Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Production and Consumption

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/spc

Research article

Determinant attributes and the compensatory judgement rules applied

by young consumers to purchase environmentally sustainable food
products
Nicole Cecchele Lago a, Arthur Marcon a, José Luis Duarte Ribeiro a, Janine Fleith de
Medeiros a,b,∗, Vandré Basbosa Brião b, Verner Luis Antoni b
a
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Industrial Engineering Department, Av. Osvaldo Aranha, 99, 5° Andar – 90035-190 Porto Alegre, Brazil
b
Universidade de Passo Fundo, Graduate Program on Business Administration and Graduate Program on Food Science and Technology Rodovia BR 285, Km
292,7, S/n - São José, Passo Fundo - RS, 99052-900 Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Young consumers are known to value environmentally sustainable features in products. In this regard,
Received 31 January 2020 understanding the determinant green attributes and whether these attributes are able to compensate for
Revised 6 June 2020
the lack or low level of regular attributes can contribute to deepening the understanding of how young
Accepted 7 June 2020
consumers decide. Hence, this paper aims to identify the determinant attributes for the behaviour of
Available online 11 June 2020
young consumer environmentally sustainable food purchases and to investigate the compensatory rules
Keywords: applied during pre-purchase evaluation processes. To that end, we employed a quantitative study of both
Environmentally sustainable food descriptive and causal objectives through a questionnaire. To identify the determinant attributes, descrip-
Green food tive statistics techniques were used, with attributes divided into instrumental and expressive. Whereas
Green marketing strategies for the compensatory rules, a factorial experiment was conducted to test purchase scenarios. We anal-
Environmental sustainability ysed the effect of environmentally sustainable product attributes on purchase intention using the analysis
Green consumer behavior
of variance. And, given the additive characteristic of compensatory models, a linear regression model was
Purchase decision-making
Green Consumption
used to test the hypothesis of the application of compensatory rules for environmentally sustainable food
purchase. Results showed that product quality, cleaner production and price are the determinant instru-
mental attributes valued by young consumers. Health concern, a healthy lifestyle and environmental con-
cern are the determinant expressive attributes. Our inferential results support the hypothesis that young
consumers judge environmentally sustainable food attributes under compensatory rules. Thus, high levels
of attributes compensate for the low level or absence of others. The implications of such findings in light
of consumer behaviour theory are then discussed.
© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Such actions have promoted changes in consumer behaviour.

Eating healthier and more sustainably is a recurring phe-
nomenon in different sectors of society (Moragues-Faus et al.,
2017; Godin and Sahakian, 2018). Governments, class associations
and the press have undertaken a set of actions to raise consumer
awareness about the origin and techniques employed in the food
production system (Sharma et al., 2010; Halkier et al., 2017). Ad-
ditionally, laws and regulations have been implemented in the in-
dustry to improve products and processes to reduce their environ-
mental impact (Kim, 2017; Rueda et al., 2017).
∗
Corresponding author at: UFRGS, Av. Osvaldo Aranha, 99, 5 andar, 900, 35-190,
Porto Alegre, 90035-190 Porto Alegre, Brazil.
E-mail address: janine@upf.br (J.F. de Medeiros).
Many consumers have broadened and/or modified their assess-
ment criteria when choosing certain food products over oth-
ers, based on the greater amount of information available and
the motivation to choose sustainable options (Asioli et al., 2017;
Thøgersen, 2017; Harray et al., 2018). Focusing on the sustain-
able theme, several research papers indicate that environmen-
tal certifications and labels (Leach et al., 2016; O’Connor et al.,
2017; Ehgartner, 2018), sustainable packaging (Dangelico and Vo-
calelli, 2017; Hoek et al., 2017a; Songa et al., 2018) and product
origin/processing attributes (Mohr and Schlich, 2015; Sama et al.,
2018) are used by consumers to assess options while making deci-
sions on purchasing food.
However, although academic research indicates that some
consumer profiles have included environmentally sustainable
attributes in the purchase decision-making process (Grunert et al.,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.003
2352-5509/© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
2014; Ghvanidze et al., 2016; Hoek et al., 2017a, 2017b),
some questions remain unanswered. Especially regarding
the “pre-purchase alternative assessment” step. According to
Feil et al. (2020) and Ketelsen et al. (2020), some consumer
responses towards the evaluation and the purchase decision
for environmentally sustainable food, also known as green food
(Tobler et al., 2011; Thøgersen, 2017), remain understudied.
Ricci et al. (2018) and Tong et al. (2020) argue that the role
played by green and non-green attributes and their weight on con-
sumer choice are challenging subjects in green food research. Con-
sumers show some confusion during decision making. For exam-
ple: attributes such as green labelling may not improve and/or ac-
celerate judgement regarding the reduced environmental impact of
production processes (Ketelsen et al., 2020). Finally, it is unknown
whether price elasticity for green products observed in garments,
furniture, and automobiles is also found in green food purchasing
(de Medeiros et al., 2016; Ricci et al., 2018).
In light of that, more research is necessary to understand con-
sumer decision-making criteria regarding green food (Feil et al.,
2020; Ketelsen et al., 2020). amongst instrumental attributes (those
related to functionality, utility, and performance) and expressive
attributes (those related to values and experiences) (Allen et al.,
2002), which are the most important in determining the selec-
tion of a given green food product over another? Additionally, can
the weakness in an attribute, such as the lack of green packaging,
be compensated by the presence of other instrumental attributes,
such as cleaner production and quality?
Considering the above, this study aims to: (i) identify the de-
terminant attributes for the purchase of green food by young
consumers; and (ii) analyse whether consumers apply compen-
satory judgement heuristics while purchasing green food. Address-
ing such topics can help broaden current understanding of the pur-
chase decision-making dynamics involving green food, especially
regarding the rules for judging green offers (Lazzarini et al., 2018;
Tong et al., 2020). There is very little research on judgement com-
pensation rules in food consumption literature. Mai et al. (2014) is
one of the few examples of studies that analysed the compensation
effects in food product purchases. Nevertheless, green food prod-
ucts have long called for an analysis that determines the cognitive
rules that dictate how consumers decide on green food.
Our contribution also advances the knowledge about green con-
sumer behaviour by going beyond the discussion on consumers’
willingness to pay a premium for green products. We argue that,
as a complex task, young consumer decision-making regarding the
purchase of green products is cognitively simplified by using com-
pensatory decision rules (Rothrock and Yin, 2008). Based on that,
the low level (or lack) of a given attribute may be compensated by
the presence or high level of other attributes.
Methodologically, we conducted a quantitative study. There-
fore, to identify the determinant attributes for the purchase of
green food, we employed a descriptive objective. While to anal-
yse whether consumers apply compensatory judgement heuristics,
a causal objective was used. Regarding the selected population co-
hort, many studies explore age as an alternative for market posi-
tioning of green offers (Kanchanapibul et al., 2014; de Medeiros
et al., 2016), and a large body of research indicates that the Y (mil-
lennials) and Z1 generations are more sensitive to environmental
issues (Gan et al., 2008; Mahesh and Ganapathi, 2012). According
to consumer trend research, 75% of millennials expect sustainable
1
Generations, or cohorts, are consumer groups that indicate when consumers
were born and raised. People from the same generation share the same important
cultural, political, and economic experiences, and thus they hold similar views and
values. Generation Y corresponds to people born between 1980-20 0 0, and Genera-
tion Z encompasses consumers born between 20 0 0-2010 (Kotler and Keller, 2014).
257
actions from brands, and 65% of generation Z wish to know the
origin of the products they intend to buy (ABIHPEC/SEBRAE, 2019).
The article is composed of six sections. Following this intro-
duction, the theoretical background is presented in Section 2.
Next, the methodological procedures are described in Section 3.
Section 4 presents the results, while Section 5 addresses the dis-
cussions and implications Finally, Section 6 concludes the research
and presents the limitations and the direction of future research.
2. Theoretical background
Considering the objectives, the literature review addresses three
main topics, namely (i) consumer purchase decision processes, (ii)
attributes for green food purchase, and (iii) hypotheses proposi-
tions.
2.1. Consumers’ purchase decision processes
The green marketing concept has evolved from a tool of tradi-
tional marketing into a company-wide strategy that considers the
environmental impact of the whole market (Dangelico and Vocal-
leli, 2017). Green marketing also plays an essential role in firms
adapting to the growing demand amongst consumers for sustain-
ability, as it is responsible for defining green product concepts
that benefit consumers and the environment. Nevertheless, the
definition of product concepts must be grounded on a deep un-
derstanding of consumer behaviour, especially for green products
(de Medeiros and Ribeiro, 2017).
In this perspective, purchase decision processes explore the de-
cision processes, evaluation criteria, and rules analysed by con-
sumers while deciding what to buy (Blackwell et al., 2011). Theo-
retically, the evaluation criteria assessed by consumers while eval-
uating choice alternatives are named attributes (Blackwell et al.,
2011). Consumers can prioritize attributes related to utility (such
as performance, price, brand name, safety, amongst others) or he-
donism (such as pleasure, status, subjective aesthetic consider-
ations, amongst others) (Klein and Melnyk, 2016). According to
Allen et al. (2002) instrumental attributes are related to a prod-
uct’s utility purposes and thus consumers’ judgement of this type
of attribute is logical. That is, consumers seek to maximize the util-
ity function of the product and therefore conduct a comprehensive
and systematic analysis of each attribute. On the other hand, ex-
pressive attributes concern consumers’ use of an object as a means
to express the self (Allen et al., 2002). In this sense, expressive at-
tributes are judged through affective (hedonic) principles.
The importance of the evaluation criteria employed reflects the
notion that the influence of the attributes on consumers’ decisions
differs based on the attributes carried by products. In other words,
this means that some attributes have a greater impact than others
on consumer decision-making. The attributes that make consumers
aware of an offer’s performance differences are called determinant
attributes (Alpert, 1971). That is, according to Alpert (1971), deter-
minant attributes are those that determine overall product prefer-
ence according to consumer judgement. Speaking specifically about
green products, de Medeiros and Ribeiro (2017) mapped the de-
terminant attributes in green purchases of innovative products for
automobiles and furniture pieces. Tseng and Hung (2013), on the
other hand, identified the gaps between consumers’ determinant
attribute expectations in comparison to their actual perceptions of
green product attributes. Additionally, Wan et al. (2015) studied
the determinant attributes for the purchase of green furniture in
China.
Purchase decision processes for green products have been
shown to present differences when compared to the purchase of
regular products. Goucher-Lambert and Cagan (2015) found that
258 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
when consumers are provided with information regarding the en-
vironmental impact of products, they place greater importance on
the instrumental attributes (functional attributes related to product
performance), while the importance of form and price falls with
regards to consumers’ decisions. In other words, when consumer
judgement is placed within a social and moral context, the pur-
chase priorities change.
Another relevant element for the alternative assessment process
focuses on decision rules (Blackwell et al., 2011). Falling within
the field of behavioural economics, decision rules in consumer
behaviour indicate the type of strategy used by consumers to
make their choice while purchasing (Bettman, 1979). According to
Baxter (2016), a useful distinction for decision rules lies in un-
derstanding compensatory and non-compensatory models. In non-
compensatory rules, the weakness in one product attribute can-
not be compensated by a strong performance in another attribute.
Thus, in non-compensatory rules, a high score in a given dimen-
sion may not be offset by a low score in another dimension. In
other words, trade-offs between dimensions are not accepted in
non-compensatory rules for decision-making (Baxter, 2016). Hence,
if consumers apply non-compensatory rules to decide on a given
item, a furniture piece, for example, then the absence of a feature
such as the use of recycled wood or wood certification may not
be compensated by a reduced price or easy maintenance. And, as
such, consumers will opt for a product under a different brand that
meets such requirements.
On the other hand, in compensatory rules, a perceived weak-
ness in one attribute can be counterbalanced by the perceived
strength in another attribute. Compensatory rules are seen to be
the linear addition of all information on the determinant attributes
of a product in consumers’ evoked set. Consumers then assess
whether the combination of attributes is satisfactory and proceed
to purchase (Woodside, 2008). As an illustrative example, a hypo-
thetical consumer that decides to purchase a car with green fea-
tures may place great importance on a hybrid engine and seats
made with recycled fibers. Nevertheless, the consumer may also
value good acceleration and design features. And in the case of ac-
celeration or design (or even both) being above a satisfying level,
the absence of a hybrid engine or recycled fibre in seats may not
hinder the purchase of a given car. Therefore, the absence of val-
ued features may be compensated by the presence of a satisfactory
level of other features.
2.2. Attributes for green food purchases
Conceptually, green food, or environmentally sustainable food,
is understood as those products with stages of design, production
processes, uses, and disposal that offer reduced environmental im-
pacts (Kumar and Ghodeswar, 2015). Therefore, this concept goes
beyond the simple organic food concept and includes best produc-
tion practices, reduction of food loss on the processing line and use
of cleaner technologies (Woodhouse et al., 2018).
The past two decades have seen an increase in consumer re-
search addressing green products and green consumer behaviour
(Gershoff and Frels, 2015). Nevertheless, Thøgersen (2017) and
Hoek et al. (2017b) claim that demographic characteristics are in-
sufficient to explain the differences in consumer buying behaviour.
In this sense, some authors have addressed the expressive at-
tributes of green food purchase to broaden the understanding of
hedonic consumption drivers.
Previous research has shown the positive association be-
tween green food consumption and health concern (Mohr and
Schlich, 2015; Hoek et al., 2017a, 2017b). Some authors have also
found positive effects of healthy lifestyle on green food purchases
(Ghvanidze et al., 2016; Thøgersen, 2017). Indeed, such attributes
are considered to be distinct elements in the literature. This dis-
tinction can be justified by the attitude and behaviour model of
Kok and Siero (1985). The attitude-behaviour model encompasses
awareness (also known as concern) (Hoek et al., 2017b), as the first
step towards behaviour shift. Behaviour maintenance is expressed
by acquired standards, which support the lifestyle. The model is
a hierarchical structure (that is, to reach the next stage towards
behaviour shift, individuals must go through the previous stages).
Hence, since awareness is the first stage of the model, not all con-
sumers who show health concern may have acquired maturity in
their behaviour to effectively adopt a healthy lifestyle.
These aspects are also contemplated in Schwartz’s (1977) norm
activation model, which predicts that attitudes become behaviour
when there is the influence of accepting responsibility about the
problem, since it is associated with altruistic behaviour. That is,
the concern, inherent to altruism, is transformed into behaviour
only if there is the mediating action of accepting responsibility,
which is responsible for triggering greater pro-ecological conse-
quences in the individual. Therefore, health concern may not be
associated with pro-ecological behaviour, since it depends on the
level of responsibility (Schwartz, 1977). While the lifestyle, linked
to the behaviour maintenance stage, directly influences the con-
sumer’s choices and purchase behaviour (Thøgersen, 2017).
Tobler et al. (2011) found that the main reasons for environ-
mentally sustainable consumption amongst Swiss respondents are
the search for the reduction of excessive packaging waste and
health concern. The results of Lombardi et al. (2017) show that the
increase in knowledge about sustainable issues alters consumer’s
purchase decision. Grunert et al. (2014), Hoek et al. (2017b) and
Stranieri et al. (2017) also confirm that individuals with high
knowledge about sustainability are more likely to consume green
food.
Similarly, Joshi and Rahman (2017) found a low association
between knowledge about sustainability issues and the decision
to buy green. Choi and Johnson (2019) claim that the environ-
mental knowledge had a positive effect on green product pur-
chase intention. Mixed results have been found for the relation be-
tween environmental concern and green food consumption. While
Grunert et al. (2014) and Mohr and Schlich (2015) found environ-
mental concern to have a strong effect on green food consumption,
Joshi and Rahman (2017) found a weak relation between them. Fi-
nally, previous findings show that social pressure exerted by oth-
ers, especially regarding waste reduction, also influences the con-
sumption (Verain et al., 2015; Hoek et al., 2017a). Fig. 1 summa-
rizes the main findings of previous studies on expressive attributes.
Nevertheless, research on green product attributes has mostly
focused on the instrumental attributes. That is, research has inves-
tigated the performance-related attributes mostly focused on util-
ity purposes, as proposed by Allen et al. (2002). Instrumental green
food attributes addressed in earlier literature are related to product
labels, packaging, production type, quality and price.
Green labels can be grouped into (i) environmental la-
bels and (ii) ethical labels. (i) Environmental labels in-
volve labels developed by certifying organizations. The most
famous are the carbon footprint, nitrogen footprint, and
the water footprint labels (Leach et al., 2016). Ecolabels
have also been subject to contradictory findings in liter-
ature. Grunert et al. (2014), Vlaeminck et al. (2014), Risius
et al. (2017) and Stranieri et al. (2017) add that ecolabels provide
consumers with environmental education that positively affects
purchase behaviour. However, studies such as Hoek et al. (2017b),
Ehgartner (2018) and Songa et al. (2018) found that the volume
and the cognitive value of information present on labels do not
influence the pro-environmental choices of consumers.
On the other hand, (ii) ethical labels seek to comply with
the correct standards of fair production systems and working
conditions (Sama et al., 2018), thus, a responsible view from a
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
Fig. 1. Expressive attributes for green food consumption.
social perspective is adopted, in addition to environmental is-
sues. Within such attribute classification, the most often cited as-
pects in studies are fair trade certification (Grunert et al., 2014;
O’Connor et al., 2017; Sama et al., 2018) and the animal welfare
labels (Grunert et al., 2014; Leach et al., 2016).
Regarding green packaging, the results of Hoek et al.
(2017a) show that consumers consider green packaging
as a relevant attribute during purchase decision. Similarly,
Tobler et al. (2011) found that consumers believe that reduc-
ing the waste by avoiding products with excessive packaging had
the largest environmental benefit. Differently from green packag-
ing, studies on package recyclability have not met a consensus in
findings. While some researchers have found green packaging to
be a key attribute in green food purchase (such as Hoek et al.,
2017a; Stranieri et al., 2017; Songa et al., 2018), Jerzyk (2017)
studied young consumers and found that they do not consider
packaging recyclability to be an important attribute during green
purchases.
Another instrumental attribute that has been found to posi-
tively impact purchase intention is the use of cleaner production
processes. Consumers were found to highly value food products
with cleaner production practices (Sama et al., 2018). Mohr and
Schlich (2015) studied green consumer behaviour for food prod-
ucts and found that consumers value attributes related to cleaner
production processes. Also, their findings show that attributes that
directly affect consumers are perceived as more important, while
altruistic attributes are not perceived to be as important.
Pricing presents contradictory findings in several studies on
the topic. Hoek et al. (2017b) argues that price is the attribute
with the highest impact on consumers’ green choices. This evi-
dence corroborates the findings of Ingenbleek (2015), Mohr and
259
Schlich (2015) and Sama et al. (2018), which go as far as to catego-
rize high prices as a barrier to consumption. On the other hand,
Chkanikova and Lehner (2015) and Chekima et al. (2016) found
that consumers are willing to pay extra for green food products.
The quality attribute of products has long been studied for reg-
ular products. In green food products, Gonçalves et al. (2016) found
that consumers actively evaluate product quality during purchase.
Mohr and Schlich (2015) found that quality is reported to be even
more important than price for consumers buying meat products
with green characteristics. The main findings addressing the instru-
mental attributes from previous research are presented in Fig. 2.
Furthermore, the attributes mentioned in Figs. 1 and 2, Cheng
and To (M.F.Y. 2019) found that consumer’ attitudes towards green
issues are key to understanding green purchase behaviour. The au-
thors used the extended value-attitude-behaviour model to anal-
yse the dynamics between green attributes, an ecological attitude,
and purchase behaviour. Their findings show that environmental
consciousness and green product information are positively asso-
ciated with an ecological attitude, which, in turn, positively influ-
ences purchase behaviour.
2.3. Hypotheses proposition
As a very relevant part of green marketing, consumer purchase
behaviour has received important contributions that aim to bet-
ter understand how consumers decide (Johan et al., 2010), the
mental processes employed in green purchase (Gershoff and Frels,
2010), which socio-demographic aspects influence purchase deci-
sions (Grunert et al., 2014), and the determinant product attributes
for green purchase (de Medeiros and Ribeiro, 2017). Nonetheless,
260 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273

Fig. 2. Instrumental attributes for green food consumption.

the heuristic rules applied to the offer of green products during
pre-purchase evaluation have received little attention.
Young consumers are known to place great importance on cer-
tain green product attributes such as biodegradability and recycla-
bility (Lu et al., 2013), and packaging recyclability (Jerzyk, 2016).
However, consumer willingness to accept compensations through
other attributes such as quality and price still remain unknown. In
turn, Gershoff and Frels (2015) analysed whether consumers per-
ceive a product to be more sustainable depending on how cen-
tral an attribute is. The authors found that even when a cen-
tral and a peripheral attribute present the same environmen-
tal friendliness, consumers will perceive a product to be overall
greener if this attribute is more central. That is, consumers per-
ceive products to be greener if the attribute that holds the sus-
tainable characteristic is more central in consumers’ cognitive def-
inition of a product. This finding can largely increase the under-
standing of how consumers make decisions and how they assess
which attributes are determinant during pre-purchase evaluation
processes.
Olson (2012) analysed how consumer preference for green
products is affected by negative tradeoffs. Findings show that when
a green product conditions consumers to make negative tradeoffs
with conventional attributes, such as a higher price, lower quality
or performance and such tradeoff is not apparent, consumers show
strong preference for green. Whereas, when attribute tradeoff is
evident, consumers tend to prefer green products less. Thus, al-
though knowledge about green consumer behaviour has advanced
to the point where tradeoffs and attribute centrality have been ex-
plored and their effects clarified, the rules applied by consumers
when purchasing green products remain unknown. In other words,
the extent to which consumers are willing to accept attribute com-
pensation has not yet been addressed.
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
We argue that green food products are judged by consumers
under compensatory rules and, as such, the absence (or low level)
of one feature may be offset by the presence (high level) of an-
other. Compensatory heuristic rules are employed as a means to
reduce the cognitive task of purchase decision-making. Hence, as
consumers cognitively assess green food attributes in pre-purchase
evaluations, they balance the green food product attributes in such
a way that the higher price or regular quality (in comparison to
above average quality) of a food product can be compensated by
the presence of green features such as biodegradable packaging
or the use of cleaner production practices. Thus, grounded on the
contributions from the compensatory theory, we propose the fol-
lowing hypothesis:
Hypothesis 1. Green food products are judged by young con-
sumers under compensatory heuristic rules of judgement.
In more practical terms, our hypothesis is grounded on the
compensatory framework of decision rules where consumers as-
sess the total utility of the product based on an evaluation of indi-
vidual attributes against the attributes of a competing alternative
(a non-green food product), and as such, attribute tradeoffs are
accepted. We test our hypothesis using a linear regression model
where price, quality, production type, and packaging work as inde-
pendent variables and purchase intention is measured as the de-
pendant variable. Given the additive characteristics of linear mod-
els, the posited hypothesis is supported if the effects of the main
factors are significant, in line with Rothrock and Yin (2008), who
state that linear regression modelling is the most used represen-
tation for compensatory decision modelling. This is grounded on
the linear compensatory decision model, whereby compensatory
rules can be estimated through a linear combination of product
features, wherein the lack (or low level) of a desired feature can
be compensated by the presence (or high level) of another feature
(Elrod et al., 2004).
Several studies have shown that price can work as a bar-
rier to green product purchasing (Brouhle and Khanna, 2012;
Gleim et al., 2013), since it is the main choice factor for many
consumers (Khan and Mohsin, 2017). In this regard, de Medeiros
et al. (2016) developed an econometric model that estimates price
elasticity for cars and furniture with green attributes. Their find-
ings provide evidence that if products with and without green at-
tributes are the exact same price, 95% of respondents would pur-
chase green. Nevertheless, they also found that if prices carry a 10%
increase, only 50% of consumers would choose a green car and 60%
would choose green furniture.
Moser (2016), however, suggests that willingness to pay a pre-
mium for green products cannot be generalized for all products
and that consumers may behave differently depending on the
product category. In addition, although willingness to pay premium
has been found by several papers (Dangelico and Vocalelli, 2017),
price increase can reduce consumers’ intention to purchase green
products. In other words, although some consumers may be willing
to pay extra, a price increase may reduce their purchase intention,
although not necessarily to such an extent that deters them from
effectively purchasing the product. Therefore, H1a posits that:
Hypothesis 1a. Price increase has a negative significant impact on
young consumers’ green food purchase intention.
Product quality is an attribute of major relevance in consumer
behaviour. For example, Luchs et al. (2012) and Luchs and Ku-
mar (2017) studied consumers’ behaviour when presented with a
situation of trade-off between product quality and sustainability
characteristics. Their findings show that in such trade-off scenarios,
consumers prefer products of superior functional quality instead of
products with sustainable characteristics. This highlights the im-
261
portant role played by quality in products. Similarly, Tseng and
Hung (2013) and Ritter et al. (2015) found that the perceived qual-
ity of the product, even in the presence of other green attributes,
directly affects the purchase intention. This is reinforced by the
study of Biswas and Roy (2015), who found that the preference
for green products is related to the guarantee of minimum qual-
ity standards and benefits resulting from consumption. In turn,
the conclusions of Suki (2016) point out that, for consumers with
strong environmental beliefs, green products are judged as prod-
ucts of higher quality and, therefore, there is this strong influ-
ence of quality in their purchasing situations. The same occurs
for food consumption, since consumers associate the quality to
aspects such as healthy, sustainable, natural, organic, and fresh
(Thøgersen, 2017) and use such aspects to justify their purchases
(Thøgersen, 2017). Schösler and Boer (2018) also relate sustainable
foods to higher quality standards, since consumers who value qual-
ity, have demonstrated greater involvement with the origin, pro-
cessing and availability of the food. In this regard, we posit that the
quality increase of green products positively impacts young con-
sumers’ purchase intention:
Hypothesis 1b. Quality increase has a positive significant impact
on young consumers’ green food purchase intention.
Packaging has been found to hold a positive rela-
tionship with consumers’ attitude toward green products.
Herbes et al. (2018) found that consumers’ prefer biodegrad-
able packages. The results of Grebitus et al. (2020) also show a
similar effect with packages made from recycled plastic materials.
Additionally, green packaging acts as a motivator for green food
purchases according to the study of Tobler et al. (2011). Consumers
have also been found to have an overall positive attitude towards
products with recyclable packaging and higher willingness to pay
for products with green packaging (Ketelsen et al., 2020).
Dangelico and Vocalelli (2017) emphasize that green packaging
is a key element for product strategies and for promotion strate-
gies of green products. This is also in line with the results of
Lu et al. (2013). In their study, recyclability was positively and sig-
nificantly correlated with Millennials’ purchase intention. Hence,
based on the previous literature regarding green products pre-
sented, we posit that young consumers value food products with
recyclable packages and, as such, recyclability will exert a positive
significant impact on their consumer behaviour. Therefore, the fol-
lowing hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 1c. Recyclable packaging has a positive significant im-
pact on young consumers’ green food purchase intention.
Cleaner production practices are also valued by consumers.
Cerri et al. (2018), for example, identified that they are the sec-
ond most valued attribute in sustainable products. Similarly, the
study developed by de Medeiros and Ribeiro (2017) found that the
use of biofuels, resources that can reduce carbon dioxide emissions
and a hybrid engine technology are the most valued attributes in
car purchases. For green furniture, cleaner production technologies
and total reuse of cut leftovers were the most valued attributes by
consumers (by Medeiros and Ribeiro, 2017).
Esteves et al. (2017) also highlighted some important practices
for consumers, such as production through waste, waste manage-
ment and energy. In addition, Lu et al. (2013) found a positive and
significant correlation between eco-efficient production processes
and Millennials’ purchase intention of green products. Therefore, in
light of the previous findings presenting evidence that associates
cleaner production practices in green products with consumers’
purchase intention, we elaborate on such relationship and propose
that cleaner production practices in green food products have a
262 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
positive impact on young consumers’ purchase intention. Based on
that, H1d is proposed as follows:
Hypothesis 1d. Cleaner production practices have a positive signif-
icant impact on young consumers’ green food purchase intention.
Additionally, as a set of studies indicates that consumers say
that green products are more expensive (Janssen and Jager, 2002;
Young et al., 2010; Rahnama and Rajabpour, 2017; Shen et al.,
2020), therefore it is relevant to investigate how the perceived
value can interfere in the use of compensatory decision rules for
the purchase of environmentally sustainable food. We emphasize
that the concept of perceived value is related to most constructs
that address price elasticity (de Medeiros et al., 2016). In the eco-
nomic model of value proposed by Zeithaml (1988), perceived
value results from the relationship between what consumers re-
ceive (bonus) versus what they disburse (onus). The model ad-
vocates that the perceived sacrifice negatively influences the per-
ceived value. As a sacrifice, the model considers the monetary
price and the non-monetary costs associated with the offer. As
non-monetary costs, we highlight psychic, time and energy costs.
Thus, we posit that the positive effect of quality, production and
packaging reduce the negative impact exerted by monetary cost
(price) on consumers’ purchase intention.
Hypothesis 2. The magnitude of the effect of price on young con-
sumers’ green purchase intention depends on quality, packaging
and type of production.
Some studies reveal that the perceived quality triggers a posi-
tive purchase intention, based on the willingness to pay for green
products (Biswas and Roy, 2015; Gonçalves et al., 2016). That
is, when consumers perceive the utility and benefits obtained
through consumption, purchase likelihood is increased (Khan and
Mohsin, 2017). Considering that this relationship is well consoli-
dated in green product purchase contexts, we argue that the in-
teraction between price and quality in the context of food also
promotes positive effects on purchase intention. In this sense, our
proposition is in line with studies that reveal that consumers
concerned with product quality are willing to pay a premium
price for products with ecolabels (Chkanikova and Lehner, 2015;
de Medeiros et al., 2016). As such, Hypothesis 2a proposes the fol-
lowing:
Hypothesis 2a. The impact of price on young consumers’ green
purchase intention depends on quality level.
Studies by Lindh et al. (2016) and Singh and Pandey (2018) in-
dicate that consumers are predisposed to pay premium prices
for products with environmentally friendly packaging. Specifically,
Singh and Pandey (2018) highlight that consumers recognize green
packaging as a product differentiating value, capable of offering
potential “exclusivity” to it. Neill and Williams (2016) found that
consumers are willing to pay more for milk packaged in returnable
glass bottles, due to less environmental impact. In the same vein,
Seo et al. (2016) identified that price sensitivity may be higher or
lower depending on the type of green product. For example, they
found that the willingness to pay a higher price was greater for
jelly beans and energy drinks with environmentally friendly pack-
aging than for yogurt drinks. Considering the above, we propose
the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2b. The impact of price on young consumers’ green
purchase intention depends on recyclable packaging.
On the other hand, some studies link the willingness to pay
premium prices to cleaner production practices. In this case, the
predisposition can be triggered by the existence of labels that in-
dicate a lower amount of carbon in the product (Shuai et al., 2014;
Fig. 3. Causal model tested through the experimental design.
Leach et al., 2016), by minimizing greenhouse gases (Tait et al.,
2016), or, still, for the use of more sustainable methods of pro-
duction (Lanfranchi et al., 2019). Tait et al. (2016) found that con-
sumers perceive that the benefits of buying these products go be-
yond consumption since they are associated with a larger envi-
ronmental strategy, focused on climate gains. In the food context,
this relationship is known through the willingness to pay for or-
ganic products (Vecchio et al., 2016; De-Magistris and Gracia, 2016;
Lombardi et al., 2017). The motivations that support this predis-
position are the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the ben-
efits associated with health and the knowledge about origins and
processing. When assessing the willingness to pay for organic al-
monds, De-Magistris and Gracia (2016) found that consumers were
willing to pay up to 25% more for food. Based on previous liter-
ature, we propose a similar interaction for the context of green
foods, as follows:
Hypothesis 2c. The impact of price on young consumers’ green
purchase intention depends on cleaner production practices.
Fig. 3 graphically presents the causal model of main effects
(H1a through H1d) and the interactions between price and packag-
ing (H2a), price and quality (H2b), and price and production (H2c)
on young consumers’ green purchase intention.
3. Method
In this section, the applied methodological procedures for quan-
titative study operationalization are described. Therefore, we ini-
tially present the classification of the study and describe the data
collection procedures (3.1). Next, the statistical procedures applied
for data analysis are detailed (3.2).
3.1. Data collection and study design
Considering the main objective of this study, a conclusive study
with a quantitative approach was carried out. Conclusive research
allows the testing of specific hypotheses and examining rela-
tions (Malhotra, 2012). The process of conclusive studies is for-
mal and structured, and the findings are used for decision-making
(Hair et al., 2008).
Regarding the data collection procedure, based on the research
problems, we decided to use both descriptive and causal research
techniques in the data collection instrument (detailed question-
naire is provided as Supplementary Information). Theoretically,
descriptive research enables detailed descriptions of marketing
functions, such as consumer perception and consumer behaviour
(Malhotra, 2012). On the other hand, causal studies allow for the
examination of cause-effect relationships (Hair et al., 2007). There-
fore, descriptive research methods help identify which attributes
are determinant for the purchase of environmentally sustainable
food by young consumers. On the other hand, scenario-based ex-
periment design, a causal research technique, was employed to
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
analyse the compensatory rules for green product attributes dur-
ing pre-purchase evaluation.
The data collection instrument used in this research was a
structured questionnaire divided into blocks. To design the ques-
tionnaire and map attributes a literature review was conducted on
green food studies. To analyse the determinant attributes, green
product attributes were divided into instrumental and expressive
attributes as presented in Figs. 1 and 2 of Section 2 (blocks 2 and
3 of the instrument). The construct for consumers’ ecological atti-
tude towards green products was created using the variables de-
scribed in the study of de Medeiros et al. (2016) (block 1 of the
instrument).
To investigate the decision rules, we describe different types
of chocolates through a combination of four attributes at two
levels. This experimental design allowed respondents to evalu-
ate scenarios and not the attributes themselves singlehandedly.
Theoretically, we can define an experiment as a trial or series
of trials, where propositional changes to the input variables are
made in order to identify reasons for changes in output variables
(Montgomery, 2017). Its outline includes choosing factors, levels
and treatments (de Medeiros et al., 2018). The factors and levels
examined in the study were four instrumental attributes (price,
quality, cleaner production and packing) at two levels. Based on
the factors listed, sixteen scenarios have been proposed, combin-
ing two levels of performance. We emphasize that the choice of
instrumental attributes as factors in the experimental design is
because, in the evaluation of decision rules, the main objective
of consumers is to maximize utility (see Section 2.3). Also, ex-
pressive attributes are not easily manipulated, and, in the case of
some expressive attributes, manipulation of levels would not be
feasible.
Our quantitative study was made up of young consumers and
the justification for choosing this segment of the population is
presented in Section 1. The sample of young consumers was col-
lected from among university students. This group is believed to
represent the population of young consumers since scholarships
and other incentives (such as funding programs), as well as quota
programs established in public institutions, has made enrolment
in Brazilian higher education more accessible. This is especially so
for young people from different social classes, races, and genders
(PNAD-IBGE, M.F.Y. 2019). In addition, the southern region of Brazil
(where this study was conducted) presents one of the highest per-
centages of young people enrolled in higher education in Brazil
(10% above the national average of 24%) (INEP, 2019).
The sample was composed of 106 respondents and is character-
ized as non-probabilistic by quotas. Sampling by quotas involves
individuals who represent a population, and the subjects are cho-
sen according to their characteristics or qualities (Malhotra, 2012).
In the construction of the sample, special attention was given to
demographic variables. Therefore, the sample is composed of 58
women and 48 men; considering income, the sample comprises
50 lower-income, 29 intermediate income and 27 high-income stu-
dents. Our sample also comprises students from the 12 existing
faculty schools on campus.
Regarding the data collection procedures, we used both non-
personal data collection (sending the survey via email to people
that fit the study’s objective), and personal (physically approaching
people on the university’s grounds). We performed electronic data
collection using the Google Docs tool. Questionnaires were sent to
students through mailing lists provided by faculty offices of under-
graduate and graduate courses. We also conducted in-person data
collection to complement the number of respondents of our re-
search. A trained researcher was responsible for carrying out data
collection. Young students were approached in places of social in-
teraction at the university, such as restaurants and green areas.
We consider time as an important determinant while approaching
263
young people, thus we invited them to participate during the in-
tervals between class shifts. The use of these two procedures stems
from the following reasons: the need to meet the selection criteria
of the sample and the need for a greater number of respondents,
since the rate of return in electronic questionnaires was low (7% to
10% of the questionnaires sent).
3.2. Data analysis
With the assistance of the IBM SPSS Statistics software, the in-
ternal coherence coefficient was assessed, provided as Supplemen-
tary Information (see tables B.1 and B.2). In general, Cronbach’s
alpha values resulted in good and excellent associations, between
0.7 and 0.9, indicating that each block coherently captured the ex-
pected constructs. Furthermore, we used descriptive statistics to
analyse frequency related to the declared importance of expressive
and instrumental attributes. To analyse the most relevant attributes
in the purchase decision process, we used Pareto charts to identify
the determining attributes for the purchase of green foods based
on response frequencies.
Next, we created the variable ecological attitude by calculating
the mean for each respondent for eleven variables. The ecologi-
cal attitude variable is based on the criteria of M.F.Y. Cheung and
To (2019). Variables from Block A of the data collection instru-
ment (such as concern for the environment, knowledge of environ-
mentally sustainable products, and purchase decisions orientated
by brands and products that cause less environmental impact) in
addition to questions related to instrumental variables. It is impor-
tant to highlight that quality and price were not considered for the
creation of the variable as these are attributes inherent to all prod-
ucts and, thus, do not shape ecological attitude. The questions that
addressed the importance of the expressive attributes of healthy
lifestyle, environmental concern and waste reduction were also in-
cluded.
After obtaining the average of each respondent for the eleven
variables, we calculated the percentiles to develop the ecological
attitude levels. The first third characterizes consumers with the
lowest averages, who were classified as consumers with a low eco-
logical attitude level. The second third covered intermediate scores,
and the final third was classified as a high ecological attitude level.
The levels were then used as a basis for comparing means for the
expressive and instrumental attributes to identify significant dif-
ferences between the three ecological attitude levels. To define the
statistically significant difference for the means of the different lev-
els, the upper and lower limits were calculated using the distance
of 2 standard deviations from the attribute mean for each level of
ecological attitude for each attribute. Finally, we used forest plots
to graphically present the mean and the upper and lower limits for
each ecological attitude group in each attribute.
Finally, for the questions that assessed scenario-based purchase
intention based on the 2k factorial design of experiment, analysis
of variance (ANOVA) and a multiple regression were carried out.
We used the ANOVA to test whether a variation in Price, Quality,
Packaging, and Production type accounted for a significant differ-
ence in the response variable, namely purchase intention. Addi-
tionally, we tested two-factor interactions for their effect on pur-
chase intention. Then, an Ordinary-Least Squares Linear Regression
model was used to estimate the effect sizes for each main fac-
tor (price, quality, packaging, and production type) in addition to
their two-factor interactions, using purchase intention as the pre-
dicted variable. The linear regression allows us to assess whether
attributes are judged under compensatory rules, as compensatory
decision-making is expressed as the linear addition of product at-
tributes to increase purchase intention.
264 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273

Table 1
Perception of the importance of expressive attributes for green food purchases.

Expressive Attributes Mean Std. Deviation Frequency

1 2 3 4 5

Environmental concern 4.35 0.781 0 3 11 38 54

Health concern 3.74 1.026 3 9 28 39 27
Knowledge about sustainability 3.63 1.081 4 13 25 40 24
Healthy lifestyle 3.45 1.061 6 10 38 34 18
Waste reduction 3.39 1.126 7 16 29 37 17
Guilt/social pressure 2.28 1.119 33 30 25 16 2

Table 2
Perception of the importance of instrumental attributes for green food purchases.

Instrumental Attributes Mean Std. Deviation Frequency

1 2 3 4 5

Quality 4.86 0.376 0 0 1 13 92

Price 4.04 1.023 1 10 17 34 44
Package recyclability 3.70 1.189 6 10 29 26 35
Cleaner production practices 3.60 1.224 7 12 30 24 33
Ethical labels 3.51 1.213 7 15 29 27 28
Environmental labels 3.46 1.318 10 17 24 24 31
Green pack 3.26 1.319 16 12 27 30 21

4. Results as appearance or healthiness, but also to reliability when specific

Initially, the results from the descriptive research are presented
(4.1) and, posteriorly, the results from the causal research are anal-
ysed (4.2).
4.1. Determinant attributes
In order to know the determinant attributes of young con-
sumers’ purchase decision concerning green food, we initially
asked respondents to indicate the degree of importance given to
each of the items mapped in the literature (Table 1).
The results show that environmental concern is the main ex-
pressive attribute related to the purchase of green food. Accord-
ing to Stern and Dietz (1994), environmental concern is related
to selfish and social-altruistic value orientations, as well as beliefs
about the environmental changes caused on valued objects. The-
oretically, “environmental concern” is not influenced or described
by a single factor, but for some actions (behaviours) (Ohtomo and
Hirose, 2007; Koenig-Lewis et al., 2014). Still, the low frequency for
the variable “guilt/social pressure” might have been influenced by
the direct2 data collection approach, which could have made sub-
jects self-conscious about openly stating such feelings.
In addition to investigating expressive attributes of food pur-
chase (described in Table 1), we also analysed instrumental at-
tributes related to the utility perceived by young consumers (see
Table 2), since it is common for instrumental and expressive at-
tributes to simultaneously interfere in the purchase decision. Con-
ceptually, instrumental attributes usually cover objective and func-
tional matters of the product, while the expressive attributes en-
compass hedonistic, subjective considerations and associations of
the product with projections of the self (Blackwell et al., 2011;
Solomon, 2013).
Quality and price were the attributes with highest perceived
importance in the purchase decision. Consumers increasingly per-
ceive product quality to be not only related to visual aspects, such
2
In the indirect approach, research objectives are hidden from the respondents,
while in the direct approach participants are aware of the objective as interviews
are used. That is, techniques used in the indirect approach may lead consumers to
give responses that they would not if they were being asked directly about a certain
subject. Whereas the direct approach facilitates complete and detailed information
gathering (Malhotra, 2012).
features are present, that is, it refers to the confidence with which
consumers can buy certain products (Petrescu et al., 2020).
After assessing the respondents’ perceptions of importance re-
garding instrumental and expressive attributes, we sought to de-
fine their importance in the purchase decision. That is, we asked
respondents to indicate the three most important attributes in
decision-making out of the full set of attributes previously eval-
uated. Figs. 4 and 5 show the results obtained.
Determinant attributes are those that really influence the eval-
uation process causing consumers to notice differences in perfor-
mance from different offers (Alpert, 1971). The accumulated per-
centage of instrumental attributes shows that "quality", "cleaner
production practices" and "price" are determinant attributes for
the choice of green food. Likewise, we suggest that “health con-
cern”, “healthy lifestyle” and “environmental concern” are determi-
nant expressive attributes.
Another relevant aspect of understanding consumer decision-
making involves identifying the determinants of the evaluation cri-
teria. As such, we also conducted an analysis to identify the exist-
ing association between the level of ecological attitude and the im-
portance assigned to green attributes for food consumption. The-
oretically, attitudes are derived from one’s knowledge and beliefs
about a certain object or subject (the cognitive component), as well
as from feelings related to that object or subject (affective compo-
nent) (Zanna and Rempel, 1988). Therefore, Table 3 presents the
existing association between the level of ecological attitude and
the importance assigned to expressive attributes for green food
consumption.
The results show that the level of ecological attitude positively
influences purchase behaviour, since we found statistical signifi-
cance for the expressive attributes. Participants with a high level
of ecological attitude seem to purchase green food due to their
healthy lifestyle, concern for health and the environment. Addi-
tionally, young consumers are positively influenced by information
and knowledge about green food and sustainability and seek to re-
duce waste through conscious consumption.
In addition, we compared the results of the means between
the three levels of ecological attitude and the expressive attributes
through the representation of forest plots, which provide insight
into existent variations between the results of the different con-
sumer groups for each attribute (see Fig. 6). Statistical difference
between means was inferred using 2 standard deviations of the
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273 265

Fig. 4. Frequency graph of the relevant expressive attributes for the purchase of green food.

Fig. 5. Frequency graph of the relevant instrumental attributes for the purchase of green food.

Table 3
Comparison of means considering expressive attributes and the ecological attitude of the university students.

Ecological Attitude

Average for Intermediate

Average for Low Ecological Ecological Attitude Average for High Ecological
Attitude (Standard Dev) (Standard Dev) Attitude (Standard Dev) Diff.

Waste reduction 2.65 3.43 4.10 1.46∗

(1.23) (0.88) (0.89)
Knowledge about sustainability 3.03 3.74 4.10 1.07∗
(1.20) (0.92) (0.84)
Guilt/Social Pressure 2.32 2.22 2.34 0.02
(1.20) (0.98) (1.21)
Healthy lifestyle 2.81 3.46 4.14 1.33∗
(1.09) (0.95) (0.68)
Environmental concern 3.97 4.39 4.69 0.72∗
(0.97) (0.64) (0.53)
Health concern 3.06 3.76 4.41 1.35∗
(0.95) (0.96) (0.67)
∗
Significant at the 95% confidence level (p-value < 0.05).
266 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273

Fig. 6. Forest plots for comparison of means of expressive attributes.

mean difference for a 95% confidence interval. Hence, if the upper
or lower limits of each ecological attitude level falls with the limits
of other levels, they are not considered statistically different.
Averages for environmental concern are the highest for all lev-
els of ecological attitude. This shows that regardless of the level
of consumer attitude in terms of ecological issues, environmental
concern is a relevant attribute in the green food purchasing de-
cision process. Additionally, this may be related to the attitude-
behaviour gap widely reported in literature, wherein consumers
are concerned about sustainable issues, however these concerns
are not always translated into green purchases and attitudes.
Health concern and healthy lifestyle seem to be perceived sim-
ilarly for each of the three ecological attitude levels. Young peo-
ple with lower levels of ecological attitude assign less importance
to these two attributes in the purchasing decision process. In the
case of the guilt/social pressure attribute, the three levels of eco-
logical attitude do not present a statistically significant difference
in means, since the consumers in the high level attributed simi-
lar weights of importance as consumers in the intermediate and
low levels. The same procedures of investigation were applied to
instrumental attributes and the level of ecological attitude. The re-
sults are summarized in Table 4.
Again, the results show that the level of ecological attitude pos-
itively influences purchase behaviour. Additionally, as price was the
only attribute that did not present statistical significance, we may
infer that people with a higher level of ecological attitude perceive
greater value in green food products. According to Zeithaml (1988),
perceived value is a positive function of the perception of qual-
ity and intrinsic and extrinsic attributes. According to this view,
value is also a negative function of the costs, which can be mon-
etary and non-monetary (such as psychological, sensory, time, and
physical energy costs). Thus, perceived value is derived from the
relationship between what one receives (bonus) versus what one
loses (burden). Fig. 7 presents the results of the comparison of the
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273 267

Table 4
Comparison of means considering instrumental attributes and the ecological attitude of young consumers .

Ecological Attitude

Average for Low Ecological Average for Intermediate Ecological Average for High Ecological
Attitude (Standard Dev) Attitude (Standard Dev) Attitude (Standard Dev) Diff.

Environmental labels 2.06 3.57 4.79 2.73∗

(1.01) (0.82) (0.48)
Ethical labels 2.71 3.39 4.55 1.84∗
(1.20) (0.87) (0.89)
Green pack 1.97 3.46 4.34 2.38∗
(1.06) (0.97) (0.76)
Package recyclability 2.61 3.93 4.48 1.87∗
(1.07) (0.84) (0.90)
Cleaner production practices 2.26 3.76 4.79 2.54∗
(0.88) (0.81) (0.41)
Price 4.19 3.74 4.34 0.15
(0.82) (1.07) (0.99)
Quality 4.71 4.89 4.97 0.26∗
(0.52) (0.31) (0.18)
∗
Significant at the 95% confidence level (p-value < 0.05).

Table 5
Experimental design for purchase intention scenarios of green food.

Scenario Price Quality Packaging Production Purchase intention

1 Regular Market price (−1) Average quality (−1) Plastic material (−1) Traditional (−1) 57.3%
2 Regular Market price (−1) Average quality (−1) Plastic material (−1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 71.2%
3 Regular Market price (−1) Average quality (−1) Recyclable material (+1) Traditional 71.9%
4 Regular Market price(−1) Average quality (−1) Recyclable material (+1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 78.5%
5 10% above market price (+1) Average quality (−1) Plastic material (−1) Traditional (−1) 38.0%
6 10% above market price (+1) Average quality (−1) Plastic material (−1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 57.3%
7 10% above market price (+1) Average quality (−1) Recyclable material (+1) Traditional (−1) 50.9%
8 10% above market price (+1) Average quality (−1) Recyclable material (+1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 62.7%
9 10% above market price (+1) Excellent quality (+1) Plastic material (−1) Traditional (−1) 60.6%
10 10% above market price (+1) Excellent quality (+1) Plastic material (−1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 70.5%
11 10% above market price (+1) Excellent quality (+1) Recyclable material (+1) Traditional (−1) 65.3%
12 10% above market price (+1) Excellent quality (+1) Recyclable material (+1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 77.6%
13 Regular Market price (−1) Excellent quality (+1) Plastic material (−1) Traditional (−1) 69.8%
14 Regular Market price (−1) Excellent quality (+1) Plastic material (−1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 75.7%
15 Regular Market price (−1) Excellent quality (+1) Recyclable material (+1) Traditional (−1) 81.1%
16 Regular Market price (−1) Excellent quality (+1) Recyclable material (+1) Cleaner Production Practices (+1) 86.1%

means between instrumental attributes at the three levels of eco- Table 6

logical attitude in forest plots.
In this case, low ecological attitude consumers, at the time of
purchase decisions, give less importance to the instrumental at-
tributes than the higher-level groups dispend. We infer that price
is a product-inherent attribute; that is why there is no asso-
ciation between price and consumer ecological attitude. On the
other hand, quality was considered of paramount importance to
all groups. Although there are small differences among groups, we
may infer that quality is not that closely related to ecological atti-
tude. We assume that there is a low association with this variable.
For the other associations, graphics clearly reveal that the lower
ecological attitude group gives less importance to instrumental at-
tributes, while higher levels groups consider these factors crucial
in green food purchasing.
4.2. Hypotheses testing
To analyse whether some attributes related to the purchase of
green food are compensatory or non-compensatory, one of the re-
search instrument blocks sought to understand choices based on
the construction of scenarios. To that end, we designed distinct
purchase possibilities of green food products, based on the liter-
ature review, using a chocolate bar as a reference product.
Table 5 presents the scenarios tested and respondents’ purchase
intentions for each experimental scenario tested. The independent
variables (price, quality, packaging, and production) were tested at
two levels, constituting a 2k factorial experiment, where each at-
Results of analysis of variance.
Source Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F-Ratio P-Value
Model 2173.22 10 217.32 45.38 0.001
Residual 19.16 4 4.79
Total (Corr.) 2192.38 14
tribute could vary in two levels. Product price was tested at the
regular market price (−1) and at a 10% above market price level
(−1). Quality was tested at an average quality level (−1) and at a
level of excellence (+1). Packaging was tested using plastic mate-
rial (−1) and using recyclable material (+1), whereas production
process was tested at a traditional production standard (−1) and
using cleaner production practices (+1). In Table 5, the low levels
of attributes (−1) are presented in cells with a white background,
while the high levels (+1) are presented with grey background.
Therefore, purchase intention was investigated through a single
replication of a 2^4 factorial experiment. This type of experiment
allows all major factors and all two-factor interactions to be tested.
The interactions comprising three or more factors cannot be tested,
as they are used to estimate the error term (Montgomery, 2017).
Analysis of variance indicates that there is a statistically signif-
icant relationship among the ten variables at the 95.0% confidence
level (p-value <0.05, as presented in Table 6). A multiple regres-
sion confirmed the significance of the main factors (price, quality,
packaging, and production) and the interaction and provided es-
timated purchase intention of green food products dependending
268 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273

Fig. 7. Forest plots for the comparison of means of the instrumental attribute.

on the levels of Price, Quality, Packaging, and Production. Table 7
summarizes the results.
The output shows the results of fitting a multiple linear regres-
sion model to describe the relationship among purchase intention,
four main factors and three interactions. The R² coefficient indi-
cates that the model as fitted explains 99.13% of the variability in
purchase intention. Since for the Durbin-Watson test, the p-value
is greater than 0.05, there is no indication of serial autocorrelation
in the residuals at the 95.0% confidence level. The obtained regres-
sion equation is as follows:
P urchaseIntention : 0.672 − −0.0679xP rice + 0.0618xQuality+
0.0461xPackaging + 0.0529xP roduction + 0.0196xP ricexQuality
(1)
The results of the ANOVA and the regression model (Table 7)
support the proposed hypothesis of compensatory rules in green
food purchase (H1), since price, quality, recyclable packaging, and
cleaner production were found to be significant. As the standard-
ized levels vary from −1 to +1, the effect of any factor is twice the
value of its respective coefficient, we observe that increased price
reduces the purchase intention by 13.6%. Hence, results support
H1a. This decision rule is also applied to quality, since its improve-
ment implies a 12.4% increase on purchase intention, even in sce-
narios where plastic packaging is present, supporting H1b and pro-
vide evidence that higher prices can be compensated by the pos-
itive effects of excellent-quality foods.. The same behaviour occurs
with recyclable packaging, since it expands the purchase intention
in 9.2% regardless of other attributes at lower levels, which include,
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273 269

Table 7
Results of multiple regression analysis.

Parameter Estimate Std Error T Statistic P-Value

Constant 67.285 0.599 112.267 0.000

Main Effects
Price −6.225 0.599 −11.550 0.000
Quality 6.053 0.599 10.099 0.000
Packaging 4.478 0.599 7.471 0.002
Production 5.165 0.599 8.618 0.001
Interactions
Price∗ Quality 2.085 0.599 3.479 0.025
Price∗ Packaging −0.715 0.599 −1.193 0.299
Price∗ Production 1.498 0.599 2.499 0.067
R² 99.13%
Adjusted R² 96.94%
Standard Error of Estimation 2.188
Mean Absolute Error 0.967
Durbin-Watson statistic 2.019 0.236

In sum, this interaction between price and quality means that

Fig. 8. Interaction between price and quality attributes.
for example, the use of traditional techniques for food processing.
More specifically, we can claim that recyclable packaging helps to
compensate for the use of traditional production techniques.
These results support the hypothesis H1c, since recyclable pack-
aging has a positive significant impact on young consumers’ green
food purchase intention. That is, products that are weak at some
attributes (the lower level ones) acquire an increase in purchase
intention through the existence of another attribute at a higher
level. Similarly, the use of cleaner production practices increases
the purchase intention by 10.6%, regardless of the negative effects
of other attributes, supporting H1d. Therefore, cleaner production
practices also act in a compensatory way and have a positive sig-
nificant impact on young consumers’ green food purchase inten-
tion.
Regarding the interaction of price with other green attributes
and their impact on young consumers’ purchase intention, H2 can
be partially supported. The effects yielded from interaction be-
tween price and quality there is statistical significance (the p-value
is less than 0.05). For the average quality level, price increase re-
duces purchase intention by 18%. On the other hand, when testing
excellent quality, we found that the same price elevation results in
a drop in purchase intention of only 8.5%. These results support hy-
pothesis H2a. Fig. 8 presents the nature of price and quality inter-
action. Findings show that price increase affects purchase intention
to a higher extent when the quality of the product is lower. More
specifically, when price varies from a low (−1) to the high (+1)
level, purchase intention for products of excellent quality (+1) de-
creases less than when price varies from low to high for products
of average quality (−1).
consumers can use the price as an indicator of quality during the
evaluation of choice alternatives. Nevertheless, this criterion can
also be used as a cut-off criterion. That is, consumers are likely to
have a very well-defined price range that they are willing to pay
for green food. And exceeding this price elasticity boundary will
most likely lead consumers to avoid the product because it may
become too expensive.
However, the results of the interactions between price and
packaging, and between price and production type were not signif-
icant (p-value greater than 0.05). Thus we may infer that the effect
of one attribute on purchase intention is independent of the level
of the second attribute. In other words, in the interaction between
price and packaging, we argue that when considering a green food
product, regardless of the packaging material, the effect of price on
purchase intention is approximately the same in both situations.
Thus, the results do not support H2b. The same holds true for
the interaction between price and cleaner production: the effect
of price on purchase intention is approximately equal in the sce-
nario where there are traditional production practices or cleaner
production practices. Hence, H2c is not supported.
5. Discussion
Based on the diagnosis conducted, we identified the (i) in-
strumental (“quality”, “cleaner production practices” and “price”)
and (ii) expressive attributes (“health concern”, “healthy lifestyle”
and “environmental concern”) that are determinant amongst young
consumers when purchasing green food. Regarding (iii) rules used
to judge green food offers, we found that a higher price, within a
rational elasticity, can be compensated by the attributes of quality,
recyclable packaging material and/or cleaner production practices.
With respect to (i) instrumental attributes, other studies have
already verified the relevance of quality and price for green foods,
which tend to mediate purchase intention and willingness to
pay (Mohr and Schlich, 2015; Tong et al., 2020). In general, au-
thors state that when consumers perceive attributes related to
the product, such as utility (performance) and quality, a posi-
tive purchase intention is generated, based on the willingness to
pay premium prices for a green product (Biswas and Roy, 2015;
Gonçalves et al., 2016; Moser, 2016). Regarding the “source and
processing” attribute, Kushwah et al. (2019) mention that cleaner
production practices for food processing and organic farming in-
crease consumer perception of functional benefits, which trans-
lates into purchase intention and behaviour. In a study that anal-
ysed the impact of ecological brands in food retail, Chkanikova and
Lehner (2015) reported that consumers are willing to pay a pre-
mium price for products featuring labels certifying compliance
270 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
with environmental, social and ethical standards. However, it is
important to note that such labels are subject to standardization.
Lin et al. (2019) highlight that the relationship of trust between
companies and consumers can be established through certifying
institutions (ecolabeling) and organic control organizations.
As for (ii) expressive attributes, Lin et al. (2019) and
Thøgersen et al. (2019) found that food safety and health concerns
are driving factors to increase the preference for and the consump-
tion of organic food. Specifically, Thøgersen et al. (2019) describe
that the “healthy” idea can become tangible for consumers through
cleaner production methods and the use of local raw materials, as
long as these actions are correctly communicated to consumers.
However, it is pertinent to highlight that most of the studies car-
ried out, unlike the present study, describe expressive attributes
as antecedent factors of purchase intention (Barker et al., 2019;
Feil et al., 2020; Tong et al., 2020, amongst others), and not as he-
donic requirements to be incorporated by brands into their green
offerings.
Finally, with regard to (iii) rules used to judge green foods, our
results confirm that consumers use compensatory rules to judge
green food products. From this, we can say that young people tend
to evaluate the total utility of the product based on an analysis
of the performance of individual attributes. This means that the
weakness in one attribute could be compensated for the good per-
formance in another attribute. Furthermore, we confirm that there
is less influence of the price on the intention to purchase green
products when there is perceived value based on higher quality.
This information is relevant since it indicates a lower sensitivity
to the price of green food when people perceived sustainable at-
tributes. Quality is an element of great value in the purchase de-
cision process of green food products. Results from the scenarios
tested show a positive relationship with purchase intention since
the proposed quality increase augmented green food purchase in-
tention by 12.4%. Additionally, packages developed with recycled
material and cleaner production practices increase purchase inten-
tion by 9.2 and 10.6%, respectively. Nevertheless, the interactions
between price and packaging, and price and production type did
not reach statistical significance.
In summary, the results indicate that quality and price tend to
reduce consumer non-monetary “costs”, that is, reduce the risks
associated with the consumer purchasing decision-making process.
Theoretically, when marketing professionals find ways to reduce
perceived risks for distinct decision-making processes, they are
“adding value to the offer” and, consequently, there is an increase
in selling price elasticity (Kotler and Keller, 2014). Obviously, in
markets of customary purchases such as the food market, where
most products are convenience goods, such elasticity is not very
high, but it certainly exists, especially if the products are associ-
ated with expressive attributes.
5.1. Theoretical implications
We found that young people, when choosing green foods, use
a simplified model by shortcuts (heuristics). This model contem-
plates the rational search amongst consumers for an efficient deci-
sion, which satisfies some of their established expectations. There-
fore, our study allowed us to verify that the decision rules used
by consumers to purchase green foods focus on satisfying some of
their aspirations, and not on maximizing all their aspirations . Ad-
ditionally, we have identified that a quality increase can decrease
price sensitivity, that is, quality increases generate a perception of
additional value for buyers in on regular (or less involved) pur-
chases (Blackwell et al., 2011).
Another relevant point to highlight focuses on the analysis
of consumer involvement, and its interference in judgement pro-
cesses. Studies carried out by Nuttavuthisit and Thøgersen (2017),
Brach et al. (2018) and Woo and Kim (2019) indicated that, even
though the purchase of food is characterized as a regular pur-
chase (therefore less involved), the insertion of aspects related
to sustainability could make it increase in consumers percep-
tion of psychological risk (confidence in the veracity of informa-
tion) and performance. This perception could make consumers
use non-compensatory rules in the decision to purchase green
foods. However, the results of the present study elucidated that,
at least amongst the young audience, this does not happen. It is
worth mentioning, however, that in medium and high involve-
ment purchases, in which perceived risks tend to be higher (such
as the purchase of furniture and automobiles, for example), non-
compensatory rules are often employed, establishing a relevant
topic for future studies.
Additionally, by aiming to list the determinant attributes for
the set of considerations that guide consumers’ decision-making,
we show that both instrumental and expressive attributes are im-
portant drivers of choice. At this point, note that, although in-
strumentals are attributes considered for evaluating compensatory
and non-compensatory decision rules, expressive attributes can fig-
ure as modelers for reducing psychological cost and performance
(Kotler and Keller, 2014), expanding price elasticity for green foods.
The study by de Medeiros et al. (2016), when relating ecological at-
titude to price elasticity for furniture and cars, found that if prod-
ucts with and without green attributes are the exact same price,
95% of the respondents would purchase green.
5.2. Practical implications
From the study’s conclusions, we suggest that the food indus-
try: (i) use the value-added strategy to price green food; (ii) pri-
oritize actions in advertising that focus on expressive attributes;
and (iii) invest in the development of healthy products, developed
through cleaner production processes.
We justify our proposition (i) since concerns about instrumen-
tal attributes (such as quality and cleaner production), as well as
expressive attributes, tend to reduce risks perceived by consumers,
decreasing their price sensitivity (that is, expanding upward elas-
ticity). Regarding proposition (ii), consumers also have a propen-
sity for self-interest, that is, consumers prioritize personal matters
(Griskevicius et al., 2012; Vugt et al., 2014). Under this perspec-
tive, people are more willing to behave proactively towards sus-
tainability if they perceive benefits for themselves, for their rel-
atives, for their community or for their organization. Finally, we
support proposition (iii) as the frequency ranking for the instru-
mental attributes shows that “origin” and “processing” have a high
degree of relevance, as well as “health concern” for expressive at-
tributes. Additionally, the scenarios tested showed an increase of
10.6% in students’ purchase intention when food products are pro-
cessed through clean technologies.
Finally, since we performed the study in Brazil, a country where
sustainable production and consumption systems are under devel-
opment, we understand that the present research tends to help
other peripheral regions with production chains in similar stages.
Additionally, observing the relevance of small and medium-sized
companies to the food sector, we believe that organizations could
use the results to strengthen their marketing strategies, expanding
the capacity to generate jobs and quality of life for their host re-
gions.
6. Conclusion
Consumer purchase intention can be influenced by some green
food attributes, as shown in previous studies. Nevertheless, the lit-
erature is not clear when it comes to elucidating which criteria
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
consumers rely on to make their own food purchase decisions. De-
spite research having advanced in terms of understanding how the
behaviour of green consumers works, the decision rules applied by
these individuals remain unknown. For this reason, besides inves-
tigating which attributes are determinant to the purchase process,
we aimed to identify how consumers assess the presence and the
intensity of the attributes in green food. That is, we sought to test
the compensatory character of some attributes in green food pur-
chase scenarios.
It is important to understand the relation between green food
purchasing and the compensatory heuristic rules of judgement, as
managerial insights were developed based on this point. analysing
different experimental scenarios, we supported hypothesis H1
through the discovery that price, quality, recyclable packaging and
cleaner production practices work as compensatory attributes. The
effects of these factors explain the judgmental rules applied by
young consumers in their decision-making process of whether or
not to purchase green food. In this sense, we also support the hy-
potheses H1a, H1b, H1c and H1d, since the four attributes have a
significant impact on the young consumers’ green food purchase
intention. Our results also partially support H2, since the interac-
tion between price and product quality were found to have a sig-
nificant impact on young consumers’ green purchase intention.
We further discovered that quality, cleaner production practices
and price are the most important instrumental attributes in de-
termining the choice of green food. This means that they offer
differentials related to product performance. Similarly, health con-
cern, healthy lifestyle and environmental concern are determinants
amongst the expressive attributes. Additionally, a strong associa-
tion between the level of consumers’ ecological attitude and the
perception of importance given to instrumental and expressive at-
tributes was observed. In general, consumers with a high level of
ecological attitude consider the mapped attributes more important
than the lower-level consumers do. The exceptions are price and
guilt/social pressure.
As a limitation of this study, we note that purchase behaviour
reported may differ from the actual behaviour towards green food
products. The actual product choices in the store depend on many
other factors (Lazzarini et al., 2018). Considering that the percep-
tion of importance and purchase intention do not necessarily im-
ply behaviour (Moser, 2016; Stranieri et al., 2017), future research
could effectively investigate the purchases made by consumers at
the point of sale using objective measures, and exploring factor
levels using experimental research design with real products. Ad-
ditionally, future research could expand the study of consumer
purchase behaviour to other countries, levels of education and
age groups. Finally, researchers also could apply our experiment
to other purchase contexts, like furniture and automobiles, since
there is higher involvement and perceived risk when compared to
the chocolate bar context. It would be possible to verify whether
non-compensatory judgement rules are applied in these cases.
Declaration of Competing Interest
Author A declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author
B declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author C declares
that he has no conflict of interest. Author D declares that she has
no conflict of interest. Author E declares that he has no conflict of
interest. Author F declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the Brazilian National Council for Scientific
and Technological Development (CNPq Conselho Nacional de De-
senvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico), Coordination for the Im-
provement of Higher Education Personnel in Brazil (CAPES - Co-
271
ordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior) and
Foundation to support research in the state of Rio Grande do Sul
(FAPERGS) for the financial support received to conduct this re-
search.
Supplementary materials
Supplementary material associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.spc.2020.06.003.
References
Abihpec Sebrae, 2019. Trends notebook 2019–2020. Pers. Hygiene Per-
fumer Cosmetic. Available in: https://abihpec.org.br/publicacao/
caderno- de- tendencias- 2019- 2020/ (accessed 28 october 2019).
Allen, M.W., Hung Ng, S., Wilson, M., 2002. A functional approach to instrumen-
tal and terminal values and the value-attitude-behaviour system of consumer
choice. Eur. J. Mark. 36, 111–135. doi:10.1108/03090560210412728.
Alpert, M., 1971. Identification of determinant attributes: a comparison of methods.
J. Mark. Res. 8 (2), 184–191. doi:10.2307/3149759.
Asioli, D., Aschemann-Witzel, J., Caputo, V., Vecchio, R., Annunziata, A., Næs, T.,
Varela, P., 2017. Making sense of the “clean label” trends: a review of consumer
food choice behavior and discussion of industry implications. Food Res. Int. 99,
58–71. doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2017.07.022.
Baxter, J., 2016. Behavioural Foundations of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, UK.
Bettman, J.R, 1979. Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice. Wesley Pub.
Co., Addison.
Biswas, A., Roy, M., 2015. Leveraging factors for sustained green consumption be-
havior based on consumption value perceptions: testing the structural model. J.
Clean. Prod. 95, 332–340. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.042.
Blackwell, R.D., Miniard, P.W., Engel, J.F., 2011. Consumer Behavior. tenth ed.
South-Western College Pub, Cincinnati.
Brouhle, K., Khanna, M., 2012. Determinants of participation versus consumption
in the Nordic Swan eco-labeled market. Ecol. Econ. 73, 142–151. doi:10.1016/j.
ecolecon.2011.10.011.
Cerri, J., Testa, F., Rizzi, F., 2018. The more I care, the less I will listen to you: how in-
formation, environmental concern and ethical production influence consumers’
attitudes and the purchasing of sustainable products. J. Clean. Prod. 175, 343–
353. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.054.
Chekima, B., Wafa, S.A., Igau, O.A., Chekima, S., Sondoh, L., 2016. Examining green
consumerism motivational drivers: does premium price and demographics mat-
ter to green purchasing? J. Clean. Prod 112, 3436–3450. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.
2015.09.102.
Cheung, M.F.Y., To, W.M., 2019. An extended model of value-attitude-behavior to
explain Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 50,
145–153. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.006.
Chkanikova, O., Lehner, M., 2015. Private eco-brands and green market develop-
ment: towards new forms of sustainability governance in the food retailing. J.
Clean. Prod. 107, 74–84. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.055.
Choi, D., Johnson, K.K., 2019. Influences of environmental and hedonic motivations
on intention to purchase green products: an extension of the theory of planned
behavior. Sustain. Prod. and Consum. 18, 145–155. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2019.02.001.
Dangelico, R.M., Vocalelli, D., 2017. “Green Marketing”: an analysis of definitions,
strategy steps, and tools through a systematic review of the literature. J. Clean.
Prod. 165, 1263–1279. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.184.
De-Magistris, T., Gracia, A., 2016. Consumers’ willingness-to-pay for sustainable food
products: the case of organically and locally grown almonds in spain. J. Clean.
Prod. 118, 97–104. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.01.050.
de Medeiros, J.F., Ribeiro, J.L.D., Cortimiglia, M.N., 2016. Influence of perceived value
on purchasing decisions of green products in Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 110, 158–169.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.100.
de Medeiros, J.F., Ribeiro, J.L.D., 2017. Environmentally sustainable innovation: ex-
pected attributes in the purchase of green products. J. Clean. Prod. 142, 240–
248. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.191.
de Medeiros, J.F., Vidor, G., Korzenowski, A.L., 2018. Review of experimental meth-
ods to optimise the collaboration between organisations in the new product de-
velopment process. Int. J. of Bus. Innov. Res. 15 (4), 467–482. doi:10.1504/IJBIR.
2018.090463.
Ehgartner, U., 2018. Discourses of the food retail industry: changing understandings
of ‘the consumer’ and strategies for sustainability. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 16,
154–161. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2018.08.002.
Elrod, T., Johnson, R.D., White, J., 2004. A new integrated model of noncompensatory
and compensatory decision strategies. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 95, 1–
19. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.20 04.06.0 02.
Esteves, M.C., Dean, D., Balzarova, M., 2017. Assessment of building products at-
tributes - A comparative study between eco-labelled and non-eco-labelled
products available in the New Zealand market. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 10, 100–
109. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2017.02.003.
Feil, A.A., Cyrne, C.C.S., Sindelar, F.C.W., Barden, J.E., Dalmoro, M., 2020. Profiles
of sustainable food consumption: consumer behavior toward organic food in
southern region of Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 258, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.
120690.
272 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
Gan, C., Wee, H.Y., Ozanne, L., Kao, T., 2008. Consumers’ purchasing behavior to-
wards green products in New Zealand. Inn. Mark. 4 (1), 93–102.
Gershoff, A.D., Frels, J.K., 2015. What makes it green? The role of centrality of green
attributes in evaluations of the greenness of products. J. Mark 79, 97–110.
Ghvanidze, S., Velikova, N., Dodd, T.H., Oldewage-Theron, W., 2016. Consumers’ en-
vironmental and ethical consciousness and the use of the related food products
information: the role of perceived consumer effectiveness. Appetite 107, 311–
322. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2016.08.097.
Gleim, M.R., Smith, J.S., Andrews, D., Cronin, J.J., 2013. Against the green: a multi-
method examination of the barriers to green consumption. J. Retail. 89 (1), 44–
61. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2012.10.001.
Godin, L., Sahakian, M., 2018. Cutting through conflicting prescriptions: how guide-
lines inform “healthy and sustainable” diets in Switzerland. Appetite 130, 123–
133. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2018.08.004.
Gonçalves, H.M., Lourenço, T.F., Silva, G.M., 2016. Green buying behavior and the
theory of consumption values: a fuzzy-set approach. J. Bus. R. 69 (4), 1484–
1491. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.129.
Goucher-Lambert, K., Cagan, J., 2015. The impact of sustainability on consumer
preference judgments of product attributes. J. Mech. Des. Trans. ASME 137.
doi:10.1115/1.4030271.
Grebitus, C., Roscoe, R.D., Van Loo, L.J., Kula, I., 2020. Sustainable bottled water: how
nudging and internet search affect consumer’s choices. J. Clean. Prod. 267, 1–13.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121930.
Griskevicius, V., Cantú, S., Van Vugt, M., 2012. The evolutionary bases for sustain-
able behavior: implications for marketing, policy, and social entrepreneurship. J.
Public Policy Mark. 31 (1), 115–128. doi:10.1509/jppm.11.040.
Grunert, K.G., Hieke, S., Wills, J., 2014. Sustainability labels on food products: con-
sumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy 44, 177–189. doi:10.1016/
j.foodpol.2013.12.001.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2007. Multivariate data analysis,
Bookman.
Hair, J.F., Bush, R.P., Ortinau, D.J., 2008. Marketing Research. McGraw-Hill Higher Ed-
ucation.
Halkier, H., James, L., Stræte, E.P., 2017. Quality turns in Nordic food: a comparative
analysis of specialty food in Denmark, Norway and Sweden. Europ. Plan. Stud.
25 (7), 1111–1128. doi:10.1080/09654313.2016.1261805.
Harray, A.J., Meng, X., Kerr, D.A., Pollard, C.M., 2018. Healthy and sustainable diets:
community concern about the effect of the future food environments and sup-
port for government regulating sustainable food supplies in Western Australia.
Appetite 125, 225–232. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2018.01.009.
Herbes, C., Beuthner, C., Ramme, I., 2018. Consumer attitudes towards biobased
packaging - A cross-cultural comparative study. J. Clean. Prod. 194, 203–218.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.05.106.
Hoek, A.C., Pearson, D., James, S.W., Lawrence, M.A., Friel, S., 2017a. Shrinking the
food-print: a qualitative study into consumer perceptions, experiences and at-
titudes towards healthy and environmentally friendly food behaviors. Appetite
108, 117–131. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.12.008.
Hoek, A.C., Pearson, D., James, S.W., Lawrence, M.A., Friel, S., 2017b. Healthy and
environmentally sustainable food choices: consumer responses to point-of-
purchase actions. Food Qual. Prefer. 58, 94–106. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.009.
Ingenbleek, P.T., 2015. Price strategies for sustainable food products. Br. Food J. 117
(2), 915–928. doi:10.1108/BFJ- 02- 2014- 0066.
Janssen, M., Jager, W., 2002. Stimulating diffusion of green products. J. Evol. Econ.
12, 283–306. doi:10.10 07/s0 0191-0 02-0120-1.
Jerzyk, E., 2016. Design and communication of ecological content on sustainable
packaging in young Consumers’ opinions. J. Food Prod. Mark. 22, 707–716.
doi:10.1080/10454446.2015.1121435.
Joshi, Y., Rahman, Z., 2017. Investigating the determinants of consumers’ sustainable
purchase behaviour. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 10, 110–120. doi:10.1016/j.spc.2017.
02.002.
Kanchanapibul, M., Wang, X., Chan, H.K., 2014. An empirical investigation of green
purchase behaviour among the young generation. J. Clean. Prod. 66, 528–536.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.062.
Ketelsen, M., Janssen, M., Hamm, U., 2020. Consumers’ response to environmentally
friendly food packaging - A systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 254, 1–22. doi:10.
1016/j.jclepro.2020.120123.
Khan, S.N., Mohsin, M., 2017. The power of emotional value: exploring the effects of
values on green product consumer choice behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 150, 65–74.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.187.
Kim, Y., 2017. Consumer responses to the food industry’s proactive and passive en-
vironmental CSR, factoring in price as CSR tradeoff. J. Bus. Ethics. 140 (2), 307–
321. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2671-8.
Klein, K., Melnyk, V., 2016. Speaking to the mind or the heart: effects of matching
hedonic versus utilitarian arguments and products. Mark. Lett. 27 (1), 131–142.
doi:10.1007/s11002- 014- 9320- 3.
Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., Dermody, J., Urbye, A., 2014. Consumers’ evaluations of
ecological packaging – Rational and emotional approaches. J. Environ. Psychol.
14, 94–105. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.009.
Kok, G., Siero, S., 1985. Tin recycling: awareness, comprehension, attitude, inten-
tion and behavior. J. Econ. Psychol. 6 (2), 157–173. doi:10.1016/0167-4870(85)
90019-4.
Kotler, P., Keller, K.L., Ancarani, F., Costabile, M., 2014. Marketing management 14/e.
Pearson.
Kumar, P., Ghodeswar, B.M., 2015. Factors affecting consumers’ green prod-
uct purchase decisions. Mark. Intel. Plan. 33 (3), 330–347. doi:10.1108/
MIP- 03- 2014- 0068.
Kushwah, S., Dhir, A., Sagar, M., 2019. Ethical consumption intentions and choice
behavior towards organic food. Moderation role of buying and environmental
concerns. J. Clean. Prod. 236, 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.350.
Lanfranchi, M., Schimmenti, E., Campolo, M.G., Gianetto, C., 2019. The willingness
to pay of Sicilian consumers for a wine obtained with sustainable production
method: an estimate through an ordered probit sample-selection model. Wine
Econ. Policy 8 (2), 203–215. doi:10.1016/j.wep.2019.11.001.
Lazzarini, G.A., Visschers, V.H.M., Siegrist, M., 2018. How to improve consumers’ en-
vironmental sustainability judgements of foods. J. Clean. Prod. 198, 564–574.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.033.
Leach, A.M., Emery, K.A., Gephart, J., Davis, K.F., Erisman, J.W., Leip, A., Pace, M.L.,
D’Odorico, P., Carr, J., Noll, L.C., Castner, E., Galloway, J.N., 2016. Environmental
impact food labels combining carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints. Food Pol-
icy 61, 213–223. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.03.006.
Lin, J., Guo, J., Turel, O., Liu, S., 2019. Purchasing organic food with social commerce:
an integrated food-technology consumption values perspective. Int. J. Inform.
Manag. 51, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.11.001.
Lindh, H., Olsson, A., Williams, H., 2016. Consumer perceptions of food packag-
ing: contributing to or counteracting environmentally sustainable development?
Packag. Technol. Sci 29, 3–23. doi:10.1002/pts.2184.
Lombardi, G.V., Berni, R., Rocchi, B., 2017. Environmental friendly food. Choice exper-
iment to assess consumer’s attitude toward “climate neutral” milk: the role of
communication. J. Clean. Prod 142, 257–262. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.125.
Lu, L., Bock, D., Joseph, M., 2013. Green marketing: what the Millennials buy. J. Bus.
Strategy 34, 3–10. doi:10.1108/JBS- 05- 2013- 0036.
Luchs, M.G., Brower, J., Chitturi, R., 2012. Product choice and the importance
of aesthetic design given the emotion-laden trade-off between sustainability
and functional performance. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 29, 903–916. doi:10.1111/j.
1540-5885.2012.00970.x.
Luchs, M.G., Kumar, M., 2017. “Yes, but this Other one looks better/works better”:
how do consumers respond to trade-offs between sustainability and other val-
ued attributes? J. Bus. Ethics 140, 567–584. doi:10.1007/s10551-015-2695-0.
Mahesh, N., Ganapathi, R., 2012. Influence of consumer’s socio-economic character-
istics and attitude on purchase intention of green products. Int. J. Bus. Manag.
4 (5), 33–37. doi:10.9790/487X-0453337.
Mai, R., Zahn, S., Hoppert, K., Hoffmann, S., Rohm, H., 2014. Tailoring compensation
effects of health-unrelated food properties. Appetite 80, 143–153. doi:10.1016/j.
appet.2014.05.014.
Malhotra, N.K., 2012. Marketing Research: an Applied Orientation. Porto Alegre,
Bookman sixth ed..
Mohr, M., Schlich, M., 2015. Socio-demographic basic factors of German customers
as predictors for sustainable consumer’s m regarding foodstuffs and me prod-
ucts. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 40 (2), 158–167. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12239.
Montgomery, D.C., 2017. Design and Analysis of Experiments. Wiley, London 9th Edi-
tion.
Moragues-Faus, A., Sonnino, R., Marsden, T., 2017. Exploring European food system
vulnerabilities: towards integrated food security governance. Environ. Sci. Policy
75, 184–215. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.05.015.
Moser, A.K., 2016. Consumers’ purchasing decisions regarding environmentally
friendly products:an empirical analysis of German consumers. J. Retail. Consum.
Serv. 31, 389–397. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.05.006.
Neill, L.C., Williams, R., 2016. Consumer preference for alternative milk packaging.
The case of an inferred environmental attribute. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 48 (03),
241–256. doi:10.1017/aae.2016.17.
O’Connor, E.L., Sims, L., White, K.M., 2017. Ethical food choices: examining people’s
Fair-Trade purchasing decisions. Food Qual. Prefer 60, 105–112. doi:10.1016/j.
foodqual.2017.04.001.
Ohtomo, S., Hirose, Y., 2007. The dual-process of reactive and intentional decision-
making involved in eco-friendly behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 27 (2), 117–125.
doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.01.005.
Petrescu, D.C., Vermeir, I., Petrescu-Mag, R.M., 2020. Consumer understanding of
food quality, healthiness, and environmental impact: a cross-national perspec-
tive. Int. J. Environ. Res. Pub. Health 17 (1), 169. doi:10.3390/ijerph17010169.
PNAD/IBGE (Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios Contínua/Instituto
Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística), 2019. Educação 2018. Available
at: https://agenciadenoticias.ibge.gov.br/media/com_mediaibge/arquivos/
00e02a8bb67cdedc4fb22601ed264c00.pdf .
Rahnama, H., Rajabpour, S., 2017. Identifying effective factors on consumers’ choice
behavior toward green products: the case of Tehran, the capital of Iran. Environ.
Sci. Pol. Res. 24 (1), 911–925. doi:10.1007/s11356- 016- 7791- x, https://doi.
Ricci, E.C., Banterle, A., Stranieri, S., 2018. Trust to go green: an exploration of
consumer intentions for eco-friendly convenience food. Ecol. Econ. 148, 54–65.
doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.02.010.
Risius, A., Janssen, M., Hamm, U., 2017. Consumer preferences for sustainable aqua-
culture products: evidence from in-depth interviews, think aloud protocols and
choice experiments. Appetite 113, 246–254. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2017.02.021.
Ritter, A.M., Borchardt, M., Vaccaro, G.L.R., Pereira, G.M., Almeida, F., 2015. Motiva-
tions for promoting the consumption of green products in an emerging coun-
try: exploring attitudes of Brazilian consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 106, 507–520.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.066.
Rothrock, L., Yin, J., 2008. Integrating Compensatory and noncompensatory decision-
making strategies in dynamic task environments 125–141. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-0-387-77131-1_6.
Rueda, X., Garrett, R.D., Lambin, E.F., 2017. Corporate investments in supply chain
sustainability: selecting instruments in the agri-food industry. J. Clean. Prod.
142, 2480–2492. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.026.
 N.C. Lago, A. Marcon and J.L.D. Ribeiro et al. / Sustainable Production and Consumption 23 (2020) 256–273
Sama, C., Crespo-Cebada, E., Díaz-Caro, C., Escribano, M., Mesías, F.J., 2018. Con-
sumer Preferences for Foodstuffs Produced in a Socio-environmentally Respon-
sible Manner: a Threat to Fair Trade Producers? Ecol. Econ 150, 290–296.
doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.04.031.
Seo, S., Ahn, H.K., Jeong, J., Moon, J., 2016. Consumers’ attitude toward sustain-
able food products: ingredients vs. packaging. Sustainability 8 (10), 1073. doi:10.
3390/su8101073.
Schwartz, S.H., 1977. Normative influences on altruism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol 221–
279. doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60358-5.
Sharma, L.L., Teret, S.P., Brownell, K.D., 2010. The food industry and self-regulation:
standards to promote success and to avoid public health failures. Amer. J. Pub.
Health 100 (2), 240–246. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.160960.
Shen, B., Cao, Y., Xu, X., 2020. Product line design and quality differentiation for
green and non-green products in a supply chain. Int. J. Prod. Res. 58 (1), 148–
164. doi:10.1080/00207543.2019.1656843.
Shuai, C., Ding, L., Zhang, Y., Guo, Q., Shuai, J., 2014. How consumers are willing to
pay for low-carbon products? – Results from a carbon-labeling scenario experi-
ment in China. J. Clean. Prod 83, 366–373. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.07.008.
Singh, G., Pandey, N., 2018. The determinants of green packaging that influence
buyers’ willingness to pay a price premium. Austral. Mark. J. 26 (3), 221–230.
doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2018.06.001.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., 1994. The Value Basis of Environmental Concern. Soc. Psychol.
Soc. Issues 50, 65–84. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb02420.x.
Stranieri, S., Ricci, E., Banterle, A., 2017. Convenience food with environmentally sus-
tainable attributes: a consumer perspective. Appetite 116, 11–20. doi:10.1016/j.
appet.2017.04.015.
Suki, N.M., 2016. Consumer environmental concern and green product purchase in
Malaysia: structural effects of consumption values. J. Clean. Prod. 132, 204–214.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.087.
Tait, P., Saunders, C., Guenther, M., Rutherford, P., 2016. Emerging versus devel-
oped economy consumer willingness to pay for environmentally sustainable
food production: a choice experiment approach comparing indian, chinese and
united kingdom lamb consumers. J. Clean. Prod. 124, 65–72. doi:10.1016/j.
jclepro.2016.02.088.
Thøgersen, J., 2017. Sustainable food consumption in the nexus between national
context and private lifestyle: a multi-level study. Food Qual. Prefer. 55, 16–25.
doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2016.08.006.
Thøgersen, J., Pedersen, S., Aschemann-Witzel, J., 2019. The impact of organic certifi-
cation and country of origin on consumer food choice in developed and emerg-
ing economies. Food Qual. Prefer. 72, 10–30. doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.09.003.
273
Tobler, C., Visschers, V.H., Siegrist, M., 2011. Eating green. Consumers’ willingness to
adopt ecological food consumption behaviors. Appetite 57 (3), 674–682. doi:10.
1016/j.appet.2011.08.010.
Tong, Q., Anders, S., Zhang, J., Zhang, L., 2020. The roles of pollution concerns and
environmental knowledge in making green food choices: evidence from Chinese
consumers. Food Res. Int. 130, 108881. doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2019.108881.
Tseng, S.-.C., Hung, S.-.W., 2013. A framework identifying the gaps between cus-
tomers’ expectations and their perceptions in green products. J. Clean. Prod. 59,
174–184. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.050.
Vecchio, R., Van Loo, E.J., Annunziata, A., 2016. Consumers’ willingness to pay for
conventional, organic and functional yogurt: evidence from experimental auc-
tions. Int. J. Cons. Stud. 40 (3), 368–378. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12264.
Verain, M.C., Dagevos, H., Antonides, G., 2015. Sustainable food consumption. Prod-
uct choice or curtailment? Appetite 91, 375–384. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.
055.
Vlaeminck, P., Jiang, T., Vranken, L., 2014. Food labeling and eco-friendly consump-
tion: experimental evidence from a Belgian supermarket. Ecol. Econ. 108, 180–
190. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.10.019.
Vugt, M.V., Griskevicius, V., Schultz, P.W., 2014. Naturally green: harnessing atone
age psychological biases to foster environmental behavior. Soc. Issues Policy Rev.
8 (1), 1–32. doi:10.1111/sipr.120 0 0.
Wan, M., Chen, J., Toppinen, A., 2015. Consumers’ environmental perceptions of chil-
dren’s furniture in China. For. Prod. J. 65, 395–405. doi:10.13073/FPJ- 14- 00102.
Woodhouse, A., Davis, J., Pénicaud, C., Östergren, K., 2018. Sustainability checklist in
support of the design of food processing. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 16, 110–120.
doi:10.1016/j.spc.2018.06.008.
Woodside, A.G., 2008. Advances in culture, tourism and hospitality research, ad-
vances in culture. Tourism and Hospitality Research. Emerald Group Publishing
Limited.
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., Oates, C.J., 2010. Sustainable consumption:
green consumer behaviour when purchasing products. Sustain. Dev 18 (1), 20–
31. doi:10.1002/sd.394.
Zanna, M.P., Rempel, J.K., 1988. Attitudes: a new look at an old concept. In: Bar-
Tal, D., Kruglanski, A.W. (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Knowledge. University
press, Cambridge, Cambridge.
Zeithaml, V., 1988. Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and value: a means-
end model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark 52 (3), 2–22. doi:10.1177/
0 0222429880520 0302.