Measuring the political cost of environmental problems (PCEP): a scale development and validation

Abstract

With the improvement of people’s living standards and the awakening of environmental rights awareness, pollution and mass environmental incidents have become the focus of public attention. Using grounded theory analysis in qualitative research and multivariate statistical technology in quantitative research, taking residents and public officials of Shijiazhuang, Tangshan and Heng Shui as the research objects, Study 1 has defined the concept of the political cost of environmental problems (PCEP) and has constructed the PCEP scale by using the methods of interview and questionnaire survey, which provided sufficient theoretical explanation and empirical support for the research on the political cost of environmental problems. Study 2 has explored the relationship between PCEP and the environment-friendly behaviors, verified the applicability of the scale, and found the institutional PCEP, the organizational PCEP, the social PCEP, and the mass basic PCEP all have a positive impact on environment-friendly behaviors.

KEYWORDS:

• Political cost of environmental problems (PCEP)
• scale development
• environment-friendly behavior

Funding

This work was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China, Research on the Generating Mechanism Evaluation Method and Governance Model of the Political Cost of Environmental Pollution Problem [No.16BGL138].

Notes

1 Wu, Ye, and Fang, “Spatial Analysis of the Effects of PM2.5,” 1–12.

2 Niu et al., “Has Third-Party Monitoring Improved Environmental Data Quality?,” 109698.

3 Bai and Zhang,“Political Cost of Environmental Problems,” 131–136.

4 Liu et al., “Environmental Regulation, Green Technological Innovation, and Eco-Efficiency,” 119993.

5 Handlin, “Mass Organization and the Durability,” 1238–1269.

6 Draper, “Administration and Institutional Provisions,” 446–455.

7 Burden et al., “Education, Early Life, and Political Participation,” 205316802095831.

8 Ehrlich and Ehrlich. The Population Explosion.

9 Meadows and Club of Rome. The Limits to Growth.

10 White and Watts. Ecological Crisis.

11 Myers, Ultimate Security.

12 Hall, “Clearing Curses and Commanding Crocodiles,” 183–195.

13 Easton, The Analysis of Political Structure.

14 Taras, Steel, and Kirkman, “Does Country Equate with Culture?,” 455–487.

15 Dimitrova and Poppetrov. “Past Continuous,” 121–158.

16 Beltran et al., “Male and Female Politicians on Twitter,” 239–251.

17 Tran and Tran, “Estimating Public Opinion,” 101–115.

18 Molle and Closas, “Why Is State-Centered Groundwater Governance Largely Ineffective?,” 1–17.

19 Lopez-Aviles et al., “Sustainable Energy Opportunities,” 98–116.

20 Tian, Xu, and Zhang, “Does Environmental Inspection Led,” 117695.

21 Teschner, Garb, and Paavola, “The Role of Technology in Policy Dynamics,” 91–103.

22 Yang et al., “Environmentally Sustainable or Economically Sustainable?,” 989–997.

23 Li et al., “Numerical Simulation of the Large-Scale,” 232–244.

24 Fidelis et al., “Governance for Sustainability of Estuarine,” 846.

25 Knight, “The Societal Cost of China's Rapid Economic Growth,” 138–159.

26 Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, “Competition and Strategic Differentiation,” 376–406.

27 Hickmann and Elsasser, “New Alliances in Global Environmental Governance,” 459–481.

28 Tecklin, Bauer, and Prieto, “Making Environmental Law for the Market,” 879–898.

29 Poguntke et al., “Party Rules, Party Resources and the Politics of Parliamentary Democracies,” 661–678.

30 Wooden, “Another Way of Saying Enough,” 314–353.

31 Chen, Wang, and Li, “Research on the Impact of Multi-Dimensional,” 111123.

32 Li, Xu, and Zheng, “Green Governance,” 3845.

33 Kassen, “Promoting Public Cooperation in Government,” 743–762.

34 Ponte, “The Hidden Costs of Environmental.”

35 Yang, Xue, and Huang, “The Changing Factors,” 3573.

36 Ding et al., “An Emergency Decision-Making Method,” 3453.

37 Liu et al., “Environmental Regulation,” 119993; Sellers, Ebi, and Hess, “Climate Change, Human Health, and Social Stability,” 045002.

38 Glaser, and Strauss. The Discovery of Grounded Theory.

39 Xu et al., Beyond Place Attachment,” 420.

40 Triyanti, and Chu, “A Survey of Governance Approaches,” 11–21.

41 Zhen, “Analysis on Physical Exercise,” 293–299.

42 Ibid.

43 Xie and Han, “Capacity Sharing and Capacity,” 5790.

44 Bruschi et al., “An Example of Environment-Friendly Psychiatry,” 1.

45 Thogersen and Olander, “The Dynamic Interaction,” 1758–1780.

46 Thogersen and Olander, “Spillover of Environment-Friendly,” 225–236.

47 Bendell, “I Don't Want to Be Green,” 277–288.

48 Schultz et al., “Cross-Cultural Evidence,” 267–302.

49 Arata et al., “Do City Dwellers Care about Peri-Urban Land Use?,” 1044–1066.

50 Bae, “Decentralized Urban Governance and Environmental Collaboration,” 759–783.

51 Beak et al., “Is the Environment-Friendly Factor Attractive to Customers,” 996–1006.

52 Chen and Taylor, “Economic Development and Pollution,” 111123.

53 Weng, Chang, and Lee, “Nonlinear Time Series Analysis,” 405–414.

54 Li, Feng, and Hao, “The Evolving Concepts,” 262–272.

55 Ciner, and Dogan-Saglamtimur, “Environmental and Sustainable Aspects,” 012001.

56 Liu, de Jong, and Huang, “Assessing the Administrative Practice,” 51–60.

57 Hiroyasu, Miljanich, and Anderson, “Drivers of Support,” 401–417.

58 Pan, Y., Q. P. Chen, and P. D. Zhang. “Does Policy Uncertainty Affect,” 903–931.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Yingyan Liu

Yingyan Liu, PhD, College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.

Zaisheng Zhang

Zaisheng Zhang, PhD, is a Professor at College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, Research direction is human resources and government governance.

Huadun Chen

Huadun Chen, PhD, College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.

Heng Zhao

Heng Zhao, PhD, College of Management and Economics, Tianjin University, Tianjin, China.