How to Achieve a Healthier and More Sustainable Europe by 2040 According to the Public? Results of a Five-Country Questionnaire Survey

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to understand public preferences for several future scenarios of achieving a healthier, more equitable and sustainable Europe, which differ in the way the society is organized (individualistically vs. collectively) and in the driving sector (public vs. private). To achieve this aim, we conducted a questionnaire survey using representative samples for five European countries in 2018. About three thousand respondents chose among the four scenarios presented within four different contexts (green spaces, active mobility, energy-efficient housing, food consumption) or none of them. A majority of people in the five European countries were ready to accept one of the scenarios. We found significant differences in preferences according to socioeconomic backgrounds and values of respondents. People above 35 years old, those who were less educated, and those in the lowest household income tertile were less supportive of all scenarios. The heterogeneity in preferences associated with differences in socioeconomic backgrounds was larger for the scenario in which society is organized individualistically and driven by the private sector. Smaller distinctions were found in case of the scenario in which society is organized collectively and is driven by the public sector. Departing from social psychological theories, we examine the role of altruistic, biospheric, egoistic, hedonic, and security values. People with stronger biospheric values were more likely to accept scenarios, particularly those which are driven by the public sector and where there is more collective organisation. Those with a more egoistic value orientation were more likely to have higher preferences for scenarios where the private sector had a dominant role. The policy implications, in terms of the selection and framing of policy measures to enhance public support, are discussed.

Student Perception of the Social Value of Responsible Management

“…Katz-Gerro et al (2017) used four value types (biospheric value, universalism, benevolence and conformity) to explain the engagement in different forms of environmental behaviours, including environmental philanthropic behaviour [23]. Zverinová and her colleagues found that biospheric and egoistic value orientation is useful for examining preferences for healthier and more environmentally friendly scenarios [24].…”

Behavioural change box? Applying the COM-B model to understand behavioural triggers that support consumption of fruits and vegetable among subscribers of a fruit and vegetable box scheme

“…PROVE subscribers are compared with non-subscriber participants in the INHERIT survey of attitudes, preferences and behaviours related to consuming, moving and living. The formulation of the respective items took into account previous studies and was then validated in a pre-study phase (23) – details in Supplemental Materials Table .…”

“…The INHERIT Five-Country Survey constitutes one component of an international study on the attitudes, preferences and behaviours related to consumption, mobility and housing (23) . Paid online panels compose the INHERIT Survey sample, targeting representative samples of the adult population of the five countries involved by quota sampling.…”

“…A standardised fifteen items for the Self-Reported FFQ served for the collection of dietary information (23,34) . The frequency of consumption for each food group was asked about on separate screens complemented by visual depictions of a typical portion.…”

“…The analysis was structured into three main sequential steps. First (1) we undertook preliminary studies to select the most relevant indicators of Capability, Motivation and Opportunity as related to F&V intake and available in the INHERIT Five-Country Survey (23) (see online Supplemental materials Table ); Then (2) a structural equation model was developed to estimated regression coefficients needed to and (3) estimate and assess the relevance of each mediation effect.…”