Research of Ecological Behavior of Agglomerations Residents of Kazakhstan

The purpose is to research the environmental and economic practices used by households in urban agglomerations. As is known, ecological behavior is a very important part of the value paradigms. Improvement of the environmental situation at the global level is possible only with the active participation of civil society, while country and regional specifics determine the research and development of effective approaches of a reasonable environment attitude. Kazakhstan with large territories has urgent problems in terms of air quality, water quality, waste management, biodiversity conservation, etc. The authors used a directional approach in the formation of a questionnaire, considering the peculiarities of residence at the place of residence and the characteristics of the respondents. This as result of the understanding that residents of urban agglomerations have wide access to information, infrastructure, communities and movements, which positively affects the dynamics of the formation of important skills, as well as more environmentally responsible behavior in behavior. Based on international experience, a research methodology included conducting a survey in three large Kazakhstan’s cities. The regression model used for quantitative results, which mathematically describe the degree of influence of individual variables on the overall indicator. As part of the research, three hypotheses determined how individual factors effect on environmental behavior, which made recommendations and conclusions. The results presented in the research used for a comparative analysis of the manifestation of the ecological behavior of the inhabitants of agglomerations. The results used for a comparative analysis of the ecological behavior of the inhabitants of agglomerations.

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 between consideration 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. (In Russ.)

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 inthe 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). Consumer consciousness 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 reviewand 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