The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 56, Issue 1, pp 295–315 | Cite as

Location matters for pro-environmental behavior: a spatial Markov Chains approach to proximity effects in differentiated waste collection

  • Massimiliano Agovino
  • Alessandro Crociata
  • Pier Luigi Sacco
Original Paper
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

We analyze data on differentiated waste collection (as a proxy of pro-environmental behaviors) in Italian provinces in the years 1999–2012. We make use of a Markov Spatial Transition approach to model the dynamic of local transitions among different levels of environmental pro-sociality, and we find that behaviors, and in particular differentiated waste collecting habits, tend to be strongly influenced by proximity effects, so that provinces with good levels of environmental pro-sociality may positively influence nearby ones, and vice versa for provinces with poor levels of environmental pro-sociality. We also show that in the long term separate clusters with markedly different levels of differentiated waste collection rates emerge.

JEL Classification

Q53 R15 C23 C61 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Anselin L (1988) Spatial econometrics: methods and models. Kluwer, BostonGoogle Scholar
  2. Anselin L (1993) The Moran scatterplot as an ESDA tool to assess local instability in spatial association. Paper presented at the GISDATA specialist meeting on GIS and spatial analysis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1–5 Dec (West Virginia University, Regional Research Institute, Research Paper 9330)Google Scholar
  3. Anselin L (1995) Local indicators of spatial association—LISA. Geogr Anal 27:93–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anselin L (1996) The Moran scatterplot as an ESDA tool to assess local instability in spatial association. In: Fischer M, Scholten H, Unwin D (eds) Spatial analytical perspectives on GIS. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 111–125Google Scholar
  5. Anselin L (2002a) Exploring spatial data with DynESDA2. CSISS and Spatial Analysis Laboratory University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 12 Sept 2002Google Scholar
  6. Anselin L (2002b) Under the hood: issues in the specification and interpretation of spatial regression models. Agric Econ 27:247–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anselin L (2010) Thirty years of spatial econometrics. Pap Reg Sci 89:3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Anselin L, Bera A (1998) Spatial dependence in linear regression models with an introduction to spatial econometrics. In: Ullah A, Giles DEA (eds) Handbook of applied economic statistics. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Arbia G (1988) Spatial data configuration in statistical analysis of regional economics and related problems, advanced statistical theory and applied econometrics. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  10. Arbia G (2005) Spatial econometrics, statistical foundations and applications to regional convergence. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. Arbia G, Basile R, Mirella S (2002) Regional convergence in Italy 1951–199: a spatial econometric perspective. ISAE working papers 29, ISAE—Institute for Studies and Economic Analyses (Rome, ITALY)Google Scholar
  12. Brueckner JK (2003) Strategic interaction among governments: an overview of empirical studies. Int Reg Sci Rev 26:175–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bliz K, Nadler J (2014) Law, moral attitudes, and behavioral change. In: Zamir E, Teichman D (eds) The Oxford Handbook of behavioral economics and the law. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Burn SM, Oskamp S (1986). Increasing community recycling with persuasive communication and public commitment. J Appl Soc Psych 26:29–41Google Scholar
  15. Basile R, Capello R, Caragliu A (2012) Technological interdependence and regional growth in Europe: proximity and synergy in knowledge spillovers. Pap Reg Sci 91:697–722Google Scholar
  16. Curlee RT (1986) The economic feasibility of recycling. Praeger, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Cassi L, Plunket A (2014) Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox. Ann Reg Sci 53:395–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clark TN et al (2014) Can Tocqueville karaoke? Global contrasts of citizen participation, the arts and development. Emerald, BingleyGoogle Scholar
  19. Crociata A, Agovino M, Sacco PL (2015) Recycling waste: does culture matter? J Behav Exp Econ 55:40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. De Young R (1986) Some psychological aspects of recycling: the structure of conservation-satisfactions. Environ Behav 18:435–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Espa G, Arbia G, Giuliani D (2013) Conditional versus unconditional industrial agglomeration: disentangling spatial dependence and spatial heterogeneity in the analysis of ICT firms’ distribution in Milan. J Geogr Syst 15:31–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fowler JH, Christakis NA (2008) Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham heart study. Br Med J 337:a2338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Greunz L (2003) Geographically and technologically mediated knowledge spillovers between European regions. Ann Reg Sci 37:657–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Griffith DA, Paelinck JHP (2007) An equation by any other name is still the same: on spatial econometrics and spatial statistics. Ann Reg Sci 41:209–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jamison A (2001) The making of green knowledge: environmental politics and cultural transformation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Krasny ME, Lundholm C, Plummer R (2010) Environmental education, resilience, and learning: reflection and moving forward. Environ Educ Res (Special Issue: Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems: The Roles of Learning and Education) 16:463–474Google Scholar
  27. Kyriacou AP, Muinelo-Gallo L, Roca-Sagalés O (2015) Fiscal decentralization and regional disparities: the importance of good governance. Pap Reg Sci 94:89–107Google Scholar
  28. Læssøe J (2010) Education for sustainable development, participation and socio-cultural change. Environ Educ Res 16:39–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lanza DR (1983) Municipal solid waste regulations: an ineffective solution to a national problem. Fordham Urban Law J 10:215–245Google Scholar
  30. Le Gallo J (2004) Space-time analysis of GDP disparities among European regions: a Markov chains approach. Int Reg Sci Rev 27:138–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miafodzyeva S, Brandt N (2013) Recycling behaviour among householders: synthesizing determinants via a meta-analysis. Waste Biomass Valoriz 4:221–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Noll K (1985) Recovery, recycle and reuse of industrial wastes. Lewis Publishers, ChelseaGoogle Scholar
  33. Oskamp S, Harrington MJ, Edwards TC, Sherwood DL, Okuda SM, Swanson DC (1991) Factors influencing household recycling behavior. Environ Behav 23:494–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Putnam RD (1993) Making democracy work: civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  35. Putnam RD (2000) Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community. Simon & Schuster, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Rey SJ (2001) Spatial empirics for economic growth and convergence. Geogr Anal 33:195–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rey SJ, Montouri BD (1999) US regional income convergence: a spatial econometric perspective. Reg Stud 33:143–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schettini D, Azzoni CR, Paez A (2011) Neighborhood and efficiency in manufacturing in Brazilian regions: a spatial Markov chain analysis. Int Reg Sci Rev 34:397–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Valkering P, Beumer C, de Kraker J, Ruelle C (2013) An analysis of learning interactions in a cross-border network for sustainable urban neighbourhood development. J Clean Prod 49:85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Poeck K, Vandenabeele J (2012) Learning from sustainable development: education in the light of public issues. Environ Educ Res 18:541–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yan J, Sha J, Chu X, Xu F, Higano Y (2014) Endogenous derivation of optimal environmental policies for proper treatment of stockbreeding wastes in the upstream region of the Miyun Reservoir, Beijing. Pap Reg Sci 93:477–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Massimiliano Agovino
    • 1
  • Alessandro Crociata
    • 2
  • Pier Luigi Sacco
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Economic and Legal StudiesUniversity of Naples “Parthenope”NaplesItaly
  2. 2.Department of Philosophical, Pedagogical and Economic-Quantitative SciencesUniversity “G. D’Annunzio” of Chieti-PescaraPescaraItaly
  3. 3.Department of Comparative Literature and LinguisticsIULM UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations