A Conceptual Framework to Enable the Changes Required for a One-Planet Future

Abstract

We conceptualise a framework that incorporates psychological and non-psychological factors influencing pro-environmental behaviour. We conducted qualitative investigations in five sectors in South Africa, where individuals and groups are dealing with significant environmental issues, including climate change, biodiversity loss and land-use change. We found three fundamental elements necessary for behavioural change to be realised: awareness (A) is defined as an understanding that society and earth systems are connected; motivation (M) involves the personal and operational drivers that encourage an individual or organisation to respond to new levels of awareness; and pathways (P) recognise the practical solutions and opportunities that facilitate actual change. AMP was built up from 38 variables that cut across between three and five of the case studies, which were further grouped into 14 categories. The inter-connectedness of AMP suggests that for pro-environmental behaviour to occur, attention cannot be focussed on satisfying one of the elements in isolation. This is the first attempt to integrate theory from social psychology, sociology, organisational theory, and management in a conceptual framework for proenvironmental behaviour. The AMP framework is useful for supporting practitioners or change agents designing environmental sustainability initiatives.

Using social‐network research to improve outcomes in natural resource management

“…Whether complying with existing norms of resource use or participating in new conservation initiatives, individuals need the necessary awareness, attitude, and capacity to implement those actions (Honig et al. ). This involves learning about new management options (Pannell et al.…”

Reframing Tacit Human–Nature Relations: An Inquiry into Process Philosophy and the Philosophy of Michael Polanyi

“…Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). Indeed, other behaviour-affecting parameters suggested in sustainability research, such as values, attitudes, socio-economic processes, awareness, affect, interconnection and involvement could all be interpreted to be at the heart of the process-philosophical inquiry (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002;Honig et al, 2015;Richardson et al, 2015).…”

“…If, as I claim, 'tacit metaphysical frameworks' are precedent to explicitly held belief systems (since they are 'embodied tacit knowledge'), they might be even more fundamental to habitual behaviour patterns than explicitly stated values. Furthermore, a topic I unfortunately only vaguely touch upon in the article below is that reframed 'awareness' is not in itself sufficient in changing environmental behaviour if sufficient institutional 'pathways' to facilitate this do not exist (Honig et al, 2015). Whilst my focus in the article is almost purely on a bottom-up approach, this perspective should not be interpreted in any way to deny macro-level top-down approaches of instrumental utility.…”

“…The target audience of the article is therefore designed to consist primarily of environment-oriented policy makers and designers as well as environmental philosophers and scientists, although I expect the text to be wholly comprehensible -and moreover, interesting -to the more casual reader (this is also in accordance with the journal's guidelines). Also, since Environmental Values emphasizes cognizance and familiarity with current ongoing debate in the journal, I have made numerous references (Honig et al, 2015;Hukkinen, forthcoming;Richardson et al, 2015;Shahar, 2015) to recent (as of 3/2016) articles published in the journal and set the article in the context of current discussion within the journals publications.…”

“…I have suggested above that we live in a framework of substance metaphysics where the human has separated itself from nature and has justified itself to abuse its environment at the price of both its own and the environment's wellbeing. As Honig et al (2015) note, altering environmental behaviour requires a novel understanding of how society and earth systems are connected, yet to achieve this it is simply not enough to attempt to modify human-environment interaction through building on explicit or rational knowledge. A more thorough Gestalt shift in how we attend to the world is required, and I suggest process philosophy can serve as the metaphysical basis for this thorough reinterpretation of human-environment interaction.…”