Исследование экологического поведения жителей агломераций Казахстана

Цель данного исследования заключается в изучении используемых эколого-экономических практик домохозяйств городских агломераций. Как известно в поведенческих ценностных установках очень важную часть занимает экологическое поведение. Улучшение на глобальном уровне экологической ситуации возможно только при активном участии гражданского общества, при этом страновые и региональные особенности определяют необходимость исследования и выработки эффективных подходов по вопросам активного продвижения идей разумного отношения к окружающей среде. Казахстан, отличающийся значительными территориями, имеет актуальные проблемы по вопросам качества воздуха, воды, управления отходами, сохранения биоразнообразия и т.д. Авторы использовали направленный подход при формировании анкеты для массового опроса с учетом особенности проживания по месту жительства и ценностных характеристик респондентов. Это было связано с пониманием того факта, что жители городских агломераций имеют более широкий доступ к информации, инфраструктуре, сообществам и движениям, что позитивно отражается на динамике формирования важных навыков, а также отражение в поведении более ответственного поведения к окружающей среде. На основании изученного международного опыта, была сформирована методология исследования, которая включала в себя проведение опроса в трех крупных городах Казахстана, а также использование результатов опроса для проведения регрессионного анализа. Для получения количественных результатов была использована регрессионная модель, которая позволила математически описать степень влияния отдельных переменных на общий показатель. В рамках исследования были сформированы три гипотезы, которые определяли, как отдельные факторы влияют на экологическое поведение, что позволило сформировать рекомендации и выводы. Результаты, приведенные в исследовании, могут использоваться для сравнительного анализа проявления экологического поведения жителей агломераций.

1. Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2009). How do socio-demographic and psychological factors relate to households’ direct and indirect energy use and savings? Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(5), 711-720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2009.05.006

2. Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2011). Factors related to household energy use and intention to reduce it: the role of psychological and socio-demographic variables. Human Ecology Review, 18(1), 30-40.

3. Arnocky, S., Milfont, T. L., & Nickol, J. R. (2013). Time perspective and sustainable behavior: evidence for the distinction betweenconsideration of immediate and future consequences. Environment and Behavior, 46(5), 556-582. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512474987

4. Bamberg, S. (2003). How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(1), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00078-6

5. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman.

6. Bandura, A. (2000). Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75-78. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064

7. Barr, S., Gilg, A., & Ford, N. (2005). The household energy gap: examining the divide between habitual and purchase-related conservation behaviors. Energy Policy, 33(11), 1425-1444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2003.12.016

8. Bogel, P.M., & Upham, P. (2018). Role of psychology in sociotechnical transitions studies: review inrelation to consumption and technology acceptance. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 28, 122-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2018.01.002

9. Bonera, M., Corvi, E., Codini, A.P., & Ma, R. (2017) Does Nationality Matter in Eco-Behaviour? Sustainability, 9(10), 1694. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101694

10. Carlsson-Kanyama, A., & Linden, A. L. (2007). Energy efficiency in residences-challenges for women and men in the North. Energy Policy, 35(4), 2163-2172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2006.06.018

11. Corral-Verdugo, V. (2006). Contributions of behaviorism to the study of proecological behavior. Revista Mexicana de Analisis de la Conducta, 32(2), 111-127. https://doi.org/10.5514/rmac.v32.i2.23270

12. Fischer, D., & Barth, M. (2014). Key Competencies for and beyond Sustainable Consumption: An Educational Contribution to the Debate. Gaia, 23(1), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.23.S1.7

13. Frick, J., Kaiser, F.G., & Wilson, M. (2004). Environmental knowledge and conservation behavior: exploring prevalence and structure in a representative sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(8), 1597-1613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.02.015

14. Geels, F.W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Resource Policy, 33(6-7), 897-920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015

15. Geiger, S.M., Dombois, C., & Funke, J. (2018) The Role of Environmental Knowledge and Attitude: Predictors for Ecological Behavior Across Cultures? An Analysis of Argentinean and German Students. Umweltpsychologie, 22(1), 69-87.

16. Geiger, S. M., Fischer, D., & Schrader, U. (2017). Measuring what matters in sustainable consumption: An integrative framework for the selection of relevant behaviors. Sustainable Development, 26(1), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1688

17. Gromyko, G. L., Vorobyov, A. N., Ivanov, Yu. N., Kazarinova, S. E., Karaseva, L. A., Mamiy, I. P., ... & Okhrimenko, A. A. (2019). The theory of statistics. М.: INFRA-M.

18. Heiskanen, E., & Matschoss, K. (2017). Understanding the uneven diffusion of building scale renewable energy systems: a review of household, local and country level factors in diverse European countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 75, 580-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.027

19. Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1987.9943482

20. Kaiser, F.G. (1998). A general measure of ecological behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(5), 395-422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01712.x

21. Kaiser, F. G., & Wilson, M. (2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: the specific composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(7), 1531–1544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.003

22. Kaiser, F.G., Roczen, N., & Bogner, F.X. (2008). Competence Formation in Environmental Education: Advancing Ecology-Specific Rather Than General Abilities. Umweltpsychologie, 12(2), 56–70. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-9249

23. Karpova, N.N. (2005). Formation of environmental responsibility of high school students in the course of solving environmental applied problems (Doctoral dissertation, [Volgograd State Pedagogical University]).

24. Klöckner, C.A., & Nayum, A. (2017). Psychological and structural facilitators and barriers to energy upgrades of the privately-owned building stock. Energy, 140(1), 1005-1017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.09.016

25. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401

26. Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2007). Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17(3-4), 445-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.01.004

27. Martinsson, J., Lundqvist, L.J., & Sundstrom, A. (2011). Energy saving in Swedish households. The (relative) importance of environmental attitudes. Energy Policy, 39(9), 5182-5191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.05.046

28. Moorman, C., Diehl, K., Brinberg, D., & Kidwell, B. (2004). Subjective knowledge, search locations, and consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 673-678. HTTPS://DOI.ORG10.1086/425102

29. Pohjolainen, P., Tapio, P., Vinnari, M., Jokinen, P., & Rasanen, P. (2016). Consumerconsciousness on meat and the environment - exploring differences. Appetite, 101, 37-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.02.012

30. Poortinga, V., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2004). Values, environmental concern, and environmental behaviour: a study into household energy use. Environment and Behavior, 36(1), 70-93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916503251466

31. Rabinovich, A., Morton, T., & Postmes, T. (2010). Time perspective and attitude behavior consistency in future-oriented behaviours. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(1), 69-89. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466608X401875

32. Rouvinen, S., & Matero, J. (2013). Stated preferences of Finnish private homeowners for residential heating systems: a discrete choice experiment. Biomass Bioenergy, 57, 22-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.10.010

33. Sardianou, E., & Genoudi, P. (2013). Which factors affect the willingness of consumers to adopt renewable energies? Renewable Energy, 57, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.01.031

34. Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How it Changes. London: Sage.

35. Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., & van der Werff, E. (2015). Understanding the human dimensions of a sustainable energy transition. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 805. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00805

36. Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004

37. Stern, P.C. (1999). Information, incentives, and proenvironmental consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Policy, 22(4), 461-478. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006211709570

38. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407-424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175

39. Stern, P. C. (2008). Environmentally significant behavior in the home. In: Lewis, A. (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Psychology and Economic Behaviour. Cambridge University Press.

40. Tabernero, C., & Hernandez, B. (2011). Self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation guiding environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 43(5), 658-675. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916510379759

41. Trotta, G. (2018). Factors affecting energy-saving behaviours and energy efficiency investments in British households. Energy Policy, 114, 529-539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2017.12.042

42. Upham, P., Dütschke, E., Schneider, U., Oltra, C., Sala, R., Lores, M., Klapper, R., & Bogel, P. (2018). Agency and structure in a sociotechnical transition: hydrogen fuel cells, conjunctural knowledge and structuration in Europe. Energy Research and Social Science, 37, 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.040

43. Vainio, A., & Paloniemi, R. (2013). Does belief matter in climate change action? Public Understanding of Science, 22(4), 382-395. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662511410268

44. Vainio, A., & Paloniemi, R. (2014). The complex role of attitudes toward science in proenvironmental consumption in the Nordic countries. Ecological Economics, 108, 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.09.026

45. Vainio, A., Pulkka, A., Paloniemi, R., Varho, V., & Tapio, P. (2020) Citizens’ sustainable, future-oriented energy behaviours in energy transition. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245, 118801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118801