Humans play an important role in tackling the climate crisis we are facing. As 40% of all ecological destruction is being caused by household purchases, there is a need to motivate consumers to buy better, more sustainable options (Joshi & Rahman, 2019). Previous studies indicated that even though consumers advocate valuing sustainability and the climate, their behaviour is not always corresponding, meaning their purchasing behaviour does not match these advocated values (CBS, 2018; Joshi & Rahman, 2017). This behavioural gap is what was investigated in this study to understand so we can contribute to bridging it. In order to understand what drives sustainable purchasing behaviour, the following research questions were asked:
What is the relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour of Dutch consumers? What is the role of age and gender on this relationship? Is the relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour mediated by status consumption, and what is the role of materialism on this indirect effect?
First, we investigated the relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour. It was hypothesized that self-interest positively influences sustainable purchasing behaviour due to egoistic drivers of sustainable behaviour. Engaging in sustainable purchasing behaviour namely makes consumers look good, since this shows that they are helping to tackle climate change (De Dominicis et al., 2017; Schradin, 2022). Therefore, because of the desire for status, a positive relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour was expected.
Second, it was hypothesized that the relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour is moderated by age. Previous studies found that younger consumers engage more in behaviour that benefits themselves compared to older consumers (Eastman &
Liu, 2012). This suggests that age strengthens the effect between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour for younger consumers. Another moderator investigated in this study is
gender. Since a study by Roux et al. (2017) shows that the positive relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour is strengthened for men. This is due to the fact that men value elitism and exclusivity more than women, which explains why men have a higher desire for prestige.
Finally, a moderated mediation model was investigated with status consumption as a mediator for the relationship between self-interest and sustainable purchasing behaviour. The moderator between status consumption and sustainable purchasing behaviour was materialism.
It was argued that self-interested people engage in behaviour that will benefit themselves, part of which is gaining status. In addition, a positive relationship between status consumption and sustainable purchasing behaviour was highlighted in the literature since sustainable consumer behaviour can act as a way for consumers to meet their status needs (Eastman & Liu, 2012;
Tascioglu et al., 2017). Regarding the moderating effect of materialism, it was argued that this strengthens the relationship between status consumption and sustainable purchasing behaviour since materialistic reasons for buying sustainable products can be associated with gaining status (Goldsmith & Clark, 2012; Kaur et al., 2022; Talukdar & Yu, 2020).
To test the abovementioned hypotheses, an online survey was conducted using convenience sampling among Dutch consumers, 16 years or older. This resulted in 483 respondents that were included of which 82.5% were female. Regarding the internal consistency of the scales used in this study, they all had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.7 or higher.
To ensure this, one item was removed from the altruism scale. The statistical analysis were conducted using SPSS, including a linear regression, mediation-, moderation- and moderated mediation analysis (IBM, n.d.).
No support was found for the hypotheses tested in this study. Nonetheless, this study was able to contribute to the existing literature in several ways. A significant direct effect between age and sustainable purchasing behaviour was found, indicating that a higher age
results in a higher level of sustainable purchasing behaviour. In addition, it has been found that altruism has a positive direct effect on sustainable purchasing behaviour as well. These findings can be leveraged by social entrepreneurs and policy makers promote sustainable purchasing behaviour among consumers, by taking into account the differences between different age groups and the role of altruism.
In conclusion, this study outlined the sustainable purchasing behaviour of Dutch consumers, investigating the direct effect of self-interest. In addition, age and gender were investigated as moderators and a moderated mediation model was tested regarding status consumption and materialism. While no support has been found for the hypotheses, this study provides several remarkable insights. The main finding of this study was that altruism increases sustainable purchasing behaviour. In addition, a direct effect of age on sustainable purchasing behaviour was found, which means that older people engage in more sustainable purchasing behaviour. Since 40% of all ecological destruction is as a result of household purchases, it is important to raise more awareness about the determinants of sustainable purchasing behaviour (Joshi & Rahman, 2019). As a consequence, this gives the opportunity to social entrepreneurs to identify ways to promote sustainable consumer behaviour. This is necessary to ensure minimalization in the use of natural resources and preserve the ability of future generations to meet their needs as well.
Acknowledgement
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Balazs Szatmari, for his valuable feedback, advice and guidance on my thesis. I would also like to express my gratitude for getting the opportunity to be a part of the Honours Programme Sustainability, which gave me the inspiration to explore the topic of sustainable purchasing behaviour.
Reference list
Allianz. (2021). Allianz Global Wealth Report 2021. https://www.allianz-
trade.com/content/dam/onemarketing/aztrade/allianz-trade_com/en_gl/erd/publications/pdf/2021_10_07_Global-Wealth-Report.pdf
Bloodhart, B., & Swim, J. (2020). Sustainability and Consumption: What’s Gender Got to Do with It? Journal of Social Issues, 76, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12370
Bowen, H. P., & Wiersema, M. F. (1999). Matching method to paradigm in strategy research:
Limitations of cross-sectional analysis and some methodological alternatives. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7).
https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199907)20:7<625::aid-smj45>3.0.co;2-v
Casalegno, C., Candelo, E., & Santoro, G. (2022). Exploring the antecedents of green and sustainable purchase behaviour: A comparison among different generations. Psychology and Marketing, 39(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21637
CBS. (2018). Milieu en duurzame energie.
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/achtergrond/2018/43/milieu-en-duurzame-energie-opvattingen-en-gedrag
Clark, C. F., Kotchen, M. J., & Moore, M. R. (2003). Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior: Participation in a green electricity program. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 23(3), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(02)00105-6
De Dominicis, S., Schultz, P. W., & Bonaiuto, M. (2017). Protecting the environment for self-interested reasons: Altruism is not the only pathway to sustainability. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1065. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2017.01065/BIBTEX
Eastman, J. K., & Iyer, R. (2021). Understanding the ecologically conscious behaviors of status motivated millennials. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 38(5).
https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-02-2020-3652
Eastman, J. K., & Liu, J. (2012). The impact of generational cohorts on status consumption:
An exploratory look at generational cohort and demographics on status consumption.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761211206348 ElHaffar, G., Durif, F., & Dubé, L. (2020). Towards closing the attitude-intention-behavior
gap in green consumption: A narrative review of the literature and an overview of future research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122556
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. In Statistics (Vol. 58).
Goldsmith, R. E., & Clark, R. A. (2012). Materialism, status consumption, and consumer independence. Journal of Social Psychology, 152(1).
https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2011.555434
Griskevicius, V., Cantú, S. M., & Van Vugt, M. (2012). The Evolutionary Bases for
Sustainable Behavior: Implications for Marketing, Policy, and Social Entrepreneurship:
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31(1), 115–128.
https://doi.org/10.1509/JPPM.11.040
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis, Second Edition: A Regression-Based Approach. In the Guilford Press (Vol.
46, Issue 3).
IBM. (n.d.). SPSS Statistics | IBM. Retrieved June 16, 2021, from https://www.ibm.com/products/spss-statistics
Impact Institute. (2019). True price of jeans. https://www.impactinstitute.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Impact-Institute-Report-True-Price-of-Jeans.pdf IPCC. (2022). Climate Change 2022 - Impacts, Adaption and Vulnerability.
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_FinalDraft_Fu llReport.pdf
Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2017). Investigating the determinants of consumers’ sustainable
purchase behaviour. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 10, 110–120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SPC.2017.02.002
Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2019). Consumers’ Sustainable Purchase Behaviour: Modeling the Impact of Psychological Factors. Ecological Economics, 159, 235–243.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2019.01.025
Kaur, J., Parida, R., Ghosh, S., & Lavuri, R. (2022). Impact of materialism on purchase intention of sustainable luxury goods: An empirical study in India. Society and Business Review, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1108/SBR-10-2020-0130
Lee, M. S. W., & Ahn, C. S. Y. (2016). Anti-consumption, Materialism, and Consumer Well-being. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 50(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12089
Meinzen-Dick, R., Kovarik, C., & Quisumbing, A. R. (2014). Gender and sustainability.
Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 39, 29–55.
https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-environ-101813-013240 Norum, P. S. (2003). Examination of generational differences in household apparel
expenditures. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 32(1).
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077727X03255901
Olsson, D., & Gericke, N. (2017). The effect of gender on students’ sustainability
consciousness: A nationwide Swedish study. The Journal of Environmental Education, 48(5), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2017.1310083
Park, H. J., & Lin, L. M. (2020). Exploring attitude–behavior gap in sustainable consumption: comparison of recycled and upcycled fashion products. Journal of Business Research, 117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.08.025
Puska, P., Kurki, S., Lähdesmäki, M., Siltaoja, M., & Luomala, H. (2018). Sweet taste of prosocial status signaling: When eating organic foods makes you happy and hopeful.
Appetite, 121, 348–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APPET.2017.11.102
Qualtrics. (n.d.). Determining sample size: how to make sure you get the correct sample size.
https://www.qualtrics.com/uk/experience-management/research/determine-sample-size/?rid=ip&prevsite=en&newsite=uk&geo=NL&geomatch=uk#calculator Roux, E., Tafani, E., & Vigneron, F. (2017). Values associated with luxury brand
consumption and the role of gender. Journal of Business Research, 71.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.10.012
Schradin, C. (2022). What is needed to overcome egoism? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 37(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2021.10.015
Schubert, C. (2017). Green nudges: Do they work? Are they ethical? Ecological Economics, 132, 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLECON.2016.11.009
Sirgy, M. J., Gurel-Atay, E., Webb, D., Cicic, M., Husic, M., Ekici, A., Herrmann, A., Hegazy, I., Lee, D. J., & Johar, J. S. (2012). Linking Advertising, Materialism, and Life Satisfaction. Social Indicators Research, 107(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9829-2
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2009). Ten facet scales for the Big Five Inventory: Convergence with NEO PI-R facets, self-peer agreement, and discriminant validity. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(1), 84–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRP.2008.10.002 Sun, Y., Li, T., & Wang, S. (2021). “I buy green products for my benefits or yours”:
understanding consumers’ intention to purchase green products. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-04-2021-0244
Talukdar, N., & Yu, S. (2020). Do materialists care about sustainable luxury? Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 38(4). https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-05-2019-0277
Tascioglu, M., Eastman, J. K., & Iyer, R. (2017). The impact of the motivation for status on consumers’ perceptions of retailer sustainability: the moderating impact of collectivism and materialism. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 34(4), 292–305.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-03-2015-1351/FULL/PDF
Trudel, R. (2018). Sustainable consumer behavior. Consumer Psychology Review, 2(1), 85–
96. https://doi.org/10.1002/ARCP.1045
Uddin, S. M. F., & Khan, M. N. (2018). Young Consumer’s Green Purchasing Behavior:
Opportunities for Green Marketing. Journal of Global Marketing, 31(4), 270–281.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2017.1407982
Volkmann, C., Fichter, K., Klofsten, M., & Audretsch, D. B. (2021). Sustainable
entrepreneurial ecosystems: an emerging field of research. Small Business Economics, 56(3), 1047–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11187-019-00253-7/TABLES/1
Wiernik, B. M., Ones, D. S., & Dilchert, S. (2013). Age and environmental sustainability: A meta-analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28(7), 826–856.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-07-2013-0221
Witek, L., & Kuźniar, W. (2021). Green purchase behavior: The effectiveness of sociodemographic variables for explaining green purchases in emerging market.
Sustainability, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010209
Appendix Table A1
Questionnaire
Variable Statements/answer options
Altruism 1. I see myself as someone who is helpful and unselfish with others
2. I see myself as someone who is generally trusting 3. I see myself as someone who can be cold and aloof
(reversed)
4. I see myself as someone who is considerate and kind to almost everyone
Sustainable purchasing behaviour
1. When shopping, I deliberately check products for environmentally harmful ingredients
2. When shopping, I deliberately choose products with environmentally friendly packaging
3. I’ll prefer to buy sustainable products even if they are more expensive than others
4. While purchasing, I check the environmental and fair trade label before buying the products
Status consumption 1. I would pay more for a product if it had status 2. I would buy a product just because it has status 3. I am interested in new products with status
4. A product is more valuable to me if it has some snob appeal
Materialism – happiness 1. Having luxury items is important to a happy life 2. To me, it is important to have expensive homes, cars,
clothes and other things
3. Having these expensive items makes me happy 4. Material possessions are important because they
contribute a lot to my happiness Materialism – social
recognition
1. I love to buy new products that reflect status and prestige