Sustainable consumption faces several challenges that make it difficult for individuals and societies to adopt and maintain. When it comes to self-discipline, psychological research traditionally focuses on individual responsibility. Some researchers believe this is too short-sighted. Self-discipline doesn’t work without effective regulation.
While many people want to achieve major long-term goals – such as improving their diet, quitting smoking or adopting a more sustainable lifestyle – they often find it difficult to do so. Is it all down to a lack of self-discipline?
No, according to social psychologist Professor Wilhelm Hofmann of Ruhr University Bochum in Germany. Hofmann examined numerous research studies for a review article published in Nature Reviews Psychology, highlighting the extent to which the physical and social environment influence individual behavior. He criticizes the fact that many psychological studies continue to focus on the individual while ignoring critical structural factors.
The accelerating climate crisis is the best example of how the unlimited exercise of personal consumer freedoms leads to negative consequences for society as a whole. To some extent, we’ve forgotten to consider the collective benefit, i.e. the common good, and we need to rediscover the importance of good regulation.
Wilhelm Hofmann
Environmental factors have enormous impact on decisions
Traditional approaches such as self-determination theory focus on personal autonomy. This means that an individual’s freedom of choice must be preserved at all costs. “The public policy recommendations that result from this are to make no restrictions, provide sufficient information about the identified risks and side effects of the various options and then trust that people will make the right decisions and act appropriately,” says Hofmann. But this formula doesn’t work.
To demonstrate this, the Bochum-based psychologist uses the example of an eco-conscious consumer who wants to reduce their meat consumption but is occasionally tempted by a meat dish. “In conventional psychology, this is regarded as a conflict within the individual,” he said. If the individual could only muster enough willpower, they would be able to accomplish their long-term goal. This, according to Hofmann, is a mistake because decisions are profoundly affected by the environment: For example, if the canteen has five meat dishes but only one vegetarian option – the latter may even be more expensive. People also want to fit in with social norms: if a lot of your friends and family drive big cars, you’re more likely to want one yourself.
It’s not enough to hope for individual discipline
In his article, Hofmann combines psychological research with public policy research to illustrate that psychological research has implications for other areas and should take a broader view. In particular, he argues that we need to be more aware of the fact that people don’t have the power to shape many of their own environments.
“Many people try to live in a more sustainable manner, but fail to do so in reality,” says Wilhelm Hofmann. Unsustainable options are often cheaper, more visible and more available than sustainable ones. “Relying on individual discipline, willingness to make sacrifices and a sense of guilt won’t get us very far. We need to question and change the structures that contribute to social problems such as the overuse of natural resources and make sustainable behavior more difficult. And in order to achieve this, we need sound and effective political decisions.”
Many people would like to see more regulation so that they no longer have to swim against the tide. Growing awareness of the problem, combined with the realization that some social challenges and crises can’t be solved through personal responsibility or free markets, is driving the desire for government intervention and solutions. In essence, society needs to agree on good rules in order to provide individuals with the best possible support on the path to the desired change towards greater sustainability.
Greater focus on the common good
“The accelerating climate crisis is the best example of how the unlimited exercise of personal consumer freedoms leads to negative consequences for society as a whole,” Hofmann says. “To some extent, we’ve forgotten to consider the collective benefit, i.e. the common good, and we need to rediscover the importance of good regulation.” This means that we must agree on effective and fair rules that protect us from risks and apply equally to everyone. Such as what is standard practice in road traffic.”
Nonetheless, the psychologist believes that individuals must also play a role. “Everyone can take small steps to help shape their environment in whatever way they can.” When your own creative power as a citizen, employee, or customer has been exhausted, you can advocate for people with decision-making power to take up the cause. “We always have the ability to influence,” he asserts.
