What’s with the Attitude? Unravelling the Dynamics of Pro-Environmental Action in India

Fazli Salim

Psychophysiology Laboratory, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai - 400 076, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Azizuddin Khan *

Psychophysiology Laboratory, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai - 400 076, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Environmental degradation has become one of the most significant threats for humanity. Insights on individual’s pro-environmental actions remain insufficiently investigated in India.

The study aims to explore the effect of attitude, injunctive and descriptive norms, self-efficacy, controllability and behavioural intentions on individual’s pro-environmental action. Drawing on a sample of individuals from India (n = 308), the study conducts multilinear regression and correlation analysis to explore the association between the variables. The results indicate that individual pro-environmental action is significantly affected by behavioural intentions, descriptive and injunctive norms. In contrast, attitude show a close-to-significant impact, while self-efficacy and controllability show negligible effects. Overall, these factors explain 35.6% of the variance in individual pro-environmental action. The present analysis provides an important overview of pro-environmental actions in India, essential in addressing environmental degradation. The study end by highlighting the necessity of localised research, and advancement of research in pro-environmental action in India.

Keywords: Pro-environmental attitude, behavioural intentions, self-efficacy, controllability, norms

How to Cite

Salim, F., & Khan, A. (2023). What’s with the Attitude? Unravelling the Dynamics of Pro-Environmental Action in India. Asian Journal of Environment & Ecology, 22(4), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajee/2023/v22i4507


Download data is not yet available.


Anderegg WR, Prall JW, Harold J, Schneider SH. Expert credibility inclimate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2010;107(27): 12107-12109.

Cook J, Oreskes N, Doran PT, Anderegg WR, Verheggen B, Maibach EW, Rice K. Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters. 2016;11(4):048002.

De Pryck K. Intergovernmental expert consensus in the making: The case of the summary for policy makers of the IPCC 2014 Synthesis Report. Global Environmental Politics.2021;21(1): 108-129.

Yue XL, Gao QX. Contributions of natural systems and human activity to greenhouse gas emissions. Adv Clim Change Res. 2018;9:243–252.

Patel Shivam. Over 50 killed in Indian Himalayas as rain triggers landslides. Reuters; 2023.

Nandi Jayashree. East India faced life-threatening heat stress in June, say experts. Hindustan Times; 2023.

World Weather Attribution. Extreme humid heat in South Asia in April 2023, largely driven by climate change, detrimental to vulnerable and disadvantaged communities; 2023.

Klitkou A, Bolwig S, Huber A, Ingeborgrud L, Pluciński P, Rohracher H, Żuk P. The interconnected dynamics of social practices and their implications for transformative change: A review. Sustainable production and consumption. 2022;31:603 614.

Nielsen KS, Cologna V, Lange F, Brick C, Stern PC. The case for impact focused environmental psychology. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2021;74.

Nielsen KS, Clayton S, Stern PC, Dietz T, Capstick S, Whitmarsh L. How psychology can help limit climate change. American Psychologist. 2021;76(1):130.

IPCC. Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group i to the sixth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Masson-Delmotte VP, Zhai A, Pirani SL, Connors C, Péan S, Berger N, Caud Y; 2021.

Clayton S, Myers G. Conservation psychology: Understanding and promoting human care for nature. John Wiley & Sons; 2015.

De Leeuw A, Valois P, Ajzen I, Schmidt P. Using the theory of planned behavior to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behavior in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions. Journal of environmental psychology. 2015;42:128-138.

Bohner G, Dickel N. Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology. 2011;62: 391-417.

Wallace DS, Paulson RM, Lord CG, Bond Jr CF. Which behaviors do attitudes predict? Meta-analyzing the effects of social pressure and perceived difficulty. Review of General Psychology. 2005;9(3):214-227.

Barr S, Ford NJ, Gilg AW. Attitudes towards recycling household waste in Exeter, Devon: quantitative and qualitative approaches. Local Environment. 2003;8 (4):407-421.

Bamberg S. How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of environmental psychology. 2003;23(1):21-32.

Kothe EJ, Ling M, North M, Klas A, Mullan BA, Novoradovskaya L. Protection motivation theory and pro‐environmental behaviour: A systematic mapping review. Australian Journal of Psychology. 2019;71(4):411-432.

Bamberg S, Möser G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2007;27(1):14-25.

Klöckner CA. A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour-A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change. 2013;23(5):1028-1038.

Reno RR, Cialdini RB, Kallgren CA. The transsituational influence of social norms. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1993;64(1):104.

Cialdini RB, Demaine LJ, Sagarin BJ, Barrett DW, Rhoads K, Winter PL. Managing social norms for persuasive impact. Social Influence. 2006;1(1): 3-15.

Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science. 2007;18(5):429-434.

Lian JW, Yen DC. Online shopping drivers and barriers for older adults: Age and gender differences. Computers in Human Behaviour. 2014;37:133-143.

Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. 1975;181-202.

Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action- control Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 1985;11-39.

Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and humandecision processes. 1991;50(2): 179-211.

Maddux JE, Rogers RW. Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of experimental social psychology. 1983;19(5):469-479.

Zailani S, Iranmanesh M, Masron TA, Chan TH. Is the intention to use public transport for different travel purposes determined by different factors?. Transportation research part D: transport and environment. 2016;49:18-24.

Tuu HH, Olsen SO, Thao DT, Anh NTK. The role of norms in explaining attitudes, intention and consumption of a common food (fish) in Vietnam. Appetite. 2008;51(3):546-551.

Milner HR, Landsman J, Lewis C. But good intentions are not enough. White teachers/diverse classrooms: Creating inclusive schools, building on students’ diversity, and providing true educational equity. 2011;2:56-74.

Ajzen I. Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theoryof planned behavior 1. Journal of applied social psychology. 2002;32(4):665-683.

Nugent LE, Carson M, Zammitt NN, Smith GD, Wallston KA. Health value & perceived control over health: behavioural constructs to support Type 2 diabetes self‐ management in clinical practice. Journal of clinical nursing. 2015; 24(15-16):2201- 2210.

Mullan B, Henderson J, Kothe E, Allom V, Orbell S, Hamilton K. The role of habit and perceived control on health behavior among pregnant women. American Journal of Health Behavior. 2016;40(3):291-301.

Kumar A. Exploring young adults’e-waste recycling behaviour using an extended theory of planned behaviour model: A cross-cultural study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2019;141: 378-389.

Ajzen I. The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections; 2011.

Ajzen I. Consumer attitudes and behavior: the theory of planned behavior applied to food consumption decisions. Italian Review of Agricultural Economics. 2015;70 (2):121138.

Stoet G. PsyToolkit: A novel web-based method for running online questionnaires and reaction-time experiments. Teaching of Psychology. 2017;44(1):24-31.

Huang H. Media use, environmental beliefs, self-efficacy, and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Business Research. 2016;69(6):2206–2212.

Kim S, Jeong SH, Hwang Y. Predictors of pro-environmental behaviors of American and Korean students: The application of the theory of reasoned action and protection motivation theory. Science Communication. 2013;35(2):168-188.

Christensen R, Knezek G. The Climate Change Attitude Survey: Measuring Middle School Student Beliefs and Intentions to Enact Positive Environmental Change. International journal of environmental and science education. 2015;10:773-788.

Han R, Cheng Y. The Influence of Norm Perception on Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Comparison between the Moderating Roles of Traditional Media and Social Media. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(19):7164.

Abraham J, Pane M, Chairiyani R. An investigation on cynicism andenvironmental self-efficacy as predictors of pro-environmental behavior. Psychology. 2015;6:234-242.

Chen MF. Extending the theory of planned behavior model to explain people's energy savings and carbon reduction behavioral intentions to mitigate climate change in Taiwan–moral obligation matters. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016;112: 1746-1753.

Picodi report; 2020.


Hopper JR, Nielsen JM. Recycling as altruistic behavior: Normative and behavioral strategies to expand participation in a community recycling program. Environment and Behavior. 1991; 23(2):195-220.

Khan A. Prospective Memory performance and emotional regulation during wintering at Bharat Station in Antarctica. Polar Science. 2022;34:100877.