This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Drawing on the emerging scarcity, abundance, and sufficiency (SAS) framework, this study explores how various consumer behaviors with potential environmental impacts relate to subjective evaluations of psychological resources such as economic resources, time, social networks, and emotional support. Assuming that individuals may “trade” the costs and efforts of green consumption, including the buying of eco-labeled goods, altered eating habits, and choice of transportation mode, against such psychological resources, we investigate the relationships between green consumer choices and resource evaluations using hierarchical regression analysis of data from an online panel survey. The results suggest that green consumer behaviors are positively related to subjectively evaluated resources such as feelings of economic sufficiency and other, more “relational” resources, including social networks and emotional support. Performing such behaviors may therefore lead to psychological gains. These findings do paint a rather positive picture of environmental behaviors, since they may thus be viewed as having a personal positive trade-off. Although directional effects cannot be firmly established, our study suggests that pro-environmental behavior may increase wellbeing and experienced prosperity. Future studies should further investigate these causalities and implications of these suggested relationships.
Mathias Zannakis; Sverker Molander; Lars-Olof Johansson. On the Relationship between Pro-Environmental Behavior, Experienced Monetary Costs, and Psychological Gains. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5467 .
AMA StyleMathias Zannakis, Sverker Molander, Lars-Olof Johansson. On the Relationship between Pro-Environmental Behavior, Experienced Monetary Costs, and Psychological Gains. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (19):5467.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMathias Zannakis; Sverker Molander; Lars-Olof Johansson. 2019. "On the Relationship between Pro-Environmental Behavior, Experienced Monetary Costs, and Psychological Gains." Sustainability 11, no. 19: 5467.
This article reports results from a questionnaire administered to Swedish homeowners (N = 1481) investigating factors that influence them, as users and owners of on-site sewage systems (OSS), to environmentally improve their OSS. Social and psychological factors were based on previous research into pro-environmental and compliance behaviors and a previous interview study. The results suggest that the most important motives are to benefit, to act when outcomes are fair, and to avoid inconvenience. Less important motives are to act when outcomes are fair and to act of concern for the environment. Perceived efficacy in decreasing the environmental impacts of current OSS, when the OSS is changed, and perceived ability to change their OSS are also among the strongest predictors of readiness to change OSS. However, among homeowners who changed their OSS to do ones duty and achieve long-term safety were ranked highest. The results support the expectations of goal-framing theory that motives related to “gain” would be focal in situations of unfavorable cost–benefit ratios. Similarly, the importance of fair outcomes and efficacious rules is consistent with general findings in research on social dilemmas.
Are Wallin; Mathias Zannakis; Lars-Olof Johansson; Sverker Molander. Influence of interventions and internal motivation on Swedish homeowners’ change of on-site sewage systems. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2013, 76, 27 -40.
AMA StyleAre Wallin, Mathias Zannakis, Lars-Olof Johansson, Sverker Molander. Influence of interventions and internal motivation on Swedish homeowners’ change of on-site sewage systems. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2013; 76 ():27-40.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAre Wallin; Mathias Zannakis; Lars-Olof Johansson; Sverker Molander. 2013. "Influence of interventions and internal motivation on Swedish homeowners’ change of on-site sewage systems." Resources, Conservation and Recycling 76, no. : 27-40.
Reactions to third-party inequality were investigated in three experiments. In Experiment 1, 52 undergraduates allocated money between themselves and two others. Preferences for equal and unequal distributions were also rated. The results show that people are averse to inequalities between themselves and others, and to inequalities between others. Post-experimental ratings indicate that egocentric equality, third-party equality, and max–min preferences are important motives. The findings were replicated in Experiment 2, where 74 undergraduates allocated compensation for a previously conducted task, and in Experiment 3, where 112 participants rated preferences. In these experiments random determination of rewards to third parties altered participants’ behavior and preferences. The results indicated that random determination decreases the importance of all fairness motives while increasing the importance of monetary payoff. While people still care about economic equality under these conditions, contextual factors, such as perceived responsibility for unfair outcomes, seem to alter the impact of fairness.
Lars-Olof Johansson; Henrik Svedsäter. Piece of cake? Allocating rewards to third parties when fairness is costly. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 2009, 109, 107 -119.
AMA StyleLars-Olof Johansson, Henrik Svedsäter. Piece of cake? Allocating rewards to third parties when fairness is costly. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2009; 109 (2):107-119.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLars-Olof Johansson; Henrik Svedsäter. 2009. "Piece of cake? Allocating rewards to third parties when fairness is costly." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 109, no. 2: 107-119.
In two experiments participants allocated a resource between themselves, one privileged, and one unprivileged group. Conflicts were induced between “third-party fairness” (difference in payoff to the two groups) and efficient resource use. Experiment 1 employed 42 undergraduates making multi-stage allocation decisions. Fairness was varied at three levels and self-interest, operationalized as the political motive of win votes, at two levels. Adverse effects of fairness on preserving the resource were found. In Experiment 2 another 48 undergraduates performed a similar task. Self-interest was now operationalized as a financial motive. The results showed that participants reduced their resource use when neither fairness nor self-interest was salient. A regression analysis demonstrated consistent adverse effects of fairness on resource use controlling for efficient resource use and total group payoff. It was concluded that fairness causes decision makers to overuse resources, although they are unwilling to totally deplete a resource and will make compromises.
Lars-Olof Johansson; Mathias Gustafsson; Lars E. Olsson; Tommy Gärling. Weighing third-party fairness, efficiency, and self-interest in resource allocation decisions. Journal of Economic Psychology 2007, 28, 53 -68.
AMA StyleLars-Olof Johansson, Mathias Gustafsson, Lars E. Olsson, Tommy Gärling. Weighing third-party fairness, efficiency, and self-interest in resource allocation decisions. Journal of Economic Psychology. 2007; 28 (1):53-68.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLars-Olof Johansson; Mathias Gustafsson; Lars E. Olsson; Tommy Gärling. 2007. "Weighing third-party fairness, efficiency, and self-interest in resource allocation decisions." Journal of Economic Psychology 28, no. 1: 53-68.
The aim of three experiments was to examine the idea that when judging the fairness of allocations people are influenced both by differences in relative payoffs and the number of comparisons among payoffs. The hypothesis tested was that judged fairness would be inversely related to the average difference between payoffs; average difference was defined as the sum of absolute differences between outcomes to groups divided by the number of pairwise comparisons between the groups. In Experiment 1, 24 undergraduates rated fairness and goodness (desirability) of allocations to one privileged and one underprivileged group consisting of fellow students. The participants were not themselves members of the groups and their ratings did not depend on evaluations by the groups’ members. Results showed, as expected, that differences in payoff determined judgments of fairness but also that larger sums were to some extent rated as more fair than smaller sums. However, as the sum increased, the effect of difference was shown to decrease. Fairness ratings partially mediated ratings of goodness. In Experiment 2, 72 undergraduates rated fairness and goodness of combinations of payoffs to two or four groups consisting of fellow students. Results confirmed that rated fairness was inversely related to the average difference between payoffs. The total sum of the groups’ payoffs was again found to somewhat increase rated fairness, whereas the number of members in the groups did not have any clear effect. In Experiment 3, 24 undergraduates rated the goodness of allocations to two, three, and four groups. The results showed similar effects as in the preceding experiments.
Lars-Olof Johansson. Fairness of Allocations among Groups of Unknown Others. Social Justice Research 2005, 18, 43 -61.
AMA StyleLars-Olof Johansson. Fairness of Allocations among Groups of Unknown Others. Social Justice Research. 2005; 18 (1):43-61.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLars-Olof Johansson. 2005. "Fairness of Allocations among Groups of Unknown Others." Social Justice Research 18, no. 1: 43-61.
Henrik Svedsater; Lars-Olof Johansson. Beyond egocentric judgments of fairness: The price of reducing economic differences between others. PsycEXTRA Dataset 2004, 1 .
AMA StyleHenrik Svedsater, Lars-Olof Johansson. Beyond egocentric judgments of fairness: The price of reducing economic differences between others. PsycEXTRA Dataset. 2004; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleHenrik Svedsater; Lars-Olof Johansson. 2004. "Beyond egocentric judgments of fairness: The price of reducing economic differences between others." PsycEXTRA Dataset , no. : 1.
Lars-Olof Johansson; Henrik Svedsater. Displaying concern for economic fairness without genuine intentions of being fair: Pay-off allocations to identified versus unidentified individuals. PsycEXTRA Dataset 2004, 1 .
AMA StyleLars-Olof Johansson, Henrik Svedsater. Displaying concern for economic fairness without genuine intentions of being fair: Pay-off allocations to identified versus unidentified individuals. PsycEXTRA Dataset. 2004; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLars-Olof Johansson; Henrik Svedsater. 2004. "Displaying concern for economic fairness without genuine intentions of being fair: Pay-off allocations to identified versus unidentified individuals." PsycEXTRA Dataset , no. : 1.
An ongoing discussion concerns road-pricing schemes as measures to abate traffic congestion and air pollution in metropolitan areas. If such measures are to be effective, road-pricing fees must be set sufficiently high However, municipalities are likely to have other goals besides reducing car use, such as upholding fairness among citizens and financial goals such as creating revenues. If conflicts prove to exist between different goals, road-pricing schemes are not likely to achieve the environmental goal. To investigate the degree to which these goal conflicts exist, members of the local governments in the three major metropolitan areas of Sweden responded to a survey questionnaire. In the questionnaire they rated a number of principles guiding the setting of road-pricing fees hypothesized to correspond to the three goals. The results showed that, for the political majority, the hypothesized goal conflicts existed in that no single goal was optimized. It is concluded that in particular fairness may prevent road pricing achieving the environmental goal.
Lars-Olof Johansson; Mathias Gustafsson; Gunnar Falkemark; Tommy Gärling; Olof Johansson-Stenman. Goal Conflicts in Political Decisionmaking: A Survey of Municipality Politicians' Views of Road Pricing. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2003, 21, 615 -624.
AMA StyleLars-Olof Johansson, Mathias Gustafsson, Gunnar Falkemark, Tommy Gärling, Olof Johansson-Stenman. Goal Conflicts in Political Decisionmaking: A Survey of Municipality Politicians' Views of Road Pricing. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy. 2003; 21 (4):615-624.
Chicago/Turabian StyleLars-Olof Johansson; Mathias Gustafsson; Gunnar Falkemark; Tommy Gärling; Olof Johansson-Stenman. 2003. "Goal Conflicts in Political Decisionmaking: A Survey of Municipality Politicians' Views of Road Pricing." Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 21, no. 4: 615-624.