Recent decades have been marked by significant climatic changes and serious environmental damage. This phenomenon is growing more ubiquitous over time and across borders, majorly due to the alarming increase in global energy consumption. Considering the urgent need of reversing the current adverse environmental trends, this study contributes to elucidating the determinants shaping energy-saving behavior among the youth, the central agents of the future economy. We base our analysis on the eminent theory of planned behavior, with the addition of pro-environmental knowledge as a predictor and migration status as a moderator. Crucial findings have been drawn via a structural equation model approach from survey data on 1303 people aged 18 to 29. First, pro-environmental knowledge and subjective norms, through the media of attitude and perceived behavioral control, can predict energy-saving intentions and behavior among the youth. Second, migration status casts a widespread moderating effect across all translation routes, from knowledge to energy-saving behavior. This study is a serious attempt to enrich the relevant literature, further covering the population of the youth and the context of emerging nations. It also provides more in-depth insights into the psychological mechanism underlying the formulation of energy-saving behavior, with the issue of migration being considered. These findings highlight the importance of a migration-specific perspective in designing policies and subsequent programs geared toward energy conservation.
Enerdata. Global energy trends. Grenoble: Enerdata, 2021.
3.
Balsalobre-LorenteDIbáñez-LuzónLUsmanM,et al.The environmental Kuznets curve, based on the economic complexity, and the pollution haven hypothesis in PIIGS countries. Renew Energy2022; 185: 1441–1455.
4.
AbbassKQasimMZSongH, et al.A review of the global climate change impacts, adaptation, and sustainable mitigation measures. Environ Sci Pollut Res2022; 29: 42539–42559.
5.
WanXJahangerAUsmanM, et al.Exploring the effects of economic complexity and the transition to a clean energy pattern on ecological footprint from the Indian perspective. Front Environ Sci2022; 9: 816519. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.816519
6.
IEA. World energy outlook. Paris: IEA, 2021.
7.
DincerI. Renewable energy and sustainable development: A crucial review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2000; 4: 157–175.
8.
NevesJOliveiraT. Understanding energy-efficient heating appliance behavior change: The moderating impact of the green self-identity. Energy2021; 225: 120169.
9.
BhuttoMYSoomroYAYangH. Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting young consumer purchase behavior of energy-efficient appliances (evidence from developing economy). SAGE Open2022; 12: 215824402210782.
10.
RezaeiRGhofranfaridM. Rural households’ renewable energy usage intention in Iran: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. Renew Energy2018; 122: 382–391.
11.
AzamARafiqMShafiqueM,et al.An empirical analysis of the non-linear effects of natural gas, nuclear energy, renewable energy and ICT-Trade in leading CO2 emitter countries: Policy towards CO2 mitigation and economic sustainability. J Environ Manag2021; 286: 112232.
12.
IvlevsA. Does emigration affect pro-environmental behaviour back home? A long-term, local-level perspective. SSRN Electron J2020; 74: 48–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/kykl.12257
13.
XuQHwangBGLuY. Exploring the influencing paths of behavior-driven household energy-saving intervention—household energy saving option (HESO). Sustain Cities Society2021; 71: 102951.
14.
DelistavrouA. Water and energy conservation in Greece: The impact of values and attitudes. Int J Sustain Energy2020; 40: 602–615.
15.
al MamunAHayatNMasudMM, et al.Energy conservation behaviour among the Malaysian youth: A study under the premises of value-belief-norm model. Front Energy Res2022; 10: 902619. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.902619
16.
IvlevsAKingRM. Does emigration reduce corruption?Public Choice2017; 171: 389–408.
17.
RoosenISiegelM. Migration and its influence on the knowledge and usage of birth control methods among Afghan women who stay behind. Public Health2018; 158: 183–197.
18.
AjzenI. The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process1991; 50: 179–211.
19.
GreavesMZibarrasLDStrideC. Using the theory of planned behavior to explore environmental behavioral intentions in the workplace. J Environ Psychol2013; 34: 109–120.
20.
SchaffnerDOhnmachtTWeibelC,et al.Moving into energy-efficient homes: A dynamic approach to understanding residents’ decision-making. Build Environ2017; 123: 211–222.
21.
DuJPanW. Examining energy saving behaviors in student dormitories using an expanded theory of planned behavior. Habitat Int2021; 107: 102308.
22.
LiuXWangQCJianIY, et al.Are you an energy saver at home? The personality insights of household energy conservation behaviors based on theory of planned behavior. Resour Conserv Recycl2021; 174: 105823.
23.
ChenXGouZ. Bridging the knowledge gap between energy-saving intentions and behaviours of young people in residential buildings. J Build Eng2022; 57: 104932.
24.
ShahangianSATabeshMYazdanpanahM. How can socio-psychological factors be related to water-efficiency intention and behaviors among Iranian residential water consumers?J Environ Manag2021; 288: 112466.
25.
FishbeinMAjzenI. Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. 1st ed. New York: Psychology Press, 2009.
26.
WebbDSoutarGNMazzarolT,et al.Self-determination theory and consumer behavioural change: Evidence from a household energy-saving behaviour study. J Environ Psychol2013; 35: 59–66.
27.
KimSHSeockYK. The roles of values and social norm on personal norms and pro-environmentally friendly apparel product purchasing behavior: The mediating role of personal norms. J Retail Consum Serv2019; 51: 83–90.
28.
ArcuryT. Environmental attitude and environmental knowledge. Hum Organ1990; 49: 300–304.
29.
PaçoALavradorT. Environmental knowledge and attitudes and behaviours towards energy consumption. J Environ Manag2017; 197: 384–392.
30.
FlammB. The impacts of environmental knowledge and attitudes on vehicle ownership and use. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ2009; 14: 272–279.
31.
PolonskyMJVocinoAGrauSL, et al.The impact of general and carbon-related environmental knowledge on attitudes and behaviour of US consumers. J Market Manage2012; 28: 238–263.
32.
PagiaslisAKrontalisAK. Green consumption behavior antecedents: Environmental concern, knowledge, and beliefs. Psychol Market2014; 31: 335–348.
33.
ColognaVOreskesN. Don’t gloss over social science! A response to: Glavovic et al. (2021) ‘the tragedy of climate change science’. Clim Dev2022: 14: 839–841.
34.
SariDPMasrurohNAAsihAMS. Consumer intention to participate in E-waste collection programs: A study of smartphone waste in Indonesia. Sustainability2021; 13: 2759.
35.
OttoSPensiniP. Nature-based environmental education of children: Environmental knowledge and connectedness to nature, together, are related to ecological behaviour. Glob Environ Change2017; 47: 88–94.
36.
Marquart-PyattSTQianHHouserMK,et al.Climate change views, energy policy preferences, and intended actions across welfare state regimes: Evidence from the European Social Survey. Int J Sociol2019; 49: 1–26.
37.
DelmasMALessemN. Saving power to conserve your reputation? The effectiveness of private versus public information. J Environ Econ Manage2014; 67: 353–370.
38.
StegLVlekC. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol2009; 29: 309–317.
39.
SternPC. New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Issues2000; 56: 407–424.
40.
BambergSMöserG. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol2007; 27: 14–25.
41.
GaterslebenBStegLVlekC. Measurement and determinants of environmentally significant consumer behavior. Environ Behav2002; 34: 335–362.
42.
BarrS. Factors influencing environmental attitudes and behaviors: A U.K. case study of household waste management. Environ Behav2007; 39: 435–473.
43.
CornerARandallA. Selling climate change? The limitations of social marketing as a strategy for climate change public engagement. Glob Environ Change2011; 21: 1005–1014.
44.
KollmussAAgyemanJ. Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?Environ Educ Res2010; 8: 239–260.
45.
AbrahamseWStegLVlekC,et al.A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. J Environ Psychol2005; 25: 273–291.
46.
DarbyS. Smart metering: What potential for householder engagement?Build Res Inf2010; 38: 442–457.
47.
LiuSZhangP. Foreign direct investment and air pollution in China: Evidence from the global financial Crisis. Dev Econ2021; 60: 30–61.
48.
WangSWangJRuX,et al.Public smog knowledge, risk perception, and intention to reduce car use: Evidence from China. Hum Ecol Risk Assess2018; 25: 1745–1759.
49.
ShiHFanJZhaoD. Predicting household PM2.5-reduction behavior in Chinese urban areas: An integrative model of theory of planned behavior and norm activation theory. J Cleaner Prod2017; 145: 64–73.
50.
AjzenI. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. 2nd ed. Milton-Keynes: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill Education, 2005.
51.
AbrahamseWStegL. Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: A meta-analysis. Glob Environ Change2013; 23: 1773–1785.
52.
GuerinRJTolandMD. An application of a modified theory of planned behavior model to investigate adolescents’ job safety knowledge, norms, attitude and intention to enact workplace safety and health skills. J Saf Res2020; 72: 189–198.
53.
LiuZYangJZClarkSS,et al.Recycling as a planned behavior: The moderating role of perceived behavioral control. Environ Dev Sustain2021; 24: 11011–11026.
54.
Wong-ParodiGFeyginaI. Engaging people on climate change: The role of emotional responses. Environ Commun2021; 15: 571–593.
55.
BicchieriCXiaoE. Do the right thing: But only if others do so. J Behav Decis Mak2009; 22: 191–208.
56.
Zhang L, Fan Y, Zhang W, et al. Extending the theory of planned behavior to explain the effects of cognitive factors across different kinds of green products. Sustainability2019; 11: 4222.
57.
ZhongFLiLGuoA, et al.Quantifying the influence path of water conservation awareness on water-saving irrigation behavior based on the theory of planned behavior and structural equation modeling: A case study from northwest China. Sustainability2019; 11: 4967.
58.
PreteMIPiperLRizzoC, et al.Determinants of Southern Italian households’ intention to adopt energy efficiency measures in residential buildings. J Cleaner Prod2017; 153: 83–91.
59.
RuXWangSYanS. Exploring the effects of normative factors and perceived behavioral control on individual’s energy-saving intention: An empirical study in eastern China. Resour Conserv Recycl2018; 134: 91–99.
60.
ParkEKwonSJ. What motivations drive sustainable energy-saving behavior?: An examination in South Korea. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2017; 79: 494–502.
61.
BambergSHuneckeMBlöbaumA. Social context, personal norms and the use of public transportation: Two field studies. J Environ Psychol2015; 42: 47–54.
62.
BagozziRP. The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Soc Psychol Q1992; 55: 178–204.
63.
LutzenhiserL. Social and behavioral aspects of energy use. Annu Rev Energy Env1993; 18: 247–289.
64.
GaterslebenBVlekC. The multiple layers of sustainable lifestyles. Environ Behav2010; 42: 685–705.
65.
CaoBFuKTaoJ,et al.GMM-based research on environmental pollution and population migration in Anhui province, China. Ecol Indic2015; 51: 159–164.
66.
BatesDC. Environmental refugees? Classifying human migrations caused by environmental change. Popul Environ2002; 23: 465–477.
67.
ZhaoZPanJLeiP. Real curve: Identifying and quantifying the real environmental effects on migration in China. Ecol Indic2021; 133: 108348.
68.
TakahashiYKubotaHShigetoS, et al.Diverse values of urban-to-rural migration: A case study of Hokuto City, Japan. J Rural Stud2021; 87: 292–299.
69.
YanLMcManusPDuncanE. Understanding ethnic differences in perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours: A study of domestic water use in Sydney. Geogr Res2017; 56: 54–67.
70.
GibsonJMcKenzieDStillmanS. The impacts of international migration on remaining household members: Omnibus results from a migration lottery program. Rev Econ Stat2011; 93: 1297–1318.
71.
WangZWangQQiJ. Ten years of the China migrants dynamic survey: Retrospective and prospects. China Popul Dev Stud2021; 5: 296–305.
72.
KubrinCE. Social disorganization theory: Then, now, and in the future. In: KrohnMDLizotteAJHallGP (eds) Handbook on Crime and Deviance. New York: Springer, 2009, pp.225–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0245-0_12.
73.
MacGregorCJThomasCDRoyDB, et al.Climate-induced phenology shifts linked to range expansions in species with multiple reproductive cycles per year. Nat Commun2019; 10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12479-w
74.
HeadLKlockerNAguirre-BielschowskyI. Environmental values, knowledge and behaviour: Contributions of an emergent literature on the role of ethnicity and migration. Progress in Human Geography2018; 43(3): 397–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518768407
75.
Liu X, Wang Q, Wei HH. Psychological and demographic factors affecting household energy-saving intentions: a TPB-based study in Northwest China. Sustainability2020; 12: 836.
76.
PerriCGiglioCCorvelloV. Smart users for smart technologies: Investigating the intention to adopt smart energy consumption behaviors. Technol Forecast Soc Change2020; 155: 119991.
77.
HaTGivensDNguyenT,et al.Stigmatizing attitudes toward people living with HIV among young women migrant workers in Vietnam. Int J Environ Res Public Health2022; 19: 6366.
78.
KlineRB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (Methodology in the social sciences) 4th ed. New York: The Guilford Press, 2015.
79.
HairJFRisherJJSarstedtM,et al.When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur Business Rev2019; 31: 2–24.
80.
GraceJBAndersonTMOlffH,et al.On the specification of structural equation models for ecological systems. Ecol Monogr2010; 80: 67–87.
81.
LowryPBGaskinJ. Partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and testing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to use it. IEEE Trans Prof Commun2014; 57: 123–146.
82.
HairJFJrHultGTMRingleCM,et al.A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2022, pp.81–190.
83.
Sarstedt M, Henseler J and Ringle CM. Multigroup analysis in Partial Least Squares (PLS) path modeling: Alternative methods and empirical results. In: Sarstedt M, Schwaiger M and Taylor CR (eds) Measurement and research methods in international marketing (Advances in International Marketing, Vol. 22), Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2011, pp.195–218. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2011)0000022012
