IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/hukrgr/190594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability And Endogenous Individual Needs: A Survey Among The Working Age Population Of Hajdú-Bihar County, Hungary

Author

Listed:
  • Dombi, Mihály
  • Kuti, István
  • Bauer-Gáthy, Andrea
  • Karcagi-Kováts, Andrea
  • Balogh, Péter

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify the preferences among the working age population of Hajdú-Bihar County, Hungary regarding the dimensions of sustainability. The significance of the financial increment, welfare, and the preserving of environmental capital were considered. The preferences were examined using choice experiment. The dimensions of sustainability were represented by six attributes and the respondents were asked to evaluate them indirectly. The results are representative of the county’s working age population by age, gender, qualification and dwelling type. The most important attribute regarding future development is the healthy life expectancy. Inflation, unemployment and income are valued lower and the less important issues are those connected with the ecosystem (biodiversity and climate change). However, the results vary significantly by gender and qualification. Ecological aspects are not at all considered in the preferences of men. The higher level of education helps the environmental awareness.

Suggested Citation

  • Dombi, Mihály & Kuti, István & Bauer-Gáthy, Andrea & Karcagi-Kováts, Andrea & Balogh, Péter, 2014. "Sustainability And Endogenous Individual Needs: A Survey Among The Working Age Population Of Hajdú-Bihar County, Hungary," Journal of Central European Green Innovation, Karoly Robert University College, vol. 2(4), pages 1-15.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:hukrgr:190594
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.190594
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/190594/files/Dombi%20et%20al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.190594?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Dobson, 2007. "Environmental citizenship: towards sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 276-285.
    2. Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Liebe, Ulf & Hartje, Volkmar, 2009. "Benefits of biodiversity enhancement of nature-oriented silviculture: Evidence from two choice experiments in Germany," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 37-58, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sedlacek Sabine & Kurka Bernhard & Maier Gunther, 2009. "Regional identity: a key to overcome structural weaknesses in peripheral rural regions?," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 1(4), pages 180-201, January.
    2. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers, 2013. "Should We Trust in Values? Explaining Public Support for Pro-Environmental Taxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.
    4. Uthes, Sandra & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2016. "Budgeting for government-financed PES: Does ecosystem service demand equal ecosystem service supply?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 255-264.
    5. Gaston Fornes & Abel Monfort & Camelia Ilie & Chun Kwong (Tony) Koo & Guillermo Cardoza, 2019. "Ethics, Responsibility, and Sustainability in MBAs. Understanding the Motivations for the Incorporation of ERS in Less Traditional Markets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-22, December.
    6. Jürgen Meyerhoff & Ulf Liebe, 2009. "Status Quo Effect in Choice Experiments: Empirical Evidence on Attitudes and Choice Task Complexity," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(3), pages 515-528.
    7. Ariel Sarid & Daphne Goldman, 2021. "A Value-Based Framework Connecting Environmental Citizenship and Change Agents for Sustainability—Implications for Education for Environmental Citizenship," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    8. Elisabete Linhares & Pedro Reis, 2023. "Education for Environmental Citizenship in Pre-Service Teachers: Potentialities and Limitations of a Pedagogical Approach Applied at a Distance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-21, October.
    9. Claudio Siminelli, 2017. "Consumer behaviours and attitudes towards a circular economy: Knowledge and culture as determinants in a four-market analysis," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(1-2), pages 135-169.
    10. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Examining the Moderation Effect of Political Trust on the Linkage between Civic Morality and Support for Environmental Taxation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    11. Juutinen, Artti & Kosenius, Anna-Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Estimating the benefits of recreation-oriented management in state-owned commercial forests in Finland: A choice experiment," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 396-412.
    12. Pariman Boostani & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Jørgen Klein, 2024. "The Role of Community Energy Schemes in Reducing Energy Poverty and Promoting Social Inclusion: A Systematic Literature Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-29, July.
    13. Weller, Priska & Elsasser, Peter, 2018. "Preferences for forest structural attributes in Germany – Evidence from a choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-9.
    14. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    15. repec:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special3:p:203-219 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Dolors Setó-Pamies & Eleni Papaoikonomou, 2020. "Sustainable Development Goals: A Powerful Framework for Embedding Ethics, CSR, and Sustainability in Management Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-8, February.
    17. Elsa Varela & Zein Kallas, 2022. "Societal preferences for the conservation of traditional pig breeds and their agroecosystems: Addressing preference heterogeneity and protest responses through deterministic allocation and scale‐exten," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 761-788, September.
    18. Fermín Sánchez-Carracedo & Francisco Manuel Moreno-Pino & Daniel Romero-Portillo & Bárbara Sureda, 2021. "Education for Sustainable Development in Spanish University Education Degrees," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-24, January.
    19. Gaël Plumecocq, 2013. "L'action publique entre rhétorique et légitimité : une analyse des politiques locales de développement durable en termes de besoins fondamentaux," Post-Print hal-00994921, HAL.
    20. Dong-Hyeon Kim & Byeong-Il Ahn & Eui-Gyeong Kim, 2016. "Metropolitan Residents’ Preferences and Willingness to Pay for a Life Zone Forest for Mitigating Heat Island Effects during Summer Season in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.
    21. Yiannis Georgiou & Andreas Ch. Hadjichambis & Demetra Hadjichambi, 2021. "Teachers’ Perceptions on Environmental Citizenship: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-29, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:hukrgr:190594. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtkrghu.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.