IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csn/wpaper/2021-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation to protect the environment: correlational and causal evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Maurizio Pugno

    (University of Cassino and Lazio Meridionale)

  • Francesco Sarracino

    (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques du Grand-Duché du Luxembourg)

Abstract

Understanding why many people spontaneously perform pro-environmental behaviours, rather than requiring some incentive, is an active area of research. To solve the puzzle, many studies address people’s intrinsic motivation for this kind of behaviour. However, the term ‘intrinsic’ remains unclear, and thus also the solution of the puzzle. We contribute to this research by attaching intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to the pursuit of central goals in people’s lives. We take the prominent example of the motivations in looking for a job, and relate these motivations to pro-environmental attitudes and engagements. Using an international sample, we find that intrinsic motivation relates positively and extrinsic motivation relates negatively to a variety of subjective pro-environmental outcomes.This result holds for different sub-samples and for various econometric specifications and methodologies. In particular, two-stage least squares estimation with proper instruments provides evidence of a causal relationship between motivations and pro-environmental outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Maurizio Pugno & Francesco Sarracino, 2021. "Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation to protect the environment: correlational and causal evidence," Working Papers 2021-01, Universita' di Cassino, Dipartimento di Economia e Giurisprudenza.
  • Handle: RePEc:csn:wpaper:2021-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipeg-wpe.unicas.it/files/wp_202101.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert C. Feenstra & Robert Inklaar & Marcel P. Timmer, 2015. "The Next Generation of the Penn World Table," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(10), pages 3150-3182, October.
    2. repec:elg:eechap:15612_21 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2017. "Green lifestyles and subjective well-being: More about self-image than actual behavior?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 304-323.
    4. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    5. Konow, James & Earley, Joseph, 2008. "The Hedonistic Paradox: Is homo economicus happier," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 1-33, February.
    6. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    7. Fischbacher, Urs & Gachter, Simon & Fehr, Ernst, 2001. "Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 397-404, June.
    8. Brian Chi-ang Lin & Siqi Zheng & Ankinée Kirakozian, 2016. "One Without The Other? Behavioural And Incentive Policies For Household Waste Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 526-551, July.
    9. Bartolini, Stefano & Sarracino, Francesco, 2014. "Happy for how long? How social capital and economic growth relate to happiness over time," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 242-256.
    10. Stephan Meier & Alois Stutzer, 2008. "Is Volunteering Rewarding in Itself?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 75(297), pages 39-59, February.
    11. Welsch, Heinz & Kühling, Jan, 2011. "Are pro-environmental consumption choices utility-maximizing? Evidence from subjective well-being data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 75-87.
    12. Birgitta Gatersleben & Niamh Murtagh & Wokje Abrahamse, 2014. "Values, identity and pro-environmental behaviour," Contemporary Social Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 374-392, December.
    13. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    14. Kirk Brown & Tim Kasser, 2005. "Are Psychological and Ecological Well-being Compatible? The Role of Values, Mindfulness, and Lifestyle," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 349-368, November.
    15. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    16. repec:bla:kyklos:v:54:y:2001:i:2-3:p:317-42 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Carol Ryff & Burton Singer, 2008. "Know Thyself and Become What You Are: A Eudaimonic Approach to Psychological Well-Being," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 13-39, January.
    18. Siegwart Lindenberg, 2001. "Intrinsic Motivation in a New Light," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(2‐3), pages 317-342, May.
    19. Richard M. Ryan & Veronika Huta & Edward Deci, 2008. "Living well: a self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 139-170, January.
    20. Stefano Bartolini & Ennio Bilancini & Maurizio Pugno, 2013. "Did the Decline in Social Connections Depress Americans’ Happiness?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 1033-1059, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Olawale Fatoki, 2022. "Determinants of Employee Electricity Saving Behavior in Small Firms: The Role of Benefits and Leadership," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-20, April.

    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. Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Alhusen, Harm, 2019. "On the determinants of pro-environmental behavior: A literature review and guide for the empirical economist," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 350, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2019.
    2. Mavisakalyan, Astghik & Sharma, Swati & Weber, Clas, 2024. "Pro-environmental behavior and subjective well-being: Culture has a role to play," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    3. Martin Binder & Ann-Kathrin Blankenberg & Heinz Welsch, 2019. "Pro-environmental norms and subjective well-being: panel evidence from the UK," Working Papers V-417-19, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2019.
    4. Koch, Christian, 2013. "The Virtue Ethics Hypothesis: Is there a nexus between virtues and well-being?," VfS Annual Conference 2013 (Duesseldorf): Competition Policy and Regulation in a Global Economic Order 80054, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Marco Vincenzi, 2023. "Mapping the empirical relationship between environmental performance and social preferences: Evidence from macro data," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(1), pages 85-102.
    6. Welsch, Heinz, 2024. "Why is satisfaction from pro-environmental behaviors increasing in costs? Insights from the rational-choice decision-error framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    7. Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin & Guardiola, Jorge, 2020. "Does it have to be a sacrifice? Different notions of the good life, pro-environmental behavior and their heterogeneous impact on well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Heinz Welsch & Jan Kuehling, 2017. "How Green Self Image Affects Subjective Well-Being: Pro-Environmental Values as a Social Norm," Working Papers V-404-17, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Oct 2017.
    9. Nazaret Ibáñez-Rueda & Mònica Guillén-Royo & Jorge Guardiola, 2020. "Pro-Environmental Behavior, Connectedness to Nature, and Wellbeing Dimensions among Granada Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-16, November.
    10. Raquel Redondo & Carmen Valor & Isabel Carrero, 2022. "Unraveling the Relationship between Well-Being, Sustainable Consumption and Nature Relatedness: a Study of University Students," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 17(2), pages 913-930, April.
    11. Martin Binder & Ann-Kathrin Blankenberg & Heinz Welsch, 2020. "Pro-environmental Norms, Green Lifestyles, and Subjective Well-Being: Panel Evidence from the UK," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 1029-1060, December.
    12. Welsch, Heinz & Kühling, Jan, 2018. "How Green Self Image is Related to Subjective Well-Being: Pro-Environmental Values as a Social Norm," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 105-119.
    13. Welsch, Heinz & Binder, Martin & Blankenberg, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Green behavior, green self-image, and subjective well-being: Separating affective and cognitive relationships," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    14. Jian Gao & Jianguo Wang & Jianming Wang, 2020. "The Impact of Pro-environmental Preference on Consumers’ Perceived Well-being: The Mediating Role of Self-Determination Need Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, January.
    15. Lane, Tom, 2017. "How does happiness relate to economic behaviour? A review of the literature," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 62-78.
    16. Haverkamp, Thilo K.G. & Welsch, Heinz & Ziegler, Andreas, 2023. "The relationship between climate protection activities, economic preferences, and life satisfaction: Empirical evidence for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    17. Persichina, Marco, 2016. "Cascading Defections from Cooperation Triggered by Present-Biased Behaviors in the Commons," MPRA Paper 83131, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 30 Nov 2017.
    18. Schmitt, Michael T. & Aknin, Lara B. & Axsen, Jonn & Shwom, Rachael L., 2018. "Unpacking the Relationships Between Pro-environmental Behavior, Life Satisfaction, and Perceived Ecological Threat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 130-140.
    19. Francesco Sarracino & Kelsey J. O’Connor, 2023. "Neo-humanism and COVID-19: Opportunities for a socially and environmentally sustainable world," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(1), pages 9-41, February.
    20. Mikucka, Malgorzata & Sarracino, Francesco & Dubrow, Joshua K., 2017. "When Does Economic Growth Improve Life Satisfaction? Multilevel Analysis of the Roles of Social Trust and Income Inequality in 46 Countries, 1981–2012," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 447-459.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:csn:wpaper:2021-01. 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: Gennaro Zezza (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crcasit.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.