A Critical Study of Theoretical Models of Sustainability through Structural Equation Systems

Abstract

This article presents the results of a comparative analysis of three models: the identification model (IM), the cohesion model (CM), and the general model (GM) proposed by the City-Identity-Sustainability (CIS) Network. These models have been designed for the description of sustainability and all try to explain its relationship with identity and urban development using structural equations. The analyzed items were selected from a longer questionnaire as part of the general CIS Network study. Ten samples from different origins were obtained, with a total of 1, 421 participants. To test the models to the concept of sustainability, the parameters are presented in a comparative way. The indicators show a moderate fit. The IM presents a better fit in samples with high levels of urban development, whereas the CM shows a better fit in samples with less developed areas. The best general fit is in the GM model for all the samples.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bentler, P. M. (1995). EQS Structural Equations Program. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software.

Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equation models. New York: John Wiley.

Cliff, N. (1983). Some cautions concerning the applications of causal modeling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 18, 115-126.

Deutsch, M. (1949). A theory of cooperation and competition. Human Relations, 2, 129-152.

Goffin, R. D. (1991). A comparison of two new indices for the assessment of fit of structural equation models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 28, 205-214.

Guàrdia, J. , & Arnau, J. (1991). Análisis evaluativo de las características teórico-empíricas de los sistemas de ecuaciones estructurales [Evaluative analysis of theoretical-empirical characteristics of the structural equation models]. Anuario de Psicología, 48(1), 5-16.

Lee, S. Y. , Poon, W. Y. , & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Full maximum likelihood analysis of structural equation models with polytomous variables. Statistics & Probability Letters, 9, 91-97.

Lewin, K. (1965). Group decision and social change. In H. Proshansky & B. Seidenberg (Eds.), Basic studies in social psychology (pp. 423-437). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. (Original work published 1947)

Pol, E. (1998). Evoluciones de la psicología ambiental hacia la sostenibilidad: Tres propuestas teóricas y orientaciones para la gestión [Environmental psychology evolution toward sustainability: Three theoretical approaches and guidelines for management]. In D. Páez & S. Ayestarán (Eds.), Los desarrollos de la psicología social en España (pp.105-120). Madrid, Spain: Infancia y Aprendizaje.

10.

Pol, E. (2002). The theoretical background of the City-Identity-Sustainability Network. Environment & Behavior, 34, 8-25.

11.

Sherif, M. , & Sherif, C. (1953). Groups in harmony and tension. New York: Harper.

12.

Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.