The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1757-4323.htm

Development and validation Development

and validation
of scale to measure of scale

responsible consumption
Vijay Kumar Jain and Aditi Dahiya
Department of Management, DIT University, Dehradun, India
Received 28 December 2020
Vikas Tyagi Revised 18 May 2021
School of Business Studies, Himgiri Zee University, Dehradun, India, and 14 August 2021
21 April 2022
Preeti Sharma 8 May 2022
Accepted 10 May 2022
Department of Management, DIT University, Dehradun, India

Abstract
Purpose – The objective of this paper is to identify dimensions of responsible consumption from consumer
perspective and develop a reliable and valid measurement scale.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper has employed mixed methodology to develop items for
responsible consumption. In first phase, experts’ interviews were carried out to unearth the dimensions of
responsible consumption. In second phase, quantitative survey was carried out to among consumers to
measure their response. This was done using five-point Likert scale. The reliability and validity were ensured
through empirical data online. Structural equation modeling was used to test the structural model.
Findings – The result showed that consumer perception of responsible consumption consists of five
dimensions (Rationality, Sustainable Consumption, Local Consumption, Ethical Consumption and
Minimalism). The result also showed strong relationship among satisfaction and responsible consumption
dimensions.
Practical implications – It will help policymakers to measure and promote responsible consumption thereby
improving environmental performance and reducing carbon footprint.
Originality/value – This is the first study to develop valid and reliable instrument for responsible
consumption. The findings will have several implications both theoretical and practical for policymakers and
society.
Keywords SEM, Rationality, Ethical consumption, Minimalism, Responsible consumption, Local
consumption
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The availability of natural resources, including materials, water and fertile land, are the main
reasons for the existence of human beings on the planet (Abdel-Shafy and Mansour, 2018).
The exploitation of resources has cost us very much and is reflected in the form of climate
change, shrinking water and forest reserves, loss of many species and corrosion of fertile land
(Barange et al., 2018). The perpetual use of these resources at the current rate may deprive
future generations of the resources that we are blessed with. The mounting consumption is
posing a serious menace to the environment (Tseng et al., 2013).
The current consumption pattern needs resources 10 times more than what it used to
require 30 years ago, at around 60 billion tons of raw material every year (Giljum et al., 2009). If
consumption goes by the current rate, the extraction of resources would reach a whopping 100
billion tons by 2030. Every year, an estimated one-third of all food produced that is 1.3 billion
tons’ worth about $1 trillion rots in consumers’ and retailers’ bins or spoils due to inadequate
transportation and harvesting practices. If the world’s population grows to 9.6 billion people Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
Administration
by 2050, nearly three worlds will be required to provide the natural resources required to © Emerald Publishing Limited
1757-4323
maintain current lifestyles (Tseng et al., 2013). The deteriorating environment and fast DOI 10.1108/APJBA-12-2020-0460
APJBA depleting resources, therefore, necessitates the need for new consumption practices. The
importance of responsible consumption can be understood from the fact that it has been
included among one of the 17th goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Therefore, responsible consumption cannot be separated from the sustainable development
goal defined by the United Nations, as this will help in attaining sustainable development in the
long run. The growing population along with rapid industrialization in developing countries
like India, China, Brazil and in other parts of the world have increased the demand manifold for
resources and put a burden on already stressed resources. As Asia accounted for 59.51% of the
global population in 2020, therefore, the responsible consumption issue becomes more relevant
in the Asian context. There have been numerous studies on sustainable consumption,
environmental-friendly consumption, green consumption, and socially responsible
consumption (SRC), but very few studies have been done on responsible consumption
(Sudbury-Riley and Kohlbacher, 2016; Fischer et al., 2017; Bhatia and Jain, 2017; Marde and
Verite-Masserot, 2018; Quoquab et al., 2019). All previous studies have developed scales to
measure environment-friendly consumer behavior, green consumption (Marde and Verite-
Masserot, 2018), SRC (Tseng et al., 2013), sustainable consumption (Quoquab et al., 2019) and
ethical consumption, but yet there is no instrument has been developed yet to measure
responsible consumption. Responsible consumption is different from green consumption,
sustainable consumption and environmental-friendly consumption. Therefore, it requires a
new instrument of measurement. The present study’s objective is to develop instruments to
measure responsible consumption. The findings of the study will contribute to measuring and
encouraging responsible consumption, which will help in saving valuable resources, reducing
carbon footprint, thereby improving environmental performance. Further, minimalism has
emerged as the most important predictor of consumer satisfaction. This is relevant for all
companies, as customer satisfaction is coveted by all organizations and is the hallmark of their
success. Therefore, all companies must emphasize the philosophy of minimalism and educate
consumers about its future repercussions.

2. Conceptual framework
2.1 The responsible consumption concept
The term responsible consumption is innate out of the grassroots social movement that was
started as a protest movement and alternative culture (Wagner, 1960). It emerged as a result
of social movements and solidarity and fair trade in the year 1960. Thereafter, Fisk (1973) has
defined it formally as the rational and efficient use of resources. Responsible consumption is
about conscious and judicious consumption of resources which tries to negate environmental
impact by preventing environmental degradation. It is also defined as being aware of their
spending habits and changing them and choosing socially and environmentally ethical
purchases.
The role of signaling theory, identity signaling and social signaling is crucial in
conceptualizing responsible consumption. The ability of a customer to share information
about themselves with others through measurable socially responsible (SR) consumption
behavior is conceptualized as social signaling for SRC. More specifically, Berger (2017) claims
that people who participate in public acts of social responsibility action are seen as
trustworthy and cooperative. SR products are known to convey a high symbolic value and
are typically consumed by people who want to present themselves to others in a positive way
(Zabkar and Hosta, 2013). SR products are an important element of responsible consumption
as it advocates consumption of green and sustainable goods. Further, self-signaling is
derived from behaviors, specifically consumption (Quattrone and Tversky, 1984). Individuals
indulge in eating to bolster their sense of self (Lisjak et al., 2014). Both social signaling and
self-signaling capacity are used to evaluate corporate social responsibility (CSR) related
items. Individuals indulge in SR activities when social incentives are absent. One of the Development
critical factors in how status motivations affect purchasing decisions, according to costly and validation
signaling theory, is the degree to which the purchase is public versus private (Griskevicius
et al., 2010). The above definition of responsible consumption leads to the inference that
of scale
environmental, ethical, societal concerns and rationality are dimensions of responsible
consumption (Figure 1).

3. Specifying the domain of responsible consumption

Understanding dimensions is the first step toward the development of a measurement scale.
One step in this is going through literature (Churchill, 1979). Extensive literature reviews
have been carried out to understand the dimension of responsible consumption. Focus groups
and personal interviews were also conducted to understand the dimensions of responsible
consumption and for the generation of items for scale.

3.1 Rational consumption

Man is a rational animal, and it is assumed that he makes rational choices or rational
behavior. Rational behavior implies a decision-making process that is grounded in making
choices that result in the optimization of utility for an individual (Schiliro, 2018). The
assumption behind this behavior is that people would prefer decisions that would create more
utility for them than harm. According to economic theories, all individuals taking part in the
exchange process behave rationally. Rationality in consumption plays a significant role, as it
may help people cut down on unnecessary and wasteful consumption (Aldridge, 1994). It can
also be defined in terms of economic consumption (Frederiks et al., 2015). People need to be
economical in consumption along with being rational. People consume excess due to social
pressure or make unnecessary consumption (Zukin and Maguire, 2004). This happens
especially in the case of conspicuous consumption, where consumption is not aimed at
satisfying needs but for other purposes. The resources that we use flood Earth with chemical
waste, landfill mountains and carbon emissions that inch Earth toward disaster.
It is estimated that around one-third of the world’s food is wasted every year (Amato et al.,
2021) The reduction of food loss would improve land use efficiency and better water
management, which would have a positive impact on climate change and livelihoods (Shukla
et al., 2019). This wastage can be minimized by consumers who consume goods judiciously.

Figure 1.
Framework to
understand
responsible
consumption
APJBA Rationality and economy in consumption will curtail unnecessary consumption on the part of
consumers and improve the saving of resources and the environment. Janssen et al. (2021)
focuses on consumers and changing their attitudes, behavior, consumption and spending
habits related to food. There is an urgent need to economize the resources consumption and
level of pollution in everyday lives. Sustainable consumption is the only way to meet these
objectives (Mont and Plepys, 2008; Vergragt et al., 2014). Rationality, being the core element of
responsible consumption, aims at making rational use of resources and is therefore deemed as
an important element of responsible consumption.

3.2 Sustainable consumption

Sustainable consumption is described as consumption that has a low environmental impact,
is economically feasible and equitable, while meeting the needs of people all over the world
(Phang et al., 2021). Sustainable consumption aims at doing well with fewer resources and
improves welfare gains from economic activities by minimizing resource usage,
environmental degradation and population across the whole lifecycle while improving the
quality of life. All environmental problems, including climate change, depletion of resources,
disturbing biodiversity and polluted air, today are associated with our consumption and
production patterns. The purchase of goods and services by us impacts the environment
during their life cycle in manufacturing and when they are recycled and disposed of as waste
(Gupta et al., 2020). Our purchasing habits and how much we consume have an influence on
the environment (Dhanda and Hill, 2007). The change in consumption patterns like energy
consumption and transport may drastically reduce the emission of gases sustainably (Shukla
et al., 2019).
The existing consumption patterns in developed countries are not sustainable and often
result in over consumption of resources (Lorek and Vergragt, 2015). The current lifestyles are
posing a new challenge to sustainability and endangering society over the years. The
consumption of goods and services by the global population in the last 50 years is higher than
the total consumption by previous generations in the same period. This is reflected in the
form of economic growth, environmental degradation, and has led to an improvement in the
quality of life (Streimikiene, 2015). Since sustainable consumption is the consumption of
goods and services which are environmentally friendly and made of recycled goods,
therefore, it is considered being part of responsible consumption.

3.3 Local consumption

Globalization has facilitated the interconnectedness between people and places across the
globe through the market, the flow of goods and services and labor (Amir et al., 2016). Due to
this, goods made in one country can be consumed in another country far from the point of
manufacturing. But recently, people have coined a new concept called local consumption,
which advocates shrinking the distance between manufacturing and points of consumption
(Hubacek et al., 2016). Consumption in smaller regions minimizes the distance between food
supply chain stages and enhances the chances of potential environmental and social effects
relying on proximity (Schonhart et al., 2009). Local consumption is the purchase and
consumption of goods made in the vicinity of a local area. Consuming goods which are made
locally, offer several advantages to the economy and society (Bianchi and Mortimer, 2015). It
helps the local economy to grow and create jobs in the community, and helps local producers
gain. The benefits of this for the market are reflected in the form of gaps for smaller
competitors, which further results in a better outcome, lowering of prices and wide
accessibility for consumers (Heda et al., 2017).
Local consumption has an environmental aspect also as promoting local consumption
leads to energy saving and a drop in greenhouse gas emissions (Blake, 2019). The
transportation of goods is minimized due to cuts in distance, which further cuts down Development
emissions and reduces the cost of final products. It further removes the need for packaging, as and validation
less packaging is needed to ferry the goods. Since local consumption contributes to improving
the environment and reduces greenhouse gasses, therefore, it contributes toward responsible
of scale
consumption. Thus, consumption of locally made goods is regarded as responsible
consumption.

3.4 Ethical consumption

Ethical consumption is defined as consumption that promotes positive buying. It is about
buying products made ethically and boycotting products made violating ethical standards
(Hosta and Zabkar, 2016). Consumers opt for negative voting or avoid purchasing products
from companies disrespecting moral standards. Fair trade, being a subset of ethical
consumption, aims to promote responsible consumption and offer shoppers by providing
socially and environmental-friendly products (Raynolds, 2012). Fair trade is a regulatory
system that puts social and environmental standards in production globally. Being an
emerging concept, it attempts to regulate the market socially in the food sector. Many
provisions have been made in the form of certification, codes and guidelines to govern
production systems globally, but fair trade establishes a link between labor, community and
environmental concerns, particularly in food items (Brown and Vergragt, 2016).
The fair exchange of goods is an important issue between producers and retailers.
Consumers in developed countries are looking for products that are ethically manufactured.
The share of ethical products has increased in the last two decades (Carrigan and De
Pelsmacker, 2009). Ethical consumption is also gaining importance in developed countries.
Consumers prefer to pay an extra amount of money for products that are certified as ethically
made (Laroche et al., 2001). The improvement in environmental and employment conditions
can satisfy the consumer demand for social responsibility (Gupta et al., 2020). The perception
of products complying with fair trade standards motivates or serves as a strong incentive for
consumers to behave responsibly. The consumers’ preference for fair trade products has led
to increased sales of these products by 30% annually. All major brands across the globe are
using private standards to reduce their risk and distinguish themselves from competitors.
Private standards provide consumers information about products’ compliance regarding
health and safety, environmental and labor conditions, which manufacturers have followed
during production (Nadvi, 2008). The progress of fair-trade products in categories like the
ground coffee segment, the banana segment, the roast coffee segment and the tea market in
Germany (2.5%), shows consumer liking for these products (Moore, 2004). Ethical
consumption is associated with sustainability and responsible consumption.

3.5 Minimalism
Minimalism is defined as a low consumption lifestyle where people intentionally try to live
with fewer possessions (Lloyd and Pennington, 2020). Minimalism is a lifestyle that is
regarded as an anti-consumerist approach, combined with the demand for seeking meaning
in life by means other than consumerism-oriented attitudes (Dopierala, 2017). Minimalism’s
core idea is that less is more, and that owning less allows you to achieve more in non-material
elements of life (Lloyd and Pennington, 2020). The transformation of life, as suggested by
minimalism, starts with understanding what is unnecessary in life and getting rid of or
limiting and reducing dependency on such things. The main dimension that defines
minimalism is an attitude toward consumption.
Some researchers have described minimalism as an example of an anti-consumerist protest
or a reaction to the overabundance of excessive consumption (Blonski and Witek, 2019).
Minimalism helps individuals to achieve balance and better quality in everyday life. The
APJBA possession of things necessary for living and skillful management is the goal of minimalism.
Discarding items which are non-functional and unused and the retention of only necessary
things is minimalism. A minimalist lifestyle asks consumers to consume less. Adopting
minimalism as a way of life is tied to sustainability. It is less about goods and more about the
community. When consumers buy and consume something, then the cost of consumption is not
borne by the consumer or manufacturer but by the environment and our communities. The
social power of the community is the strength of minimalism. People can resort to minimalism
by sharing goods (Lloyd and Pennington, 2020). For example, the impact on our carbon
footprint of sharing a lawnmower with neighbors’ is less about buying fewer lawn mowers and
more about building social connections that help close the inequality gap, which over time will
reduce our need and desire for stuff. Minimalism is really about community, equality and
happiness. As a result, we will inevitably live a more sustainable life. Another contribution of
minimalism to sustainability is the use of only what is necessary and the avoidance of
unnecessary possessions. Minimalism helps people meet this expectation by buying less. Based
on the above literature, minimalism is regarded as an important element of responsible
consumption.

4. Method
4.1 Item generation
This research has surfaced more than 41 items with the help of an existing literature review
(Sudbury-Riley and Kohlbacher, 2016; Fischer et al., 2017; Bhatia and Jain, 2017; Marde and
Verite-Masserot, 2018; Quoquab et al., 2019). Five focus group interviews were carried out,
which consisted of 10 members each. A total of 10 in-depth interviews were also conducted.
Judgmental sampling was used to sample respondents for interviews. This was done to
ensure the appropriateness of the wording of items and eliminate ambiguity in the items. The
focus group was carried out for one hour. The questions were asked related to five dimensions
of responsible consumption: sustainable consumption, ethical consumption, local
consumption, rationality and minimalism. Respondents were asked to express their
feelings on responsible consumption and what, in their opinion, constitutes responsible
consumption. They were further asked to think about their last purchase and relate it to
responsible consumption in terms of saving of resources, recycling of goods and
environmental improvement of their purchasing. A total of 41 items were uncovered
through literature and interviews. A total of 10 environmental science faculty and Ph.D.
students in the sustainability area validated these 41 statements. These faculties were
domain experts and had good knowledge of the subject. The rationale for inclusion of PhD
scholars working in the same areas was that they are abreast of current research and
developments in the responsible consumption area. They assigned the items to one of the five
categories of responsible consumption after reading the items. Some items were not assigned
to any of the categories, and they were further eliminated from the pool of items. A scale was
used to judge the appropriateness of items consisting of 1 5 representative; 2 5 somewhat
representative, and 3 5 not representative at all. Only those items were retained, which three
judges regarded as clearly representative, and that the fourth judge rated as somewhat
representative. In total, 10 items were removed through this process.
A qualitative research approach for this study was chosen because qualitative methods
are especially useful in discovering the meaning that people attach to responsible
consumption and give researchers more flexibility to explore the concept in depth. For
interviews, participants were reminded of the study’s intent, research protocols, anticipated
benefits; their right to withdraw from the study at any time, and confidentiality security as a
first step in the interview process. The researcher described himself as a researcher in order to
establish a good rapport with respondents and demonstrate familiarity with the subject
(Creswell, 1994). The interviews were audio-recorded with participant permission to ensure a Development
full transcript (Merriam, 1998; Rubin and Rubin, 1995). During all interviews, typed notes and validation
were taken, allowing the researcher to keep track of key points, to refer to later in the
interview and for data analysis. To carry on conversations that would elicit rich data, a semi-
of scale
structured interview technique was used. Participants in semi-structured interviews have
more freedom to react in terms of what is relevant to them and to monitor the introduction and
flow of topics. The interview protocol (Appendix) was provided to participants about a week
before their scheduled interview so that they could think about and plan their responses.
Interview transcripts were re-read multiple times in order to look for recurring regularities
(Merriam, 1998). The data collected from the personal interviews and focus groups were
analyzed using content analysis. Text analysis is a systematic technique for gathering and
organizing a vast volume of text into recognizable and distinct content categories that can
then be analyzed for desired outcomes. The authors drew replicable and true inferences by
concentrating on the material and content. The authors read the published text from the
interview many times to get a clear picture of the content. The individual text was then
categorized into coherent sentences and paragraphs as part of the process. The structures
were then categorized, coded and sorted into major themes using N-VIVO. Data triangulation
has been used to establish the credibility of qualitative data. As research progressed and new
information became available, steps were taken to verify each piece of data with at least one
other source. Using a second source or process may result in more precise, thorough and
objective results. To ensure the reliability of this report, interviews and field notes were
compared.

4.2 Item purification

To know the structure of the factor of responsible consumption and further purify the
measurement tool, a questionnaire approach was adopted by this research. An email message
explaining the purpose of the research, along with the questionnaire, was sent to respondents.
People were invited to participate in the survey by filling out an e-questionnaire. E-mail
surveys make data collection more efficient and convenient. Data has been collected from
respondents across major cities including Dehradun, Delhi, Chennai and Bangalore. These
cities were chosen as literacy is high in these cities and people have a good understanding of
environmental and sustainability-related issues. A total of 1,000 respondents were
approached. Finally, 382 responses were received, which were used in the study.
The corrected item-to-total correlation along with item correlation was tested for each item
indicating responsible consumption first in the study. The item-total correlation test is used in
psychometrics to create a useful single quantity for each individual that can be used to
compare that individual to others in a given population when a number of tests or questions
are given to an individual. All items had corrected items to a total correlation above 0.5.
Therefore, they all were retained for further analysis. In addition to this, exploratory factor
analysis was carried out to evaluate the items taken on the scale. Data set was randomly
divided into two equal parts. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was carried out using the first
data set and CFA using the second data set. Items having loadings less than 0.50 were
removed from the analysis and items with cross-loadings of more than 0.40 were also deleted
from the analysis. A total of nine items were deleted due to low loadings.
The first factor sustainable consumption (Table 2) consists of five items and explains 36.34%
of the variance. This factor consists of recycling goods, the longevity of resources and
environmental improvement. Recycling of goods is an important consideration when consumers
buy goods and finally dispose of it upon its usage. Sustainable products contribute toward
environmental improvement and help the longevity of resources through resource efficiency and
removing wastage of resources. Raynolds (2012) has revealed that recycling of goods and
APJBA environmental improvement is an important dimension of responsible consumption. Reducing
environmental harm is the core element of sustainable and responsible consumption.
The second factor rationality explains around 15.42% of the variance in responsible
consumption. It contains five items that advocate for economy and rationality in consumption
practices. Rational consumption is mindfully consuming resources. It is about being
thoughtful about consumption. Rationality is the pillar of responsible consumption and
highlights the need for consuming resources in a logical way (Fisk, 1973). The second
important element of rationality is the economy of consumption. Often, people consume more
than what is required, which leads to either over consumption or wastage of resources.
Economic consumption can improve and optimize consumption practices and help
consumers behave responsibly (Sadollah et al., 2020).
The third factor is local consumption and explains the 7.13% variance in responsible
consumption. This factor has four items which are about priority to local consumption,
packaging requirement, reduction in environmental pollution and improvement to the local
economy. Local consumption removes the need for long-distance transportation and helps in
saving resources. It also benefits the environment by removing the need for packing and fuel
to transport the items. Ethical consumption is the fourth factor which explains 11.26% of the
variance in responsible consumption. It contains four items and consists of ethical buying,
compliance with labor and environmental regulations. Responsible consumption favor
ethically made goods and promotes goods carrying fair trade or ethically made certifications.
Ethical certifications help consumers to buy goods that are made complying with all ethical
standards (Raynolds, 2012). Goods which are manufactured with full environmental and
labor regulations affect consumer purchase decisions. The fifth factor is minimalism (Table 2)
and explains 6.85% of the variance in responsible consumption. It is composed of four items.
The items of this factor reflect living with less, a sense of importance in life, cutting down on
unnecessary consumption and sustainable goods. Simple living is emerging as a new normal
and is causing people to behave responsibly. The important element of minimalism is
developing a sense of important things in life and doing away with unnecessary things in life.

5. Results
The demographic information shows that 200 (52%) were male participants out of a total of
382 respondents (Table 1). The majority of respondents were from the 30–40 age category.
Table 2 shows the results of EFA with Promax rotation on the responsible consumption data
set (N 5 191). The analysis revealed that a total of five factors were extracted and accounted
for 77% of the variance. The first factor, which is sustainable consumption, accounted for
36.34% of the variance. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin was 0.88 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity
was significant (Chi Square 5 3,205, df 5 231, p < 0.001). This indicates that the sample is
adequate for performing factor analysis.

Categories N %

Gender Male 200 52

Female 182 48
Education PhD 48 13
Post Graduate 155 41
Graduate 179 47
Income 20,000–40,000 50 13
Table 1. 41,000–60,000 100 26
Demographic 60,000–80,000 168 44
summary 80,000 Above 64 17
 Internal
Factor Factor consistency Average
loading loading Eigenvalue % Cronbach’s Composite variance
Factors Items (EFA) (CFA) (λ) Variance alpha Reliability Extracted

Sustainable The adoption of sustainable 0.671 0.79 8.00 36.34 0.901 0.903 0.652
consumption products improves the
environment
It minimizes the burden on the 0.664 0.712
resources
It improves the longevity of 0.658 0.767
resources
It contributes to the recycling of 0.638 0.864
goods
It cut down the wastage of 0.635 0.892
resources
Consumers must behave 0.634 0.88
rationally
Rationality Consuming economically is 0.642 0.75 3.39 15.42 0.918 0.920 0.699
synonymous to behaving
rationally
Economical consumption is a 0.695 0.844
step toward rationality
Rationality emphasis on 0.673 0.889
conscious consumption
Reducing wastage would help 0.670 0.838
people to act rationally
It promotes ethical buying 0.656 0.882

(continued )
Development

properties of
of scale
and validation

consumption scale
Table 2.

responsible
Psychometric
 Table 2.
APJBA
Internal
Factor Factor consistency Average
loading loading Eigenvalue % Cronbach’s Composite variance
Factors Items (EFA) (CFA) (λ) Variance alpha Reliability Extracted

Ethical It is about boycotting products 0.620 0.901 2.48 11.26 0.902 0.906 0.707
consumption made that violate ethical
standards
Fair trade certification motivates 0.667 0.841
consumers to buy ethical
products
It follows all environmental 0.701 0.73
compliances
Local It reduces environmental 0.790 0.887 1.57 7.13 0.905 0.912 0.723
consumption pollution by reducing
transportation
It removes the packaging 0.596 0.874
requirement
Local consumption must be 0.650 0.85
given priority
It contributes to the 0.683 0.786
improvement of the local
economy
Minimalism It promotes living with less 0.709 0.826 1.51 6.85 0.870 0.872 0.632
It propagates a sense of what is 0.697 0.892
important in life is essential
It saves valuable resources by 0.589 0.727
cutting down unnecessary
consumption
It helps consumers to behave 0.598 0.722
sustainably
CFA was carried out to assess the dimensionality of the constructs using Amos 21.00 (Sharif Development
et al., 2018) on the second data set (N 5 191) to confirm and validate the structure that and validation
emerged in EFA. The results of CFA confirm 22 items and five dimensions of scale (Chi
Square 5 363(54); GFI 5 0.857; CFI 5 0.945; NFI 5 0.887; AGFI 5 0.819; RMR 5 0.034;
of scale
RMSEA 5 0.066). The study has also assessed the reliability of each construct using AVE
and CR. The result proves that all constructs have a good reliability, as CR for all constructs is
more than 0.7 and AVE values are more than recommended value 0.5. This does not require
the need for the deletion of any item from the study.
The instrument has been examined for Nomo-logical validity also (Figure 2). This measure
of validity is used to test whether the instrument behaves with theoretically related
constructs in a way that it is supposed to relate (She et al., 2021). The degree to which a
summated scale accurately predicts other concepts in a theoretically dependent model is
referred to as Nomo-logical validity. The researcher must first determine if the scale has
corresponding relationships based on theoretically supported relationships from prior
research or agreed principles. To establish Nomo-logical validity, data were collected from
382 respondents. This study has replicated the same data that were collected in study 2.
Concerning Nomo-logical validity, responsible consumption is said to have a positive impact
on the consumer and people feel satisfied after behaving responsibly. The purchasing of
sustainable and ethically made goods evokes a feeling of satisfaction among consumers. In
this study, satisfaction is the feeling that consumers sense after purchasing and consuming
responsible goods. Therefore, we have tested a structural model that relates responsible
consumption to the satisfaction of consumers. Figure 2 presents the results of structural
analysis where the relationship between dependent variable satisfaction and five dimensions
of responsible consumption has been tested. The results show the significant effect of
responsible consumption dimensions on satisfaction. The fitness indices indicate a good
model fit. Responsible consumption dimensions explain a 62% variance in dependent

Sustainable Consumption
R2 = 62 e12
14*

Ethical Consumption 27*

20* Satisfaction

68*
Local Consumption
12*

Minimalism

Rationality

Note(s): All paths are significant at p < 0.00 Figure 2.

Nomo-logical validity
Source(s): Author Calculation
APJBA variables, which is satisfaction. Concerning satisfaction, minimalism seems to be the most
important dimension, which explains 68% contribution to satisfaction. This is consistent
with previous findings (Lloyd and Pennington, 2020). The other dimensions of responsible
consumption, i.e. ethical consumption, local consumption, sustainable consumption and
rationality, explain 27, 20, 14 and 12% variance in the satisfaction, respectively. These
findings again highlight the importance of minimalism and the ethical dimension of
consumption for consumer satisfaction.

6. Discussions
The astounding level of consumption has caused a huge impact on the environment and
biodiversity (Crenna et al., 2019). Consumer spending is pushing natural extraction and
production levels, which further has an impact on water, land use and energy. Annual
consumption is expected to double to $8.2 trillion in China and $6 trillion in India (Gonzalez,
2019). At present, consumption expenditure stands at 60% of global GDP. The United States
alone consumes $16 trillion, and people are consuming things less responsibly today than
they used to behave five years ago.
Consumption has increased significantly in recent years due to rising affluence across the
world. The growing consumption has highlighted the need for responsible consumption, as it
leads to depletion of resources. Therefore, there is an urgent need to consume responsibly.
The objective of the study was to develop a scale to measure responsible consumption.
Previous studies (Sudbury-Riley and Kohlbacher, 2016; Fischer et al., 2017; Bhatia and Jain,
2017; Marde and Verite-Masserot, 2018; Quoquab et al., 2019) have developed a scale to
measure SRC, sustainable consumption, green consumption, but responsible consumption is
theoretically different from these concepts. Therefore, it requires the development of a new
scale. The psychometric properties that were tested on two samples of consumers, indicates
that a responsible consumption scale will be useful for academic research and will have
managerial implications. The findings of the study confirm the multidimensionality of the
construct. Responsible consumption is composed of five constructs: sustainable
consumption, ethical consumption, rationality, minimalism and local consumption. This
has broadened the concept of responsible consumption, which was earlier only defined in
terms of sustainability and rationality. The three new dimensions, namely minimalism,
ethical consumption and local consumption, enrich the definition of responsible consumption
and contribute to the literature. The key finding of the study is that minimalism is the key
dimension of responsible consumption.
Minimalism has gained importance in recent years in developed countries and people
want to live with fewer possessions. People want to avoid excess and live a simple life free of
worldly possessions. Minimalism has multiple benefits. It helps people to get rid of
unnecessary financial burden and anxiety (Dopierala, 2017). It also helps people reduce their
stress and makes them happier. Minimalism requires a change in the thought process of
people. The finding states that minimalism is part of responsible consumption. This is in
addition to previous research which defined responsible consumption with respect to
sustainability (Fisk, 1973; Marde and Verite-Masserot, 2018). This adds to the literature by
contributing a new dimension to responsible consumption. Minimalism is of utmost
importance for responsible consumption as it paves the way for curtailing unnecessary
consumption.
Ethical consumption, the second dimension, is an important component of responsible
consumption. Ethical issues are important considerations for people and they care and see
whether the product is made of complying with all ethical guidelines or not. The goods
labeled with fair trade certifications are received positively by consumers. Ethical and fair-
trade certifications motivate people to buy sustainable products. Ethical behavior is related to
responsible consumption, as supporting and purchasing ethical products leads to responsible
behavior. Ethics is at the core of responsible consumption, as people love and accept products Development
made ethically. Therefore, in order to promote responsible consumption behaviors, firms and validation
need to convince and communicate to customers that their products are made by complying
all essential laws and regulations defined by the state. The third dimension of responsible
of scale
consumption is local consumption.
Local consumption contributes to environmental improvement and helps in saving
valuable resources (Blake, 2019). Local consumption cuts down transportation costs by
cutting down packaging, storage, and traveling requirements. The reduction of traveling
time further cuts the fuel requirement, which leads to saving of resources and also helps in the
prevention of emission. It also boosts the local economy and reduces dependence on imports
(Schonhart et al., 2009). The selection of local goods will pave the way toward sustainable
development. Consumers can influence the demand for fair and responsible goods and help in
achieving sustainable development. The shipping of goods from far-off areas produces more
carbon, local consumption results in environmental benefits, which are energy savings and a
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Consumer can reward equitable and responsible
production models through their consumption. Consumers’ ability to influence equitable and
ethical production models can make a significant difference in achieving global sustainable
growth.
Sustainable consumption is another dimension of responsible consumption. The
consumption of sustainable products is at the core of responsible consumption.
Sustainable consumption prevents environmental degradation, increases resource
efficiency and encourages green and eco-friendly goods (Dhanda and Hill, 2007). Consumer
purchase of sustainable goods cuts down on resource extraction. The use of these products
supports a sustainable lifestyle and contributes to environmental improvement (Lorek and
Vergragt, 2015). Goods made from recycled products are sustainable products and help both
firms and consumers to be sustainable. The uses of goods which consume less energy, require
fewer resources and are energy efficient are considered sustainable consumption. Consumers
are considered being responsible for adopting a sustainable lifestyle.
Rationality or rational consumption is the most important dimension of responsible
consumption. This finding is consistent with the previous finding, which say that rationality
is an important dimension of responsible consumption (Fisk, 1973). Excess consumption has
a very high cost to the environment. The majority of environmental problems are related to
excess consumption. Consumers, if they consume only what is required, will reduce
unwanted consumption. The rationality calls for being mindful concerning consumption. The
rationality checks excess or irresponsible consumption, thereby helping consumers to behave
responsibly.

7. Managerial implications
Many implications are resulting from this study. The study highlights the significance of
dimensions of responsible consumption in consumer satisfaction. The study has revealed
that minimalism is the most important predictor of consumer satisfaction. This is relevant for
all companies, as customer satisfaction is coveted by all organizations and is the hallmark of
their success. Therefore, all companies must emphasize the philosophy of minimalism and tell
consumers about its future repercussions. Although minimalism is not economically good for
companies still, they must promote this in the larger interest of consumers. We also
recommend companies to sell ethically made goods as it is the second most predictor of
customer satisfaction.
Companies should highlight the label of fair-trade and ethical compliance certifications to
boost customer confidence in the products. The adoption of responsible consumption will
have many implications, including social and environmental. First, it will encourage
APJBA ecological consumption. It will help in saving invaluable resources, reducing environmental
degradation, minimizing wastage of resources, and carbon footprint. It will also contribute to
improving the longevity of resources. The responsible use of resources will also help in
bridging the existing socio-economic disparities existing between people. On the economic
front, the growth of the local economy through local consumption will create jobs and wealth
for local people, which will aid in reducing economic disparity.

8. Limitations and direction for future research

This research also suffers from some limitations, like other research. The research has used
convenience sampling to collect data, so results must be generalized with caution. The
literature on consumption has divulged five dimensions of responsible consumption, which
were further validated by expert opinions and focus group interviews. Responsible
consumption may have different connotations for people due to cultural and financial
disparities. Further, the study was conducted in India, which is culturally and financially
different. The impact of responsible consumption dimensions across demographics may be
studied in future research. Responsible consumption may have a different understanding for
different people. Therefore, a future study is warranted to confirm the dimension of
responsible consumption across demographics.

Abbreviations
UNEP United Nation Environment Program
SR Socially responsible
CSR Corporate social responsibility
SRC Socially responsible consumption

References
Abdel-Shafy, H.I. and Mansour, M.S. (2018), “Solid waste issue: sources, composition, disposal,
recycling, and valorization”, Egyptian Journal of Petroleum, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 1275-1290.
Aldridge, A. (1994), “The construction of rational consumption in Which? Magazine: the more blobs
the better?”, Sociology, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 899-912.
Amato, M., Verneau, F., Coppola, A. and La Barbera, F. (2021), “Domestic food waste and Covid-19
concern: an application of the theory of planned behaviour”, Sustainability, Vol. 13 No. 15,
p. 8366.
Amir, S., Osman, M.M., Bachok, S. and Ibrahim, M. (2016), “Local economic benefit in shopping and
transportation: a study on tourists’ expenditure in Melaka, Malaysia”, Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 222, pp. 374-381.
Barange, M., Bahri, T., Beveridge, M.C., Cochrane, K.L., Funge-Smith, S. and Poulain, F. (2018),
“Impacts of climate change on fisheries and aquaculture”, United Nations’ Food and Agriculture
Organization, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 628-635.
Berger, J. (2017), “Are luxury brand labels and ‘green’ labels costly signals of social status? an
extended replication”, PloS One, Vol. 12 No. 2, e0170216.
Bhatia, M. and Jain, A. (2017), “Development of multi-item measurement scale for green consumer
behaviour”, International Journal of Society Systems Science, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 199-221.
Bianchi, C. and Mortimer, G. (2015), “Drivers of local food consumption: a comparative study”, British
Food Journal, Vol. 117 No. 9, pp. 2282-2299.
Blake, M.K. (2019), “More than just food: food insecurity and resilient place making through
community self-organizing”, Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 10, p. 2942.
Blonski, K. and Witek, J. (2019), “Minimalism in consumption”, Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie- Development
Skłodowska, Sectio H–Oeconomia, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 7-15.
and validation
Brown, H.S. and Vergragt, P.J. (2016), “From consumerism to wellbeing: toward a cultural transition?”,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 132, pp. 308-317.
of scale
Carrigan, M. and De Pelsmacker, P. (2009), “Will ethical consumers sustain their values in the global
credit crunch?”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 674-687.
Churchill, G.A. Jr (1979), “A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs”,
Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 64-73.
Crenna, E., Sinkko, T. and Sala, S. (2019), “Biodiversity impacts due to food consumption in Europe”,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 227, pp. 378-391.
Creswell, J.W. (1994), Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Dhanda, K.K. and Hill, R.P. (2007), “Consumption and environmental degradation: a long-term view”,
in Product and Market Development for Subsistence Marketplaces, Emerald Group Publishing,
pp. 297-317.
Dopierala, R. (2017), “Minimalism–a new mode of consumption?”, Przegla˛ d Socjologiczny, Vol. 66 No. 4,
pp. 67-83.
Fischer, D., Bohme, T. and Geiger, S.M. (2017), “Measuring young consumers’ sustainable
consumption behavior: development and validation of the YCSCB scale”, Young Consumers,
Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 312-326.
Fisk, G. (1973), “Criteria for a theory of responsible consumption”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 2,
pp. 24-31.
Frederiks, E.R., Stenner, K. and Hobman, E.V. (2015), “Household energy use: applying behavioral
economics to understand consumer decision-making and behaviour”, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 41, pp. 1385-1394.
Giljum, S., Hinterberger, F., Bruckner, M., Burger, E., Fruhmann, J., Lutter, S., . . . and Warhurst, M.
(2009), “Overconsumption? Our use of the world’s natural resources”, available at: https://
friendsoftheearth.uk/sites.
Gonzalez, B.L. (2019), “Why responsible consumption is everyone’s business”, in World Economic
Forum, available at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/09/why-responsible-consumption-
is-everyone-s-business.
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J.M. and Van den Bergh, B. (2010), “Going green to be seen: status, reputation,
and conspicuous conservation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 98 No. 3, p. 392.
Gupta, P., Jain, V.K. and Aggarwal, S. (2020), “Exploring relationship between employees well-being
and green lot using structural equation modeling”, Innovation, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 2590-2600.
Heda, S., Mewborn, S. and Caine, S. (2017), “How customers perceive a price is as important as the
price itself”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 3, p. 5.
Hosta, M. and Zabkar, V. (2016), “Consumer sustainability and responsibility: beyond green and
ethical consumption”, Market-Trziste, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 143-157.
Hubacek, K., Feng, K., Chen, B. and Kagawa, S. (2016), “Linking local consumption to global impacts”,
Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 382-386.
Janssen, M., Chang, B.P., Hristov, H., Pravst, I., Profeta, A. and Millard, J. (2021), “Changes in food
consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic: analysis of consumer survey data from the first
lockdown period in Denmark, Germany, and Slovenia”, Frontiers in Nutrition, Vol. 8, p. 60.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J. and Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001), “Targeting consumers who are willing to pay
more for environmentally friendly products”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18, pp. 503-520.
Lisjak, M., Levav, J. and Rucker, D.D. (2014), “Compensatory consumption as self-and social-
signaling”, ACR North American Advances, Vol. 42, pp. 156-162.
APJBA Lloyd, K. and Pennington, W. (2020), “Towards a theory of minimalism and wellbeing”, International
Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 121-136.
Lorek, S. and Vergragt, P.J. (2015), “Sustainable consumption as a systemic challenge: inter-and
transdisciplinary research and research questions”, in Handbook of Research on Sustainable
Consumption, Edward Elgar Publishing.
Marde, S. and Verite-Masserot, C. (2018), “Antecedents of green consumption: a scale of measure”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 414-425.
Merriam, S.B. (1998), Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and
Expanded from “Case Study Research in Education”, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco,
CA, Vol. 350.
Mont, O. and Plepys, A. (2008), “Sustainable consumption progress: should we be proud or alarmed?”,
Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 531-537.
Moore, G. (2004), “The fair trade movement: parameters, issues and future research”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 73-86.
Nadvi, K. (2008), “Global standards, global governance and the organization of global value chains”,
Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 323-343.
Phang, G., Balakrishnan, B.K. and Ting, H. (2021), “Does sustainable consumption matter? Consumer
grocery shopping behaviour and the pandemic”, Journal of Social Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 4,
pp. 507-522.
Quattrone, G.A. and Tversky, A. (1984), “Causal versus diagnostic contingencies: on self-deception
and on the voter’s illusion”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 46 No. 2, p. 237.
Quoquab, F., Mohammad, J. and Sukari, N.N. (2019), “A multiple-item scale for measuring “sustainable
consumption behaviour” construct: development and psychometric evaluation”, Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 791-816.
Raynolds, L.T. (2012), “Fair Trade: social regulation in global food markets”, Journal of Rural Studies,
Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 276-287.
Rubin, H.J. and Rubin, I.S. (1995), Qualitative Interviewing, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sadollah, A., Nasir, M. and Geem, Z.W. (2020), “Sustainability and optimization: from conceptual
fundamentals to applications”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 5, p. 2027.
Schiliro, D. (2018), “Economic decisions and Simon’s notion of bounded rationality”, International
Business Research, Vol. 11 No. 7, pp. 64-75.
Schonhart, M., Penker, M. and Schmid, E. (2009), “Sustainable local food production and consumption:
challenges for implementation and research”, Outlook on Agriculture, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 175-182.
Sharif, S.P., Abaeian, V. and Khanekharab, J. (2018), “Attitudes toward mammography: questionnaire
psychometric properties”, International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, Vol. 31 No. 5,
pp. 391-399.
She, L., Sharif, S.P. and Nia, H.S. (2021), “Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the
modified online compulsive buying scale among Chinese young consumers”, Journal of Asia-
Pacific Business, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 121-133.
Shukla, P., Skeg, J., Buendıa, E., Masson-Delmotte, V., P€ortner, H., Roberts, D., Zhai, P., Slade, R.,
Connors, S., Diemen, S.V., Ferrat, M., Haughey, E., Luz, S., Pathak, M., Petzold, J., Pereira, J.,
Vyas, P., Huntley, E., Kissick, K., Belkacemi, M. and Malley, J. (2019), “Climate Change and
Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable
land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems”, Vol. 5
No. 2, pp. 424-432.
Streimikiene, D. (2015), “Environmental indicators for the assessment of quality of life”, Intelektine
Ekonomika, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 67-79.
Sudbury-Riley, L. and Kohlbacher, F. (2016), “Ethically minded consumer behavior: scale review,
development, and validation”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 8, pp. 2697-2710.
Tseng, M.L., Tan, R.R. and Siriban-Manalang, A.B. (2013), “Sustainable consumption and production Development
for Asia: sustainability through green design and practice”, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Vol. 40, pp. 1-5. and validation
Vergragt, P., Akenji, L. and Dewick, P. (2014), “Sustainable production, consumption, and livelihoods:
of scale
global and regional research perspectives”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 63, pp. 1-12.
Wagner, W. (1960), “Responsible consumption”, available at: www.unescoet^e.org (accessed 4
March 2020).
Zabkar, V. and Hosta, M. (2013), “Willingness to act and environmentally conscious consumer
behaviour: can prosocial status perceptions help overcome the gap”, International Journal of
Consumer Studies, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 257-264.
Zukin, S. and Maguire, J.S. (2004), “Consumers and consumption”, Annual Review Socialogy, Vol. 30,
pp. 173-197.
APJBA Appendix
Summary of questions and key theme emerged from interviews

Questions Excerpts Key findings Theme

How would you define [. . .] Consumption practices Sustainability and Sustainability

responsible which are sustainable and environmental-friendly
consumption? environmental-friendly. consumption
Consumption of green
products falls into the
category of responsible
consumption
[. . .] Consumption practices Reduction in wastages Waste Reduction
where wastage is minimized,
can be termed as responsible
consumption
[. . .] Consumption practices Rational consumption Rationality
which show rationality and
are required. Rational
consumption is responsible
consumption
[. . .] Any consumption of Environmental and Laws Laws Compliance
goods which are made in compliance
compliance with all
environmental and laws is
responsible consumption
What are the key [. . .] Responsible Sustainability and Longevity of
dimensions of consumption is sustainable Longevity of resources Resources
responsible consumption as resources
consumption? conservation and longevity
are important
[. . .] Responsible Rational and Free from Waste free
consumption is rational and waste consumption
it should be free of waste.
Cutting down on wastage of
resources is responsible
consumption
[. . .] If we consume locally Consumption of Local Local goods
made products, then it goods
would reduce traveling costs
and packaging requirement
which would support
responsible consumption
[. . .] Minimum consumption Minimum Consumption Minimum
is required to save resources. Consumption
Therefore, minimum
consumption also adds to
responsible consumption

(continued )
Questions Excerpts Key findings Theme
Development
and validation
Is rational consumption [. . .] Rational consumption is Rational Consumption, Rational of scale
central to responsible a crucial element of Less wastage of resource Consumption
consumption? responsible consumption.
Over consumption leads to
wastage of resources which
must be curtailed to keep
resources for long and future
generations
[. . .] Rational consumption is Excess consumption and Excess consumption
an important dimension of waste of valuable
responsible consumption. resources
People make excess
consumption and waste
valuable resources
How can we be more [. . .] Goods which require Goods made of less Less use of
responsible consumers fewer resources are resources resources
and make consumption environmental-friendly. If
more responsible? people use these goods in
their day-to day life, this can
promote or make
consumption practices
responsible
[. . .] People consume a lot of Reduction in extravagant Reduction in
money in marriages and consumption consumption
events which are visible and
can be noticed by others.
They believe in showing off.
If they reduce these
extravagant expenditures
and spend on things which
are necessary, then
responsible consumption is
encouraged
[. . .] These two concepts are Sustainability is an Sustainability
related to each other. They important element
complement each other.
Sustainability is a key
component of responsible
consumption
Do you see difference [. . .] Both are similar in Slight difference in Sustainability and
between sustainable nature, but there is little sustainable and Responsible
and responsible difference. Sustainable responsible consumption consumption are
consumption consumption promotes the different
thought of longevity of
resources, whereas
responsible consumption
lays more emphasis on
rational consumption

(continued )
APJBA Questions Excerpts Key findings Theme

Is local consumption [. . .] A lot of money and Local consumption Local consumption

part of responsible resources are used to ferry supports the environment improves the
consumption? goods from one place to environment
another. If people only buy
locally made goods, it would
support the environment
[. . .] Local consumption will Local consumption Local consumption
improve the economy and strengthens the local improves the local
generate employment at the economy and generates economy
local level. Therefore, local employment for local
consumption needs to be people
promoted
[. . .] The consumption of Reduces the need for Reduction in
locally grown or produced transportation and transportation
goods will reduce the need improve environment
for transportation. This
would improve the
environment

Corresponding author
Vikas Tyagi can be contacted at: vikastyagi2112@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com