Proposing a Value Field Model for Predicting Homebuyers’ Purchasing Behavior of Green Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China

Abstract

Understanding the motivations that stimulate homebuyers’ green purchasing behavior can increase market demand for green products, especially considering the comparably low market share of green products worldwide. In this context, various studies have been conducted examining consumers’ intentions to pay for green products. Nevertheless, there is still limited research on evaluating homebuyers’ purchasing behavior toward green residential buildings. This study argues that the value of green residential buildings (GRBs) affects their adoption, and thus exerts an invisible force on homebuyers’ purchasing behavior. It also finds that field theory provides a scientific perspective on this phenomenon. Thus, this paper proposes a value field model for evaluating homebuyers’ GRB purchasing behavior based on physical field theory and psychology field theory. In particular, physical field theory provides the measurement formula, while psychological field theory explains the effect of the force stimulating homebuyers’ purchasing intention, and ultimately influencing their purchasing behavior. The initial model consisted of a field source (green perceived value), target charge (GRB demand), distance (psychological distance), and value field factor. As the value field factor was calculated to be approximately equal to 1, the final model is a composite of a field source (green perceived value), target charge (GRB demand), and distance (psychological distance). The results validate the construction of the value field model on the basis of field theory. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by analyzing GRB value and provides a clearer understanding of how GRBs and the environment combine to fulfill homebuyers’ requirements and influence their GRB purchasing behavior.

Exploring Residents’ Purchase Intention of Green Housings in China: An Extended Perspective of Perceived Value

“…Items for perceived value were adapted from Kim et al [ 43 ]. Items for perceived functional benefits were adapted from Sweeney and Soutar [ 49 ], Liu et al [ 16 ], and Zhang et al [ 36 ]. Items for perceived green benefits were derived from He et al [ 41 ] and Zhang et al [ 54 ].…”

“…In other words, satiating psychological needs may also motivate customers’ purchasing behavior [ 50 ]. Corresponding to GHs, psychological needs imply a sense of reassurance, happiness, and pleasure from a better living experience in GHs than traditional housing [ 36 ]. This positive emotional expectation is conducive to residents’ better evaluation of GHs.…”

“…Compared to traditional housing, GHs can reduce environmental pollution and make effective use of resources and energy throughout the life cycle [ 53 ]. Therefore, GHs have unique environmental benefits compared to traditional housing, which form residents’ perception of green value [ 36 , 54 ]. In particular, environmentalists will be more likely to accept GHs since they consider GH purchase behavior to be an approach for preserving the eco-environment.…”

“…Jia et al found that consumers who attach importance to a positive image are more willing to pay for energy conservation housing [ 26 ]. Zhang et al suggested that perceived social benefits is an important antecedent of the perceived value of GHs [ 36 ]. Therefore, the more residents believe that GHs contribute to improving personal image and winning plaudits, the more value they likely perceive.…”

“…That is, the promotion of GHs should fully consider residents’ tradeoff between multi-dimensional perceived benefits and perceived risks [ 34 , 35 ]. Homebuyers consider GHs’ primary benefits to be their functional benefits with regard to comfort, health, and economy [ 8 , 12 , 17 , 34 ]; their emotional benefits as related to psychological satisfaction [ 12 , 36 ]; their green benefits associated with reduced environmental pollution and efficient energy utilization [ 8 , 21 , 22 , 37 ]; and their social benefits concerning individual image and social acceptance [ 12 , 26 , 27 ]. The main hindrances are perceived to be the performance risk involving uncertain stability, safety, and reliability [ 4 , 35 , 38 , 39 ] and the financial risk in terms of high acquisition costs, operating costs, and maintenance costs [ 4 , 28 , 35 , 38 ].…”