Collective human attitudes influenced by macro-forces that impact environmental issues are partially correlated to our behaviors for the good and the harm of the planet. In this thesis, I will explore how collective human attitudes contribute to pro-environmental behaviors, common and pre-existing frames of mind on major conservation dilemmas, and finally suggest future directions on how humans could be inclined to take on more environmental responsibility through an increase in human-environmental connectivity. It is found that humans are largely driven by institution structures, education, and social influence. In conclusion, more efforts should be placed to further analyze these structural incentives for pro-environmental behaviors and use them to make environmental stewardship more accessible for all people and diverse circumstances. This can be done by evaluating the human dimensions of what influences human attitudes and behaviors, how to use these forces to systematically influence pro-environmental choices, applying these structural forces to main conservation issues, and further incorporating moral discourse into the environmental research in order to appeal correctly to all aspects and perspectives. Only when human connectivity is understood in relation to the natural sciences will we be able to make positive change in the direction of a healthier Earth.

In 2018, the United States generated 37.4 million more U.S. tons of paper and cardboard material compared to in 1960 (EPA, 2020). As the United States produces a disproportionate amount of packaging waste every year when accounting for population size, it has become increasingly difficult to mitigate waste production, lessen the environmental impact of generating more paperboard materials, and move towards a more ethical circular economy. In efforts to adopt the principles of a green economy, deviate from the linear supply chain model, minimize packaging waste, and encourage more sustainable lifestyles, we developed a business centered around a circular, service based model called Room & Cardboard. Our initiative collects cardboard waste generated in and around the ASU community and repurposes it for dorm-style furniture available for students to rent throughout the school year. Using cardboard, we have built prototypes for two products (desk lamps and shoe racks) that are sturdy, visually pleasing, and recyclable. Our initiative helps to reduce cardboard packaging waste by upcycling cardboard waste into products that will increase the lifespan of the cardboard material. At the end of the product’s life span, in cases of severe damage, we will turn the product into a seed board made with blended cardboard paste that can then be used to plant a succulent we will make available to students to buy as dorm decor. The feedback on our initiative through online surveys and in-person tabling has generated enough traction for Dean Rendell of Barrett, the Honors College at Arizona State University to consider a test-drive of our products in the upcoming Fall semester.

The policy design process in the United States has been guiding policymakers for decades. In order to keep up with the developing sustainability challenges that the US is facing, a new method of policy design needs to be determined for long-lasting, sustainable change. Human-centered design principles provide a new, unique perspective for analyzing sustainability challenges. Through the integration of human-centered design principles into policy systems, a new framework for policy design can be created. Through this project, a new framework that allows for the adaptation to new technologies, scientific information, and developments in the sustainability crisis to be accounted for and adequately addressed in future policies has been created.

The cosmetic industry has a significant lack of data on sustainability practices. The global market for cosmetics is expected to grow from $288 billion in 2021 to $415 billion in 2028 as more people populate the globe (Cosmetics Market Size, Share, & COVID-19 Impact Analysis, 2022). This research paper analyzes sustainability within the cosmetic industry. Specifically, comparing the practices between The Body Shop and Bath & Body Works. To test the hypothesis that The Body Shop is more sustainable than Bath & Body Works, a case study analysis was conducted to measure the companies’ performance in the environmental, economic, and social sectors. Comparable metrics were selected, and a pairwise comparison was completed to weigh the different metrics. To analyze the results, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was used to ensure consistency in metric weights, and a Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the sector's final weights. The results verified the hypothesis that The Body Shop was more sustainable than Bath & Body Works. In all, the results support the idea that the cosmetic industry needs stronger regulations and oversight of cosmetic companies’ sustainability impact. One of the most prevalent limitations of this study is the lack of transparency and information from cosmetic companies. Moving forward, it is recommended to use data from multiple years with key performance indicators (KPIs) to assess sustainability performance more accurately.