The Concept of Psychology - Essay Example

Psychological barriers to environmental action Introduction Environmental psychology can be said to be an art and science that looks at the range of interaction between humans and the environment. It is thus the branch of psychology that attempts to analyze the interrelationship between environmental attitude and the pro-environmental behavior in people (Gifford, Steg, & Reser, 2011. P. 452). Over more than three decades, environmentalists, sociologists and psychologists have attempted to cause of environmental action with the question of why people act in an environmentally friendly manner and the barriers to pro-environmental actions being the focus of the research. An attempt to answer this question would necessitate understanding the psychological implications of environmental action thus helping to understand the psychological barriers to environmental action. Several theoretical frameworks that have been proposed to analyze the psychological barriers to environmental action have managed to identify an existence in the relationship between environmental knowledge, environmental awareness and pro-environmental action with all the three interrelated environmental action influencers having psychological roots (Gifford, 2014, P. 560). Possession of environmental knowledge leads to environmental awareness, which would ultimately lead to environmental action. This is a linear process that is expected to be uniform to everyone, nevertheless, in most instances, pro-environmental action is not usually the ultimate outcome of the process. This study is thus set to elaborate the psychological barriers to environmental action despite possession of environmental knowledge and awareness. Barriers to Environmental action Psychological discounting of the future is psychologically determined that people prefer an immediate result to a future result. A survey conducted to understand the psychological orientation of people’s mind towards the future with a simple question of “Would you prefer $5000 now or $6000 after a year” reveals that most people would prefer $5000 now despite a 20% increment in the future. The same mindset applies to the psychological orientation towards importance of the environment and the need to conserve the environment (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002, P 82). According to Takács-Sánta, (2007, P. 117), discounting of the future of the future can be seen in various activities of the day ranging from personal level, to the level of the organization and ultimately to the level of the government which would contribute to a barrier to environmental action. On a personal level, homeowners could in certain instances fail to insulate their homes appropriately with proper electrical insulators since it may be expensive for the initial start. This is at the future expense of environmental action consummation of excess energy will inflict. At the level of the government, psychological discounting of the future makes economies to over rely on the natural resources like the forests and the oceans for their economic value at the expense of the action to the environment. Instead of advancement in technology that would be beneficial to the future, most governments over harvest the forests for the immediate use of timber and wood. This action leads to global environmental change with increased rate of desertification thus affecting the future environmental status (Moser et al., 2013, P. 129). According to Joshi & Fast (2013, P. 436), over harvesting of the oceans is equally an example of how discounting of the future Is a psychological barrier to environmental action. Overharvesting of the ocean has led to disaster in the fishing lanes at the global platform. It is evident that 11 of the 17 global fishing basins have been depleted because of the human desire to satisfy the immediate wants without consideration to the future implications of action to the environment. According to Lee & Chung (2008, P. 96), positive illusion is a psychological mindset of optimism in the future despite all pointing indications of impending future hazards. This is a psychological barrier to environmental action that is mostly witnessed in the high levels of decision-making in the governmental and organizational level. In the modern environmental status, there have been increased evidences of hurricanes and submission of ocean front line that is an indication of environmental change and a need for environmental action. The action that should be taken by the governments and international organization should be ones that limit overreliance on fossil fuel as a means of conserving the environment through a reduction of global warming. Nevertheless, despite all the warning indications of impending environmental disaster, Positive illusion hinders the actions towards pro-environment activity with the governments and organizations banking hopes on natural resolution to environmental challenges in the future. In as much as positive illusion enhances the self-esteem, it reduces the capacity of decision making that preventing people from acting in a timely manner to address the impending challenges to the environment (Gifford, 2011, P. 110). Egocentrism is a psychological mindset where one sees self as the center of attention. The same psychological mindset can equally apply at an international level where countries see themselves be more valuable in comparison to others. In relation to environmental action, Egocentrism normally prompts the question of “who is to blame for environmental changes?” witnessed in different environmental summits in Copenhagen, countries normally have different assessment of their proportionate blame on their contribution to environmental problems (Kesselring & Müller, 2011, P. 328). Most of the emergent industrialized nations like India and China point figures at the western nations as the main contributors towards environmental degradation and global warming, equally, the United States have failed to contribute to the agreement towards environmental conservation partly because emerging industrialized nations like China and India have accepted minimal responsibility for their actions on environmental pollution. Egocentrism at an international platform poses one of the greatest barriers towards environmental action, as nations would continue to affect the environment, engage in blame games and have little impute in pro-environment action. Egocentrism has resulted in the developed economies pointing fingers at the emergent economies on the grounds of unchecked deforestation as well as unchecked population growth as the main effectors on the environment while the emergent economies point fingers back on the grounds of the past implications for action of the developed nations on their responsibility for climate change. This tag of war thus results to a standstill in environmental action thus passes as a psychological barrier towards environmental action (Hoffman & Bazerman, 2007, P. 96). According to Chang & Tseng (2013, P. 866), perception of an impending risk is equally a psychological barrier to environmental action. Using clean energy is an example of the areas of environmental action that has been hindered by perception of impending risk. Eclectic car as an example of clean energy is one are people have not fully ventured into. Weighing of the cost of the vehicle in comparison to those that uses gasoline indicate that investment in an electric car poses a risk of one wasting a lot of money (Clayton, Litchfield, & Geller, 2013, P. 71). Equally, social cost and what people will think in case an individual purchases an electric car is one area where perception of risk is evident. In most circumstances, people will not involve in actions that conserve the environment despite knowledge and awareness since people are usually risk phobic. According to Holt (2009, P. 10) sunken costs are prior investments that are made in life that are difficult to forgo despite knowledge and awareness of their implication for the environment. Sunken costs are equally well-established habits that are difficult to forego. An example of having a hot shower is difficult to forego if it has become a habit despite the knowledge of its implication on the energy sector. Equally, possession of a luxury car would necessitate the use of the care despite the fuel consumption rate being high. Sunken cost is an ideological mindset that results in wastage and depletion of resources that acts as a psychological barrier to conservation of the environment. Conclusion Environmental conservation actions are important to ensure that the future generation lives in an environmental friendly atmosphere. Failure to act in a pro-environment manner has a direct implication to the human and the ecology at large. This is seen through various climate changes indicators like the rise in the ocean level, periodic hurricanes and increment in desertification. Nevertheless, despite these indicators for a prompt need for climate action as well as possession of knowledge on the best practice of environmental action, there is still laxity at personal, organizational and national level. The core-contributing barriers to environmental action are psychological factors. In an attempt to conserve the environment, these barriers must be identified, and relevant policies set at various levels of environmental degradation to help in environmental conservation. Additionally, commitment at governmental levels must be ensured successfully to achieve the desired results for environmental action. References Chang, E.C. & Tseng, Y.F., 2013. Research note: E-store image, perceived value and perceived risk. Journal of Business Research, 66, pp.864–870. Clayton, S., Litchfield, C. & Geller, E.S., 2013. Psychological science, conservation, and environmental sustainability. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11, pp.377–382. Gifford, R., 2014. Environmental psychology matters. Annual review of psychology, 65, pp.541. Gifford, R., 2011. The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66, pp.290–302. Gifford, R., Steg, L. & Reser, J.P., 2011. Environmental psychology, Hoffman, A. & Bazerman, M., 2007. Changing practice on sustainability: Understanding and overcoming the organizational and psychological barriers to action. In Organizations and the Sustainability Mosaic. Crafting Long-Term Ecological and Societal Solutions. pp. 83. Holt, S., 2009. Sunken Billions - But how many? Fisheries Research, 97, pp.3–10. Joshi, P.D. & Fast, N.J., 2013. Power and reduced temporal discounting. Psychological science, 24, pp.432–8. Kesselring, T. & Müller, U., 2011. The concept of egocentrism in the context of Piaget’s theory. New Ideas in Psychology, 29, pp.327–345. Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J., 2002. Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8, pp.239–260. Lee, J.Y. & Chung, H.Y., 2008. Positive Illusion of exemplary altruists. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9, pp.94–100. Moser, C. et al., 2013. Psychological factors in discounting negative impacts of nuclear waste. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 35, pp.121–131. Takács-Sánta, A., 2007. Barriers to environmental concern. Human Ecology Review, 14, pp.26–38. Read More