Popular culture is typically distributed about the environment without consideration for physical features. Instead, popular culture is distributed with concern to social and economic features.

General Environmental Impact:
-Unlike folk culture, popular culture modifies the environment instead of developing from it.
-Modification of an environment can be with the intention of increasing leisure activity participation by the public and/or promotion of a consumer good being sold.
-Creating a ‘natural’ environment can sometimes hide the modification but the purpose remains to purposefully invite people to visit the location by terms of popular culture.
-The distribution of popular culture tends to establish uniform landscapes. Such as Route 66 with an influx of large signs for motels, gas stations, and restaurants.
-In order to generate greater consumption and ‘product recognition’, promoters of popular culture create a uniform landscape.
-With the advent of faster communication and transportation, distribution of popular culture does not depend on a single place instead; the customs can arise from any place across the globe as long as the popular culture customs fit with consumer preference.
-Diffusion of some popular culture across the globe or even locally can impact the environment negatively in two major ways: -Depletion of scarce natural resources and pollution of the landscape.


Negative Environmental Impact:
-Depletion of Scarce Natural Resources:
-Diffusion of popular culture, which can possibly be through hierarchical diffusion and/or contagious diffusion, increases the demand for raw materials dug from the Earth. The demand can hinder the resources scarce and depleted the environmental supply.
-In terms of clothing, popular culture may demand a large supply of animals for their skins and cause certain species to become extinct.
-Increased meat consumption through popular culture is an inefficient way the world is nourished. It takes twice as much grain in weight that is fed to an animal to produce half the weight of the animal in meat for consumption. With malnourishment in some countries, this is seen as a highly inefficient use of grain.
-Pollution of the Landscape:
-Popular culture generates high volumes of waste in forms of solids, liquids, and gases. Some of the waste can be absorbed of the environment, but high levels can overwhelm it. The most visible, solids are often discarded and not recycled and as more and more people follow popular culture, this becomes an issue.
-More developed countries produce endless supplies to meet demands of popular culture with the advent of technology that both damages the environment and controls the damage made. Often times it is cheaper to damage the environment than to restore it.


Examples:
-An example of uniform landscape would be fast-food restaurant franchises that allow business people of an establishment to use their trademark. Once many establishments follow, the trademark becomes a recognized and uniform landscape. Often times, the symbol can be recognized internationally because of its uniformity.
-Automobiles also are an example of uniformity. Before the 1970s, automobiles from different countries varied greatly in size and appearance. After the 1970s, when Japanese automobiles were sold globally, they won consumer preference and became the standard in style of automobiles, which began the uniformity.
An example of a negative impact on the environment would be of the large number of demands for animals in order to produce clothing worn by consumers thousands of miles from the animal’s habitat. The skins of these animals are used to produce clothing, which hinders certain species instinct. This can cause an imbalance in the ecological system that the animal belongs to.
-Many popular culture items, ranging from cups from fast-food chains to CD’s of the latest music artist, end up being improperly discarded instead of recycled. This solid waste ends up in landfills, shantytowns, bodies of water, and so on.