A Study on the Impact of Ideological and Political Education of Ecological Civilization on College Students’ Willingness to Act Pro-Environment: Evidence from China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Theoretical and Hypothesis
4. Data, Variables, and Descriptive Statistics
4.1. Data Sources
4.2. Variable Selection
Explained Variables
4.3. Explanatory Variables
4.4. Mediating Variables
4.5. Control Variables
5. Method
5.1. Oprobit Model
5.2. Instrumental Variable Method
5.3. The Mediation Effect Model
6. Results
6.1. External Driving Role of Publicity and Education
6.2. Test of Mediating Effect of Knowledge Accumulation of Ecological and Environmental Protection
6.3. Test for Mediating Effects of Ecological Concerns
6.4. Test of Intermediary Effect of Ecological Reflection
6.5. Robustness Check
7. Discussion
7.1. Comparison with Existing Studies
7.2. Innovative Findings of This Study
7.3. Countermeasures and Suggestions
7.4. Research Deficiencies and Future Directions
8. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Filho, L.W.; Brandli, L.L.; Becker, D.; Skanavis, C.; Kounani, A.; Sardi, C.; Papaioannidou, D.; Paço, A.; Azeiteiro, U.; de Sousa, L.O.; et al. Sustainable Development Policies as Indicators and Pre-conditions for Sustainability Efforts at Universities: Fact or Fiction? Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2018, 19, 85–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, R.; Jia, T.; Qi, R.; Cheng, J.; Zhang, K.; Wang, E.; Wang, X. Differentiated Impact of Politicsand Science-Oriented Education on Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Case Study of Chinese University Students. Sustainability 2021, 13, 616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Earle, A.G.; Leyva-de la Hiz, D.I. The Wicked Problem of Teaching about Wicked Problems: Design Thinking and Emerging Technologies in Sustainability Education. Manag. Learn. 2020, 2020, 4857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, P.C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J. Soc. Issues 2000, 56, 407–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pizmony-Levy, O.; Michel, J.O. Pro-Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors in Higher Education: Investigating the Role of Formal and Informal Factors; Research Report; International and Transcultural Studies Unit, Columbia University: New York, NY, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- The Guardian. ‘More Masks than Jellyfish’: Coronavirus Waste Ends up in Ocean. 2020. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/08/more-masks-than-jellyfish-coronavirus-waste-ends-up-in-ocean (accessed on 13 March 2021).
- The New York Times. How Climate Change May Affect Your Health. 2021. Available online: http://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/well/eat/climate-change-health.html (accessed on 13 March 2021).
- Luo, L.; Qiao, D.; Tang, J.; Wan, A.; Qiu, L.; Liu, X.; Liu, Y.; Fu, X. Training of Farmers’ Cooperatives, Value Perception and Members’Willingness of Green Production. J. Agric. 2022, 12, 1145. [Google Scholar]
- Jin, J.; Wang, W.; He, R.; Gong, H. Pesticide use and risk perceptions among small scale farmers in Anqiu County, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 2017, 14, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Luo, L.; Qiao, D.; Zhang, R.; Luo, C.; Fu, X.; Liu, Y. Research on the Influence of Education of Farmers’ Cooperatives on the Adoption of Green Prevention and Control Technologies by Members: Evidence from Rural China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 6255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.X.; Zhang, J.; Lu, L.; Wu, L.; Yin, S. Adoption Behavior of Green Control Techniques by Family Farms in China: Evidence from 676 Family Farms in Huang-Huai-Hai Plain. J. Crop Prot. 2017, 99, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kukkonen, J.; Kärkkäinen, S.; Keinonen, T. Examining the Relationships between Factors Influencing Environmental Behaviour among University Students. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Arnon, S.; Orion, N.; Carmi, N. Environmental literacy components and their promotion by institutions of higher education: An Israeli case study. Environ. Educ. Res. 2015, 21, 1029–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borchers, C.; Boesch, C.; Riedel, J.; Guilahoux, H.; Ouattara, D.; Randler, C. Environmental education in Côte d’Ivoire/West Africa: Extra-curricular primary school teaching shows positive impact on environmental knowledge and attitudes. Int. J. Sci. Educ. Part B 2013, 4, 240–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, L.; Qiao, D.; Wang, L.; Qiu, L.; Liu, Y.; Fu, X. Farmers’ cognition of the COVID-19 outbreak, risk perception and willingness of green production. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 380, 135068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bola, A.; Aziz, A.; Aliou, D. Agricultural technology adoption, commercialization and smallholder rice farmers’welfare in rural Nigeria. J. Agric. Food Econ. 2016, 4, 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, Y.; Li, P.; Wu, L.; Lu, J.; Yu, L.; Yin, S. Preferences of for-profit pest control firms on support policy in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 181, 809–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kassie, M.; Jaleta, M.; Shiferaw, B.; Mmbando, F.; Mekuria, M. Adoption of interrelated sustainable agricultural practices in smallholder systems:evidence from rural Tanzania. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2013, 80, 525–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiao, D.; Luo, L.; Zheng, X.; Fu, X. External Supervision, Face Consciousness, and Pesticide Safety Use: Evidence from Sichuan Province, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 7013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Irawan, E. Adoption model of falcataria-based farm forestry:A duration analysis approach. J. Ekon. Pembang. 2016, 17, 28–36. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, R.; Luo, L.; Liu, Y.; Fu, X. Impact of Labor Migration on Chemical Fertilizer Application of Citrus Growers: Empirical Evidence from China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qiao, D.; Luo, L.; Zhou, C.; Fu, X. The influence of social learning on Chinese farmers’ adoption of green pest control: Mediation by environmental literacy and moderation by market conditions. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacharya, H. Do Pro-Social Students Care More for the Environment? Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2019, 20, 761–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chwialkowska, A.; Bhatti, W.A.; Glowik, M. The Influence of Cultural Values on Pro-Environmental Behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 268, 122305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, H. System Construction of Polycentric Governance in Local Universities. Univ. Educ. Sci. 2012, 6, 29–35. [Google Scholar]
- Chattopadhyay, P.; Banerjee, G.; Mukherjee, S. Recent trends of modern bacterial insecticides for pest control practice in integrated crop management system. 3 Biotech 2017, 7, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Benelli, G.; Pavela, R.; Maggi, F.; Petrelli, R.; Nicoletti, M. Commentary:Making green pesticides greener?The potential of plant products for nanosynthesis and pest control. J. Clust. Sci. 2017, 28, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baloch, A.; Thapa, B. Agricultural extension in Balochistan, Pakistan:Date palm farmers’access and satisfaction. J. Mt. Sci. 2014, 11, 1035–1048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marsh, L.; Zoumenou, V.; Cotton, C.; Hashem, F. Organic farming:Knowledge, practices, and views of limited resource farmers and nonfarmers on the Delmarva Peninsula. J. Org. Agric. 2017, 7, 125–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bilqis, A.; Kelly, H.; Jason, L.; Bouis, H.; Ali, N.; Khan, F.; Khanam, S.; Kabir, M.; Hossain, S.; Alam, M.S. Rural drinking water at supply and household levels: Quality and management. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2006, 209, 451–460. [Google Scholar]
- Yazdanpanah, M.; Feyzabad, F. Investigating Iranian farmers’satisfaction with agricultural extension programs using the American customer satisfaction index. J. Agric. Food Inf. 2017, 18, 123–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Onumah, J.; Williams, P.; Quaye, W.; Onumah, E.E. Smallholder cocoa farmers access to on/off-farm support services and its contribution to output in the eastern region of Ghana. J. Asian J. Agric. Rural. Dev. 2014, 4, 484–495. [Google Scholar]
- Timprasert, S.; Datta, A.; Ranamukhaarachchi, S. Factors determining adoption of integrated pest management by vegetable growers in Nakhon Ratchasima Province Thailand. J. Crop Prot. 2014, 62, 32–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latynskiy, E.; Berger, T. Networks of rural producer organizations in Uganda:What can be done to make them work better? J. World Dev. 2016, 78, 572–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Levy, B.L.M.; Marans, R.W. Towards a Campus Culture of Environmental Sustainability: Recommendations for a Large University. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2012, 13, 365–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orellana-Ríos, A.; Pozo-Llorente, M.T.; Poza-Vilches, M.D.F. Pro-Environmental Attitudes and Teaching Practice in Secondary Schools Located in Natural Protected Areas from the Perception of Students: The Case of Níjar Fields (Almería—Spain). Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2017, 237, 1112–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zsóka, Á.; Szerényi, Z.M.; Széchy, A.; Kocsis, T. Greening Due to Environmental Education? Environmental Knowledge, Attitudes, Consumer Behavior and Everyday Pro-Environmental Activities of Hungarian High School and University Students. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 48, 126–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jurdi-Hage, R.; Hage, H.; Chow, H. Cognitive and behavioural environmental concern among university students in a Canadian city: Implications for institutional interventions. Aust. J. Environ. Educ. 2019, 35, 28–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, L.; Qiao, D.; Tang, J.; Wang, L.; Liu, Y.; Fu, X. Research on the influence of education and training of farmers’ professional cooperatives on the willingness of members to green production-perspectives based on time, method and content elements. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bradley, J.C.; Waliczek, T.M.; Zajicek, J.M. Relationship between Environmental Knowledge and Environmental Attitude of High School Students. J. Environ. Educ. 1999, 30, 17–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duerden, M.D.; Witt, P.A. The impact of direct and indirect experiences on the development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 2010, 30, 379–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asunta, T. Knowledge of Environmental Issues. In Where Pupils Acquire Information Opinions, and How It Affects Their Attitudes, and Laboratory Behavior; University of Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä, Finland, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Harring, N.; Jagers, S.C. Why do people accept environmental policies? The prospects of higher education and changes in norms, beliefs and policy preferences. Environ. Educ. Res. 2017, 24, 791–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frick, J.; Kaiser, F.G.; Wilson, M. Environmental knowledge and conservation behavior: Exploring prevalence and structure in a representative sample. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2004, 37, 1597–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaiser, F.G.; Fuhrer, U. Ecological behaviour’s dependency on different forms of knowledge. Appl. Psychol. Int. Rev. 2003, 52, 598–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dietz, T.; Ostrom, E.; Stern, P.C. The struggle to govern the commons. Science 2003, 302, 1907–1912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Díaz-Siefer, P.; Neaman, A.; Salgado, E.; Celis-Diez, J.L.; Otto, S. Human-Environment System Knowledge: A Correlate of Pro-Environmental Behavior. Sustainability 2015, 7, 15510–15526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Berkes, F.; Colding, J.; Folke, C. Navigating Social-Ecological Systems; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Saha, A.; Love, H.; Schwart, R. Adoption of emerging technologies under output uncertainty. J. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1994, 76, 836–846. [Google Scholar]
- Hovland, C.; Janis, I.; Kelley, H. Communication and persuasion. J. Audiov. Commun. Rev. 1953, 2, 135–142. [Google Scholar]
- Gintis, H. Beyond homo economicus:evidence from experimental economics. J. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 35, 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stern, P.; Dietz, T.; Guagnano, G.A. The new ecological paradigm in social-psychological context. J. Environ. Behav. 1995, 27, 723–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Staige, R.; Stock, J. Instrumental variables regression with weak instruments. J. Econom. 1997, 3, 557–586. [Google Scholar]
- MacKinnon, D.; Fairchild, A.; Fritz, M. Mediation Analysis. J. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2007, 58, 593–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wooldridge, J. Econometric Analysis of Cross-Section and Panel Data; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Flamm, B. The impacts of environmental knowledge and attitudes on vehicle ownership and use. Transp. Res. 2009, 14, 272–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thøgersen, J. Media attention and the market for ‘green’ consumer products. Bus. Strategy Dev. 2006, 15, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gram-Hanssen, K. Standby consumption in households analyzed with a practice theory approach. J. Ind. Ecol. 2010, 14, 150–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kollmuss, A.; Agyeman, J. Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ. Educ. Res. 2002, 8, 239–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Oguz, D.; Çakci, I.; Kavas, S. Environmental awareness of university students in Ankara, Turkey. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 2010, 5, 2629–2636. [Google Scholar]
- Diamantopoulos, A.; Schlegelmilch, B.B.; Sinkovics, R.R.; Bohlen, G.M. Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. J. Bus. Res. 2003, 56, 465–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable Type | Variable | Assignment | Mean Value | Standard Deviation | Minimum Value | Maximum Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dependent variable | College students’ willingness to act pro-environment | Reluctant = 1; less willing = 2; generally = 3; more willing = 4; more willing = 5 | 4.060 | 1.017 | 1 | 5 | |
Independent variable | Ideological and political education of ecological civilization | In 2022, the sample received the number of times of ideological and political education of ecological civilization | 2.477 | 4.123 | 0 | 58 | |
Intermediate variable | Knowledge accumulation of ecological and environmental protection | Very few = 1; Less = 2; generally = 3; more = 4; many = 5 | 2.998 | 0.813 | 1 | 5 | |
Ecological concerns | Very few = 1; Less = 2; generally = 3; more = 4; many = 5 | 3.436 | 0.908 | 1 | 5 | ||
Ecological reflection | Very few = 1; Less = 2; generally = 3; more = 4; many = 5 | 3.818 | 0.981 | 1 | 5 | ||
Control variable | Personal characteristics of interviewees | Sex | Female = 1; Male = 0 | 0.313 | 0.464 | 0 | 1 |
Age | Actual age/year | 18.848 | 1.038 | 17 | 26 | ||
Level of education | Actual years of education | 13.039 | 1.078 | 12 | 19 | ||
Political identity | Member of the Communist Party of China: Yes = 1; No = 0 | 0.092 | 0.289 | 0 | 1 | ||
Health condition | Bad = 1; worse = 2; General = 3; Better = 4; good = 5 | 3.806 | 0.817 | 1 | 5 | ||
Participation of environmental groups | Whether to join the eco-environmental Student Association: YES = 1; No = 0 | 0.113 | 0.317 | 0 | 1 | ||
Subject categories | The major belongs to which classification: Humanities and Social Sciences = 1; natural sciences = 0 | 0.436 | 0.496 | 0 | 1 | ||
Household Resource Endowment | Social Networking | Whether there are civil servants at home: Yes = 1; No = 0 | 0.208 | 0.406 | 0 | 1 | |
Geographical location | Whether the family is in town or rural: rural = 1; urban = 0 | 0.386 | 0.487 | 0 | 1 | ||
Total household income | Total household income/yuan | 110,390.600 | 151,214.300 | 0 | 2,000,000 | ||
Family members work | Whether there is anyone in the family engaged in environmental protection work: YES = 1; No = 0 | 0.098 | 0.297 | 0 | 1 |
Variable | Model (1) Oprobit | Model (2) Oprobit | Model (3) IV-Oprobit | Model (4) Marginal Utility |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ideological and political education of ecological civilization | 0.052 *** (0.007) | 0.026 *** (0.008) | 0.148 *** (0.016) | 0.048 *** (0.005) |
Sex | — | −0.184 *** (0.060) | −0.217 *** (0.059) | −0.071 *** (0.019) |
Age | — | −0.078 (0.034) | −0.046 (0.034) | −0.015 (0.011) |
Level of education | — | −0.044 (0.032) | −0.031 (0.032) | −0.010 (0.010) |
Political identity | — | 0.953 *** (0.130) | 0.523 *** (0.143) | 0.171 *** (0.046) |
Health condition | — | 0.277 *** (0.035) | 0.265 *** (0.035) | 0.086 *** (0.011) |
Participation of environmental groups | — | 0.188 ** (0.096) | 0.144 ** (0.102) | 0.047 ** (0.033) |
Subject categories | — | 0.525 *** (0.060) | 0.286 *** (0.069) | 0.093 *** (0.022) |
Social Networking | — | 0.085 (0.074) | −0.136 (0.077) | −0.044 (0.025) |
Geographical location | — | 0.171 *** (0.062) | 0.001 * (0.065) | 0.000 * (0.021) |
Total household income | — | 0.000 (0.000) | 0.000 (0.000) | 0.000 (0.000) |
Family members work | — | 0.350 *** (0.115) | 0.238 ** (0.113) | 0.077 ** (0.037) |
Sample size | 1622 | 1622 | 1622 | 1622 |
Pseudo R2/lnsig_2 | 0.014 | 0.082 | 1.256 *** (0.018) | — |
LRchi2/ atanhrho_12 | 54.24 (0.000) | 319.09 (0.000) | −0.552 *** (0.080) | — |
Log likelihood | −1923.62 | −1791.196 | −6106.218 | — |
Variable | Model (5) Knowledge Accumulation of Ecological and Environmental Protection (Oprobit) | Model (6) Willingness to Act Pro-Environment (Oprobit) | Model (7) Willingness to Act Pro-Environment (Oprobit) |
---|---|---|---|
Ideological and political education of ecological civilization | 0.046 *** (0.008) | — | 0.017 * (0.008) |
Knowledge accumulation of ecological and environmental protection | — | 0.626 *** (0.040) | 0.621 *** (0.039) |
Control variables | Under control | Under control | Under control |
Number of samples | 1622 | 1622 | 1622 |
LRchi2 | 158.93 (0.000) | 572.58 (0.000) | 573.40 (0.000) |
Loglikelihood | −1730.597 | −1664.449 | −1664.040 |
Variable | Model (8) Ecological Concerns (Oprobit) | Model (9) Willingness to Act Pro-Environment (Oprobit) | Model (10) Willingness to Act Pro-Environment (Oprobit) |
---|---|---|---|
Ideological and political education of ecological civili-zation | 0.037 *** (0.008) | — | 0.015 * (0.008) |
Ecological concerns | — | 0.796 *** (0.038) | 0.792 *** (0.038) |
Control variables | Under control | Under control | Under control |
Number of samples | 1622 | 1622 | 1622 |
LRchi2 | 161.13 (0.000) | 798.47 (0.000) | 798.87 (0.000) |
Loglikelihood | −1913.833 | −1551.506 | −1551.3047 |
Variable | Model (11) Ecological Reflection (Oprobit) | Model (12) Willingness to Act Pro-Environment (Oprobit) | Model (13) Willingness to Act Pro-Environment (Oprobit) |
---|---|---|---|
Ideological and political education of ecological civili-zation | 0.024 *** (0.008) | — | 0.013 *** (0.008) |
Ecological reflection | — | 0.663 *** (0.033) | 0.659 *** (0.033) |
Control variables | Under control | Under control | Under control |
Number of samples | 1622 | 1622 | 1622 |
LRchi2 | 87.41 (0.000) | 735.64 (0.000) | 738.34 (0.000) |
Loglikelihood | −2000.613 | −1582.919 | −1581.570 |
Variable | Model (14) Oprobit | Model (15) Oprobit |
---|---|---|
Ideological and political education of ecological civili-zation | 0.049 *** (0.007) | 0.024 *** (0.008) |
Control variables | Uncontrolled | Under control |
Sample size | 1555 | 1555 |
LRchi2 | 81.23 (0.000) | 299.91 (0.000) |
Pseudo R2 | 0.087 | 0.091 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liu, S.; Luo, L. A Study on the Impact of Ideological and Political Education of Ecological Civilization on College Students’ Willingness to Act Pro-Environment: Evidence from China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 2608. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032608
Liu S, Luo L. A Study on the Impact of Ideological and Political Education of Ecological Civilization on College Students’ Willingness to Act Pro-Environment: Evidence from China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(3):2608. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032608
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiu, Silin, and Lei Luo. 2023. "A Study on the Impact of Ideological and Political Education of Ecological Civilization on College Students’ Willingness to Act Pro-Environment: Evidence from China" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 3: 2608. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032608