Assessing Adaptive & Transformation Capacity and Climate Resilience Utilizing Sociological & Psychological Indicators

Sep 1

Author’s Note:

The following is a manuscript completed in 2019 at the end of 3-year Master’s of Environmental Management program at Western Colorado University.

This article is published on Research Gate as a PrePrint. I am currently a research scholar at the Ronin Institute.

Click to View on Research Gate

It matters deeply to me that this work is there for others to make use of, to hopefully move our communities forward towards sustainability and resilience.

Please feel free to cite my work, and/or contact me to discuss it further should you have any questions about the theoretical and applied nature of the research.

Correspondence concerning this should be addressed to aurora.flynn@ronininstitute.org

-Aurora Daniela Flynn

MEM, Research Scholar, Ronin Institute

“A decade into the 21st century, the world faces substantial, complex and interlinked development and lifestyle challenges and problems. The challenges arise from values that have created unsustainable societies. The challenges are interlinked, and their resolution requires stronger political commitment and decisive action. We have the knowledge, technology and skills available to turn the situation around. We now need to mobilize our potential to make use of all opportunities for improving action and change.”

--Bonn Declaration, UNESCO World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development, 2009

*emphasis added

Abstract

The proliferation of sustainable development and the creation of adaptive, climate resilient communities can be advanced through the use of social and psychological sustainability metrics. To be effective and timely, globally applied sustainability indicators must become holistic and integrative to include the evaluation and tracking of cross-cultural indicators that reflect the transformative capacity of communities to radically adapt and respond to impending, or current, climate change impacts. To develop these indicators, sociological and psychological connections to the following established concepts in climate change research was explored; sustainable development and proliferation, adaptive capacity, transformation capacity, and climate resilience. Five cross-cultural sociological and psychological indicators were determined to be of primary relevance; sense of belonging, psychological resilience, autonomy of self-determination theory, emotional self-awareness, and an assessment of positive and negative affects. These indicators are to be utilized alongside the assessment of greenhouse gas emission footprints and sustainability efforts to help assist communities in moving forward in a transitionary process.

Introduction

To achieve global carbon neutrality by 2050 as urged in the recent IPCC Special Report (IPCC 2018), critical focus must be centered on creating climate resilient societies, ones that are both able to cope with the impacts from climate change and are capable of creating, mobilizing and implementing rapid multisystem shifts in the built environment towards sustainability. Whether or not a society is capable of making these fundamental shifts towards equitable social and ecological outcomes is a growing concern in climate change research (McAlpine et al., 2015). This theoretical research is an attempt to further understand, quantify, and materialize the transformative mechanisms behind a community's ability to mobilize, adapt and transform into resilient societies.

Sustainable Development and Proliferation

In 2012, UNESCO stated that sustainable development and proliferation was driven by culture, and that if culture was not “at the heart of a sustainability agenda,” sustainable development and proliferation would not take place. Cultures performs like an underlying substrate upon which the built environment then emerges out of, exemplified in the diagram located on the far right of Figure 1 (see Dessien, 2015 for further explanation.)

Figure 1: Three models for the relationship of culture to sustainable development and proliferation

Culture-focused sustainability development is already known to include benefits such as community resilience, creativity, innovation, social inclusiveness, the use of local resources, skills, knowledge and entrepreneurship for both the individual and community, as well as creating a sense of place amongst the community members (UNESCO 2012a). Using culture as the key focus to drive sustainable development can create social cohesion, conviviality and citizenship (Cities & Governments 2016).

Yet tending culture for sustainable development may not actually be enough for proliferation to occur as a culture can still be founded on underlying values, beliefs, and patterns of behavior that created the current global ecological crisis. Aligning with a “sustainability paradigm” which brings into balance economic, environmental and societal wellbeing may actually require a shift of values within the culture (Onkila 2009), and an expanse of awareness of connectivity, ones that would unseat the existing anthropocentric worldview (Cortese 2003). Sustainable development is thought by some to actually require “a revolution of a new value system, consciousness, and worldview” (Edwards 2005). This is because culture informs people’s identities, cosmologies, signifying systems, and epistemic frameworks which then inform how the natural and built environment is lived in (Fithian & Powell, 2009). These components of culture shape the way people regard and connect with the natural world and the built environment (Opoku 2015). They also determine the underlying values of that culture, informing the worldview (Du Plessis & Brandon 2015). Values are formed by the beliefs of individual identities within the culture, which informs the collective identity of the culture itself. A society is composed of external systems consisting of the biophysical world (e.g., nature and the built environment) and institutions (e.g., politics, economic, and relationship conventions), and internal systems consisting of systemic sociological values and beliefs that directly inform the cultural fabric of the people. These internal systems establish an invisible foundation upon which the external systemic architecture is built, thus the internal realms creating the cultural fabric must shift structurally before external can transform.

Yet still more often than not, policy and research around sustainable development in regard to climate change mitigation and adaptation actions are centered solely around material aspects of climate change, such as costs of decarbonizing economies, risks to lives and livelihoods, and the costs of impacts on various sectors of the economy (National Research Council 2010). Typical sociological demographic metrics used to inform sustainable development include tracking indicators such as physical health and healthcare access, resource allocation, access to housing and education, employment information, economic status, etc. Because of this, climate action planning (CAP) and sustainability planning (SP), which are used as roadmaps to enable a community to proliferate sustainable development, largely utilize sustainability indicators driven solely by the most cost-effective mitigation and adaptation actions available, with only the rare inclusion of marginal data on certain sociological, environmental and physical health conditions.

It is critical that at this time we move beyond creating sustainability simply within the seven supporting systems of the built environment (as defined by Coyle 2011, to include transportation, energy, water, natural environment, solid waste, food production/agriculture, and economy), and address the sustainability pathways within the social structure of the community and individuals themselves (Mang & Haggard 2016). To be effective and timely with mitigation and adaptation actions and climate resiliency efforts, sustainability indicators must include metrics to quantify the state and traits of the individual and community on a behavioral and psychological level, ones that drive transformation, adaptation, and resiliency.

Adaptive Capacity

The adaptive capacity of a socio-ecological system is increasingly being accepted as critical to maintain resilience in response to climate change (Gunderson and Holling, 2002; Adger, 2003; Folke et al., 2007.) Adaptive capacity is "the ability of a system to adjust to climate change, including climate variability and extremes, to moderate potential damages, to take advantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences,” (IPCC 2001.) Another definition of adaptive capacity from a socio-cognitive perspective, but also within the context of climate change, are “the conditions that allow people to foresee and respond to change, recover from and minimize the consequences of change (Grothmann & Patt 2005), as well as take advantages of new opportunities. Underlying elements necessary for an adaptive capacity of a socio-ecological system are the availability of capital, e.g., social, financial, and human (Hinkel, 2011; Smit & Wandel 2006; Yohe & Tol, 2002), and the willingness and aptitude to convert resources into effective adaptive action (Brown & Westaway 2011; Coulthard 2012). Therefore, to adapt to change, a society must have the capability to change current patterns of behavior and engage in proactive behavior (Fazey et al., 2007). Enhancing the adaptive capacity of individual members of a community can greatly increase adaptive capacity of the society (Fazey et al., 2007) as changes in the behavior of individuals can also result in changes at larger community and societal scales. For decision makers to set new directions for society, and for detrimental behavioral patterns to be broken, a sustainable and resilient society will require a critical mass of the population to embody proactivity (Wood 2004). Within the science of education and the fields of cognitive and social psychology, there are copious amounts of knowledge on how to encourage the adaptability of individuals (Fazey et al., 2005). A highly adaptive individual has an internal drive to continuously improve performance, learn from their experiences, is flexible in their thought process, understands that their perspective and understanding of the world will continuously change, recognizes that reframing situations is essential to provide illumination to the drivers of change and so engages in proactive actions by assessing potential responses (Fazey et al., 2005; Brooks, Adger, & Kelly 2005; Fazey et al., 2007). Proactive behavior is of vital import in regard to community resilience as it enables a community to create the future, rather than reacting to past or current events (Fazey et al., 2007). Community resilience is broadly defined as a community’s collective capacity to function in, respond to, and potentially influence an environment characterized by continuous change, uncertainty, and crisis (Maclean et al., 2014). Social-ecological resilience cannot be maintained with reactive behavior, as it is often too late to stop impacts from past decisions by the time they are occurring (Fazey et al., 2007). It is possible to teach and learn these driving beliefs, attitudes, and associated behaviors that support socio-ecological resilience (Perkins & Grotzer 1997).

Climate Resilience

Climate Resilience is generally defined as the capacity for a socio-ecological system to: (1) absorb stresses and maintain function in the face of external stresses forced upon it by climate change and (2) adapt, reorganize, and evolve into more desirable configurations that improve the sustainability of the system, leaving it better prepared for future climate change impacts (Folke 2006, Nelson 2007). But climate resilience is deeply dependent upon community resilience, to such an extent that the former is not achievable without first ensuring the latter. Enhancing community resilience has become a major focus of academic and policy investigation and practice in diverse fields such as climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction, to conservation and community development (Brown 2012; 2014). Community resilience is found within the convergence of the fields of human development, social-ecological systems thinking, developmental psychology, community development, disasters, and mental health. Social capital is now being considered by some to be synonymous with climate resilience (Shepperd 2011) as in order to handle or adapt to climate stress, communities must value social cohesion (Adger 2003). Connectedness to one’s community directly encourages effective collective action. With a high degree of connectivity, there is more likely to be trust, respect, and support for social cohesion as a society that experiences a strong sense of community directly correlates to the level of social cohesion felt among the individual members (Wilkinson 2007). As one of the main drivers behind climate resiliency is community resiliency, so, too, are the embedded and vital dynamics of social capital, social cohesion, collective efficacy, and the flexibility of the community and the individual to utilize adaptive thinking, and to undergo the process of transformation itself. For a community to begin the journey of sustainable development, Duxbury et al., (2016) states that the community must, as a collective, have a strong sense of “peace and social cohesion,” as well as a sense of empowerment. An aspect of social cohesion and social capital is collective efficacy, which is based in mutual trust and describes a community’s ability to create change and influence behavior through social norms (Sampson, Raudenbush, Earls, 1997). A host of other benefits are associated with collective efficacy such as better self-rated health (Browning Cagney, 2002), lower rates of neighborhood violence (Sampson, Raudenbush, Earls 1997), and improved access to health-enhancing resources like medical care, healthy food options, and places to exercise (Matsaganis & Wilkin, 2015), which are all attributes that would serve a sustainable society. With a strong sense of community comes the recognition of responsibility to, and the interconnections with, other residents and to the place in which they reside. The social fabric (e.g., interpersonal relationships) will be strong (Ahlbrandt & Cunningham 1979), as will be the sense of a greater purpose and perceived control (Bachrach & Zautra 1985), and so will greater civic contributions (Davidson & Cotter 1986). All of these qualities lend to the resilience of the community.

Transformation Capacity

Walker et al. (2004) defines transformation as the “capacity to create a fundamentally new system when changes in ecological, economic, or social structures make the existing system untenable.” One of the greatest barriers to the creation of climate resilient sustainable societies, is the understanding and utilization of the process of transformation itself (Reed, 2007). A critical component to creating a sustainable future on a global scale is the understanding of how human societies transform and in a way that allows for flexibility while responding appropriately to new information and circumstances (Adger 2003; Folke et al., 2005). More and more, analytical attention is being focused on the multifaceted and nuanced dynamics of transformation resilience theory in social-ecological systems (Olsson, Galaz, and Boonstra, 2014). With an increase in scientific and mainstream dialogue on the subject of transformation as a climate change solution (O’Brien, 2012), determining indicators that measure the “transformation capacity” of a socio-ecological system is now very relevant. Understanding the sociological and psychological elements involved in this process is paramount.

As culture is a driver for 1) transforming the built environment and 2) how humans design and use the natural environment, it will be of critical importance to identify and address fundamental personal and interpersonal beliefs and barriers that impede a community’s ability to transform, to maneuver adaptively, cohesively, to respond proactively, to connect, and to see possibilities that enable their transformation into a sustainable society. For a society to shift broad cultural behavioral patterns to enable transformation, the individuals must also be able to accept change and understand and embody the process of transformation itself. Learning to be open to shifts in professional or personal identity is paramount, especially as communities seek to increase their social cohesion. This ability will provide the basis for reconstructing and creating new, adaptive institutions (Connor and Dovers, 2004; Rushmer et al., 2004). Individuals must have the ability to change their behavior and outlook, to promote a proactive society with improved knowledge by the development of empathetic, questioning individuals (Antonacopoulou 2004; Bammer 2005). Limiting psychological characteristics that restrict transformative shifts in thinking, identity, and behavior, is detrimental to social–ecological resilience. Some of these characteristics manifest as defensiveness, assumptions, lack of awareness of the subjective nature of reality, and a focus on smaller issues that have immediate personal impact rather than an awareness of the bigger picture (Morris and Su, 1999). With research in neuroscience allowing for greater understanding of childhood nervous system and brain development relational psychology, mindfulness practices, reflective awareness, and tools such as self-directed neuroplasticity, it is possible to rewire the brain for states and traits that allow for increased resilience.

Identifying cultural constructs and norms that are cognitively submerged and imbedded within society that may impede transformation must also be clarified. This will take immense inquiry in self-knowledge, and a disposition of learning to live in inquiry in general. This will enable a greater openness to change and ability as an adaptive expert (Fazey et al., 2007).

A whole-systems approach is needed, one that fully “considers the interpenetrating physical (external, tangible, visible) and mental (internal, intangible, invisible) domains of existence experienced at individual and collective levels across scales of space and time within a social-ecological system,” (Wilber, 2000). A society is composed of external systems consisting of the biophysical world (e.g., nature and the built environment) and institutions (e.g., politics, economic, and relationship conventions), and internal systems consisting of systemic sociological values and beliefs that directly inform the cultural fabric of the people. These internal systems establish an invisible foundation upon which the external systemic architecture is built, thus the internal realms creating the cultural fabric must shift structurally before external can transform. And by doing so, the external structures then support and entrench the internal shift in values and beliefs and ecological worldview.

Indicators to track the adaptive capacity, transformation capacity, and resilience of a community are located within the social structure and in individuals themselves (Mang & Haggard, 2016.) These indicators once determined with the complex human social infrastructure, must be made robust alongside the support systems of the built environment to ensure that a timely and effective process occurs.

**Figure 2: Relational aspects of the sustainability pathways**

The Sociological Indicator Baseline

Five cross-cultural sociological and psychological indicators were determined after a list of states and traits were identified that would be critical for a shift in an individual to possess an ecological worldview, sense of connectedness to humanity, self-efficacy, value on social capacity, to have deeply interconnected elements to do with the climate resiliency, the transformation and adaptive capacity of socio-ecological systems. Sense of belonging, psychological resilience, autonomy, emotional self-awareness and positive and negative affects are theorized to be “social sustainability pathways” that must be robust in order to create empathetic, resilient communities with a high degree of social cohesion, collective efficacy, connectedness, and adaptive capacity. These indicators are to be combined to form a Sociological Indicator Survey which enables the creation of the Sociological Indicator Baseline (SIB).

I. Sense of Belonging

There is now a large body of research revealing the critical importance of a sense of belonging to long-term psychological and physical health, (Daley & Buchanan, 1999; Hagerty, Williams, & Oe, 2002; Hale, Hannum, & Espelage, 2005; Poulton, Caspi, & Milne, 2002; Wadsworth et al., 2001.) This cross-cultural indicator is defined as “the experience of personal involvement in a system or environment so that people feel themselves to be an integral part of that system or environment” (Hagerty et al., 1992, p. 173). Sense of belonging has two defining features: (1) the experience of being valued, needed, or important to other people, groups, or environments, and (2) the experience of being in alignment with other people, groups, or environments through shared or complementary characteristics (Haggerty, 1995).

Individuals with a high sense of belonging are “able to act with courage in facing and dealing with our problems” (Corey, 2001), something that is critical in the face of climate change impacts. These individuals are more likely to have a higher sense of connectedness to other group members as they are more likely to have a positive regard, respect, and trust in their fellow members, thereby encouraging social cohesion in the group (Tabane & Human-Vogal, 2010). Goodenow (1993) has identified that adolescents with a high sense of belonging are more likely to be resilient through the belief that resources are available to them to overcome difficulties. Individuals with a high sense of belonging also generally have higher levels of self-efficacy and self-esteem, lower levels of stress, depression and anxiety, are better at coping and making easier adjustment to life changes. Self-efficacy is highly relevant for the successful mobilization and transformation of communities. The concept of self-efficacy was first proposed by Bandura (1977) as central to behavior change. Self-efficacy beliefs have been identified as fundamental in establishing an individual's capacity to initiate behavior and produce outcomes (Passmore, 2004). Based on these assumptions of self-efficacy, individuals self-reflect and self-regulate according to the situation, all of which is highly necessary for confronting climate change and creating resilience.

A higher sense of belonging is also known to correlate to improved neurological functioning, higher intellect and cognition, greater therapeutic benefit, improved resistance to disease, and to societal manifestations such as healthier and safer schools and communities, improved academic achievement performance and motivation, (Inzlicht & Good, 2006; Edwards & Mullis, 2001.)

The ramifications of a low sense of belonging are profound. It can be as harmful to physical health as smoking, obesity and high blood pressure (Haslam et al., 2009; Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010), and just as damaging to psychological health. Maslow (1968) defines belongingness as a basic human need, and when disparity occurs the individual becomes exposed to maladjustment and emotional illness. A lack of belonging paired with feelings of inauthenticity can lead to feelings of hopelessness, despair, and general disconnection (Menzies & Davidson, 2002). Loneliness, social isolation and a lack of social support, have been linked to greater mortality, poor health behaviors, psychological distress, mental illness, self-harm behaviors and greater risk for suicide (Cacioppo & Hawley, 2003; McMahon, Singh, Garner, & Benhorin, 2004; Shochet, Dadds, Ham, & Montague, 2006; Resnick et al., 1997; Seeman, 1996; Seeman, Lusignolo, Albert, & Berkman, 2001; Taylor, 2010). Because of these crucial implications of sense of belonging, it could be seen as being just as important as diet and exercise as a protective factor against psychological or physical ill health (Jetten et al., 2009). A community deficient in this indicator will lack the foundation for community resilience and adaptive capacity as there would be little to no ability on the part of the individual to proactively adapt and respond, and have the resilience to withstand, impacts from climate change.

II. Autonomy

Autonomy is defined as regulation by the self in self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan 1985a; Ryan & Deci 2000). Autonomy is not the same as self-reliance (independence) as autonomous individuals can be willingly interdependent on others, (Ryan, La Guardia, Solky-Butzel, Chirkov, & Kim, 2005). To operate in congruence with the self, a fully autonomous individual is open to self-exploration, and is active in their attention to understanding their values and feelings (Weinstein et. al 2012). When autonomy is embodied by an individual, their values and interests are self-endorsed, and their behavior is congruent and integrated within them. For a community to confront climate change impacts and to adapt and plan in a proactive capacity, individuals will need to have a strong sense of self, be non-judgmental, reflective, open to learning, tapped into their creativity and drivers, deeply aware of their interconnected nature with other members and able to stay in alignment with their visions in the face of contracted social pressure.

When an individual is fully autonomous, their values, needs and interests are aligned with their behavior, (Deci & Ryan 1985b; Koestner, Bernieri, & Zuckerman 1992; Scherhorn & Grunert, 1988; Vall- erand, Deci, & Ryan 1987; Zuckerman, Gioioso, & Tellini 1988). An individual’s actions are self-organized, and they readily take initiation and wholeheartedly “stand behind” their actions (Deci & Ryan 2000; Ryan 1995). More research is revealing that as behavior is increasingly regulated by the self, as opposed to external forces, the more a variety of positively experienced behaviors and events can be predicted (Ryan & Deci 2, 2004). More autonomous behavior is correlated with more engagement and creative learning (Roth, Assor, Kanat-Maymon, & Kaplan 2007), improved performance (Vansteenkiste, Ryan, & Deci 2008) higher well-being and lower stress (Weinstein & Ryan 2011), greater vitality and energy (Ryan & Frederick 1997), and more gratifying socialization and relationships (Knee, Lonsbary, Canevello, & Patrick 2005; Niemiec et al. 2006). In contrast, individuals who experience low autonomy feel controlled by outside influences, including social pressure (de Charms 1968; Ryan & Connell 1989;) and embody behavior not in alignment with the self (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci 2000). Societies will need embodied individuals to follow through on the individual action that is required to advance a society through complex systemic shifts needed.

III. Psychological Resilience

A vital component of climate and community resilience is the psychological resilience of the individual. Psychological resilience is a multidimensional, dynamic personal characteristic that defined as an individual's capacity to transcend adversity and furthermore transform it into an opportunity for growth is encompassed in the concept of resilience (Gillespie, Chaboyer & Wallis, 2007). Psychological resilience enables individuals to successfully function despite significant life adversities (Werner & Smith 1992; Rutter 1987). It is considered “a personality characteristic that moderates the negative effects of stress and promotes adaptation,” (Wagnild and Young 1993). It has also been further defined as a process (Werner & Smith 1982; Wagnild & Young 1993) which is supported by individual characteristics, social support and family congruence (Scoloveno 2017). It has been identified as an internal resource which promotes adaptive outcomes and decreases stress (Scoloveno, 2017). Research has shown that individuals with a resilient personality will have the internal resources of self-esteem, optimism, cultural interdependence (Lee et al., 2008) with elements of equanimity, perseverance, self-reliance, meaningfulness and existential aloneness (Lindenberg et al., (2002). Individuals with high levels of resilience correlated to a higher perception of self-efficacy (Schwarzer & Warner 2013), also in an academic context (Kanevsky, Cork, & Frangkiser 2008). Psychological resilience is vital when facing the unknown and the impacts of climate change. The outcomes or consequences of resilience that have been recognized are effective coping, mastery, and positive adaptation (Earvolino-Ramirez, 2007). Resilience is linked to self-efficacy due to the level of awareness of one’s strengths (Lightsey, 2006.) Self-efficacy is central to behavior change (Bandura, 1977) and is fundamental in an individual’s abtility to both produce outcomes and initiate behavior (Passmore, 2004.)

IV. Emotional Self-Awareness

Emotional Self-Awareness (ESA) is paramount for the transformation of the self, for self-awareness, self-regulation, connection, trust, empathy, compassion, and thus for understanding humanity at large. It is an essential ingredient for high functioning teams and effective leadership (Goleman et al., 2002). It enables an individual to identify and understand emotions and motivations, allowing for the identification of the psychological limitations and strengths of themselves and others, as well as understanding how emotions affect performance and how someone is perceived by others (Goleman et al.,2017). Research from Cornell University concluded that high ESA was the single strongest predictor of overall life success (Hausknecht 2019). ESA is fundamental for compassion and empathy as well as understanding another’s perspective. Individuals who have difficulty identifying, recognizing, and describing emotions are actually shown to have an impairment on a neuronal basis of mentalizing associated with the inability to understand the perspective of others (Moriguchi et al., 2006; Jankowiak-Siuda et al., 2011.) For a community to operate with cohesion and cooperation, individuals must be able to hold multiple perspectives as the partiality of perspectives creates the bedrock for conflict within complexity, effectively removing the opportunity for win-win solutions to be found. The ability to identify emotions can enable an individual to learnmore productive adaptive coping strategies as primes them for changing their cognition, beliefs, and schemas (Beck 1997). This is critical when facing the unknowns of climate change impacts. Community resiliency and adaptive capacity require flexible, introspective, self-aware individuals who know how to self-regulate their emotions and understand their internal drivers. Emotional regulation requires interrelated skills necessary in comprehending the self and others, (Moriguchi et al., 2006) and a lack of ESA is directly linked to a lack of self-awareness and ability to regulate emotion (Kauer et al., 2012). Increasing awareness of emotions is an important step in most therapeutic psychotherapies for depression and other mental illnesses (Prochaska & Diclemente 1982), and a higher level of ESA is shown to decrease rumination and depressive symptoms over time (Reid et al., 2011.) This ability and level of self-responsibility will lend itself to social cohesion and connectedness. As ESA is a cornerstone for self-awareness and self-knowledge, it is therefore foundational to increasing autonomy, sense of belonging, and psychological resilience.

V. Positive and Negative Affects

Included in the Sociological Indicator Baseline is an assessment of affects, which are two mood scales, one measuring positive affects and the other measuring negative affects. The term “affect” is utilized as a noun in this case and is synonymous with the term “mood.” A psychometric scale can show relations between positive and negative affect with personality stats and traits and this was used to inform later applied research in the form of an intervention. An assessment of these scales can help reveal the general emotional states of a community which was helpful when assess any outliers in the data and when applying the intervention to increase the indicators.

Conclusion

I believe these indicators must be used in tandem with a carbon footprint containing scopes 1, 2 and 3. The inclusion of transboundary emissions will ensure a more realistic assessment of the actual impact of any given community, municipality, or institution. Using the sociological indicator baseline as a framework for climate action plans and sustainability plans will help ensure that we forever keep our eye on the ball, understanding that first and foremost our duty is to shift the cultural values driving the destruction of our planet. This begins and ends with a robust and nourished social fabric.

Additional research should be done in the form of long-term studies to provide further evidence of the interwoven connectivity of sustainability in the built environment to the sociological and psychological indicators utilized in the baseline.

Only when we accept and interpret the expression of the world around us through a holistic lens will we be able to grapple with the harrowing reality around us and mount an appropriate response.

Works Cited

Adger, N. W. (2003). Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Economic geography, 79(4), 387-404. http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/people/adgerwn/EconGeog2003.pdf

Ahlbrandt, R. S., & Cunningham, J. V. (1979). A new public policy for neighborhood preservation. New York: Praeger.

American psychological association. 2018. The Road to Resilience. [Online]. [18 December 2018]. Available from: https://www.apa.org/helpcenter/road-resilience.aspx

Antonacopoulou, E. (2004). On the virtues of practicing scholarship: a tribute to Chris Argyris, a “timeless learner”. Manage Learn 35: 381–95.

Bachrach, K., & Zautra, A. (1985). Coping with a Community Stressor: The Threat of a Hazardous Waste Facility. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 26(2), 127-141. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2136602

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Bammer, G., (2005). Integration and implementation sciences: building a new specialization. Ecol Soc 10:6.

Barrow, M., Buckley, B., Caldicott, T., Cumberlege, T., Hsu, J., Kaufman, S., … Sotos, M. (2013). Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions (p. 182). World Resources Institute & World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1995). The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin. 117(3).

Beck, A.T., (1997). The past and future of cognitive therapy. J Psychother Pract Res 6(4):276-284 [Medline: 9292441]

Beitman, B.D., Soth, A.M., (2006). Activation of self-observation: a core process among the psychotherapies. J Psychother Integr.16:383-397. [doi: 10.1037/1053-0479.16.4.383]

Brown, K.W., Ryan, R.M., (2003). The benefits of being present: mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. Apr;84(4):822-848. [Medline: 12703651]

Brooks N, Adger WN, Kelly M. The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications for adaptation. Global Environmental Change 2005, 15(2): 151-163

Brown, K. (2014). Global environmental change. I: A social turn for resilience? Progress in Human Geography 38(1):107–117.

Brown, K., E. Westaway. (2011). Agency, capacity, and resilience to environmental change: lessons from human development, well-being, and disasters. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 36:321–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/ annurev-environ-052610-092905

Browning C.R., Cagney K.A., Neighborhood structural disadvantage, collective efficacy, and self-rated physical health in an urban setting. J Health Soc Behav. 2002;43(4):383–99.

Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L., (2003). Social Isolation and Health, with an Emphasis on Underlying Mechanisms. Perspectives in biology and medicine. 46. S39-52. 10.1353/pbm.2003.0063.

Chambers, T., Porritt, J., Price-Thomas, P. (2008). Sustainable Wealth Creation within Environmental Limits, Forum for the Future: Action for a Sustainable World.

Chambers, R., Lo, BCY., Allen, N.B., (2008.) The impact of intensive mindfulness training on attentional control, cognitive style, and affect. Cognit Ther Res. 32:303-322. [doi: 10.1007/s10608-007-9119-0]

Cities, U., & Governments, L. (2016). Why must Culture be at the heart of urban development? Agenda 21 for culture - Committee on culture of United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG).

Connor, R., Dovers, S., (2004). Institutional change for sustainable development. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Corey, G. (2001). Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy 6th edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Coyle, S. J. (2011). Sustainable and Resilient Communities: A Comprehensive Action Plan for Towns, Cities, and Regions. John Wiley & Sons.

Cortese, A.D. (2003). The critical role of higher education in creating a sustainable future. Plan High Education 31(3):15–22.

Dailey, A.J., Buchanan, J., (1999) Aerobic Dance and Physical Self-Perceptions in Female Adolescents: Some Implications for Physical Education, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 70:2, 196-200, [doi: 10.1080/02701367.1999.10608037]

Davidson, W. B. and Cotter, P. R. (1986), Measurement of Sense of Community Within the Sphere of City. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16: 608–619. [doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1986.tb01162.x]

de Charms, R. (1968). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985a). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985b). The general causality orientations scale: Self- determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19, 109–134.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘‘what’’ and ‘‘why’’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 4, 227–268.

Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A., Sheinman, L., & Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess adult’s orientations toward control versus autonomy in children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived compe- tence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 642–650.

Dessein, J., K. Soini, G. Fairclough and L. G. Horlings (Eds.). (2015, May). Culture in, for and as Sustainable Development: Conclusions from the COST Action IS 1007 Investigating Cultural Sustainability. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.

Du Plessis, C., Brandon, P, (2015). An ecological worldview as basis for a regenerative sustainability paradigm for the built environment. Journal of Cleaner Production 109, 53-61.

Duxbury, N., & Jeannotte, M. S. (2010a). Culture, sustainability and communities: Exploring the myths. In 6th International Conference on Cultural Policy Research, Jyväskylä, Finland (pp. 24–27).

Duxbury, N., & Jeannotte, M. S. (2010b). From the bottom-up: culture in community sustainability planning. Paper for ‘Culture and the Making of Worlds’, 3rd ESA Sociology of Culture research network mid-term Conference, 7-9 October 2010, Universita Bocconi, Milan, Italy.

Duxbury, N., & Jeannotte, M. S. (2011). Introduction: culture and sustainable communities. Culture and Local Governance (Vol. 3, pp. 1–10). University of Ottawa.

Duxbury, N., Cullen, C., & Pascual, J. (2012). Cities, culture and sustainable development. Cultural Policy and Governance in a New Metropolitan Age. The Cultures and Globalization Series, 5, 73–86.

Earvolino-Ramirez, (2007). Resilience: A Concept Analysis. Nursing Forum 42(2), 73-82 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6198.2007.00070.x

Eisenberg, D., Hunt, J., & Speer, N. (2013). Mental health in American colleges and universities: Variation across student subgroups and across campuses. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 201(1), 60–67.

Eiser, A. (2011). The crisis on campus. Monitor on Psychology, 42(8), 18.

Epstein, S., (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol Aug;49(8):709-724. [Medline: 8092614]

Fazey, I., Fazey, J.A., Fischer, J., Sherren, K., Warren, J., Noss, R. F., Dovers, S.R., (2007). Adaptive capacity and learning to learn as leverage for social–ecological resilience. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 5. 10.1890/060118.

Fithian C., Powell A. (2009). Cultural aspects of sustainable development. Student paper for sustainable design seminar/studio, fall 2009, seminar in sustainable architecture, University of Texas School of Architecture. Retrieved from http://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/ 2152/11698/5-Fithian_Powell-Cultural_Aspects_of_Sustainable_Development.pdf?sequence= 2.

Fivush, R., Bohanek, J. G. & Duke, M. (2008). The intergenerational self: Subjective perspective and family history. In S. Sani (Ed.), Self continuity: Individual and collective perspectives (pp. 131-143). New York: Psychology Press.

Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Global Environmental Change. 16 (3): 253-267. [doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002].

Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, and Norberg J. (2005). Adaptive governance of social–ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resourc 30: 441–73.

Gabriel, T. (2010, December 9). Mental health needs seen growing at colleges. New York Times.

Game, A., (2001). Creative ways of being. In J. R. Morss, N. Stephenson & J.
F. H. V. Rappard (Eds.), Theoretical issues in psychology: Proceedings of the International Society for Theoretical Psychology 1999 Conference (pp. 3-12). Sydney: Springer.

Gillespie BM, Chaboyer W, Wallis M., (2007). Development of a theoretically derived model of resilience through concept analysis. Contemp Nurse. May-Jun;25(1-2):124-35. http://doi: 10.5172/conu.2007.25.1-2.124. PMID: 17622996.

Grothmann T, Patt A. (2005). Adaptive capacity and human cognition: the process of individual adaptation to climate change. Global Environmental Change, 15(3): 199-213

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., Davidson, R.J., Druskat, V., Kohlriseser, G. Emotional Self-Awareness: A Primer (Building Blocks of Emotional Intelligence Book 1). Florence MA, More Than Sound LLC, 2017

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R., McKee, A. Primal Leadership: Realizing the Power of Emotional Intelligence. Boston, Harvard Business School Press, 2002

Grosse-Holtforth, M., Casonguay, L.G., Boswell, J.F., Wilson, L.A., Kakouros, A.A., Borkovec, T.D., (2007). Insight in cognitive-behavioral therapy. In: Castonguay LG, Hill CE, editors. Castonguay LG, Hill CE, editors. Insight in Psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 57-80.

Gunderson LH and Holling CS., (2002). Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Hagerty, B. M., Williams, R.A., Oe, H., (2002). Childhood antecedents of adult sense of belonging. Journal of clinical psychology. 58. 793-801. 10.1002/jclp.2007.

Hagerty, B.M., Lynch-Sauer, J., Patusky, K., Bouwsema, M., & Collier, P., (1992). Sense of belonging: a vital mental health concept. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 6, 172-177.

Hagerty, B.M., & Patusky, K. (1995). Developing a measure of sense of belonging. Nursing Research, 44, 9-13.

Hale, C. J., Hannum, J.W., & Espelage, D. L., (2005). Social Support and Physical Health: The Importance of Belonging. Journal of American college health : J of ACH. 53. 276-84. 10.3200/JACH.53.6.276-284.

Harvard University, (2019). Brain Architecture. Center on the Developing Child. https://developingchild.harvard.edu/science/key-concepts/brain-architecture/

Haslam, S., Jetten, J., Postmes, T., Haslam, C., (2009). Social Identity, Health and Well‐Being: An Emerging Agenda for Applied Psychology. Applied Psychology. 58. 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00379.x.

Hausknecht, J., (2019) “What Predicts Executive Success,” http://www.amanet.org/training/articles/New-Study-Shows-Nice-Guys-Finish-First.aspx?pcode=XCRP

Hinkel J., (2011). Indicators of vulnerability and adaptive capacity: Towards a clarification of the science-policy interface. Global Environmental Change, 21(1): 198-208

Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T.B., Layton, J.B., (2010). Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review. PLoS Med. Jul 27;7(7):e1000316. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316.

IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Summary for Policymakers, WMO.

IPCC, (2018). Global warming of 1.5°C: An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/07/SR15_SPM_version_stand_alone_LR.pdf

Jang, H. (2008). Supporting students’ motivation, engagement, and learning during an uninteresting activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 798–811.

Jankowiak-Siuda, Kamila et al., (2011). “How we empathize with others: a neurobiological perspective.” Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research. vol. 17,1: RA18-24. [doi:10.12659/MSM.881324].

Jetten, J., Haslam, S., Iyer, A., Haslam, C., (2010). Turning to others in times of change: Social identity and coping with stress. The psychology of prosocial behavior: Group processes, intergroup relations, and helping. Wiley-Blackwell, Publications.

Johnson, E.A. (2017, February 11). The Five Values of Regenerating Communities: It’s not what you think [Web log] Retrieved from http://drericanthonyjohnson.com/leadershio/five-elements-regenerating-communities-not-think/

Kauer, S. D., Reid, S.C., Crooke, A.H.D., Khor, A., Hearps, S.J.C., Jorm, A.F., Sanci, L., Patton, G., (2012). Self-monitoring Using Mobile Phones in the Early Stages of Adolescent Depression: Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res. 14(3):e67) [doi:10.2196/jmir.1858].

Knee, C. R., Lonsbary, C., Canevello, A., & Patrick, H., (2005). Self-determination and conflict in romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 997–1009.

Koestner, R., Bernieri, F., & Zuckerman, M., (1992). Self-regulation and consistency between attitudes, traits, and behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 52–59.

Lane, R.D., Schwartz, G.E., (1987). Levels of emotional awareness: a cognitive-developmental theory and its application to psychopathology. Am J Psychiatry Feb;144(2):133-143. [Medline: 3812780]

Lee, H., Brown, S., Mitchell, M., & Schiraldi, G., (2007). Correlates of resilience in the face of adversity for Korean women immigrating to the US. Journal of Immigrant Minority Health, 10, 415-422.

Lightsey OR., (2006). Resilience, Meaning, and Well-Being. The Counseling Psychologist. 34(1):96-107. http://doi:10.1177/0011000005282369

Lindenberg, C., Solorzano, R., Bear, D., Strickland, O., Galvis, C., & Pittman, K., (2002). Reducing substance use and risky sexual behavior among young low-income, Mexican-american women: Comparison of two interventions. Applied Nursing Research, 16(2), 137-148.

Lyke, J.A., Insight, but not self-reflection, is related to subjective well-being. Pers Individ Diff 2009;46:66-70. [doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.09.010]

Maclean, K., Cuthill, M., Ross, H., (2014). Six attributes of social resilience. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 54(1):144–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0964056 8.2013.763774 Community resilience as an emergent property

Mang, P., Haggard, B. (2016). Regenerative development and design: a framework for evolving sustainability, John Wiley & Sons, pp 216.

Manzo, L.C.; Perkins, D.D. (2006). Finding Common Ground: e Importance of Place Attachment to Community Participation and Planning. Journal of Planning Literature. 20(4): 335-350.

Marcia, J. E. (2002). Adolescence, identity, and the Bernardone Family. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 2(3), 199–209.

Matsaganis, M.D., Wilkin H.A., (2015). Communicative social capital and collective efficacy as determinants of access to health-enhancing resources in residential communities. J Health Commun.: 20(4):1–10. [doi: 10.1080/10810730.2014.927037].

Mayer J.D., Stevens A.A., (1994). An emerging understanding of the reflective (meta-) experience of mood. J Res Pers 1994;28:351-373. [doi: 10.1006/jrpe.1994.1025]

McAlpine, C. A., L. M. Seabrook, J. G. Ryan, B. J. Feeney, W. J. Ripple, A. H. Ehrlich, and P. R. Ehrlich., (2015). Transformational change: Creating a safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 20 (1):56.

McMahon, S. D., Singh, J. A., Garner, L. S., & Benhorin, S. (2004). Taking advantage of opportunities: Community involvement, well-being, and urban youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 34, 262 – 265.

Menzies, D. & Davidson, B. (2002). Authenticity and Belonging: The Experience of Being Known in the Group. Group Analysis. 35(1), 43-55.

Moriguchi, Y., Ohnishi, T., Lane, R. D., Maeda, M., Mori, T., Nemoto, K., Matsuda, K., Komaki, G., (2006). Impaired self-awareness and theory of mind: an fMRI study of mentalizing in alexithymia. NeuroImage 32: 1472-1482

Morris, M. W., Su, S. K., (1999). Social psychological obstacles in environmental conflict resolution. Am Behav Sci 42: 1322–49.

National Research Council (2010). America’s Climate Choices: Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. National Academies Press.

New Zealand Ministry for the Environment (2009). Rethinking our built environment: towards a sustainable future. New Zealand Government.

Nelson, D. R.; Adger, W.N; Brown, K., (2007). Adaptation to Environmental Change: Contributions of a Resilience Framework. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 32: 395–419.

North, P. and Bruegel, I., (2001). Community empowerment: rethinking resistance in an era of partnership, in: J. Pierson and J. Smith (Eds) Rebuilding Community: Policy and Practice in Urban Regeneration, pp. 174–188. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Nurse, K., (2006). Culture as the fourth pillar of sustainable development. Small States: Economic Review and Basic Statistics, 11, 28–40.

NZMCH, (2006). Cultural well-being and local government report 1: definition and context of cultural well-being. New Zealand Ministry for Culture and Heritage (NZMCH), Wellington.

O’Brien, K., (2012). Global environmental change II: From adaptation to deliberate transformation. Progress in Human Geography 36 (5):667–76.

Olsson, P., V. Galaz, and W. J. Boonstra., (2014). Sustainability transformations: A resilience per- spective. Ecology and Society 19 (4):1.

Opoku, A. (2015). The Role of Culture in a Sustainable Built Environment, Springer International Publishing Switzerland Sustainable Operations Management, Measuring Operations Performance, [doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14002-5_3]

Passmore, 2004). Education, health and school meals: a review of policy changes in England and Wales over the last century. Nutrition Bulletin, 29(3), 221-227 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-3010.2004.00430.x

Perkins, D. N., & Grotzer, T. A., (1997). Teaching intelligence. Am Psychol 52: 1125–33.

Price-Robertson, R. (n.d.). Ancestry, identity and meaning. Families, Policy and the Law, 19.

Prochaska, J.O., Diclemente, C.C., (1982). Transtheoretical therapy: towards a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy (Chic) 19(3):276-288. [doi: 10.1037/h0088437]

Poulton, R., Caspi, A., Milne, B. J., Thomson, W. M., Taylor, A., Sears, M. R., Moffitt, T. E., (2002). Association between children's experience of socioeconomic disadvantage and adult health: a life-course study. Nov 23;360(9346):1640-5.

Reed, B., (2007). Shifting from ‘sustainability’ to regeneration. Building Research & Information, 35(6), 674–680.

Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44, 159–175.

Reeve, J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2004). Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for understanding the sociocultural influences on student motivation. In D. M. McInerney & S. Van Etten (Eds.), Research on sociocultural influences on motivation and learning: Big theories revisited (Vol. 4, pp. 31–59). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Press.

Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28, 147–169.

Reid, S.C., Kauer, S.D., Hearps S. J., Crooke, A.H., Khor, A.S., Sanci, L.A., et al., (2011). A mobile phone application for the assessment and management of youth mental health problems in primary care: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Fam Pract.12:131 [doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-12-131] [Medline: 22123031]

Resnick, M. D., Bearman, P. S., Blum, R. W., Bauman, K. E., Harris, K. M., Jones, J., & Udry, R., (1997). Protecting adolescents from harm: Findings from the National Longitudinal Study on adolescent health. Journal of the American Medical Association, 278(10), 823- 832.

Riopel, Leslie. “Resilience Skills, Factors and Strategies of the Resilient Person.” Positive Psychology Program. [10 March 2019]. Available from: https://positivepsychologyprogram.com/resilience-skills/

Roth, G., Assor, A., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Kaplan, H., (2007). Autonomous motivation for teaching: How self-determined teaching may lead to self-determined learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 761–774.

Rushmer, R., Kelly, D., Lough, M., et al. (2004). Introducing the learning practice: III. Leadership, empowerment, protected time and reflective practice as core contextual conditions. J Eval Clin Pract 10: 399–405.

Rutter, M. (1987). Developmental Psychiatry (1st American Psychiatric Press Ed.,). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63, 397–427.

Ryan, R. M., & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749–761.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Autonomy is no illusion: Self-determination theory and the empirical study of authenticity, awareness, and will. In J. Greenberg, S. L. Koole, & T. Pyszczynski (Eds.), Handbook of experimental existential psychology. New York: Guilford.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self-determination, and will? Journal of Personality, 74, 1557–1586.

Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. M. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of Personality, 65, 529–565.

Ryan, R. M., La Guardia, J. G., Solky-Butzel, J., Chirkov, V. I., & Kim, Y. (2005). On the interpersonal regulation of emotions: Emotional reliance across gender, relationships, and culture. Personal Relationships, 12, 146–163.

Sarason, S.B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a community psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Out of print. See American Psychology and Schools.)

Sagone, E., De Caroli, M., (2013). Relationships between Resilience, Self-Efficacy, and Thinking Styles in Italian Middle Adolescents. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 92. 838-845. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.763.

Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science. 1997;277(5328):918–24.

Scoloveno, R., (2017). Measure of resilience and an evaluation of the resilience scale. International journal of Emergency Mental Health and Human Resilience, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp 1-7 OMICS International ISSN 1522-4821

Scherhorn, G., & Grunert, S. C. (1988). Using the causality orientations concept on consumer behavior research. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 33–39.

Schwartz, V., & Kay, J. (2009). The crisis in college and university mental health. Psychiatric Times, 26(10), 32–32.

Schwarzer, R., Warner, L. (2013). Perceived Self-Efficacy and its Relationship to Resilience. Resilience in Children, Adolescents, and Adults. The Springer Series on Human Exceptionality. 139-150. 10.1007/978-1-4614-4939-3_10.

Seeman, T. E., (1996). Social Ties and Health: The Benefits of Social Integration. Annals of epidemiology. 6. 442-51. 10.1016/S1047-2797(96)00095-6.

Seeman, T. E., Lusignolo, T. M., Albert, M., & Berkman, L. (2001). Social relationships, social support, and patterns of cognitive aging in healthy, high-functioning older adults: MacArthur Studies of Successful Aging. Health Psychology, 20(4), 243-255.

Segerstrom, S.C., Stanton, A.L., Alden L.E., Shortridge, B.E., (2003). A multidimensional structure for repetitive thought: what's on your mind, and how, and how much? J Pers Soc Psychol. Nov;85(5):909-921. [doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.909] [Medline: 14599253]

Sheppard, D.C., (2011) “Social Solutions for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Cross Cultural Lessons from Denmark to the United States.” Intersect, Volume 4, Number 1, Colby College

Shochet, I. M., Dadds, M. R., Ham, D., & Montague, R., (2006). School connectedness is an underemphasized parameter in adolescent mental health: Results of a community prediction study. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 35, 170-179.

Smit B, Wandel J., (2006). Adaptation, adaptive capacity and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3): 282-292

Stedman, R. C., (1999). Sense of place as indicator of community sustainability. Forestry Chronicle 75(5):765-770.

Stedman, R.C., (2003). Sense of Place and Forest Science: Toward a Program of Quantitative Research. Forest Science. 49(6): 822-829.

Swinkels, A., Giuliano, T.A., (1995). The measurement and conceptualisation of mood awareness: monitoring and labeling one' mood states. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 21:934-949. [doi: 10.1177/0146167295219008]

UNESCO, (31 March- 2 April 2009). Proceedings from UNESCO WCESD 09’: World Conference on Education for Sustainable Development, Bonn, Germany http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001850/185056e.pdf

UNESCO, (2012a). Culture: a driver and an enabler of sustainable development. UN system task team on the post-2015 development agenda, The United Nations Scientific, Educational and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/ post2015/pdf/Think_Piece_Culture.pdf.

UNESCO, (2012b). The future we want: the role of culture in sustainable development. The United Nations Scientific, Educational and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). http://www.unesco.org/ new/en/rio-20/culture-for-sustainable-development/.

Tabane, R., Human-Vogal, S., (2010). Sense of Belonging and social cohesion in a desegregated former House of Delegates School. South African Journal of Education. ESAS Vol 30:491 - 504

Twenge, J. M., Gentile, B., DeWall, C. N., Ma, D., Lacefield, K., & Schurtz, D. R. (2010). Birth cohort increases in psychopathology among young Americans, 1938–2007: A cross-temporal meta-analysis of the MMPI. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(2), 145– 154.

Vallerand, R. J., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M., (1987). Intrinsic motivation in sport. In K. Pandolf (Ed.). Exercise and sport science reviews (Vol. 15, pp. 389–425). New York: Macmillan.

Vansteenkiste, M., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L., (2008). Self-determination theory and the explanatory role of psychological needs in human well-being. In L. Bruni, F. Comim, & M. Pugno (Eds.), Capabilities and happiness (pp. 187–223). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Voβ, J.P., Smith, A. & Grin, J., (2009). Designing long-term policy: Rethinking transition management. Policy Sciences, 42: 275-302.

Wadsworth, M. E., Thomsen, A. H., Saltzman, H., Connor-Smith, J. K., & Compas, B. E., (2001). Coping with stress during childhood and adolescence: Problems, progress, and potential in theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 127(1), 87-127.

Wagnild, G., & Young, H., (1993). Development and psychometric evaluation of the resilience scale. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 1(2), 165-178.

Walker, B., C. S. Holling, S. R. Carpenter, and A. Kinzig. 2004. Resilience, adaptability and transformability in social–ecological systems. Ecology and Society 9(2):5. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-00650-090205

Watkins, E.R., (2008). Constructive and unconstructive repetitive thought. Psychol Bull. Mar;134(2):163-206. [doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.163] [Medline: 18298268]

Weinstein, N., Deci, E., & Ryan, R. M., (2011). Motivational determinants of integrating positive and negative past identities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 527–544.

Weinstein, N., Przybylski, A. K., Ryan, R. M., (2012). The Index of Autonomous Functioning: Development of a scale of human autonomy. Journal of Research in Personality. 46 (2012) 397-413

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R.S., (1982). Vulnerable but invincible: A longitudinal study of resilient children and youth. New York: McGraw Hill.

Werner, E.E., & Smith, R.S., (1992). Overcoming the odds: High risk children from birth to adulthood. Ithaca, NY, US: Cornell University Press.

Wilber, K., (2001). Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution, Second Edition. Shambhala Publications.

Wilkinson, D., (2007). The multidimensional nature of social cohesion: psychological sense of community, attraction, and neighboring. Am J Community Psychology Dec; 40 (3-4): 214-29.

Wood P. 2004. Intergenerational justice and curtailments on the discretionary powers of government. Environ Ethics 26: 411–28.

Yohe, G., Tol, RSJ., (2002). Indicators for social and economic coping capacity - moving toward a working definition of adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change, 12(1): 25-40

Zuckerman, M., Gioioso, C., & Tellini, S., (1988). Control orientation, self-monitoring, and preference for image versus quality approach to advertising. Journal of Research in Personality, 22, 89–100.

Inzlicht, M. & Good, C., (2006). How environments can threaten academic performance, self-knowledge, and sense of belonging. In Levin, S., & Van Laar, C. (Eds.), Stigma and Group Inequality: Social Psychological Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Aurora Flynn