[Un article de The Conversation écrit
par Magali Jaoul-Grammare – Chargée de Recherche CNRS en Economie,
Université de Strasbourg & Anne Stenger – Directrice de
recherche en économie, Inrae]
Beyond monetary incentives, which are often temporary, education can constitute a lasting lever in favor of pro-environmental behavior (CPE). If a high level of education promotes understanding of ecological issues, its effects on CPE nevertheless remain variable, and sometimes even negative. Other factors come into play: gender, age, income, social background or lifestyle.
We looked at the determinants of student eating and mobility practices based on the 2023 “Student living conditions” survey, including the following two questions: “For ecological reasons, have you changed your eating habits (less meat, eating organic, etc.)? » ; “For ecological reasons, have you changed your transport habits (less travel, other modes of transport)? »
Knowledge and emotions, factors of change
An environmentally conscious person can reduce their consumption, favor a plant-based, local or seasonal diet, and adopt low-impact diets. In transport, she will choose low-emission modes or limit her travel. However, health, habits, social norms and economic constraints also influence these choices, where environmental motivations mix with social and educational dimensions.
Better informed individuals adopt pro-environmental behaviors more easily. Education, formal or informal, transmits ecological knowledge and values, strengthening critical thinking and sustainable awareness. The social environment remains decisive: well-off households have easier access to organic products or electric vehicles, while poorer ones depend on public transport.
The student lifestyle also influences: the transition to autonomy modifies habits and leads to distinguishing different profiles, from the committed to the indifferent, etc. Finally, sport is increasingly spreading ecological values.
Emotions, particularly negative ones, constitute an important lever for behavior change. Ecoanxiety – unease and worry about global warming – influences behavior, although its effects vary between studies.
Eco-anxious graduates
Since 2020, the “Living conditions of students” survey has measured this phenomenon via a question on climate concern. In 2023, 87% of respondents say they are worried, especially women, and this proportion remains stable despite the worsening of crises. Ecoanxiety also differs depending on social and educational background.
Finally, living conditions also influence behavior: students living with their parents change less, while financial difficulties promote dietary adaptation but slow down sustainable mobility.
Among students surveyed in 2023, a third have changed both their eating and transportation habits for environmental reasons. These changes vary according to gender, social background, level of education and sensitivity to climate.
Female students adapt their diet more (18% compared to 9% of men), while students modify their transport more often (23% compared to 18%). The most educated, from well-off, eco-anxious or committed backgrounds, change their behavior more frequently: 35% of students worried about the climate change both, compared to 7% of those who are not concerned.
Participation in conferences or events, as well as sports practice, promote pro-environmental behavior: 34% of athletes have changed their habits, while the effects of tobacco or alcohol remain uncertain. Material constraints also play a role: urban residents adapt their transport more (21% compared to 15% in rural areas) but less their food (14% compared to 21%). Independent students (38%) change more often than those living with their parents (19%).
Economic and geographical obstacles
The factors associated with dietary and transportation changes are similar: women, athletic students, those worried about the climate or those who are better educated are more inclined to change their practices. The level of studies remains decisive: master's students more often adopt sustainable behaviors, supporting the role of education.
The living environment also matters: rurality encourages dietary changes but slows down sustainable mobility, while living alone or in residence encourages them. Financial constraints, on the other hand, mainly limit transport changes. Finally, 34% of students would like to change their diet and 27% their transport without being able to do so, hampered by their economic or geographical conditions: living with their parents restricts their food options, while urban distance and lack of resources limit sustainable mobility.
Certain characteristics – wealthy social background, good educational level, environmental commitment, climate concern or sports practice – promote pro-environmental behavior in food and transport.
The “Living Conditions of Students” survey, however, remains limited: it details neither concrete actions nor the chronology of changes, making it difficult to assess leverage or rebound effects. However, education, formal or informal, remains a central lever for encouraging pro-environmental behavior, through awareness-raising, the dissemination of knowledge and intergenerational transmission.
Strengthening environmental education and free access to workshops or conferences, especially in disadvantaged areas, illustrate this path. Other levers can complement this action: sustainable sport, active mobility and social policies reducing inequalities.
With an unwavering passion for local news, Christopher leads our editorial team with integrity and dedication. With over 20 years’ experience, he is the backbone of Wouldsayso, ensuring that we stay true to our mission to inform.
