The authors explore the impact of geographical proximity of environmental problems on environmental concern and willingness to pay (WTP) for environmental improvement, with emphasis on the relevance of Inglehart’s postmaterialism thesis on this inquiry. A questionnaire was administered to 1,565 respondents in Istanbul. The Contingent Valuation Method was used to measure WTP. Sea pollution in Istanbul (local issue), soil erosion in Turkey (national issue), and ozone depletion (global issue) were issues chosen for valuation. The sample was separated into three subsamples, with each being presented with only one issue. Individuals distinguish between local and global environmental concern. People with materialist values rather than postmaterialist values exhibit more concern for local environmental problems. However, postmaterialist values determine WTP for improvement in both the local and the global environmental problems. Distinguishing among concern for environmental issues, which are differentiated on the basis of geographical proximity, has relevance for the ongoing postmaterialist values debate.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abramson, P. R. (1997). Postmaterialism and environmentalism: A comment on an analysis and a reappraisal. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 21-23.
2.
Adaman, F., Göks7en, F., & Zenginobuz, E. Ü. (2000). Citizens of Istanbul confronting environmental problems: The political economy of civic engagement and the possibility of cooperation. Unpublished manuscript, Istanbul.
3.
Arcury, T. A. , & Christianson, E. H. (1993). Rural-urban differences in environmental knowledge and actions. Journal of Environmental Education, 25, 19-25.
4.
Brechin, S. R. (1999). Objective problems, subjective values and global environmentalism: Evaluating the postmaterialist argument and challenging a new explanation. Social Science Quarterly, 80, 793-809.
5.
Brechin, S. R. , & Kempton, W. (1994). Global environmentalism: A challenge to the postmaterialism thesis?Social Science Quarterly, 75, 245-269.
6.
Brechin, S. R. , & Kempton, W. (1997). Beyond postmaterialist values: National versus individual explanations of global environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 121-137.
7.
Brooks, C. , & Manza, J. (1994). Do changing values explain the new politics? A critical assessment of the postmaterialist thesis. Sociological Quarterly, 35, 541-571.
8.
Buttel, F. H. , & Flinn, W. L. (1978). The politics of environmental concern: The impact of party identification and political ideology on environmental attitudes. Environment & Behavior, 10, 17-36.
9.
Carson, R. T. , Mitchell, R. C., Hanemann, W. M., Kopp R. J., Presser, S., & Ruud, P. A. (1992, November 19). A contingent valuation study of lost passive use values resulting from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. A report to the Attorney General of the State of Alaska.
10.
Davis, D. W. , & Davenport, C. (1999). Assessing the validity of the postmaterialism index. American Political Science Review, 93, 649-664.
11.
Diekmann, A. , & Franzen, A. (1999). The wealth of nations and environmental concern. Environment & Behavior, 31, 540-549.
12.
Dunlap, R. E. , Gallup, G. H., Jr., & Gallup, A. M. (1993). Of global concern: Results of the health of theplanet survey. Environment, 35, 7-15, 33-39.
13.
Dunlap, R. E. , & Mertig, A. G. (1995). Global concern for the environment: Is affluence a prerequisite?Journal of Social Issues, 51, 121-137.
14.
Dunlap, R. E. , & Mertig, A. G. (1997). Global environmental concern: An anomaly for postmaterialism. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 24-29.
15.
Guagnano, G. A. , & Markee, N. (1995). Regional differences in the sociodemographic determinants of environmental concern. Population and Environment, 17, 135-150.
16.
Guha, R. , & Martinez-Alier, J. (1997). Varieties of environmentalism: Essays North and South. London: Earthscan.
17.
Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18.
Inglehart, R. (1987). Value change in industrial societies. American Political Science Review, 81, 1289-1303.
19.
Inglehart, R. (1990). Cultural shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
20.
Inglehart, R. (1995). Public support for environmental protection: Objective problems and subjective values in 43 societies. Political Science & Politics, 28, 57-72.
21.
Inglehart, R. , & Abramson, P. R. (1999). Measuring postmaterialism. American Political Science Review, 93, 665-677.
22.
Kanagy, C. L. , Humphrey C. R., & Firebaugh, G. (1994). Surging environmentalism: Changing public opinion or changing publics?Social Science Quarterly, 75, 804-819.
23.
Kidd, Q. , & Lee, A. (1997). Postmaterialist values and the environment: A critique and reappraisal. Social Science Quarterly, 78, 1-15.
24.
Martinez-Alier, J. (1995). Political ecology, distributional conflicts and economic incommensurability. New Left Review, 211, 70-88.
25.
Mitchell, R. C. , & Carson, R. T. (1989). Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method.Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
26.
Neiman, M. , & Loveridge, R. O. (1981). Environmentalism and local growth control: A probe into theclass bias. Environment & Behavior, 13, 759-772.
27.
Pierce, J. C. (1997). The hidden layer of political culture: A comment on “postmaterialist values and the environment: A critique and reappraisal.”Social Science Quarterly, 78, 30-35.
28.
Scott, D. , & Willits, F. K. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behavior: A Pennsylvania survey. Environment & Behavior, 26, 239-260.
29.
Stern, P. C. , Dietz T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender and environmental concern. Environment & Behavior, 25, 322-348.
30.
Van Liere, K. D. , & Dunlap, R. E. (1980). The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 181-199.
31.
Vining, J. , & Ebreo, A. (1993). Predicting recycling behavior from global and specific environmental attitudes and changes in recycling opportunities. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 1580-1607.
32.
Wall, G. (1995). Barriers to individual environmental action: The influence of attitudes and social experiences. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 32, 465-489.
33.
Whittington, D. (1998). Administering contingent valuation surveys in developing countries. World Development, 26, 21-30.
34.
Zenginobuz, E. Ü., Adaman, F., & Göks7en, F. (2000). Local vs. national vs. global environmental goods: Does it make any difference in terms of willingness to pay? Evidence from a contingent valuation survey in Istanbul. Unpublished manuscript, Istanbul.
