See the green?
Posted on 05/09/2008 8:20:18 PM PDT by JACKRUSSELL
Poorer people living in developing countries care more about the environment than those living in more prosperous countries, a global survey has revealed.
They feel more responsible for man-made problems, live a greener lifestyle and are prepared to do more to reduce their own impact on the environment.
It is the better-off consumers living more comfortably in developed western countries who are the worst environmental offenders, the survey found.
They lead the least sustainable lifestyles because they live in bigger houses, have more cars and consume more goods and food.
The United States was identified as the biggest culprit for unsustainable consumption among developed countries while at the other end of the scale Brazil and India were judged to be the least environmentally greedy. The UK finished mid-table.
The survey was carried out by the National Geographic Society and the international polling firm GlobeScan in 14 countries cross the globe.
A thousand people in each country were questioned about environmentally sustainable consumption and behaviour taking particular account of housing, transportation, food and goods.
The "Greendex 2008: Consumer Choice and the Environment" survey looks at environmentally sustainable consumption and behaviour among consumers in the 14 countries. It is the first to rank the performance of individual consumers rather than countries as a whole.
The online survey questioned 14,000 consumers in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hungary, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Spain and the United States.
A panel of 27 international experts in global sustainability helped identify the crucial issues. Each person was given a score that reflected the environmental impact of their lifestyle which included the size and energy-efficiency of their home, commuting habits and use of fresh water, among dozens of other measures.
Consumption was determined both by the choices consumers actively make - such as repairing rather than replacing items, using cold water to wash laundry, choosing green products rather than environmentally unfriendly ones - and choices that are controlled more by their circumstances - such as the climate they live in or the availability of green products or public transport.
Brazil and India tied for the highest Greendex score for environmentally sustainable consumption at 60 points each. They were followed by China (56.1), Mexico (54.3), Hungary (53.2) and Russia (52.4).
Among consumers in wealthy countries, Great Britain, Germany and Australia each had a Greendex score of 50.2. Spain scored 50.0 and Japan, 49.1.
Other low-scoring consumers were Canada with 48.5 and the French with 48.7 but U.S. consumers had the lowest Greendex score of all at 44.9.
The survey, which will now be conducted annually, found that the scores are likely to change in the near future as developing countries become more successful and their consumers demand a standard of living equal to that enjoyed by the wealthiest countries.
It found that people in all countries are taking some action to reduce consumption and waste.
Those in the developing countries were most concerned that their behaviour and personal choices were more environmentally friendly than those in developed countries.
They also feel more responsible for environmental problems than those in developed countries, feel strongest that global warming will worsen their way of life and are more prepared to discuss the environment. They feel the most guilt about their environmental impact and are willing to do the most to minimize their impact.
Terry Garcia, National Geographic's executive vice president of Mission Programs, said: "The Greendex gives us an unprecedented, meaningful look at how consumers across the globe are behaving. It will allow us over time to assess the progress that people are making to conserve, minimize waste and protect natural resources for the future.
"Consumers who score highest have a responsibility to maintain their behaviour and provide an example to those who need to improve.
"We hope the study inspires all consumers, particularly those in countries where consumers scored lowest, to adopt the best behaviours of those who scored well, and that consumers in countries with expanding economies, who may consume more in the future, will do so responsibly."
People in developing countries are more likely to:
Live in smaller residences;
Prefer green products and own relatively few appliances or expensive electronic devices;
Walk, cycle, or use public transportation, and choose to live close to their most common destination.
By contrast, consumers in developed countries, who have more environmentally friendly options to choose from, often don’t make those choices.
They have larger homes and are more likely to have air-conditioning.
They generally own more cars, drive alone most frequently and use public transport infrequently.
They are least likely to buy environmentally friendly products and to avoid environmentally unfriendly products.
U.S. consumers scored worse than those in any other country, developing or developed, on housing, transportation and goods.
They are by far the least likely to use public transportation, to walk or bike to their destinations or to eat locally grown foods. They have among the largest average residence size in the survey. Only 15 percent say they minimize their use of fresh water.
Discovering Your Greendex Score:
Individuals a can find out where they rank on the Greendex scale by visiting National Geographic Greendex Scale and taking an abbreviated survey.
They can also examine the Greendex survey results by country, measure their knowledge of some basic green issues against what others around the world know, and get tips on living a more environmentally friendly lifestyle.
WTF????!!!!!
Brazil is notorious for its destruction of the Amazon Rain Forest!
A good laugh.
Most people who live at a higher standard of living have worked their asses off to get that standard of living. While we too want to protect the environment we aren’t willing to live in a mud hut to make it happen.
so sweet never got to use it
Bravo Sierra
If they have a "residence" at all.
Prefer green products and own relatively few appliances or expensive electronic devices;
Primarily because they aren't...what's that word? Oh, right they're not available to the common folk in "developing" countries.
Walk, cycle, or use public transportation, and choose to live close to their most common destination.
Maybe they should have bought some carbon credits?
They don't have garbage dumps because they just use their streets. And toxic waste is just poured into the open sewers.
First belly laugh I’ve had in a long time....
This is so absurd, it defies belief.
There should be an award for this stuff.
Well DUH! If they had the money and similar resources we have they would be living high on the hog too.
People from third world countries don’t risk their lives for nothing just trying to get here to escape those hellholes.
http://www.wwltv.com/local/stories/wwl0808mlcuba.e09b814a.html#
I let my membership to the National Geographic Society lapse twenty five years ago, when the handwriting was on the wall that they'd gone over to the dark side. Periodically they send those wantcha back letters, which I return in their prepaid envelope with a note that says "GFY."
Thanks for reaffirming my judgment.
The National Geographic actually published this tripe? So they are saying that other countries that eschew modern conveniences are “greener” than the US? I take it life span isn’t measure. Actually, given it is NG, it is probably cause for docking points.
So if we all live like cavemen, minus the fire of course, then we can all live GREEN. Yay.
PUKE!!!
Obviously they’ve never been out of their ivory towers!
Reminder
This Sunday on C-Span 2:
Really!?!?!
It seems to me that those in poorer countries might “care” more about environmental issues, but it’s the richer, capitalist countries that actually do something about it.
Does anyone remember the environmental nightmares revealed with the collapse of the Iron Curtain?
As usual, for libs “caring” is more important than actual, concrete results!
Mark
As usual, for libs “caring” is more important than actual, concrete results!
^^
Bingo!
Living the green lifestyle...
It is the better-off consumers living more comfortably in developed western countries who are the worst environmental offenders... They lead the least sustainable lifestyles because they live in bigger houses, have more cars and consume more goods and food.
One of the worst environmental offenders...
Well, he's certainly offensive.
I only recently did that.
Scientific American is another Dark Side recruit and most recently Science News.
The author's head is as soft as an overripe tomato
I think few scientists--many of whom are now sympathetic to the project--understand how dangerous the politicization of science really is. In my first year as a grad student in Physics I came across a curious little book in the physical sciences library stacks attacking the theory of relativity as a "Jewish Theory". The book, published in 1937, was undoubtedly of Nazi origin. Reflecting then on how thoroughly the propagandists (of all forms) of socialism had taken hold in the 1930's struck me like a physical blow.
A "Jewish Theory." How insane! And yet... and yet...
Hopefully, we are not as close to the radical excesses of those times as it sometimes appears, but yes, you're quite correct about Scientific American. One of the great icons of my childhood. It has been lost, unfortunately for some time.
In the poorer countries, every day is Earth Day, or more accurately, Dirt and Squalor Day.
Credit to P. J. O’Rourke for the latter terminology.
What a pant load. Go to Haiti. There isn’t one bird in the air. There aren’t any trees bigger around than about an inch. There aren’t any squirrels, snakes, or any kind of wild life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.