Advertisement

Living Well and Living Green: Participant Conceptualizations of Green Citizenship

  • Erin Miller Hamilton
  • Meaghan L. Guckian
  • Raymond De Young
Chapter
Part of the World Sustainability Series book series (WSUSE)

Abstract

For many people, sustainable behavior can be clearly articulated through an array of consumer choices made every day based on: where products come from, the environmental impact of the ingredients in household products, and how products are disposed of at the end of their life cycle. But outside of consumerism, are there other avenues an individual might explore in the pursuit of living a sustainable lifestyle? In an activity called Conceptual Content Cognitive Mapping (3CM) completed by environmentally-concerned academics and professionals, this study asked what it means to be a green citizen. Green citizenship, as understood and lived by our participants, transcends multiple levels of involvement that extend beyond consumer behavior. Green citizens embrace their individual agency to affect change, while recognizing the socially embedded nature of their actions. Beyond the support of community networks, green citizens also identify higher institutional structures as both conduits and barriers to change. Implications for constructing supportive pathways to sustainable participation focusing on the whole citizen, rather than just the consumer, will be discussed.

Keywords

Green citizen Green consumer Conceptual content cognitive map (3CM) 

References

  1. Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2005). A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 273–291. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Affluenza. (2017). Retrieved February 6, 2017, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/affluenza.
  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldenderfer, M. S., & Blashfield, R. K. (1984). Cluster analysis. In Quantitative applications in the social sciences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org.proxy.lib.umich.edu/10.4135/9781412983648.n3.Google Scholar
  5. Anderson, M. (2016). For Earth Day, here’s how Americans view environmental issues. Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/22/for-earth-day-heres-how-americans-view-environmental-issues/.
  6. Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Incentives, morality, or habit?: Predicting students’ car use for university routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz, and Triandis. Environment Behavior, 35(2), 264–285. doi: 10.1177/0013916502250134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dean, H. (2001). Green citizenship. Social Policy & Administration, 35(5), 490–505. doi: 10.1111/1467-9515.t01-1-00249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. De Young, R. (1996). Some psychological aspects of a reduced consumption lifestyle: The role of intrinsic satisfaction and competence. Environment and Behavior, 28(3), 358–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Young, R. (2000). Expanding and evaluating motives for environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 509–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dietz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P. C., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2009). Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(44), 18452–18456. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908738106.
  11. Dobson, A. (2003). Citizenship and the environment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fredrickson, B. L., Grewen, K. M., Coffey, K. A., Algoe, S. B., Firestine, A. M., Arevalo, J. M. G., …& Cole, S. W. (2013). A functional genomic perspective on human well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(33), 13684–13689. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1305419110.
  13. Grese, R. E., Kaplan, R., Ryan, R. L., & Buxton, J. (2000). Psychological benefits of volunteering in stewardship programs. In P. H. Gobster & R. B. Hull (Eds.), Restoring nature: Perspectives from the social sciences and humanities (pp. 265–280). Washington, DC; Covelo, CA: Island Press.Google Scholar
  14. Guckian, M., Hamilton, E. M., & De Young, R. (2018). Cognitive Mapping as Participatory Engagement in Social Science Research on Sustainability. In W. Leal, J. Callewaert, & R. W. Marans (Eds.), Handbook of Sustainability and Social Science Research. Springer.Google Scholar
  15. Jagers, S. C. (2009). In search of the ecological citizen. Environmental Politics, 18(1), 18–36. doi: 10.1080/09644010802624751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jagers, S. C., Martinsson, J., & Matti, S. (2013). Ecological citizenship: A driver of pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Politics, 23(3), 434–453. doi: 10.1080/09644016.2013.835202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2015). Factors Affecting Green Purchase Behaviour and Future Research Directions. International Strategic Management Review (Vol. 3). Holy Spirit University of Kaslik. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ism.2015.04.001.
  18. Kaplan, S., & Kearney, A. R. (1997). Toward a methodology for the measurement of knowledge structures of ordinary people: the conceptual content cognitive map (3CM). Environment and Behavior, 29(5), 579–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (2008). Bringing out the best in people: A psychological perspective. Conservation Biology: The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 22(4), 826–829. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01010.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kaplan, S., & Kaplan, R. (2009). Creating a larger role for environmental psychology: The reasonable person model as an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 329–339. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Meadows, D. H., Randers, J., & Meadows, D. L. (2004). Limits to growth. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Ryan, R. L., & Grese, R. E. (2005). Urban Volunteers and the Environment: Forest and Prairie Restoration. In P. F. Bartlett (Ed.), Urban place: Reconneting with the natural world (pp. 173–188). Cambridge, MA; London, England: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ryan, R. L., Kaplan, R., & Grese, R. E. (2001). Predicting volunteer commitment in environmental stewardship programmes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 44(5), 629–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sheldon, K. M., Nichols, C. P., & Kasser, T. (2011). Americans Recommend Smaller Ecological Footprints When Reminded of Intrinsic American Values of Self-Expression, Family, and Generosity. Ecopsychology, 3(2), 97–104. doi: 10.1089/eco.2010.0078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. U.S. Department of Energy. (2017). Global greenhouse gas emissions data. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data#Country.
  27. Walker, L. (2013). Green product growth outpaced others during recession. Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://www.environmentalleader.com/2013/06/11/green-product-growth-outpaced-others-during-recession/.
  28. Wolf, J., Brown, K., & Conway, D. (2009). Ecological citizenship and climate change: Perceptions and practice. Environmental Politics, 18(4), 503–521. doi: 10.1080/09644010903007377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erin Miller Hamilton
    • 1
  • Meaghan L. Guckian
    • 2
  • Raymond De Young
    • 1
  1. 1.School for Environment and SustainabilityUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Environmental ConservationUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations