IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i10p4197-d1396152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Social Dimensions of Sustainability at the Community Level: An Illustrative but Cautionary Tale

Author

Listed:
  • Cynthia McPherson Frantz

    (Department of Psychology and Environmental Studies, Oberlin College, 120 W Lorain Street, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA)

  • Ifunanya Ezimora

    (Department of Psychology and Environmental Studies, Oberlin College, 120 W Lorain Street, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA
    Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 1001 Potrero Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94110, USA)

  • John E. Petersen

    (Environmental Studies Program and Department of Biology, Oberlin College, 132 Elm Street, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA)

  • Alexandria Edminster

    (Department of Psychology and Environmental Studies, Oberlin College, 120 W Lorain Street, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA
    Paul H. O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University, 1315 E 10th Street, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA)

  • Md Rumi Shammin

    (Environmental Studies Program, Oberlin College, 132 Elm Street, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA)

  • Yunzhang Chi

    (Department of Psychology, Oberlin College, 120 W Lorain Street, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA)

Abstract

Many communities are working to enhance the sustainability of their physical, economic, and social systems. While economic and physical systems are routinely measured (e.g., money and energy), psychological and behavioral elements of social systems (norms, attitudes, and individual behavior) are seldom tracked. The objective of this research was to evaluate a potentially scalable approach to measure the impact of sustainability initiatives on these variables in a community engaged in holistic sustainability programming. Online survey data were collected in 2012 ( N = 155) and 2016 ( N = 137), measuring pro-environmental thought and behavior in two towns in Ohio: Oberlin, a community engaged in holistic efforts to enhance environmental sustainability; and a similar community (Berea) used as a control. Survey links were distributed via recruitment letters mailed to randomly selected community residents from a purchased mailing list. We used two (town) by two (time) between subjects’ ANOVAs to evaluate whether Oberlin saw predicted increases in sustainable thought and behavior from 2012 to 2016, compared to the control community. Despite verifiable participation in and awareness of sustainability programs in Oberlin, our survey results did not provide strong evidence that programs resulted in the desired changes in attitudes, norms, and individual behaviors. Recycling attitudes and LED bulb installation were two exceptions. We conclude that assessing the psychological and behavioral dimensions of sustainability poses particular challenges. We encountered ceiling effects and inadequate statistical power. Possibly, norms and attitudes are not easily influenced even by a holistic community-wide effort.

Suggested Citation

  • Cynthia McPherson Frantz & Ifunanya Ezimora & John E. Petersen & Alexandria Edminster & Md Rumi Shammin & Yunzhang Chi, 2024. "Measuring Social Dimensions of Sustainability at the Community Level: An Illustrative but Cautionary Tale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-36, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:10:p:4197-:d:1396152
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/10/4197/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/10/4197/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lori M. Hunter & Alison Hatch & Aaron Johnson, 2004. "Cross‐National Gender Variation in Environmental Behaviors," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(3), pages 677-694, September.
    2. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Bruce D. Meyer & Wallace K. C. Mok & James X. Sullivan, 2015. "Household Surveys in Crisis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 29(4), pages 199-226, Fall.
    4. Emmanuel Senior Tenakwah & Emmanuel Junior Tenakwah & Mary Amponsah & Sarah Eyaa & Elliot Boateng & Nekpen Okhawere, 2022. "Adoption of Sustainable Technologies during Crisis: Examining Employees’ Perception and Readiness across Cultures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-20, April.
    5. Adam McBride Lazri & David M. Konisky, 2019. "Environmental Attitudes Across Race and Ethnicity," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1039-1055, June.
    6. Pothitou, Mary & Hanna, Richard F. & Chalvatzis, Konstantinos J., 2016. "Environmental knowledge, pro-environmental behaviour and energy savings in households: An empirical study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1217-1229.
    7. Andy S. Blanke & Norman Walzer, 2013. "Measuring community development: what have we learned?," Community Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(5), pages 534-550, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.
    2. Anthony Amoah & Thomas Addoah, 2021. "Does environmental knowledge drive pro-environmental behaviour in developing countries? Evidence from households in Ghana," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 2719-2738, February.
    3. Ming, Yaxin & Deng, Huixin & Wu, Xiaoyue, 2022. "The negative effect of air pollution on people's pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 72-87.
    4. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Dula Etana & Denyse J. R. M. Snelder & Cornelia F. A. van Wesenbeeck & Tjard de Cock Buning, 2020. "Dynamics of Smallholder Farmers’ Livelihood Adaptation Decision-Making in Central Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-26, June.
    6. Spandagos, Constantine & Baark, Erik & Ng, Tze Ling & Yarime, Masaru, 2021. "Social influence and economic intervention policies to save energy at home: Critical questions for the new decade and evidence from air-condition use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    7. Matthias Winfried Kleespies & Paul Wilhelm Dierkes, 2020. "Impact of biological education and gender on students’ connection to nature and relational values," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, November.
    8. Alvaredo, Facundo & Bourguignon, François & Ferreira, Francisco H. G. & Lustig, Nora, 2023. "Seventy-five Years of Measuring Income Inequality in Latin America," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 13157, Inter-American Development Bank.
    9. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Xiaolun Wang & Xinlin Yao, 2020. "Fueling Pro-Environmental Behaviors with Gamification Design: Identifying Key Elements in Ant Forest with the Kano Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-17, March.
    11. Schleich, Joachim & Alsheimer, Sven, 2024. "The relationship between willingness to pay and carbon footprint knowledge: Are individuals willing to pay more to offset their carbon footprint if they learn about its size and distance to the 1.5 °C," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    12. Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette & Mzoughi, Naoufel, 2020. "Moral judgment of environmental harm caused by a single versus multiple wrongdoers: A survey experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    13. Charles Courtemanche & Augustine Denteh & Rusty Tchernis, 2019. "Estimating the Associations between SNAP and Food Insecurity, Obesity, and Food Purchases with Imperfect Administrative Measures of Participation," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(1), pages 202-228, July.
    14. Maccarrone, Giovanni & Marini, Marco A. & Tarola, Ornella, 2023. "Shop Until You Drop: the Unexpected Effects of Anticonsumerism and Environmentalism," FEEM Working Papers 330384, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    15. Bradley Hardy & Timothy Smeeding & James P. Ziliak, 2018. "The Changing Safety Net for Low-Income Parents and Their Children: Structural or Cyclical Changes in Income Support Policy?," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(1), pages 189-221, February.
    16. De Gobbi, Maria Sabrina., 2012. "Gender and the environment : a survey in the manufacturing of machine- parts sector in Indonesia and China," ILO Working Papers 994692493402676, International Labour Organization.
    17. Karoline Gamma & Robert Mai & Moritz Loock, 2020. "The Double-Edged Sword of Ethical Nudges: Does Inducing Hypocrisy Help or Hinder the Adoption of Pro-environmental Behaviors?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 351-373, January.
    18. Ascione, Fabrizio & De Masi, Rosa Francesca & de Rossi, Filippo & Ruggiero, Silvia & Vanoli, Giuseppe Peter, 2016. "Optimization of building envelope design for nZEBs in Mediterranean climate: Performance analysis of residential case study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 938-957.
    19. Fang, Xingming & Wang, Lu & Sun, Chuanwang & Zheng, Xuemei & Wei, Jing, 2021. "Gap between words and actions: Empirical study on consistency of residents supporting renewable energy development in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    20. Enzo Loner, 2016. "A new way of looking at old things. An application of Guttman errors analysis to the study of environmental concern," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 823-847, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:10:p:4197-:d:1396152. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.