THE PSYCHO-SPATIAL DIMENSION OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS

By David Uzzell. 2000

383 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract There has been little research on the differential aspects of the local/global dichotomy, yet there is every suggestion that such a distinction could be crucially important in terms of understanding the public's perceptions and attitudes towards environmental problems as well as understanding their subsequent behaviour. This research sought to address three questions. First, are people only able to relate to environmental issues if they are concrete, immediate and local? Second, do people consider environmental problems to be more serious at a global or a local level? Third, what is the effect of the public's perceptions of the seriousness of environmental problems on their sense of responsibility for taking action? Three studies were undertaken in Australia, England, Ireland and Slovakia. The results of each study consistently demonstrate that respondents are not only able to conceptualize problems at a global level, but an inverse distance effect is found such that environmental problems are perceived to be more serious the farther away they are from the perceiver. An inverse relationship was also found between a sense of responsibility for environmental problems and spatial scale resulting in feelings of powerlessness at a global level. The paper concludes with a discussion of various psychological theories and perspectives which informs our analysis and understanding of what might be seen as environmental hyperopia.

Subfields: Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9f1df30e5fcf470dd1f789b78e16e47fecbd0ee3

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Psychology and Global Climate Change: Addressing a Multi-faceted Phenomenon and Set of Challenges A Report by the American Psychological Association's Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change Members (2009, background): “Indeed research findings suggest that they may see that global and distant others are responsible for the global and largely distant problem, thereby abnegating personal responsibility (e.g., Uzzell, 2000; 2004).”
The effects of social desirability on self-reported environmental attitudes and ecological behaviour (2009, background): “has also indicated that people evaluate environmental problems differently because there are variables that effect people’s perception and evaluation of these problems (e.g., Dunlap and Jones 2002; Milfont and Gouveia 2006; Pawlik 1991; Uzzell 2000 ).”
Why aren’t we taking action? Psychological barriers to climate-positive food choices (2016, background): “Thus, pro-environmental behaviors may be hindered by environmental numbness (Gifford 1976), uncertainty (Messick et al. 1988), judgmental discounting (e.g., Uzzell 2000), optimism bias (Gifford et al. 2009), and a lack of perceived self-efficacy (e.g., Kaiser and Gutscher 2003).”
Cross-Cultural Evidence for Spatial Bias in Beliefs About the Severity of Environmental Problems (2014, background): “Unfortunately, Uzzell (2000) also reported that perceived individual responsibility for responding to environmental problems decreases as the distance increases.”
The Green Purchase Behavior of Hong Kong Young Consumers: The Role of Peer Influence, Local Environmental Involvement, and Concrete Environmental Knowledge (2010, background): “Uzzell (2000) found in his samples drawn from Australia, England, Ireland, and Slovakia that there is an inverse relationship between perceived individual responsibility for the environment and the spatial distance of environmental problems in that individuals feel more powerless and less…”
Applying social psychology to the study of environmental concern and environmental worldviews: contributions from the social representations approach (2006, background): “This means that the concept is well positioned for entering a discussion that is becoming more central in the environmental field—the articulation of the global and the local (Bonaiuto et al., 2002; Lima & Castro, 2005; Uzzell, 2000).”
The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. (2011, background): “This study and others (e.g., Uzzell, 2000) demonstrate that spatial discounting of environmental problems occurs.”
Perceptions of time in relation to climate change (2014, positive): “Uzzell 78 (see also Ref 79) focused on spatial distance and showed that environmental problems were perceived to be more serious at the global than the local level.”
Situational influences upon children's beliefs about global warming and energy (2004, background): “…9 .7 % ) 2 6 (3 8 .2 % ) 2 (2 .9 % ) 6 8 (m v = 1 0 ) W o o d cr a ft F o lk a d u lt s 2 (3 .6 % ) 4 (7 .3 % ) 4 6 (8 3 .6 % ) 3 (5 .5 % ) 0 5 5 (m v = 2 ) and personal responsibility concerning environmental problems are the norm, at least among adults (Levy-Leboyer & Duron, 1991; Uzzell, 2000).”
Naturally Green: Harnessing Stone Age Psychological Biases to Foster Environmental Behavior (2014, background): “A critical difference between the modern world and our ancestral environment is that we rarely see, feel, touch, hear, or smell how our behaviors impact the environment (Gifford, 2011; Uzzell, 2000).”
Comparative Study Between the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Value–Belief–Norm Model Regarding the Environment, on Spanish Housewives' Recycling Behavior (2012, background): “Furthermore, we believe that our results may be explained along the lines put forward by Uzzell (2000) or, more recently, by García-Mira, Real, and Romay (2005), with regard to the concept of environmental hyperopia; that is, in accordance with these authors, we have to bear in mind that…”
Behavioral Environmental Economics: Promises and Challenges (2014, background): “This relates to the concept of " psychological distance " (Trope and Liberman 2010), which has been studied in the environmental field (Uzzell 2000).”