Equal responsibility, unequal ability : allocation of environmental responsibility in pro-environmental behavior research

Abstract: Neoliberalism, as a loosely defined set of political beliefs, calls for more individual freedom and autonomy, resulting in increased responsibility for each person to address major societal issues. ‘Individualization’ is the process by which responsibility for addressing major environmental issues such as climate change is placed on individuals. In this thesis I investigate whether individualization as a neoliberal concept is present in pro-environmental behavior (PEB) research through a comprehensive examination of abstracts from articles in the field. I further explore whether increased individualization present in PEB research hinders the usefulness of the field’s contribution to sustainability knowledge by exploring a number of barriers and critiques. I performed an examination of article abstracts (n=487) published from 2011-2015 found through a keyword search for ‘pro-environmental behavior’ via the internet search engines Web of Science and Scopus. Depending on how environmental responsibility was framed in the abstract text, I categorized each abstract as ‘individualizing’, ‘non-individualizing’ or ‘neutral’. An overwhelming majority (72%) of articles were categorized as ‘individualizing’, with ‘non-individualizing’ and ‘neutral’ resulting in 2% and 26% respectively. The most common PEB research in the abstracts included simple, relatively apolitical activities such as recycling, private car use and electricity usage. Also of note was the tendency of the researchers to focus on consumption as a means of addressing major sustainability problems. Individualization is a well-accepted concept in PEB research but its presence can have a number of negative implications for PEB attempts by researchers to make meaningful contributions to sustainability. With increased individualization, cognitive barriers to PEB are exacerbated as private choices become politicized and increased pressure is put on individuals to act. Moreover, instead of focusing on changes that can be made more easily by producers, researchers expect consumers at the end of the production chain to ameliorate the problems created in large part by producers. Conflicts between sustainability and neoliberal goals are marginalized as environmental goals are framed as compatible with the idea of infinite growth and mass resource extraction. The few studies that have attempted to measure the effectiveness of pro-environmental behaviors in reducing environmental impacts (such as carbon footprint) have found very little correlation between individual PEB and lowered environmental impacts, probably due to other high-impact behaviors, and contextual and structural constraints. I recommend that future PEB research focus on individuals and other actors with the power and capability to make the needed behavioral changes to address sustainability issues.