sustainable consumer behavior research paper

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior toward Green Products: A Systematic Literature Review

Andreea barbu.

1 Faculty of Entrepreneurship, Business Engineering and Management, University Politehnica of Bucharest, RO-060042 Bucharest, Romania

2 Academy of Romanian Scientists, RO-050044 Bucharest, Romania

Ștefan-Alexandru Catană

3 Faculty of Business and Administration, Department of Business Administration, University of Bucharest, RO-030167 Bucharest, Romania

Dana Corina Deselnicu

Lucian-ionel cioca.

4 Faculty of Engineering, Industrial Engineering and Management Department, “Lucian Blaga” University of Sibiu, RO-550025 Sibiu, Romania

Alexandra Ioanid

Associated data.

Not applicable.

In the last few decades, humans have consumed more resources than in all of previous history. Hence, we are living in times in which the topic of environmental protection is a global concern. The paper aims to conduct a systematic literature review on consumer behavior, as well as identifying the main factors that interfere with consumer behavior toward green products. A total of 37 studies were found and systematized using inclusion and exclusion criteria. The papers were selected only if they featured research on consumer perceptions of green products. Using this search strategy, a literature analysis was performed based on papers extracted from Web of Science, Emerald Insights, Springer Link, and Science Direct. As a result, various factors that influence consumer behavior toward green products were identified, such as social norms, natural environmental orientation, the company’s perceived green image, green product characteristics, perceived risks and inconvenience of buying green products, perceived benefits of buying green products, institutional trust, sociodemographic characteristics, and consumer confidence. Even though completing a systematic literature review is not something new in academic research, the novelty of this paper is found in its theme: consumer behavior toward green products. Although the analyzed articles highlight quite varied reasons, the articles emphasize that the green products should take into account the needs, expectations, and perceptions of customers.

1. Introduction

In the last few decades, humans have consumed more resources than in all of previous history. Hence, we are living in times in which the topic of environmental protection is a global concern. There are estimations that almost 70% of the planet’s greenhouse gas footprint depends on which products customers choose and whether they use and dispose of them in a sustainable manner [ 1 ]. Thus, consumers are becoming more interested in environmental topics and reflecting their interest in their decision to buy green products [ 2 ]. The United Nations Environment Programme (2011) [ 3 ] has estimated that the green products market doubles annually. Another international study has indicated that 73% of consumers across 60 countries are determined to pay more for sustainable products [ 4 ]. In a survey developed by Harvard Business Review [ 1 ], 65% of the consumers surveyed said they want to buy eco-friendly products, but only 26% of them do so, thus this is a contradictory desire.

The topic of increasing consumer interest in green products has rapidly expanded globally over the last few years [ 5 ]. The global market for green products is estimated at USD 44 trillion, more than half of global GDP [ 6 ]. The global market for low-carbon environmental goods and services is estimated at EUR 4.2 trillion [ 7 ]. Moreover, the global green technology and sustainability market size was valued at USD 11.49 billion in 2021 and is projected to grow to USD 13.76 billion in 2022 [ 8 ]. This phenomenon is facilitated by the COVID-19 pandemic when the heightened attention to hygiene and wellness led to increasing demand for safe products for both consumers’ families and the environment [ 9 ]. In Romania, a European Union country with an emerging economy, 73% of the consumers state that they are willing to pay more for green food grown without chemical fertilizers and pesticides, 49% would agree to pay more for renewable energy, and 36% would pay more for products with biodegradable components [ 10 ].

The state-of-art review confirms the absence of a universal, effective, and well-structured definition of a green product [ 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. Although there is no internationally recognized definition, a green product (or ecological product/eco-friendly product/sustainable product) is “a sustainable product designed to minimize its environmental impacts during its whole life-cycle and even after it is of no use” [ 15 ]. In essence, a green product has two main characteristics: reducing waste and maximizing resource efficiency [ 16 ]. The literature analyzed focused on green products from a variety of viewpoints, presenting both their benefits and barriers [ 17 ]. Researchers have linked ecological products with environmental protection [ 18 ], sustainability [ 19 ], reduced wastage during production [ 20 ], social quality [ 21 ], economic benefits [ 22 ], low energy consumption [ 23 ], low emissions [ 24 ], less packaging [ 14 ], etc. However, other authors have revealed the negative aspects of sustainable products as follows: higher price [ 25 ], costly green certifications [ 26 ], and the short durability of the product [ 27 ].

Many researchers have explored consumer behavior toward the green products topic and have presented different viewpoints on this subject. First of all, the green products consumers use contribute to the protection of the environment by consumers’ refusal to buy products that are harmful to the environment [ 28 , 29 ]. Secondly, a green consumer can be defined as an individual who adopts environmentally-friendly behaviors and buys green products rather than standard products [ 30 ]. Thirdly, consumers with environmental awareness are not only interested in the consumption process, but also in the production, the scarcity of consumed resources, and post-use processes of products [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ].

Against this background, this paper seeks to identify and analyze the factors that influence consumer behavior toward green products. To achieve the aims of the paper, the authors employed a systematic literature review. Even though completing a systematic literature review is not something new in academic research, the novelty of this paper is in its theme: consumer behavior toward green products. Although the analyzed articles highlight quite varied reasons, the topic of green products should take into account the needs, expectations, and perceptions of customers. Moreover, to determine the main factors that influence consumer behavior toward green products, the authors of this paper also analyzed if the factors treated by each of the analyzed paper confirmed the existing correlations between these factors and the consumer behavior toward green products.

This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 presents the Materials and Methods. The Results and Discussion are presented in Section 3 and Section 4 , respectively. Section 5 summarizes this study and illustrates the Conclusions, along with their limitations and research perspectives.

2. Materials and Methods

In order to achieve the aims of the paper, the authors carried out a systematic literature review that encompassed several phases ( Figure 1 ), based on the methodology presented by Glogovețan et al. (2022) [ 34 ]. Firstly, the authors of this paper designed the plan for the scientific research by setting the research objectives. Secondly, they defined the conceptual boundaries. The main identified research directions are composed of consumer behavior regarding green products.

Phases of the systematic literature review.

Thirdly, the authors used the inclusion and exclusion criteria reported by [ 34 , 35 ] and they performed a literature analysis through a combination of the following keywords ( Figure 2 ) in several electronic databases such as Web of Science, Science Direct, Springer Link, SAGE, and Emerald Insight.

Keywords used for search strategy.

The initial search generated 119 papers, of which 37 titles fit the considered criteria ( Table 1 ); therefore, they were analyzed further. The articles were evaluated to identify if they deal with consumer perception on green products.

The methodological criteria.

Source: [ 34 , 35 ].

The publications were selected only if they featured research on consumer perceptions regarding green products and were retained for further analysis only if they simultaneously fulfilled the eight methodological criteria ( Table 1 ) proposed by [ 34 ] and [ 35 ]. The final set of articles included in the present systematic literature review consists of 37 publications.

To achieve the goal of this paper, the authors divided the results of their analysis into three sections. The first section presents the methodology used in the reviewed studies and other significant information about the analyzed articles. The second section presents the main factors influencing consumer behavior toward green products observed by the authors in the reviewed studies, while the third part contains a brief analysis of each determined dimension.

3.1. Revision of the Studies

Out of the 37 reviewed articles ( Table 2 ), 5 of them were published in 2022, and 13 were published in 2021, while the rest covered the years 2017–2020. These articles were published in journals with the main focus being on business strategy and the environment (14), sustainability (11), consumer services (5), cleaner production (4), environmental psychology, and public health (3). The majority of the papers presented quantitative studies, with some of them also containing qualitative research.

Basic information of the reviewed articles.

Note: * total number of citations on Google Scholar on 1 August 2022.

Out of the 37 papers, 4 of them presented a literature review about different variables that can influence green product purchasing behavior. Moreover, in these papers, a variety of statistical procedures were used, such as the ANOVA Kruskal–Wallis test, the Mann–Whitney U test, Pearson’s Chi-square test, Exploratory Factor Analysis, Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin test, personal interview and focus group discussions, multivariate data analysis techniques using structural equation modelling, and multiple regression analyses.

3.2. The Main Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

The analysis of the reviewed papers revealed a series of factors that can influence consumer behavior toward green products. 111 factors were analyzed, with most of them being quite similar in form and meaning. However, the authors of this paper were able to group these factors according to their form and meaning into eight main categories: social norms, natural environmental orientation, a company’s perceived green image, green product characteristics, perceived risks and inconvenience of buying green products, perceived benefits of buying green products, institutional trust, sociodemographic characteristics, and consumer confidence ( Figure 3 ):

Factors influencing consumer behavior toward green products.

Regarding the results of the analyzed studies, the authors of this paper also analyzed if the factors assessed by each paper confirmed the existing correlations and the buying behavior toward green products. Comments based on these correlations will be made in the following subsections, for each main category of identified factors.

3.3. Social Norms and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

The reviewed papers highlighted that in the context of green product consumption, social norms describe the way society views environmental issues [ 47 ]. In addition, social norms refer to how people think and act pro-environmentally [ 72 ]. The reviewed studies present the role of social norms in predicting pro-environmental behavior and changing people’s green behaviors [ 41 , 47 , 53 , 62 , 72 ]. The results indicate that people are significantly influenced by society’s actions regarding pro-environmental issues and the way society presents normality in this context.

The factors that were grouped in this category also refer to green product knowledge [ 40 , 50 , 63 , 65 ], natural environmental orientation [ 67 ], green habit [ 67 ], knowledge about environmental damage and pollution [ 71 ], attitudes toward environmental protection [ 71 ], environmental concern habit [ 40 ], environmental consciousness [ 37 , 58 , 61 , 64 ], attitudes toward environmental issues [ 64 ], green trust [ 40 , 50 , 54 , 66 ] green involvement [ 54 ], environmental beliefs [ 59 , 60 ], environmental awareness [ 5 , 50 , 59 ], environmental concerns [ 36 , 58 , 59 ], green attitudes [ 50 , 61 ], drive for environmental responsibility [ 36 , 42 ], perceived ecological value [ 44 ], green practices [ 46 ], green product awareness [ 44 , 45 ], and consumer social responsibility [ 54 ].

All of the identified factors influence consumer behavior toward green products. Thus, to make positive changes in people’s behavior toward green products, it is necessary to make changes at a societal level regarding the attitudes toward environmental issues and also to educate people in this regard.

3.4. A Company’s Perceived Image and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

Corporate image refers to the overall impressions of the organization’s stakeholders, as well as how stakeholders perceive the firm as a business [ 38 ].

In the last few years, environmental issues such as global warming and environmental damage have represented real concerns for people all over the world [ 73 ]. People have tried to be more responsible with their actions and have attempted to buy environmentally-friendly products [ 74 ]. In this context, companies have been forced to modify their services or products, offering clients solutions that would also meet the environmental protection needs. Thus, they have started to invest in building a strong green image or a green brand for their businesses, and therefore they are trying to influence the consumer behavior of buying green products [ 75 ].

The reviewed papers that addressed this topic also highlighted that a company’s perceived green image is built around several concepts such as eco-certification origin [ 43 ], brand image [ 40 , 48 ], brand love [ 48 ], brand loyalty [ 48 ], brand trust [ 66 ], green brand associations [ 5 ], green brand attitude [ 5 ], green brand knowledge [ 66 ], green communication [ 39 ], social media [ 42 ], and product innovation and segmentation [ 50 ].

However, not all the studies demonstrated that all of these concepts influence consumer behavior toward green products. For example, [ 40 ], as well as [ 69 ], argues that green brand knowledge, environmental knowledge, consumers’ environmental attitudes and green knowledge do not influence attitudes toward using green products, but investing in brand trust and brand image are key actions that influence consumer behavior [ 5 ].

3.5. Green Product Characteristics and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

It is almost impossible to talk about green products without mentioning their characteristics or attributes. Cheung and To (2019) [ 64 ] found out that green product information can be a key determinant of consumers’ green purchase behavior. Zhang and Dong (2020) [ 55 ] claim that a green product needs to be credible in order to be appreciated by potential buyers, so the eco-label can affect the consumers’ buying behavior [ 55 ]. In addition, besides eco-labels, consumers are taking into account other aspects such as the quality of the green products [ 45 , 51 , 55 , 57 , 70 ] or the awareness about green products [ 44 , 45 , 54 , 55 ], with all of them having a significant impact on consumer behavior toward green products.

After analyzing the selected papers, the authors of this research concluded that consumer behavior toward green products can be influenced by the following product characteristics: price [ 45 , 57 ], quality [ 45 , 51 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 64 , 70 , 71 ], availability [ 45 , 46 , 55 , 68 ], packaging [ 55 ], eco-label [ 45 , 46 , 55 ], material [ 46 ], functional value [ 46 ], and green product information [ 64 ].

The availability of green products is an important factor that can positively influence consumer behavior toward green products [ 45 ]. This factor can also influence the consumers’ buying behavior, because they can choose between different types of green products or different brand names. In addition, the perceived quality of green products can impact consumers’ green purchasing intentions [ 46 , 64 ], with the packaging also playing an important role in influencing the perceived quality of green products [ 45 ].

3.6. Perceived Risks and Inconvenience of Buying Green Products and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

Perceived risk refers to the subjective evaluation of customers regarding the possible consequences of wrong purchasing decisions [ 70 ], while perceived inconvenience of buying green products refers to aspects such as: the price, difficulty in evaluating them depending on how ecological they are, difficulty in finding green products in regular stores, and additional time and effort to get to the specialized stores where they are marketed [ 60 ].

In their research, Caniëls et al. (2021) [ 60 ] started from the idea that higher perceived inconvenience is associated with a negative attitude towards buying green products. Their paper highlights that green products are more expensive than normal products, they are not easy to find in stores and it is also hard to determine their actual degree of “greenness”. Therefore, consumers need to make an extra effort in order to find green products, to analyze the specifications written on the label and their relevance, and of course, to buy them at a higher price. Furthermore, the analyzed paper also focuses on the relationship between the inconvenience of buying green products, pro-environmental beliefs, and social values. According to the consumers’ pro-environmental beliefs, the green buying behavior of young people who perceive the high inconvenience of buying green products is largely influenced by the social value attached to buying green products [ 60 ]. Moreover, Wasaya et al. (2021) [ 51 ] state that those customers who attach great importance to the environment, who are aware of its problems, have a risk perception in their mind that the product or service they use will not be according to the claims they have made. This situation generates uncertainty and brings negative changes regarding the attitudes of customers regarding the purchase of products or services. Thus, the perceived risk becomes a subjective assessment of potential clients that is associated with the possible consequences of wrong decisions. Regarding the types of perceived risks, Wang (2017) [ 70 ] states that they can refer to product performance, social aspects, psychological aspects, physical aspects, and loss of time.

Regarding this section, by analyzing the selected papers of this study, the authors found out that consumer behavior toward green products can be influenced by the following factors: green perceived risk [ 51 , 70 ], perception of recycled product risk and uncertainty [ 71 ], and perceived inconvenience of buying green products [ 60 ].

Sun et al. (2018) [ 71 ] analyzed the case of recycled products and discovered that the perception of recycled products risk is negatively related to the perception of quality for recycled products and positively to the pro attitude toward environmental protection. Their results showed that concepts such as risk and uncertainty associated with green products negatively influence consumers’ buying behavior. Wasaya et al. (2021) [ 51 ] also highlight that there is a negative and significant relationship between environmental awareness and green perceived risk.

3.7. Perceived Benefits of Buying Green and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

Regarding the attitude toward eco-social benefits, Cheung and To (2019) [ 64 ] claim that this concept measures the degree to which the potential consumers of green products agree that purchasing those products will bring social benefits and have a positive moral value.

When it comes to the relationship between the benefits of green products and consumer behavior toward green products, the authors of this paper extracted from the selected papers some important factors that can be grouped into a single dimension: attitude toward eco-social benefits [ 64 ], company benefit belief, personal benefit belief [ 47 ], and perceived consumer effectiveness [ 38 , 40 ]

Concern for the environment may lead consumers to maximize the eco-social benefits. Buying eco-friendly products brings them more psychological benefits, and they perceive life improvement through using green products [ 64 ]. In addition, as green products consume less energy, consumers believe that green products can bring even more benefits, while their attitude towards environmental protection will also be improved. Therefore, this study asks how a consumer’s target knowledge (the belief that the consumer will benefit from good quality) and agent knowledge (the belief that the company will benefit from it) are associated with their purchase intentions from companies, following environmentally sound practices.

Besides personal benefit beliefs, company benefit beliefs significantly predicted purchase intentions [ 47 ]. In their research, Ham et al. (2022) claim that the company benefit belief is one of the strongest predictors of purchase intentions across all generations. In the case of the companies that use corporate social responsibility and also green marketing, potential customers are more attracted to buy from them and seem to appreciate their efforts to be eco-friendly. Moreover, if a customer believes that a company implements green practices, he/she is willing to support that company and buy green products from it [ 47 ].

Perceived consumer effectiveness becomes an important predictor of green purchase behavior, with it being even more significant than environmental attitudes alone [ 38 ]. Perceived consumer effectiveness positively influences green purchase behavior and also the company’s perceived green image [ 38 ]. Wang et al. (2019) [ 40 ] highlight the fact that companies should attach environmental protection labels to green product packaging to enhance perceived consumer effectiveness. Thus, by specifying such information on the label, such as resources saved or carbon emissions reduced, companies can encourage consumers to contribute to the protection of the environment by purchasing green products.

3.8. Institutional Trust and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

Institutional trust refers to trust in institutions, whether we are considering governments or companies. This is an important aspect to be studied in the case of green product buying behavior, mainly when consumers do not have enough knowledge or time to analyze their options regarding green products [ 68 ].

In the papers selected for this study, the authors found that there is a significant relationship between institutional trust and consumer behavior toward green products, with this relationship being mediated by factors such as institutional trust [ 68 ] and government support [ 44 ].

In their paper, Ricci et al. (2018) studied the trust-to-go-green concept and discovered that institutional trust in food supply chain-related actors influences the attitudes of consumers towards green products and also the concern about the environmental and health-related impacts of agricultural practices. Their results indicate that the more consumers trust supply chain-related actors, the more they would be willing to buy green food [ 68 ].

An important role is played by government support, which should act in the sense of promoting a sustainable market, and positively influencing consumer attitudes toward green products [ 76 ]. Al-Kumaim et al. (2021) [ 44 ] analyzed the relationship between government support and purchase intention toward green products purchase behavior. According to them, one of the government’s roles is to provide guiding principles to consumers that can affect their buying attitudes based on the health and safety values of green products. In addition, the government’s policies regarding the environment positively impact consumers’ attitudes toward green products [ 44 , 77 ] the government’s support and institutional trust play an important role in consumer behavior toward green products.

When green companies manage to raise the consumers’ level of trust in institutions, they can also improve the consumers’ probability to choose green products [ 68 ]. Thus, institutional trust can be considered as an important factor that can be used to promote green acquisitions to consumers who are not particularly involved in eco-friendly behavior [ 68 ].

3.9. Sociodemographic Characteristics and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

Sociodemographic characteristic seems to also be an important factor that can influence consumer behavior regarding green product acquisitions [ 52 , 55 ]. This dimension was represented in the specialty literature by items such as age [ 47 ], gender, education, number of children [ 40 ], place of residence, or financial situation [ 40 , 52 ].

When it comes to the influence of gender on green product acquisition, Witek and Kuźniar (2021) [ 52 ] highlighted the fact that women are more sensitive about environmental issues than men, more interested in health and living in a safe environment, and more interested in buying eco-products than men, even if they need to pay higher prices for green products.

Even if some pieces of research have demonstrated that age does not influence green behaviors [ 36 ], the results obtained by Witek and Kuźniar (2021) [ 52 ] show that the older age the of consumers, the greater the social pressure for purchasing green products, and older consumers expressing green purchase intentions [ 47 ]. Thus, older people seem to be more responsible in addressing environmental problems through actions than the younger generation [ 47 ].

Regarding the impact of education on green product acquisition, there is still room for improvement. The results obtained by Witek and Kuźniar (2021) [ 52 ] did not support the hypothesis according to which education has a positive impact on the consumers’ green purchase intentions, while other studies show the opposite [ 40 , 78 , 79 ].

Income [ 40 ] and personal financial situation are factors that can influence green behavior too, as the personal financial situation highly influences the consumers’ willingness to pay more for green products [ 52 ]. The number of children has an impact on the frequency of green product purchases as well, as mothers are very concerned about their children’s health and safety, which is why they tend to buy more green products [ 52 ].

3.10. Consumer Confidence and Consumer Behavior toward Green Products

Consumer self-confidence is associated with buying intention, as well as green product quality and price perceptions [ 57 ]. Self-confidence is related to a positive experience in supermarkets or other marketplaces [ 76 ].

By analyzing the papers selected for this research, the authors of this paper discovered that some similar concepts that can influence consumer behavior toward green products could be grouped into consumer confidence [ 37 ], consumer protection confidence, and consumer self-confidence [ 57 ].

To predict consumers’ purchase decisions, it is necessary to understand consumer confidence, which is an indicator of customers’ evaluations of the national economy and their financial situation [ 80 ]. In their research, Han et al. (2022) [ 37 ] discussed consumer confidence and its positive relationship with green purchase intention. They found that this relationship is partially mediated by environmental and status consciousness. Moreover, they highlighted that the results of their paper can help retailers in developing better marketing tactics by understanding how consumer confidence fluctuations can influence the major economic growth-driven environmental challenges.

In their paper, D’Souza et al. (2020) [ 57 ] discussed the level of the consumers’ perceived ability to make sound decisions and also the ability to acquire and use information by looking at consumer self-confidence and consumer protection self-confidence.

When it comes to consumer self-confidence, manufacturers, and retailers need to analyze the consumers’ confidence in their ability to obtain and understand green product information, their ability to choose the right product based on that information, their confidence regarding how their choices correspond with their expectations, and how they can improve satisfaction [ 57 ].

Similarly, regarding consumer protection self-confidence, it is important to analyze the marketers’ strategies used to persuade consumers to buy green products and also the level of consumers’ confidence in dealing with these strategies and consumers’ rights. Thus, through their paper, D’Souza et al. (2020) [ 57 ] claim that consumer self-confidence moderates the relationship between the price and the quality of green products in the decision to buy green products, highlighting the fact that consumer protection confidence has no moderating effect on these relationships. In addition, consumer self-confidence can modify consumers’ purchasing intentions.

4. Discussion

This systematic review reveals the most important factors influencing consumer behavior of green products. From the analysis of the selected 37 papers, a series of common characteristics were identified, highlighting various representative factors for this field, even if the methodologies used in these studies were different or the results obtained were somewhat contradictory regarding the relationship between the studied variables. Thus, the most used factors in influencing user behavior toward green products could be grouped into eight distinct categories: social norms, a company’s perceived green image, green product characteristics, perceived risks and inconvenience of buying green products, perceived benefits of buying green products, institutional trust, sociodemographic characteristics, and consumer confidence.

This grouping made by the authors of this paper, as well as the establishment of the eight categories of factors, can be seen as a new contribution to the specialty literature, thus coming in as a gap analysis that has the role of both filtering, extracting, and presenting the most representative factors that influence consumer behavior regarding the purchase of green products.

Although in the past, social norms represented one of the most used factors influencing consumers’ environmental behaviors [ 81 ], this concept is still an important one when it comes to making consumers act pro-environmentally [ 41 , 47 , 53 , 62 , 72 , 82 ]. Letting people know how others act regarding the protection of the environment can be the key to how social norms can influence green buying behavior [ 81 ]. Consumers need to choose products that do not harm the environment and take care of their buying behavior as well. Their attitude towards using and buying green products can influence other members of society, which is why they need to be responsible for their actions. Consumer social responsibility is positively related to green purchasing intention [ 54 ], therefore “people must be aware of their role in reducing ecological issues and respond appropriately” [ 83 ].

Even if the majority of the papers from our study have shown that the subjective norms directly affect consumer behavior toward green products [ 36 , 51 , 54 , 61 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 71 ], there is evidence to support the fact that this factor does not directly impact green purchase intention, but it indirectly relates to future purchase intention [ 38 , 43 , 66 ]. This relationship is mediated by a company’s perceived green image when a green corporate image is a long-term goal for the management. In a competitive market, the green image could play a key role in building a company’s brand, which can differentiate a company’s offerings from competing ones [ 47 ], with the image of a company being valuable for increasing customer satisfaction [ 84 ]. Thus, companies should focus on communication and green marketing techniques which deliver information that influences consumer behavior to be more eco-friendly [ 85 ].

Also, making consumers aware of green product information can be a key determinant of green purchase behavior [ 64 ]. Most of the time, when customers are concerned about the environment and its preservation, they tend to buy green products if these products have eco-certifications or are produced under eco-certification schemes and respect rigorous regulations [ 45 , 46 , 49 , 55 ].

For the potential customers who find the green product characteristics on the eco-labels, the decision to buy the product is easy to make, with this analysis making them pay even higher prices for green products that might cause less harm to the environment [ 64 ]. Thus, if the information regarding green product characteristics convinces consumers that their attributes, designs, and functions are beneficial to them or the environment [ 45 ], people are willing to pay more for that functional value.

When it comes to green product buying behavior, perceived risk is also a factor that should be analyzed [ 51 , 60 , 70 , 71 ]. This perceived risk is consumers’ valuation, which is associated with the possible consequences of wrong decisions [ 86 ]. The analyzed scientific papers of this research topic highlight that risks and uncertainty regarding green products negatively influence potential customers’ buying behavior, with environmental awareness being an important factor that can affect green perceived risk [ 51 ]. Therefore, in order to reduce risks, consumers can use different strategies, such as pre-purchase deliberation, seeking additional information, reliance on brand image, personal recommendations, or the security of warranties [ 70 ].

Also, the perceived benefits of buying green products can influence consumers’ behavior toward green products [ 38 , 40 , 47 , 64 ]. Perceived consumer effectiveness refers to the consumer’s belief that the efforts of his/her actions can make significant differences in solving environmental problems [ 87 ]. Therefore, consumers who think that their choices to buy green products will bring benefits to the environment tend to buy more green products [ 40 ].

Although trust is considered to be an important factor that can influence consumer behavior [ 88 , 89 ], there is still a lot of debate about how institutional trust can affect consumer behavior toward green products, especially when trust levels may be influenced both positively and negatively [ 90 ]. Ricci et al. (2018) [ 68 ] highlight the fact that institutional trust can influence consumer risk perception and attitudes, with the level of trust negatively affecting those variables [ 91 ]. Concerning the relationship between trust and consumer attitudes, several studies have shown that the higher the level of consumer trust, the higher the probability to develop a positive attitude and, thus, choosing products with eco-friendly characteristics [ 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 ].

This research also revealed that sociodemographic characteristics can be important factors that influence consumer behavior toward green products [ 52 , 55 ]. While the results obtained by Witek and Kuźniar (2021) [ 52 ] showed no relationship between the consumers’ education and their buying behavior toward green products, other studies claim the opposite [ 58 , 78 , 79 ]. In addition, sociodemographic characteristics such as gender [ 47 ], age [ 52 ] or personal financial situation [ 47 ] can influence consumer behavior toward green products, while other studies claim they are not important when it comes to the final decision of buying green products [ 63 , 96 , 97 ]. Moreover, our analysis showed that there is a positive relationship between consumer confidence and consumer behavior toward green products [ 37 , 57 ], with this being one of the factors that can significantly influence potential customers’ behavior.

The papers from the specialty literature that separately analyze the interaction between various factors and the attitude of consumers and their behavior regarding the purchase of green products make the mission of researchers, and also merchants, quite difficult in terms of understanding and managing these situations. On one hand, researchers who want to make important contributions to the green products industry should start from a clear set of factors that generally influence the purchase of green products. After understanding these concepts and how they are correlated with the perceptions of potential consumers, they should customize them for specific green product industries and test if the same types of correlations exist in their case. However, if there is not a clear enough basis regarding the main factors from which their analysis must start, then the future results that will be obtained by them could be incomplete or less relevant for all those who want to know more about generic green products. On the other hand, green product traders must research the existing case studies in the specialized literature to analyze the type of variables taken into account for testing the conceptual models presented in the scientific works. They must understand the basic concepts used, check if they all match their types of specialized green products, and if the conclusions and directions formulated by the authors of the papers present information that could be useful to them in the case of the industries in which they are used. The efforts of retailers should first focus on papers that present the basic concepts absolutely necessary in managing the behavior of customers interested in green products, and only then should they focus on specific case studies. Thus, this paper comes as a cornerstone in the green products industry in order to be able to create an overview necessary for both researchers and green product traders in relation to the main factors that can determine the purchase of green products.

5. Conclusions

Considering that in the last few decades humans have consumed more resources than in all of previous history, the topic of environmental protection is a global concern. In this vein, consumers’ interest in green products has witnessed an impressive rise.

From a theoretical point of view, this paper provides valuable new insights into the expansion of the scientific literature on consumer perceptions on green products. In this line, the green products acquisition process should take into account the factors influencing consumer behavior. Moreover, the paper discusses the positive and negative influence of several key factors that influence consumers’ behavior toward green products: social norms, natural environmental orientation, company’s perceived green image, green product characteristics, perceived risks and inconvenience of buying green products, perceived benefits of buying green products, institutional trust, sociodemographic characteristics, and consumer confidence.

From a practical point of view, the topic of green products should take into account the needs, expectations, and perceptions of consumers. Firstly, by taking into consideration all the factors influencing consumer behavior, companies from the ecological sector should design and implement several strategies to target interested consumers. Secondly, government authorities should support and promote a culture of green products. Thirdly, companies should create a good institutional image, highlighting that consumers should choose products that do not harm the environment.

The present study has certain limitations. First of all, considering the research strategy (which takes into account only papers that fit into the mentioned criteria), the authors of this paper may have omitted some pertinent articles. This brings about the possibility that the removed papers include information that could affect our conclusions. Secondly, there is a need for future research related to factors influencing the consumer behavior toward green products, considering the discrepancy between nations or areas. Thirdly, since this study was based on only some of the factors that influence consumer behavior toward green products, future research should be conducted to identify and analyze other important factors.

Funding Statement

The publication of this article has been funded by the University Politehnica of Bucharest (UPB) through the PubArt Programme.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Ș.-A.C. and A.B.; literature review, Ș.-A.C. and A.B.; data curation, Ș.-A.C., A.B., D.C.D., L.-I.C. and A.I.; formal analysis, Ș.-A.C., A.B., D.C.D., L.-I.C. and A.I.; methodology, A.B., D.C.D. and Ș.-A.C.; supervision, L.-I.C. and D.C.D.; writing—original draft, Ș.-A.C. and A.B.; writing—review and editing, Ș.-A.C., A.B., D.C.D., L.-I.C. and A.I. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Research: Consumers’ Sustainability Demands Are Rising

• Ashley Reichheld,
• Cory Ritthaler

We’re on the brink of a major shift in consumption patterns, where brands that make good on their promises to people and the planet will have the advantage.

Three factors are driving us toward a major shift in consumption patterns where consumers will consider sustainability as a baseline requirement for purchase: 1) Trust drives behavior and, ultimately, business outcomes; 2) Sustainability promotes trust, particularly among younger generations; and 3) Younger generations will soon have most of the purchasing power in the U.S. Companies that understand these trends — and create truly sustainable brands that make good on their promises to people and the planet — will seize advantage from brands that make flimsy claims or have not invested sufficiently in sustainability.

For most consumers, sustainability has been considered a “nice-to-have” in the brands they buy, but it’s rarely been table stakes . That’s about to change. Our research suggests we’re on the brink of a major shift in consumption patterns, where truly sustainable brands — those that make good on their promises to people and the planet — will seize the advantage from brands that make flimsy claims or that have not invested sufficiently in sustainability. We’re fast approaching this tipping point where sustainability will be considered a baseline requirement for purchase, and companies should prepare now.

• Ashley Reichheld , a principal at Deloitte Consulting LLP, created TrustID, a groundbreaking system to help companies measure, predict, and build trust with their customers, workforce, and partners. Ashley is the lead author of The Four Factors of Trust .
• JP John Peto , a principal at Deloitte Consulting LLP, is a reformed cattle farmer who now leads the practice of sustainability-oriented offerings across Deloitte Consulting in the U.S.
• CR Cory Ritthaler is a principal at Deloitte Consulting LLP in the power, utilities, and renewables industry.  He helps clients drive profitability and growth by increasing customer engagement, reducing cost to serve without sacrificing quality, and combining digital capabilities and a human touch.

Partner Center

Consumer awareness and sustainability-focused value orientation as motivating factors of responsible consumer behavior

• Original Paper
• Published: 13 September 2016
• Volume 11 , pages 959–991, ( 2017 )

Cite this article

• Anja Buerke   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5896-748X 1 ,
• Tammo Straatmann 2 ,
• Nick Lin-Hi 3 &
• Karsten Müller 2  

14k Accesses

105 Citations

Explore all metrics

Consumers are put in the driver seat on the road to a sustainable development. Following a consumer-centric approach, this paper explores the dimensionality and the antecedents of responsible consumption from a psychological perspective. Concerning the dimensionality, the study proposes that responsible consumption should comprise a societal as well as an individual dimension. The data (N = 339) supported this two-dimensional approach, differentiating between societal responsibilities of consumers (doing good) and consumers’ responsibilities for their personal well-being (doing well). Moreover, the results indicate that both consumer awareness and sustainability-focused value orientation have a direct positive influence on responsible consumer behavior. In addition, the hypothesized mediating role of consumer awareness is confirmed, with mediations for societal or personal responsible consumer behavior by the respective consumer awareness dimension. Consequently, it is crucial for organizations to flank their sustainable offers with appropriate communication activities in order to motivate consumers to engage in more responsible consumption.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Antecedents of Environmentally and Socially Responsible Sustainable Consumer Behavior

Sustainability Marketing Strategies: How Self-Efficacy and Controllability can Stimulate Pro-Environmental Behaviors for Individuals: An Abstract

Psychological Barriers to Environmentally Responsible Consumption

Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 103(3):411–423

Article   Google Scholar  

Antil JH (1984) Socially responsible consumers: profile and implications for public policy. J Macromark 4(2):18–39

Astley WG, Zammuto RF (1992) Organization science, managers, and language games. Organ Sci 3(4):443–460

Auger P, Devinney TM, Louviere JJ, Burke PF (2008) Do social product features have value to consumers? Int J Res Mark 25(3):183–191

Bagozzi R, Yi Y (2012) Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models. J Acad Mark Sci 40(1):8–34

Balderjahn I, Buerke A, Kirchgeorg M, Peyer M, Seegebarth B, Wiedmann K-P (2013) Consciousness for sustainable consumption: scale development and new insights in the economic dimension of consumers’ sustainability. AMS Rev 3(4):181–192

Bamberg S, Hunecke M, Blöbaum A (2007) Social context, personal norms and the use of public transportation: two field studies. J Environ Psychol 27(3):190–203

Bansal P (2002) The corporate challenges of sustainable development. Acad Manag Executive 16(2):122–131

Bardi A, Schwartz SH (2003) Values and behavior: strength and structure of relations. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 29(10):1207–1220

Bearden WO, Netemeyer RG, Teel JE (1989) Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence. J Consum Res 15(4):473–481

Bearden WO, Hardesty DM, Rose RL (2001) Consumer self-confidence: refinements in conceptualization and measurement. J Consum Res 28(1):121–134

Beaudoin P, Lachance MJ (2006) Determinants of adolescents’ brand sensitivity to clothing. Fam Consum Sci Res J 34(4):312–331

Benson MH, Craig RK (2014) The end of sustainability. Soc Nat Resour 27(7):777–782

Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 107(2):238–246

Bentler PM, Chou C-P (1987) Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociol Methods Res 16(1):78–117

Berg L (2007) Competent consumers? Consumer competence profiles in Norway. Int J Consum Stud 31(4):418–427

Berger IE, Corbin RM (1992) Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. J Public Policy Mark 11(2):79–89

Google Scholar  

Beschorner T, Mueller M (2007) Social standards: toward an active ethical involvement of businesses in developing countries. J Bus Ethics 73(1):11–20

Bowie N (1991) New directions in corporate social responsibility. Bus Horiz 34(4):56–65

Brinkmann J, Peattie K (2008) Consumer ethics research: reframing the debate about consumption for good. Electron J Bus Ethics Organ Stud 13(1):27–31

Caruana R, Chatzidakis A (2014) Consumer social responsibility (CnSR): toward a multi-level, multi-agent conceptualization of the ‘Other CSR’. J Bus Ethics 121(4):577–592

Caruana R, Crane A (2008) Constructing consumer responsibility: exploring the role of corporate communications. Organ Stud 29(12):1495–1519

Castaldo S, Perrini F, Misani N, Tencati A (2009) The missing link between corporate social responsibility and consumer trust: the case of fair trade products. J Bus Ethics 84(1):1–15

Chartrand TL (2005) The role of conscious awareness in consumer behavior. J Consum Psychol 15(3):203–210

Cheung GW, Lau RS (2008) Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organ Res Methods 11(2):296–325

Cleveland M, Kalamas M, Laroche M (2012) ‘It’s not easy being green’: exploring green creeds, green deeds, and internal environmental locus of control. Psychol Mark 29(5):293–305

Cohen MJ (1992) A Power Primer. Psychol Bull 112(1):155–159

Cohen MJ (2007) Consumer credit, household financial management and sustainable consumption. Int J Consum Stud 31(1):57–65

Connolly J, Prothero A (1998) Sustainable consumption: consumption, consumers and the commodity discourse. Consum Mark Cult 6(4):275–291

Creyer EH, Ross WT Jr (1997) The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumers really care about business ethics? J Consum Mark 14(6):421–432

De Groot JIM, Steg L (2007) Value orientations and environmental beliefs in five countries. Validity of an instrument to measure egoistic, altruistic and biospheric value orientations. J Cross Cult Psychol 38(3):318–332

De Groot JIM, Steg L (2008) Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmental significant behavior. How to measure egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric value orientations. Environ Behav 40(3):330–354

DeVincenzo MH, Scammon D (2015) Principle-based consumption communities: exploring the meanings derived from socially conscious consumption practices. J Public Policy Mark 33(2):143–155

Diamantopoulos A, Schlegelmilch BB, Sinkovics RR, Bohlen GM (2003) Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. J Bus Res 56(6):465–480

Dickinson RA, Carsky ML (2005) The consumer as economic voter: an economic perspective on ethical consumer behaviour. In: Harrison R, Newholm T (eds) The ethical consumer. Sage, London, pp 25–36

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Diefendorff JM, Silverman SB, Greguras GJ (2005) Measurement equivalence and multisource ratings for non-managerial positions: recommendations for research and practice. J Bus Psychol 19(3):339–425

Dittmar H (2005) Compulsive buying—a growing concern? An examination of gender, age, and endorsement of materialistic values as predictors. Br J Psychol 96(4):467–491

Dodou D, de Winter J (2014) Social desirability is the same in offline, online, and paper surveys: a meta-analysis. Comput Hum Behav 36:487–495

Du S, Bhattacharya CB, Sen S (2007) Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: the role of competitive positioning. Int J Res Mark 24(3):224–241

Dunlap RE, Van Liere KD, Mertig AG, Jones RE (2000) New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. J Soc Issues 56(3):425–442

Elkington J (1997) Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publication, London

Ellen PS, Wiener JL, Cobb-Walgren C (1991) The role of perceived consumer effectiveness in motivating environmentally conscious behaviors. J Public Policy Mark 10(2):102–117

Escrig-Olmedo E, Muñoz-Torres MJ, Fernández-Izquierdo MA, Rivera-Lirio JM (2014) Lights and shadows on sustainability rating scoring. RMS Rev Manag Sci 8(4):559–574

Evan WM, Freeman RE (1988) A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: kantian capitalism. In: Beauchamp T, Bowie N (eds) Ethical theory and business. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 75–84

Eyal T, Sagristano MD, Trope Y, Liberman N, Chaiken S (2009) When values matter: expressing values in behavioral intentions for the near versus distant future. J Exp Soc Psychol 45(1):35–43

Falck O, Heblich S (2007) Corporate social responsibility: doing well by doing dood. Bus Horiz 50(3):247–254

Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18(1):39–50

Fraj E, Martinez E (2007) Ecological consumer behaviour: an empirical analysis. Int J Consum Stud 31(1):26–33

Gamerschlag R, Möller K, Verbeeten F (2011) Determinants of voluntary CSR disclosure: empirical evidence from germany. RMS Rev Manag Sci 5(2–3):233–262

Gleim MR, Smith HG, Andrews D, Cronin JJ Jr (2013) Against the green: a multi-method examination of the barriers to green consumption. J Retail 89(1):44–61

Gupta S, Ogden DT (2009) To buy or not to buy? A social dilemma perspective on green buying. J Consum Mark 26(6):376–391

Haase M (2008) Customer integration and beyond: towards a business economic-ethical theory of the firm. Z für Wirtsch- und Unternehm 9(1):129–152

Habermas J (1990) Moral consciousness and communicative action. MIT Press, Cambridge

Hansen U, Schrader U (1997) A modern model of consumption for a sustainable society. J Consum Policy 20(4):443–469

Haws KL, Bearden WO, Nenkov GY (2012) Consumer spending self-control effectiveness and outcome elaboration prompts. J Acad Mark Sci 40(5):695–710

Haws KL, Winterich KP, Naylor RW (2014) Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses: green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. J Consum Psychol 24(3):336–354

Hediger W (2000) Sustainable development and social welfare. Ecol Econ 32(3):481–492

Höffe O (1993) Moral als Preis der Moderne: Ein Versuch über Wissenschaft, Technik und Umwelt (morality as the price of modernity: an approach to science, technics and environment). Suhrkamp, Frankfurt

Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6(1):1–55

Hunecke M, Blöbaum A, Matthies E, Höger R (2001) Responsibility and environment: ecological norm orientation and external factors in the domain of travel mode choice behavior. Environ Behav 33(6):830–852

Hurst M, Dittmar H, Bond R, Kasser T (2013) The relationship between materialistic values and environmental attitudes and behaviors: a meta-analysis. J Environ Psychol 36:257–269

Iacobucci D, Saldanha N, Deng X (2007) A meditation on mediation: evidence that structural equations models perform better than regressions. J Consum Psychol 17(2):139–153

Jackson T (2005) Live better by consuming less? Is there a ‘Double Dividend’ in sustainable consumption? J Ind Ecol 9(1–2):19–36

Kasser T, Ahuvia A (2002) Materialistic values and well-being in business students. Eur J Soc Psychol 32(1):137–146

Kinnear TC, Taylor JR, Ahmed SA (1974) Ecologically concerned consumers: who are they? J Market 38(2):20–24

Kishton JM, Widaman KF (1994) Unidimensional versus domain representative parceling of questionnaire items: an empirical example. Educ Psychol Meas 54(3):757–765

Klöckner CA, Blöbaum A (2010) A comprehensive action determination model: toward a broader understanding of ecological behaviour using the example of travel mode choice. J Environ Psychol 30(4):574–586

Koenig-Lewis N, Palmer A, Dermody J, Urbye A (2014) Consumers’ evaluations of ecological packaging—rational and emotional approaches. J Environ Psychol 37:94–105

Kormos C, Gifford R (2014) The validity of self-report measures of proenvironmental behavior: a meta-analytic review. J Environ Psychol 40:359–371

Kotler P (2011) Reinventing marketing to manage the environmental imperative. J Mark 75(4):132–135

Kotler P, Armstrong G (2011) Principles of marketing, 14th edn. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River

Kuckertz A, Wagner M (2010) The Influence of sustainability orientation on entrepreneurial intentions—investigating the role of business experience. J Bus Ventur 25(5):524–539

Kuhn T (1970) the structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Lee SY, Carroll CE (2011) the emergence, variation, and evolution of corporate social responsibility in the public sphere, 1980–2004: the exposure of firms to public debate. J Bus Ethics 104(1):115–131

Lin-Hi N, Mueller K (2013) The CSR bottom line: preventing corporate social irresponsibility. J Bus Res 66(10):1928–1936

Little TD, Cunningham WA, Shahar G, Widaman KF (2002) To parcel or not to parcel: exploring the question, weighing the merits. Struct Equ Modeling 9(2):151–171

Macdonald EK, Uncles MD (2007) Consumer savvy: conceptualisation and measurement. J Mark Manag 23(5–6):497–517

Macho S, Ledermann T (2011) Estimating, testing, and comparing specific effects in structural equation models: the phantom model approach. Psychol Methods 16(1):34–43

Martínez-Ferrero J, García-Sánchez I (2015) Is corporate social responsibility an entrenchment strategy? Evidence in stakeholder protection environments. RMS Rev Manag Sci 9(1):89–114

McDonald S, Oates C, Thyne M, Alevizou P, McMorland L-A (2009) Comparing sustainable consumption patterns across product sectors. Int J Consum Stud 33(2):137–145

Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J, Behrens WW III (1972) The limits to growth: a report for the club of Rome’s project on the predicament of Mankind. Universe Books, New York

Minton AP, Rose RL (1997) The effects of environmental concern on environmentally friendly consumer behavior: an exploratory study. J Bus Res 40(1):37–48

Mohr LA, Webb DJ, Harris KE (2001) Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. J Consum Aff 35(1):45–72

Murphy PE, Öberseder M, Laczniak GR (2013) Corporate societal responsibility in marketing: normatively broadening the concept. AMS Rev 3(2):86–102

Nath B (2008) A heuristic for setting effective standards to ensure global environmental sustainability. Environ Dev Sustain 10(4):471–486

Nilsson J (2008) Investment with a conscience: examining the impact of pro-social attitudes and perceived financial performance on socially responsible investment behavior. J Bus Ethics 83(2):307–325

Nordlund AM, Garvill J (2003) Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use. J Environ Psychol 23(4):339–347

Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (2006) Psychometric theory, vol 3. McGraw-Hill, New York

Obermiller C (1995) The baby is sick/the baby is well: a test of environmental communication appeals. J Advert 24(2):55–70

Obermiller C, Spangenberg ER (1998) Development of a scale to measure consumer skepticism toward advertising. J Consum Psychol 7(2):159–186

Obermiller C, Spangenberg ER, MacLachlan DL (2005) Ad skepticism: the consequences of disbelief. J Advert 34(3):7–17

Olson EL (2013) It’s not easy being green: the effects of attribute tradeoffs on green product preference and choice. J Acad Mark Sci 41(2):171–184

Pedersen ER, Neergaard P (2006) Caveat Emptor—let the buyer beware! environmental labelling and the limitations of ‘Green’ consumerism. Bus Strategy Environ 15(1):15–29

Pepper M, Jackson T, Uzzell D (2009) An examination of the values that motivate socially conscious and frugal consumer behaviours. Int J Consum Stud 33(2):126–136

Pezzey J (1992) Sustainability: an interdisciplinary guide. Environ Values 1(4):321–362

Phipps M, Ozanne LK, Luchs MG, Subrahmanyan S, Kapitan S, Catlin JR, Gau R et al (2013) Understanding the inherent complexity of sustainable consumption: a social cognitive framework. J Bus Res 66(8):1227–1234

Porter ME, Kramer MR (2006) The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Bus Rev 84(12):78–92

Porter ME, Kramer MR (2011) Creating shared value: how to reinvent capitalism—and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Bus Rev 89(1/2):62–77

Preacher KJ, Hayes AF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behav Res Methods 40(30):879–891

Prothero A, Dobscha S, Freund J, Kilbourne WE, Luchs MG, Ozanne LK, Thøgersen J (2011) Sustainable consumption: opportunities for consumer research and public policy. J Public Policy Mark 30(1):31–38

Remund DL (2010) Financial literacy explicated: the case for a clearer definition in an increasingly complex economy. J Consum Aff 44(2):276–295

Roberts JA (1996) Green consumers in the 1990s: profile and implications for advertising. J Bus Res 36(3):217–231

Schaefer A, Crane A (2005) Addressing sustainability and consumption. J Macromark 25(1):76–92

Schaltegger S, Wagner M (2011) Sustainable entrepreneurship and sustainability innovation: categories and interactions. Bus Strategy Environ 20(4):222–237

Schwartz SH (1994) Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? J Soc Issues 50(4):19–45

Schwartz SH, Bilsky W (1987) Toward a psychological structure of human values. J Pers Soc Psychol 53(3):550–562

Shaw D, Newholm T (2002) Voluntary simplicity and the ethics of consumption. Psychol Mark 19(2):167–185

Sheth JN, Sethia NK, Srinivas S (2011) Mindful consumption: a customer-centric approach to sustainability. J Acad Mark Sci 39(1):21–39

Singhapakdi A, Vitell SJ, Rallapalli KC, Kraft KL (1996) The perceived role of ethics and social responsibility: a scale development. J Bus Ethics 15(11):1131–1140

Solomon MR, Bamossy GJ, Askegaard ST, Hogg MK (2013) Consumer behaviour—a european perspective, 5th edn. Pearson Education, Harlow

Steg L, Vlek C (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol 29(3):309–317

Steg L, Bolderdijk JW, Keizer K, Perlaviciute G (2014) An integrated framework for encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: the role of values, situational factors and goals. J Environ Psychol 38:104–115

Steiger JH (1990) Structural model evaluation and modification: an interval estimation approach. Multivar Behav Res 25(2):173–180

Stern PC (2000) Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J Soc Issues 56(3):407–424

Stern PC, Dietz T, Kalof L (1993) Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environ Behav 25(5):322–348

Stern PC, Dietz T, Abel TD, Guagnano GA, Kalof L (1999) A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Hum Ecol Rev 6(2):81–97

Stichweh R (1992) The sociology of scientific disciplines: on the genesis and stability of the disciplinary structure of modern science. Sci Context 5(1):3–15

Straughan RD, Roberts JA (1999) Environmental segmentation alternatives: a look at green consumer behavior in the new millennium. J Consum Mark 16(6):558–575

Sudbury-Riley L, Kohlbacher F (2016) Ethically minded consumer behavior: scale review, development, and validation. J Bus Res 69(8):2697–2710

Tanner C, Wölfing Kast S (2003) Promoting sustainable consumption: determinants of green purchases by swiss consumers. Psychol Market 20(10):883–902

Thøgersen J (1999) The ethical consumer. Moral norms and packaging choice. J Consum Policy 22(4):439–460

Thøgersen J (2000) Psychological determinants of paying attention to eco-labels in purchase decisions: model development and multinational validation. J Consum Policy 23(3):285–313

Thøgersen J (2005) How may consumer policy empower consumers for sustainable lifestyles? J Consum Policy 28(2):143–177

Thøgersen J (2014) Unsustainable consumption. Eur Psychol 19(2):84–95

Thøgersen J, Ölander F (2002) Human values and the emergence of a sustainable consumption pattern: a panel study. J Econ Psychol 23(5):605–630

Titus PA, Bradford JL (1999) Reflections on consumer sophistication and its impact on ethical business practice. J Consum Aff 30(1):170–194

UNCED (1992) Agenda 21 and the UNCED proceedings. Oceana Publications, New York

Urien B, Kilbourne W (2011) Generativity and self-enhancement values in eco-friendly behavioral intentions and environmentally responsible consumption behavior. Psychol Mark 28(1):69–90

Uusitalo O, Oksanen R (2004) Ethical consumerism: a view from Finland. Int J Consum Stud 28(3):214–221

Valor C, Carrero I (2014) Viewing responsible consumption as a personal project. Psychol Mark 31(12):1110–1121

Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE (2000) A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ Res Methods 3(1):4–70

Webb DJ, Mohr LA, Harris KE (2008) A re-examination of socially responsible consumption and its measurement. J Bus Res 61(2):91–98

Weigold A, Weigold IK, Russell EJ (2013) Examination of the equivalence of self-report survey-based paper-and-pencil and internet data collection methods. Psychol Methods 18(1):53–70

Wells VK, Ponting CA, Peattie K (2011) Behaviour and climate change: consumer perceptions of responsibility. J Mark Manag 27(7–8):808–833

West SG, Finch JF, Curran PJ (1995) Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: problems and remedies. In: Hoyle RH (ed) Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 56–75

Wooliscroft B, Ganglmair-Wooliscroft A, Noone A (2014) The hierarchy of ethical consumption behavior: the case of New Zealand. J Macromark 34(1):57–72

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Zavestoski S (2002) The social-psychological bases of anticonsumption attitudes. Psychol Market 19(2):149–165

Zhao X, Lynch JG, Chen Q (2010) Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: myths and truths about mediation analysis. J Consum Res 37(2):197–206

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our manuscript and their insightful comments and suggestions.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

SVI-Endowed Chair of Marketing, esp. E-Commerce and Cross-Media Management, HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management, Jahnallee 59, 04109, Leipzig, Germany

Anja Buerke

Work and Organizational Psychology, and Cross-Cultural Business Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Osnabrueck, Seminarstraße 20, 49074, Osnabrueck, Germany

Tammo Straatmann & Karsten Müller

Chair of Business and Ethics, University of Vechta, Driverstraße 22, 49377, Vechta, Germany

Nick Lin-Hi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anja Buerke .

Additional information

A. Buerke and T. Straatmann have contributed equally to this work and should be considered co-first authors.

Appendix: Scales

Rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Buerke, A., Straatmann, T., Lin-Hi, N. et al. Consumer awareness and sustainability-focused value orientation as motivating factors of responsible consumer behavior. Rev Manag Sci 11 , 959–991 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-016-0211-2

Download citation

Received : 29 February 2016

Accepted : 29 August 2016

Published : 13 September 2016

Issue Date : October 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-016-0211-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Consumer awareness
• Multiple mediation model
• Responsible consumer behavior
• Sustainability
• Sustainability-focused value orientation

JEL Classification

• M31 Marketing
• Q01 Sustainable development
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• News & Events
• About Samuel DuBois Cook
• Director’s Message
• Distinguished Fellows
• Career Achievement Award
• Outside Opportunities
• Class, Wealth, & Social Mobility
• Health Equity
• Education Equity & Policy
• Visual Narratives of Inequality
• Environmental Justice
• Policing Enforcement & Justice
• Artificial Intelligence
• Journal Articles
• Global Inequality Research Initiative (GIRI) Seminar
• Hank & Billye Suber Aaron Young Scholars Summer Research Institute
• Inequality Studies Minor
• Graduate Programs
• Doctoral Fellows Program
• Postdoctoral Programs
• Diversity Initiative for Tenure Economics (DITE)
• Shame of Chicago
• Durham’s Black Wall Street Exhibit
• Past Newsletters

Gender and Racial Behavior in Consumer Payment Methods under Economic Uncertainty

The question "Cash or credit?" is misleadingly simple, and the answer depends on many factors.

In this article, written by lead author Raffi E. García, Cook Center Visiting Faculty, the authors analyze how gender and race influence consumer payment behaviors under times of financial uncertainty.

This paper analyzes the effects of high economic uncertainty on racial and gender behavior in payment methods. Using US consumer transaction-level data, we find that consumers alter their payment behavior patterns in periods of high economic uncertainty by moving away from costly and risky payment methods with high interest rates, such as credit cards. We find that females reduce their cash usage but increase their credit card usage relative to males, thus exposing themselves to higher financial vulnerability. We find no major differences in payment behavior between Blacks and Whites.