ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to present the ways in which people act in the face of social dilemmas. According to J.J. Rousseau (2001), humans act based on egotism or self-interest, and altruism, which is the application of the general will of society for the welfare of others. In order to respond to the objective of this study, sociology and psychology – academic
disciplines in which behavioural change may be produced – were reviewed (Kruglanski and Higgins 2003;Myers 2007; Smith and Mackie 2007). Meanwhile, changes in behaviour which are studied from a biological perspective were not considered (Berry et al. 2002). Importantly, social psychology attempts to explain the behaviour of individuals by taking into account human values and moral and subjective norms. In this context values and norms appear to be key elements for attending to social dilemmas (Axelrod and Lehman 1993; Hardin 1968; Kollock 1998; Macy and Flache 2002; Rokeach 1973). In turn, social dilemmas describe situations in which the rational behaviour of an individual – defined in economic terms – leads to suboptimal outcomes from the collective standpoint (Kollock 1998). A social dilemma is a conflict in which the most beneficial action for an individual will, if chosen by most people, have a harmful effect on everyone (Aronson et al. 2009). In an attempt to promote sustainable human development, the United Nations proposes to
attend to social dilemmas (UNEP 2011) which affect the world in order to reduce poverty, as well as to promote health, respect for human rights, sustainable production and consumption, gender equality, environmental conservation and protection, rural transformation, and adoption of interculturalism as a path toward peace. Education is a cornerstone for achieving sustainable development. Thus, UNESCO (2005,
2009 and 2012) launched the Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (DESD) for 2005-2014. This initiative has the potential to be transformative and emphasises aspects of learning which facilitate a transition toward sustainability as it promotes holistic educational
practices intended to develop responsible citizens with critical attitudes, and who participate in economic, environmental, political and cultural spheres of society. Behavioural psychosocial theories which attempt to explain key determinants of behaviour
– such as beliefs, attitudes and values which promote or limit behaviour of individuals in society – are based on cognition (von Eckardt 1996) and on information processing (Leahey and Harris 2001).Within the field of cognitive information processing, two conceptual frameworks explain human behaviour (Kaiser et al. 2005); one is based on self-interest, deliberation and rational choice (Ajzen 1991, 2005); the other is based on altruism and is rooted in values and moral norms (Schwartz 1977, 1994). Some authors (Corral-Verdugo 2001;Harland 2001; Stern 2000) present social psychology models which explain behaviour in favour of the environment with a variance of approximately 40 per cent. These authors call for an attempt to increase variance in psychosocial models in order to explain such behaviour. With these concepts as guiders, the present study used conceptual frameworks (Corral-
Verdugo 2010; Corral-Verdugo and Pinheiro 2004; Gardner 2001; Hines et al. 1988; Stern, 2000) based on values and moral norms as these appear to explain peoples’ altruism. According to the philosophers Rousseau (2001) and Neuhouser (2008), human goodness should be fomented so that the individual may continue to be human. Following this development for the research frameworks the study process followed an addi-
tional seven stages. Figure 23.1 schematically shows these stages.
