Antecedents of Environmentally and Socially Responsible Sustainable Consumer Behavior

Abstract

Responsible sustainable consumer behavior (RSCB) involves a complex pattern of environmental and social issues, in line with the view of sustainability as a construct with both environmental and social pillar. So far, environmental dimension was far more researched than social dimension. In this article, we investigate the antecedents of both environmentally and socially RSCB and willingness to behave in environmentally/socially responsible way. We include measures of concern, perceived consumer control/effectiveness, personal/social norms and ethical ideologies/obligation to better explain and extend the traditional theory of planned behavior. Additionally, we test the impact of information availability about environmental or social impact on RSCB. Our findings on a representative sample of 426 respondents (ages 18 to 65) show that in general, antecedents of environmentally and socially responsible sustainable consumption are similar in their effect on consumer behavior, with personal norms, concern and ethical ideologies having the strongest impact on RSCB. When comparing both types of behavior, socially responsible behavior is more influenced by perceived behavioral control and possibly social norms than environmentally responsible behavior, while information availability plays its role for both behaviors. Sustainable responsible consumption can be achieved by embracing both dimensions of sustainability and consumers need to have a sense for both social and environmental issues. The complexity and struggles between doing what is good for environment and society could be the reason why consumers have difficulties achieving sustainable responsible consumption.

From Words to Deeds: How Do Knowledge, Effectiveness, and Personal Relevance Link Environmental Concern and Buying Behavior?

“…The choice of constructs in our study was guided by the research of Brochado et al (2017), who found that the individual or psychographic factors were more relevant than demographic variables. For example, environmental concern was found to be one of the factors with the strongest impact on environmental behavior in a recent study by Hosta and Zabkar (2020). What is more, Kang et al (2013) led us to the trio of individual factors, i.e.…”

Local food sales and point of sale priming: evidence from a supermarket field experiment

“…They were told that for a specific variety of apples, there were two options, namely, local apples costing 10 Subjects were asked to choose between the local or imported apples or select neither. After making a choice, respondents completed a five-item scale of personal norms (Hosta and Zabkar, 2020), adapted to local foods (a = 0.893). In addition, to further enhance understanding of choices, respondents completed the five-item scale of Lichtenstein et al (1993) to capture price consciousness (a = 0.902).…”

How does Schwartz's theory of human values affect the proenvironmental behavior model?

“…Studies clearly present the role of attitudes, values, beliefs, knowledge, personality and skills in explaining environmental behavior (Biswas and Roy, 2015;Obery and Bangert, 2017). Other constructs like collective efficacy (Chen, 2015;Neamtu et al, 2014), emotions (Rees et al, 2015), mindfulness (Panno et al, 2018), environmental consciousness (Garvey and Bolton, 2017), perceived behavioral control (Hosta and Zabkar, 2020) and social influence (Axsen and Kurani, 2014) are also shown to be related to proenvironmental behavior. Oreg and Katz-Gerro (2006) developed one of the most comprehensive cross-national proenvironmental behavior models and one of the few not to be limited to either a local or single-country context or one specific proenvironmental behavior.…”