Do global attitudes and behaviors support sustainable development?

Environment

Volumn 47, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 22-38

  Leiserowitz, Anthony A ^a,b   Kates, Robert W ^c,d   Parris, Thomas M ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

^b Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^c Brown University ^*

^d BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e New England Offices of ISCIENCES LLC   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE; BEHAVIOR; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; GLOBAL CHANGE; HEALTH SURVEY; LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT; POLICY; POVERTY; PUBLIC OPINION; REVIEW; SCIENCE; TECHNOLOGY; WELLBEING;

EID: 27644443745     PISSN: 00139157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/ENVT.47.9.22-38     Document Type: Review

References (106)

1. For example, see U. S. National Research Council, Policy Division, Board on Sustainable Development, Our Common Journey: A Transition toward Sustainability (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999);
2. and P. Raskin et al., Great Transition: The Promise and Lure of the Tones Ahead (Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute, 2002).
3. R. W. Kates, T. M. Parris, and A. Leiserowitz, "What Is Sustainable Development? Goals, Indicators, Values, and Practice," Environment, April 2005, 8-21.
4. For simplicity, the words "global" and "worldwide" are used throughout this article to refer to survey results. Please note, however, that there has never been a truly representative global survey with either representative samples from every country in the world or in which all human beings worldwide had an equal probability of being selected. Additionally, some developing country results are taken from predominantly urban samples and are thus not fully representative.
5. For more detail about these surveys and the countries sampled, see Appendix A in A. Leiserowitz, R. W. Kates, and T. M. Parris, Sustainability Values, Attitudes and Behaviors: A Review of Multi-national and Global Trends (No. CID Working Paper No. 113) (Cambridge, MA: Science, Environment and Development Group, Center for International Development, Harvard University, 2004), http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidwp/113.htm.
6. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, Views of a Changing World (Washington, DC: The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 2003), T72.
7. See R. Inglehart, "Globalization and Postmodern Values," Washington Quarterly 23, no. 1 (1999): 215-28.
8. Leiserowitz, Kates, and Parris, note 4 above, page 8.
9. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, The Pew Global Attitudes Project Dataset (Washington, DC: The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 2004).
10. Gross national income (GNI) is "[t]he total market value of goods and services produced during a given period by labor and capital supplied by residents of a country, regardless of where the labor and capital are located. [GNI] differs from GDP primarily by including the capital income that residents earn from investments abroad and excluding the capital income that nonresidents earn from domestic investment." Official development assistance (ODA) is defined as "[t]hose flows to developing countries and multilateral institutions provided by official agencies, including state and local governments, or by their executive agencies, each transaction of which meets the following tests: (a) it is administered with the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries as its main objective; and (b) it is concessional in character and conveys a grant element of at least 25 per cent." UN Millennium Project, The 0.7% Target: An In-Depth Look, http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/involved/action07 .htm (accessed 24 August 2005).
11. Official development assistance (ODA) does not include aid flows from private voluntary organizations (such as churches, universities, or foundations). For example, it is estimated that in 2000, the United States provided more than $4 billion in private grants for development assistance, versus nearly $10 billion in ODA. U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Foreign Aid in the National Interest (Washington, DC, 2002), 134.
12. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Official Development Assistance Increases Further - But 2006 Targets Still a Challenge (Paris: OECD, 2005), http://www.oecd.org/document/ 3/0,2340, en_2649_34447_34700611_1_1_1_1,00.html (accessed 30 July 2005).
13. Environics International (GlobeScan), The World Economic Forum Poll: Global Public Opinion on Globalization (Toronto: Environics International, 2002), http://www.globescan.com/brochures/WEF_Poll_Brief .pdf (accessed 5 October 2004), 3. Note that Environics International changed its name to GlobeScan Incorporated in November 2003.
14. OECD, Public Opinion and the Fight Against Poverty (Paris: OECD Development Centre, 2003), 17.
15. Ibid, page 19.
16. Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA), Americans on Foreign Aid and World Hunger: A Study of U.S. Public Attitudes (Washington, DC: PIPA, 2001), http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/BFW (accessed 17 November 2004);
17. and OECD, note 12 above, page 22.
18. See OECD Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD-DAC Secretariat Simulation of DAC Members' Net ODA Volumes in 2006 and 2010, http://www .oecd.org/dataoecd/57/30/35320618.pdf;
19. and Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook, http://www .cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/.
20. OECD, note 12 above, page 20.
21. I. Smillie and H. Helmich, eds., Stakeholders: Government-NGO Partnerships for International Development (London: Earthscan, 1999).
22. L. White Jr., "The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis," Science, 10 March 1967, 1203-07.
23. See C. Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution (1st ed.) (San Francisco: Harper & Row 1980);
24. C. Merchant, Radical Ecology: The Search for a Livable World (New York: Routledge, 1992);
25. and G. Sessions, Deep Ecology for the Twenty-First Century (1st ed.) (New York: Shambhala Press 1995).
26. World Values Survey, The 1999-2002 Values Surveys Integrated Data File 1.0, CD-ROM in R. Inglehart, M. Basanez, J. Diez-Medrano, L. Halman, and R. Luijkx, eds., Human Beliefs and Values: A Cross-Cultural Sourcebook Based on the 1999-2002 Values Surveys, first edition (Mexico City: Siglo XXI, 2004).
27. These results come from a representative national survey of American climate change risk perceptions, policy preferences, and behaviors and broader environmental and cultural values. From November 2002 to February 2003, 673 adults (18 and older) completed a mail-out, mail-back questionnaire, for a response rate of 55 percent. The results are weighted to bring them in line with actual population proportions. See A. Leiserowitz, "American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?" Risk Analysis, in press;
28. and A. Leiserowitz, "Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect, Imagery, and Values," Climatic Change, in press.
29. These results support the argument that concerns about the environment are not "a luxury affordable only by those who have enough economic security to pursue quality-of-life goals." See R. E. Dunlap, G. H. Gallup Jr., and A. M. Gallup, "Of Global Concern: Results of the Health of the Planet Survey," Environment, November 1993, 7-15, 33-39 (quote at 37);
30. R. E. Dunlap, A. G. Mertig, "Global Concern for the Environment: Is Affluence a Prerequisite?" Journal of Social Issues 51, no. 4 (1995): 121-37;
31. S. R. Brechin and W. Kempton, "Global Environmentalism: A Challenge to the Postmaterialism Thesis?" Social Science Quarterly 75, no. 2 (1994): 245-69.
32. Environics International (GlobeScan), Environics International Environmental Monitor Survey Data-set (Kingston, Canada: Environics International, 2000), http://jeff-lab.queensu.ca/poadata/info/iem/iemlist.shtml (accessed 5 October 2004).
33. These multinational levels of concern and perceived seriousness of environmental problems remained roughly equivalent from 1992 to 2000, averaged across the countries sampled by the 1992 Health of the Planet and the Environics surveys, although some countries saw significant increases in perceived seriousness of environmental problems (India, the Netherlands, the Philippines, and South Korea), while others saw significant decreases (Turkey and Uruguay). See R. E. Dunlap, G. H. Gallup Jr., and A. M. Gallup, Health of the Planet: Results of a 1992 International Environmental Opinion Survey of Citizens in 24 Nations (Princeton, NJ: The George H. Gallup International Institute, 1993);
34. and R. E. Dunlap, G. H. Gallup Jr., and A. M. Gallup, "Of Global Concern: Results of the Health of the Planet Survey," Environment, November 1993, 7-15, 33-39.
35. GlobeScan, Results of First-Ever Global Poll on Humanity's Relationship with Nature (Toronto: GlobeScan Incorporated, 2004), http://www.globescan.com/ news_archives/IUCN_PR.html (accessed 30 July 2005).
36. World Values Survey, note 20 above;
37. and Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, What the World Thinks in 2002 (Washington, DC: The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 2002), T-9. The G7 includes Canada, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Japan and the United States. It expanded to the G8 with the addition of Russia in 1998.
38. R. Inglehart, et al., World Values Surveys and European Values Surveys, 1981-1984, 1990-1993, and 1995-1997 [computer file], Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) version (Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research [producer], 2000; Ann Arbor, MI: ICPSR [distributor], 2000).
39. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 23 above.
40. Dunlap, Gallup Jr., and Gallup, Health of the Planet: Results of a 1992 International Environmental Opinion Survey of Citizens in 24 Nations, note 23 above.
41. Environics International (GlobeScan), New Poll Shows G8 Citizens Want Legally-Binding Climate Accord (Toronto: Environics International, 2001), http://www .globescan.com/news_archives/IEM_climatechange.pdf (accessed 30 July 2005).
42. Environics International (GlobeScan), International Environmental Monitor (Toronto: Environics International, 2002), 44.
43. Ibid., page 49.
44. The European Opinion Research Group, Eurobarometer: Energy: Issues, Options and Technologies. Science and Society, EUR 20624 (Brussels: European Commission, 2002), 96-99.
45. Inglehart, note 26 above.
46. C. M. Rogerson, "The Waste Sector and Informal Entrepreneurship in Developing World Cities," Urban Forum 12, no. 2 (2001): 247-59.
47. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 63. These results are based on the subsample of those who own or have regular use of a car.
48. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 65.
49. Inglehart, note 26 above.
50. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 23 above.
51. P. A. Ehrlich and J. P. Holdren, review of The Closing Circle, by Barry Commoner, Environment, April 1972, 24, 26-39.
52. Y. Kaya, "Impact of Carbon Dioxide Emission Control on GNP Growth: Interpretation of Proposed Scenarios," paper presented at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Energy and Industry Subgroup, Response Strategies Working Group, Paris, France, 1990;
53. and R. York, E. Rosa, and T. Dietz, "STIR-PAT, IPAT and ImPACT: Analytic Tools for Unpacking the Driving Forces of Environmental Impacts," Ecological Economics 46, no. 3 (2003): 351.
54. IPCC, Emissions Scenarios (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000);
55. and E. F. Lambin, et al., "The Causes of Land-Use and Land-Cover Change: Moving Beyond the Myths," Global Environmental Change: Human and Policy Dimensions 11, no. 4 (2001): 10.
56. T. M. Parris and R. W. Kates, "Characterizing a Sustainability Transition: Goals, Targets, Trends, and Driving Forces," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100, no. 14 (2003): 6.
57. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, note 8 above, page T17.
58. United Nations, Majority of World's Couples Are Using Contraception (New York: United Nations Population Division, 2001).
59. J. Bongaarts, "Trends in Unwanted Childbearing in the Developing World," Studies in Family Planning 28, no. 4 (1997): 267-77.
60. Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS), STAT-Compiler (Calverton, MD: Measure DHS, 2004), http:// www.measuredhs.com/ (accessed 5 October, 2004).
61. Ibid.
62. U.S. Bureau of the Census, World Population Profile: 1998, WP/98 (Washington, DC, 1999), 45.
63. World Bank, World Development Indicators CD-ROM 2004 [computer file] (Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) [producer], 2004).
64. World Bank, Global Economic Prospects 2005: Trade, Regionalism, and Development [computer file] (Washington, DC: IBRD [producer], 2005).
65. For more information on poverty reduction strategies, see T. Banuri, review of Investing in Development: A Practical Plan to Acheive the Millennium Goals, by UN Millennium Project, Environment, November 2005 (this issue), 37.
66. Inglehart, note 26 above.
67. Inglehart, note 26 above.
68. Inglehart, note 26 above.
69. Environics International (GlobeScan), Consumerism: A Special Report (Toronto: Environics International, 2002), 6.
70. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, note 25 above.
71. Dunlap, Gallup Jr., and Gallup, Health of the Planet: Results of a 1992 International Environmental Opinion Survey of Citizens in 24 Nations, note 23 above, page 57.
72. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 55 above, pages 3-4.
73. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 55 above, pages 3-4.
74. T. Veblen, The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions (New York: Macmillan, 1899).
75. Inglehart, note 26 above.
76. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 133.
77. The European Opinion Research Group, note 32 above, page 70.
78. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 23 above.
79. For example, see J. Flynn, P. Slovic, and H. Kunreuther, Risk, Media and Stigma: Understanding Public Challenges to Modern Science and Technology (London: Earthscan, 2001).
80. International Social Science Program, Environment II, (No. 3440) (Cologne: Zentralarchiv für Empirische Sozialforschung, Universitaet zu Koeln (Central Archive for Empirical Social Research, University of Cologne), 2000), 114.
81. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 139.
82. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 141.
83. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, note 25 above, page T20.
84. Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR), Worldviews 2002 (Chicago: CCFR, 2002), 26.
85. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 163.
86. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, pages 156-57.
87. Environics International (GlobeScan), note 30 above, page 157.
88. W. J. Baumol, R. R. Nelson, and E. N. Wolff, Convergence of Productivity: Cross-National Studies and Historical Evidence (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).
89. A. K. Sen, Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981).
90. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, note 5 above, page 37.
91. World Values Survey, note 20 above.
92. World Values Survey, note 20 above.
93. The human development index (HDI) measures a country's average achievements in three basic aspects of human development: longevity, knowledge, and a decent standard of living. Longevity is measured by life expectancy at birth; knowledge is measured with the adult literacy rate and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrollment ratio; and standard of living is measured by gross domestic product per capita (purchase-power parity US$). The UN Development Programme (UNDP) has used the HDI for its annual reports since 1993. UNDP, Questions About the Human Development Index (HDI), http://www.undp .org/hdr2003/faq.html#21 (accessed 25 August 2005).
94. See, for example, J. Blake, "Overcoming the 'Value-Action Gap' in Environmental Policy: Tensions Between National Policy and Local Experience," Local Environment 4, no. 3 (1999): 257-78;
95. A. Kollmuss and J. Agyeman, "Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to Pro-Environmental Behavior?" Environmental Education Research 8, no. 3 (2002): 239-60;
96. and P. C. Stern, "Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior," Journal of Social Issues 56, no. 3 (2000): 407-24.
97. Stern, ibid., page 421.
98. See, for example, P. W. Schultz and L. Zelezny, "Reframing Environmental Messages to Be Congruent with American Values," Human Ecology Review 10, no. 2 (2003): 126-36.
99. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis (Washington, DC: Island Press, 2005).
100. Dunlap, Gallup Jr., and Gallup, Health of the Planet: Results of a 1992 International Environmental Opinion Survey of Citizens in 24 Nations, note 23 above, page 36.
101. See The Harvard Forum on Religion and Ecology, http://environment. harvard.edu/religion/main.html;
102. R. S. Gottlieb, This Sacred Earth: Religion, Nature, Environment (New York: Routledge, 1996);
103. and G. Gardner, Worldwatch Paper # 164: Invoking the Spirit: Religion and Spirituality in the Quest for a Sustainable World (Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute, 2002).
104. R. Inglehart, Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997);
105. T. O'Riordan, "Frameworks for Choice: Core Beliefs and the Environment," Environment, October 1995, 4-9, 25-29;
106. and P. Raskin and Global Scenario Group, Great Transition: The Promise and Lure of the Times Ahead (Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute, 2002).