Cultural biases as a predictor of environmental attitudes in Taiwan and the United States

Liu, L.-Y. . (2020). Does culture travel? Cultural influences on environmentalism in Taiwan in comparison to the United States. The Journal of Environmental Education, 51, 214-231.

An individual's environmentalism can be influenced by a variety of factors, from demographic attributes to political ideology. However, there is no standard theory regarding variety in individuals' environmental attitudes. To address this gap, researchers developed the cultural theory (CT) model, which examines how a person's cultural biases affect their environmental attitudes, perception of environmental issues, and environmental identity. Cultural theory consists of two dimensions: grid, referring to the extent to which individuals are influenced by socially imposed rules; and group, referring to an individual's participation in group thinking. Individuals are separated into one of four cultural institutions: hierarchism (high group/ high grid), individualism (low group/ low grid); egalitarianism (high group/low grid); and fatalists (low group/ high grid). This study aimed to discover the extent to which CT can account for variation in environmentalism in Taiwan and whether CT can explain variations in environmentalism better than demographic attributes or political party affiliation. The researchers also compared how cultural biases influence environmentalism in Taiwan and the United States.

The study was conducted in Taiwan in 2016. Researchers analyzed two groups: environmentalists and the general public. To collect information on environmentalists, researchers distributed an online survey to the leaders of environmental nonprofit organizations and received 50 completed surveys. For the general public analysis, researchers distributed an online survey to all members of a nationally represented online panel developed through National Chengchi University's election study center, and received 500 completed surveys. These individuals were qualified Taiwanese voters, meaning they were Taiwanese citizens over the age of 20. In both cases, email recipients were able to opt in or out of completing the survey. For the US comparison, researchers used 2,342 responses collected by the University of Oklahoma's Center of Risk and Crisis Management in 2017. All of the surveys used in the US and Taiwan were the Weather, Society, and Government survey, which used part of the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) to measure environmental attitudes and included questions to measure participants' awareness of environmental issues. Researchers also collected demographic information using the survey, including gender, income, education level, age, and partisan identification. Survey results were analyzed and used to develop estimation/ predictor models.

Researchers found that CT did not have significantly explain the level of environmentalism for the general public in Taiwan, though it did explain attitudes within the environmentalist group. Males, individualists, young people, and people who identified with the political party Kuomintang (KMT) in the general public were less concerned with the preservation of natural resources. The KMT party is traditionally focused on economic development with less concern for the environment. While individualism negatively impacted concern over preservation, it did not impact other environmental concerns. In the environmentalist group, egalitarianism was positively associated with NEP scores but did not have an impact with the general public's attitude. Political leanings influenced environmental attitudes in both the general population and the environmentalist groups—however, it cannot be used as a predictor of environmental attitudes because there were discrepancies in the assumptions made about each party. In the general public analysis, KMT was assumed to be pro-capitalism, while the environmentalist analysis revealed that the Democratic Progressive Party, typically considered more progressive, was negatively associated with pro-environmental attitudes. In the US, egalitarianism was positively associated with NEP scores, while individualism was negatively associated. Gender, education level, and age all impacted environmental attitudes, while income and political affiliation had no impact, contrary to the results in Taiwan. Though the CT model did not suitably explain environmental attitudes in Taiwan, the researchers determined that it was an effective tool in the US.

This study had limitations. The survey used for all participants was originally written in English and translated directly for use in Taiwan, which may have impacted the results. The survey only used the NEP to determine environmental attitudes, though other evaluation methods may have been more effective or yielded different results. Also, the study only assessed environmental attitudes in Taiwan and the US, limiting the generalizability of results.

The researchers recommend exploring the predictive value of the CT model with regards to environmental attitudes. Determining how and where this model is most effective will provide other researchers and practitioners with a method to evaluate and compare environmental attitudes of different populations.

The Bottom Line

<p>An individual's environmentalism is influenced by a variety of factors, including demographic attributes, political ideologies, and cultural biases. The cultural theory (CT) model examines how a person's cultural biases affect their environmental attitudes, perception of environmental issues, and environmental identity. This study aimed to determine the extent to which CT can explain variation in environmentalism in Taiwan, whether CT can explain variations in environmentalism better than demographic attributes or political party affiliation, and how it compares to the United States. Results came from a survey that used the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) to measure environmental attitudes and awareness of environmental issues and was used with three groups: Taiwanese environmentalists, the general public in Taiwan, and individuals in the US. Analysis revealed that CT did not have explanatory power over either Taiwanese group, though it was an appropriate predictor in the US. Some demographic variables, such as gender, age, and education level were more effective predictors in both countries.</p>

Research Partner

Research Category