Place-Based Identity and Environmental Citizenship Behaviors Among Residents of the Great Barrier Reef

Adam LandonGerard Kyle

Nadine MarshallRenae Tobin

Outline

• Great Barrier Reef• Identity Theory and Pro-Environmental Behavior• Research Questions and Specific Hypotheses• Context/Methods/Analysis• Results• Discussion/Future Work

1

Great Barrier Reef

• UNESCO World Heritage Area

• Worlds Largest Reef System– 3000 Individual Reefs– 600 Islands– 150 Mangrove Islands~ ½ the size of Texas

• Globally significant amounts of biodiversity

• Socially, Economically and Ecologically important to the people of Australia– $5.68 Billion yr-1 and 70,000 jobs

2

Threats to GBR and Individual Behavior

• However….GBR threatened by a number of anthropogenic activities and drivers of change.

• Some of these threats are the function of the collective impacts of individual behaviors.

• Therefore it is important to understand why people engage in voluntary behaviors that reduce or mitigate these threats.

• In order to develop policy solutions that encourage desired behaviors and reduce threats posed by deleterious ones

3

Theoretical Approaches to PEB

• Expected Utility– Theory of Planned Behavior (Ajzen et al)– Theory of Interpersonal Behavior (Triandis et al)

• Altruism/Moral Norms– Norm Activation Model (Schwartz et al)– Value Belief Norm Theory (Stern, Dietz et al)– Environmental Concern/NEP (Dunlap, Van Liere et al)

• Identity Theory and PEB?– Less well known in the environmental psych. literature but

significant theoretical framework that can aid in understanding PEB.

4

Identity Theory

• Identity is the primary motivator of social behavior, composed of the meanings that the individual ascribes to themselves.

• Individuals hold many Identities constructed through social interaction and vary in their degree of prominence, salience, and commitment

• Attitudes and beliefs are congruent with meanings that are associated with the self. Role appropriateness etc.

• Individuals verify their self-concept with behaviors that reflect the meanings that they associate with their identity. Self-verification achieved by bringing perceptions in-line with identity standard

Burke and Stets, 2009

5

COMPARATOR

SYMBOLS & RESOURCE

FLOWS IN THE ENVIRONMENT

PERSON

ENVIRONMENTINPUT OUTPUT

IDENTITY STANDARD

REFLECTED APPRAISALS

PERCEPTIONS(SELF-MEANINGS)

ERROR(PERCEPTION-STANDARD)

SOCIAL BEHAVIOR

DISTURBANCES

IDENTITY CONTROL SYSTEM(Burke and Stets, 2009)

6

ENVIRONMENTALIDENTITY

ENVIRONMENTALATTITUDES

ENVIRONMENTALBEHAVIOR

Identity Theory Cont.

• Stets and Biga (2003) provide a framework to integrate perspectives from Identity Theory and attitude based theories of PEB

7

General Research Questions

• What is the role of a GBR derived identity in individual engagement in PEB? 1) Do individuals who derive part of their self-concept from the GBR engage in activities to protect it? Are PEBs a form of Self-Verification?2) Is a GBR derived self-concept related to specific attitudes and beliefs congruent with the identity?3) Does a GBR identity get stronger overtime? If so does it moderate the relationships above?

8

DESIRE TO ENGAGE IN GBRSTEWARDSHIP

RESPONSIBILITYTO PROTECT

GBR

GBR DERIVED SELF-IDENTITY

ENVIRONMENTALBEHAVIOR

(+)

(+)

(+)

(+)

(+)

(+)

Generalized Hypothesis

RES. TENURE

9

Study Context and Data Collection

• Data for the study are from the Great Barrier Reef Long-term Socio-Economic Monitoring program (GBR-LTSEM)– Multi-stakeholder survey of attitudes, beliefs, management

preferences related to the GBR– Residents, Tourists, Commercial Fisheries– Partnership between CSIRO, JCU, many others…..

• RESIDENTS were surveyed using a quota based site intercept methodology– Communities in the GBR region – Targets established for race, ethnicity, gender– Questionnaire administered in public places, malls, parks, etc. – N = 3,151

10

IDENTITY M SD. λ The Great Barrier Reef is part of my IDENTITY 8.9 1.7 .54**

I feel PROUD that the GBR is a world heritage area 6.4 2.8 .59**

RESPONSIBILITY      

It is not my RESPONSIBILITY to protect the GBR (r) 2.7 2.3 .45**

Coastal residents should take steps to PROTECT the GBR 8.4 1.9 .63**

Its the RESPONSIBILITY of all Australians protect the GBR 8.9 1.7 .72**

STEWARDSHIP      

I would like to DO MORE to protect the GBR 7.1 2.2 .81**

I would like to LEARN MORE about the condition of the GBR 6.9 2.4 .71**

BEHAVIOR      

Recycle 3.4 .82 .37**

Bring your own bags to the supermarket 2.3 1.1 .56**

Engage in environmental community programs 1.8 .89 .58**

Measurement Model Χ2 =164.07 **, RMSEA = .04, CFI = .97, NNFI = .96

Measures and Confirmatory Factor Analysis 11

STEWARDSHIPR2 = .26

RESPONSIBILITYR2 = .15

IDENTITY

BEHAVIORR2 = .07

.39*

.39*

.22*

.07*

.14*

.13*Final Model

Fully SaturatedRMESA = 0.00

CFI = 1.00NNFI = 1.00

N=3,134

12

IDENTITY BEHAVIOR.18**

Results

• Hypothesis #1: – There is a significant relationship between a GBR

derived IDENTITY and BEHAVIOR. However, it explains a small amount of the variance in BEHAVIOR.

– IDENTITY significantly related to both RESPONSIBILITY and STEWARDSHIP

– Coefficient between IDENTITY and BEHAVIOR reduced from .18 to .07 when mediators added, although still significant.

– RESPONSIBILITY and STEWARDSHIP both SIGNIFICANTLY related to BEHAVIOR

13

Identity and Residential Tenure

H2: The longer an individual resides in the GBR region the more strongly they will identify the GBR as part of their IDENTITY. Length of residence will moderate the relationships in H1.

• Split sample into 3 equal groups based on length of residenceGroup 1: <8 Years (n=1,044)Group 2: ≥8 and ≤25 Years (n=1,027)Group 3: >25 Years (n=1,063)

14

VariableGroup 1

<8Group 2

≥8 and ≤25Group 3

>25 F Statistic P-Value

IDENTITY 14.6 15.4 16.3 53.34** .000

RESPONSIBILTY 25.3 25.5 26.0 6.27** .001

STEWARDSHIP 14.4 13.8 14.1 5.12** .006

BEHAVIOR 7.5 7.5 7.8 6.43** .001

Identity and Residential Tenure

• Invariance testing procedure (Bollen, 1989)– Allow structural paths to freely vary across the three groups. – Constrain the groups to be invariant and examine the

change in model fit.

• Δ (Χ2 = 177.77, d.f = 28) p=.000

15

Independent Variable Dependent Variable Low(1) Medium(2) High(3)

DIRECT IDENTITY BEHAVIOR .10 .07 -

RESPONSIBILTY (N.S.) .38 .40 .39

STEWARDSHIP .20 .26 .23

RESPONSIBILTY BEHAVIOR .11 .19 .09

STEWARDSHIP .44 .36 .35

STEWARDSHIP BEHAVIOR .14 .10 .18

INDIRECT IDENTITY BEHAVIOR .05 .06 .06

STEWARDSHIP .18 .16 .15

RESPONSIBILTY BEHAVIOR .03 .02 .03

TOTAL IDENTITY BEHAVIOR .10 .11 .08

RESPONSIBILITY .46 .49 .45

STEWARDSHIP .38 .45 .41

RESPONSIBILTIY BEHAVIOR .08 .10 .07

STEWARDSHIP .38 .32 .33

STEWARDSHIP BEHAVIOR .07 .05 .09

16

General Discussion

• GBR derived IDENTITY is a significant predictor of BEHAVIOR– Largest total effects on behavior– In-line with Identity theory, viewing identity (verification) as

the largest motivator of social behavior.

• IDENTITY significantly related to feelings of RESPONSIBILTY and a willingness to engage in STEWARDSHIP– Attitude based theories view these as significant predictors

of PEB, NAM/VBN. – Room to more formally incorporate aspects of identity

theory in these approaches.

17

• Residential tenure significantly moderates the hypothesized relationships – Length of residence contributes to the

development of a place-based self-concept. – Important in fostering a culture supportive of

environmental protection. • Need expanded measures of Identity and PEB– Better psychometric properties, scale reliability– Prominence, Salience, Commitment– Difference between age and length of res.?

General Discussion18

Questions?