Within the theory of Environmental and Sustainability Education (ESE) motivation is an important subject of research as it is considered the condition where a person has or acquires intrinsic and extrinsic incentives (motives), to involve into pro-environmental behavior and actions (Christodoulou & Korfiatis, 2019; Darner, 2012). According to the Self Determination Theory (SDT) of motivation, people are rarely driven by only one type of motivation. Different goals, desires, and ideas inform us what we want and need. Thus, it is useful to think of motivation on a continuum ranging from “non-self-determined to self-determined.” (Ryan and Deci, 2020). At the left end of the spectrum, we have amotivation, in which an individual is completely non-autonomous, has no drive to speak of, and is struggling to have any of their needs met. In the middle, we have several levels of extrinsic motivation. One step to the right of amotivation is external regulation, in which motivation is exclusively external and regulated by compliance, conformity, and external rewards and punishments. The next level of extrinsic motivation is termed introjected regulation, in which the motivation is somewhat external and is driven by self-control, efforts to protect the ego, and internal rewards and punishments. In identified regulation, the motivation is somewhat internal and based on conscious values and that which is personally important to the individual. The final step of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation, in which intrinsic sources and the desire to be self-aware are guiding an individual’s behavior. The right end of the continuum shows an individual entirely motivated by intrinsic sources. In intrinsic regulation, the individual is self-motivated and self-determined, and driven by interest, enjoyment, and the satisfaction inherent in the behavior or activity he or she is engaging in.

From an educational point of view, the aim is to support those types of motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic) who are more strongly connected with students’ personal development and well-being.  Indeed, various studies in the domain of environmental and sustainability education have shown that integrated and intrinsic types of motivation for participation and action are connected with empowerment, self-efficacy and ownership, as well as with a longer sustaining of a behavior or action (Dutta and Chandrasekharan, 2017; Murakami, Su-Russell and Manfra, 2018).

Research on environmental motivation usually follows a quantitative approach (e.g. Darner 2009; Karaaslan et al. 2014; Cooke et al. 2016). One of the most well-known instruments is the MTES (motivation towards the environment scale) introduced by Pelletier et al. (1998). The MTES is a 24-item questionnaire that measures an individual’s motivation toward proenvironmental behaviours. Four items correspond to each of the six types of motivation, according to the seld-determination theory.

In the present research we studied changes in environmental motivation of a group of elementary school children participating in a schoolgarden project. We follewed a qualitative approach, which allowed us to depict finer differences in environmental motives than those predicted by the basic model of the Self-Determination Theory.

Thirteen students from an urban elementary school, aged 6-12 years old, participated in the kitchengarden project. Students were characterized by medium educational level, low environmental motivation, limited interaction with nature, low socio-economic background, and high level of obesity. Project activities were based on students’ thoughts and decisions during the implementation of the project. Students worked in mixed capacity groups of three to four members. The project was designed with aim to enhance participating children satisfaction of their basic psychological needs, according to SDT: their sense of autonomy by making their own choices about maintaining their garden and managing their crops; their sense of competence by collecting good quality and fresh vegetables; and their sense of relatedness by discussing problem-solving activities and making group decisions (Korfiatis & Petrou, 2021). Data collection Data were collected by pre and post-test semi-structured interviews, aiming in understanding participants environmental motivation. The interview protocol was based on ten main questions inspired by MTES. Data analysis Content Analysis used to analyse the data gathered with the above-mentioned methodological tools. The categories of analysis derived deductively (i.e the five types of motivation (External Regulation, Introjected Regulation, Identified Regulation, Integrated Regulation, Intrinsic Regulation, plus Amotivation), but also inductively, based on the answers of the participating students. At the end of analysis, 21 sub-categories of motivation were recorded.

One notable difference between Self-Determination theory and other theories that seek to explain motivation is that Self-Determination theory emphasizes the types/categories of motivation that individuals have and how these types are transformed from one type to another (Deci & Ryan, 2008), rather than the degree to which motivation exists as a measurable type (e.g., the more motivation, the more individuals act towards a behavior). In fact, Self-Determination theory argues that types or categories of motivation are more important than the degree of motivation existence. The results of the present study come to add another feature to children's motivation as it confirms the different types of motivation that characterize students/participants but at the same time identifies a gradient that characterizes each type of motivation for each child. Specifically, from the analysis process of the initial and final semi-structured interviews/discussions, we found that the participants statements could not be placed in a type/category of motivation that they represented to an absolute degree. As a result, we decided statements to create graded subcategories under each motivation category. Thus, under the Internal Regulation category, instead of dividing the students' statements into those marked "Internal Regulation" and those not marked "Internal Regulation" we placed their statements into four subcategories: Absence of Internal Regulation, Moderate to Low Internal Regulation, Moderate to High Internal Regulation, High Internal Regulation. The same procedure was followed for all motivations categories. Results showed large changes between the different sub-categories of our analysis concerning participants motivation, which would not have been depicted if we had followed a quantitative approach based on the six types of motivation only.

Christodoulou, A., & Korfiatis, K. (2019). Children's interest in school garden projects, environmental motivation, and intention to act: A case study from a primary school of Cyprus. Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 1-11. Cooke, A. N., Fielding, K. S., & Louis, W. R. (2016). Environmentally active people: the role of autonomy, relatedness, competence and self-determined motivation. Environmental Education Research, 22(5), 631-657. Darner, R. (2012). An empirical test of self-determination theory as a guide to fostering environmental motivation. Environmental Education Research, 18(4), 463-472. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne, 49(3), 182. Dutta, D., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2018). Doing to being: farming actions in a community coalesce into pro-environment motivations and values. Environmental Education Research, 24(8), 1192-1210. Karaarslan, G. Sungur, S. & Ertepinar, H. (2014). Developing preservice science teachers’ self-determined motivation toward environment through environmental activities. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 9, 1-19. Korfiatis, K., & Petrou, S. (2021). Participation and why it matters: children’s perspectives and expressions of ownership, motivation, collective efficacy and self-efficacy and locus of control. Environmental Education Research, 27(12), 1700-1722. Murakami, C. D., Su-Russell, C., & Manfra, L. (2018). Analyzing teacher narratives in early childhood garden-based education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 49(1), 18-29. Pelletier, L. G., Tuson, K. M., Green-Demers, I., Noels K., & Beaton, A. M. (1998). Why are you doing things for the environment? The motivation toward the environment scale (MTES). Journal of Applied Psychology, 28(5), 437-468. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 61, 101860.