Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, Vol. 00, No. 00, 2012, pp. 1--4

Will People Act to Mitigate Climate Change?

A Comment on Markowitz & Bowerman, and Liu & Sibley

Susan Clayton∗The College of Wooster

The articles by Markowitz and Bowerman (2011) and by Liu and Sibley (2011)highlight the importance of individual behavior and attitudes in addressing climatechange, and suggest reasons for optimism about the possibility of individualchange. In this comment, I reflect on the role of identity in both studies. Appealsbased on personal and group identities have an important role in behavior change.

These articles, with very different methodologies and theoretical approaches,have some similar messages for the literature on climate change. First, they bothprovide an optimistic assessment of the possibilities for behavior change, by show-ing that people are interested in reducing their levels of consumption (Markowitz& Bowerman) and that people who are concerned about climate change are morewilling to make personal sacrifices to mitigate it, particularly if they have a highenough standard of living (Liu & Sibley). Second, they emphasize the importanceof individual behavior. Markowitz and Bowerman cite evidence that individualconsumption contributes a significant proportion of greenhouse gas emissions tojustify their attempt to understand individual attitudes about consumption. For Liuand Sibley, the assumption that individual policy preferences and behaviors areimportant serves as a background for their analysis of how country-level variablesmay moderate the relationship between attitudes and action, an assumption ex-pressed in their quotation from Cock: “the psychology of sustainability dependson several partnerships: Between inner and outer life, so that strategies for sus-tainability address the sociopolitical arenas connected with the psycho-spiritualdomains. . .” (2007, p. 117, cited in Liu and Sibley). I argue that both articlesimplicitly support a third message: the significance of identity.

∗Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Susan Clayton, PsychologyDepartment, The College of Wooster, 930 College Mall, Wooster, OH 44691 [e-mail: SClay-ton@wooster.edu].

1

DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-2415.2012.01284.x C© 2012 The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues

2 Clayton

One of Markowitz and Bowerman’s goals was to find a way to circumventthe resistance to address climate change that is associated with political ideology.Because political ideology has emerged as one of the strongest predictors ofattitudes about climate change in the United States, attempts to elicit behaviorchange sometimes seem to represent a zero-sum game: any acknowledgement thatclimate change presents a real threat is seen as a “win” for liberals and a “loss” forconservatives. Thus, attitude toward climate change serves as a marker of politicalidentity, and conservative denial of climate change helps to defend that groupidentity. Markowitz and Bowerman try to de-couple reduced consumption fromclimate change to avoid triggering those identity defenses. Because a majority ofthe American public, across gender, income level, and ideology, agrees that “Ourcountry would be better off if we all consumed less,” as they found, this attitudedoes not provide a good basis for distinguishing between political groups.

Markowitz and Bowerman’s respondents talk about consumption in ways thatindicate important connections to identity, but these are ties to personal identitiesor to less politicized groups. We know that material consumption is closely tied toself-expression (Belk, 1992; Prentice, 1987). Many purchases serve as a type ofimpression management. People want to demonstrate financial success, with bighouses and expensive cars; they can also express a distinctive identity through theaccumulation of objects that illustrate their hobbies, abilities, and experiences.

Interestingly, Markowitz and Bowerman’s interviews indicate identities thatare defined by limits on consumption. The fact that a number of the respondentslinked consumption with overeating, junk food, and obesity suggests attitudes thatare based on the symbolic significance of consumption for the individual ratherthan (or in addition to) the practical significance for the planet. Refraining fromconsumption would signal personal virtue, that is, frugality and self-control—a finding that replicates De Young’s (1996) research about the personal benefitspeople find in recycling. Other research on people trying to limit their consumptionshows ways in which, for example, reduced use of technology can symbolizemembership in a group defined by its distinctive lifestyle (Lorenzen, 2012), orform part of a religious identity (Gardner, 2006). Recent research suggests thatmore “green” consumption can even be a signal of status (Griskevicius, Tybur, &Van den Bergh, 2010).

Identity is highlighted in different ways in the Liu and Sibley article, butit is still relevant. National identity is important to many people, and will beinformed by real differences among nations such as those captured in the HumanDevelopment Index. As Liu and Sibley point out, a significant obstacle to achievemultinational agreements on addressing climate change has been each country’sinsistence that it not be relatively disadvantaged. Even without a strong pro- oranti-consumption position for oneself, one may be reluctant to see lower levels ofconsumption in one’s own country relative to the levels common in other countries.A policy that promotes this could be seen as a threat to national identity.

Will People Act to Mitigate Climate Change? 3

National identity, however, may contain the roots for an approach that restrainsconsumption. A high proportion of Markowitz and Bowerman’s respondents en-dorsed the statement that the economic downturn “may be just what we need toreorder our values.” Note the “we” and the “our,” which suggest that people arethinking about American identity as a whole. As Markowitz and Bowerman state,reduced consumption represents “a shared belief that unites rather than separatesus” (p.10). Although their participants are apparently unaware of this consensus,it could present an opportunity to highlight social norms that encourage frugality.The Kingdom of Bhutan has cultivated a national identity centered on environ-mental protection or on reduced consumption. In a 2010 survey, Turkish nationalidentity was significantly correlated with environmental identity and behavior(Clayton & Kilinc, 2012).

An identity perspective on this issue helps to identify obstacles that will hinderattempts to address climate change. More importantly, it points to directions thatmight encourage those attempts—as both sets of authors, particularly Markowitzand Bowerman, show (See also Crompton & Kasser, 2009). If both personaland national identities are seen to benefit from reducing consumption, impressionmanagement and identity-based norms can be powerful tools to encourage change.Policy initiatives could stress frugality as a virtue and an American value, andprovide positive recognition and awards for people who use less. Groups could beformed in which people shared ways to reduce consumption, even competing withother groups to see which one could use the least. Researchers should explore theways in which identity as a careful consumer can be used as a successful strategyfor self-presentation.

References

Belk, R. (1992). Attachment to possessions. In I. Altman & S. Low (Eds.), Place attachment (pp.37–55). New York: Plenum Press.

Clayton, S., & Kilinc, A. (2012). Proenvironmental concern and behavior: The role of environmentaland national identity. Unpublished manuscript.

Crompton, T., & Kasser, T. (2009). Meeting environmental challenges: The role of human identity.Surrey, UK: World Wildlife Foundation.

DeYoung, R. (1996). Some psychological aspects of reduced consumption behavior: The roleof intrinsic satisfaction and competence motivation. Environment and Behavior, 28, 358–409.

Gardner, G. T. (2006). Inspiring progress: Religions’ contributions to sustainable development. NewYork: W.W. Norton & Company.

Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 98(3), 392–404.

Liu, J. H., & Sibley, C. G. (2011). Hope for the future? Understanding self-sacrifice among youngcitizens of the world in the face of global warming. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy,doi: 10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01275.x.

Lorenzen, J. (2012, in press). Green and smart: The co-construction of users and technology. HumanEcology Review, 19(1).

4 Clayton

Markowitz, E. M. and Bowerman, T. (2011), How Much Is Enough? Examining the Public’s Be-liefs About Consumption. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-2415.2011.01230.x

Prentice, D. A. (1987). Psychological correspondence of possessions, attitudes, and values. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 53, 993–1003.

SUSAN CLAYTON is a professor of psychology and environmental studies atthe College of Wooster in Ohio. Her PhD, from Yale University, is in socialpsychology. Her research focuses on questions of identity and justice, particularlyas they arise with regard to environmental issues, and on ways to encourage pro-environmental behavior. She is the author or co-author of three books and theeditor of the forthcoming Oxford Handbook of Environmental and ConservationPsychology.