IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pie/dsedps/2021-269.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pro-environmental attitude and behaviours: an investigation on the role of pro-sociality

Author

Listed:
  • Caterina Giannetti
  • Pietro Guarnieri
  • Tommaso Luzzati

Abstract

The multifaceted nature of contemporary environmental degradation requires an all-round policy approach, that cannot disregard the role of people's behaviour. To study how to promote environmentally friendly actions, this paper investigates whether pro-sociality triggers pro-environmental behaviours (PEBs). To this aim, we consider not only the direct effect that pro-sociality might have on PEBs but also the indirect effect transmitted through environmental concerns. After outlining a theoretical framework based on the literature on PEBs, we use a Eurobarometer survey to conduct a causal mediation analysis. Our results show that pro social attitudes are actually important, having also a strong indirect effect on PEBs. Furthermore, they suggest that policies promoting pro-social attitudes may be more effective than those simply promoting pro environmental attitudes.

Suggested Citation

  • Caterina Giannetti & Pietro Guarnieri & Tommaso Luzzati, 2021. "Pro-environmental attitude and behaviours: an investigation on the role of pro-sociality," Discussion Papers 2021/269, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    • Handle: RePEc:pie:dsedps:2021/269
    Note: ISSN 2039-1854
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ec.unipi.it/documents/Ricerca/papers/2021-269.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Rodrigo Pinto, 2015. "Econometric Mediation Analyses: Identifying the Sources of Treatment Effects from Experimentally Estimated Production Technologies with Unmeasured and Mismeasured Inputs," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1-2), pages 6-31, February.
    2. Karapetyan, Deanna & d'Adda, Giovanna, 2014. "Determinants of conservation among the rural poor: A charitable contribution experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 74-87.
    3. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    4. Bruns, Stephan B. & Moneta, Alessio & Stern, David I., 2021. "Estimating the economy-wide rebound effect using empirically identified structural vector autoregressions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    5. Stefan Drews & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2016. "What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 855-876, October.
    6. Freire-González, Jaume, 2017. "Evidence of direct and indirect rebound effect in households in EU-27 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 270-276.
    7. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2017. "Green lifestyles and subjective well-being: More about self-image than actual behavior?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 304-323.
    8. Christian Dippel & Robert Gold & Stephan Heblich & Rodrigo Pinto, 2017. "Instrumental Variables and Causal Mechanisms: Unpacking the Effect of Trade on Workers and Voters," CESifo Working Paper Series 6816, CESifo.
    9. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2016. "Environmental concerns, volunteering and subjective well-being: Antecedents and outcomes of environmental activism in Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-16.
    10. David Cesarini & Christopher T. Dawes & Magnus Johannesson & Paul Lichtenstein & Björn Wallace, 2009. "Genetic Variation in Preferences for Giving and Risk Taking," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(2), pages 809-842.
    11. Sverker C. Jagers & Simon Matti, 2010. "Ecological Citizens: Identifying Values and Beliefs that Support Individual Environmental Responsibility among Swedes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-25, April.
    12. Huber, Martin, 2019. "A review of causal mediation analysis for assessing direct and indirect treatment effects," FSES Working Papers 500, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    13. Luzzati, Tommaso & Orsini, Marco & Gucciardi, Gianluca, 2018. "A multiscale reassessment of the Environmental Kuznets Curve for energy and CO2 emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 612-621.
    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. Bilancini, Ennio & Boncinelli, Leonardo & Di Paolo, Roberto, 2023. "Game-based education promotes practices supporting sustainable water use," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).

    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. Heinz, Nicolai & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Other-regarding preferences and pro-environmental behaviour: An interdisciplinary review of experimental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.
    3. Leonhard K. Lades & Kate Laffan & Till O. Weber, 2020. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Working Papers 202003, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    4. Erda Wang & Nannan Kang, 2019. "Does life satisfaction matter for pro-environmental behavior? Empirical evidence from China General Social Survey," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 449-469, January.
    5. Chiara Franco & Claudia Ghisetti, 2022. "What shapes the “value-action” gap? The role of time perception reconsidered," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 39(3), pages 1023-1053, October.
    6. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Welsch, Heinz, 2019. "Peer influences and proenvironmental behavior: Panel evidence for the role of regional prevalence and diversity," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 367, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Guardiola, Jorge, 2020. "Does it have to be a sacrifice? Different notions of the good life, pro-environmental behavior and their heterogeneous impact on well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Salvador del Saz Salazar & Luis Pérez y Pérez, 2021. "Exploring the Differential Effect of Life Satisfaction on Low and High-Cost Pro-Environmental Behaviors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-17, December.
    9. Maurizio Pugno & Francesco Sarracino, 2021. "Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation to protect the environment: correlational and causal evidence," Working Papers 2021-01, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
    10. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers & Simon Matti, 2017. "Public Support for Pro-Environmental Policy Measures: Examining the Impact of Personal Values and Ideology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Martin Binder & Ann-Kathrin Blankenberg & Heinz Welsch, 2020. "Pro-environmental Norms, Green Lifestyles, and Subjective Well-Being: Panel Evidence from the UK," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 1029-1060, December.
    12. Stefano Carattini & Simon Levin & Alessandro Tavoni, 2019. "Cooperation in the Climate Commons," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 227-247.
    13. Ary José A. Souza-Jr., 2021. "Climate change and behavior: Do environmental attitudes and perceptions impact on subjective well-being in Europe?," Working Papers REM 2021/0207, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    14. Ary Júnior, 2022. "Does income inequality change the relationship between environmental attitudes and subjective well-being? Evidence for 27 European countries," Working Papers REM 2022/0229, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    15. Christopher Severen & Arthur A. van Benthem, 2022. "Formative Experiences and the Price of Gasoline," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 256-284, April.
    16. Sverker C. Jagers & Erick Lachapelle & Johan Martinsson & Simon Matti, 2021. "Bridging the ideological gap? How fairness perceptions mediate the effect of revenue recycling on public support for carbon taxes in the United States, Canada and Germany," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(5), pages 529-554, September.
    17. Heinz Welsch & Philipp Bierman & Jan Kühling, 2021. "Immigration Attitudes and Subjective Well-Being: A Matter of Identity?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1563-1581, April.
    18. Martin Binder & Ann-Kathrin Blankenberg & Heinz Welsch, 2019. "Pro-environmental norms and subjective well-being: panel evidence from the UK," Working Papers V-417-19, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2019.
    19. Bart Defloor & Brent Bleys & Elsy Verhofstadt & Luc Van Ootegem, 2022. "How to Reduce Individuals’ Ecological Footprint without Harming Their Well-Being: An Application to Belgium," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-30, April.
    20. Martin Binder, 2017. "Entrepreneurial Success and Subjective Well-Being: Worries about the Business Explain One's Well-Being Loss from Self-Employment," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 947, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    IV-mediation analysis; environmental citizenship; PEBs; EU citizens;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C36 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Instrumental Variables (IV) Estimation
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pie:dsedps:2021/269. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dspisit.html .

    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.