Report, Scied 227
Report, Scied 227
Report, Scied 227
'Tell me and I will forget. Show me and I may remember. Involve me and I will understand.' ~Chinese
proverb
If we define sustainability as addressing the ongoing capacity for Earth to maintain life, and we consider
this our goal, Education for Sustainability (EfS) is how we get there.
Education for Sustainability (EfS) is an educational approach that aims to develop students, schools
and communities with the values and the motivation to take action for sustainability – in their
personal lives, within their community and also at a global scale, now and in the future.
Education for Sustainability (EfS) aims to build awareness and knowledge of sustainability issues but
also to develop students and schools that are able to think critically, innovate and provide solutions
towards more sustainable patterns of living.
“Education for sustainability develops the knowledge, skills, values and world-views necessary for
people to act in ways that contribute to more sustainable patterns of living. It enables individuals and
communities to reflect on ways of interpreting and engaging with the world. Sustainability education is
futures-oriented, focusing on protecting environments and creating a more ecologically and socially just
world through informed action. Actions that support more sustainable patterns of living require
consideration of environmental, social, cultural and economic systems and their interdependence."
Source: Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA), viewed on the Australian
Curriculum website on 21/10/2015.
Education for sustainability is based on the following seven principles, which were developed
collaboratively by EfS practitioners and published in Living Sustainably: National Action Plan on
Education for Sustainability, 2009. We have simplified them here.
Education for Sustainability involves equipping people with skills, capacity and motivation to plan and
manage change towards sustainability within an organization, industry or community.
Education for sustainability is driven by a broad understanding of education and learning that includes
people of all ages and backgrounds and at all stages of life and takes place within formal and informal
learning places, in schools, workplaces, homes and communities.
Systems thinking
Education for sustainability aims to equip people to understand connections between environmental,
economic, social and political systems.
Envisioning a better future
Education for sustainability encourages individuals and groups to reflect upon personal experiences and
worldviews, and challenges accepted ways of interpreting and engaging with the world.
Participation
Education for sustainability recognizes community participation as critical to the collective shift towards
an environmentally sustainable society.
Education for sustainability focuses on partnerships to build networks and relationships, and improve
communication between different sectors of the community.
Maya Fischhoff
“Alone we can do so little,” said educator and activist Helen Keller. “Together we can do so much.“
The field of conservation psychology studies people’s attitudes and behaviours toward the natural
environment. Researchers have found seven ways to motivate greater environmental action. Because
these draw on general psychological principles, they apply to most people you will encounter.
1. Equip people with (the right) knowledge. People need to know both why an action is important
and how to do it. People are often hesitant to do something that’s unfamiliar, so being able to try
new actions out in a small way can be reassuring. Pilot programs are a great low-risk strategy.
2. Help people process information. People absorb ideas and make decisions in specific ways (see
NBS’s report on Decision Making for Sustainability for a full review). For example, people are
more affected by stories than by abstract statements. They’re more moved by positive messages
than gloom and doom — no more images of drowning polar bears! And hearing a message
multiple times, in multiple ways, is often necessary for it to sink in.
3. Leverage the leaders. People look to leaders — formal and informal — as they’re deciding how
to act. If others they respect are doing or endorsing behaviors, people are likely to follow them.
Leaders might be nearby in the organization or more distant public figures. Peer action also sets a
standard. Group activities can be a way to show that peers are engaged.
4. Make actions easy and enjoyable. People can have wonderful intentions, but without practical
support, the action often won’t happen. If a recycling bin is close by, people are more likely to
use it. If a product’s not readily available, people may not seek it out. Positive messages, social
norms, and group activities can make sustainability-related behaviors seem more fun.\
5. Allow participation. People want to be involved in issues that concern them. Participation can
mean many things, including just having information, but people often want the opportunity to
contribute ideas as well. Participation leads to positive attitudes and often innovative ideas.
6. Take one step at a time. People can be overwhelmed by major change; generally, they prefer to
get comfortable with one behavior before they try another. Consider introducing a new initiative
gradually and connecting it to things people are already familiar with. A simple example might be
expanding community outreach efforts from philanthropy to volunteering, with the same
organizations.
7. Pause rewards. Rewards should be used carefully. They tend to be effective while they continue.
But once they stop, the behavior usually drops off. Rewards are “extrinsic motivation,”
motivation from outside the person. Motivation that people develop internally, rooted in their
beliefs, is more long-lasting.
Individuals efforts can greatly contribute towards advancing the sustainable development goals. We are
often faced with the doubt of how we can positively influence our sustainable development behavior, it is
necessary to understand that the problems that affect sustainability are not restricted to large companies,
in one way or another we all contribute to our grain of sand.
The solutions to the problems that affect sustainable development should not be limited solely to the
policies, strategies and standards designed and established in companies.
Although they seem insignificant, our individual actions can contribute significantly and positively to
sustainability, our commitment and awareness is needed to achieve truly sustainable development.
At Developing Our World, we present a set of measures that we must contemplate to contribute to this
very important cause.
Reduce (not waste resources)
In particular, avoid plastic bags and wrappers, aluminum foil and paper cups.
Print, for example, on paper already used on one side.
Rehabilitate homes, make them more sustainable (better insulation, etc.) avoiding new
construction)
Replace them with reusable, repairing them when necessary, while you can use recycled products
(paper, toner...) and recyclable.
Reuse paper.
Reuse water: use water from washing fruits and vegetables and cooking eggs (enriched with
calcium) to water the plant.
Recycle
Recycle batteries, mobiles, bulbs containing mercury, computers, oil, toxic products.
Separate waste for selective collection (“compacting” to occupy less).
Take “Clean Points” which cannot go to ordinary deposits.
Contribute to environmentalize the workplace, the neighborhood and city where we live.
Help conceive sustainability measures as an improvement that guarantees everyone’s future and
not as a limitation.
Help to become aware of unsustainable and closely linked problems: consumerism, population
explosion, predatory economic growth, environmental degradation and imbalances.
Inform about the actions that we can carry out and promote their implementation, promoting
campaigns to use light bulbs, reforestation and association.
Investigate, innovate and teach.
Perform dissemination and impulse tasks: take advantage of the press, Internet, video, ecological
fairs and school supplies.
Promote social recognition of positive measures for a sustainable future.
Study and apply what can be done for sustainability as a professional.
It is appropriate to initially select those measures that are most achievable and agree on plans and forms
of follow-up that become effective momentum, favor positive results and stimulate a growing
involvement. At Developing Our World, we encourage you to act responsibly and sustainably in your day
to day work in order to individually advance the Sustainable Development Goals. Every drop in the ocean
can make a great difference.
Human impact on the planet is intensifying due to rapid globalization, economic and population growth,
and changing lifestyles. In addition to technical and regulatory solutions, sustainable development must
include a transformation of human consumption behaviors.
Given the magnitude of today’s environmental challenges, sustainable development must include
human dimensions of change, specifically behavior change for sustainable development. Since the 1992
Rio Earth Summit, there has been increased focus on the role of individual consumption patterns and
production systems for sustainability. Achieving the sustainable development goals requires a critical
understanding of “how people make decisions and act on them, how they think about, influence, and
relate to one another, and how they develop beliefs and attitudes” (UNDP 2016, pp. 1–2).
Behavioral science theories and behavior change tools inform the creation of behavior change
interventions for sustainable development. Such interventions are “coordinated sets of activities
designed to change specified behavior patterns” (Michie et al. 2011, p. 1) and can focus on increasing,
decreasing, or maintaining behaviors, as well as enhancing or improving behaviors (Morra Imas and Rist
2009).
In addition to understanding behavior, scholars have also developed theories and models to understand
changes in behavior.
Lewin’s Change Theory (1951) was created around habits defined as resistance to change, in relation to
behavior in groups. More permanent individual change and new habits will primarily occur if the whole
social field adjusts. Lewin’s Change Theory conceptualizes change as a process, instead of an event.
The Change Theory was developed by Kurt Lewin, who is considered the father of social
psychology. This theory is his most influential theory. He theorized a three-stage model of
change known as unfreezing-change-refreeze model that requires prior learning to be rejected
and replaced.
Lewin’s definition of behavior in this model is “a dynamic balance of forces working in opposing
directions.”
The Change Theory has three major concepts: driving forces, restraining forces, and equilibrium.
Driving forces are those that push in a direction that causes change to occur. They facilitate
change because they push the patient in a desired direction. They cause a shift in the
equilibrium towards change.
Restraining forces are those forces that counter the driving forces. They hinder change because
they push the patient in the opposite direction. They cause a shift in the equilibrium that
opposes change.
Equilibrium is a state of being where driving forces equal restraining forces, and no change
occurs. It can be raised or lowered by changes that occur between the driving and restraining
forces.
There are three stages in this nursing theory: unfreezing, change, and refreezing.
Unfreezing is the process which involves finding a method of making it possible for people to let
go of an old pattern that was somehow counterproductive. It is necessary to overcome the
strains of individual resistance and group conformity.
There are three methods that can lead to the achievement of unfreezing.
The first is to increase the driving forces that direct behavior away from the existing
situation or status quo.
Second, decrease the restraining forces that negatively affect the movement from the
existing equilibrium.
Thirdly, finding a combination of the first two methods.
The change stage, which is also called “moving to a new level” or “movement,” involves a
process of change in thoughts, feeling, behavior, or all three, that is in some way more liberating
or more productive.
The refreezing stage is establishing the change as the new habit, so that it now becomes the
“standard operating procedure.” Without this final stage, it can be easy for the patient to go back
to old habits.
https://nursing-theory.org/theories-and-models/lewin-change-theory.php
The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change (or Stages of Change Model) sees behavior
change as a process of six different stages of change that an individual must go through for lasting
behavior change (Prochaska and Velicer 1997). Bamberg adds that people can proceed from one stage
to the next based on varied intentions and suggests different variables that contribute to forming the
intention of each respective stage (2013).
The Transtheoretical Model (also called the Stages of Change Model), developed by Prochaska
and DiClemente in the late 1970s, evolved through studies examining the experiences of
smokers who quit on their own with those requiring further treatment to understand why some
people were capable of quitting on their own. It was determined that people quit smoking if they
were ready to do so. Thus, the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) focuses on the decision-making of
the individual and is a model of intentional change. The TTM operates on the assumption that
people do not change behaviors quickly and decisively. Rather, change in behavior, especially
habitual behavior, occurs continuously through a cyclical process. The TTM is not a theory but a
model; different behavioral theories and constructs can be applied to various stages of the
model where they may be most effective.
The TTM posits that individuals move through six stages of change: precontemplation,
contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance, and termination. Termination was not part of
the original model and is less often used in application of stages of change for health-related
behaviors. For each stage of change, different intervention strategies are most effective at
moving the person to the next stage of change and subsequently through the model to
maintenance, the ideal stage of behavior.
1. Precontemplation - In this stage, people do not intend to take action in the foreseeable
future (defined as within the next 6 months). People are often unaware that their
behavior is problematic or produces negative consequences. People in this stage often
underestimate the pros of changing behavior and place too much emphasis on the cons
of changing behavior.
2. Contemplation - In this stage, people are intending to start the healthy behavior in the
foreseeable future (defined as within the next 6 months). People recognize that their
behavior may be problematic, and a more thoughtful and practical consideration of the
pros and cons of changing the behavior takes place, with equal emphasis placed on
both. Even with this recognition, people may still feel ambivalent toward changing their
behavior.
3. Preparation (Determination) - In this stage, people are ready to take action within the
next 30 days. People start to take small steps toward the behavior change, and they
believe changing their behavior can lead to a healthier life.
4. Action - In this stage, people have recently changed their behavior (defined as within the
last 6 months) and intend to keep moving forward with that behavior change. People
may exhibit this by modifying their problem behavior or acquiring new healthy behaviors.
5. Maintenance - In this stage, people have sustained their behavior change for a while
(defined as more than 6 months) and intend to maintain the behavior change going
forward. People in this stage work to prevent relapse to earlier stages.
6. Termination - In this stage, people have no desire to return to their unhealthy behaviors
and are sure they will not relapse. Since this is rarely reached, and people tend to stay in
the maintenance stage, this stage is often not considered in health promotion programs.
To progress through the stages of change, people apply cognitive, affective, and evaluative
processes. Ten processes of change have been identified with some processes being more
relevant to a specific stage of change than other processes. These processes result in
strategies that help people make and maintain change.
There are several limitations of TTM, which should be considered when using this theory in
public health. Limitations of the model include the following:
The theory ignores the social context in which change occurs, such as SES and income.
The lines between the stages can be arbitrary with no set criteria of how to determine a
person's stage of change. The questionnaires that have been developed to assign a
person to a stage of change are not always standardized or validated.
There is no clear sense for how much time is needed for each stage, or how long a
person can remain in a stage.
The model assumes that individuals make coherent and logical plans in their decision-
making process when this is not always true.
The Transtheoretical Model provides suggested strategies for public health interventions to
address people at various stages of the decision-making process. This can result in
interventions that are tailored (i.e., a message or program component has been specifically
created for a target population's level of knowledge and motivation) and effective. The TTM
encourages an assessment of an individual's current stage of change and accounts for relapse
in people's decision-making process
https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mph-modules/sb/behavioralchangetheories/
behavioralchangetheories6.html
The abovementioned theories each seek to explain behavior change at the individual level. To
contribute to sustainable development, there is, however, a need for behavior changes to happen
across large populations.
In order to achieve this, Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovations Theory and Model (2003) integrates the
impact of social networks and interactions within the networks to develop more effective behavior
change programs.
The Diffusion of Innovation Theory was first discussed historically in 1903 by the French
sociologist Gabriel Tarde (Toews, 2003) who plotted the original S-shaped diffusion curve,
followed by Ryan and Gross (1943) who introduced the adopter categories that were later used
in the current theory popularized by Everett Rogers. Katz (1957) is also credited for first
introducing the notion of opinion leaders, opinion followers and how the media interacts to
influence these two groups. The Diffusion of Innovation theory is often regarded as a valuable
change model for guiding technological innovation where the innovation itself is modified and
presented in ways that meet the needs across all levels of adopters. It also stresses the
importance of communication and peer networking within the adoption process.
In simple terms, the diffusion of innovation refers to the process that occurs as people adopt a
new idea, product, practice, philosophy, and so on. Rogers mapped out this process, stressing
that in most cases, an initial few are open to the new idea and adopt its use. As these early
innovators ‘spread the word’ more and more people become open to it which leads to the
development of a critical mass. Over time, the innovative idea or product becomes diffused
amongst the population until a saturation point is achieved. Rogers distinguished five categories
of adopters of an innovation: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and
laggards. Sometimes, a sixth group is added: non-adopters. The original five categories are
illustrated in the bell-shaped curve image below. As you can see. Rogers estimated the
percentage of each category, which in fact, are very similar to the proportions found in a normal
bell-curve.
The five categories of adopters can be described in the context of technological innovation
adoption and their influence on the innovative and adoption processes.
Within this theory, the goal is not to move people within the five adopter categories into another
category, but to streamline the innovation to meet the needs of all five categories.
Peer Networks
The concept of peer networks is important in the Diffusion of Innovation theory. It is the critical
mass achieved through the influence of innovators and early adopters who serve as opinion
leaders that sparks the initial “take off” point in the innovation adoption process. These opinion
leaders serve as valuable integral change agents who influence their peers through peer to peer
communication, role modeling, and networking. This process works well within an organization
or in society at large. A prime example is the use of social media networking to influence people
through opinion leader tactics.
Individual becomes interested in the new idea and seeks additional information
Individual mentally applies innovation to his present and anticipated future situation, and then
decides whether or not to try it
Implementation or Trial Stage
Rogers (2003) explained that diffusion of innovation was the process by which an innovation is
communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system.
It is important to examine why some innovations are successful, while others never become
widely accepted. Five distinct innovation characteristics have been identified by Rogers to
explain this mystery. These characteristics include observability, relative advantage,
compatibility, trialability, and complexity and according to Rogers, account for 49 to 87 per cent
of the adoption variation seen across all categories of adopters. These characteristics also
provide a valuable evaluation list for technology project leaders to apply when first considering
innovative changes.
Innovation Characteristics
Observability
The degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to potential adopters
Relative Advantage
Compatibility
The degree to which the innovation is perceived to be consistent with socio-cultural values,
previous ideas, and/or perceived needs
Trialability
Complexity
Re-invention
Re-invention is another important consideration. This is basically referring to the degree that an
innovation is changed or modified as the adoption and implementation process is enacted. If an
innovation is amenable to re-invention as dictated by the needs of the five adopter categories, ,
the more versatile and adaptable it is seen to be, and the more likely it will be fully adopted to a
healthy saturation point.
Communication Channels
Communication Channels refers to the rate and degree that people talk about and spread the
news about the innovations. Two major communication channels were described by Rogers:
These are effective in creating knowledge about the innovation, for instance system related
videos or DVDs, or television commercials within the mainstream media
Interpersonal Channels
Person to person communication is very effective in changing people’s attitudes about the
innovation which ultimately influences their decision to accept or reject the innovation. Peer
subjective evaluations of an innovation are very influential.
Time
– including first knowledge of the innovation through to final acceptance or rejection of its
utility and ultimate implementation, as discussed earlier.
– time is also critical within the five adopter categories and how they influence one another to
support full saturation of the innovation.
Rate of Adoption
– time is also involved when looking at the ultimate rate of adoption, say within an organization,
from start to finish, and how many people of the total population have adopted the innovation.
This rate of adoption is influenced by the innovation characteristics introduced above.
Social System
The fourth and final dimension refers to the groups of people involved in the innovation
adoption process. This could be employees at an institution, a neighborhood or a whole nation.
Conclusion
The Diffusion of Innovation theory is a very important theory that can serve administrators,
information technologists, nursing informatics experts, and change agents well. The theory also
benefits the targets of change, since respect and consideration for all involved stakeholders is
intertwined with robust strategies for implementing innovative change. The theory fits nursing
informatics well, and provides a scaffold for planning informatics related innovations.
REFERENCES
Katz, E. (1957). The Two-Step Flow of Communication: an Up-To Date Report on a
Hypothesis. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 21 (1). pp. 61-78.
Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. Fifth edition. Free Press: New York.
Ryan & Gross (1943), The Diffusion of Hybrid Seed Corn in Two Iowa Communities, Rural
Sociology 8 (March): 15
Toews, D. (2003) The New Tarde: Sociology after the End of the Social Theory Culture &
Society 20 (5), 81-98.
CITATION
Kaminski, J. (Spring 2011).Diffusion of Innovation Theory Canadian Journal of Nursing
Informatics, 6(2). Theory in Nursing Informatics Column. https://cjni.net/journal/?p=1444
Conclusions
Solving today’s environmental problems will require large-scale shifts in human behavior. McMenzie-
Mohr and Schultz state that “behaviour change is central to the quest for a sustainable future” (2014, p.
35). Behavioral theories and models focused on motivational and contextual factors provide structure to
the field of behavior change for sustainable development by providing explanations and rationale for
how people make decisions and act on them. These theories inform experiments on pro-environmental
behavior change and the development of informational and structural tools that foster the adoption of
sustainable behaviors. Behavior change programs that reference behavioral theory, carefully research
selected behaviors, and utilize a range of tools to target barriers and benefits will be most successful for
fostering behavioral change for sustainable development.