IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5232-d802587.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Reduce Individuals’ Ecological Footprint without Harming Their Well-Being: An Application to Belgium

Author

Listed:
  • Bart Defloor

    (Department of Economics, Ghent University, Sint-Pietersplein 5, B-9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Brent Bleys

    (Department of Economics, Ghent University, Sint-Pietersplein 5, B-9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Elsy Verhofstadt

    (Department of Economics, Ghent University, Sint-Pietersplein 5, B-9000 Gent, Belgium)

  • Luc Van Ootegem

    (Department of Economics, Ghent University, Sint-Pietersplein 5, B-9000 Gent, Belgium)

Abstract

Human activities are a key driver of many environmental problems the world is facing today, including climate change, the disruption of biogeochemical cycles, and biodiversity loss. Behavioural changes at the individual and household level are needed to reduce humanity’s environmental impact, but people also need the capacity to behave in a sustainable way. If their well-being is negatively impacted or if behaving sustainably is too time consuming or too expensive, people might be less inclined to change their behaviour. In this article, we look at the determinants of different types of pro-environmental behaviour and how these are associated with their experienced levels of well-being. More specifically, we focus on the determinants of behaviours that influence both the ecological footprint (EF) and satisfaction with life. In our analysis we include socio-demographic characteristics and a number of psychological antecedents of pro-environmental behaviour (PEB). The data we use was collected in Flanders (Belgium) and allows us to calculate the EF of each respondent individually. Our main conclusions are threefold. First, even if individuals are provided with opportunities to behave in a more sustainable way, they do not always do so (e.g., richer people on average have a higher EF). Efforts could be put in place at the collective side (e.g., public infrastructure) to stimulate people to reduce their environmental impact. Second, as we distinguish seven EF components, we are able to show differential effects of each of the determinants. Third, the association between PEB and satisfaction with life is not strong: only the type of housing is significantly associated with satisfaction with life. Related to that, the psychological antecedents of PEB are only associated with the EF, not with satisfaction with life.

Suggested Citation

  • Bart Defloor & Brent Bleys & Elsy Verhofstadt & Luc Van Ootegem, 2022. "How to Reduce Individuals’ Ecological Footprint without Harming Their Well-Being: An Application to Belgium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-30, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5232-:d:802587
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5232/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5232/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ida Ferrara & Paul Missios, 2005. "Recycling and Waste Diversion Effectiveness: Evidence from Canada," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(2), pages 221-238, February.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Robert Sugden, 2005. "Experienced Utility as a Standard of Policy Evaluation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 161-181, September.
    3. Welsch, Heinz & Kühling, Jan, 2011. "Are pro-environmental consumption choices utility-maximizing? Evidence from subjective well-being data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 75-87.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Guardiola, Jorge, 2020. "Does it have to be a sacrifice? Different notions of the good life, pro-environmental behavior and their heterogeneous impact on well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    6. Claborn, Kelly A. & Brooks, Jeremy S., 2019. "Can We Consume Less and Gain More? Environmental Efficiency of Well-being at the Individual Level," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 110-120.
    7. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2017. "Green lifestyles and subjective well-being: More about self-image than actual behavior?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 304-323.
    8. Lorenzo Cerda Planas, 2018. "Moving Toward Greener Societies: Moral Motivation and Green Behaviour," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(4), pages 835-860, August.
    9. Herziger, Atar & Claborn, Kelly A. & Brooks, Jeremy S., 2020. "Is There Hope for the Double Dividend? How Social Context Can Shape Synergies and Tradeoffs between Sustainable Consumption and Well-Being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. Smetschka, Barbara & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Egger, Claudine & Haselsteiner, Edeltraud & Moran, Daniel & Gaube, Veronika, 2019. "Time Matters: The Carbon Footprint of Everyday Activities in Austria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Verhofstadt, E. & Van Ootegem, L. & Defloor, B. & Bleys, B., 2016. "Linking individuals' ecological footprint to their subjective well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 80-89.
    12. Schmitt, Michael T. & Aknin, Lara B. & Axsen, Jonn & Shwom, Rachael L., 2018. "Unpacking the Relationships Between Pro-environmental Behavior, Life Satisfaction, and Perceived Ecological Threat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 130-140.
    13. Daniel Kahneman & Peter P. Wakker & Rakesh Sarin, 1997. "Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 375-406.
    14. Carter, Steven & McBride, Michael, 2013. "Experienced utility versus decision utility: Putting the ‘S’ in satisfaction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 13-23.
    15. Büchs, Milena & Schnepf, Sylke V., 2013. "Who emits most? Associations between socio-economic factors and UK households' home energy, transport, indirect and total CO2 emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 114-123.
    16. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2016. "Environmental concerns, volunteering and subjective well-being: Antecedents and outcomes of environmental activism in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-16.
    17. Andersson, David & Nässén, Jonas & Larsson, Jörgen & Holmberg, John, 2014. "Greenhouse gas emissions and subjective well-being: An analysis of Swedish households," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 75-82.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Salvador del Saz Salazar & Luis Pérez y Pérez, 2021. "Exploring the Differential Effect of Life Satisfaction on Low and High-Cost Pro-Environmental Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.
    3. Nazaret Ibáñez-Rueda & Mònica Guillén-Royo & Jorge Guardiola, 2020. "Pro-Environmental Behavior, Connectedness to Nature, and Wellbeing Dimensions among Granada Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Herziger, Atar & Claborn, Kelly A. & Brooks, Jeremy S., 2020. "Is There Hope for the Double Dividend? How Social Context Can Shape Synergies and Tradeoffs between Sustainable Consumption and Well-Being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    5. Echeverría, Lucía & Gimenez-Nadal, J. Ignacio & Molina, José Alberto, 2022. "Green mobility and well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    6. Mònica Guillen-Royo, 2018. "Sustainable consumption and wellbeing: does on-line shopping matter?," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20181022, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    7. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Guardiola, Jorge, 2020. "Does it have to be a sacrifice? Different notions of the good life, pro-environmental behavior and their heterogeneous impact on well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Baltruszewicz, Marta & Steinberger, Julia K. & Paavola, Jouni & Ivanova, Diana & Brand-Correa, Lina I. & Owen, Anne, 2023. "Social outcomes of energy use in the United Kingdom: Household energy footprints and their links to well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    9. Raquel Redondo & Carmen Valor & Isabel Carrero, 2022. "Unraveling the Relationship between Well-Being, Sustainable Consumption and Nature Relatedness: a Study of University Students," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 913-930, April.
    10. Martin Binder & Ann-Kathrin Blankenberg & Heinz Welsch, 2020. "Pro-environmental Norms, Green Lifestyles, and Subjective Well-Being: Panel Evidence from the UK," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 1029-1060, December.
    11. Welsch, Heinz & Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Green behavior, green self-image, and subjective well-being: Separating affective and cognitive relationships," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    12. Schmitt, Michael T. & Aknin, Lara B. & Axsen, Jonn & Shwom, Rachael L., 2018. "Unpacking the Relationships Between Pro-environmental Behavior, Life Satisfaction, and Perceived Ecological Threat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 130-140.
    13. van Hoorn, André, 2018. "Is the happiness approach to measuring preferences valid?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 53-65.
    14. Mohd Yusoff Yusliza & Amirudin Amirudin & Raden Aswin Rahadi & Nik Afzan Nik Sarah Athirah & Thurasamy Ramayah & Zikri Muhammad & Francesca Dal Mas & Maurizio Massaro & Jumadil Saputra & Safiek Mokhli, 2020. "An Investigation of Pro-Environmental Behaviour and Sustainable Development in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    15. Welsch, Heinz & Ferreira, Susana, 2014. "Environment, Well-Being, and Experienced Preference," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 7(3-4), pages 205-239, December.
    16. Lena Kilian & Anne Owen & Andy Newing & Diana Ivanova, 2022. "Exploring Transport Consumption-Based Emissions: Spatial Patterns, Social Factors, Well-Being, and Policy Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-26, September.
    17. Erda Wang & Nannan Kang, 2019. "Does life satisfaction matter for pro-environmental behavior? Empirical evidence from China General Social Survey," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 449-469, January.
    18. Chiara Franco & Claudia Ghisetti, 2022. "What shapes the “value-action” gap? The role of time perception reconsidered," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 1023-1053, October.
    19. Elgaaied-Gambier, Leila & Mandler, Timo, 2021. "Me trying to talk about sustainability: Exploring the psychological and social implications of environmental threats through user-generated content," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    20. Friman, Margareta & Fujii, Satoshi & Ettema, Dick & Gärling, Tommy & Olsson, Lars E., 2013. "Psychometric analysis of the satisfaction with travel scale," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 132-145.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5232-:d:802587. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.