What predicts environmental activism? The roles of identification with nature and politicized environmental identity

Schmitt, Michael; Mackay, Caroline M.L.; Droogendyk, Lisa; Payne, Daphne

doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.11.003

Cited by 118 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is possible that some factors not included in the study may be of significant relevance, for example differing motives (Molinario et al., 2019; Rode, Gomez‐Baggethun, & Krause, 2015), politicized environmental identity (Schmitt, Mackay, Droogendyk, & Payne, 2019) or place attachment (Scannell & Gifford, 2010; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001; Xu & Han, 2019; see also Devine‐Wright & Clayton, 2010). Psychological adaptation to climate change and eco‐anxiety over climate change and biodiversity crises may play an important role in boosting individuals’ pro‐nature behaviour.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The biodiversity crisis demands greater engagement in pro‐nature conservation behaviours. Research has examined factors which account for general pro‐environmental behaviour; that is, behaviour geared to minimizing one's impact on the environment. Yet, a dearth of research exists examining factors that account for pro‐nature conservation behaviour specifically—behaviour that directly and actively supports conservation of biodiversity. This study is the first of its kind to use a validated scale of pro‐nature conservation behaviour. Using online data from a United Kingdom population survey of 1,298 adults (16+ years), we examined factors (composed of nine variable‐blocks of items) that accounted for pro‐nature conservation behaviour. These were: individual characteristics (demographics, nature connectedness), nature experiences (time spent in nature, engaging with nature through simple activities, indirect engagement with nature), knowledge and attitudes (knowledge/study of nature, valuing and concern for nature) and pro‐environmental behaviour. Together, these explained 70% of the variation in people's actions for nature. Importantly, in a linear regression examining the relative importance of these variables to the prediction of pro‐nature conservation behaviour, time in nature did not emerge as significant. Engaging in simple nature activities (which is related to nature connectedness) emerged as the largest significant contributor to pro‐nature conservation behaviour. Commonality analysis revealed that variables worked together, with nature connectedness and engagement in simple activities being involved in the largest portion of explained variance. Overall, findings from the current study reinforce the critical role that having a close relationship with nature through simple everyday engagement plays in pro‐nature conservation behaviour. Policy recommendations are made. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus the social identity approach explains collective action as resulting from collective identification with a group whose identity and interests are served by that action (van Zomeren, Postmes, & Spears, 2008). For example, just as identification with human categories tends to predict action on behalf of those categories, identifying with the category "nature" predicts engagement in proenvironmental behaviour (Mackay, 2019;Mayer & Frantz, 2004;Nisbett, Zolenski, & Murphy, 2009). When it comes to collective action, however, politicized identities-identification with a group actively working for social change-tend to be stronger and more proximal predictors than identification with a larger social category (Simon & Klandermans, 2001;Simon et al, 1998;.…”

Section: Predictors Of Environmental Collective Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imagining a sustainable world: Measuring cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo

Wright

Schmitt

Mackay

et al. 2020

Journal of Environmental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We build on social identity models of environmental collective action by considering the role of people's access to cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo. We developed a new measure of cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo, and examined its ability to predict environmental activist identification and willingness to engage in environmental activism. In Study 1 (N = 386), we developed the initial scale, and found evidence for its reliability and validity. The ability to imagine cognitive alternatives was associated with other relevant social identity and environmental variables including perceived legitimacy of the current environmental status quo, pro-environmental consumer and activist behavior, and beliefs in anthropogenic climate change. In Study 2 (N = 393), we confirmed the factor structure of the scale and found that it was a strong predictor of environmental activist identification, explaining variance beyond extensive control variables including identification with nature. It also explained additional variance in willingness to engage in activist behavior beyond even environmental activist identification. Our results suggest that the ability to imagine cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo might have important implications for whether people engage in pro-environmental collection action to mitigate climate-change and other environmental problems.

show abstract

“…Advocacy behaviors (e.g., voting in consideration of biodiversity issues, campaign for local government on an environmental platform) were generally associated with high impact but low plasticity. While there may be multiple barriers to the uptake of environmental activism (Paço & Gouveia Rodrigues, 2016;Schmitt, Mackay, Droogendyk, & Payne, 2019), advocacy behaviors have greater potential to generate transformational change than other categories of behaviors (Amel et al, 2017). While advocacy behaviors may not be appropriate behaviors for governmental departments to promote, NGOs or advocacy groups could drive participation in these types of behaviors.…”

Section: Prioritization Process Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NGOs may generate activism and advocacy by highlighting issues and producing resources for those interested in participating but who are unsure how to engage (Hasler, Walters, & White, 2019). Further research that examines how personal, environmental, and social identity influences individual involvement in activism (Schmitt et al, 2019) or identifies key barriers to advocacy (Uusi-Rauva & Heikkurinen, 2013) is needed.…”

Section: Prioritization Process Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying and prioritizing human behaviors that benefit biodiversity

Selinske

Garrard

Gregg

et al. 2020

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conservation profession is increasingly seeking effective ways to reduce societal impact on biodiversity, including through targeted behavior change interventions. Multiple conservation behavior change programs exist, but there is also great uncertainty regarding which behaviors are most strategic to target. Behavioral prioritization is a tool that has been used effectively to support behavior change decision‐making in other environmental disciplines and more recently for a small sub‐set of biodiversity behavior change challenges. Here, we use behavioral prioritization to identify individual behaviors that could be modified to achieve biodiversity benefits in the state of Victoria, Australia. We use an adapted nominal group technique method to identify potential biodiversity behaviors and, for each behavior, estimate the corresponding plasticity (or capacity for change) and positive impact on biodiversity outcomes. We elicited 27 behaviors that individuals could undertake to benefit or reduce their negative impact on biodiversity. This list was then used to prioritize 10 behaviors as determined by their likely effect(s) on biodiversity, plasticity, and current prevalence in Victoria. We take a first step in outlining a list of behaviors that can direct Victorian decision‐makers toward increasing positive and reducing negative impacts of society on biodiversity, guide motivated individuals to reduce their own biodiversity footprint, and more broadly, develop a behavior change research agenda for behaviors most likely to benefit biodiversity.

show abstract

What predicts environmental activism? The roles of identification with nature and politicized environmental identity

Cited by 118 publications

References 48 publications

The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours

The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours

Imagining a sustainable world: Measuring cognitive alternatives to the environmental status quo

Identifying and prioritizing human behaviors that benefit biodiversity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About