Internal

Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) categorize internal factors into eight separate factors. First is motivation, the driving force for behaviour, which can be obvious or not (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). Stern et al. (1993) model motivation for

pro-environmental behaviour as having three main drivers (or orientations) for motivation.

These are egoistic orientation, whereby personal concern and harm alleviation is primary;

social orientation, whereby concern for alleviating pain for others is primary; and

biospheric orientation, whereby concern and harm alleviation for the natural environment is primary (Stern et al., 1993; Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). It is important to note that motives may exist and not necessarily translate into behaviour; for example, if there are habits that contradict one’s intent to act pro-environmentally, that intent will likely not be actualized, unless the habits, which are acting as barriers, are changed (Preuss, 1991;

Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002).

Next, environmental knowledge is generally considered not to be a strong

influencing factor contributing to pro-environmental behaviour (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002; Kempton et al., 1995). Though there is some level of influence, studies have found the level of pro-environmental behaviour to be the same for environmentalists and non-environmentalists (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). Once again, habits and economical factors can act as barriers for actualizing intentions to behave pro-environmentally.

Another factor that influences pro-environmental behaviour is values. Values are shaped by an individual’s personal social network and upbringing (Kollmuss and

Agyeman, 2002; Chawla, 1998). A study by Chawla (1998) finds that it is the emotional attachment with nature that allows one to value nature and thereby promote

environmental awareness and concern.

The next factor is attitudes, which is found to be indirectly related to pro-environmental behaviour (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). The literature indicates that those with pro-environmental attitudes do not necessarily behave pro-environmentally (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002; Diekmann and Preisendoerfer, 1992). That said, those with pro-environmental attitudes have been found to be more likely to take part in lower cost (financially and mentally) behaviour (such as recycling) and are more supportive of policies that promote pro-environmental behaviour (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002;

Diekmann and Preisendoerfer, 1992; Lehmann (1999). Closely tied to attitudes is the knowledge and beliefs one has regarding a given issue.

The factor of environmental awareness is based on having knowledge of the impact of human behaviour on the environment (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002).

Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) describe three main characteristics of environmental issues that act as barriers for people to cognitively become aware of environmental problems, such as climate change. First is the non-tangible aspect of environmental issues, which makes it difficult for emotional attachment to develop (e.g., not being able to see the impacts directly, but rather through information and language) (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002; Preuss, 1991). Second is the time lag of actual environmental change;

the gradual nature of environmental issues (such as climate change), which can act as a barrier for humans to cognitively understand what is occurring (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). Lastly is the complex nature of environmental issues, which can make it very

difficult for people to easily draw linkages between various contributing components and impacts (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). All aforementioned characteristics of

environmental issues make it difficult for an emotional attachment to develop, and subsequently any intention to act to take place.

Next is the factor of emotional involvement, which Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) define as “the extent to which we have an affective relationship to the natural world”. Emotional involvement can be existing or developed during an onset of environmental harm (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). It can act as a barrier in cases where there is resistance to information (whereby people do not wish to change their ways) or there is simply a lack of knowledge and awareness (which may or may not lead to one having emotional concern) (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). There are also a series of emotional reactions that one can have to environmental harm, which can influence the level of pro-environmental behaviour one may or may not show (Kollmuss and

Agyeman, 2002). Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) point out that emotional feelings of sadness, fear, pain, and anger are expected to be more likely to lead to pro-environmental behaviour. Thus, in regions where people and communities have been impacted by environmental harm, there is likely to be a greater emotional attachment and thus potential for pro-environmental behaviour.

The locus of control factor is the degree to which one believes he or she has the ability to create change through his or her actions (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). This can vary depending on the issue at hand and the amount of power one feels they have towards controlling the output.

The final factor ties in closely to the previous three. This is the factor of

responsibility and priorities, which is determined by one’s values, attitudes, and locus of

control (Kollmuss and Agyeman, 2002). For example, in a highly vulnerable region, community members may have a more protective attitude and prioritize safety of their community, homes, and families, as these are likely to be valued greatly.

In conclusion, the literature indicates that simply having information and knowledge (no matter how technical) is not enough to create behaviour change (Diekmann & Preisendoerfer, 1992; Fliegenschnee & Schelakovsky, 1998). There are several complex barriers to achieving pro-environmental behaviour. However, further research is needed to determine how certain methods of engagement/raising awareness (such as through the use of visualization tools) at the local-level can go beyond just providing information and influence other factors, such as those outlined by Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) (i.e., responsibility and priorities, emotional involvement, values, and attitudes).