Measuring cultural values and beliefs about environment to identify their role in climate change responses

Price, Jennifer; Walker, Iain; Boschetti, Fabio

doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.10.001

Cited by 127 publications

(135 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, Cultural values are guiding worldviews-or "ways of life"-that define a society (Inglehart et al 1998, Milton 2013. They encompass the dominant normative, attitudinal, and behavioral patterns that exist within and between collectives (Stigler et al 1990, Chai et al 2009, Kitayama and Cohen 2010, and have been used to explain social constructions of risk (Dake 1991), responses to environmental policies (Price et al 2014), cultural differences in environmental attitudes (Steg and Sievers 2000), and behavioral intentions (Yazdanpanah et al 2014). Secondly, Individual values are fundamental, guiding principles in life that reflect the most basic elements of cognition (Allport et al 1960, Rokeach 1973.…”

Section: Multiple Levels Of the Value Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating multilevel values into the social-ecological systems framework

Riper¹,

Thiel²,

Penker³

et al. 2018

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The social-ecological systems framework has guided investigations of complex interactions among ecosystems, society, and economies. In recent years, academics and practitioners have taken steps to strengthen this framework by calling for more systematic engagement with the cognitive and affective bases of human behavior. We suggest research that engages with multilevel values (i.e., individual, cultural, assigned) will be better positioned to understand how and why people cooperate in natural resource comanagement situations, and in turn, develop more effective strategies for mitigating and adapting to a changing world. We review three conceptualizations of the value concept operating within environmental governance regimes to offer a deeper understanding of how multilevel values fit within the social-ecological systems framework. Drawing on a conceptual model of these relationships, we share results from three example studies that demonstrate how values and governance can be more explicitly integrated in future research. We aim to stimulate a dialogue about the mutual benefits that can emerge from a fuller characterization of the relationship between values and environmental governance to manage for complexities of social-ecological systems.

show abstract

Section: Multiple Levels Of the Value Conceptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incorporating multilevel values into the social-ecological systems framework

Riper¹,

Thiel²,

Penker³

et al. 2018

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, while the focus group participants appear to be slightly more open-minded, they do not appear to display a preference for a deeper or more complex approach to the issues we discussed, compared to the rest of the nation. They are less likely to believe that Nature is able to recover from human impacts and stressors (Nature Elastic in [148]). They are less authoritarian (lower Right-Wing Authoritarianism [149,150]), but show no differences on other measure of political beliefs (Social Dominance Orientation [65]) or affiliation [26].…”

Section: Participants' Cognitive Signaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens’ Views of Australia’s Future to 2050

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In four focus group exercises involving both forecasting and backcasting approaches, we gave approximately 100 Australian citizens the opportunity to discuss likely, desirable and feared futures to 2050. The image they paint is both coherent and consistent. Education, governance, personal attitudes and societal trends, rather than specific events, are drivers of a future which is perceived as being largely shaped by human choices. Innovation is believed to be more necessary in novel social arrangements than in further technology. The most feared futures arise from an amplification of trends already at play in the present: economic growth at the expense of the environment and quality of life, lack of equity, poor government, corporate greed, commercialism and erosion of social values. Economic and material growth does not feature in the most desired futures which are local, inclusive, peaceful, equitable and in some cases frugal. The visions and scenarios developed find a place within established foresight frameworks and global political narratives, but seem to lie at the fringe of current media and short-term political discourse. These results should not be interpreted as representative of the overall Australian population, but suggest that extending the analysis to the broader community could provide significant insights and enrich the discussion of important societal choices. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 223

show abstract

“…To make evidence-based decisions about biofuels, students will need specific scientific knowledge about matter and energy in processes like photosynthesis, cellular respiration and combustion that are often challenging (Parker, de los Santos, Anderson 2015). Additionally, students will need to weigh and leverage economic, environmental and social values along with scientific information to navigate decision about biofuel technology (Price, Walker, & Boschetti, 2014). These factors make biofuels a significant, timely and complex SSI requiring multidisciplinary learning.…”

Section: Biofuels As a Socioscientific Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Indicators of Informal and Formal Decision-making about a Socioscientific Issue

Dauer¹,

Lute²,

Straka³

2016

IJEMST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose two contrasting types of student decision-making based on social and cognitive psychology models of separate mental processes for problem solving. Informal decision-making uses intuitive reasoning and is subject to cognitive biases, whereas formal decision-making uses effortful, logical reasoning. We explored indicators of students' formal decision-making in a socioscientific issue-focused general science post-secondary course that used a seven-step decision-making framework based in decision-science models. We found that students' value orientations predicted students' stance towards biofuels at the beginning but not at the end of the course, indicating some students' post-survey opinions were less rooted in affective value-judgments. Themes in student personal reasoning about biofuels were primarily focused on environmental and economic dimensions of the issue and revealed a greater awareness of alternative options and potential consequences of biofuel use at the end of the course. We observed a decrease in students' emotive arguments and an increase in students' justificatory arguments about biofuel use. A formal decision-making framework may be a useful tool in supporting students' formal, reasoned approach to deciding what we should do about complex socioscientific issues.

show abstract

Measuring cultural values and beliefs about environment to identify their role in climate change responses

Cited by 127 publications

References 59 publications

Incorporating multilevel values into the social-ecological systems framework

Incorporating multilevel values into the social-ecological systems framework

Citizens’ Views of Australia’s Future to 2050

Indicators of Informal and Formal Decision-making about a Socioscientific Issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About