A new study delves deeper into how our environmentally-oriented decisions are controlled by emotions of shame and guilt.
Previous studies have demonstrated that emotions of shame and guilt are often considered provocative when individuals need to address environmental problems.
The new study’s main conclusion is that people who are very environmentally aware are more likely to experience guilt when they fail to live up to their own high environmental standards.
At the same time, people who are less environmentally conscious feel shameful about their lack of engagement.
“People who care deeply about the environment experience guilt for not doing enough, as they assume a high degree of responsibility for their actions and impact on the environment. Meanwhile, individuals who care less tend to feel shame over their lack of interest and action with regards to environmental issues, which is often triggered during social interaction,” explains Rikke Sigmer Nielsen, the study’s lead author.
The researchers conducted in-depth interviews with 18 Danes, representing a cross-section of the population based on gender, educational background, age, place of residence, and level of engagement.
Among the participants most concerned with being environmentally friendly, sustainability and environmental consciousness played a significant role in their daily lives, a concern for which they had many supporting moral principles. Still, they experienced guilt every now and then. Indeed, there were certain things that complicated their desire to do what was best for the environment.
“One participant mentioned that finding jeans in a second-hand shop could be challenging. As such, she occasionally ended up buying new ones,” says Nielsen. “Although she had a principle of not buying new clothes, she compromised from time to time when making a sustainable choice became too difficult.
“Another participant felt guilty about her frequent camper-van travel, which depends on fossil fuel and pollutes more than trains, for example. Though she justified it by saying that one needs to live life and that seeing the world was important too.”
On the other hand, people with less of an interest and concern for the environment felt that society’s increasing focus on climate, environment, and sustainability can be too much at times. They often cited a lack of time and money as reasons for not making more environmentally friendly consumptive choices.
“Environmental issues weren’t that much of a concern in their daily lives, and they generally felt that the whole climate and environmental debate had gone a bit too far. However, they still experienced shame in social contexts because they were aware that others might think that they had the wrong attitudes or were filling their shopping carts with the wrong items,” explains Nielsen.
The new study contributes a deeper understanding of how emotions of guilt and shame influence people’s everyday environmental decisions. The research helps to explain why some respond to environmental issues with guilt or shame and how these emotions can lead to different reactions.
This new knowledge can be put to use by government agencies when developing policies, strategies, and communications to encourage more pro-environmental behavior.
“The results can help policymakers and organizations design more effective campaigns and political initiatives aimed at promoting more sustainable behavior,” says Nielsen.
The study also opens a broader discussion about whether it is ethically and morally acceptable to deploy guilt and shame as tools in environmental communication. At the same time, according to the researcher, caution should be exercised when using guilt and shame to influence people, as doing so can have unintended consequences.
“Invoking shame often leads to resistance and defiance rather than positive behavioral change. And that’s not where we want to go. But some people—those who care about environmental issues—might in some cases use their feelings of guilt and shame as a kind of moral compass to motivate them to act more sustainably. So, these emotions are complex and need to be deeply understood if we are to encourage pro-environmental behavior,” concludes Nielsen.
Source: University of Copenhagen
