Interpreting Taiwanese Undergraduate Students' Environmental Perspectives

Both environmental knowledge and pro-environmental values are important for encouraging pro-environmental behavior. An environmental worldview is understood as a value system formed by how individuals perceive and relate to the natural world. Scholars suggest that reflecting on personal and alternate environmental worldviews within Environmental Education (EE) may facilitate pro-environmental beliefs and behavior. Existing studies focus on measuring environmental worldviews through questionnaires, such as the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP). The NEP is useful for determining where an individual is on the spectrum between biocentrism/ecocentrism (the belief that nature and biodiversity should be valued above all else) and anthropocentrism (the belief that humans are separate from and superior to nature), but the authors argue that it fails to capture the nuances of various worldviews. This research uses a mix of methods to interpret extensive environmental worldviews of Taiwanese undergraduate students.

This research was conducted at a medium-sized university in Taiwan. The researchers recruited participants from 64 third- and fourth-year undergraduate students enrolled in the same general science course. These students were given the NEP and asked how strongly they agreed or disagreed with 15 statements about human-nature relationships on the questionnaire. The researchers then calculated the NEP scores, which range from 15 to 75, or pro-ecology (bio-/ecocentrism) to human-dominance (anthropocentrism), respectively. These scores, along with information about the students' focus of study, were used to select interviewees that represented the largest possible variety in environmental perspectives. A total of 29 participants were interviewed. During the interview, participants were asked about nature, human-nature relationships, and environmental challenges. The interview data were analyzed for themes.

This study identified complex and nuanced environmental worldviews in the population of Taiwanese undergraduate students that did not fit well within the bio-/ecocentrism to anthropocentrism spectrum. The NEP scores demonstrated that the group of 64 students were generally pro-ecological. However, the interview data exposed varied perspectives on human-nature relationships that could not be classified as purely pro-ecology or human-dominance oriented.

Three primary environmental perspectives found in the interview process included: 1) humanity is not separate from nature, and thereby cannot destroy nature, 2) humanity dominates nature, but humans may not have that role forever and 3) humanity must act to manage nature responsibly to secure resources for human use, along with creating a livable environment for all species. The authors argue that these perspectives demonstrate how the linear NEP spectrum cannot fully capture the complexity of environmental worldviews. For example, the third perspective mixes anthropocentric, utilitarian, and bio-/ecocentric views. The idea that humankind has a responsibility to nature was frequently recorded in interviews, and it was mentioned as important to human ends slightly more often, but a similar number of times, to being necessary for moral reasons.

From the interviews, the authors categorized responses into thoughts about nature and thoughts about human-nature relationships. The responses regarding human-nature relationships highlighted a common belief that there is perceived conflict between humans and the natural world. For example, the concepts humanity is a threat to nature and humankind dominates and controls nature were frequently recorded. The interview data also reflected varying levels of belief in humanity's ability to effectively regulate nature.

The most frequently occurring concept about nature was that nature is a system. Another important and frequent idea about nature was that nature excludes anything man-made. However, many interviewees also believed that humans are intrinsically like all other animals, and some mentioned that humankind is subject to natural laws which would suggest that humans are a part of nature. However, another somewhat frequent response was that humankind is not really a part of nature. All of these responses demonstrate very different conceptual definitions of “humankind” and “nature,” and how they are separate or interwoven.

This research only represents a population of undergraduate students from a single university in Taiwan. If a similar study were conducted in another location, the results may vary due to different contexts. For example, the idea that humans are inherently part of nature has roots in traditional Taiwanese culture, and that value may not be as common in other cultures. The students were enrolled in the same general science course, meaning they may be more aware of environmental issues and have different environmental worldviews that students in non-science courses. Additionally, the authors only investigated the students' conceptual understanding of nature. Emotional and experiential perspectives are also critical to a holistic representation of environmental worldviews.

The authors recommend using a more complex understanding of environmental worldviews to inform EE programs, and suggest both EE practitioners and students themselves should be more aware of the complex and varied environmental perspectives that exist. Specifically, the authors recommend using a multi-disciplinary curriculum to help students understand human-nature relationships from an ethical point of view as well as a scientific perspective.