IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i8p3292-d1376022.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment on the Environmental Concern Level and Driving Mechanism of Beach Recreationists Based on the New Ecological Paradigm Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaowei Wu

    (School of History, Culture and Tourism, Huaiyin Normal University, Huaian 223300, China)

  • Chongqing Zhong

    (School of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Huaiyin Normal University, Huaian 223300, China
    School of Geographic and Oceanographic Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China)

  • Han Chen

    (School of History, Culture and Tourism, Huaiyin Normal University, Huaian 223300, China)

  • Xinqing Zou

    (School of Geographic and Oceanographic Sciences, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China)

Abstract

This study uses the new ecological paradigm (NEP) scale to measure the level of environmental concern among beach recreationists, innovatively constructs a model based on the measurement results to depict a group portrait, and analyzes the driving mechanism of beach recreation pro-environmental behavior. The level of environmental concern of beach tourists is 66.2%, which is slightly higher than the average level of Chinese urban residents, and is significantly correlated with age, occupation, education level, and income level. The newly constructed environmental behavior group portrait index indicates that the group that actively participates in recreational environmental behavior at Haichow Bay Beach includes college students, primary and secondary school students, retirees, and surrounding residents. Key factors in the generation of environmentally friendly behavior for beach enthusiasts include individual self-control constraints, regional ecological environment management, the improvement in environmental literacy, overcoming individualism, external environmental impacts, and environmental education.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaowei Wu & Chongqing Zhong & Han Chen & Xinqing Zou, 2024. "Assessment on the Environmental Concern Level and Driving Mechanism of Beach Recreationists Based on the New Ecological Paradigm Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3292-:d:1376022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3292/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3292/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ziegler, Andreas, 2017. "Political orientation, environmental values, and climate change beliefs and attitudes: An empirical cross country analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 144-153.
    2. Michalis I. Vousdoukas & Roshanka Ranasinghe & Lorenzo Mentaschi & Theocharis A. Plomaritis & Panagiotis Athanasiou & Arjen Luijendijk & Luc Feyen, 2020. "Sandy coastlines under threat of erosion," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 10(3), pages 260-263, March.
    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. E. Keith Smith & Adam Mayer, 2019. "Anomalous Anglophones? Contours of free market ideology, political polarization, and climate change attitudes in English-speaking countries, Western European and post-Communist states," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 17-34, January.
    2. Panarello, Demetrio, 2021. "Economic insecurity, conservatism, and the crisis of environmentalism: 30 years of evidence," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent & Shannon Hagerman & Robert Kozak, 2018. "What risks matter? Public views about assisted migration and other climate-adaptive reforestation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 573-587, December.
    4. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    5. Lan Anh Nguyen & Manh-Hung Nguyen & Viet-Ngu Hoang & Arnaud Reynaud & Michel Simioni & Clevo Wilson, 2024. "Tourists’ preferences and willingness to pay for protecting a World Heritage site from coastal erosion in Vietnam," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 27607-27628, November.
    6. Philip R. Walsh & Rachel Dodds & Julianna Priskin & Jonathon Day & Oxana Belozerova, 2021. "The Corporate Responsibility Paradox: A Multi-National Investigation of Business Traveller Attitudes and Their Sustainable Travel Behaviour," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, April.
    7. O'Dell, Dallas & Contu, Davide & Shreedhar, Ganga, 2025. "Public support for degrowth policies and sufficiency behaviours in the United States: a discrete choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126084, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Groh, Elke D. & Möllendorff, Charlotte v., 2020. "What shapes the support of renewable energy expansion? Public attitudes between policy goals and risk, time, and social preferences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    9. Magalhães Filho, L.N.L. & Roebeling, P.C. & Costa, L.F.C. & de Lima, L.T., 2022. "Ecosystem services values at risk in the Atlantic coastal zone due to sea-level rise and socioeconomic development," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    10. Kanberger, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2023. "On the preferences for an environmentally friendly and fair energy transition: A stated choice experiment for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    11. Yeheng Pan & Yu Xie & Hepeng Jia & Xi Luo & Ruifen Zhang, 2022. "Lower Carbon, Stronger Nation: Exploring Sociopolitical Determinants for the Chinese Public’s Climate Attitudes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Arndt, Christoph, 2023. "Climate change vs energy security? The conditional support for energy sources among Western Europeans," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    13. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Krupnick, Alan & Lampi, Elina & Löfgren, Åsa & Qin, Ping & Sterner, Thomas & Yang, Xiaojun, 2021. "The climate decade: Changing attitudes on three continents," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    14. Hu, Saiquan & Jia, Xiao & Zhang, Xiaojin & Zheng, Xiaoying & Zhu, Junming, 2017. "How political ideology affects climate perception: Moderation effects of time orientation and knowledge," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 124-131.
    15. Yingying Sun & Ziqiang Han, 2018. "Climate Change Risk Perception in Taiwan: Correlation with Individual and Societal Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, January.
    16. Ertör-Akyazi, Pinar & Akçay, Çağlar, 2021. "Moral intuitions predict pro-social behaviour in a climate commons game," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    17. Andreas Ziegler, 2018. "Heterogeneous preferences and the individual change to alternative electricity contracts," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201827, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    18. Matthew R. Sanderson & Jason S. Bergtold & Jessica L. Heier Stamm & Marcellus M. Caldas & Steven M. Ramsey & Joseph Aistrup, 2018. "Climate change beliefs in an agricultural context: what is the role of values held by farming and non-farming groups?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 150(3), pages 259-272, October.
    19. Vu, Trung V., 2020. "Individualism and climate change policies: International evidence," MPRA Paper 98888, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Jennifer R. Shadrick & Dylan H. Rood & Martin D. Hurst & Matthew D. Piggott & Bethany G. Hebditch & Alexander J. Seal & Klaus M. Wilcken, 2022. "Sea-level rise will likely accelerate rock coast cliff retreat rates," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3292-:d:1376022. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.