sustainabilit y

Article

The Impact of ESG on Brand Trust and Word of Mouth in Food and
Beverage Companies: Focusing on Jeju Island Tourists
Gum-Kwang Bae 1, Sang-Mook Lee 2,*
Citation: Bae, G.-K.; Lee, S.-M.;
Luan, B.-K. The Impact of ESG on
Brand Trust and Word of Mouth in
Food and Beverage Companies:
Focusing on Jeju Island Tourists.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 2348.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ su15032348
Academic Editor: Chengpeng Lu
Received: 31 December 2022
Revised: 15 January 2023
Accepted: 19 January 2023
Published: 27 January 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This
article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
and Bui-Kim Luan 3
1
Department of Foodservice Management, Dong-Eui University, Busan 47340, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Tourism Management, Jeju National University, Jeonju 63243, Republic of Korea
3
Hospitality & Tourism Institute, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam
* Correspondence: leepro@jejunu.ac.kr
Abstract: This study conducted to verfiy the structural causal relationship between the ESG attributes of
food and beverage companies, trust, and word of mouth (WOM) as perceived by consumers visiting Jeju
Island. The present study used respondents who understand ESG management and selected a
representative ESG management company in the food service business (e.g., Starbucks Reusable Cup or
Samdasoo Unlabeled, etc.). A survey was requested from an online survey company, and total 521
participants were selected for the data analysis. The IBM 24.0 program and AMOS 22.0 program was
employed to conduct statistic analysis. Present study demonstrated as follows. First, as a result of the
hypothesis testing of the relationship between the three attributes of ESG and brand trust, the
environmental factor (E) and the social factor (S) have a significant positive (+) effect on brand trust.
Second, hypothesis testing on the relationship between the three attributes of ESG and the influence of
WOM showed that environmental factors and social factors were critical antecedents of WOM. Next,
verifying the hypothesis between brand trust and WOM, brand trust had a significant positive (+) effect
on WOM. By verifying the hypotheses, the current study identified a critical relationship between the ESG
management attributes of food and beverage companies and customers’ brand trust and WOM. These
founding showed differences in the variables that directly affect brand trust and WOM among the ESG
attributes recognized by tourists in Jeju Island about Jeju-based food and beverage companies practicing
ESG management. Furthermore, it was confirmed that the value formed by these food and beverage
companies’ ESG management activities could directly affect consumers’ brand trust and WOM intentions.
Hence, the study intends to expand the range of ESG-related academic views and suggest meaningful
marketing implications for various food and beverage companies that want to practice ESG management.

Keywords: ESG; brand trust; word of mouth; food & beverage company; Jeju Island

Sustainability 2023, 15, 2348. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032348 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

in various fields is considered an essential management strategy for companies that want to
achieve sustainability in terms of environment, society, and governance [4]. Therefore,
various industry have more focused on ESG(environmental, social, and governance)
management because ESG has become an important evaluation criterion for corporate ethical
management. [5,6]. However, previous studies related ESG theory have paid attention to
determine financial performance and stock value of the companies [5,7], and a few study that
concentrated on consumer behavior and perception have rarely conducted in foodservice
sector. To apply the ESG framework to consumer research, present study try to extant

1 . Introduction
ESG is a word derived from the first letters of environmental, social, and governance. It is receiving significant attention
as an essential criterion for evaluating corporate sustainability. In the past, the value of a company was mainly determined by
short-term and quantitative indicators, such as financial statements. However, the importance of non-financial values, such as
ESG, is increasing because of the global climate change crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic [1]. Therefore, previous studies
related to ESG have verified that companies following ESG management can increase efficiency and positively affect asset
returns [2]. In addition, Laurence Douglas Fink (CEO of BlackRock, the largest asset management company in the world)
delivered a letter to companies subject to asset management in 2021 titled “Corporate ESG management is no longer an
option,” and ESG has emerged as the most critical issue for companies globally. [3]. The evaluation of ESG factors is emerging
as a major criterion for ensuring a company’s long-term value and sustainability when a company’s financial performance and
profits, Accordingly, ESG management
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 2 of 14

literature has rarely explored how tourists’ ESG perception affects consumers’ assessment of

the beverage business field.

Interest in ESG is continuously increasing in various domestic industries. For example,
domestic global companies, such as Samsung, SK, Hyundai, Kia, Hanwha, and POSCO, are
actively considering ESG management as a survival strategy, focusing on new and renewable
energy development, and expansion of the use of electric vehicles [4]. ESG directly impacts
corporate value, and ESG is recognized as a core value directly related to companies’ long-
term survival and prosperity. In particular, the government of Jeju Island, which is the only
island in the world to have won three crowns in the UNESCO natural science field, is showing
significant interest in ESG management related to environmental preservation. According to
data from the Korea Tourism Data Lab, furthermore, out of the expenses spent by tourists
who visited Jeju this year, food and beverage consumption accounted for the highest portion
at 41.3%, making food and beverage tourism a very important industry for the Jeju tourism
industry.
The importance of corporate ESG management is continuously reported in industry and
academia. Jones [8] argued that a company’s ethical behavior increases its competitiveness by
establishing a positive and sustainable relationship with its stakeholders. Rezaee [9] argued
that a company could increase its sustainability by considering financial value and non-
financial characteristics, such as ESG. In addition, Kang & Jung [10] emphasized that ESG
activities can significantly affect companies with good transparency. Studies on ESG
management centered on Jeju have also been reported. For example, Shin & Hong [11]
studied the impact of social responsibility activities of lodging companies on Jeju Island on
business performance, and Ha [12] demonstrated the importance of mid-priced hotel ESG
management on revisit intention among customers using mid-price hotels in Jeju Island.
Although various studies have been conducted on the use of ESG across diverse fields,
studies have primarily focused on the relationship between ESG and corporate financial
performance, ESG performance indicators for investment decision-making, and the
perspective of ESG management and marketing. In particular, research on food and beverage
companies practicing ESG management is minimal, and such research with Jeju Island tourists
as study subjects has not yet been reported. Therefore, the main research question of this
study is to find out how the elements of ESG management for food and beverage companies
mainly used by tourists visiting Jeju Island affect the brand trust as well as word of mouth
intention. Hence, this study aims to verify the structural causal relationship between the ESG
attributes of food and beverage companies, trust, and word of mouth (WOM) as perceived by
consumers visiting Jeju Island.
Therefore, the originality of this study is as follows. Current study not only examine the
effect of ESG management on beverage customers’ reaction but also identify critical elements
that influence perceptions of brand trust and word of mouth about the companies. In
addition, present study is able to contribute to the literature by ensuring the explanatory
power of ESG theory in the food service field especially in beverage industry as perceived by
Jeju Island tourists.
In scope of the above mentioned, these research questions have been set:
(1) Is ESG appropriate for the consumer perception in the beverage business context?
(2) Can this study contribute to develop business guideline by applying ESG concept
according to examine tourists perception?
In sum, the study intends to expand the range of ESG-related academic views and
suggest meaningful marketing implications for various food and beverage companies that
want to practice ESG management. A review of literature on ESG management, and
hypotheses among constructs (ESG, brand trust, and Word of mouth) will be presented in the
literature review.

2. Literature Review and Hypotheses

2.1. ESG
ESG was first reported in “Who Cares Wins—Connecting Financial Markets to a Changing
World,” published by the 2004 UN Global Compact. This report emphasized that a systematic
response to non-financial factors is also essential for a company to achieve sustainable
growth. In 2006, the United Nations Environment Program Finance Initiative (UNEP FI), an
organization affiliated with the United Nations, reported that corporate environmental, social,
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 3 of 14

and governance (ESG) issues affect investment performance, and the ESG factors must be

considered essential when selecting a company. After this, the ISO (International
Standardization Organization) developed “ISO 26000:2010—Guidance on social responsibility”
and emphasized ESG management as an international standard for social responsibility.
ESG is composed of three elements, the first of which, the environment (E), is the most
important [13]. Environmental factors refer to activities that benefit the natural ecological
environment surrounding the company and are related to climate change and carbon
emissions, environmental pollution, environmental regulation, ecosystems and biodiversity,
resource and waste management, energy efficiency, responsible purchasing and procurement,
etc. [1,14]. In particular, the rapid progress of environmental pollution and global warming
after industrialization has gained attention, so many companies are carrying out various
activities to reduce carbon emissions from business [15,16]. Kim, Kim, & Huh [17] empirically
demonstrated the structural relationship between ESG management, customer satisfaction,
and financial performance by focusing on the mediating effect of customer satisfaction
between ESG management and financial performance. The study found that environment (E)
and social responsibility (S) have a direct impact on customer satisfaction, and environment
(E) has the most significant impact on customer satisfaction. Second, society (S) refers to
activities that benefit society or people [14]. Specifically, this includes social factors related to
customer satisfaction, data protection and privacy, community relations, supply chain
management, worker safety, and so on. Therefore, these factors are referred to as the
activities performed to meet social obligations as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Most
CSR-related studies investigate activities carried out by organizations and companies out of
concern for the community and shareholders [2], that is, responsibility to society beyond
profit maximization [18]. Previous studies verified that these social activities of companies
positively affect performance improvement by enhancing the company’s image, which can
positively impact society [19]. The last element of ESG is governance (G), which consists of
items related to internal decision-making, not external activities [14]. In various industries,
including academia, governance (G) has been also estimated as a key element of ESG
management as well as environmental factors (E) and social factors (S).
Prior research on ESG in the hospitality industry demonstrated that ESG and corporate
value are closely related, and a company’s ESG activities can directly impact corporate value.
For example, Lee [20] verified that ESG management activities of domestic golf course
companies have a positive (+) and direct effect on corporate image. In addition, Ha [12]
confirmed that ESG activities from mid- to low-priced hotels had a positive (+) effect on revisit
intentions in South Korea. Furthermore, Moon, Tang, & Lee [21] confirmed that ESG factors
could directly or indirectly affect brand trust and repurchase intention for Starbucks. Food and
beverage companies also have a significant interest in ESG management, and previous studies
have verified the influence relationships among ESG factors, corporate values, trust, and
behavioral intentions. However, studies on visitors to specific tourist areas centering on food
and beverage companies are still very lacking. Hence, this study tries to identify the
relationship between ESG factors, brand trust, and WOM as perceived by food and beverage
equipment companies targeting Jeju Island visitors.

2.2. Brand Trust

Trust has consistently received much attention from scholars in many fields, such as
psychology, sociology, economics, and management or marketing. Although this ongoing
interest has added structural richness to the concept of trust, it has made it difficult to find
consensus about the nature of the concept. A careful review of the literature shows that the
most important definitions of trust are confident expectations and risk factors [22]. In other
words, trust is defined not as fear of something but as the conviction that you will find what
you want from another person [23].
According to Dwyer, Schurr, & Oh [24], trust refers to the expectation that people want
to cooperate and fulfill their duties and obligations in relationships. Kumar, Scheer, &
Steenkamp [25] defined trust as the belief in mutual benefit among consumers. Tseng & Fogg
[26] defined trust as “believability.” Based on various scholars’ definitions of trust, trust can
generally be referred to as “belief,” which is beneficial when any goods or services are
exchanged by the company [27].
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 4 of 14

Trusting a brand is based on experiencing it [28]. Therefore, brand trust is influenced by

consumer evaluation based on direct contact with the brand (e.g., trial, use, consumer
satisfaction) and indirect contact (advertising, WOM, brand reputation) [29,30]. In particular,
consumption experience is more relevant and important for trust than other contacts with
brands [28]. According to Dwyer et al. [24] and Krishnan [30], consumption experiences are
more self-related and create associations and emotions that are more reliably linked to
brands because brand trust evolves steadily from past experiences or previous interactions
[31].
Hence, brand trust is crucial for successful marketing. Dwyer et al. [24] said that brand
trust can reduce consumers’ perception of risk or uncertainty about products or services
provided by companies and that it affects future purchase intentions. Moreover, Swan &
Nolan [32] emphasized that brand trust is important in maintaining long-term consumer
relationships in corporate marketing. After all, brand trust serves as a kind of glue that
successfully maintains the relationship between a company and customers [33], and it is an
important element that can develop customer loyalty [34]. Several studies have recently
reported that a company’s ESG activities can directly impact corporate value. For example,
Baek [35] focused on corporate social contribution activities and verified the impact of these
social contribution activities on corporate trust and brand image. According to the research
results, corporate social contribution activities positively affected trust, and trust significantly
affected brand image and intention to pay more. In addition, Huo, Hameed, Zhang, Bin Mohd
Ali, & Amri Nik Hashim [36] identified the relationships among CSR(Corporate Social
Responsibility), brand trust, and brand loyalty by demonstrating the mediating role of brand
trust. The study found that corporate social responsibility significantly affects consumers’
long-term purchase intention, and brand trust and loyalty effectively mediate between CSR
and sustainable purchase intention and between CSR and green innovation performance.
Furthermore, Lim & Kim [37] identified the airline’s eco-friendly management and social
responsibility as a measurement dimension from the ESG perspective—which is emerging as
an essential element of corporate management worldwide—to determine the causal
relationship between the airline’s brand attitude and trust level perceived by consumers. Lee
[20] reported that ESG management activities of domestic golf course companies positively (+)
affect corporate image. Ha [12] reported that hotels’ ESG activities positively (+) affect
consumers’ revisit intentions. Tran Van Anh [38] studied the impact of ESG on consumers’
purchase and recommendation intentions and identified that the company’s positive and
negative ESG information increases and decreases, respectively, consumers’ purchase
intentions and recommendation intentions.
Although previous studies identified the relationship between ESG or CSR concept and
brand and behavioral intention, a few study that conducted the relationship between
customer-based brand equity and sustainable purchase intentions as regards ESG
management attributes of food and beverage companies has barely been reported [39–41].
For example, Majerova et al. [39] and Lăzăroiu et al. [41] identified the phenomenon of brand
loyalty which are relevant to sustainable brand management of alimentary goods. Hence, the
study confirmed that components of brand value sources do not vary when comparing brands
and those without loyal consumers, and suggested that the theory and practice of sustainable
brand management need to formulate for alimentary goods. In addition, Lăzăroiu et al. [41]
verified that trust and purchase intention are significantly linked each other when customers
make a decision on social commerce platform.
In sum, previous studies related to ESG verify the potential utility of ESG in the analysis
from the consumer’s point of view, which scholars have not thoroughly reviewed in the past.
In addition, previous studies have identified that companies’ ESG, CSR, and eco-friendly
management are directly related to their brand trust. Therefore, this study established the
following hypotheses, focusing on the causal relationship between ESG management and
brand trust in food and beverage companies.

Hypothesis 1. ESG management will have a positive impact on brand trust.

Hypothesis 1-1. Environmental element will significantly impact brand trust.

Hypothesis 1-2. Social element will significantly impact brand trust.

Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 5 of 14

Hypothesis 1-3. Governance element will significantly impact brand trust.

2.3. Word of Mouth

There is a difference between oral WOM and eWOM(electronic word of mouth): oral
WOM usually occurs between two people or small groups. Although the strength of the
relationship between sender and receiver may be weaker for eWOM, it can span multiple
senders and receivers [42]. In addition, research has shown that information is delivered in a
less biased way to the recipient because eWOM involves different opinions together on the
same web page [43]. In the 1990s, technological innovations changed people’s daily lives,
leading to the implementation of the World Wide Web and the birth of Google. These tools
became a stepping-stone for eWOM [44]. Goldsmith & Horowitz [45] and
Hennig-Thurau, Gwinner, Walsh, & Gremler [46] reported that eWOM is communication via
the internet. As such, the concept of WOM is continuously expanding in response to
technological changes.
Previous studies researched the effect of perceived suitability for ESG on WOM
intention. For example, Lim et al. [37] studied the impact of travelers’ evaluations of golf
resort eco-friendly service quality on satisfaction, WOM intention, and revisit intention, and
the eco-friendly service quality positively affected the image of travelers and wordof-mouth
and revisit intention. Kim, Choi, & Kim [47] identified the mediating effects of motivation and
authenticity between perceived compatibility of CSR and WOM. This study reported that if a
company’s CSR activities are appropriate, customers’ positive WOM intention increases. Park,
Lee, Yoo, & Hyun [48] demonstrated the impact of word-of-mouth and purchase intentions
for public interest marketing products through consumers’ trust in companies. The study
reported that consumers’ positive perceptions could be improved through the company’s
actual public interest activities, and consumer trust could also be developed according to
social contribution marketing. Similarly, Park [49] identified the influence of the suitability of
CSR activities and business contents of companies on attitudes toward companies and WOM
intentions based on the persuasion knowledge model. In addition, Kim, Jeong, & Park [50]
evaluated the ESG activities of companies. They found that among the elements of ESG, the
more positive the evaluation of environment (E) and society (S), the more positive the effect
on WOM and continued use intention among people who experienced regular food delivery
through a subscription service. In this way, the following hypotheses were established
according to previous findings that ESG, CSR, and eco-friendly management of companies can
positively affect consumers’ WOM intention.

Hypothesis 2. ESG management will play a positive influence on WOM intention.

Hypothesis 2-1. Environmental element will significantly impact WOM intention.

Hypothesis 2-2. Social element will significantly impact WOM intention.

Hypothesis 2-3. Governance element will significantly impact WOM intention.

Lee [51] studied the effects of brand emotion and brand trust on brand WOM brand
loyalty in the mobile SNS environment. This study verified that brand trust and brand emotion
had a significant effect on brand WOM. In addition, Lee & Min [52] conducted a study to verify
the mediating effect of effort saving and brand trust on the relationship between brand
authenticity, WOM, and purchase intention. The results found that brand trust can be formed
when consumers consider a brand highly authentic, which increased WOM and purchase
intention Lee, Kim, & Kim [53] examined the relationships among airline brand evidence,
brand value, brand trust, brand attitude, and WOM intention. The study demonstrated that
brand trust significantly influenced brand attitude and WOM intention. Furthermore, Bae [54]
conducted a study to identify the effects of perceived risk of online restaurants on brand trust,
value, and WOM effect. The results showed that perceived risk of online restaurants had a
negative effect on brand trust, and brand trust had a significant effect on WOM. Yu [55]
studied the relationship between perceived brand authenticity, brand trust, customer
satisfaction, and WOM intention as perceived by coffee shop consumers. This study also
found that brand trust was a critical antecedent of customer satisfaction and WOM.
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 6 of 14

Therefore, this study established the following hypotheses based on the previous research

(Figure 1).

Figure 1. Research Model.

Hypothesis 3. Brand trust will play a positive influence on WOM intention.

3. Methodology
3.1. Measurement Items
A self-administrated questionnaire consisting of six sections was designed for this study.
All questionnaires in Sections 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 measure responses with a 7-point Likerttype
scale for estimating the major elements (ESG, brand trust, and WOM). To evaluate ESG
factors, the current study adopted 13 items (four items from environmental, four items from
social, and five items from governance) from Chang, Yeh, & Li [56], Güner [16], Gillan et al. [2],
and Ha [12]. In Section 3, the estimation of brand trust adapts and modifies three items from
Dywer et al. [24] and Krishnan [30]. In Section 4, WOM is measured based on Court, Elzinga,
Mulder, & Vetvik [57] and Kim et al. [50]. The final section of the questionnaire accesses
relevant demographic information of survey participants.

3.2. Data Collection

The present study used respondents who understand ESG management and selected a
representative ESG management company in the food service business (e.g., Starbucks
Reusable Cup or Samdasoo Unlabeled, etc.). A pilot test conducted to identify the adequacy of
the measurement by using the data after verifying the constructs of the questionnaires. A
survey was requested from Micro Embrain, which is an online survey company. The survey
was conducted for about a month, beginning in June 2022; 600 responses were distributed,
and 521 participants were selected for the data analysis.
This study conducted frequency analysis of the respondent to identify demographic
characteristics and correlation analysis to assess the strength of the linear relationship
between two variables and compute their association using the IBM 24.0 program. In
addition, the AMOS 22.0 program was employed to conduct confirmatory factor analysis and
verify model fit of the proposed hypotheses.
The current study employed Cronbach’s alpha to estimate the reliability of all
measurements using recommended cut-off point of 0.70, indicating internal consistency [58].
After confirming the internal consistency of the measurements, confirmatory factor analysis
(CFA) was conducted to ensure whether the observed variables reflected the hypothesized
latent constructs using a covariance matrix because the calculation of composite reliability
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 7 of 14

means the measurements’ reliability. In addition, this study verified the convergent and

discriminate validity according to factor loading and average variance extracted (AVE) scores.
After checking the developed research model for measurement, structural equation modeling
(SEM) tested the overall fit of the proposed model and hypotheses.

4. Analysis and Results

Measurement Model
Table 1 shows the demographic information of participants. A total of 600 surveys were
distributed online, and 521 respondents were collected after removing incomplete responses.
The results of demographic characteristics were as follows. The sample was 50.3% (n = 262)
male and 49.7% (n = 259) female. Married consumers were in the majority (63.7%), followed
by single (35.5%), etc. (0.8%). In addition, age groups were similarly investigated (20s: 20.3%,
30s: 20%, 40s: 19.2%, 50s: 19.8%, over 60: 20.7%). The majority of participants were officers
(33.4%), followed by homemakers (15.5%), public officials (14.4%), administrators (9.2%),
service workers (8.1%), students (6.3%), unemployed (5.4%), and personal business owners
(3.6%).
Table 1. Result of Demographic Characteristics (N = 521).
Demographic Characters n %
Male Female 262 50.3
Gender
259 49.7
Single Married 185 35.5
Marital Status 332 63.7
Etc 4 0.8

20–29 106 20.3

30–39 104 20.0
Age 40–49 100 19.2
50–59 103 19.8

Over 60 108 20.7

Officer 174 33.4

Service worker 42 8.1
Administrator 48 9.2
Public Official 75 14.4
Occupation Personal Business 19 3.6
Homemaker 81 15.5

Student 33 6.3

Unemployed 28 5.4

Etc 21 4.0

Total 521 100%

Measurement Model and Discriminant Validity Analysis.

Table 2 shows the measurement items and factor loading. All factor loadings for the
items are equal to or greater than 0.781 and are all significant at the 0.001 level. Cronbach’s
alpha was employed to assess the reliability of the measurements before performing
hierarchical regression. All values exceeded the suggested cut-off of 0.70 (Environmental:
0.900; Social: 0.888; Governance: 0.921; Brand Trust: 0.862; Word of Mouth: 0.894),
demonstrating that internal homogeneity existed among the factors in the present study [59].
Table 3 shows the measurement model and discriminant validity analysis for all
constructs. The results show that the AVE is greater than 0.50 for all constructs
(Environmental: 0.693; Social: 0.663; Governance: 0.708; Brand Trust: 0.682; Word of Mouth:
0.744), and its estimates ensure adequate convergent validity for the items [60,61]. Fornell &
Larcker [61] reported that discriminant validity can be confirmed when each squared
correlation (R2) between a pair of constructs is less than the AVE score for each corresponding
construct. Table 3 shows that all AVE scores (0.663–0.744) were greater than the squared
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 8 of 14

correlation (0.127–0.658), so the discriminant validity was confirmed. Thus, environmental,

social, governance, brand trust, and WOM represent five unique constructs. Last, the
verification of the research model fit index was performed. The absolute and incremental fit
index verification was performed for the suitability verification. First, the CMIN value was
279.605, the df value was 142, and the CMIN/df value was 1.969, indicating that it was a very
suitable criterion. The GFI value was 0.948, and the AGFI value was 0.930, which was
investigated as a very suitable standard, and the RMSEA value was also derived as 0.043.
Hence, the absolute suitability index for this study model was excellent. Second, the
incremental fit index was verified, and all criteria met a very suitable criterion (NFI = 0.964; RFI
= 0.957; IFI = 0.982; TLI = 0.978; CFI = 0.982).
Table 2. Results of Factor Analysis and Validity(N = 521).

Measured Factor Cronbach’s

Factors Estimate S.E t-Value p References
Variable Loading α

Providing eco-friendly 0.822 1

products
0.847 1.06
Effort to save energy 0.046 22.91 ***
0.796 1.01
Environmental Effort for Recycling 0.049 20.676 *** 0.900
Concern about
0.863 1.069 0.046 22.998 ***
environmental protection
compliance with the
0.819 Gillan et al.
employment law 1
Fair trade with partners [2], Ha [12],
Social 0.842 1.023 0.044 23.063 *** 0.888
Güner [16],
Social Return 0.814 0.982 0.045 21.886 ***
and Chang
Community contribution 0.781 0.952 0.046 20.522 *** et al. [56].

Compliance with ethical

0.893 1
guidelines
Compliance with the law 0.82 0.906
0.036 25.377
Ethical management 0.862 0.946 ***
0.033 28.228
Compliance with ethical ***
0.787 0.924
Governance standards 0.039 23.476 *** 0.924
Management in accordance with
0.874 0.985 0.034 29.33 ***
legal standards
Trust Brand 0.852 1 Dywer et al.
Brand Trust Safety Brand 0.807 1.035 0.05 20.545 *** 0.862 [24] and
Honest Brand 0.817 1.019 0.048 21.408 *** Krishnan [30]
Recommendation 0.812 1 Kim et al.
Spoke about this brand more [50] and
0.925 1.109
Word of Mouth frequently 0.045 24.589 *** 0.894 Court et al.
Sharing positive things about this [57]
0.846 0.973
brand with others 0.044 22.222 ***
*** p < 0.001.

Table 3. Result of Discriminant Validity (N = 521).

Constructs
Factors CR Brand Trust Word of
Environmental Social Governance
Mouth
Environmental 0.900 0.693

Social 0.887 0.654 0.663

Governance 0.939 0.548 0.658 0.708

Brand Trust 0.865 0.177 0.173 0.127 0.682

Word of Mouth 0.897 0.139 0.217 0.165 0.513 0.744

Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 9 of 14
2
χ = 279.605, d.f. = 142, CMIN/DF = 1.969, GFI = 0.948, AGFI = 0.930,

NFI = 0.964, RFI = 0.957, IFI = 0.982, TLI = 0.978, CFI = 0.982, RMSEA = 0.043
Note. AVE is bolded and italicized. Squares of paired constructs are on the off-diagonal.

Table 3 shows the main effects of perceived value and service quality on attitudinal
loyalty (AL) and behavioral loyalty (BL) and the moderating effect of service quality (SQ) on the
relationship between perceived value (PV) and AL and BL. This process tested Hypothesis 1a
and 1b. As a result of the first step of hierarchical regression analyses, PV and SQ were
identified as direct influences on both loyalties: AL and BL. In the second step, the results
revealed that the service quality at the water park played a moderating role only in the
relationship between perceived value and AT, thereby only supporting H1a (p < 0.05) (Table 4
and Figure 2).
Table 4. Result of Structural Parameter Estimates (N = 521).
Paths Estimate S.E. t-Value p-Value Results
H 1-1: Environmental → Brand Trust 0.211 0.101 2.099 0.036 * Supported
H 1-2: Environmental → Word of Mouth 0.230 0.112 2.063 0.039 * Supported
H 2-1: Social → Brand Trust 0.518 0.263 1.974 0.048 * Supported
H 2-2: Social → Word of Mouth 0.623 0.297 2.099 0.036 * Supported
H 3-1: Governance → Brand Trust −0.279 0.206 −1.355 0.176 Non Support
H 3-2: Governance → Word of Mouth −0.163 0.230 −0.708 0.479 Non Support
H 4: Brand Trust → Word of Mouth 0.859 0.068 12.649 *** Supported
χ2 = 267.095, d.f. = 141, CMIN/DF = 1.894, GFI = 0.950, AGFI = 0.932, NFI = 0.966, RFI = 0.959, IFI = 0.984, TLI = 0.980,
CFI = 0.984, RMSEA = 0.041. * p < 0.05, *** p <0.001.

Figure 2. Result of Hypotheses Test. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

5.1. Discussion
There is a growing interest in ESG in response to global environmental issues, with ESG
issues being criticized and supported by industry managers, politicians, and academics.
Several studies related to ESG management have been reported in various sectors, such as the
hospitality industry. However, previous research on ESG management has been focused on
the economy [62,63], hotels [64], and airlines [65]. Therefore, the present study is unique in
focusing on food service production sectors, which have scarcely been explored in previous
research.
A summary of this study’s research hypothesis verification results is as follows.
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 10 of 14

First, as a result of the hypothesis testing of the relationship between the three

attributes of ESG and brand trust, the environmental factor (E) (t = 2.099, p < 0.05) and the
social factor (S) (t = 1.974, p < 0.05) have a significant positive (+) effect on brand trust. Prior
research have supported the impact of corporate ESG on brand reliability [66,67], and current
study also demonstrated the relationships between ESG elements and brand trust.
Second, hypothesis testing on the relationship between the three attributes of ESG and
the influence of WOM showed that environmental factors (t = 2.063, p < 0.05) and social
factors (t = 2.098, p < 0.05) were critical antecedents of WOM. These founding have verified
the ESG elements can be critical antecedent WOM [44,68].
Next, verifying the hypothesis between brand trust and WOM, brand trust had a
significant positive (+) effect on WOM (t = 12.649, p < 0.001). These research results are
consistent with the study of Im [66], who reported that eco-friendly management has a
significant positive (+) effect on brand attitude, and Baek [35], who reported that corporate
social contribution activities positively affected trust in the company. These results showed
differences in the variables that directly affect brand trust and WOM among the ESG
attributes recognized by tourists in Jeju Island about Jeju-based food and beverage companies
practicing ESG management. Furthermore, it was confirmed that the value formed by these
food and beverage companies’ ESG management activities could directly affect consumers’
brand trust and WOM intentions.
Although this study shows that corporate governance (G) factors in corporate ESG
management do not directly affect brand trust and WOM intentions, previous studies have
shown that corporate governance (G) promotion strategies and implementation plans are
important to develop the profit and management strategy [69]. By verifying the hypotheses,
therefore, the current study identified a critical relationship between the ESG management
attributes of food and beverage companies and customers’ brand trust and WOM.

5.2. Conclusions
5.2.1. Theoretical Implications
The implications of the results of this study are as follows. First, the study verified the
relationship between brand trust and WOM based on a systematic and logical analysis of the
ESG activities of Jeju-based food and beverage companies that practiced ESG management.
Prior research has already verified the relationships among ESG elements, brand trust and
WOM. Hence, this study has academic originality because it focused on ESG attributes from
the perspective of visitors to tourist areas that value eco-friendliness. In addition, this study
has academic significance in that the ESG management attributes of regional-based food and
beverage companies reaffirmed the value of brand trust and WOM intention perceived by
visitors. In addition, this study verified the causal relationship between ESG management
attributes and brand value. Therefore, the present study theoretically reconfirmed that the
ESG attributes of local food and beverage companies recognized by tourists visiting areas that
value environmental protection are important attributes that can enhance the value of the
corresponding brand.

5.2.2. Managerial Implications

The practical implications of this study are as follows. First, this study confirmed that
environmental factors (E) and social factors (S) among the attributes (Environmental, Social,
Governance) of ESG management performed by companies are variables that directly affect
brand trust and WOM. In this study, environment (E) was measured by active attitude toward
environmental protection, provision of eco-friendly products, energy saving, recycling efforts,
and interest in environmental protection. In other words, positive brand trust and WOM are
positively associated with consumers feeling the company is active in environmental
protection, makes eco-friendly products, and puts effort into energy saving, recycling, and
environmental protection. Therefore, visitors are expected to build trust and positive WOM
intention when a food service company considers environmental protection and ethical
standards for the development of the local community.
In this study, governance (G) factors included the following: compliance with ethical
codes of conduct, compliance with relevant laws, transparent management, compliance with
ethical standards, and management in compliance with relevant laws based on previous
studies. However, these standards are not easy for consumers to recognize ethical
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 11 of 14

management or standards for a specific company, such as compliance with ethical guidelines

or ethical management. Therefore, even if a company operates its business with ethical
standards, it is difficult for consumers to easily recognize this. Accordingly, companies should
make efforts to raise consumer awareness of the ethical management that companies are
practicing and pursuing through various promotional activities to raise consumers’ awareness
of ethical management. In sum, food and beverage companies are expected to achieve
customer satisfaction and brand recommendation by disclosing their business management
process according to legal and ethical norms.
Recently, after the COVID-19 was eased, the number of tourists to Jeju Island has
increased rapidly. A survey reported that tourists who visited Jeju Island about their travel
plans, 74.2% of tourists who preferred food and beverage were the highest. Consumers who
are interest in the food and beverage industry and companies in Jeju Island is continuously
increasing and consumers who are also interested in ESG when they chose a product or
service. Therefore, this study can contribute to provide academic and practical significance in
verifying how companies that practice ESG management in the Jeju region according to
perceived the value and word of mouth of the company.

5.2.3. Limitations and Future Research

In this study, the following research limitations were not overcome. First, the study was
conducted with people who had visited Jeju Island and were aware of the ESG management of
Samdasoo and Starbucks, which are representative companies trying to practice ESG
management in Jeju Island. Therefore, our findings may not generalize to other food and
beverage companies practicing ESG management. In addition, detailed verification that can be
used for marketing, such as verification of differences between groups based on demographic
variables or ESG-related perceived attributes of visitors, was not performed. Therefore, more
diverse studies on the value of ESG management should be conducted.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.-M.L.; Validation, B.-K.L.; Resources, B.-K.L.; Data curation,
G.-K.B.; Writing—original draft, S.-M.L.; Writing—review and editing, G.-K.B.; Visualization, S.-M.L. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Samjung KPMG. The Rise of ESG, What Companies Should Prepare For? Samjung Insight: Gyeonggi-Do, Republic of Korea, 2021.
2. Gillan, S.; Hartzell, J.C.; Koch, A.; Starks, L.T. Firms’ environmental, social and governance (ESG) choices, performance and managerial
motivation. Unpublished Work 2010, 1–43.
3. BlackRock. Sustainability as BlackRock’s New Standard for Investing. 2020. Available online: https://www.blackrock.com/us/
individual/blackrock-client-letter (accessed on 14 January 2020).
4. Koh, H.K.; Burnasheva, R.; Suh, Y.G. Perceived ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) and Consumers’ Responses: The Mediating
Role of Brand Credibility, Brand Image, and Perceived Quality. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4515. [CrossRef]
5. Mervelskemper, L.; Streit, D. Enhancing market valuation of ESG performance: Is integrated reporting keeping its promise? Bus.
Strategy Environ. 2017, 26, 536–549. [CrossRef]
6. Velte, P. Women on management board and ESG performance. J. Global Respon. 2016, 7, 98–109. [CrossRef]
7. Fatemi, A.; Glaum, M.; Kaiser, S. ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure. Glob. Finan. J. 2018, 38, 45–64.
[CrossRef]
8. Jones, T.M. Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Acad. Manag. 1995, 20, 404–437. [CrossRef]
9. Rezaee, Z. Business sustainability research: A theoretical and integrated perspective. J. Account. Lit. 2016, 36, 48–64. [CrossRef]
10. Kang, W.; Jung, M. Effect of ESG activities and firm’s financial characteristics. Korean J. Finan. Stud. 2020, 49, 681–707. [CrossRef]
11. Shin, Y.; Hong, S. The Effect of CSR Activities of Jeju Lodging Companies on Management Performance. J. Tour. Leis. Res. 2021, 33, 249–
266. [CrossRef]
12. Ha, M. Importance of ESG Management in Budget Hotel Perceived by Budget Hotel Customer Influencing Revisit Intention: Moderating
Effect of ESG Recognition level. Master’s Thesis, Department of Hospitality & Tourism Management, The Graduate School Sejong
University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2022.
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 12 of 14
13. Park, A. The Effect of Employees’ Perceptions of ESG Activities of Casino Companies on Organizational Commitment and Customer

Orientation. Master’s Thesis, Department of Tourism Sciences Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2022.
14. Kim, K.; Kim, Y. A Study of the Improvement plans of related to Environmental Factors(E) of ESG—Focused on Information Disclosure
and Tax Regulations. Environ. Law and Policy 2021, 27, 55–91. [CrossRef]
15. Kim, S.; Kim, J.; Roh, T. Who eases fiscal downturn from greenhouse gas emissions? Moderating role of corporate governance. Acad.
Manag. Annu. Meet. Proc. 2016, 2016, 15812. [CrossRef]
16. Güner, S. Evaluation of the evolution of green management with a Kuhnian perspective. Bus. Res. 2018, 11, 309–328. [CrossRef]
17. Kim, T.; Kim, R.; Huh, J. The Influence of ESG Management on Financial Performance: The Mediation Effect of Customer Satisfaction. J.
CEO Manag. Stud. 2022, 25, 159–176. [CrossRef]
18. Quak, S.; Heilbron, J.; van der Veen, R. Has globalization eroded firms’ responsibility for their employees? A sociological analysis of
transnational firms’ corporate social responsibility policies concerning their employees in The Netherlands, 1980–2010. Bus. Politics
2012, 14, 1–21. [CrossRef]
19. Mitra, A.W.; Anas, E.P. Impact of ESG/Corporate Social Responsibility on Company Performance Before and During Covid 19 Crisis:
Study of Listed Companies in Indonesia. Int. J. Bus. Tech. Manag. 2021, 3, 143–155.
20. Lee, C. The Effect of Golf Course Company’s ESG Management Activities on Corporate Image and Usage Intention. Master’s Thesis,
Department of Tourism Sciences Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2022.
21. Moon, J.; Tang, R.; Lee, W.S. Antecedents and consequences of Starbucks’ environmental, social and governance (ESG)
implementation. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour. 2022, 1–23. [CrossRef]
22. Delgado-Ballester, E.; Munuera-Alemán, J.L. Does brand trust matter to brand equity? J. Prod. Brand Manag. 2005, 14, 187–196.
[CrossRef]
23. Deutsch, M. The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 1973.
24. Dwyer, F.R.; Schurr, P.H.; Oh, S. Developing buyer-seller relationships. J. Mark. 1987, 51, 11–27. [CrossRef]
25. Kumar, N.; Scheer, L.K.; Steenkamp, J.B.E. The effects of supplier fairness on vulnerable resellers. J. Mark. Res. 1995, 32, 54–65.
[CrossRef]
26. Tseng, S.; Fogg, B.J. Credibility and computing technology. Comm. ACM 1999, 42, 39–44. [CrossRef]
27. Uh, K. The influence of corporate image of financial institution on brand attitude, brand trust, and brand loyalty: Focusing on the
moderating effect on brand public utility. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Business Administration Graduate School of Konkuk University,
Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2013.
28. Delgado-Ballester, E.; Munuera-Alemán, J.L. Brand trust in the context of consumer loyalty. Eur. J. Mark. 2001, 35, 1238–1258.
[CrossRef]
29. Keller, K.L. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity. J. Mark. 1993, 57, 1–22. [CrossRef]
30. Krishnan, H.S. Characteristics of memory associations: A consumer-based brand equity perspective. Int. J. Res. Mark. 1996, 13, 389–
405. [CrossRef]
31. Garbarino, E.; Johnson, M.S. The different roles of satisfaction, trust, and commitment in customer relationships. J. Mark. 1999, 63,
70–87. [CrossRef]
32. Swan, J.E.; Nolan, J.J. Gaining customer trust: A conceptual guide for the salesperson. J. Person. Sell. Sales Manag. 1985, 5, 39–48.
33. Morgan, R.M.; Hunt, S.D. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. J. Mark. 1994, 58, 20–38. [CrossRef]
34. Gefen, D. Customer loyalty in e-commerce. J. Assoc. Inform. Sys. 2002, 3, 2. [CrossRef]
35. Baek, S. A study on Relations among Social Contribution Activities, Business Confidence, Brand Image, and Intention to Pay a Premium
Price in Food Companies. Master’s Thesis, Department of Culinary Science & Food Service Management Graduate School of Tourism
Kyunghee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2021.
36. Huo, C.; Hameed, J.; Zhang, M.; Bin Mohd Ali, A.F.; Amri Nik Hashim, N.A. Modeling the impact of corporate social responsibility on
sustainable purchase intentions: Insights into brand trust and brand loyalty. Econ. Res. Ekon. Istraživanja 2022, 35, 4710–4739.
[CrossRef]
37. Lim, W.; Kim, H. The Effect of the Environment-friendly Service Quality of the Golf Resort on Visitor’s Image, Satisfaction, Word-of-
mouth Intentions and the Revisit. Korean J. Phys. Edu. 2006, 45, 167–176.
38. Van Anh, T. The Impact of ESG on Vietnamese Consumers’ Intention of Purchase and Recommendation. Master’s Thesis, Graduate
School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2022.
39. Majerova, J.; Sroka, W.; Krizanova, A.; Gajanova, L.; Lazaroiu, G.; Nadanyiova, M. Sustainable brand management of alimentary goods.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 556. [CrossRef]
40. Smith, A.; Machova, V. Consumer Tastes, Sentiments, Attitudes, and Behaviors Related to COVID-19. Anal. Metaphys. 2021, 20, 145–
158.
41. Lăzăroiu, G.; Neguri¸tă, O.; Grecu, I.; Grecu, G.; Mitran, P.C. Consumers’ decision-making process on social commerce platforms: Online
trust, perceived risk, and purchase intentions. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 890. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Steffes, E.; Burgee, L. Social ties and online word of mouth. Internet Res. 2009, 19, 42–59. [CrossRef]
43. Lee, Y.L.; Song, S. An empirical investigation of electronic word-of-mouth: Informational motive and corporate response strategy.
Comput. Hum. Behav. 2010, 26, 1073–1080. [CrossRef]
44. de Colaço Valarinho, F.J.A. Negative Electronic Word-Of-Mouth (NWOM): How to Avoid and Respond to Negative Online Feedback.
Ph.D. Thesis, ISCTE-Instituto Universitario de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal, 2021.
45. Goldsmith, R.E.; Horowitz, D. Measuring motivations for online opinion seeking. J. Interact. Advert. 2006, 6, 2–14. [CrossRef]
46. Hennig-Thurau, T.; Gwinner, K.P.; Walsh, G.; Gremler, D.D. Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: What motivates
consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 38–52. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2023, 14, 2348 13 of 14
47. Kim, H.; Choi, M.; Kim, B. Effect of the Perceived Fit on the Word of Mouth Intention for CSR—Motivation Inference and Authenticity

as Mediators. Advert. Res. 2017, 38–74. [CrossRef]

48. Park, J.; Lee, Y.; Yoo, W.; Hyun, H. The Effects of Cause-Related Marketing on Consumer Evaluation and Purchase Intention.
J. Prod. Res. 2017, 35, 1–11. [CrossRef]
49. Park, E. The Effect of Fit of Corporate CSR Activities on Corporate Attitudes and Word of Mouth Intention—Focusing on Persuasion
Knowledge Model. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Communication & Advertising, Graduate School, Dong Eui University, Busan, Republic
of Korea, 2018.
50. Kim, C.; Jeong, O.; Park, C. Effects of Consumer Evaluation of ESG for Food Subscription Services on Intention to Word-of-Mouth and
Continuous Usage: Moderating Role of Altruism. J. Channel Retail. 2022, 27, 67–91. [CrossRef]
51. Lee, T.M. The effects of brand trust and brand affect on brand word of mouth and brand loyalty: Focused on the moderating effect of
mobile SNS intensity. e-Bus. Assoc. 2015, 16, 121–144.
52. Lee, S.; Min, D. The Effect of Brand Authenticity on WOM and Purchase Intention: Mediating Role of Effort Saving and Brand Trust.
Korean Manag. Rev. 2016, 45, 1279–1307. [CrossRef]
53. Lee, J.Y.; Kim, K.W.; Kim, G.S. A Study on the Effect of Airline Brand Evidence on Brand Value, Brand Trust, Brand Attitude, and Word-
of-mouth Intention. J. Converg. Inform. Tech. 2019, 9, 71–80.
54. Bae, I.H. A study of relationship of restaurants with the perceived risk and brand trust, brand value and word of mouth: Focused on
popular chain restaurant on the web. Culin. Sci. Hosp. Res. 2019, 25, 151–158.
55. Yu, K. A Study on the Relationship between Brand Authenticity, Brand Trust, Customer Satisfaction and WOM Intention in Coffee
Chains. Master’s Thesis, Hotel Tourist Leisure Graduate School of Dongguk University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2019.
56. Chang, T.W.; Yeh, Y.L.; Li, H.X. How to shape an organization’s sustainable green management performance: The mediation effect of
environmental corporate social responsibility. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9198. [CrossRef]
57. Court, D.; Elzinga, D.; Mulder, S.; Vetvik, O.J. The consumer decision journey. McKinsey Q. 2009, 3, 96–107.
58. Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L.; Black, W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed.; Prentice Hall: New York, NY, USA, 1998.
59. Nunnally, J.C. An overview of psychological measurement. In Clinical Diagnosis of Mental Disorders; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 1978; pp. 97–146.
60. Bagozzi, R.P.; Yi, Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 1988, 16, 74–94. [CrossRef]
61. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. J.
Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39–50. [CrossRef]
62. Ionescu, G.H.; Firoiu, D.; Pirvu, R.; Vilag, R.D. The impact of ESG factors on market value of companies from travel and tourism
industry. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 2019, 25, 820–849. [CrossRef]
63. Tarmuji, I.; Maelah, R.; Tarmuji, N.H. The impact of environmental, social and governance practices (ESG) on economic performance:
Evidence from ESG score. Int. J. Trade Econ. Financ. 2016, 7, 67. [CrossRef]
64. Bae, J.H. Developing ESG Evaluation Guidelines for the Tourism Sector: With a Focus on the Hotel Industry. Sustainability 2022, 14,
16474. [CrossRef]
65. Chen, C.D.; Su, C.H.J.; Chen, M.H. Understanding how ESG-focused airlines reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on stock
returns. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2022, 102, 102229. [CrossRef]
66. Im, H. The Impact of Airline ESG Management on Brand Attitude, Trust and Loyalty: Focused on Eco-friendly Management and CSR.
Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Tourism Sciences The Graduate School of Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2022.
67. Ryu, M. The Impact of ESG Activities of Sports Brands on Consumers’ Self-determination, Voluntary Behavioral Intention, Brand Image,
and Brand Trust. Korean J. Sport. 2022, 20, 79–89. [CrossRef]
68. Guerreiro, J.; Pacheco, M. How green trust, consumer brand engagement and green word-of-mouth mediate purchasing intentions.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 7877. [CrossRef]
69. Sohn, S.; Kim, Y.; Lee, S. Strategy of Public Organization on Governance of ESG: Focusing on KOTRA’s Governance Strategy.
J. Korea Serv. Manag. Soc. 2021, 22, 159–183. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and
contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property
resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further
reproduction prohibited without permission.