S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N 10 (2017) 110120

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Production and Consumption

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

Investigating the determinants of consumers sustainable

purchase behaviour

Yatish Joshi , Zillur Rahman

Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India

A B S T R A C T

This paper seeks to identify the elements that anticipate sustainable purchase behaviour of educated young
consumers in Delhi. A survey has been done on a sample of 750 young consumers. Structural equation modelling is
used to determine the predicting power of the various variables considered. Results show that the studied variables
predict sustainable purchasing behaviour of young Delhi consumers in the following order: supportive behaviours
for environmental organizations, subjective norms, consumer attitude towards sustainable purchasing, perceived
marketplace influence, consumers knowledge regarding sustainability related issues, and environmental concern.
The paper educates about the primary indicators of consumers sustainable purchasing behaviour. The findings
can be utilized by strategy makers and government agencies in developing messages and campaigns for promoting
sustainable purchase behaviour of people.

Keywords: Sustainable purchasing; Attitudebehaviour gap; Supportive behaviours for environmental organizations;
Subjective norms

c 2017 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction tally friendly behaviour and facilitate equal distribution of es-

While rapid development over the last few decades has of-
fered a better quality of life, it has come with its own set of
ecological and social problems (climate change, exhaustion
of natural assets, increased pollution, financial imbalance
among different sections of the general public, etc.) (Wang
et al., 2014).
India is one of the fastest developing economies; however,
this development has been associated with increased eco-
logical contamination and exhaustion of natural resources.
In a study led by the United Nations in 2011, India was po-
sitioned seventh among the most polluted nations on the
planet (UNEP, 2011). There are various reasons that can be
cited for the situation, such as urbanization, unplanned de-
velopment and excessive industrialization. The Government
of India has taken several steps to address these issues and
numerous laws have been formed to promote environmen-
sential items to customers. Nevertheless, ecological contam-
ination is on the rise, natural assets are fast depleting and
social disparity is only widening (Krishna, 2011).
Individuals generally ignore the effect of their consump-
tion practices on the society and the planet while irrespon-
sible consumption practices may bring about natural, social
and economic degradation (Young et al., 2010). In the quest
for increased consumption and modernization, the damage
to the environment and the society is greatly ignored (Barber
et al., 2014). The solution to the problem lies in stringent law
enforcement and motivating individuals to be responsible.
The idea of sustainable consumption was initially high-
lighted in the Brundtland report Our Common Future in
1987 (Peattie and Peattie, 2009). Sustainable consumption is
concerned with customers ecologically and socially respon-
sible consumption practices (Vermeir and Verbeke, 2006). Sus-
tainable consumption has been defined as the use of goods

Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: yatish.joshi24@gmail.com (Y. Joshi), zrahman786@gmail.com (Z. Rahman).
Received 24 March 2016; Received in revised form 28 January 2017; Accepted 9 February 2017; Published online 7 March 2017.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2017.02.002
2352-5509/c 2017 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
and services that respond to basic needs and bring a bet-
ter quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural re-
sources, toxic materials and emissions of waste and pollu-
tants over the life cycle, so as not to jeopardize the needs
of future generations (Ofstad, 1994). Sustainable purchas-
ing is an important form of sustainable consumer behaviour
and may be described as consumers purchasing activities
that are influenced by their environmental, societal and fair
trade concerns; sustainable purchasing includes purchasing
of sustainable, environmentally friendly and fair trade prod-
ucts (De Pelsmacker et al., 2005). Sustainable purchasing is
important as unplanned purchasing practices may result in
environmental, social and economic degeneration (Young
et al., 2010). Consumers possess the capability to prevent or
decrease environmental damage by purchasing sustainable
products (Arvola et al., 2008). Grunert and Juhl (1995) reported
that consumer household purchases are responsible for 40%
of the total environmental damage. With increasing focus on
corporate social responsibility, a greater number of organi-
zations are embracing sustainability practices (Wang et al.,
2014); numerous firms worldwide have begun producing sus-
tainable products. Also, over the years, the number of people
willing to embrace sustainable consumption has increased
(Tanner and WlfingKast, 2003; Young et al., 2010). However, it
has been found that this increased willingness has not trans-
lated into real sustainable purchase activities (Young et al.,
2010). Many of the past studies have observed a weak relation-
ship between consumers positive attitude towards sustain-
able purchase activities and actual purchase behaviour (Ben-
son and Hiller Connell, 2014; Tanner and WlfingKast, 2003;
Vermeir and Verbeke, 2006). It is thus clear that there exists
a gap between consumers thinking and actual actions and
people generally overlook the environmental and social im-
pacts of their purchases. This discrepancy or gap is referred
to as sustainable purchasing inconsistency or sustainable
attitudebehaviour gap (Tanner and WlfingKast, 2003; Ver-
meir and Verbeke, 2006).
Several studies have examined the effect of customer
purchasing activities on the environment in the context
of developed nations, and identified various psychological
and personal factors influencing consumer sustainable
consumption behaviour. However, a majority of studies have
overlooked the impact of behavioural variables (such as
past sustainable behaviour) on consumers future sustainable
consumption behaviour (Lee, 2014). Phipps et al. (2013),
through their theory of reciprocal determinism, proposed that
past behaviour is not only an outcome of its antecedents, but
also a determining variable that can affect future sustainable
behaviour. They further asserted that past sustainable
behaviour can also, along with personal and environmental
factors (such as socio-cultural factors), influence consumers
future sustainable behaviour and that it should be considered
as a determinant of such behaviour. Further, self-perception
theory also suggests that Individuals come to know their
own attitudes, emotions and other internal states partially
by inferring them from observations of their own overt
behaviour and/or the circumstances in which this behaviour
occurs. It illustrates that a consumers behaviour may be the
result of interpersonal observation in which the observer and
the observed happen to be the same individual. According to
self-perception theory, we interpret our own actions in the
same way as we interpret others actions and our attitude,
emotions and other behavioural factors may be influenced by
our own behaviour. Hence, consumers past behaviour may
10 (2017) 110120 111
affect their future intention and behaviour. It is therefore
important to study the effect of consumers past sustainable
behaviour on their future behaviour.
A limited number of studies have examined consumer
past behaviour as a predictor of future sustainable purchase
behaviour (Lee, 2014). The lack of research in this area reveals
a major gap in literature which this study attempts to fill
by ascertaining the effect of past sustainable behaviour on
consumer future sustainable behaviour.
If the Asian context be considered, still there is shortage
of studies on sustainable purchase behaviour. Hitherto, just
two studies have attempted to investigate the sustainable
consumption behaviour of Chinese buyers (Lee, 2014; Wang
et al., 2014). In India, more studies have been oriented towards
studying consumer green purchase behaviour (Nittala, 2014).
The authors did not find any study that explored sustain-
able purchase behaviour of Indian consumers. The current
attitudebehaviour gap and an absence of proper clarification
thereof, alongside the absence of studies on sustainable pur-
chasing motivated the authors to identify important factors
affecting consumers sustainable purchase behaviour. In ad-
dition, environmental damage (ecological contamination, de-
pletion of natural resources, and so forth) and the resultant
increased emphasis on producing sustainable products by the
firms provide extra inspiration for the present research.
Young, educated consumers are chosen in light of the fact
that they are a key component in bringing about the de-
sired change with respect to sustainable purchasing. Young
purchasers are more open to new thoughts; they can com-
prehend the idea and significance of sustainable purchasing,
and show a higher concern towards social and natural issues
(Singh, 2009). Young consumers also have a longer anticipated
life span which may to a great extent ensure that the positive
change brought about stays and is passed on to future gener-
ations.
The present study seeks to examine empirically what
influence consumer supportive behaviours for environ-
mental organizations (a form of sustainable consumption
behaviour), subjective norms (sociocultural factors), environ-
mental concern, perceived knowledge about sustainability is-
sues, consumer attitude towards sustainable purchasing, and
perceived marketplace influence (personal factors) have on
consumer sustainable purchase behaviour. The implications
of this study for sustainable marketers worldwide are mani-
fold. As India is one of the largest consumer markets it has
great potential for sustainable products. Among the numer-
ous urban areas of India, Delhi is the capital of the nation,
and global sustainable marketers can consider it as an essen-
tial passage to begin and develop business in India. Likewise
by deciding the predictors of sustainable purchasing, proper
marketing strategies can be embraced to address the sustain-
able attitudebehaviour gap and to increase the purchase of
sustainable products.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2
reviews relevant literature and presents the hypotheses
developed. Section 3 describes sample and data collection,
questionnaire development, and data analysis methods.
Section 4 explains data analysis including validity, reliability
and hypotheses testing. Section 5 discusses results. Section 6
comprises implications. Section 7 contains conclusions,
implications and future research directions.
112 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
2. Theoretical structure
While trying to explain sustainable purchase behaviour,
prior studies have concentrated on describing the underlying
consumer values, attitudes and behavioural intentions
towards environmentally friendly and socially responsible
products (Benson and Hiller Connell, 2014; Vermeir and
Verbeke, 2006). The theory of reasoned action (TRA)
(Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980) and the theory of planned
behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1985) were the two prominent
theoretical approaches applied by the vast majority of
studies. Other approaches considered are: Hines et al. (1987)
model of responsible environmental behaviour (REB), Stern
and Dietzs (1994) valuesbeliefs-norm (VBN) model, and
motivationopportunityabilities (MOA) model (lander and
Thgersens, 1995).
Several previous studies have observed a weak relation-
ship between consumers positive attitude towards sustain-
able purchase practices and their actual purchase behaviour,
which is generally referred to as the attitudebehaviour gap
(Tanner and WlfingKast, 2003; Vermeir and Verbeke, 2006).
While there are studies on sustainable purchasing that have
investigated the impact of individual factors on consumers
environmentally and socially responsible consumption be-
haviour, very few have considered behavioural variables as
determining variables. Also, less research attention has been
paid to the impact of external factors on sustainable purchase
behaviour (Lee, 2014).
Recently, Phipps et al. (2013) suggested a model of recip-
rocal determinism where consumer behaviour is viewed both
as an end product and a determining variable. The proposed
model incorporated social cognitive theory (SCT) and consid-
ered behaviour as an end result as well as a predicting vari-
able. In other words, they proposed a model that incorporated
social cognitive theory (SCT) and developed a framework to
suggest that past environmental behaviours, sociocultural
environments, and personal factors together affected future
sustainable behaviours (as opposed to just personal factors
alone). Through this model, Phipps et al. (2013) asserted that
pro-environment or sustainable behaviour in one area has
the potential to leak, or spill over to another area, and that
present sustainability related consumption behaviours af-
fect future sustainable consumption behaviours. Hence, the
model included a new dimension of behavioural variables
that predicted consumers future sustainable behaviour. The
authors, during literature review, found only one study (Lee,
2014) that considered reciprocal determinism theory to ex-
amine consumer sustainable consumption behaviour. This
highlights the necessity for further studies that incorporate
reciprocal determinism theory and consider the effect of be-
havioural variables along with personal and sociocultural fac-
tors to study consumer sustainable consumption behaviour.
The present study intends to enrich existing body of re-
search by examining the indicators of consumer sustainable
purchase behaviour. Responding to the call of Phipps et al.
(2013) to simultaneously examine the behavioural, socio-
cultural and personal variables with respect to consumers,
the present study looks at the effect of consumer support-
ive behaviours for environmental organizations (a type of
sustainable behaviour), subjective norms (sociocultural fac-
tors), environmental concern, perceived knowledge about
sustainability issues, consumer attitude towards sustainable
purchasing, and perceived marketplace influence (personal
factors) on consumer sustainable purchase behaviour. The
conceptual framework for the study is shown in Fig. 1.
10 (2017) 110120
2.1. Past environmental behaviours
The theory of reciprocal determinism suggests that behaviour
is an end result as well as a predicting variable. The
present study tries to find out how supportive behaviours for
environmental organizations facilitate sustainable purchase
behaviour.
2.1.1. Past supportive behaviours towards environmental
organizations
So far, very little attention has been paid to the effect of
sustainable behaviours on sustainable purchase behaviour
(Lee, 2014). This article focuses on supportive behaviours
for environmental organizations. Supportive behaviour for
environmental organizations refers to consumer behaviour
such as voluntarily helping an environmental organization,
making a donation towards an environmental organization,
and participating in activities organized by such an
organization. In other words, such behaviour exhibited by
the consumer that financially, morally or socially supports an
environmental organization may be understood as supportive
behaviour for environmental organizations. So far, only one
study (Lee, 2014) has considered this variable and found
a positive influence on consumer sustainable consumption
behaviour. The studies in sociopolitical participation also
suggested that one type of engagement may affect the other
types of engagement (Latta, 2007; MacGregor, 2006). Further,
self-perception theory also suggests that a consumers
behaviour may be the result of interpersonal observation
and his attitude, emotions and other behavioural factors
may be influenced by his own behaviour. Hence, consumers
past behaviour may affect their future intention and
behaviour. The present study investigates whether and
how supportive behaviours for environmental organizations
facilitate sustainable purchase behaviour. Thus we propose:
H1: Supportive behaviours for environmental organiza-
tions will positively predict sustainable purchase behaviour
of young consumers.
2.2. Personal factors
2.2.1. Attitude towards sustainable purchasing
Attitude towards sustainable purchasing refers to consumers
cognitive evaluation of sustainable purchase behaviour.
Attitude towards sustainable purchasing includes consumer
attitude towards green and fair-trade purchasing. Different
studies have yielded mixed results with respect to customer
attitude and behaviour. While some studies report a positive
relation (Kozar and Hiller Connell, 2013; Tanner and Wlfin-
gKast, 2003), others show weak or no relationship between
consumers sustainable attitude and their sustainable pur-
chase behaviour (Tanner and WlfingKast, 2003; Vermeir and
Verbeke, 2006). A couple of studies on fair-trade purchas-
ing suggest a positive relationship between buyer attitude
and behaviour with regard to purchase of fair trade prod-
ucts (Jin Ma et al., 2012; Ozcaglar-Toulouse et al., 2006). Pro-
environmental attitude is found to affect consumer sustain-
able consumption behaviour (Panzone et al., 2016). It is thus
hypothesized,
H2: Consumers attitude towards sustainable purchasing
will positively influence their sustainable purchase behaviour.
 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
Fig. 1 Conceptual framework.
2.2.2. Perceived knowledge about sustainability issues
Perceived knowledge of sustainability issues refers to
consumers perceived knowledge of environmental and social
issues and approaches to address these issues. Past studies
on ecological knowledge give mixed results. While a couple
of studies have demonstrated a weak relationship between
environmental knowledge and behaviour (Bang et al.,
2000; Wolsink, 2007), others have shown that substantial
environmental knowledge is necessary to take suitable action
towards ecological protection and that consumers with
higher ecological knowledge are more likely to demonstrate
sustainable purchasing behaviour (deCarvalho et al., 2015;
Mostafa, 2006; Young et al., 2010). Similarly, a few more
studies have reported that consumer knowledge about
social issues significantly influences consumers socially
responsible purchasing (Bang et al., 2000; Kozar and Hiller
Connell, 2013) and recycling behaviour (Bezzina and Dimech,
2011). Thus, we posit:
H3: Perceived knowledge about sustainability issues will
positively influence sustainable purchase behaviour among
young consumers.
2.2.3. Perceived marketplace influence
Social perception is an effective influencer of judgment and
behaviour. In environmental concern and sustainable con-
sumption literature, primary focus has been on perceived
consumer effectiveness (PCE) which represents the convic-
tion that the endeavors of an individual can have any kind of
effect in the answer for an issue (Ellen et al., 1991). While PCE
has been examined in context of sustainable consumption
(Cho et al., 2013; Roberts, 1996), no study has tried to deter-
mine whether ones perceived influence on other marketplace
actors motivates ones own behaviour. The present study con-
siders this perspective and suggests that when individuals
see their behaviour impact the sustainable behaviour of oth-
ers, their own sustainable behaviour is influenced. The study
uses the concept of Perceived Marketplace Influence (PMI) in-
troduced by Leary et al. (2014) which proposes that to varying
degrees, some people believe their decision to engage in sus-
tainable behaviour influences the marketplace behaviour of
other consumers and organizations. In turn, this perceived
influence encourages these individuals to behave in a sus-
tainable manner. The concept of PMI is comparable to PCE in
that under both approaches, people assess their ability to im-
pact a circumstance through behaviour (Bandura, 1997; Ellen
10 (2017) 110120 113
et al., 1991). The difference between the two however, lies in
the fact that while PCE is concerned with consumers percep-
tion of the impact their behaviours have on the environment,
PMI considers the degree to which an individual believes his
or her actions influence the conduct of other marketplace ac-
tors. So far, only one study (Leary et al., 2014) has tested the
impact of PMI on consumers environmental behaviour and
reported a positive and significant relationship. The present
research contends that PMI has a positive relationship with
consumers sustainable purchase behaviour. Thus, it is hy-
pothesized:
H4: Perceived marketplace influence will positively affect
sustainable purchase behaviour of young consumers.
2.2.4. Environmental concern
Environmental concern refers to an affective attribute that
can present a persons worries, compassion, likes, and
dislikes about the environment (Yeung, 2004), and has been
observed to be a key determinant of the choice to purchase
organic food (Grunert, 1993).
Bang et al. (2000) found that consumers emotional
involvement with environmental issues had a positive
association with high willingness to pay for renewable energy.
Lee (2008) also found that environmental concern was a
strong determinant of environmental behaviour. Thus, it is
posited:
H5: Environmental concerns will positively anticipate
sustainable purchase behaviour of young buyers.
2.3. Sociocultural factors
Sociocultural factors impact individuals reasoning and
choice (Tikka et al., 2000). However, little research has been
done to establish the impact of sociocultural elements on
individuals sustainable purchase behaviour (Young et al.,
2010).
2.3.1. Subjective norms
Subjective norms have been defined as perceived social
force to carry out a particular behaviour (Ajzen, 1991). It
can be explained as an individuals perception of the social
response towards an action performed or not performed by
the individual. In other words, it refers to what an individual
feels that people around him would think about him or
114 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N 10 (2017) 110120

Table 1 Demographical information of respondents. During the survey, general measures of items were
chosen rather than context-specific items. General measures
Details of Frequency (s) Percentage are picked because in comparison with context-specific
respondents (N = 750) (%) items, generalized items are not significantly influenced
Gender by situational variables and are better predictors of
Male 454 60.53 environmental behaviour (Kaiser et al., 1999).
Female 296 39.47 Most items used in the scales are constructed in the same
Age
fashion. Mixed wording scales are not used as they have
1520 182 24.27
been found to reduce the scales internal consistency and
2025 341 45.47
2530 227 30.26 disturb dimensionality (Benson and Hocevar, 1985; Goldsmith
Education and Desborde, 1991). Further, such scales may confuse young
Under Graduate 392 52.27 respondents (Schmitz and Baer, 2001). The scales used are
Post Graduate 214 28.53 further modified and designed for better suitability to the
Others 144 19.20 study. Five items are used to inspect buyers perceived
knowledge about sustainability issues. Relevant items are
her if he or she did, or did not do something. Subjective adopted from knowledge of ecological issue scale (Ellen et al.,
norms provide information about the perceived suitability of 1997). The scale has been used by numerous studies (Mohr
behaviour under thought (Jager, 2000), and is believed to affect et al., 1998). The reliability of the scale is = 0.83. Four items
purchase intention independently (Robinson and Smith, [adopted from do Do Valle et al., 2005 measure] are used to
2002). Studies on environmental behaviour have deeply measure buyer attitude towards sustainable purchasing. The
analysed subjective norms (Biel and Thgersen, 2007) and reliability of the scale is = 0.86. Four items are used to
found that subjective norms positively influence consumers measure subjective norms. The items are taken from the scale
buying of sustainable food products (Chen, 2007; Vermeir utilized by Vermeir and Verbeke (2008). The reliability of the
and Verbeke, 2006). Subjective norms also have a positive scale is = 0.83. Four items [adopted from the scale used
influence on consumers green purchase behaviour (Chan and by Leary et al., 2014] measure environmental concern. The
Lau, 2002). Several studies also reveal a strong relationship reliability of the scale is 0.83. Three items are utilized for
between subjective norms and consumer green intention measuring perceived marketplace influence. These items are
(Bamberg, 2003; Kalafatis et al., 1999). Based on the discussion taken from the scale used by Leary et al. (2014). The reliability
above, it is hypothesized: of the scale is = 0.84. Three items are used to measure
H6: Subjective norms will positively influence sustainable supportive behaviour for environmental organizations. The
purchase behaviour of young consumers. items are adopted from the scale used by Lee (2014). The
reliability of the scale is = 0.81. Four items [adopted from
the scale used by Lee, 2009] measure consumer sustainable
purchase behaviour. The reliability of this scale is.86. A scale
3. Methodology
is viewed as solid when the Cronbach alpha () of the scale is
equivalent to or more than.65 (Burns and Bush, 2006). Based
3.1. Sample on this criterion, every one of the scales utilized in the study
is found valid.
Information for the study is collected from 750 young
employees in Delhi consisting of 454 males and 296 females.
The employees fall between 15 and 30 years of age. 4. Analysis
Demographics of the samples are given in Table 1. For
collecting information, a measuring instrument is prepared To begin with, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)
by adopting scale items from past studies. Questions is performed to check group differences between gender,
are further modified to remove any ambiguity and get and between groups of different ages and educational levels
appropriate answers from respondents. Before finalizing the with regard to supportive behaviours for environmental
questionnaire, a pilot review has been conducted on 50 organizations, subjective norms, consumer attitude towards
respondents. Convenience sampling is adopted and total 1100 sustainable purchasing, perceived marketplace influence,
questionnaires are distributed to young consumers employed consumers knowledge regarding sustainability related issues
in various organizations in Delhi. The respondents chosen and environmental concern. Wilks lambda measure is
for the sample are those working (with any organization) in utilized, and the multiple analysis of variance does not show
Delhi. Participants (at the time of the survey) are working any significant effect of (1) sex (F[3, 1030] = 1.61, Wilks
in various sectors such as banks, hospitals, hotels, and lambda = .98, non-significant(ns)); (2) educational level (F[12,
manufacturing firms. The objective is to reach out to 1320] = 1.54, Wilks lambda = .97, ns); and (3) age (F[12,
respondents working and earning for themselves. Out of the 1563] = 1.22, Wilks lambda = .97, ns) on the study variables.
1100 questionnaires served, 750 responses are received which Results of MANOVA additionally demonstrate that the
include 454 males and 296 females. possible interactions between sex, educational level, and age
will not function as covariates in further analyses. So we can
3.2. Measurements say that sex, education and age will not work as covariates
in further analysis. Factor analysis with a oblimin rotation
The scale items utilized as part of the review are shown in is carried out to check whether the data could be reduced
Table 1. Every scale item is measured using a 7-point Likert to important factors. Sample adequacy is checked by using
scale (where 1 = strongly disagree, and 7 = strongly agree) KaiserMeyerOlkin test. A value of.87 is obtained which
also (1 = never, and 7 = always). indicates adequacy of the sample.
 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N 10 (2017) 110120 115

Table 2 Factor loading table.

Factors Factor loadings

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Perceived knowledge about sustainability issues
(1) I know I purchase ecologically safe products. .72
(2) I have more knowledge about recycling than an average person .69
(3) I know where I can find products that create less wastage. .64
(4) I have the knowledge about the sustainability symbols used on product packages. .72
(5) I am very knowledgeable about environmental and social issues. .79
Eigenvalues 6.64
Variance explained (in %) 20.04
Cronbachs alpha .83
Attitude towards sustainable purchasing
(1) I believe that sustainable purchasing by me will help in reducing pollution and also .65
help in improving the environment.
(2) I believe that sustainable purchasing by me will help in reducing wasteful use of .73
natural resources
(3) I believe that sustainable purchasing by me will help in conserving natural resources .75
(4) I feel good about myself when I involved in sustainable purchasing. .65
Eigenvalues 6.47
Variance explained (in %) 20.28
Cronbachs alpha .86
Sustainable purchase behaviour
(1) When shopping, I deliberately check products for environmentally harmful .77
ingredients.
(2) When shopping, I deliberately choose products with environmentally friendly .74
packaging.
(3) Ill prefer to buy sustainable products even if they are expensive than others. .68
(4) While purchasing, I will see environmental and fair trade label before buying the .74
product.
Eigenvalues 2.14
Variance explained (in %) 6.64
Cronbachs alpha .86
Environmental concern
(1) When deciding what to buy, consumers should balance what is cheapest with what .76
is in the best interest of the environment and society.
(2) Those who consume more bear the greatest responsibility when it comes to .83
protecting the environment.
(3) Consumers should consider the environment as one of their stakeholders when .79
making decisions.
(4) To be environmentally responsible, consumers need to make purchases that account .64
for the earths physical and social limits.
Eigenvalues 1.92
Variance explained (in %) 5.12
Cronbachs alpha .83
Subjective norm
(1) My friends expect me to engage in sustainable purchasing. .68
(2) My family expects me to engage in sustainable purchasing. .75
(3) My society expects me to engage in sustainable purchasing. .74
(4) People can rely on me to make a positive contribution to the society due to my .67
engagement in sustainable purchasing?
Eigenvalues 1.43
Variance explained (in %) 4.20
Cronbachs alpha .83
Supportive behaviour for environmental organizations
(1) How often do you serve as a volunteer helper in an environmental organization? .83
(2) How often do you donate to an environmental organization? .75
(3) How often do you join an activity that is organized by an environmental .72
organization?
Eigenvalues 1.73
Variance explained (in %) 4.94
Cronbachs alpha .81
Perceived marketplace influence
(continued on next page)

There are total 27 items under the seven studied variables.
All items undergo factor analysis. Results reveal that the
seven variables associate with 64.53% of the total variance.
Perceived knowledge about sustainability issues represents
20.04% of the total variance; each item in this variable
has a loading higher than.63. Attitude towards sustainable
purchasing represents 20.28% of the variance with each item
having loadings between.65 and.75. Sustainable purchase
behaviour represents 6.64% of the total variance where each
item in the factor has loadings more than.67. Environmental
116 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N 10 (2017) 110120

Table 2 (continued)

Factors Factor loadings

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(1) I believe my individual efforts to be environmentally friendly will persuade others in .84
my community to purchase environmentally friendly products
(2) The choices I make can influence what companies make and sell in the marketplace .67
(3) If I buy environmentally friendly products, companies will introduce more of them .73

Eigenvalues 1.33
Variance explained (in %) 3.31
Cronbachs alpha .84
Note:.45 is the acknowledged criterion for significant factor loadings (Hair et al., 2006).

Table 3 Correlations, means, standard deviation.

N = 750 Mean S.D Correlation

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
1 Gender 1.2 .50
2 Age 2.22 .81 .076
3 Education 1.73 .78 .287* .036
4 Perceived knowledge about sustainability issues 3.54 1.84 .072 .035 .077
5 Attitude towards sustainable purchasing 3.13 1.81 .018 .065 .095 .316*
6 Sustainable purchase behaviour 3.05 1.71 .021 .060 .097 .195* .346*
7 Environmental concern 3.96 1.47 .084 .014 .104 .094 .206* .311*
8 Subjective norm 3.51 1.75 .043 .027 084 .265* .246* .384* .243*
9 Supportive behaviour for environmental 3.57 1.59 096 .024 .077 .177* .218* .345* .324* .288*
organizations
10 Perceived marketplace influence 3.61 1.56 .083 .052 .025 .317* .257* .234* .216* .196* .247*
p < .001.

Table 4 Path of structural model.

Dependent variable Sustainable purchase behaviour

Coefficient (t-value) S.E
Supportive behaviour for environmental organizations 0.34 (13.41*** ) 0.045
Subjective norm 0.32 (11.63*** ) 0.045
Attitude towards sustainable purchasing 0.30 (10.86*** ) 0.047
Perceived marketplace influence 0.27 (9.76*** ) 0.049
Perceived knowledge regarding sustainability issues 0.20 (7.78*** ) 0.05
Environmental concern 0.18 (6.04*** ) 0.051
Observations 750
R2 0.58
p-value < 0.001.

concern accounts for 5.12% of the total variance; each item
in this element has loadings between.64 and.76. Subjective
norms explain 4.20% of the total variance with loadings
of items falling between.67 and.75. Supportive behaviour
for environmental organizations explains 4.94% of the total
variance where each item utilized for estimation of this
variable has loadings more than.71. Perceived marketplace
influence explains 3.31% of the total variance; each item in
the element has loadings more than.72. Table 2 demonstrates
the factor loadings, reliability coefficients, and variances for
each factor (see Table 3).
Furthermore, for examining fitness of the model, confir-
matory factor analysis (CFA) is performed and the results
signify good model fit (2 = 728.46, degrees of freedom
[df] = 344, p < 0.000, GFI = 0.901, AGFI = 0.894, NFI = 0.926,
RMSEA = 0.024).
After examining fitness of model through CFA, structural
equation modeling (SEM) is carried out. Results show good
model fit (2 = 738.46, degrees of freedom [df] = 343,
p < 0.000, GFI = 0.911, AGFI = 0.902, NFI = 0.912,
RMSEA = 0.022).
Table 4 demonstrates the path results of SEM. Results
reveal significant predictive power of considered variables
with respect to sustainable purchase behaviour of young
consumers, thereby supporting hypotheses 16. On the
basis of path analysis, consumer supportive behaviour for
environmental organizations has been found to be the
top predictor of sustainable purchase behaviour of young
consumers living in Delhi ( = .34, p < .0001), followed
by subjective norms ( = .32, p < .0001), attitude towards
sustainable purchasing ( = .30, p < .0001), perceived
marketplace influence ( = .27, p < .0001), perceived
knowledge regarding sustainability issues ( = .20, p < .0001),
and environmental concern ( = .18, p < .0001).
5. Discussion
The present study seeks to determine the elements encour-
aging sustainable purchase behaviour of young consumers in
India. Past studies on sustainable behaviour have not given
much consideration to reciprocal determinism and social cog-
nitive theories (Phipps et al., 2013). This article contributes to
 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
existing literature by highlighting that purchasers past sus-
tainable behaviour (here, supportive behaviour towards en-
vironmental organization) along with other individual and
sociocultural variables anticipates their future sustainable
purchase behaviour. Structural equation modeling has been
utilized to determine the predictive influence of the studied
variables. The outcomes demonstrate that all the considered
variables predict purchasers sustainable purchasing in the
following order: (1) supportive behaviours for environmental
organizations; (2) subjective norms; (3) attitude towards sus-
tainable purchasing; (4) perceived marketplace influence; (5)
perceived knowledge regarding sustainability issues; and (6)
environmental concern.
Supportive behaviours for environmental organizations
have the highest predictive power among all variables
considered. This result is in line with the findings of
Lee (2014) which suggest that past sustainable behaviour
is the most important predictor of future sustainable
consumption behaviour. Results suggest that individuals read
in a socially desirable act something about themselves,
and in future behaviours they act in accordance with past
behaviours. People determine whether to do something,
and base their decision on their past behaviour. This
result challenges previous studies which have considered
sustainable behaviour only as a dependent variable and
supports self-perception theory which states that individuals
come to know about their own attitudes, emotions and
other internal states partially by inferring them from
observations of their own overt behaviour. Results indicate
that consumers sustainable purchase behaviour may be
the result of the experiences arising out of their own
past sustainable behaviour (here supportive behaviours for
environmental organizations) and that sustainable purchase
intention develops due to the resultant experience from
a behaviour. For example, when an individual engages in
a behaviour with respect to an environmental issue, it
generates a unique experience, familiarizing the individual
with the issue and his/her own behaviour and its outcomes,
while possibly increasing consumer involvement in the
issue. Thus, adoption may be a result of an emotional
and experiential process rather than being an outcome
of only rational thought. When engaging in any kind of
sustainable behaviour, consumers may experience a sense
of responsibility and well-being, and feel part of the change
process. In so doing, they behave not only rationally, but
also emotionally. Their sense of civic duty may strengthen
and they may incorporate the values and behaviours of a
responsible consumer in their short and long term plans.
Subjective norms emerge as the second most important
predictor. This outcome can be justified with the help of
customer socialization theory which recommends that social
norms have an extensive impact on young consumers
consumption behaviour (John, 1999). It further proposes
that sustainable purchase behaviours are connected with
social values. A higher effect of subjective norms might
also denote the group effect on consumers sustainable
purchase behaviour (Dotson and Hyatt, 2000).
Attitude towards sustainable purchasing emerges as the
third most essential indicator. The result of the present
study supports previous findings which show a positive
relation between ecological attitude and green consumption
(Chan and Lau, 2000; Eze and Ndubisi, 2013; Tanner and
WlfingKast, 2003).
Perceived marketplace influence (PMI) is observed to be
the fourth most vital indicator of consumers sustainable
10 (2017) 110120 117
purchase behaviour. It supplements the results of Leary et al.
(2014) which emphasized PMI as an essential indicator of
the different types of sustainable consumption behaviour
(Mostafa, 2006; Vermeir and Verbeke, 2006). In the present
study, it is found that a vast majority of respondents had a
conviction that individual effort can affect the behaviour of
other marketplace actors. Numerous respondents with high
perceived marketplace influence are observed to be more
positive towards sustainable purchase behaviour.
Knowledge about sustainability issues has a relatively
lesser impact on consumers sustainable purchase behaviour.
The outcome supports past research reporting a weak rela-
tionship between environmental knowledge and sustainable
purchasing (Bang et al., 2000). A possible explanation for this
result is that just a fundamental knowledge of environmental
and social issues may not have the capacity to propel shop-
pers towards sustainable purchasing practices.
Among the considered variables, environmental concern
has the least influence on consumer sustainable purchase be-
haviour. The result supports past studies which have reported
a significant but weak relation between environmental con-
cern and consumer sustainable consumption behaviour (Lee,
2014). The reason behind this finding may be that other be-
havioural, personal and situational variables possibly over-
shadow the impact of consumer environmental concern.
6. Implication
6.1. Theoretical implications
Majority of previous research on consumer sustainable be-
haviour has been conducted on western samples. No study
on the topic has been carried out in an Indian context. The
present study enables researchers to compare and analyse
the effects of sociocultural factors on individual sustainable
consumption behaviour. The study is exploratory in nature
and proposes a model to investigate the influence of be-
havioural, personal and sociocultural factors on consumers
sustainable purchase behaviour. Results emphasize the im-
portance of supportive behaviour towards environmental or-
ganizations (a form of sustainable consumption behaviour)
and subjective norms (sociocultural factors) in determining
sustainable consumption behaviour of consumers.
The present study is the first to identify the indica-
tors of sustainable purchase behaviour of Indian consumers.
Results suggest that sustainable behaviour (here, support-
ive behaviour towards environmental organizations) can be
considered as an important indicator of sustainable purchas-
ing. Results further affirm the behaviourbehaviour systems
as recommended in reciprocal determinism and confirm the
appropriateness of reciprocal determinism and social cogni-
tive theories with respect to sustainable purchase behaviour.
The present study challenges past studies that regard be-
haviour only as a predictive variable, and supports the sus-
tainable attitudebehaviour relationship. Several studies have
demonstrated a weak or negative relationship between sus-
tainable attitude and consumer purchase behaviour. This may
be due to the numerous factors intervening in the sustainable
attitudebehaviour relationship. This study further confirms
the strong relationship between social influence and sustain-
able purchase behaviour of young consumers.
Results also demonstrate a weak relationship between
knowledge about sustainability issues and consumer sus-
tainable purchase behaviour. This finding supports results of
118 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
previous studies reporting a gap between consumers envi-
ronmental knowledge and behaviour. The relationship can
however, be possibly strengthened by providing concrete
knowledge to consumers about environmental and social
problems and probable solutions (Wolsink, 2007).
6.2. Practical implications
The present study has valuable practical implications.
It informs about the principal indicators of sustainable
purchasing and can be useful for marketers in designing
suitable strategies for promoting sustainable purchase
behaviour among young consumers in Delhi. Findings of the
present study recommend that consumers past sustainable
behaviour (here supportive behaviours for environmental
organizations) is an essential indicator of their future
sustainable purchase behaviour. This implies that consumers
future sustainable purchase behaviour can be developed by
engaging them in sustainable behaviour. So, marketers and
government should make attempts to involve consumers in
sustainable activities (e.g., reusing of utilized merchandise,
utilizing public transport, etc.). Recycling is a form of
sustainable behaviour which not only reduces waste, but
may also create marketing opportunities (Ghose et al.,
2006). Companies and government must promote recycling
behaviour to minimize damage to the environment due
to ecologically harmful manufacturing and consumption
practices. Incentivizing recycling could go a long way in
this direction. Incentives for such behaviour could include
providing discounts to the consumer on the next purchase
if they returned a product after use. Also, recycling could
be promoted as an activity beneficial to the consumer. For
example, re-selling of used products (such as clothes, shoes,
electronic equipment, etc.) could be encouraged as profit
making activities. The internet is a good platform to carry out
such transactions (Ghose et al., 2006). An established recycle
behaviour could lead to other forms of sustainable behaviour
also.
To promote sustainable behaviour, the government could
run schemes to engage more consumers in various forms
of sustainable activities such as plantation, recycling, etc.
Programmes and events could be organized in schools and
colleges to make students aware of environmental issues and
the steps they could take to help protect the environment.
Sustainable activities could also be made an essential part of
corporate social responsibility (CSR) of companies. Further,
the government could work in collaboration with private
firms to run pro-environment campaigns in educational
institutes and other public platforms. Emphasizing peer-
group cooperation in such events would highlight the
importance of working together towards protecting and
bettering the environment. An effective way of making
consumers appreciate the environment and its importance
could be to create more opportunities for them to experience
ecological beauty in and around their local communities.
Short study tours on environmental studies in schools
and colleges could prove very effective. Activities such as
tree planting and other team building games could be
included. Such measures could give participants a sense of
empowerment and make them more committed to displaying
environmentally responsible behaviour through emotional
and rational engagement. Marketers and the government
should collaborate to conduct educational campaigns to
promote public sensitivity towards, and increase public
knowledge of environmental and sustainability issues.
10 (2017) 110120
As subjective norms have been found to be a key predictor
of consumers sustainable behaviour, it is more likely that
an individual would engage in sustainable behaviours to
conform with the prevailing subjective norms. McMillan and
Chavis (1986) suggested that a sense of community may act
as a catalyst for active participation in a group. This sense of
community has been found to facilitate citizens participation
in community development, tourism development, civic
participation, voting, volunteering, maintaining quality of
public spaces, and recycling (Kim and Choi, 2005a,b). A
sense of community might reinforce in the minds of
individuals: (1) environmental problems are pressing and
there is urgent need of solutions; (2) pro-environmental
behaviours are socially meaningful; and (3) problems can be
effectively solved if collective efforts are made. Marketers and
advertisers can influence the sustainable purchase behaviour
of youths by reinforcing social norms. Reinforcing green
social norms and generating societal pressure could influence
sustainable consumption behaviour of individuals of all
age groups. To this end, sustainable marketing campaigns
must consider convincing consumers to openly discuss
sustainable consumption activities within social groups and
circulate sustainable products among their family members.
Promoting group sustainable activities such as tree plantation
campaigns, cleaning drives, etc. could prove effective in
engaging parents, peers and members of other social groups.
Attitude towards sustainable purchase and perceived
marketing influence also arise as important indicators of
consumers sustainable purchase behaviour. This implies
that buyers are sensitive to the impact of their sustainable
purchases on the environment. Further, as young buyers
tend to think more objectively, messages appealing to
the rationale of such youth could be disseminated to
encourage sustainable consumption behaviour. Sustainable
marketers should, through effective messaging, emotionally
and rationally appeal to the youth to adopt sustainable
purchasing. The messages could be formulated to draw
attention to specific natural or social issues to inform and
motivate young shoppers.
7. Conclusion, limitations and future research
directions
India is one of the larger world markets and has great
potential for sustainable products. However, international
green and sustainable marketers face challenges when
engaging Indian shoppers as almost no data is available
pertaining to their sustainable purchase behaviour. The
present study contributes to existing body of research by
analysing the predictive influence of important variables
on sustainable purchase behaviour of young consumers
in Delhi. Delhi is the capital of India, and may prove
to be an appropriate place to initiate the creation of a
sustainable market in India. The results obtained through
structural equation modeling show that customer supportive
behaviour towards environmental organizations is the most
important indicator of consumers sustainable purchase
behaviour, followed by subjective norms, attitude towards
sustainable purchasing, perceived marketplace influence,
perceived knowledge regarding sustainability issues and
environmental concern. Results of this study support the
outcomes of past studies (Lee, 2014). Findings may prove
useful in better understanding the various drivers behind
 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
consumers sustainable consumption behaviour thereby
enabling marketers and policy makers to design effective
marketing activities and develop suitable interventions to
promote such behaviour. On the basis of the findings of the
study, some possible courses of action towards encouraging
sustainable consumer behaviour may be: (1) consumers
future sustainable consumption behaviour could be fostered
by involving them in sustainable consumption practices such
as maintenance and recycling of used goods, using public
transport. as it has been established that behaviour can
determine future sustainable consumption behaviour. (2)
Governments and companies could run schemes to engage
more consumers in various forms of sustainable activities
such as plantation, recycling. Programmes and events could
also be organized in schools and colleges to make students
aware of environmental issues and the steps they could
take to help protect the environment. These activities could
be carried out as CSR activities, government initiatives,
or public private partnerships. In essence, such actions
would entail reinforcing social norms and creating peer-
pressure towards performing pro-environmental behaviour.
(3) Perceived marketplace influence should be maximized
to influence consumers sustainable purchase behaviour,
companies and governments could use the media extensively
to run campaigns that stimulate people at emotional and
rational levels and increase their perceived marketplace
influence.
Like all studies, the present study also has some
limitations: The study considers self-reported information
which is subject to social desirability bias. To minimize
bias, the survey questions in the present study were taken
from diverse literary sources. Respondents were told that
there were no right or wrong answers. Future studies may
gather information through other methodologies (i.e. direct
observation). Further, findings of the present study cannot
be generalized to different segments of the population or
social groups as young buyers differ from purchasers falling
in other age-groups. Also, the influence of subjective norms
may be higher in the collectivist Indian society. The data were
collected from employees of various organizations and not
from a specific organization. Future studies might consider
variables excluded in the present study. This may help
future researchers identify other factors affecting consumers
sustainable purchase behaviour.
References
Ajzen, I., 1985. From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned
Behavior. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 1139.
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav.
Hum. Decis. Process. 50 (2), 179211.
Ajzen, I., Fishbein, M., 1980. Understanding Attitudes and
Predicting Social Behaviour. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,
NJ.
Arvola, A., Vassallo, M., Dean, M., Lampila, P., Saba, A.,
Lhteenmki, L., Shepherd, R., 2008. Predicting intentions
to purchase organic food: The role of affective and moral
attitudes in the theory of planned behaviour. Appetite 50 (2),
443454.
Bamberg, S., 2003. How does environmental concern influence
specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to
an old question. J. Environ. Psychol. 23 (1), 2132.
Bandura, A., 1997. Self-efficacy: The exercise of self-control.
Bang, H.K., Ellinger, A.E., Hadjimarcou, J., Traichal, P.A., 2000.
Consumer concern, knowledge, belief, and attitude toward
renewable energy: An application of the reasoned action
theory. Psychol. Mark. 17 (6), 449468.
10 (2017) 110120 119
Barber, N.A., Bishop, M., Gruen, T., 2014. Who pays more
(or less) for pro-environmental consumer goods? Using the
auction method to assess actual willingness-to-pay. J. Environ.
Psychol. 40, 218227.
Benson, E., Hiller Connell, Y., , K., 2014. Fair trade consumption
from the perspective of US Baby Boomers. Soc. Respons. J. 10
(2), 364382.
Benson, J., Hocevar, D., 1985. The impact of item phrasing on the
validity of attitude scales for elementary school children. J.
Educ. Meas. 22 (3), 231240.
Bezzina, F.H., Dimech, S., 2011. Investigating the determinants of
recycling behaviour in Malta. Manag. Environ. Qual.: Int. J. 22
(4), 463485.
Biel, A., Thgersen, J., 2007. Activation of social norms in social
dilemmas: A review of the evidence and reflections on the
implications for environmental behaviour. J. Econ. Psychol. 28
(1), 93112.
Burns, A.C., Bush, R.F., 2006. Marketing Research. Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Chan, R.Y., Lau, L.B., 2000. Antecedents of greenpurchases: a
survey in China. J. Consum. Mark. 17 (4), 338357.
Chan, R.Y., Lau, L.B., 2002. Explaining green purchasing behavior:
A cross-cultural study on American and Chinese consumers.
J. Int. Consum. Mark. 14 (23), 940.
Chen, M.F., 2007. Consumer attitudes and purchase intentions
in relation to organic foods in Taiwan: Moderating effects of
food-related personality traits. Food Qual. Preference 18 (7),
10081021.
Cho, Y.N., Thyroff, A., Rapert, M.I., Park, S.Y., Lee, H.J., 2013. To be
or not to be green: Exploring individualism and collectivism
as antecedents of environmental behavior. J. Bus. Res. 66 (8),
10521059.
deCarvalho, B.L., de FtimaSalgueiro, M., Rita, P., 2015. Consumer
Sustainability Consciousness: A five dimensional construct.
Ecol. Indic. 58, 402410.
De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., Rayp, G., 2005. Do consumers
care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. J.
Consum. Aff. 39 (2), 363385.
Dotson, M.J., Hyatt, E.M., 2000. A comparison of parents and
childrens knowledge of brands and advertising slogans in
the United States: implications for consumer socialization. J.
Market. Commun. 6 (4), 219230.
Do Valle, P.O., Rebelo, E., Reis, E., Menezes, J., 2005. Combining
behavioral theories to predict recycling involvement. Environ.
Behav. 37 (3), 364396.
Ellen, P., Eroglu, D., Webb, D., 1997. Consumer Judgments in
a Changing Information Environment: How Consumers Re-
spond to Green Marketing Claims. Georgia State University.
Ellen, P.S., Wiener, J.L., Cobb-Walgren, C., 1991. The role of per-
ceived consumer effectiveness in motivating environmentally
conscious behaviors. J. Public Policy Mark. 102117.
Eze, U.C., Ndubisi, N.O., 2013. Green buyer behavior: evidence
from Asia consumers. J. Asian Afr. Stud. 48 (4), 413426.
Ghose, A., Smith, M.D., Telang, R., 2006. Internet exchanges for
used books: An empirical analysis of product cannibalization
and welfare impact. Inf. Syst. Res. 17 (1), 319.
Goldsmith, R.E., Desborde, R., 1991. A validity study of a measure
of opinion leadership. J. Bus. Res. 22 (1), 1119.
Grunert, S., 1993. Everybody seems concerned about the
environment but is this concern reflected in Danish
consumers food choice? Eur. Adv. Consum. Res. 1, 428433.
Grunert, S.C., Juhl, H.J., 1995. Values, environmental attitudes, and
buying of organic foods. J. Econ. Psychol. 16 (1), 3962.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L.,
2006. Multivariate Data Analysis (Vol. 6). Pearson Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Hines, J.M., Hungerford, H.R., Tomera, A.N., 1987. Analysis and
synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior:
A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Educ. 18 (2), 18.
Jager, W., 2000. Modelling Consumer Behavior. University of
Groningen, Groningen.
Jin Ma, Y., Littrell, M.A., Niehm, L., 2012. Young female consumers
intentions toward fair trade consumption. Int. J. Retail Distrib.
Manag. 40 (1), 4163.
John, D.R., 1999. Consumer socialization of children: A retrospec-
tive look at twenty-five years of research. J. Consum. Res. 26
(3), 183213.
120 S U S TA I N A B L E P R O D U C T I O N A N D C O N S U M P T I O N
Kaiser, G.F., Wlfing, S., Fuhrer, U., 1999. Environmental attitude
and ecological behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 19 (1), 119.
Kalafatis, S.P., Pollard, M., East, R., Tsogas, M.H., 1999. Green
marketing and Ajzens theory of planned behaviour: a cross-
market examination. J. Consum. Mark. 16 (5), 441460.
Kim, Y., Choi, S.M., 2005a. Antecedents of green purchase
behavior: an examination of collectivism, environmental
concern, and PCE. Adv. Consum. Res. 32 (1), 592599.
Kim, Y., Choi, S.M., 2005b. Antecedents of green purchase
behavior: An examination of collectivism, environmental
concern, and PCE. Adv. Consum. Res. 32, 592.
Kozar, J.M., Hiller Connell, K.Y., 2013. Socially and environmen-
tally responsible apparel consumption: knowledge, attitudes,
and behaviors. Soc. Responsibility J. 9 (2), 315324.
Krishna, N., 2011. Awareness up but more green action needed,
Times of India, 29 December.
Latta, P.A., 2007. Locating democratic politics in ecological
citizenship. Environ. Polit. 16 (3), 377393.
Leary, R.B., Vann, R.J., Mittelstaedt, J.D., Murphy, P.E., Sherry,
J.F., 2014. Changing the marketplace one behavior at
a time: Perceived marketplace influence and sustainable
consumption. J. Bus. Res. 67 (9), 19531958.
Lee, K., 2008. Making environmental communications meaningful
to female adolescents: A study in Hong Kong. Sci. Commun. 30
(2), 147176.
Lee, K., 2009. Gender differences in Hong Kong adolescent
consumers green purchasing behavior. J. Consum. Mark. 26
(2), 8796.
Lee, K., 2014. Predictors of sustainable consumption among young
educated consumers in Hong Kong. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 26
(3), 217238.
MacGregor, S., 2006. Beyond Mothering Earth: Ecological Citizen-
ship and the Politics of Care. UBC Press, Vancouver, BC.
McMillan, D.W., Chavis, D.M., 1986. Sense of community: A
definition and theory. J. Community Psychol. 14 (1), 623.
Mohr, L.A., Eroglu, D., Ellen, P.S., 1998. The development and
testing of a measure of skepticism toward environmental
claims in marketers communications. J. Consum. Aff. 32 (1),
3055.
Mostafa, M.M., 2006. Antecedents of Egyptian consumers green
purchase intentions: A hierarchical multivariate regression
model. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 19 (2), 97126.
Nittala, R., 2014. Green consumer behavior of the educated
segment in India. J. Int. Consum. Mark. 26 (2), 138152.
Ofstad, S., 1994. Symposium: Sustainable Consumption. Ministry
of Environment, Oslo, (publisher).
lander, F., Thgersen, J., 1995. Understanding of consumer
behaviour as a prerequisite for environmental protection. J.
Consum. Policy 18 (4), 345385.
Ozcaglar-Toulouse, N., Shiu, E., Shaw, D., 2006. In search of fair
trade: ethical consumer decision making in France. Int. J.
Consum. Stud. 30 (5), 502514.
10 (2017) 110120
Panzone, L., Hilton, D., Sale, L., Cohen, D., 2016. Socio-
demographics, implicit attitudes, explicit attitudes, and
sustainable consumption in supermarket shopping. J. Econ.
Psychol. 55, 7795.
Peattie, K., Peattie, S., 2009. Social marketing: A pathway to
consumption reduction? J. Bus. Res. 62 (2), 260268.
Phipps, M., Ozanne, L.K., Luchs, M.G., Subrahmanyan, S., Kapitan,
S., Catlin, J.R., Weaver, T., 2013. Understanding the inherent
complexity of sustainable consumption: A social cognitive
framework. J. Bus. Res. 66 (8), 12271234. . . . .
Roberts, J.A., 1996. Green consumers in the 1990s: profile and
implications for advertising. J. Bus. Res. 36 (3), 217231.
Robinson, R., Smith, C., 2002. Psychosocial and demographic
variables associated with consumer intention to purchase
sustainably produced foods as defined by the Midwest Food
Alliance. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 34 (6), 316325.
Schmitz, M.F., Baer, J.C., 2001. The vicissitudes of measurement: A
confirmatory factor analysis of the emotional autonomy scale.
Child Dev. 72 (1), 207219.
Singh, N., 2009. Exploring socially responsible behaviour of Indian
consumers: An empirical investigation. Soc. Responsibility J. 5
(2), 200211.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., 1994. The value basis of environmental
concern. J. Soc. Issues 50 (3), 6584.
Tanner, C., WlfingKast, S., 2003. Promoting sustainable con-
sumption: Determinants of green purchases by Swiss con-
sumers. Psychol. Mark. 20 (10), 883902.
Tikka, P.M., Kuitunen, M.T., Tynys, S.M., 2000. Effects of
educational background on students attitudes, activity levels,
and knowledge concerning the environment. J. Environ. Educ.
31 (3), 1219.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2011. World
Conservation Monitoring Centre, available at: www.unep-
wcmc.org. (Accessed 10 March 2016).
Vermeir, I., Verbeke, W., 2006. Sustainable food consumption:
Exploring the consumer attitudebehavioural intention gap.
J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 19 (2), 169194.
Vermeir, I., Verbeke, W., 2008. Sustainable food consumption
among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour
and the role of confidence and values. Ecol. Econ. 64 (3),
542553.
Wang, P., Liu, Q., Qi, Y., 2014. Factors influencing sustainable
consumption behaviors: a survey of the rural residents in
China. J. Cleaner Prod. 63, 152165.
Wolsink, M., 2007. Wind power implementation: the nature of
public attitudes: equity and fairness instead of backyard
motives. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 11 (6), 11881207.
Yeung, S.P.M., 2004. Teaching approaches in geography and
students environmental attitudes. Environmentalist 24 (2),
101117.
Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., Oates, C.J., 2010. Sustainable
consumption: green consumer behaviour when purchasing
products. Sustain. Dev. 18 (1), 2031.