IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5192-d801927.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Meta-Reflexivity as a Way toward Responsible and Sustainable Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Tea Golob

    (School of Advanced Social Studies, SI-5000 Nova Gorica, Slovenia
    Faculty of Information Studies, SI-8000 Novo Mesto, Slovenia)

  • Matej Makarovič

    (School of Advanced Social Studies, SI-5000 Nova Gorica, Slovenia
    Institute for Developmental and Strategic Analysis, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia)

Abstract

In line with the social morphogenetic approach, this article explores the role of meta-reflexivity in responsible concerns and actions oriented toward achieving a sustainable society. Based on the case study of Slovenia, this article addresses individuals’ social and environmental responsibility by considering the relationships between their attitudes, intentions and behavior. It draws on a survey questionnaire that includes the reflexivity measurement tool. The path-analysis is applied to consider the aspects of responsibility as endogenous variables, while the social/cultural conditions (age, gender, educational level, income and the survey wave) and meta-reflexivity as a specific mode of inner dialog are included as exogenous variables. A coherent index of socially and environmentally responsible behavior can be constructed and explained by social/cultural conditions and meta-reflexivity. The COVID-19 pandemic indicates negative effects on responsibility, mostly due to a decline in meta-reflexivity. The study reveals two different—although not mutually exclusive—paths towards socially and environmentally responsible behavior. The first one is based on a combination of well-established values, habits and inertia. This behavior is more typical for older generations, as indicated by the impact of age. The second one is mostly based on critical, meta-reflexive thinking and it is more typical for younger, more educated and more affluent people.

Suggested Citation

  • Tea Golob & Matej Makarovič, 2022. "Meta-Reflexivity as a Way toward Responsible and Sustainable Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5192-:d:801927
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5192/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5192/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Fabiana Zollo & Petra Kralj Novak & Michela Del Vicario & Alessandro Bessi & Igor Mozetič & Antonio Scala & Guido Caldarelli & Walter Quattrociocchi, 2015. "Emotional Dynamics in the Age of Misinformation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Józef Ober & Janusz Karwot, 2022. "Pro-Ecological Behavior: Empirical Analysis on the Example of Polish Consumers," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-27, February.
    4. Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar & Callum J. Gunn & Barbara J. Regeer & Jacqueline E. W. Broerse, 2021. "Institutionalizing Reflexivity for Sustainability: Two Cases in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Tea Golob & Matej Makarovič, 2018. "Student Mobility and Transnational Social Ties as Factors of Reflexivity," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Tea Golob & Matej Makarovič, 2017. "Self-organisation and Development: A Comparative Approach to Post-communist Transformations from the Perspective of Social Systems Theory," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 69(10), pages 1499-1525, November.
    7. Efrat Eilam & Tamar Trop, 2012. "Environmental Attitudes and Environmental Behavior—Which Is the Horse and Which Is the Cart?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-37, September.
    8. Roman Hoffmann & Raya Muttarak & Jonas Peisker & Piero Stanig, 2022. "Climate change experiences raise environmental concerns and promote Green voting," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 12(2), pages 148-155, February.
    9. Tea Golob & Matej Makarovič, 2019. "Reflexivity and Structural Positions: The Effects of Generation, Gender and Education," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-23, August.
    10. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    11. Genus, Audley & Stirling, Andy, 2018. "Collingridge and the dilemma of control: Towards responsible and accountable innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 61-69.
    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. Abayomi Samuel Oyekale, 2018. "Determinants of households’ involvement in waste separation and collection for recycling in South Africa," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 2343-2371, October.
    2. Daniel G. J. Kuchinka & Szilvia Balazs & Marius Dan Gavriletea & Borivoje-Boris Djokic, 2018. "Consumer Attitudes toward Sustainable Development and Risk to Brand Loyalty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-25, March.
    3. Chuanhui Liao & Hui Li, 2019. "Environmental Education, Knowledge, and High School Students’ Intention toward Separation of Solid Waste on Campus," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-15, May.
    4. Tea Golob & Matej Makarovič, 2019. "Reflexivity and Structural Positions: The Effects of Generation, Gender and Education," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-23, August.
    5. Sorin Popescu & Diana Rusu & Mihai Dragomir & Daniela Popescu & Șerban Nedelcu, 2019. "Competitive Development Tools in Identifying Efficient Educational Interventions for Improving Pro-Environmental and Recycling Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-25, December.
    6. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    8. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    9. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.
    10. Mohammed Akhmaaj, Asmaeil Ali & Sharif, Mohamed Omar, 2024. "The effects of planned behavior model constructs and technology acceptance model constructs on online purchasing behavior: An empirical study on internet users in the Libya city of Tripoli," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    11. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.
    12. Kristin Thomas & Evalill Nilsson & Karin Festin & Pontus Henriksson & Mats Lowén & Marie Löf & Margareta Kristenson, 2020. "Associations of Psychosocial Factors with Multiple Health Behaviors: A Population-Based Study of Middle-Aged Men and Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, February.
    13. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Baker, Douglas & Washington, Simon & Turrell, Gavin, 2013. "Residential dissonance and mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 12-28.
    14. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.
    15. Muhammad Shahid Qureshi & Saadat Saeed & Syed Waleed Mehmood Wasti, 2016. "Erratum to: The impact of various entrepreneurial interventions during the business plan competition on the entrepreneur identity aspirations of participants," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 6(1), pages 1-1, December.
    16. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Popova, Olga, 2026. "Environment vs. economic growth: Do environmental preferences translate into support for Green parties?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    17. Julie Bayle-Cordier & Loïc Berger & Rayan Elatmani & Massimo Tavoni, 2023. "Breath, Love, Walk? The Impact of Mindfulness Interventions on Climate Policy Support and Environmental Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, July.
    18. Szu‐Szu Ho & Rosie Stenhouse & Aisha Holloway, 2020. "Understanding HIV‐positive drug users’ experiences of taking highly active antiretroviral treatment: Identity–Values–Conscious engagement model," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(9-10), pages 1561-1575, May.
    19. Alexandre Cabagnols & Ali Maâlej & Pierre Mauchand & Olfa Kammoun, 2022. "The determinants of entrepreneurial intention of scientist PhD students: analytical vs emotional formation of the intention," Insights into Regional Development, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 4(4), pages 63-82, December.
    20. Diwanji, Vaibhav S. & Cortese, Juliann, 2020. "Contrasting user generated videos versus brand generated videos in ecommerce," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:5192-:d:801927. 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.