Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

The Impact of Green Product Innovation, Green Perceived

Quality to Purchase Intention Moderated by Lifestyle on
Stainless Steel Straw
Lily Suhaily1, Syarief Darmoyo2, Sinta Boentoro3, Eleonaora Anasthashia4
Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia1,2,3
An Alumna of Atma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia4
Jl. Jend. Sudirman No.51, Karet Semanggi, Kecamatan Setiabudi, Kota Jakarta
Selatan, Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta 12930 Correspondence Email:
lily.eddy@atmajaya.ac.id

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of green product innovation,
green perceived quality to purchase intention moderated by lifestyle on stainless steel
straw. There is a direct influence of green product innovation, green perceived quality,
and life style to purchase intention. Lifestyle does not moderate the relationship
between green product innovation and purchase intention. However, lifestyle
moderates the relationship between green perceived quality and purchase intention.
Based on the results, restaurants and cafes should use stainless steel straws because
the consumers have a lifestyle with the perception that eco-friendly products can
reduce the impact of environmental pollution therefore, they intend to visit restaurants
and cafes that use stainless steel straws.

Keywords: Green Perceived Quality, Green Product Innovation, Lifestyle, Purchase

Intention

INTRODUCTION

Since long ago, the world has been preoccupied with contaminating plastic products,
including Indonesia. This is due to the large number of people in Indonesia who use
plastic for their everyday’s life for the reason that it is much cheaper, practical than
other materials. Products made from plastic such as plastic bags, food and beverage
wrappers and others can pollute the environment because they cannot be rapidly
recycled and take a long time to decompose.

Data from the Ministry of Environment (KLH) states that since 1950, approximately 8.3
billion tons of plastic have been produced every day and our people produce 189
thousand tons of garbage per day. Of that amount, 15% is plastic waste or 28.4
thousand tons of plastic waste per day, followed by paper waste (8%), metal (4.3%),
glass, wood and other materials (12.7%). Based on the International Coastal Cleanup
Report, ten types of waste that dominate the coastal world are cigarette butts, food
wrappers, plastic bottle caps, plastic beverage bottles, beverage cans, plastic straws
and stirrers, glass drink bottles, metal bottle caps, plastic shopping bags, and other
plastics packaging (Oceanconservancy.org).

13
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Figure 1.1 Ten types of waste that dominate the world coast
Source: oceanconservancy.org

According to research from Sustainable Waste Indonesia (SWI), 24% of waste in

Indonesia remains unmanaged well, while 7% of it is recycled and the other 69% is in
Final Disposal Sites which will eventually end up at sea. From these problems,
Indonesia was declared as a contributor to waste, especially the second largest marine
plastic waste in the world after China with an estimated number of 0.48-3.2 million
metric tons per year (Jambeck, 2015). At present it is estimated that the sea has
accommodated 150 million tons of plastic waste and predicted that by 2050, it will
accommodate 250 million tons of plastic waste (Gallo, 2011).

Plastics are long chain hydrocarbon polymers consisting of millions of monomers which
are bonded to one another and cannot be broken down by microorganisms
(Trisunaryanti, 2018). In the process, plastic takes 200-1000 years to decompose.
Plastics will break down into particles in small sizes that allow it to be consumed by
marine biota. This will lead to their death, since the plastic particles will interfere with
both metabolisms, and the digestive system of marine life. In addition, the number of
plastic particles consumed by marine biota allows it to move into the human body
through the food chain scheme. A research conducted by the Ocean Conservancy
found that 28% fish in Indonesia contained plastic.

In addition, plastic will also cause death on coral reefs. According to the Australian
Coral Reef Research Center (ARC) on the Indonesian sea, 26 parts per 100 square
meters of coral reef have been exposed to plastic waste.

By the government, a policy has been issued in order to reduce the use of plastic
through a circular letter KLHK No. S.1230 / PSLB3-PS / 2016 containing the price and
mechanism for applying paid plastic bags. This policy has been tested in various
regions in Indonesia and apparently has no significant impact on reducing plastic
waste. Some business owners remain making their plastic bags free, as well as local
governments have different attitudes in overcoming this rule (Ekawati, 2016). In

14
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

addition to these policies, the government has appealed to the people for doing 3R
(Reuse, Reduce, Recycle). This is applied to the use of plastic straws, as plastic straws
are taken into account in the 10 contributors to garbage in the ocean.

According to data owned by Divers Clean Action consisting of a group of

environmentalists, especially the sea, the use of plastic straws in Indonesia reaches
93,244,847 sticks every day. This is heavily problematic since plastic straws are easy
to get and find in everyday life such as in small restaurants and fast food restaurants
definitely using straws to serve drinks. To implement the 3R (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle)
policy, the production of Stainless-Steel Straw is an effective way to reduce disposable
plastic straws due to its continual use.

Based on the above conditions, the researchers will conduct research on the Effect of
Green Product Innovation, Green Perceived Quality, and Lifestyle on Purchase
Intention on Stainless Steel Straw.

Green Product Innovation

Innovation of eco-friendly products helps preserve the environment and provide
benefits to the community (Triguero, et al., 2013). According to Soylu & Dumville
(2011), innovative ideas, product design, production and marketing the new eco-
friendly products can be said to be products with eco-friendly innovation. Innovative
eco-friendly products use recyclable and non-toxic materials, give no pollution and
damage to the environment (Chiou et al., 2011). Hartmann and Ibáñez (2012) said
consumers with eco-friendly awareness will intend to make purchases of these
products.

Over the years, many authorities at both national and international agencies have
attempted to establish standards or specification for product “greenness” through
treaties, regulations, practices, and guidelines. Although the standards may vary, they
are generally concerned with ecological and human health, as well as the social,
cultural, and economic impacts of a product. Chuang & Yang (2014) mention that
products considered to be superior as non eco-friendly products if they can reduce the
environmental burden in reducing energy use, air emissions, waste discharged into the
sea, and solid waste, to lessen environmental pollution. According to Wu and Chen
(2014), eco-friendly innovation products are products designed, produced and
distributed to consumers in order to reduce the effects of environmental pollution.

In the process of making eco-friendly innovation products, technological capability,

knowledge capital, increased researches and development for companies are
noteworthy. In addition to strengthen environmental policies and regulations in
producing innovative products, it is necessary to reduce costs with a good managerial
system and management tools related to the environment (Horbach, 2008).

H1: There is the influence of Green Product Innovation to Purchase Intention

Hartmann and Ibáñez (2012) said consumers’ eco-friendly product innovation
awareness will intend to make purchases of these products.

Green Perceived Quality

Product quality is important and can be interpreted as the best product or service. To
make consumers intend to buy company’s products, the quality is one prominent factor.

15
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Quality factor is a factor enabling to improve product performance and influence

consumer purchase intentions (Asshidin et al., 2016).

Perception of the product or service quality is determined by consumer decisions

regarding the product or service is either the best or better compared to other
competitors’ (Snoj, et al., 2004). Perceived Quality comes from consumers' subjective
thoughts which will end in the decision to use a product. In addition, the perceived
quality can also be concluded as a consumer evaluation of overall brand superiority
based on intrinsic (performance and endurance) and extrinsic (brand name).

According to Chen & Chang (2013), consumers value an eco-friendly product or

service based on their assessment of the quality aspects of the product. To measure
green perceived quality, Chen & Chang (2013) mention there are 4 dimension such as
(1) consumers will feel concern to eco-friendly products when the quality is good; (2)
reliable eco-friendly products; (3) to reduce the impact of environmental pollution; (4)
consumers have a professional and responsible view of eco-friendly products.

Gan et al., (2008) stated “If the company offers eco-friendly products at affordable
prices, good quality, and available in many places, then consumers will purchase these
products." According to Chang & Fong (2010), quality products are products with good
performance, sturdy and reliable to meet the consumers’ desire. Consumers will make
a purchase due to their positive perception (Chen & Chang, 2013).

H2: There is the influence of Green Perceived Quality to Purchase Intention

Consumers will make a purchase if their perception of eco-friendly products is positive
(Chen & Chang, 2013).

Lifestyle
Many factors can affect consumers when deciding to buy a product. This can come
from internal factors and external factors such as environmental influences. As to
internal factors, lifestyle factors are quite influential on the process of purchasing a
product or service, and would trigger someone to make a purchase. There are several
factors that can determine the consumer's lifestyle such as activity, personal and
psychology (Solomon, 2009). Activity is a form of consumer action. Personal factor are
factors within the consumers (called consumer tastes) that influence purchasing
decisions. In addition, psychological factors are the actions of consumers in making
decisions.

Diyah & Wijaya (2017) concluded that one of the indicators that consumers are eager
to buy eco-friendly products are their orientation and healthy consumption lifestyle.
Further, Margistris and Gracia (2008) mentioned that there is a relationship between
the lifestyle of consuming eco-friendly products and positive attitude towards green
products.

According to Rizwan et al., (2013) and Chen (2011) the society know that
environmental pollution comes from the manufacturing industry sector and they take it
more seriously. A healthy lifestyle is formed from the mindset of consumers such as
interests, opinions about health awareness by no longer using synthetic products and
being interested in recyclable products (Magistris & Gracia, 2008; Fraj & Martinez,
2007)

16
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Barry & Weinstein (2009) mentioned that lifestyle is one of the factors of psychographic
segmentation. Lifestyle focuses on the relationship between products and customer
interests in the form of values created based on daily needs.

H3: There is the influence of Lifestyle to Purchase Intention

Diyah & Wijaya (2017) contended one of the indicators that consumers want to buy
eco-friendly products are consumers’ orientation and healthy consumption lifestyle.

Purchase Intention
Consumer purchase intention is the possibility and desire of someone to choose eco-
friendly products compared to traditional products (Rashid, 2009). A nearer point of
view that green purchase intention refers to consumers’ willingness to purchase.
Motivation is one of the influencing factors to their intention (Ramayah et al., 2010).
Many customers are willing to pay for less air pollution and willingness to pay some
more amounts for reduced emissions through renewable fuels. Based on these
conditions, producers need to change products used to be non eco-friendly to eco-
friendly ones (Chen, 2010). By offering eco-friendly products to consumers and they
notice their availability in the market, they intend to purchases these products (Verma,
2014; Datta, 2011; Chen, 2010; Gan et al., 2008;). According to Gogoi (2013),
consumers do not trust the products offered at low prices, with simple packaging and if
they have no idea about the products.

Pooladireishahri & Asgarpour (2015) said consumers prefer and make a purchase to
certain eco-friendly product categories. Therefore, the company will put up the products
for sale to make a profit. To find out their intention to purchase, it is necessary to know
the perceptions and attitudes of consumers towards the products offered (Kotler &
Keller). According to Netemeyer et al. (2005), their interest to eco-friendly products in
which they live, make them buy the product.

Gogoi (2013) mentions that before deciding to buy a product the consumers are
influenced by both internal and external motivation. Awareness of the presence of eco-
friendly products at the market, knowledge of the product, interests, preferences and
persuasion are processes before deciding to buy a certain product (Kawa et al. 2013).

Research Model

Green Product
Innovation

Purchase Intention
Green Perceived
Quality
Lifestyle
Figure 1: Research Model

Conceptual Hypothesis
H1 : There is the influence of green product innovation to purchase intention
H2 : There is the influence of green perceived quality to purchase intention

17
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

H3 : There is the influence of lifestyle to purchase intention

H4 : Lifestyle moderates the relationship between green product innovation
and purchase intention
H5 : Lifestyle moderates the relationship between green perceived quality
and purchase intention

RESEARCH METHOD

Samples and Procedures

The study population is consumers who visited the Hyge coffee shop at Pluit Village
Mall on May 6-15, 2019. Sampling is carried out by systematic random sampling
technique. Determination of the number of samples is based on the criteria of Hair,
Black, & Anderson (2010). Because there are 16 indicators of this study, the number of
study samples is 160 respondents (16 x 10). However, to anticipate the damaged data,
the authors distributed 200 questionnaires to respondents. Green product innovation
data analysis results show that there are 8 data detected as outliers and not included in
the next analysis. Thus, the final number of this sample is 192 respondents.

Data collection was carried out by the research team visiting coffee shops. Every fifth
visitor was given a questionnaire. But before filling it, they were asked whether they
had ever used stainless steel straws. If so, then they were asked to fill out a
questionnaire. In the process of filling out the questionnaire the research team invited
respondents to ask if there were things that were less clear from the questionnaire. The
filling out of the questionnaire lasted 10-15 minutes and respondents were given
souvenirs as a token of gratitude for their participation in this study.

The questionnaire consisted of 2 parts: 1) the respondent profile included gender, age,
spending / month, job, frequency of buying coffee, and the source of knowledge of
stainless-steel straws, and 2) the main variables of the study included, green perceived
quality, lifestyle, and purchase intention.

Measurement
Green product innovation was measured by three question items (for example,
"Stainless steel straws are not made from plastic therefore it does not pollute the
environment"). Respondents were asked to rate how far they agreed or disagreed with
each item on the Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 strongly agree). The results of
the validity and reliability test show that this scale is valid (Pearson Correlation for all
indicators ranges from 0.464 to 0.784 and significant at 0.01) and reliable (Cronbach's
Alpha = 0.668).

Green perceived quality was measured by Chen & Chang's scale (2013). This scale
consists of four question items (for example, "Stainless steel straws are superior to
plastic straws because they reduce environmental pollution"). Respondents were asked
to rate how far they agreed or disagreed with each item on the Likert scale (1 =
strongly disagree, 5 strongly agree). The results of the validity and reliability test show
that this scale is valid (Pearson Correlation for all indicators ranges item on the Likert
scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 strongly agreed)). The results of the validity and
reliability test show that this scale is valid (Pearson Correlation from 0.673 - 0.824 and
significant at 0.01) and reliable (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.758).

18
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Lifestyle was measured by the Setiadi scale (2015). This scale consists of four
question items (for example, "Consumers with an opinion that using stainless steel
straws can reduce plastic waste"). Respondents were asked to rate how far they
agreed or disagreed with each item on the Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5
strongly agree). The results of the validity and reliability test show that this scale is valid
(Pearson Correlation for all indicators ranges from 0.730 - 0.828 and significant at 0.01)
and reliable (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.798).

Purchase intention was measured by a scale developed from Kotler and Keller (2015)
and Chen and Chang (2013). This scale consists of four question items (for example,
"After getting information, consumers will consider buying stainless steel straw
products"). Respondents were asked to rate how far they agree or disagree with each
question item on the Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 strongly agree). Validity and
reliability test results show that this scale is valid (Pearson Correlation for all indicators
ranges from 0.599 - 0.809 and significant at 0.01) and reliable (Cronbach's Alpha =
0.729).

Data analysis
This research used various statistical methods. First, frequency, mean, and standard
deviation were used to describe the characteristics of the respondent, and the main
variables of the study. Pearson correlation was used to analyze the relationship
between research variables. Hierarchical regression analysis was used to examine the
effect of interaction variables between green product innovation and lifestyle, and
interaction variables between green perceived quality and lifestyle on purchase
intention. Simple slope analysis was used to find out more about the form of interactive

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Profile of Respondent
Table 1 presents the profile of respondents. From this table it can be observed that the
number of male respondents (49%) is not much different from the number of female
respondents (51%). Generally, respondents (65%) age between 17-25 years. As to
their spending per month, most respondents (70.5%) have an income of Rp. 1,500,000
- Rp. 3,000,000 and Rp. 3,000,001 - Rp. 5,000,000. The occupation of respondents is
quite varied; however, the biggest percentage is in the category of students (41.15%)
and employees (25.52%). Frequency of buying coffee in a week is 3 times a week
(41,67%) and the source of knowledge of stainless-steel straws comes from the social
media (51.50%) and friends (34%).

Tabel 1. Profile of Respondent (N = 192)

Variabel N %
Gender Male 94 49,00
Female 98 51,00
th
Age 17-25 128 66,50
25-35th 36 19,00
th
>35 28 14,50
Rp. 1.500.000 - Rp.
Spending/month 71 37,00
3.000.000

19
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Rp. 3.000.001 - Rp.

64 33,50
5.000.000
>Rp. 5.000.000 57 29,50
Student/undergraduate
Job 79 41,15
students
Entrepreneur 35 18,23
Employee 49 25,52
Housewife 20 10,42
Others 9 4,69
Frequency 1 time 32 16,67
2 times 56 29,17
3 times 80 41,67
More than 3 times 24 12,50
The source of knowledge
Friends 65 34,00
of stainless-steel straws
Family 21 11,00
Sosial Media 99 51,50
Others 7 3,50

Bivariate Analysis

Table 2. Correlation Coefficient between Research Variables

Variables 1 2 3 4
1. Green product innovation 1,00
2. Green perceived quality .650** 1,00
3. Lifestyle .739** .740** 1,00
4. Purchase intention .575** .796** .858** 1,00

Mean 3,956 3,961 3,697 3,794

Std. Deviation 0,499 0,588 0,684 0,563
Note:
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Regression Analysis
To test the hypothesis, this study used hierarchical regression analysis. However,
before conducting the regression analysis, the independent variable and the moderator
variable were mean-centered first to avoid the problem of multicollinearity (Dawson,
2014). The assumption test results show that the regression model does not contain
problems:
• Multicollinearity (VIF value <5)
• Heteroscedasticity (there are no clear patterns on scatterplot charts)
• Data normality (Kolmogorov-Smirnov test results are not significant, p = 0.118)

The hierarchical regression analysis steps are carried out by: Step 1, inserting the
predictor variables (Green Product Innovation and Green Perceived Quality) into the

20
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

regression model to test the main effects of the predictors; Step 2, incorporating the
variable moderator (Lifestyle) into the regression model to test the main effect of the
moderator; Step 3, incorporating the interaction of Green Product Innovation and
Lifestyle and the interaction of Green Perceived Quality and Lifestyle interactions into
the regression model to test the moderating effect. Table 3 presents the results of
hypothesis testing with hierarchical regression analysis. This table implies that the full
model is able to explain the variation in purchase intention of 82.6%.

In model 1, Green Product Innovation and Green Perceived Quality have a significant
and positive effect on Purchase Intention (В = 0.112, p < 0.1). Accordingly, H1 is
accepted. Likewise, Green Perceived Quality has a significant and positive effect on
Purchase Intention (В = 0.701, p < 0.001). Thus, H2 is accepted. In model 2, Lifestyle
has a significant and positive effect on Purchase Intention (В = 0.594, p < 0.001). Thus,
H3 is accepted. In model 3, the Green Product Innovation and Lifestyle interaction
variable does not affect the Purchase Intention (В = -0.023, p > 0.05). Whereas, Green
Perceived Quality and Lifestyle interaction variables have a significant and positive
effect on Purchase Intention (В = 0.046, p > 0.01). Therefore, H4 is not accepted, while
H5 is accepted. In other words, Lifestyle only moderates the relationship between
Green Perceived Quality and Purchase Intention.

Table 3 Results of regression analysis

B SE β R² ΔR² ΔF
Step 1 0,800 0,639 167,465***
(Constant) 15,186 0,098
Green Product
0,112**** 0,065 0,099
Innovation
Green Perceived
0,701*** 0,055 0,731
Quality
Step 2 0,903 0,176 178,329***
(Constant) 15,221 0,071
Green Product
-0,252*** 0,054 -0,224
Innovation
Green Perceived
0,391*** 0,046 0,408
Quality
Lifestyle 0,594*** 0,045 0,722
Step 3 0,909 0,011 5,7134**
(Constant) 15,101 0,081
Green Product
-0,281*** 0,053 -0,249
Innovation
Green Perceived
0,384*** 0,046 0,401
Quality
Lifestyle 0,653*** 0,049 0,793
Green Product
Innovation x -0,023 0,014 -0,092
Lifestyle
Green Perceived
0,046** 0,015 0,181
Quality x Lifestyle

21
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Notes:
1) Dependent variable = purchase intention
2) *< 0,5, **< 0,01, ***< 0,001, ****< 0,1

Simple Slope Test

In relation to H5 hypothesis, this study shows that there is an interaction effect between
Green Perceived Quality and Lifestyle to Purchase Intention. To determine the form of
interaction, this study conducted a simple slope analysis (Frazier, Tix, & Barron, 2004)
to test whether the influence of Green Perceived Quality and Lifestyle to Purchase
Intention was significant at Low Lifestyle (1 SD below mean) and High Lifestyle (1 SD
above mean). Figure 1, the effect of Green Perceived Quality to Purchase Intention is
significant at Low Lifestyle (В = 0.256, р < 0.001) and also High Lifestyle (В = 0.507, р
< 0.001). However, the influence of Green Perceived Quality to Purchase Intention is
greater in individuals with High Lifestyle than that in individuals with Low Lifestyle. This
shows that Lifestyle acts as a moderator in the relationship between Green Perceived
Quality and Purchase Intention.

24

22

20
Purchase Intention

18
Low
Lifestyle
16
High
Lifstyle
14

12

10
Low GPQ High GPQ

Picture 2. Effect of Green Perceived Quality (GPQ) on Purchase Intention on

Lifestyle Scores

Discussion
The results show that there is a direct influence of green product innovation, green
perceived quality, and life style to purchase intention. The effect of green product
innovation to purchase intention is that most consumers like innovative products, one
of which is eco-friendly straw products using stainless steel that is cleanable and
reusable. In addition, there is the effect of green perceived quality to purchase intention
because consumers like eco-friendly products such as quality stainless-steel straws to
reduce environmental pollution. Furthermore, they can be used many times compared

22
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

to disposable plastic straws. Furthermore, consumer lifestyles such as orientation on

eco-friendly products affect purchase intentions since many people today are aware
about the environmental of plastic waste, one of which is plastic straws polluting the
sea. Polluted sea will damage coral reefs and harm the government in relation to
tourism.

Lifestyle moderates mean that lifestyle can strengthen or weaken the relationship
between green perceived quality and purchase intention. It can be concluded that
green perceived quality to purchase intention is stronger in consumers with high
lifestyle than those with low lifestyles.

Furthermore, the results of this study indicate that there is an influence of Green
Product Innovation to Purchase Intention. These results are in accordance with
research conducted by Hartmann and Ibáñez (2012) implying that consumers with eco-
friendly product innovation awareness will intend to make purchases of these products.
There is the influence of Green Perceived Quality to Purchase Intention. The results of
this study are consistent with research conducted by (Chen & Chang, 2013) stating that
consumers will make a purchase if their perception to the quality of eco-friendly
products is positive. The results of this study indicate that lifestyles affect consumer
purchase intentions, therefore these results are consistent with research conducted by
Diyah & Wijaya (2017) which shows one of the indicators that consumers want to buy
eco-friendly products are their orientation and healthy consumption lifestyle.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a direct influence of green product innovation, green perceived quality, and life
style to purchase intention. Lifestyle does not moderate the relationship between green
product innovation and purchase intention. However, lifestyle moderates the
relationship between green perceived quality and purchase intention.

REFERENCES

Asshidin, N., Hazlin, N., Nurazariah, A., & Bashira, B. H. (2016). Perceived quality and
emotional value that influence consumer’s purchase intention towards american
and local products. Journal Procedia Economics and Finance, 3, 639 – 643.
Barry, J., & Weinstein, A. (2009). Business psychographics revisited: From
segmentation theory to successful marketing practice. Journal of Marketing
Management, 25 (3-4), 315-340.
Chang. & Fong. (2010). Green product quality, green customer satisfaction, green
corporate image and green customer loyalty. African Journal of Business
Management, 4(13), 2837-2842.
Chen, Y. S. (2011). Green organizational identity: sources and consequence.
Management Decision, 49(3),384-404.
Chen, Y. S. (2010). The drivers of green brand equity: green brand image, green
satisfaction, andgreen trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(2), 307–319.
Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C. H. (2013). Greenwash and green trust: The mediation effect
of green consumer confusion and green perceived risk. Journal of Bussines
Ethic, 14, 489-500.
Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C. H. (2013). Towards green trust: The influence of green
perceive quality, green perceived risk, and green satisfaction. Management
Decision, 51(1), 63-82.

23
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Chiou, T. Y. Chan, H. K., Lettice, F., & Chung, S. H. (2011). The influence of greening
the suppliers and green innovation on environmental performance and
competitive advantage in Taiwan. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and
Transportation Review, 47(6), 822-836,
Chuang, S. P., & Yang, C. L. (2014). Key success factors when implementing a green-
manufacturing system. Production Planning & Control, 25 (11), 923-937
Datta, S. K. (2011). Pro-environmental concern influencing green buying: a study on
Indianconsumers. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(6),124.
Diyah, I. A., & Wijaya. T. (2017). Determinant factors of purchase intention on green
product. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen, 15(1), 54-62. Retrieved from:
https://jurnaljam.ub.ac.id/index.php/jam/article/view/1040
Dawson, J. F. (2014). Moderation in management research: What, why, when, and
how. Journal of Business and Psychology, 29, 1–19.
Ekawati, S. (2016). Mengkritisi kebijakan penanganan kantong plastik di Indonesia.
Policy Brief Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Sosial, Ekonomi, Kebijakan
dan PerubahanI klim, Badan Penelitian, Pengembangan dan Inovasi
Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan, 16(6), 2-3.
Fraj, A., & Martinez. S. (2007).Family as a source of consumer-based brand
equity.Journal pf Product & Brand Management, 6(3), 188-199.
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004).Testing moderator and mediator effects
in counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 115-
134.
Gallo, T. et al., (2011). Accumulations of microplastic on shorelines worldwide: souces
and sinks. Environmental Scienceand Technology, 45 (21): 9175-9179. Retrieved
from: https://doi.org/10.1021/es201811s.
Gan, C., Wee, H.Y., Ozanne, L. and Kao, T-H.(2008).Consumers purchasing behavior
towards green products in New Zealand’, Innovative Marketing, 4(1), 93–102.
Gogoi, B. (2013). Study of antecedents of purchase intention and its effect on brand
loyalty pf private label brand of apparel, International Journal of Sales &
Marketing, 2(1), 267-271.
Hartmann, P. & Ibáñez, V. A. (2012). Consumer attitude and purchase intention toward
green energy brands: The roles of psychological benefits and environmental
concern. Journal of Business Research, 65, 1254-1263.
Ho, H. T., & Olsen, S. V. (2012). Certainty, Risk and Knowledge in The Satisfaction-
Purchase Intention Relationship in a New Product Experiment. Asia Pacific
Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 241, 78-101.
Horbach, J. (2008). Determinants of environmental innovation—new evidence from
German panel data sources.Research policy,37(1), 163-173.
Jambeck, J. R. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347
(6223), 768-771.
Jansson, D., (2010), Development and characterisation of chitosan-plasmid DNA
nanoparticles, Thesis, University of Technology, Tempere.
Kawa, L. W., Rahmadani, S. F., & Kumar, S. (2013). Factor affecting consumer
decision making: A survey od young-adults on imported cosmetics in
Jabodetabek , Indonesia. The SIJ Transaction on Industrial, Financial &
Business Management (IFBM), 1(5), 175-179.
Magistris, T., & Gracia, A., (2008), The decision to buy organic food products in
Southern Italy, Biritish Food Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited 110( 9),
929-947.

24
Volume 5 Number 2, August 2020

Netemeyer, R. G., Maxham, J.G. & Pullig, C. 2005. Conflicts in the work-family
interface: links to job stress, customer service employee performance, and
customer purchase intent. Journal of Marketing, 69 (2), 130-143.
Ocean Conservancy (2017). Together for our ocean: International coastal cleanup
2017 report. Washington, DC. Retrieved from: https://oceanconservancy.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/04/2017-Ocean-Conservancy-ICC-Report.pdf
Pooladireishahri, M., & Asgarpour, R. (2015). Does supplier’s willingness to customize
influence the buyer’s retention? European Journal of Business and Management,
7(23), 91-98.
Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W. C., & Mohamad, O. (2010). Green product purchase intention:
Some insights from a developing country. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 54(12), 1419-1427.
Rashid, N. R. N. A. (2009). Awareness of eco-label in Malaysia’s green marketing
initiative. International Journal of Business and Management, 4(8), 54-112.
Rizwan, et al., (2013). Measuring the Scope of green products in developing countries:
A Myth Breaking Study, American Journal of Scientific Research, 85, 32-46.
Setadi, N. J. 2015. Perilaku konsumen (Edisi Revisi). Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media
Group.
Snoj, B., Korda. A. P., & Mumel D. (2004). The relationship among perceived quality,
perceived risk and perceived product product value. The Journal of Product and
Brand Management, 13(2/3), 156-167.
Solomon, M. R. & Rabolt, N. 2009. Consumer Behaviour in Fashion (2nd Ed.). USA:
Prentice Hall.
Soylu, K., & Dumville, J. C. (2011). Design for environment: The greening of product
and supply chain. Maritime Economics & Logistics,13(1), 29-43
Triguero, A., Moreno-Mondéjar, & L.,Davia, M. A. (2013. Drivers of Different Types of
Eco-Innovation in European SMEs. Ecological Economics, 92, 25-33.
Trisunaryati, W. (2018). Dari sampah plastik menjadi bensindan solar. Yogyakarta:
Gajah Mada University Press.
Verma, S. (2014). Psychological interventions in promoting sustainable consumption
behaviour: anempirical study. International Journal of Business Innovation and
Research, 8(4), 373-384.
Wu, S. I., and Chen, Y. J. (2014). The Impact of green marketing and perceived
innovation on purchase intention for green products. International Journal of
Marketing Studies, 6(5),1918-719.

25