IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v9y2020i12p221-d454601.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Functionality of Dissimilarity: Pro-Environmental Behavior through Heterogenous Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Robbe Geerts

    (Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

  • Frédéric Vandermoere

    (Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

  • Stijn Oosterlynck

    (Department of Sociology, University of Antwerp, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium)

Abstract

This study explores whether social interaction with dissimilar others can lead to pro-environmental behavior. Dissimilar others are people who differ from the person in question (e.g., in terms of lifestyle or culture). While most research focuses on homogenous social networks (e.g., spatial communities), we explore the potential of network heterophily. Specifically, using data ( n = 1370) from the Flemish Survey on Sociocultural Shifts, we examine the relationship between network heterophily and pro-environmental behavior (i.e., shopping decisions and curtailment behavior). Building on Granovetter’s study on ‘the strength of weak ties’, we emphasize the importance of social ties that provide novel information and social expectations. Through interaction with dissimilar others, people may create a heterogeneous network in which a diversity of information and social expectations with regard to pro-environmental behavior circulates. We expect that network heterophily may foster pro-environmental behavior. Our findings indicate that pro-environmental behavior may indeed be positively related to interaction with dissimilar others, partly because people with many dissimilar ties know more about environmental problems and are more concerned about them. This study therefore shows that network heterophily promotes pro-environmental behavior. The paper concludes with a discussion of the functionality of dissimilarity and some avenues for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Robbe Geerts & Frédéric Vandermoere & Stijn Oosterlynck, 2020. "The Functionality of Dissimilarity: Pro-Environmental Behavior through Heterogenous Networks," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-16, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:9:y:2020:i:12:p:221-:d:454601
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/12/221/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/9/12/221/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frédéric Vandermoere & Robbe Geerts & Charlotte De Backer & Sara Erreygers & Els Van Doorslaer, 2019. "Meat Consumption and Vegaphobia: An Exploration of the Characteristics of Meat Eaters, Vegaphobes, and Their Social Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Babutsidze, Zakaria & Chai, Andreas, 2018. "Look at me Saving the Planet! The Imitation of Visible Green Behavior and its Impact on the Climate Value-Action Gap," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 290-303.
    3. 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.
    4. Brooks, Jeremy S. & Wilson, Charlie, 2015. "The influence of contextual cues on the perceived status of consumption-reducing behavior," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 108-117.
    5. 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.
    6. Simon Rodan & Charles Galunic, 2004. "More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 541-562, June.
    7. Matheus Nardo & Jeremy S. Brooks & Sonja Klinsky & Charlie Wilson, 2017. "Social signals and sustainability: ambiguity about motivations can affect status perceptions of efficiency and curtailment behaviors," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 184-197, June.
    8. Jones, Nikoleta & Clark, Julian R.A. & Malesios, Chrisovaladis, 2015. "Social capital and willingness-to-pay for coastal defences in south-east England," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 74-82.
    9. Jeongsik “Jay” Lee, 2010. "Heterogeneity, Brokerage, and Innovative Performance: Endogenous Formation of Collaborative Inventor Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 804-822, August.
    10. Videras, Julio & Owen, Ann L. & Conover, Emily & Wu, Stephen, 2012. "The influence of social relationships on pro-environment behaviors," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 35-50.
    11. Seong-gin Moon, 2017. "The influence of trust on environmental behavior: evidence from South Korea," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 123-137, April.
    12. Sverker C. Jagers & Stefan Linde & Johan Martinsson & Simon Matti, 2017. "Testing the Importance of Individuals’ Motives for Explaining Environmentally Significant Behavior," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 98(2), pages 644-658, June.
    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. Robbe Geerts & Frédéric Vandermoere & Hanne Dallenes & Raf Vanderstraeten, 2022. "Crowding-In and Crowding-Out. Studying the Relationship between Sustainable Citizenship and Political Activism in Flanders," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-12, August.

    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. Dannenberg, Astrid & Weingärtner, Eva, 2023. "The effects of observability and an information nudge on food choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    2. Soda, Giuseppe & Zaheer, Akbar & Sun, Xiaoming & Cui, Wentian, 2021. "Brokerage evolution in innovation contexts: Formal structure, network neighborhoods and knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    3. Jiancheng Guan & Lanxin Pang, 2018. "Bidirectional relationship between network position and knowledge creation in Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 201-222, April.
    4. Barkemeyer, Ralf & Young, C. William & Chintakayala, Phani Kumar & Owen, Anne, 2023. "Eco-labels, conspicuous conservation and moral licensing: An indirect behavioural rebound effect," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    5. 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.
    6. Robbe Geerts & Frédéric Vandermoere & Hanne Dallenes & Raf Vanderstraeten, 2022. "Crowding-In and Crowding-Out. Studying the Relationship between Sustainable Citizenship and Political Activism in Flanders," Societies, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-12, August.
    7. Syalie Liu & Sacha Altay & Hugo Mercier, 2022. "Being green or being nice? People are more likely to share nicer but potentially less impactful green messages," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-14, September.
    8. 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.
    9. Brennecke, Julia & Rank, Olaf, 2017. "The firm’s knowledge network and the transfer of advice among corporate inventors—A multilevel network study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 768-783.
    10. Dannenberg, Astrid & Klatt, Charlotte & Weingärtner, Eva, 2024. "The effects of social norms and observability on food choice," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    11. Nathalie Lazaric & Fabrice Guel & Jean Belin & Vanessa Oltra & Sébastien Lavaud & Ali Douai, 2020. "Determinants of sustainable consumption in France: the importance of social influence and environmental values," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1337-1366, November.
    12. Kudic, Muhamed & Guhr, Katja, 2013. "Cooperation Events, Ego-Network Characteristics and Firm Innovativeness – Empirical Evidence from the German Laser Industry," IWH Discussion Papers 6/2013, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    13. Joana Almodovar & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2014. "Assessing the Importance of Local Supporting Organizations in the Automotive Industry: A Hybrid Dynamic Framework of Innovation Networks," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 841-865, April.
    14. Jiancheng Guan & He Wei, 2015. "A bilateral comparison of research performance at an institutional level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(1), pages 147-173, July.
    15. Benedikt Schmid & Iana Nesterova, 2024. "Unearthing intentionality: Building transformative capacity by reclaiming consciousness," Environmental Values, , vol. 33(3), pages 311-328, June.
    16. Joshua Henkel & Georg Schwesinger, 2020. "Establishing Sustainable Consumption - How Future Policies Can Channel Consumer Preferences," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2007, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    17. Jeffrey A. Edwards & Tara R. Wade & Mark L. Burkey & R. Gary Pumphrey, 2014. "Forecasting the Public's Acceptability of Municipal Water Regulation and Price Rationing for Communities on the Ogallala Aquifer," Journal of Economic Insight, Missouri Valley Economic Association, vol. 40(1), pages 1-30.
    18. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    19. Juan Wang & Yongbo Li, 2024. "Do subjective well-being influence people’s willingness to pay for improved air quality: evidence from China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 7857-7879, March.
    20. Xiaoxia Huang & Yuyin Liu & Jing Zhao, 2024. "The Impacts of Work-Family Conflict and Corporate Innovation on Organizational Performance," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, 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:jscscx:v:9:y:2020:i:12:p:221-:d:454601. 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.