| Summary: | 博士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 農業推廣學研究所 === 95 === Quantitative and qualitative research methods were utilized in this study of individual pro-environmental behavior. Quantitative analysis of census data and structure equation modeling was performed to investigate the relationship between variables. Qualitative research methods adopted the concepts and techniques of grounded theory. In-depth interviews and observations were conducted to examine mechanisms and processes of pro-environmental behavior. There were 1664 effective questionnaires and 20 interviewees in this study.
Quantitative analysis revealed that most psychological variables did not differ between male and female subjects. However, the three observed variables of pro-environmental behavior were more constructive in females than in males. Further, highly educated, high-economic state and urban residents were more active about pro-environmental behavior than other people. After including demographic variables in the model, it is revealed that some psychological factors influencing pro-environmental behavior change from obvious to unobvious; this indicated that these psychological variables were in fact spurious variables, on the contrary, demographic variables such as “gender”, “age”, “education level”, “economic status”, “degree of urbanization”, obviously influence pro-environmental behavior. Whether or not demographic variables were included in this model, the influence of “willing to pay” was on pro-environmental behavior.
Qualitative analysis found what was the general concepts of pro-environmental behavior of people. Higher-educated people have more various pro-environmental concepts compared to lower-educated, and the concepts vary with gender and residential area difference. The “rural-urban differences” caused by the “pro-environmental policy dissimilarity” and the “gender effect” in “pro-environmental behavior” were noticeable. Most interviewees thought “character” and “education” as two main factors influencing pro-environmental behavior.
According to current conditions, motivation and difficulty of the execution of pro-environmental behavior, the two factors influencing pro-environment behavior were categorized, one was positive the other was negative. The two “strengths” involved the components “personality” and “outside environmental condition”; “personality” involved “character” and “ability’; “outside environmental condition” involved “pro-environmental policy” and “society expectancy and support”.
With “personal” and “environment” as two axis coordinates forming four different strength quadrants: positive-positive, positive-negative, negative-positive, and negative-negative, personal execution of pro-environmental behavior would be placed in different quadrant, and express positive or negative reaction. Despite having environmental concerns, lack of execution prevents active pro-environmental action.
Further studies may consider paradigm crossing with multiform study strategy and consider applying quantitative and qualitative methods to clarify the mechanisms of pro-environmental behavior by introducing demographic variables into the model. Qualitative analysis would require increased frequency and duration of observation. Regarding actual application, the government, schools and the pro-environmental organizations should strengthen the people''s "pro-environmental knowledge", “pro-environmental education”, “character education” and “religion education”, and the government should also response to people''s need on “pro-environmental policy”.
|
|---|
