Abstract
Little is known about how environmental concern in young adulthood may shape childbearing attitudes and intentions. Here, we examine the relationship between individual environmental concern, fertility intentions, and attitudes toward reproduction in a sample of Canadian university students, N = 139. General environmental concern and pollution-related health concerns both predicted a less positive attitude toward having children. Further, attitude toward having children mediated the negative relationship between pollution-related health concerns and personal fertility intentions. This study offers an important early step in empirical examination of the association between environmental concern and fertility.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
Arnocky, S., & Stroink, M. L. (2011a). Variation in environmentalism among university students: Majoring in outdoor recreation, parks, and tourism predicts environmental concerns and behaviors. Journal of Environmental Education, 42, 137–151.
Arnocky, S., & Stroink, M. L. (2011b). Gender differences in environmental concern and cooperation: The mediating role of emotional empathy. Current Research in Social Psychology, 16(9), 1–14.
Arnocky, S., Stroink, M., & DeCicco, T. (2007). Self-construal predicts environmental concern, cooperation, and conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 255–264.
Bamberg, S. (2003). How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 21–32.
Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator—mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Blake, D. E., Guppy, N., & Urmetzer, P. (1997). Canadian public opinion and environmental action. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 30, 451–472.
Coombs, L. C., & Chang, M. C. (1981). Do husbands and wives agree? Fertility attitudes and later behavior. Population and Environment, 4, 109–127.
Courtney-Smith, N., & Turner, M. (2007). Meet the women who won’t have babies—because they’re not eco-friendly. Retrieved from mail online on January 15, 2011 from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-495495/Meet-women-wont-babies-theyre-eco-friendly.html.
Curry, T. E., Reiner, D. M., de Figueiredo, M. A., & Herzog, H. J. (2005). A survey of public attitudes towards energy & environment in Great Britain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment.
Day, R. J. (2006). Traffic-related air pollution and perceived health risk: Lay assessment of an everyday hazard. Health, Risk, & Society, 8, 305–322.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442.
Easterlin, R. A. (1971). Does human fertility adjust to the environment. The American Economic Review, 61(2), 399–407.
Engber, D. (2007). Global swarming: Is it time for Americans to start cutting out our baby emissions? Retrieved from Slate Magazine on January 11, 2011 from: http://www.slate.com/id/2173458/.
Gardner, G. T., & Stern, P. C. (2008). The short list: The most effective actions U.S. households can take to curb climate change. Environment, 50, 12–23.
Ghimire, D. J., & Mohai, P. (2006). Environmentalism and contraceptive use: How people in less developed settings approach environmental issues. Population and Environment, 27(1), 29–61.
Homburg, A., & Stolberg, A. (2006). Explaining pro-environmental behavior with a cognitive theory of stress. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, 1–14.
Iacovou, M., & Tavares, L. P. (2011). Yearning, learning, and conceding: Reasons men and women change their childbearing intentions. Population and Development Review, 37, 89–123.
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. In S. Solomon, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. Averyt, M. Tignor, & H. Miller (Eds.), IPCC fourth assessment report: Climate change 2007. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kar, S. B. (1978). Consistency between fertility attitudes and behavior: A conceptual model. Population Studies, 32, 173–185.
Kazdin, A. E. (2009). Psychological science’s contribution to a sustainable environment: Extending our reach to a grand challenge of society. American Psychologist, 64, 339–356.
Kempton, W., Boster, J., & Hartley, J. (1995). Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Core techniques: Details of path analysis. In R. B. Kline & D. Kenny (Eds.), Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (pp. 123–164). New York, NY: Guildford.
Koger, S. M., & Scott, B. A. (2007). Psychology and environmental sustainability: A call for integration. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 10–18.
Krewski, D., Slovic, P., Bartlett, S., Flynn, J., & Mertz, C. K. (1995). Health risk perception in Canada. 1: Rating hazards, sources of information and responsibility for health protection. Hum Ecol Risk Assess, 1, 117–132.
Langridge, D., Sheeran, P., & Connolly, K. (2005). Understanding the reasons for parenthood. J Reprod Inf Psycho, 23, 121–133.
Leiserowitz, A. (2005). American risk perceptions: Is climate change dangerous? Risk Analysis, 25(6), 1433–1442.
Milfont, T. L., & Duckitt, J. (2004). The structure of environmental attitudes: A first and second-order confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 289–303.
Miller, W. B. (1992). Personality traits and developmental experiences as antecedents of childbearing motivation. Demography, 29(2), 265–285.
Miller, W. B., & Pasta, D. J. (1988). A model of fertility motivation, desires and expectations early in women’s reproductive careers. Social Biology, 35(3–4), 236–250.
Murtaugh, P., & Schlax, M. (2009). Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals. Global Environmental Change, 19, 14–20.
Ogilvie, G., Palepu, A., Remple, V., Maan, E., Heath, K., MacDonald, G., et al. (2007). Fertility intentions of women of reproductive age living with HIV in British Columbia, Canada. AIDS, 21, 83–88.
Oskamp, S. (2000). A sustainable future for humanity? How can psychology help? American Psychologist, 55, 496–508.
Philipov, D., & Berghammer, C. (2007). Religion and fertility ideals, intentions and behavior: A comparative study of European countries. Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, 27, 271–305.
Schultz, P. W., & Oskamp, S. (1996). Effort as a moderator of the attitude-behavior relationship: General environmental concern and recycling. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 375–383.
Schultz, P. W., & Zelezny, L. (1998). Values and pro-environmental behavior: A five-country survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 540–558.
Shreffer, K., & Ni-Amoo Dodoo, F. (2009). The role of intergenerational transfers, land, and education in fertility transition in rural Kenya: The case of Nyeri district. Population and Environment, 30, 75–92.
Statistics Canada. (2004). Births, 2004 (Volume 1).
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G. A. (1995). The new ecological paradigm in social psychological context. Environmental and Behavior, 27, 723–743.
Swim, J., Clayton, S., Doherty, T., Gifford, R., Howard, G., Reser, J., et al. (2009). Psychology & global climate change: Addressing a multifaceted phenomenon and set of challenges. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Thompson, K. S. (1980). A comparison of black and white adolescents’ attitudes about having children. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42(1), 133–139.
Tickamyer, A. R. (1979). Women’s roles and fertility intentions. Pacific Sociological Review, 22, 167–184.
Voas, D. (2003). Conflicting preferences: A reason fertility tends to be too high or too low. Population and Development Review, 29, 627–646.
Williams, I. D., & Bird, A. (2003). Public perceptions of air quality and quality of life in urban and suburban areas of London. Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 5, 253–259.
Zelezny, L. C., Chua, P. P., & Aldrich, C. (2000). Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443–457.
Zeveloff, N. (2010). Gink is the new dink: Going childless for mother nature. Retrieved on January 15, 2011 from: http://ecosalon.com/gink-is-new-dink/.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arnocky, S., Dupuis, D. & Stroink, M.L. Environmental concern and fertility intentions among Canadian university students. Popul Environ 34, 279–292 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-011-0164-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-011-0164-y