IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v100y2019icp33-43.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intentions to engage in forest law enforcement in Romania: An application of the theory of planned behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Popa, Bogdan
  • Niță, Mihai Daniel
  • Hălălișan, Aureliu Florin

Abstract

Despite numerous positive achievements, the institutional reforms in the forest sector in Central and Eastern European countries are still facing numerous problems. In Romanian case, the relatively new created Forest Inspectorates (FI) have not reached the initial expectations of applying and monitoring the forest-specific regulations. Theory of Planned Behavior was used in this context. FIs employees' intention to engage in forest law enforcement effort was investigated using a questionnaire-based survey including all the FIs employees and having a 77% rate of response. The intention to engage in forest law enforcement was predicted from employees' attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioral control factors. A rather neutral FIs employees' intention to engage in forest law enforcement was satisfactory explained according to the theory of planned behavior. Particularly, the limited perceived power to affect factors like unsuited training, FIs improper planning & management and unsuited legislation influenced the behavioral intention. Because the effectiveness of new institutions is affected by the engagement of their employees, the conclusions of the study are useful for formulating recommendations on how effectiveness of FIs can be improved by supporting the employees to perform the required engagement in their work. The main recommendations of the study are: to build the capacity of FIs through training and improved management arrangements and to reform the legislation to make it more stable, predictable and easy to implement and monitor.

Suggested Citation

  • Popa, Bogdan & Niță, Mihai Daniel & Hălălișan, Aureliu Florin, 2019. "Intentions to engage in forest law enforcement in Romania: An application of the theory of planned behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 33-43.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:100:y:2019:i:c:p:33-43
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2018.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934117304641
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.11.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karppinen, Heimo & Berghäll, Sami, 2015. "Forest owners' stand improvement decisions: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 275-284.
    2. Teemu Kautonen & Marco van Gelderen & Erno T. Tornikoski, 2013. "Predicting entrepreneurial behaviour: a test of the theory of planned behaviour," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(6), pages 697-707, February.
    3. Lynne, Gary D. & Franklin Casey, C. & Hodges, Alan & Rahmani, Mohammed, 1995. "Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 581-598, December.
    4. Ulybina, Olga, 2014. "Russian forests: The path of reform," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 143-150.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Weiss, Gerhard & Lawrence, Anna & Hujala, Teppo & Lidestav, Gun & Nichiforel, Liviu & Nybakk, Erlend & Quiroga, Sonia & Sarvašová, Zuzana & Suarez, Cristina & Živojinović, Ivana, 2019. "Forest ownership changes in Europe: State of knowledge and conceptual foundations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 9-20.
    7. van der Voet, Joris, 2014. "The effectiveness and specificity of change management in a public organization: Transformational leadership and a bureaucratic organizational structure," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 373-382.
    8. Nijnik, Maria & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2000. "Forestry in the Ukraine: the road ahead?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 139-151, August.
    9. Rauch, Peter & Wolfsmayr, Ulrich J. & Borz, Stelian Alexandru & Triplat, Matevž & Krajnc, Nike & Kolck, Matthias & Oberwimmer, Roland & Ketikidis, Chrysovalantis & Vasiljevic, Aleksandar & Stauder, Mi, 2015. "SWOT analysis and strategy development for forest fuel supply chains in South East Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 87-94.
    10. Liobikienė, Genovaitė & Mandravickaitė, Justina & Bernatonienė, Jurga, 2016. "Theory of planned behavior approach to understand the green purchasing behavior in the EU: A cross-cultural study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 38-46.
    11. Lazdinis, Marius & Carver, Andrew & Tonisson, Kristjan & Silamikele, Ilze, 2005. "Innovative use of forest policy instruments in countries with economies in transition: experience of the Baltic States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 527-537, May.
    12. Ameyaw, Joana & Arts, Bas & Wals, Arjen, 2016. "Challenges to responsible forest governance in Ghana and its implications for professional education," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 78-87.
    13. Primmer, Eeva & Karppinen, Heimo, 2010. "Professional judgment in non-industrial private forestry: Forester attitudes and social norms influencing biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 136-146, February.
    14. Karppinen, Heimo, 2005. "Forest owners' choice of reforestation method: an application of the theory of planned behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 393-409, March.
    15. Fréchette, Alain & Lewis, Nathalie, 2011. "Pushing the boundaries of conventional forest policy research: Analyzing institutional change at multiple levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(7), pages 582-589, September.
    16. Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe, 2016. "Barriers to policy implementation and implications for Zambia's forest ecosystems," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 40-44.
    17. Sandulescu, Emil & Wagner, John E. & Pailler, Sharon & Floyd, Donald W. & Davis, Craig J., 2007. "Policy analysis of a government-sanctioned management plan for a community-owned forest in Romania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1-2), pages 14-24, December.
    18. Ibarra, Enrique & Hirakuri, Sofia R., 2007. "Institutional conflict and forest policy effectiveness: The case of the Costa Rican institutional reform," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(6), pages 591-601, February.
    19. Yeboah-Assiamah, Emmanuel & Muller, Kobus & Domfeh, Kwame Ameyaw, 2017. "Institutional assessment in natural resource governance: A conceptual overview," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1-12.
    20. Dragoi, Marian & Popa, Bogdan & Blujdea, Viorel, 2011. "Improving communication among stakeholders through ex-post transactional analysis -- case study on Romanian forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 16-23, January.
    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. Marian Drăgoi & Veronica Toza, 2019. "Did Forestland Restitution Facilitate Institutional Amnesia? Some Evidence from Romanian Forest Policy," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Nichiforel, Liviu & Duduman, Gabriel & Scriban, Ramona Elena & Popa, Bogdan & Barnoaiea, Ionut & Drăgoi, Marian, 2021. "Forest ecosystem services in Romania: Orchestrating regulatory and voluntary planning documents," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Saif Ullah & Ali Abid & Waqas Aslam & Rana Shahzad Noor & Muhammad Mohsin Waqas & Tian Gang, 2021. "Predicting Behavioral Intention of Rural Inhabitants toward Economic Incentive for Deforestation in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Xiaoyong Li & Giuseppe T. Cirella & Yali Wen & Yi Xie, 2020. "Farmers’ Intentions to Lease Forestland: Evidence from Rural China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Edi Dwi Cahyono & Salsabila Fairuzzana & Deltanti Willianto & Eka Pradesti & Niall P. McNamara & Rebecca L. Rowe & Meine van Noordwijk, 2020. "Agroforestry Innovation through Planned Farmer Behavior: Trimming in Pine–Coffee Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, September.

    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. Arlixcya Vinnisa Anak Empidi & Diana Emang, 2021. "Understanding Public Intentions to Participate in Protection Initiatives for Forested Watershed Areas Using the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Case Study of Cameron Highlands in Pahang, Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Karppinen, Heimo & Berghäll, Sami, 2015. "Forest owners' stand improvement decisions: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 275-284.
    3. Guang-Wen Zheng & Abu Bakkar Siddik & Mohammad Masukujjaman & Syed Shah Alam & Alvina Akter, 2020. "Perceived Environmental Responsibilities and Green Buying Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Grace B. Villamor & Andrew Dunningham & Philip Stahlmann-Brown & Peter W. Clinton, 2022. "Improving the Representation of Climate Change Adaptation Behaviour in New Zealand’s Forest Growing Sector," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, March.
    5. Lodin, Isak & Brukas, Vilis, 2021. "Ideal vs real forest management: Challenges in promoting production-oriented silvicultural ideals among small-scale forest owners in southern Sweden," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    6. Bethany Cooper, 2017. "What drives compliance? An application of the theory of planned behaviour to urban water restrictions using structural equation modelling," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(14), pages 1426-1439, March.
    7. Pereira Lima, Flávia & Pereira Bastos, Rogério, 2020. "Understanding landowners’ intention to restore native areas: The role of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    8. Carlos Bazan, 2022. "Effect of the University’s Environment and Support System on Subjective Social Norms as Precursor of the Entrepreneurial Intention of Students," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, October.
    9. Fayolle, Alain & Liñán, Francisco, 2014. "The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 663-666.
    10. repec:idn:jimfjn:v:4:y:2018:i:1j:p:1-22 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Abdullah Al Mamun & Syed Ali Fazal & Muhammad Mehedi Masud & Ganeshsree Selvachandran & Noor Raihani Zainol & Quek Shio Gai, 2020. "The Underlying Drivers of Underprivileged Households’ Intention and Behavior towards Community Forestry Management: A Study Using Structural Equation Modelling and Artificial Neural Network Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-26, September.
    12. Abu Elnasr E. Sobaih & Ibrahim A. Elshaer, 2023. "Risk-Taking, Financial Knowledge, and Risky Investment Intention: Expanding Theory of Planned Behavior Using a Moderating-Mediating Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, January.
    13. Meles, Tensay Hadush & Ryan, Lisa & Mukherjee, Sanghamitra C., 2022. "Heterogeneity in preferences for renewable home heating systems among Irish households," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    14. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    15. Yadav, Rambalak & Pathak, Govind S., 2017. "Determinants of Consumers' Green Purchase Behavior in a Developing Nation: Applying and Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 114-122.
    16. Changjoon Lee & Soyoun Lim & Byoungchun Ha, 2021. "Green Supply Chain Management and Its Impact on Consumer Purchase Decision as a Marketing Strategy: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Meqbel M. Aliedan & Ibrahim A. Elshaer & Mansour A. Alyahya & Abu Elnasr E. Sobaih, 2022. "Influences of University Education Support on Entrepreneurship Orientation and Entrepreneurship Intention: Application of Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-18, October.
    18. David R. Marshall & Robert Gigliotti, 2020. "Bound for entrepreneurship? A career-theoretical perspective on entrepreneurial intentions," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 287-303, March.
    19. Ben Youssef, Adel & Boubaker, Sabri & Dedaj, But & Carabregu-Vokshi, Mjellma, 2021. "Digitalization of the economy and entrepreneurship intention," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    20. Kevin Banning* & Ravi Chinta, 2019. "Attitudinal and Structural Determinants of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Women," Business, Management and Economics Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 5(2), pages 26-32, 02-2019.
    21. Franz Huber & Alan Ponce & Francesco Rentocchini & Thomas Wainwright, 2020. "The Wealth of (Open Data) Nations? Examining the interplay of open government data and country-level institutions for entrepreneurial activity at the country-level," SEEDS Working Papers 1120, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised Nov 2020.

    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:eee:forpol:v:100:y:2019:i:c:p:33-43. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.