Sustainability and the good society:
Research on psychological needs
Seminar on Global Sustainable Development
Elsinore, Denmark, March 6-8, 2013
Ib Ravn, Ph.D., Associate Professor
The Research Program on Organization and Learning
Aarhus University, Campus Emdrup.
ravn@dpu.dk, edu.au.dk/fv
1. Sustainability and the good society
 Sustainability: balance in our consumption of physical resources.
 But people’s personal, social & political lives: endless improvement (more justice, more democracy, etc.) (Bjerre, 1988).
 ”Sustainability”: suitable concept – and a legitimate object of
research today.
 We need such a concept for research and development of
humanity’s psychological, social and political prospects.
 We’re talking about a still better life for all, in a still better society.
How to conceptualize that?
2
2. ”Oprør fra midten” (1978):
Villy Sørensen’s proposed psychology of needs
 Distinction: our insatiable desires vs. our natural needs
 ”… design society’s institutions such that human needs are met…”
(p. 77, OfM) → a better life in a better society
 What are these needs?
 Fairly solid knowledge about physiological needs (nutrition,
hygiene, contagious disease, exercise)
 Until the 1970’s very little research on psycho-social needs
3
3. Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
 Edward L. Deci, University of Rochester, 1970’s: Intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic rewards tend to inhibit subjects’
interest and intrinsic motivation (contra Skinner)
 With Richard M. Ryan from 1980’s: Motivational psychology →
psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness
(Deci & Ryan, 2002)
 www.selfdeterminationtheory.org: >500 research publications
from scores of researchers in 13 languages.

Overview and intro: Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory
and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.
American Psychologist, vol. 55, pp. 68-78.
4
4. SDT’s three needs
1. Autonomy: Author in your own life. The self as a source of
action. Sense of volition
2. Competence: We can effect outcomes in the world
3. Relatedness: Need to receive and show care. Intimacy and community. Be a part of a larger social whole.
 The needs are hypothesized to reflect our human nature.
They can be met in culturally diverse ways.
Much research points to their universality .
(Chirkov et al. (eds): Human Autonomy in Cross-Cultural Context, Springer, 2011)
 Nothing sacred about three needs. Occam!
5
5. Need support – personal and societal

The needs may be supported – for better satisfaction.
Cf. OfM: ”..design society’s institutions such that human needs are met…”

Autonomy supports: See the other’s perspective. Acknowledge
feelings. Avoid controlling language. Give rationale. Provide choice.

Competence supports: Provide structure. Give informational feedback
(vs. neg. criticism). Support self-initiated actions (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Support can be provided by persons, groups, institutions, norms, laws.

SDT research investigates one type of support after the other: What
results in better psycho-social function? (depression, anxiety, quality of
life, sociality, vitality) (as measured by standard psychometric instruments: survey, experience sampling, interview) (Vansteenkiste, 2010).

Typical finding: Those who meet the three needs
6
6. What goals do we pursue: Intrinsic or extrinsic

Traditional ”goal theory”: If the goals you pursue in life fit your context,
good psycho-social function is produced – regardless of the goals (e.g.,
Business school goals fit MBA students). ‘All goals are created equal’

SDT: No. Different types of goal yield different outcomes:

”Extrinsic goals”: wealth, fame and image (eco-warning!). Pursuit of
them correlates negatively with good psycho-social function (also in B-sch’l)

”Intrinsic goals”: relationships, community, health, personal growth:
they correlate positively (Vansteenkiste et al., 2006).

Autonomy mediates: Extrinsic goals provide poor satisfaction of the need
for autonomy – that’s why they produce poor psycho-social function
(Kasser & Ryan, 1996)
7
7. The SDT needs in society
 The goals and norms suggested by society’s various institutions
can be assessed through research: Do they support human needs
for autonomy, competence and relatedness?
Advertising: ”freedom to shop” or mind control?
Private cars: mobility autonomy or financial dependency and
rush-hour unfreedom?
Manufacturing: What do products give – image or community?
50-hour work weeks: money, image (status)?
Taxes: Do they really inhibit personal initiative? (comp., aut.)
TV entertainment: relatedness or loneliness?
Facebook: social network or depression?
8
8. Doing research on a still better society

Perhaps the good society can be estimated by the degree to which these
three needs are met (and new undiscovered needs)(Deci & Ryan,2012)

Social research that attempts to find still better supports for needs may
help move towards a better society (Bjerre, 1972; Ravn, 2006, 2008).

This may relieve us somewhat from ideological ignorance, just as…
- basic nutrition, surgery and infant care are now on okay scientific footing
- organic agriculture and climate research are still struggling
- economics, sociology and political science have barely started

Sustainability: a useful paradigm for our balance with external nature.

A psychology of researchable human needs (like SDT): a useful research
program for exploring how the human psyche may flourish and develop
infinitely within the bounds of limited physical nature.
9
9. Litteratur

Bjerre, Poul (1988). Opbrud. Utopisk humanisme. Gyldendal.

Bjerre, Poul (1972). Videnskabens natur. Gyldendal.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits:
Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological
Inquiry, 11(4): 227-268.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (eds.)(2002). Handbook of self-determination
research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2012). Motivation, personality, and development
within embedded social contexts: An overview of self-determination theory.
In R. M. Ryan (ed.), Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 85-107).
Oxford, UK: OUP.
10
10. Litteratur (fortsat)

Kasser, T., & Ryan, R.M. (1996). Further examining the american dream:
Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 22: 280-287.

Meyer, N.I., Petersen, K.H. & Sørensen, S. (1978). Oprør fra midten.
Gyldendal.

Ravn, Ib (2006). Forskning i sammenhænge. Hvordan natur- og
samfundsvidenskaberne kunne bidrage mere til udvikling af liv og
samfund. Multivers.

Ravn, Ib (2010). Transformativ forskningsmetode – belyst gennem et
projekt om mødefacilitering. Tidsskrift for Arbejdsliv, 12(1): 51-66.
11
11. Litteratur (fortsat)

Shah, H., & Marks, N. (2004): A manifesto for a flourishing society.
London: New Economics Foundation.

Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus
extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the
quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41: 19-31.

Vansteenkiste, M., Niemiec, C. P., & Soenens, B. (2010). The
development of the five mini-theories of self-determination theory: An
historical overview, emerging trends, and future directions. In T. C.
Urdan & S. A. Karabenick (eds.), Advances in motivation and
achievement, v. 16A—The decade ahead: Theoretical perspectives on
motivation and achievement (pp. 105-165). London: Emerald.
12