Community for sustainability: some initial findings on the
influence of community-based organisations on individuals
Lucie Middlemiss
Abstract: Academics and policy-makers claim that communitybased organisations can mobilise citizens to take on more sustainable
behaviours. This entails organisations such as schools, places of worship,
clubs and others in the voluntary sector playing a part in persuading
individuals to reduce their impacts on the environment and on other people.
This paper presents initial findings of a research project into the role of
community-based organisations in influencing individuals to live more
sustainably. Research has consisted of a number of case studies of
interventions by community-based organisations in the UK, including
projects in church, school and community garden contexts. The data gathered
sheds light on the conditions that are favourable for such interventions, the
types of individuals that are involved, the decision-making processes of
individuals in taking on targeted behaviours and the outcomes of projects for
the individuals involved. One of the themes emerging from the research is the
tendency of these projects to work towards multiple goals across the various
dimensions of sustainability (e.g. health, local environment, global
environment, employment and social capital) and towards multiple potential
outcomes for individuals (e.g. behavioural change, attitudinal change,
awareness raising). The paper discusses the implications of such a broad
focus for involving and influencing individuals.
Keywords: Community-based organisations; pro-environmental
behaviour; community; sustainability.
1.
Introduction
Academics and policy-makers claim that community-based
organisations can mobilise citizens to take on more sustainable behaviours. 1-3
This entails organisations such as schools, places of worship, social groups,
clubs and other community groups playing a part in persuading individuals to
reduce their impacts on the environment and on other people. This paper
presents the initial findings of a research project into the role of communitybased organisations in influencing individuals to live more sustainably. The
research attempts to address the following questions: what effects do
sustainability activities run by community-based organisations have on
participants, what are the means by which such activities stimulate change in
a participant, and in what project and organisation circumstances, and for
which types of participant, is change more likely to occur. Work to date has
consisted of three case studies of interventions by community-based
2
Community for Sustainability
______________________________________________________________
organisations in the UK. The theoretical framework guiding this research and
existing evidence in this area has been summarised elsewhere. 4
This paper will focus on the results of a case study of a sustainable
consumption project run by the Christian Ecology Group at Holy Trinity
church in Skipton. The Christian Ecology Group (CEG) is a group of people,
mostly connected with Holy Trinity which has been active for about 12 years.
The group has worked on various projects in and around the church to try to
improve the environmental and ethical performance and understanding of the
congregation and the people of Skipton. Activities have included a fair-trade
fashion show, a listings for environmental and ethical products and services
in the Skipton area, and the sale of exclusively fair trade tea and coffee in
church.
The paper proceeds as follows: first an outline of the research
method is given, second, results of the case study of Holy Trinity are
summarised, third, an analysis of the results is presented, and finally
conclusions are drawn with comments on future research.
2.
Method
The research project takes a case study approach, with all cases
conducted in a similar manner allowing for comparison of data. In the Holy
Trinity case, data was collected from three sources: the practitioners (or
organisers of the group), the full congregation and participants in the
Christian Ecology group. Practitioners were interviewed for contextual
information on the case and its participants. A brief questionnaire was then
given to members of the congregation to establish the outcomes of the CEG’s
activities for individuals, and their level of participation in the group. A range
of congregation members (n=10) were selected for interview from returned
questionnaires. Interviews with these participants covered the individual’s
involvement in the activity, their motivations for behavioural change and the
effect that the project has had on their lives, as well as gathering structured
background information on each individual. Following data collection and
initial analysis, results of the case were presented back to the practitioners for
discussion and verification.
Data from the whole group questionnaire was tabulated and
subjected to the chi squared test. Participant and practitioner interviews were
transcribed, and analysed using the coding program Nvivo. Coding was
informed from the beginning by the concepts of contexts (“the prior set of
social rules, norms, values and interrelationships … which sets limits on the
efficacy of program mechanisms”), mechanisms (“how program outputs
follow from the stakeholders’ choices (reasoning) and their capacity
(resources) to put these into practice”) and outcomes (“the change in rates
which evaluation research will try to discern and explain”). 5
Lucie Middlemiss
3
______________________________________________________________
3.
Results and Analysis
This section presents the initial results of the case study at Holy
Trinity. Results from the whole group questionnaire and participant
interviews at Holy Trinity are discussed below. Practitioner interviews were
mainly used for initial scene setting and verification, and will not be reported
here for reasons of space.
A.
Whole group questionnaire
Congregation members were asked a series of questions on their
sustainable consumption behaviour taken from a Cooperative Bank survey on
ethical consumerism. 6 This allows for a basic comparison between the
sustainable consumption behaviour of Holy Trinity’s congregation and that
of the general population (as represented by the Cooperative Bank survey).
Results from this questionnaire are shown in Table 1. The only differences of
statistical significance here are the responses to the question on campaigning
(final row) for those subgroups at Holy Trinity that are either slightly or more
actively involved in the GEG (‘CEG involved’, p<0.05 and ‘CEG more
involved’ p<0.06). The lack of statistical significance in other figures given
here is partly due to the small size of the sample involved. The whole group
questionnaire therefore reliably tells us a few things: the congregation at Holy
Trinity (‘All at HT’) are not very different to the general population (‘Coop’),
however if a congregation member is involved with the CEG, he or she is
more likely to be campaigning on an environmental social issue.
Table 1: A comparison of responses to the question ‘How often, if at
all, have you done each of the following in the last 12 months?’ by the
general population (Cooperative bank questionnaire) to different parts of the
congregation at Holy Trinity (numbers show percentages of individuals who
have taken each action at least once in the past year).
Coop
Recycled materials (e.g. paper,
bottles, plastic)
Bought to support local shops/
suppliers
Chosen a product or service on a
company’s responsible reputation
Avoided a product or service
because of a company’s behaviour
Actively campaigned about an
environmental/ social issue
All at
HT
CEG
involved
n=1,181
93
n=54
98
n=38
97
CEG
more
involved
n=15
100
80
78
82
80
62
57
58
60
58
54
58
67
25
31
39
47
4
Community for Sustainability
______________________________________________________________
There are two problems with these results: they do not tell us about
causation (whether membership of the group caused the campaigning or
whether those that campaign are more likely to join the group) and the
simplicity of the questions lead to rather crude measures of participation (e.g.
someone that has recycled once in the last year is in the same category as
someone that recycles regularly). These two problems are to some extent
addressed by the qualitative research undertaken for the case, where the
participants’ history of engagement with environmental and ethical issues is
explored, and where more detailed data is collected on changes experienced
by participants.
B.
Participant interviews
The Christian Ecology Group has had a marked effect on the selfreported actions of those participating in its activities with all but two of the
participants interviewed reporting changes in awareness, attitudes or
behaviour on environmental and ethical matters. The research aimed to
establish what kinds of people were influenced by CEG activities (‘context’),
what changes they made during their involvement in the CEG’s work
(‘outcomes’) and by what means these changes were stimulated
(‘mechanisms’). These three points will be discussed in turn in the following
paragraphs. The results from participant interviews are summarised in Table
2.
Participants varied somewhat in their understanding, valueorientation and behaviour on environmental and ethical issues, although
many of the sample (n=8) had been previously active in the area. As such the
main factor that seemed to divide participants both at the start and in the way
that they reacted to the project was the length of time for which they had been
engaged in environmental and ethical issues. Participants varied from people
who had very little experience or understanding of such issues (n=2,
unengaged), to those who had engaged in the issues relatively recently (n=3,
recently engaged), to those who had been engaged in environmental and
ethical activities for many years (n=5, long-term engaged). There was no
marked difference in the extent of pro-environmental actions that the latter
two groups reported, rather a difference in the nature of awareness and
attitudes towards environmental and ethical issues (recently engaged
participants are more concerned with details of how things should be done,
whereas more long-term engaged participants are concerned with trade-offs
between different environmental and ethical factors).
Participants from the range of backgrounds experienced changes in
behaviour, attitudes and awareness as a result of the work of the CEG, with
only two participants reporting no changes. The changes that participants
made as a result of CEG activities varied from substantial behavioural
Lucie Middlemiss
5
______________________________________________________________
changes (such as a decision to incorporate as many fair trade local and
organic products into shopping as possible) to more modest awareness
changes (such as an increase in familiarity with the issues surrounding fair
trade fashion).
The most important finding on outcomes was that different types of
participants experienced different types of change, with long-term engaged
participants using the CEG in a different way to unengaged participants. For
long-term engaged participants the CEG activities were reinforcing, leading
to intensification of behaviours or attitudes. For recently engaged participants
there was more room for increases in knowledge and action when a particular
issue (fair trade) was opened up to one member through church activities. For
unengaged participants the CEG provides a first point of call for basic
information on sustainable living, for instance one participant used the
church as her main source of information on ethical and environmental issues:
“If I didn’t come to church I probably wouldn’t feel as strongly about things,
or even know about them”. 7
As well as noting the effects on participants, the research set out to
establish how individuals are stimulated to change in the context of a
community-based organisation such as Holy Trinity. Multiple reasons why
individuals change their behaviour, attitude or awareness on environmental
and ethical matters were found at Holy Trinity. These also varied by type of
individual. Some of the most prominent stimuli for change as a result of the
CEG’s work are explained in turn here.
Information provided by the CEG is tailored to local and personal
needs, with the local focus particularly helpful for long-term engaged
participants: “the ecology group just kind of linked it all up and made me
aware of what locally … what I could do”. 8 The presence of knowledgeable
people (CEG members) in church allows recently engaged or unengaged
participants to access personalised information on sustainable living. For one
participant the CEG are: “people you can talk to if you want to know
something”. 7 Information integrated into the church service also helps to
target those participants that are currently unengaged. Active members of the
CEG are an inspiring role model for change, particularly for the long-term
and recently engaged participants. One participant recounts: “‘cause [CEG
member] told me ‘Oh I buy Christmas presents for my god children here’ and
I thought, I could do that as well.”. 9 Repeated exposure to ethical and
environmental ideas is reinforcing for those already interested in the issues
(long-term engaged). The very presence of CEG activities in church, and the
CEG group as a respected part of the church has persuaded individuals in the
recently engaged and unengaged groups of the need for action. The CEG’s
activities have created a culture within the church where discussion on
environmental and ethical issues is acceptable, and a means of supporting
individual change.
6
Community for Sustainability
______________________________________________________________
Unengaged
Recently engaged
Long-term engaged
Table 2: Summary of effects of CEG activities and stimuli for
change for individuals by participant type.
4.
Description of
participant (Context)
Those with a
considerable history of
engagement in proenvironmental or
ethical behaviours,
attitudes and
awareness.
Those with a more
recent history of
engagement in proenvironmental or
ethical behaviours,
attitudes and
awareness.
Those with no history
of engagement in proenvironmental or
ethical behaviours,
attitudes and
awareness.
Effects on participant
(Outcomes)
Participants
experienced affirmation
and intensification of
behaviours, attitudes
and awareness
(reinforcement).
Participants also
became more aware of
local possibilities for
sustainable living.
Participants learned
more about a variety of
issues connected to
sustainable living.
One participant
experienced
considerable changes to
behaviour, attitudes and
awareness on a new
issue (Fair Trade).
Participants
experienced small
changes in behaviour.
One participant
experienced
considerable increase in
knowledge on
sustainability issues.
Change stimulus
(Mechanism)
Provision of locally
tailored information
Leadership
Reinforcement
Discussion culture
Leadership
Provision of personally
tailored information
Presence of group and
activities in church
Discussion culture
Provision of personally
tailored information
Provision of integrated
information
Presence of group and
activities in church
Discussion culture
Discussion
One of the themes emerging from the literature is the tendency of
these projects to work towards multiple goals alongside environmental or
sustainability ones (e.g. health, local environment, global environment,
employment and social capital). 10-14 There is also a suggestion in the
literature that sustainability projects in the community could represent an
exchange of benefits for the individual, who reduces his/her impacts on the
environment in exchange for improved social capital. 15, 16
Unlike the other cases in this research project thus far (primary
school and community garden projects), the group at Holy Trinity do not
explicitly set out to achieve goals other than promoting sustainable
consumption within the congregation (and in Skipton). While the work of the
Lucie Middlemiss
7
______________________________________________________________
CEG has stimulated pro-environmental and ethical change for participants,
activities run by the group do not seem to affect other facets of the
individual’s life (social capital, skills, political engagement etc.). This makes
the effects of the CEG’s activities particularly noteworthy since most
participants did not incur any personal benefit from being involved. The key
here is probably the nature of the participants: most (n=8/10) had an existing
interest in environmental and ethical issues and for most change consisted of
behaviour being reinforced or spilling over into other behaviours rather than
emerging from nothing. The CEG also exists within a context where social
cohesion is already high (church members are familiar with each other), and
where individual skills are considerable (interviewees are well educated and
many work(ed) in public service professions). A few participants emphasised
the importance of ‘doing the right thing’ as Christians, this moral code may
make participants more likely to follow what is perceived as ‘good’
behaviour than in other contexts.
While the CEG’s focus is on the single goal of sustainable
consumption, the group has hit upon a range of mechanisms to stimulate that
outcome in the members of the congregation with different experiences and
knowledge. By providing a variety of activities and services they target
different types of people with different needs from such a group. This results
in the multiple potential outcomes for individuals according to their previous
experiences.
5.
Conclusions
There is a need to differentiate between individuals in designing for
behavioural change, as people come with a variety of different backgrounds,
resources and needs to community-based initiatives. The CEG fulfils this
need by providing a range of resources in different contexts which are used
by different types of people. The typology of individuals that is emerging
here may be useful in managing such projects, and this will be developed
further for that purpose. Creating such typology can help a group to see
where priorities should lie in choosing and defining activities to ensure
maximum effect.
6.
References
1. GARDNER, G. and STERN, P., Environmental Problems and Human
Behaviour (2nd edn; Boston, MA.: Pearson, 2002).
2. JACKSON, TIM, 'Motivating Sustainable Consumption', (Sustainable
Development Research Network, 2005).
3. DEFRA, 'Securing the Future - UK Government sustainable development
strategy',
(2005),
<http://www.sustainabledevelopment.gov.uk/publications/pdf/strategy/SecFut_complete.pdf>.
8
Community for Sustainability
______________________________________________________________
4. MIDDLEMISS, L.K., 'Influencing Individual Sustainability: Exploring the
Role of Community-Based Organisations', SRI Papers, 2 (2007),
<http://homepages.see.leeds.ac.uk/~leclkm/index_files/SRIPs%2002.pdf>.
5. PAWSON, RAY and TILLEY, NICK, Realistic evaluation (London: Sage,
1997), pp. 70, 66 and 74.
6. THE COOPERATIVE BANK, NEW ECONOMICS FOUNDATION, and THE
FUTURE FOUNDATION, 'The Ethical Consumerism Report 2005', (2005),
<http://www.cooperativebank.co.uk/images/pdf/coopEthicalConsumerismReport2005.pdf>.
7. Participant 9, Holy Trinity Interviews, (2006).
8. Participant 10, Holy Trinity Interviews, (2006).
9. Participant 2, Holy Trinity Interviews, (2006).
10. HOWARD, N, et al., 'Greenroots: attempting to build a sustainable
community', Clinical Psychology Forum, 153 (2005), 39-43.
11. ENVIRON, 'Local sustainability: turning sustainable development into
practical action in our communities: case studies, observations and lessons
from the Leicester Environment City project and other pioneering initiatives ',
(Environ, 1996).
12. MACGILLIVRAY, ALEX and WALKER, PERRY, 'Local Social Capital:
Making it work on the ground', in S. Baron, J. Field, and T. Schuller (eds.),
Social Capital: Critical perspectives (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2000), 197-211.
13. CHURCH, CHRIS and ELSTER, JAKE, 'Thinking locally, acting nationally:
lessons for national policy from work on local sustainability', (Joseph
Rowntree Foundation, 2002).
14. SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION, 'Communities of Interest and Action?' Sustainable Consumption Roundtable Briefing (2006).
15. PENNINGTON, MARK and RYDIN, YVONNE, 'Researching social capital in
local environmental policy contexts', Policy & Politics, 28/2 (2000), 233-49.
16. JACKSON, T. and MARKS, N., 'Consumption, Sustainable Welfare, and
Human Needs - with Reference to UK Expenditures Patterns Between 1954
and 1994', Ecological Economics, 28 (1999), 421–41.
Author identification
Lucie Middlemiss is a Teaching and Research Fellow at the Sustainability
Research Institute of the School of Earth and Environment at the University
of Leeds.