Environmental protection and restoration are some of the major challenges faced by our society. To address this problem, it is fundamental to understand pro-environmental behaviors in the population, as well as the factors that determine them. There are, however, very few studies conducted in Latin America that are focused in understanding the environmental behavior of its citizens. The main goal of this research was to study the environmental behaviors of a Chilean community and identify the factors that determine them. To that end, a diverse set of environmental behaviors (power and water conservation, environmentally-aware consumer behavior, biodiversity protection, rational automobile use and ecological waste management) and sociodemographic and attitudinal factors-based on the VBN model-were evaluated. Survey data was obtained from a statistically representative sample (N = 1537) in Santiago, Chile. Our results suggest that several participants displayed tendencies that favor more responsible environmental behaviors, with high environmental OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 14134 concern, and demonstrating their ample awareness of the consequences of failing to protect the environment. Nevertheless, the highest average scores of environmental behavior were related to low cost behaviors and those that imposed the fewest behavioral restrictions. In global terms, we concluded that the youngest subjects in the lowest socioeconomic group obtained the lowest scores across the pro-environmental behavior spectrum.

No abstract

Several recent studies have identified the significant role social trust in regulatory organizations plays in the public acceptance of various technologies and activities. In a cross-cultural investigation, the current work explores empirically the relationship between social trust in management authorities and the degree of public acceptability of hazards for individuals residing in either developed or emerging Latin American economies using confirmatory rather than exploratory techniques. Undergraduates in Mexico, Brazil, and Chile and the United States and Spain assessed trust in regulatory authorities, public acceptance, personal knowledge, and the risks and benefits for 23 activities and technological hazards. Four findings were encountered. (i) In Latin American nations trust in regulatory entities was strongly and significantly (directly as well as indirectly) linked with the public's acceptance of any activity or technology. In developed countries trust and acceptability are essentially linked indirectly (through perceived risk and perceived benefit). (ii) Lack of knowledge strengthened the magnitude and statistical significance of the trust-acceptability relationship in both developed and developing countries. (iii) For high levels of claimed knowledge, the impact on the trust-acceptability relationship varied depending upon the origin of the sample. (iv) Confirmatory analysis revealed the relative importance of perceived benefit over perceived risk in meditating the trust-acceptability causal chain.

Studies over the past decade have found empirical links between trust in risk management institutions and the risk perceptions and acceptability of various individual hazards. Mostly addressing food technologies, no study to date has explored wider possible relationships among all four core variables (risk, benefit, trust and acceptability) covering a heterogeneous group of hazards. Our prime objective was to ascertain effects among social trust in regulatory entities, and the public's perceived risk, perceived benefit and the degree of acceptability towards both technological and environmental hazards. We also assess whether trust in regulatory authorities is the cause (causal model) or a consequence (associationist model) of a hazard's acceptability for a wide and heterogeneous range of hazards on all four core variables. Using a web-based survey, 539 undergraduates in Chile rated the five variables across 30 hazards. Implications for technology and environmental risk management organizations are discussed. Independent of the magnitude of the perceived risk or benefit surrounding a given hazard, or how knowledgeable the public claim to be of it, the trust sustained in regulatory institutions will either generate or be the consequence of public attitudes towards the hazard.

No abstract