ArticleScientific reports2023
An examination of how six reasons for valuing nature are endorsed and associated with pro-environmental behavior across 12 countries.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stewardship Behaviour Among Residents of the Great Barrier Reef Region and the Role of Self-Efficacy.Environmental management · 2026Article
- An aspirational approach to planetary futures.Nature · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Balanced samples from 12 countries (N = 12,000) were surveyed about their reasons for valuing nature and pro-environmental behaviors. Results showed that people were least likely to endorse moral-based reasons for valuing nature, as compared to five other reasons (wellbeing benefits, nature's intrinsic value, health benefits, economic value, identity-based reasons). However, moral- and identity-based reasons (relative to the other four reasons) for valuing nature were the strongest predictors of pro-environmental behavior across three different methods (correlations, linear mixed models, and relative importance analysis) and two pro-environmental behavior categories (consumer behavior and activism). In other words, the reasons for valuing nature most associated with pro-environmental behavior also garnered the weakest support, presenting a potential dilemma for those hoping to leverage values to promote pro-environmental behavior. We also identify a possible mechanism (awareness of one's environmental impact) to explain why moral- and identity-based reasons for valuing nature best predict behavior. Finally, we examine between-country variability in the endorsement of the six reasons and the reasons' associations with pro-environmental behaviors, and country-level factors that may explain between-country variability in these outcomes. We discuss these results in the context of broader literature that has focused on an intrinsic vs. instrumental valuation of nature dichotomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.