IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v303y2024ics0378377424003706.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moving toward salvaging Iran's groundwater: A psychological analysis of blocking unauthorized agricultural wells

Author

Listed:
  • Haji, Latif
  • Momenpour, Yadgar
  • Choobchian, Shahla

Abstract

Concerns about the over-extraction of groundwater and the environmental effects of that have increased the need to change mental patterns about water consumption. This study is aimed on the psychological analysis of the blockage of unauthorized water wells in the agricultural sector of Iran through the integration of PMT and TPB models. The research model was tested with 384 farmers. A questionnaire was used for data collection, the validity and reliability of which were obtained to be at an optimal level. For testing the research hypotheses Smart-PLS4 software was used. The research findings showed that the effects of six variables being attitude, subjective norm, perceived severity, response cost, response efficacy, and self-efficacy on intention were significant; however, the effect of perceived vulnerability on intention was not significant. Based on structural equation modeling results, the intention variable mediates significantly the relationship between dependent and independent variables. The independent and mediating variables were able to explain 49 % of the variance of farmers' behavior toward blockage of unauthorized water wells. Other than providing a new theoretical perspective toward understanding the blocking behavior of unauthorized water wells, the present study findings provide valuable insights for enhancing conservation behavior. To encourage people to participate in conservation behaviors, practical suggestions are provided for relevant policy-makers and planners as well as water conservation advocates.

Suggested Citation

  • Haji, Latif & Momenpour, Yadgar & Choobchian, Shahla, 2024. "Moving toward salvaging Iran's groundwater: A psychological analysis of blocking unauthorized agricultural wells," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:303:y:2024:i:c:s0378377424003706
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2024.109035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377424003706
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2024.109035?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hashemi, Masoumeh & Mazandarani Zadeh, Hamed & Zarghami, Mahdi & Demeke, Betelhem W. & Taraghi Delgarm, Razieh, 2023. "An analysis of why rehabilitation and balancing programs for aquifers do not meet water organizations' targets (a case study of the Qazvin aquifer in Iran)," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).
    2. Moslem Savari & Mohammad Shokati Amghani, 2021. "Factors influencing farmers’ adaptation strategies in confronting the drought in Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 4949-4972, April.
    3. Piyapong Janmaimool, 2017. "Application of Protection Motivation Theory to Investigate Sustainable Waste Management Behaviors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-16, June.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. J. Arbuckle & Lois Morton & Jon Hobbs, 2013. "Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: Evidence from Iowa," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 551-563, June.
    6. Lies De Kimpe & Michel Walrave & Pieter Verdegem & Koen Ponnet, 2022. "What we think we know about cybersecurity: an investigation of the relationship between perceived knowledge, internet trust, and protection motivation in a cybercrime context," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(8), pages 1796-1808, June.
    7. Aysel Tikir & Bernard Lehmann, 2011. "Climate change, theory of planned behavior and values: a structural equation model with mediation analysis," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 389-402, January.
    8. Moslem Savari & Hamed Eskandari Damaneh & Hadi Eskandari Damaneh, 2021. "Factors influencing farmers’ management behaviors toward coping with drought: evidence from Iran," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(11), pages 2021-2046, July.
    9. Bayard, Budry & Jolly, Curtis, 2007. "Environmental behavior structure and socio-economic conditions of hillside farmers: A multiple-group structural equation modeling approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 433-440, May.
    10. Suk Min Pang & Booi Chen Tan & Teck Chai Lau, 2021. "Antecedents of Consumers’ Purchase Intention towards Organic Food: Integration of Theory of Planned Behavior and Protection Motivation Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-18, May.
    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. Zobeidi, Tahereh & Komendantova, Nadejda & Yazdanpanah, Masoud, 2022. "Social media as a driver of the use of renewable energy: The perceptions of instagram users in Iran," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    2. Ahmad Samim Pouya & Özge Can Niyaz, 2022. "Modeling Turkish Households’ Climate Change-Related Behaviors: Theory of Planned Behavior Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    3. Alessandro Concari & Gerjo Kok & Pim Martens, 2020. "A Systematic Literature Review of Concepts and Factors Related to Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviour in Relation to Waste Management Through an Interdisciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-50, May.
    4. Farida Saleem & Ahmad Adeel & Rizwan Ali & Shabir Hyder, 2018. "Intentions to adopt ecopreneurship: moderating role of collectivism and altruism," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(2), pages 517-537, December.
    5. Francis Yao Anyan, 2018. "Farmers Perceptions and Attitudes Towards the Use of Agricultural Indigenous Knowledge in Farming," Journal of Agriculture and Crops, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 4(6), pages 63-67, 06-2018.
    6. Menrad, K. & Emberger-Klein, A. & Schops, J., 2018. "Factors influencing consumers behavioral intention towards climate-friendly food consumption in Southern Germany," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277108, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Abebe, Fentahun & Zuo, Alec & Wheeler, Sarah Ann & Bjornlund, Henning & Chilundo, Mario & Kissoly, Luitfred & Dube, Thabani, 2022. "The influences on farmers' planned and actual farm adaptation decisions: Evidence from small-scale irrigation schemes in South-Eastern Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    8. Catarina Roseira & Sandrina Teixeira & Belem Barbosa & Rita Macedo, 2022. "How Collectivism Affects Organic Food Purchase Intention and Behavior: A Study with Norwegian and Portuguese Young Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    9. Albert Moerkerken & Julia Blasch & Pieter Beukering & Erik Well, 2020. "A new approach to explain farmers’ adoption of climate change mitigation measures," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 141-161, March.
    10. Meredith T. Niles & Margaret Brown & Robyn Dynes, 2016. "Farmer’s intended and actual adoption of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 277-295, March.
    11. Tiberio Daddi & Niccolò Maria Todaro & Maria Rosa De Giacomo & Marco Frey, 2018. "A Systematic Review of the Use of Organization and Management Theories in Climate Change Studies," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(4), pages 456-474, May.
    12. Allison M. Chatrchyan & Rachel C. Erlebacher & Nina T. Chaopricha & Joana Chan & Daniel Tobin & Shorna B. Allred, 2017. "United States agricultural stakeholder views and decisions on climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(5), September.
    13. Shis-Ping Lin, 2015. "Raising Public Awareness: The Role of the Household Sector in Mitigating Climate Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Brigitta Plasek & Zoltán Lakner & Ágoston Temesi, 2022. "Environmental, Health or Social Impacts? Investigating Ethical Food Consumption Behavior in the Case of Palm Oil-Free Foods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-12, August.
    15. Wang, Xueqin & Wong, Yiik Diew & Chen, Tianyi & Yuen, Kum Fai, 2022. "An investigation of technology-dependent shopping in the pandemic era: Integrating response efficacy and identity expressiveness into theory of planned behaviour," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 1053-1067.
    16. Guang-Wen Zheng & Abu Bakkar Siddik & Mohammad Masukujjaman & Syed Shah Alam & Alvina Akter, 2020. "Perceived Environmental Responsibilities and Green Buying Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, December.
    17. Hao Dong & Yang Zhang & Tianqing Chen, 2023. "A Study on Farmers’ Participation in Environmental Protection in the Context of Rural Revitalization: The Moderating Role of Policy Environment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-13, January.
    18. Dongliang Zhang & Guangqing Huang & Xiaoling Yin & Qinghua Gong, 2015. "Residents’ Waste Separation Behaviors at the Source: Using SEM with the Theory of Planned Behavior in Guangzhou, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, August.
    19. Lindung Parningotan Manik & Zaenal Akbar & Aris Yaman & Ariani Indrawati, 2022. "Indonesian Scientists’ Behavior Relative to Research Data Governance in Preventing WMD-Applicable Technology Transfer," Publications, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-29, December.
    20. Ting Que & Yuxin Wu & Shiyu Hu & Jianmin Cai & Nan Jiang & Huige Xing, 2022. "Factors Influencing Public Participation in Community Disaster Mitigation Activities: A Comparison of Model and Nonmodel Disaster Mitigation Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-18, September.

    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:eee:agiwat:v:303:y:2024:i:c:s0378377424003706. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    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.