Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Environmental concern and fertility intentions among Canadian university students

  • Research Brief
  • Published:
Population and Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnocky, S., Stroink, M., & DeCicco, T. (2007). Self-construal predicts environmental concern, cooperation, and conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 255–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake, D. E., Guppy, N., & Urmetzer, P. (1997). Canadian public opinion and environmental action. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 30, 451–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, L. C., & Chang, M. C. (1981). Do husbands and wives agree? Fertility attitudes and later behavior. Population and Environment, 4, 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Courtney-Smith, N., & Turner, M. (2007). Meet the women who won’t have babiesbecause 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. J. (2006). Traffic-related air pollution and perceived health risk: Lay assessment of an everyday hazard. Health, Risk, & Society, 8, 305–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easterlin, R. A. (1971). Does human fertility adjust to the environment. The American Economic Review, 61(2), 399–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, A., & Stolberg, A. (2006). Explaining pro-environmental behavior with a cognitive theory of stress. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kar, S. B. (1978). Consistency between fertility attitudes and behavior: A conceptual model. Population Studies, 32, 173–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kempton, W., Boster, J., & Hartley, J. (1995). Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koger, S. M., & Scott, B. A. (2007). Psychology and environmental sustainability: A call for integration. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langridge, D., Sheeran, P., & Connolly, K. (2005). Understanding the reasons for parenthood. J Reprod Inf Psycho, 23, 121–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiserowitz, A. (2005). American risk perceptions: Is climate change dangerous? Risk Analysis, 25(6), 1433–1442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W. B. (1992). Personality traits and developmental experiences as antecedents of childbearing motivation. Demography, 29(2), 265–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murtaugh, P., & Schlax, M. (2009). Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals. Global Environmental Change, 19, 14–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oskamp, S. (2000). A sustainable future for humanity? How can psychology help? American Psychologist, 55, 496–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, P. W., & Zelezny, L. (1998). Values and pro-environmental behavior: A five-country survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 29, 540–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tickamyer, A. R. (1979). Women’s roles and fertility intentions. Pacific Sociological Review, 22, 167–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voas, D. (2003). Conflicting preferences: A reason fertility tends to be too high or too low. Population and Development Review, 29, 627–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelezny, L. C., Chua, P. P., & Aldrich, C. (2000). Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven Arnocky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-011-0164-y

Keywords

Navigation