农业专家应对气候变化的个人和职业减缓行为意向

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Management Pub Date : 2023-04-03 DOI:10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y
Tahereh Zobeidi, Masoud Yazdanpanah, Laura A. Warner, Alexa Lamm, Katharina Löhr, Stefan Sieber
{"title":"农业专家应对气候变化的个人和职业减缓行为意向","authors":"Tahereh Zobeidi,&nbsp;Masoud Yazdanpanah,&nbsp;Laura A. Warner,&nbsp;Alexa Lamm,&nbsp;Katharina Löhr,&nbsp;Stefan Sieber","doi":"10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Mitigation activities, whether at the personal level relating to lifestyle or on the professional level, especially in the agriculture sector, are widely encouraged by scientists and policymakers. This research empirically analyses the association between agricultural experts’ perceptions about climate change and their intention to implement climate change mitigation. Based on survey data, individuals’ reported intention to implement personal and professional mitigation behavior is explained using a conceptual model. The structural equation modeling results suggest that the new ecological paradigm (NEP), institutional trust, and risk salience indirectly influence climate change mitigation intentions. The findings indicate that risk perception, personal efficacy, responsibility, belief in climate change occurring, and low psychological distance trigger a significantly greater intention to support personal and professional mitigation behaviors. However, the research framework is much stronger at predicting the intention to mitigate climate change in professional affairs compared to personal activities. The findings suggest that hypothetical distance factors only have a moderating effect on the relationship between higher climate change environmental values, institutional trust, risk salience, and mitigation intention. This paper analytically explores the regulating role of risk perception, hypothetical distance, personal efficacy, and responsibility between institutional trust, risk salience, and the NEP as independent concepts and intention to personal and professional mitigation behaviors as dependent variables. The findings of the study have important implications for encouraging personal and professional mitigation behaviors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":543,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Management","volume":"72 2","pages":"396 - 409"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Personal and Professional Mitigation Behavioral Intentions of Agricultural Experts to Address Climate Change\",\"authors\":\"Tahereh Zobeidi,&nbsp;Masoud Yazdanpanah,&nbsp;Laura A. Warner,&nbsp;Alexa Lamm,&nbsp;Katharina Löhr,&nbsp;Stefan Sieber\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Mitigation activities, whether at the personal level relating to lifestyle or on the professional level, especially in the agriculture sector, are widely encouraged by scientists and policymakers. This research empirically analyses the association between agricultural experts’ perceptions about climate change and their intention to implement climate change mitigation. Based on survey data, individuals’ reported intention to implement personal and professional mitigation behavior is explained using a conceptual model. The structural equation modeling results suggest that the new ecological paradigm (NEP), institutional trust, and risk salience indirectly influence climate change mitigation intentions. The findings indicate that risk perception, personal efficacy, responsibility, belief in climate change occurring, and low psychological distance trigger a significantly greater intention to support personal and professional mitigation behaviors. However, the research framework is much stronger at predicting the intention to mitigate climate change in professional affairs compared to personal activities. The findings suggest that hypothetical distance factors only have a moderating effect on the relationship between higher climate change environmental values, institutional trust, risk salience, and mitigation intention. This paper analytically explores the regulating role of risk perception, hypothetical distance, personal efficacy, and responsibility between institutional trust, risk salience, and the NEP as independent concepts and intention to personal and professional mitigation behaviors as dependent variables. The findings of the study have important implications for encouraging personal and professional mitigation behaviors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":543,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Management\",\"volume\":\"72 2\",\"pages\":\"396 - 409\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00267-023-01815-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

科学家和政策制定者普遍鼓励减缓活动,无论是在与生活方式有关的个人层面,还是在专业层面,特别是在农业部门。本研究实证分析了农业专家对气候变化的认知与他们实施减缓气候变化的意愿之间的关系。基于调查数据,使用概念模型解释了个人报告的实施个人和专业缓解行为的意图。结构方程模型结果表明,新生态范式(NEP)、制度信任和风险显著性间接影响气候变化减缓意图。研究结果表明,风险感知、个人效能、责任、对气候变化发生的信念和低心理距离触发了更大的支持个人和职业缓解行为的意愿。然而,与个人活动相比,研究框架在预测专业事务中缓解气候变化的意图方面要强大得多。研究结果表明,假设距离因子仅对较高的气候变化环境价值、制度信任、风险显著性和减缓意愿之间的关系具有调节作用。本文分析了风险感知、假设距离、个人效能和责任在制度信任、风险显著性和新经济政策作为独立概念和意愿对个人和职业缓解行为作为因变量之间的调节作用。研究结果对鼓励个人和专业缓解行为具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Personal and Professional Mitigation Behavioral Intentions of Agricultural Experts to Address Climate Change

Mitigation activities, whether at the personal level relating to lifestyle or on the professional level, especially in the agriculture sector, are widely encouraged by scientists and policymakers. This research empirically analyses the association between agricultural experts’ perceptions about climate change and their intention to implement climate change mitigation. Based on survey data, individuals’ reported intention to implement personal and professional mitigation behavior is explained using a conceptual model. The structural equation modeling results suggest that the new ecological paradigm (NEP), institutional trust, and risk salience indirectly influence climate change mitigation intentions. The findings indicate that risk perception, personal efficacy, responsibility, belief in climate change occurring, and low psychological distance trigger a significantly greater intention to support personal and professional mitigation behaviors. However, the research framework is much stronger at predicting the intention to mitigate climate change in professional affairs compared to personal activities. The findings suggest that hypothetical distance factors only have a moderating effect on the relationship between higher climate change environmental values, institutional trust, risk salience, and mitigation intention. This paper analytically explores the regulating role of risk perception, hypothetical distance, personal efficacy, and responsibility between institutional trust, risk salience, and the NEP as independent concepts and intention to personal and professional mitigation behaviors as dependent variables. The findings of the study have important implications for encouraging personal and professional mitigation behaviors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Management
Environmental Management 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
2.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Management offers research and opinions on use and conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats and control of hazards, spanning the field of environmental management without regard to traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal aims to improve communication, making ideas and results from any field available to practitioners from other backgrounds. Contributions are drawn from biology, botany, chemistry, climatology, ecology, ecological economics, environmental engineering, fisheries, environmental law, forest sciences, geosciences, information science, public affairs, public health, toxicology, zoology and more. As the principal user of nature, humanity is responsible for ensuring that its environmental impacts are benign rather than catastrophic. Environmental Management presents the work of academic researchers and professionals outside universities, including those in business, government, research establishments, and public interest groups, presenting a wide spectrum of viewpoints and approaches.
期刊最新文献
Addressing Cumulative Effects through an Indigenous-led Assessment Process. Exploring the Effect of Institutional Trust on the Relationship between Environmental Consciousness and Household Recycling Behavior. Extrinsic Motivation vs. Intrinsic Motivation: Key Factors Influencing Farmers' Land Quality Protection Behavior in China. Impacts of Supplemental Feeding on Sunbird-Pollination Systems in Young Fynbos Varies with Floral Abundance. Environmental Threat Assessment Framework for Mining Activities in Guinea: An Integrated Approach for Sustainable Development.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1