PLASTİK POŞETLERİN UCRETLENDİRİLMESİ UYGULAMASıNA GÖSTERİLEN TUTUMSAL VE DAVRANIŞSAL DESTEGİN AÇIKLANMASINA YÖNELİK MODEL ÖNERİSİ

Bu araştırmanın amacı Türk tüketicisinin, çevre politikası araçlarından biri olan plastik poşetlerinücretlendirilmesi (PPÜ) uygulamasına göstereceği destek üzerinde etkili olan faktörlerin belirlenmesidir. Buamaç doğrultusunda çevreci tüketim ve çevreci politikaların kabulüne yönelik araştırmalar ile doğrudankonuya ilişkin yapılmış nitel araştırma bulgularına dayalı olarak bir kavramsal çerçeve geliştirilmiştir. Buçerçeve kapsamında PPÜ uygulamasına gösterilen tutumsal ve davranışsal desteğin oluşumunda;tutumluluğun, bireysel çevreci normların. hali hazırdaki plastik poşet kullanım miktarının, uygulamaya ilişkinbilgi düzeyinin, uygulamanın algılanan etkililiğinin. uygulamanın algılanan maliyetinin ve çeşitli demografiközelliklerin oynadığı roller incelenmiştir. Önerilen teorik çerçevenin testi için gerekli veri İstanbul, Kocaeli veBursa ağırlıklı olmak üzere toplam 23 farklı şehirde yaşayan 321 tüketiciden anket yöntemi ile toplanmıştır.Analiz sonuçları PPÜ uygulamasına yönelik davranışsal ve tutumsal desteğin bazı farklı dinamiklere sahipolduğunu göstermiştir. Ancak uygulamanın algılanan etkililiği ve tüketicilerin uygulama hakkında sahipolduğu bilgi düzeyi hem tutumsal hem de davranışsal desteği önemli derecede etkilemektedir. Araştırmasonuçları ayrıca, tutumsal desteğin bir taraftan mevcut uygulamaya yönelik davranışsal desteği güçlendirirkendiğer yandan gelecekteki benzer uygulamaların kabulünü kolaylaştırıldığına işaret etmiştir. Bulgular ışığında,gelecekte kullanılması olası benzer uygulamalar için güçlü tüketici desteğinin nasıl oluşturulabileceğihususunda önerilerde bulunulmuştur.

A PROPOSED MODEL OF ATTITUDINAL AND BEHA VIORAL SUPPORT FOR PLASTIC BAG FEE IN TURKEY

This study aims to explore thefactors that injluence Turkish consumers' supportfor the plastic bagfee (PBF) as an environmental policy intervention. For this purpose, a conceptual Jramework has been developed based on the previous research of environmental consumption, environmental policy support, and the qualitative research jindings on responses to plastic bag fee. Within this framework, the impacts of frugality, proenvironmental personal norms, the amount of plastic bag usage, knowledge about the purpose of the practice, perceived effectiveness and perceived cost of the practice, and various demographic factors on the attitudinal and behavioral support were investigated. To test the theoretical Jramework data was collected through a survey on a sample consisted of 321 consumers living in 23 different cities of Turkey, mainly in Istanbul, Kocaeli, and Bursa. Analysis results showed that behavioral and attitudinal support for the plastic bagfee has some distinct antecedents. However, the perceived effectiveness of and consumers' knowledge about PBF practice has a critical impact on both attitudinal and behavioral support. The jindings also indicated that attitudinal support does not only promote behavioral support for the current practice but als o facilitate the adoption of similar future practices. In the light of the findings, suggestions on how to enable a strong consumer support for similar practices that may be used in the future are provided

PDF

___

Anderson, 1. e., & Gerbing, D.W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A reviewand recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bul/etin, 103,411 - 423.
Baker, A. R. (2010). Fees on plastic bags: Altering consumer behavior by taxing environmentally damaging choices. Unpublished working paper, Available at: https://works.bepress.com/alice baker/1/
Berglund, e., & Matti, S. (2006). Citizen and consumer: The dual role of individuals in environmental policy. Environmental Politics, 15(4), 550-571. https://doi.org/10.1080/096440 10600785176
BİK (2017). Basın İlan Kurumu, http://www.bik.gov.tr/bakan1ik-acikladi-20 19da-ucret1i-olacak/ (Erişim tarihi: 14.12.2018)
Carman, e. 1. (1998). Dimensions of environmental policy support in the United States. Social Science Quarterly, 79(4),717-733
Clap, J., & Swanston, L. (2009). Doing away with plastic shopping bags: International patterns of norm emergence and policy implementation. Environmental Politics, 18(3), 315-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/096440 10902823717 eNN TURK (2019). httos:/ /www.cnnturk.com/yere1-haberler/trabzonlmerkez/bakan-kurum-depozitouygulanıasi-2021-yilinda-baslayacak-920044 (Erişim tarihi: 12.03.2019)
Convery, F., McDonnell, S., & Ferreira, S. (2007). The most popular tax in Europe? Lessons from the Irish plastic bags levy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 38(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-006-9059-2
çevre ve Şehireilik Bakanlığı, (2019) çevre ve Şehireilik Bakanlığı 12 Ocak 2019 tarihli internet sitesi haberi, httos://www.csb.gov.tr/yere1-yonetimlere-plastik-poset-ku1laniminin-azaltilmasina-yonelik-gene1gegonderildi-bakanlik-faaliyetleri-25415 (Erişim tarihi: 12.03.2019)
D'Astous, A., & Legendre, A. (2009). Understanding consumers' ethicaljustifıcations: A scale for appraising consumers' reasons for not behaving ethically. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(2), 255-268.
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Sinkovics, R R, & Bohlen, G. M. (2003). ean socio-demographics still play a role in profıling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 56(6), 465-480.
Dietz, T., Dan, A., & Shwom, R (2007). Support for climate change policy: Social psychological and social structural influences. Rural Sociology, 72(2), 185-214.
Dursun İ.,Tümer Kabadayı, E., Köksal, G. e., & Tuğer, T. A. (2016). Pro-environmental consumption: Is it reallyall about the environment? Journal of Management Marketing and Logistics, 3(2), 114-114.
Dursun, İ. (2019). Türkiye'de plastik poşetlerin ücretlendirilmesi uygulanıasına yönelik tüketici tepkilerinin belirlenmesi. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(1),427-446.
Eriksson, L., Garvill, J., & Nordlund, A. M. (2006). Acceptability of travel demand management measures: The importance of problem awareness, personal norm, freedom, and fairness. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology,26,15-26.
Eurof'ommerce Report, The use of LeAs on plastic bags in an IPP context Brussels. Retrieved July 19,2018 from the World Wide Web: httos://circabc.europa.eu/webdav/eircaBe/env/ipp regmeeting/Library/documents distributionleurocommercelEuroeommerceLeA%20in%20 an%20IPP%20context%20FINAL%20S eptemberoIo202004.pdf.
Fujii, S. (2006). Environmental concern, attitude toward frugality, and ease ofbehavior as deterrninants ofproenvironmental behavior intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology 26, 262-268.
Gruber, V., & Schlegelmilch, B. (2014). How techniques of neutralization legitimize norm- and attitudeinconsistent consumer behavior, Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), 29-45.
Harland, P., Staats, H., & Wilke, H. A., (1999). Explaining pro-environmental intention and behavior by personal norms and the theory ofplanned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(12),2505- 2528.
Harring, N., & Jagers, S. (2013). Should we trust in values? Explaining public support for pro-environmental taxes. Sustainability, 5(1), 210-227.
Iyer, R, & Muncy, J. A. (2009). Purpose and object of anti-consumption. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 160-168.
Jackson, T., & Michaelis, L. (2003). Policies for Sustainable Consumption: A report to the Sustainable Development Commission, Retrieved July 19, 2018 from the World Wide Web: http://www.sdcommission.org. uk/publications. php@id= 138.html
Jakovcevic, A., Steg, L., Mazzeo, N., Caballero, R, Franco, P., Putrino, N., & Favara, J. (2014). Charges for plastic bags: Motivational and behavioral effects. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 372-380.
Kallbekken, S., & Seelen, H. (2011). Public acceptance for environmental taxes: Self-interest, environmental and distributional concerns. Energy Policy, 39(5), 2966-2973.
Kauder, B., Potrafke, N., & Ursprung, H. (2018). Behavioral determinants of proclaimed support for environment protection policies. European Journal of Political Economy, 54, 26-41.
Konisky, D. M., Milyo, J., & Richardson, L. E. (2008). Environmental policy attitudes: Issues, geographical scale, and political trust. Social Science Quarterly, 89(5), 1066-1085.
Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2010). Social marketing: 1njluencing behaviorsfor good (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Lanı, S. P. (2015). Predicting support of climate policies by using a protection Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G., (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal ofConsumer Marketing, 18(6),503-520.
Lastovicka, J. L., Bettencourt, L. A., Hughner, R. S., & Kuntze, R. J. (1999). Lifestyle of the tight and frugal: Theory and measurement. Journal ofConsumer Research, 26(1), 85-98.
Lewis, H., Verghese, K., & Fitzpatrick, L. (2010). Evaluating the sustainability impacts of packaging: the plastic carry bag dilemma. Packaging Technology and Science, 23, 145-160.
Lubell, M. (2003). Collaborative Institutions, Belief-Systems, and Perceived Policy Effectiveness. Political Research Quarterly, 56(3), 309-323. https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290305600306
Merk, T. Bech-Larsen, T., Grunert, K.G., & Tsalis, G. (2017). Deterrninants of citizen acceptance of environmental policy regulating consumption in public settings: Organic food in public institutions. Journal ofCleaner Production, 148, 407-414
Mostafa, M. M. (2007). Gender differences in Egyptian consumers' green purchase behaviour: the effects of environmental knowledge, concern and attitude.1nternational Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(3), 220- 229.
Musa, H. M., Hayes, e., Bradley, M. J., Clayson, A., & Gillibrand, G. (2013). Measures aimed at reducing plastic carrier bag use: A consumer behaviour focused study, Natural Environment, 1(1), 17-23. doi:10.12966/ne.06.02.2013.
NTV,20 19. Erişim Adresi: https:/ /www.ntv.com.tr/turkiye/2021-yilinda-depozito-uvınılamasina-ge cecegiz,evAexsAcEOmSZ6snSRKa7g (Erişim tarihi: 12.03.2019)
Nunnally, J. e., 1978. Psychometric Theory, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Ozanne, L. K., & Ballantine, P. W. (2010). Sharing as a form of anti-consumption? An examination of toy library users. Journal ofConsumer Behaviour, 9(6), 485-498.
Pelletier, L. G., Dion, S., Tuson, K., & Green-Demers, i.(1999). Why do people fail to adopt environmental protective behaviors? Toward a taxonomy of environmental anıotivation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(12),2481-2504.
Rauwald, K. S., & Moore, e. F. (2002). Environmental attitudes as predictors of policy support across three countries. Environment and behavior, 34(6), 709-739.
Resmi Gazete, 2017, Ambalaj Atıklarının Kontrolü Yönetmeliği. Erişim Adresi: http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2017/12/20171227-12.htm
Rhodes E., Axsen, J., & Jaccard, M. (2014). Does effective c1imate policy require well-informed citizen support? Global Environmental Change, 29,92-104.
Rienstra, S., Rietveld, P., & Verhoef, E. (1999). The social support for policy measures in passenger transport.Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 4(3), 181-200. https://doi.org/10.1 O16/S 1361-9209(99)00005-X
Rivers, N., Shenstone-Harris, S., & Young, N. (2017). Using nudges to reduce waste? The case of Toronto's plastic bag levy. Journal of environmental management, 188, 153-162.
Romer, J. R. (2010). The evolution of San Francisco's plastic-bag ban. Golden Gate University Environmental LawJournal, 1(2),438-466.
Schade, J., & Schlag, B. (2003). Acceptability of urban transport pricing strategies. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 6(1), 45-61.
Schwartz, S. H., (1977). Normative influences on altruism, In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (VoL. 10, pp. 221-279). New York: Academic Press.
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. New York: The Macmillan Company.
Steg L., Dreijerink, L., & Abrahamse, W. (2005). Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: A test ofVBN theory. Journal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 25, 415-425.
Steg, L., & Gifford, R. (2005). Sustainable transportation and quality of1ife. Journal of Transport Geography, 13,59-69.
Stern, P. e. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal ofSocial1ssues, 56 (3), 407-424.
Stern, P. e., Dietz, T., Abe1, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L., (1999). A value-belief-norm theory ofsupport for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 81-97.
Tan, L.P., Johnstone, M.L., & Yang, L. (2016). Barriers to green consumption behaviours: The roles of consumers' green perceptions. Australasian Marketing Journal, 24 (4), 288-299.
Tuğer, A. T., Dursun, İ., & Kabadayı, E. T. (2018). Çevreci tüketim davranışı: Etkili faktörler ve teorik açıklanıalar. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(4),2978-3007.
UNEP (2018). Single-use plastics: A roadmap for sustainability. Erişim Adresi: https:/ /wedocs. unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/25496/singleU sePlastic sustainability.pdf?se quence= 1&isAllowed=y
Yilmaz, e., Sezen, B., & Ozdemir, O. (2005). Joint and interactive effects of trust and (inter) dependence on relational behaviors in long-term channel dyads. /ndustrial Marketing Management, 34(3),235-248.
Wan, e., Shen, G. Q., & Choi, S. (2017). A review on political factors influencing public support for urban environmental policy. Environmental Science & Policy, 75, 70-80.
Witkowski, T. H. (2010). A briefhistory offrugality discourses in the United States. Consumption, Markets and Culture, /3(3), 235-258.