SOME SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL PREDICTORS OF ENVIRONMENTALISM

Introduction Two tendencies have emerged in contemporary public consciousness: on the one hand, superficial ecological awareness has become widespread and normative in Western developed nations (e.g. Nas 1995, Nas & Dekker 1996, Thompson & Rayner 1998), on the other hand--environmental mentality and ecological lifestyles are becoming increasingly heterogeneous and inconsistent (Brand 1997, Macnaghten & Urry 1998). In other words, on a declarative level more and more people express their concern over the ecological situation and declare their willingness to contribute somehow to the protection of environment. However, in reality this concern may not be manifested consistently. Identification of factors that influence various forms of environmentalism remains a theoretical and empirical problem. Environmental concern may be manifested both in representational phenomena (beliefs and attitudes concerning nature and human-environment relations) as well as in overt (ecological) activities (e.g. self-restriction in consumption, participation in ecological movements, willingness to sacrifice for environmental quality). Attitudinal phenomena and overt behavior are easily distinguishable, but relations between them remain a controversial issue. Models based on attitude theories assume a causal chain starting from most general beliefs, proceeding to more specific attitudes and beliefs, which cause behavior intentions and/or actual behavior (e.g. Fishbein & Ajzen 1975). Other models consider the system of attitudes and the behavioral system as relatively independent and not necessarily consistent with each other (e.g. McGuire 1986). Alternatively (e.g. in the theory of social representations), attitudinal and behavioral aspects can be considered as two manifestations of the same underlying symbolic structures, therefore denying any causal relations between them (Wagner 1993). In psychology environmentalism is most often conceptualized either in the framework of various attitude theories (e.g. theory of reasoned action (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975) and theory of planned behavior (Ajzen 1985) which deal with cognitive and normative beliefs that influence behavior intentions), or theories of altruism (e.g. norm activation model (Schwartz 1977) which deals with the activation of interiorized values through the processes of ascription of responsibility and awareness of consequences, resulting in the feeling of moral obligation to perform specific actions). An example of applying the attitude-theory approach to environmentalism could be a model by Kaiser et al (1999) that operates with such variables as knowledge (factual and normative), attitudes (towards environment and towards ecological behavior), a sense of responsibility and behavior intentions. Examples of altruistic models could be an extension of norm activation model to situations of individual contribution to common good (Blamley 1998), and a model of actively caring by Geller (1995) which emphasizes value preferences, self-esteem and a sense of belonging. Thogersen (1996) has compared these two general approaches, arguing that the theory of reasoned action implies that people decide on the basis of calculating costs and benefits resulting from the chosen alternative. On the other hand, when the action is perceived in the framework of morality, the perceived behavioral costs are not in the foreground, but, instead, the moral value of the decision alternatives is under consideration. Kaplan (2000) has recently proposed to integrate the models of rational decision-making and of altruism in order to explain and change environmental behavior. An integrative model of environmentalism has been presented by Stern (2000) which includes not only attitudinal variables, but also personal capabilities, contextual (interpersonal) and social structural variables. It is supposed that different varieties of environmentalism (types of ecological behavior) are associated with a specific set of determinants. …