Understanding the Acceptance of Nature-Preservation-Related Restrictions as the Result of the Compensatory Effects of Environmental Attitude and Behavioral Costs

Abstract

Personal costs that accompany nature-preservation-related restrictions hurt their acceptance, irrespective of whether individuals care about environmental protection or not (i.e., irrespective of people’s environmental attitude). Analogically, people’s environmental attitude unconditionally determines their acceptance of nature-preservation-related restrictions, irrespective of the costs. This view stands in contrast to the typical NIMBY (not-in-my-back-yard) research in which people’s environmental attitude is expected to moderate the costs that arise from proximate exposure to nature-preservation efforts. In our quasi-experiment involving community samples of 598 Polish residents living at different distances from a nature preserve, we corroborated that the proximity and, thus, the palpable costs that come with nature-preservation efforts diminished people’s acceptance of nature-preservation-related restrictions. Over and above this NIMBY effect, environmental attitude determined people’s acceptance even beyond income and education. Predictably, environmental attitude is even able to compensate for the costs involved when people live in close proximity to a nature preserve.

Keywords

environmental attitude ecological (conservation) behaviors acceptance of nature preserves NIMBY personal costs

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bell

Gray

Haggett

(2005). The “social gap” in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics, 14, 460-477.

Bond

Fox

C. M.

(2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Byrka

(2015). Łancuchowe zmiany zachowan w kontekscie ochrony srodowiska i promocji zdrowia [Spillover behavior effects in the context of environmental conservation and health promotion]. Warszawa, Poland: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Byrka

Hartig

Kaiser

F. G.

(2010). Environmental attitude as a mediator of the relationship between psychological restoration in nature and self-reported ecological behavior. Psychological Reports, 107, 847-859.

Byrka

Kaiser

F. G.

(2013). Health performance of individuals within the Campbell paradigm. International Journal of Psychology, 48, 986-999. doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.702215

Campbell

D. T.

(1963). Social attitudes and other acquired behavioral dispositions. In Koch

(Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 6, pp. 94-172). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Campbell

D. T.

Fiske

D. W.

(1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.

DeCoster

Iselin

A. M. R.

Gallucci

(2009). A conceptual and empirical examination of justifications for dichotomization. Psychological Methods, 14, 349-366. doi:10.1037/a0016956

Devine-Wright

(2009). Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place-protective action. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 19, 426-441. doi:10.1002/casp.1004

10.

Devine-Wright

(2011). Place attachment and public acceptance of renewable energy: A tidal energy case study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31, 336-343. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.07.001

11.

Ferraro

P. J.

(2002). The local costs of establishing protected areas in low-income nations: Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar. Ecological Economics, 43, 261-275. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00219-7

12.

Fiallo

E. A.

Jacobson

S. K.

(1995). Local communities and protected areas: Attitudes of rural residents towards conservation and Machalilla National Park, Ecuador. Environmental Conservation, 22, 241-249. doi:10.1017/S037689290001064X

13.

Gervers

J. H.

(1987). The Nimby syndrome: Is it inevitable? Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 29, 18-43. doi:10.1080/00139157.1987.9931352

14.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

15.

Joule

R.-V.

Girandola

Bernard

(2007). How can people be induced to willingly change their behavior? The path from persuasive communication to binding communication. Social & Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 493-505. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00018.x

16.

Kaiser

F. G.

Arnold

Otto

(2014). Attitudes and defaults save lives and protect the environment jointly and compensatorily: Understanding the behavioral efficacy of nudges and other structural interventions. Behavioral Sciences, 4, 202-212. doi:10.3390/bs4030202

17.

Kaiser

F. G.

Brügger

Hartig

Bogner

F. X.

Gutscher

(2014). Appreciation of nature and appreciation of environmental protection: How stable are these attitudes and which comes first? European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 64, 269-277. doi:10.1016/j.erap.2014.09.001%20

18.

Kaiser

F. G.

Byrka

(2011). Environmentalism as a trait: Gauging people’s prosocial personality in terms of environmental engagement. International Journal of Psychology, 46, 71-79. doi:10.1080/00207594.2010.516830

19.

Kaiser

F. G.

Byrka

(2015). The Campbell paradigm as a conceptual alternative to the expectation of hypocrisy in contemporary attitude research. The Journal of Social Psychology, 155, 12-29. doi:10.1080/00224545.2014.959884

20.

Kaiser

F. G.

Byrka

Hartig

(2010). Reviving Campbell’s paradigm for attitude research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 351-367. doi:10.1177/1088868310366452

21.

Kaiser

F. G.

Hartig

Brügger

Duvier

(2013). Environmental protection and nature as distinct attitudinal objects: An application of the Campbell paradigm. Environment and Behavior, 45, 369-398. doi:10.1177/0013916511422444

22.

Kaiser

F. G.

Wilson

(2004). Goal-directed conservation behavior: The specific composition of a general performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1531-1544. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2003.06.003

23.

Matell

M. S.

Jacoby

(1971). Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert scales? Study 1: Reliability and validity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 31, 657-674. doi:10.1177/001316447103100307

24.

Olko

Hędrzak

Cent

Subel

(2011). Cooperation in the Polish national parks and their neighborhood in a view of different stakeholders—A long way ahead? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 24, 295-312. doi:10.1080/13511610.2011.592074

25.

Orr

J. M.

Sackett

P. R.

DuBois

C. L. Z.

(1991). Outlier detection and treatment in I/O psychology: A survey of researcher beliefs and an empirical illustration. Personnel Psychology, 44, 473-486. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb02401.x

26.

Otto

Kaiser

F. G.

(2014). Ecological behavior across the lifespan: Why environmentalism increases as people grow older. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 331-338. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.08.004

27.

Peabody

(1962). Two components in bipolar scales: Direction and extremeness. Psychological Review, 69, 65-73.

28.

Pohl

Hübner

Mohs

(2012). Acceptance and stress effects of aircraft obstruction markings of wind turbines. Energy Policy, 50, 592-600. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.07.062

29.

Poortinga

Whitmarsh

L. E.

Suffolk

(2013). The introduction of a single-use carrier bag charge in Wales: Attitude change and behavioural spillover effects. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 240-247. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.09.001

30.

Rasch

(1980). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1960)

31.

Scheuthle

Carabias-Hütter

Kaiser

F. G.

(2005). The motivational and instantaneous behavior effects of contexts: Steps toward a theory of goal-directed behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 2076-2093. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02210.x

32.

Schultz

P. W.

Khazian

A. M.

Zaleski

A. C.

(2008). Using normative social influence to promote conservation among hotel guests. Social Influence, 3, 4-23. doi:10.1080/15534510701755614

33.

Smolders

K. C. H. J.

de Kort

Y. A. W.

Tenner

A. D.

Kaiser

F. G.

(2012). Need for recovery in offices: Behavior-based assessment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 32, 126-135. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.12.003

34.

Swofford

Slattery

(2010). Public attitudes of wind energy in Texas: Local communities in close proximity to wind farms and their effect on decision-making. Energy Policy, 38, 2508-2519. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.046

35.

van der Aa

B. J. M.

Groote

P. D.

Huigen

P. P. P.

(2004). World heritage as NIMBY? The case of the Dutch part of the Wadden Sea. Current Issues in Tourism, 7, 291-302. doi:10.1080/13683500408667986

36.

van der Horst

(2007). NIMBY or not? Exploring the relevance of location and the politics of voiced opinions in renewable energy siting controversies. Energy Policy, 35, 2705-2714. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.012

37.

Walpole

M. J.

Goodwin

H. J.

(2001). Local attitudes towards conservation and tourism around Komodo National Park, Indonesia. Environmental Conservation, 28, 160-166. doi:10.1017/S0376892901000169

38.

Walter

(2014). Determining the local acceptance of wind energy projects in Switzerland: The importance of general attitudes and project characteristics. Energy Research & Social Science, 4, 78-88. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2014.09.003

39.

Wang

(2001). Precision of Warm’s weighted likelihood estimates for a polytomous model in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 317-331.

40.

Wolsink

(2007). Wind power implementation: The nature of public attitudes: Equity and fairness instead of “backyard motives.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 11, 1188-1207. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2005.10.005

41.

Wright

B. D.

Linacre

J. M.

(1994). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 8, 370.

42.

Wüstenhagen

Wolsink

Bürer

M. J.

(2007). Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy, 35, 2683-2691. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.12.001