IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v8y2018i2p2158244018774826.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Wrinkles in Time and Drops in the Bucket: Circumventing Temporal and Social Barriers to Pro-Environmental Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Monica Soliman
  • Susan Alisat
  • Nadia Y. Bashir
  • Anne E. Wilson

Abstract

Human engagement in pro-environmental action is necessary for mitigating the effects of climate change. However, psychological barriers, such as feeling that the problem is distant in time and that any personal actions would only be a “drop in the bucket,†reduce people’s motivation to engage in pro-environmental behaviors that are essential for the future of the planet but that incur short-term personal costs. In the present study, we drew on theory and research regarding the subjective experience of temporal distance and the effects of social norms on action. We used an experimental methodology in which we presented scientifically predicted outcomes of climate change expected around the year 2100, then manipulated the degree to which these future consequences felt proximal or distant. We also altered whether people perceived pro-environmental action to be normative in society, reasoning that people would be more motivated to take on a subjectively looming threat if they believed they were part of a collective who were also taking action. Results indicated that after considering far-off, large-scale climate outcomes, neither subjective proximity nor social norms were sufficient in isolation to motivate behavior, but in combination, they effectively increased pro-environmental intentions and behavior. Those who were induced to feel that these objectively distant future outcomes were subjectively imminent, and who were also led to believe that pro-environmental behavior was normative, reported more intentions to engage in environmentally responsible behavior, and actually reported more sustainable behaviors in the weeks following the study.

Suggested Citation

  • Monica Soliman & Susan Alisat & Nadia Y. Bashir & Anne E. Wilson, 2018. "Wrinkles in Time and Drops in the Bucket: Circumventing Temporal and Social Barriers to Pro-Environmental Behavior," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:2:p:2158244018774826
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244018774826
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244018774826
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244018774826?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexa Spence & Wouter Poortinga & Nick Pidgeon, 2012. "The Psychological Distance of Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 957-972, June.
    2. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Nathaniel Geiger & Bryan McLaughlin & John Velez, 2021. "Not all boomers: temporal orientation explains inter- and intra-cultural variability in the link between age and climate engagement," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.

    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. Robyn S. Wilson & Adam Zwickle & Hugh Walpole, 2019. "Developing a Broadly Applicable Measure of Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 777-791, April.
    2. Benjamin Volland, 2018. "Après nous le déluge? Perceived distance of climate change impacts and pro-environmental behaviour," IRENE Working Papers 18-05, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    3. Rita Abdel Sater, 2021. "Essays on the application of behavioural insights to environmental policy [Essais sur l’application des connaissances comportementales aux politiques environnementales]," SciencePo Working papers tel-03450909, HAL.
    4. Rita Abdel Sater, 2021. "Essays on the application of behavioural insights to environmental policy [Essais sur l’application des connaissances comportementales aux politiques environnementales]," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03450909, HAL.
    5. Teklewold, Hailemariam, 2011. "Farming or burning? shadow prices and farmer’s impatience on the allocation of multi-purpose resource in the mixed farming system of Ethiopia," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116080, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    7. Janel Jett & Leigh Raymond, 2021. "Issue Framing and U.S. State Energy and Climate Policy Choice," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 278-299, May.
    8. Robert Gazzale & Julian Jamison & Alexander Karlan & Dean Karlan, 2013. "Ambiguous Solicitation: Ambiguous Prescription," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(1), pages 1002-1011, January.
    9. Hinnosaar, Marit, 2016. "Time inconsistency and alcohol sales restrictions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 108-131.
    10. Caroline Flammer & Michael W. Toffel & Kala Viswanathan, 2021. "Shareholder activism and firms' voluntary disclosure of climate change risks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(10), pages 1850-1879, October.
    11. Min Gong & David Krantz & Elke Weber, 2014. "Why Chinese discount future financial and environmental gains but not losses more than Americans," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 103-124, October.
    12. Matteo Iacoviello, 2008. "Household Debt and Income Inequality, 1963–2003," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(5), pages 929-965, August.
    13. Cosmo, Valeria Di & O’Hora, Denis, 2017. "Nudging electricity consumption using TOU pricing and feedback: evidence from Irish households," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-14.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:3:p:709-728 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Richard M. H. Suen, 2014. "Time Preference And The Distributions Of Wealth And Income," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 364-381, January.
    16. Mitchell, O.S. & Piggott, J., 2016. "Workplace-Linked Pensions for an Aging Demographic," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 865-904, Elsevier.
    17. Kimmich, Christian & Fischbacher, Urs, 2016. "Behavioral determinants of supply chain integration and coexistence," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 55-77.
    18. Filiz-Ozbay, Emel & Guryan, Jonathan & Hyndman, Kyle & Kearney, Melissa & Ozbay, Erkut Y., 2015. "Do lottery payments induce savings behavior? Evidence from the lab," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 1-24.
    19. Stephen L. Cheung & Agnieszka Tymula & Xueting Wang, 2022. "Present bias for monetary and dietary rewards," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(4), pages 1202-1233, September.
    20. Lex Borghans & Angela Lee Duckworth & James J. Heckman & Bas ter Weel, 2008. "The Economics and Psychology of Personality Traits," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 43(4).
    21. Luc Arrondel & André Masson, 2013. "Measuring savers' preferences how and why?," PSE Working Papers halshs-00834203, HAL.

    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:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:2:p:2158244018774826. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.