MADHUBANI, FORESTS OF HONEY: FROM PAINTING NATURE TO PERCEIVING ENVIRONMENT

Authors

  • Anindita Roy Saha Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Indraprastha College for Women, University of Delhi, Delhi, India.
  • Ambuj Kumar Student, Department of Environmental Studies, University of Delhi, Delhi, India.

Keywords:

Madhubani, Nature painting, Occupation, Environmental Consciousness, Pro-environmental behavior

Abstract

In the present study, an attempt has been made to measure environmental consciousness among the people of Madhubani district in Bihar, India, famous for its unique art form, the Madhubani paintings which depict nature and the living world. The analysis of different parameters viz. affective dimension, cognitive dimension, dispositional dimension and active dimension shows that the mean of total environmental consciousness score of all occupational groups taken together is 0.62 on a scale of 0 to 1. This score exhibits a diffused level of environmental consciousness. Groups that are engaged in professions that require knowledge and information have shown a much better response in terms of environmental consciousness e.g., government/ private officials, teachers, business/other works and students in comparison to those who are involved in nature-based activities like paintings. A community that has identified nature as an integral part of their art and culture has the potential to improve their pro-environmental behaviour. Initiation of environmental projects and appropriate sensitization can surely bring in a change in their perspective towards nature and make the nature painters of Madhubani leaders for tomorrow in environmental awareness.

References

I. Axelrod, L.J., and D.R. Lehman. 1993. Responding to Environmental Concerns: What Factors Guide Individual Action? Journal of Environmental Psychology 13 (2): 149–159.

II. Carolan, M.S. 2009. “This Is Not a Biodiversity Hotspot”: The Power of Maps and Other Images in the Environmental Sciences. Society and Natural Resources 22 (3): 278–286.

III. Directorate of Census Operations. 2011. Census of India. Government of India.

IV. Dunlap, R.E., and K.D. Van Liere. 2008. The “New Environmental Paradigm.” The Journal of Environmental Education 40 (1): 19–28.

V. Dunlap, R.E., K.D. Van Liere, A.G. Mertig, and R.E. Jones. 2000. Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale. Journal of Social Issues 56, (3): 425–442.

VI. Geller, E.S. 1995. Integrating Behaviorism and Humanism for Environmental Protection. Journal of Social Issues 51, (4): 179–195.

VII. Gooch, G.D. 1995. Environmental Beliefs and Attitudes in Sweden and the Baltic States. Environment and Behavior 27, (4): 513–539.

VIII. Herva, V.P. 2006. Marvels of the System. Art, Perception and Engagement with the Environment in Minoan Crete. Archaeological Dialogues 13, (2): 221–240.

IX. Hocking, C. 2020. Occupation in Context: A Reflection on Environmental Influences on Human Doing. Journal of Occupational Science 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2019.1708434.

X. Van Liere, K.D., and R.E. Dunlap. 1981. Environmental Concern: Does It Make a Difference How It’s Measured? Environment and Behavior 13, (6): 651–676.

XI. Liere, K.D.V., and R.E. Dunlap. 1980. The Social Bases of Environmental Concern: A Review of Hypotheses, Explanations and Empirical Evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly 44, (2): 181–197.

XII. Makower, J. 2009. Strategies for the Green Economy. McGrawHill.

XIII. Maloney, M.P., and M.P. Ward. 1973. Ecology: Let’s Hear from the People: An Objective Scale for the Measurement of Ecological Attitudes and Knowledge. American Psychologist 28, (7): 583–586.

XIV. Matthews, P. 2002. Scientific Knowledge and the Aesthetic Appreciation of Nature. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 60, (1): 37–48.

XV. Myers, F. 2012. Emplacement and Displacement: Perceiving the Landscape Through Aboriginal Australian Acrylic Painting. Ethnos 78, (4): 435–463.

XVI. Rozario, L. do. 1997. Shifting Paradigms: The Transpersonal Dimensions of Ecology and Occupation. Journal of Occupational Science 4, (3): 112–118.

XVII. Sánchez, M.J., and R. Lafuente. 2010. Defining and Measuring Environmental Consciousness. Revista Internacional de Sociologia 68, (3): 731–755.

XVIII. Schwartz, S.H. 1977. Normative Influences on Altruism. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 10: 221–279.

XIX. Stern, P.C. 2000. Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues 56, (3): 407–424.

XX. Tewary, A. 2012. Indian Tribal Art Form Madhubani to Save Trees. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-20422540.

XXI. Wesley Schultz, P., and L. Zelezny. 1999. Values as Predictors of Environmental Attitudes: Evidence for Consistency across 14 Countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology 19 (3): 255–265.

Additional Files

Published

15-06-2022

How to Cite

Anindita Roy Saha, & Ambuj Kumar. (2022). MADHUBANI, FORESTS OF HONEY: FROM PAINTING NATURE TO PERCEIVING ENVIRONMENT. International Education and Research Journal (IERJ), 8(6). Retrieved from https://ierj.in/journal/index.php/ierj/article/view/2514