# Barriers to Enduring Pro-Environmental Habits among Urban Residents
## 5 Results and Discussion
### Generalized Least Square (GLS)  
This study used the generalized least square (GLS) estimation method to deal with the heteroscedasticity problem. GLS is a technique for assessing the unidentified parameters in a linear regression model when there is a certain degree of correlation between the residuals in a regression model and when the data have the problem of heteroscedasticity. The results of the GLS regression are given in Table 6. The environmental concerns, economic concerns, health concerns, and household size have a significant positive impact, while income significantly negatively affects pro-environmental habits. Education, owning one's own home, gender, and age have insignificant impacts. These results imply that more economic concern improves pro-environmental habits. Economic concern suggests more correction in spending money and resources on products and services. Several studies, such as [14,74,75], also have comparable findings. Similarly, [PERSON] et al. [76] discovered that a readiness to make economic sacrifices to safeguard the environment had a beneficial impact on the amount of attention devoted to (unspecified) eco-labeled goods, resulting in pro-environmental purchasing intentions. According to the results of our sample data, if economic concern increased by 1 unit, then the pro-environmental habits will be improved by 64 units measured on the scale of this study. These findings are similar to the results of some earlier studies [14,75,77,78,79]. According to [PERSON] and [PERSON] [80], environmental concern comes from political discourse and refers to \"the entire range of ecologically connected perceptions, emotions, knowledge, attitudes, values, and behaviors\" (p. 21). Environmental concern was previously described as a broad or specific perception of an environmental problem. The current study's findings indicate that environmental concerns have a positive and significant impact on pro-environmental habits. If environmental concern increases by one unit, pro-environmental practices will be improved by 52 units. These results align with the findings of [PERSON] et al. [81], [PERSON] [82], [PERSON] et al. [83], and [PERSON] et al. [7]. Health concerns also have a positive and significant impact on pro-environmental habits. Results indicate that when health concerns increased by 1 unit, then pro-environmental habits also improved by 25 units. Environmental problems are a danger to health; therefore, health-conscious people are inclined to display more pro-environmental behavior, such as recycling, water, energy conservation, and buying eco-friendly goods [84]. [PERSON] [48] found that health awareness positively correlates with pro-environmental behavior. Our findings are similar to those of the existing literature [85, 86, 87, 88]. The income of the individuals has been found to harm their pro-environmental practices. These results align with the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) theory that people \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Coef.** & **Std. Err.** & **Z** & \(p>1\,\mathrm{z}1\) & **[95\% Conf. Interval]** \\ \hline ECO & 0.643 & 0.112 & 5.70 & 0.000 & 0.418 & 0.857 \\ EC & 0.522 & 0.153 & 3.41 & 0.001 & 0.221 & 0.821 \\ HC & 0.249 & 0.081 & 3.07 & 0.002 & 0.089 & 0.408 \\ INC & \(-0.010\) & \(6.54\times 10^{-6}\) & \(-2.36\) & 0.018 & \(-0.001\) & \(-2.61\times 10^{-6}\) \\ EDU & 0.691 & 0.685 & 1.01 & 0.314 & \(-0.652\) & 2.034 \\ HHS & 0.188 & 0.067 & 2.82 & 0.005 & 0.057 & 0.319 \\ OH & 0.379 & 0.369 & 1.03 & 0.305 & \(-0.345\) & 1.104 \\ AGE & \(-0.005\) & 0.0149 & \(-0.32\) & 0.748 & \(-0.034\) & 0.024 \\ GEN & 0.494 & 0.661 & 0.75 & 0.456 & \(-0.802\) & 1.790 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: Generalized Least Square (GLS).