The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature
Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
Kemas Mohd Saddam Abd Somad, Ayyu Latifah Budyaningrum and Putu Danindya Krisnadhi Dewi
Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Diponegoro, Jl. Prof. Soedarto SH, Semarang, Indonesia
Keywords: Values Orientation, Nature Contact, Childhood Nature Experience, Pro-environmental Behavior, Systematic
Literature Review.
Abstract: Environmental issues caused by human activities have been threatening the sustainability of both people and
the planet. Thus a shift towards a more environmentally friendly society has become very important.
Promoting pro-environmental behavior is seen to be the first key to reach sustainability. The role of values,
contact with nature, and childhood nature experiences seem to be important in predicting pro-environmental
behavior on the individual level. Therefore, this article aims to systematically review the relation between
values orientation, nature contact, and childhood nature experience with pro-environmental behavior
respectively. We identified articles related to the topic from the following databases: ScienceDirect, Scopus,
and ProQuest. A total of 1241 articles were found with only 21 matching the inclusion criteria thus eligible
to be reviewed. Based on our review, values orientation such as biospheric and altruistic values predicted
pro-environmental behavior mainly through a chain of effects, while egoistic values showed contradicting
results on pro-environmental behavior according to the situational cues which was explained in the paper.
Contact with nature did not show constant results in predicting pro-environmental behavior, thus reasons
and suggestions were investigated. Childhood nature experiences influenced pro-environmental behavior in
adulthood through positive and emotional bonding with the natural environment.
1 INTRODUCTION
Anthropogenic environmental issues such as climate
change, biodiversity loss, lack of clean water
resources, and pollution are threatening
environmental sustainability (Arora et al., 2018).
Human activities, mainly rooted in economics,
without paying attention to the environmental
impact such as overconsumption, inefficient energy
use, and irresponsible waste management are
accounted for the issues (Schröder et al., 2019; Alabi
et al., 2019). Unsustainable behavior on the
individual level then affects a larger scale of
production or the wider environment. Therefore,
changes in human behavior become very important
to ensure the sustainability of both people and the
environment. In order to make that happen,
promoting people to act more pro-environmentally
would play a crucial role.
Pro-environmental behavior is defined as a
behavior that undertakes the intention change and
gives benefit to the environment (Stern in Vicente-
Molina et al., 2018). Pro-environmental behavior, as
the name suggests, can serve to protect the
environment as a whole and the ecosystem from the
destructive impact of human activities (Kiatkawsin
& Han, 2017; Stern, 2000). Larson et al. (2015)
identified four dimensions of pro-environmental
behavior comprising conservation lifestyle behavior,
social environmentalism, environmental citizenship,
and land stewardship. Conservation lifestyles refer
to behaviors such as recycling, energy conservation,
eco-friendly consumption, etc. Social
environmentalism is related to engagement in social
movement for the environment (joining
environmental organization). Environmental
citizenship refers to civic engagement like pro-
environmental voting. While land stewardship is
related to activities on improving the local wildlife
(conservation). However, a question was raised on
the factors that influence these behaviors.
Research has shown that values are important as
a predictor of pro-environmental behavior (De Groot
& Steg, 2007). Values are desirable goals or
standards that serve as guiding principles, transcend
specific situations, and form a system of priorities
238
Somad, K., Budyaningrum, A. and Dewi, P.
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review.
DOI: 10.5220/0010811000003347
In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Psychological Studies (ICPsyche 2021), pages 238-250
ISBN: 978-989-758-580-7
Copyright
c
 2022 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

(Schwartz, 1992). However, values may not be
directly translated into pro-environmental behavior,
meaning it is mainly mediated by other constructs.
Hence several theoretical frameworks tried to
explain the relation (Stern, 2000; Werff & Steg,
2016). Further, values that are held by a person
related to the environment may not always be
actualized into an actual behavior despite its
transcending trait (Steg et al., 2014a).
The theories that are commonly used in defining
the role of values in predicting pro-environmental
behavior are Value-Belief-Norm Theory (VBN) by
Stern et al. (1999) and the new parsimonious Value-
Identity-Personal Norm (VIP) model by Werff &
Steg (2016). VBN posits value as a predictor of pro-
environmental through a causal chain of effects in
relation to beliefs and personal norms by being the
antecedent (Stern et al., 1999). Four values
orientation were identified to be a significant
antecedent of pro-environmental behavior:
biospheric, altruistic, egoistic, and hedonic (Steg et
al. 2014b). Biospheric values are related to concern
on the welfare of nature, altruistic values are focused
on other people’s welfare, egoistic values are
associated with self-promoting and guarding
individual’s resources, while hedonic values are
focused on personal gratification and satisfaction
(Stern et al., 1993; Steg et al., 2014, in Nordfjærn &
Rundmo, 2019). However, several researches have
combined the biospheric and altruistic values
forming a single orientation, bio-altruistic values, in
the sense that both were activated by a morality that
transcends fulfillment of one’s need to the welfare of
nature and humanity (Nordlund & Garvill, 2002; van
Riper & Kyle, 2014; Kim & Seock, 2019).
The VIP model proposes that feelings of moral
obligation are influencing people to engage in
environmental behavior and further reflect how
people see themself as pro-environment (Werff &
Steg, 2016). This model was developed to
understand pro-environmental behavior through
analyzing the relations among biospheric value,
environmental self-identity, and personal norms
(Ates, 2020). In the VIP model, biospheric values
are the first and core component that determined
one's pro-environmental action which affected
environmental self-identity and consequently
personal norms. The reason why only biospheric
values were included is that only these values were
found to be significantly related to the other
variables in the causal and sequential chain of VBN
(Werf & Steg, 2016).
Besides values orientation, contact with the
natural environment seems to be important in
predicting pro-environmental behavior (Rosa &
Collado, 2019). Contact means any form of human
interaction with the living nature of plants and
animals, together with the air, water, and
geographical landscapes (Martin et al., 2020; Hartig
et al., 2014). Keniger et al. (2013) classified three
types of contact with nature which are intentionally,
indirectly, and incidentally. Further explained that
activities of being in nature with direct attention like
gardening are considered to be intentional,
experiencing nature without being physically present
in nature itself like watching nature videos is
considered to be indirect, and experiencing nature
through a by-product of another activity like
encountering greenspaces is considered to be
incidental. However, direct contact with nature is
found to be the best way of connecting with nature
compared to the indirect one (Lumber et al., 2017;
Mayer et al., 2009). By establishing contact with
nature the propensity of people to be engaged in pro-
environmental behavior is likely to be increased as
well (Rosa & Collado, 2019).
The past can shape an individual's future because
it shapes identity, so can past experiences in nature,
especially in childhood (Prévot et al., 2018). Bardi &
Goodwin (2011, in Steg, 2016) said that the values
systems are formed throughout childhood thus
creating a stable orientation of their behavior. The
process started from the first time children establish
contact with nature, what is called microsystem
interaction, as a site for the journey of coexistence
with nature which determines a pathway of
environmentalism in adulthood (Jensen & Olsen,
2019). However, children’s direct contact with the
natural environment has been declining over the
recent decades thus affecting their care for nature
(Soga & Gaston, 2016; Chawla, 2020). Researchers
have found that childhood nature experiences
influenced positive attitudes towards biodiversity
and willingness to coexist (Hosaka et al., 2017),
greater contact with nature, and further pro-
environmental behavior in adulthood (Rosa et al.,
2018). Therefore, either the past or the present
experience in nature is suggested to be important in
influencing pro-environmental behavior.
As humans’ behaviors are causing more damage
to the environment, there’s a need to change
people’s lifestyles to be more sustainable. By
understanding the antecedents of pro-environmental
behavior, whether it’s innate psychological
constructs like values or the experience in nature
itself both in the past and the present, we can then
design interventions or develop policies that
promote pro-environmental behavior as a way to
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
239

achieve sustainability. However, questions were
raised whether each value orientation constantly
predicts pro-environmental behavior, whether
contact with nature alone is enough to predict pro-
environmental behavior, and whether childhood
nature experiences are significant enough to predict
pro-environmental behavior in adulthood. Therefore,
this study aims to systematically review the relation
between values orientation, nature contact, and
childhood nature experience with pro-environmental
behavior respectively.
2 METHODS
We conducted a systematic literature review
following the PRISMA guidelines (Page et al., 2021)
in order to find the relationship between values
orientation and pro-environmental behavior, nature
contact and pro-environmental behavior, as well as
childhood nature experience and pro-environmental
behavior. The literature research was initiated in
June 2021 by collecting articles from ScienceDirect,
Scopus, and ProQuest. We used the following
keywords on the literature search phase: 1)
“biospheric value” OR “altruistic value” OR
“egoistic value” OR “hedonic value” AND “pro-
environmental behavior”; 2) “nature contact” AND
“pro-environmental behavior”; 3) “childhood” AND
“nature experience” AND “pro-environmental
behavior”.
We used the following inclusion criteria to find
relevant articles: 1) Articles related to values
orientation (biospheric, altruistic, egoistic, and
hedonic) and pro-environmental behavior, nature
contact and pro-environmental behavior, and
childhood nature experience and pro-environmental
behavior; 2) the sample used was adult or aged 18
and above; 3) research or conference articles; 4)
published in the last 10 years (2011-2021); 5)
written in English.
In addition, the following exclusion criteria were
used to help excluding irrelevant articles: 1)
Review/conceptual articles; 2) subjects used in the
study were aged below 18; 3) outside area of interest
such as sustainable agriculture and fisheries; 4)
studying the effect of values/nature
contact/childhood nature experience on pro-
environmental intention, attitude, and willingness
(not actual reported behavior); 5) using values
conceptualization and measurement that is not based
on VBN or VIP.
3 RESULTS
A PRISMA flow diagram was developed to
summarize the article selection process (see Figure
1). We identified 1301 articles which consisted of
815 articles in ScienceDirect, 111 articles in
Scopus, and 375 articles in ProQuest. A total of 45
articles were excluded automatically by the
reference automation tools (Mendeley), 11 articles
were excluded by using the tools feature to detect
duplicates, and 4 articles were excluded because of
insufficient article details, resulting in 1241 articles
for title/abstract screening. We screened the articles
that mentioned the reviewed variables in the title,
abstract, or keywords to be included. A total of
1111 articles were excluded resulting in 130
articles to be retrieved. 10 articles were not
accessible leaving 120 articles to be assessed for
eligibility. Finally, we excluded 99 articles based
on the exclusion criteria which left 21 articles
consisting of 18 articles on values relation with
pro-environmental behavior, 1 article on nature
contact relation with pro-environmental behavior,
and 2 articles on nature contact and childhood
nature experience relation with pro-environmental
behavior.
Figure 1: PRISMA Flow Diagram for Systematic
Literature Review.
We further summarized the findings into two
tables that differ the finding of value orientation
influence on pro-environmental behavior (see
Table 1) with findings from nature contact and
childhood nature experience influence on pro-
environmental behavior (see Table 2). The
population from all of the studies we included
ICPsyche 2021 - International Conference on Psychological Studies
240

consists of Asia, Australia, Europe, America, and
Canada.
We found 18 articles related to value
orientation. From the findings, we separate the
form of pro-environmental behavior into general
pro-environmental behavior and specific pro-
environmental behavior. Results on the general
pro-environmental group that consists of 6 articles
show that values are directly and indirectly
influenced pro-environmental behavior through
mediators, such as personal norms (van Riper &
Kyle, 2014; Kim & Seock, 2019), environmental
worldviews (van Riper & Kyle, 2014),
environmental self-identity (Balundė et al., 2019;
Ajibade & Boateng, 2021; Wang et al., 2021),
ecological grief, and climate change belief
(Marshall et al., 2019). On the other hand, some
studies showed egoistic values indirectly affected
the decrease of the likelihood of engagement in
pro-environmental behavior (van Riper & Kyle,
2014; Ajibade & Boateng, 2021).
Van Riper & Kyle on 2014 researched the
influence of bio-altruistic value and egoistic value
on pro-environmental behavior through some
mediators. This study revealed environmental
worldviews’ influence is sequential to other
mediators, starting from giving influence to
awareness of consequences, affecting ascription of
responsibility, and personal norm. The study
conducted by Balundė et al. (2019) also found
similar results where biospheric values indirectly
affect pro-environmental behavior through
environmental self-identity, but this research also
specified the influenced behaviors like recycling,
environmental activism, and fuel-efficient driving
while sustainable transport use was not
significantly predicted. Biospheric and altruistic
value were also found to affect climate change
belief and ecological grief that influence pro-
environmental behavior in the study conducted by
Marshall et al. (2019). Unlike the other values,
egoistic value seems to influence the decreasing
effect on the likelihood to engage in pro-
environmental behavior indirectly. The study
conducted by van Riper & Kyle (2014) showed that
egoistic values both negatively and directly
influence personal norms thus causing the decrease
of pro-environmental behavior engagement. A
study by Ajibade & Boateng in 2021 also supports
the previous finding. From the conducted study,
results show that egoistic value has a relation to
less effective engagement in pro-sustainable
behavior.
Specific pro-environmental behavior groups
consisted of 12 articles with several different
outcome variables as follows: planting native
vegetation, fuel-efficient driving, purchase
behavior, sustainable clothing purchase behavior,
preserving nature and biodiversity action, pro-
environmental personal practice & habitual
behavior, voting behavior, trash separation
behavior, green technology purchasing frequency,
and green consumer behavior showed different yet
related result with one another (Raymond et al.,
2019; Werff et al., 2013; Nguyen et al., 2016;
Nguyen et al., 2017; Fornara et al., 2020;
Gkargkavouzi et al., 2019; Aguilar-Luzón, 2020;
Pivetti et al., 2020; Ajibade & Boateng, 2021;
Berman Caggiano et al., 2021; Wu & Zhu, 2021).
From the reviewed study, it's known that on the
purchase behavior outcome variable, biospheric
and altruistic values seem to hold a big role in
one’s personal norms (Nguyen et al., 2016; Nguyen
et al., 2017). Other purchase behavior study that
analyzes sustainable clothing purchase behavior
found that self-transcendence values (biospheric &
altruistic) positively influenced attitude towards
sustainable clothing and sustainable clothing
purchase behavior, while self-enhancement
(egoistic & hedonic) values negatively influenced
positive attitude toward sustainable clothing and
did not have a significant direct effect on
sustainable clothing purchase behavior (Jacobs et
al., 2018). Results of the study conducted by
Berman Caggiano et al. (2021) also found that
biospheric and altruistic value are positively
associated with environmental concern and green
lifestyle orientation that indirectly influence green
technology purchasing frequency. A correlational
study by Aguilar-Luzón et al. (2020) found a
positive relation between biospheric and altruistic
values with pro-environmental voting behavior.
However several findings showed contrary results
where biospheric, altruistic, and egoistic values
appeared to have a significant effect on
environmental concerns but did not predict planting
intention or behavior (Raymond et al. 2011).
Findings in a study that was conducted by Pivetti et
al. (2020) on trash separation behavior shows that
biospheric values and egoistic values did not
predict pro-environmental attitude-behavior but
altruistic values did.
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
241

Table 1: Values orientation influence on pro-environmental behavior.
Reference Country Values
orientation
Mediator
variables
Other
constructs
Outcome
variables
Results
Raymond et
al. 2011)
Australia Biospheric
value,
altruistic
value, &
egoistic value
Personal norms,
awareness of
consequences,
environmental
concern, & place
attachment
- Pro-
environmental
behavior
(planting of
native
vegetation)
Biospheric, altruistic, & egoistic values each have
a significant effect on environmental concern.
Environmental concerns did not predict planting
intention or behavior. Thus value orientations did
not predict native planting intention or behavior.
Werff et al.
(2013)
Netherlands Biospheric
value
Energy-saving
self-identity
Intention to
reduce energy
Energy use
(fuel-efficient
driving)
Biospheric value influenced fuel-efficient driving
through energy-saving identity.
van Riper &
Kyle (2014)
Visitors of
ecoregion
in
California:
Anacapa
and Santa
Cruz
Bio-altruistic
values &
egoistic
values
Personal norms,
environmental
worldviews,
ascription of
responsibility, and
awareness of
consequences
- Pro-
environmental
behavior
Bio-altruistic values indirectly affect pro-
environmental behavior through personal norms.
Mediation through environmental worldviews also
present which further sequentially influence
awareness of consequences, affecting ascription of
responsibility, and personal norm.
Egoistic values directly and negatively influence
personal norms which decrease the likelihood of
engagement in pro-environmental behavior.
Nguyen et al.
(2016)
Vietnam Biospheric
values
Attitude Towards
Environmental
Protection,
Subjective Norms,
Perceived
Inconvenience,
Environmental
Self-Identity, &
Purchase Intention
- Pro-
Environmental
Purchase
Behavior
Biospheric values positively influenced attitude
towards environmental protection and
environmental self-identity which translated into
pro-environmental purchase behavior of energy-
efficient appliances.
Biospheric value influenced subjective norms
which then indirectly influenced pro-
environmental purchase behavior of energy-
efficient appliances through purchase intention.
Biospheric value negated the effect of perceived
inconvenience related to pro-environment purchase
behavior which then has a positive effect on pro-
environmental purchase behavior of energy-
efficient appliances.
Nguyen et al.
(2017)
Vietnam Altruistic
value
Personal norms,
environmental
attitudes,
subjective norms,
& perceived
barriers
- Pro-
environmental
purchase
behavior
Altruistic values positively affected personal
norms, environmental attitudes, subjective norms,
and perceived barriers that influenced pro-
environmental purchase behavior.
Jacobs et al.
(2018)
Germany Self-
transcendence
values
(biospheric-
altruistic) &
self-
enhancement
values
(egoistic-
hedonic)
Positive attitude
towards
sustainable
clothing
Online and
catalog
shopping
affinity,
Preference for
durability,
Fashion
consciousness,
& Price
sensitivity
Sustainable
Clothing
Purchase
Behavior
Self-transcendence values positively and directly
influenced the positive attitude towards sustainable
clothing and sustainable clothing purchase
behavior in which the association is stronger on
attitude than behavior.
Self-enhancement values negatively and directly
influenced positive attitude towards sustainable
clothing but did not have a significant direct effect
on sustainable clothing purchase behavior, thus the
influence on behavior is mediated by attitude.
Balundė et al.
(2019)
Lithuania Biospheric
values
Environmental
Self-Identity
- Pro-
Environmental
Behavior
Biospheric values correlated positively with pro-
environmental behavior such as recycling,
environmental activism, and fuel-efficient driving
but correlated negatively while not significant with
sustainable transportation use.
Biospheric value had a significant indirect
relationship with pro-environmental behavior when
mediated with environmental self-identity on
behaviors like recycling and environmental
activism but not with fuel-efficient driving and
sustainable transportation.
ICPsyche 2021 - International Conference on Psychological Studies
242

Table 1: Values orientation influence on pro-environmental behavior (cont.).
Reference Country Values
orientation
Mediator
variables
Other
constructs
Outcome
variables
Results
Fornara et al.
(2020)
Belgium,
Finland,
Germany,
Italy,
Slovenia,
Netherlands,
United
Kingdom
Biospheric
values
Moral norm,
perceived
behavioral
control, general
pro-environmental
beliefs, awareness
of consequences,
and ascription of
responsibility
Injunctive
norm
Action for
preserving
nature and
biodiversity
Biospheric value directly influenced action for
preserving nature and biodiversity. The mediation
through perceived behavioral control was also
found. A sequential chain of effect from biospheric
values to moral norms which influenced action for
preserving nature and biodiversity through general
pro-environmental beliefs, awareness of
consequences, and ascription of responsibility was
supported.
Gkargkavouzi
et al. (2019)
Greece Biospheric
values
Identity, perceived
b
ehavioral control,
subjective norms,
personal norms,
ecological
worldview,
awareness of
consequences,
ascription of
responsibility,
attitude, and
intention to adopt
pro-environmental
behavior
Demographic
Factors
Pro-
environmental
personal
practice &
habitual
behavior
Biospheric values influenced pro-environmental
personal practices & habitual behavior from a
sequential chain of mediation. All of the effect
relations in the path analysis were significant thus
can be concluded biospheric values indirectly
influenced personal practices and habitual
behavior.
Kim & Seock
(2019)
United
States
Bio-altruistic
values &
egoistic
values
Personal norms Social norms Pro-
environmental
behavior
Bio-altruistic and egoistic values are positively
related to personal norms which influenced pro-
environmental behavior.
Marshall et
al. (2019)
Australia Biospheric
values,
altruistic
value, egoistic
value, &
hedonic value
Climate change
belief, ecological
grief
- Pro-
environmental
behavior
Pro-environmental behavior was influenced by
biospheric and altruistic values. Biospheric value,
altruistic value, and egoistic value affected Reef
Grief as ecological grief. Besides that, biospheric
value and altruistic value influenced climate
change belief. People with climate change beliefs
are more likely to feel reef grief and show pro-
environmental behavior.
Hedonic values were found to be insignificant in
predicting reef grief, environmental behavior, and
climate change beliefs.
Aguilar-
Luzón et al.
(2020)
Spain Biospheric
value, socio-
altruistic
value,
egocentric
value
- Environmental
belief,
connectivity
with nature
Pro
environmental
voting
behavior
Pro-environmental voters are inclined more to
biospheric and altruistic values with a lower
inclination to adhere to egocentric values. There is
also a significant positive correlation between
biospheric values and altruistic values with pro-
environmental vote, while the correlation between
egoistic values and pro-environmental vote was
negative.
Pivetti et al.
(2020)
Southern
Italy
Egoistic
value,
altruistic
value, &
biospheric
value
Attitude and
behavioral
intention
Level of
knowledge,
internal
attribution,
social norms,
& political
trust
Trash
separation
behavior
Biospheric values and altruistic values were highly
correlated with attitude, behavioral intention, and
trash separation behavior while egoistic values
were not.
Biospheric and egoistic values influence on
attitude towards recycling was not significant
wherein attitude strongly predicted behavioral
intention and trash separation behavior. Only
altruistic values were influential in predicting
attitude thus affecting trash separation behavior.
Ajibade &
Boateng
(2021)
Portland Biospheric
value,
altruistic
value, &
egoistic value
Environmental
self-identity
- Pro-
sustainable
behavior
Biospheric and altruistic values are positively
related to environmental self-identity that are
significantly associated with pro-sustainable
behavior. Whereas egoistic value is related to less
effective engagement in pro-sustainable behavior.
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
243

Table 1: Values orientation influence on pro-environmental behavior (cont.).
Reference Country Values
orientation
Mediator
variables
Other
constructs
Outcome
variables
Results
Berman
Caggiano et
al. (2021)
United
States &
Canada
Biospheric
values &
altruistic
values
Environmental
Concern & Green
Lifestyle
Orientation
Demographic
Factors
Green
Technology
Purchasing
Frequency
Biospheric and altruistic values associated
positively with environmental concern and green
lifestyle orientation, thus indirectly influenced
green technology purchasing frequency.
Lee et al.
(2021)
Upo
Wetland
visitors
Biospheric
value
- Sustainable
intelligence,
destination
social
responsibility
(DSR), visit
experience
Pro-
environmental
behavior
Biospheric values had a positive influence on pro-
environmental behavior.
Wang et al.
(2021)
Netherlands
& China
Biospheric
value
Environmental
self-identity
- Pro-
environmental
behavior
Biospheric value influenced pro-environmental
behavior through environmental identity as a
mediator variable
Wu & Zhu
(2021)
China Biospheric
values &
egoistic
values
Ecological
Worldview &
Personal Norms
Love of
Nature
Green
consumer
behavior
Biospheric values positively predicted ecological
worldview which influenced low-cost green
consumption behavior and personal norm. The
latter predicted both low and high-cost green
consumer behavior.
Egoistic values did not significantly predict
ecological worldview thus no conclusion was
made.
Table 2 contains reviews of the influence nature
contact and childhood nature experience have on
one's pro-environmental behavior. After screening, 3
articles related to the topics were found. All the
findings mainly discuss nature experience but, in a
way refers to nature contact as well. Rosa et al.
(2018) conducted a study with the purpose to
explain the relationship between childhood nature
experience and pro-environmental behavior with
current nature contact and nature connectedness as
the mediator variables. The study found current
nature contact influenced pro-environmental
behavior directly and childhood nature experience
influenced connectedness to nature and pro-
environmental behavior indirectly that manifested
through current nature contact. A study conducted
by Křepelková et al. (2020) as well supports the
influence of childhood nature experience on pro-
environmental behavior in adulthood by the
mediation of affection. The other form of pro-
environmental behavior and its correlation with
experiences of nature is shown through bio-diversity
practices in the research conducted in Paris by
Prévot et al. (2018). Findings suggest that
individuals with nature experiences engagement will
implement biodiversity conservation practice more
than people who did not.
4 DISCUSSION
Our findings on values orientation mainly suggested
that biospheric and altruistic values were significant
predictors of pro-environmental behavior, either
directly or indirectly more than egoistic and hedonic
values, which both latter mainly deter one to act
environmentally friendly. The findings supported the
VBN theory (Stern, 2000) and VIP model (Werff &
Steg, 2016) where most of the influence of values on
pro-environmental behavior was mediated by other
constructs related to beliefs (environmental
worldview, awareness of consequences, ascription of
responsibility, and other types of specific beliefs),
personal norms, and identity. We also found other
constructs that were mediating the influence on pro-
environmental behavior such as subjective norms,
attitude, and perceived behavioral control, thus
reflecting the Theory of Planned Behavior by Ajzen
(1991).
Some studies however revealed conflicting
findings, where biospheric or altruistic values did
not predict pro-environmental behavior directly or
indirectly (Raymond et al., 2011; Pivetti et al.,
2020), biospheric values did not predict sustainable
transportation use (Balundė et al., 2019), different
biospheric values effect on fuel-efficient driving
(Werff et al. 2013; Balundė et al., 2019), and
ICPsyche 2021 - International Conference on Psychological Studies
244

Table 2: Nature contact and childhood nature experiences influence on pro-environmental behavior.
Reference Population Variable
Mediator
variables
Other
constructs
Outcome
variables
Results
Prévot et
al. (2018)
Paris Experiences
of nature
- Knowledge
about
biodiversity,
connectedness
with nature
Pro-
biodiversity
practices
Correlation between experiences of
nature and pro-
b
iodiversity practices
was found. Individuals who engaged
in nature experiences implemented
biodiversity conservation practices
more than those who did not.
Rosa et al
(2018)
Brazil Positive
childhood
nature
experiences
Current
contact with
nature
(frequency) &
nature
connectedness
- Pro-
environmental
behavior
Current contact with nature directly
influenced pro-environmental
behavior while also partially
explained with nature connectedness
mediation.
Childhood nature experiences
indirectly influenced connectedness
to nature and pro-environmental
behavior by the mediation of current
contact with nature.
Křepelkov
á et al.
(2020)
Moravian
(part of
Czech
Republic)
Interaction
with nature
in childhood
(one-time
childhood
experiences
and long-
term
childhood
experiences)
Interaction
with nature in
adulthood
(frequency),
affective
mediator
(emotional
connection
with nature),
and cognitive
mediator
- Pro-
environmental
behavior in
adulthood
One-time and long-term interaction
with nature in childhood indirectly
influenced pro-environmental
behavior in adulthood by the
mediation of affective mediator.
Interaction with nature in adulthood
correlated with pro-environmental
behavior but did not have a
significant effect on the path
analysis.
egoistic values that positively predicted reef grief or
personal norms which in turns influenced
engagement in pro-environmental behavior
(Marshall et al., 2019; Kim & Seock, 2019).
The conflicting findings on biospheric and/or
altruistic values may have some situational factors
that prevent the causal effect to form (Raymond et
al., 2011; Pivetti et al., 2020; Balundė et al., 2019).
If we look further at the outcome variables, these
studies targeted specific pro-environmental
behaviors which are native planting behavior, trash
separation behavior, and sustainable transportation
use where perceived costs and benefits
(economically or socially) may play important roles
that deter them from doing the behaviors (Steg,
2016). In terms of economic cost, we can apply the
condition on Balundė et al. (2019) study on the
effect biospheric values have on sustainable
transportation use. Using public transportation
instead of personal vehicles can be considered
effortful thus hinder one from doing such behavior.
While social cost can be applied to Pivetti (2020)
and Raymond et al. (2011) study. Specifically, in
Pivetti (2020) study, social norm and internal
attribution play a great role in predicting trash
separation behaviors in Italy suggesting that it was
more of social responsibility rather than values-
oriented behavior. While Raymond et al. (2011)
study stated that the injunctive norms on the use of
land for production rather than conservation may
have a greater effect on the behavioral decision than
the values. Thus, in line with Steg (2016) regarding
the perceived social cost which can deter or promote
one to act environmentally friendly. People are more
likely to act pro-environment when they think others
do the same (descriptive norms) or when they think
others approve the behavior (injunctive norms). In
addition, hedonic values orientation or principles
held by a person may direct to socially desirable
behavior in order to avoid pain and achieve pleasure
(Ahn, et al., 2020; Steg, 2016). Therefore, it can be
concluded that both social influence and innate
tendency to act in socially desirable ways can
promote or prevent one to act environmentally
friendly. We suggest further research to focus on the
socio-cultural and economical aspects of the
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
245

population studied and its influence on values
orientation and pro-environmental behavior. We also
found conflicted findings where biospheric values in
one study affected fuel-efficient driving (Werff et al.
2013), while in another study did not (Balundė et al.,
2019). Therefore, pointing out research in the future
to investigate this.
The contrary findings on the egoistic values'
positive effect on reef grief (emotional suffering
related to reef losses) or personal norms may have
something to do with the values themselves
(Marshall et al., 2019; Kim & Seock, 2019).
Individuals with higher egoistic values orientation
tend to focus on the fulfillment of self rather than
beyond self, this is somehow contradictory with the
findings in the previously mentioned studies.
However, Marshall et al. (2019) and Kim & Seock
(2019) explained something similar that if
conserving nature benefits the individuals and it
surpasses the perceived cost, one’s with egoistic
values orientation would likely be engaged in that
behavior. This could be purely influenced by
individual reasoning or by the community.
Therefore, also in line with the explanation about the
situational cause of biospheric and altruistic values
that did not predict pro-environmental behavior
discussed above. However, this also indicates
egoistic values, not just biospheric and altruistic,
might be influential in promoting pro-environmental
behavior at least in some situational cues which will
be discussed in the following paragraph.
De Groot & Steg (2009) and Steg (2016) have
discussed the importance of creating a balance
between activating biospheric and altruistic values
and reducing the conflict with egoistic and hedonic
values. Activating biospheric and altruistic values
alone do not always predict pro-environmental
behavior especially if the behavior is perceived to be
costly (socially or economically), conflicting with
their egoistic and hedonic interest, e.g. buying
organic foods, reducing car use, traveling using public
transports. However, when people’s pro-
environmental behaviors are only based on egoistic or
hedonic values, as soon as performing the behaviors
no longer benefits them, are perceived to be too
costly, or become less pleasurable then they will stop
performing those behaviors. It can be concluded that
in the end, biospheric and altruistic values are the
ones that predict pro-environmental behavior the most
stable. Hence policies should focus on how to form
and activate people’s bio-altruistic values while also
making pro-environmental behavior less costly
therefore reducing the conflicts between bio-altruistic
values and egoistic-hedonic values.
Research findings on the influence of nature
contact showed some contradictory outcomes.
Prévot et al. (2018) study shows nature contact,
specifically everyday experiences, correlated
positively with pro-biodiversity practices.
Křepelková et al. (2020) study suggests that
interaction with nature correlates with pro-
environmental behavior but does not have a
significant effect on the path analysis. However, a
contrary finding by Rosa et al. (2018) shows that
current contact with nature has a significant direct
effect on pro-environmental behavior and indirectly
through nature connectedness. However, Rosa et al.
(2018) and Křepelková et al. (2020) studied the
frequency of contact with the natural environment
effects on pro-environmental behavior, which opens
up another discussion about whether frequency
equals to engagement. Therefore, we suggest
research in the future to focus on the engagement,
especially mindful engagement, to nature and its
relation with pro-environmental behavior. According
to a review article on the relationship between
experiences in nature and environmental behavior,
the types of natural environment exposures,
activities, also the subject's socio-demographic
status should be considered as well (Rosa &
Collado, 2019).
Our review on the relation between childhood
nature experience and adult pro-environmental
behavior shows relatable findings. For childhood
nature experiences to affect future pro-
environmental behavior, the experiences have to
include some type of positive emotional bonding or
connection with nature, therefore, inducing
emotional connectedness thus shapes preferences to
coexist with nature. We suggest research in the
future to focus on studying the nature experience
and connectedness to nature in the children themself.
We also suggest for schools to include educational
activity in the outdoors and for parents to let the
children have meaningful and emotional contact
with the natural environment. Several studies about
building connection to nature in children through
education and activities have been done in the past
to further support this (Barrable, 2019; Barrable et
al., 2021).
Finally, to synthesize, future research should
focus on the forming of bio-altruistic values
orientation in children, having mindful engagement
with nature, and connecting to nature as the
prerequisites needed to engage in more
environmentally friendly behavior. It’s also
suggested to consider socio-cultural and economic
aspects where the study is conducted. Researchers in
ICPsyche 2021 - International Conference on Psychological Studies
246

the future should consider activating people’s
biospheric and altruistic values on designing
intervention or making it nature-based to promote
pro-environmental behavior. While in terms of
policymaking, there’s an urgency on making
environmental education from an early age
accessible to all thus hoping it would form a stable
biospheric orientation for future generations. In
addition, making sustainability less costly would
encourage people to act pro-environmentally and
reduce the conflict in their values system.
This paper also comes with limitations. We only
included studies that used subjects on the age of 18
and above, which may lead to the omission of
several findings, especially on the study about nature
contact and childhood nature experiences. Further,
we also excluded articles that did not address actual
pro-environmental behavior as the dependent
variable. In the process of abstract screening, we
also can not make sure all of the papers excluded
were completely irrelevant even with the help of
inclusion criteria and keywords matching.
Regardless of the limitations, we hope that our paper
can help in understanding the impact of values
orientation, nature contact, and childhood nature
experiences on pro-environmental behavior.
5 CONCLUSION
Anthropogenic environmental issues have been
threatening the sustainability of the people and the
planet. Pro-environmental behavior is seen to be the
key to change people’s lifestyles to be more
sustainable. By understanding the factors that
influenced this behavior, which we specifically limit
to values orientation, nature contact, and childhood
nature experience, we can then design intervention
or develop policy to promote the behavior. Our
literature review showed that values orientation
mainly biospheric and altruistic values positively
influence pro-environmental behavior which can be
directly or indirectly through mediating variables
that formed a causal chain of effect. We found
contradictory outcomes on nature contact relation
with pro-environmental behavior studies where
results vary on each reviewed article, thus
suggesting further research or systematic review on
investigating nature contact as an independent
variable while the mediator could be nature
connectedness. Our review on childhood nature
experience influence on pro-environmental behavior
showed the effects were mediated by emotional
factors, therefore suggesting parents or educational
practitioners give their child a time to form an
emotional connection with nature thus further
predict pro-environmental behavior in adulthood. To
conclude, we suggest interventions to consider
activating biospheric and altruistic values or making
the intervention nature-based. We also suggest
policymakers consider forming biospheric or
altruistic orientations in people from a young age
through environmental education that is accessible
to all. Making pro-environmental behavior less
costly is also suggested to reduce the conflict in
people’s value system, thus it’s more likely for them
to act environmentally friendly.
AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION
KMSAS conceived the study, drafted the manuscript,
and designed the search strategy. KMSAS, ALB, and
PDKD collected and analyzed the literature. KMSAS,
PDKD, and ALB worked on writing the manuscript.
All authors were involved in revising the manuscript
and have agreed to the final content.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank Fakultas Psikologi
Universitas Diponegoro for holding the International
Conference on Psychological Studies (ICPSYCHE
2021) that gave us a medium to present our study.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
Aguilar-Luzón, M. C., Carmona, B., Calvo-Salguero, A.,
& Castillo Valdivieso, P. A. (2020). Values,
environmental beliefs, and connection with nature as
predictive factors of the pro-environmental vote in
Spain. Frontiers in Psychology, 11.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01043
Ahn, I., Kim, S., & Kim, M. (2020). The relative
importance of values, social norms, and enjoyment-
based motivation in explaining pro-environmental
product purchasing behavior in apparel domain.
Sustainability, 12(17), 6797. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su12176797
Ajibade, I., & Boateng, G. O. (2021). Predicting why
people engage in pro-sustainable behaviors in Portland
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
247

Oregon: The role of environmental self-identity,
personal norm, and socio-demographics. Journal of
Environmental Management, 289, 112538.
https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jenvman.2021.112538
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0749-5978(91)90020-T\
Alabi, O. A., Ologbonjaye, K. I., Awosolu, O., Alalade, O.
E. (2019). Public and environmental health effects of
plastic wastes disposal: A review. Journal of
Toxicology and Risk Assess, 5(021).
https://doi.org/10.23937/2572-4061.1510021
Arora, N. K., Fatima, T., Mishra, I., Verma, M., Mishra, J.
& Mishra, V. (2018). Environmental sustainability:
Challenges and viable solutions. Environmental
Sustainability, 1, 309-340. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s42398-018-00038-w
Ates, H. (2020). Merging theory of planned behavior and
value identity personal norm model to explain pro-
environmental behaviors. Sustainable Production and
Consumption, 24, 169-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.spc.2020.07.006
Balundė, A., Perlaviciute, G., & Steg, L. (2019). The
relationship between people’s environmental
considerations and pro-environmental behavior in
Lithuania. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(OCT).
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02319
Barrable, A. (2019). Refocusing environmental education
in the early years: A brief introduction to a pedagogy
for connection. Education Sciences, 9(1), 61.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010061
Barrable, A., Booth, D., Adams, D., & Beauchamp, G.
(2021). Enhancing nature connection and positive
affect in children through mindful engagement with
natural environments. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(9),
4785. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094785
Berman Caggiano, H., Kumar, P., Shwom, R., Cuite, C.,
& Axsen, J. (2021). Explaining green technology
purchases by US and Canadian households: The role
of pro-environmental lifestyles, values, and
environmental concern. Energy Efficiency, 14(5).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-021-09959-8
Chawla, L. (2020). Childhood nature connection and
constructive hope: A review of research on connecting
with nature and coping with environmental loss.
People and Nature, 2(3), 619– 642. https://doi.org/
10.1002/pan3.10128
De Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, L. (2007). Value orientations
and environmental beliefs in five countries: Validity of
an instrument to measure egoistic, altruistic and
biospheric value orientations. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 38(3), 318–332. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0022022107300278
De Groot, J. I. M., & Steg, L. (2009). Mean or green:
Which values can promote stable pro-environmental
behavior? Conservation Letters, 2, 61-66.
https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2009.00048.x
Fornara, F., Molinario, E., Scopelliti, M., Bonnes, M.,
Bonaiuto, F., Cicero, L., Admiraal, J., Beringer, A.,
Dedeurwaerdere, T., de Groot, W., Hiedanpää, J.,
Knights, P., Knippenberg, L., Ovenden, C., Horvat, K.
P., Popa, F., Porras-Gomez, C., Smrekar, A., Soethe,
N., Bonaiuto, M. (2020). The extended Value-Belief-
Norm theory predicts committed action for nature and
biodiversity in Europe. Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 81. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.eiar.
2019.106338
Gkargkavouzi, A., Halkos, G., & Matsiori, S. (2019).
Environmental behavior in a private-sphere context:
Integrating theories of planned behavior and value
belief norm, self-identity and habit. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, 148, 145–156.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.01.039
Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., De Vries, S., & Frumkin, H.
(2014). Nature and health. Annual Review of Public
Health, 35, 207–228. https://doi.org/10.1146/ annurev-
publhealth-032013-182443
Hosaka, T., Sugimoto, K. & Numata, S. (2017). Childhood
experience of nature influences the willingness to
coexist with biodiversity in cities. Palgrave
Communications, 3, 17071. https://doi.org/10.1057/
palcomms.2017.71
Jacobs, K., Petersen, L., Hörisch, J., & Battenfeld, D.
(2018). Green thinking but thoughtless buying? An
empirical extension of the value-attitude-behaviour
hierarchy in sustainable clothing. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 203, 1155–1169. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2018.07.320
Jensen, A. K., & Olsen, S. B. (2019). Childhood nature
experiences and adulthood environmental preferences.
Ecological Economics, 156, 48–56. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.09.011
Kiatkawsin, K., & Han, H. (2017). Young travelers
intention to behave pro-environmentally: merging the
value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory.
Tourism Management, 59, 76–88.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.06.018
Keniger, L., Gaston, K., Irvine, K., & Fuller, R. (2013).
What are the benefits of interacting with nature?
International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 10(3), 913–935. https://doi.org/
10.3390/ijerph10030913
Kim, S. H., & Seock, Y.-K. (2019). The roles of values
and social norm on personal norms and pro-
environmentally friendly apparel product purchasing
behavior: The mediating role of personal norms.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 83–
90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.023
Křepelková, Š. D., Krajhanzl, J., & Kroufek, R. (2020).
The influence of interaction with nature in childhood
on future pro-environmental behavior. Journal of
Baltic Science Education, 19(4), 536–550.
http://dx.doi.org/10.33225/jbse/20.19.536
Larson, L. R., Stedman, R. C., Cooper, C. B., & Decker,
D. J. (2015). Understanding the multi-dimensional
structure of pro-environmental behavior. Journal of
ICPsyche 2021 - International Conference on Psychological Studies
248

Environmental Psychology, 43, 112–124.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.004
Lee, C.-K., Olya, H., Ahmad, M. S., Kim, K. H., & Oh,
M.-J. (2021). Sustainable intelligence, destination
social responsibility, and pro-environmental behaviour
of visitors: Evidence from an eco-tourism site. Journal
of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 47, 365–
376. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jhtm.2021.04.010
Lumber R., Richardson M., & Sheffield D. (2017).
Beyond knowing nature: Contact, emotion,
compassion, meaning, and beauty are pathways to
nature connection. PLOS ONE 12(5), e0177186.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177186
Marshall, N. A., Thiault, L., Beeden, A., Beeden, R.,
Benham, C., Curnock, M. I., Diedrich, A., Gurney, G.,
Jones, L., & Marshall, P. A. (2019). Our
environmental value orientations influence how we
respond to climate change. Frontiers in Psychology,
10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00938
Martin, L., White, M. P., Hunt, A., Richardson, M., Pahl,
S., & Burt, J. (2020). Nature contact, nature
connectedness and associations with health, wellbeing
and pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 68, 101389.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101389
Mayer, F. S., Frantz, C. M., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., &
Dolliver, K. (2009). Why is nature beneficial?: The
role of connectedness to nature. Environment and
Behavior, 41(5), 607–643. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0013916508319745
Nguyen, T. N., Lobo, A., & Greenland, S. (2016). Pro-
environmental purchase behaviour: The role of
consumers’ biospheric values. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 33, 98–108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.08.010
Nguyen, T. N., Lobo, A., & Greenland, S. (2017). The
influence of Vietnamese consumers’ altruistic values
on their purchase of energy efficient appliances. Asia
Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 29(4),
759–777. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/APJML-08-2016-
0151
Nordfjærn, T., & Rundmo, T. (2019). Acceptance of
distinctiveness to driving and pro-environmental
transport intentions: The role of value structure,
environmental beliefs and norm activation.
Transportation, 46(6), 2381-2396. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11116-018-9950-z
Nordlund, A. M., & Garvill, J. (2002). Value structures
behind pro environmental behavior. Environment and
Behavior, 34(6), 740–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/
001391602237244
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I.,
Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L.,
Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R.,
Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu,
M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E.,
McDonald, S., Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020
statement: An updated guideline for reporting
systematic reviews. BMJ, 372.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pivetti, M., Melotti, G., Vespa, M., Cappabianca, F.,
Troilo, F., & Placentino, M. P. (2020). Predicting
recycling in Southern Italy: An exploratory study.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 156.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104727
Prévot, A.-C., Cheval, H., Raymond, R., & Cosquer, A.
(2018). Routine experiences of nature in cities can
increase personal commitment toward biodiversity
conservation. Biological Conservation, 226, 1–8.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.0
7.008
Raymond, C. M., Brown, G., & Robinson, G. M. (2011).
The influence of place attachment, and moral and
normative concerns on the conservation of native
vegetation: A test of two behavioural models. Journal
of Environmental Psychology, 31(4), 323–335.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.08.006
Rosa, C. D., & Collado, S. (2019). Experiences in nature
and environmental attitudes and behaviors: Setting the
ground for future research. Frontiers in Psychology,
10, 763. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2019.00763
Rosa, C. D., Profice, C. C., & Collado, S. (2018). Nature
experiences and adults’ self-reported pro-
environmental behaviors: The role of connectedness to
nature and childhood nature experiences. Frontiers in
Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.010
55
Schröder, P., Vergragt, P., Brown, H. S., Dendler, L.,
Gorenflo, N., Matus, K., Quist, J., Rupprecht, C. D.
D., Tukker, A., & Wennersten, R. (2019). Advancing
sustainable consumption and production in cities - A
transdisciplinary research and stakeholder engagement
framework to address consumption-based emissions
and impacts. Journal of Cleaner Production, 213, 114–
125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.050
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and
structure of values: Theoretical advances and
empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.),
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–
65. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-
2601(08)60281-6
Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of
experience: the loss of human–nature interactions.
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(2), 94-
101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1225
Steg, L. (2016). Values, norms, and intrinsic motivation to
act proenvironmentally. Annual Review of
Environment and Resources, 41, 277–292. https://
doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085947
Steg, L., Bolderdijk, J. W., Keizer, K., & Perlaviciute, G.
(2014a). An integrated framework for encouraging
pro-environmental behaviour: The role of values,
situational factors and goals. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 38, 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvp.2014.01.002\
Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., Werff, E., & Lurvink, J.
(2014b). The significance of hedonic values for
environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and
actions. Environment and Behavior, 46(2), 163–192.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512454730
The Impact of Values, Nature Contact, and Childhood Nature Experience on Pro-environmental Behavior: A Systematic Review
249

Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of
environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social
Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/0022-
4537.00175
Stern, P. C., et al. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of
support for social movements: The case of
environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81-
97.
van Riper, C. J., & Kyle, G. T. (2014). Understanding the
internal processes of behavioral engagement in a
national park: A latent variable path analysis of the
value-belief-norm theory. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 38, 288–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvp.2014.03.002
Vicente-Molina, M. A., Fernández-Sainz, A., & Izagirre-
Olaizola, J. (2018). Does gender make a difference in
pro-environmental behavior? The case of the Basque
Country University students. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 176, 89-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2017.12.079
Wang, X., der Werff, E., Bouman, T., Harder, M. K., &
Steg, L. (2021). I am vs. we are: How biospheric
values and environmental identity of individuals and
groups can influence pro-environmental behaviour.
Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.618956
Werff, E., & Steg, L. (2016). The psychology of
participation and interest in smart energy systems:
Comparing the value-belief-norm theory and the
value-identity-personal norm model. Energy Research
& Social Science, 22, 107–114.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.022
Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2013). The value of
environmental self-identity: The relationship between
biospheric values, environmental self-identity and
environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 55–63.
https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jenvp.2012.12.006
Wu, L., & Zhu, Y. (2021). How love of nature promotes
green consumer behaviors: The mediating role of
biospheric values, ecological worldview, and personal
norms. PsyCh Journal, 10(3), 402–414.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.430
ICPsyche 2021 - International Conference on Psychological Studies
250