In my family group, we attempt to leave as small of a carbon footprint as possible. Teaching lessons in conservation and protecting our resources is rather important. With this said, I found myself in quite a dilemma the other day while driving to the store with my seven-year-old son.
The conversation went like this:
Son: Mommy, what is the black stuff coming from that truck?
Me: Well, it depends on the truck as if it is a diesel truck, it is the “normal” exhaust. If it is a gasoline truck, it could be an issue within the engine.
Son: Is it bad?
Me: Yes, it is bad for our air. It is called pollution. Remember? We have talked about pollution and you learned in class.
Son: I remember. Why can’t we tell the person they are wrong and to stop?
Me *can not form words*
How does a parent explain to their child that you cannot simply walk up to another and inform them they are polluting the air we all have to breathe? Life does not work in that manner nowadays. However, when you think about it the way my son did, someone should in fact make a comment to the individual. Too many individuals today are so nonchalant when it comes to the limited resources we have on Earth. I am not sure if it is simply for the reasons they do not care or if they are not informed. It reminds me of trying to persuade an individual to be energy conscious or to recycle. One cannot be forced, they must understand the benefits and have desire to make a change.
The social dilemma here is too many individuals are not venturing to make a change. Many times an electric car limits the individual to short driving, i.e. staying in the town they reside as there are not areas for them to charge. When it comes to recycling, all too often smaller towns do not have a recycling program (such as the town we reside) therefore if an individual desires to recycle, they must drive a few towns away. Whether it is simply for the reason that electric cars are not feasible or implementing a community/city wide recycling plan is too costly, the problem will not change until someone or group begins the process.
Many groups have come forward over the years to inform the public of the many issues we can face down the road if change does not happen soon. At times, individuals hear what is being said and decide this is something they want to do, although they are unsure how much time, effort, or even money it will take to contribute to the campaign. If they do make the decision, they may begin the campaign, stick with it for some time, but then stop as they are becoming overwhelmed with the extra effort they are giving when they do not see others doing the same.
Our environment has given the individuals of this world so much bounty; however, this bounty will not last forever. It is time to stand up and make a change. It is election time in many local communities, therefore, make the issue known and see that change is made.
Tags: Applied social psychology, Community, environment, psych424, resource dilemma, social change, Social Dilemma
I understand and identify with the concern of reducing pollution and carbon-emission. What i don’t encourage or support is the stance that people must be controlled or mandated to be healthier.
We have speed limits, and those speed limits are nothing more than an arbitrary number on a sign. People are no more inclined to listen to them than they are to listen to foreign countries’ news. When people do follow the speed limits, its because (this is normally, not always) they feel it’s the best option they have. Going any higher or any lower would be counterproductive, like getting a ticket or making the commute longer. The same goes for any other law or legislation. It’s only followed if people feel that it is the best course of action, given their resources, and given the future impact.
Restricting personal choices or activities is counter-productive as it creates a negative reactance between the intervention and the participants. The entire strategy may be ruined by the boomerang effect, wherein people behave in opposition of what is advocated, in order to resist persuasion.
If the aim is to reduce carbon emissions and pollution, we have to tackle intrinsic motivations. We want lasting results and continued activity not fearful regulations. We need advertisement, social endorsement, celebrity endorsement, public service announcements to acknowledge, teach, and exemplify the use of beneficial environmental habits. Take Al Gore for instance: He drives an electric cars and is very supportive of this measure. Areas of focus should include teaching children better environmental habits on a constant basis, such as everyday (just like how they are taught how to be potty trained); teaching adults how to recycled and holding recycle contest (provides extrinsic motivation and public awareness); or illustrating better environmental habits in our media such as recycling in movies, electric cars in shows.
Great blog! I love how you incorporated the dialogue between you and your son. What a dilemma occurred from such a simple question, yet it is a dilemma that every environmentally aware American can face. Since you established that there is a problem, what is an effective programmatic intervention you could design to help solve the problem of excessive human consumption or irresponsible use of natural resources? Do you think there is an resolution to this problem or do you think it is too big a social problem to target? I think this problem can only be conquered by changing the habits of a large portion of the population. It is hard not to despair in accomplishing such an effort. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your blog post!