You are on page 1of 33

A STUDY ON FACTORS

AFFECTING GREEN
CONSUMER BEHAVIOR

Submitted by:
Aniruddha Uike 2015B04
Ankush Dhabarde
2015B05 Jayanth N
2015B18
Mukund Goel 2015A58
Pranav Patwardhan
2015A31
Rahul Chauhan 2015A34
Summet Arora 2015A59
Vinayak Patil 2015A49

1. Abstract
The research aims to explore the parameters which have an influence over
consumers green purchase behavior and examines the work done in the past to
determine their impact in the current scenario. Thus on that grounds of the research
a conceptual model was designed which forms basis of developing the
questionnaire for consumer survey.
Keywords: pro-environmental consumer behavior, sustainability, green consumer
behavior, green purchasing

2. Introduction
The world is up against a number of sustainability issues and environmental
problems demanding to reduce the human consumption pattern. Sustainability is
making an attempt to fulfil demand of the present considering welfare of future
generation. Growing concerns to protect our environment have led to development
of many product and services that are eco-friendly in nature and use. Some types of
products are labelled as Eco-Friendly so that it will be appropriate for the
consumers decisions to buy. It is of utmost importance to educate consumers about
their consumption habits and the alternatives available in the market and shifting
their inclination from conventional products and services to the greener ones.
Although even after knowing these product development philosophies there is still
lot to be explored regarding the consumer behavior and consumption habits to cater
to their needs effectively and in an environment friendly manner.
Green consumer supply is making a strong impression on researchers as well as
professionals in operation and supply chain management. New conceptual and real
studies of eco-friendly products are based on the industry to fulfil the increasing
demand of environmental friendly consumers. Also, buying, utilizing and disposing
green products claims consumers principle of social responsibility and moral
awareness and, hence, it can be predicted that eco-friendly behavior of consumer
connects with ethical behavior.
Research across various countries have explained that moral factors draw
consumption behavior, and this latest green marketing pattern shows the change in
consumer behavior. But, in reality, green consumers who are not finding solution to
ecological problems, have buying intention is the utmost immediate appropriate
predictor of corresponding behavior.
Following table provides the research done by many researchers on different
variables. The table shows name of author on left side and the variables considered
by them in research on right hand side.

3. Literature Review
Theoretical Background
The term green is usually used interchangeably with pro-environmental or ecofriendly. However the term is simply used to indicate concern for the physical
environment (air, water, land). Some authors have made finer distinctions in
classifying different types of greenness (Iyer al.,1994). The behavior that consumers
display in searching for, purchasing, using, evaluating and disposing of products and
services that will satisfy their needs is called Consumer Behavior (Sciffman & Kanuk
2007). Hence, for this study the green consumer is considered as anyone whose
behavior is influenced by environmental concerns and the environmental concern
that consumers display in searching for, purchasing, using, evaluating, and
disposing of products is considered as Green Consumer Behavior.

Author

Variables Considered for Research

Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002)


Webster (1957)

Environmental awareness, Environmentalconcern,


Environmentalattitude, Perceived consumer
effectiveness, Perceived seriousness of
environmental, Perceived environmental
responsibility, SocialInfluence, Governments roles,
Functional value ,Social value, Emotional value
,Conditional value ,Epistemic value , Awareness of
green products
Collectivism, Environmental Concern, and Perceived
Consumer Effectiveness
Environmental Consciousness, Gender, Employment
status, Age
Demographic factors (Gender, age, etc.)
Social Consciousness,

Ruiz, Arcas and Cuestas (2001)

Gender

Berkowitz and Lutterman (1968)


Pessemier (1973)

Level of Education, Age


Women Educational Level
Pro environmental Behavior, Green Purchasing
Behavior, Environmental Awareness

Hessam Zand Hessami , Parisa Yousefi


(2013)

Yeonshin Kim and Sejung Marina Choi


(2005)
Harris et.al (2000)

Panni (2006)

Hans Ruediger Kaufmann, Mohammad


Fateh Ali Khan Panni and Yianna
Orphanidou (2012)

Tan Booi Chen, Lau Teck Chai (2010)

Yatish Joshi, Zillur Rahman (2015)

Sandra Larsson, Muhammad Arif


Khan (2011)
Yeonshin Kim and Sejung Marina Choi
(2005)
Jatin Pandey, S.J.C.E. Mysore (2012)
Sunaina R., S.J.C.E. Mysore (2012)
Ranjit Kumar Siringi (2012)
Lee (2009)
Sheth et al., 1991

Schwartz, 1994
Triandis findings (1993)
MacCarty and Shrum (1994)

Lin and Huang (2011)


Johan Jansson, Agneta Marell, Annika
Nordlund (2010)

Environmental knowledge, Altruism, Environmental


awareness, Environmental concern and attitudes,
Availability of product information and product
availability and belief about
product safety for use, Perceived Consumer
effectiveness (PCE) , collectivism, Transparency /
fairness on trade practices, demographic factors.
Environmental attitudes, demographic
characteristics
Individual factors, Emotions, Habits, Perceived
behavioral control, Values and Personal norms, Trust,
knowledge, Other individual factors (selfindulgence), situational factors, Price, Product
availability, Social norms, Product attributes and
quality, store related attributes, Brand Image, Ecolabelling and certification.
Eco-motivation, Price, Peer influence, Ecoknowledge, Shelf space, Reliability, Quality,
Environment awareness.
Collectivism, Environmental Concern, and Perceived
Consumer Effectiveness
Collectivism (C), Environmental Concern (EC),
Skepticism (SK) and Perceived Consumer
Effectiveness (PCE) on ecological purchase/Green
Purchasing Behavior (GPB)
Determinants of Green Consumer Behavior of Post
graduate Teachers
social impact a significant stimulus, Social media,
idea sharing, expressing opinions, knowledge
Social value, choice imagery , social status,
socializing, peer opinion ,similar perception, attitude
or belief
principles of human movements in life, ecological
behavior ,self-transcendence, self enhancement ecocentric attitude
individualism, collectivism, cooperation, sympathy,
assistance, personal goals
Recreation, pleasure , Personal security, recycling
and recycling behavior, consumers values
Human values, green products. General aspects,
consumers values green purchasing, consumer
behavior, values such as functional, social,
emotional, conditional and cognitive values.
Consumer Behavior, Ecology, Eco-Innovation
Adoption

Tina Mainieri, Elaine G. Barnett, Trisha


R. Valdero, John B. Unipan& Stuart
Oskamp (1995)

Awareness about environmental impacts of


products, specific environmental beliefs of
consumers, several general environmental attitude
scales, demographic variables, and several proenvironment behaviors other than buying behavior.

Variables selected for research:


A number of researchers have identified many variables that affect purchase
behavior of green consumers. We have identified following variables (Independent
variables).
Environmental awareness, concern and attitude, Availability of product information
and product availability, Altruism, Perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE),
Transparency in business practices, Social influence, consumer values, Demographic
Circumstances.

a. Environmental knowledge:
In a research paper published by Kempton et.al (1995), it suggested that most
people do not have sufficient knowledge about environmental issues, to act in a
responsible way towards environment. Fryxell & Lo (2003) stated Environmental
knowledge as a general knowledge of facts, concepts, and relationships concerning
the environment and its ecosystems. Thus, environmental knowledge involves
knowledge of environment, key aspects or impacts that their actions have, and
most importantly, collective responsibilities necessary for establishing sustainable
environment. Rokicka (2002) in research paper suggested that a high level of
environmental knowledge leads to a better pro-environmental behavior.
Concordantly, Mostafa (2009) in research paper found that there is a significant
impact of environmental knowledge on the consumers buying behavior of green
products.

b. Environmental awareness:
Environmental awareness can be defined as knowing and understanding the
impact of human behavior on the surrounding environment. According to Kollmuss
and Agyeman, (2006), Environmental awareness has both a knowledge-based
(cognitive) component and a perception based (affective) component. In a research
article by Panni (2006), it is found that the more the consumers / buyers are aware
about the societal and environmental issues, the more is their pro-social and proenvironmental behavior.

c. Environmental concern and attitude:


According to Hines et. al (1987), an individuals concern for the environment is the
most fundamental to environmental research. Based on the research of Dunlap and
Van Liere (1978), environmental concern can be defined as global attitude with
indirect effects on behavior through behavioral intention. Crosby, Gill and Taylor
(1981) suggested that environmental concern provides a strong attitude in
preserving the environment. Newhouse (1991) defined attitudes as enduring
positive or negative feeling based on particular information, about some person,
object, or issue. According to a research by Kotchen & Reiling (2000) has defined
attitudes as an important predictor of behavior, behavioral intention, and
explanatory factors of variants in individual behavior. Many of the studies have
both these factors found to be significant indicators/ predictors of pro-environmental
behavior of consumer.
Thus, the hypothesis can be constructed as:
H0: Environmental awareness, concern and attitude
associated with consumers green purchasing behavior

are

positively

H1: Environmental awareness, concern and attitude are not positively


associated with consumers green purchasing behavior
Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior
Independent Variable: Environmental awareness, concern and attitude
d. Availability of product information and product availability:
Researchers Brown and Wahlers (1998) show that due to lack of information about
the environmentally directed product and its availability, a consumer finds it difficult
to locate them. Also, some researchers Byrne et.al (1991) and Davies (1995) found
that lack of availability of green food products on shelf is one of the biggest barriers
to consumer purchase. Availability is defined as the level of ease or difficulty to
obtain or consume a specific product. Researchers Vermeir and Verbeke (2004)
suggested that due to low availability, many consumers cannot buy green products
even if there was a motive, thus, motive does not translate into purchase. Mainieri
et al. (1997) also suggested in paper that inadequate availability and marketing of
eco-friendly products being one of the reason as to why the consumers lag behind
in pro-environmental behavior. Also, in research papers by Ismail and Panni (2008),
Ismail, Panni and Talukder (2006) and Panni (2006) it is suggested and confirmed
that availability of information about green products improves the knowledge of the
consumers about the impact on environment, which in turn is essential to motivate
the consumers to get involved in pro-environmental behavior.
Thus, the hypothesis can be constructed as:

H0: Availability of product & information has a positive influence on


consumers green purchasing behavior
H1: Availability of product & information do not have a positive influence
on consumers green purchasing behavior
Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior
Independent Variable: Availability of product and information
e. Altruism
Altruism is understood to be a subset of pro-social behavior. In a paper by Schwartz
(1977), the theory of altruism explains that the pro-environmental behavior
becomes more accountable when a person is aware of the probable harmful
consequences to others and on environment, thus that individual takes the
responsibility to change the offending environmental condition. Also, if you consider
vice versa, relating to the detrimental effects of individualism, Borden and Francis
(1978) in their research hypothesize that:

Individuals with a strong selfish and competitive orientation are less likely to
act ecologically
Individuals who have fulfilled their personal needs are more likely to act
ecologically as they possess more resources (including time, money and
energy) so as to care about larger, less personal, social and proenvironmental issues.

Also, Schwartz, Stern, Dietz and Kalof (1993) studied the role social altruism and
pro-environmental altruism play in influencing green purchase behavior. The results
show that the two parameters positively affect consumers green purchase
behavior. Similarly, Mostafa (2009) in research found that altruism has a positive
significant influence on the decision to buy eco-friendly products.
Thus, the hypothesis:
H0: There is no positive relationship between altruism and consumers
green purchasing behavior.
H1: There is a positive relationship between altruism and consumers
green purchasing behavior.
Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior
Independent Variable: Altruism
f. Perceived Consumer effectiveness (PCE)

Perceived Consumer effectiveness (PCE) in our research study attempts to find out
to extent the consumers feel responsible that their actions affect the environment.
A number of researchers have confirmed the role of PCE as a predictor of green
purchase behavior of consumer. More commonly it explains when consumers
observe that their actions have made a significant environmental impact by using
the green products and services, theyd would be more likely to follow these
practices and influence others too. Thus PCE was found to be critical parameter
aligned with socially responsible behavior.
Thus, the hypothesis:
H0: Perceived Consumer effectiveness has no significant impact on the
buying behavior of the consumers.
H1: Perceived Consumer effectiveness has significant impact and is an
important factor for understanding the buying behaviors of consumers.
Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior
Independent Variable: Perceived Consumer Effectiveness (PCE)

g. Transparency in Business Practices


In the aspect of fair trade, AIM- the European Brands Association (2002) formed a
paper on the fairness of trade so as to meet consumers current and future needs
and by its of consumer rights and interests. According to AIM, there are several
categories of unfairness which are misleading practices i.e. failure to provide
material information to the consumers, handling complaint and after sales service.
According to Kaynak (1985); Quazi (2002) and Sherlaker (1999), the term- Micro
issues of consumerism, which is the fairness on trade practices construct, consider
various exploitative practices among which the mostly discussed issues are
deceptive packaging, misleading advertising, customer care, unfair pricing, product
adulteration, black marketing, etc.
Thus, the hypothesis can be formulated as:
H0: Transparency / Fairness on business practices do not positively affect
consumers green purchasing behavior.
H1: Transparency / Fairness on business practices positively affect
consumers green purchasing behavior.
Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior
Independent Variable: Transparency on business practices
h. Social influence
The social influence means the effects of the social environment on consumers
green purchasing behavior. That is, by how much the person gains knowledge about

green products through his/ her family, how much she/he discusses in the field of
environmental products with his/her friends and how much he shares the
information about green products with family (Finisterrado Pao & Raposo , 2004).
Lee (2009) realised that the social impact is a significant stimulus for Hong Kong
youths green purchasing behavior during his investigation to assesinf important
factors influencing Hong Kong youths green purchasing behavior. Social value is
also measured on a profile of choice imagery (Sheth et al., 1991). Indeed, social
values are not just an economic measure but also include several concepts such as
prestige, status and the common sense of belonging.
Thus, the hypothesis:
H0: Social impact is NOT a significant stimulus for green purchasing
behavior
H1: Social impact is a significant stimulus for green purchasing behavior
Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior
Independent Variable: Social Influence
i. Consumer values
Consumer values are the desirable goals that identify the principles of human
movements in life (Schwartz, 1994). Based on Triandis findings (1993) two of the
core values that influence consumers behavior consists of individualism and
collectivism. Individualism indicates to what extent a person focusses on his own.
But in contrast, collectivism refers to cooperation, sympathy, assistance and
considers the groups goals and preferring them to personal goals. MacCarty and
Shrum (1994) have also examined two other variables from the value variables
class in their researches: recreation or pleasure and personal security. In their
studies they found that the fun is positively associated with the importance of
recycling and recycling behavior but security does not have a significant correlation.
In an other research, based on the theory of consumers values, Lin and Huang
(2011) measured the role of human values in their willingness to purchase green
products. In fact, the difference between this study and previous studies was that
these two researchers tested the problem from more general aspects. According to
the presented contents, in this study the role of consumers values in green
purchasingof products behavior has been measured based on the theory of
consumers values. According to the theory of consumers values, consumer
behavior is influenced by values such as functional, social, emotional, conditional
and cognitive values.
Thus, the hypothesis:
H0: Buying behavior is NOT influenced by consumer values
H1: Buying behavior is influenced by consumer values

Dependent Variable: Green Purchasing Behavior


Independent Variable: Consumer Values
j. Demographic Perception
Conclusion of various studies states that some demographic variables can have
influence over the green purchasing behavior of consumers. Harris et.al(2000)
found that consumers like female, professional and of young age are more aware of
environment. Demographic circumstances are the most impactful circumstances in
green purchasing behavior by Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) studies. It has been
found by Hustad and Pessemier that higher women education creates more
awareness about environment.
A study by Webster (1957) stated that female consumer are especially alert about
environment. Ruiz, Arcas and Cuestas (2001) stated that gender helps to
understand the environment alert behavior. As per Berkowitz and Lutterman (1968)
as well as Hustad and Pessemier(1973) education play an important role to be
consumerist and aware of environmental consumers.
Panni (2006) discovered that demographic factors like age, income status, level of
education and employment status influences the pro-social and pro- ethical
behaviors of consumer.
Thus, the hypothesis can be constructed as:
H0: Demographic Perception DOES NOT play an important role in proenvironmental behavior.
H1: Demographic Perception plays an important role in pro-environmental
behavior.
Dependent Variable: Pro-environmental behavior
Independent Variable: Demographic perception

Conceptual Model

4. Research Methodology
The following sections describe the methodologies that were used to conduct the
research. A practical research approach was used to study the topic under research.
Quantitative Research was used to quantify the problem, and generate numerical
data on which statistical survey could be conducted.
Participants
Data for the study were collected through a self-administered survey distributed to
friends and family. A total of 147 respondents participated in the study. The
respondents ranged in age from 18 years to 29 years, with a few respondents in the
40-50 years age group. Of the total respondents, 55.5 percent were male and 45.5
percent were female. Approximately 38 percent of the participants majored in MBA,
and almost 55 percent holding an Engineering degree while the rest held other
degrees.
Measures
Each latent construct was measured using multiple items, mostly adapted from
previous literature. The items under each construct are shown in Table 1
Respondents indicated the extent to which they engaged in purchasing green
products on a five-point scale anchored with (1) Strongly disagree, (2) Disagree,
(3) Neutral, (4) Agree, and (5) Strongly Agree.
Table 1: Variable Descriptions
Variable

Factor

EA1

EA2

EA3

Effect
of
Awareness,
Attitude

environmental
concern
and

EA4

EA5

PI1
PI2

Effect
of
Product
Information availability

and

Question
Factor 1: Effect of environmental Awareness, concern
and Attitude [Having environmental awareness, concern
towards the environment, attitude motivates me to buy
Green Products]
Factor 1: Effect of environmental Awareness, concern
and Attitude [I consider the effect a particular product
has on environment before making a purchase decision]
Factor 1: Effect of environmental Awareness, concern
and Attitude [I think purchasing an eco-friendly product
would eventually lead to sustainable environment in
near future]
Factor 1: Effect of environmental Awareness, concern
and Attitude [The prices of eco-friendly products are
high, but the value they provide in terms of sustainable
environment is even higher]
Factor 1: Effect of environmental Awareness, concern
and Attitude [Its better to buy green product as it is ecofriendly]
Factor 2: Effect of Product and Information availability
[Adequate information about a particular green product
leads to improved awareness & concern about the
environment]
Factor 2: Effect of Product and Information availability

PI3

PI4

PI5

PCE1

PCE2
PCE3

Effect
of
Perceived
Consumer Effectiveness

PCE4

PCE5

TF1

TF2

TF3

Effect of
Fairness
practices

Transparency /
on
business

TF4

TF5
SF1
SF2
SF3

Social Factors & Influence

SF4
SF5
CV1

Consumer Values

[Availability of information related to the green product


has an impact on potential purchase of such products]
Factor 2: Effect of Product and Information availability [I
often decide my purchase based on product information]
Factor 2: Effect of Product and Information availability [If
a green product is available on shelf along with other
non-green products, I would often prefer to buy it if
provided with adequate information]
Factor 2: Effect of Product and Information availability
[More shelf-space allocated to green-products affects my
purchasing decisions]
Factor 3: Effect of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness
[Your
knowledge
and
awareness
about
the
environmental effects of the product impact your buying
decisions]
Factor 3: Effect of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness
[Self-beliefs and attitude play an important role in
influencing your purchasing behavior]
Factor 3: Effect of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness
[Your pro-conservational efforts impact the environment]
Factor 3: Effect of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness [I
often consider the environmental effects of the product
before purchasing it]
Factor 3: Effect of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness
[Engaging in green purchasing practices will result into a
sustainable environment]
Factor 4: Effect of Transparency / Fairness on business
practices [Business operations with respect to the
environment are transparent enough these days]
Factor 4: Effect of Transparency / Fairness on business
practices [Transparent/ fair business practices motivates
me towards purchase of green products]
Factor 4: Effect of Transparency / Fairness on business
practices [Having an Ethical brand matters while
purchasing a product]
Factor 4: Effect of Transparency / Fairness on business
practices [CSR activities, green initiatives taken up by
companies play a vital role in building the brand (like
TATA)]
Factor 4: Effect of Transparency / Fairness on business
practices [I buy green products because I have faith in
the brands (like TATA)]
Factor 5: Social Factors & Influence [I gain knowledge
about the green products from my friends or family]
Factor 5: Social Factors & Influence [I often discuss
effects and advantages of green products with my family
/ friends]
Factor 5: Social Factors & Influence [My friends and
family influence my green purchase behavior]
Factor 5: Social Factors & Influence [Purchase of green
products enhance my social status]
Factor 5: Social Factors & Influence [I often attach selfesteem to a green product]
Factor 6: Consumer Values [The higher price of the green
product as compared to the equivalent non- green

CV2

CV3

CV4

CV5
DV1
DV2
DV3
DV4
Demographic Circumstances
DV5
DV6
A1
A2
A3

Altruism

A4
A5
A6
GPB1
GPB2
GPB3

GPB4

GPB5

Green Purchase Behavior

product often affects my purchase]


Factor 6: Consumer Values [I consider quality as one of
the important parameters before buying a green
product]
Factor 6: Consumer Values [Buying a green product
makes me feel that I am contributing to the
environment]
Factor 6: Consumer Values [I think innate values of an
individual and the environment in which the individual
grows has a considerable impact of green purchase
behavior]
Factor 6: Consumer Values [I often connect emotionally
to a green product as I think it helps the environment]
Factor 7: Demographic Variables [With growing age you
exhibit more environment friendly behavior]
Factor 7: Demographic Variables [Age of an individual
affects the green purchase behavior]
Factor 7: Demographic Variables [Educated people
exhibit more environment friendly behavior]
Factor 7: Demographic Variables [Gender of an individual
plays an important role in exhibiting pro-environment
behavior]
Factor 7: Demographic Variables [The geography,
location or society which you are a part of has an impact
on green behavior]
Factor 7: Demographic Variables [Income of an individual
has an impact on green purchase behavior]
Factor 8: Altruism [I feel preservation of environment will
help welfare of future generation]
Factor 8: Altruism [I consider myself responsible for
changing
the
current
offending
environmental
conditions]
Factor 8: Altruism [Keeping self-interest over the others
causes danger to ecological & environmental changes]
Factor 8: Altruism [High competition among industries
lead to the environmental degradation]
Factor 8: Altruism [I feel motivated to buy green
products as it helps the environment]
Factor 8: Altruism [I consider myself responsible for
welfare of future generation]
Green Purchase Behavior [I make a special effort to buy
paper and plastic products that are made from recycled
materials]
Green Purchase Behavior [I have switched products for
ecological reasons]
Green Purchase Behavior [When I have a choice
between two equal products, I purchase the one less
harmful to other people and the environment]
Green Purchase Behavior [I make a special effort to buy
household chemicals such as detergents and cleansing
solutions that are environmentally friendly]
Green Purchase Behavior [I have avoided buying a
product
because
it
had
potentially
harmful
environmental effects]

Analysis
Steps followed for analysis:
1. Factor Analysis
2. Reliability Analysis
3. Validity Analysis

I. Factor Analysis
In this research, we conducted a factor analysis, a technique for identifying groups
of variables. Factor analysis can be used to (1) understand the structure of a
set of variables; (2) to construct a questionnaire to measure an underlying
variable and (3) to reduce a data set to a more manageable size while
retaining as much of the original information as possible (Field, 2005).
The first step is to look at the inter-correlation between variables. The questionnaire
questions should measure the same underlying dimension and therefore they
should correlate with each other (because they are measuring the same thing). The
variables that do not correlate with each other should be eliminated. Principal
components analysis with Varimax rotation was used so as to extract maximum
possible variance from the data (Kim and Mueller, 1978).
According to the results that we got from the factor analysis, the questions that are
not correlating and will be eliminated are PI1, PI2, PI3, PI4, PI5, PCE1, PCE2, PCE3,
PCE4, PCE5, TF1, SF4, SF5, DV4, DV5, DV6. The constructs that were deleted are:
Perceived Consumer Effectivness, certain questions from Product and Information
Availability, Demographic Perception, Social Factors and Transperancy. All the other
variables are correlating with each other and are therefore correct to perform a
factor analysis.
KMO & Bartletts Test of Sphericity is a measure of sampling adequacy that is
recommended to check the case to variable ratio for the analysis being conducted.
The Bartletts test compares the observed correlation matrix to the identity
matrix. In other words, it checks if there is a certain redundancy between the
variables that we can summarize with a few number of factors. If the variables are
perfectly correlated, only one factor is sufficient. If they are orthogonal, we need as
many factors as variables.
The null hypothesis is that the inter-correlation matrix comes from a population in
which the variables are non-collinear (i.e. an identity matrix)

In most academic and business studies, KMO & Bartletts test play an important role
for accepting the sample adequacy.

Table 2: KMO and Bartlett's Test


Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square

.828
2351.639

Df

300

Sig.

.000

As can be seen in Table 2, the KMO of this questionnaire is .828 which can be
classified as meritorious. This is the KMO for multiple variables. The KMO values
for individual variables should be above a minimum of 0.5 and are excellent for this
dataset: All variables are above 0.5. In addition, Bartletts test is highly significant
and based on this finding, it is confident to say that factor analysis is appropriate for
these data.
The next step is to look at the number of the components. Based on appendix 1, ten
components can be made since SPSS only extracts factors with an eigen-value
higher than 1. This is supported by the scree plot which has a point of inflexion after
five factors.
A Scree Plot displays the eigen-values associated with a component or factor in
descending order versus the number of the component or factor. You can use scree
plots in principal components analysis and factor analysis to visually assess which
components or factors explain most of the variability in the data.

The final step is the principal component analysis. Table 4 shows the rotated
component matrix which is a matrix of the factor loadings for each variable onto
each factor. In other words, Table 4 shows which questions relates to which factor.
The 10 factors are labelled as EA1, EA2, EA3, EA4, EA5, TF2, TF3, TF4, TF5, SF1,
SF2, SF3, DV1, DV2, DV3, A1, A2, A3, A5, A6.

First iteration of Rotated Component matrix


Table 3: Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1
EA1

.666

EA2

.646

EA3

.779

EA4

.718

10

11

12

EA5

.803

PI1

.649

PI2

.604

PI3
PI4

.651

PI5

.823

PCE1
PCE2

.544

PCE3

.530

PCE4
PCE5

.618

TF1

.873

TF2
TF3

.646

TF4

.758

TF5

.628

SF1

.740

SF2

.759

SF3

.757

SF4

.736

SF5

.817

CV1

.720

CV2

.550

CV3
CV4
CV5

.671

DV1

.818

DV2

.725

DV3

.719

DV4

.565

DV5

.668

DV6
A1

.594

A2

.676

A3

.687

A4

.655

A5

.606

A6

.639

GPB1

.680

GPB2

.825

GPB3

.757

GPB4

.827

GPB5

.863

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.a
a. Rotation converged in 16 iterations.

Final Rotated Component Matrix Iteration:


Table 4: Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
1

A1

.761

A2

.735

A3

.723

A5

.710

A6

.714

EA1

.595

EA2

.638

EA3

.755

EA4

.733

EA5

.807

GPB1

.679

GPB2

.825

GPB3

.767

GPB4

.832

GPB5

.865

TF2

.576

TF3

.751

TF4

.819

TF5

.736

SF1

.813

SF2

.794

SF3

.845

DV1

.830

DV2

.789

DV3

.735

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.


Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.a

a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

II. Scale Reliability


The next step is to measure the reliability of the questionnaire. For this, the
Cronbachs Alpha is found out for each of the constructs that are obtained from the
Factor Analysis (Table 4). The Cronbachs value should be above 0.7, for the
construct to be considered reliable.
a. Effect of environmental Awareness, concern and Attitude (EA 1, 2, 3, 4,
5)

Table 5: Reliability Statistics


Cronbach's
Alpha Based on
Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items

N of Items

.877

.877

Table 6: Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if
Item Deleted

Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted

Total Correlation

Squared

Cronbach's

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Correlation

Deleted

EA1

14.86

12.740

.707

.520

.851

EA2

15.19

13.224

.653

.486

.864

EA3

14.65

12.940

.722

.523

.848

EA4

14.71

12.849

.688

.586

.855

EA5

14.63

12.469

.769

.648

.836

A closer look will be taken to the items that measure the above factor. As shown in
Table 5, the Cronbachs Alpha is .877 which is above 0.7 and therefore excellent. In
Table 6, the values in the column labeled Corrected Item-Total Correlation have no
items that are less than .3. Again this is good, since values under .3 indicate that
this item does not correlate well with the scale overall. The column labeled
Cronbachs Alpha if item deleted reflect the change in Cronbachs Alpha that would
be seen if a particular item were deleted. Field (2005) stated that any items that

result in substantially greater values of than the overall may need to be deleted
from the scale to improve its reliability. Since none of the Alphas is higher than .877
there is no need to delete any of the items.

b. Effect of Transparency (TF 2, 3, 4, 5)


The reliability score for the TF is .846 (Table 7). Again, values between .7 and .8 are
good, higher values indicate a high reliability. The Cronbachs Alpha cannot be
improved if one of the four items would be removed.

Table 7: Reliability Statistics


Cronbach's
Alpha Based on
Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items
.846

N of Items
.849

Table 8: Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if
Item Deleted

Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted

Total Correlation

Squared

Cronbach's

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Correlation

Deleted

TF2

11.22

7.025

.598

.379

.839

TF3

10.97

6.376

.721

.534

.789

TF4

10.95

6.271

.765

.597

.771

TF5

11.25

5.957

.665

.483

.818

c. Effect of Altruism (A 1, 2, 3, 5, 6)
The reliability score for the Altruism is .885 (Table 9). Again, values between .7 and .
8 are good, higher values indicate a high reliability. The Cronbachs Alpha cannot be
improved if one of the five items would be removed.
Table 9: Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha Based on
Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items
.885

N of Items
.886

Table 10: Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if
Item Deleted

Squared

Cronbach's

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Correlation

Deleted

Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted

Total Correlation

A1

15.56

10.165

.714

.513

.863

A2

15.73

10.004

.769

.607

.850

A3

15.86

10.475

.651

.450

.878

A5

15.71

10.233

.725

.561

.860

A6

15.65

10.214

.761

.625

.852

d. Effect of Social Factors & Influence (SF 1, 2, 3)


The Cronbachs Alpha for Social Factors & Influence is .866 which is a good score.
The Cronbachs Alpha cannot be improved if one of the three items would be
removed.
Table 11: Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha Based on
Cronbach's

Standardized

Alpha

Items
.866

N of Items
.867

Table 12: Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if
Item Deleted

Squared

Cronbach's

Multiple

Alpha if Item

Correlation

Deleted

Scale Variance if Corrected ItemItem Deleted

Total Correlation

SF1

6.81

3.402

.728

.544

.829

SF2

6.79

3.551

.721

.533

.834

SF3

6.81

3.470

.789

.623

.773

e. Effect of Demographic Perception (DV 1, 2, 3)


Taking a look at the construct Demographic Variables, the questionnaire scored a
Cronbachs Alpha of .809. If any of the items would be deleted the Cronbachs Alpha
would decrease. Therefore, all the items remain in the analysis
Table 13: Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's
Alpha
.809

DV1
DV2
DV3

f.

Cronbach's
Alpha
Based
on
Standardize N
of
d Items
Items
.808
3

Table 14: Item-Total Statistics


Scale
Scale Mean Variance if Corrected
Squared
if
Item Item
Item-Total
Multiple
Deleted
Deleted
Correlation Correlation
7.20
3.365
.727
.533
7.19
3.635
.656
.462
7.01
4.014
.595
.366

Cronbach's
Alpha
if
Item
Deleted
.663
.740
.800

Effect of Green Purchase Behaviour (GPB 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

The last dimension to look at is the dependent variable GPB. The items that
measure this dimension are GPB (1,2,3,4,5). As shown in Table 15, the Cronbachs
Alpha for the GPB is .865 which is good. It shows that the questionnaire finding
respondents Green Purchase Behavior as reliable. The Cronbachs Alpha cannot be
improved if one of the items would be deleted.
Table 15: Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha
Based
on
Cronbach's Alpha
Standardized Items N of Items
.865
.866
5

Table 16: Item-Total Statistics


Scale
Scale Mean Variance if Corrected
Squared
if
Item Item
Item-Total
Multiple
Deleted
Deleted
Correlation Correlation
GPB1 13.84
14.736
.565
.649
GPB2 13.87
13.990
.714
.732
GPB3 13.53
13.319
.708
.547

Cronbach's
Alpha
if
Item
Deleted
.864
.833
.831

GPB4 13.65
GPB5 13.81

12.735
11.237

.684
.789

.780
.726

.837
.810

The results of the factor analysis can be summarized in the following table:

Table 17: Factor Analysis Results


Factors

Reliability

EA

0.877

TF

0.846

SF
DV
A

0.866
0.809
0.885

Reliable
Variables
EA1, EA2, EA3,
EA4, EA5
TF2, TF3, TF4,
TF5
SF1, SF2, SF3
DV1, DV2, DV3
A1, A2, A3, A5,
A6

Deleted
Variables

TF1
SF4, SF5
DV4, DV5, DV6
A4

The reliability for all the factors is between >0.7 which indicates that this research
is reliable.

III. Convergent Validity


Convergent Validity refers to the degree of agreement in two or more measures of
the same construct (Camines and Zeller, 1979). Evidence of convergent validity was
assessed by inspection of variance extracted for each factor (Fornell and Larcker,
1981). According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), convergent validity is established, if
the variance- extracted value exceeds 0.50. It is indicated that the variance
extracted for 5 scales ranged from 0.470 to 0.693. This shows that the scales
possessed convergent validity. The AVE for Construct 1 is 0.470 i.e. less than 0.5,
however it is negligible and can therefore be ignored.

Table 18: Convergent Validity

Construct 1

factor
loading

1factor^
2

Scale Composite
reliability

sqr of
factor

AVE

A1

0.421

0.761

0.850

0.579

A2

0.735

0.460

0.540

A3

0.723

0.477

0.523

A5

0.710

0.496

0.504

A6

0.714

0.490

0.510

SUM

3.643

2.343

2.657

Construct 2

factor
loading

GPB1

1factor^
2

Scale Composite
reliability

sqr of
factor

0.540

0.679

0.896

0.460

GPB2

0.825

0.320

0.680

GPB3

0.767

0.412

0.588

GPB4

0.832

0.308

0.692

GPB5

0.865

0.252

0.748

SUM

3.967

1.832

3.168

Construct 3

factor
loading

EA1

1factor^
2

Scale Composite
reliability

sqr of
factor

0.645

0.595

0.834

0.355

EA2

0.638

0.594

0.406

EA3

0.755

0.431

0.569

EA4

0.733

0.462

0.538

EA5

0.807

0.348

0.652

SUM

3.528

2.480

2.520

Construct 4

factor
loading

1factor^

Scale Composite

sqr of

0.53
1

AVE
0.63
4

AVE
0.50
4

AVE

reliability

factor

0.668

TF2

0.576

TF3

0.751

0.436

0.564

TF4

0.819

0.329

0.671

TF5

0.736

0.458

0.542

SUM

2.883

1.890

2.110

Construct 5

factor
loading

SF1

0.815

1factor^
2

Scale Composite
reliability

0.332

sqr of
factor

0.338

0.813

0.858

0.662

SF2

0.794

0.370

0.630

SF3

0.845

0.285

0.715

SUM

2.453

0.994

2.006

0.52
7

AVE
0.66
9

IV. Discriminant Validity


Discriminate validity is the degree to which any single construct is different from the
other constructs in the model (Carmines and Zeller, 1979). Discriminant validity was
assessed by the test provided by Fornell and Larcker (1981) in which the pair-wise
correlations between factors obtained were compared with the variance extracted
estimates for the constructs making up each possible pair. The Discriminate validity
is adequate when constructs have an AVE loading greater than 0.5 meaning that at
least 50% of measurement variance was captured by the construct (Chin, 1998). In
addition, discriminate validity is confirmed if the diagonal elements are significantly
higher than the off-diagonal values in the corresponding rows and columns. The
diagonal elements are the square root of the AVE score for each construct (i.e. EA,
A, TF, SF, DV). These values are shown in Table 19. Result revealed that all the
constructs possess Discriminant validity.
The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is a measure of the strength of
the linear relationship between two variables. It is referred to as Pearson's
correlation or simply as the correlation coefficient. If the relationship between the
variables is not linear, then the correlation coefficient does not adequately
represent the strength of the relationship between the variables.

Table 19: Discriminant Result

A
GPB
EA
TF
SF
DV

A
GPB
EA
TF
SF
DV
0.729
0.188
0.796
0.561
0.283
0.710
0.545
0.167
0.666
0.726
0.461
0.250
0.455
0.422 0.818
0.560
0.109
0.346
0.311 0.332
0.786

V. Regression
From the last table, estimated regression coefficients are: o = 2.212, 1 = 0.257
Based on the estimated regression equation Y= 2.212+0.257*X, we expect that
the sales (Y) will increase by 0.257 units if we increase advertising frequency (X) by
one unit.
R-square = 0.102 (10.2%) in the second table indicates that the 10.2% of total
variance of sales(Y) is explained by the estimated regression equation, by the
Effect of Product and Information availability and Effect of environmental
Awareness, concern and Attitude (X)

Table 20: Model Summary

Model

R Square

.319a

Adjusted R

Std. Error of the

Square

Estimate

.102

.070

.86164

a. Predictors: (Constant), EA, DV, SF, TF, A

Table 21: ANOVAa


Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

df

Mean Square

11.854

2.371

Residual

104.683

141

.742

Total

116.536

146

a. Dependent Variable: GPB


b. Predictors: (Constant), EA, DV, SF, TF, A

Table 22: Coefficientsa

F
3.193

Sig.
.009b

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

B
(Constant)

Std. Error
2.212

.412

.028

.130

TF

-.083

SF

Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

5.366

.000

.025

.217

.829

.122

-.077

-.684

.495

.161

.093

.163

1.725

.087

DV

-.022

.095

-.023

-.233

.816

EA

.257

.116

.254

2.213

.028

a. Dependent Variable: GPB

5. Discussion
As public concern for the environment increases, green marketing, which appeals to
consumers with products that are green or environmentally friendly, emerged
as a new strategy. Ecologically themed product claims, such as safe for the
environment and biodegradable became common in the 1980s. However, there
is skepticism about how committed consumers are to environmentally friendly
products in the real marketplace. Not all people who consider themselves
environmentally concerned purchase and consume products environmentally
positioned. Past studies of environmental or ecological concern have examined this
environmental concern as an attitude towards the environment and as reflected in
past behaviors. Few studies have attempted to model the psychological
determinants of ecological consumption (see Ellen, Wiener, and Cobb-Walgren 1991
for a notable example) and no empirical research has tested a theoretical model for
integrating consumer values and environmental concern and assessing their
influence on green purchase decisions. The study presented in this paper provides a
deeper understanding of green buying behavior by focusing on how collectivism,
environmental concern, PCE etc. drive ecological consumptions as well as how they
relate to each other.
As the starting point for the model presented in this paper, collectivism, defined as
an individual-level value orientation, appeared to positively influence individuals
tendency to buy green products, but only through their positive beliefs about selfefficacy. Collectivistic individuals who value group goals and cooperation might be
highly motivated to make pro-environmental choices by having stronger beliefs that
their behavior would make a difference in mitigating environmental problems.
Greater perceived self-efficacy directly influences the likelihood that consumers
actually engage in green purchase behavior. These findings seem to reflect the
unique nature of pro-environmental behavior. Unlike general product purchase
decisions, ecological consumption choices are future and group oriented. That is,
instead of instant gratification for the buyer, using green products often provides

benefits for the entire society in the long term. Continuous reinforcement of selfefficacy should be provided for further promoting consumer commitment to green
purchase. Environmental concerns also had a direct, positive influence on green
purchase, suggesting that consumers who possess strong environmental concern
may be interested in consumption of products that reflect that concern. However,
environmental attitudes or concerns that reflect an individuals orientation or belief
toward the environment specifically appear to be not related to their collectivistic
tendencies at a more general level. Theoretically, the approach used in this study
resembles the conceptual framework of several previous studies on proenvironmental behaviors that emphasize the role of intervening
Findings of this study also highlight the importance of consumer attitudes towards
issues closely related to the behavior of interest in understanding the relationship
between values and behavior. Fundamental values that individuals hold at an
abstract level can motivate and drive behavior, but attitudes and beliefs measured
with regards to a particular object or topic may intervene between the abstract
values and the specific behavior. Therefore, a better predictor of target behavior can
be obtained by considering the level of specificity of attitudes and behavior or
motivational factors such as personal efficacy and behavioral intentions. In practical
terms, findings of this study offer implications for marketers and public policy
makers who promote green products or programs for pro-environmental behavior.
Taken together, the results suggest that it is important to increase consumer
awareness of the environmental issues and enhance the perceived efficacy of their
contribution to improving them. Applied to the segmentation and targeting
strategies, promotional messages can be tailored to collectivistic people with an
appeal that emphasizes the importance of their role in improving the environment
as an achievement of group goals such as the societys well-being. For example, the
portrayal of an individuals green behavior contributing to the welfare of the
community they belong to might effectively encourage people to act proenvironmentally. For those who are already environmentally concerned, an
emphasis on success they can yield by taking environmentally conscious actions
might be effective for promoting their ecological purchase and consumption.

6. Conclusion
Based on a comprehensive literature review, this paper, innovatively, provides an
integrated and comprehensive set of hypothesized explanatory variables of Green
Consumer Behavior. It is regarded as the basis for a consensus among the partners
of the value chain for Green products on consumer Behavior in this sensitive field.
Hence, this information is an invaluable source which should inform marketing
strategies and tactics of companies operating in the green product business.
As with any other studies using a student sample, the findings of this study might
not represent consumers at large. A replication of this study with more general

consumers of a wide range in their characteristics might be necessary to attest the


applicability of the model to the broader public. Similarly, the model presented in
this paper was tested for green buying decisions only, so the interrelationships
among the variables might vary with different types of pro-environmental behavior
such as recycling or energy saving behavior.
In line with the relevant literature, the value-attitude-behavior structure proved
useful for understanding the predictors of environmentally conscious behavior and
their interrelationships. Future research should continue to delve into this question
as to what drives ecologically friendly behaviors by incorporating more cultural and
psychological factors. A more comprehensive model could be constructed in
which more relevant variables are identified and the related variables are
laid out from general to specific with regards to the issue of interest or
context of target behavior.

References

Hessam Zand Hessami, Parisa Yousefi, Investigation of major factors


influencing green purchasing behavior: Interactive approach, European Online
Journal of Natural and Social Sciences 2013,vol.2, No.4, pp. 584-596,ISSN
1805-3602
Hans Ruediger Kaufmann, Mohammad Fateh Ali Khan Panni and Yianna
Orphanidou (2012). Factors Affecting Consumers Green Purchasing
Behavior: An Integrated Conceptual Framework
Tan Booi Chen; Lau Teck Chai(2010). Management Science and Engineering
Vol.4 No.2, 2010
Yatish Joshi, Zillur Rahman (2015). Factors Affecting Green Purchase
Behaviour and Future Research Directions
Weifeng Yang and Yuelei Zhang(2012). Research on factors of green
purchasing practices of Chinese, E3 Journal of Business Management and
Economics Vol. 3(5). pp. 222-231, May, 2012
Sandra Larsson, Muhammad Arif Khan (2011). A Study of Factors That
Influence Green Purchase
Kenneth, L.K. and Sanjay, P. (1998). Acceptance of Recycling Appeals: The
Moderating Role of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness, Journal of Marketing
Management.
Yeonshin, K. (2005). Antecedents of Green Purchase Behavior: An
Examination of Collectivism, Environmental Concern, and PCE, Advances in
Consumer Research.
Ellen, P.M., Wiener, J.L. and Cobb-Walgren, C. (1991), The role of perceived
consumer effectiveness in motivating environmentally conscious behaviors.
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing.
Berger, I.E. and Corbin, R.M. (1992), Perceived consumer effectiveness and
faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviours,
Journal of Public Policy and Marketing
Johan Jansson, Agneta Marell, Annika Nordlund (2010), Green consumer
behavior: determinants of curtailment and ecoinnovation adoption
Tina Mainieri, Elaine G. Barnett, Trisha R. Valdero, John B. Unipan & Stuart
Oskamp (1995), Green Buying: The Influence of Environmental Concern on
Consumer Behavior
Lee (2009), Green Marketing: A Study of Consumers Attitude towards
Environment Friendly Products
Sheth et al., 1991, Investigation of major factors influencing green purchasing
behavior: Interactive approach
Schwartz, 1994, Classifying consumers based upon their pro-environmental
behaviour: an empirical investigation
Triandis findings (1993), Variation of Individualism And Collectivism Within
And Between 20 Countries A Typological Analysis

MacCarty and Shrum (1994), Factors Affecting Consumers Green Purchasing


Behavior: An Integrated Conceptual Framework
Lin and Huang (2011), Investigation of major factors influencing green
purchasing behavior: Interactive approach
Yeonshin Kim and Sejung Marina Choi (2005),"Antecedents of Green Purchase
Behavior: an Examination of Collectivism, Environmental Concern, and Pce",
in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 32, eds. Geeta Menon and
Akshay R. Rao, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research, Pages: 592599.
Jatin Pandey and Sunaina R. (2012), Factor Influencing Green Purchasing
Behavior, JM INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MARKETING MANAGEMENT,
VOLUME -2 ISSUE-2 MARCH 2012
Ranjit Kumar Siringi (2012), Determinants of Green Consumer Behavior of
Post Graduate Teachers, IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSRJBM), ISSN: 2278-487X. Volume 6, Issue 3 (Nov. - Dec. 2012), PP 19-25

APPENDIX
Appendix 1

Total Variance Explained


Extraction Sums of Squared

Rotation Sums of Squared

Loadings

Loadings

Initial Eigenvalues
% of

Cumulative

Variance

Total

% of

Cumulative

Variance

Total

% of

Cumulative

Variance

Component

Total

8.865

35.459

35.459

8.865

35.459

35.459

3.431

13.726

13.726

3.070

12.278

47.738

3.070

12.278

47.738

3.332

13.330

27.056

2.169

8.676

56.413

2.169

8.676

56.413

3.299

13.197

40.253

1.649

6.596

63.010

1.649

6.596

63.010

2.847

11.387

51.639

1.178

4.712

67.721

1.178

4.712

67.721

2.712

10.847

62.486

1.084

4.337

72.059

1.084

4.337

72.059

2.393

9.573

72.059

.775

3.099

75.157

.667

2.668

77.826

.645

2.579

80.404

10

.587

2.347

82.751

11

.507

2.028

84.779

12

.469

1.875

86.654

13

.452

1.809

88.464

14

.404

1.617

90.081

15

.364

1.456

91.536

16

.350

1.399

92.935

17

.292

1.168

94.103

18

.285

1.138

95.242

19

.228

.913

96.155

20

.206

.822

96.977

21

.185

.741

97.718

22

.178

.710

98.428

23

.166

.664

99.092

24

.155

.619

99.711

25

.072

.289

100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.