Paradoxical Ecological Behaviours Perceived by Preschool and Early School Education Students
Abstract
This article addresses the issue of paradoxical ecological behaviours noticed by students of early childhood pedagogy in the surrounding reality. The aim of the study was to diagnose the knowledge of female students of preschool and early school pedagogy about environmental problems. The research included 120 female students who, as future teachers, will create space for children to learn about the natural environment and its protection. On the basis of keywords, a categorisation key resulting from the material collected by the students was created based on the content analysis method. The analysis of the results showed that the university students notice paradoxical environmental behaviours in the areas of (1) waste management, (2) climate crisis, (3) environmental education, (4) consumer behaviour and health, and (5) educational policy, which are close to their everyday functioning, as well as observational and experiential possibilities. It is necessary to take care of the quality of higher education in the field of environmental education, which would broaden the pro-environmental horizons among future teachers as those who have the opportunity to co-construct the space for education towards a sustainable future taking care of the balance in the area of natural, social and economic environment.
References
Barr S., Gilg A. W., Ford N. (2005). The household energy gap: Examining the divide between habitual- and purchase-related conservation behaviours, „Energy Policy”, nr 33, s. 1425–1444. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2003.12.016.
Brundtland G. H., Khalid M. (1987). Our Common Future, Offord: Oxford University Press.
Debref R. (2012). The Paradoxes of Environmental Innovations: The Case of Green Chemistry, „Journal of Innovation Economics & Management”, nr 9, s. 83–102. DOI:10.3917/jie.009.0083.
Fanning L., O'Neill D.W. (2019). The Wellbeing–Consumption paradox: Happiness, health, income, and carbon emissions in growing versus non-growing economies, „Journal of Cleaner Production”, nr 212, s. 810–821. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.223.
Gardner G. T., Stern P. C. (2008). The Short List: The Most Effective Actions U.S. Households Can Take to Curb Climate Change, „Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development”, nr 50(5), s. 12–25. DOI: 10.3200/ENVT.50.5.12-25
Karlin B., Davis N., Sanguinetti A., Gamble K., Kirkby D., Stokols D. (2012). Dimensions of Conservation: Exploring Differences Among Energy Behaviors, „Environment and Behavior”, nr 46(4), s. 423–452. DOI: 10.1177/0013916512467532
Kollmuss A., Agyeman J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to Pro-Environmental Behavior?, „Environmental Education Research”, nr 8, s. 239-260. DOI: 10.1080/13504620220145401.
Kurisu K. (2015). Pro-environmental Behaviors, Japan: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-4-431-55834-7.
Laitner J. A. S., Ehrhardt-Martinez K., Mckinney V. (2009). Examining the Scale of the Behaviour Energy Efficiency Continuum, 1–8.
Lewis M. W. (2000). Exploring paradox: Toward a more comprehensive guide, „Academy of Management Review”, nr 25(4), s. 760-776.
Lisowska-Magdziarz M. (2004). Analiza zawartości mediów. Przewodnik dla studentów, Kraków: Uniwersytet Jagielloński.
Łepko Z., Sadowski R.F. (2020). Paradoksalne konsekwencje nowożytnego projektu panowania człowieka nad przyrodą, [w:] R. F. Sadowski, A. Kosieradzka-Federczyk (red.), Odpady miarą sukcesu i porażki cywilizowanej ludzkości, Warszawa: Krajowa Szkoła Administracji Publicznej im. Prezydenta Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej Lecha Kaczyńskiego, s. 5–17.
Meadowcroft J., Holden E., Linnerud K., Banister D., Langhelle O., Gilpin G. (2019). What Next for Sustainable Development? Our Common Future at Thirty, Cheltenham, UK Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
Mikuła A, Raczkowska M, Utzig M. (2021). Pro-Environmental Behaviour in the European Union Countries, „Energies”, nr 14(18), DOI: 10.3390/en14185689.
Sadowski R. F., Kosieradzka-Fererczyk A. (2020). Paradoksy ekologiczne. Odpady miarą sukcesu cywilizacyjnego i porażki cywilizowanej ludzkości. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo KSAP.
Sadowski R.F., Łepko Z. (2017). Theoria i praxis zrównoważonego rozwoju. 30 lat od ogłoszenia raportu Brundtland, Warszawa: Towarzystwo Naukowe Franciszka Salezego.
Scott W., Vare P. (2020). Learning, Environment and Sustainable Development: A History of Ideas, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Smith Z.A. (2012). The Environmental Policy Paradox, New York: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9781315664262.
Steg L. & Vlek Ch.. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review and research agenda, „Journal of Environmental Psychology”, nr 20, s. 309–317. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004.
Stern P. C. (2000). Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior, „Journal of Social Issues”, 56(3), 407–424.
Szczepaniak K. (2012). Zastosowanie analizy treści w badaniach artykułów prasowych – refleksje metodologiczne, „Acta Uviversitatis Lodziensis”, Folia Sociologica, nr 42, s. 83–112.
Tobias M. Ch, Morrison J. G. (2021). On the Nature of Ecological Paradox, Switzerland: Springer Nature.
Tomlinson C. (1987). Our Common Future, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van Poeck, K., Goeminne, G., & Vandenabeele, J. (2016). Revisiting the democratic paradox of environmental and sustainability education: sustainability issues as matters of concern. „Environmental Education Research”, nr 22(6), s. 806–826. DOI: 10.1080/13504622.2014.966659.
Venhoeven L.A., Bolderdijk, J., Steg, L. (2013). Explaining the Paradox: How Pro-Environmental Behaviour can both Thwart and Foster Well-Being, „Sustainability”, nr 5, s. 1372–1386. DOI: 10.3390/su5041372.
Whitmarsh L. (2009). Behavioural responses to climate change: Asymmetry of intentions and impacts, „Journal of Environmental Psychology”, nr 29(1), s. 13–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.003.
Whitmarsh L., O’Neill S. (2010). Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse pro-environmental behaviours, „Journal of Environmental Psychology”, nr 30(3), s. 305–314. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.003
York R. (2006). Ecological Paradoxes: William Stanley Jevons and the Paperless Office, „Human Ecology Review”, nr 2, s. 143–147.
th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow on 31 October – 13 November 2021, https://ukcop26.org/ [dostęp: 14.12.2021].
Europejska Agencja Środowiska (2020). The European environment — state and outlook 2020 Knowledge for transition to a sustainable Europe, https://www.eea.europa.eu/soer/publications/soer-2020 [dostęp: 1.02.2022].
Gillis, A. J. (2016). Categorizing Pro-environmental Behaviors Using the Laypeople's Perspective. UNF Graduate Theses and Dissertations https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/etd/641 [dostęp: 1.02.2022]
United Nations General Assembly (1987). Report of the world commission on environment and development: Our common future. Oslo, Norway: United Nations General Assembly, Development and International Co-operation: Environment, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org [dostęp: 15.12.2021].
Copyright (c) 2022 Elementary Education in Theory and Practice
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
- When submitting a text, the author declares that he/she is the Author of the article (hereinafter referred to as the “Work”) and:
- he/she owns the exclusive and unlimited copyright to the Work,
- is entitled to dispose of the copyright to the Work.
Declares that it does not infringe any third party copyrights or legal rights.
Declares that there is no conflict of interest.
2. At the same time, the Author grants the Ignatianum University in Cracowa royalty-free, non-exclusive and territorially unlimited licence to use the Work in the following fields of exploitation:
- recording the Work in a hard copy, as well as on a digital or magnetic medium;
- reproduction of the Work using any technique, without limitation of the number of editions or copies;
- distribution of the Work and its copies on any medium, including marketing, sale, lending, and rental;
- introduction of the Work into a computer memory;
- disseminating the Work in information networks, including in the Internet;
- public performance, exhibition, display, reproduction, broadcasting and re-broadcasting, as well as making the Work available to the public in such a way that everyone can have access to it at a time and place of their own choosing;
- within the scope of dependent rights to the Work, including in particular the right to make necessary changes to the Work resulting from editorial and methodical development, as well as to translate the Work into foreign languages;
The licence is granted from the moment of the transfer of the Work to the Ignatianum University in Cracow. The Ignatianum University in Cracow is entitled to grant further sub-licences to the Work within the scope of the right granted. The licence is time-limited and it is granted for a period of 15 years, starting from the date of its granting.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to publish their text online (e.g. in their institution’s repository or on the institution’s website) before or during the submission process as this may lead to beneficial exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published text (See The Effect of Open Access). We recommend using any of the following portals of research associations:
- ResearchGate
- SSRN
- Academia.edu
- Selected Works
- Academic Search
