There are certain events in our lifetimes where it is easier to set up new behavioral patterns.  Going through a life transition like moving or beginning a new job creates opportunities to disrupt and alter our consumption habits (Bamberg, 2006)

Take for example, the process of going to a grocery store.  When a person thinks of going to a grocery store, there is an unconscious reaction based on all your previous conditioning with respect to that word.  You are influenced by your behavioral history and your immediate environment.  When you have lived in the same location for years, you are likely to start behaving without being aware of it.  Many times, we are not consciously aware of how ingrained these behavioral patterns are.  

This is compared to when a person relocates.  In this case, there is no pre-determined location influencing your actions.  Creating a new living situation allows you to consciously decide how to proceed. You are given the opportunity to evaluate what lifestyle best meets your needs.

You could refer to a period like this as a behavioral “break.”  These breaks are a prime time to re-introduce sustainable behaviors. 

This same logic could be applied to the pandemic.  March 2020 was a hard pause for the world.  Everyone had the opportunity for many of their behavioral patterns to simply stop occurring.  It gave many people the opportunity to evaluate the critical components to their lifestyle.  What activities serve you and the planet? What can you do without?

Re-emerging from the pandemic is an ideal time to become more sustainable.  You have less conditioning to overcome because your lifestyle has changed.  Where are you spending your time and money? Is it helping to create the world you wish to see?

This is an incredible opportunity for us to consciously decide how we return. It’s important how we return. There is power in how we return.

Reference

Bamberg, S. (2006), ‘Is residential relocation a good opportunity to change people’s travel behavior? Results from a theory-driven intervention study’, Environment and Behavior, 38 (6): 820 – 840.