Value Action Gap Outcomes Management Essay

Value Action Gap Outcomes Management Es pleadThe value- achieve wisecrack is a term use to describe the gap that enkindle occur when the value or attitudes of an fewbody do not correlate to their actions. More generally, it is the difference mingled with what peck say and what people do. This discrepancy is just about associated at bottom environmental geography, as usually attitudes affect carriage however the opposite frequently seems to be the grounds with devotion to environmental attitudes and conducts.The outcome is that at that place is a gap surrounded by the gamey value people place on the inwrought environment and the comparatively woeful level of action taken by individuals to counter environmental problems.( The outcome is that there is a disparity between the value placed on the natural environment and the level of action taken by individuals to counter environmental problems. )This disparity has been termed the value-action gap, or occasionally, it is r evivered to as the attitude-behavior gap (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002).Therefore, it is not a change in attitudes that is required, but a fundamental shift in behavior towards the environment and individuals use of natural resources, to ensure sustainable development and conservation of the environment.Debates surrounding the termination of the value-action gap have mainly taken place within environmental and social psychology. Research is often based within cognitive theories of how attitudes be make and how this affects individuals behavior (Blake 1999). The research suggests that there are m whatever an an opposite(prenominal)(prenominal) internal and external factors that affect behavior and the reasons behind consumer choices. Therefore, it mint be difficult to identify the ingest reasons for why this gap survives, as it can be due to a number of reasons.When purchasing a production for example, many attributes are assessed when making decisions. Dickson (2000) suggests t hat the closely significant factors affecting the reasons behind buying behavior are price, quality, convenience, and brand familiarity. Young et al (2010) argue point out that the gap can besides be due to brand strength culture, finance habit lack of knowledge lifestyles personalities or, trading off between divergent ethical factors (p22). Therefore, environmental or ethical considerations are often not taken into account, regardless of attitudes people have regarding the environment. Time or convenience is usually a major clincher of consumer behaviour, and therefore a gap between value and behavior is understandable.Moreover, Chatzidakis et al (2007) argue that consumers use neutralisation techniques to justify pursuing their more selfish goals or else of purchasing environmental friendly or ethical products. Therefore, environmental determine are usually less dominant in the decision-making.Development of the subjectsummaryThe usual theories of reasoned action argue th at values and actions are related. The theory of reasoned action states that behavioral intention is dependent on attitudes surrounding that behavior and social norms (Fishbein and Ajzen 1975). This reckons that a person acts or behaves in a way that correlates to their attitudes towards that behavior. Therefore, a persons voluntary behavior can be predicted by his/her attitudes and values on that behavior (Kaiser et al 1999). Homer and Kahle (1988) argue that attitudes influence behaviors and therefore values can explain the reasons behind human behavior. However, the opposite appears to be the case for certain actions, especially those related to environmental or ethical actions.In recent decades, universal support for environmental protection measures has grown and, correspond to Barr (2004), there has also been a growing interest in ethical consumption. This has been fuelled by pressure groups, consumer groups, and even businesses (Young et al 2010).Furthermore, increased me dia coverage of environmental disasters and social problems has also resulted in a heightened concern of such issues. This was given a political boost by the publication of the Stern Review on the Economics of humor Change (Stern 2006). Therefore, people are more aware of environmental issues, such as global warming or humor change. It is often reported that many people have a heights concern for environmental issues and ethical consumption, for example, Dunlap (2002) states that 54% of Americans agreed environmental protection was a key priority, even if stinting growth was restricted. Furthermore, Banerjee and Solomon (2003) also argue that the general support for Ecolabels and ethical foods is high among the public.With these studies in mine, it is expected that there would be an increase in pro-environmental behavior, such as recycling, or limiting energy usage (Flynn et al 2010). However, these absolute attitudes have not translated into a large increase these behviours an d ethical consumption is still relatively low (Aguiar et al 2009). olibanum, attitudes are not always a clear prediction of behavior, resulting in the value-action gap. For example, the the market component part for ethical goods is low as according to Young et al (2010) the market share of ethical foods is only 5% of total food sales in the UK. Furthermore, as Dickson (2000) points out, ethical labelling initiatives such as legally logged wood, and fair-trade products, often have market shares of less than 1%. Thus, consumers buying behaviour does not reflect their positive attitudes toward ethical products (De Pelsmacker et al 2006). This means that other factors are more significant that values relating to the environment.Factors that affect behaviorThere are many factors that lead to an individuals behavior, and therefore it is not just personal values that affect behavior. There are many different theories regarding how consumers make decisions. These can be applied to try an d explain why there is a value-action gap for some behaviors.For example, microeconomic theory (consumer, household theory) states that, humans make decisions that maximise their utility (Sammer and Wstenhagen 2006188). Therefore, if buying ethical or environmental products does not maximize their utility then they will not purchase them, regardless of their attitudes towards these issues. Making these decisions requires a comparison of the costs and benefits of alternative actions, rather than about certain values, within their budgetary constraint. This means other factors, such as price or quality, are still more important.Vermeir and Verbeke (2006) suggest that the three main determinants of behavioral intention with relevance to sustainable consumption are values, needs, and motivations breeding and knowledge and behavioral control. They argue that consumers are passive when it comes to supporting environmental improvements within their budget. mien is often based on habit an d therefore values concerning the environment are often not taken into consideration. Therefore, this can account for the low market share of sustainable products (Minteer et al 2004). These theories can explain the gap that appears between attitudes and actions.Application (Further explanation and examples)Even though many support ethical trade in principle, this is often not taken into consideration as a purchase criterion. Cohen and Murphy (2001) argue that for around 40% of consumers the environmental friendliness of a product will never be a factor in purchasing decisions regardless of positive attitudes towards ethical consumption.There are many studies which support the initiation of a value-action gap. Mostly these can be demonstrate within the field of environmental geography. Lane and Potter (2007) found a discrepancy between attitudes and behavior regarding the adoption of cleaner vehicles. They reported that concern for the environmental impact of cars did not result i n behavioral changes at the individual level. Thus, what consumers reported as their mean actions or concerns often did not translate into their actual behavior.Furthermore, Vermeir and Verbeke (2006) also found that positive consumer attitudes towards sustainability were not consistent with their behavioral patterns. They found that attitudes were positive whereas intentions to buy sustainable dairy products were low. They also found that peoples perceptions of the availability of sustainable dairy products was low, which might explain why attitudes were positive yet intentions to buy were low. Additionally, evidence of this gap has been found with organic food as illustrated by Hughner et al (2007) who show that patronage 46-67% of the population expressing favorable attitudes for organic food, the actual purchase behavior is only 4-10% of different product ranges.Three/four main issues/debates described belowInformation gapOne explanation for the discrepancy between attitudes bu ying behaviour is the perceived lack of availability of certain products and lack of information (Dickson 2000). Therefore, because there was a lack of information about environmentally friendly behavior this caused the gap between values and attitudes. Traditional thinking supported the idea that increased knowledge tended to encourage favorable attitudes which, in turn, lead to pro-environmental action. Burgess et al (1998) called this the information famine model.Therefore, increasing knowledge and awareness surrounding environmental and ethical issues should result in behavioral changes. Burgess et al (1998) argue that filling the values-action gap with information would lead result in a change in public behaviors towards the environment. Furthermore, Owens (2000 1142) argues that if people had more information about environmental risks, they would become more virtuous. slightly are that to increase environmental action there needs to be educational marketing campaigns on the ethical and environmental issuesThus, the main motivations for actions are opportunism rather than altruistic. Therefore, to increase environmental action products must aim to change perceptions by using. McEachern and McClean (2002).However, so far no one has been able to confirm the validity of such a model (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). As a result, the decision-making process could be considered as almost unpredictable positive attitudes were not needfully followed by positive intentions. Therefore, attitudes alone are a poor predictor of intentional behavior. As such, there seemed to be many more factors that influenced pro-environmental behavior.Barr and Gilg (2002) argue that just increasing information will not lead to behavior change that would close this gap. Due to the increased media attention surrounding environmental issues, and products such as Fairtrade having a high profile, it could be argued that there is already a lot of information on these issues, and many are aware of the issues. It is genuinely considered that many have a high regard for environmental issues. Sammer and Wstenhagen (2006) point out that while people may be aware of ethical and environmental issues and products that attempts to solve these issues, this does not necessarily mean that it plays a major role in their buying decision.. 99% of respondents in both surveys reported that they had heard the terms global warming and climate change, and most respondents said they knew a fair amount about these terms (Thornton, 2009)Yet, because the market share of these products and level of environmental action is quite low, there is exits a gap between attitudes and behaviors.Therefore, the key issue is why our attitudes often fail to materialize into concrete actions (Barr 2004).Blake (1999) many national policies are based on this idea of an information deficit model of participation. For example, Going for Green (GFG). It is considered the most effective means to overcome the v alue-action gap is by translating environmental concern into pro-environmental behavior. This can be done through increasing information. The core assumption is that the main barrier between environmental concern and action is the lack of appropriate information. The GFG argue that the most effective way to encourage people to act is to give locally relevant information and highlight a few facts. Environmental concern and elementary environmental action (such as recycling), are now becoming widespread throughout the population. However, few people take environmental actions which involve changes to their lifestyle. This may mean that environmental actions people take may be unrelated to the particular concerns that they express about the environment. This environmental value-action gap is clearly of key importance to environmental policy, not least because it is repeated at other scales, involving different actors thus local or national government, business and even international o rganizations have policies whose effectuate fail to match up to the environmental concerns people are expressing. the attitude-behavior relationship is moderated by two primary sets of variables the structure of personal attitudes themselves and external or situational constraints. . Attitudes are likely to be better predictors of behavior if the attitudes in question are strong relative to other ( by chance conflicting) attitudes, and based on direct experience. Situational constraints mainly refer to whether the behavior is in line with the individuals favored social norms, which in turn are influenced by different social, economic, demographic and political contexts. . Research has shown that people do not have a fixed, rational and ready-made set of values that will be activated by particular calls to action rather peoples values are negotiated, transitory and sometimes contradictory.these findings suggest that the value-action gap cannot be overcome simply by using an informat ion deficit model of individual participation, as empowerment of individuals to act does not of itself guarantee action without an appropriate institutional location within which action is located, policy turns from raising environmental awareness to promoting pro-environmental behavior, possibly involving lifestyle change, Blake 1999As Eden (1996) has argued policy still fails to appreciate the huge gulf between information and action, between appreciation as awareness and understanding as the cause of behavior. Policy-makers seem to assume that environmental education, drawing from scientific work, will lead to people making the link between policy and action and acting in order to meet policy objectives, (p. 197)Barriers to behaviorAjzen Fishbein have developed an additional theory of reasoned action and planned behavior. they argue that individual attitudes must include an intention to carry out a specific action that reflects a reasoned evaluation of the likely consequences o f that action. Ajzen, I. Fishbein, M. (1980) Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall).other researchers have pointed out that these intentions are related to more general values, worldviews and beliefs (e.g. Stern et al, This theoretical approach has also been the dominant influence on public and policy research into public attitudes,Different people will interpret and respond to the same environmental information in unpredictable and often exceedingly variable ways, at times producing a quite opposite interpretation to the one expected by those (often in the policy community) who promulgate the information (Myers Macnaghten, 1998).Thus individuals must accept responsibility for the future, but conditions, institutions and their own day-to-day responsibilities constrain their actions (Myers Macnaghten, 1998, p. 346). Myers, G. Macnaghten, P. (1998) Rhetorics of environmental sustainability commonplaces and places, Environment a nd Planning A, 30(2), pp. 333-353.The causes of this gap between attitude and behavior can be explained in terms of personal, social and structural barriers to action. Different barriers often overlap or work in conjunction to limit behavioral change. However, these barriers can be tackled,It is considered that there are numerous barriers of motivations for individual action.microeconomic theory (consumer, household theory), which says that humans make decisions that maximize their utility (Sammer and Wstenhagen 2006188).Furthermore, many people act impulsively and in ways that do not correspond to their declared evaluations and goals (Boulstridge and Carrigan, (2000).Attitudes often derive from social norms.For example, Schwartz (1977, cited in Jackson, 2005) has suggested in his Norm energizingTheory that the intention to perform a proenvironmental or pro-social behaviour is based on the acceptance of personal responsibility for ones actions and an awareness of their consequences. (p166)Blake (1999)- three different categories of obstacles that exist between the sphere of concern and that of action individuality responsibility and practicality. that both psychological and institutional factors affect individual action. Which factors are important in any one case will vary for different individuals, environmental actions, and social or institutional constraints. individual barriers refers to what social psychologists would call personal attitudes or cognitive structure. Environmental concerns are outweighed by other conflicting attitudes. wrong type of person to do certain types of environmental actions, such as campaigning. peoples perceptions of institutions and responsibility. At present, despite general environmental concern, that evaluation is often negative. Even if individual factors would support environmental action, people may still not act because they do not feel that they (as individuals) should take the responsibility for helping to solve enviro nmental problems. practical social or institutional constraints that may prevent people from adopting pro-environmental action, regardless of their attitudes or intentions. These include lack of time, lack of money and lack of physical storage space (in the case of recycling), as well as lack of information, encouragement and pro-environmental facilities such as recycling and adequate public transport provision. Some people may also be physically unable to carry out some environmental actions. Clearly, there will be overlaps between the three sets of obstacles, and the reasons why people do not engage in pro-environmental action will not always fall into such neat categories. classification shows is that at a particular moment, and in a particular place, distinctions can be made between different types of barriers that may prevent individual environmental action, and that policy will need to respond in differentiated ways. policies need to also tackle other individual, social and in stitutional barriers. Not just provide more information or recycling facilities. organizations that are trusted more by the public, such as environmental NGOs, are likely to be most successful.The factors involved in making people willing to reduce environmental damage are essentially different from the factors involved in making people take active steps to reduce damage and to improve the environment.The gap dilemmaMarket-based mechanisms.SolutionsCriticism4 See alsoAttitudes, behavior, cognitive psychology, social psychology, theory of planned behavior