Analysis of Delay Discounting as a Psychological Measure of Sustainable Behavior

Abstract

As concerns regarding the current and future state of the planet continue to grow, the need to understand the behavioral mechanisms that underlie behaviors linked to large-scale delayed outcomes becomes more critical. Delay discounting refers to decline in the subjective value of stimuli as the delayinterval to access those stimuli increases. In this article, the relevance of delay discounting to issues of sustainability is explored, in addition to other relevant behavioral explanations of the issue. The research on delay discounting and related processes is summarized, specifically research that relates discounting and sustainability issues. Implications for behavior change and future research are discussed. KEYWORDS: delay discounting, sustainability, choice, decision-making, behavior analysis Sustainability has been generally defined as behavior "…that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). There is a pressing challenge to increase sustainable development across realms of the environment, economy, and social/political landscape, as people all over the globe struggle with poor water quality, threat of natural disasters, extreme poverty, lack of access to quality food, education, and healthcare, and an everexpanding population affecting the earth's natural resources (The Earth Institute, 2014). Underlying these sustainability issues is the impact of human behavior, including actions, inactions, communication, and decisions that have a direct effect on sustainability issues. These human behaviors include, but are not limited to, policy decisions by political leaders, production and resource allocation policies by businesses, and consumption patterns by consumers. Delay discounting, a measure of an individual's endorsement of long-term consequences as opposed to

The Value of Clean Air: Comparing Discounting of Delayed Air Quality and Money Across Magnitudes

“…Delay discounting research in laboratory settings, therefore, may also be informative for understanding decision-making that proves relevant for air quality (e.g., private car use, use of energy efficient appliances). However, more research is needed to understand the potential links between delay discounting of air quality and decisions that may affect air quality (and other environmentally relevant decisions and behaviors; see Hirsh, Costello, & Fuqua, 2015 for discussion).…”

Delay Discounting as an Index of Sustainable Behavior: Devaluation of Future Air Quality and Implications for Public Health

“…Although decades of research have been devoted to relations between delay discounting and individual health related behaviors (e.g., smoking, drug use), only relatively recently have economists (and even less so psychologists) begun to experimentally isolate degree of delay discounting as it relates to sustainable natural resource practices and related public health concerns [ 9 ]. A central focus of research has emerged to identify the extent to which individual and societal delay discounting may hold implications for pressing environmental issues such as air quality, and intimately related public health concerns such as respiratory health, lung cancer, and 7 million annual premature deaths worldwide due to poor air quality [ 1 , 10 , 11 ].…”

The History and Current Status of Behavior and Social Issues: 1978–2016

“…While there are encouraging areas of growth (e.g., environmental sustainability, criminal behavior), other topics frequently covered in the early years of the journal have decreased to zero or minimal articles in recent years (i.e., communities, collective violence). Increases in articles concerned with environmental sustainability, criminal behavior, and diversity/bias are justified as these topics have become increasingly more urgent due to continuing evidence of climate change, increasing incarceration rates, and the recent focus on implicit bias, disparities, and disproportionate outcomes for minority populations (e.g., Hirsh, Costello, & Fuqua, 2015;Murrell, Rogers, & Johnson, 2009;Weatherly & Kehn, 2013). However, it might be valuable to recruit and encourage submissions of articles in other areas, such as collective violence and activism, as world issues and political climates change.…”