Transcript for:
Psychology of Sustainability Lecture 1

Greetings Earthlings! Today we begin our  section on the psychology of sustainability.   It's all about using psychology to save  the environment and promote human health   and well-being. But first we have to start  off with some environmental problem basics.   Now if you're like most people you want to live  long and prosper, and you hope to have children   one day, and you have a family that you love. So  maybe if you're not initially sympathetic to the   idea that you should care about environmental  problems and that you should act to address   them, then maybe you'll change your mind once  you think about it from a sustainability point   of view. Now they're different definitions of  sustainability but one of the most agreed upon   has to do with the idea that sustainability is  about meeting the needs of the present without   compromising our ability to meet needs in the  future. Now the truth is that much of our economic   Development and the way we live our lives does  not contribute to environmental sustainability.   In fact, the very opposite-- we're already  starting to see some of the consequences of   that now. These consequences are only likely  to grow in the future if we don't act now. Let's start off by getting clear on what I mean  by environmental problems. Most environmental   problems fall into three different types: they're  aesthetic environmental problems; there are   health-related environmental problems; and there  are resource-related environmental problems.   Some environmental problems fall into all of these  categories, so keep that in mind as well. So first   so first let's talk a little bit about problems  of "environmental aesthetics." These have to do   with problems that impair the quality of our  lives and the appearance of the environment.   Litter is a really obvious example of  an aesthetic environmental problem. Air   pollution is another example. Air pollution  is destroying some of the world's most   beautiful vistas. In our national parks here in  the United States, air pollution is an aesthetic   problem when it affects the clarity of park  views. According to the U.S National Park Service,   almost all U.S national parks have been affected  by haze resulting from air pollution particles.   Haze affects the color ,the forms, and the  textures of natural and historic vistas.   Another type of environmental problem is the  health-related environmental problem. These are   problems that pose a threat to human health and  produce disease and illness. Air pollution also   falls into this category. It is considered one of  the world's biggest environmental health threats   and it causes upwards of seven million deaths a  year. According to the World Health Organization,   around 91 percent of the world's population  lives in areas where air pollution exceeds   healthy limits. Here in the U.S, the American Lung  Association estimates that four in ten Americans   live in communities with unhealthy air. you  might also find it interesting to know that   f the top 10 air polluted  areas in the United States,   four of those are in California. They include  Bakersfield, the Fresno-Madera-Hartford area,   the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland area,  and also the Los Angeles Long Beach area. Air pollution creates and exacerbates lung  problems and cardiovascular disease and in   some cases can cause cancer. Air pollution arises  from cars and power plants, petrochemical plants,   construction, and also wildfire smoke. Warmer  temperatures from climate change increase some   sources of air pollution like ozone. There are  lots of different health related environmental   problems, air pollution is not the only one of  them. Toxic wastes are another good example of   a health-related environmental problem. These  wastes are called "toxic" for a reason-- they   harm the health of people and they harm the  health of ecosystems. The U.S alone generates   upwards of 25 million tons of toxic waste every  year. Toxic waste often contains cancer-causing   and mutagenic agents that can affect cellular  DNA, and when improperly disposed of, toxic   waste can accumulate in water and soil andcause  harm to human, animal, and ecosystem health.   In the United States, the biggest source of  toxic waste is the manufacturing of chemicals   and petroleum and coal products but the  manufacturing of chemicals, petroleum,   coal products aren't the only sources of toxic  waste. Toxic waste also comes from farming and   other types of manufacturing. They come from the  disposal of medical waste and the disposal of our   used electronics--our televisions, our batteries,  our computers, our solar panels, our phones--   and also from the disposal of our leftover  paint and chemicals, pesticides for example. Resource problems are a third type  of environmental problem and these   involve the depletion of resources upon which we  depend. Things like fossil fuels, clean water,   arable land (that means land that can grow crops),   forests, landfill space... these types of  resources that we depend on. Most of the wood,   the metal ,the minerals, consumed in industrial  countries are only used once and then disposed   of. Those wasteful practices contribute to  some of these resource related environmental   problems as does high consumption. In fact,  according to the Global Footprint Network,   world consumption is increasing and we need  the equivalent of 1.6 Earths at our current   rate and we'll need the equivalent of two  Earths to meet our demands by the 2030s. Water scarcity, also known as water stress, is  an example of a resource-related environmental   problem. Extreme water stress occurs  when irrigated agriculture, industries,   and municipalities withdraw more than 80 percent  of their available supply on average every year.   It means there's no buffer, no wiggle room,  no backup, if supply drops due to drought,   unpredictable precipitation, or increased  withdrawals. According to the World Resources   Institute, 17 countries where 25 percent of the  world's people live, face extreme water stress.   The Middle East and North Africa region are the  most highly stressed. Qatar, Israel, Lebanon,   Iran, and Jordan are the most stressed-- meaning  that agriculture, industry, and municipalities   used up to 80 percent of available surface and  groundwater in an average year leaving the supply   extremely vulnerable to shortages. 44 countries,  home to one-third of the world, face high levels   of stress where on average more than 40 percent of  available supplies are withdrawn every year. Half   of the world's population could be living in areas  facing water scarcity by as early as 2025, and by   2040, one in four children will be living in areas  of extreme water stress. Currently, as much as   one-quarter of the world's people experience water  scarcity for at least one month out of the year. Now periods of water scarcity aren't just  for other parts of the world. Due to climate   change-related weather and disasters and  technological failures, there are also   increasingly common in the United States. For  example, due to drought in the western U.S, two   of the largest reservoirs in America (Lake Mead  and Lake Powell) are at their lowest levels in   history due to climate change and over consumption  of water. They provide water and electricity   to millions in Nevada, Arizona, California,  Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, and Mexico. They   also provide irrigation water for agriculture.  Water cuts are expected and may not be enough.   Can you imagine not being able to turn on the  tap and get safe drinking water? In the summer   of 2022, 150,000 residents of Jackson, Mississippi  had no safe drinking water and little to no water   pressure to flush toilets, to fight fires, etc.  for over a week. The cause: flooding overwhelmed   the city's water treatment plant. In Eastern  Kentucky, more than 25 000 people lost their water   after major flooding and in Texas, hundreds of  water mains broke during a stretch of record heat. Water stress is complicated and it has multiple,  often overlapping causes. Generally speaking,   there are two broad categories of water scarcity:  diminished quantity and diminished quality.   Diminished quantity or diminished supply is  when there is simply not enough water to meet   existing needs. One cause of that is wasteful  use by individuals, agriculture, and Industry.   Another cause of diminished supply is poor  management of supply by governments. For example,   governments frequently allow economic development  that's unsustainable from a water supply   perspective. Climate change related drought and  shifting precipitation patterns are also reducing   supply in many places. Population growth poses yet  another supply problem. Population growth usually   increases demand for water in all sectors of the  economy-- agricultural, industrial, and domestic.   More people means more agriculture  to feed them. Economic development   requires water for manufacturing and cooling  processes, as well as for removing the waste   generated by these processes. Domestic use  also increases which includes more drinking,   food preparation, washing, cleaning  and watering gardens. However,   Agriculture and Industry use  more water than domestic users. Poor quality supply is another source of  water stress. Technological failures from   poor maintenance of water infrastructures  is one cause. Recent water crises in Flint,   Michigan and Jackson, Mississippi were partly  the result of deteriorating municipal water   systems that were largely ignored by  federal, state, and local governments.   Climate-related storms are also  leading to increased flooding   of water and waste treatment plants and  flooding also contaminates water sources.   Poor quality supply is also caused by lacking  governmental regulation. Some water stress happens   due to the discharge of untreated municipal  industrial or agricultural waste into waterways. Water stress matters. It places an area at risk  for humanitarian disaster when you have narrow   gaps between supply and demand. Countries are  vulnerable to fluctuations caused by droughts   or increased water withdrawals such as that from  increased population growth or increased economic   development. According to predictions by  the United Nations and the World Bank,   drought could put up to 700 million people  at risk of displacement by 2030-- forced to   leave their homelands in search of food and water.   Scarcity is also an example of a health-related  environmental problem caused by the scarcity of   an environmental resource and that can lead  to humanitarian crises. When water needed for   agriculture becomes scarce, people may often go  hungry-- that's what we mean by "food insecurity." When waterways or water systems are polluted  people are forced to drink and bathe in polluted   water and they may get sick from water-borne  pathogens or toxins or chemicals in the water. Water scarcity is an intersectional issue and  by that I mean that demographics like race,   gender, and class often interact to play a  role in its impacts. For example, in the U.S,   water infrastructures are more likely to be  neglected in low-income communities of color.   In developing nations, water scarcity  impacts women differently than men.   It can add hours to women's daily  labor when women are responsible for   water collection and have to travel  further and further to obtain water. Water scarcity also contributes to social  conflict and unrest. Recorded incidents of   water-related violence have more than doubled in  the past 10 years compared with previous decades.  In some regions, the conflicts are  between farmers in the same community,   but sometimes the violence is  between police and protesters.   Conflict between countries is also growing since  water sources often traverse multiple countries. Another thing I want you to think about is  the complexity of environmental problems   and how a lot of times one alteration  of the natural environment-- one thing   that humans do that affects one aspect of  the environment--often has a ripple effect   through the rest of the natural environment. In  other words, what I'm talking about is how the   environmental impacts of human actions often  have cascading effects because ecosystems are   comprised of many interlocking synergistic  elements and systems. That means that   a change in one part of the system reverberates  throughout the entire ecosystem. This makes   environmental problems complex and it also  means that the consequences of human actions   on the environment are often magnified as they  reverberate through an environmental system. So I'm talking about these cascading effects  of humans' impacts on the environment and   let's think about this with a few examples. And  the first one I'll mention is deforestation. So   this is the conversion of a forested land to  non-forested land as a direct effect of human   activities. This is a problem based on almost  every continent and the main causes are logging;   clearing of forests for conversion to agriculture,  cattle ranching, buildings; fuel wood collection;   and forest fires aggravated by climate  change. Now trees hold soil in place and   consequently deforestation contributes to  soil erosion, and agricultural yields that   are significantly decreased when valuable  topsoil washes away. And that topsoil can   clog and pollute the waterways. Desertification  sometimes results. What that basically means is   that the land no longer supports vegetation.  That means the land is no longer useful   for cattle, or for agriculture, or for  lumber. Deforestation also threatens   biodiversity since 80 percent of the Earth's  plants and animals live in forests. Remember   too that deforestation contributes to climate  change because trees consume the greenhouse gas   carbon dioxide. The World Resources Institute  notes that tropical rainforest deforestation   is the third largest source of carbon dioxide  emissions next to China and the United States. So let's talk some more about climate change.  It's another good example of this idea that   human impacts on the environment have cascading  effects because of these multiple ecosystems that   work together synergistically such that change  in one part of a system affects the rest of the   environmental system. And I was saying that  deforestation contributes to climate change   because trees are major consumers of carbon  dioxide which is what we call a "greenhouse   gas." And climate change is another example of  how economic development can be unsustainable.   A heavy diet of fossil fuels-- this has served  economic development for some time and has created   and contributed to a high standard of living in  the United States and many other in industrialized   countries. But it is a major contributor to  global climate change. Billions of people,   particularly in developing countries, are expected  to face shortages of water and food and risks to   health and life as a result of climate change.  Climate change results largely from human   activities that lead to a buildup of greenhouse  gases that trap heat near the Earth's surface.   Greenhouse gases from human activities include  carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use, and and by   fossil fuel use I mean petroleum, natural gas,  and coal. Methane is a another greenhouse gas.   It is the world's second largest contributor to  climate change among greenhouse gases. iI is a   byproduct of oil and natural gas production,  and also agricultural practices and livestock.   Methane is also trapped underneath the  permafrost in the Arctic and so as climate   change heats up temperatures and the polar  ice caps melt, and the permafrost defrosts,   more methane is also released. Nitrous oxide is  another greenhouse gas. This is from fertilizers,   fossil fuels, and also biomass burning. And  then there are also chlorofluorocarbons-- more   greenhouse gases that arise from industry. Once  again, as I said before, climate change is also   partly the result of deforestation because  forests "eat" some of this carbon dioxide.   Now there are lots of different effects of climate  change. Rising mean temperatures across the globe;   more severe weather events and related natural  disasters; increased ecosystem stresses;   shifting precipitation patterns; and rising ocean  temperatures which affect food and water security,   which increase the likelihood of pest  and disease outbreaks; more wildfires;   rising sea levels and flooding from the melting of  the polar ice caps; and even social effects like   increased conflict due to increased poverty  and resource shortages from climate change. Now when you study climate change's sources  and its consequences it seems obvious that   we need to act now and human behavior  needs to change--but let's face it,   people being people makes it complicated.  So let's talk a little bit about that. So now that we've covered some sustainability  basics, let's think about the role of psychology.   So these are (for the most part ) human-created  problems, so psychology certainly is relevant.   The goal of the "psychology of sustainability"  is to understand people's pro-environmental   attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors so that  we can promote environmentally sustainable   behavior and so we can motivate people to act  for the greater environmental good. Sometimes   you'll hear this called by some other  names. Those include green psychology,   pro-environmental psychology,  and conservation psychology. We've already studied a few things  that are relevant to the psychology   of sustainability. One of those is  bounded rationality and motivated   reasoning. So let's take a quick visit to  the past and talk about these concepts in   regards to sustainability, using  the example of climate change. When you study climate change's sources and  consequences it seems obvious that we need to act   now, but people being people makes it complicated.  Think about our section on environmental risk   perception and all those risk perception errors  and biases. Those also apply to climate change.   Present bias, or temporal discounting  bias, happens because our attention is   usually focused on the here-and-now. The  present bias partly explains why it's   been so hard to get people to reduce their  consumerism and carbon footprints to reduce   climate change. The effects of climate change  seem far away but the benefits of the SUV,   the regular plane travel, and the  fossil fuel use are immediate. It's also hard to imagine--though becoming  easier and easier as the effects of climate   change are starting to bear down on us--  remember the availability heuristic? We   tend to judge things as probable based  on how easily we can imagine them.   Motivated reasoning also applies. People tend  to perceive environmental problems in ways that   allow them to keep doing what they want to  do and that often translates into ignoring   or downplaying the environmental consequences  of our choices due to the affect heuristic. Remember many people don't like the solution  so they're motivated to ignore the problem,   which you'll remember is called solution  aversion. And as we noted earlier in the quarter,   our risk perceptions are also influenced by  social influences. Most of us aren't experts   on environmental problems and are subject  to informational pressure--taking our cue   from experts and from the people around us.  Likewise, as we said before, risk perceptions can   be social norms policed with social approval and  disapproval-- what is known as normative pressure.   The optimism bias is also relevant. Remember  that this motivational bias involves denying   or downplaying environmental risk to reduce our  anxiety and help us feel safe. For example, 61   percent of Americans say climate change is a risk  in the U.S but only 43 percent believe it will   affect them personally. However, it's expected  that 169 million Americans have a high risk of   water stress from climate change; 104 million  have a high risk of experiencing hurricanes;   22 million have a high risk of being affected  by sea level rise from climate change;   92 million have a high risk of heat stress;  and 7 million have a high risk of wildfires. Environmental risk perception matters because  it affects whether we prepare, and whether we   do things to prevent and mitigate the effects of  climate change and other environmental problems.