Advertisement

Social-cognitive conceptualization of Iranian farmers’ water conservation behavior

  • Naser Valizadeh
  • Masoud Bijani
  • Dariush Hayati
  • Negin Fallah Haghighi
Paper
  • 35 Downloads

Abstract

Many environmental dilemmas such as water scarcity originate from human behavior. This study aimed to analyze Iranian farmers’ water conservation behavior using Bandura’s social-cognitive theory. To this end, a cross-sectional survey was conducted to collect the required data. The research instrument was a questionnaire. A sample of 380 farmers was selected using a multistage stratified random sampling method. The results indicated that variables of social-cognitive theory could predict about 73% of farmers’ water conservation behavior variance. Investigation of direct effects of factors on farmers’ water conservation behavior revealed that the major determinants are as follows: intention of water conservation, social-structural factors, perception of others’ behavior, outcome expectancy, self-efficacy, and water conservation co-regulation. Findings showed that factors that have been mentioned in social-cognitive theory could be considered for enhancing farmers’ water conservation behaviors since the theory provides a more realistic insight into farmers’ behaviors with an emphasis on farmers’ social and structural contexts.

Keywords

Water conservation behavior Social cognitive theory Agriculture Socio-economic aspects Iran 

Abbreviations

IWC

Intention of water conservation

OE

Outcome expectancy

POB

Perception of others behavior

SCT

Social cognitive theory

SE

Self-efficacy

SI

Self-identity

SRAWC

Self-regulation ability of water conservation

SSF

Socio-structural factors

WCB

Water conservation behavior

WCCR

Water conservation co-regulation.

Conceptualisation sociocognitive du comportement de conservation de l’eau des agriculteurs iraniens

Résumé

De nombreux dilemmes environnementaux tels que la rareté de l’eau trouvent leur origine dans le comportement humain. Cette étude visait à analyser le comportement de conservation de l’eau des agriculteurs iraniens en utilisant la théorie sociocognitive de Bandura. A cette fin, une enquête transversale a été réalisée pour recueillir les données requises. L’instrument de recherche était le questionnaire. Un échantillon de 380 agriculteurs a été sélectionné à l’aide d’une méthode d’échantillonnage aléatoire stratifiée à étapes multiples. Les résultats indiquent que les variables de la théorie sociocognitive pourraient prédire environ 73% de la variance des comportements de conservation de l’eau des agriculteurs. L’étude des effets directs des facteurs sur le comportement des agriculteurs en matière de conservation de l’eau a révélé que les principaux déterminants sont les suivants: l’intention de la conservation de l’eau, les facteurs sociaux-structurels, la perception du comportement des autres, les résultats escomptés, l’auto-efficacité, et la co-régulation de la conservation de l’eau. Les résultats ont montré que des facteurs qui ont été mentionnés dans la théorie sociocognitive pourraient être considérés pour améliorer le comportement de conservation de l’eau des agriculteurs puisque la théorie fournit un aperçu plus réaliste des comportements des agriculteurs en mettant l’accent sur les contextes sociaux et structurels des agriculteurs.

Conceptualización socio-cognitiva del comportamiento de los agricultores iraníes en la conservación de agua

Resumen

Muchos dilemas ambientales, como la escasez de agua, se originan en el comportamiento humano. Este estudio tuvo como objetivo analizar el comportamiento de los agricultores iraníes en la conservación del agua utilizando la teoría cognitivo-social de Bandura. Con este fin, se realizó una encuesta transversal para recopilar los datos requeridos. El instrumento de investigación fue un cuestionario. Se seleccionó una muestra de 380 agricultores utilizando un método de muestreo aleatorio estratificado multietapa. Los resultados indicaron que las variables de la teoría socio-cognitiva podrían predecir alrededor del 73% de la variación del comportamiento de los agricultores en la conservación del agua. La investigación de los efectos directos reveló que los principales determinantes son los siguientes: intención de la conservación de agua, factores socioestructurales, percepción del comportamiento de otros, expectativa de resultados, autoeficacia y co-regulación de la conservación de agua. Los hallazgos mostraron que los factores que se han mencionado en la teoría cognitivo-social podrían considerarse para mejorar el comportamiento de los agricultores en la conservación del agua, ya que la teoría proporciona una visión más realista con un énfasis en los contextos sociales y estructurales de los agricultores.

伊朗农民水保护行为的社会-认知的概念化

摘要

许多环境困境诸如缺水源自于人类行为。本研究旨在利用Bandura社会-认知理论分析伊朗农民的水保护行为。为此,进行了具有代表性的调查以收集数据。研究手段为调查问卷。采用多级分层随机采样方法,选择了380个农民作为采样对象。结果表明,社会-认知理论的变量可以预测大约73%的农民水保护行为变化。因素对农民的水保护行为直接影响揭示,主要决定因素如下:水保护的意图、社会结构因素、其它行为的知觉、成果预期、自我效能以及水保护的共同管制。调查结果显示,社会认知理论中提到的因素可以被认为能增强农民的水保护行为,因为该理论能够使人们更实际地了解农民的行为,着重了解农民的社会和结构环境。

Conceitualização social cognitiva do comportamento de conservação de água de fazendeiros iranianos

Resumo

Muitos dilemas ambientais como a escassez de água se originam no comportamento humano. Este estudo buscou analisar o comportamento de fazendeiros iranianos quanto à conservação da água utilizando a teoria social cognitiva de Bandura. Para este fim, uma pesquisa transversal foi conduzida para coletar os dados necessários. O instrumento de pesquisa foi um questionário. Uma amostra de 380 fazendeiros foi selecionada através de um método de amostragem aleatória estratificada por estágios múltiplos. Os resultados indicaram que as variáveis da teoria social cognitiva podiam prever cerca de 73% da variância do comportamento de conservação de água dos fazendeiros. A investigação dos efeitos diretos dos fatores no comportamento de conservação de água dos fazendeiros revelou que os maiores determinantes são os seguintes: intenção de conservação da água, fatores socio-estruturais, percepção do comportamento de terceiros, expectativa dos resultados, autoeficácia, e corregulação da conservação da água. Os resultados indicaram que os fatores mencionados na teoria social cognitiva poderiam ser considerados para aprimorar o comportamento de conservação da água dos fazendeiros, uma vez que a teoria fornece uma compreensão mais realista dos comportamentos dos fazendeiros com ênfase em seus contextos sociais e estruturais.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors hereby express their special gratitude to all the farmers who completed the study questionnaires with great patience as well as the surveyors and interviewers who did their best in terms of data collection.

Supplementary material

10040_2018_1915_MOESM1_ESM.sav (25 kb)
ESM 1 (SAV 25 kb)

References

  1. Abbasian A, Chizari M, Bijani M (2017) Farmers’ views on the factors inhibiting the implementation of soil conservation practices in Koohdasht, Iran. J Agric Sci Technol 19(4):797–807Google Scholar
  2. Azizi Khalkheili T, Zamani GH (2009) Farmer participation in irrigation management: the case of Doroodzan dam irrigation network, Iran. Agric Water Manag 96(5):859–865.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2008.11.008 Google Scholar
  3. Azizi Khalkheili T, Bakhshi Jahromi A, Bijani M (2012) Soil conservative behavior of farmers: the role of information & communication media. Iran Agric Ext Educ J 7(2):51–61 (In Persian)Google Scholar
  4. Balali MR, Keulartz J, Korthals M (2009) Reflexive water management in arid regions: the case of Iran. Environ Values 18(1):91–112.  https://doi.org/10.3197/096327109x404807 Google Scholar
  5. Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev 84(2):191–215.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191 Google Scholar
  6. Bandura A (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  7. Bandura A (2004) Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Educ Behav 31(2):143–164.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104263660 Google Scholar
  8. Bandura A (1991) Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):248–287.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-l Google Scholar
  9. Bandura A (1997) Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Bijani M, Hayati D (2011) Water conflict in agricultural system in Iran: a human ecological analysis. J Ecol Environ Sci 2(2):27–41.  https://doi.org/10.9735/0976-9900.2.2.27-40 Google Scholar
  11. Bijani M, Hayati D (2015) Farmers’ perceptions toward agricultural water conflict: the case of Doroodzan dam irrigation network, Iran. J Agric Sci Technol (JAST) 17(3):561–575Google Scholar
  12. Bijani M, Ghazani E, Valizadeh N, Fallah Haghighi N (2017) Pro-environmental analysis of farmers’ concerns and behaviors towards soil conservation in central district of Sari County, Iran. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 5(1):43–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2017.03.001 Google Scholar
  13. Burton RJ (2004) Reconceptualising the ‘behavioural approach’ in agricultural studies: a socio-psychological perspective. J Rural Stud 20(3):359–371.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2003.12.001 Google Scholar
  14. Cary JW (2008) Influencing attitudes and changing consumers’ household water consumption behaviour. Water Sci Technol Water Supply 8(3):325–330.  https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2008.078 Google Scholar
  15. Compeau DR, Higgins CA, Huff S (1999) Social cognitive theory and individual reactions to computing technology: a longitudinal study. MIS Q 23(2):145–158.  https://doi.org/10.2307/249749 Google Scholar
  16. Corral-Verdugo V, Bechtel RB, Fraijo-Sing B (2003) Environmental beliefs and water conservation: an empirical study. J Environ Psychol 23(3):247–257.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0272-4944(02)00086-5 Google Scholar
  17. Corral-Verdugo V, Fraijo-Sing B, Pinheiro JQ (2006) Sustainable behavior and time perspective: present, past, and future orientations and their relationship with water conservation behavior. Int J Psychol 40(2):139–147Google Scholar
  18. Eagly AH, Chaiken S (1993) The psychology of attitudes, vol 12. Harcourt, Orlando, FLGoogle Scholar
  19. Ebrahimi Sarcheshmeh E, Bijani M, Sadighi H (2018) Adoption behavior towards the use of nuclear technology in agriculture: a causal analysis. Technol Soc 54(2018):175–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.08.001 Google Scholar
  20. Font X, Garay L, Jones S (2016) A social cognitive theory of sustainability empathy. Ann Tour Res 58(1):65–80.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2016.02.004 Google Scholar
  21. Forouzani M, Karami E (2010) Agricultural water poverty index and sustainability. Agron Sustain Dev 31(4):415–431.  https://doi.org/10.1051/agro/2010026 Google Scholar
  22. Haghighatian M (2014) Analyzing environmental behavior among residents of Esfahan County and factors affecting on their behavior. Urban Reg Stud Res 6(23):133–144Google Scholar
  23. Hajihosseini H, Hajihosseini M, Morid S, Delavar M, Booij MJ (2016) Hydrological assessment of the 1973 treaty on the transboundary Helmand River, using the SWAT model and a global climate database. Water Resour Manag 30(13):4681–4694.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1447-y Google Scholar
  24. Hurlimann A, Dolnicar S, Meyer P (2009) Understanding behaviour to inform water supply management in developed nations: a review of literature, conceptual model and research agenda. J Environ Manag 91(1):47–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.07.014 Google Scholar
  25. Jorgensen B, Graymore M, O’Toole K (2009) Household water use behavior: an integrated model. J Environ Manag 91(1):227–236.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.08.009 Google Scholar
  26. Kanekar A, Sharma M (2009) Using social cognitive theory to predict safer sex behavior among African-American college students. Acta Didactica Napocensia 2(2):51–56Google Scholar
  27. Keshavarz M, Karami E (2016) Farmers’ pro-environmental behavior under drought: application of protection motivation theory. J Arid Environ 127:128–136.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2015.11.010 Google Scholar
  28. Keshavarz M, Karami E, Vanclay F (2013) The social experience of drought in rural Iran. Land Use Policy 30(1):120–129.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.03.003 Google Scholar
  29. Kollmuss A, Agyeman J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ Educ Res 8(3):239–260.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401 Google Scholar
  30. Krejcie RV, Morgan DW (1970) Determining sample size for research activities. Educ Psychol Meas 30(3):607–610.  https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308 Google Scholar
  31. Lee EW, Ho SS, Lwin MO (2017) Extending the social cognitive model-examining the external and personal antecedents of social network sites use among Singaporean adolescents. Comput Hum Behav 67:240–251.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.030 Google Scholar
  32. Madani K (2014) Water management in Iran: what is causing the looming crisis? J Environ Stud Sci 4(4):315–328.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0182-z Google Scholar
  33. Malekian A, Hayati D, Aarts N (2017) Conceptualizations of water security in the agricultural sector: perceptions, practices, and paradigms. J Hydrol 544:224–232.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.11.026 Google Scholar
  34. Maleksaeidi H, Karami E (2013) Social-ecological resilience and sustainable agriculture under water scarcity. Agroecol Sustain Food Syst 37(3):262–290.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10440046.2012.746767 Google Scholar
  35. Mirchi A, Watkins D Jr, Madani K (2010) Modeling for watershed planning, management, and decision making. Watersheds: management, restoration and environmental impact. Nova, Hauppauge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Mirzaei A, Knierima A, Fealy Nahavand S, Mahmoudi H (2017) Gap analysis of water governance in northern Iran: a closer look into the water reservoirs. Environ Sci Policy 77(2017):98–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.08.004 Google Scholar
  37. Moon MK, Jahng SG, Park SY, Lee JE (2016) The perceptions of knowledge sharing behavior in virtual community: using an extended social cognitive theory approach. Int J Appl Eng Res 11(8):5430–5439Google Scholar
  38. Noorollah-noorivandi A, Ajili A, Chizari M, Bijani M (2009) The socio-economic characteristics of farmers regarding adoption of sustainable soil sanagement. J Hum Ecol 27(3):201–205.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2009.11906211 Google Scholar
  39. O’Donnell AM, Reeve J, Smith JK (2011) Educational psychology: reflection for action. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  40. Pelling EL, White KM (2009) The theory of planned behavior applied to young people’s use of social networking web sites. Cyber Psychol Behav 12(6):755–759.  https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2009.0109 Google Scholar
  41. Phipps M, Ozanne LK, Luchs MG, Subrahmanyan S, Kapitan S, Catlin JR, Gau R, Walker Naylor RL, Rose R, Simpson B, Weaver T (2013) Understanding the inherent complexity of sustainable consumption: a social cognitive framework. J Bus Res 66(8):1227–1234.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.08.016 Google Scholar
  42. Pradhananga AK, Davenport MA, Fulton DC, Maruyama GM, Current D (2017) An integrated moral obligation model for landowner conservation norms. Soc Nat Resour 30(2):212–227.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1239289 Google Scholar
  43. Raeisi AA, Bijani M, Chizari M (2018) The mediating role of environmental emotions in transition from knowledge to sustainable behavior toward exploit groundwater resources in Iran’s agriculture. Int Soil Water Conserv Res 6(2):143–152.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2018.01.002 Google Scholar
  44. Rana NP, Dwivedi YK (2015) Citizen’s adoption of an e-government system: validating extended social cognitive theory (SCT). Gov Inf Q 32(2):172–181.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2015.02.002 Google Scholar
  45. Ratten V, Ratten H (2007) Social cognitive theory in technological innovations. Eur J Innov Manag 10(1):90–108.  https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060710720564 Google Scholar
  46. Roudi-Fahimi F, Creel L, De Souza RM (2002) Finding the balance: population and water scarcity in the Middle East and North Africa. Popul Ref Bur Policy Brief 1:1–8Google Scholar
  47. Sahu GP, Gupta MP (2007) Users’ acceptance of e-government: a study of Indian central excise. Int J Electron Gov Res 3(3):1–21.  https://doi.org/10.4018/jegr.2007070101 Google Scholar
  48. Saif AA (2012) Modern educational psychology (psychology of learning and instruction). Dowran, TehranGoogle Scholar
  49. Salehi S, Chizari M, Sadighi H, Bijani M (2017) Assessment of agricultural groundwater users in Iran: a cultural environmental bias. Hydrogeol J 26(1):285–295.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-017-1634-9
  50. Shahroudi AA, Chizari M (2009) An analysis of farmers’ behavioral domains regarding optimal agricultural water management in Kharasan-Razavi Province: a comparation of participants and non-participants in water users’ cooperatives (in Persian). Iran Agric Ext Educ J 4(2):81–99Google Scholar
  51. Shiri S, Bijani M, Chaharsoughi Amin H, Noori H, Soleymanifard A (2011) Effectiveness evaluation of the axial plan of wheat from expert supervisors’ view in Ilam province. World Appl Sci J 14(11):1724–1729Google Scholar
  52. Statistical Centre of Iran (2016) Statistical year book of West Azerbaijan. https://www.amar.org.ir. Accessed December 2018
  53. Stern P (2000) Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Issues 56(3):407–424Google Scholar
  54. Thøgersen J, Grønhøj A (2010) Electricity saving in households: a social cognitive approach. Energy Policy 38(12):7732–7743.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.08.025 Google Scholar
  55. Valizadeh N, Bijani M, Abbasi E (2016) Pro-environmental analysis of farmers’ participatory behavior toward conservation of surface water resources in southern sector of Urmia Lake’s catchment area (in Persian). Iran Agric Ext Educ J 11(2):183–201Google Scholar
  56. Valizadeh N, Bijani M, Abbasi E (2018) Farmers’ active participation in water conservation: insights from a survey among farmers in southern regions of West Azerbaijan province, Iran. J Agric Sci Technol (JAST) 20(5):895–910Google Scholar
  57. Willis RM, Stewart RA, Panuwatwanich K, Williams PR, Hollingsworth AL (2011) Quantifying the influence of environmental and water conservation attitudes on household end use water consumption. J Environ Manag 92(8):1996–2009.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.03.023 Google Scholar
  58. Wood R, Bandura A (1989) Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Acad Manag Rev 14(3):361–384.  https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1989.4279067 Google Scholar
  59. Yazdanpanah M, Feyzabad FR, Forouzani M, Mohammadzadeh S, Burton RJ (2015) Predicting farmers’ water conservation goals and behavior in Iran: a test of social cognitive theory. Land Use Policy 47:401–407.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.04.022 Google Scholar
  60. Yazdanpanah M, Hayati D, Zamani GH (2012) Application of cultural theory in analysis of attitude and activities toward water resource conversation: the case of Jihad-e Keshavarzi staffs in Bushehr Province (in Persian). Iranian Agric Ext Educ J 7(2):1–19Google Scholar
  61. Yazdanpanah M, Hayati D, Hochrainer-Stigler S, Zamani GH (2014) Understanding farmers’ intention and behavior regarding water conservation in the middle-east and North Africa: a case study in Iran. J Environ Manag 135:63–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.01.016 Google Scholar
  62. Young HN, Lipowski EE, Cline RJ (2005) Using social cognitive theory to explain consumers’ behavioral intentions in response to direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising. Res Soc Adm Pharm 1(2):270–288.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2005.03.011 Google Scholar
  63. Zimmerman FJ, Ortiz SE, Christakis DA, Elkun D (2012) The value of social-cognitive theory to reducing preschool TV viewing: a pilot randomized trial. Prev Med 54(3):212–218.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.02.004 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, School of AgricultureShiraz UniversityShirazIran
  2. 2.Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, College of AgricultureTarbiat Modares University (TMU)TehranIran
  3. 3.Department of Technology Development Studies (DTDS)Iranian Research Organization for Science and Technology (IROST)TehranIran

Personalised recommendations