IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i3p1443-d735743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Capital, Environmental Knowledge, and Pro-Environmental Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Qinyuan Wan

    (School of Economics, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

  • Wencui Du

    (School of Economics, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing 100070, China)

Abstract

As the value form of public access to environmental information, the impact of social capital on pro-environmental behavior cannot be ignored. Based on the data of the Chinese General Social Survey 2013 (CGSS2013), this study measures social capital from four aspects—social trust, social norms, social network, and social participation—and it empirically tests the impact of social capital on private and public pro-environmental behavior. The study finds that social capital helps promote pro-environmental behavior. Specifically, the more the public abides by social norms, the higher the degree of social participation, and the stronger the willingness to adopt private and public pro-environmental behaviors. However, the improvement of social trust only has a significant impact on the private environmental behaviors, and the expansion of the social network scale only has a significant impact on the public pro-environmental behaviors. The enhancement of social capital enriches environmental knowledge and promotes pro-environmental behaviors. The mechanism test shows that environmental knowledge plays an intermediary role in the path of social capital affecting individual pro-environmental behavior. The improvement of social capital has a significant impact on the environmental knowledge of individuals with high subjective social class. The gender heterogeneity of social capital affecting environmental knowledge mainly stems from social trust and social network. The stronger the degree of social trust, the richer the environmental knowledge of women, and the social network mainly affects the knowledge level of men. In addition, the publics in the southern region are more likely to be affected by social trust and improve environmental knowledge. Based on the above research conclusions, this paper puts forward policy suggestions on institutional aspects, such as increasing support for informal environmental organizations, carrying out differentiated sustainable development education, and improving the mechanism of environmental information communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Qinyuan Wan & Wencui Du, 2022. "Social Capital, Environmental Knowledge, and Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1443-:d:735743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1443/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1443/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pretty, Jules & Ward, Hugh, 2001. "Social Capital and the Environment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 209-227, February.
    2. Shan Gao & Weimin Li & Shuang Ling & Xin Dou & Xiaozhou Liu, 2019. "An Empirical Study on the Influence Path of Environmental Risk Perception on Behavioral Responses In China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-18, August.
    3. Yogo, Urbain Thierry, 2015. "Trust and the willingness to contribute to environmental goods in selected African countries," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(5), pages 650-672, October.
    4. Shao, Shuai & Tian, Zhihua & Fan, Meiting, 2018. "Do the rich have stronger willingness to pay for environmental protection? New evidence from a survey in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 83-94.
    5. Jingjing Zeng & Meiquan Jiang & Meng Yuan, 2020. "Environmental Risk Perception, Risk Culture, and Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-18, March.
    6. Nikoleta Jones, 2010. "Investigating the influence of social costs and benefits of environmental policies through social capital theory," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(3), pages 229-244, September.
    7. Ruixia Han & Yali Cheng, 2020. "The Influence of Norm Perception on Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Comparison between the Moderating Roles of Traditional Media and Social Media," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-18, September.
    8. Gillian Rice, 2006. "Pro-environmental Behavior in Egypt: Is there a Role for Islamic Environmental Ethics?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 65(4), pages 373-390, June.
    9. Polyzou, E. & Jones, N. & Evangelinos, K.I. & Halvadakis, C.P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for drinking water quality improvement and the influence of social capital," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 74-80, February.
    10. Zhenhua Zheng & Junling Gao & Ye Yang, 2020. "The Enigma of Gender Differences in an Environment-Behavior-Health Model of Elderly People: The Choice Between Individually and Sociality," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-18, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Katarzyna Pawlewicz & Iwona Cieślak, 2024. "An Analysis of the Relationships between Social Capital Levels and Selected Green Economy Indicators on the Example of Polish Voivodeships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Hong Tian & Xinyu Liu, 2022. "Pro-Environmental Behavior Research: Theoretical Progress and Future Directions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Wentao Si & Chen Jiang & Lin Meng, 2022. "The Relationship between Environmental Awareness, Habitat Quality, and Community Residents’ Pro-Environmental Behavior—Mediated Effects Model Analysis Based on Social Capital," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Yongliang Yang & Yuting Zhu & Xiaopeng Wang & Yi Li, 2022. "The Perception of Environmental Information Disclosure on Rural Residents’ Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-22, June.
    5. Jian Cao & Hongliang Qiu & Alastair M. Morrison & Wei Wei, 2022. "The Role of Social Capital in Predicting Tourists’ Waste Sorting Intentions in Rural Destinations: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Tao Xie & Jianguo Du & Kofi Baah Boamah & Lingyan Xu & Mingyue Ma, 2023. "The Internal and External Factors of Environmental Destructive Behavior in the Supply Chain: New Evidence from the Perspective of Brand-Name Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. George Marbuah, 2016. "Willingness to pay for environmental quality and social capital influence in Sweden," Working Papers 2016.13, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    2. George Marbuah, 2019. "Is willingness to contribute for environmental protection in Sweden affected by social capital?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(3), pages 451-475, July.
    3. George Marbuah & Ing-Marie Gren, 2015. "Carbon Emissions and Social Capital in Sweden," Working Papers 2015.14, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    4. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2019. "Is Social Capital Green? Cultural Features and Environmental Performance in the European Union," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(3), pages 795-822, March.
    5. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    6. Vogt, Nora & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "Lock-in effects in competitive bidding schemes for payments for ecosystem services: Revisiting the fundamental transformation," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 158, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    8. Marbuah, George & Gren, Ing-Marie & Tirkaso, Wondmagegn Tafesse, 2021. "Social capital, economic development and carbon emissions: Empirical evidence from counties in Sweden," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    9. Yanqiang Du & Pingyang Liu & Shipeng Su & Linyi Zhou, 2022. "The Sharing of Costs and Benefits of Rural Environmental Pollution Governance in China: A Qualitative Analysis through Guanxi Networks Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Abida Begum & Liu Jingwei & Maqsood Haider & Muhammad Maroof Ajmal & Salim Khan & Heesup Han, 2021. "Impact of Environmental Moral Education on Pro-Environmental Behaviour: Do Psychological Empowerment and Islamic Religiosity Matter?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-19, February.
    11. Teisl, Mario F. & Rubin, Jonathan & Noblet, Caroline L., 2008. "Non-dirty dancing? Interactions between eco-labels and consumers," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 140-159, April.
    12. Dastjerdi, Aliasghar Mehdizadeh & Kaplan, Sigal & de Abreu e Silva, Joao & Anker Nielsen, Otto & Camara Pereira, Francisco, 2019. "Use intention of mobility-management travel apps: The role of users goals, technophile attitude and community trust," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 114-135.
    13. Nurullah Gür, 2020. "Does social trust promote behaviour aimed at mitigating climate change?," Economic Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(1), pages 36-49, February.
    14. Polyzou, E. & Jones, N. & Evangelinos, K.I. & Halvadakis, C.P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for drinking water quality improvement and the influence of social capital," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 74-80, February.
    15. Raffaele Scuderi & Giuseppe Tesoriere & Giulio Pedrini, 2023. "Social capital and women's willingness to pay for safe water access: Evidence from African rural areas," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 91(2), pages 161-185, June.
    16. John D. Ditekemena & Christophe Luhata & Hypolite M. Mavoko & Joseph Nelson Siewe Fodjo & Dalau M. Nkamba & Wim Van Damme & Shahul H. Ebrahim & Christiana Noestlinger & Robert Colebunders, 2021. "Intimate Partners Violence against Women during a COVID-19 Lockdown Period: Results of an Online Survey in 7 Provinces of the Democratic Republic of Congo," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-10, May.
    17. Sergio Currarini & Carmen Marchiori & Alessandro Tavoni, 2016. "Network Economics and the Environment: Insights and Perspectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 159-189, September.
    18. Crespo, Joan & Réquier-Desjardins, Denis & Vicente, Jérôme, 2014. "Why can collective action fail in Local Agri-food Systems? A social network analysis of cheese producers in Aculco, Mexico," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 165-177.
    19. Arsovski Slobodan & Kwiatkowski Michał & Lewandowska Aleksandra & Peshevska Dimitrinka Jordanova & Sofeska Emilija & Dymitrow Mirek, 2018. "Can urban environmental problems be overcome? The case of Skopje–world’s most polluted city," Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, Sciendo, vol. 40(40), pages 17-39, June.
    20. Tobias Böhmelt & Jürg Vollenweider, 2015. "Information flows and social capital through linkages: the effectiveness of the CLRTAP network," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 105-123, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1443-:d:735743. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.