Human Behavior: Negative and Positive Effects on the Environment - Coursework Example

Human Behavior: Negative and Positive Effects on the Environment – 460 affiliation Human Behavior: Negative and PositiveEffects on the Environment – 460 The environment has and will continually be affected by the humans. It is evident that these effects can either be negative or constructive. On the negative side, humans have been seen to cut down trees, polluting the environment and even poaching that has lost a huge percentage of the wild animals in the globe today. However, on the positive side, humans have contributed to conserving resources and even preserving the rare species (Scopelliti & Giuliani, 2004). This piece will evaluate human behavior that affects on the environment both negatively and positively. Environmental cues shape behavior Environmental cues as seen in the research conducted by Berger & Heath (2005) play a role in shaping behavior. Environmental cues simply send vital information to individuals that in turn lead to humans developing effectual reactions in individuals. This is to mean that through the environmental cues, humans are trained and encouraged to respond to the cues through certain actions. Berger & Heath (2005) explain that through the environmental cues, the feelings, thoughts and the opinions of persons change; thus, humans develop more connection with the environment. At most times, humans change through connecting more with their environment. In the long run, humans do activities that are appealing to them and on the other hand, contribute positively to the environment. The way humans act, as Berger & Heath’s (2005) work depicts, is greatly determined by the environmental cues; thus generally acceptable values. A good example of environmental cues is avoidance of littering everywhere. Little by little, litter has become a challenge that can simply be changed through change of behavior. At most times, some people will choose to assume that they did not see a trash bin. Nevertheless, after constant pleas and urges to use trash bins, especially in busy towns, most individuals are encouraged and forced to use the trash bins. This change of behavior can be credited to the pressure of persons in their vicinity to do the acceptable action and avoid littering. How behavior can be modified to sustain sustainability and how this can reduce negative implications on the environment Indeed, behavior can be modified to support sustainability. As Kaplan & Kaplan (2009) and Steg & Vlek (2009) indicate humans can be empowered to change their way of living and lead a more sustainable life. However, it is worth questioning why lots of individuals continually obliterate the environment despite the numerous calls to protect the environment. In line with this thought, human instincts may be manipulated to help them conserve the environment. Since most humans are not inclined to affect the environment, it is practicable for them to change their way of living through shaping their actions on a positive side (Scopelliti & Giuliani, 2004). For instance, in the event that individuals have a tendency of littering, they may be reinforced to stop this vice through sending them constant messages that will help them stop the vice. This move changes their intention despite the conditions they may be undergoing at the moment (Steg & Vlek, 2009). In the end, it is anticipated that the behavior will change and most will reflect on their actions prior to doing them. It is also recommended that humans are constantly presented with cues that will continually erode the fact that they may engage in unsustainable activities (Steg & Vlek, 2009). In the event that humans are presented with minimal chances of engaging in unsustainable behavior, they are likely to change for the better. A good example is when there is provision of trash bins in almost every location; humans will be discouraged to throw litter everywhere. This action will make littering a routine that is unacceptable. How social norms influence behavior and beliefs about the environment Steg & Vlek (2009) and Berger & Heath (2005) indicate that social norms play a pivotal role in the way in which individuals view the environment and the activities that they take on in the environment as shaped by these opinions. Since all persons hold certain beliefs and values, they are inclined to behave in a particular way. It is also these social norms that lead individuals engaging in certain activities either for their benefit or in ways that will please them in a way or another. In the event that an individual holds the belief it is the role of the city council to clean the streets as they pay taxes for the same, such persons are likely to litter continually as they believe in the government providing the cleaning services to the citizens. The repetitive act of littering will be a norm for such individuals, therefore, become part of their living and consequently, their nature. On the other hand, if a person hold the religious belief that cleanliness leads one closer to God, then, they are less likely to litter everywhere. Such persons hold the belief that despite there existing a service that is held accountable for the cleanliness of the city; it is the role of every individual to contribute actively in making their environment cleans. Such persons make environmental sustainability possible as their social norms are contrary to the norms of the persons who do not believe in avoiding littering for environmental sustainability. It is as a result worth justifying that an individual’s social norms play a major role in shaping one’s environment. In line with this argument, it is recommended that the perceptions of persons regarding their environment be changed and reinforced to the positive if environmental sustainability is to be achieved in the long run (Stern, 2000). Solutions that could productively transform behavior and practices so as to minimize negative environmental implications Various solutions exist that may help individuals change their behaviors that have continually affected the environment in a negative way. Among such ways include recycling items. A lot of persons have the tendency of throwing bags especially plastic bags after use. They then end up purchasing more when need arises. Evidently, this leads to too many plastic bags in the environment, and this causes great nuisance. In the event that the same are recycled, the non-decomposable material will be minimal in the environment; thus, reduction of the effects of the plastic bags in the environment. Secondly, controlling the amount of water used in a day plays a major role in protecting the environment. Lots of people have been seen to let taps run unnecessarily; thus, creating a lot of wastage. Saving on water will reduce the consumption of the same in every household. If all households adopt this policy, it means that the amount water saved worldwide will be extremely high. An interpretation of this means that the water sources will be conserved a great deal. This is indeed a plus for the environment in general. Conclusion Evidently, conserving the environment is a task that requires the collaboration of all stakeholders, humans being the major stakeholders. Nonetheless, it has proven complex to change the way of thinking of most humans in an attempt to reduce the negative impacts of humans on the environment. It is through repetitive calls to humans that the negative social norms that individuals hold can be changed for the better. Lots of effort needs to be put so as the environment can be sustainable even in the long run. The environmental cues, for instance, can lead to behavior change in the environment with time. The behaviors that humans adopt determine if they will damage the environment or not. Positive behaviors will have fewer impacts on the environment and vice versa. Despite the benefits that humans accrue from the environment, they should be prepared to put all their energy to conserving this precious resource. References Berger, J. & Heath, C. (2005).Idea Habitats: How the Prevalence of Environmental Cues Influences the Success of Ideas. Cognitive Science, 29, 195–221. 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), 387–389. Scopelliti, M. & Giuliani, M. V. (2004). Choosing restorative environments across the lifespan: A matter of place experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 423–437. Steg, L. & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging proenvironmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 309–317. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. Read More