| Summary: | 本研究旨在探討利己及利他價值觀如何影響大眾環境風險認知及政策支持，並進一步探討其影響是否受到風險規模、文化取向、及國家發展程度之影響。資料來源為世界價值觀調查(World Value Survey)第五波資料，以Schwartz的「人類價值觀理論」為理論基礎，測量個人利己及利他價值觀，並依風險規模將環境風險認知分為全球性及地區性。統計方法使用層級迴歸，同時檢驗國家層級變項(文化取向及發展程度)對個人層級變項之跨層級調節效果。研究結果顯示大眾對環境風險的感知及反應，受到其價值觀的影響，但針對不同規模的風險議題，在不同文化取向及發展程度的國家，其影響有顯著不同。 === Environmental issues have received much public and media attention abroad and at home. With the increased environmental awareness, there is a strong call for relevant policies and regulations aimed at sustainable development. To ensure sufficient public support, it is crucial to develop a fuller understanding of factors and processes underlying people’s willingness to help protect the environment when making decisions as consumers and citizens.
This study aims to predict people’s environmental risk perception and policy support as a function of their values. Specifically, Schwartz’s self-transcendence and self-enhancement value clusters will be examined as determinants to understand why few people choose to make collectively beneficial decisions.
Three extensions were made. First, instead of focusing on low-cost lifestyle changes, this study examined policy support that requires substantial personal costs. Second, global and local environmental risk perceptions are treated as two qualitatively different constructs according to their geographical scales. Finally, this study moves beyond an individualistic approach, incorporating country-level forces into the model.
Information about the individuals are based on variables measured in the World Value Survey (2005), while cultural orientations and levels of development are measured by the Schwartz Value Survey (2005) and the Human Development Index (2005) respectively. Hierarchical regression are employed, with the nature of interaction being revealed by plotting techniques.
The results suggested that perception and responses to environmental risks reflect their most basic value priorities and life goals. Consequently, environmental persuasive messages are most effective when intended behaviors are framed as fulfilling important life goals. However, the effects of person-level constructs greatly vary with social contexts and issue scales, suggesting that different strategies are preferred when dealing with risks associated with different geographical frame. Finally, cultural orientations and levels of development will influence the way members of a society respond to environmental threats. Practical implications for environmental risk communication are proposed and discussed.
|
|---|
