Skip to main content

Understanding Pro-Environmental Behavior: Models and Messages

  • Chapter
Strategic Communication for Sustainable Organizations

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

Abstract

Certainly societal Discourses shape our individual worldviews, and our behaviors are influenced by our organizations’ quest for legitimacy during stakeholder interactions. However, when individuals communicate about sustainability-related initiatives, part of that exchange is influenced by each person’s environmental values, attitudes, and beliefs. What influences an individual’s pro-environmental values and behaviors? How can communication facilitate individual-level behavioral change? This chapter identifies factors influencing an individual’s pro-environmental values and behaviors; discusses the tentative link between values, attitudes, and behaviors; and identifies how communication can be used to influence individual-level behavioral change. Literature is reviewed which identifies and discusses pro-environmental values and beliefs and defines pro-environmental behaviors. Various persuasion and social influence theories are reviewed to help practitioners better understand how to stimulate pro-environmental behaviors. Key models of pro-environmental behavior are identified. Information is drawn from social marketing, health-related models, stages of change models, energy use reduction models, and communication campaign literatures. At the end of each block of theories, ways these theories can guide practice are highlighted. The chapter ends by focusing on concrete message strategies and the importance of interpersonal communication. Interview data is drawn from Sam’s Club; Bayern Brewing; the South Dakota Bureau of Administration; the State Farm Insurance processing facility in Lincoln, NE; the Neil Kelly Company; the City of Fayetteville; the University of Colorado, Boulder; and the University of Colorado, Denver.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, M. W., Wicks, R., & Schulte, S. (2013). Online environmental engagement among youth: Influence of parents, attitudes and demographics. Mass Communication and Society, 16(5), 661–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg, S., & Moser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bissing-Olson, M. J., Iyer, A., Fielding, K. S., & Zacher, H. (2013). Relationships between daily affect and pro-environmental behavior at work: The moderating role of pro-environmental attitude. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 156–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, W. R. (2007). The sustainability handbook: The complete management guide to achieving social, economic and environmental responsibility. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, J. (1999). Overcoming the ‘value–action gap’ in environmental policy: Tensions between national policy and local experience. Local Environment, 4, 257–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrch, C., Kearnins, K., Milne, M., & Morgan, R. (2007). Sustainable “what”? A cognitive approach to understanding sustainable development. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 4, 26–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantrill, J. G. (2010). Measurement and meaning in environmental communication studies: A response to Kassing, Johnson, Kloeber, and Wentzel. Environmental Communication, 4, 22–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chawla, L. (1999). Life paths into effective environmental action. Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B. (2003). Crafting normative messages to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 105–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. A. (1984). Persuasive messages. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordano, M., Welcomer, S. A., & Scherer, R. F. (2003). An analysis of the predictive validity of the new ecological paradigm scale. Journal of Environmental Education, 34, 22–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and self-determination of behaviour. Psychology Inquiry, 11, 227–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickerson, C. A., Thibodeau, R., Aronson, E., & Miller, D. (2006). Using cognitive dissonance to encourage water conservation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 841–854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietz, T., Fitzgerald, A., & Shwom, R. (2005). Environmental values. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30, 335–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhardt-Martinez, K., Donnelly, K. A., & Laitner, J. A. (2010). Advanced metering initiatives and residential feedback programs: A meta-review for household electricity-saving opportunities. Report Number E105. Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganesh, S., & Stohl, C. (2014). Community organizing, social movements, and collective action. In L. L. Putnam & D. K. Mumby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 743–766). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gass, R. H. (2009). Compliance gaining strategies. In S. W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol. 1, pp. 155–160). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, K. (2009). Reasoned action theory. In S. W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol. 2, pp. 826–828). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guagnano, G. A., Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1995). Influences on attitude-behavior relationships: A natural experiment with curbside recycling. Environmental Behavior, 27, 699–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haldeman, T., & Turner, J. (2009). Implementing a community-based social marketing program to increase recycling. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15, 114–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1986). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behaviour: A metaanalysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassing, J. W., Johnson, H. S., Kloeber, D. N., & Wentzel, B. R. (2010). Development and validation of the environmental communication scale. Environmental Communication, 4, 121–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, A. (2010). Using community-based social marketing techniques to enhance environmental regulation. Sustainability, 2(4), 1138–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2010). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to proenvironmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Zaltman, G. (1971). Social marketing: An approach to planned social change. Journal of Marketing, 35, 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (2010). Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture, 4, 70–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, R. C. (2013). Social marketing and social change: Strategies and tools for improving health, well-being and the environment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loroz, P. S. (2007). The interaction of message frames and reference points in prosocial persuasive appeals. Psychology & Marketing, 24, 1001–1023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubell, M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2007). Collective action and citizen responses to global warming. Political Behavior, 27, 391–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaou, A. (2014). In China, 64 percent say they are environmentalists – Report. http://news.yahoo.com/china-64-percent-environmentalists-report-010358076--sector.html. Accessed 6 June 2014.

  • Parguel, B., Benoit-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, L. G., & Sharp, E. (2008). Persuasive communication and proenvironmental behaviors: How message tailoring and message framing can improve the integration of behaviors through self-determined motivation. Canadian Psychology, 49, 210–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier, L. G., Tuson, K. M., Green-Demers, I., Noels, K., & Beaton, A. M. (1998). Why are you doing things for the environment? The motivation toward the environment scale (MTES). Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(5), 437–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peloza, J., Loock, M., Cerruti, J., & Muyot, M. (2012). Sustainability: How stakeholder perceptions differ from corporate reality. California Management Review, 55, 74–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18, 429–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221–279). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seiter, J. S. (2009). Social judgment theory. In S. W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol. 2, pp. 905–908). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimanoff, S. B. (2009). Facework theories. In S. W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol. 1, pp. 374–377). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silk, K. J. (2009). Campaign communication theories. In S. W. Littlejohn & K. A. Foss (Eds.), Encyclopedia of communication theory (Vol. 1, pp. 87–91). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staats, H., Harland, P., & Wilke, H. A. (2004). Effecting durable change: A team approach to improve environmental behavior in the household. Environment and Behavior, 36, 341–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1995). Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1611–1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thogersen, J. (2004). A cognitive dissonance interpretation of consistencies and inconsistencies in environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiedemann, K. H. (2010). Targeting residential energy use behavior. In K. Ehrhardt-Martineq & J. A. Laitner (Eds.), People-centered initiatives for increasing energy savings (pp. 1–18). Washington, DC: American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, K. L., Dmitrieva, A., & Adriasola, E. (2013). Changing behavior: Increasing the effectiveness of workplace interventions in creating pro-environmental behaviour change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34, 211–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). It’s the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, 472–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, C., & Dowlatabad, H. (2007). Models of decision making and residential energy use. Annual Review of Environmental Resources, 32, 169–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 56(3), 407–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Allen, M. (2016). Understanding Pro-Environmental Behavior: Models and Messages. In: Strategic Communication for Sustainable Organizations. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18005-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics