Environmental transgressions involve breaking environmental protection laws (EPL), constituting a singular kind of illegal conduct from a legal and psychosocial perspective. EPL encompass a wide variety of behaviours which is very broad-ranging and, therefore, require different evaluation criteria. This study analyzes the responses of 196 university students living in an area of high environmental protection to a questionnaire encompassing 20 common environmental transgressions in their immediate surroundings, which they had to evaluate using 14 scales. The results show that the dimensions of the participants' perceptive space are consistent with those obtained through other samples, episodes, scales and statistical procedures. These dimensions enabled 85% of transgressions to be correctly classified into the three categories commonly used by public administrations, with more accurate predictions found for Transgressions against the Natural Environment than for Pollution/Contamination and Construction Activities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ClaytonS. (2003). Environmental Identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Comps.), Identity and the natural environment: the psychological significance of nature (Cap. 3, pp. 45–66). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
DarleyJ. M.CarlsmithK. M.RobinsonP. H. (2000). Incapacitation and just deserts as motives for punishment. Law and Human Behaviour, 24, 659–684.
3.
DECRETO LEGISLATIVO 1/2000, de 8 de mayo, por el que se aprueba el Texto Refundido de las Leyes de Ordenación del Territorio de Canarias y de Espacios Naturales de Canarias. Boletín Oficial de Canarias, no60, de 15 de mayo de 2000, pp. 5989–6307.
4.
DeLAFuenteE.García-cuetoE.San LuisC.GarcíaJ.DeLAFuenteL. (2002). Escalamiento subjetivo de conductas delictivas.Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento, 4, 67–76.
5.
Du RéesH. (2001). Can criminal law protect the environment?Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime prevention, 2, 109–126.
6.
FergusonT.RuleB. G. (1983). An attributional perspective on anger and aggression. In R.G. Geen & E. I. Donnerstein (Coords.), Aggression. Theoretical and Empirical Review (Vol. 1, pp. 41–74). New York: Academia Press.
7.
ForgasJ. P.BrownL. B.MenyhartJ. (1980). Dimensions of aggression: the perception of aggressive episodes.British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 19, 215–227.
8.
FritscheI. (2002). Account strategies for the violation of social norms: Integration and extension of sociological and social psychological typologies.Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 32, 21–83.
9.
García-cuetoE.GarcíaJ.FuenteL.BorgesA.Sánchez-brunoA.San LuisC. (2003). Escalamiento subjetivo de conductas delictivas en legos y expertos.Psicothema, 15, 638–642.
10.
HawkinsK. (1984a). Creating cases in a regulatory agency.Urban life, 12, 371–395.
11.
HawkinsK. (1984b). Environment and enforcement: Regulation and the social definition of pollution.New York: Oxford University Press.
12.
HernándezB.HidalgoM. C.Salazar-LaplaceM. E.HessS. (2007). Place attachment and place identity in natives and non-natives.Journal of Environmental Behaviour, 4, 310–319.
13.
HernándezB.MartínA.HessS.Martínez-torviscoJ.SuárezE.SalazarM.RuizC.RamírezG. (2005). Análisis multidimensional de la percepción del delito ecológico.Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 6, 51–70.
14.
MåraldE. (2001). The BT Kemi scandal and the establishment of the environmental crime concept.Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, 2, 149–170.
15.
MartínA. M. (1990). Cuando los delitos son episodios sociales.Revista de Psicología Social, 5, 215–236.
16.
MartínA. M.HernándezB. (2009). La percepción social de las transgresiones contra el medio ambiente.Boletín de la Sociedad Mexicana de Psicología, 147, 20–24.
17.
MartínA. M.HernándezB.HessS.SuárezE.Salazar-LaplaceM. E.RuizC. (2008). Valoración social y asignación de castigo en transgresiones a las leyes de protección del medio ambiente.Psicothema, 20, 90–96.
18.
MartínA. M.HernándezB.SuárezE. (2006). Elementos críticos en la valoración social de transgresiones medioambientales cotidianas. In J. A. Corraliza, J. Berenguer & R. Martín (Comps.), Medio ambiente, bienestar humano y responsabilidad ecológica (pp. 435–442). S/C Tenerife: Resma.
19.
MartínA. M.Salazar-LaplaceM. E.HessS.RuizC.KaplanM. F.HernándezB.SuárezE. (2008). Individual breaches of environmental in cases from public administration files.Deviant Behavior, 29, 611–639.
20.
McadamsR. H. (2000). An attitudinal theory of expressive law.Oregon Law Review, 79, 339–390.
21.
NadlerJ. (2005). Flouting the law.Texas law Review, 83, 1400–1439.
22.
Parejo-AlfonsoL. (2010). Código de Medio Ambiente. Cizur Menor: Aranzadi (8th ed.).
23.
RyanR. M.DecyE.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being.American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
24.
Salazar-LaplaceM. E.HernándezB.MartínA. M.HessS. (2006). Predictores de la asignación de castigo en transgresiones de las leyes medioambientales.Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 7, 103–120.
25.
SandersonC. A.DarleyJ. M. (2002). “I am moral, but you are deterred”: Differential attributions about why people obey the law.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32, 375–405.
26.
SituY. (1998). Public transgression of environmental law: a preliminary study.Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 19, 137–155.
27.
TaylorR. B.MasonR. J. (2002). Responses to prison for environmental criminals. Impact of incident, perpetrator and respondent characteristics.Environment and Behavior, 34, 194–215.
28.
ThørgensenJ. (2006). Norms for environmentally responsible behavior: An extended taxonomy.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, 247–261.
29.
TurnerJ. C. (1991). Social influence.Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
30.
WaltonM. D. (1985). Negotiation of Responsibility: Judgments of blameworthiness in a natural setting.Developmental Psychology, 21, 725–736.
