LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Thomas, Gregory O.; Poortinga, Wouter; Sautkina, Elena (2016)
Publisher: Elsevier
Journal: Journal of Environmental Psychology
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Social Psychology, Applied Psychology
A Single-Use Carrier Bag Charge (SUCBC) requires bags to be sold for a small fee, instead of free of charge. SUCBCs may produce ‘spillover’ effects, where other pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours could increase or decrease. We investigate the 2011 Welsh SUCBC, and whether spillover occurs in other behaviours and attitudes. Using the Understanding Society Survey (n = 17,636), results show that use of own shopping bags increased in Wales, compared to England and Scotland. Increased use of own bags was linked to increases in six other sustainable behaviours, although changes were significantly smaller in Wales for three of these behaviours. Increased own bag use was linked to stronger environmental views, but effects were weaker in Wales for two out of three measures. We conclude that the Welsh SUCBC effectively encouraged bag re-use, but with minimal changes in other environmental attitudes and behaviours, due to the external motivation to change behaviour.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple Regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. SAGE Publications.
    • Austin, A., Cox, J., Barnett, J., & Thomas, C. (2011). Exploring catalyst Behaviours: Full report. London: A report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
    • BBC. (30 January 2012). Tax on plastic bags introduced in April 2013. BBC News. from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-16787121.
    • Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. Advances in experimental social psychology, 6, 1e62.
    • Clarke, J. (24/02/2014). Plastic bags - the irish experience. In Paper presented at the dialogue event “disposable bag”, brussels.
    • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power (2nd ed.). Taylor & Francis Group.
    • Convery, F., McDonnell, S., & Ferreira, S. (2007). The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 38(1), 1e11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10640-006-9059-2.
    • Cornelissen, G., Pandelaere, M., Warlop, L., & Dewitte, S. (2008). Positive cueing: promoting sustainable consumer behavior by cueing common environmental behaviors as environmental. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(1), 46e55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.06.002.
    • DEFRA. (2008). A framework for pro-environmental behaviours: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
    • DEFRA. (2013). Single-use plastic bag charge for England: Call for evidence. Retrieved from https://consult.defra.gov.uk/resource-atmosphere-and-sustainability/callfor-evidence-plastic-bag-charge-for-england.
    • Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
    • Hawcroft, L. J., & Milfont, T. L. (2010). The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm scale over the last 30 years: a meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(2), 143e158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.10.003.
    • Holland, R. W., Verplanken, B., & Van Knippenberg, A. (2002). On the nature of attitudeebehavior relations: the strong guide, the weak follow. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(6), 869e876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.135.
    • Knies, G. (2014). Understanding society eUK household longitudinal Study: Wave 1-4 (pp. 2009e2013). Colchester: Essex. User Manual.
    • Lacasse, K. (2015). The importance of being green: the influence of green behaviors on Americans' political attitudes toward climate change. Environment and Behavior, 47, 754e781. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013916513520491.
    • Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863.
    • Lanzini, P., & Thøgersen, J. (2014). Behavioural spillover in the environmental domain: an intervention study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40(0), 381e390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.006.
    • Miller, R. M. (2012). Plastic shopping bags: An analysis of policy instruments for plastic bag reduction. (MSc Sustainable Development). Universiteit Utrecht. Retrieved from http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/253904.
    • Pieters, R., Bijmolt, T., Van Raaij, F., & de Kruijk, M. (1998). Consumers' attributions of pro environmental behavior, motivation, and ability to self and others. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 215e225.
    • Poortinga, W., Whitmarsh, L., & Suffolk, C. (2013). The introduction of a single-use carrier bag charge in Wales: attitude change and behavioural spillover effects. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36(0), 240e247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jenvp.2013.09.001.
    • Ritch, E., Brennan, C., & MacLeod, C. (2009). Plastic bag politics: modifying consumer behaviour for sustainable development. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(2), 168e174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1470- 6431.2009.00749.x.
    • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68e78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68.
    • Thøgersen, J. (1999). Spillover processes in the development of a sustainable consumption pattern. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20(1), 53e81. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(98)00043-9.
    • Thøgersen, J. (2004). A cognitive dissonance interpretation of consistencies and inconsistencies in environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(1), 93e103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(03) 00039-2.
    • Thøgersen, J. (2012). Spillover of pro-environmental behaviour: generalizing, a license to anti-social behaviour, or neither?. In Paper presented at the STEEP summer school 2012. Denmark: Aarhus Universitet.
    • Thøgersen, J., & Crompton, T. (2009). Simple and painless? the limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32(2), 141e163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10603-009-9101-1.
    • Thøgersen, J., & O€lander, F. (2003). Spillover of environment-friendly consumer behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(3), 225e236. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(03)00018-5.
    • Tiefenbeck, V., Staake, T., Roth, K., & Sachs, O. (2013). For better or for worse? Empirical evidence of moral licensing in a behavioral energy conservation campaign. Energy Policy, 57(0), 160e171. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.enpol.2013.01.021.
    • Truelove, H. B., Carrico, A. R., Weber, E. U., Raimi, K. T., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2014). Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and theoretical framework. Global Environmental Change, 29(0), 127e138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.09.004.
    • University of Essex. (2015). Institute for social and economic research and NatCen social research, understanding society: Waves 1-4, 2009e2013 [computer file]. 6th Edition. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Archive [distributor], November 2015. SN: 6614.
    • Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2013). The value of environmental selfidentity: the relationship between biospheric values, environmental selfidentity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34(0), 55e63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.jenvp.2012.12.006.
    • Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2014). I am what I am, by looking past the present: the influence of biospheric values and past behavior on environmental self-identity. Environment and Behavior, 46(5), 626e657. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/0013916512475209.
    • Whitmarsh, L., & O'Neill, S. (2010). Green identity, green living? the role of proenvironmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse proenvironmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 305e314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.003.
    • WRAP. (2013). UK voluntary carrier bag monitoring - 2013.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article