Consumption is a major contributor to environmental harm, and also one area where the Swedish performance is in urgent need of improvement. While it is well known that changes are needed on all societal levels for sustainability to be realized, it is unclear whether the population is aware of which changes that refers to, since the impacts from individual consumption remain high. Previous research has identified psychological, cultural, social, and economic determinants as barriers to change, however, removing those barriers will not be sufficient if it results in changes entailing only marginal environmental benefits. The question that initiated this research is whether common people in Sweden can identify which changes are efficient enough to provide visible results, or if the current environmental discourse generates misperceptions, hindering concrete change. Meeting the objective to contribute to the identification of obstacles to sustainability by studying the perception of pro-environmental consumption among potential adopters, a qualitative interview-based case study was conducted on students at Linnaeus University in Växjö, Sweden. The research followed an abductive approach, whereby primarily the Diffusion of Innovations theory was used for structure and interpretation. The findings reveal several barriers to sustainability associated with individual perceptions, including perceptions of the concept of pro-environmental consumption as complex, a perceived lack of trustworthy information from authorities, a perceived abundance of misleading information from profit-driven actors, as well as some controversy on where to place responsibility. Alongside this, misperceptions of environmental impacts from consumption were revealed, whereby accurate perceptions and environmental education were somewhat correlated. While highlighting an unrecognized but concrete issue, this research involves a small sample, suggesting that further research is required.

Kollektiv styrka baseras på sammanhållningen och viljan hos invånarna att ingripa för bostadsområdets säkerhet. Viljan att ingripa påverkas av denna ömsesidiga tillit och de förväntningarna på att ingripa som delas inom området. Detta arbete är en kvantitativ studie baserat på enkäter från 691 respondenter som besvarat frågan ”Vad är bra respektive dåligt med ditt bostadsområde?”. Denna fråga har undersökts för att ta reda på hur den individuellt upplevda kollektiva styrkan påverkar vilka positiva och negativa faktorer man ser hos sitt bostadsområde. Resultaten visar att respondenter med låg upplevd kollektiv styrka oftare anger den sociala oordningen och den fysiska oordningen som negativa faktorer med bostadsområdet. De med hög kollektiv styrka tenderar att ange den sociala strukturen som positiv faktor med sitt bostadsområde. / Collective efficacy is based on the willingness of the residents to intervene for the neighborhoods sake. The willingness to intervene is affected by the mutual trust between the residents and the expectations that is shared for others to intervene. This quantitative study is based on a survey answered by 691 respondents. They’ve answered the question: ”What is good and what is bad with your neighborhood?” This question has bin examined to learn how the individual perception of collective efficacy tends to affect what positive and negative aspects of their neighborhood the respondents see. The results of the study show that respondents with a low perception of collective efficacy more often tend to see the social- and physical disorder as negative factors with their neighborhood. Those with a greater perception of collective efficacy tend to see the social structure as a positive factor with their neighborhood.