Rationalizing environmental responsibilities

(Johul Envrronnwn,ul

Clrrm~r,, Vol. 6. No. 3. pp. 215 234, 1996 CopyrIght

Pergamon

0

1996 Elsevier Science Ltd

PrInted m Great Britain.

SO959-3780(96)00016-7

All rights reserved

0959-37x0:96 1615on+ 0.00

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities A comparison of lay publics in the UK and the Netherlands Carolyn M Harrison, Jacquelin Burgess and Petra Filius

The results from a cross-cultural study of citizens in Nottingham (UK) and Eindhoven (NL) carried out in 199344 are discussed in this paper. Drawing on the results of household surveys and in-depth single dlscussion groups gender conducted in both cities, ttre paper compares the extent to which members of the general public are actively engaged in pro-environmental behaviours, before focusing on the discursive rationalizations through which men and women justify their willingness or refusal to accept environmental responsibilities. The study shows that the level of pro-environmental behaviour is much higher among the Dutch sample than among the English sample on all indicators. The key fuller constraints inhibiting the acceptance of personal responsibility among citizens in both countries are shown to be first, the extent to which individuals are able to make judgements about the validity of environmental rhetoric and expert claims based on personal and local knowledge as well as mass media. Second, the increasingly confused and contingent nature of environmental ‘truths’ which is encouraging cynicism and doubt among lay publics; and flnally, the extent to which trust relations exist between citizens and government in which both acknowledge their rights and responsibilities. Copyright 0 lgg6 Elsevier Science Ltd

The authors are with the Department of Geography, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WClH OAP, UK. continued on page 216

In this paper, we explore the extent to which members of the general public are receptive to calls to change aspects of their everyday behaviours for the sake of the environment. In particular, we focus on the discursive rationalizations through which individuals justify their willingness or refusal to convert expressions of environmental awareness and concern into pro-environmental practices. To do so, we will draw on results from a two year cross-cultural study in Nottingham in the UK and Eindhoven in the Netherlands between 1993 and 1995. The research programme comprised three elements: a questionnaire survey of environmental awareness, attitudes and behaviour; four in-depth, single gender discussion groups with members drawn from the survey samples; and expert workshops with those responsible for the delivery of environmental policy at the local level, where the research findings were discussed and evaluated. Here we report on the findings of the household questionnaire and the in-depth discussion groups. We take a social realist perspective to questions of environmental awareness, understanding and action, believing that the key to achieving more sustainable societies lies in a better understanding of the ‘ways in which individual behaviour is shaped by the wider collectivities or normative frameworks within whi_ch individuals are situated’.’ The practical and discursive constraints of context, both locally and nationally, inhibit people’s freedom of choice and action, as a number of recent studies2 have demonstrated. In the light of these observations, we undertook a cross-cultural study of the extent to which ordinary citizens feel a lack of agency and/or an unwillingness to assume greater personal responsibility for effecting pro-environmental behaviours. For example, do the citizens of some European countries feel more empowered, more able to assume responsibility and undertake pro-environmental action than others and if so, how may these differences be accounted for? It is this line of comparison we wish to follow in the paper.

215

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C h4 Harrison et al Continued from page 275 This research was supported by the ESRC (award no l-320253053), the Dutch Institute of Forestry and Nature, the City of Environmental Education Eindhoven Department, and Nottingham City Council. The Dutch group transcripts were translated by Mary S Boorman. ‘T Benton and M Redclift, ‘Introduction’, in M Redclift and T Benton teds) Social Theory and the Global Environment, Routledge, London, 1994, p 9 2B Wynne, ‘Frameworks of rationality in risk management: towards the testing of naive sociology’, in J Brown (ed) Environmental Threats Perception, Belhaven, Analysis, Management. London, 1993, ~~33-47; S MacGill, The Politics of Anxiety: Sellafield’s CancerLink Controversy, Pion, London, 1987; A Irwin, Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. Routledge, London, 1995; C M Harrison and J Burgess, ‘Social constructions of nature: a case study of the conflict over Rainham Marshes’ Transactions, institute of British Geographers, Vol 19, 1994, pp291-310; J Burgess and C M Harrison, ‘The circulation of claims in the cultural politics of environmental change’, in A Hansen (ed) The Mass Media and Leicester fnvironmental Issues, University Press, Leicester, 1993, pp 198221 3Benton and Redclift, op tit, Ref 1, p 9 4C Lacey and D Longman, ‘The press and public access to the environmental debate’, Sociological Review, Vol 41, 1993, ~~207-243; A Mazur and J Lee, alarm: ‘Sounding global the environmental issues in the US national news’, Social Studies of Science, Vol 23, 1993, ~~281-720; L Wilkins, ‘Between facts and values: print media coverage of the greenhouse effect, 1987-1990’, Public Understanding of Science, Vol 2, 1993, pp 71-84 5R M Worcester, ‘Public and elite attitudes to environmental issues’, International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Vol 5, 1993, pp 315-334 6W Rudig, Public Opinion and Global Warming. Strathclyde Papers on Government and Politics, No 101, Department of Government, University of Strathclyde, 1995 ‘See 0 Wiegman and J M Gutteling, ‘Risk appraisal and risk communication: some empirical data from the Netherlands reviewed’, Basic and Applied Psychology, Vol 16, 1995, ~~227-249; S Dunwoody and H P Peters, ‘Mass media coverage of technological and environmental risks: a survey of research in the United States and Germany’, Public Understanding of Science, Vol 1, 1992, pp 19%230 ‘See N Rollhansen, ‘Science, politics, and the mass media on biased communication of environmental issues’, Science Technology and Human Values, Continued on page 217

216

Public discourse and personal responsibility Expressions of environmental awareness and concern are highly contingent on changing global, national and local circumstances. Of particular importance but often neglected or simply taken for granted, is the symbolic context of national media and public debate. Benton and Redclift3 emphasize the importance of a better understanding of the cultural political processes through which environmental science claims are formed and transformed - but there is still relatively little detailed ethnographic work through which it is possible to tease out ‘the processes of communication, discursive “processing”, normative orientation, (and) “moral entrepreneurship” by which these public antagonisms get formed and transformed’. We begin therefore, by reviewing current evidence of the relations between coverage of environmental matters in the media and its effectiveness in shaping people’s environmental concerns, before moving into a brief discussion of existing research on environmental behaviour and responsibility. The role of the media in constructing

the environmental

‘crisis’

Coverage of global environmental issues in the mass media peaked between 1987-1991,4 with a dramatic decline since that time and public opinion surveys reveal a very similar pattern of rising and falling concern. The results of public opinion surveys revealed, briefly, that environmental problems were ranked as the most serious of all contemporary problems facing societies. In 1989, in the UK for example, more people said they were concerned about environmental problems than any other economic, social or political issue.5 By 1990, environmental problems were ranked equally alongside other problems but by 1991 they had fallen to fourth place behind unemployment, the economy and health and welfare. These trends are repeated elsewhere in the EU. Rudig’s6 analyses of successive Eurobarometer surveys confirmed a decline in public concern between 1991-93 about the seriousness of the threat posed by global environmental problems such as the greenhouse effect. Further, by 1993 the public in the Netherlands expressed least concern of all European nations about climate change with only 35% being worried a great deal about it. In the UK the comparable figure was 40%. Media coverage of global environmental change is thus likely to be strongly implicated in any study of environmental awareness, understanding and action. However, researchers disagree about the nature of the relationship. Some argue that the media play a causal role in effecting changes in risk perception, environmental attitudes and behaviour’ whereas others believe that the media provide only a superficial guide to what people should be thinking about without providing any depth of knowledge or understanding.’ Mazur and Lee,’ for example, argue that public opinion is highly susceptible to the sheer volume of media coverage of particular environmental problems and that, regardless of the tone of content, the more coverage there is, the more negatively people come to view the issues. A number of qualitative studies” such as those by Kempton, and Doble in the United States; Lofstedt in Sweden and Austria; and Bell in New Zealand highlight the global reach of contemporary media. These studies revealed lay publics to be uncertain about the causes and consequences of global environmental change. Confusion not only related to the separate and combined environmental effects of ozone depletion and greenhouse forcing gases but also to the kind of

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C A4 Harrison et al

behavioural shifts which are required to reduce the damaging effects of global climate change. Given this level of confusion, there are few grounds for optimism that the media are contributing to any deepening of public understanding of environmental issues. From environmental

Continued from page 276 Vol 19, No 3, 1994,324-341; C Lacey and D Longman, op tit, Ref 4; A W Palmer, rainforest: Niklas ‘News from the Luhmann and the social integration of environmental communication’, Public Understanding of Science, Vol 2, 1993, pp 157-178 ‘A Mazur and J Lee, op tit, Ref 4 “W Kempton, ‘Lay perspectives on global climate change’, Global Environmental Change, Vol 1, 1991, pp18%208; J Doble, ‘Public opinion about issues technological characterized by complexity and scientific uncertainty’, Public Understanding of Science, Vol 4, R E Lofstedt, ‘Lay 1995, 95-118; perspectives concerning global climate change in environmental Sweden’, Energy and Environment, Vol 3, 1992, pp 161-175, and ‘Lay perspectives concerning global environmental climate change in Vienna, Austria’, Energy and Environment, Vol 4, 1993, pp14Cl-154; A of opinion: public and Bell, ‘Climate media on the global environment’, Discourse and Society, Vol 5, 1994, pp 3364 “S Witherspoon and J Martin, ‘What do we mean by green?’ in R Jowell, L Brook, G Prior and 6 Taylor (eds) British Social SCPR. Attitudes: The 9th Report, Dartmouth, UK, 199273, pp l-26 “S Witherspoon, ‘The greening of Britain: romance and rationality’, in R Jowell, J Curtice, L Brook, G Prior and D Ahrendt (eds) British Social Attitudes: The 77th Report, SCPR, Dartmouth, UK, 1994, p,p 107-139 Atfitudes to Energy A Hedges, Conservation in the Home: Report on a C$a/it;&iz Study, HMSO, London, 1991 , ‘Individual environmental responsibility and its role in public Environment and environmentalism’ Planning, A, Vol 25, 1995 pp 1743-1758

awareness

to environmental

action?

Evidence of the extent to which environmental concerns are consistently translated into particular kinds of environmentally conscious behaviour is usually acquired through public opinion surveys. Analyses suggest that those people who are concerned and act in environmentally friendly ways are more like the rest of the population than was the case in the 1980s. This finding gives support to the thesis that there has been a significant and enduring shift in environmental values. However, there does not appear to be any simple or consistent relationship between either the breadth or depth of environmental concern and action. For example, Witherspoon and Martin” showed that a variable such as social class affects environmental behaviour in different ways. Witherspoon’2 has gone on to argue convincingly that wider social values are also intricately interwoven with these dimensions of environmental concern. Fundamental values towards the economy and to the community appear to exert an influence on people’s willingness or otherwise to act in environmentally conscious ways. Thus, people who place a high value on the welfare of others and on a collective approach to solving social problems are more likely to be willing to support environmental action than those who do not. To ascertain the strength of such moral and social commitments, qualitative research provides better insights than public opinion questionnaires. HedgesI for example. conducted a series of focus groups in the spring of 1990 in a study of public attitudes towards domestic energy consumption. Confirming opinion poll data of the same period, Hedges reported the growing public concern, linked to increased media coverage which together ‘seems to form part of a cultural pattern which calls for a shift in lifestyle’. But, in addition, Hedges’ groups spoke of a number of severe impediments to that movement. The primary difficulties were a sense of confusion and uncertainty among lay publics, with individuals not sure what to do for the best, given their perceptions of conflicting advice from government and the energy industries. This confusion was compounded by feelings of impotence - that the actions of one person could achieve little in the face of massive, intractable global problems. Such feelings of lack of agency were compounded by a widely shared sense of media ‘overload’. For many group members, too many stories seemed to demand responses that were beyond the power and capacity of people to deal with. Comparable findings come from research by EdenI who has made an important contribution to discussions about environmental responsibilities. Working with a small group of mainly environmental activists in Leeds, Eden developed the concept of actionable responsibility to explain these individuals’ heightened sense of moral responsibility for the amelioration of environmental problems. This normative stance drew strength both from individuals’ understanding of the depth and seriousness of environmental issues, and their sense of relative privilege in terms of being able, financially perhaps, to do something about them. But, Eden argued, the sense of moral obligation was also supported by feelings of efficacy ~ the sense of individual control over the outcome of their

217

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

actions, and a demonstration of the worth of what they had done. Thus, among environmental activists, it was possible to discern a pattern of self-ascribed responsibility which does not seem to be present among the majority of non-activists who chose to allocate responsibility to other actors and agencies rather than themselves. These may be negative attributions in the sense of allocating blame to others - the government, big business, other countries; or positive, in the sense that environmental activists/NGOs know best how to do it and so responsibility should be left to the ‘professional’ environmentalists. In other words, for the majority of the population who were not environmental activists, the assumption was made that there was little sense of efficacy, either in terms of the local cultural politics or in terms of national environmental agendas. Certainly, this assumption could be seen to be supported in other qualitative research undertaken in the same periodI while more recent work such as that by Macnaghten et a1,16 suggests feelings of apathy and alienation were being expressed even more strongly in 1994 than they were at the start of the decade, at least in the UK. It is in the context of these different strands of research that we now turn to our cross-cultural study of public understanding of environmental change. Set within the context of rapidly declining media coverage of global environmental issues (1993-94) the research set out to explore the extent to which the national and local contexts impinge on individuals’ willingness to undertake changes in their lifestyles so as to achieve more environmentally sustainable societies. “C M Harrison, ‘Nature conservation, science and popular values’, in A Warren and B Goldsmith (eds) Conservation in Progress, John Wiley, Chichester, 1993, ~~35-50; J Burgess, C M Harrison and P ‘Contested meanings: the Maiteny, of news about nature consumption Media, conservation’, Culture and Society, Vol 13, 1991, pp499-519 16P Macnaghten, R Grove-White, M Jacobs and B Wynne, Public Perceptions Sustainability in Lancashire, and Lancashire County Council, Preston, 1995 17Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, To Choose or to Loose, First National Environmental Policy Plan, The Hague, 1969; Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, The Environment: Today’s Touchstone, Second National Environmental Policy Plan, The Hague, 1993; see also M Wintle Reality in Rhetoric and (ed) Environmental Policy, Avery Studies in Green Research, Gower, Aldershot, 1994 18VRGM Memorandum on information as a Policy Instrument. AVT91, VROM, The $gue, 1991 ‘Implementation of B Wynne, greenhouse gas reductions in the European Community: institutional and cultural factors’, Global Environmental Change, Vol3, 1993 pp 101 and 114 ‘OHMSO, This Common Inheritance: Britain’s Environmental Strategy, UK Government White Paper, HMSO, London, 1990; HMSO, Sustainable September, Development. HMSO, London, 1993 2’HMS0, Indicators of Sustainable Development for the United Kingdom, HMSO, London, March 1996

218

The Anglo-Dutch case studies The national government of the Netherlands is at the forefront of programmes to achieve more sustainable development.17 After extensive consultation with environmental and consumer organizations, the Dutch government produced its first National Environment Plan in 1989. This was revised and the second plan issued in 1993. Since 1990, government has continuously funded a national advertising campaign to change public attitudes and behaviour towards the environment.18 New money is available at local authority level to support environmental initiatives such as recycling schemes and local environmental education initiatives. As Wynnelg commented, ‘the Dutch programme is unprecedented in scale, pervasiveness and diversity of the behavioural habits it is thought necessary and possible to reshape. It is tantamount to a wholesale cultural reorientation’. The UK has taken a much more market led view, giving priority to the operation of the market as both the primary definer of environmental problems and of their solution. The Environment White Paper was published in 1990 with further guidance papers on sustainable development issued in 1993.20 Legislation to establish an Environmental Protection Agency was passed in 1995; and the DOE published the first set of indicators of sustainable development in 1996.21 Efforts to change aspects of people’s behaviour are reliant primarily on advertising campaigns, and target projects within selected local communities such as Goingfor Green. No new money has been allocated to Local Authorities charged with the responsibility of recycling 25% of all domestic waste by the year 2000, and it is unlikely that new money will be found to support local environmental initiatives in the way that has been done in the Netherlands.

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

The local contexts Finding two cities at roughly the same point in terms of local environmental policy initiatives was difficult, given the differences between the two countries at national level. The cities of Nottingham and Eindhoven were chosen because they are broadly comparable in terms of a number of geographical, economic and social characteristics. Both are free standing towns, surrounded by agriculturally productive countryside. Both are middle-sized in terms of population (Nottingham: 274000 and Eindhoven: 195 000). Both cities have a tradition of large manufacturing companies with their headquarters in the city: Nottingham has Boots pharmaceuticals, and an industrial history based on textiles, coal mining and bicycle manufacturing; Eindhoven is the headquarters for Philips electronics and has a major car manufacturing tradition through the presence of DAF. In 1993. the cities had similar levels of unemployment (9%). Both Councils have undertaken a number of environmental initiatives since 1990. These are more extensive in Eindhoven than they are in Nottingham but not exceptionally so. Eindhoven had just begun to implement a series of environmental initiatives during 1993, including a compulsory domestic waste sorting programme. The city has an extensive public transport network based on buses. The council has taken initiatives to improve the public transport system with the aim of reducing car traffic in the city. A so-called HOV-net (High Quality Public Transport Network) is being developed, which connects the suburbs by passing through the city centre. The network consists of two railway lines and four HOV-lines - buses that use separate lanes and have priority over other traffic at junctions. Waste separation is common practice for households in Eindhoven. Bottle banks are present near every local shopping centre. Waste paper, chemicals and organic waste are collected regularly. Three waste centres take in textiles glass, chemicals, building materials etc. A number of council departments, services and NGOs are involved with environmental communication and education. All activities are co-ordinated by the Environmental Communication Centre which was established in 1992, funded by the City Council. This centre develops strategies for communication and defines what actions are to be taken by the different departments and agencies. Local strategies are designed in the context of the national campaign. Several environmental initiatives have been taken in Nottingham in the last few years. The city launched its Green Charter in 1989. An Energy Action Plan was published in 1992, ajming to reduce the City Council’s energy consumption by 15% by 1995, and to disseminate advice and information. ‘The city’s Waste Recycling Plan was published in 1992 and will require the development of a Materials Sorting Plant. An increasing range of recycling facilities have been provided by local councils, usually located in supermarket car parks and, more recently, at schools. The facilities offer local people the opportunity to recycle a range of materials including glass, cans, paper and clothing. Despite this, only 223% of household waste is recycled. Local councils are planning to introduce a new service within the next few years that will collect recycled materials from the home. Nottingham is well served by bus transport which is privately managed. Bus routes focus on the city centre and a network of ‘park and

219

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

ride’ sites are being developed to encourage car drivers to complete their journey to the city centre by bus. It is planned to introduce a modern light rail tram system within the next few years. In 1991, Nottingham City Council established an environmental forum called the Nottingham Green Partnership, bringing together NGOs (such as Friends of the Earth, Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust and Women’s Environmental Network) the two local Universities, local businesses and local government. The partnership has produced a number of publications and has developed environmental campaigns.

The methodological strategy for the case studies It was vital to ensure comparability

“J Burgess, C M Harrison and M Limb, ‘Exploring environmental values through the medium of small groups. Part one: theory and practice’, Environment and Planning A, Vol 20, 1988. ~~309-326; ‘Exploring environmental values through the medium of small groups. Part two: illustrations of a group at work’, Environment and Planning A, Vol 20, 1988, pp 457476

220

at each stage of the research. The aims of the questionnaire were to provide a statistically reliable means of comparing the populations of the two cities, to provide an indication of the extent to which there is congruence in their routine patterns of behaviour, and to be able to position the study in the stream of public opinion surveys. Further, respondents to the surveys were to provide the pools from which we recruited participants for the more substantive, qualitative phase of the research. The aim of the latter was to cut beneath the predetermined format of the questionnaire survey to gain deeper insight into the ways in which ordinary members of the public debate demands by their national governments and NGOs for individuals to become more environmentally active citizens. The questionnaire was extensively piloted in the UK, and the survey conducted in Nottingham in April-May 1993. The Eindhoven neighbourhoods were selected later in the year to achieve as close a match as possible to the Nottingham sample in terms of age, social class and housing tenure. The questionnaire was translated into Dutch and completed in November 1993. In addition to providing standard socio-economic data across the samples, the questionnaire was designed to measure existing levels of involvement with community and political activities; levels of ‘green’ activism and ‘green consumerism’; levels of awareness and depth of understanding of specific global and local environmental issues (rainforest destruction; greenhouse effect; car exhaust emissions; the environmental benefits of tree planting); and individual preferences for environmental policy options in response to three environmental scenarios. The in-depth discussion groups represent our preferred qualitative research strategy.22 In-depth discussion groups have several advantages over focus groups. First, the group members meet for several weeks, giving people enough space and time to develop relationships with each other and the researchers, and through dialogue, to develop a group identity. Second, the flow of discussion is directed by the members of the group rather than the conductor and there is considerable scope for the free association of ideas and experiences between group members. Third, recruitment of group members is an intensive process which allows considerable trust to be built between the researchers and each group member which enables the researchers to develop a far deeper understanding of both the individuals and the group. Finally, it is possible to study the kind of arguments that people mobilize to rationalize their environmental practices, and to do so in a way which replicates the social contexts of everyday life. The methodology enables us to establish an intermediate space between the private world of individual families and households, and the public sphere.

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Hurrison et al

The questionnaire samples compared

A total of 250 questionnaires were completed in each city and the populations are comparable in terms of socio-economic characteristics. A 50% quota sample for men and women was achieved with all age groups (from 16 years and older). In terms of economic position, the percentage of unemployed (11%) in the Nottingham sample is slightly higher than the Nottingham 1991 figure of 9%. For the Eindhoven sample, levels of unemployment (6%) are lower than the Eindhoven average of 8% (1992). Both cities have higher levels of unemployment than the national averages. Approximately one quarter of both samples are retired. In Eindhoven, more women say they are housewives (17% vs. 11% in Nottingham) and more respondents are in full-time education (10% vs. 6% in Nottingham). Social class corresponds to national distributions in the UK and the Netherlands but also highlights differences between the two populations. In the Nottingham sample, 8% are classified as professional and a further 19% fall within the managerial and technical group. The Eindhoven figures are 9% and 36% respectively. Skilled, non-manual groups are roughly equivalent at 20% (Nottingham) and 16% (Eindhoven). For the lower social classes, the Nottingham sample has 33% skilled manual (29% Eindhoven); 18% partly skilled which compares with 9% in Eindhoven; and the number of unskilled people in the two samples is very low (4% Nottingham; 1% Eindhoven). The samples differ considerably in terms of educational level. The Nottingham sample is slightly less well educated than the UK average: 23% have A level qualifications and above compared with 27% nationally. In Eindhoven the sample matches the Dutch average: 55% have A level qualifications and above. Nationally the figure is 54%. This is probably the most striking difference between the two countries and requires a careful interpretation of responses. Media consumption as expressed through hours of radio, press and television listened to, read or viewed is remarkably similar between the two samples ~ with educational level and gender exerting a strong influence. For example, in both Eindhoven and Nottingham more women than men listen to local and commercial radio stations, and the better educated respondents prefer national news networks and broadsheet national papers. The highest media consumption figures in both cities are encountered amongst the least well educated groups. In Nottingham 73% of these groups watched three or more hours of television compared with the sample average of 57%. This same trend is apparent in Eindhoven where 48% of the group with basic qualifications watches three or more hours a day compared with 11% of the highest educated groups. The in-depth discussion groups compared

Members of all four groups, each of which met for five consecutive weeks for one and a half hours, were recruited from respondents to the two surveys. The Nottingham groups met between 14 June and 13 July 1993; the Eindhoven groups between 17 January and 22 February 1994. We tried to recruit members so as to ensure a reasonably balanced age and social class distribution within each group. Tables 1 and 2 provide details of the age, occupation and levels of social and environmental activity of the group members. While all four groups had members in their twenties and early thirties, more were middle-aged and elderly. All four groups were heterogeneous in terms of social class, as indicated by

221

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al Table 1. Members of the Nottingham groups Age distribution

Women’s group

Men’s group

Twenties

1 (student)

1

Thirties

2 (housewife: school librarian)

1 (local authority officer)

Forties

4 rtechnrcal officer in pharmacy; cleaner; library assistant; school helper - FOE; RSPB; Notts Wildlife Trust)

3 (prison officer; head teacher; house-husband;

Fifties

1 (social worker FOE, Greenpeace)

2 (market trader; senior sales executive - Notts Wildlife Trust)

Sixties

1 (housewife)

2 (telephone engineer [ret.]; fireman [ret.] - local history group

Table 2. Members of tha lndhovm

(Computer section supervisor Greenpeace)

groups

Age distribution

Women’s group

Men’s group

Twenties

1 (housewife and part time student in social work)

2 (engineer in cooling industry; student in computer science WWF)

Thirties

3 (housewrfe; cleaner; part time nurse - National Trust, Regional Trust, Greenpeace)

3 (head nurse; car salesman; children’s therapist - National Trust)

Forties

(2 housewives; cleaner - WWF)

2 (stock fillers)

Fifties

(housewife; care assistant National Trust)

1 (pub owner)

Sixties

2 (organisational advisor [ret]; quality controller [ret] - Greenpeace)

occupational status and educational qualifications. The age of leaving full-time education varied in accordance with these activities. Patterns of media consumption among group members were on a par with the survey samples, and accorded with other studies in terms of social class and gender based preferences. Finally, the political affiliations and voting intentions of group members were similar to the samples as a whole. The number of people in the groups who regarded themselves as being active in their local community was higher than the sample averages. Members of the Nottingham men’s group are more socially engaged than the women’s group, while the reverse is true in Eindhoven with the Dutch women. This reflected an important difference between the two cities. In Nottingham, women with children are an important element in the labour market whereas in Dutch society, the majority of women still take time out from paid work to raise their children. If we take membership of environmental organizations as an indication of increased aware-

222

Rationdizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

ness and commitment, the tables show that commitment among group members is slightly higher (4 people in Nottingham groups (22%)) compared with the sample average of 13%. The Dutch groups (with 9 out of 20 members belonging to an environmental organization) means that 45% compares with the sample (42%) as a whole. However, none of the group members described themselves as active within these environmental organizations. These group profiles suggest that our interpretive analysis is based upon the views and understanding of group members who in the main have a propensity to act both socially and politically. In this sense the arguments and actions supported by the groups are those advanced by a predominantly receptive and well motivated public and not by a disaffected or disengaged one. Understanding the concerns of this former constituency and the constraints they believe serve to inhibit social engagement and sustainable actions is therefore important to policy makers in both countries who are seeking ways of mobilizing local communities.

Pro-environmental behaviours: understanding the opportunities and constraints Confirming other studies taken at the time (1993), our samples showed that anxieties about a range of global and local environmental problems had been displaced by concerns about social and economic issues, notably crime and unemployment. The global environmental crisis of a few years previously had receded. As a context for the group analyses, we compare briefly the two sample populations in terms of levels of reported pro-environmental activities such as recycling; green consumerism; energy consumption; and changing transport actions. The surveys also assessed the different kinds of political actions people felt were efficacious in resolving global and local problems. The in-depth group discussions followed the same broad topics over the five meetings but each group was free to take the discussion forward in whatever way it chose. The questionnaire responses compared Levels of pro-environmental activity. Turning first to aspects of reported environmental behaviour undertaken by individuals in their household, the results support those of other studies. The level of pro-environmental behaviour is much higher among the Dutch sample than among Nottingham residents on all indicators. For example, more green products are purchased in Eindhoven than in Nottingham. Percentages in Eindhoven vary from 63% for buying aerosols without CFCs to 93% for buying bottles with a returnable deposit. In NoMingham percentages vary from 22% for buying bottles with deposit to 86% buying aerosols without CFCs. The extent to which these tasks are shared among members of the household is also higher in the Netherlands. For recycling we see the same pattern. In Eindhoven percentages vary from 7% for recycling tins to 96% for waste paper. In Nottingham, they range from 16% of the sample separating chemical waste to 58% recycling waste paper. The overall commitment to recycling in Eindhoven is much higher. The level of car ownership is slightly higher in Nottingham (77%) than in Eindhoven (74%). Here, 69% of car owners use their cars five days a week or more, compared with 41% of car owners in Eindhoven. The

223

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

majority of respondents in both cities believed that people should be encouraged to use cars less. When asked if they had changed their transport behaviour in the last live years, 60% in Eindhoven and 37% in Nottingham said they had. Of this group in Eindhoven, 35% said they now used their car less often, as did 17% in Nottingham. The change most frequently mentioned in Eindhoven was walking and cycling more often (49%; cf Nottingham 16%). In Nottingham 47% mentioned using public transport more often (Eindhoven 36%). In both cities these changes had been made for a variety of practical, financial and physical reasons, but in Eindhoven 13% of respondents said they had changed their behaviour ‘for the sake of the environment’. This was not cited as a reason by any of the Nottingham respondents. In accordance with other national surveys, the characteristics of members of the ‘most environmentally active households’ (not taking into account car use) are better educated than average, have higher incomes and more often hold managerial and professional jobs. However, in both Nottingham and Eindhoven members of all social classes participate in pro-environmental behaviour suggesting, much as other surveys have found, that a marked shift in environmental behaviour has taken place since the early 1980s. Even though ‘reported behaviour’ may exaggerate the true state of participation, the consistently higher level of participation among Eindhoven respondents in comparison to Nottingham respondents is impressive. Certainly, the Dutch public appear to be more environmentally committed than the UK public but as Witherspoon has suggested, other social attitudes may predispose Dutch people to act in environmentally responsible ways rather than simply knowing what actions are appropriate or having access to recycling facilities. In an attempt to explore people’s commitment to a collective approach to solving problems, a separate section of the questionnaire reported people’s involvement in the wider community. Community involvement. The survey included a number of questions to examine the level of involvement with the community and readiness to take action on local problems. Used as a measure of social and political engagement, the levels of self reported behaviour show that people in Eindhoven considered themselves to be more active than their counterparts in Nottingham: 45% ranked themselves as moderately to highly active compared with 33% in Nottingham. Active community members can be characterized in both cities as being better educated than the samples as a whole. They are also more likely to be women and established members of the community in the sense that the most active respondents are older and have lived in the area longer than average. However, the oldest age group of retired respondents is not as active in the Eindhoven community as they seem to be in Nottingham. Housewives are the most active members of the Eindhoven community. In both cities active community members participate slightly more in proenvironmental behaviours than non-active members. responsibilities for change. In an attempt to explore the underlying rationalities people use to cope with the risks of global and local environmental change, and the institutional and individual responses thought appropriate for dealing with these risks, we developed a series of questions modified from the work of Dake.23 Presented as a series of scenarios, these questions asked about the urgency of environ-

Rationalizing

23K Dake. ‘Myths of nature: culture and the social construction of risk’, Journal of Social Issues, Vol 48, 1992, pp 2137

224

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

mental problems and the appropriate steps people favoured for coping with them. Three scenarios were included ~ global climate change, destruction of tropical rainforest and traffic growth. In each scenario, people could choose one of live options, each of which represented a different kind of rational response to the problem. These were a market led approach; a partnership approach; a government regulation approach; an individual action approach; and a fatalistic option that said none of the proposed approaches would work. At this point, the results reveal striking similarities between the English and the Dutch. For all three problems, majorities in both countries chose the government regulation and partnership approaches. In both samples, for example 4450% of respondents thought that government regulation would be the best way to reduce cars in the city and to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by the energy industry. The partnership approach (5(r57%) was favoured for stopping rainforest destruction. The market led scenario was not considered to be a good option for resolving any of the environmental problems. Only 3% in both samples chose this option to stop rainforest destruction, and only l-2% thought it would be the best option for reducing carbon dioxide emissions by the energy industry. In Nottingham 10% and in Eindhoven 14% thought that increasing the cost of motoring was the best way to reduce the number of cars in the city. Less than 10% of the samples in both cities thought that individual actions like boycotting products from the rainforest, reducing household energy consumption, or reducing the use of the car were likely to be effective ways of tackling these major global and local environmental problems. Less than 7% of the samples chose the fatalistic option for any of the problems. In both cities, more detailed analysis revealed very little consistency by gender, education, class, voting intention or even by individuals in their choices across all three environmental problems. Although some evidence of gender difference had been revealed in our analyses of people’s community involvement, no such difference is revealed in terms of the political scenarios favoured by men and women. Overall these findings confirm those of other questionnaire surveys which show that people do not have a simple and coherent ‘green’ view about appropriate solutions to environmental problems. At the same time, and despite the evidence of high levels of reported pro-environmental behaviour in answer to direct questions, especially in Eindhoven, the responses to the scenarios suggest the overwhelming majority of respondents in both cities also feel unable or unwilling to take responsibility themselves for addressing these problems. The in-depth groups compared

A primary aim of recruiting survey respondents to join an in-depth discussion group was to provide a social context in which individuals could explore some of the issues underpinning responses in the questionnaire. The apparent ambiguities between what people say they do in terms of pro-environmental behaviour, when compared with sustainability indicators which show, for example, that less than 5% of domestic waste in the UK is actually recycled, and the apparent strong support given to government regulations to achieve environmental goals, indicate that a different forum/methodology is needed. How are these ambiguities to be explained? Over the course of five weekly

225

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

meetings, the men’s and women’s group discussed a series of issues, including green consumerism; the impacts of technological and social changes in their daily lives; their experiences of environmental changes; and ideas about sustainability. In the section which follows we draw together their arguments about the opportunities and constraints people face in assuming personal responsibility for undertaking proenvironmental behaviour in the two countries. It becomes clear from the discussions that assuming responsibility for ameliorating environmental impacts is a complex concept. It includes a powerful moral or normative dimension about what people ought to be doing, not only for the sake of the environment but also for the discharge of their social obligations, especially at the local level. For some individuals, such a commitment stems from deep personal conviction and is expressed with considerable emotional force. For others, there is a much weaker emotional commitment but a desire to engage altruistically in contributing to the collective good. Practical expressions of these commitments depend crucially on the individual’s abilities to exercise choice, especially in terms of being able to control scarce resources such as time and money. Many women, for example, feel that organically produced foodstuffs are better for their children but cannot afford to buy them. Their inabilities to be ‘a good mother’ in these circumstances leave many feeling angry, frustrated and ‘guilty’. Presuming that these two conditions are met, there are also other important dimensions which determine the nature of opportunities and constraints. Supporting Eden’s analysis, the group discussions reveal considerable concerns about efficacy. People want to know that their actions are effective and do achieve the goals they wish to espouse. What is the point in laboriously separating all the household waste, only to have it all dumped in a landfill site because the waste handling facilities are inadequate? How much reliance can be placed on scientific explanations of what needs to be done to ameliorate the effects of environmental pollution? But more than this, people are also deeply concerned about questions of equity - to what extent are these new environmental responsibilities being shared across all sectors of society? To what extent can people trust that governments, industry and other institutions are also modifying or changing aspects of their practices? The mass media play an especially potent role in these broader social and political concerns, by providing an endless stream of stories which highlight the ineffectiveness of environmental actions, the inequalities between institutions and individual citizens, and the highly contingent status of environmental ‘truths’. The opportunities and constraints underpinning people’s willingness to accept individual responsibility for taking pro-environmental actions will now briefly be explored. While there are important similarities between the two countries as the demands for changes in lifestyle become more onerous, one fundamental difference between the groups was the extent to which the tenor of discussion in Eindhoven was much more positive and optimistic than in either of the groups in Nottingham. The example of recycling waste illustrates the differences between the two countries. Recycling waste. In both Eindhoven and Nottingham recycling activities were talked about with more enthusiasm than either reducing energy consumption or green consumer purchasing. It was something everyone readily could see the sense of, and wanted to do if they could. The

226

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

recent provision of a new domestic waste collection service in Eindhoven meant that both men and women were experiencing the practical demands of a committed recycling scheme, whereas people in Nottingham still recycle through individual initiative and in an ad hoc way. In Eindhoven, both groups discussed the practical changes that the separation of domestic waste demanded. There was a slightly ironical view of the lengths to which one should go: ‘do we have to separate the tea bag from the tag, and what about the string?’ one women asked her group members. The women discussed how they were re-organizing their household practices to conform with the new responsibilities expected of participants in the recycling scheme. They worried that recycling would take additional time and effort. There was particular concern about how elderly people would cope, and how people without gardens would be able to deal with organic waste. Significantly, the men did not mention these new organizational aspects of the household. So, although the surveys suggested recycling to be a shared activity, the group discussions reveal that women feel the burden falls primarily on them. A number of common issues were discussed by both the Eindhoven men and women. Many of these reflect the novelty of the scheme and people’s unfamiliarity with it. There were specific anxieties about the costs and provision of recycling different items especially chemical waste; the future and role of the community recycling centres most group members had used previously; the reliability of the service; and policing/compliance arrangements. Of particular concern to people was the effectiveness of the recycling scheme. For example, once waste had been separated, individuals wanted to know it would be put to good use. They wanted evidence that their individual commitment in terms of time and effort had a tangible benefit. Group members stressed the need to invest in waste reclamation technology and industrial plant to ensure that material would be reclaimed. At the moment these aspects of waste reclamation seem to be lagging behind. Despite these uncertainties, people continued to comply, largely through a sense of wanting to play their part for the community, and because separating waste soon becomes routine behaviour. Overall, the Dutch groups were convinced that the benefits of a regular and convenient household collection would eventually outweigh the disadvantages of additional sorting. They were very largely committed to the process, believing the new policies would be successful and the environment too wouldbenetit. In Nottingham, much less optimism about recycling was expressed in the groups. Most members had some experience of recycling, but the consensus among men and women was that without a reliable service for domestic waste collection, most people’s efforts were well-intentioned but inadequate. As one woman put it - ‘lots of us start off but give up half way through’. Here too, recycling was of ‘more immediate concern to the women than the men. Several women said they found storage of waste difficult, particularly if other members of the household were not supportive of their efforts. Like the women in Eindhoven finding the time to organize things was a significant problem, particularly for those with full or part-time jobs outside the home. Additionally, maintaining a commitment to active recycling was difficult because there were few local facilities and people were not well informed about them. Non-car owners could not imagine how they were ‘going to cart the papers and the bottles’ when the nearest recycling point was a bus ride away. It was better in the past when the garbage men used to take bundles of papers, people agreed.

221

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

The men discussed the implementation of individual recycling schemes. School schemes in the neighbourhood were regarded as a way of setting a good example to children and young people, but the bureaucratic procedures associated with organizing an individual scheme also meant that these well-intentioned initiatives often failed. Such failures led people to question the effectiveness of uncoordinated efforts. Group members wanted to take a more responsible attitude to recycling but they wanted to see a properly organized programme run by the local authority with a house-to-house collection service. However, there was considerable doubt that public finances would be made available for such a scheme. Further contrasts were apparent between Dutch and English. In Eindhoven people readily accept that waste reclamation was intimately linked with both environmental improvement and the economy, whereas people in Nottingham were only just beginning to appreciate these relationships. Recycling schemes in Eindhoven were seen as businesses requiring investment in new technology and as a potential employer. However, people in both cities recognized that household recycling behaviour did nothing to stem the production of waste. The consumer society produced ‘mountains of rubbish’. Industry too needed to be seen to be doing something to cut down on waste production because after all, as one of the women in Nottingham put it: ‘We only produce a third or a quarter of what they do and they’re sending a lot of our rubbish over to developing countries, and Romania, and poor countries to be disposed of’. Self-ascribed responsibility? The Dutch groups regarded it as important to participate fully in the recycling scheme recently introduced in their neighbourhood even though they knew that not all the elements of the scheme had been resolved. Above all, the introduction of the compulsory household waste collection reinforced individual responsibility because, as one of the men observed ‘you can’t hide from your responsibility at the local level’. On a related theme of reducing the demand made of natural resources, Kees, one of the members of the men’s group felt that ‘water is a common property . . the more you do yourself the more you’re going to change’ and Karel agreed with him, arguing that ‘it’s everybody’s responsibility to see that the drop becomes a bucketful’. Likewise at the national level, although members of the men’s group agreed with Jan that governments ‘always promise more than they deliver’, they also accepted his metaphor of environmental progress resembling the moves of a knight in chess game: ‘if the worst comes to the worst you go forward one and back two. But we must go on all out and try to keep going through it’. This positive attitude and willingness to accept some measure of selfascribed responsibility for pro-environmental actions contrasts with the seemingly more defeatist attitude amongst the English groups in Nottingham, even among those members who had attempted to act responsibly. Members of the Nottingham groups argued fiercely about where the responsibility for changing attitudes and practices resided. Was it with individuals or with government and commerce? There was more disagreement about the nature of individual responsibility than there was about the need for government to demonstrate that it was sincere in its own actions. In these discussions, there was a consensus that national and local government were not setting an example for people to follow. The imposition of Value Added Tax on domestic fuel in 1993, for example, was interpreted in both groups as a means of raising

228

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

revenue dressed up as an environmental measure: as one of the men said: ‘that’s how greedy this government is. It’s not green. It points the way down the green road but doesn’t go down it’. For some of the women, this action by government was indicative of a broader change in social values which seem to inhibit any real shift towards more altruistic behaviour. ‘People now are just so greedy and selfish . . . it’s like our country is selfish, we don’t want to stop our people driving cars and stop acid rain. Because we want to drive our cars and we’ve got a right to do it. You know, we don’t seem to have a moral conscience’. Others felt that the free market, individualistic ideology of the Thatcherite revolution was more to blame. It was agreed by both groups, that the absence of both personal and national commitment to the shared responsibility a more sustainable society seemed to demand, meant there was no basis upon which a social contract between individuals and their neighbours, and between the UK government and its citizens could be built. In summarizing what were complex discussions, perhaps the most obvious difference between the two nations resides in the enduring sense of people’s commitment to a shared responsibility as active citizens in Holland and the sense these values have been eroded or broken down in the UK. Typical of this commitment at the neighbourhood level in Eindhoven was the joint responsibility for sweeping the street to which both men and women subscribed. For example, the women were critical of people who always blamed the council for dog mess and litter believing that people should take personal responsibility for these things. The women agree with Weineke when she said: ‘You keep your patch tidy. But if you get on well with the neighbours then you sweep the whole street’. The men too regarded ‘neighbourliness’ and altruism with satisfaction whether this was sweeping the streets; an ‘illegal’ but spontaneous joint action to remove unwanted, noisy ‘rips-strips’ in their street; or the sharing of household tools and equipment. The gradual erosion of these widely held social values by opportunistic landlords, young people and immigrants was a cause of concern, but the enduring continuity of these shared values at least among the majority of people meant that a sense of collective identity still prevailed. The absence of this sense of a ‘collectivity’ in Nottingham was reflected in people’s talk in terms of feeling alienated, depressed, frustrated and unable to take the personal action recognized in their discussions as being morally correct. The causes of this social and moral decline were acknowledged to be complex - the liberated sixties, the scandalous behaviour of politicians, single mothers, the consumer society, ‘greed’, privatization policies pursued by a government out of touch with its people and so on. These broader social trends were set in the context of people’s daily experiences, living in peripheral housing estates where the sense of community remembered from the early days of settling in, seemed irrevocably to have broken down. The corrosive effects of crime, vandalism and unemployment resulting from major restructuring of industry and the government’s decision in late 1992 to close the Nottinghamshire coal mines were all too evident in the groups’ discussions. It is equally clear however, that while the people of Eindhoven express a greater willingness to accept personal responsibility for environmental action, beyond the practical realities of the enforced recycling scheme, members of all groups found it difficult routinely to behave in a pro-

229

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

environmental way. In other words, despite the heightened awareness of environmental issues and all the information available about environmental problems, there is little evidence to suggest that Dutch people have internalized environmental values to the extent that pro-environmental behaviour has become part of their practical consciousness. For people in the Dutch groups also recognized that what an individual could achieve on their own was still constrained by wider economic and political factors. In this respect, just as in the Nottingham groups, people found it necessary to ascribe responsibility to others for taking action. Rationalizing the constraints. There was a wide measure of agreement across all four groups about the range of constraints which served to prevent individuals from accepting a wide range of pro-environmental responsibilities. One of the most important concerns the question of competence and the ability to be able to make sound judgements about the validity of environmental communications, rhetoric and claims. For it is in these judgements that questions of efficacy are most often resolved. What resources can individuals mobilize in their search for convincing evidence to support individual decisions to make changes in their lifestyles? One reason for the cross-cultural comparison was to explore the assumption, based on the findings of earlier studies, that Dutch citizens are more knowledgeable than English about environmental problems and are hence able to make more informed judgements about how to act in pro-environmental ways. The discussion groups lend support to this hypothesis in some respects but not in others. One notable contrast was that members of the Dutch groups demonstrated considerable expertise in discussion of environmental problems of agricultural production processes such as biogas production from composting; and the chemical contamination of both food and ground water by heavy metals and animal slurry. In part, this competence comes from their everyday experiences because their grandparents and parents were often still engaged in agriculture. In part, too, it comes from having acquired a higher standard of formal education than the majority of their English counterparts. Competence also derives from the high profile given to these issues in the National Environmental Plans and the national government’s media campaign over a considerable time period. Together, these ‘public’ and ‘private’ knowledge combine to raise the level of debate about these issues in both Dutch groups. In Nottingham by contrast, discussions about similar issues are derived almost exclusively from mass media reports such as reports of the health risks associated with agro-chemicals, and the contaminated food scares, such as BSE in cattle and salmonella in eggs. The women in particular were concerned about not knowing what to do for the best when their families were being exposed to pesticides in apple skins which had, traditionally thought to be ‘good for you’ and when children’s drinks contained ‘hidden’ ingredients banned in other countries because they were damaging to health. Wanting to do the best for their families but dependent on expert advice, and the conflicting claims of different interests as represented through media reports provoked a real sense of confusion for both women and men in the Nottingham groups, although it is notable that the men were much more flippant about ‘media food scares’ than the women.

230

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

Dutch people were equally cynical about the media as a purveyor of trustworthy information, especially about food contamination, but were better able to base their judgements from within their own competencies. Resonating with the UK discussions, one of the Dutch women said ‘50% can’t be believed, but it’s difficult because I don’t know which half?‘. In these circumstances ‘following your own instinct didn’t help either because there comes a point where that’s very difficult if you are getting so much false or biased information. Often they say something in the morning and in the evening its retracted’. In other cases the messages themselves were unrealistic. In Eindhoven, both men and women talked of being ‘flooded’ by information which was often contradictory. Of the government’s national media campaign which depicted an image of a burning globe held in a hand, accompanied by a message exhorting people to act locally, think globally, one of the Dutch men observed ‘One person cannot blow out the candle to save the world - it’s much more complex than that’. Even taken for granted behaviour has to be questioned, and there does not appear to be any ‘correct’ solutions, as this example from the Dutch women’s group illustrates: Wieneke; I’ve always had a milkman but that doesn’t appear to be environmentally aware (laughing) (. .) because those milk bottles are cleaned in some way or other. I think sometimes I just don’t know anymore, do I? Henriette: With sulphite. Wieneke; It appears that it’s more environmentally aware to have milk cartons. Nelly: Yes, but those cartons are another thing again. They can’t be put with the waste paper. Wieneke: No, but then I think well I always get it from the milkman. In any case that’s one little thing. Inge: That man comes past with a van. Wieneke: That’s not good either sometimes , Nelly: Well that’s the sense and the nonsense of it! Now that’s an example of it!

The contingent nature of ‘the truth’ in environmental terms was a powerful theme in all the groups and made it more difficult to tease out the efficacy of pro-environmental behaviours from the complex web of social, economic, political and cultural practices within which they are embedded. The questionnaire survey revealed that a significant majority of respondents looked to government for a lead, believing that environmental problems could be mitigated by government regulation and working in partnership with industry. The arguments and rationales discussed in the groups serve to confirm that only by addressing major structural changes in the way contemporary society is organized, will progress be made. In both countries, individuals expressed similar feelings of being somehow overwhelmed by the enormity of the problems; one of the Eindhoven men commented wryly: ‘We are sitting here now as 10 lads from Eindhoven but the world is a little bigger isn’t it? We can’t prevent all that’s happening’, while Janie in Nottingham, said ‘you have enough pressures in your own life - with your own problems ~ without taking on the world’s ALL of the time’. The intractable nature of environmental problems meant that they did not lend themselves to easy solutions, but the position was made worse by the extent to which people felt they could not trust government, experts and commercial organizations to make decisions and act in the interests of citizens and consumers. Discussions about the single-minded pursuit of profit by businesses and the short-termism of political timetables geared to the next election took place in both the Eindhoven and Nottingham groups. However, the lack of trust in experts and the politi-

231

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C A4 Harrison et al

cal process for effecting desirable change was more strongly articulated

in the UK, as this extract from the men’s group illustrates: Jack: We talked last week about aerosols. Why didn’t they just ban them straight

away if they’re dangerous! And if they’re not dangerous why scare us! I’ve actually lost confidence in, urn, supposed experts on environmental issues. Because (. .) then you get the politicians coming in and they don’t tell you the truth. (. .) Suppose I had asked your advice about food, what food I should eat, or whether an aerosol is dangerous. I’d want to know the credibility, that where you’re coming from? What experience have you got, er, to make an opinion. Bob: I think you’ve got it the other way round. You say you’ve lost confidence in the environmental expert who says that, er, er, aerosols are dangerous. But the reason why you’ve lost confidence in him is because that the Government and the manufacturing agents have failed to do anything about it. Whereas it’s them (emphasis) you should lose confidence in. They’re (emphasis) the ones Jack: It maybe that, Bob. It may be. But it may be that, er, anybody, if they’ve got some sort of a power base ~ we talked about power briefly - could get themselves into the media, with a message about something. And it becomes maybe only a nine day wonder but they get their ‘credibility’ with their work or whatever. And it may be that that person was wrong in the first place. I mean, there are cases of, urn, research not being properly carried out on all sorts of things. You don’t actually hear that. You’ve heard that research said from so and so and it’s a big mega-thing. But when it turns out that perhaps the research was discredited in some way. You don’t actually hear about that. So it may be that (emphasis). But it may also be, and that’s why I say about the politicians and the media that they are distorting things. And what I would say is that I live in a period of confusion. The downturn

in the media coverage of environmental issues in the two countries was commented on and then interpreted in the light of these political considerations. For example, the Dutch men’s group read it as a sign that the national government’s resolve to tackle environmental issues was weakening. They were conscious of the ability of the government to manipulate people’s environmental attitudes through stealth. Pointing to the reversal of public attitudes over a period of live years to the nuclear question and to the ability of the government to reverse it’s anti-nuclear policy, Eric was convinced ‘there were clever brains working on it - sociologists, psychologists, and I don’t know what - all in the way of experts in influence and strategy ~ to produce a plan like that in a different way’. In Eindhoven and Nottingham both men and women wanted central government to regulate blatant polluters but these discussions in Holland were moderated by an acute awareness that to act independently of other European countries would have severe repercussions for their economy. Adding an international dimension to discussions of an already intractable problem served to exacerbated the problem. Holland could no longer send its waste to Belgium and the men in particular were quick to point to the added costs likely to be incurred by exercising Draconian environmental legislation to regulate the activities of large corporations. Similar dilemmas were presented by attempts to reduce travel by car. It would not be in the government’s interest for after all - ‘who would fill the coffers? We’d end up with a shoe tax!‘. The men’s group in Nottingham were also direct in their criticism of businesses and their influence on government. They regarded society as being organized solely to serve these interests, rather than those of ordinary people, the environment. In Nottingham, too, group members felt strongly that the government

232

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

seemed unwilling to respond to even legitimate demonstrations against their chosen policies. As the women saw it, this intransigent behaviour by politicians whose own moral integrity was constantly being questioned in media reports of ‘sleaze’ and corruption, was arrogant and patronizing. The refusal of politicians to respond to popular concerns was contrasted with the activities of pressure groups who were thought to be more effective at addressing environmental issues ‘because they’re on the outside of the system. And unlike somebody in government or industry - who have interests, the national interest to defend, whereas Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth have the environment as their concern’. Even when politicians appeared to support environmental action such as at the Rio Summit things deteriorated. As one of the women said: I read, didn’t it fall apart as it started: Really because the Americans pulled out of it ~ literally as it started. And it was, seemed to be in immediate coverage, a non-event as it happened. I mean, there’s been a big hype about it, leading up to it. But as the conference actually opened, it sort of disintegrated into politics. The sense of overwhelming resignation expressed in these discussions is an active rebuttal of the existing political process and a far cry from the passivity suggested by the term inertia or fatalism. Ultimately, the Nottingham groups were questioning the efficacy of collective action and the democratic basis of British society. Similar criticisms were levelled at politicians in the Eindhoven group but without such strong resonances. Both women and men felt that in matters of major planning decisions consultation with the public was too little and too late and needed to be improved. There was also a suggestion that as far as road schemes were concerned the ‘the government was getting it’s way’. But there was much less sense of the alienation and powerlessness so strongly expressed by members of the Nottingham groups.

Conclusions There is little evidence across the groups of pro-environmental behaviour becoming habituated as part of taken for granted ways of living. Even in Eindhoven where the newly introduced recycling scheme was forcing people to engage directly with a new ways of organizing their household practices, this behaviour was not yet taken for granted, especially by the men. The women believed these tasks fell unequally on their shoulders and were not shared by all members of their household. At the same time, practical action did not necessarily allow people to acknowledge or internalize the wider rationales to which committed environmentalists adhere, such as challenging the way ‘consumer society’ was organized. For the overwhelming majority of group members, environmental problems remain as discursive problems, something to be talked about but not incorporated into everyday behaviour. The fact that members of the Eindhoven groups express a greater willingness or propensity to take personal responsibility for adopting proenvironmental behaviour than members in Nottingham cannot be explained simply. Although communications about environmental problems and their ‘solution’ are undoubtedly more diverse in Eindhoven than Nottingham, evidence from the groups in Eindhoven suggests that people are suffering from ‘information overload’. At the same time, the downturn in mass media coverage of environmental news in the early part of the decade has contributed to public concerns about the

233

Rationalizing environmental responsibilities: C M Harrison et al

extent to which the ‘environmental crisis’ was ‘real’ and .encouraged a growing sense of cynicism about the validity of environmental claims and rhetoric. These communicative contexts have a material but complex influence on the arguments people in the groups used to rationalize their beliefs and actions. The case studies suggest that citizen empowerment is indeed culturally specific. In the UK, group members despaired of effecting change through their own individual actions. They sought, above all, active leadership by government both at national and local levels and an enduring commitment to tackling environmental and social problems which was properly resourced. This approach contrasts with current practice namely the pursuit of privatization policies by central government coupled with the duplicity of unregulated green consumerism, both of which emphasize the benefits to customers rather than to society as a whole. People were all too accustomed to being addressed as consumers rather than citizens, and the rhetoric of the Government in its environmental ‘advertising’ was dismissed with contempt. By contrast, the positive attitudes expressed by members of the Eindhoven group to attempts by their government to move towards a more sustainable society lies in the nature of the social contract established between Dutch citizens and ‘the state’. Although not totally immune from criticism, the Dutch government through its use of a variety of regulatory, fiscal and planning measures has sought to protect its citizens from the worst excesses of an industrial society. That the government has not been wholly successful in resolving the conflicts between economic development and the protection of environmental quality and natural resources is self-evident from the group discussions. But, by requiring the many different sectors of society to acknowledge their rights and responsibilities in respect of the environment some progress is beginning to be made. Members of the Eindhoven groups all placed high value on the benefits accruing from this social contract which is further reinforced by a strong sense of collective identity at the neighbourhood level. We therefore conclude that individual acceptance of environmental responsibility is more likely to be secured in these social and cultural contexts than in the more alienated conditions prevelant in many urban neighbourhoods in the UK.

234