found that these groups
are not insensitive to environmental issues, but environmental
policies with a strong local focus are more likely to attract
public interest and engagement than those which rely on a global
consciousness; support for local environmental projects may be
better motivated by talk of local improvements than by reference
to the environment which many people feel unqualified to discuss.
This conclusion might be extended to sustainability education
and initiatives generally.
Unjustified assumptions are made about the potential
effectiveness of "soft" targets for sustainability communications.
For example, children are regarded as a key audience for environmental
messages, although the objectives of such a strategy are only
loosely articulated. One justification is future oriented: however,
by laying emphasis on teaching children to become environmentally
aware and responsible citizens tomorrow, many children interpret
this to mean and resent that adults can continue to live their
unsustainable lives today. A second justification focuses on immediate
benefits by suggesting that children have the potential to influence
their parents and those around them. Our research has identified
very clearly some of the critical barriers to children acting
as environmental change agents in the home and the community (Uzzell
et al, 1994; Uzzell, 1999). For this to happen the child and
parent have to be willing to communicate with each other; the
environment had to be regarded as an appropriate topic for discussion
within the home; the child's openness and concerns about the environment
should be valued by the parent resulting in "expert"
status for the child; equally the parent should be willing to
adopt the role of pupil in deference to the "expert"
status of the child. These conditions are rarely met. In the majority
of homes we found low levels of concern about environmental problems
by children and parents. Furthermore, parents had little knowledge
about environmental problems, negative attitudes towards education
and low levels of motivation and poor self esteem in respect of
their educational role. It is clearly not simply a question of
giving children sustainability information and hoping that either
they themselves will act upon it, or through a process of osmosis
they will persuade those around them to be more aware and concerned.
The concept of sustainability is complex and
invariably bound up with larger cultural values which influence
our society. We have found in focus group discussions comprising
young people and young parents that recycling and pro-environmental
behaviour change was not regarded as a priority because there
are perceived to be few immediate, serious, and tangible benefits
or costs to the individuals concerned; the environmental consequences
of unsustainable behaviours were regarded as too distant to motivate
change, and in any case small lifestyle changes by an individual
are seen to have "zero effect" on what is regarded as
a global problem. Young people were the most strongly opposed
to changing their `waste' behaviour as they considered being forced
to recycle was an infringement of individual freedom. In general,
they resented being told what to do and admitted that if they
felt under pressure to recycle they were less likely to do it.
Developing environmental awareness or sustainability
values is not sufficient. It is necessary to a) identify which
forms of behaviour with harmful effects on the environment can
be changed by which strategies and interventions, and b) know
more about the conditions necessary for sustainability-relevant
behaviour and the possibilities for changing behaviours if political,
economic, social, and technological strategies are to be effective.
2. Is there a need for a national strategy
for education for sustainable development? Would additional infrastructure
be required to deliver a coherent, national strategy?
If a national strategy means another "Are
you doing your bit?" campaign, then probably not. A national
strategy is desirable if it is intended to address institutional
and cultural barriers to social change. One significant area of
investment in education for sustainable development is currently
made through school-based environmental education. Such programmes
currently have serious shortcomings (Uzzell, 1999), yet with imagination
and willingness these could be developed so that they extend into
and incorporate the wider community (ie, social groups as well
as public, private, and voluntary sector organizations). If this
is to be achieved sustainability education initiatives will require
pupils (and the individuals, groups and agencies with which they
interacted in their local communities) to critically examine controversial
and complex value issues which form the basis of all people-environment
interactions. The emphasis in this form of sustainability education
should be to encourage within pupils the development of responsible,
action-oriented strategies to solve real concrete problems within
their local environment, and thereby understand more fully not
only how the natural but also the social, cultural, and political
environments operate in practice. Sustainable behaviour based
on awareness and knowledge should not be regarded as an accepted
given, but as socially constructed which informs purposive human
action within the context of people's lives and society. This
kind of approach to education for sustainability both alters our
understanding of the nature and scope of environmental and sustainability
education and changes markedly our appreciation of the relationship
of the child and the school to the local community. A strategy
addressing genuine environmental problems by means of establishing
a partnership between children, the school, and the local community
will encourage the development of action competencies for pupils
as well as effective environmental actions and environmental change
in the local community (Uzzell, 1999).
3. Are existing awareness raising Government
campaigns such as "Are you doing your bit" effective
and well targeted? Have past campaigns been evaluated? How could
they be improved in the future?
One has to challenge the assumption in the DEFRA/DTLR
"Are you doing your bit?" campaign that change will
be achieved through individual actions. Change is more likely
to come about and should be encouraged through collective effort.
The collective problems of waste generation, car use, electricity
consumption, etc, are neither caused nor can they be solved by
single individuals. They are typically collective problems. The
public feels neither personally responsible for the problems,
nor in control of the solutions (Uzzell, 2000).
Developing social capital by means of strengthening
community networks and civic infrastructure, and creating and
maintaining a sense of local identity and social cohesion among
community members is an important part of sustainability. There
may be different pathways towards sustainable lifestyles depending
on the different characteristics of places and the people who
reside there. Our research has shown that issues such as social
cohesion, and the generation of place identity and place attachment
may be important drivers and conditions for a community-based
acceptance of sustainability policies and practices (Uzzell, Pol
and Badenes, 2002). While one can address the problem of sustainability
at an individual level, it would seem that any long-term environmental
and sustainability acceptance strategy has to be located in the
relationships which exist between people in the community and
the relationship between those people—individually and collectively—and
their environment. If change can only come about through social
and collective action that is grounded in identity processes and
people's identification with place, then we need to devise social
and political strategies that recognise these processes.
People who attempt to lead sustainable lives
are not necessarily regarded as role models—quite the opposite.
We have found that the role models associated with recycling are
sometimes largely negative. The prototypical recycler identified
by young people in focus group discussions was an "old man
in his fifties with a beard or a woman in a tie-dyed t-shirts
and dungarees" (Lyons, Uzzell, and Storey, 2001). For young
parents the images offered were: Swedes/Scandinavians, "Swampy",
outdoors types, people who purchase Ikea furniture, a Blue Peter
presenter. The middle aged group described a recycler as "someone
boring". The "celebrities" used in the "Are
you doing your bit?" campaign perhaps did not fall into these
categories but whether these celebrities were plausible, convincing
and appropriate is another issue.
4. Are there existing education programmes
relating to sustainable development which might be considered
good practice? These might include in-house training schemes for
ESD for employees and stakeholders within businesses, the civil
service, and other organisations. Are there elements of successful,
strategic communication programmes in other areas which could
be applied to ESD? For example, from other Government awareness
campaigns such as those for drink driving, AIDS and smoking.
Surrey County Council launched an initiative
in 1999 called the Sustainable Surrey Forum. The Forum
comprised over 140 key strategic economic, social and environmental
organisations (representing local authority, education, business,
health, law enforcement, environmental interests and voluntary
work) who signed up to the Common Agenda, which was a commitment
to follow sustainable practices. The Forum was established so
that it would be recognised as the "powerhouse driving through
sustainable development messages and actions throughout Surrey",
and aimed to promote economic, social, and environmental well
being across the county in a way that was innovative, structured,
and systematic.
Regular conferences, the promotion of best practice
through case studies, action-oriented working groups, the development
of Surrey indicators, a newsletter, and web based information
all served to promote sustainability in the county. Surrey County
Council sponsored the Forum, with secretariat support from county
officers. However, the Chairs and membership of all the committees
were drawn from outside organisations. Unfortunately, county support
for the Forum was withdrawn in favour of Community Planning work
which was meant to incorporate the work of the Forum. Information
available at http://www.sustainable-surrey.org.uk/
March 2003
REFERENCES
Burningham, K. and Thrush, D (2000). Rainforests
Are A Long Way From Here': The Environmental Concerns of Disadvantaged
Groups, Report to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, London.
Lyons, E., Uzzell, DL., and Storey, L. (2001).
Surrey Waste Attitudes and Actions Study, Report to Surrey
CC & SITA Environmental Trust.
Uzzell, DL. (1999). "Education for Environmental
Action in the Community: New Roles and Relationships" Cambridge
Journal of Education, 29, 3, 397-413.
Uzzell, DL. (2000). "The Psycho-Spatial
Dimension to Global Environmental Problems", Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 20, 3, pp 307-318.
Uzzell, DL., Davallon, J., Bruun Jensen, B.,
Gottesdiener, H., Fontes, J., Kofoed, J., Uhrenholdt, G., and
Vognsen, C., (1994). Children as Catalysts of Environmental
Change, Report to DGXII/D-5 Research on Economic and Social
Aspects of the Environment (SEER)., European Commission, Brussels.
Final Report, Contract No. EV5V-CT92-0157.
Uzzell, DL & Leach, R. (2001). Community
Planning: The Views of Young People in West Woking. Report
to Surrey County Council and Woking Borough Council.
Uzzell, DL. Pol, E and Badenes, D. (2002). "Place
identification, social cohesion and environmental sustainability",
Environment and Behavior, 34, 1, 26-53.
Uzzell, DL., Leach, R., & Hunt, L. (2002).
Woking Community Safety Strategy: Minority Group Perceptions of
Crime in Woking. Report to Woking Crime and Disorder Partnership.
All references are available from Professor
David Uzzell, Department of Psychology, University of Surrey,
Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH. d.uzzell@surrey.ac.uk
|
