Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Justice and Environmental Sustainability

  • Chapter
Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research

Abstract

The world faces significant challenges pertaining to the depletion and degradation of environmental resources. A public that is increasingly aware of resource scarcity, understands ecosystem interdependence, and frames the current situation in comparison to previous conditions, has become sensitized to the implications for personal and social justice. This chapter reviews research at the interface of justice and environmental issues. We discuss ways in which the natural environment presents a distinctive domain for justice research, and in particular the need to consider intergenerational justice and reasons for individual differences in justice perceptions. Because perceptions of justice and fairness are important determinants of policy acceptance, we consider some predictors of beliefs about environmental justice and discuss the role of justice in motivating behavior. We close by identifying promising areas for future research.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 422–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., Rosenthal, L. H., & Brown, T. C. (2000). Effects of perceived fairness on willingness to pay. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2439–2450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, R. S., Castano, E., & Allen, P. D. (2007). Conservatism and concern for the environment. Quarterly Journal of Ideology, 30, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison, S., & Messick, D. (1990). Social decision heuristics in the use of shared resources. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 195–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altemeyer, B. (2003). What happens when authoritarians inherit the Earth? A simulation. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 3, 161–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baier, M., Kals, E., & Müller, M. M. (2013). Ecological belief in a just world. Social Justice Research, 26(3), 272–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baltes, P. B., & Staudinger, U. M. (2000). Wisdom: Metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence. American Psychologist, 55, 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berenguer, J. (2007). The effect of empathy in proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39, 269–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolderdijk, J., Steg, L., Geller, E. S., Lehman, P., & Postmes, T. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning. Nature Climate Change, 3, 413–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickman, P., Folger, R., Goode, E., & Schul, Y. (1981). Micro and macro justice. In M. J. Lerner & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior: Adapting to times of scarcity and change (pp. 173–202). New York, NY: Plenum.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T., Peterson, G., Brodersen, R., Ford, V., & Bell, P. (2005). The judged seriousness of an environmental loss is a matter of what caused it. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrus, G., Passafaro, P., & Bonnes, M. (2008). Emotions, habits, and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (1996). What is fair in the environmental debate? In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Current societal concerns about justice (pp. 195–211). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (1998). Preference for macrojustice versus microjustice in environmental decisions. Environment and Behavior, 30, 162–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (2000). Models of justice in the environmental debate. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 459–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and operational definition. In S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Eds.), Identity and the natural environment. The psychology of nature (pp. 45–65). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (2008). Attending to identity: Ideology, group membership, and perceptions of justice. In K. Hegtvedt & J. Clay-Warner (Eds.), Advances in group processes: Justice (pp. 241–266). Bingley, England: Emerald.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S. (2012). Environment and identity. In S. Clayton (Ed.), Handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 164–180). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S., Koehn, A., & Grover, E. (2013). Making sense of the senseless: Justice, identity, and the framing of environmental crises. Social Justice Research, 26, 301–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S., & Müller, M. (2013). Special issue on “environment and justice”. Social Justice Research, 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Justice and identity: Changing perspectives on what is fair. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7, 298–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change. (2002). The drama of the commons. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cottrell, S. P. (2003). The influence of sociodemographics and environmental attitudes on general responsible environmental behavior among recreational boaters. Environment and Behavior, 35, 347–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalbert, C., & Stöber, J. (2006). The personal belief in a just world and domain-specific beliefs about justice at school and in the family: A longitudinal study with adolescents. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30, 200–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M. (2000). Distributive justice. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devine-Wright, P. (2013). Explaining “NIMBY” objections to a power line: The role of personal, place attachment and project-related factors. Environment and Behavior, 45, 761–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyer, S. J., & Walker, I. (2013). Acceptance and support of the Australian carbon policy. Social Justice Research, 26, 343–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The new environmental paradigm: A proposed instrument and preliminary results. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, M., & Willer, R. (2013). The moral roots of environmental attitudes. Psychological Science, 24, 56–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feygina, I. (2013). Social justice and the human-environment relationship: Common systemic, ideological, and psychological roots and processes. Social Justice Research, 26, 363–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feygina, I., Goldsmith, R., & Jost, J. T. (2010). System justification and the disruption of environmental goal-setting: A self-regulatory perspective. In R. Hassin, K. Ochsner, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Self control in society, mind, and brain (pp. 490–505). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Feygina, I., Jost, J. T., & Goldsmith, R. (2010). System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of “system-sanctioned change”. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 326–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gethmann, C. F. (2008). Wer ist der Adressat der Langzeitverpflichtung?. In J. Mittelstraß & C. F. Gethmann (Eds.), Langzeitverantwortung. Ethik-Technik-Ökologie [Long-term responsibility. Ethics-technology-ecology]. Darmstadt, Germany: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gifford, R. (2007). Environmental psychology and sustainable development: Expansion, maturation, and challenges. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 199–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1983). Procedural justice, participation, and the fair process effect in groups and organizations. In P. Paulus (Ed.), Basic group process (pp. 235–256). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Choma, B. L. (2009). Belief in a just world, perceived fairness, and justification of the status quo. In J. T. Jost, A. C. Kay, & H. Thorisdottir (Eds.), Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification (pp. 107–125). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Harth, N. S., Leach, C. W., & Kessler, T. (2013). Guilt, anger, and pride about in-group environmental behaviour: Different emotions predict distinct intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 18–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2006). Free-market ideology and environmental degradation: The case of belief in global climate change. Environment and Behavior, 38, 48–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegtvedt, K. A., & Flinn, P. (2000). Intergenerational justice and the environment: Determining the fair use of Mono Basin water. Advances in Group Processes, 17, 255–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz, W. A. (1994). Characteristics of environmental ethics: Environmental activists’ accounts. Ethics and Behavior, 4, 345–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussar, K., & Horvath, J. C. (2011). Do children play fair with mother nature? Understanding children’s judgments of environmentally harmful actions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31, 309–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC. (2007). Fourth assessment report: Climate change 2007. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ittner, H., & Ohl, C. (2012). International negotiations on climate change: Integrating justice psychology and economics—A way out of the normative blind alley? In E. Kals & J. Maes (Eds.), Justice and conflicts (pp. 269–282). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. International Society of Political Psychology, 25, 881–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn, P. (2001). The human relationship with nature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, F., & Shimoda, T. (1999). Responsibility as a predictor of ecological behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 243–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kals, E. (1996). Are proenvironmental commitments motivated by health concerns or by perceived justice? In L. Montada & M. Lerner (Eds.), Current societal concerns about justice (pp. 231–258). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kals, E. (in press). Affective connection to nature. In A. C. Michalos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of quality of life research. Berlin, Germany: Springer. Retrieved from http://referencelife.springer.com

  • Kals, E., Becker, R., & Ittner, H. (2006). Protecting nature or promoting competing values and interests? In R. J. G. van den Born, R. H. J. Lenders, & W. T. de Groot (Eds.), Visions of nature (pp. 129–151). Berlin, Germany: LIT Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kals, E., & Müller, M. M. (2012). Emotion and environment. In S. Clayton (Ed.), Handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 128–147). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kals, E., Schumacher, D., & Montada, L. (1999). Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment & Behavior, 31, 178–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpiak, C. P., & Baril, G. L. (2008). Moral reasoning and concern for the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 203–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann-Hayoz, R. (2006). Human action in context: A model framework for interdisciplinary studies in view of sustainable development. Umweltpsychologie, 10, 154–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kazdin, A. E. (2009). Psychological science’s contributions 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 

  • Kirby, A. (2003). Redefining social and environmental relations at the ecovillage at Ithaca: A case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 323–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kriss, P. H., Loewenstein, G., Wang, X., & Weber, R. A. (2011). Behind the veil of ignorance: Self-serving bias in climate change negotiations. Judgment and Decision Making, 6, 602–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, L. (2006). Globalization and sustainable development as issues of environmental psychology. Umweltpsychologie, 10, 136–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kushler, M. G. (1989). Use of evaluation to improve energy conservation programs: A review and scale study. Journal of Social Issues, 45, 153–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lange, A., Vogt, C., & Ziegler, A. (2007). On the importance of equity in international climate policy: An empirical analysis. Energy Economics, 29, 545–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leist, A. (2007). Ökologische Gerechtigkeit als bessere Nachhaltigkeit [Ecological justice as better sustainability]. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, 54, 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J. (1981). Justice motive in human relations: Some thoughts on what we know and need to know about justice. In M. J. Lerner & S. C. Lerner (Eds.), The justice motive in social behavior: Adapting to times of scarcity and change. New York, NY: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, M. J., & Clayton, S. D. (2011). Justice and self-interest: Two fundamental motives. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Linneweber, V. (1998). Nachhaltige Entwicklung als unscharfes Prädikat [Sustainable development as a fuzzy construct]. Umweltpsychologie, 2, 66–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukasiewicz, A., Syme, G. J., Bowmer, K. H., & Davidson, P. (2013). Is the environment getting its fair share? An analysis of the Australian water reform process using a social justice framework. Social Justice Research, 26, 231–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, E. M., & Bowerman, T. (2012). How much is enough? Examining the public’s beliefs about consumption. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 12, 167–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503–515.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D. H., Meadows, J. R., & Behrens, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth. New York, NY: Universe Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L. (2007). Conflicts and the justice of conflict resolution. In K. Törnblom & R. Vermunt (Eds.), Distributive and procedural justice. Research and applications (pp. 255–268). Burlington, MA: Ashgate/Glower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L., & Kals, E. (1995). Perceived justice of ecological policy and proenvironmental commitments. Social Justice Research, 8, 305–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montada, L., & Kals, E. (2000). Political implications of psychological research on ecological justice and proenvironmental behaviour. International Journal of Psychology, 35, 168–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, M. M. (2012). Justice as a framework for the solution of environmental conflicts. In E. Kals & J. Maes (Eds.), Justice and conflicts (pp. 239–250). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, M. M., & Kals, E. (2007). Interactions between procedural fairness and outcome favorability in conflict situations. In K. Y. Törnblom & R. Vermunt (Eds.), Distributive and procedural justice (pp. 125–140). Aldershot, England: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, S., & Kulish, N. (2013, November 16). Growing clamor about inequities of climate crisis. New York Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nancarrow, B. E., & Syme, G. J. (2001). Challenges in implementing justice research in the allocation of natural resources. Social Justice Research, 14, 441–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumayer, E. (1970). Weak versus strong sustainability: Exploring the limits of two opposing paradigms. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connections with nature to environmental concern and behaviour. Environment & Behavior, 41, 715–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nweke, O., & Lee, C. (2011). Achieving environmental justice: Perspectives on the path forward through collective action to eliminate health disparities. American Journal of Public Health, 101, S6–S8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S. (1990). Moral exclusion and injustice: An introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 4, 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S. (1994). Predicting protection: Scope of justice and the natural world. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opotow, S., & Clayton, S. (1994). Green justice: Conceptions of fairness and the natural world. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, B. E., Doty, R. M., & Winter, D. G. (1993). Authoritarianism and attitudes toward contemporary social issues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 174–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringold, P., Boyd, J., Landers, D., & Weber, M. (2013). What data should we collect? A framework for identifying indicators of ecosystem contributions to human well-being. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11, 98–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Y. (2001). Intergenerationelle Verantwortlichkeit und Gerechtigkeit im globalen Umweltschutz. Unveröffentlichte Dissertation [Intergenerational responsibility and justice in global environmental protection. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis]. Trier, Germany: Universität Trier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabbagh, C. (2005). Environmentalism, right-wing extremism, and social justice beliefs among East German adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 118–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, P. W., & Stone, W. F. (1994). Authoritarianism and attitudes toward the environment. Environment and Behavior, 26, 25–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirrenberg, M., & Kals, E. (in press). Engagements und Gerechtigkeitsüberzeugen zur Nutzung von Atomenergie im Spiegel von Fukushima [Commitments and justice beliefs concerning nuclear power after the Fukushima Daiichi disaster]. Umweltpsychologie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, C. (1972). Should trees have standing? New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Syme, G. (2012). Justice and environmental decision making. In E. Kals & J. Maes (Eds.), Justice and conflicts (pp. 283–295). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Syme, G., & Nancarrow, B. (2012). Justice and the allocation of natural resources. In S. Clayton (Ed.), Handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 93–112). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Törnblom, K. Y., & Kazemi, A. (2007). Toward a resource production theory of distributive justice. In K. Y. Törnblom & R. Vermunt (Eds.), Distributive and procedural justice: Research and social applications (pp. 39–64). Aldershot, Germany: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2006). Water: A shared responsibility. New York, NY: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Headquarters. (2010). Sustainable development: From Brundtland to Rio 2012. Background paper prepared by John Drexhage and Deborah Murphy (International Institute for Sustainable Development; IISD). New York, NY: United Nations Headquarters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vugt, M. (2009). Averting the tragedy of the commons: Using social psychological science to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 169–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G. (2012). Environmental justice: Concepts, evidence, and politics. London, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walster, E., Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity theory and research. New York, NY: Allyn Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, E. (1992). In fairness to future generations and sustainable development. American University International Law Review, 8, 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, N., & Rollings, K. (2012). The natural environment in residential settings: Influences on human health and function. In S. Clayton (Ed.), Oxford handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 509–523). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wojcik, A., & Cislak, A. (2013). When appreciating nature makes one care less for human beings: The role of belief in just nature in helping victims of natural disasters. Social Justice Research, 26, 253–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1990). Our common future. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The College of Wooster, Wooster, OH, USA

    Susan Clayton

  2. Catholic University of Eichstaett, Eichstaett, Germany

    Elisabeth Kals

  3. New York University, New York, NY, USA

    Irina Feygina

Authors
  1. Susan Clayton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elisabeth Kals
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Irina Feygina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susan Clayton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Haifa Faculty of Education, Haifa, Israel

    Clara Sabbagh

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany

    Manfred Schmitt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clayton, S., Kals, E., Feygina, I. (2016). Justice and Environmental Sustainability. In: Sabbagh, C., Schmitt, M. (eds) Handbook of Social Justice Theory and Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_20

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-3215-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-3216-0

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation