政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/132084
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113451/144438 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51257292      線上人數 : 877
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/132084


    題名: 引入未來想像機制對於個人環保意圖與行為之影響
    Does the future imagination treatment affect people’s pro-environmental intention and behavior?
    作者: 陳曉萱
    Chen, Hsiao-Hsuan
    貢獻者: 蕭代基
    Shaw, Dai-Gee
    陳曉萱
    Chen, Hsiao-Hsuan
    關鍵詞: 未來想像機制
    跨代環境問題
    計畫行為理論
    獨裁者賽局
    Future imagination
    Theory of planned behavior
    Dictator game
    日期: 2020
    上傳時間: 2020-10-05 15:18:55 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 公共財悲歌不僅存在於當代，亦存在於跨世代中。當代人追求自利所產生的行為與政策，忽略後世代的生存權，便會使得資源加速耗竭，而使得未來世代的人面臨更巨大的考驗。特別是未來世代於現今並不存在，在法律上也沒有財產權之保障，此外民主選舉產生之國家決策者任期短，且選民為當代人，因此決議之政策往往著重於當代需求。再者，一般人通常有短視近利之傾向，可能使得現代人忽略自己行為將造成後代不利。使得永續發展困難重重。
    本文試圖利用未來想像機制（future imagination）為實驗變數，探討對當代較有影響的環境議題—空氣汙染以及另一個對未來世代造成不可抹滅之影響的議題-氣候變遷，利用計畫行為理論設計問卷調查結合獨裁者賽局的實驗兩種研究方法，瞭解人們的環保行為、態度及意識，是否會因為成為想像的未來世代而提升當代人對於未來議題的關懷，願意犧牲自身短期利益，做出實際行動。經由似不相關迴歸（seemingly unrelated regression）與三階段最小平方法（three-stage least squares）分析，發現以下結論：
    1. 未來想像機制的存在並沒有顯著提升捐款以減輕氣候變遷的金額，顯示出未來想像機制的存在並無法使當代人犧牲短期利益，須搭配其他政策機制。
    2. 影響永續行為主要的構面變數為減輕氣候變遷的意圖與感知行為控制。此外這兩個變數對於帶走金額也有顯著負向影響。
    3. 男女在決定捐贈金額的思考模式不一樣。影響男性決定帶走多少金額的變數主要是意圖與氣候變遷的感知行為控制，但是女生還會受到未來性意識程度影響，可作為後續政策制定之參考。
    參考文獻: 吳明隆、涂金堂，2005. 『SPSS 與統計應用分析』。臺北：五南。
    林生傳，2003。『教育研究法: 全方位的統整與分析』。臺北：心理。
    科技部經濟學門，2015。『熱門及前瞻學術研究議題調查更新』。台北：科技部。
    曾治乾、林姵君、黃禎貞、張永達、鄧毓浩、黃壁祈、葉國樑，2011。「新北市某國中學生節能減碳行為意圖之相關研究」，『健康促進暨衛生教育雜誌』32期，103-124。
    陳思利、葉國樑，2002。「環境行為意圖與相關因素之研究-以屏東縣國中為例」，『環境教育學刊』17期，13-30。
    蕭代基、李誠、林建甫、林國慶、丁育群、江益璋、吳克偉、洪志銘、馬鴻文、莊慶達、張瓊婷、脫宗華、馮正民、鄒倫、黃裕星、黃德秀、溫麗琪、楊致行、駱尚廉、顧洋，2014。國家發展委員會102年度「推動綠色經濟專案計畫」委託辦理案總結報告。
    蕭代基，2015。「永續發展與綠色經濟根本之道」。於幼華（主編），《環境與人——環境保護篇》，二版，第十二章作者心得。台北市：遠流出版公司。

    Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Gifford, R., & Vlek, C. (2009). Factors influencing car use for commuting and the intention to reduce it: A question of self-interest or morality? Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12(4), 317-324.
    Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1969). The prediction of behavioral intentions in a choice situation. Journal of experimental social psychology, 5(4), 400-416.
    Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control (pp. 11-39). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
    Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211.
    Anderson, C. M., & Putterman, L. (2006). Do non-strategic sanctions obey the law of demand? The demand for punishment in the voluntary contribution mechanism. Games and Economic Behavior, 54(1), 1-24.
    Andreoni, J., Brown, E., & Rischall, I. (2003). Charitable giving by married couples who decides and why does it matter?. Journal of human Resources, 38(1), 111-133.
    Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: An essay on psychology and religion: Rand McNally Chicago.
    Bem, S. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny, Journal of Consulting and Clinical psychology, 42(2), 1S5-162.
    Boyes, E., Skamp, K., & Stanisstreet, M. (2009). Australian secondary students’ views about global warming: Beliefs about actions, and willingness to act. Research in Science Education, 39(5), 661-680.
    Chang, SH., Lin, LY., Horng, RY. & Wang, YD. (2014). The effect of amount and tangibility of endowment and certainty of recipients on selfishness in a modified dictator game. Psychological Reports: Employment Psychology and Marketing, 114(3), 1-20.
    Chasek, P., Downie, D. L., & Welsh Brown, J. (2010). Global environmental politics, 5th ed.
    Chatfield, C. (1995). Problem solving: a statistician`s guide. CRC Press.
    Choi, D., & Johnson, K. K. (2019). Influences of environmental and hedonic motivations on intention to purchase green products: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 18, 145-155.
    Clement, C. A., Henning, J. B., & Osbaldiston, R. (2014). Integrating factors that predict energy conservation: The theory of planned behavior and beliefs about climate change.
    Dal, B., Alper, U., Özdem-Yilmaz, Y., Öztürk, N., & Sönmez, D. (2015). A model for pre-service teachers` climate change awareness and willingness to act for pro-climate change friendly behavior: adaptation of awareness to climate change questionnaire. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 24(3), 184-200.
    Dietz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P. C., & Vandenbergh, M. P. (2009). Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(44), 18452-18456.
    Dresner, M., Handelman, C., Braun, S., & Rollwagen-Bollens, G. (2015). Environmental identity, pro-environmental behaviors, and civic engagement of volunteer stewards in Portland area parks. Environmental Education Research, 21(7), 991-1010.
    Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (1996). Altruism in anonymous dictator games. Games and Economic Behavior, 16(2), 181-191.
    Elliott, L. (2004). The global politics of the environment. In The global politics of the environment (pp. 223-238). Palgrave, London.
    Faravelli, M. (2007). How context matters: A survey based experiment on distributive justice. Journal of Public Economics, 91(7-8), 1399-1422.
    Forsythe, R., Horowitz, J. L., Savin, N. E., & Sefton, M. (1994). Fairness in simple bargaining experiments. Games and Economic behavior, 6(3), 347-369.
    Gampfer, R. (2014). Do individuals care about fairness in burden sharing for climate change mitigation? Evidence from a lab experiment. Climatic Change, 124(1-2), 65-77.
    Guilford, J. P. (1965). Reliability of measurements. Fundamental statistics in psychology and education. 4th ed. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill, 438-469.
    Hara, K., Yoshioka, R., Kuroda, M., Kurimoto, S., & Saijo, T. (2019). Reconciling intergenerational conflicts with imaginary future generations: Evidence from a participatory deliberation practice in a municipality in Japan. Sustainability Science, 14(6), 1605-1619.
    Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2002). Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting the use of public transportation 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(10), 2154-2189.
    Hoffman, E., McCabe, K., Shachat, K., & Smith, V. (1994). Preferences, property rights, and anonymity in bargaining games. Games and Economic behavior, 7(3), 346-380.
    Hoffman, E., McCabe, K. A., & Smith, V. L. (1996). On expectations and the monetary stakes in ultimatum games. International Journal of Game Theory, 25(3), 289-301.
    Huang, Gillan C. L. & Chen, Rung Yi. (2016). Institutional arrangement for intergenerational Justice: Rethinking representative democracy. Paper presented at the meeting of Tamkang University
    Huang, G. C. L., Leng, T. K., & Lin, H. S. (2016). Intergenerational justice and its policy implications. Taiwan Economic Forecast and Policy, 46(2), 185.
    Hung, M. F., Chang, C. T., & Shaw, D. (2019). Individuals’ intentions to mitigate air pollution: Vehicles, household appliances, and religious practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 227, 566-577.
    Jacobson, M. Z. (2002). Control of fossil‐fuel particulate black carbon and organic matter, possibly the most effective method of slowing global warming. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 107(D19), ACH-16.
    Jain, S., Singhal, S., & Pandey, S. (2020). Environmental life cycle assessment of construction and demolition waste recycling: a case of urban India. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 155, 104642.
    Järvi, L., Hannuniemi, H., Hussein, T., Junninen, H., Aalto, P. P., Hillamo, R., Mäkelä, T., Keronen, P., Siivola1, E., Vesala, T., & Kulmala, M. (2009). The urban measurement station SMEAR III: Continuous monitoring of air pollution and surface–atmosphere interactions in Helsinki, Finland.
    Johnson, G. F. (2007). Discursive democracy in the transgenerational context and a precautionary turn in public reasoning. Contemporary political theory, 6(1), 67-85.
    Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). On the interpretation of intuitive probability: A reply to Jonathan Cohen.
    Kaiser, F. G., & Gutscher, H. (2003). The proposition of a general version of the theory of planned behavior: Predicting ecological behavior 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 33(3), 586-603.
    Kamijo, Y., Komiya, A., Mifune, N., & Saijo, T. (2017). Negotiating with the future: Incorporating imaginary future generations into negotiations. Sustainability Science, 12(3), 409-420.
    Kamijo, Y., Hizen, Y., Saijo, T., & Tamura, T. (2019). Voting on behalf of a future generation: A laboratory experiment. Sustainability, 11(16), 4271.
    Katsuki, S., & Hizen, Y. (2020). Does Voting Solve the Intergenerational Sustainability Dilemma? Sustainability, 12(16), 6311.
    Keshavarzi, S., Ayatollahi, S. M. T., Zare, N., & Sharif, F. (2013). Quality of life of childbearing age women and its associated factors: an application of seemingly unrelated regression (SUR) models. Quality of Life Research, 22(6), 1255-1263.
    Kumar, M., & Dutt, V. (2015). Understanding Cooperative Behavior against Climate Change through a Public-Goods Game. History, 1(2), 68-71.
    Laudenslager, M. S., Holt, D. T., & Lofgren, S. T. (2004). Understanding air force members` intentions to participate in pro-environmental behaviors: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Perceptual and motor skills, 98(3_suppl), 1162-1170.
    Lefever, S., Dal, M., & Matthiasdottir, A. (2007). Online data collection in academic research: advantages and limitations. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 574-582.
    Lv, Z., Jin, Y., & Huang, J. (2019). MGC, consumers’ engagement with MGC, WOM and consumers’ purchase intention: the case of Weibo platform. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 1-22.
    Maggio, G., & Cacciola, G. (2012). When will oil, natural gas, and coal peak? Fuel, 98, 111-123.
    Mesch, D. J., Rooney, P. M., Steinberg, K. S., & Denton, B. (2006). The effects of race, gender, and marital status on giving and volunteering in Indiana. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 35(4), 565-587.
    Milinski, M., Sommerfeld, R. D., Krambeck, H. J., Reed, F. A., & Marotzke, J. (2008). The collective-risk social dilemma and the prevention of simulated dangerous climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(7), 2291-2294.
    Moser, Susanne C. and Lisa Dilling. (2004). Making Climate Hot: Communicating the Urgency and Challenge of Global Climate Change.Environment 46(10): 32– 46.
    Murnighan, J. K., Oesch, J. M., & Pillutla, M. (2001). Player types and self-impression management in dictatorship games: Two experiments. Games and Economic Behavior, 37(2), 388-414.
    Nakagawa, Y., Hara, K., & Saijo, T. (2017). Becoming sympathetic to the needs of future generations: A phenomenological study of participation in future design workshops. Kochi University of Technology, Social Design Engineering Series, SDES-2017-4.
    Nakagawa, Y., Kotani, K., Matsumoto, M., & Saijo, T. (2018). Intergenerational retrospective viewpoints and individual preferences of policies for future: A deliberative experiment for forest management. Futures.
    Nakagawa, Y., Kotani, K., Matsumoto, M., & Saijo, T. (2019). Intergenerational retrospective viewpoints and individual policy preferences for future: A deliberative experiment for forest management. Futures, 105, 40-53.
    Nakagawa, Y. (2020). Taking a Future Generation’s Perspective as a Facilitator of Insight Problem-Solving: Sustainable Water Supply Management. Sustainability, 12(3), 1000.
    Nikiforakis, N. (2008). Punishment and counter-punishment in public good games: Can we really govern ourselves? Journal of Public Economics, 92(1-2), 91-112.
    Parveen, R., & Ahmad, A. (2020). Public behavior in reducing urban air pollution: an application of the theory of planned behavior in Lahore. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1-16.
    Pereira, L. A., Loomis, D., Conceicao, G. M., Braga, A. L., Arcas, R. M., Kishi, H. S., ... Singer, J. M., Böhm, G. M., & Saldiva, P. H. (1998). Association between air pollution and intrauterine mortality in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Environmental health perspectives, 106(6), 325-329.
    Rivaroli, S., Kozák, V., & Spadoni, R. (2019). What motivates Czech and international “millennial-aged” university students to consume craft beers?International Journal of Wine Business Research.
    Plummer, M. L., Ross, D. A., Wight, D., Changalucha, J., Mshana, G., Wamoyi, J.,
    Todd, J., Anemona, A., Mosha, F. F., Obasi, A. I. N., & Hayes, R. J. (2004). A bit more truthful: The validity of adolescent sexual behaviour data collected in rural northern Tanzania using five methods. Sexually transmitted infections, 80 (suppl 2), ii49-ii56.
    Rhodes, R. E., & Kates, A. (2015). Can the affective response to exercise predict future motives and physical activity behavior? A systematic review of published evidence. Annals of Behavioral medicine, 49(5), 715-731.
    Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Nykvist, B., Wit, C. A. D., Hughes, T., Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sörlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell, R.W. Fabry, V. J., Hansen, J., Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P., & Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature461(7263), 472-475.
    Saijo, T. (2015). Future design: Concept for a ministry of the future. Social Design Engineering Serie.
    Saijo, T. (2018). Future design: incorporating preferences of future generations for sustainability.
    Saijo, T. (2020). Future Design: An Introduction. In Future Design (pp. 1-16). Springer, Singapore.
    Shahen, M. E., Shahrier, S., & Kotani, K. (2019). Happiness, Generativity and Social Preferences in a Developing Country: A Possibility of Future Design. Sustainability, 11(19), 5256.
    Shahrier, S., Kotani, K., & Saijo, T. (2017). Intergenerational sustainability dilemma and the degree of capitalism in societies: a field experiment. Sustainability Science, 12(6), 957-967.
    Shefrin, H. M., & Statman, M. (1984). Explaining investor preference for cash dividends. Journal of financial economics, 13(2), 253-282.
    Shrader-Frechette, K. (2002). Environmental justice: Creating equality, reclaiming democracy. Oxford University Press.
    Skoe, E. Cumberland, A. Eisenberg, N. Hansen, K., and Perry, J. (2002). The influences of sex and gender-role identity on moral cognition and prosocial personality traits, Sex Roles, 46(9), 295-309.
    Spence, J. and Helmreich, R. (1978). Masculinity and femininity: Their psychological dimensions, correlates, and antecedents: University of Texas Press Austin.
    Steffen, W., Sanderson, R. A., Tyson, P. D., Jäger, J., Matson, P. A., Moore III, B., ... & Wasson, R. J. (2006). Global change and the earth system: a planet under pressure. Springer Science & Business Media.
    Uwasu, M., Kishita, Y., Hara, K., & Nomaguchi, Y. (2020). Citizen-Participatory Scenario Design Methodology with Future Design Approach: A Case Study of Visioning of a Low-Carbon Society in Suita City, Japan. Sustainability, 12(11), 4746.
    Whitmarsh, L. (2008). Are flood victims more concerned about climate change than other people? The role of direct experience in risk perception and behavioural response. Journal of risk research, 11(3), 351-374.
    Xu, Z., Shan, J., Li, J., & Zhang, W. (2020). Extending the theory of planned behavior to predict public participation behavior in air pollution control: Beijing, China. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 63(4), 669-688.
    Zahedi, S., Batista-Foguet, J. M., & van Wunnik, L. (2019). Exploring the public`s willingness to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from private road transport in Catalonia. Science of the total environment, 646, 850-861.
    Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American statistical Association, 57(298), 348-368.
    Zhang, N., & Skoric, M. M. (2018). Media use and environmental engagement: Examining differential gains from news media and social media. International Journal of Communication, 12, 24.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    經濟學系
    107258037
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107258037
    資料類型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001738
    顯示於類別:[經濟學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    803701.pdf3713KbAdobe PDF20檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋