2.pdf

This article was published in the November 2005 issue of Environment .

Volume 47, Number 9, pages 22–38. http://www.heldref.org/env.php.

Do Global Attitudes and Behaviors

Support Sustainable Development?

By A NTHONY A. L EISEROWITZ , R OBERT W. K ATES , AND T HOMAS M. P ARRIS

Many advocates of sustainable development recognize

that a transition to global sustainability—meeting human

needs and reducing hunger and poverty while maintaining

the life-support systems of the planet—will require changes

in human values, attitudes, and behaviors. 1 A previous article

in Environment described some of the values used to define

or support sustainable development as well as key goals,

indicators, and practices. 2 Drawing on the few multinational

and quasi-global-scale surveys that have been conducted, 3

this article synthesizes and reviews what is currently known

about global attitudes and behavior that will either support

or discourage a global sustainability transition. 4 (Table 1 on

page 24 provides details about these surveys.)

None of these surveys measured public attitudes toward

“sustainable development” as a holistic concept. There

is, however, a diverse range of empirical data related

to many of the subcomponents of sustainable develop-

ment: development and environment; the driving forces

of population, affluence/poverty/consumerism, technology,

and entitlement programs; and the gap between attitudes

and behavior.

distributed within and between nations, however, are much

more contentious questions. Unfortunately, there does not

appear to be any global-scale survey research that has tried

to identify public attitudes or preferences for particular

levels or end-states of economic development (for example,

infinite growth versus steady-state economies) and only

limited or tangential data on the ideal distribution of wealth

(see the section on affluence below).

Data from the World Values Survey suggest that eco-

nomic development leads to greater perceived happi-

ness as countries make the transition from subsistence to

advanced industrial economies. But above a certain level

of gross national product (GNP) per capita—approximately

$14,000—the relationship between income level and sub-

jective well-being disappears (see Figure 1 on page 25).

This implies that infinite economic growth does not lead to

greater human happiness. Additionally, many of the unhap-

piest countries had, at the time of these surveys, recently

experienced significant declines in living standards with the

collapse of the Soviet Union. Yet GNP per capita remained

higher in these ex-Soviet countries than in developing

countries like India and Nigeria. 6 This suggests that relative

trends in living standards influence happiness more than

absolute levels of affluence, but the relationship between

economic development and subjective well-being deserves

more research attention.

Development

Concerns for environment and development merged in

the early concept of sustainable development, but the mean-

ing of these terms has evolved over time. For example,

global economic development is widely viewed as a central

priority of sustainable development, but development has

come to mean human and social development as well.

Human Development

Very limited data is available on public attitudes toward

issues of human development, although it can be assumed

that there is near-universal support for increased child

survival rates, adult life expectancies, and educational

opportunities. However, despite the remarkable increases in

these indicators of human well-being since World War II, 7

there appears to be a globally pervasive sense that human

well-being has been deteriorating in recent years. In 2002,

large majorities worldwide said that a variety of condi-

tions had worsened over the previous five years, including

the availability of well-paying jobs (58 percent); working

conditions (59 percent); the spread of diseases (66 per-

cent); the affordability of health care (60 percent); and the

ability of old people to care for themselves in old age (59

Economic Development

The desire for economic development is often assumed

to be universal, transcending all cultural and national con-

texts. Although the surveys in Table 1 have no global-scale

data on public attitudes toward economic development per

se, this assumption appears to be supported by 91 percent

of respondents from 35 developing countries, the United

States, and Germany, who said that it is very important (75

percent) or somewhat important (16 percent) to live in a

country where there is economic prosperity. 5 What level

of affluence is desired, how that economic prosperity is to

be achieved, and how economic wealth should ideally be

percent). Likewise, thinking of their own

countries, large majorities worldwide were

concerned about the living conditions of

the elderly (61 percent) and the sick and

disabled (56 percent), while a plurality

was concerned about the living conditions

of the unemployed (42 percent). 8

aid was too high. 13 There is also little evi-

dence that the public in OECD countries

has developed “donor fatigue.” Although

surveys have found increasing public con-

cerns about corruption, aid diversion, and

inefficiency, these surveys also continue

to show very high levels of public support

for aid.

Public support for development aid is

belied, however, by several factors. First,

large majorities demonstrate little under-

standing of development aid, with most

unable to identify their national aid agen-

cies and greatly overestimating the per-

centage of their national budget devoted

to development aid. For example, recent

polls have found that Americans believed

their government spent 24 percent (mean

estimate) of the national budget on for-

eign assistance, while Europeans often

estimated their governments spent 5 to 10

percent. 14 In reality, in 2004 the United

States spent approximately 0.81 percent

and the European Union member countries

an average of approximately 0.75 percent

of their national budgets on official devel-

opment assistance, ranging from a low

of 0.30 percent (Italy) to a high of 1.66

percent (Luxembourg). 15 Second, devel-

opment aid is almost always ranked low

on lists of national priorities, well below

more salient concerns about (for example)

unemployment, education, and health care.

Third, “the overwhelming support for for-

eign aid is based upon the perception that

it will be spent on remedying humanitarian

crises,” not used for other development-

related issues like Third World debt, trade

Development Assistance

One important way to promote devel-

opment is to extend help to poorer coun-

tries and people, either through national

governments or nongovernmental organ-

izations and charities. There is strong

popular support but less official support

for development assistance to poor coun-

tries. In 1970, the United Nations General

Assembly resolved thateach economically

advanced country would dedicate 0.7 per-

cent of its gross national income (GNI) to

official development assistance (ODA) by

the middle of the 1970s—a target that has

been reaffirmed in many subsequent inter-

national agreements. 9 As of 2004, only five

countries had achieved this goal (Denmark,

Norway, the Netherlands, Luxembourg,

and Sweden). Portugal was close to the

target at 0.63, yet all other countries ranged

from a high of 0.42 percent (France) to

lows of 0.16 and 0.15 percent (the United

States and Italy respectively). Overall, the

average ODA/GNI among the industrial-

ized countries was only 0.25 percent—far

below the UN target. 10

By contrast, in 2002, more than 70

percent of respondents from 21 developed

and developing countries said they would

support paying 1 percent more in taxes to

help the world’s poor. 11 Likewise, surveys

in the 13 countries of the Organisation

for Economic Co-operation and Develop-

ment’s Development Assistance Commit-

tee (OECD-DAC) have found that public

support for the principle of giving aid to

developing countries (81 percent in 2003)

has remained high and stable for more than

20 years. 12 Further, 45 percent said that

their government’s current (1999–2001)

level of expenditure on foreign aid was

too low, while only 10 percent said foreign

Table 1. Multinational surveys

One-time surveys

Name

Year(s)

Number of countries

Pew Global Attitudes

Project

2002

Eurobarometer

2002

International Social Science

Program

2000

Health of the Planet

1992

Repeated surveys

GlobeScan International

Enviromental Monitor

1997–2003

World Values Survey

1981–2002

Demographic and Health

Surveys

1986–2002

Organisation for Economic

Co-operation and

Development

1990–2002

NOTE: Before November 2003, GlobeScan, Inc. was known as Environics

International. Surveys before this time bear the older name.

SOURCE: 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 , CID Working

Paper No. 113 (Cambridge, MA: Science, Environment and Development Group, Cen-

ter for International Development, Harvard University, 2004), http://www.cid.harvard.

edu/cidwp/113.htm.

24 ENVIRONMENT

VOLUME 47 NUMBER 9

barriers, or increasing inequality between

rich and poor countries—or for geopoliti-

cal reasons (for example, U.S. aid to Israel

and Egypt). 16 Support for development

assistance has thus been characterized as

“a mile wide, but an inch deep” with

large majorities supporting aid (in princi-

ple) and increasing budget allocations but

few understanding what development aid

encompasses or giving it a high priority. 17

Europeans, Japanese, and North Ameri-

cans said that human beings should coexist

with nature, ranging from 85 percent in

the United States to 96 percent in Japan.

By contrast, only in Jordan, Vietnam, Tan-

zania, and the Philippines did more than

40 percent say that human beings should

master nature. 20 In 2002, a national survey

of the United States explored environmen-

tal values in more depth and found that

Americans strongly agreed that nature has

intrinsic value and that humans have moral

duties and obligations to animals, plants,

and non-living nature (such as rocks, water,

and air). The survey found that Americans

strongly disagreed that “humans have the

right to alter nature to satisfy wants and

desires” and that “humans are not part of

nature” (see Figure 3 on page 28). 20 This

very limited data suggests that large major-

ities in the United States and worldwide

now reject a domination ethic as the basis

of the human-nature relationship, at least at

an abstract level. This question, however,

deserves much more cross-cultural empiri-

cal research.

Environment

Figure 1. Subjective well-being by level

of economic development

Compared to the very limited or nonex-

istent data on attitudes toward economic

and human development and the over-

all concept of sustainable development,

research on global environmental attitudes

is somewhat more substantial. Several

surveys have measured attitudes regard-

ing the intrinsic value of nature, global

environmental concerns, the trade-offs

between environmental protection and

economic growth, government policies,

and individual and household behaviors.

100

Switzerland

Sweden

Norway

Ireland

United States

West Germany

Taiwan

Japan

South Korea

Nigeria

India

Human-Nature Relationship

Most research has focused on anthro-

pocentric concerns about environmental

quality and natural resource use, with

less attention to ecocentric concerns about

the intrinsic value of nature. In 1967, the

historian Lynn White Jr. published a now-

famous and controversial article arguing

that a Judeo-Christian ethic and attitude of

domination, derived from Genesis, was an

underlying historical and cultural cause of

the modern environmental crisis. 18 Subse-

quent ecocentric, ecofeminist, and social

ecology theorists have also argued that a

domination ethic toward people, women,

and nature runs deep in Western, patri-

archal, and capitalist culture. 19 The 2000

World Values Survey, however, found that

76 percent of respondents across 27 coun-

tries said that human beings should “coex-

ist with nature,” while only 19 percent said

they should “master nature” (see Figure 2

on page 27). Overwhelming majorities of

Estonia

Bulgaria

-10

Russia

Belarus

-20

Ukraine

-30

Moldova

Gross national product (GNP) per capita in 1998 U.S. dollars

NOTE: The subjective well-being index reflects the average of the percentage

in each country who describe themselves as “very happy” or “happy” minus the

percentage who describe themselves as “not very happy” or “unhappy”; and the

percentage placing themselves in the 7–10 range, minus the percentage placing

themselves in the 1–4 range, on a 10-point scale on which 1 indicates that one

is strongly dissatisfied with one’s life as a whole, and 10 indicates that one is

highly satisfied with one’s life as a whole.

SOURCE: R. Inglehart, “Globalization and Postmodern Values,” Washington

Quarterly 23, no. 1 (1999): 215–228 . Subjective well-being data from the 1990

and 1996 World Values Surveys. GNP per capita for 1993 data from World Bank,

World Development Report, 1995 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).

NOVEMBER 2005

ENVIRONMENT 25

climate change. 23 Further, 52 percent of

the global public said that if no action is

taken, “species loss will seriously affect

the planet’s ability to sustain life” just 20

years from now. 24

Environmental Concern

Attitudes toward

Environmental Policies

In 2000, a survey of 11 developed and

23 developing countries found that 83

percent of all respondents were concerned

a fair amount (41 percent) to a great

deal (42 percent) about environmental

problems. Interestingly, more respondents

from developing countries (47 percent)

were “a great deal concerned” about the

environment than from developed coun-

tries (33 percent), ranging from more than

60 percent in Peru, the Philippines, Nige-

ria, and India to less than 30 percent in the

Netherlands, Germany, Japan, and Spain. 22

In 1995, a large majority (62 percent)

worldwide said they “would agree to an

increase in taxes if the extra money were

used to prevent environmental damage,”

while 33 percent said they would oppose

them. 26 In 2000, there was widespread

global support for stronger environmen-

tal protection laws and regulations, with

69 percent saying that, at the time of the

survey, their national laws and regula-

tions did not go at all far enough. 27 The

1992 Health of the Planet survey found

that a very large majority (78 percent)

favored the idea of their own national

government “contributing money to an

international agency to work on solving

global environmental problems.” Attitudes

toward international agreements in this

survey, however, were less favorable. In

1992, 47 percent worldwide agreed that

“our nation’s environmental problems can

be solved without any international agree-

ments,” with respondents from low-income

countries more likely to strongly agree (23

percent) than individuals from middle-

income (17 percent) or high-income (12

percent) countries. 28 In 2001, however, 79

percent of respondents from the G8 coun-

tries said that international negotiations

and progress on climate change was either

“not good enough” (39 percent) or “not

acceptable” (40 percent) and needed faster

action. Surprisingly, this latter 40 percent

supported giving the United Nations “the

power to impose legally-binding actions

on national governments to protect the

Earth’s climate.” 29

Environmental Protection versus

Economic Growth

In two recent studies, 52 percent of

respondents worldwide agreed that “pro-

tecting the environment should be given

priority” over “economic growth and cre-

ating jobs,” while 74 percent of respon-

dents in the G7 countries prioritized

Children play in a polluted creek near Calcutta, India. Global public opinion

holds that environmental problems such as water pollution are very serious

problems—but such attitudes have not always translated into action.

This survey also asked respondents to rate

the seriousness of several environmental

problems (see Figure 4 on page 29). Large

majorities worldwide selected the stron-

gest response possible (“very serious”)

for seven of the eight problems measured.

Overall, these results demonstrate very

high levels of public concern about a wide

range of environmental issues, from local

problems like water and air pollution to

global problems like ozone depletion and

environmental protection over economic

growth, even if some jobs were lost. 25

Unfortunately, this now-standard survey

question pits the environment against

economic growth as an either/or dilemma.

Rarely do surveys allow respondents to

choose an alternative answer, that environ-

mental protection can generate economic

growth and create jobs (for example, in

new energy system development, tourism,

and manufacturing).

Environmental Behavior

Material consumption is one of the pri-

mary means by which environmental val-

ues and attitudes get translated into behav-

ior. (For attitudes toward consumption per

se, see the section on affluence, poverty,

and consumerism below.)

In 2002, Environics International (Globe-

Scan) found that 36 percent of respondents

26 ENVIRONMENT

VOLUME 47 NUMBER 9

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: