Abstract
The environmental attitudes of young people are a growing topic of interest for social scientists. Most research that aims to explain differences in (youth) environmental attitudes focuses on the individual as the level of measurement. There is, however, a growing body of evidence that illustrates that the context within which that individual operates can contribute to their environmental attitudes. Based on the PISA 2006 data, and while controlling for individual characteristics, we tested Inglehart’s ‘objective problems, subjective values’ hypothesis. This hypothesis divides the contextual influences on environmental attitudes into (1) objective problems in the individual’s natural environment and (2) subjective values linked to post-materialistic goals in life. We analyzed both the individual and the country level simultaneously, controlling for compositional effects, by performing a multilevel analysis on the 2006 PISA data for youth environmental attitudes (398,750 15 year olds from 56 countries). At the individual level, the results are generally consistent with the literature; at the contextual level, the stage of development of a country (as a proxy for post-materialistic values) is shown to be unrelated to environmental attitudes. Both natural riches of a country and its environmental problems are shown to positively influence the environmental attitudes of that country’s youth. These results are discussed in relation to the ‘objective problems, subjective values’ hypothesis. The results also point towards the necessity of simultaneously assessing the effect of individual- and contextual-level characteristics on environmental attitudes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1977) Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychol Bull 84:888–918
Arcury T, Scollay S, Johnson T (1987) Sex difference in environmental concern and knowledge. The case of acid rain. Sex Roles 16:463–472
Barr S (2007) Factor influencing environmental attitudes and behaviors: a UK case study of household waste management. Environ Behav 39(4):435–473
Bechtel RB, Verdugo VC, de Queiroz Pinhiero J (1999) Environmental belief systems: United States, Brazil and Mexico. J Cross-Cult Psychol 30(1):122–128
Bogner FX, Wiseman M (1997) Environmental perception of rural and urban pupils. J Environ Psychol 17:111–122
Bogner FX, Wiseman M (2006) Adolescents’ attitudes towards nature and environment: quantifying the 2-MEV. Environmentalist 26:247–254
Buttel F (1992) Environmentalization: origins, processes, and implications for rural social change. Rural Sociol 57:1–27
Chawla L (1998) Significant life experiences revisited: a review of research on sources of environmental sensitivity. Environ Educ Res 4(4):369–382
Diez Roux AV (2002) A glossary for multilevel analysis. J Epidemiol Commun Health 56(8):558–594
Eagly A (1987) Sex differences in social behavior: a social interpretation. Erlbaum, Hillsdale
Evans GW, Brauchle G, Haq A, Steckler R, Wong K, Shapiro E (2007) Young children’s environmental attitudes and behaviors. Environ Behav 39(5):635–659
Gelissen J (2007) Explaining popular support for environmental protection. Environ Behav 39(3):392–415
Giddens A (1997) Sociology. Blackwell, Cambridge
Goldman D, Yavetz B, Pe’er S (2006) Environmental literacy in teacher training in Israel: environmental behavior in new students. J Environ Educ 38(1):3–22
Herrera M (1992) Environmental and political participation: towards a new system of social beliefs and values. J Appl Soc Psychol 229:657–676
Howell SE, Laska SB (1992) The changing face of the environmental coalition: a research note. Environ Behav 24:134–144
Hox J (2002) Multilevel analysis: techniques and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah
Inglehart (1995) Public support for environmental protection: objective problems and subjective values in 43 societies. Polit Sci Polit 15:57–72
Kemmelmeier M, Król G, Kim YH (2002) Values, economics and pro-environmental attitudes. Cross-Cult Res 36(3):256–285
OECD (2007) PISA 2006: science competencies for tomorrow’s world, vol 1. OECD, Paris
OECD (2009) PISA 2006: technical report. OECD Publishing, Paris
Palmer JA, Suggate J, Bajd B, Hart P, Ho R, Ofwono-Orecho JKW, Peries M, Robottom I, Tsaliki E, Van Staden C (1998) An overview of significant influences and formative experiences on the development of adults’ environmental awareness in nine countries. Environ Educ Res 4(4):445–464
Rasbash J, Charlton C, Browne WJ, Healy M, Cameron B (2009) MLwiN version 2.10. Centre for multilevel modelling. University of Bristol, England
Schahn J, Holzer E (1990) Studies of individual environmental concern. The role of knowledge, gender, and background variables. Environ Behav 22(6):767–786
Schultz PW, Oskamp S, Mainieri T (1995) Who recycles and when? A review of personal and situational factors. J Environ Psychol 15(2):105–121
Shen J, Saijo T (2007) Re-examining the relations between socio-demographic characteristics and individual environmental concern: evidence from Shanghai data. J Environ Psychol 28:42–50
Tremblay KR, Dunlap RE (1977) Rural–urban residence and concern with environmental quality: a replication and extension. Rural Sociol 43:474–491
Van Liere K, Dunlap R (1980) The social bases of environmental concem: a review of hypotheses, explanations, and empirical evidence. Public Opin Q 44:181–197
Van Petegem P, Blieck A (2006) The environmental worldview of children: a cross cultural perspective. Environ Educ Res 12(5):625–635
Wilson EO (1993) Is Humanity Suicidal? New York Times Magazine, May 30:24
World Economic Forum, Yale Centre for Environmental Law and Policy, and Centre for International Earth Science Information Network (2001) Environmental performance index. Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy, New Haven. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://epi.yale.edu/Home
Zelezny LC, Chua PP, Aldrich C (2000) Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. J Soc Stud 56(3):443–457
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Items in the ENVATT scale (taken from PISA 2006 student Questionnaire)
How much do you agree with the statements below? (Strongly agree—Agree—Disagree—Strongly disagree). Cronbach’s Alpha: 0.79
-
1.
It is important to carry out regular checks on the emissions from cars as a condition of their use.
-
2.
It disturbs me when energy is wasted through the unnecessary use of electrical appliances.
-
3.
I am in favour of having laws that regulate factory emissions even if this would increase the price of products.
-
4.
To reduce waste, the use of plastic packaging should be kept to a minimum.
-
5.
Industries should be required to prove that they safely dispose of dangerous waste materials.
-
6.
I am in favour of having laws that protect the habitats of endangered species.
-
7.
Electricity should be produced from renewable sources as much as possible, even if this increases the cost.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Boeve-de Pauw, J., Van Petegem, P. A cross-national perspective on youth environmental attitudes. Environmentalist 30, 133–144 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-009-9253-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-009-9253-1