IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7866-d1144448.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Green Attitude of Four European Capitals of Culture’s Youth

Author

Listed:
  • Edit Kővári

    (Department of Management, University of Pannonia, Egyetem Str. 10, H-8200 Veszprém, Hungary)

  • Katalin Formádi

    (Department of Marketing, University of Pannonia, Egyetem Str. 10, H-8200 Veszprém, Hungary)

  • Zsuzsanna Banász

    (Department of Economics, University of Pannonia, Egyetem Str. 10, H-8200 Veszprém, Hungary)

Abstract

This study investigated the attitude of young people (individuals aged 14–25 years old) towards environmental protection using the NEP scale. The research aims to understand how demographic characteristics may influence young people’s attitudes toward green issues. The study focuses on answering the following two research questions: Q1. How can the environmental attitudes of young individuals be systematically characterized and summarized? Q2. To what extent do demographic factors influence the environmental attitudes of young individuals? A computer-assisted data collection (CAPI) method was carried out in four European Capital of Culture cities from different countries (Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania) from April to June 2022. On the basis of this primary questionnaire survey, descriptive statistics and relationship analyses (Cramer’s V and Kendall’s tau) were used to analyze the collected data (n = 712). The results revealed that in most cases, demographic characteristics had little or no impact at all on green attitudes. Thus, most youth attitudes showed the concept that humanity must adapt to the limits of nature. Furthermore, there were three green attitude statements where moderate differences could be detected by the countries. The findings can provide guidance for decision-makers in the field of environmental education and marketing, and they can also serve as a benchmark for other countries. Additionally, it opens up new opportunities for further research on the role of formal and informal education, as well as to measure the impact of social media on youth environmental behavior and their proactivity towards green issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Edit Kővári & Katalin Formádi & Zsuzsanna Banász, 2023. "The Green Attitude of Four European Capitals of Culture’s Youth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7866-:d:1144448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7866/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7866/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Kilbourne, William E. & Beckmann, Suzanne C. & Thelen, Eva, 2002. "The role of the dominant social paradigm in environmental attitudes: a multinational examination," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 193-204, March.
    3. Måns Nilsson & Dave Griggs & Martin Visbeck, 2016. "Policy: Map the interactions between Sustainable Development Goals," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7607), pages 320-322, June.
    4. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    5. Vishal Kumar & Aude Vuilliomenet, 2021. "Urban Nature: Does Green Infrastructure Relate to the Cultural and Creative Vitality of European Cities?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-12, July.
    6. Stamatios Ntanos & Grigorios Kyriakopoulos & Michalis Skordoulis & Miltiadis Chalikias & Garyfallos Arabatzis, 2019. "An Application of the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Scale in a Greek Context," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    7. Jason Hickel, 2019. "The contradiction of the sustainable development goals: Growth versus ecology on a finite planet," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 873-884, September.
    8. Marcell Tamás Kurbucz & Attila Imre Katona & Zoltán Lantos & Zsolt Tibor Kosztyán, 2021. "The Role of Societal Aspects in the Formation of Official COVID-19 Reports: A Data-Driven Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-15, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yizhong Huan & Lingqing Wang & Mark Burgman & Haitao Li & Yurong Yu & Jianpeng Zhang & Tao Liang, 2022. "A multi‐perspective composite assessment framework for prioritizing targets of sustainable development goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 833-847, October.
    2. Simona Fiandrino & Francesco Scarpa & Riccardo Torelli, 2022. "Fostering Social Impact Through Corporate Implementation of the SDGs: Transformative Mechanisms Towards Interconnectedness and Inclusiveness," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(4), pages 959-973, November.
    3. Patricia Urban & Markus Hametner, 2022. "The Economy–Environment Nexus: Sustainable Development Goals Interlinkages in Austria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    4. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.
    5. Joyeeta Gupta & Louis Lebel, 0. "Access and allocation in earth system governance: lessons learnt in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-18.
    6. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    7. David Tremblay & François Fortier & Jean‐François Boucher & Olivier Riffon & Claude Villeneuve, 2020. "Sustainable development goal interactions: An analysis based on the five pillars of the 2030 agenda," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1584-1596, November.
    8. Jan Anton van Zanten & Rob van Tulder, 2020. "Beyond COVID-19: Applying “SDG logics” for resilient transformations," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 451-464, December.
    9. Anne Warchold & Prajal Pradhan & Jürgen P. Kropp, 2021. "Variations in sustainable development goal interactions: Population, regional, and income disaggregation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2), pages 285-299, March.
    10. Kristin Linnerud & Erling Holden & Morten Simonsen, 2021. "Closing the sustainable development gap: A global study of goal interactions," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 738-753, July.
    11. Seyed Meysam Khoshnava & Raheleh Rostami & Rosli Mohamad Zin & Dalia Štreimikienė & Alireza Yousefpour & Wadim Strielkowski & Abbas Mardani, 2019. "Aligning the Criteria of Green Economy (GE) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to Implement Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-23, August.
    12. Francesco Fuso Nerini & Julia Tomei & Long Seng To & Iwona Bisaga & Priti Parikh & Mairi Black & Aiduan Borrion & Catalina Spataru & Vanesa Castán Broto & Gabrial Anandarajah & Ben Milligan & Yacob Mu, 2018. "Mapping synergies and trade-offs between energy and the Sustainable Development Goals," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(1), pages 10-15, January.
    13. Syrus M. Islam & Asheq Rahman, 2023. "Impact investment deal flow and Sustainable Development Goals: “Mind the gap?”," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 3797-3813, December.
    14. Rachel E. Bitoun & Gilbert David & Rodolphe Devillers, 2023. "Strategic use of ecosystem services and co‐benefits for Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 1296-1310, June.
    15. Stöckigt, Gerrit & Schiebener, Johannes & Brand, Matthias, 2018. "Providing sustainability information in shopping situations contributes to sustainable decision making: An empirical study with choice-based conjoint analyses," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 188-199.
    16. Gabriela Olmos Antillón & Håkan Tunón & Daiana de Oliveira & Michael Jones & Anna Wallenbeck & Janice Swanson & Harry Blokhuis & Linda Keeling, 2021. "Animal Welfare and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals—Broadening Students’ Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    17. Marwa B. Hannouf & Alejandro Padilla‐Rivera & Getachew Assefa & Ian Gates, 2023. "Methodological framework to find links between life cycle sustainability assessment categories and the UN Sustainable Development Goals based on literature," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(3), pages 707-725, June.
    18. Olawole Fawehinmi & M. Y. Yusliza & Wan Zulkifli Wan Kasim & Zaleha Mohamad & Muhammad Abi Sofian Abdul Halim, 2020. "Exploring the Interplay of Green Human Resource Management, Employee Green Behavior, and Personal Moral Norms," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, December.
    19. Mohammad Naushad, 2018. "A study on the antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions among Saudi students," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 5(3), pages 600-617, March.
    20. Nessa Winston, 2022. "Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 191-202, February.

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7866-:d:1144448. 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.