The Role of Persuasive Communication in Environmental Preservation: A Qualitative Inquiry

This study explored the role of persuasive communication in forming community members' environmental awareness, attitudes, and active participation. The findings showed that clear, relatable, evidence-based, and practical communication strategies efficiently influence individuals to recognize their environmental responsibilities and participate in activities such as community cleanups, tree planting, and local environmental initiatives. Results also indicate that environmental protection is increasingly perceived as a shared responsibility rather than a duty limited only to government agencies; collective action, community partnership, and credible leadership are key to promoting meaningful change. However, barriers, including complex messaging, lack of resources, time constraints, insufficient support, and misinformation, commonly hinder the translation of awareness into steady practice. The study finds that persuasive communication serves as a vital tool beyond mere information dissemination—it promotes accountability, shifts perspectives, and encourages sustained behavioral change. To achieve lasting sustainability, environmental programs must deliver simple, relevant, and wide-ranging messages while offering the necessary support systems that enable communities to become active partners in environmental protection.

Persuasive Communication and Environmental Preservation SDG: #4 Quality Education

1. Ajzen, I., Joyce, N., Sheikh, S., & Cote, N. G. (2011). Knowledge and the Prediction of behavior: The role of information Accuracy in the theory of planned Behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33(2), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2011.568834 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alkadash, T. M., Vorobyova, K., Alhajjar, A., Almaamari, Q., & Abdulrahim, A. (2021). The influence of social public announcement on consumers’ behavior: A content analysis related to cognitive attitude, affective attitude, behavioral attitude. PalArch’s Journal of Archaeology of Egypt / Egyptology, 18(4), 2047–2060.https://www.archives.palarch.nl/index.php/jae/article/view/6616 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Almufassir, A. Z., Mu’tamiroh, N., Fitrianingtyas, P. A., Latif, Z. M. F., Murtadho, A., & Sulistio. (2026). Communicator’s Credibility in Persuasive Communication of Da’wah: A study of the Pandawara Group Environmental Conservation Campaign Perspective Source Credibility Theory. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, X(XIII), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2026.1013com0005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bach, P., Schmitt, C. E., & McGregor, S. C. (2025). Let me be perfectly unclear: strategic ambiguity in political communication. Communication Theory, 35(2), 96–106. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtaf001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Becchetti, L., Pisani, F., & Raffaele, L. (2023). Co-planning and co-design as progress in the implementation of welfare services. International Review of Economics, 70(3), 301–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12232-02300420-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. International Journal of Transgender Health, 24(1), 1–6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chen, L., Yan, Y., & Smith, A. N. (2022). What drives digital engagement with sponsored videos? An investigation of video influencers’ authenticity management strategies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 51(1), 198–221. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Choi, J., & Lee, J. K. (2021). Confusing effects of fake news on clarity of political information in the social media environment. Journalism Practice, 16(10), 2147–2165. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chung, H., & Van Der Lippe, T. (2020). Flexible Working, Work–Life Balance, and Gender Equality: Introduction. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 365–381. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Crossman, A. (2020, March 19). Understanding Purposive Sampling. ThoughtCo. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Day, E., Steinka-Fry, K., Schweer-Collins, M., Grant, S., Trevino, S., & TannerSmith, E. E. (2025). Talking at cross purposes? Exploring (mis)alignment between research and practice. Educational Research, 67(3), 265–285. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Diver, S., Vaughan, M., & Baker-Medard, M. (2024). Collaborative care in environmental governance: restoring reciprocal relations and community self-determination. Ecology and Society, 29(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Ewane, E. B. (2023). Understanding community participation in tree planting and management in deforested areas in Cameroon’s western highlands. Environmental Management, 73(1), 274–291. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gonella, J. D. S. L., Filho, M. G., Ganga, G. M. D., Latan, H., & Jabbour, C. J. C. (2024). A behavioral perspective on circular economy awareness: The moderating role of social influence and psychological barriers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 441, 141062. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hennel, E. K., Trachsel, A., Subotic, U., Lörwald, A. C., Harendza, S., & Huwendiek, S. (2022). How does multisource feedback influence residency training? A qualitative case study. Medical Education, 56(6), 660–669. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hochachka, G. (2024). When concern is not enough: Overcoming the climate awareness-action gap. AMBIO, 53(8), 1182–1202. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Huang, X., Ruan, W., Huang, W., Jin, G., Dong, Y., Wu, C., Bensalem, S., Mu, R., Qi, Y., Zhao, X., Cai, K., Zhang, Y., Wu, S., Xu, P., Wu, D., Freitas, A., & Mustafa, M. A. (2024). A survey of safety and trustworthiness of large language models through the lens of verification and validation. Artificial Intelligence Review, 57(7). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Ibbett, H., Dorward, L., Jones, J. P. G., Kohi, E. M., Dwiyahreni, A. A., Sankeni, S., Prayitno, K., Mchomvu, J., Kaduma, J., Saputra, A. W., Agustin, I. Y., Tryswidiarini, T., Mawenya, R., Supriatna, J., & St John, F. a. V. (2024). Improving compliance around protected areas through fair administration of rules. Conservation Biology, 39(1), e14332. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Jaber, Asmaa Hussain. (2024). “The Effect of Self-voice Recording Technique on Oral Performance of EFL Learners in Electronic Learning.” Journal of Arts Literature Humanities and Social Sciences, 70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Jain, R., Luck, E., Mathews, S., & Schuster, L. (2023). Creating Persuasive Environmental Communicators: Spokescharacters as Endorsers in Promoting Sustainable Behaviors. Sustainability, 15(1), 335. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Jamali, H., Dascalu, S. M., & Harris, F. C. (2024). Fostering Joint Innovation: a global online platform for ideas sharing and collaboration. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 305–312. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Jancsics, D., Espinosa, S., & Carlos, J. (2022). Organizational noncompliance: an interdisciplinary review of social and organizational factors. Management Review Quarterly, 73(3), 1273–1301. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Janorkar, A. V., Nalls, K., & Koka, S. (2022). Leadership capabilities to establish a successful research program of any size in any place. Journal of Prosthodontic Research, 66(3), viii–xi. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Jerie, S., Chireshe, A., Shabani, T., Shabani, T., Shabani, T., Shabani, T., Maswoswere, P., Mudyazhezha, O. C., Mashiringwani, C., & Mangwandi, L. (2024). Environmental impacts of plastic waste management practices in urban suburbs areas of Zimbabwe. Discover Sustainability, 5(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kahlke, R. M. (2014). Generic Qualitative Approaches: Pitfalls and Benefits of Methodological Mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 13(1), 37–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Khokhar, Sameena, et al. (2020). “Theory Development in Thematic Analysis: Procedure and Practice.” Review of Applied Management and Social Sciences, 3(3), 423–433. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Khuc, V. Q., Tran, M., Thinh, N. A., Lich, H. K., Dang, T., Nguyen, T. M. H., & Tran, D. T. (2024). Closing nature connectedness to foster environmental culture: investigating urban residents’ utilization and contribution to parks in Vietnam. Discover Sustainability, 5(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Kim, A. E. (2023). Ideas of working young people about laziness in connection with their self-attitude and self-regulation. Психолог, 6, 34–53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Maleknia, R., & Namdari, S. (2024). Generation Z and climate mitigation initiatives: Understanding intention to join national tree-planting projects. Trees, Forests and People, 19, 100754. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Marter-Kenyon, J. S., Blakeley, S. L., Banks, J. L., Ndiaye, C., & Diop, M. (2023). Who has the time? A qualitative assessment of gendered intrahousehold labor allocation, time use and time poverty in rural Senegal. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Maynard, L. T., Torchalski, J. R., Gezon, Z. J., Callwood, K. A., Stamper, M. A., Schook, M. W., & Martin, C. (2024). Does Active or Informative Messaging Result in Greater Conservation Engagement? Conservation, 4(2), 236–252. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Monzani, L., & Van Dick, R. (2020). Positive leadership in organizations. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Mulcahy, R., Fleischman, D., English, P., Florence, E., Scheepers, R., & Roennberg, M. S. (2023). Promoting sport organisations inclusivity initiatives: tailored message frames and audience selection to drive change and attitude towards team. Sport Management Review, 27(3), 432–454. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Nur, M., & Sabur, F. (2025). Development of Teaching Materials and Harmonized Semester Learning Plan for the Aircraft Basic Workshop Theory Course through Learner-Centered Instructional Design in Indonesian Aviation Polytechnics. Journal La Edusci, 6(2), 284–308. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. O’Callaghan, Clare, et al. (2024). “Thematic Analysis Informed by Grounded Theory (TAG) in Healthcare Research: Foundations and Applications.” Qualitative Research in Psychology, 21(3), 279–306. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Oyeleke, A. S., & Onyike, I. E. (2025). Strategies to Instil Environmental Consciousness and Commitment in Future Generations. Media and Communication Systems for Sustainability in Nigeria, 145–160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 123–205. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Prasannath, V., Adhikari, R. P., Gronum, S., & Miles, M. P. (2024). Impact of government support policies on entrepreneurial orientation and SME performance. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 20(3), 1533–1595. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Rinda, E. (2025). THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. Multidisciplinary Indonesian Center Journal, 2(2), 1711–1717. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Ruslin, R., Mashuri, S., Sarib, M., & Syam, H. (2022). Semi-structured Interview: A Methodological Reflection on the Development of a Qualitative Research Instrument in Educational Studies. In ResearchGate. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Rydberg, J., Socia, K. M., Dum, C. P., & Cole, K. (2023). Shooting The Messenger: How expert statements on stigmatized populations negatively impact perceived credibility. Justice Quarterly, 42(1), 64–89. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Sacca, L., Shegog, R., Hernandez, B., Peskin, M., Rushing, S. C., Jessen, C., Lane, T., & Markham, C. (2022). Barriers, frameworks, and mitigating strategies influencing the dissemination and implementation of health promotion interventions in indigenous communities: a scoping review. Implementation Science, 17(1), 18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Sarabi, S., Gillebaart, M., & De Ridder, D. (2025). Turning on the we-mode: a systematic review on joint action principles for promoting collective proenvironmental engagement. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1642312. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Saxton, J. C. (2022). How a House Becomes a Person: Understanding Identity through Lived Space. College English, 84(6), 596–612. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Shahreza, M., Imaniah, I., & Purwanto, E. (2025). Communication strategies of environmental activists in conducting sustainable environmental awareness campaigns. BIO Web of Conferences, 173, 03017. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Sikhosana, P., & Mashalaba, Y. (2025). Rethinking rural development research: Gaps, frameworks, and emerging directions (2010–2025). Town and Regional Planning, 87. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Subban, P., Bradford, B., Sharma, U., Loreman, T., Avramidis, E., Kullmann, H., Lozano, C. S., Romano, A., & Woodcock, S. (2022). Does it really take a village to raise a child? Reflections on the need for collective responsibility in inclusive education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 38(2), 291–302. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Sulistyaningsih, E. (2022). Community participation in improving environmental protection and effort management. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1030(1), 012021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. Tang, Y., & Chooi, W. (2022). From concern to action: the role of psychological distance in attitude towards environmental issues. Current Psychology, 42(30), 26570–26586. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Tenny, S., Brannan, J. M., & Brannan, G. D. (2022). Qualitative Study. StatPearls. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. UNEP. (2024, January 24). Annual Report 2023. UNEP – UN Environment Programme. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Van Der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S., & Maibach, E. (2017). Inoculating the Public against Misinformation about Climate Change. Global Challenges, 1(2), 1600008. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Velempini, K. (2025). Assessing the role of environmental education practices towards the attainment of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability, 17(5), 2043. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Verhoest, P., Bauwens, J., Braak, P. T., & Huysmans, M. (2025). The social resonance of environmental media messages: a connectionist-inspired reception analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Waghid, Z. (2023). Cultivating critical thinking, social justice awareness and empathy among pre-service teachers through online discussions on global citizenship education. Journal of Creative Communications, 19(1), 74–93. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. Ward, F., Lowther-Payne, H. J., Halliday, E. C., Dooley, K., Joseph, N., Livesey, R., Moran, P., Kirby, S., & Cloke, J. (2022). Engaging communities in addressing air quality: a scoping review. Environmental Health, 21(1), 89. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

57. Why Endangered Species Matter to Humans. (2025, November 10). ScienceInsights. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

58. World Health Organization. (2026). Evaluation framework for subregional approaches and their roadmaps: principles and methods. Regional Office for Europe. WHO-EURO-2026-13199-52973-82595-eng.pdf. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

59. Wyss, A. M., Knoch, D., & Berger, S. (2021). When and how pro-environmental attitudes turn into behavior: The role of costs, benefits, and self-control. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 79, 101748. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

60. Zhang, W., & Lim, B. Y. (2022). Towards Relatable Explainable AI with the Perceptual Process. CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Evaluating the Impacts of Mind Mapping Strategy on Developing EFL Students’ Critical Reading Skills
• Significance of Reading Instructions for Language Improvement in Children with Down Syndrome
• Prenasalised Consonants in Liangmai
• Metadiscourse Matters: Definitions, Models, and Advantages for ESL/ EFL Writing
• Blank Minds and Stuck Voices: Understanding and Addressing Cognitive Anxiety in High-Stakes ESL Speaking Tests