Development and Validation of the Readiness to Change Scale (RtC) for Sustainability

The climate emergency is increasingly looming, and its consequences on nature and human systems are increasingly severe and pervasive, as reported by the world’s leading conferences and organizations on the subject. There appears to be an immediate need to adopt more sustainable behaviors in order to stem consequences that are becoming increasingly dramatic. In this regard, environmental psychology and other related disciplines have sought and still seek to understand how to translate the environmental concerns of individuals and communities into effective and efficient conservation and protection actions to contain the emergency and avoid further consequences. The contribution of psychological theories, particularly the transtheoretical model of change and the planned behavior model, appears very promising for assessing and promoting the potential for activation toward sustainability. The aim of this study was to develop a new conceptualization of the psychological construct of readiness to change (RtC) applied to sustainability issues and validated internally and externally through two separate studies (N1 = 228, N2 = 713). The sample for the two studies was recruited by distributing an anonymous online survey. For Study 1, we administered an online survey investigating basic sociodemographic characteristics and the preliminary set of 42 items of the readiness to change scale. For Study 2, the survey was composed of the following tools: a sociodemographic form, the readiness to change scale, a connectedness to nature scale, a climate change attitude survey, consumers’ perceived readiness toward green products, and a pro-environmental behaviors scale. Through exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, 29 items were selected from an initial set of 42. The 29 items were divided and organized into seven factors (namely: perceived importance of the problem/change, motivation, self-efficacy, effectiveness of the proposed solution, social support, action and involvement, and perceived readiness). Each factor showed adequate reliability (McDonald’s ω range: 0.74–0.87). Regarding external validity, the scale showed correlations—with typical to large effect sizes—with pro-environmental identity, green attitudes, sustainable intentions, and pro-environmental behaviors (PEBs) (i.e., conservation, environmental citizenship, food, transportation). Given the results obtained, we can say that the scale we constructed can infer the individual’s propensity to enact PEBs, and consequently it can give input to the implementation of interventions aimed at stimulating RtC and, therefore, sustainable behaviors. In conclusion, the scale appears valid and usable for assessing the activation potential of both individuals but also at the group and community levels—the latter factor being an important contribution to scientific research, since most of the instruments used to date fail to estimate this aspect.