The Structure and Coherence of the New Environmental Paradigm: Reconceptualizing the Dimensionality Debate

Abstract

This research examines the structure and coherence of an emerging environmental world view as measured by the new environmental paradigm (NEP) scale, developed by Dunlap and Van Liere (1978). We utilize data from two independent surveys of three communities in Colorado and Wyoming, United States, in 1997 and 2012, and examine the extent to which this world view has been accepted by the general public. Using factor analysis, we focus our attention on the structure and coherence of the NEP, as well as the dimensionality of this scale, revisiting the original question raised by Dunlap and Van Liere of whether a coherent ecological world view has emerged among the general public at this point in time. Comparisons between the two surveys reveal that both the structure and coherence of the NEP are highly consistent and stable over time, lending support to the belief that the general public within our study areas has indeed developed such a world view.

An Application of the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Scale in a Greek Context

“…Therefore, NEP scaling aims at unveiling the broad spectrum of ecological viewpoints and environmental items to verify environmental concerns measured worldwide. These authors further signified the determining role of internal consistency and multidimensionality of the NEP scaling against sample-focused and conflict-suffered appreciation of environmental values [3].…”

“…Xiao and Buhrmann [3] framed a multifaceted viewpoint of NEP conceptualization under the aspects of consistency and dimensionality. Notably, the authors signified the fact that the NEP represents the belief of certain economic constraints to growth and the ecological balance predomination over humansʹ power relative to nature.…”

“…2 This parameter is set to zero because it is redundant. 3 The H 0 states that the location parameters are the same across response categories.…”

“…In response to this environmental transition from the local to global level of manipulation, a measurable tool of 3 revisions of the original NEP Scale was developed by Dunlap [1], with the latest revision rapidly replacing the 1978 version in most studies. Under the original NEP Scale, the questions rotate around three aspects of environmental beliefs (these are the sub-scales which frame the psychological tendency to evaluate the favoring or disfavoring of the natural environment): "(1) a belief in humans' ability to upset the balance of nature, (2) the existence of limits to growth, and, (3) humans' right to rule over the rest of nature" [2]. Consequently, the uni-dimensionality of NEP scaling towards environmental attitudes reflects an ecologically oriented point of view (a high NEP score reflects positiveness for the preservation of natural sources) or an anthropogenic (a low NEP score reflects positiveness for the exploitation of natural sources) approach, accordingly.…”

Sustainability Education and Environmental Worldviews: Shifting a Paradigm

“…A third major criticism of the measure, and the issue that has been raised most often, is that the NEP is not consistently unidimensional. Researchers have found anywhere from one to five factors underlying the NEP, which calls into question Dunlap et al's assertion of unidimensionality [14,18,19].…”