Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

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

Impressing my friends: The role of social value in green purchasing

attitude for youthful consumers
€ls a, *, Wim Lambrechts a, Johannes (Joost) Platje b,
Marjolein C.J. Canie
Anna Motylska-Ku  ski c
zma b, Bartosz Fortun
a
Faculty of Management, Open Universiteit, P.O. Box 2960, NL-6401 DL, Heerlen, the Netherlands
b
WSB University in Wrocław, Ul. Fabryczna 29-31, 53-609, Wrocław, Poland
c
Faculty of Economics, Opole University, Ul. Ozimska 46a, 45-058, Opole, Poland

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

Article history: Prior studies predominantly use cross-sectional designs to determine effects of pro-environmental be-
Received 20 January 2021 liefs on green purchasing attitudes, thereby limiting the possibility for causal inferences and examining
Received in revised form mediation effects. We overcome these gaps by adopting a two-wave longitudinal design to test a
26 March 2021
moderated-mediation model that draws on consumer choice theory, positing that the effect of implicit
Accepted 2 April 2021
Available online 7 April 2021
pro-environmental beliefs on green purchasing attitudes is mediated by perceived social value from
buying green, while the relationship between pro-environmental beliefs and perceived social value is
Handling editor Dr. Govindan Kannan moderated by perceived inconvenience of buying green. Findings from a sample of Polish youth indicate
that green purchasing attitudes resulting from implicit pro-environmental beliefs, partly depend on
Keywords: wider societal factors, i.e., perceived social value and inconvenience. These findings suggest that it is not
Pro-environmental beliefs a desire to do good for society motivates pro-environmental attitudes of the youth, but rather a desire to
Green purchasing look good, especially for consumers who perceive high inconveniences of buying green. The attitude of
Purchasing attitude youthful consumers who are less susceptible to social values is directly determined by beliefs.
Longitudinal design
© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
Moderated mediation
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Youth

1. Introduction 2016).
Theoretical insights from the theory of consumer values suggest
Several studies have examined the implicit beliefs that in- an importance of social context, such as image, acceptance, and
dividuals hold about their relationship with the natural world peer group identity value in the green product purchasing decision
(Ballew et al., 2019; Dunlap et al., 2000). Beliefs about humanity (Long and Schiffman, 2000; Sweeney and Soutar, 2001; Laroche
and its impact on, as well as its responsibility towards, the envi- et al., 2001), stemming from the symbolic meaning of consump-
ronment have been shown to be related to green consumer tion (Aagerup and Nilsson, 2016; Costa et al., 2014; Griskevisius
behavior of individuals (Dunlap et al., 2000; Ebreo et al., 1999; Klain et al., 2010; Salazar et al., 2013). This factor has been labelled “so-
et al., 2017; Poortinga et al., 2004). Prior studies have acknowledged cial value” and it denotes individuals’ concern about their own
the importance of pro-environmental beliefs for the attitude to- image and the impression one makes on peer groups (Biswas and
wards green purchasing (Follows and Jobber, 2000; Schlegelmilch Roy, 2015, Sheth et al., 1991; Bei and Simpson, 1995), and may be
et al., 1996; Cameron et al., 1998), yet, much is still unclear about especially important for young adults who are in the process of
the mechanism via which this process occurs, and the relation developing and discovering their own social identity (Lee, 2009).
between attitudes and actual behavior is under discussion (e.g. Consumers associate positive psychological feelings to an envi-
Carrington et al., 2010; Hassan et al., 2016; Joshi and Rahman, ronmentally friendly attitude (Bei and Simpson, 1995; Biswas and
Roy, 2015), which suggests that the social value of buying green
may be important in generating a green purchasing attitude. It
* Corresponding author. could very well be that a desire to impress peers with one’s envi-
€ls), Wim.Lambrechts@
E-mail addresses: Marjolein.Caniels@ou.nl (M.C.J. Canie ronmental awareness motivates a pro-environmental attitude. In
ou.nl (W. Lambrechts), johannes.platje@wsb.wroclaw.pl (J. Platje), anna.motylska-
kuzma@wsb.wroclaw.pl (A. Motylska-Kuzma), b.fortunski@uni.opole.pl
our study we build upon the above theoretical insights and we pose
 ski).
(B. Fortun that social value plays a crucial role in catalyzing pro-

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126993
0959-6526/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

environmental beliefs towards green purchasing attitude. purchasing. Youthful consumers have been labelled as Generation Y
Relatedly, researchers have investigated the consequences of (or the Millennials, born between 1981 and 1996) and Generation Z
the perceived inconvenience of buying green products (Bray et al., (born between 1997 and 2012). In many societies it is envisioned
2011; Gleim et al., 2013). Generally, it is expected that higher that the upcoming generation of consumers will be environmen-
perceived inconvenience is associated with a negative attitude to- tally conscious and adhere importance to sustainable policies of
wards buying green products (Nguyen, Lobo, & Greenland, 2016, manufacturers (Amoako et al., 2020; Salam et al., 2021). Both
2017; Abeliotis et al., 2010; Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker, 2016). Generation Y and Z are believed to be ‘greener’ than their previous
However, taking into account the role of social value, this expec- generations, e.g. by being more critical towards unsustainable
tation may be in need of nuance. While consumers may perceive conduct of companies (Voyer and Beckham, 2014; Winston, 2016).
inconveniences of buying green, they may still derive social value of Winston (2016) reports that in the United States and the United
buying green. In fact, it may be so that for consumers who perceive Kingdom, 88% of Generation Y and Z expect companies to do more
inconveniences of buying green, the experience of social value good, instead of less bad. Other studies acknowledge several sub-
becomes more important in determining their attitude towards groups or segments within Generation Y and Z, depending on their
buying green products. sustainability perceptions (e.g. Lambrechts et al., 2018). Moreover,
The aim of our study is to shed light on the mechanism via the passionate use of internet and social media by young adults is
which pro-environmental beliefs lead to a green purchasing atti- associated with materialism, need for self-expression and social
tude in youthful consumers. We examine a moderated mediation inclusion (Perera and Hewege, 2013; Fien et al., 2008). This trend
model in which the effect of implicit pro-environmental beliefs on may have its effect on youthful consumers’ consciousness of envi-
green purchasing attitude is mediated by levels of perceived social ronmental issues and their attitude toward sustainability and green
value generated by buying green products, while the relationship consumption.
between pro-environmental beliefs and perceived social value is
moderated by perceived inconvenience of buying green products. 2.2. The mediating role of social value
The key variables of our study are investigated in a two-wave study
over a three-month period among 165 Polish business students. We The majority of green consumer behavior models draw on the
conduct structural equations modelling to test our model. Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB, Ajzen, 1991) to explain how in-
Our theoretical point of view and empirical findings provide a dividuals form their intention to act (e.g. Han et al., 2017;
contribution to the existing literature in several ways. First, our Carrington et al., 2010; Amoako et al., 2020; Ahmmadi et al., 2021;
study adds to current knowledge about factors that determine Yadav and Pathak, 2016). The TPB poses that beliefs determine at-
green purchasing attitude of youthful consumers (Rahimah et al., titudes, attitudes lead to intentions, and, in turn, intentions inform
2018; Follows and Jobber, 2000; Cameron et al., 1998; Amoako behavior (Carrington et al., 2010, p. 142; Ajzen, 1991). In our study,
et al., 2020; Lee, 2009; Yadav and Pathak, 2016). While there is a we are interested in the first step, namely how beliefs determine
blossoming literature on pro-environmental beliefs in connection attitude. To better comprehend consumers’ attitude towards green
to green consumer behavior, much research is still needed to products, Long and Schiffman’s (2000) theoretical insights provide
elucidate the mechanisms at work, especially for youthful con- a framework for understanding the interplay of beliefs, personal
sumers. Until now, studies mainly have focused on regular con- values, and behavior. Researchers have noted that addressing an
sumers and on direct effects of pro-environmental beliefs on green individual’s attitude and belief system is important, particularly
purchasing attitude (e.g., Rahimah et al., 2018; Nguyen et al., 2017), with regard to green products (de Groot and Steg, 2009). Ac-
disregarding mediating factors. We address this gap in the litera- counting for attitudes, beliefs, and barriers towards buying green
ture by mapping whether and how perceived social value of buying may help provide a more complete depiction of the decision-
green enhances green purchasing attitude of consumers with making process regarding green consumption patterns.
highly pro-environmental beliefs. Second, previous studies about Prior studies have shown that implicit beliefs about humanity
pro-environmental beliefs and green purchasing attitude have and its impact on, as well as its responsibility towards, the envi-
predominantly used cross-sectional or experimental designs (e.g., ronment are related to green purchasing attitude (Follows and
Follows and Jobber, 2000; Nguyen et al., 2017; Rahimah et al., 2018; Jobber, 2000; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996; Cameron et al., 1998) as
Leonidou et al., 2010) and call for longitudinal studies (e.g. Amoako well as to green consumer behavior (Dunlap et al., 2000; Ebreo
et al., 2020). Cross-sectional studies can only identify correlations et al., 1999; Klain et al., 2017; Poortinga et al., 2004; Nguyen
and cannot make inferences about the direction of influence be- et al., 2016, 2017; Lee et al., 2014). Implicit pro-environmental be-
tween variables. In our study, we hypothesize relationships from liefs, also labelled the “New Ecological Paradigm” (Dunlap et al.,
pro-environmental beliefs to green purchasing attitude via social 2000) assess people’s beliefs about humanity’s relationship with
value by using time-lagged data. By adopting a two-wave design, in nature (Dunlap et al., 2000). People with pro-environmental beliefs
which data is collected at two moments in time, we are better able have been demonstrated to be more concerned about global
to assess mediation effects than prior studies with cross sectional warming and the quality of the environment (Poortinga et al.,
designs (Rahimah et al., 2018; Leonidou et al., 2010; Amoako et al., 2004). They tend to be motivated to address environmental prob-
2020). By measuring the predictor variable at an earlier moment in lems (Ebreo et al., 1999). While these studies assess the direct
time than the dependent variable and establishing a significant relationship between pro-environmental implicit beliefs and green
relationship, it is less likely to be mistaken in the direction of behavior, much is still unclear about the mechanism via which this
causation than it is when adopting a cross-sectional research process occurs.
design. To unravel the relation between belief and attitude, we resort to
the Theory of Consumption Values, which postulates that con-
2. Theoretical background and hypotheses sumption values influence consumer choice attitude and behavior
(Sheth et al., 1991). Based on theoretical work by Sheth et al. (1991),
2.1. Young consumers Long and Schiffman (2000) empirically explore a range of values
and their impact on consumers. Although different consumer
This study aims to unravel how pro-environmental beliefs of segments favor different values, their study shows that social
youthful consumers are related to their attitude towards green bonding and belonging to a group is an important driver for
2
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

consumer attitude and behavior. In this respect, Salazar et al. (2013) Hypothesis 1. Social value will mediate the relationship between
investigated ‘herd behavior’, a type of action in which consumers pro-environmental beliefs and green purchasing attitude.
observe and imitate others. Herd behavior, a type of social influence
which does not involve direct interaction between customers in the 2.3. Perceived inconvenience of buying green
form of information exchange, is found to have a significant effect
on attitude towards sustainable consumption (Salazar et al., 2013). Green purchasing often comes at a price. Frequently, green
Relatedly, Aagerup & Nilsson (2016) find that social identification is products are more expensive, difficult to find in a store, and hard to
an important determinant of green consumption. Social identifi- assess with respect to their degree of actual “greenness” (Gupta and
cation can be defined as “the individual’s knowledge that he (or Ogden, 2009; Barbarossa and Pastore, 2015). Studies among con-
she) belongs to certain groups together with some emotional and sumers indicate that the green product range is perceived to be
value significance to him (or her) of the group membership” (Tajfel, narrow and green alternatives to regular products are not always
1972, p. 31, cited in Bartels and Onwezen, 2014). In other words, readily available (Bray et al., 2011; Gleim et al., 2013), or only
symbolic and social values have been found to play an important available in specialized stores which may require extra time and
role in the attitude towards buying green products (Bartels and effort to reach (De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Barbarossa and Pastore,
Hoogendam, 2011; Bartels and Reinders, 2010). These values may 2015). Furthermore, given the plethora of green labels, consumers
be especially important to youthful consumers, who are still find it difficult to assess whether a particular green label can be
discovering their own identity and are strongly influenced by peer trusted (De Pelsmacker et al., 2005). In other words, buying green
pressure and role models (Fien et al., 2008). requires determination, persistence and cognitive efforts from
Studies have shown that altruism provides one of the most consumers, and consumers experience inconveniences when
stable bases for pro-environmental behavior (de Groot and Steg, buying green products. These perceived inconveniences attached to
2009; Karp, 1996). This follows from the idea that a green atti- buying green have negative consequences for the attitude towards
tude is inspired by sense of social responsibility. Pro-environmental green products. For example, Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker (2016)
or green consumer behavior is believed to be the result from both found that consumers’ perceptions of inconvenience when buying
rational and moral decision making, in which attitudes, moral green is negatively related to their green purchase intention and
considerations and personal norms play a role (Bamberg and behavior. Consumers dislike having to undertake much personal
Moser, 2007; Klo €ckner, 2013; de Groot et al., 2016; Thøgersen, effort when buying green products (Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker,
2009; 2014). Previous studies have looked into the role of feelings 2016). A recent study of Nguyen et al. (2017) confirmed that con-
of moral obligations: when people feel obliged to do so, due to their sumers’ perceived inconvenience of buying green is negatively
personal (social) responsibility, they will be likely to engage in pro- associated with their green purchase intention.
environmental behavior (Tanner and Kast, 2003; Vining and Ebreo, Given the negative influence of the perceived inconvenience of
1992). Furthermore, social identification processes have been found buying green as theorized and demonstrated in prior studies, in
to influence positive attitudes (Bartels and Onwezen, 2014). How- addition to the hypothesized indirect path between implicit pro-
ever, maybe it is not a desire to do good for society that motivates a environmental beliefs and green purchasing attitude, we pose
pro-environmental attitude, but rather a desire to look good for that the positive association between pro-environmental beliefs
society. The theory of consumption value suggests that social and social value is likely to be strengthened by the perceived
pressure and social impressions are a key driving force behind inconvenience of buying green. The assumption behind this hy-
consumer choice (Sheth et al., 1991; Bei and Simpson, 1995). pothesized moderator effect is that people who perceive high
Products have been known to hold symbolic value in addition to inconvenience of buying green are less inclined to display green
their functional utility (Veblen, 1899). Consumers may adopt a purchasing attitudes as a consequence of pro-environmental beliefs
green purchasing attitude to signal a high social status to peers. (a direct effect), but instead they are more inclined to attach social
This effect has been labelled “conspicuous conservation” values to buying green. Studies have shown that social identifica-
(Griskevicius, Tybur, & Van den Bergh, 2010). Individuals may tion may outweigh perceived inconveniences of green products
derive value from displaying their care for the environment to their (Aagerup and Nilsson, 2016; Bartels and Onwezen, 2014; Bartels
peers (Griskevicius et al., 2010). Moreover, consumer research has and Hoogendam, 2011; Bartels and Reinders, 2010). To put it
demonstrated that consumers’ perceptions of peer opinion and bluntly, the perceived trouble of buying green may be perceived as
concerns about their image when buying green products is strongly being worth it to gain a favorable social impression on peers.
related to green purchasing behavior (Laroche et al., 2001; Sharma Therefore, we expect that the indirect effect of the implicit pro-
and Bagoria, 2012). In other words, (youthful) consumers may environmental beliefs via social values to green purchasing atti-
derive social value from buying green: they derive utility from tude is stronger for individuals who perceive high inconveniences
being associated with societal groups that they aspire to belong to than for individuals who perceive few inconveniences of buying
or identify with (Long and Schiffman, 2000). green. In other words:
As a consequence of the above reasoning, we pose that social
value is the mechanism via which pro-environmental implicit be- Hypothesis 2. The positive relationship between pro-
liefs lead to green consumer behavior, especially for young con- environmental beliefs and social values is moderated by the
sumers. This is because e in addition to a direct effect of pro- perceived inconvenience of buying green, in a way that indirect
environmental beliefs on green attitude, as demonstrated in prior path is stronger for individuals who perceived high inconveniences
studies (e.g. Follows and Jobber, 2000) e it is likely that pro- of buying green.
environmental beliefs activate perceptions about social value, Fig. 1 shows the conceptual model of our study.
especially in youngsters who are in search of their social identity
(Salam et al., 2021), and these social values in turn may relate to 3. Method
green purchasing attitude when social impressions drive attitude in
a social group (Sharma and Bagoria, 2012). Hence, we pose that 3.1. Sample and procedure
individuals with pro-environmental beliefs will derive social value
from being associated with a green, sustainable image, which in Data was collected in two waves from a sample containing 339
turn leads to a green purchasing attitude. We hypothesize: Polish business students. Previous studies have been analyzing
3
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

Fig. 1. Conceptual model.

different sustainability dispositions among students (e.g. Bahaee the “New Environmental Paradigm” Scale (NEP), developed by
et al., 2014; Kagawa, 2007; Nejati and Nejati, 2013; Yuan and Zuo, Dunlap and Van Liere (1978). The revised version was titled the
2013; Zso  ka et al., 2013) and more specifically business students “New Ecological Paradigm” Scale (Dunlap et al., 2000). This scale
(e.g. Lambrechts et al., 2018; Ng and Burke, 2010). In the literature, has often been used to assess environmental values, beliefs, atti-
these specific students are described as being focused on successful tudes, and worldviews. Its dimensions cover aspects of ecological
and strategic business management, and oriented towards profit worldviews, namely: (1) the fragility of nature’s balance, (2) the
making. Also, they have been portrayed as being the ‘self-serving’ reality of limits to growth, (3) anti-anthropocentrism, (4) human
type (Lopez et al., 2005; Ng and Burke, 2010). However, these exemptionalism, referring to the idea that humans are exempt from
negative stereotypes have been challenged in different studies, the constraints of nature (Dunlap and Catton, 1994), and (5) the
showing that some of these business students do show pro- likelihood of the occurrence of potentially disastrous environ-
environmental attitudes (Ng and Burke, 2010), and that different mental changes, i.e. an ecological crisis. The revised New Environ-
subgroups (or segments) could be detected showing a variety of mental Paradigm scale by Dunlap et al. (2000) has generally been
sustainability dispositions (Lambrechts et al., 2018). Research has conceived of as an unidimensional scale (Hawcroft and Milfont
demonstrated that business students show “complex, layered and 2010). We conducted a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) to
multi-dimensional attitudes toward sustainability” (Lambrechts examine whether our data was in line with a one-factor or a five-
et al., 2018, p. 566). Therefore, business students seem to be an factor structure. In our case, the one-factor model at T1
appropriate and interesting sample for studying the role of social (c2 ¼ 178.612; df ¼ 90; c2/df ¼ 1.98; CFI ¼ 0.742; TLI ¼ 0.699;
value in pro-environmental attitudes. RMSEA ¼ 0.077; SRMR ¼ 0.085) showed a good fit. The five factor
Both survey-waves were self-administered, with waves being model did not converge. At T2 the one-factor structure was less
about two months apart. Each survey began with an explanation of good, but still acceptable (c2 ¼ 320.638; df ¼ 90; c2/df ¼ 3.56;
the purpose of the research and the assurance of strict confiden- CFI ¼ 0.599; TLI ¼ 0.532; RMSEA ¼ 0.125; SRMR ¼ 0.127). We
tiality of the results. Participation was voluntary. Data on beliefs considered it the better option, as the five-factor model did again
about the new ecological paradigm, social value, perceived incon- not converge. An example item is: “The earth is like a spaceship
venience of buying green products and collectivism were collected with very limited room and resources”. The scale demonstrated
at time 1 (T1). Data on green purchase attitude was collected two good internal consistency, aT1 ¼ 0.70 and aT2 ¼ 0.73.
months later, at time 2 (T2). The first wave consisted of 291 Social value was measured with the four-item scale of Biswas
completed questionnaires, while the second wave contained 179 and Roy (2015), anchored by 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally
valid responses. Matching respondents of both waves led to 165 agree). It measures the extent in which consumers expect to make a
paired responses, yielding an overall response rate of 48.7%. In this positive impression on their peers by buying green. An example
final sample, Fifty-two percent of the respondents were female; all item is: “Purchase of green products will help me gain social
respondents were following university level courses. The average approval”. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency,
age of the respondents was 22.79 (SD ¼ 4.67) years. aT1 ¼ 0.84 and aT2 ¼ 0.86.
Perceived inconvenience of buying green was assessed by using
the four-item scale of Nguyen et al. (2017), anchored by 1 (totally
3.2. Measures disagree) to 7 (totally agree). An example item is: “While shopping,
I cannot easily distinguish between energy-efficient and conven-
The items for our core constructs were drawn from prior tional electrical appliances”. The scale demonstrated good internal
research and have previously demonstrated appropriate psycho- consistency, aT1 ¼ 0.75 and aT2 ¼ 0.78.
metric properties. We performed back and forward translations Controls. We used several control variables as prior research
following the back-translation procedure recommended by Brislin suggests that the demographic background of consumers may ac-
(1986) to translate the original English items into Polish, the local count for the variance in their purchasing behavior (Nguyen et al.,
language of the target respondents. 2016). Age was measured in years. Gender was measured as a
Green-product purchase attitude was measured with the three- dichotomous variable coded as 0 for male and 1 for female.
item scale used in Rahimah et al. (2018), anchored by 1 (totally Furthermore, we included collectivism as a control variable. Studies
disagree) to 7 (totally agree). A sample item is: “I have a favorable have indicated that consumers’ cultural values are related to their
attitude towards purchasing the green version of a product”. The green purchasing attitude and behavior (Kim and Choi, 2005;
scale demonstrated good internal consistency, aT1 ¼ 0.81 and Nguyen et al., 2016). We used the five-item collectivism scale of
aT2 ¼ 0.91. Nguyen et al. (2017), which is anchored by 1 (totally disagree) to 7
Implicit pro-environmental beliefs were measured by using a 15- (totally agree). One of the items is: “I work hard for the goals of a
item scale, anchored by 1 (completely disagree) and 5 (completely group, even if it does not result in personal recognition”. The scale
agree), from Dunlap et al. (2000). This scale is a revised version of
4
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

demonstrated good internal consistency, aT1 ¼ 0.81 and aT2 ¼ 0.86. (b ¼ 0.21, p ¼ .021) as expected, and thereby supportive of
Hypothesis 1. The direct effect is also statistically significant
3.3. Analytical strategy (b ¼ 0.58, p ¼ .013), suggesting a partial mediation.
The addition of the moderator, perceived inconvenience of
To examine the hypothesized moderated mediation effects, we buying green, on the a-path provides information about the con-
used the R package Rosetta (Peters, 2019), which is based on a ditions under which a positive relationship between implicit pro-
structural equations analysis with Lavaan (Rosseel, 2012). We used environmental beliefs and social value occurs. The interaction
bootstrapping (n ¼ 1000). Measures were mean-centered to elim- term (NEP x PIN) is significant and positive (b ¼ .171, p ¼ .043),
inate any multicollinearity problems. Occasional missing values which is in line with our expectation, and supports Hypothesis 2.
were imputed using multivariate imputation by chained equation Fig. 3 presents the index of moderated mediation (Hayes, 2015),
(implementing the MICE algorithm as described in van Buuren and which represents the slope (and intercept) of the line that relates
Groothuis-Oudshoorn, 2011); an advanced technique for handing the predictor with the dependent variable, as a function of the
missing values that draws plausible values from a distribution moderator (Verboon and Peters, 2019). Fig. 3 shows how the rela-
specifically designed for each missing data point. We checked for tion between implicit pro-environmental beliefs and social values
robustness of the model by investigating alternative specifications, changes with changes in the perceived inconvenience of buying
such as reversing the order between mediator and outcome vari- green. A flat horizontal line would indicate the absence of a
ables. These analyses indicated that the variance explained by moderated mediation effect. The upward sloping line in Fig. 3 im-
alternative model specifications were less than the variance plies that mediation by social value is larger (more positive) for
explained by our current model specification. individuals who perceive more inconvenience of buying green
compared to individuals who perceive less inconvenience of buying
4. Results green. The steeper the line, the stronger the moderated mediation
effect. The gray area around the line shows the 95% confidence
Table 1 shows means, standard deviations for each scale and interval. Fig. 4 shows the mediated simple slopes plot. It shows the
inter-scale correlations for all variables in our study. All correlations indirect effect of implicit pro-environmental beliefs (NEP) on green
are below the threshold of 0.70 (Tabachnick and Fidell, 1996), purchasing attitude through social value for a low value of
indicating that the likelihood of multicollinearity is low. Table 1 perceived inconvenience of buying green (16th percentile) and a
shows that gender and age have a correlation coefficient below high value of perceived inconvenience (84th percentile), as rec-
0.3 with all our main variables. Therefore, conform the recom- ommended by Hayes (2018). Parallel lines would indicate the
mendation of Becker (2005), we left the control variables out of the absence of moderation, while the crossing lines in Fig. 4 demon-
regression analyses to increase the power of our tests. strate the presence of moderation (Verboon and Peters, 2019).
The proposed moderated mediation model fits the data very Finally, collectivism is used as covariate for predicting green
well (c2 ¼ 7.559; df ¼ 5; c2/df ¼ 1.51; CFI ¼ 0.945; TLI ¼ 0.868; purchase attitude, because we assume that green purchase attitude
RMSEA ¼ 0.056) (Kline, 2005). Fig. 2 displays the results for the may be influenced by collectivism, that is, high-collectivist people
partial relationships in our hypothesized model. We find that all may feel more responsibility towards society and hence show more
partial relationships (a-path as well as b-path) are significant. The green purchasing attitude than non-collectivist people (Kim and
paths towards and from social value have positive coefficients, Choi, 2005). The analysis indicates that collectivism is a signifi-
which is in accordance with what one would expect. cant covariate for GPA (b ¼ 0.18, p ¼ .046).
Table 2 presents the results of our moderated mediation model
(derived from 1000 bootstrap samples). The total effect indicates 5. Discussion
that implicit pro-environmental beliefs are positively associated
with green purchasing attitude (b ¼ 0.85, p ¼ .001). More pro- In this study we set out to develop and test a moderated
environmental beliefs may “cause” more green purchasing atti- mediation model linking implicit pro-environmental beliefs, as
tude. The estimate of the a-path shows that implicit pro- measured by the New Ecological Paradigm, to perceived social
environmental beliefs are positively associated with social values value of buying green and green purchasing attitude of youthful
(b ¼ 0.47, p ¼ .002). The estimate of the b-path shows that social consumers, while the relationship between pro-environmental
values are positively associated with green purchasing attitudes beliefs and perceived social value was moderated by perceived
(b ¼ 0.46, p ¼ .00). The indirect effect is significant and positive inconvenience of buying green products.

Table 1
Means, standard deviations, and correlations with confidence intervals (matched data, n ¼ 165).

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Green purchase attitude (1e7) T2 4.52 1.27

2. Implicit pro-environmental beliefs (1e5) T1 3.49 0.40 .27**

3. Social value (1e5) T1 2.70 0.79 .34** .22**

4. Perceived inconvenience of buying green (1e7) T1 3.88 1.25 .03 .00 -.01

5. Collectivism (1e7) T1 5.39 0.94 .20* .15 .11 .05

6. Gender 0.52 0.50 .18* .10 .08 -.03 -.07

7. Age 22.79 4.67 -.02 -.02 -.05 .01 .09 -.18*

Note. M and SD are used to represent mean and standard deviation, respectively. * indicates p < .05. ** indicates p < .01.

5
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

Fig. 2. Results for the hypothesized model

Note. ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.

Table 2
Regression summary for the mediating role of social value in the relationship between NEP and green purchase attitude (n ¼ 165).

Mediation through Social Value [95% bias-corrected CI]

Total effect
NEP / Green purchasing attitude .85*** (.001) [.38; 1.32]
Collectivism .18* (.046) [-.00; 0.36]

Partial effect toward social value (a-path)

NEP / Social value .47** (.002) [.18; .76]
PIN / Social value -.01 (.911) [-.11; .10]
NEP x PIN - > SVL .17* (.043) [-.02; .32]

Partial effects from social value to green purchasing attitude (b-path)

Social value / Green purchasing attitude .46*** (.000) [.18; .70]

Direct effects (c’-path)

NEP / Green purchasing attitude .58* (.013) [.10, 1.01]

Indirect effects (a*b)

through social value .21* (.021) [.06, .41]

Notes. Unstandardized coefficients are reported, independent variables were centered, p-values between brackets. ***p < .001, **p < .01, *p < .05.

Fig. 3. Index of moderated mediation.

6
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

Fig. 4. Simple slopes in the x-m path for the indirect effect.

5.1. Theoretical contributions evidence that we found for the moderating effect of perceived
inconvenience of buying green products (Hypothesis 2). It seems
Our study has several core findings. First, our analyses show a that for young adults who perceive high inconvenience of buying
significant indirect, mediating effect of social value in the relation green, it is more important to derive social approval of their green
between implicit pro-environmental beliefs and green purchasing behavior. They are less inclined to display green purchasing atti-
attitude. This finding seems to support the idea that not a desire to tudes as a consequence of pro-environmental beliefs (a direct ef-
do good for society motivates a pro-environmental attitude, but fect), but instead they are more inclined to attach social values to
rather a desire to look good for society. Apparently, for youthful buying green. This finding is in line with studies that suggest that
consumers, social value is an important mechanism that translates green consumer choices are influenced by personal factors, such as
implicit pro-environmental beliefs into a green purchasing attitude the impression one makes on peer groups (Biswas and Roy, 2015;
(Hypothesis 1). This finding is in line with previous studies in which Aagerup and Nilsson, 2016). In our study, we did not find clear
social value has been studied in relation to green purchasing gender related differences, such as the ones reported by Lee (2009)
behavior (Aagerup and Nilsson, 2016; Bartels and Onwezen, 2014; and Costa et al. (2014).
Costa et al., 2014), to which we now add the refinement that social Third, our study harbors a methodological contribution. Most
value mediates the relationship between implicit beliefs and green studies about green consumer patterns are cross-sectional in na-
purchasing attitudes. Note that the direct effect of pro- ture and rest heavily on theoretical argumentation to suggest the
environmental beliefs on green purchasing behavior is also signif- direction of causality (Follows and Jobber, 2000; Nguyen et al.,
icant, suggesting that social value partially mediates the process, 2016, 2017; Kim and Choi, 2005; Amoako et al., 2020). However,
but not fully. This pattern of results is in line with the tenets of the cross-sectional designs limit the possibility of making causal in-
Theory of Consumption Values (TCV), which postulates that con- ferences. Yet it is crucial to examine multiple time points to fully
sumption values influence consumer choice attitude and behavior grasp how beliefs and values determine green purchasing attitude.
(Sheth et al., 1991). Individuals derive several values from having a Our study answers to the repeated call for longitudinal research
green purchasing attitude (Biswas and Roy, 2015; Sheth et al., 1991). designs and approaches for data gathering (e.g. Rahimah et al.,
For example, based on TCV, Long and Schiffman (2000) empirically 2018; Amoako et al., 2020).
explore a range of values and their impact on consumers. Although
different consumer segments favor different values, their study 5.2. Managerial implications
shows that social bonding and belonging to a group is an important
driver for consumer attitude and behavior. Furthermore, green Time and budgets are always scarce, also for marketers of green
products may provide social value in terms of status (being able to products. Our study provides insights for practitioners who want to
afford the often quite expensive green products) and the display of focus on the most fruitful ways to encourage a green purchasing
self-sacrifice for community wellbeing (voluntary forgoing a attitude in young consumers.
luxurious product by choosing a green product) (Griskevicius, First, marketers should realize the impact of youthful con-
Tybur, & Van den Bergh, 2010; Grazzini et al., 2021). Our results sumers’ implicit beliefs on their green purchasing attitude. Our
indicate that consumers may adopt a green purchasing attitude to results provide evidence for a strong positive effect (Table 2). In
signal a high social status to peers. Thereby, our study adds marketing campaigns marketers can try to influence consumers’
empirical evidence that substantiates the importance of social implicit environmental beliefs. It has been shown that implicit
values for (green) consumers. Whereas prior research is limited to beliefs can be changed albeit slowly (Meadows, 1999). Changing
studying the direct relationship between social value and green consumers’ implicit beliefs to a pro-environmental stance, is key to
consumption (e.g. Aagerup and Nilsson, 2016) or intention to buy spawning a green purchasing attitude. Following social marketing
green (e.g. Bartels and Onwezen, 2014; Costa et al., 2014), our study approaches, such as segmentation studies of green consumers (e.g.
shows social value as a mechanism that (partly) translates implicit Do Paco et al., 2009), green marketing campaigns are a tool that can
beliefs into green purchasing attitude. be used to influence certain consumers’ implicit environmental
Second, given an individual’s implicit pro-environmental be- beliefs, especially those consumers in the ‘non-green’ segments,
liefs, the green purchasing attitude of youthful individuals who also labelled as ‘uncommitted’, ‘undefined’ (Do Paco et al., 2009) or
perceive high inconvenience of buying green is largely influenced ‘non-believer’ segments (Lambrechts et al., 2018). For example,
by the social value attached to buying green. This is attested by the using emotional appeal in marketing campaigns can be very
7
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

successful (Salam et al., 2021). consumer patterns may differ between frequently and infrequently
Second, another way to increase environmental consciousness purchased items. Frequently bought products can be bought rapidly
(pro-environmental beliefs) among young people is to influence and effortless with consumers following a pre-mediated plan of
the social group that they are part of. This can be done by effectively intended purchases or an established purchasing habit. In these
use social media campaigns to provide information about a com- cases, priorities have been weighted beforehand. In contrast,
pany’s commitment towards sustainable production. Also testi- infrequently bought products require decision making at the spot,
monials of peers that endorse green products can be very effective, and in those cases pro-environmental intentions are easily lost
as young people use social media an online communities to make (Carrington et al., 2014). Furthermore, different studies have come
up their mind about what is accepted behavior in their social group to different results, and differences in consumer patterns may be
(Smith, 2017; Salam et al., 2021). With the principles of purpose related to product type (Niedermeier et al., 2021). For example,
marketing or purpose-driven marketing in mind (e.g. Kullnig et al., social value of organic food has been found to differ from social
2020), marketers should, however, be careful in the statements value of organic clothing (Bartels and Onwezen, 2014; Costa et al.,
they want to make. The intended ‘halo’ effect they want to pursue 2014), although this difference may have been the result of cul-
may turn into adverse feelings of mistrust and guilt-by-association tural differences, as social value may have different effects in
(e.g. Veit et al., 2018) when pro-environmental marketing efforts collectivist cultures (Varshneya et al., 2017). Nevertheless, future
are perceived as window dressing or green washing. Given that studies may take into account the attitude towards different cate-
purpose marketing is identified as one of the upcoming research gories of products. Relatedly, our study focused on the attitude of
topics which currently lacks academic attention (e.g. Hajdas and end consumers, while it may be worthwhile to also investigate a
Kłeczek, 2021), we call for in-depth studies related to green pur- business-to-business perspective and investigate the factors at play
chasing in this field. in green public procurement (Cheng et al., 2018).
Third, the role of social value must not be underestimated. Third, it has been shown that responses to questionnaires
Green products signal status and a pro-environmental orientation regarding ethical purchase intentions are biased by social desir-
(Griskevicius et al., 2010; Sheth et al., 1991). Marketers of green ability (Auger and Devinney, 2007; Carrigan and Attalla, 2001). It is
products may use these findings by emphasizing the status aspect conceivable that also responses about green purchasing attitude
of green product. For example, green products can be linked to may be affected by such a bias. To cope with social desirability bias,
celebrities or prestigious events. Furthermore, providing visual future research could employ qualitative research along with
signs that showcase pro-environmental beliefs may address the quantitative methods.
need for social value of young adults. For example, badges or con- Fourth, although our two-wave design is a strength of our study,
spicuous designs of ordinary products may fulfil this function. it would have been ideal to have three waves of data (Ployhart and
Brand managers of luxury products could stress sustainable pro- Vandenberg, 2010) or to adopt an experimental design to provide
duction methods and materials and associate these with the high further evidence of causality. Future studies may want to test the
quality and durability of their products. Additionally, marketers robustness of our results in an alternative research design, for
may be well-advised to consider the role of pricing of the green example a randomized experimental design (Stone-Romero and
product for its effect on status of the owner. Although it may be Rosopa, 2010).
tempting to drive up prices to create a feeling of “exclusivity”, we Finally, it should be noted that our sample consists of Polish
challenge marketers to lower prices in order to bring green prod- business students. This makes our sample fairly homogenous, but
ucts into reach of all consumers, as green products with a good ratio at the same time it may generate questions about the generaliz-
of price versus quality are better for societal welfare as well as the ability of our findings. Future studies should try to replicate this
environment. The challenge for marketers is to create a feeling of study among other samples that may perhaps better reflect the
status, without artificially keeping prices high. population in a certain country, to see whether our findings are
Our findings show that young adults who perceive high incon- robust to more differentiated populations, as well as taking into
venience of buying green are less inclined to display green pur- account different segments of consumers, as within one popula-
chasing attitudes as a consequence of pro-environmental beliefs (a tion, attitudes differ among groups (e.g. Park, 2018).
direct effect), but instead they are more inclined to attach social Despite these limitations, we believe that our study has
values to buying green. Marketers of green products can use this advanced current knowledge about the role of social value in green
finding to identify a particular segment of buyers, namely the ones purchasing attitude.
that perceive buying green as highly inconvenient. Especially this
group of consumers is susceptible for status cues, such as product
and package designs that show off pro-environmental beliefs. CRediT authorship contribution statement

5.3. Limitations and directions for future research €ls: Conceptualization, Methodology, survey
Marjolein C.J. Canie
design, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing e original draft,
This study has some shortcomings, that suggest directions for preparation, Writing e review & editing. Wim Lambrechts:
future research. First, we use green purchasing attitude as a Writing e original draft, preparation, Writing e review & editing.
dependent variable. Studies have shown that there may be a Johannes (Joost) Platje: Conceptualization, survey design, survey
disparity between attitude, intention and behavior, i.e. a gap be- translation, Writing e review & editing. Anna Motylska-Ku zma:
tween consumer attitude and purchase intent, and a gap between  ski:
survey translation, Writing e review & editing. Bartosz Fortun
purchase intent and actual purchase behavior (e.g., Carrington survey translation, Writing e review & editing.
et al., 2010). A study by Futerra (2005), demonstrated that while
30% of consumers state their intention to buy ethically, only 3%
actually does (Futerra, 2005, p. 92). Future research may want to Declaration of competing interest
replicate our study and analyze effect on consumers’ intentions and
behavioral patterns. The authors declare that they have no known competing
Second, in our study we focused on attitude towards green financial interests or personal relationships that could have
products in general. However, Carrington et al. (2014) suggests that appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
8
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

References environmentally responsible consumerism. Environ. Behav. 31 (1), 107e135.

Fien, J., Neil, C., Bentley, M., 2008. Youth can lead the way to sustainable con-
sumption. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2 (1), 51.
Aagerup, U., Nilsson, J., 2016. Green consumer behavior: being good or seeming
Follows, S.B., Jobber, D., 2000. Environmentally responsible purchase behavior. Eur.
good? J. Prod. Brand Manag. 25 (3), 274e286.
J. Market. 34 (5/6), 723e746.
Abeliotis, K., Koniari, C., Sardianou, E., 2010. The profile of the green consumer in
Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd, 2005. The Rules of the Game: the
Greece. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 34 (2), 153e160.
Principals of Climate Change Communication. Department for Environment,
Ahmmadi, P., Rahimian, M., Movahed, R.G., 2021. Theory of planned behavior to
Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK.
predict consumer behavior in using products irrigated with purified waste-
Gleim, M.R., Smith, J.S., Andrews, D., Cronin Jr., J.J., 2013. Against the green: a multi-
water in Iran. J. Clean. Prod. 296, 126359.
method examination of the barriers to green consumption. J. Retailing 89 (1),
Ajzen, I., 1991. Theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50
44e61.
(2), 179e211.
Grazzini, L., Acuti, D., Aiello, G., 2021. Solving the puzzle of sustainable fashion
Amoako, G.K., Dzogbenuku, R.K., Abubakari, A., 2020. Do green knowledge and
consumption. J. Clean. Prod. 287, 125579. https://doi.org/10.1016/
attitude influence the youth’s green purchasing? Int. J. Prod. Perform. Manag.
j.jclepro.2020.125579.
69 (8), 1609e1626.
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J.M., Van den Bergh, B., 2010. Going green to be seen: status,
Auger, P., Devinney, T.M., 2007. Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment
reputation, and conspicuous conservation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 98 (3), 392e404.
of preferences with unconstrained ethical intentions. J. Bus. Ethics 76 (4),
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017346.
361e383.
Gupta, S., Ogden, D.T., 2009. To buy or not to buy? A social dilemma perspective on
Bahaee, M., Perez-Batres, L.A., Pisani, M.J., Miller, V.V., Saremi, M., 2014. Sustainable
green buying. J. Consum. Market. 26 (6), 376e391.
development in Iran: an exploratory study of university students’ attitudes and
Hajdas, M., Kłeczek, R., 2021. The real purpose of purpose-driven branding: con-
knowledge about sustainable developmenta. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ.
sumer empowerment and social transformations. J. Brand Manag. 1e15.
Manag. 21 (3), 175e187.
Han, H., Meng, B., Kim, W., 2017. Emerging bicycle tourism and the theory of
Ballew, M., Goldberg, M., Rosenthal, S., Gustafson, A., Leiserowitz, A., 2019. Systems
planned behavior. J. Sustain. Tourism 25 (2), 292e309.
thinking as a pathway to global warming beliefs and attitudes through an
Hassan, L.M., Shiu, E., Shaw, D., 2016. Who says there is an intentionebehavior gap?
ecological worldview. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A 116 (17), 8214e8219. https://
J. Bus. Ethics 136 (2), 219e236.
doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1819310116.
€ ser, G., 2007. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a Hawcroft, L.J., Milfont, T.L., 2010. The use and abuse of the new environmental
Bamberg, S., Mo
paradigm scale over the last 30 Years: a meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 30,
new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental
143e158.
behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 27 (1), 14e25.
Hayes, A.F., 2015. An index and test of linear moderated mediation. Multivariate
Barbarossa, C., De Pelsmacker, P., 2016. Positive and negative antecedents of pur-
Behav. Res. 50 (1), 1e22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2014.962683.
chasing eco-friendly products. J. Bus. Ethics 134 (2), 229e247.
Hayes, A.F., 2018. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process
Barbarossa, C., Pastore, A., 2015. Why environmentally conscious consumers do not
Analysis. Guilford Press, NY.
purchase green products. Qual. Mark. Res. Int. J. 18 (2), 188e209. https://doi.org/
Joshi, Y., Rahman, Z., 2016. Predictors of young consumer’s green purchase behavior.
10.1108/QMR-06-2012-0030.
Manag. Environ. Qual. Int. J. 27 (4), 452e472.
Bartels, J., Hoogendam, K., 2011. The role of social identity and attitudes toward
Kagawa, F., 2007. Dissonance in students’ perceptions of sustainable development
sustainability brands in buying behavior for organic products. J. Brand Manag.
and sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. High Educ. 8 (3), 317e338.
18, 697e708.
Karp, D., 1996. Values and their effect on pro-environmental behavior. Environ.
Bartels, J., Reinders, M.J., 2010. Social identification, social representations, and
Behav. 28, 111e133.
consumer innovativeness in an organic food context. Food Qual. Prefer. 21,
Kim, Y., Choi, S.M., 2005. Antecedents of green purchase behavior. Adv. Consum.
347e352.
Res. 32, 592e599.
Bartels, J., Onwezen, M.C., 2014. Consumers’ willingness to buy products with
Klain, S.C., Olmsted, P., Chan, K.M.A., Satterfield, T., 2017. Relational values resonate
environmental and ethical claims. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 38 (1), 82e89.
broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the New
Becker, T.E., 2005. Potential problems in statistical control of variables in organi-
Ecological Paradigm. PloS One 12 (8), e0183962. https://doi.org/10.1371/
zational research. Organ. Res. Methods 8, 274e289.
journal.pone.0183962.
Bei, L., Simpson, E., 1995. The determinants of consumers’ purchase decisions for
Kline, R.B., 2005. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling. The
recycled products. Adv. Consum. Res. 22 (1), 257e261.
Guilford Press, New York.
Biswas, A., Roy, M., 2015. Green products: an exploratory study on the consumer
€ ckner, C.A., 2013. A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental
Klo
behavior in emerging economies of the East. J. Clean. Prod. 87, 463e468.
behavior. Global Environ. Change 23 (5), 1028e1038.
Bray, J., Johns, N., Kilburn, D., 2011. An exploratory study into the factors impeding
Kullnig, C., Obermüller, A., Aichhorn, K., 2020. Improving campaign performance
ethical consumption. J. Bus. Ethics 98 (4), 597e608.
using purpose marketing. J. Brand Strategy 9 (1), 7e17.
Brislin, R., 1986. The wording and translation of research instruments. In:
Lambrechts, W., Ghijsen, P.W.T., Jacques, A., Walravens, H., Van Liedekerke, L., Van
Lonner, W., Berry, J. (Eds.), Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research: Cross-
Petegem, P., 2018. Sustainability segmentation of business students. J. Clean.
Cultural Research and Methodology Series. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
Prod. 202, 561e570.
CA, pp. 137e164.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., Barbaro-Forleo, G., 2001. Targeting consumers who are
Cameron, L., Brown, P., Chapman, J., 1998. Social value orientations and decisions to
willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. J. Consum. Market.
take proenvironmental action. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 28 (8), 675e697.
18 (6), 503e520. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006155.
Carrigan, M., Attalla, A., 2001. The myth of the ethical consumeredo ethics matter in
Lee, Y., Kim, M., Kim, S., Choi, J., 2014. Antecedents and interrelationships of three
purchase behavior? J. Consum. Market. 18 (7), 560e578.
types of pro-environmental behavior. J. Bus. Res. 67 (10), 2097e2105. https://
Carrington, M.J., Neville, B.A., Whitwell, G.J., 2010. Why ethical consumers don’t
doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.04.018.
walk their talk. J. Bus. Ethics 97 (1), 139e158.
Lee, K., 2009. Gender differences in Hong Kong adolescent consumers’ green pur-
Carrington, M.J., Neville, B.A., Whitwell, G.J., 2014. Lost in translation: exploring the
chasing behavior. J. Consum. Market. 26 (2), 87e96.
ethical consumer intentionebehavior gap. J. Bus. Res. 67 (1), 2759e2767.
Leonidou, L.C., Leonidou, C.N., Kvasova, O., 2010. Antecedents and outcomes of
Cheng, W., Appolloni, A., D’Amato, A., Zhu, Q., 2018. Green public procurement,
consumer environmentally friendly attitudes and behavior. J. Market. Manag.
missing concepts and future trends. J. Clean. Prod. 176, 770e784.
26 (13/14), 1319e1344.
Costa Pinto, D., Herter, M.M., Rossi, P., Borges, A., 2014. Going green for self or for
Long, M.M., Schiffman, L.G., 2000. Consumption values and relationships. J. Consum.
others? Int. J. Consum. Stud. 38 (5), 540e549.
Market. 17 (3), 214e232.
Costa, S., Zepeda, L., Sirieix, L., 2014. Exploring the social value of organic food. Int. J.
Lopez, Y.P., Rechner, P.L., Olson-Buchanan, J.B., 2005. Shaping ethical perceptions.
Consum. Stud. 38 (3), 228e237.
J. Bus. Ethics 60 (4), 341e358.
de Groot, J.I., Steg, L., 2009. Mean or green: which values can promote stable pro-
Meadows, D., 1999. Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System. The Sustain-
environmental behavior? Conserv. Lett. 2 (2), 61e66.
ability Institute, Hartland.
de Groot, J.I., Schubert, I., Thøgersen, J., 2016. Morality and green consumer
Nejati, M., Nejati, M., 2013. Assessment of sustainable university factors from the
behavior: a psychological perspective. In: Ethics and Morality in Consumption.
perspective of university students. J. Clean. Prod. 48, 101e107.
Routledge, pp. 89e106.
Ng, E.S., Burke, R.J., 2010. Predictor of business students’ attitudes toward sustain-
De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., Rayp, G., 2005. Do consumers care about ethics?
able business practices. J. Bus. Ethics 95 (4), 603e615.
Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. J. Consum. Aff. 39 (2), 363e385.
Nguyen, T.N., Lobo, A., Greenland, S., 2016. Pro-environmental purchase behavior:
Do Paco, A.M.F., Raposo, M.L.B., Leal Filho, W., 2009. Identifying the green con-
the role of consumers’ biospheric values. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 33, 98e108.
sumer: a segmentation study. J. Target Meas. Anal. Market. 17 (1), 17e25.
Nguyen, T.N., Lobo, A., Greenland, S., 2017. The influence of cultural values on green
Dunlap, R.E., Catton Jr., W.R., 1994. Toward an ecological sociology. In:
purchase behavior. Market. Intell. Plann. 35 (3), 377e396.
D’Antonio, W.V., Sasaki, M., Yonebayashi, Y. (Eds.), Ecology, Society and the
Niedermeier, A., Emberger-Klein, A., Menrad, K., 2021. Drivers and barriers for
Quality of Social Life. Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ, pp. 11e31.
purchasing green fast-moving consumer goods. J. Clean. Prod. 284 https://
Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., 1978. The “new environmental paradigm”. J. Environ.
doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124804.
Educ. 9 (4), 10e19.
Park, K.C., 2018. Understanding ethical consumers: willingness-to-pay by moral
Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., Jones, R.E., 2000. New trends in measuring
cause. J. Consum. Market. 35 (2), 157e168.
environmental attitudes. J. Soc. Issues 56 (3), 425e442.
Peters, G.-J., 2019. Rosetta: parallel use of statistical packages in teaching. https://ro
Ebreo, A., Hershey, J., Vining, J., 1999. Reducing solid waste: linking recycling to
setta.opens.science.

9
M.C.J. Cani€els, W. Lambrechts, J. Platje et al. Journal of Cleaner Production 303 (2021) 126993

Perera, L.C., Hewege, C.R., 2013. Climate change risk perceptions and environmen- Tajfel, H., 1972. Experiments in a vacuum. In: Isreal, J., Tajfel, H. (Eds.), The Context of
tally conscious behavior among young environmentalists in Australia. Young Social Psychology. Academic Press, London, pp. 438e448.
Consum. 14 (2), 139e154. Tanner, C., Kast, S.W., 2003. Promotine sustainable consumption: Determinants of
Ployhart, R.E., Vandenberg, R.J., 2010. Longitudinal research: the theory, design, and green purchases by Swiss consumers. Psychology & Marketing 20, 883e889.
analysis of change. J. Manag. 36, 94e120. Thøgersen, J., 2009. The motivational roots of norms for environmentally respon-
Poortinga, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., 2004. Values, environmental concern, and envi- sible behavior. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31, 348e362.
ronmental behavior. Environ. Behav. 36 (1), 70e93. Thøgersen, J., 2014. Unsustainable consumption: basic causes and implications for
Rahimah, A., Khalil, S., Cheng, J.M.S., Tran, M.D., Panwar, V., 2018. Understanding policy. Eur. Psychol. 19, 84e95.
green purchase behavior through death anxiety and individual social re- van Buuren, S., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K., 2011. MICE: multivariate imputation by
sponsibility. J. Consum. Behav. 17 (5), 477e490. chained equations in R. J. Stat. Software 45 (3), 1e67.
Rosseel, Y., 2012. Lavaan: an R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Varshneya, G., Pandey, S.K., Das, G., 2017. Impact of social influence and green
Software 48 (2), 1e36. consumption values on purchase intention of organic clothing. Global Bus. Rev.
Salam, M.T., Smith, K.T., Mehboob, F., 2021. Purchase intention for green brands 18 (2), 478e492.
among pakistani millennials. Soc. Responsib. J. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-08- Veblen, T., 1899. Theory of the Leisure Class: an Economic Study in the Evolution of
2020-0341 ahead-of-print. Institutions. also, 1994 Dover paperback edition. Macmillan, New York, ISBN 0-
Salazar, H.A., Oerlemans, L., van Stroe-Biezen, S., 2013. Social influence on sus- 486-28062-4, p. 400. 1994 Penguin Classics edition.
tainable consumption. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 37 (2), 172e180. Veit, C., Lambrechts, W., Quintens, L., Semeijn, J., 2018. The impact of sustainable
Schlegelmilch, B.B., Bohlen, G.M., Diamantopoulos, A., 1996. The link between green sourcing on customer perceptions. Sustainability 10 (7), 2519.
purchasing decisions and measures of environmental consciousness. Eur. J. Verboon, P., Peters, G.Y., 2019. Rosetta: R Functions for Education. Open Universiteit.
Market. 30 (5), 35e55. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/mj2ug. (Accessed 22 July 2020).
Sharma, S.C., Bagoria, H., 2012. Green marketing: a gimmick or the real deal. Int. J. Vining, J., Ebreo, A., 1992. Predicting recycling behavior from global and specific
Resear. Finance Market. 2 (2), 404e414. environmental attitudes and changes in recycling opportunities. J. Appl. Soc.
Sheth, J., Newman, B., Gross, B., 1991. Why we buy what we buy: a theory of con- Psychol. 22, 1580e1607.
sumption values. J. Bus. Res. 22 (2), 159e170. Voyer, B., Beckham, D., 2014. Can sustainability Be luxurious? J. Consum. Res. 21 (1),
Smith, K.T., 2017. Hospital marketing and communications via social media. Serv. 215e219. https://doi.org/10.1086/429607.
Market. Q. 38 (3), 187e201. Winston, A., 2016. Luxury brands can no longer ignore sustainability. Harvard
Stone-Romero, E.F., Rosopa, P.J., 2010. Research design options for testing mediation Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/02/luxury-brands-can-no-longer-ignore-
models and their implications for facets of validity. J. Manag. Psychol. 25 (7), sustainability.
697e712. Yadav, R., Pathak, G.S., 2016. Young consumers’ intention towards buying green
Sweeney, J.C., Soutar, G.N., 2001. Consumer perceived value: the development of a products in a developing nation. J. Clean. Prod. 135, 732e739.
multiple item scale. J. Retailing 77 (2), 203e220. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022- Yuan, X., Zuo, J., 2013. A critical assessment of the Higher Education for Sustainable
4359(01)00041-0. Development from students’ perspectives. J. Clean. Prod. 48, 108e115.
Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S., 1996. Using Multivariate Statistics, third ed. Harper Zso  Szere
ka, A., nyi, Z.M., Sze
chy, A., Kocsis, T., 2013. Greening due to environmental
Collins, New York. education? J. Clean. Prod. 48, 126e138.

10