       
    

                 

 

Q

1

. O . . .

. 3101.! -. I «.1... 3:415}... 1.5,

y? 9:... 9.961... VI. il‘h vilVlg .5; . Tattﬂqa . w
. YE: QVFigt imvlﬂ_l'"','90uell1$§n u

a .D.‘ «PM. it...“ ‘otgvfli5ffz~

v I F

, 5 9 .2
, k , 15
I... .1534 a . .117 L; . . .
7. {5. 1.3132“! . u.‘ , . .
no . .\ «5‘. \i‘wavlo‘lhnu. V at 2,. 318... 5 . I. . Juli... ﬁnﬁm 13!... .1 . you.
I v a. v ' .lnfvai : IlOVveaiiitvﬂthnltrlrmKN 1411‘” .514.» .J g \5 «E T I V
. .. Q11. trivial; if. 1' .I‘ .\ “Eng". % 11 A
I. .5!th chug!!! cryitifx. . 515 in
:re \ A:
. In. .L

I
x \ t
:1 ’3 . . > .
:31. 24.1.9”. 3....
gaitisglinzo . . u
.- 2. I.
.. .

.
31 w . 5..- . 1%...
, .1.“
5.1!..sz .whbﬁVEII a 7 31:3... h§i§nu
«gift I. II... :"FVY by“ . ;§\5.§J :54. 3.55 i
99.0 P > «.701 u. g]: Vm((r

       

2
3

x .
u. . -. i .3622
v... . , 1) ((-3) .N.t s .2; x. Y,
. z. . {ytiizntiivthf 0......» ﬁﬁalfgga .. .94 {£55 m.» .353
a. r v. . . v1.0.1.1: v: .1\ 13.2.... 1.3.5, . .. s5 . i. , .
. .. .v1:2§§.uw$wnﬂmn%vhﬁtumnhx t3§§5 .1. .1. $9.39... 2. a 1. 3. .H... 1...... :14.

I 2.0 lsz E.O!.vItaJ-n§.t.ltv ‘flrllovr’ﬁ.’vﬂz .1.“ 1 Mali}.
. . . 1 II . . I.
. .. ﬁgwﬁi . i

’ '

v§ «.1

            

 

        

    

   

            

      

   
   

         

 

           

 

J. , n .,
\.. ‘ x. 1.227,
53.3.... it... «ﬂux. 31:... . ti .
1.x .11 .\ an . 9.3.131. I 3. 1 . a
a». . 3.3?!5 .ii .aﬁuuuu.» \ ,.....$)..ﬁurh.r%sli$x .. :1 ,
v 1559... IV! ,Exfihf 6.31 .315 .x m: 1 {$73115ng .“ 5.u&,z5x.5..}h.tﬁ§ .35.? \yinhu .. .. z :3. I: 1 ,
It :15... . zﬁﬂ‘iﬁﬁdﬁaﬁ.¥. ,.. . .. ‘{snﬂh{x inaugﬂﬁlﬁwnrgr Rh}? sag... ,. 3 g .3 aw... .
In!" ”5&- =Itl Ir £, "UV 511 {1... . 91.1... W . n 75 14(1),). s.) . . .r 5 , . I.
s . z. 2 31.. .ﬁawvteéin. 5 : 43... u: .5 1 . a . . +3.. I. .1 My}... 3.1;
1 I x r. “6&3! .- IIRIivt .00 0. 7!}. “If.“ . grilg‘zt . WR.’§C. 7.x «in. . , iﬂxduwi ,\ r. .1.ij . 2. .5! L.
b u v u .qt'cgi2n.tlll.v l'lt.'|n’) (I “w I \. II. A. .35... . . hub-3R) . 0a. . 75 , 1 H.
I: gzs‘ttlf! . 1.311;... fie. .54.. ~MI .8 NI!YL\~S.§‘11§$ Akkdnw ,11 .Wwwmltlﬁ \ﬁ‘qYKHMS \Wmmﬂﬂnt 550.41.. .) 5 .1 a V
y a a. .. , . . a. If... 2:: )2. mum. gun. Luv...) 1 u... .1. a. 5. N.
23).. 91...} .Iﬁta. “ , . .k. .n !>\ ha . Ru 5
.. y . . 1.1. .eﬁ.....1§x§2.ﬁ0nvti>?2{sw.u«} lungc... £9.11»... tam, unﬁﬂus .130 s. :40}.
In. . . J 1 \ .3555 \h. ﬁghxxﬁik..5313.i.\3¥\.i 52.55515 w. in“! N. . \
I £110.? . 5 www‘ 15%... X§§§fi 355155.}..whmtn5ikngu, 1
I.» . mgll. ,. . ‘4... . . . 351.)... .3: \
.1 3v . 1 , 2335 \ §\> I} «.2. \(l%.. \«c .5be . ﬁ
9 I 5 15 313%}...xllﬂt1s‘. Lmﬂ. 44568.) L. . I 3 , 1. .
VI . n \5 . 1§.5\ 53.5.5 I“ hit}! tun-n}... l. VT: 51. . ~ h x
t 3.. 3.15%“); w...) r,1§\ 1 Kx;kt§7%ﬁi§n$.§ I}:1., .. \\.1uw.k.u. a; . . 1 «1..
. v 1 [V i s t . 1§.\J . 35‘ .(3. 114.41%: .4321. 123.! a .r v .x\.‘\€%u$ Agass . , . I ..
. a . :azctttﬁvinlics‘,‘ 015: is.) hung”. 2).»..qu I. . 0.94.. 31):} . «.51.! as)..\ 53. u. .. . x.
u !.rvaz’§f..t9££§;§‘itli , . . .. . 1 . x a I .9 .1153, 1 £3 i323... 1.111%..N5 , x .. , . ,. \ 3
:09...ka intrusi- Iax‘apl ihttxPrvtllr; I»: \< .413. .uynwﬂ? «4.3.411... 2......sz I911: . 212%);x Y‘7$§WQ¥ . 5.5115131mnuﬂhﬂiur193tauinu{(34315 I u. . .4 a. .1 I 1 , .1 a
..a. . R .-.-.-.v‘ﬁl¢vft!u.€t . , .. .. , . i.., ,. .I. :1)...» .1 , . ., .. . .
:hov) MHV!:J.«>J.I~Ivre....hrhi'vv§’igiii.3nXIVIIHMFJIEIITANVO £3.35 . . II ”81.1. €¥$.Y§a) .. «8.9.5... I v1.51! gﬁﬁkﬂlﬂdih hi.5)11¥n€i\\\ﬂ1txkkﬂufi} :, >ei>VY|1.-1\ 1 URN-"y 53.3.1 Xvi, )1. 7155 . .. 1-1
“153:“. .135.)ttiitﬁnll....4Zrﬂvl‘..ui'£'b.if17€ 01.9051: $11.“. .1115. xi". .55rjw1hlkﬂeu .\)h¥. 1 ~ .h.1¥ k3.)\,ﬂ~.uu1\w.‘owmﬂuvi r51. 1.. .1 371117.“..HNN. \JHIWofzﬂdltnw5TKuumrt31 kWVKSN ‘31:. >945 151.7... 1.3!. . .\\T.1 1|,
. 3.11:1...2...» vanadium"! .20.; wig”)... Ce. . 1‘8 3. .. . 35 _ 1 c- .. . )1 . .4. fads»)! . 2-3711)“: 53.1 in “[573... \ 1?}...11 3.5.11, 33:)r911}\l{ih\ \ »£:...\u.l.~v\..15.71 :th. 5.5.1.1.. “$1.51!: , . a1?- . All...
5.35:... nhﬁ»,.,.vovlz!s.nol.u6ysl In I... 31¢..H«.2<{§..Lx 2.0.. If}. 33.); 35..- .h. {akasﬁzlﬁxnsixllégxwzk \, n KS: #30 Z. 3.24.. 3.3%... ... \. .ﬁu..«aﬁa.43..1...mn4.. V531,} 2. a
‘57.. VIII-“ht Et~AE§Et§§O ii . igfggéx v - .. 55...): #155“ x 55..) 55,... yrs 3‘533515. V)T.ﬂ..»xn.5.15sr>55\\ .57351.$.vs§111\wi}n )f. 5.1:. ‘5 .. «NVEuSWSYWHthN 35.3.1.4. . u 3 N .21.. 62. I‘ll... ‘3. ‘Il’tvilsa
I. 911...} 10’ .094: L1 . I :13]... 14.) \551?.724\Q1..1.51L>\131I5 zit... .54., I... y,)..1\\\(..¢.11\...1\{, . 5am- “... 55 .15 . . 551,35 3...? ~51v.a155§1 \\\\$..\I52:l.. 1 5..
..ci.a‘n...0rv.\c.p5l9.vlvua.ilvl.f;.§’ D Iii! 1.3.: . 51. gm 4.51.».ﬂﬂvrq‘ﬂlﬁuxg3 ii:l>x§.\.§ \igﬁxévvsr‘ Q11hnnrv5 . Aimﬁhu'ﬁﬁﬂaﬁsi§\?) 43.8%.. . Q“) 7197.“... . .Lmuv‘ I. {v4.1.3.7}
?.n.w“7Y(7!Vru$-§ial.4Nvﬁv if. v! I! . . 33. Q)! In; 1 2.41m”... . h. 13.5%) .1xxz.)s..19~vm.%vilx {15.11321manhunujhi§$1.¥h§u§ swwvigaﬁwxhﬂn11P§NEzaslh~ﬂhh 325?... Jutziqhnil‘su “9:191:11“! vhf...» . 535.7)...“
tiatxl. .3! 20:30. 3? , n , 33¢. 0.5:)Vz\}.o¢.. ch. .15.... . , a5}.§‘xhi..1.§c.§}.i1 1... 22.5.... .3..{>}(§\Jza\xa>y\s3§(»( 3312...: ..( A... .1 , . . . . 3...... .13.... s 3.1. .J
in gut-.28. '61 $.(Orlf'lvfg‘19gii‘gn lingo. V I. 553131» 1575 5‘53,. 554$... 55:. 51u§z$7137\\5\i’)\)h.7!ﬁ 1) {it 5) Si\5‘.\ ‘7’". , i;3§31.5351§\1i.
vitlvuuﬂpi *3...”th IO J n v 1).. \x. 3.4105(1) ‘L.§%\\5 !‘..2.1. 11. at 25555151}. 5“} 1 1 , ~ - 31. L... .51)?! 5.21 .s l ,
o. gullﬁﬂnetvlu W.‘...~“‘£1I~éi.tl\0zn¥~g IQ It: ii. 2 . .0..i\.ﬂwl..hifimuull;§}ﬂifiaui§i. ”133%.3.kn:15.555§\531u“.5§ 53.3.“... “$3: 1101.. 5 nuns“... 5.6%....«1. .. .. 1 x, , . .
9, +31. db: ”\‘telﬂ’vzv Otiltizcifz. 11'0" . 3} 321.5%, [11%; 7x ‘4. r: 3W5]: \ .z“i;ﬁ§5dis\l,§r¥5,ﬁ7wﬂ§qﬂ 5:5]..“18T1Vul‘. 54.1.2511): I 51%;}311’5’ 5|, 3.51...
2.5.. ﬁx. 4... p. $2.1... tit.._.~.z£:.f:i......£§.c§£: ii..,u.8:u..£.z....£z§h .. .31....i..iz..:....z§¥1§xi:§§§.? .wriﬂuz.§.u.$. ,.13§§§£n§ ....m2.u.zu;....§.irﬁhiei....:. 5913.. .. 3.2.4:; 25...: ..zza;§.,.«§.......nv.ai..z...é...ba. . ..... . . 4:
.1 :1 d O . .) . . : 1. . . , I I... 1 . ‘
,.V Lh;tV!...¢. II I l 2‘0... b V; , ‘1 1 . \U.\ - 352.36! $133113?“ 3\3)I...)31351 v ilvaiWV 1h... VﬁJﬂW5¢5R .1 ul\i\ . v III-vi .
.Ic ttAAAtu.ro}-bh..vaao\§1.i in 0.21."... . 3 . . )5 )ﬂﬂl 9311.551 I) 1!..(n “NH“ 3364.!!! ‘55.?{5 51:35L%,w1;\1\£1\55?.\:.§1 $.51. \\3l.$~.a)\..ux .- . 5.5.3.1.. :71... “2515a!
"ii, I; 1.5. ;...r. .xc..>59¢ll.vft. £3... £1... igg. . 30...} ....x»:\l£. 1. 3.5V 33.1....ahﬁxvgﬁugsaﬁhﬁxf?.?12.4ﬁnﬁgadguzcnﬁ3}.i<24sg¢.swﬂé§tajs13i€ . .x.31¥.!u1..5~..s
. .. {I I. I L .115 . v "VJ . .. . n . . . . , . . \I \.
.V. a . ’13,. ‘;,)}h 5‘ ”anlw‘a: 47.)! Z .7155} 1 .5 . I l YiVu
r: . i )o 115. ,3gghﬁlnlgkzxt 2“ In)“ s ‘15 5.0.1113 “3...”! «gnythHsa‘qua‘EM"§3.MHNVJHW5\x 1d. I n ”.013“... ”“5! .3 3.11 .
. . . . «a h 5...,r a 5;):luzf‘: 2.751....) (inf? A13 51153155.. . 3Q!-
.-. £K¢§§+§ 31.1... $331.; : I 388‘s?! , . 5.. i2. , , (“diva“).......u..<,,§»n.§1w1ﬁﬁ§saﬂnﬁﬂhga33%....n £33 339313“...
_ s ‘ I , a 2. , x . 3 . . .. a 1.5.4 . Juli: .. .. .. . 12. gig?! .
v .. vx)! , If: .5. 1 O u . :lyu , 5.... u p» , . \. \.... 5‘5 ..1IzYst.$5m\Ju.wh-\.uuﬂhuhuxﬂi. Yguuulﬁ- I533
unu%.nn....§t..i?3£.y£;tvﬂ£ .7 2.1.2631... p 3+3». . . . . .. 2.. .., . .. 1..., . a .. .. 3118..."... 39... thiub.tiri.wlasa33 ..\.
, ‘mv.ﬂnﬁxnuﬁﬁﬂﬁnﬂ~iiﬁ. . \Brtrlﬂw , . . . . . . , , y ,s ,v 7 . ”hm. a:
tally). .nus. A 1!. I... r fixiivuu Plfci’: .. . . .
Ail. If‘xiltlvlkgﬂhgvtﬂvlf’.gz¥§ é . . .
«iii... 1...- siting-x...» E EEO)... .
f/lhvlvsvti:llt‘)lirrlt.£l‘§£ ‘:
> . .

\ V )1. .
£6713)... 8‘55 5..\. .11.... 111

       
  

(It? 1:31..) . ’52., 55
I]... . a). . a .1235»): II. is)...
1....1T S 1>I311v11 WA .459
. 1 11775.15} 15 3.5
.f :5: I. If ,vr.vvl.«$t>l.lvf«z{.

. t) u y y ?

s... . ..
.i y III
.. a . ,2!\L.>Jn .a.‘ 1.1...
. \ v 1!.)31 5'\5\ it 53.} g:
. ., . is. x. ..ﬁ.u.325§1n.w2.3.¥2ﬁ€23.21... .54.... u? win.
. , ;| 53 \ﬁzqiv. .7! i u , . IV sit
I. .5 0013. LE. 1... :1 5 June.“ 3.3.“? .81.... v hﬁﬁ. EH.

 

, ‘ I . 5!"
$11.31! 3‘ \(. 5V 3! . g .5.
I. .eia... .Lx.3..1.h%§ﬁwﬁam . a. 4 34.3.3
3.. v 5.. 5.1??? 2.... on: .. 1 .2139}? . ixisiiﬂﬁuigg Xi...
. , t , . glitz; 5.5.4.5! 515).. , :01.
.. s . 5 .Uaﬂ.15.. . 5.\,Ilo)ﬂllﬁaiﬁ...lou\r...1 J.))VW§.HM¢111?IP§Z§ Mg“. ’25."... 31‘
. (cumin; )1: 1.5.15. \\5 5 “(Ln ,Iltn. . . v. )5 v ztiiﬁs 5‘... 151. a. .n 11 . 11.131. . g'ﬁ‘rg5
v .ggﬂxﬁﬁg5hpziliimmz 1.3.3.21 §7\5 \i‘) ixhéﬂkiifig. 11.555. I‘ll. . .. - ,
, .1531; gr 1..., ,I u 5.1“, . $3. 11 III; }\ \iikdi\‘1v)15?\ 3“...” 31): .
. 1.75 3‘! 51‘3.‘ 2.401113241»).....3ﬂ{1¥$\n...lw’a‘§i.g kl 1 155 5:5 v... 3:! . l
. li’aiz .133.JA\UuN¢-‘(.1;Ntl iiiigéjiiixinihhi a #52 ’5‘ 5 5

            

  

{.515
\ ﬁgh$1¥5$11ia\ .

ii 515.. .

, . ¥§§\ )3... )Ezgibmiﬁ 1‘55 31‘ 5“ zWInglv‘.
, . 5‘3; ﬁgﬁg ﬁgs“... I g}1§l‘§\1§¥hﬂxﬂ€dﬁ.§z f \. ,Nundgi‘uﬂﬂnwwnirby .11, ﬁgggzi
111: . 3\1..\i~41§. .F.§.\n§:1ai\x.l...\li~wvxu§ - 153555;..11ef. 2 .3...1:21LV$\\(9 Soﬁa... 3.4:. ”Hr-c.5311! i. .3. x V 11.1.1.3... 11.51.!- < 5.. ~65: x. 11.5....
. _ ‘ , ﬁsﬁgh;{xitinﬁwnsﬂdhﬁlav%ﬁ§n¥&.\.ﬂ§ .ta.huu,lf£n3 324.1%“: 1133,3412???

g; . . r . . . .. .
A1371?“ 1 , a 1133‘; .1. .«NwVQ aggi‘Iifsigwglii «ﬂy-‘41. 51 7555»).- it
. s§.ﬁiiﬁ\\n.ﬁ\ﬂ‘kw $59915 €‘1ggﬁ .... x .. . .mzl .
¥i%ﬁ..i\? 2....) v .1... . . .
. , s . , \
.‘ . . .

‘kstﬂelu!

 

        

   
 

      

    

               

 

 

   
                 

 

  

30$. . . I
. SM- Wq‘5zwﬁ‘a . . 1 “
11 \v .\ . $3151.53...“ 1 . 5%
1c .5“ a .. . . .. .. 2 . .
. . 2.... . ._ .7... .wnkkvs...._3. .. 1.7.. .35 s . .1502.
I I. inﬁniq;iu.ﬂiﬁha)r5k 1 . . an. . .. 7 run“. . .
. .13.; S§a\\>i35\anib<$vfﬂ. , .?\?¥§A 1.0. .. . r
’53:)! ?$fli!itl‘)v\u§ulﬂumi‘iiil ”-31.3155 . . . 35;; 'ﬁ
. 5%?5? is: . 191).... His-\xﬁ‘ﬁlits»... gigs 1 . . . , .
3 J'axuzl’...’ . . .5 153.351.3111, has: $557151 "Qz.iuz..3.l¥vf17§‘i \. ..
. 11:14:32? 1.333.. atr é : ,
. . , :7 .1. )um. . ﬁg.

lhﬁfgk\$%ﬂmn.
x

   

. . .
1 .s .

:5 .220 n.7- . “I. 11.27... .b.NN.: )2}
, J75); . Age V1! .; . .

                           
           

     

            
   

. . .. . a - 7 . .

, .1 , 3 it:

i»)... \ L 5!. v , 15 . a .\ up

.\I .1 . I?! ‘ >5 \.... v . L “Lt. .Irv. .. . p .. ..

y . igﬁuxu I .r? . 373.8”... K . \lu: ,f‘liff
.5; . $.11... gugxsszulxiaralgr $33.... .3» g
1?) .2;- 13¥i3§i}.15 . . ,
\ 131%... 5.. :5 32W: .. I. . g1?111§3§1}
. 1%31thﬁ.11 illﬁlﬁ‘g

E)...“

      
 

  

u C. . . .nrevléigg. KKK. It
ill. 5.511.? (4.. Act with 1271.3 gill. Ito... . . 2 I .
119.. .oﬂ‘x3arzdaIK§.ow.§.>9xrfvlﬂlz’ufﬁﬂiuuulifmlzﬂttiivrtir {it‘igvlf . . 114.? 2.
I . 1.75.97 iii!!! bgéilftl’hﬂr
Riga). .v’ff/ul) \ Iv

  

. .I 5"?
.rr &) a.
.3 .a. 1 . {gt-£3...

as}; $.12er {if

  
     

 

ET! A ,

.5

    

 

8§ ,. - _

.\ . .. \ .

. . . 9 : Ezravuhtrztvténmuhimﬁsiﬂxé .
. . 7 t .ﬁnﬂtﬁtf.szyz .2, gunk. .X
. . E EAR-Ir? f4. .4
- . , a it m .mﬂfﬁxnnrﬁﬁ . .
. U ‘§ .§ . I
r

.l .
Van

      

   

      

. .
. l . Ett:§5>{.k .

.. . .13.}...129

it.-.» Exeya5t4fiizxituggt 2 .2322.

V.i.r.$u..xl.: ..-.:...-.!....z.2é??;¢12?3..§= :13: . .

7!!!! l£.rxl7"s¥f‘v)rlv,1vi . .25.... . . . . .

.. .3 .. .3 .,,.3..3.$.<.§vii;. , .

     

 

 

? . 1.: . T . , . r? .......ix.4!..coot+...¥. ,.,.... 4
:r. .. . .i .
. . nix-.3 v.33...:.e=r$$.. 1.§urw§?§iw .. :32}- .
array... .1‘... gauguhwrwﬁ... in. «é... (Iii)? sis.

thﬂwnvtasrlsrfﬁn|ibrlotteyang, . . ....

 

llllﬂillllﬂlﬂlllﬂlllll'lWilli!HIIIIHUHIIWIIIJIUHHI

93 10529 6333

. «nurd't'au'i-é-ﬁ'uﬁl'j:
.5
1
3,...
r
I
I?

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled
Direct and Indirect Conservation of Fossil Fuel Energy:
The Infiuence of Financia] and Phiiosophicai Motivators
and Availabie Human Resources,

presented by

Mari S. Wiiheim ‘

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for

PhD degreein Famiiy and Chiid Ecoiogy

L// Major professor

Date 6; /? 3R

MSU is an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
bV1ESI.) Place in book drop to

remove this checkout from
w your record. FINES wil]

be charged if book is

returned after the date

stamped_be10w.

.1 A

W raga-13837:“
Waugh M2988”?

w'\‘ )

1+0 K093 @618 5“???”
PW!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DIRECT AND INDIRECT CONSERVATION OF FOSSIL FUEL ENERGY:
THE INFLUENCE OF FINANCIAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL MOTIVATORS
AND AVAILABLE HUMAN RESOURCES

BY

Mari Wilhelm

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Family and Child Ecology

1981

6W 7.3 7 /

ABSTRACT

DIRECT AND INDIRECT CONSERVATION OF FOSSIL FUEL ENERGY:
THE INFLUENCE OF FINANCIAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL MOTIVATORS
AND AVAILABLE HUMAN RESOURCES
BY

Mari Wilhelm

The develOpment of this research was based upon a
management model of motivation and available human
resources for making decisions concerning the conservation
of fossil fuel energy. The focus of the study was upon a
measure of both direct and indirect conservation.

The research was conducted as a secondary analysis
of data collected during the evaluation of a statewide
household energy audit conducted at Michigan State
University. Energy consumption data from utility and oil
companies served as the measure of direct conservation.
Indirect conservation was investigated through analysis of
self-reported participation in a variety of behaviors col-
lectively defined as voluntary simplicity. The household
was the unit of analysis for a total sample of 638 families.
Multiple regression analysis served as the primary statis—

tical procedure for testing the hypotheses.

Mari Wilhelm

A 1.8 percentage reduction in direct household
energy consumption was found between the years 1977-78 and
1979-80. Nearly three-fourths of the households were found
to have practiced at least some voluntary simplicity
behaviors.

Relative cost of fuel used by the household was the
only significant motivator for direct conservation (p=.016).
Availability of human resources did not influence direct
conservation. Neither did direct conservation contribute
to a sense of personal control over energy problems.

Both motivation variables and human resources were
included in a significant prediction model of voluntary
simplicity behaviors. Philosophical perspective contri-
buted four percent of the variance (p=.000). Income ade-
quacy had a negative relationship with voluntary simplicity
participation but contributed only an additional 0.8 per-
cent to the variance (p=.022). Reported skills was the
strongest predictor accounting for a bivariate contribution
of 10.9 percent and a multivariate 12.0 percent of the
variance (p=.000). Average household education and percep-
tion of the ability to afford a conservation device also
had significant contribution to the predictive model. In
addition,the practice of voluntary simplicity behaviors
explained 3.1 percent of the variance to the measure of

personal control (p=.000).

© 1982

MARI SUE NILHELM

All Rights Reserved

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many persons deserve a hearty and sincere thanks
for their continued support and encouragement during the
entirety of my graduate program and especially during the
process of my dissertation. As a result of their efforts—-
I made it.

My doctoral committee provided considerable
guidance for which I am especially appreciative. Dr.
Arthur Kohrman served on my committee until his sabbatical
and later move to Chicago. His encouragement and confi-
dence was greatly appreciated. Dr. Margaret Bubloz pro-
vided continued support and contributed much to my interest
and knowledge of family theory. Dr. Craig Harris was an
incredible source of help in learning the research process
and in understanding Hal, the computer. For the many hours
of his time a very special thank-you. Dr. Beatrice Paolucci
was an inspiration through her teaching and amazing ability
to challenge students to grow just a bit more.

Dr. Joanne Keith served as my major professor and
the director of research. Without Dr. Keith's friendship
and professional support, I would many times have given in
to the pressure of graduate school. Congratulations go

to Dr. Keith for surviving!! I would also like to

ii

 

acknowledge Dr. Keith's very special family--husband, Bob,
daughter, Julie; and son, Robbie. Many times they accepted
and treated me as a member of their family.

Several friends were made during graduate school.
We all shared the same problems which seemed to make life
more tolerable. I would like to especially thank Dr. Susan
Merkley, Edith Hanlon Katz, Martha Bristor, Bonnie Knutson,
Dr. Madeline Trimby and Dr. Carol Darling. In addition, I
would like to thank a very special friend, Roger Brooks,
for his continued belief in my abilities.

A very special group of friends from my teaching
years in Dubuque, Iowa were always there when I needed them.
To Michael Harvey, many thanks for the letters of support.
Beverly Vaninger, Deborah Ioerger, Janet Shelledy Dillavou
and Judith Schmidt are truly loved. Many thanks to each
of them.

A special thank you also goes to my typist Diane

Osburn for her patience. Without Diane I'd still be typing.

iii

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vi
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Background of Problem . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Purpose of Research . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Conceptual Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Energy Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Energy and Lifestyle . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Reduction in Household Consumption
of Fossil Fuel Energy . . . . . . . . . . 27
Voluntary Simplicity Participation . . . . . 35
Human Resource Availability . . . . . . . . 44
III. METHODOLOGY AND HYPOTHBSIZED RELATIONSHIPS . . 55
Research Subsample Selection and
Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Measurement Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Measures of Conservation . . . . . . . . . 63
Measures of Motivation . . . . . . . . . . 74
Indicators of Human Resources . . . . . . 81
Statistical Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
IV. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Participation in Direct and Indirect

Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
The Effect of Motivators and Human Direct

and Indirect Conservation of Fossil

Fuel Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

iv

Chapter

Percentage Change in Consumption . . .
Bivariate Regression Analysis--
Percentage Change in Consumption . . .
Multiple Regression Analysis—-
Percentage Change in Consumption . .
Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses . .
Participation in Voluntary Simplicity
Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses . .
A Comparison of Percentage Reduced
Consumption and Voluntary Simplicity
Contribution of Conservation Behaviors

to Personal Control . . . . . . . . .
Testing the Model . . . . . . . . . . .
V. OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Summary of the Findings . . . . . . . .
Conclusions and Implications . . . . . .
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix
A. Percentage of Households Reporting
Agreement to Philosophical
Statements Concerning Energy and
Conservation, 1979 . . . . . . . .
B. Percentage of Households Reporting
Agreement to Statements Regarding
Personal Control Over Energy
PrOblems I 0 O O O O O O O O O O O
C. Voluntary Simplicity Score (1980) by
Categorical Level of Conservation
Actions Taken . . . . . . . .
BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . .

Page
104
106
108
117
119
130
134

135
138

145

147
152

159

159

160

161

162

 

Table

l.

10.

ll.

12.

LIST OF TABLES

Selected Household Characteristics-Comparison
of Research Subsample, 1978, and Michigan
Households . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Selected Household. Comparison of Research
Subsample, 1978, and Michigan Households .

Percentage Change in Household Consumption
1977-78, 1979-80 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percentage of Households Reporting
Participation in Voluntary Simplicity
BehaViors O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0

Participation in Voluntary Simplicity
Behaviors: Total Scale and Subscale
Mean Scores and Categorical Percentages .

Factor Analysis of Voluntary Simplicity
Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Household Income Adequacy Levels, 1979 . .

Household Scores on a Measure of Philosophical
Energy Perspective, 1979 . . . . . . . . .

Summary Data of Human Resource Variables . .
Personal Control, 1980 . . . . . . . . . .

Comparison of Participation in Voluntary
Simplicity Behaviors and Reduced Household
Energy Consumption . . . . . . . .

Bivariate Regression Analysis with
Percentage Change in Consumption as the
Dependent Variable and Motivators, Human
Resources and Demographics as Independent
Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

vi

Page

61

62

65

67

71

76

80
91

93

101

107

 

Table

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

Hierarchial Multiple Regression Analysis with
Percentage Change in Consumption as the
Dependent Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percentage Reduced Consumption by Philosophical
Perspective by Income Adequacy

Bivariate Regression Analyses with Total
Voluntary Simplicity Scores as the Dependent
Variable and Motivators, Human Resources
and Demographics as Independent Variables .

Hierarchial Multiple Regression Analysis with
Total Voluntary Simplicity as the
Dependent Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Regression Analyses with Direct and Indirect
Measures of Conservation as Dependent
Variables and Motivators and Human
Resources as Independent Variables . . . . .

Bivariate Regression Analysis with Personal
Control as the Dependent Variable . . . . .

Multiple Regression Analysis with Personal
Control as the Dependent Variable and
Conservation, Motivators, Human Resources,
and Contextual Variables as Independent
Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Percentage of Households Reporting Agreement
to Philosophical Statements Concerning
Energy and Conservation, 1979 . . . . .

Percentage of Households Reporting Agreement
to Statements Regarding Personal Control
Over Energy Problems . . . . . . . . . . . .

Voluntary Simplicity Score, 1980, by Categorical

Level of Conservation Actions Taken, 1980

vii

Page

110

112

123

126

136

139

140

159

160

161

n 3;...

..- ..

 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1-1. Management Model for Conservation Behavior . 15
4-1. Percent Change in Consumption by Knowledge

by Income Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
4-2. Percent Change in Consumption by Age by

Income Adequacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
4-3. Percent Change in Consumption by Rurality

by Fuel Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
4-4. Mean Voluntary Simplicity Score by Skill

Level and Income Adequacy . . . . . . . 131
4-5. Mean Voluntary Simplicity Score by

Education by Income Adequacy . . . . . . . 132
4-6. Path Analytic Model Showing Direct and

Indirect Relationships Between Motivators,

Resources, Conservation Behaviors and

Demographics . . . . . . . 144

viii

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of Problem

 

Carver (1924) noted that the basic problem of living
living was, in fact, a problem of conserving energy. The.
focus of his statement was the economy of human energy as
a rationalization for increased use of fossil fuels.
Carver also pointed out that when coal and oil were ex-
hausted; wood, alcohol, waterwheels, windmills and solar
engines would provide Viable energy alternatives. Nearly
sixty years later, evidence supporting the limitations of
fossil fuel reserves has brought the energy alternatives
mentioned by Carver, as well as others, under serious con-
sideration as substitutes for finite fossil fuels.

The use of fossil fuel resources in the United
States has increased steadily over the years in an effort
to improve the level of living. Considerable utility has
been derived from their use. Labor saving devices,
powered by fossil fuels, made leisure time a reality.
Travel became much less difficult and considerably faster.
Services were provided at a high enough level outside the

home that the household became a center for consumption of

 

goods and services. Consumption would become a symbol of
a household's quality of life.

Awareness of the limitations of fossil fuels to
meet the energy demand has been a major concern of the last
decade. The focus of this concern was frequently based on
the dependency of the American lifestyle on fossil fuels
for abundant and inexpensive energy resources. The in-
creasing demand for energy coupled with the rising prices
of imported fuels and the extensive cost of extracting less
easily accessible fuel sources would eventually result in
less energy available for consumption (LeGrand and
Robinson, 1980).

Concern over loss of the benefits of fossil fuel
energy has led to speculations about future energy life-
style alternatives (Ford Foundation, 1974; O'Toole, 1976;
Lovins, 1977; National Research Council, 1979; Stobaugh and
Yergin, 1979; Toeffler, 1980; Schurr, et a1., 1980). In
general, the various lifestyle alternatives range from con-
tinued growth through use of nuclear power to extensive
cutbacks in consumption of energy.

The Ford Foundation (1974), for example, identified
three future energy scenarios. The Historical Growth
Scenario is based on the assumption that consumption of
energy resources would increase at about 3.4 percent

annually. This growth would require aggressive efforts to

balance supplies of energy with increasing demand through
development of all energy resources including nuclear power.

The second scenario, Technical Fix, included an in-
crease in the energy growth rate of approximately 1.9
percent annually to the year 2000. Through a conscious
effort towards more efficient use of energy resources this
scenario would consume one-third fewer British thermal
units (Btus) than the Historical Growth Scenario. Applica-
tion of energy conserving technologies would be expected to
improve both direct energy savings and indirect savings
from energy processing.

The third scenario, Zero Energy Growth, involved
social and economic systems which are based on a harmony
-with the natural environment. Economic growth would be
expected to continue through production of durable goods
and a larger proportion of services. Conservation would
be accomplished through technical fixes and fewer purchases
of material goods.

As the population became aware of a potential
energy shortage, technology frequently was turned to as the
answer. Technology may be answering the questions con-
cerned with increasing energy supplies, however, the more
appropriate question might be the extent to which energy is
required and beneficial to society.

Amory Lovins (1977), an advocate of soft technology,
questioned whether the Historical Growth Scenario, or as he

called it, the Hard Technology Path, was truly the answer

to societal goals. He pointed out that continued use of
oil and coal at the present level and increased development
of nuclear power would continue present inefficient use of
energy resources. In addition, he noted the steep invest-
ment of capital necessary for such developments. Lovins
proposed that where energy was concerned, we ask questions
concerning what energy source would be best for which par-
ticular purpose.

Lovins claimed that premium fuels have been used
inefficiently in places where other energy resources could
accomplish designated goals equally well without being
wasteful. In addition to efficient use of fossil fuels
through technical fixes, Lovins supported what he called
soft energy technologies. Technical fixes included, among
others, insulation, heat pumps, and proper ventilation.
Soft energy technology included the use of renewable energy
resources such as the sun, wind, and vegetation.

Decisions being made at present determine our per—
sonal as well as our economic future. Lovins as well as
other critics of our present pattern of economic progress
suggested that while making economic decisions regarding
allocation of scarce resources it is necessary to incor-
porate social decisions into the process. It is their
position that society can maintain a level of living com—
parable to present standards while enhancing a quality of
living based on personal and human values. This would,

however, require an assessment of our current consumption

and production patterns (economic decisions) in relation to
societal values and goals (social decisions).

Theorists supporting Zero Growth or Soft Path
Technology Scenarios claimed that their ideas for solving
the energy dilemma have fewer long term liabilities and
greater societal benefits. Such proposed scenarios vary in
scope and intensity. Some suggest a reorganization of the
production-consumption system; others pr0pose a back-to-
the-land lifestyle.

Morrison and Lodwick (1981) suggested that the
claims made by soft energy advocates should be treated as
hypotheses to be tested. Information gained related to the
claimed impacts would be beneficial to policy. Nelson and
Honnold (1976) also suggested that the lifestyles proposed
by conservationists may be contrary to what is known
through sociology and psychology about behavior; primarily
that consumption fulfills a status need. Ashby (1977) sug-
gested that we first need to begin to find out what people
are actually doing in terms of alternative lifestyle
changes.

It appears that during the decade of the eighties,
the following questions concerning lifestyles and energy
may grow increasingly important: Which persons are actually
behaving in ways positive to conservation of fossil fuels?
What factors or characteristics contribute to this behavior?

What are the impacts of this behavior?

 

 

Approximately two—thirds of the direct and indirect
consumption of energy can be attributed to the choices and
patterns of living in the American households (Hannon,
1975). Direct consumption of energy represents slightly
less than one-half of household consumption and is used
primarily for transportation and space and water heating.
Indirect consumption of energy occurs when households make
purchases of goods or services which require energy for
production, storage, and transportation to market. This
consumption exceeds slightly the amount of energy consumed
directly by households.

Due to the large amount of energy consumed, house-
holds are recognized as primary decision makers involved in
both direct and indirect consumption. Purchase decisions
made within the household have both short and long range
implications for energy use. For example, a large portion
of the energy used within the home has been determined by
previous lifestyle decisions such as where to live and what
kind of house to own. Previous purchases of various house-
hold appliances are other contributors to lifestyle demands
on energy resources (Morrison and Gladhart, 1976).

Making lifestyle decisions based on the fulfillment
of goals or wants requires the accessibility of resources.
During the last several decades fossil fuels have been
readily available as an energy resource. As the limits of
fossil fuel supplies have become evident, allocation of

energy by households for direct and indirect consumption

 

 

— — ‘X a. 35.1 _’.."‘$.\ ~ g."- .: .. _ -

has come under considerable scrutiny. The household has
been viewed as a possible source of direct conservation and
potential source for production of goods and services for
future less energy intensive lifestyles. Little is known,
however, concerning the motivation involved in adoption of

less fossil fuel intensive lifestyles.

Purpose of the Research

 

The primary purpose of this research was to deter-
mine if there were differences in the adoption rate of direct
and indirect conservation behaviors among households of
various income adequacy and philosophical energy perspec-
tives. Direct conservation was investigated through analy—
sis of annual residential energy consumption over a period
of three years. Indirect conservation was investigated
through analysis of self-reported participation in a variety
of behaviors reflecting self-sufficiency, recycling, and
contributions to ecological organizations. These behaviors
have been collectively defined as voluntary simplicity.

A second purpose of the research included testing
the influences of available human resources within the
household on the motivation to practice direct and indirect
conservation. Thirdly, the research explored the impact of
participation in conservation behaviors on the development
of a sense of personal control over energy issues. Personal
control was measured through analysis of self-reported
answers to five locus of control questions modified for

energy use.

 

Research Questions

 

In an effort to contribute to the knowledge con—

cerning actions adopted by households which relate to

present issues of energy and lifestyle and the factors

which contribute to these actions the following research

questions were posed:

1.

With what frequency are households reducing
direct consumption of fossil fuel energy and
with what frequency are they participating in
behaviors related to voluntary simplicity?

To what extent are indicators of income and
philosophical perspective towards the energy
issue related to a household's reduction

in direct energy consumption and/or participa-
tion in voluntary simplicity behaviors?

To what extent does the availability of human
resources influence the relationship between
indicators of income and philosophical perspec-
tive and a household's reduction in direct
energy consumption and/or participation in
voluntary simplicity behaviors?

To what extent does participation in voluntary
simplicity and/or reduction in household energy
consumption contribute to a family's feeling of

control over energy related stressors?

 

Conceptual Framework

Management within the household is directed toward
the allocation of resources for the fulfillment of goals.
It implies that there can be control over the process and
the outcome of an event.

A managerial perspective includes four basic con-
cepts: values, resources, decision making, and goals.
Values have been defined as personal preferences and
beliefs about what is desirable (Hungerford, 1978). The
expression of values can occur in a variety of ways.
Values may be expressed culturally through norms and role
expectations. In an economic system the value of a re-
source or an end product is also expressed through its
media of comparison or exchange value which is more com—
monly referred to as price or cost. According to Deising,

It is the value system of a culture which deter—
mines the extent to which ends can be alternative,
which makes some means normative and others
neutral, and which allows media of value compar-
ison to develop (Diesing, 1972, p. 46).

Ashby (1977) maintained that the value of a re-
source to the household can be assessed from four defini-
tional components. They include cost of the resource
within the marketplace, usefulness derived from its con-
sumption, symbolic value attributed to benefits derived,
and beauty.

Within the context of managerial theory values are

said to influence the development of goals. Values may

thus be expressed in terms of goals or wants. Values are

 

10

also said to motivate the use of resources while attempting
to satisfy goals (Nickell, Rice, and Tucker, 1976; Paolucci,
1977).

Goals are frequently described as wants. In most,
if not all cases, an individual or group has more than one
goal. Resources provide the means whereby goals are suc-
cessfully attained. Resources may be tangible commodities
such as tools or raw materials. Resources may also be
intangible such as time, skills, or knowledge. In addition,
resources can be said to be human or nonhuman. Money is a
nonhuman resource whereas self-esteem or motivation would
be considered psychological human resources (Rice, 1969).
When resources are plentiful they can be more easily used
to satisfy a variety of alternative goals. When resources
are scarce they must be allocated to specific goals. This
allocation requires a more conscious process of decision
making for goal satisfaction (Gross, Crandall, and Knoll,
1973).

It is the decision making process that is the
controlling factor in the choice of outcome and effective
use of resources. When the outcome is not determined
through a conscious choice among alternatives, less effi-
cient use of resources may occur. Diesing (1972) identi-
fied five types of rationality, two of which are useful for
discussion of the decision process relevant to this
research. Economic rationality was described as continuous

measurement, comparison, ordering and exchange of

ll

commodities. The objective of economic rationality is

the transformation of resources into maximum value. Social
rationality was described as concerned with joint action
based on shared meaning, trust, and mutual support. The
objective of social rationality is the attainment of goals
through use of resources.

Values have been linked to social decisions and
the allocation of resources to economic decisions
(Paolucci, 1966). Through the conscious allocation of
resources, households make economic decisions among alter-
native ends. Through interactions among individual mem-
bers, households make social decisions. Control exer-
cised over the choice between alternative ends and the
allocation of resources are said to be motivated by
values.

An ecological-systems approach was introduced to
facilitate study of the management process within the
family (Steidl, 1969; Hook and Paolucci, 1970). This per-
spective allows for the conceptualization of the iterative
process of management. In other words, rather than being
involved in cause and effect relationships, management con-
cepts are interdependent. For example, values are said to
influence the choice among alternative goals and to moti-
vate the allocation of resources towards the achievement
of those goals. According to a family ecological model,
however, a shift in the availability of resources can

create changes in the choices made between various goals.

 

12

In addition, availability of resources is identified as an
important component to the process of value development.

The family ecological approach facilitates a focus
on the interrelationship between the household and the con-
text in which managerial control is being exercised. This
context has also been referred to as the environment.
Three subenvironments have been defined and include the
natural environment, the human—made environment, and the
social-emotional environment (Morrison, 1974; Bubolz, et
a1., 1979).

Resources are available to families from each of
the various environments. When a change occurs in one
subenvironment, changes will also occur in the other sub-
environments. In the case of energy, limits of fossil
fuel resources available from the natural environment will
follow with changes in each subenvironment including the
natural environment. Therefore, decisions regarding the
use and development of resources from each area are
critical.

A shift in the availability of resources can
create change through a reallocation of that particular
resource along with reallocation and substitution of other
available resources. Rice (1969) proposed an economic
framework for assessing managerial behavior in which she
stated:

Change occurs in the family (individual or

household) when its values are expressed in
terms of wants (or goals) strongly enough

13

to cause decisions which direct behavior in
the use of resources to increase or decrease
production and consumption (Rice, 1969, p. 6).

A discrepancy between what is and what one expects
or wants may create change by setting into motion a process
of decision making. Change in reaction to the energy
crisis was discussed by Perlman and Warren (1977) as a pro-
cessing of information whereby the system first notes an
incongruency between what is actually occurring and the
standard for what should occur.

Until recently the comparison value of fossil fuels
in respect to other energy resources has been relatively
low. Since 1973 sources of natural gas and fuel oil have
increased rapidly in price and supplies have been inter-
rupted. This has meant that households are paying
increasingly larger percentages of their income for home
heating, electricity, and transportation.

The symbolic value of fossil fuels as a resource
could be described in terms of the interrelation between
the shared meanings of a society, social interaction, and
the individual (Schmitt and Grupp, 1976, p. 325). From
this perspective fossil fuel energy could mean a warm
house, ability to travel to visit family or friend, a
sports car, stylish clothing, or a way to get what is
desired out of 1ife.~ For others, it might mean pollution,
inequitable distribution of wealth, or an impersonal

market economy.

 

14

Conservationists have been quick to identify and
focus on the less positive of the symbolic meanings of
fossil fuel energy. They have suggested that society has
focused on meanings of energy which are directed towards
short-term benefits rather than long-term lifestyle values.
In the process, values for the social good may be forfeited.

The purpose of this research was to explore the
impact of income adequacy and philosophical motivators ahd
the availability of specific human resources on the prac-
tice of direct and indirect conservation. Figure 1 depicts
the underlying theoretical model.

Income adequacy, philosophical perspective, and
resources interact within the decision process. The imme-
diate outcome of the decision process is the allocation of
resources to a variety of behaviors. In this research the
behaviors were specifically defined as structural and be-
havioral changes related to direct conservation and volun-
tary simplicity behaviors. Both aspects of behavior in
the model were expected to lead to either direct or in-
direct conservation of fossil fuel energy. A predicted
outcome of participation in conservation was the produc-
tion of motivation and resources upon which to draw at a
later time.

As with all models, only certain variables can be
observed within one research tOpic. Variables studied in

this project are defined below.

 

15

 

532:5. 6.32350 3— .26.2 EoEomucaE ... 0.39“.

 

9.3228

DEE—Em
O\ b.3515

AcetaOEomcoo.
mhcgagom

335.8.—

 

/
V

82:83.

\ 5.5... ///<

0562.98.— A
A1111.11....3....§..£ ....—

 

63.83

32.33
2:8...

16

Definitions

 

Income Adequacy

 

The assessment of the adequacy of the total money
income of the household unit. This indicator was based on
expenditure and need studies and was then adjusted for
household composition and geographic residence. This was
an objective indicator of the household's financial
ability to purchase resources which have an exchange value

within the marketplace.

Philosophical Perspective

 

An assessment of the symbolic value of fossil fuel
energy to the respondent. This measure was based on the
respondent's subjective orientation to issues or problems

of energy consumption.

Knowledge of Conservation Actions

 

The ability of respondents to identify efficient

methods of direct conservation of fossil fuels.

Average Household Education

 

The educational attainment of the principal

adult(s) within the household.

Reported Home Repair Skills

 

The extent to which the respondent perceived
household members capable of performing various household

repairs.

 

l7

Perceived Money Availability

 

The respondent's personal assessment of the house-
hold's ability to make purchases of equipment or devices

which would facilitate fossil fuel conservation.

Perceived Time Availability

 

The respondent's personal assessment of the amount
of time that household members could contribute to the

installation of a conservation device.

Human Labor

 

The total number of household members who could

potentially replace fossil fuel energy with human energy.

Number of Employed Household Members

 

Participation of household members within the

labor market outside the household.

Personal Control

 

Subjective assessment of the respondent's compe-
tence, achievement and individual efficacy in managing

problems related to energy consumption.

Voluntary Simplicity

 

The respondent's judgment of the extent to which
households participate in behaviors which have been
theoretically defined as a less energy intensive life-

style. The behaviors are considered indirect

l8

conservation based on reduced purchase of material goods

and substitution of human energy for fossil fuel energy.

Percentage Change in Consumption

An objective measure of direct consumption of
fossil fuel energy within the household. This measure
was based on actual meter readings obtained from utility

companies for the years 1977-1978 and 1979-1980.

 

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Energy is a vital resource for living. Looking at
energy from a historical perspective O'Toole (1978) pointed
out that the importance of energy is relative to the abil-
ity of man/woman to perceive and harness the energy for
use. O'Toole further maintained that history has shown
that people can and do make choices among the use of alter-
native technologies; that changes in use of various energy
forms needs not create disaster yet they often result in

social change.

Energy Alternatives

 

The increasing awareness of the finite character-
istics of present fossil fuel energy sources has created'
considerable concern regarding our energy future. Imme-
diate reactions tended to display a sense of crisis
(Morrison and Gladhart, 1976; Boulding, 1974; Perlman
and Warren, 1977). More recently, however, the limita-
tions of fossil fuels to meet future energy demands have
resulted in the recognition of numerous alternative
energy sources. LeGrand and Robinson (1980) noted that
two objectives in the allocation of resources to

19

 

20

alternative ends were the achievement of social efficiency
and social equity. The allocation of resources to energy
alternatives requires consideration of these objectives
through time as well as in the present.

At present, natural gas and fuel oil provide
approximately 75 percent of the energy used within our
nation. These energy sources are nonrenewable and the
domestic supply and production of fuels from fossil fuel
sources is said to have begun an irreversible decline
(National Research Council, 1979). Responses to a decline
in an available resource traditionally have involved
attempts to increase supply. Alternative energy sources
such as coal, nuclear power, biomass, geothermal, wind,
and solar are possible substitutions for natural gas and
fuel oil to increase supplies of energy. Human labor is
another potential energy resource.

Control over demand for energy resources, i.e.,
conservation, has also been given considerable attention
(Wolf, 1979). One aspect of conservation has been directed
towards limiting the extraction of fuels from the ground.
Another perspective of conservation has been described as
efficient use of energy resources.

Natural gas and fuel oil have provided an efficient
inexpensive source of energy. Increased use has been
associated with economic growth and, therefore, our present

level of living. Reduction or change in the use of energy

21

may frequently meet with resistance due to concern over a

potential lowered level of living.

As a result, a variety of future energy scenarios
have been identified and described (Ford Foundation, 1976;
National Research Council, 1979; Williams, Kruvant, and
Newman, 1979; and Amory Lovins, 1977). In general they
each predict two basic future alternatives: increased
supply or decreased demand. (The scenarios of the Ford
Foundation were discussed in Chapter One.)

Williams, Kruvant, and Newman studied the energy
consumption of a national sample of household consumers.
Based on actual energy consumption in 1972 and 1974 and an
analysis of conservation attempts the authors sought to
identify impacts of alternative energy futures. Four
futures were identified: Business as Usual, Conservation
Incentives and Mandates, Acute Shortage, and High Elec-
tricity. Each future was discussed from analysis of the
potential impacts on metrOpolitan trends of housing, land
use, employment and transportation. The population of
households was broken down according to five variables to
facilitate analysis. These variables included: income
(adjusted for family size and geographical location),
location, race, age, and family size.

The authors predicted few metropolitan changes in
the Business as Usual and Acute Shortage Scenarios. A
period of acute shortage would be likely to result in

decreased housing availability and a shift to public

22

transportation. Households with adequate income resources
would be least affected. On the other hand, low income,
black, and older populations would experience the most
negative impacts.

The High Electricity scenario would mean abundant
energy from development of coal and nuclear technologies.
Growth would be expected to continue at present rates.

The Conservation Incentive and Mandate Program
would be expected to introduce greater change. The addi-
tional input of capital to promote conservation would be
expected to result in increased prices for housing and
land. A movement towards back to the city and public
transportation was also predicted. Once again higher in-
come households would be expected to be least affected.
Cost of housing and energy efficient transportation
would impact primarily on low-income families. Larger
families residing in the suburbs would also be expected to
experience a squeeze on the pocketbook.

Amory Lovins (1977) discussed energy futures in
terms of hard and soft paths. The hard energy path would
be similar to the Historical Growth scenario of the Ford
Foundation and the High Electric scenario described by
Williams, Kruvant, and Newman.

Lovins described the soft energy path as involving
aspects of both supply and demand. Supply of energy would
result through the use of renewable energy sources and the

harnessing of less environmentally harmful energy sources

 

23

such as solar. Since these sources of energy would not

provide the one overall inexpensive and efficient energy
resource, the soft path also incorporates restraints on

the demand for energy.

Wolfe (1979) viewed the soft path from two perspec—
tives: alternative technology and conservation. Conserva-
tion was perceived to occur through technical efficiency
within the household and patterns of use based on lifestyle
and value change. Changes related to lifestyle could occur
through voluntary or mandated behavior.

All too frequently decisions related to the choice
among energy alternatives are concerned merely with the
immediate availability of fuel to meet Wants and needs. The
basic objectives of social efficiency and social equity if
included in the decision process may receive short-term con-
sideration rather than the long-term, throughout time
consideration suggested by LeGrand and Robinson (1980).

Edney (1980) noted that shortages and equality in
the common social unit cannot exist together in a society
where self-sufficiency requires the scarce resources for
functioning. Resolution of scarcity problems in a demo-
cratic community, according to Edney, should be focused
on alternatives which would preserve individual choice;
should not cause long-term problems; should be based on
current technological capabilities; and should not create

drastic lifestyle changes.

 

24

Edney further suggested that the dilemma of choice
was not one of individual versus group rationality but
rather a conflict of human values. Values of identity,
competition, survival, freedom of choice, and social power
may conflict with those focused on the common good. Stern
and Gardner (1980) suggested that energy conservation from
a commons framework is a problem of motivating persons to
act in ways that promote lifestyles based on long-term

social interests.

Energy and Lifestyle

 

Nader and Beckerman (1978) referred to lifestyle
as the expression of value preferences through consuming
behaviors. Value preferences or lifestyles are dynamic
rather than static. Lifestyles will change as energy
sources change throughout time.

Nader and Beckerman noted differences between life-
style changes and mere behavior change. Specifically they
stated that lowering thermostats or carpooling would not
be considered lifestyle changes. Rather they suggested
that lifestyle refer to broader changes in social values
or ideologies. They identified four: investment and
reinvestment, hoarding, consumption, and work. A conflict
of values appeared to be the common denominator in the
relationship of lifestyle and energy. This is similar to
the identification of a "Commons dilemma" discussed by

Edney (1980).

 

25

Lifestyle is frequently used synonymously
(although incorrectly), with quality of life. Quality of
life is sometimes measured in terms of goods and services
available for use. This measure is nearly always related
to the Gross National Product and thus with production and
consumption.

Nader and Beckerman (1978) noted that several of
the theorists they reviewedl had agreed that social change
and social action were constrained by the amount of energy
available. They noted, however, that within the last
three decades energy theorists had not identified changes
as necessarily higher, better, or more desirable. This
is the view taken by Lovins and other conservationists in
support of soft path energy technologies and the incor-
poration of social as well as economic considerations
into energy decision—making.

Households are responsible for two-thirds of the
direct and indirect consumption of energy (Hannon, 1975).
Morrison and Gladhart (1976) noted that a great deal of
consumption occurs as a result of "non-decisions" on the
part of families. What they in essence were saying is
that families or households form patterns of behavior
which result in the consumption of energy. Such family
tasks as preparing food, maintaining the household, and

providing recreation require direct consumption of energy.

 

lTheorists reviewed included Odum (1971), Cottrell
(1955), Adams (1975), and White (1959).

26

Gladhart (1977) studied what he defined as life-
style decisions and their relationship to energy consump-
tion. Data were collected in May of 1974 on a sample of
216 urban and rural households in Michigan. Using regres-
sion analysis to control for the effects of other variables,
the specific contribution of various lifestyle features to
energy conservation were determined.

Findings indicated that multiunit and mobile
dwellings used considerably less energy than single family
dwellings. Houses with more insulation and houses with
fewer doors, windows, and heated rooms required less
energy to heat. Households without children and house-
holds with older families were also found to use less
energy. There was no important difference identified
between urban and rural families residential energy use.
Rural families, however, used 42 percent more gasoline.
This difference was noted for travel to work, shopping
for food, and transporting children to activities.

It should be noted that the conceptualization of
lifestyle used by Gladhart would have been discussed by
Nader and Beckerman as patterns of behavior indicative
of lifestyle or value preferences rather than the life—
style itself. None-the—less, recognition of these be-
haviors is important. Gladhart maintained that changes
made in behavior patterns which may contribute to con-
servation in one sense might result in consumption in

another. Change in one behavior alone will not conserve

 

 

 

27

fossil fuels if not considered in the context of all life-
style behaviors. Since conservation may result in dollar
savings, the reallocation of that money needs to be for

goods and services which are also less energy intensive.

Reduction in Household Consumption of Fossil Fuel Energy

 

The present study was directed towards understanding
the motivations and household characteristics which facil-
itate conservation of fossil fuel energy. It is, therefore,
necessary to briefly discuss research related to household
energy consumption.

Based on an analysis of two studies, Grier and Grier
(1978) identified three structural factors and a variety of
population characteristics which influence consumption.
Lowered population density of residential communities,
smaller households, more adults per household, more workers
per household, more elderly people and greater affluence
all contribute to higher overall consumption of energy.

Several of these population trends also have poten-
tial for conservation. Affluence may afford households
the ability to equip homes with energy saving technology
therefore providing a potential area of conservation. In
addition, higher income households due to initial higher
levels of consumption may have more flexibility to conserve.

A second trend noted by Grier and Grier was a back-
to-the-city movement thus increasing the population density
of residential areas. As these homeowners implement reno-

vation of older homes, energy efficient technology can be

 

 

28

incorporated. In addition, energy costs for transportation
may be evidenced. These benefits may be lost, however, if
affluent households returning to the city bring with them
energy intensive lifestyles.

Perlman and Warren (1977) reported that the impact
of the 1973-74 energy crisis was limited in the majority
of 1440 households interviewed in their study. The main
impact was primarily a change in the material resources
available to families. They specifically identified money
and gasoline as scarce resources. A few households suf-
fered reductions of income through job loss; others noted
a change in the availability of various goods and
services.

Changes in behavior related to noted impacts were
assessed through analysis of self-reported data on house-
hold uses of energy for transportation, heating, lighting,
cooking, and air-conditioning. Estimates were made on the
amount of energy actually consumed before and during the
oil embargo. All figures were converted into British
thermal units. A comparison was made based on the prOpor-
tion of precrisis energy that was saved as a result of
reported behavior changes. Overall, reports indicated a
12 percent reduction during the year following the oil
embargo.

Self—reported conservation estimates were validated
by obtaining actual copies of the utility bills from a sub-

sample of the total 1440 households in the study. A

 

29

comparison of actual consumption and estimated conservation
showed that while households somewhat overestimated their
attempts at conservation, the amount of energy actually
saved was only slightly lower than the estimated figure.
Btus saved on heating were estimated at 15.9 million
British thermal units (MBTUs) actual consumption records
showed a savings of 10.3 MBTUs. Conservation of energy
used for other household purposes was estimated at 4.8
MBTUs, actual savings however, were not observed.

Perlman and Warren reported that income differences
in families resulted in differences in conservation beha—
viors. A direct linear relationship was reported between
income and absolute reduction in direct household energy
consumption. Proportion of energy saved showed a slightly
curvilinear pattern. Households with income under $5,000
and greater than $15,000 reported a similar reduction of
approximately twenty-five percent. A slightly lower re—
duction was reported by other household income groups.

William, Kruvant, and Newman (1979) reported on
actual consumption data of a national sample of households
during 1972 and 1974. Their findings showed a 1.8 percent
overall decrease in energy consumption. The reduction was
noted primarily in apartment dwellings (-3.3% change) as com-
pared to singleTfamily dwellings (0.2% increase); the older,

over sixty—five pOpulation (—7.l% change) as compared to

 

 

30

middle-aged persons (1.4% increase); and central city resi-
dents (—4.9% change) as compared to suburban (-2.4% change)
and rural (1.0% increase) residents.

A large portion of energy research directed to the
study of conservation has resulted from the work of the
Family Energy Project at Michigan State University. Their
work included data based on self-reported conservation
actions as practiced by households, but also included actual
measures of conservation as reported through changes in
direct consumption over time. Consumption data were
obtained from appropriate utility companies once permission
was given by the household.

Hogan (1976) hypothesized that household energy
conservation practices would differ among husbands and wives
with varying commitment and congruency to selected values.
Four values were studied separately: self-esteem, familism,
social responsiveness, and ecoconsciousness. Using one-way
analysis of variance, she found that commitment to ecocon-
sciousness was the only value which contributed to differ—
ences in adOption of conservation practices. Those families
with high commitment to ecoconsciousness adopted 72 percent
of the practices compared to 46 percent by families with
low commitment.

Hungerford (1978) examined the relationship of
value commitments to residential energy use. Initial analy-
sis showed that households reduced gas consumption by nine

percent and fuel oil by 15.6 percent. Electricity was

31

reduced but not significantly. Stepwise multiple regression
was used to investigate the relationship of value commit-
ment and residential energy consumption. Results indicated
that an increase in husbands' ecoconsciousness value was
related to an increase in consumption whereas an increase

in the wife's ecoconsciousness value was associated with a
decrease in consumption.

Further analysis looked at the relationship between
congruency of a husband's and a wife's ecoconsciousness value
and change in consumptiOn (1974-76). Ecoconsciousness value
scores of husbands and wives were categorized as congruent
and incongruent. Congruency was not found as a significant
aspect of change in consumption. An analysis of the dif-
ferences in ecoconsciousness congruency patterns found the
greatest reduction in consumption in households where the
wife had high commitment and the husband had a medium com-
mitment to values of ecoconsciousness.

Keith (1977) investigated household microdecisions
related to energy consumption and their relationship to
changes in consumption levels from 1973-74 to 1975-76. Data
concerning family microdecisions were collected from self—
administered questionnaires completed by both husbands and
wives (or single parents) of one hundred and thirty house—
holds. In addition, a scale was developed to determine a
composite measure of conservation practices in which
responses were weighted according to intensity of practice

and number of adults.

 

32

Keith found an overall reduction in Btu consumption
of 6.3 percent (p=.000). When controlling for fuel type,
electricity showed a slight nonsignificant increase in con-
sumption. Fuel oil users showed a greater decrease (11.1
percent) when compared with natural gas users (6.6 percent).

A significant predictive model of conservation
included three variables: addition of a new furnace, in-
creased intensity of conservation behaviors, and addition
of ceiling insulation. When electricity was weighted to

account for conversion and transmission the stepwise

regression model included change in the number of people.
Morrison, Keith, and Roosa (1978) studied charac-
teristics of conserver and nonconserver households by com-
paring their scores on eighteen variables. Discriminant
analysis was used in order to identify variables which
would measure expected differences between the two groups.
Morrison et. al., reported that households which
actually reduced their direct consumption of energy
(conservers) tended to be significantly (p=.013) more aware
of their conserving behaviors. The conserving households
were also significantly (p=.025) less likely to report
acceptability of a scale of fifteen energy policies than
were nonconserving households. The authors suggested that
these results supported the case for voluntary conservation
on the part of households. They further maintained that
incentives rather than restrictions might promote greater
conservation in the future. It was also reported that

conserver groups generally were of a higher income bracket

 

33

(p=.039). Higher incomes were those households reporting
at least a $15,000 annual gross income. Conservers also
reported a higher level of education (p=.006). The dif-
ference, however, was slight with conservers reporting
slightly more than 13.4 years and nonconservers reporting
slightly less than 13 years.

Morrison, Keith, and Zuiches (1979) identified
price of energy supplies as the most apparent impact of
recent changes in fossil fuel availability. They reported
that households from lower income, lower educational, rural,
and older populations experienced greater stress from in-
creased cost of fuels.

Of various familial characteristics, Morrison et al.,
found that a reduction in direct household energy consump-
tion was significantly related only to educational level.
Specifically, households where the male head had some
college showed a 8.5 percent reduction whereas households
in which the female head had less than a high school educa-
tion reduced 10.6 percent. The authors attributed the re—
duction to choice and economic need, respectively.

Other familial characteristics reported by Morrison
et al., showed directional yet nonsignificant differences
in actual reduced consumption. The greatest reduction
occurred in the middle income groups; households where the
head was within the over-45 age group; white collar; and
urban households. In addition, households with one to two

persons and households with more than five persons showed

34

greater conservation than did medium sized households.
Similar reductions were found based on number of rooms in
the house.

The authors also reported that cost of fuel used
for heating was an important factor in the reduction of
energy consumption. It was reported that the greater rate
of increase in the cost of the fuel used by the households,
the greater the reduction in use. Fuel oil showed a 126
percent increase in cost over the period studied; natural
gas an 81 percent increase. Fuel oil users reduced con-
sumption by 11.1 percent compared to 6.6 percent by natural
gas users. The cost of electricity increased by 50 percent
and there was a slight increase in use as well. The authors
explained this difference by noting that most household.
uses of electricity are for lighting and appliances rather
than space heating. Thus, the impact may have been of a
smaller proportion.

Morrison, Keith, and Zuiches reported that belief
in the energy problem showed an unexpected influence on
conservation. Households where both husband and wife did
not believe there was a problem had, in fact, reduced their
consumption more than households where both husbands and
wives reported belief. The authors maintained that these
results supported the idea that conservation tended to be
based on economic reasons rather than moral perceptions of

an energy problem.

35

Merkley (1980) conducted a secondary analysis of
data collected during the evaluation of Pilot Project
Conserve (see Harris, et a1., 1980). When testing for the
influence of age related factors on conservation, Merkley
found that the level of past experience with deprivation
and shortages was a significant indicator of a proportional
change in energy consumption. Thus households having mem-
bers with higher levels of past experience with deprivation
(the depression years, world wars) were conserving more
than households with less experience. Merkley concluded
that two factors might account for this finding. First,
she suggested that persons previously having experience
with a deprivation have the knowledge and skills to cut
back. Secondly she suggested that these persons may be

conserving in order to forstall a crisis.

Voluntarnyimplicity Participation

 

Voluntary simplicity has been identified as
a lifestyle alternative which would involve the sub-
stitution of human energy for fossil fuel energy. Based
on five values this lifestyle integrates both social and
economic decision making into the definition of goals and
the use of resources.

The term voluntary simplicity was originally coined
in 1936 by Richard Gregg to describe a lifestyle involving
a singleness of purpose; inward sincerity and honesty; and

avoidance of excessive material possessions. Its background

36

is in religious and spiritual philosophies (Gregg, 1977).
According to Gregg, voluntary simplicity requires the
management of resources from a quality of life based on
material goods to one based on a philosophy of life:
It means an ordering and guiding of our energy
and our desires, a partial restraint in some
directions in order to secure greater abundance
of life in other directions. It involves a
deliberate organization of life for a purpose
(Gregg, 1977 p. 20).

Gregg identified some basic reasons for a life of
simplicity. His first was improvement of the economic
system. Gregg maintained that control over individual
consumption would act as a deterrent to the greedy and com-
petitive nature of our present system of production and
distribution. Production of material luxuries requires the
use of labor, capital, and raw materials which could be
used toward greater social ends. Gregg noted that such
production involved the exploitation of humans through
price increases, lowered real wages, and excessive labor on
the part of the poor to make up for economic losses. He
also maintained that participation in the production of
luxury items led to frequent unemployment in times of
consumer fluctuations and economic depression.

In addition, Gregg suggested that material simpli-
city was a factor in the political greatness of men such as
Lenin, Gandhi, and Buddah. The simplicity of their lives,

he maintained, identified the leader with others of small

material wealth. This contributed to the self-respect of

37

persons within the society through sharing in the leader's
greatness. Self-respect is the basis for a morality
achieved through expression of basic values.

Elgin and Mitchell (1977) drew from Gregg to iden-
tify five basic values on which voluntary simplicity as a
lifestyle is said to be based. These values include mater-
ial simplicity, human scale, self-determination, ecological
awareness, and personal growth. Simplification of material
life is based on consumption of goods through examination
of the contribution of the good in relation to the four
other values. For example, when deciding on the purchase
of a new item, its value would be assessed based on its
contribution to self-reliance and common social good; and
cooperation with rather than control of the natural environ-
ment.

It is important to note that material simplicity
does not mean poverty (Gregg, 1977; Elgin and Mitchell,
1977). On the contrary, the concept of voluntary simpli-
city requires that basic needs be met; otherwise an environ-
ment for personal growth is missing.

Elgin and Mitchell (1977) described material sim—
plicity from the perspective that possessions must contri-
bute to personal growth. Human scale and self—
determination values lead to the goal that living and
working environments become human rather than institution
controlled. The self-determined individual may seek

material sufficiency by producing his/her own goods for

38

consumption. A greater connection can then be identified
between work and the contribution of that work to society
as a whole.

Mitchell and Elgin defined ecological awareness as
an acknowledgement of the "interconnectedness and inter-
dependence of people and resources." Also involved is the
awareness of the finiteness of physical resources. Equally
important, however, is the awareness and concern for those
less fortunate resulting in a sense of social responsibility.

When characterizing those persons living a lifestyle
of voluntary simplicity Elgin and Mitchell first noted that
there are degrees of participation. Full voluntary simpli-
Icity is followed by only about three percent of the popula-
tion. Partial participation involves about twice as many
persons. A third group is made up of individuals who sym—
pathize with the goals of voluntary simplicity but for one
or more reasons do not participate. Finally, there is the
group that is indifferent, unaware or opposed to the life—
style.

Specific characteristics of the participants as
identified by Elgin and Mitchell included well educated,
white males and females from middle or upper class back—
grounds. They are most likely in their twenties or
thirties and predominantly single. Incomes tended to be
bimodal with students making up the greatest portion of the

group under $5,000.

39

Leonard-Barton and Rogers (1980) designed an 18-
item measure of voluntary simplicity behaviors. They
selected items which were most directly related to conser-
vation and therefore intended to also relate to three of
the five values significant to voluntary simplicity:
material simplicity, self-determdnation, and ecological
awareness. Several of the questions were derived from
behaviors identified previously by Elgin and Mitchell.

The scale progressed through three stages to reach
its most recent 18-item format. Data provided by Leonard-
Barton and Rogers concerning use of the scale were based on
the responses of 812 California homeowners to these 18
questions. The authors subjected the scale to factor
analysis and regression analysis in order to simplify its
contents for future needs.

Six factors emerged from factor analysis and were
characterized by Leonard-Barton and Rogers as biking, self-
suffiCiency in services, recycling of resources (metals,
glass), self-sufficiency through making goods, recycling ‘
of durable goods (clothing, furniture), and closeness with
nature.

The scale items were also regressed on the total
voluntary simplicity scores for each respondent. Once again
data were based on the responses of the 812 California home-

owners. Ninety percent of the variance was accounted for

by nine of the scale items.

40

Three studies were conducted using the question-
naire at various stages of its deveIOpment. In the spring
of 1977, a nine question measure was administered to 215
Palo Alto, California homeowners. A three county study
was conducted during the spring of 1979 using an expanded
l9-item scale. Half of this sample included households
with recently installed solar equipment. During the fall
of 1979, the 18-item scale previously described was admin-
istered to the 812 homeowners throughout California.

Leonard-Barton and Rogers reported that the
tendency toward participation in voluntary simplicity
accounted for five percent of the variance in predicting
conservation practices such as adding insulation or weather-
stripping. The complete regression model based on the 1977
data accounted for 22 percent of the variance, thus volun-
tary simplicity behaviors actually contributed to one—
fourth of the total variance accounted for in the model.
Analysis of data collected during the statewide study
resulted in low but significant correlation with two
variables: turning off the furnace pilot light during the
summer and weatherstripping.

The authors maintained that these findings
indirectly related participation in voluntary simplicity to
reduced energy consumption. While no direct significant
relationship was determined between voluntary simplicity

behaviors and natural gas usage, the connection was made

41

based on the relationship of voluntary simplicity to energy
conserving behaviors which in turn were considered predic-
tive of gas usage.

Leonard-Barton and Rogers also investigated the
relationship between voluntary simplicity behaviors and
various demographic variables. They found the relationship
between voluntary simplicity and income to be only slightly
curvilinear. The income variable was trichotomized: High
($26,000+), Medium ($16-25,000) and Low ($15,000 or less).
Mean scores of the middle income group on voluntary simpli-
city was only slightly higher, 38.2, as compared to 35.9
and 35.8 for low and high income families, respectively.

Education was found to have a low yet significant
correlation (r=.16; p=.001) to voluntary simplicity scores.
Specific items related to education included biking,
recycling paper and glass, taking classes to increase self-
reliance and contribution to ecological organizations.
Education and income were correlated, yet education was
related to voluntary simplicity while income was not, thus
the authors maintained that the data were supportive of the
premise that voluntary simplicity behaviors were indeed
voluntary.

A skill used to produce a good or make a repair
can frequently be used as a substitute for paid services.
The majority of voluntary simplicity behaviors require

possession of some basic skills. Leonard-Barton and Rogers

42

found significant relationships between voluntary simpli—
city and mechanical ability.

With an underlying assumption that a large portion
of the migrants to rural northern California areas would be
persons participating in voluntary simplicity behaviors,
Hackett and Schwartz (1980) studied 39 such individuals.
Their sample was selected from five areas: three communes,
two semi-isolated settlements, and one small village. Sub-
jects in larger communities were chosen randomly. In less
populated communities respondents were found through
referral of other respondents.

Hackett and Schwartz reported that the alternative
lifestyle participants in their sample were primarily in
their late twenties or early thirties. Four were familiar
with rural life; most tended to come from predominantly
middle-class urban backgrounds. Overall interviews de-
tected general themes of concern about simplicity of
material goods and importance of personal relationships.
Self-reliance was important but the emphasis seemed to be
geared towards a cooperative self-reliance.

Income for these persons was a result primarily of
part—time wage earning jobs. Some of the persons inter-
viewed were receiving assistance from other family members
or from government agencies in the form of unemployment
insurance, social security disability, food stamps, or

subsidized medical services.

43

Home production was an economically important aspect
of the lifestyle. Self—sufficiency in building their own
home was more important to this sample than growing food.
Only ten percent of the sample produced over 60 percent of
their food needs for summer. Considerable emphasis was
placed on recycling. Frequently homes were built from goods
salvaged. Seventy-five percent of the homes cost under
$1,000 to build. Few of these homes were insulated; most
were without plumbing. Service by utilities was infrequent
due to both the economic cost of installation and the phil—
osophical premise that utility companies are supportive of
nuclear power.

Within the communes, the sharing of appliances was
common. This resulted in a considerably-lower portion of
sampled households reporting ownership of appliances when
compared to ownership by low income households reported in
other studies.

The researchers attempted to obtain data on house-
hold use of energy. The four major available sources of
energy included prOpane, kerosene, gasoline, and wood.

Data were based on self reports. The average yearly use of
these fuels totaled 16.4 million British thermal units.

2 the authors

When comparing this use to a nationwide sample
noted that these voluntary simplicity households used
approximately half the amount of energy used by poor

families.

2Newman and Day (1975:90)

44

Human Resource Availability

 

Changes in an economy through a decline in wage
rates, fewer work opportunities, scarcity of goods, or
changed expectations of the consumer results in adjustments
in consumption and production (Strumpel, 1976; Katona, 1972;
Caplovitz, 1979; and Elder, 1974). Money income is one
such resource. When a "shortage" of income occurs, house-
holds have been found to make attempts to raise income,
save less, reduce market consumption, and increase house-
hold production.

A reduction of expenditures and attempts to generate
alternate or supplementary sources of income were responses
to loss of income during the depression (Elder, 1974).
Possible new income sources included the entry of mother
into the labor market, money from relatives or boarders,
and public assistance. Reduction of expenditures involved
a change to a more labor intensive household and a reassess-
ment of consumption norms. Elder maintained that successful
adaptation to impacts of the depression was dependent on
other household resources including motivation and familial
and environmental support systems.

Socioeconomic status and intelligence were identi-
fied as family characteristics which contributed to moti-
vational level. Elder suggested that the socioeconomic
status of a family influenced the image of self, problem
solving skills, and a sense of competence. Lower class

families have more firsthand experience with the lessons of

45

economic hardships, however, Elder maintained that middle
class families provided a greater range of problem solving
skills and knowledge of a greater range of alternatives.
Elder further contended that motivation to act only led to
frustration if skills to act were lacking by the individual
or family.

Some inconsistency can be noted in the motivation
of families to adapt during the depression. Income, occu-
pation, and educational level were found to contribute to
problem solving skills and recognition of alternative
avenues of adaptation. These same motivators, however,
frequently created greater status quo rather than coopera-
tive efforts and reduced consumption. This phenomenon
occurred most frequently in middle income families.

Caplovitz (1979) explored the coping strategies of
families according to their rankings as victims of infla—
tion and recession. An objective measure was developed by
income class and perceptions concerning the ability of
income to keep up with rising prices.

Caplovitz reported that over half of the 1,982
families interviewed in 1976 indicated that they were worse
off financially than in previous years. Approximately ten
percent reported being unemployed. Social characteristics
of families most affected included the poor, the semi-
skilled and unskilled, the poorly educated, the blacks and

Spanish speaking.

 

46

In assessing the use of coping strategies according
to financial impact of inflation, Caplovitz identified five
strategies: income raising, reduced expenditures, bargain-
hunting, greater self-reliance, and sharing with others.
Income raising involved one or more family members spending
additional hours employed.outside the home. Various other
activities included performing odd jobs (frequently not
reported on income tax forms) or making investments.
Families curtailed expenses by changing consumption patterns
for food, entertainment, clothing, vacations, and transpor-
tation. Self-reliance was achieved by making more repairs,
saving money, and discovering unknown talents. Sharing
included receiving and offering help among friends.

The proportion of families participating in each
strategy increased as their objective financial status
decreased. When controlling for income distribution the
proportion of households participating in the various
strategies was negatively related to income. Income
raising was an exception to this pattern. Caplovitz sug-'
gested that the ability to increase income is not a matter
of choice but rather one of opportunity.

In a review of research, Strumpel (1976) pointed
out factors which influenced success or failure in accommo-
dating to economic shifts. Strumpel first noted that long

term adjustment occurs slowly. Female participation in

47

the labor force can increase the supply of money to the
family, thus at least initially eliminating the need to
cut back.

Young families especially those with children re-
quired the greatest amount of consumer goods and services.
Along with families in the lower socioeconomic strata they
reported the least flexibility to consume fewer goods. In
addition, poorer families tended to be less confident of
their abilities to counteract economic crises.

Perlman and Warren (1977) noted the importance of
material and nonmaterial resources in maintaining the
family's capacities of integration, adaptability, and
cognitive competence. Material resources were listed as
housing, money, automobiles, insulation and so on. Included
as nonmaterial resources were knowledge, skills, informa—
tion, human energy, self-esteem, and kinship supports.
Adaptability refers to the ability of families to make
resource substitutions. Cognitive competence involves the
information processing of decision making.

Perlman and Warren maintained that the most impor-
tant function of families is to meet the needs of family
members by performing a variety of tasks. To perform
these tasks families must call upon both their material and
nonmaterial resources. It is assumed that families vary in
their pool of resources and therefore differ in the con—

straints and opportunities within a problem situation.

48

As an example, Perlman and Warren looked at the
importance of income as a resource which influenced adapta-
tion to pressures of energy shortage. The authors noted
that while all income groups reported price as a motivator
to reduce consumption of energy, the availability of money
was an important factor in the family's flexibility within
the problem.

Perlman and Warren also noted that shortage of
gasoline--another material resource--resulted in consider-
able changes in tasks performed inside and outside the
home. Numerous families reduced their use of the car and
use of household appliances. Twoéthirds of the families
reported that if the energy crisis kept them at home it
would be a positive outcome. One-third, however, reported
that staying at home would increase tension.

Case and Harris (1980) studied the influence of
material and nonmaterial resources on reported household
conservation actions. Their model of analysis assumed
that a household's effectiveness in performing various
conservation actions was dependent upon the availability of
a variety of resources.

Analysis of these data found meaningful breakpoints
for education and income. They reported that households
with high school education or less reported fewer conserva-
tion actions than those households having at least some
college. Households with incomes below $10,000 reported

fewer conservation behaviors than higher income households.

49

They also found that household structures had in—
teresting relationships to reported conservation action.
Two adult households reported more actions than single or
multiple (more than two) adult households. Percentage of
children in the home showed a positive significant rela—
tionship to conservation behaviors.

In terms of household resources, Case and Harris
reported that money available for energy conservation
devices, home repair skills available, and two adults in
the household showed strongest associations with energy
conserving behaviors. Knowledge of actions had a negative
relationship to actually taking the action.

Using path analysis to observe indirect effects the
data showed that rural location had a positive relationship
with conservation. This relationship was explained in
terms of rural households being more dependent on more ex-
pensive heating fuels, having higher skills, and less
knowledge of conservation actions. Education and income
were found to have a contradictory association with inter-
vening variables. Education was reported to have a posi-
tive relationship to attitudes and fuel type but a nega-
tive relationship to skills. Income was positively
related to house type, skill level and knowledge but
showed a negative relationship with attitudes, fuel type,
and number of adults. Thus, it can be seen that house-

holds with specific characteristics positive to energy

50

conserving behaviors may in fact, have other characteris—
tics which more or less constrain behavior change.

As part of the analysis of data for the evaluation
of Pilot Project Conserve (1980), the researchers looked
at the relationship between resources and resulting energy
conservation. Resources included in the analysis were
knowledge of conservation actions, accuracy of estimated
savings possible through conservation, education, income,
ability to afford conservation device, number of occupants,
health reasons, expected difficulty in obtaining materials
or installation of conservation device. The six best
bivariate predictors were included in a multivariate re-
gression analysis computed against a composite energy con-
servation action scale. Health, number of occupants,
accuracy of estimated savings, number of suggestions,
effectiveness of suggestions, and education were found to
explain eight percent of the variance.

A similar analysis was done for motivational factors.
Although many of the attitudinal and situational motivators
were positively related to taking conservation actions,
only four percent of the variance was accounted for. The
model included ecoconsciousness, presence of children,
belief in the energy problem, rurality, presence of married
adults, percentage of household income spent on heating
fuel.

The final report also included an assessment of the

affect of the conservation actions on actual reduced

51

consumption. Addition of wall insulation was the only
single measure which was significant at or below the .05
level. Using the five "best" indicators from this re-
gression together with participation in the project
accounted for four percent of the variance in the per-
centage change in energy consumption.

Gurin and Gurin (1976) discussed the relevancy of
internal-external control to economic attitudes and beha—
vior. The authors used the terms personal efficacy and
control ideology. Both were defined as bases of expec-
tancy referring to individual perceptions over what con-
trolled individual goal achievement. Personal efficacy
reflects the extent to which individuals perceive them-
selves in control. External control reflects as power-
less to affect change. The authors maintained that the
distinction between personal (internal) control and con-
trol ideology (external) was predictive of behavior and
attitudes.

The authors performed a factor analysis of res-
ponses to a variety of questions concerning bases of
expectancy, achievement, and interpersonal trust. Six
factors resulted, two of which fit the described personal
and control ideologies. The authors then compared the
factors on several classes of variables: social and

economic status; goals and values; and personal and general

 

 

 

 

52

economic reactions and behaviors. For purposes of this
review, I will focus only on findings related to personal
control.

Multiple classification was used to determine the
contribution of demographic characteristics to personal
control. Income contributed the most to the variance and
had a beta weight of .24. Occupation, education, and race
contributed in that order. The authors determined that
feelings of control were related to the actual economic
resources under one's control.

Gurin and Gurin assumed that a sense of personal
control would result in more successful income management.
They defined income management as the ability to live
within one‘s income and manage to save a portion of that
income. Findings confirmed this hypothesis. The authors
reported that individuals with greater personal efficacy
are less concerned about external crises and feel that
their economic well-being is in a large part dependent
upon their own efforts. It was also reported that those
individuals with a sense of personal control were more
willing to take risks to get ahead. Belief in personal
control was not, however, found to be related to a sense
that inflation and recession are controllable. Neither
did personal control respondents want government to inter-
fere into personal economics.

The inability of the data to show strong relation-

ships between personal efficacy and an individual's own

53

personal economic situation caused the authors to question
whether individuals were maintaining a general belief that
they were responsible for success yet had lost a sense of
control over their own lives. The authors were especially
concerned as to what impact this would have.

Looking specifically at the interaction between a
sense of personal efficacy and various objective factors
Gurin and Gurin reported that the introduction of status
indicators reduced the effect of personal efficacy in the
research previOusly mentioned. Thus the interaction of
environmental and psychological factors is considered
quite important in that while objective conditions mediate
the impact of psychological factors so do the psychologi-
cal factors mediate the impact of objective factors.

In summary, two factors emerge from the literature
on motivation towards energy conservation: income and
values. Household income represents the ability of the
household to purchase energy either directly for such uses
as heating the home or gasoline for transportation or in-
directly in the form of goods and services. If income is
scarce, the household's ability to make purchases is
lowered. If the price of energy becomes consistently
higher and the household income does not increase propor-
tionately, the household is less able to purchase energy
at the same rate without substituting income which might

be used in another way. In either case, conservation of

energy may occur.

54

On the other hand, if the household members possess
attitudes or values which recognize present patterns of
energy use as inequitable or potentially harmful to society,
that household may alter its behavior in order to maintain
its value base. The ability of a household to act upon
its motivation, however, is dependent upon the availability
of resources which may be substituted for present forms of
energy. This review has focused upon human resources.

One such resource is human energy which can be directly
substituted for fossil fuels under some circumstances.
Other human resources such as knowledge, a sense of per-
sonal control, and perceptions of time and money may facil-
itate adaptation to a less energy intensive lifestyle.

The overall assumption made is that decisions
determined by households concerned with management of
resources will determine behavior patterns of households.
Ideally, behavior patterns are reflective of lifestyle or
value preferences. As a result, these decisions will
determine the type of energy consumed and the level of

consumption.

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY AND HYPOTHESIZED RELATIONSHIPS

The purpose of this study was to determine the in-
fluence of financial and philosophical motivators on direct
and indirect conservation of energy. Direct conservation
was determined through an analysis of change in actual
consumption patterns. A measure of indirect conservation
would necessarily involve considerable monitoring of change
in household's purchases and participation in the home pro—
duction of goods and services. For purposes of this re-
search a measure of voluntary simplicity was obtained and
used as an indicator of indirect conservation. In addition,
the study was designed to assess the influence of various
human resources on the performance of conservation
behaviors.

Data used for the analysis were collected during
the evaluation of "Project Conserve." Project Conserve is
a computerized energy audit designed to provide indivi-
dualized information to households regarding potential
energy conservation.

An evaluation of Project Conserve was designed to

determine the influence of conservation information

55

56

provided in the form of a computerized printout. The
evaluation was conducted by a team of researchers at the
Institute for Family and Child Study at Michigan State
University.

The evaluation was designed to include two tele-
phone interviews. The interviews were conducted during
the spring of 1979 and the fall of 1980. The telephone
interviews were limited to approximately twenty minutes.
In order to ask all of the needed questions and to include
data on household structural characteristics for groups
not returning the audit form, an additional questionnaire
was mailed to all households which participated in the
first telephone interview. Also during the first tele-
phone interview respondents were asked if they would be
willing to sign a permission form allowing the release
of actual household consumption data from appropriate
utility and oil companies. Data were then requested for
those households, having signed the permission forms,
for the period from June 1977 through June 1980. Both
follow-up interviews asked questions related to attitudes,
demographic characteristics, and adoption of energy
conserving measures.

The 1979 telephone interview was contracted out
to Neal and Associates in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The 1980
interviews were conducted by Detroit Marketing Service in

Detroit, Michigan. Both companies were responsible for

57

providing raw data tapes. The tapes were checked by the

research team for correctness.

Research Subsample Selection and Description

The primary goal of this research was to explore
the relationship between various motivators and human
resources on a household's pattern of direct and indirect
conservation of energy. One adult from each household was
considered the unit of observation. The household was
selected as the unit of analysis. For a household to be

included in the research subsample it was required that

 

sufficient data be available to adequately measure direct
and indirect conservation. This resulted in two primary
criteria.

First, it was necessary for a household member to
have completed a series of eleven questions developed to
assess participation in voluntary simplicity. As noted
previously, participation in such behaviors is said to be
related to a less materialistically oriented philosophy
and thus less consumption of energy—intensive goods and
services. Data were considered adequate if no greater
than 20 percent (two) questions were left unanswered.

The voluntary simplicity questions were asked of respon-
dents in 924 households. Of this group, there were no
households which were unable to meet the criterion.

The second criterion for selection in the sub—

sample was concerned with the completeness of household

 

58

energy consumption data for July 1977 through June 1978
and July 1979 through June 1980. Permission to obtain this
information was requested of the total evaluation sample.3
Permission was given by 52.1 percent. Households from
which no permission was granted were eliminated from the
subsample. For most cases in which the consumption data
were available, it was complete for both years required.
In some instances, however, it was necessary to extrapolate
consumption for intermittent periods which were missing.
Extrapolation procedures resulted in conservative esti-
mates of actual consumption. Complete explanation of the
extrapolation procedure is given in the Final Report of
Pilot Project Conserve (Harris et a1., 1980).

The data base contained 638 households meeting
both criteria. These households were selected as the re-
search subsample for the analysis in this report. Basic
demographic characteristics of the subsample are reported
in Tables 1 and 2. For purposes of generalizability the
same descriptive characteristics are provided for all
households within the State of Michigan. Demographics
were collected on the research subsample in 1979, data
for the State of Michigan are reported for the latest
date available.

In the research sample, the household member res-

ponding to the interview questions was primarily

3Permission was actually requested for a three year
period from June 1977 to July 1980. Only the first and
last year were included in the analysis for this study.

 

59

middle-aged; nearly 60 percent fell between the ages of 35
and 64. Less than half the respondents had attended
college. Eighty percent, however, had at least a high
school education. Slightly more than half were female.
When compared to the State of Michigan the research sample
consisted of a similar distribution of males and females.
Age and educational level appeared somewhat higher in the
sample than in the population as a whole.

Ninety-seven percent of the respondents owned
their homes. Sixty percent of the households were located
in small to medium sized cities or towns; approximately 30
percent were located in the country and ten percent in
large cities.

Households in the research subsample consisted of
an average of 3.2 members. Nearly 70 percent (67.7) of
the households had two adult members; one-fifth had more
than two adults. Eight percent were single adult house-
holds. Children were found in 48.1 percent of the house-
holds.

Just under half of the households had one income
earner. Twenty-seven percent were two income families.
Nearly one-fifth had no employed members. The median
household income was $18,709.

When compared to the state population, household
characteristics of the research sample were somewhat dif—
ferent. Home ownership was more prevalent in the research

sample because the evaluation sample of the Statewide

60

Project Conserve overrepresented single family residences.
Income level was slightly lower perhaps due to the nonres-
ponse of reported income for nearly ten percent of the
research sample. Household structure was not greatly
different, yet tended to underrepresent single parent
households.

Seventy percent of the households used natural gas
for heating; another 19 percent used fuel oil. Electricity,
wood, and propane, in that order, completed the heating
fuel types used by households. The larger percentage of
households within the research sample which were heated by
electricity and wood when compared to heating fuels used
by households throughout the State of Michigan was reflec-
tive of the shift in household heating fuels which occurred

during the 19705.

Measurement Procedures

 

Dependent and independent variables were developed
from questions asked during the evaluation of Statewide
Project Conserve. Specifically those variables used as
predictors of conservation were based on data collected
in 1979. Dependent measures of voluntary simplicity and
personal control were each develOped from questions asked
during the 1980 telephone interviews. The measure of con-
servation was collected over a three year period from June

of 1977 through June of 1980.

61

Table 1. Selected Household Characteristics - Comparison

of Research Subsample,

1978, and Michigan

 

 

 

 

 

Households
Michigan
Respondent Households Research
Characteristics (in thousands) Subsample
100% 100% (N=638)
Gender of Respondentl (1976)
Female 52.9 51.3
Male 47.1 48.7
Age of Respondent2 (1970)
Less than 25 8.1 3.2
25 to 34 21.6 19.6
35 to 44 18.0 17.8
44 to 64 35.2 39.2
65 and older 17.0 20.4
Missing -- 0.2
Education Level3 (1970)
Less than High School 47.2 19.7
High School 33.7 41.1
Some College 14.8 30.9
Graduate Work 4.3 8.3
1State Data Source, Andrews, M.P. and Boger, R.P.

(Eds.), Michigan Family Sourcebook,

University, 1980.

Michigan State

2State Data Source, Verway, David I., Michigan
Statistical Abstracts, 1979. Table I-l6, p. 62.

3State Data Source, Verway, David I., Michigan
Statistical Abstracts, 1979. Table IV-2, p. 150. (Based
on adults age 25 or older.)

62

Table 2. Selected Household Characteristics. Comparison of Research

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subsample, 1978, and Michigan Households.
Michigan
Household Characteristics Households Subsample
100% (Year) 100% (Year)
Number of Household Occupantsl (1970)
One 8.0
Two 33.4
Three or Four 38.1
Five or More 20.5
Average 3.27 3.2
Home Ownership2 (1976)
Own 76.0 97.2
Rent 24.0 2.4
Missing -- 0.5
Household Income Level3 (1979)
Under $ 5,000 5.7 5.8
$ 5,000 - $ 9,999 12.3 13.5
$10,000 - $14,999 15.0 12.2
$15,000 - $19,999 18.8 18.2
$20,000 - $24,999 19.0 16.9
$25,000 - $29,999 11.9 8.3
Over $30,000 17.3 15.2
Missing -- 9.9
Median $19,500 $18,709
Household Structure4
Two Adults with Children 31.4 35.3
Two Adults - No Children 34.5 32.4
Female with Children 10.9 0.6
Male with Children 2.2 0.8
More than Two Adults with Children -- 11.4
More than Two Adults - No Children -- 11.4
Single Adult 20.9 8.0
Fuel Used for HeatingS (1970)
Natural Gas 69.9 71.2
Electricity 2.5 4.1
Propane 3.6 2.2
Fuel Oil 22.0 18.8
Wood 0.2 3.8
Coal, Other 2.2 --
1State Data Source, Verway, David I. Michigan Statistical
Abstract, 1979. Table I-l7, p. 63.
2State Data Source, Verway, David I. Michigan Statistical
Abstract, 1979. Table II-l, p. 81.
30.8. Bureau of Census, Current POpulation Reports, 1979.
4State Data Source
5State Data Source, Housing Characteristics for State, Cities,
and Counties, Vol. I, Part 24, Michigan 1970. Census of Housing, Bureau
of Census, 1972.

63

Measures of Conservation

 

The primary objective of this research was to ex-
plore direct and indirect conservation of fossil fuel
energy within households. Direct conservation of energy
was measured by percentage reduction in consumption. In—
direct conservation was measured based on self—reported
participation in a set of behaviors defined as voluntary
simplicity.

The first research question was specifically con-
cerned with the percentage of households participating in
conservation behaviors:

1. With what frequency are households reducing
direct consumption of fossil fuel energy and
with what frequency are they participating
in behaviors related to voluntary simplicity?

An explanation of the development of each conser-
vation measure is provided in this section. In addition,
discussion of the analysis based on the first research
question is also provided here. Analysis of the first
research question was intended to be exploratory and
therefore no hypotheses were tested. Frequencies, per—
centages, and mean scores are reported for percentage
change in direct household consumption of fossil fuel
energy (Table 3) and for participation in voluntary sim-

plicity behaviors (Tables 4 and 5).

64

Percentage Change in Consumption. Actual consumption of

 

energy within the household was determined by obtaining
utility company records for the years 1977-78 and 1979-80.
Consumption data were initially collected and coded by
month. Extrapolations were computed based on heating
degree days if a month was required to complete the data.
The monthly consumption of each fuel was summed for each
year to provide an annual consumption figure. Measures
of natural gas, electricity, prOpane, and fuel oil were
converted to British thermal units (Btus) to facilitate
computations and analysis. The following conversion

factors as reported by Newman and Day (1975) were used:

Natural Gas - 1,031 Btus per cubic foot
Electricity — 3,412.8 Btus per kilowatt hour
Fuel Oil - 138,800 Btus per gallon

Propane - 21,000 Btus per pound

The number of Btus of each fuel used within the
household was added together to determine the total Btu
consumption. This provided a precise measurement of the
household's annual consumption.

Yearly fluctuations in temperature may result in
varying fuel requirements used for space heating. Space
heating has been identified as the largest single end use
of energy within the home; therefore, it is necessary to
control for changing requirements. The number of annual
heating degree days was used to standardize yearly con—

sumption figures.

65

The resulting figures were used to compute per-
centage change in annual consumption. This was accom-
plished by dividing the difference in consumption between
1977-78 and 1979-80 by consumption during 1977-78. This
measure provided an estimate of conservation relative to
previous consumption. Summary data of the percentage

change in consumption are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Percentage Change in Household Consumption
1977-78, 1979-80

 

Level of Change (N) Percentage
Greater than 4% 232 36.4
Reduction

4% Reduction to

 

 

4% Increase 232 36.4

Greater than 4%

Increase 174 27.2
638 100.0

Mean - .018

Standard Deviation .156

Standard Error .006

Findings

One—third of the research subsample (36.4 percent)
had reduced their household consumption of energy more
than four percent. An increase in consumption of greater
than four percent was observed in 27.2 percent of the
households. The remainder of households were within i four

percent of their first year's consumption. The mean

66

change of -.018 indicated that the average household was
realizing slightly less than a two percent reduction in

direct energy consumption.

Voluntary Simplicity Participation. Structured questions

 

developed by Leonard-Barton and Rogers (1980) to assess
the extent to which persons were practicing behaviors

related to a philosophy of voluntary simplicity were used

in this study as a dependent variable measuring household
voluntary simplicity participation. The questions were
based on a survey of households claiming voluntary simpli-
city participation which was implemented by Elgin and
Mitchell.

Leonard—Barton and Rogers provided an 18-item
Likert measure which they subjected to factor analysis
and regression analysis in order to provide researchers
with a streamlined measure. For purposes of this research
11 of the 18 questions were used. Nine questions were
chosen which were shown through regression analysis to
account for 90 percent of the total voluntary simplicity
score variance. The remaining two variables were selected
based on the results of the factor analysis conducted by
Leonard—Barton and Rogers. Two factors of interest to
this research were self-sufficiency in goods and self-
sufficiency in services. The final two questions com-
pleted the inclusion of all variables which loaded on
these factors at .3 or greater. These questions, resulting

frequencies and percentages can be found in Table 4.

 

67

Bocx u.:oa

m>m= um>oz

30: uo: usn own
adamconmooo
xaco 0:0

who: no 039

 

mcoHumuﬂcmmuo HmoamoHoom 09 ousnﬁuucoo

m.o mcﬂmmﬂz

m.mm HQ>OZ
m.v~ 36m
m.e~ meow
~.ea see:
H.e umoz

va

mwsuwcnsm no
aceruoac one:

m.H schema:
m.vm um>mz
n.mm >Hamcoﬂmmooo
~.a~ haucmsvmuh
~.m sneeze:
m.m msezaa

means one:

 

meooo an Noceaoeuusmuuamm

~.o maﬁmmﬁz

m.em um>mz

>.oa nucoe a 00:0 m.ow um>mz

N.m xooz m 0020 ~.~ mono m>m=

o.am x003 Hum w.m muses Hmum>om
moEwB Hmuw>om m.m moses xcmz

m.vm wmpxuw>m m.vm manﬁmmom wm>ocw£3

va :kmv

 

wmﬂoumxm MOM mHQNon

mmoﬁ>umm a mpooo mmctcoxm

 

 

m.o m.o mcﬂmmﬂz
H.wm «.mm uu>oz
N.~H e.ma sane:0nmeooo
m.a >.e Sancwsvoua
m.m e.e seamed:
e.~e e.me m>e3e<

Am. Awe

mmauuomlmumh mmmau mummmmmBCZ
mCHHo>oom

~.e acumen:
v . OM 0202
m . mm 050%
H.m wcmz
m.m> oz >.ma who:
~.o~ mo» «.ma HH<

Amv
maﬁa umomEoo o>mm

 

Ann I:
moanmuomm> paw

muﬂswm 30pm

 

UOOE :H wocoﬂuﬂmmsmlmawm

m.hv H®>®z
v.ma mamscmz I xoom
o.ma mpcmﬂwm Eoum >HHMCOMmmooO
m.m~ upcmﬂum Eoww hauccsmmum
H.v mmcao mco
o.c~ mmmao mco cps» muoz
va

 

maaﬂxm CH noduosuumcH

v o maﬁmmﬂz
v mm wo>mz
H.w xﬁamcoﬂmmooo
o w >Hucoskum
m m seamed:
o.em msezaa
Awe

ucu >HHEmm :H HA0 omcmcu

 

meM>u®m :H Nocmﬂoﬁmwsmlwaom

Ammmuzv

.moamomnsm >2 pomsouo
.muoﬁ>mnom xuﬂoaamawm humucsao> CM coﬁummwowuuwm mcﬁuHOQQm mpaocomso: mo ommucoouom

.4 dance

68

Responses on individual items were recoded in
order that a response which indicated no participation
received a score of zero; a response indicating the
highest level of participation received a four. The over-
all voluntary simplicity index was computed by summing the
recoded raw scores on individual items and dividing by the
total number of questions answered. The resulting index
had a range from zero to four. This final score was cate-
gorized to indicate the distribution of the sample among
levels of participation. Summary data are presented in
Table 5 which indicates a moderate level of participation.

Reliability of the voluntary simplicity scale was
tested. Chronbach's alpha of .59 indicated a moderate
level of reliability. Deletion of any item did not im-
prove the reliability.

In addition to having a moderate level of relia-
bility, the items chosen for inclusion in the total index
were considered conceptually meaningful. For further
refinement, however, the 11 questions on voluntary simpli—
city were subjected to factor analysis. Factor analysis
is a statistical technique used to examine interrelation—
ships among variables with the objective of representing
them in a smaller number of hypothetical variables (Kim

and Mueller, 1978).

69

The measure of voluntary simplicity used in this
research was determined through factor analysis4 to in-
clude behaviors related to self—sufficiency in services,
self-sufficiency in goods, self-sufficiency in food,
recycling, and contributions to ecological organizations.
Factor loadings greater than .300 resulted in the inclu-
sion of item within the factor (Table 6).

Measures for each factor were constructed by sum-
ming the scores of each variable relevant to the specific
factor. Prior to summing, the raw scores were multiplied
by the regression coefficient (factor loadings) in order
to appropriately weight the influence of the variable
to the factor score. As with the total index, the factor
scores were categorized into levels of participation in
order to facilitate discussion. Frequencies, percentages,
and mean scores are reported for the total voluntary sim—
plicity scale and for each of the five subscales in

Table 5.

Findings. The mean score for the voluntary sim—
plicity scale was 1.509, based on a possible range of
zero to four. No respondent received the maximum score;
3.455 was the highest total voluntary simplicity score
achieved. Approximately one-fifth (21.5 percent) of the

respondents indicated frequent participation in voluntary

 

4Factor loadings from varimax rotation were used
in computing the subscales. Oblique rotation resulted in
delineation of similar factors.

 

7O

simplicity behaviors by household members. The majority,
54.1 percent, reported occasional participation, indicating
that a very large percentage of the households were parti-
cipating in at least some voluntary simplicity behaviors--
some of the time. Another 23.7 percent reported infre-
quent participation while less than one percent of the
respondents reported that no one in their household had
performed any voluntary simplicity behaviors.

An analysis of the subscales provided insight into
Specifically what types of behaviors were most frequently
practiced. Slightly more than half of the sample reported
frequent recycling. Two questions determined the scores
for this category. The first asked the extent to which
households recycled newspapers; the second asked the
extent to which glass jars and bottles were recycled.
Frequencies for both questions indicated that approxi—
mately half of the sample usually or always recycled news-
papers and glass jars or bottles. Approximately 13.5 per-
cent indicated that they never recycled.

Within the self—sufficiency in services subscale,
results indicated that greater than one-third of the
respondents indicated high levels of participation in
producing services within the home. Less than ten per-
cent reported that these behaviors were never performed.
Over half (56 percent) of the respondents indicated that

a household member always changed the oil in their car.

Twenty-eight percent reported never doing this.

71_

 

 

 

 

 

I: m.e N.e e.H m.e .: seamen:
m.>m m.ma 5.5m m.mH m.m w.o uo>oz
e.H e.mn m.mm m.em m.am e.mm sabedsdmumaH
e.e m.o~ «.ma e.m~ o.Hm H.em saaeeoemeooo
e.e m.mm e.Hm s.mn N.mm m.am massed

Ho waamSmD
ucoonom CH COHUMQAOHuMmm
mo Ho>oq
Ammmuzv Ammmuzv Ammmnzv Ammmuzv Ammmuzv Ammonzv
mcoﬂumeccmwo maﬁaomoom poom mpooo mooa>uom muHOHHmEHm
ou wumucsHo>
coﬂusnﬂuusou :H xocoﬂoammsmlwamm acuoe

 

manomnsm can mamom acuoa

mmamomnsm NDHOHHmEﬂm NHMDGSHO>

momcpcoouom HMOHuommuno pan mmuoom cum:

umH0ﬁ>c£om huHOHHQEHm humucsao> ca coﬂummHOHuumm .m magma

72

Nmm.

who.

mvm.

vmm.

mom.

man.

mNm.

Gav.

ahm.

vmm.

mmmHm oaoxomm

mummmmmzoc
maomoom

enhanced are:
mumam one:
maﬁa medEou

moanmwomo> mam
mpﬂsum SOHO

oaomOHm opﬂm

mooﬂ>umm Ho
mpoom omcmnoxm

Haaxm CH
coﬂuosuumcﬂ copuoo

umo SHﬂEmw
CH Hﬂo wmcmao

 

moonsommm
machoom

mpoow
soaoaoeuuemuuamm

coon
socmnoammsmamamm

mmoa>uom
suedeoeuusmamamm

COHumoso

muoﬂ>msmm huHOHHmEHm Sumucsao> mo mammamc< Honocm .o wanes

73

Similarly, over half the respondents reported that they or
some family member had gotten some type of instruction in
skills either from classes, friends or instruction manuals.
Slightly less than half (45.5 percent) reported riding a
bicycle at least several times per week. One-fourth of
the respondents indicated frequent exchange of goods and
services while 60 percent reported that they had never
exchanged goods or services.

Self—sufficiency in foods was reported at a high
level by only 31 percent of the sample respondents; 27.7
percent reported no participation. Self-sufficient be-
havior in this category involved having a compost pile and
growing fruits and vegetables for household consumption.
Of the research sample 26.2 percent had a compost pile and
35.5 percent grew some fruits and vegetables. Another
33.9 percent grew some fruits and vegetables; 30.5 percent
grew none of the fruits and vegetables eaten by household
members.

Self-sufficiency in goods was based on having made
gifts, clothes, or furniture rather than having purchased
them. Observation of individual questions showed that few
respondents (13.5 percent) reported that their household
always or usually made their own gifts. An additional
21.4 percent reported frequently making gifts while the
majority of respondents (40.2 percent) reported occasional
performance of this action. One—fourth of the respondents

indicated that no gifts were ever made. A larger

74

proportion of respondents, 38.7 percent, reported that
their household never made their own clothing or furniture.
Forty-five percent indicated that they made some or at
least a few small items. Another 16.3 percent reported
having made many or most of their clothing or furniture.
Observation of the total subscale indicated that the
majority of households produced few of their own goods.

A very small percentage of respondents indicated
contribution to ecological organizations. Less than seven
percent were actually contributing at the time surveyed.
Another 6.1 percent gave occassionally or had previously
done so. The majority, 87.3 percent, had never contri—

buted to an ecological organization.

Measures of Motivation

 

Income Adequacy is conceptually defined in this

 

research as the comparative ability of a household to make
direct and indirect purchases of energy. The proportion
of income required for lower income households to make
energy purchases is greater than for families with higher
incomes. As the market value of energy increases it
would follow that lower income households would sense a
greater stressor and possibly greater motivation to
conserve.

The use of income levels when explaining consump-
tion change is valuable, yet, does not take into consider-

ation the income needs of the household as determined by

75

family size, family life cycle stage, or geographical
cost of living differences. The income measure used in
this research took into account the previously mentioned
needs to compute an objective adequacy ratio following
the examples of Ackerman (1977) and Moen (1980).

The questions concerned with income adequacy were
asked during the first telephone interview conducted in
June of 1979. The income adequacy variable was computed
following the example of Ackerman (1977). The following
information reported here is from Ackerman, pp. 51-53.

1. Each respondent was assigned a Bureau of Labor
Statistics equivalency number which adjusted
for a moderate level of living for different
family composition. Variables used include:
age of oldest child, number of children in
household, number of adults in household, and
age of primary income earner.

2. Each respondent was assigned a BLS number which
adjusts the BLS standard budget for a moderate
level of living for different geographic loca-
tion.

3. The family income variable was recoded to
dollar amounts.

4. The objective measure was computed via the

following measure:

76

 

(Iﬁecume Touﬂ.Famﬂy'Lxrme
Adamrwy ==SumﬂaniBumﬁm. EamiurcamxsiERXiX<3xgnmxuc1xnadmm
Rank) Mmknatelxwel Equhmdemaerdxm Enuhndemaermnm

 

 

100 100

Summary data of the income adequacy variable are
presented in Table 7. Data indicated that the sample was
relatively well distributed among adequacy levels.

Household income level has been positively related
to levels of direct and indirect consumption of energy.

This relationship has been explained through the discussion
of lifestyle decisions (Morrison and Gladhart, 1976;
Gladhart, 1977). Therefore, higher income households, due
to initially higher levels of consumption, could have the

greatest flexibility for potential conservation. Lower

Table 7. Household Income Adequacy Levels, 1979

 

 

 

Level of Adequacy (N) Percentage
Very Low 92 14.4
Low 118 18.5
Medium 261 40.9
High 90 14.1
(Missing) _11 12.1

638 100.0
Mean 1.320
Standard Deviation .718
Standard Error .030

Actual Minimum — Maximum .122 to 3.895

77

income households would experience the greater stress from
the increased prices of fossil fuel energy sources. It was
hypothesized that they would be forced economically to
reduce consumption in order to reduce their fuel bill.

Based on research concerned with the relationship
between income level and conservation and the research
concerned with how families handle limited economic
resources (Caplovitz, 1972; Elder, 1974) the following
hypotheses were established:

Hypothesis 1A

 

Level of income adequacy will have a curvilinear
relationship with the percentage change in direct
household consumption of fossil fuels. Specifically
households with low and high levels of income
adequacy will reduce consumption more than house-
holds in middle levels of income adequacy.

Hypothesis 1B

 

Level of income adequacy will be negatively
related to participation in behaviors related to
voluntary simplicity.

Fuel Cost. Two additional variables were included

 

in the regression analysis of percentage change in consump-
tion. Fuels used for heating vary according to their abso-
lute cost and according to the individual increase in the
cost of each fuel type. It was determined that the cost of
various fuel types and the relative increase in cost should
be viewed as additional determinants of a household's
income adequacy.

Case and Harris (1980) regressed a conservation

action score onto fuel type ordered by cost and found a

78

significant bivariate relationship. Using path analysis
they determined that rural households, using more expensive
fuels, tended to perform more conservation actions than
urban counterparts.

Fuel cost increases were used to determine the
relative shift in prices between fuel types. Based on
data provided by Keith (1981) fuel oil was given the highest
rating, natural gas and propane second with electricity
experiencing the least increase.

These variables were included only in the regres—
sion analysis of percent change in conservation. Both
variables were hypothesized to have a positive relation-
ship with reduced consumption.

Hypothesis 2A

 

Relative fuel cost and relative change in fuel
cost will each be positively related to reduction
in direct household consumption of fossil fuels.

Philosophical Perspective. Philosophical perspec-

 

tive represents aspects of the symbolic value of energy
within society. Questions designed to elicit the respon-
dent's philosophy towards energy were asked during the
November 1980 telephone interview. Six questions were
selected from among a variety of attitudinal questions pre-
viously used in surveys conducted by the Family Energy
Project at Michigan State University. The selected ques—
tions have been previously defined as representative of

ECOCOHSCIOUSHGSS values .

79

Each question was answered on a scale of strongly
agree to strongly disagree (Appendix A). Answers were
coded so that the responses receiving the highest code were
those indicating the strongest ecoconsciousness value. An
index was formed by summing the raw score for the responses
to all questions for each respondent. This number was then
divided by the total number of questions answered. A scale
score was computed for all households which responded to at
least four of the six questions. A total of 15 households
(2.4 percent) did not meet this criterion.

Chronbach's alpha reliability was computed for the
scale. All six questions resulted in a reliability coefi-
cient of .74349. Deletion of any item did not improve the
alpha.

The continuous score was categorized into levels
which indicated agreement or disagreement with a strong
ecoconsciousness value. Mean score and category frequen-

cies are reported in Table 8.

 

80

Table 8. Household Scores on a Measure of Philosophical
Energy Perspective, 1979
/

 

 

Household Level (N) Percentage
Strong Agreement 289 45.3
Agreement 324 50.8
Disagreement 9 1.4
Strong Disagreement l i 0.2
Missing ‘ 15 2.4
Mean 2.08
Standard Deviation .467
Standard Error .019

An ecoconsciousness value has been reported to
have a positive relationship with taking actions related to
technical and behavioral conservation (Hogan, 1976) and
also with direct reduction of energy consumption within
the household (Hungerford, 1978). The theoretical concep—
tualization of a lifestyle of voluntary material simplicity
is also based on a value system which supports a positive
interaction between humans and environmental awareness
(Leonard-Barton and Rogers, 1980; Gregg, 1977; Elgin and
Mitchell, 1977). The following hypotheses were established:

Hypothesis 3A

 

Level of philosophical perspective will be
positively related to a reduction in household
energy consumption.

Hypothesis 3B

 

Level of philosophical perspective will be
positively related to participation in behaviors
related to voluntary simplicity.

81

Indicators of Human Resources

 

Individuals and households have a variety of re-
sources which are used to achieve goals. These resources
may be tangible or intangible; human or nonhuman. One
purpose of this research was to assess the influence of
human resources on behaviors related to the conservation
of fossil fuels. Nine human resources were identified
from the list of research variables; eight are entered
into the analysis as independent variables, one as a
dependent variable.

Explanation of the development of each human
resource variable is included in this section. A summary
of hypotheses regarding expected relationships of
individual variables to percent change in household
energy consumption and participation in voluntary simpli-
city behaviors is also included. Mean scores and standard

deviations for human resource measures which served as

independent variables are provided in Table 10. Summary
data for the human resource, personal control, are presented

in Table 11.

Knowledge of Conservation Actions was used as a

 

measure of the extent to which respondents could identify
efficient methods of direct conservation of fossil fuel
energy. Respondents were asked the following questions

in the June 1979 interview:

 

82

Let's talk about one area in which living costs
can be reduced--ELECTRICITY AND HOME HEATING--
and let's think about ways these costs can be
reduced without giving up basic comforts.

Think of a friend who might ask you for advice
on how to save on electricity and heating fuel
bills.

What are the most important things you would
advise your friend to do?

Respondents could mention up to six suggestions. A know-
ledge score was created. The respondent was given two
points for suggesting attic insulation, wall insulation,
basement or crawl space insulation, storm windows or doors,
thermopane windows, caulking or weatherstripping, flue
restrictor, clock thermostat, lowering thermostat, closing
off rooms, or solar heating. One point was received for
each other suggestion including hot water heater insula-
tion, covering windows with plastic, installing a fire-
place cover, servicing heating system, and turning off
pilot light during summer. The knowledge scale was
created by dividing the total score by the number of
responses; if no suggestions were offered a score of zero '
was assigned. Thus the conservation knowledge scale has a
minimum of zero and a maximum of two.

Promotional campaigns have frequently been based
on providing information to consumers regarding conserva-
tion practices and their benefits. Data have suggested
that information on how to save energy is relatively in-
effective if given alone (Gordon, 1980). Knowledge of

conservation methods was not found predictive of actually

83

taking conservation actions (Case and Harris, 1980).
Knowledge was not found predictive of conservation as re-
ported in the final report of Pilot Project Conserve
(Harris, et a1., 1980). In the last two studies neither
bivariate nor multivariate analysis proved significant.

For purposes of this research it was hypothesized that if
motivation were accounted for, knowledge would be positively
related to reduced household consumption of energy and

participation involuntary simplicity behaviors.

Average Household Education was used as a measure of the

 

educational attainment of the principal adult(s) within
the household. When there were two adults in the house-
hold the average level of schooling was computed. If only
one adult was present in the household, the level of educa-
tion for that adult was used for the educational measure.
Higher levels of education are frequently associated
with higher levels of income adequacy. Case and Harris
(1980) determined that education had a positive relation—
ship with ecoconsciousness and therefore with a greater
likelihood of performing conservation actions. The nega-
tive relationship of education with skills, however,
resulted in a contradictory relationship. Multivariate
analysis of resources included education in a predictive
model which accounted for eight percent of the variance in

reduced consumption (Harris, et a1., 1980).

84

Elgin and Mitchell (1977) determined that parti-
cipants of voluntary simplicity behaviors were well educa-
ted. Leonard-Barton and Rogers found a low yet significant
correlation of education with voluntary simplicity scores.
For purposes of this research it was hypothesized that when
motivation was accounted for, education would have a posi-
tive relationship with reduced household consumption of

energy and participation in voluntary simplicity behaviors.

Reported Home Repair Skills was created to measure
the extent to which household members appear capable to
perform a variety of household repairs. The following
questions were asked in the June 1979 telephone interview:

Now I would like you to suppose that you
needed to have some repair or remodeling
work done on your present home.

Which of the following tasks would you or

a member of your household feel confident
to do?

ASSUME THAT YOU HAVE THE TIME AND THE MONEY
TO DO THESE THINGS.

I. How about putting together the frame of
a wall with 2 x 45?

2. Put in or replace sewer and water pipes?

3. Replace a toilet or sink for an existing
plumbing system?

4. Put up or replace dry wall on a frame of
2 x 48?

5. Install or replace an electric light
fixture?

6. Install a new storm door?

7. Put insulation in the attic?

8. Do you think that you or a member of
your household could cut open a wall
to repair the plumbing, electrical
work, or heating ducts, and return the
wall back to its original condition?

85

Each variable was treated as dichotomous; any response
other than "yes" was treated as "no." The number of
responses "yes" were summed and made into a nine-point
interval scale with zero indicating no skills.

Possession of skills was found an important pre-
dictor of taking conservation actions (Case and Harris,
1980). Home production of goods and services also requires
a variety of skills. Elder (1972) found that households
with a variety of skills were better able to c0pe with
effects of the depression. For purposes of this research
it was hypothesized that number of skills would be posi-

tively related to both direct and indirect conservation.

Perceived Money Availability was determined a sub-
jective indicator of income adequacy. In other words,
this variable was used as an indicator of how the house—
hold perceived their money resources. The scale ranged
from less than fifty dollars to over $2000 and was created
from the following series of questions.

Let's talk about some things that you might
do in the future.

As you know, most of the things that can be
done to conserve energy--and to reduce your
monthly bills—-require some kind of invest-
ment at first.

It takes a while before you can get your
money back, and some peOple can afford these
investments and others cannot.

If an energy conservation device were devel-
oped which would help you save a lot of
energy, would you be able to buy such a
device if its total cost were:

86

1. $ 50
2. $ 200
3. $ 500
4. $1000
5. $2000

Again each variable was treated as dichotomous; any response
other than "yes" was treated as "no." The number of posi-
tive responses was summed and treated as a six point inter-
val scale with zero indicating no available financial
resources. Perception of the amount of available money was
hypothesized to have a positive relationship with direct

conservation and a negative relationship with indirect

conservation.

Perceived Time Availability was considered an indi-
cator of the amount of time respondents felt they had to
install an energy conservation device. The scale ranged
from less than five hours to fifty hours and was created
from the following series of questions:

If such a device were easy to install and

not expensive, would you or someone in your

household have the time to install such a

device if it took:

1. 5 hours to install

2. 10 hours?

3. 20 hours?

4. 50 hours?
Each item was treated as dichotomous; any response other
than "yes" was treated as "no." The number of positive
responses was summed and treated as a five point interval

scale with zero indicating no available time resource.

It was hypothesized that a perception of greater time

87

availability would be positively related to participation

in direct and indirect conservation of fossil fuel energy.

Number of Household Occupants was viewed as a

 

measure of the availability of human energy resources with—
in the household. The measure was actually constructed
from the perspective of the number of adults and number of
children separately.

Case and Harris (1980) found that households with
two adults tended to take more conservation measures than
did households with one, or more than two adults. Number
of children was found to have a significant positive bi-
variate relationship with taking conservation actions.

When other variables were accounted for, however, number of
children was dropped from the prediction model.

The availability of human energy within the house-
hold was hypothesized to increase the practice of voluntary
simplicity behaviors. The greater the number of adults
the greater the amount of human energy available. When
children are present within a household it was determined
that more time would be spent in providing goods and ser-
vices within the home.

Based on the concept of resources, the number of
adults within the household was also viewed as the avail-
ability of labor to perform conservation actions related
to direct consumption, therefore, number of adults was

hypothesized to have a positive relationship with direct

88

conservation of energy. In a study of energy consumed
during life cycle stages, Fritzsche (1981) indicated that
households in which children were present tended to require
more energy and thus had less flexibility for conservation.
Number of children within the household was hypothesized to
have a negative relationship with percentage change in con-

sumption.

Number of Employed Adults was a measure of human

 

resource indicating the ability of a household to increase
the availability of income. The measure was created by
counting the number of household income earners among the
two primary adults within the household.

Eichenberger (1975) found that dual employed house-
holds tended to use their household appliances less. Having
fewer people within the household during the daytime tended
to result in less direct consumption of energy within the
household. Case and Harris (1980) did not find a signifi-
cant relationship between number employed and taking con-A
servation actions.

Dual employed households would be expected to have
higher incomes and thus greater ability to purchase goods
and services outside the household. In addition, they
would he expected to perceive having less time to perform
production within the home.

Dual employed households were hypothesized to have

a positive relationship with direct conservation of fossil

89

fuel energy. They were also hypothesized to have a negative
relationship with participation in voluntary simplicity

behaviors.

Summary of Human Resource Hypotheses

 

4A. When all motivators, human resources, and
contextual variables are accounted for, a
positive relationship will exist between
percentage reduction in consumption and
the following human resources!

1) Knowledge

2) Average Household Education

3) Reported Skills

4) Perceived Money Availability
5) Perceived Time Availability

6) Number of Adults

7) Number of Employed Adults

and a negative relationship will exist
between percentage reduction in consumption
and the following human resource:

8) Number of Children

4B. When all motivators, human resources, and
contextual variables are accounted for, a
positive relationship will exist between
voluntary simplicity scores and the follow-
ing human resources:

1) Knowledge

2) Average Household Education
3) Reported Skills

4) Perceived Time Availability
5) Number of Adults

6) Number of Children;

and a negative relationship will exist
between voluntary simplicity scores and
the following human resources:

7) Perceived Money Availability
8) Number of Employed Adults

90

5A. When all motivators and human resources are
accounted for the following contextual var-
iables: age, home ownership, and rurality
should provide no further contribution to
the variance in percentage change in consump-
tion.

5B. When all motivators and human resources are
‘accounted for the following contextual var-
‘iables: age, home ownership, and rurality
should provide no further contribution to
the variance in voluntary simplicity partici-
pation.

Personal Control was computed from a series of

 

questions asked in November of 1980. Due to the difference
in time of data collection for the measure of personal con-
trol and the other human resources, this indicator was used
in the analysis as a dependent variable to measure the
impact of participation in direct and indirect conservation
on the development of human resources.

A sense of personal control has been related to
competence and achievement especially in education and
career. Gurin and Gurin (1976) have also discussed the
relevancy of perceived personal control and economic
behavior.

For the research reported here, personal control
was defined as a psychological human resource. Five
Likert-type statements were taken from the internal control
scale and adapted to specify energy problems as the

emphasis of the control.

91

 

 

 

Table 9. Summary Data of Human Resource Variables.
Standard
Human Resource Mean Score Deviation (N)
Knowledge 1.536 .332 607
Number of Adults 2.221 .758 638
Number of Children 0.980 1.211 638
Reported Skills 5.340 2.138 638
Average Household
Education 12.970 2.066 638
Perceived Money Number of
Availability Perceived Time Employed Adults
(%) Hours (%) (%)
LT s 50 10.3 LT 5 13.6 None 10.3
$ 50 27.4 5 12.1 One 47.3
$ 200 22.9 10 17.2 Two or More 27.4
$ 500 15.7 20 i 16.3 Missing 6.0
$1000 11.4 50 40.8

$2000 12.2

 

 

 

92

Each question was answered strongly disagree,
disagree, agree or strongly agree. Answers were coded so
that those indicating highest control were given a score
of three; those indicating the lowest control were given a
score of zero. A total score was computed by summing the
raw score of each variable and dividing by the total number
of statements answered. This continuous variable was cate-
gorized according to agreement levels. Summary data are
provided in Table 10.

Personal control was used as a dependent variable.
It was hypothesized that participation in direct and in-
direct conservation would increase the sense of personal

control.

Statistical Analysis

 

One goal of this research was to explore the extent
to which households had been participating in direct and
indirect conservation of energy. In addition it was pro-
posed to assess the relationship of motivation and avail—g
ability of human resources to active conservation behaviors.

Direct conservation was measured through a com-
parison of actual consumption of energy within the house-
hold as determined from records provided by utility

companies. Indirect conservation was measured by

93

Table 10. Personal Control, 1980.

 

Percent _N_
Strongly Agree 29.8 190
Agree 69.4 443
Disagree 0.5 5
Strongly Disagree 0.0 0
Missing 0.3 2
Mean: 2.02
Standard Deviation: .3425
Minimum - Maximum: 0 to 3

develOping an index from responses to eleven questions con-
cerned with the extent to which households practiced beha-
viors related to a lifestyle defined as voluntary simpli-
city.

To address the first question, measures of direct
and indirect conservation were categorized according to
levels of participation. Mean scores, absolute frequencies,
and relative frequencies were provided for comparison. In
addition, the total voluntary simplicity score was factor
analyzed in order to delineate underlying dimensions. Des-
criptive statistics were also provided for each voluntary
simplicity subscale.

Multiple regression was selected for analysis of
relationships between direct and indirect conservation and
motivation and human resource availability. Multiple
regression provided examination of two issues relevant to

the research problem.

 

94

First, the procedure provided a predictive model
developed from the collective contribution of motivation
and human resources to the variance in both direct and
indirect conServation. Use of regression with hierarchial
inclusion of independent variables in the equation facil-
itated the development of the predictive model based on a
previously defined conceptual model.

Secondly, multiple regression analysis allowed
examination of the interrelationship of variables. Speci—
fically, this procedure facilitated an examination of the
impact of human resource availability on the motivation
variables through ovservation of the standardized beta
coefficients.

Finally, path analysis was selected as a final test
of the analytical model. This procedure facilitated exam-
ination of differing relationships between motivation and
human resources and each conservation mode. The final

model allowed for a greater grasp of the whole picture.

Assumptions

 

1. Survey research is an appropriate means for
gaining information regarding social and behavioral dimen-
sions of conservation.

2. Self-report data is a reliable measure of
actual behavior.

3. A lifestyle of voluntary simplicity is, in fact,

a less energy (fossil-fuel) intensive lifestyle.

95

Limitations

 

This study was a secondary analysis of data collec-
ted for an evaluation of a household energy-audit project.
Data, therefore, were not collected solely for the goals
and objectives of this research. However, exclusion or
omission of variables potentially related to motivation and
human resources were reviewed and were not considered a
serious problem in testing the theoretical model.

The generalizability of findings is limited based
on any biases of the sampled community. The goals of the
research team in the evaluation of the energy audit resulted
in overrepresentation of households living in single family
dwellings and owning their own homes. Households living in
multiple unit dwellings and renting were underrepresented.

A major limitation of this study was the selection
of only one household member to be interviewed, the under-
lying assumption being that the responses of one member
would be representative of the entire household. Previous
research, however, has indicated that agreement of husbands
and wives on various demographics and attitudinal survey
questions cannot be relied upon (Ballweg, 1969; Byrne and
Blaylock, 1963; Safilios-Rothschild, 1968; Van Es and
Shingi, 1972).

Ballweg (1969) distinguished between nonevaluative,
or hard data, and evaluative or soft data. Specifically,
he studied the responses of 179 couples to two questions--

one considered hard data and one soft data. As expected,

96

considerable differences were found between couple consensus.
The question dealing with family income was viewed as hard
data and was found to have husband and wife consensus
greater than 60 percent of the time. The soft data question
was concerned with which parent had the final say in child
discipline. Only 23 percent of the couples were in agree-
ment in their responses to this question.

Fairly high levels of husband and wife consensus
on income was observed by Terber (1955) and also by Haberman
and Elinson (1967). Byrne and Blaylock (1963) concluded
from a study of 36 married couples that similarity in
political attitudes and in more general attitudes was
similar among couples. They also found, however, that
couples assumed greater consensus than actually existed.
The 36 couples included in this study were college students
or professionals, thus the findings may be restricted to a
relatively well educated population.

Van Es and Shingi (1972) studied the consensus of
324 husbands and wives on twenty—five attitude questions.-
They concluded that where attitudes are concerned it
should not be assumed that either the husband or the wife
can represent the whole family. They noted, however, that
when_the attitude is somewhat culturally determined more
consensus occurs among husbands and wives.

Safilios-Rothschild studied 160 families from
Detroit and 250 Athenian couples. The Detroit sample

consisted of data from both the husband and wife, whereas

 

97

the Greek data included responses from 133 wives and 117
husbands. A comparison of Detroit husbands'and wives'res-
ponses about decision making showed that less than half of
the couples agreed or slightly disagreed on their responses.
This meant that actual serious disagreement was found in
55.1 percent of the cases. The Greek data did not permit
matching. Results, however, indicated that significant
differences did result even between the aggregate samples
of husbands and wives.

Van Es and Shingi (1974) looked at aggregate res-
ponses of husbands and wives. Significant differences
between the mean scores of husbands and wives were found
on eight of the twenty-five attitudinal questions. Subsam—
ples based on husband's occupation, husband's education and
wife's education were unable to provide evidence that more
homogenous groups improved the consensus. Thus it was
concluded that distribution of scores for males and females
could not be considered similar.

Congruence of husbands' and wives' energy attitudes
was studied by Gladhart (1977) on four energy attitude
scales: ecosystem awareness, human responsibility, life-
style flexibility, and ease of cutting back. Correlations
were found in the moderate range for each scale. Hungerford
(1978) looked at the relationship of a husband's and a
wife's ecoconsciousness value and actual change in consump-
tion from 1974 to 1976. Congruency was not found as a

significant aspect of change. Rather the greatest

of soft data as a result of self-report and are, therefore,

 

subject to the perceptions of the respondent. Voluntary
simplicity behaviors, since they involved actual activity
were viewed as somewhat more generalizable than philosophi—
cal perspectives or sense of control. The reader is

advised to View the findings with these limitations.

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This research study was designed to explore the
extent to which households had participated in direct and
indirect conservation of fossil fuel energy and to further
analyze the motivations and human resources which influence
conservation behaviors. Several behaviors cumulatively
defined as voluntary simplicity were chosen as the measure
of indirect conservation. Percentage change in actual
household consumption of energy was chosen as the measure
of direct conservation.

Findings related to the first research question
were reported in detail in Chapter III and will be sum-
marized in this section. Findings related to the remaining
three research questions are reported in this chapter.

Each research question is addressed with the analysis of
direct conservation discussed first followed by the
analysis of voluntary simplicity behaviors. The primary

statistical procedure employed to test the hypotheses was

multiple regression analysis.

99

100

Participation in Direct and Indirect Conservation

 

The first research question was concerned with the
percentage of households participating in conservation be-
haviors. Approximately one-third of the sampled households
had reduced their consumption of fossil fuel energy, used
primarily for space heating, by more than four percent
during the 1979-80 heating season as compared to the 1977—
1978 heating season.

Sampled households answered a series of 11 ques-
tions designed to measure the extent to which households
have participated in lifestyle behaviors focused on self-
sufficiency, recycling, and contribution to ecological
organizations. Approximately three—fourths of the house-
holds had at least occasionally practiced some of the
behaviors. Approximately one-fifth of the households
reported active participation. As indicated by Table 11
households which reported active participation in volun-
tary simplicity are not necessarily the same households
which reduced their direct consumption of fossil fuels.

The Effect of Motivators and Human Resources on
Direct and Indirect Conservation of Fossil Fuel Energy

The second and third research questions were speci-
fically concerned with the impact of motivators and speci-
fic human resources on change in consumption and partici-

pation in voluntary simplicity behaviors.

 

101

mmmnz

 

Aanv Amvnzv Ammnzv Amvuzv mm.H who:
N.o o.m m.mH m.w no unwound usom SQ
GOHDQESmcou hmuocm

mcﬂmmouocH mpaosomsom

 

 

lauzc immuzc Ammanzc Assnzv me.a neendsnmnoo senonm an
N.o m.m o.om m.o moccao pccOHMAcmHm
oz BDHB mpaonomso:
Amnzv Aomuzv Ammauzv Aamnzv mm.a who: no usoouom
m.o m.> H.om o.m usom >2 monocm
mcﬂ>uomcou mpaozomsom
Ho>mz accoﬁmmooo usoswowm m>Huo< S 8.4.W mao>oq coﬂum>uomcou
pcooumm unmouom unmouom unmouom % 00.70. ems
s w w. a
muccmﬂoﬂuumm mHmEmm humpcsao> .e?.9
so so
AW.4

coaumﬁsmcou hmuocm paozomsom poospom
paw wHoH>msmm thOAHQEHm hucucsHo> :H :oHDcQAOHuHcm mo COmHHmQEOO .HH mange

 

102

Regression analysis was the primary statistical
procedure employed to test the hypotheses related to these
research questions. Bivariate regression analysis provided
an indication of the total effect of each motivator and
human resource on direct and indirect conservation of
energy. Multiple regression analysis provided an indica-
tion of the effect of the predictors when other character-
istics were taken into account.

Regression analysis provided various criteria used
to assess the value of motivators and human resources.
Among those used for discussion in this analysis were the
standardized regression coefficient, the R square, the
partial correlation, the F value and the probability.

An explanation of these statistics is provided here.

The standardized regression coefficient, more com—
monly referred to as beta or beta weight, was used to indi-
cate the relative importance of independent variables in
explaining the dependent variable. The beta is often des-
cribed as the direct effect of a predictor on a dependent
variable. In a bivariate analysis the beta would be con-
sidered the total effect of one variable on another. Since
no other predictors are accounted for, bivariate analysis
provided betas which were zero order relationships.
Multiple regression analysis provided beta weights which
were based on the direct effect of the independent variable
when the effects of one or more select variables were taken

into account.

103

The R-square provided an assessment of the good—

ness of fit of the regression model. It indicated the
proportion of variation in the dependent variable which was
explained by the total of independent variables. Two sta-
tistics related to R2 which were also used in the analysis
included R2 change and adjusted R2. R2 change is a mea-
sure of the additional amount of variance accounted for by
inclusion of another predictor variable. Adjusted R2 does
not increase with the addition of each new predictor
variable as does R2 but is sensitive to the effects of a
larger number of predictors. When the adjusted R2 shows a
decrease it is an indication that the predictor model would
lose its goodness of fit if applied to a new set of data
(Hull and Nie, 1981).

The partial correlation is the correlation of two
sets of residuals determined by removing the effect of
other predictors first from the dependent variable and then
from the predictor itself. When squared, the partial cor-
relation can be used to approximate contribution to vari-'
ance in the dependent variable which was not previously
accounted for by predictor variables already in the regres-
sion equation. By observation of the partial correlation
it was possible to determine relationships among the pre-
dictors.

The F-Value provided a score which indicated the
ratio of explained variance to unexplained variance. The

greater the explained variance the obvious reduction in

104

unexplained variance resulting in a ratio with a larger
numerator and a smaller denominator thus a larger F-value.
This value is associated with the probability that the pre-
dicted difference will not be a chance occurrence. For
this study the significance level was set at .10 indicating
a willingness to be incorrect in predictions only ten

percent of the time.

Percentage Change in Consumption

 

In this section two research questions are
addressed and the following hypothesized relationships
were examined:

Research Question 2.

 

To what extent are indicators of income adequacy
and philosophical perspective towards the energy
issue related to a family's household reduction

in direct energy consumption?

Hypothesis 1A

 

There will be curvilinear relationship between
income adequacy and percentage change in direct
household consumption of fossil fuels. Lower
and higher levels of income adequacy will result
in greater reduction of consumption.

Hypothesis 2A

 

Relative fuel cost and relative change in fuel
price each have a positive linear relationship

_ with a reduction in direct household consumption
of fossil fuels.

Hypothesis 3A

 

Philosophical perspective is positively related
to a reduction in household energy consumption.

105

Research Question 3.

 

To what extent is the availability of human
resources related to a household's reduction
in direct energy consumption?

Hypothesisk4A

 

A positive linear relationship exists between
percentage reduction in consumption and the
following human resources:

1) Knowledge

2) Average Household Education

3) Reported Skills

4) Perceived Money Availability
5) Perceived Time Availability

6) Number of Adults

7) Number of Employed Adults

and a negative linear relationship exists between
percentage reduction in consumption and the
following human resource:

8) Number of Children

Hypothesis 5A

 

When all motivators and human resources are
accounted for, the following contextual variables-—

age, home ownership, and rurality—-should provide

no further contribution to the variance in per-

centage change in consumption.

Percentage change in energy consumption was regres-
sed separately on each motivator, each human resource and
each contextual measure in order to determine bivariate
relationships. This procedure facilitated clarification
of the individual relationships between predictors and
percentage change in consumption and, thus, provided a

base for higher order analysis. Summary data of the bi-

variate relationships are presented in Table 12.

 

106

Multiple regression analysis was used to test the
hypotheses concerned with the interrelationships of the
motivators, the eight human resources, and the three con-
textual variables in explaining variation in change in
consumption. Summary data of the multiple regression
analysis are presented in Table 13.

Bivariate Regression Analysis-
Percentage Change in Consumption

 

A reduction in consumption was indicated by a
negative percentage change while a positive score indicated
an increase in consumption. Based on the negative scoring
of the dependent variable a negative regression coefficient
indicated a positive relationship of the independent

variable with percentage reduction in consumption.

Findings of the Bivariate Analysis. Results of

 

the bivariate regression analysis for percentage change in
household consumption scores are presented in Table 12.
None of the human resources was significantly related to

a percentage reduction in consumption. One motivation and
three contextual variables, however, were significant

contributors.

Motivators. Relative fuel cost had a significant

 

relationship with a reduction in consumption indicating

that higher cost fuels resulted in some conservation of

 

107

 

 

 

 

ooo. ooo.m moo. soo.n snﬂamnsm
ooo. omH.m moo. Hoo.u mom
omo. mmo.m ooo. oso.u oaomnmcao msom
mmHQMHHm> acszmacoo
ooo. moo. ooo. moo. omsoﬂaem umnsoz
ooo. ooo. ooo. oHo.u cmuoaﬂao no umnsoz
ooo. ooH. ooo. mHo.: coﬂnmosom oaosmmoom monum><
mom. mom. ooo. Hmo. maaﬂxm owuHOQmm
mom. mom. ooo. mmo.u moﬂ>mo oncomg on mnﬂaﬂna
mmm. Hmm. Hoo. ooo.: monaﬂnmaﬂm>a mane
oam. ooo. Hoo. omo.: muasoa no umnaoz
oom. ooH.H moo. ooo. moomazocm
mGOMZOmmm cmEsm
ooo. ooo. ooo. ooo.: womsqm©< wsoocH
mom. ooo. Hoo. ooo.: m>ﬂuumdmumm Hmoﬂbd0moHﬂnm
ooa. mo.a moo. mmo.n unﬂnm moﬂum Hmom
oHo. mo.m ooo. ooo.- nmoo Hose m>ﬁpmamm
mnouc>ﬂuoz

mocmoﬂwﬂcmﬂm Hmucm mumswm mucmHOmemoo moanoﬂum>

on m coﬂmmmummm ucwccmmmccH

m omnaonmocmum

monommmz pompcmmmwcH

mm moanmmumoama paw mGOMDOmmm :mEDm .muoum>ﬂuoz can manoeum> unmocmmmo
man no GOHHQESchU CH mmccao mmmucmoumm cuHB mﬂmhaccd coammmummm mpMHHm>Hm .NH manna

 

108

energy. The amount of variance accounted for, however,
was less than one percent. Differences in the price
increases between fuel types did not contribute signifi-
cantly to conservation. Neither income adequacy nor
philosophical perspective had a significant effect on
direct fossil fuel conservation.

Human Resources. Only three of the human resources

 

contributed to the variance in percentage change in con-
sumption. Their contribution, however, was negligible.
None of the resources was significantly related to direct

conservation.

Contextual Variables. Three contextual variables

 

were included in the analysis. Home ownership, age, and
rurality each had significant relationships with percentage
change in consumption. Each accounted for less than one
percent of the variance.

Multiple Regression Analysis-Percentage Change in Consump-
tion

 

Multiple regression analysis was the statistical»
tool used to test the hypotheses. The format of the regres—
sion model involved the assignment of specific inclusion
levels to each independent variable. Motivators were
given the highest priority, human resources were second and
contextual variables were given the lowest priority for
inclusion. This design facilitated explanation of the

additional contribution of human resources to a reduction

109

in household energy consumption. In addition, the inclu-
sion of contextual variables at the lowest priority showed
the extent to which the motivators and human resources
included for analysis were unable to explain away contri-
bution or rurality, age, and home ownership. Summary data

are reported in Table 13.

Findings. With all variables accounted for only
relative fuel cost and age of respondent maintained their
significance. Age actually increased the amount of variance
accounted for in the zero order relationship from less than
one percent to 1.1 percent in the multivariate model. The
total regression model accounted for only 3.3 percent of
the variance in percentage change in energy consumption.
The equation had a probability of .150 and therefore did
not meet significance requirements.

The R square is used to indicate the incremental
increase in the amount of variance accounted for by the
regression equation. According to Hull and Nie (1981) a
decrease in the adjusted R square is an indication of when
inclusion of additional variables into the model results in
a less generalizable model. The more generalizable model
can then be determined through observation of any decrease
in the adjusted R2. This decrease occurred on the third
step of the regression analysis. The resulting model is

identified in Table 13.

 

llO

.mmbmmmm> mmnu ocomocH UmeS

mocos m>muomcmmm ouommEoo 4 .m0m>m:on commm>mmmcoo uoommp momuompmmm Cm mocmumomEm mum
mcmumomcam manommm> mom an» MC COHUmpcm on» sumz ommmmmocm mGSmm> m cmumsmcm

m .mmcoa GOmuomwmmm

ammono map ou ucm>mmmm momummumum ou ccommmmmoo monocucommm cm momsmmmm

mooo. V oom. "mocoomomsomm

 

 

Ammo. o mmo. "mumsoo m
mmmoo.mv mom.m "m mmomm>o
omo. omo. moo. mmo.- mommmuom
oom. moo.m moo. ooo.: dmsmumozo msom
ooo. mom.m mmo. mom.u mom
omo. mmo. ooo. mooo.: mummmnmmmo>< mono: oo>mooumm
ooo. mmo. ooo. mmo.: ommOmdsm mononmmocmm
omo. ooo. ooo. mmo.: commoosom omonmmsom mommm>¢
ooo. mom. moo. ooo.: ammommoo oo umnaoz
omo. moo. moo. mmo.- mommmnmmmm>m meme om>mmonmm
ooo. mom. moo. mmo. mmmmxo omnmommm
mmo. mmo. moo. mmo.: mumoom mo monsoz
ooo. moo. moo. mmo. moommsoom
ooo. mmo. ooo. ooo.: momoomom msoocm
mmo. mmo. moo. . Ammo.no omo.u m>muomdmumm mmomodomOmmgm
oom. ooo.m moo. mmoo.uo mmo.: ammoo momma mmsm
omo. ooo.m ooo. mmmoo.nv ooo.: mmoo mono m>muommm
mocmommmcmmm mmmcm mmcmso mucmmommmmoo mGHQMHmm>
om mmosqm acmmmmmmmm ucmpcmmowcm

.m m UQNHUHMUCMuvm

mmnmmmo> ucmpcmmmm msu mm
COmuQEszou cm mmcmno mmmucmommm £um3 mmmhmmcm cemmmmmmmm ommmumsz mmmnommummm .mm omnoe

 

111

Three of the four motivators were included in this
model which contributed to 1.3 percent of the variance and
was significant at a probability of .045. Relative cost of
fuel, price shift, and philosophical perspective had beta
weights of -0.76, -.052, and -0.26 respectively. Negative
coefficients were expected due to the negative value of the
reduction measure. Income adequacy did not contribute
significantly to the model.

An attempt was made to discover whether the non-
significant contribution of income was caused by a curvi-
linear relationship between the variables. One way analysis
of variance was computed for percentage change in consump-
tion by income adequacy categories. No significant dif-
ference was found between groups. However, the relationship
between income adequacy and conservation was curvilinear in
the expected direction. To determine if there were possible
interaction effects, "breakdowns" were computed for a
selected set of independent variables.

The first interaction observed was that between
percentage change in consumption and income adequacy and
philosophical perspective. As can be seen in Table 14 the
greatest conservation was found in households with high
income adequacy where the respondent indicated a low energy
philosophical perspective. Mean scores indicated that low
and medium income groups conserved an average of 2.7 per-
cent whereas very 1ow and high income groups conserved under

one percent (Table 14).

112

Table 14. Percentage Reduced Consumption by Philosophical
Perspective by Income Adequacy

 

 

Income

Adequacy Philosophical Perspective

Low Medium High Mean N
Very Low -- -O.9 0.9 _ 0.02 92
Low -- -2.7 -2.9 2.63 . 118
Medium —o,7 -1,3 -3.7 2.76 261
High -6.0 -1.3 —0.5 0.88 90
Mean

Households with medium scores on philosophical per-
spective conserved an average of 2.7 percent if their in-
come adequacy was low and conserved approximately 1.3
percent if they fell within the medium income adequacy
groups. Households which indicated high philosophical
perspective scores tended to have greater reduction in con-
sumption due to mean reduction scores of 2.9 percent in the
low income adequacy group and 3.7 percent in the medium
income adequacy group. Households which reported high
scores on philosophical perspective and fell into the
extreme categories of income adequacy showed only small
overall percentages of reduced consumption (Table 14).

A slight shift from the bivariate contribution was
noted in the effect of income adequacy with the addition
of knowledge. Since knowledge was negatively related

conservation, not in the hypothesized direction, a

ll3

breakdown was computed for percentage change by income
adequacy and knowledge scores. Results indicated that
higher level of respondent knowledge was related to the
greatest amount of conservation in medium income groups.
Knowledge was least beneficial in very low income groups
(Figure 4.1).

Age maintained its significant relationship to
percent change in consumption. Breakdowns of percent
change in consumption indicated that households with older
members tended to conserve at approximately the same per-
centage despite income level. Within both younger and
middle-aged populations a curvilinear relationship was
observed. Younger households had increased rather than
reduced consumption; households within low and medium
income adequacy groups had the least increase. With the
exception of the very low income adequacy group, middle-aged
households showed reduced consumption. Low and medium
income adequacy households had reduced their consumption
by the greatest percentage (Figure 4.2).

Overall rural households tended to conserve more
than did urban dwellers. This difference was especially
evident in homes where fuel oil was used (Figure 4.3).
Rurality was not a factor contributing to conservation
differences in homes heated with electricity. Natural gas
users living in cities, however, reported greater conser-

vation than did rural users of natural gas.

 

114

 

3
l
1
know d
0/ --. .
° medium ugh
CHANGE
-1
CONSUMPTION
v
-3
-5
-7

 

INCOME ADEQUACY LEVELS

vl-very low
I- low

m—medium
h-high

Flgure 4-l. Percent Change in Consumption by Knowledge by

Income Adequacy.

llS

 

 

SP
3
1
°/o
F.
CHANGE
-1
CONSUMPTION
-3
‘5

 

INCOME ADEQUACY LEVE LS

VI very low
I-low
m-medium
h-high

Figure 4—2. Percent Change in Consumption by Age by
Income Adequacy.

 

ll6

 

 

3
f
1
°/. /—:2--—-
urban rural
CHANGE
-1
CONSUMPTION "
-3
-5
—7
o
—9
~11
FUEL TYPE
rug-natural gas
fo-fuel oil

e-electricity

Figure 4.3. Percent Change in Consumption by Rurality by Fuel Type.

ll7

Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses

Findings indicated that 36.4 percent of the house-
holds in the research subsample had reduced their consump-
tion of fossil fuel energy within the household by more than
four percent. The change in consumption among all subsample
households showed a 1.8 percent overall decrease. This was
consistent with the findings reported by William, Kruvant,
and Newman (1979) based on a national sample of households
during 1972 and 1974.

Percentage change in household consumption was
regressed onto specified motivators, human resources, and
contextual variables to assess their influence on conser-
vation. Findings indicated that one motivator, relative
fuel cost, and one contextual variable, age, were signifi-
cantly related to a change in consumption.

The relationship of fuel cost to percent change
in consumption was negative indicating that as the rela-
tive cost of the type of fuel used to heat the home in-
creased, households were more likely to decrease their
consumption of that fuel. Thus, that part of Hypotheses
2A concerned with relative cost of fuel was retained.
Breakdowns of fuel type according to rural and urban
residence indicated that rural households using fuel oil
and electricity reduced their consumption significantly
more than did their urban counterpart.

Income adequacy was determined to have a slight

curvilinear relationship with households in the low and

ll8

middle adequacy ranges having the greatest conservation.
A test for curvilinearity, however, did not prove signi-
ficant.

Households with low and medium adequacy levels
were found to have the greatest percentage of reduced
consumption. This was especially true for those house-
holds in which the respondent indicated a higher level
of knowledge concerning conservation actions, reflected
a socially responsible philosophy towards energy issues,
and indicated an age range between 36-54.

Since percentage change in consumption was an
objective measure obtained from actual utility company
records and not from self report, it was determined that
the indication of change was in fact a reliable finding.

While there are some questions as to the consensus

between household members on their responses to survey
questions, consensus on measures of income has been

found to be acceptable by various researchers, and was
used in this study as a measure of the household's ability
to purchase goods and services. Philosophical perspective
and knowledge, however, are not necessarily representative
of the entire household and therefore represent a limita-
tion to the generalizability of their relationship with
change in consumption to the household as a whole. More
accurately the findings can be interpreted as households

in which at least one person expresses a certain

ll9

philosophical position or possesses a certain level of

knowledge.

Participation in Voluntarnyimplicity

 

In this section two research questions are
addressed and the following hypothesized relationships
are examined.

Research Question 2.

 

To what extent are indicators of income adequacy
and philosophical perspective towards the energy
issue related to a family's participation in
voluntary simplicity behaviors?

Hypothesis 1B

 

Income adequacy is negatively related to parti-
cipation in behaviors related to voluntary
simplicity.

Hypothesis 3B

 

Philosophical perspective is positively related
to participation in behaviors related to volun-
tary simplicity.

Research Question 3.

 

To what extent is the availability of human resources
related to a household's participation in voluntary
simplicity behaviors?

Hypothesis 4B

 

A positive relationship exists between voluntary
SimpliCity scores and the following human
resources.

 

120

1) Knowledge

2) Average Household Education
3) Reported Skills

4) Perceived Time Availability
5) Number of Adults

6) Number of Children;

and a negative relationship exists between volun-
tary simplicity scores and the following human
resources:

7) Perceived Money Availability
8) Number of Employed Adults

Hypothesis SB

 

When all motivators and human resources are

accounted for the contextual variables of age,

home ownership, and rurality should provide no

further contribution to participants in voluntary

simplicity behaviors.

Similar to percentage change in consumption the
total voluntary simplicity score was regressed separately
on each motivator, each human resource and each contextual

measure in order to ascertain bivariate relationships.
Summary data of the bivariate-relationships of the total
voluntary simplicity scale and predictor variables are

presented in Table 15.

Multiple regression analysis was the statistical
tool used to test the hypotheses concerned with the inter-
relationships of the two motivators--income adequacy and
philosophical perspective; the eight human resources; and
the three contextual variables in explaining variation in
reported voluntary simplicity participation. Summary data

of the multiple regression analysis performed with Total

121

Voluntary Simplicity as the dependent measure are

presented in Table 16.

Findings of the Bivariate Analysis. The results of
the bivariate regression analysis for the total voluntary
simplicity score are presented in Table 16. All but two
of the predictors had significant relationships with

voluntary simplicity.

Motivators. Income adequacy and philosophical

 

perspective both had significant bivariate relationships
with voluntary simplicity behaviors in the hypothesized
directions. The measure of philOSOphical perspective
appeared to be the stronger of the two with a direct effect
of .200 and significantly contributed to four percent of
the variance in voluntary simplicity scores. Income
adequacy had a negative relationship to participation in
voluntary simplicity and accounted for less than one
percent of the variance. The negative relationship was ex-
pected and indicated that as the adequacy of income
lowered, participation in voluntary simplicity behaviors

increased.

Human Resources. All but one of the human resources

 

had significant positive relationships with voluntary sim-
plicity scores. Three of the bivariate relationships were
not in the expected direction. Ability to afford a con-

servation device and number of employed adults were

122

hypothesized to have negative relationships; knowledge was
expected to be positively related to voluntary simplicity
participation.

Reported skills accounted for the greatest indivi-
dual contribution to the variance, 10.9 percent, in volun-
tary simplicity scores. The beta weight of .330 was signi-
ficant with a probability of .000. Time availability was
the second highest contributor among the resources and
accounted for nearly five percent of the variance with a
beta of .214.

Next in order of importance was the number of
household occupants. Number of children entered the re-
gression model with a beta weight of .189 and contributed
to 3.6 percent of the variance. Number of adults was
entered into the bivariate model with a beta weight of .140
and accounted for approximately two percent of the variance.

Ability to afford a conservation device, average
household education, and number of employed adults were the
remaining human resources investigated. Individual contri-
bution to the variance of the dependent variable was less
than two percent for each measure and their beta weights
were .132, .121, and .070 respectively. A measure of know—
ledge was negatively related to the dependent measure with

a nonsignificant beta of —.038.

Contextual Variables. Three contextual variables

 

were included in the regression model. Two of the measures,

 

123

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mmo. mmo. ooo. ooo.
ooo. mom.mm omo. mom.
ooo. mov.om ooo. mmm.n
omm. mmo. moo. mmo.:
ooo. vmo.m moo. ooo.
moo. omm.m mmo. mmm.
moo. mom.mm mmo. mmm.
ooo. vmo.mm omo. ova.
ooo. mom.m~ mmo. mom.
ooo. vom.om ooo. vmm.
ooo. mam.oo mom. omm.
mmo. Nmm.m ooo. mmo.:
ooo. mvm.om ooo. oom.
cocoommmcmmm mopcm ommsqm masomOmmmooo
on m commmmmmmm
m pommpmmccmum

mm momzmmmmoamo can moOHDOmom cosom
can no momoom mumommmsmm mmoucdmo> Hobos

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.mmouc>muoz cam
numz mwmxmmcm

mmcmmmczo mEo:
mummomom
mom

momncmmm> mmopxwmcoo

wmpwazocm

ComoHQEm mmnﬁsz

EOHumosom pmocmmsom ommmw><
wom>oo ouomom on mummmnm
mumsom mo meEDZ

comommco mo meEDZ
mummmnammm>< mama

mmmmmm ownHOQmm

IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
moomzommm cmEsm

momsqw©< mEoocH
m>muoommmmm mwom£m0m0mm£m

mmoum>mmoz

mmmnmmmm>
ucoocommpcm

mammmo> acoccmmmccH
omnmmmm> ucmpcmmmo
COHmmwmmmm mummmm>mm .mm ombce

 

124

age and rurality, have been described in previous literature
as influencing voluntary simplicity behavior. Since the
primary purpose of the research was to explore voluntary
simplicity in terms of motivation and human resources the
contextual variables were included in the analysis to deter-
mine the extent to which the resource and motivation varia-
bles would account for variance previously attributed to
demographics.

Age was negatively related to voluntary simplicity
behaviors indicating that as the age of the respondent
increased the likelihood of household participation in
voluntary simplicity would decrease. Age accounted for 4.6
percent of the variance in total voluntary simplicity scores.
Rurality had a significant positive relationship with
voluntary simplicity behaviors with a beta weight of 0.173
and accounted for three percent of the variance. Home
ownership was not significantly related to voluntary sim-
plicity participation.

Multiple Regression Analysis--Voluntary Simplicity
Participation

 

 

Multiple regression analysis was used to test the
hypothesis based on the additional impact of human resources
on voluntary simplicity participation. The format of the
regression model involved assigning variables specific
inclusion levels. Motivators were given the highest
priority, human resources were second and contextual

variables were given the lowest priority for inclusion.

125

Two objectives were achieved through use of multi-
ple regression analysis. First, it was possible to deter-
mine a predictive model of voluntary simplicity based on
selected motivators and human resources. Secondly, the
hierarchial format facilitated an exploration of the con-

ceptual model.

Findings. The regression model with all variables
entered accounted for 21.7 percent of the variance in
voluntary simplicity participation. The equation had a
probability of .000. Human resources accounted for an
additional 14.8 percent of the variance beyond the 4.8
percent accounted for by the motivators. Two of the
three contextual variables contributed to an additional

2.1 percent of the variance.

Motivators. Philosophical perspective was the

 

first motivator to enter the regression model. The posi-
tive direction of the standardized regression coefficient
(.188) indicated that those households who reported higher
scores on the philosophical perspective scale were some-
what more likely to participate in voluntary simplicity
behaviors. Philosophical perspective accounted for four
percent of the variance as in the bivariate analysis.
Income adequacy maintained its significant negative
contribution to participation in voluntary simplicity

behaviors. The relative effect of income adequacy increased

126

.mOUOE o>mu0mcomm m CH OOOMOMOQEH mmonu
mCmOMOHUCm mmmnmmmm> mod cam hummmmsm mo cOmumpwm mam nmmz commomOCH m tommsnom
¥

N

.HOUOE m>mpom©omm

ammono map on mam>mmmm momummmmum Ou Ocommommoo mummsmcommm Cm mmmommm

 

 

m
mooo. v ooo. "mocmomomoomo
moom. o omm. “mumoom m
mmooo.omo omm.mm no mmoum>o
mmo. oom.o ooo. mmo. omomnmoao msom
omo. ooo.m moo. momm.- moo
moo. omo.om omo. momm. mummmuom
moo. mom.o ooo. mmo.- moommzoos
mmo. omm.o ooo. ooo.: ommOmdsm nonsoz
omm. oom.m moo. mooo. o moo. mumoom mo nonsoz
mmm. omo.m moo. Ammo. o moo. mummmnommo>m mama
omm. oom.m moo. looo. o mmo. omuommno mo nonsoz
moo. omo.m ooo. .mmoo. o mmo. mom>mo ouomom on mummmno
ooo. omo.mm omo. mmmm. o omm. acmuoooom omoommsom mooum>m
ooo. moo.oo omm. momm. o omm. mmmmxm ommuoomm
mmo. mmm.o ooo. loom.uo omm.- momoomom msoocm
ooo. mom.om ooo. mimom. o mom. m>muoodmumm moomndomOmmsm
mocmumwmcmmm moucm wwcmno mucmmOmwwOOU mOmQMmmm>
Om mmmsqm commmommmm ucopcomoccH
o m ommmoumocouo

mmnmmmm> ucopcomoo mam mo
wumommmEmm ammmcsmo> mouoe num3 mmmwmcd< commmmmmom mmmmumsz momsommmmm: .om Omnme

127

from the bivariate analysis as the beta weight rose from
-.091 to -.154. Income adequacy accounted for only an

additional 0.8 percent of the variance. Together, philo-
sophical perspective and income accounted for 4.8 percent

of the variance in total voluntary simplicity scores.

Human Resources. Human resources significantly

 

accounted for an additional 14.8 percent of the variance
in voluntary simplicity scores. Of the seven original
significant resources only three maintained their signifi-
cance when other resources and motivators were accounted
for. Reported skills was, by far, the most influential
human resource. The amount of variance accounted for

by skills increased from the bivariate 10.9 percent to 12
percent with a direct effect of .238.

Average household education was the second human
resource to enter the regression model. Education accoun-
ted for 1.6 percent of the variance with a positive beta
weight of .114 significant at a probability of .000. This
relative effect lowered only slightly from the zero order
effect of .121.

Ability to afford a conservation device was strong
enough to enter the regression model on the fifth step
with a significant effect. Addition of this variable,
however, only increased the variance accounted for by 0.5

percent. This was considerably less than in the bivariate

128

model where this perception had a significant effect on
voluntary simplicity scores with a beta of .132 and contri-
buted to 1.7 percent of the variance. As other variables
entered the model their significance to this measure was
reduced. When changes in the partial coefficients were
observed, the greatest reduction noted in the influence of
the ability to afford a conservation device occurred when
skill was accounted for in the equation. The remaining
human resources did not enter the regression equation at a

\

probability level less than .10.

Contextual Variables. Contextual variables cum—

 

mulatively accounted for an additional 2.1 percent of the
variance. Rurality was the greatest contextual contributor
accounting for an additional 1.4 percent of the variance
and indicated that the motivation and human resource indi-
cators included in the analysis were unable to totally
account for the contribution of rurality to voluntary
simplicity behavior. Age accounts for an additional 0.7
percent of the variance, reduced from a bivariate contri-
bution of 4.6 percent. It appeared that motivation and
resources were able to account for the majority of the
influence of age.

A decrease in the adjusted R2 was used as the
criterion for selection of the most appropriate predictive
model (Table 16). This decrease occurred at the eighth

step in the regression analysis. The resulting model

129

accounts for 19.6 percent of the variance and is signifi-
cant with a probability of .000.

A breakdown of the effect of income adequacy on
voluntary simplicity scores in the presence of skills is
presented in Figure 4.4. The presence of skills within
the household is especially influential as the adequacy of
income decreases. Low skill availability resulted in lower
participation in voluntary simplicity behaviors across
income adequacy levels; very low and high levels of adequacy
appear the most affected.

Average household education (Figure 4.5) appeared
to have increasing influence on voluntary simplicity
participation as adequacy of income decreased. This is
especially noticeable in the very low income group. The
influence of a subjective sense of money availability for
a conservation device was less evident. The higher extremes
of participation occurred when low income households per-
ceived more money availability. The lowest extreme in
participation was evidenced in households with higher income
adequacy and when the respondent indicated low perception of
money availability.

It was noted that the addition of children to the
regression equation lowered the direct effect of income
adequacy on voluntary simplicity participation. One child
in a household increased participation within each income
adequacy level. Two children somewhat reduced participa-

tion. Addition of children to a household had the greatest

130

impact on voluntary simplicity participation in very low

income adequacy households.

Summary and Discussion of Hypotheses

 

The two research questions dealt with in this sec-
tion were concerned with the influence of income adequacy,
an ecological perspective and a variety of human resources
on participation in voluntary simplicity behaviors. Overall
it was determined that a fairly large percentage of house-
holds (75.6 percent) participated in at least some activi-
ties which had an underlying dimension of a less energy
intensive lifestyle. It was determined that such participa-
tion was indeed motivated by the adequacy of one's income
and a symbolic value system which suggested a responsibility
for one's environment. The first two hypotheses were
therefore accepted.

Income adequacy significantly contributed to less
than one percent of the variance. The direction of the
relationship was negative, as indicated by the beta coef-
ficient of -.154. This finding was supportive of the
hypothesis that as the adequacy of one's ability to pur—
chase goods and services within the market place decreased
there would be an increase in their production within the
home.

Philosophical perspective was a significant contri-
butor to the variance in voluntary simplicity scores

accounting for four percent of the variance. The

131

2.0a
I
1.5
MEAN
VOLUNTARY
SIMPLIC I TY
SCORE v
1.0i
0.5

 

 

low medium
SKI LL LEVEL

INCOME ADEQUACY LEVELS

I-very low
l-low
m-medium
h-high

Figure 4.4. Mean Voluntary Simplicity Score by Skill
Level and Income Adequacy. '

132

2.51

MEAN 2.0‘ VI/

VOLUNTARY
SIMPLICI TY
SCORE

1.5

1.0

INCOME ADEQUACY
LEVELS

vl-very low
l-low

m—medium
h- high

 

 

1o 12 14 15
EDUCATION

(W8)

FIGURE 4.5. Mean Voluntary Simplicity Score by Education
by Income Adequacy.

133

The relationship with voluntary simplicity was positive
supporting the hypothesis that participation in voluntary
simplicity behaviors was related to higher scores on a
measure of philosophical perspective.

The findings concerned with the relationship of
voluntary simplicity behavior and human resources resulted
in the acceptance of only two hypotheses. Reported skills
and average household education did contribute signifi-
cantly in the hypothesized direction. All other hypotheses
were rejected.

The addition of human resources to the regression
equation accounted for an additional 14.8 percent of the
variance. Only three resources; reported skills, average
household education, and perception of the ability to
afford a conservation device had a significant contribution.
Reported skills was by far the more influential resource
having a positive relationship with voluntary simplicity
and accounting for an additional 12 percent of the variance.
Average household education also had a positive relation-
ship with voluntary simplicity. Perception of the ability
to afford a conservation device had a positive relationship
with voluntary simplicity indicating that as respondents
perceived money as available for conservation they were
also more likely to report participation in voluntary sim-
plicity behaviors. This was not in the hypothesized direc—
tion. A cross tabulation indicated that households who

had actually taken actions concerned with direct

134

conservation of energy were also those households who re—
ported higher levels of voluntary simplicity participation
(Appendix C-l). This finding may indicate that households
performing voluntary simplicity behaviors were indeed
attempting to reduce direct consumption through technical
and behavioral changes.

Availability of resources was also found to in—
fluence the direct effect of income adequacy on voluntary
simplicity participation. As the three significant
resources entered the regression model the relative effect
of income adequacy increased. This finding indicated that
in the presence of skills, education, and perceived money
availability, households with less adequate incomes were
'more likely to participate in less energy intensive life-
style behaviors of voluntary simplicity. This appears to
be a form of resource substitution--the substitution of
human labor for money income. Availability of human
resources does not appear to influence the effect of philOv
sophical perspective.

A Comparison of Percentage Reduced Consumption
and Voluntary Simplicity

 

To judge which was the more effective in determining
conservation, the individual motivators and an index of
human resources were each tested as predictors for both
direct and indirect conservation. The results of each

analysis are reported in Table 17.

135

Percentage Change in Consumption. Relative fuel

 

cost was the most influential motivator in contributing to
reduced consumption explaining 1.1 percent of the variance.
Philosophical perspective was the only other motivator to

contribute. Human resources were not strong enough predic-
tors to enter the equation. The total model was not signi—

ficant.

Voluntary Simplicity Participation. Availability

 

of human resources was the strongest contributor to parti-
cipation in voluntary simplicity behaviors. Both motiva-
tors, philosophical perspective and income adequacy contri-
buted significantly to the variance. The increase in
standardized regression coefficients from bivariate to
multivariate models reinforced the evidence of their inter-
relatedness.

Contribution of Conservation Behaviors
to Personal Control

 

Lovins (1977) and other conservationists have
suggested that participation in less energy intensive life-
styles would result in a lessening of our dependency of
fossil fuels and an increase in our sense of personal
control over energy needs. The management/decision-making
framework of this research also suggested that as one parti-
cipated in experiences or behaviors s/he would most likely
be better prepared for similar situations in the future.

Perlman and Warren described this as residuals. Within

136

o "mocmommmcmmm
o.vm "mmosvm m

Hmm.mm "m Hammm>o

 

 

 

 

 

ooo. mmo. mom.l mmo.: moasomom meooom

ooo. mmo. mom. oom. m>muomdmumo
HMOHSQOmOmmcm
o ooo. omm. omm. mmou90mom sass:
>umomHQEmm hmomcsmo>
mmm. "mocmomwmcmmm
mmo. "mmmsdm m
mo.H um Hacmm>o
ooo. ooo. moo. moo.» mocmoo momma mono
mmo. ooo. mmo. ooo.i momoqmpm OEOOCH

omm. moo. mmo.: omo.i e>muomdmumm
mmomzmomOmmzm
mmo. mmo. oom.i ooo.: umoo moon

:OHOQESmCOU
Om omcmcv mmmucmommm

mocmommmcmmm mmcmco mucOmOmwmmoo mucmmommwmoo mmmnmmmm>
mumsqm COmmmmmmmm :ommmmmmmm Ocmpcomoocm
m cmmmpmccccum mummmm>mm
. momnmmmm>
ucmpcmmmpcm mm mmomsommm spasm can mmoum>mpoz can mmmnmmmm> mcmpcommo

mm :Omum>momcoo HO momsmmmz uommmpcm pom poommo cumz mommmuca OOHmmomowm .om Omnme

137

the management model used for this research, conservation
behaviors were hypothesized to contribute to the development
of human resources, specifically, personal control. The
following research question was asked.

Research Question 4.

 

To what extent does participation in voluntary
simplicity and/or reduction in household energy
consumption contribute to a family's feeling of
control over energy related stressors?

Hypothesis 6A

 

Reduction in the direct consumption of fossil fuels
within the household will be positively related to
a sense of personal control.

Hypothesis 6B

 

Participation in voluntary simplicity behavior will
be positively related to a sense of personal
control.

Findings. The hypothesis was tested using regres-
sion analysis. Observation of the bivariate coefficients
showed that between direct and indirect conservation the
indirect method of voluntary simplicity was the only signi-
ficant contributor to a sense of personal control (Table 18).
Participation in behaviors related to voluntary simplicity
accounted for 3.1 percent of the variance. Reduced con-
sumption was actually negatively related to a sense of

control as indicated by the positive beta when a negative

beta was expected.

138

When motivators, human resources, and contextual
variables were accounted for the direct effect of voluntary
simplicity participation decreased from .175 to .105.
Hypothesis 6B was accepted and Hypothesis 6A was rejected.

Both motivators, five of the human resources, and
age had significant total effects on a sense of personal
control. The motivators and resources were all positively
related whereas age was negatively related. When account-
ing for the effects of all other variables both motivators
maintained a significant contribution. Resources, average
household education, perception of available money and
number of children enter the model with a significant con-
tribution. Number of children became negatively related

to personal control when age entered the equation. Age had

a significant yet negative contribution.

Testing the Model

 

According to the model used to direct the analysis,
it was hypothesized that motivations and human resources
would result in decisions to behave in ways which would
have potential for fossil fuel energy conservation. It
was also hypothesized that the motivations and resources
could be attributed, at least to some extent, to age and
geographic location. The final aspect of the conceptual
model was that participation in conservation behaviors
would result in an increased or reinforced sense of control

over energy problems.

139

 

 

 

 

 

ooo. omm. ooo. mmo.- summouom
ooo. moo.om ooo- omm.: mom
HGDOXOOCOU
omo. . mom. ooo. omo. moommzoom
omo. ooo. moo. mmo. mumsoa mo Monasz
mom. moo.m ooo. ooo. mummmnommo>¢ mama om>mmoumm
ooo. omo.m mmo. mmm. canommno mo monasz
moo. omm.o omo. mmm. mmmmxo ounuogmm
moo. moo.o mmo. mmm. omAOmQEo mmoolmmoomm
moo. omo.mm omo. omm. mmmmeMmmm>< mono: om>mmonmm
ooo. mom.mm omo. omm. oomumosom omonmmoom momuo>4
mmomsommm cmﬁsm
ooo. ooo.mm mmo. mom. m>muomdmumm mmomaoomOmmam
moo. mmm.o omo. omm. momsomom mEooom
mmomm>muoz
mmm. mmm. ooo. omo. commdsomooo omosomm momouom
ooo. ooo.mm mmo. omm. mumommoamm mumuaomo>
COHHM>H®mCOU

COSMOHMﬂCOHm HOHZHM OHMDHVW mUCQHOHMMOOU mmHQmmHHm>

Om m GOmmmmmmmm ucmocmmmpcm

m Ummmpmoocmum

Omnmmmm> OCOUCOQOQ ecu mm momucoo mmcommom cam: mmmmmmc¢ COHmmomoom OOMmmc>mm

.mH OHQMB

140

ooo. "mocmomwmcmmm

 

 

oom. "muooom m
mom.o no mmoum>o
omo. omo. moo. mmo.: mummmusm
moo. mmm.om omo. mmm.: mom
mmo. mmo. ooo. ooo. moommzoom
moo. omo. ooo. omo. mumsom mo.umns:z
ooo. omo. moo. omo.- mummmnommo>m mama om>mmoumm
ooo. moo. moo. omo.- omAOmosm mmsoimmocmo
mmm. ooo. moo. omo. mmmmxm ommuoomm
omo. oom.o ooo. omo.- omuommno oo nunssz
omo. oom.m ooo. ooo. momoomom msooam
mmo. mmm.o ooo. ooo. mummmnommm>o mono: om>mmoumm
ooo. moo.m mmo. omm. m>muomomumm moomsdomOmmcm
ooo. moo.mm mmo. moo. acmmoooom omoomosom momum><
mmm. mmm. ooo. ooo. composomooo omosomm ucmonmm
ooo. ooo.mm mmo. oom. mumommosmo muwuoomo>

moccomwmcmmm Hmucm mmcmzo mucwmommwmou mOHOMHmm>

Om mmwsqm commmmmmmm mcoocommocm

o m ommmonoocmmo

mmmnmmmo> OCOOCOQOOCH
mm mwmnmmmm> Hmsuxmucou can .moomsommm spasm .mmoum>muoz .comum>momcou paw
mmnmmmm> acmpcmmmo may no momucoo deOmmmm sums mmmwmmsm COHmmmmmmm ommmpmsz .om omnce

141

Based on previous regression analyses a path
analysis was constructed to test the overall model. A
human resources score was developed from the scores of six
resources included in the final regression model for volun-
tary simplicity: reported skills, average household educa-
tion, perception of money availability, perception of time
availability, number of adults and number of children. The
index was computed by first computing a proportion score
for each selected resource. This was done by dividing the
actual score by the possible score. A total score was
computed by summing the proportion score for each of the
resources.

Personal control was regressed on each conservation
measure, the motivators, the human resource score, and the
contextual variables. In addition voluntary simplicity
was regressed on income adequacy, philosophical perspective,
human resources and the contextual variables. Direct con-
servation was regressed on fuel cost, age and rurality.

The motivators and human resource score were each regressed
on the contextual variables.

Age. Age was determined to have a direct negative
relationship with a sense of personal control. It was
concluded, however, that older persons may not have par-
ticipated in voluntary simplicity because they did not
feel they had the necessary resources. Leonard-Barton
and Rogers (1980) arrived at a similar conclusion,

noting that older persons were frequently not physically

 

 

142

capable of many of the self-sufficient behaviors required
in voluntary simplicity. Older persons, however, did
tend to reduce their direct consumption of fossil fuels
more than younger households. This relationship, however,
contributed to the negative relationship of age to a

sense of personal control over energy problems.

Rurality. The direct relationship of rurality to
a sense of personal control was nonsignificant. Rural
households tended to have lower incomes and a stronger
sense of available resources both of which contributed to
participation in voluntary simplicity. Participation was

a significant contributor to a sense of control.

Income Adequacy had a positive direct relationship

 

with personal control as well as an indirect negative rela-
tionship through participation in voluntary simplicity. It
was, therefore, concluded that households who were able to
substitute human energy for a less adequate income were

more likely to sense personal control over problems.

Philosophical Perspective had both direct and in-

 

direct positive relationships with personal control. The
positive relationship was to be expected since some of the
questions related to philosophical perspective were
directed towards personal responsibility for ecological

problems. The attitude of responsibility not only

 

personal control. When resources facilitated participation
in voluntary simplicity, however, an indirect positive

relationship was noted.

Conservation. Of the conservation behaviors, only
____________

to a sense of personal control over energy problems. As
noted previously, however, participation in voluntary sim—
plicity was facilitated through possession of a variety of

human resources and both income and philosophical motivation.

144

.moEoSmOEoo Oco mco_>uzom cozaiomcoo .39. some: 6.29522
503.00 35962201 325:. Ocm 39.5 9:295 .opos. 0:395 5nd one mmaoﬁ

\mmomoommm
\

$615.25 ..\\ . V
E5239 z..- 34

6 \ Mill \\
\\ a. ‘ webmammma \ \
I o\ \I oo.\
\ moo or . ._<o_:._Omo.__zaA/m

 

 

 

7

    

        
  
 

  
  

4015.200 \.
m<20mmma

//moz<:o
29.5 .22sz

0<Dcmn .
mSOUZ.

hmOO ..mDu

 

CHAPTER V

OVERVIEW

It has become increasingly evident that fossil
fuels are limited in their long term ability to meet energy
needs. A variety of alternative energy sources have been
suggested. Conservation, however, has received frequent
attention as a household's contribution to relieving the
stress of limited energy resources. The purpose of this
research was to explore patterns of energy conservation
within the household.

Conservation usually means a reduction of energy
consumed directly for heating one's home, lighting, cooling
or transportation. Another form of conservation occurs in-
directly through limiting the purchase of goods and ser-
vices produced outside the home. This research was based
on a conceptual model of resource management with direct
and indirect conservation as results.

Specifically, it was hypothesized that given
appropriate motivation and the necessary combination of
human resources, households would make decisions concerned
with the conservation of fossil fuel energy resources. The

ability of households to make direct and indirect purchases

145

146

of fossil fuel energy is dependent upon the cost of the
energy resource and the adequacy of the household's income
to make purchases within the market system. In addition,
the symbolic value of fossil fuels may be influential in
determining the extent to which household members make
direct and indirect purchases of fossil fuel dependent

goods and services. Thus cost of fuel, income adequacy

and philOSOphical perspective each served as potential moti-
vators for conservation.

Direct conservation\was measured by observing
change in the amount of fossil fuel energy consumed in the
household during 1977-78 and the amount consumed during
1979-80. Consumption figures were obtained from appro-
priate utility companies. A measure of indirect conserva-
tion was obtained through self-report answers to a series
of eleven questions designed to determine a household's
participation in activities related to self-sufficiency,
recycling, and contributions to ecological organizations.
These activities have been previously defined as represen-
tative of a lifestyle of voluntary simplicity.

Both direct and indirect conservation may require
human resources in order to act upon a sense of motivation.
A variety of human resources may be required. For this
research, however, eight were selected from the available

data base: reported skills, average househol education,

knowledge of conservation actions, perception of money

147

availability, perception of time availability, single or
duel employment.

Multiple regression was selected as the analysis
procedure and provided for the examination of two issues
relevant to the research conducted for this report. First
use of regression with hierarchial inclusion of independent
variables to the equation facilitated the development of
the predictive model based on a previously defined concep-
tual model. Secondly, multiple regression analysis facili—
tated an examination of the impact of human resource avail-

ability on the motivation variables.

Summary of the Findings

 

Direct and Indirect Conservation Practices. The

 

first question explored by this research was concerned with
whether or not households were actually practicing direct
and indirect conservation of fossil fuel energy. Analysis
of household consumption of fossil fuel energy determined
that approximately one-third of the sampled households had
reduced their consumption by more than four percent during
the 1979-80 heating season as compared to the 1977—78 heat—
ing season. The mean percentage change in consumption for
all households in the research subsample indicated that an
overall reduction of 1.8 percent was observed.

Answers to each of the eleven voluntary simplicity
questions were scored and totaled to provide an index of

potential indirect conservation. Reliability of the index

148

was low to moderate with an alpha of .59. The questions
were felt to have conceptual validity, however, and all
were retained for further analysis. Approximately three-
fourths of the households had at least occasionally prac-
ticed some of the behaviors; approximately one-fifth of
the households reported active participation.

To better understand components of the index, all
questions were factor analyzed. Four factors were delin-
eated and defined as self-sufficiency in services, self-
sufficiency in goods, self—sufficiency in food, and recy-
cling. One question concerned with contributions to eco-
logical organizations did not load on any factors but was
retained as an individual factor.

Frequencies of these factors indicated that about
50 percent of the households actively recycled glasses,
jars, and neWSpapers. One-third of the households actively
provided services within the home. These included changing
the oil in the car, obtaining skills, riding a bicycle for
exercise and exchanging goods and services with others.
Approximately one-third of the sample produced all, or most
of their fruits and vegetables. An even smaller percentage,
13.5, were actively producing their own gifts, clothing

or furniture.

The Effect of Motivators on Conservation Behavior.

 

The effect of motivators on direct and indirect conserva-

tion was the focus of the second research question. Four

149

motivators were investigated for their effect on direct
conservation. Relative fuel cost, relative shift in fuel
cost and income adequacy were selected as financial motiva-
tors. An index of responses to six questions was chosen

as a measure of the symbolic value of fossil fuels and was
defined as the household's philOSOphical perspective. In-
come adequacy and philosophical perspective were also chosen
as motivators for indirect conservation.

Indicators of conservation were regressed onto each
of the motivators to determine the relative effect of the
motivators on the conservation behaviors and also to deter-
mine the strength of the measure as a predictor of conser-
vation. Only relative fuel cost proved a significant indi-
cator of direct conservation. This finding indicated that
as the cost of fuel increased households were somewhat more
likely to conserve. Fuel cost actually contributed to less
than one percent of the variance in direct conservation.

Income adequacy was not a significant contributor
to the variance in direct conservation. The contribution'
of income adequacy to indirect conservation, however, was
significant, p = .022, yet contributed to less than one
percent of the variance. The direction of the relationship
indicated that as the adequacy of a household's income
decreased the likelihood of voluntary simplicity participa-
tion increased.

Philosophical perspective was included in the final

regression equation for direct conservation but contributed

150

only .1 percent of the variance. PhilOSOphical perspective
was more influential in predicting participation in volun-
tary simplicity behaviors, significantly accounting for

four percent of the variance.

The Effect of Human Resources on Conservation

 

Eight human resources were assessed for their direct
influence on conservation and for their effect on motiva-
tion. To test the hypotheses related to the third research
question hierarchial regression analysis was employed.

This procedure involved assigning inclusion levels to the
various measures. Motivators were given the highest inclu-
sion value. Human resources were added to the model fol-
lowing the motivators. Results indicated that human re-
sources had little to no direct effect on direct conserva-
tion.

On the other hand, the availability of human
resources contributed significantly to participation in
voluntary simplicity. Reported availability of skills was
especially influential accounting for an additional 12
percent of the variance. Availability of skills was
positively related to participation, thus, the more skills
available to a household the more self-sufficient the be-
havior of the members. Average household education was
also a significant contributor to participation in volun—

tary simplicity behaviors. A higher educational level

151

tended to indicate greater participation and accounted for
1.6 percent of the variance.

The final predictive model for voluntary simplicity
participation accounted for 19.6 percent of the variance
with a probability of .000. Both motivators and six human
resources (reported skills, average household education,
perception of ability to afford a conservation device,
number of children, perception of time availability, and
number of adults) were included in the final model. The
final predictive model of percentage change in consumption
included only motivators and accounted for only 1.3 percent
of the variance.

Management of resources within the household was
theoretically said to have an outcome beyond the actual
behavior. The behavior itself was hypothesized to have the
potential for developing or reinforcing the development of
motivation and human resources. The final research ques-
tion of this study was concerned with the effect of the
participation in conservation on a sense of personal con—'
trol.

The relationship between direct conservation and
personal control did not prove to be significant. Indirect
conservation or voluntary simplicity participation, however,
showed a significant positive relationship. This indicated
that as a household's participation in voluntary simplicity
behaviors increased it was more likely that they would also

experience a sense of personal control. Voluntary

   

 

 

152

simplicity participation accounted for 3.1 percent of the

variance.

Conclusions and Implications

 

The limitations of fossil fuel reserves in meeting
future energy needs has brought about an awareness that
society and, therefore, households will undergo change
while adapting to shortages, increased fuel prices,
alternative energy resources, and possible future lifestyles.
The changes which occur will be the result of a variety of
decisions.

Those persons with a single goal of providing new
energy sources are primarily making technological decisions.
Others are concerned with the alternative uses of available
energy and are said to be involved in making economic deci-
sions. Lovins (1977) and other conservationists have
expressed concern that social decision making be included
into the process of decision making regarding present and
future energy problems. The conservationists are especially
hopeful that the social decisions will evolve around a
philosophy of humanistic rather than capitalistic ideals.

This research was especially concerned with speci-
fic aspects of lifestyle which might facilitate technologi-
cal and economic decisions of energy usage. It was
assumed that households make decisions regarding both

direct and indirect consumption of nonhuman energy sources.

 

 

153

Households were then seen as capable of making decisions
regarding direct and indirect conservation of energy.

It was concluded that direct conservation was
significantly motivated by the relative cost of the fuel
used by the household. Cost of fuel, however, was not a
strong predictor. Social decisions as measured by an index
of philosophical perspective, did not appear as significant
indicators of direct conservation.

On the other hand indirect conservation, as
measured by an index of voluntary simplicity behaviors, was
influenced by both financial and philosophical motivators.
A socially responsible philOSOphy was a stronger contribu-
tor than finances indicating that indirect conservation may
indeed represent a form of voluntary conservation at least
for some households. The contribution of voluntary sim-
plicity to a sense of personal control was supportive of
the arguments made by conservationists that a more humanis-
tically oriented production-consumption system is conducive
to the development of human resources.

This research added another dimension to the
knowledge of voluntary indirect conservation. The impor-
tance of skills and education to practicing voluntary sim—
plicity behaviors indicated that despite a household's
motivation it was necessary to have skills and knowledge
of behaviors.

The conclusions of this research, as should be the

case, gave relevance to a variety of other issues

154

concerning direct and indirect energy conservation. The
importance of technical, economic, and social decisions

was supported.

Implications for Energy Policy and Educational

 

Programs. This research attempted to address, at least in

 

part, the voluntary nature of conservation. The average
household was directly conserving fossil fuels at a rate
of approximately 1.8 percent. It appeared, however, that
only one-third of the sampled households were actually
doing the conserving. There are, therefore, households
which may provide a target area for conservation programs.

This particular study did not provide a statisti—
cally significant description of those households. There
is, therefore, a sense that household participation in
direct conservation is so diverse that continued generalized
educational efforts would contribute to a long term social-
ization based on direct conservation. Knowledge of conser-
vation techniques was not found to be related to direct
conservation, therefore, educational efforts must focus on
all aspects of conservation behavior.

Assuming that a lifestyle of voluntary simplicity
is potentially a less fossil fuel intensive lifestyle, the
importance of education and possession of skills was made
quite evident in this research. Education appears to be
influential in expanding the acceptable choice of lifestyle
alternatives. The possession of skills provides the ability

to implement the chosen lifestyle.

155

The importance of skill availability brings forth
two relevant questions concerning what Paul Diesing might
describe as legal and political decisions. Historically,
the female has been responsible for producing many of the
goods and services within the household. The male role
has been to participate in the production force outside the
home. Initial responses to limited resources or crisis
periods is frequently to return to known ways of behavior.
Social rules and/or legal decisions regarding who has what
skills or performs which behaviors set up subtle sex role
stereotypes. In addition, the value of productive activi-
ties to society define a person's social and political
(decision-making) status. Determining the targeted
audience for productive household skills must require
'futuristic consideration as to many desired social or
lifestyle goals. In addition, solving problems related to
fossil fuel limitations must also involve long-term consi-
derations as to specific social and political roles of

society's members.

Implications for Future Research. As analysis of

 

the data used in this research progressed a variety of
questions arose which could be potentially answered through
further research. Specifically, the actual contribution to
direct conservation of fossil fuel energy by households
which participated in voluntary simplicity behaviors needs

to be considered. At present, households participating in

156

voluntary simplicity behaviors are not necessarily those
households making reductions in their direct consumption of
fossil fuel energy. Further analysis is needed to more
completely determine the relationship between indirect and
direct conservation.

The interrelationship of direct and indirect con-
servation should involve analysis at both macro and micro—
levels. This research shouldinclude further analysis of
direct consumption patterns of households participating
in voluntary simplicity versus those households not parti—
cipating. This analysis should test hypotheses that
voluntary simplicity participants are already low consumers
of fossil fuel energy. This test should look at transpor-
tation uses of energy as well as energy consumption patterns
for space and water heating. Further analysis of the data
available from the evaluation of Project Conserve could
provide a macro perspective. A case study approach of
household patterns of consumption would provide a micro
analysis of this question.

Hypotheses based on the assumption that voluntary
simplicity behaviors are actually indirect methods of con-
servation needed to be specified and tested. To make
decisions regarding use of human energy in place of fossil
fuel, solar, or nuclear energy, the decision-maker needs
information regarding actual energy required for each.

Only with such information can decisions relating to appro-

priate technology be efficient.

157

The above mentioned research questions are concerned
primarily with technical and economic decisions. From the
perspective of family economists and management specialists
a variety of questions related to social decisions also
remain unanswered. These questions are concerned with who
performs conservation behaviors, what status the behaviors
achieve in society, and what potential exists for more
equitable distribution of skills within the home for per-

forming home production activities.

Implications for Family Theory. A management model

 

was used in this research to explore motivation and human
resource influence on conservation behaviors. The specific
variables included in the management model in this research
provided a partial model for understanding voluntary simo
plicity participation. Further identification of variables
is needed to expand understanding of the management process
related to energy conservation——both direct and indirect
conservation. Additional clarification and more specific
operationalization of variables concerned with value
motivators are greatly needed. Greater identification of
tangible and intangible, human and nonhuman resources is
also necessary.

In addition, the management model used in this
research is limited in its analytical benefits toward the
management process. Specifically, this research was

limited in its focus on evaluative feedback--a critical

158

component of the management process. Expansion of the
model probably necessitates a more micro level application
of the model.

Based on this research, however, the concept of
exchange was especially evident. Families with less
adequate incomes were more likely to substitute skills to
increase self-sufficiency in goods and services within the
home. From this perspective, management models should
provide frameworks beneficial to the exploration of family
change and adaptation in an environment of various levels

of resource availability.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

 

 

 

 

o.m o.m
>.mm N.om
m.vm o.om
m.vm m.m
o.m o.m
Umpwmz mm womwcm Umowma coo oz
:02: mm mm: OB mtoow mo>mmmcz OB
pmmumucm mm< mommmumo .m.D tomumucm mm mmmEmm >2
m.v m.v o.m o.m
m.m m.o m.m m.
v.mm m.om m.m m.m
m.hv o.>m m.mm o.oo
m.mm N.mm o.mo o.oe
mam>mm mo mm>mm Ommoz one usocmsomce wmsmsm #5094 mocomommma
somm Umscmmcoo moom msu m®>mmmma mcm>mm cosmoocoo mm < moxmz
mo mm>om ucwmmmm one pmsosm m c0mud>mwmcoo

 

mommmmz

wommmmmo mmmcomum
owmmommo

owmm<

momma mmmcompm

mcmmmmz

mmmmmwmo hmmcompm
mommmmmo

oommd

mwmm< xmmcompm

.onom .comum>mmmcoo pom mmmocm mamcmmocoo
musmﬁwumum HmOHSQOmOHmam Op Ocmﬁommmd mammmommm momocwmoo: mo commemommm .mi< omnde

159

APPENDIX B

 

 

m.o o.o mammmmz
m.o Ii 30cm p.coa
m.o m.m oommmmmo wmmcompm
m.v m.vm mommcmmo
H.oo m.mh mmmm¢
o.vm o.o momo< mmmcomum

 

OODOOM coO mmmﬁmm
.Omcccmm MH

mem Eomm mam:
H umnz #00 C00

 

H.m m.o v.m mammmmz

m.o ii m.o BOOM m.con

m.mm m.m~ v.mm mwmmmmmm mmmcomum

m.mo o.mo o.oo mmuommmo

m.mm o.mm o.vm mmmm<

m.H o.m o.m womm< mmmcomum
xosm mo Om: mmmmcm Emmnomm

Hanna: 8 mm mmmm

um>o monocoo mmuumm

ammmcm map psond
mcm£u>c< OD u.:mo

mammnomm mmmocm mo>o momucoo

mmcommmm mcmcmmmom mucmﬁmmmmm on ucmEmmmmm mamumommm mpmonmmsom mo mmoucmomom .mim Omnoe

160

APPENDIX C

 

Table C-l. Voluntary Simplicity Score (1980) by
Catagorical Level of Conservation Actions
Taken, 1980. (N=638)

 

Conservation Voluntary
Action Simplicity Mean
Level Score (N)
Low 1.30 254
Medium 1.60 294
High 1.80 90

161

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

5....

n J v .
3..., . r.
. c.1435.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackerman, Norleen Marion. "The Relationship of Objective
and Subjective Family Income Adequacy to Selected
Measures of Perceived Life Quality." Ph.D.

dissertation, Michigan State University, 1977.

Adams, R. N. Energy and Structure. Austin: University
of Texas Press, 1975.

 

Ashby, Eric. Reconciling Man With the Environment.
Stanford, California: Stanford University Press,
1977.

 

Ballweg, John A. "Husband-Wife Response Similarities on
Evaluative and Non-evaluative Survey Questions,"
Public Opinion Quarterly 33, Summer, 1969.

 

Boulding, Kenneth E. "The Social System and the Energy
Crisis," Science 184, April 19, 1974.

Bubolz, Margaret M.; Eicher, Joanne B.; and Sontag, M.
Suzanne. "The Human Ecosystem: A Model," Journal
of Home Economics, Spring, 1979.

 

Byrne, Donn and Blaylock, Barbara. "Similarity and Assumed
Similarity of Attitudes Between Husbands and Wives,"
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 67, 1963.

Caplovitz, David. Making Ends Meet: How Families Cope
With Inflation and Recession. Sage Library of
Social Research, 1979.

 

 

Carver, Thomas Nixon. The Economy of Human Energy. New
York: The MacMillan Company, 1924.

 

Case, Duncan F. and Harris, Craig K. "A Multivariate
Analysis of the Effect of Household Characteristics
on Reported Energy Conservation Actions in the
Home." Unpublished paper, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, 1980a.

Cottrell, T. Energy and Society. New York: McGraw-Hill,
9

 

162

 

163

Diesing, Paul. Reason in Society: Five Types of Decisions
and Their Social Conditions. Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1962.

 

 

Edney, Julian J. "The Commons Problem Alternative
Perspectives," American Psychologist 35 (2), 1980.

 

Eichenberger, MaryAnn. "A Comparison of Ownership of
Selected Household Appliances and Residential
Energy Use by Employed and Nonemployed Homemakers
in the Lansing, Michigan, Area." M.A. thesis,
Michigan State University, 1975.

Elder, Glen H. Children of the Great Depression: Social
Change in Life Experiences. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1974.

 

 

Elgin, Duane S. and Mitchell, Arnold. "Voluntary Simpli-
city: Life-style of the Future?" The Futurist
11:4, 1977.

 

Ferber, Robert. "On the Reliability of Responses Secured
in Sample Surveys," Journal of the American
Statistical Association750, September, 1955.

 

 

Fritzsche, David J. "An Analysis of Energy Consumption
Patterns by Stage of Family Life Cycle," Journal
of Marketing Research 28, 1981.

 

Gladhart, Peter M. "Energy Conservation and Lifestyles:
An Integrative Approach to Family Decision-Making,"
Journal of Consumer Science and Home Economics 1:4,
1977.

 

Gladhart, Peter M. "Determinants of the Demand for Residen-
tial Energy; A Family Level Analysis," revised,
Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, Journal
Article # 8317, Michigan State University, 1977a.

Gregg, Richard. "Voluntary Simplicity," The Co-Evolution
Quarterly, Summer, 1977.

 

 

Grier, George and Grier, Eunice. "Demographic Patterns and
Imperatives Affecting Energy Conservation,"
Foresight-Volume II: Energy Conservation in Cities,
prepared by the Congressional Research Service,
Library of Congress, December, 1978.

 

Gross, Irma H.; Crandall, Elizabeth W.; and Knoll, Marjorie
M. Management For Modern Families. 3rd ed. New
York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1973.

 

164

Gurin, Gerald and Gurin, Patricia. "Personal Efficacy and
the Ideology of Individual Responsibility," in
Strumpel, Burkard (Eds.), Economic Means For Human
Needs: Social Indicators of Well-Being and
Discontent. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social

Research, 1976.

 

 

Haberman, P. and Elinson, J. "Family Income Reported in
Surveys: Husbands Versus Wives," Journal of
Marketing Research 4, May, 1967.

 

Hackett, Bruce and Schwartz, Seymour. "Energy Conservation
and Rural Alternative Life—Styles," Social
Problems 28 (2), December, 1980.

Hannon, B. "Energy Conservation and the Consumer,"
Science 189: 95-102, 1975.

Harris, Craig K.; Keith, Joanne G.; Tortorici, Joseph Fr.;
Wilhelm, Mari S. Final Report on the Evaluation of
Statewide Project Conserve in Michigan. Unpublished
report submitted to the Michigan Energy Administra-
tion, Michigan Department of Commerce, Lansing:
Michigan State University, 1981.

 

 

Harris, Craig K.; Keith, Joanne G.; and Wilhelm, Mari S.
Final Report on the Evaluation of Pilot Project
Conserve in Michigan. Unpublished report submitted
to the Michigan Energy Administration, Michigan
Department of Commerce, Lansing: Michigan State
University, 1980.

 

Hogan, Mary Janice. "Energy Conservation: Family Values,
Household Practices, and Contextual Variables."
Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1976.

 

Hook, Nancy C. and Paolucci, Beatrice. "The Family as an
Ecosystem," Journal of Home Economics 62:5, 1970.

Hull, C. Hadlai and Nie, Norman H. (Eds.) SPSS Update 7—9.
New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, 1981.

Hungerford, Nancy. "Relationship of Husband/Wife Ecocon—
sciousness Value to Direct Household Energy
Consumption." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State

University, 1978.

Katona, George. "The Human Factor in Economic Affairs," in
Campbell, Angus and Converse, Philip E. (Eds.)
The Human Meaning of Social Change. New York:
Russell Sage FoundatiOn, 1972.

 

 

165

Keith, Joanne Goodman. "Direct Household Energy Consump-
tion 1973-74, 1975-76: The Impact of Family
Microdecisions Upon Levels of Consumption." Ph.D.
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1977.

Kim, Jae-On and Mueller, Charles W. Introduction to Factor
Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1978.

 

 

LeGrand, Julian and Robinson, Ray. The Economics of Social
Problems. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
Inc., 1980.

 

 

Leonard-Barton, Dorothy and Rogers, Evertt M. "Voluntary
Simplicity°in California: Precursos or Fad?"
Paper presented at the American Association for
the Advancement of Science, San Francisco, 1980.

Lovins, Amory B. Soft Energy Paths: Toward a Durable
Peace. New York: Harper and Row, 1977.

 

 

Merkley, Susan. "The Effect of Past Experience on Current
Energy Consumption and Conservation Patterns: The
Interaction of Historical Time, Social Time and
and Life Time." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan
State University, East Lansing, 1980.

Moen, Phyllis. "Developing Family Indicators," Journal of
Family Issues, March, 1980.

 

 

Morrison, Bonnie Maas. "The Importance of a Balanced
Perspective: The Environments of Man," Man-
Environment Systems 4: 171-178, 1974.

 

 

Morrison, Bonnie Maas and Gladhart, Peter Michael. "Energy
and Families: The Crisis and the Response,"
Journal of Home Economics 68: 15-18, 1976.

 

Morrison, Bonnie Maas; Keith, Joanne G.; and Roosa, Mark.
"Household Energy Conservers and Nonconservers:
A Discriminant Analysis Profile." Paper presented
at the Michigan Home Economics Association
Conference, Research Reporting Session, Mackinac
Island, August 11, 1978.

Morrison, Bonnie Maas; Keith, Joanne Goodman; and Zuiches
James J. "Impacts on Household Energy Consumption:
An Empirical Study of Michigan Families," in
Sills, David; Wolfe, Charles and Unself, Charles
(Eds.), Sociopolitical Impacts of Energy Use and
Policy Contents. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy of Science, National Research Councils
Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems,
1980.

 

166

Morrison, Denton E. and Lodwick, Dora G. "Toward Research
on the Social Impacts of Soft and Hard Energy
Systems: The Lovins' Claims as a Social Science
Challenge." Paper revised for the Annual Review
of Energy, March, 1981.

 

 

Nader, Laura and Beckerman, Stephen. "Energy as it Relates
to the Quality and Style of Life," Annual Review of
Energy 3: 1 - 28, 1978.

 

National Research Council. Energy in Transition 1985-2010.
San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1979.

 

Nelson, L. D. and Honnold, J. A. "Planning for Resource
Scarcity: A Critique of Prevalent Proposals,"
Social Science Quarterly, 1976.

 

Newman, Dorothy K. and Day, Dawn. "Energy in the Home,"
The American Energy Consumer. Cambridge: Ballinger
Publishing Company, 1975.

 

Nickell, Paulina; Rice, Ann Smith; and Tucker, SuZanne P.
"Managing Environmental Resources," Management in
Family Living, 5th ed. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1976.

 

 

Odum, H. T. Environment, Powerjand Society. New York:
John Wiley and Sons, 1971.

 

O'Toole, James. Energy and Social Change. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Institute of

Technology Press, 1978.

 

Paolucci, Beatrice. "Contributions of a Framework of
Home Management to the Teaching of Family Relation—
ships," Journal of Marriage and the Family 28, 1966.

 

Paolucci, Beatrice; Hall, Oivre A.; and Axinn, Nancy.
Family Decision Making: An Ecosystem Approach.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1977.

 

Pearlin, L. I. and Schooler, C. "The Structure of Coping,"
Journal of Health and Social Behavior 19:2, 1978.

 

Perlman, Robert and Warren, Roland L. Families in the
Energy Crisis: Impacts and Implications for Theory
and Policy. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing
Company, 1977.

 

 

 

Rice, Ann Smith. "An Emerging Economic Framework for
Analyzing Family Managerial Behavior," The Family"
Focus on Management. American Home Economics
Association, 1969.

 

 

167

Safilios-Rothschild, Constantina. "Family Sociology or
Wives' Family Sociology." Report Number 4, The
Center for Developmental Studies in Cognition,
The Merrill-Palmer Institute, 1968.

Schmitt, Raymond L. and Guipp: Stanley E. "Resource as a
Symbol," Social Science Quarterly, 1976.

 

Schurr, S.; Darmstadter, J.; Perry, H.; Ramsay, W.; and
Russell, M. Energy in America's Future: The
Choices Before Us. Baltimore: The John Hopkins
University Press, 1979.

 

 

Steidl, Rose E. "An Ecological Approach to the Study of

 

 

Family Managerial Behavior," The Family: Focus
on Management, American Home Economics Association,
lg69 O

Stern, Paul and Gardner, Gerald T. "A Review and Critique
of Energy Research in Psychology," Social Science
Energy Review 3:1, 1980.

 

 

Stobaugh, Robert and Yergin, Daniel. Energy Future. New
York: Random House, 1979.

 

Strumpel, Burkhard. "Responses to Economic Adversity: An
Agenda for Research in a Changed Environment," in
Strumpel, Burkhard (Ed.), Economic Means for Human
Needs. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research,
1976.

A Time to Choose: America's Energy Future. Final Report
by the Energy Policy Project of the Ford Founda-
tion. Cambridge: Ballinger Publishing Company,
1974.

 

Toffler, Alvin. The Third Wave. New York: William Morrow
and Company, Inc., 1980.

 

Van Es, J. C. and Shingi, P. M. "Response Consistency of
Husband and Wife for Selected Attitudinal Items,"
Journal of Marriage and the Family, November, 1972.

 

White, L. The Evolution of Culture. New York: McGraw-

 

Hill, 1959.
Williams, J. S.; Kruvant, W.; and Newman, D. "Metropolitan
Impacts of Alternative Energy Futures," in Unseld,

Charles T.; Morrison, Denton B.; Sills, David; and
Wolfe, Charles P. (Eds.), Sociopolitical Effects of
Energy Use and Policy. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy of Sciences, 1979.

 

 

168

Wolfe, Charles P. "Recommendations for Future Research on
the Sociopolitical Impacts of Energy," in Unseld,
Charles T.; Morrison, Denton E.; Sills, David; and
Wolfe, Charles P. (Eds.), Sociopolitical Effects
of Energy Use and Policy. Washington, D.C.:
National Academy of Sciences, 1979.

, H

“3...;— 'V‘

 

 

"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

3