Bridging the Gap: The Connection Between Environmental
Awareness, Past Environmental Behavior, and Green Purchasing
Darcie Honabarger
A Capstone Project
Presented to the Faculty of the School of Communication in Partial Fulfillment of
the Requirements for the Degree of Masters of Arts in Public Communication
Supervisor: Professor Lauren Feldman
April 21, 2011
COPYRIGHT
Darcie Honabarger
2011
ii
ABSTRACT
As environmental issues continue to gain prevalence, consumers are exposed daily to messages
encouraging them to green their behaviors, whether through making home improvements,
driving less, or purchasing environmentally friendly products. In spite of this encouragement and
an awareness of environmental issues, many consumers do not adopt environmentally friendly
behaviors. Specifically in terms of green purchasing, while consumers might acknowledge
awareness of environmental issues, many do not take the steps to purchase environmentally
friendly products. Finding ways to bridge the gap between environmental awareness and
behavior change is critical in increasing the adoption of environmentally sustainable behaviors,
including purchases of green products. Through a survey experiment, this capstone explored
consumers’ evaluations of cleaning products labeled with eco-labels, text indicating that the
product was environmentally friendly and effective, or both. The findings of this research
indicate that consumers more positively evaluate cleaning products labeled with eco-labels, text,
or both over cleaning products whose labels do not include that type of information. In addition,
results show that while a consumer’s overall environmental consciousness does not impact those
product evaluations, consumers with higher levels of past environmental behavior generally had
more positive evaluations of the products labeled as environmentally friendly. This
understanding of the connections between environmental consciousness, past environmental
behavior, and green purchasing provides insight for bridging the gap between environmental
awareness and behavior change.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................v
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................5
Exploring the “Value-Action Gap” ..........................................................................................5
Behavior Change Theory and Practice for Environmental Behaviors .......................................8
Impact of Individual Attitudes on Environmental Behavior Change ....................................... 12
Consumer Purchasing and Green Products ............................................................................. 15
Summary and Research Questions ......................................................................................... 19
METHODS ............................................................................................................................... 22
Sample and Sampling Procedure............................................................................................ 22
Study Materials and Procedures ............................................................................................. 23
Measures ............................................................................................................................... 23
Dependent Variable............................................................................................................ 23
Moderating Variables ......................................................................................................... 24
RESULTS ................................................................................................................................. 26
Experimental Conditions and Product Evaluation .................................................................. 26
Effects of Environmental Consciousness on Product Evaluation ............................................ 27
Effects of Past Environmental Behavior on Product Evaluation ............................................. 28
Respondent Feedback on Reasons for Product Evaluation ..................................................... 30
Awareness of Prior Product Purchases ................................................................................... 32
DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................................... 33
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research......................................................... 37
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 38
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 40
APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................... 43
APPENDIX B ........................................................................................................................... 51
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Past environmental purchasing behaviors .................................................................... 25
Table 2: Mean product evaluation by experimental condition .................................................... 26
Table 3: Mean product evaluation by experimental condition and NEP score ............................ 27
Table 4. Mean product evaluation by experimental condition and past environmental purchasing
behavior .................................................................................................................................... 29
Table 5. Frequency of responses: reasons for product evaluation ............................................... 30
Table 6. Crosstabulation of reasons for product evaluation and experimental condition ............. 31
v
INTRODUCTION
While environmental issues have gained importance in American culture since the late
1960s and 1970s with the infamous fire in the Cuyahoga River and Rachel Carson’s Silent
Spring, in the past 25 years environmental issues have consistently become of more interest to
the mainstream population. In today’s society, “green” is a pervasive buzzword. Companies are
going green, information technology is going green, and even consumers are individually trying
to go green.
One green behavior that consumers encounter on nearly a daily basis is the choice to
purchase environmentally-friendly consumable products, such as cleaning products. Many
grocery or discount retail stores have displays of different brands and types of green cleaning
products. Some of these products are simply labeled with the word “green” while others display
an eco-label backed by a government or other type of organization. These environmentally
friendly products have a variety of positive environmental benefits over traditional cleaning
products, including reduced toxicity, increased biodegradability, reduced packaging, and an
increased ease of recycling after use (Green Seal, 2007). By using these products, not only does
the consumer reduce their personal risk associated with exposure to the product, but he also uses
a product that produces less waste or is more easily recyclable, which creates less waste in the
long term.
The decision to purchase these types of products is a relatively simple behavior a
consumer might adopt. However, it is likely that a majority of consumers, many of whom are
generally environmentally-conscious, are not routinely making these purchases as the result of
what has been called the “value-action gap” (Blake, 1999). This “value-action gap” refers to the
discrepancy between consumer knowledge about the environment and taking action to adopt
1
behaviors that would lessen one’s individual environmental impact. As long as environmental
issues have been in the forefront of people’s minds, the “value-action gap” between consumer
knowledge and action has existed. A 2004 Canadian study found that 72 percent of individuals
reported a gap between their consideration of the environmental impact of their behaviors and
actually carrying out a more sustainable or environmentally friendly behavior (Kennedy,
Beckley, McFarlane, & Nadeau, 2009). Much of the literature on environmental communications
and behavior change addresses this “value-action gap” and attempts to explain why this gap
might occur by reviewing additional factors that influence the space between environmental
knowledge and behavior change (Blake, 1999). There is specific evidence for a “value-action
gap” regarding consumers’ routine purchases of cleaning products. For example, a 2007
McKinsey & Company global survey indicated that 87 percent of consumers are concerned
about the environmental impacts of the products they buy; however, only 33 percent of those
same consumers indicated they are ready to or have made green product purchases (Bonini &
Oppenheim, 2008).
This capstone attempted to better understand the “value-action gap” as it pertains to the
consumer purchase of environmentally friendly cleaning products. If consumers are
environmentally-conscious but do not make the choice to purchase these types of products, what
is holding them back from making that purchase? Does price, product effectiveness, or confusion
about the benefits of the product play a role? In order to address these questions, an online
experiment was conducted to test whether explicit promotion of the environmental benefits of
green cleaning products and the presence of an eco-label increases positive evaluation of these
products and whether these effects vary according to consumers’ level of environmental
consciousness and past environmental behaviors. The results of this experiment contribute to a
2
better understanding of why consumers might or might not purchase environmentally friendly
cleaning products and offer insight on practices for communicating with consumers about these
products in a way that helps overcome common barriers to purchase. This insight not only might
help increase the number of consumers interested in buying these products, but it could also lead
to an increase in environmentally friendly consumer behaviors.
This capstone will begin with a literature review that includes a discussion of the concept
of the “value-action gap” in the environmental movement along with a summary of previous
research designed to examine this gap between environmental awareness and behavior. Next, as
a way to better understand the existence of the “value-action gap” and potential ways to
overcome it, the literature review will discuss the application of behavior change theory in terms
of environmental behaviors. Following will be a discussion of individual attitudes and beliefs
that have been found to influence individuals’ adoption of environmental behaviors. These
attitudes and beliefs coupled with a discussion of behavior change theory establish a basic
understanding of the consumer mindset regarding the decision to adopt environmental behaviors.
Next, the literature review will specifically address consumer purchases of green
products, including environmentally friendly cleaning products, and will include a discussion of
previous research to determine what consumers see as common barriers to making these
purchases. The following section will introduce an experiment designed to better understand
consumer preference for purchasing environmentally friendly cleaning products and explore
options for overcoming the barriers to purchase identified in the literature review—namely, the
use of eco-labels and information that highlights the environmental benefits and effectiveness of
the product. The results of this experiment will be discussed and implications for overcoming the
“value-action gap” in terms of consumer purchasing decisions will be explored. Finally, the
3
capstone will conclude with a discussion of areas for future research to better understand
consumer purchasing preferences and strategies for overcoming the “value-action gap.”
4
LITERATURE REVIEW
As environmental issues have gained prevalence in everyday society, the environmental
consciousness of individual Americans has also grown. According to 2006 data from The
American Environmental Values Survey, 86 percent of Americans are concerned about
environmental issues (EcoAmerica, 2006). As research continues to illustrate the impact of
individual consumption on environmental quality, governments and other organizations have
started considering the role of individuals in helping to address ongoing environmental concerns
(Barr & Gilg, 2006). These are small changes an individual can make to reduce their individual
impact on the environment, and Americans are exposed to messages encouraging such behaviors
nearly every day. In spite of the large number of communications campaigns designed to
encourage these individual environmental behaviors, people often do not carry out the behavior
changes outlined in those campaigns even when they acknowledge awareness or understanding
of the issue (Moisander, 2007). Generally, this phenomenon is known as the “value-action gap.”
Exploring the “Value-Action Gap”
Energy conservation research in the mid-1980s found that even people who are
knowledgeable about an environmental issue and the steps needed to address it often do not take
action to change their behavior (Seligman, 1985, cited in Pelletier, Tuson, Green-Demers, Noels,
& Beaton, 1998). In addition, research in the mid-1990s illustrated that while environmental
interest and concern has become more prevalent, few people take steps to alter their
environmental behaviors in day-to-day life (Blake, 1999). This represents a discrepancy between
knowledge and understanding of environmental issues and actively taking steps to reduce one’s
impact, better known as the “value-action gap” (Blake, 1999; Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). This
5
idea illustrates that simply providing individuals with information does not necessarily lead to
behavior change. Also, this research indicates that while a large number of people might indicate
awareness and understanding of an environmental issue or problem and also behaviors to
mitigate that problem, fewer people actually follow through and take action to remedy the
problem.
Blake identified several factors as possible explanations for this gap, including
individuality, responsibility, and practicality (Blake, 1999). Individual barriers are those that are
person-specific, related to that individual’s attitudes and beliefs. An individual who is not
interested in environmental issues or feels that other topics require more attention is less likely to
adopt an environmental behavior. The second factor Blake described, responsibility, is a
common barrier to action in terms of environmental issues. Many individuals feel that one
person should not be responsible for the health of the environment or that one person’s actions
cannot make a difference, leading many people to not adopt an environmental behavior. The
final barrier, practicality, represents constraints that would prevent an individual from taking
action. By feeling that they have a lack of time, money, or information, many individuals feel
unable to adopt an environmental behavior, even if they have a positive attitude toward it.
There have been conflicting approaches suggested as the best way to address this “valueaction gap” and to increase the likelihood that environmental knowledge can successfully lead to
behavior change (Barr & Gilg, 2006). While some researchers assert that educating the public on
specific environmental topics and actions is the best approach to spurring action, this is contrary
to the idea of the “value-action gap,” which does not necessarily include a deficit in
environmental knowledge. Others argue that better understanding individual characteristics and
6
the social context in which environmental behavior occurs is more critical to ensuring the
adoption of individual environmental actions.
A 2007 study in Hong Kong looked specifically at the “value-action gap” associated with
recycling among college students and attempted to identify the reasons behind this gap (Chung &
Leung, 2007). Chung & Leung’s (2007) study found that nearly half of the respondents would
regularly throw items they knew to be recyclable into the regular trash receptacles. In addition,
the study found that 98 percent of those particular respondents agreed or strongly agreed that
individuals have a responsibility to help protect the environment and those same respondents
also do recycle on occasion. These results support the idea of the “value-action gap,” clearly
illustrating that this large percentage of respondents, while understanding the importance of a
specific environmental action and feeling a responsibility for the environmental behavior (i.e.,
recycling), do not consistently carry out that behavior.
As a possible way for bridging the “value-action gap,” Chung and Leung (2007)
discussed the idea of a person’s practical consciousness—or routine practice as a form of
knowledge—as one reason for not carrying out certain environmental behaviors. In terms of
recycling, Chung and Leung argued that because individuals use this practical consciousness,
which allows them to carry out activities in daily life without having to think about it, they often
continue throwing away items that might be recyclable just because that is what they are used to
doing. Research has shown that an attempt can be made to change habits by prompting an
individual to actively think more about the actions they are taking rather than just repeating their
usual habits (Hobson, 2003). Building on her research, Hobson (2003) suggested a variety of
tactics designed to encourage this active thinking. These include designing an event that prompts
the individual to question their routine behaviors or providing information that helps an
7
individual connect their personal actions to the larger impact on the environment. By causing
individuals to give more active thought to their actions, habits can sometime be changed and new
behaviors adopted. A lack of behavior change can also, in some cases, be due to situational
limitations. For example, throwing a plastic bottle in the trash is easier if a recycling container is
not easily accessible.
Research has shown that the “value-action gap” is a widespread phenomenon, resulting in
less frequent adoption of environmental behaviors. As Hobson’s (2003) research suggests, there
are options that might help bridge the gap between environmental awareness and behavior. The
next section of this literature review will examine how behavior change theory can be applied to
the “value-action gap.”
Behavior Change Theory and Practice for Environmental Behaviors
Behavior change theory provides one way to understand options for bridging the “valueaction gap” and turning knowledge into long-term behavior change. The Theory of Reasoned
Action and Theory of Planned Behavior both contribute ideas that are important in helping
explain why an individual might change his current behavior to a more environmentally
sustainable one (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002).
The Theory of Reasoned Action and the Theory of Planned Behavior both hold that
intention is the most important determinant of behavior and an individual will likely carry out
that behavior in the absence of other constraints (e.g., lack of knowledge or ability) (Ajzen,
1985; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). To better understand the constraints that might impact the
individual adoption of environmental behaviors, the three main constructs of the Theories of
Planned Behavior and Reasoned Action, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral
8
control, provide some guidance (Ajzen, 1985; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Kollmuss & Agyeman,
2002). Each of these constructs and their relevance to environmental behavior change are
discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.
Attitudes toward implementation of a specific behavior are critical components of the
Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior. In terms of these theories, attitudes are
composed of two beliefs. First, an individual believes that a certain behavior will result in a
specific outcome. Second, that individual will also make an overall evaluation of those particular
outcomes as positive or negative (Ajzen, 1985; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). In these terms, the
importance of one’s attitude toward implementing the desired behavior is a significant part of
these theories when it comes to environmental issues (Barr, 2004). With regard to environmental
issues, Barr and Gilg (2006) found that individuals who are committed or mainstream
environmentalists generally place a higher importance on environmental issues. In addition,
these individuals have a high level of concern for environmental issues and also feel a personal
responsibility and moral obligation to do their part to help the environment. Understanding these
existing attitudes of some individuals can help better explain their attitudes toward certain
environmental behaviors.
However, while these attitudes toward the environment help determine whether someone
intends to adopt an environmental behavior, there are additional factors to consider. For example,
while an individual may recognize that a specific environmental behavior, such as replacing
household light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs, has a positive environmental outcome
(e.g., saving energy), he may feel that it is expensive, difficult, or time-consuming to take this
action or that the quality of the product is not as high as a traditional bulb. So, while the attitude
9
toward the environmental issue is positive, the person’s attitude toward the specific behavior
might actually be a negative one, leading ultimately to a lack of behavior change.
Additional research has examined more closely what motivates consumers to include
ethical considerations (i.e., environmental concerns) when making purchasing decisions
(Freestone & McGoldrick, 2008). This research focused on the stages of change of the
transtheoretical model of behavior change and indicated that as awareness and concern for a
particular issue (e.g., the environment) increases, individuals move through the stages of change
and become more ready to take action. Freestone and McGoldrick (2008) found that as
consumers travel through the stages of change, their attitudes toward purchasing a product focus
more on the benefits and less on any negative outcomes associated with making that purchase.
This ultimately results in an overall shift in focus to the positive benefits as a consumer decides
to purchase a product. The research suggests that consumers can be influenced to make
environmentally friendly purchases by being exposed to both the positive and negative aspects of
the behavior and ultimately seeing that the positive benefits outweigh the barriers. This finding
has significance in terms of communications as it suggests how to focus messages that could
potentially resonate with a target audience and influence their attitudes toward purchasing
environmentally friendly products.
A second construct of these theories is the determinant of subjective norms. This relates
specifically to how important people in the individual’s life feel that person should address a
particular behavior and what motivation the individual has to respond or act accordingly (Ajzen,
1985; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980). In terms of environmental behaviors, there are a variety of ways
that subjective normative influences might ultimately contribute to or hinder environmental
behavior change. Prior research examining specific experiences and influences as indicators of
10
environmental action found that the influence of family members can be important in
determining an individual’s attitudes toward environmental issues (Chawla, 1999). Research
found that individuals who learned pro-environmental behaviors from family members often had
a higher commitment to environmental protection. In addition, the cooperation of family
members in carrying out environmental efforts also factored into an individual’s environmental
values.
However, certain cultural beliefs or established family routines can also act as barriers to
the implementation of new and different activities intended to increase environmental
sustainability (Rajecki, 1982, cited in Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). Because the new behavior
conflicts with these established family norms, many individuals might be less inclined to adopt
the new behavior. This contrast underscores the importance of understanding the subjective
norms that factor into the adoption of environmental behaviors.
The final theoretical construct, specific to the Theory of Planned Behavior, is the idea of
perceived behavioral control over the action, which is similar to Bandura’s idea of self-efficacy
as referenced in Social Cognitive Theory (Ajzen, 1985; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Bandura,
2001). This construct refers to an individual’s perception of aids or barriers to performing a
specific action and the individual’s confidence that he can successfully perform the action
(Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). In terms of environmental behaviors, Barr and Gilg (2006) found
that committed and mainstream environmentalists are more inclined to feel that implementing an
environmental behavior is convenient and/or easy to accomplish, increasing their feelings of selfefficacy with respect to the activity.
Behavior change theory as a whole has important implications for better understanding
what prompts individuals to adopt environmental behaviors. The constructs of the Theories of
11
Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior underscore the importance of not only informing
individuals about an environmental behavior but also making sure that those individuals see the
value, ease, and importance of carrying out those behaviors. It is also important to consider the
impact of subjective norms, attitudes, personal motivation, and self-efficacy on changing
environmental behaviors. Together, these ideas have important implications for better
understanding the psychological reasons that people take environmental actions and might
contribute to a clearer understanding of how to best ensure a stronger link between
environmental knowledge and action. Since addressing this “value-action gap” is so critical,
research has explored additional ways in conjunction with these particular behavior change
theories to explain how and why individuals develop behavioral intentions and ultimately take
environmental action (Barr, 2004).
Impact of Individual Attitudes on Environmental Behavior Change
For the past several decades, a variety of research has examined the factors and
personality traits common in people who are interested and active in environmental issues. For
example, Freymeyer and Johnson (2010) analyzed data collected in the 2000 International Social
Survey Programme to determine the importance of individual demographic characteristics in
determining environmental activism (Freymeyer & Johnson, 2010). These characteristics
included age, education, gender, socioeconomic status, and residence (i.e., urban versus rural).
While the results indicated that higher levels of education are correlated with higher participation
in relatively simple environmental actions, such as making a financial contribution to an
environmental organization or signing an environmental petition, the data did not support strong
relationships based on age, gender, or residence. Other research, however, has found a
12
correlation between gender and environmental behaviors (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002).
Women, while less likely to have as high of levels of environmental knowledge compared to
men, tend to be more emotionally connected to environmental issues and have a higher interest
in making behavior changes to avoid environmental destruction. Additional research found that,
specifically with respect to purchasing behavior, women are generally more influenced by
marketing strategies that utilize environmental messages (Ottman, 1998 in Pickett-Baker &
Ozaki, 2008).
Research has also examined a variety of internal factors that contribute to environmental
behavior change. Kollmus and Agyeman (2002) analyzed a variety of personality characteristics,
including motivation, environmental knowledge, values and attitudes, and emotional
involvement, in an attempt to determine their influence in the adoption of environmental
behaviors. This research concluded that the personality characteristics listed above do, in fact,
have varying degrees of impact on the adoption of individual environmental behaviors. However,
it is unclear how each individual characteristic ultimately factors into adoption of an
environmental behavior. Instead, Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) assert that these characteristics
combine to create an overall environmental consciousness. This environmental consciousness in
combination with social norms and other external factors, such as infrastructure, the economy,
and politics, can work together to lead to an adoption of an environmental behavior. Still, as
proven by the existence of the “value-action gap,” behavior change requires more than just a
high level of environmental consciousness. It also requires the individual to overcome barriers
such as existing habits, lack of incentives, or negative feelings; barriers that were not addressed
in this particular research.
13
With respect to individual personality characteristics, research has also focused on
specific personal experiences as indicators of environmental action (Chawla, 1999). This
research revealed that a variety of specific experiences and influences contribute to individual
actions to protect the environment, including time spent outdoors in natural areas, family
members, educational experiences, books, or witnessing environmental damage first-hand. While
this research focused primarily on respondents who were already considered to be
environmentalists, the results do describe experiences and influences that fostered long-term
environmental concern within those individuals. This research provides interesting insight into
the types of experiences that might lead to increased environmental awareness and potentially an
increased intention to adopt environmental behaviors.
As stated previously, understanding individual characteristics and the social context of
environmental behaviors is important. Additional research has examined the general population
and the environmental actions that individuals take on a daily basis in the home and how those
behaviors are integrated into general society. Specifically, Barr and Gilg’s (2006) research
addresses this point by attempting to understand the traits of individuals who voluntarily
undertake a specific set of environmental behaviors that included green consumption habits
around the home and the differences in levels of commitment to those behaviors. The findings of
this research are useful from a variety of perspectives. First, the research showed that
environmental behaviors might be best examined together in the context of everyday practices as
opposed to being considered distinct and separate behaviors (Barr & Gilg, 2006). When
implementing these types of behaviors, individuals often group them together, incorporating
them wholly into daily or weekly routines, rather than considering each separate environmental
behavior and whether or not to implement it. This finding, while not indicative of how or why an
14
individual might implement an environmental action, is interesting in terms of gaining insight
into how individuals think about their implementation of environmental behaviors. Rather than
focusing on a single environmental behavior, this research suggests there is value in encouraging
wholesale adoption of a variety of environmental practices into everyday life.
In addition, the research findings discussed above are significant in helping to better
understand the characteristics of individuals who are likely to implement environmental
behaviors. This leads to a clearer vision of the specific demographics, attitudes, and values
common in people likely to implement these behaviors and a better understanding of how people
go about incorporating these behaviors in daily life.
Consumer Purchasing and Green Products
Purchasing green products is just one set of environmental behaviors that individuals can
consider to reduce their overall environmental impact, and, again, research has shown that this
specific behavior is often not adopted due to the “value-action gap.” The 2008 Green Gap Survey
showed that only 39 percent of respondents were concerned about the state of the environment
and also consuming products that are more environmentally friendly (Cone LLC, 2008). Another
45 percent of respondents indicated a concern for the environment; however, those individuals
also indicated that they have not purchased environmentally friendly products. Finally, the last
16 percent indicated no concern for the state of the environment. Environmentally friendly
products comprise a niche market that has, in the past, often been marketed to consumers already
considered to be green (Rex & Baumann, 2007). In order to expand the market and make these
products more attractive to the mainstream population, it is important to understand how
consumers view these products and which considerations are paramount in purchasing decisions.
15
Actually finding ways to bridge the “value-action gap” seems to be a challenge
specifically in terms of getting consumers to purchase products that are environmentally friendly.
As stated earlier, McKinsey & Company found that 87 percent of consumers are concerned
about the environmental impacts of the products they buy; however, only 33 percent of those
same consumers indicated they are ready to or have made green product purchases (Bonini &
Oppenheim, 2008). Prior research has investigated possible reasons why more consumers have
not made these purchases and identified several barriers to purchasing environmentally friendly
products, which occur at nearly every stage of the purchasing process (Bonini & Oppenheim,
2008). Barriers include a lack of consumer awareness of the products, negative perceptions of the
products, distrust of company claims about how green a product is, higher prices, and lower
product availability. These factors impact the attitudes a consumer has toward altering their
behavior and purchasing an environmentally friendly product. Additional research has found that
many consumers feel the cognitive effort related to researching environmentally friendly
products is too great and that they prioritize other product characteristics above being green
(Young, Hwang, McDonald, & Oates, 2010).
Bonini and Oppenheim (2008) suggest that businesses should take the lead in helping
consumers overcome these barriers to purchase by providing more information to raise consumer
awareness, understanding, and access to the product. In addition, by providing more product
options to consumers and making those products comparable, if not better, than traditional
products, Bonini and Oppenheim suggest that consumers will be more likely to purchase
environmentally friendly options. By providing comparable options to consumers, companies
can help enhance an individual’s perceived behavioral control, as described by the Theory of
Planned Behavior. This information allows the consumer to feel they have the resources to make
16
an informed purchasing decision. Finally, companies must make accurate and verifiable claims
about the environmentally friendly nature of their products in order to increase consumer trust in
these products and the companies that make them.
In terms of consumer awareness, eco-labeling appears to be one way to enhance
understanding of a product’s green characteristics; however while a large number of eco-labels
exist internationally, generally the market share for eco-labeled products is small (Rex &
Baumann, 2007). In addition, many consumers find eco-labels confusing because of the sheer
number of different labels that exist and also because eco-labels often use disparate and
complicated systems for identifying how environmentally friendly a product is (Bonini &
Oppenheim, 2008). Some researchers argue, however, that eco-labels can be used as a heuristic,
reducing the cognitive effort required to understand the benefits of a product without extra effort
to research a product (Young et al., 2010). In spite of this benefit, because there is a lack of
consistency and simplicity in product eco-labels, consumer confusion abounds, making
consumers unlikely to embrace eco-labels as a standard decision-making tool (Davis, 1993).
While eco-labels have been a popular way to advertise environmentally friendly products
in the past, they are generally not enough to persuade a consumer to purchase a product (Rex &
Baumann, 2007). More important than using an eco-label, Rex and Baumann (2007) assert that
to persuade consumers, products should be advertised in a way that causes the consumer to
realize that this is the particular product that fits their needs. In doing this, it’s also important to
consider marketing these products to a wider audience than just the traditional green consumers.
In order to move environmentally friendly products from a niche product into the mainstream,
they need to be marketed widely in a way that focuses on all the attributes of the product, not just
its green attributes. Prior research has shown that consumers will buy a product when it meets
17
their needs while, at the same time, matching up with the consumer’s personal values (e.g.,
protecting the environment) (Pickett-Baker & Ozaki, 2008). Product design and marketing must
meet these criteria to successfully sell a product to consumers, and often some of the barriers to
purchase mentioned previously—negative perceptions of the products, distrust of company
claims about how green a product is, higher prices, and lower availability—prevent consumers
from ultimately making a purchase.
With respect to product perceptions, prior research shows that consumers often make
inferences about a product based on its characteristics and the benefits the consumer desires from
that product (Luchs, Naylor, Irwin, & Raghunathan, 2010). In some cases, consumers feel that a
product understood to be superior to other products based on one characteristic is likely to be
average in terms of other characteristics. In addition, research cited by Luchs et al. (2010),
indicated that many consumers associate the idea of sustainable products with things that are
gentle. In terms of environmentally friendly products, if a product is advertised as sustainable or
green, some consumers might assume the product is gentle and, therefore, depending on the type
of product, less effective than a traditional product. Luchs et al. (2010), labeled this idea as the
“sustainability liability.”
In the case of some products, such as those used on or around children, gentleness is a
valued product characteristic (Luchs et al., 2010). However, for other products, such as a laundry
detergent, consumers generally do not value a product that is gentle over other product
characteristics, such as strength and effectiveness in removing stains. Overall, Luchs et al.
(2010), concluded that consumers are less likely to purchase an environmentally friendly product
if their desired need for that product is associated with strength. In contrast, they also concluded
18
that for products where gentleness is a positive attribute, consumers are more likely to purchase
an environmentally friendly product.
To test these ideas, Luchs et al. (2010), conducted a number of experiments using a
variety of consumer products, including car tires, laundry detergent, car shampoo, baby
shampoo, and hand sanitizer. These experiments supported the hypothesis that environmentally
friendly products were perceived by consumers as gentler than competing products. However,
the experiment related to car tires found that environmentally friendly tires, while initially
perceived by consumers as not as strong as traditional tires, were favored by those same
consumers when guaranteed to be strong. Based on this research, Luchs et al. (2010) concluded
that by clearly communicating the benefits of a product on packaging or in advertising, negative
perceptions of an environmentally friendly product’s effectiveness can be overcome and
consumers might be more likely to see that product as comparable to a traditional product.
Similar to consumer products as a whole, consumers also perceive similar barriers to
purchasing environmentally friendly cleaning products. These barriers include confusion about
the environmental benefits of the product, product effectiveness, price, safety, accuracy of green
product claims, availability, and lack of information on the products (Forkink, 2010).
Summary and Research Questions
This literature review highlights the existence of the “value-action gap” in consumer
purchasing of environmentally friendly products, and prior research cites a variety of reasons
why consumers do not, even though concerned about the environment, ultimately purchase these
products. Behavior change theory provides a basis for understanding how environmental
awareness might translate into the intention to purchase environmentally friendly products.
19
Attitudes toward the environment, daily environmental routines, feelings of personal
responsibility, and the benefits of a particular product all factor heavily into the decision to
purchase a product advertised as environmentally friendly. A better understanding of how these
factors work together to shape purchasing behavior is critical in forming more effective ways to
communicate the environmental attributes of products to consumers, ultimately convincing them
to buy more environmentally friendly options. This capstone explored how those individual
factors in combination with the use of eco-labels and specific product descriptions can provide
insight into a consumer’s decision to purchase green cleaning products. Strategies to overcome
barriers to purchasing green cleaning products have not been previously studied, and this
capstone looked to fill this gap by considering the following research questions:
Research question 1: Will the presence of an eco-label cause people to more positively
evaluate an environmentally friendly cleaning product?
Research question 2: Will the presence of language describing that a product is both
environmentally friendly and effective cause people to more positively evaluate an
environmentally friendly cleaning product?
Research question 3: Can an eco-label used in conjunction with specific language about
the effectiveness of the product be more appealing to a consumer as compared to an eco-label
alone?
Research question 4: Will the evaluation of the product be affected by any moderating
variables, such as a high level of environmental consciousness or the adoption of environmental
behaviors in the past?
20
By addressing these research questions, this capstone looked to find ways to overcome
barriers to purchasing green cleaning products and identify communications practices for
reducing those barriers in the future.
21
METHODS
The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of individual’s
environmental awareness and past environmental behaviors and to test their reactions to images
of consumer cleaning products marked with an eco-label, labeling highlighting its effectiveness
and environmentally friendly qualities, both, or neither. Study participants were randomly
assigned to one of the four experimental conditions: (1) a product labeled with nothing but the
product name; (2) a product bearing an eco-label; (3) a product bearing language on the
packaging indicating that it is both environmentally friendly and effective; or (4) a product
bearing both an eco-label and language indicating that it is environmentally friendly and
effective.
Sample and Sampling Procedure
This study was conducted using the online survey software, Qualtrics, and utilized a
convenience and network sample. Potential respondents were either sent an email or exposed to a
Facebook posting requesting participation in the survey. In addition, respondents were asked to
pass the survey along to additional respondents, if they were inclined to do so. The complete
survey questionnaire is available in Appendix A. Out of 232 total respondents, 172 completed
the full survey, and this included 73.8 percent women and 26.2 percent men. The age of the
respondents ranged from 22 to 69, with an average age of 38.1 years old. The breakdown by
ethnicity was 89.5 percent white, 1.7 percent African American, and 2.3 percent other ethnicities.
The educational background of the sample ranged from high school graduates to respondents
holding a postgraduate degree with the median having completed some amount of postgraduate
work. The median annual household income of the sample was $80,000 to $90,000.
22
Study Materials and Procedures
Respondents were provided a link to the online survey instrument via email or on
Facebook. Upon visiting the link, respondents were asked to give consent for their participation
and began the survey. First, participants were asked a variety of questions, both open-ended and
multiple choice to explore their consumer preferences for a variety of products, including
cleaning products. Next, the respondents were asked to indicate the frequency with which they
perform certain types of behaviors, including reading product labels, performing environmentally
friendly behaviors, researching the companies that manufacture certain products, and using
coupons when making store purchases. Following those questions, respondents were asked how
strongly they felt about a variety of statements designed to assess their overall environmental
consciousness.
The next part of the survey included the experiment, as described above. Each respondent
was randomly shown one of four images of a kitchen cleaning product. These images are
available in Appendix B. Based on the image seen by the respondent, they were asked to answer
a series of questions regarding their likelihood to purchase the product, feelings of favorability
toward that product, and likelihood to recommend the product to another person. The final
section of the survey included a variety of demographic questions.
Measures
The measures used in this experiment are described below in more detail.
Dependent Variable
The dependent variable was a scale of three items used to assess respondents’ evaluation
of the product in the image. The first item is the likelihood of the respondent to purchase the
23
product in the image, using a five-point Likert scale ranging from very likely to very unlikely.
Second, respondents were asked how favorably they felt toward the product image, using a fivepoint Likert scale ranging from strongly favorable to strongly unfavorable. Finally, the
respondents were asked to indicate how likely they would be, based on the product image, to
recommend the product to another person. Respondents indicated their answer on a five-point
Likert scale ranging from very likely to very unlikely. These three items demonstrated high
internal reliability (α = .912) and were averaged together to capture the respondents’ overall
evaluation of the product.
Moderating Variables
A set of 15 questions was used to assess respondents’ overall environmental
consciousness. This set of questions was based on the New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) Scale,
which was originally conceptualized as the New Environmental Paradigm in the late 1970s
(Dunlap, 2008). Generally, this scale is well-known and accepted as the standard for measuring
an individual’s environmental concern, values, and attitudes and also an individual’s overall
environmental worldview (Hawcroft & Milfont, 2010). In the survey, respondents indicated how
strongly they agreed with the 15 items included in the NEP Scale using a five-point Likert scale
ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. More specifically, these questions inquired
about the respondents’ feelings toward the environment as well as their view on people’s
responsibility for considering their impact on the environment. The full list of NEP Scale
questions is listed in the questionnaire in Appendix A.
The 15 items demonstrated high internal reliability (α = .850), and the scores based on the
respondents’ answers to each of these 15 questions were added to obtain an overall NEP score,
with a higher score indicating a higher level of environmental consciousness. Respondents were
24
then divided into two categories, one representing high environmental consciousness and the
other representing low environmental consciousness. Respondents categorized as having a high
environmental consciousness had a NEP score at or above the sample mean; respondents
categorized as having low environmental consciousness had a NEP score below the sample
mean.
A second set of moderating variables dealt with the respondents’ past environmental
behaviors. Respondents were asked how often they performed a variety of behaviors based on a
four-point Likert scale ranging from always to never. These behaviors are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Past environmental purchasing behaviors
1.
2.
3.
4.
Use biodegradable soaps or detergents.
Buy products made with or packaged in recycled materials.
Buy products in packages that can be refilled.
Avoid buying products from companies who do not have a reputation for being
environmentally responsible.
5. Consider purchasing cleaning products advertised as environmentally friendly.
6. Compare the labels of products advertised as environmentally friendly to other
products.
A reliability analysis indicated that these six items demonstrated high internal reliability
(α = .839). The items were added together to create an overall score for each respondent’s past
environmental purchasing behavior. This overall score was then used to categorize respondents
as either having a high level of past environmental purchasing behavior or a low level of past
environmental purchasing behavior. Respondents categorized as having a high level of past
environmental purchasing behavior had an overall score at or above the sample mean;
respondents categorized as having a low level of past environmental purchasing behavior scored
below the sample mean.
25
RESULTS
A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to determine whether
respondents’ evaluation of the cleaning product varied as a function of the four experimental
conditions. In addition, two-way ANOVAs were conducted to determine whether overall
environmental consciousness and past environmental behaviors moderated the effect of the
experimental condition on the dependent variable.
Experimental Conditions and Product Evaluation
To determine differences in the evaluation of the cleaning product pictured in the four
experimental conditions, a one-way ANOVA was conducted. Table 2 shows the respondents’
mean evaluation of the cleaning product across experimental conditions. The ANOVA results
indicate a significant overall effect of the experimental condition on the respondents’ evaluation
of the product, F (3, 167) = 15.246, p < .001.
Table 2. Mean product evaluation by experimental condition
Condition
Control
Eco-label
Text
Eco-label and text
Mean
2.2008
3.0813
3.0682
3.5079
Standard Deviation
0.92802
1.04557
0.95528
0.7444
Note. F (3, 167) = 15.246, p < .001
Specifically, the analysis revealed that when compared to the control, respondents had a
significantly more positive evaluation of the products labeled with an eco-label (p < .001), with
specific language on the label indicating that the product was both environmentally friendly and
26
effective (p < .001), or both (p < .001). Although the data shows that there are more positive
evaluations of the product that includes both the eco-label and descriptive text, this was not
significantly different from the eco-label only or text only conditions. The absence of significant
differences in this case could be due to the relatively small sample size for the experiment, which
reduces the statistical power to observe effects.
Effects of Environmental Consciousness on Product Evaluation
In addition to analyzing the respondents’ evaluation of the product as a function of the
experimental conditions, a two-way ANOVA was conducted to determine if the respondents’
NEP score (i.e., overall environmental consciousness) had any moderating effect on the results of
the experiment. Table 3 shows the respondents’ mean evaluation of the product in each of the
experimental conditions by NEP score.
Table 3. Mean product evaluation by experimental condition and NEP score
Condition
Control
Eco-label
Text
Eco-label and text
All conditions combined
NEP Score
Low NEP
High NEP
Low NEP
High NEP
Low NEP
High NEP
Low NEP
High NEP
Low NEP
High NEP
Mean
2.275
2.139
3.016
3.150
2.848
3.288
3.533
3.494
2.918
3.018
Standard Deviation
0.207
0.189
0.202
0.207
0.198
0.198
0.239
0.178
0.106
0.097
The ANOVA results again confirm a significant main effect of the experimental
condition on the evaluation of the product, F (3, 163) = 14.604, p < .001. However there was no
27
main effect of NEP score, F (1, 163) = .480, p = .490, indicating that respondents’ overall
environmental consciousness did not have any significant impact on their evaluation of the
cleaning product that they were exposed to during the survey. There was also no interaction
between NEP score and experimental condition; thus, the effects of the experimental condition
did not vary as a function of the respondents’ environmental consciousness, F (3, 163) = .804, p
= .493. Despite the lack of significant results, an examination of the pattern of means in Table 3
provides some additional insight. High NEP respondents had discernibly more positive
evaluations of the product than low NEP respondents in response to the image that contained
packaging language indicating that it is both environmentally friendly and effective. In the other
three conditions, however, there were relatively negligible differences in product evaluation
between high NEP and low NEP respondents. While this pattern is suggestive of an interaction
between experimental condition and NEP, there again may have been insufficient statistical
power to detect this effect.
Effects of Past Environmental Behavior on Product Evaluation
A two-way ANOVA was also conducted to determine if the respondents’ past
environmental behavior had any moderating effect on their evaluation of the product to which
they were exposed during the survey. Table 4 shows the respondents’ mean evaluation of the
product based on their categorization as having high or low levels of past environmental
purchasing behavior.
28
Table 4. Mean product evaluation by experimental condition and past environmental
purchasing behavior
Condition
Control
Eco-label
Text
Eco-label and text
All conditions combined
Past environmental
purchasing
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Mean
2.207
2.193
2.714
3.467
3.115
3.000
3.333
3.639
2.842
3.075
Standard Deviation
0.183
0.209
0.199
0.204
0.179
0.215
0.215
0.186
0.097
0.102
The ANOVA results again confirmed a significant main effect of the experimental
condition on product evaluation, F (3, 163) = 14.973, p < .001. The main effect of past
environmental purchasing behavior approached significance, F (1, 163) = 2.714, p = .101. The
pattern of means in Table 4 suggests that, generally, those with higher levels of past purchasing
behavior were more likely to positively evaluate the product shown in the image, regardless of
condition. Likewise, the interaction between past environmental purchasing behavior and
experimental condition approached significance, F (3, 163) = 1.906, p = .131. In examining the
pattern of means in Table 4, the evaluation of the product bearing an eco-label or bearing an ecolabel and text is notably higher for those individuals with a higher level of past environmental
purchasing behavior. However, in the text-only condition, evaluation of the product was slightly
less positive among those with high levels of past environmental purchasing behavior. It is likely
that with a larger sample size both the main and interactive effects of past purchasing behavior
would have been statistically significant.
29
Respondent Feedback on Reasons for Product Evaluation
The results of the experiment, as described above, provide insight into the respondents’
overall evaluation of the cleaning products. In addition, during the survey, respondents provided
open-ended comments explaining why they gave a particular evaluation of the product. These
comments were coded into several response categories, each representing a different type of
reason given. The results are shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Frequency of responses: reasons for product evaluation
Reason
Lack of information about product/brand
Product has environmentally friendly attributes
Skeptical of environmentally friendly claim/want more
information
Use a preferred product regularly
Price
Concerned about toxicity
Other
Note. N = 169
Percent
42.0
33.1
8.9
3.6
2.4
1.8
8.3
These results showed that respondents had a variety of reasons for evaluating the
products as they did. The most notable of these reasons included a lack of information about the
product or brand, which led to a less positive product evaluation, and a belief that the product
had environmentally friendly attributes, which led to a more positive product evaluation.
Table 6 shows the results of a crosstabulation of these reasons by experimental condition.
30
Table 6. Crosstabulation of reasons for product evaluation and experimental condition
Control
Reason for product
evaluation
Lack of information about
product/brand
Both
75.0%
31.7%
34.1%
25.0%
Product has environmentally
friendly attributes
0.0
46.3
36.4
52.5
Skeptical of environmentally
friendly claim/want more
information
0.0
12.2
9.1
15.0
25.0
9.8
20.5
7.5
100.0
44
100.0
41
100.0
44
100.0
40
Other
Total percent
N
Condition
Eco-label
Text
A chi-square test indicated that the frequency of the respondents’ reasons behind product
evaluation varied based on the experimental condition, X2 (9, N = 169) = 48.942, p < .001. These
results illustrate that the respondents generally evaluated the control condition more negatively
due to a lack of information about the product and its brand. While a lack of product information
was also noted by respondents in the other experimental conditions, for the conditions bearing
the presence of an eco-label, text, or both, respondents were more likely to view the product
favorably because they perceived the product as having environmentally friendly attributes.
While respondents viewed the three experimental conditions favorably due to a perception that
the product was environmentally friendly, there was not, however, statistically significant
differences between those three conditions. The absence of significant differences could be due
to the relatively small sample size for the experiment, which reduces the statistical power to
observe effects.
31
Awareness of Prior Product Purchases
Finally, it is also important to note the results of a survey question intended to determine
if the respondent had ever purchased an environmentally friendly cleaning product. In response,
72.1 percent of respondents indicated yes, 8.7 percent indicated no, and 19.2 percent of
respondents indicated that they were not sure if they had ever purchased an environmentally
friendly cleaning product. This result is significant in terms of the number of respondents who
were unsure if they had ever purchased this type of product because it indicates that there might
be a lack of information in the marketplace or a lack of understanding on the part of the
consumer as to which products are environmentally friendly.
32
DISCUSSION
The primary objective of this study was to determine if there are any changes in a
person’s evaluation of a cleaning product if it bears an eco-label, language describing the product
as environmentally friendly and effective, or both. A secondary objective was to determine if an
individual’s environmental consciousness or past environmental purchasing behaviors had any
moderating impact on their evaluation of an environmentally friendly cleaning product. The
results of this experiment prove that consumers do, in fact, more favorably evaluate a product
with one or both of those characteristics over a product that does not include this type of
information. However, likely due to the limitations of the sample size for this experiment, there
is no way to discern whether product evaluation varied significantly between the three
experimental conditions themselves. Still, these results provide useful insight to consumer
purchasing behaviors and provide potential direction for future research.
As stated earlier, the evaluation of environmentally friendly cleaning products did not
appear to vary between individuals based on their overall level of environmental consciousness.
This finding clearly supports the idea of the “value-action gap,” as individuals, regardless of their
environmental consciousness, had very similar evaluations of the environmentally friendly
cleaning products. A higher level of environmental consciousness did not generally translate into
a more positive evaluation of or intention to buy the environmentally friendly product compared
to individuals with a lower level of environmental consciousness. Simply providing information
about a product’s environmentally friendly attributes to someone with higher levels of
environmental awareness was not effective in changing behavior.
Building on the idea of the “value-action gap” and environmental consciousness, it is
important to consider the impact of past behaviors on a consumer’s evaluation of an
33
environmentally friendly cleaning product. If the “value-action gap” represents the space
between environmental consciousness and behavior, one could assume that this gap might be less
prevalent if an individual had previously adopted other types of environmentally friendly
behaviors specifically in relation to consumer purchasing. Individuals who have previously
adopted environmental behaviors and continue to carry those out could potentially have more
positive attitudes toward these types of behaviors and their associated outcomes. Based on the
Theories of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior, these positive attitudes toward
environmentally friendly purchasing are critical to an individual’s intention to adopt a behavior
or, in this case, purchase an environmentally friendly cleaning product. While the sample size in
this research limited its statistical power, the results do indicate that respondents with past
environmental purchasing behaviors did, in general, more positively evaluate the
environmentally friendly cleaning product used in the experiment, particularly the two conditions
in which products were labeled with an eco-label. This could be due to those individuals having
more positive attitudes toward environmentally friendly behaviors in general. Additional
research might provide clearer insight into the strength of a connection between past adoption of
environmental behaviors and consumers’ evaluation of environmentally friendly cleaning
products. Generally, by gaining a better understanding of why a consumer has adopted proenvironmental behaviors previously and how those might translate into future pro-environmental
behaviors, a clearer connection between activities might be determined. This connection could
provide insight into additional ways to overcome the “value-action gap” and ultimately increase
consumer purchases of environmentally friendly products.
When looking at the impact of an individual’s environmental consciousness on their
evaluation of a product that bears an eco-label, the results of this survey support the idea that
34
eco-labels are often used by consumers as heuristics, or mental shortcuts. Since this research did
not show a significant difference between the level of an individual’s environmental
consciousness and their product evaluation, this supports the idea that both those with high and
low levels of environmental consciousness view an eco-label as a quick and easy way to choose
a product that is better for the environment. It also appears that the eco-label alone as well as in
conjunction with text indicating that the product is both environmentally friendly and effective,
acted as a heuristic in this experiment, with respondents evaluating those particular products as
favorable because they were perceived to have environmentally friendly attributes.
It is important to note that while some respondents use eco-labels as mental shortcuts,
others indicated that they were skeptical of environmentally friendly product claims and desired
additional information to better understand the specific product attributes that factored into its
environmentally friendly claim. This underscores the importance of eco-labels and
environmental product claims being reliable and verifiable to ensure that only those products that
meet high standards are labeled as environmentally friendly. Regardless of consumers’ use of
eco-labels as a heuristic or as a prompt to conduct additional product research, it is critical to
ensure that this type of labeling accurately represents the product’s characteristics. This helps
consumers be confident that they are getting what they paid for in terms of an environmentally
friendly product, which helps consumers better see the purchasing behavior as one with a
positive outcome.
It should also be reiterated that nearly 20 percent of survey respondents indicated that
they were unsure if they had ever purchased an environmentally friendly cleaning product in the
past. This uncertainty could be for a number of reasons, such as a lack of clear labeling or
consumer lack of attention. This finding has interesting implications because it indicates that
35
current product labeling or advertising might not explicitly state that a product is intended to be
more environmentally friendly than its traditional counterparts. This suggests that
environmentally friendly cleaning products should be labeled clearly and advertised in a way that
ensures consumers are made aware of the marked difference between it and traditional products.
While information alone will not change behavior, clear and understandable product labeling
could help raise consumer awareness of environmentally friendly products. This could, in turn,
increase consumer feelings of self-efficacy associated with purchasing these products because
the products are more familiar, the product benefits are easier to understand, and the behavior
could potentially be more convenient for the consumer.
As stated in the literature review, consumers encounter a variety of barriers when
considering the purchase of an environmentally friendly cleaning product, including the
environmental benefits of the product, effectiveness, price, safety, accuracy of the green product
claims, availability, and lack of information on the product itself. Providing consumers with
information alone is not enough to overcome these barriers or the “value-action gap.” The results
of this research provide a better understanding of consumers and insight on communications
practices useful in overcoming these purchasing barriers. First, as with any product,
understanding the consumer population is critical. By having a sense of consumers and their past
environmental behaviors, communications and marketing strategies can be designed to
acknowledge and tap into consumers’ feelings about those past behaviors. By creating a positive
association between past and future behaviors, these individuals’ intentions to adopt new
behaviors, such as purchasing environmentally friendly cleaning products, could be increased.
In terms of product labeling specifically, this research showed that consumers are
interested in understanding the attributes of the cleaning products they purchase. Whether
36
gaining that understanding through the use of an eco-label as a mental shortcut or learning more
detailed information about a product’s characteristics (e.g., ingredients, effectiveness, or safety),
products should be clearly labeled and advertised in a way that highlights these environmentally
friendly attributes. Also, for those products bearing an eco-label, manufacturers should be sure to
have their products labeled by a reputable eco-labeling organization that utilizes clear and
verifiable specifications that each product must meet. For those consumers interested in more
detailed information about a product, being labeled with a credible and well-known eco-label
will likely increase their positive evaluation of that particular product.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
The primary limitation of this study was the type and size of the sample used. As
mentioned previously, a larger sample size would have increased the statistical power of this
survey. In addition, the sample itself was a non-random, convenience and network sample, which
is not representative of the United States population as a whole.
A second limitation of this research deals with the worldwide presence of eco-labels. As
stated in the literature review, eco-labels abound in both the United States and internationally,
and consumers are often confused by the details of what qualifies a product to use an eco-label.
This research did not address the myriad eco-labels that exist, the technical specifications of
those eco-labels, or the United States federal government’s interest in ensuring that
environmentally friendly product claims are, in fact, valid. Because that is such a substantial
topic on its own, this research did not address those details. Additional research addressing these
points could provide further insight into a consumer’s mindset when considering purchases of
environmentally friendly products.
37
In terms of the experimental conditions presented, additional, larger-scale research might
help determine if there are more significant variations between consumer evaluations of products
with an eco-label, text describing the product as environmentally friendly, or both. In addition,
detailed research into other variations of text used on package labels might help determine the
language to which consumers most positively react, helping to develop a list of phrases and
packaging language that marketers should always consider including on environmentally friendly
product packaging.
As mentioned previously, there are additional barriers to purchase that were not
addressed as part of this research, and a closer examination of the consumer’s attitudes toward
those issues might provide more detailed insight into increasing positive evaluations of these
products. Factors for additional study might include price, package design, product availability,
location of the product in the stores, or brand loyalty.
Conclusion
This capstone took a substantial first step in better understanding consumer purchasing
decisions related to environmentally friendly cleaning products and the extent that environmental
consciousness and past behaviors impact those decisions. While the results clearly supported the
existence of the “value-action gap” in terms of consumer purchasing behavior, the research also
uncovered potential significant connections between past environmental purchasing behaviors
and an individual’s evaluation of environmentally friendly cleaning products. This connection is
critical in gaining insights into how consumers think about environmentally friendly activities
and purchases and provides companies selling environmentally friendly products or
38
organizations promoting sustainable behaviors with information helpful in designing
communications strategies that could ultimately result in behavior change.
39
REFERENCES
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl &
J. Bechmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). New York:
Springer-Verlag.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory of Mass Communication, Media Psychology, 3,
265 – 299.
Barr, S. (2004). Are we all environmentalists now? Rhetoric and reality in environmental action.
Geoforum, 35, 231 – 249.
Barr, S. & Gilg, A. (2006). Sustainable lifestyles: Framing environmental action in and around
the home, Geoforum, 37, 906 – 920.
Blake, J. (1999). Overcoming the 'value-action gap' in environmental policy: Tensions between
national policy and local experience, Local Environment, 4: 3, 257 – 278.
Bonini, S. & Oppenheim, J. (2008). Cultivating the Green Consumer, Stanford Social Innovation
Review, 6: 4, 56 – 61.
Chawla, L. (1999). Life Paths Into Effective Environmental Action, The Journal of
Environmental Education, 31: 1, 15 – 26.
Chung, S. & Leung, M.M. (2007). The Value-Action Gap in Waste Recycling: The Case of
Undergraduates in Hong Kong, Environmental Management, 40, 603 – 612.
Cone, LLC (2008). Green Gap Survey. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from
http://www.coneinc.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/57bfa0d65ae70c7e1122a05a9d0d67e0/f
iles/2008_green_gap_survey_fact_sheet.pdf
40
Davis, J.J. (1993). Strategies for Environmental Advertising, Journal of Consumer Marketing,
10: 2, 19 – 36.
Dunlap, R.E., (2008). The New Environmental Paradigm Scale: From Marginality to Worldwide
Use, The Journal of Environmental Education, 40: 1, 3 – 18.
EcoAmerica (2006). The American Environmental Values Survey. Retrieved October 31, 2010
from the EcoAmerica website at http://www.ecoamerica.net.
Forkink, A. (2010). Perception, Awareness, and Acceptance of Green Kitchen Cleaners: Go
Green Market Research, Retrieved February 6, 2011 from
http://www.greenbook.org/Content/GoGreen/Green_Cleaners_report.pdf.
Freestone, O.M. & McGoldrick, P.J. (2008). Motivations of the Ethical Consumer, Journal of
Business Ethics, 79, 445 – 467.
Freymeyer, Robert H. and Johnson, Barbara E. (2010). A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Factors
Influencing Environmental Actions, Sociological Spectrum, 30: 2, 184 – 195.
Green Seal (2007). Green Seal Standard; GS-08 Cleaning Products for Household Use. Retrieved
February 20, 2011 from
http://www.greenseal.org/GreenBusiness/Standards.aspx?vid=ViewStandardDetail&cid=
2&sid=1
Hawcroft, L.J. & Milfont, T.L. (2010). The use (and abuse) of the new environmental paradigm
scale over the last 30 years: A meta-analysis, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30,
143 – 158.
Hobson, K. (2003). Thinking Habits into Action: The role of knowledge and process in
questioning household consumption practices, Local Environment, 8: 1, 95 – 112.
41
Kennedy, E., Beckley, T., McFarlane, B., & Nadeau, S. (2009). Why We Don’t “Walk the Talk”:
Understanding the Environmental Values/Behavior Gap in Canada, Human Ecology
Review, 16: 2, 151 – 160.
Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and
what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior, Environmental Education Research,
8: 3, 239 – 260.
Lindenberg, S. & Steg, L (2007). Normative, Gain and Hedonic Goal Frames Guiding
Environmental Behavior, Journal of Social Issues, 63: 1, 117 – 137.
Luchs. M.G., Naylor, R.W., Irwin, J.R. & Raghunathan, R. (2010). The Sustainability Liability:
Potential Negative Effects of Ethicality on Product Preference, Journal of Marketing, 74,
18 – 31.
Moisander, J. (2007). Motivational complexity of green consumerism, International Journal of
Consumer Studies, 31: 4, 404 – 409.
Pelletier, L.G., Tuson, K.M., Green-Demers, I. & Noels, K. (1998). Why Are You Doing Things
for the Environment? The Motivation Toward the Environment Scale (MTES), Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 28: 5, 437 – 468.
Pickett-Baker, J. & Ozaki, R. (2008). Pro-environmental products: marketing influence on
consumer purchase decision, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25: 5, 281 – 293.
Rex, E. & Baumann, H. (2006). Beyond eco-labels: what green marketing can learn from
conventional marketing, Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 567 – 576.
Young, W., Hwang, K, McDonald, S. & Oates, C.J. (2010). Sustainable Consumption: Green
Consumer Behaviour when Purchasing Products, Sustainable Development, 18, 20 – 31.
42
APPENDIX A
Survey Questionnaire
This survey is being conducted as part of a capstone project for the requirements for the Degree
of Masters of Arts in Public Communication at American University in Washington, DC. Your
participation in this survey is purely voluntary and should not cause any discomfort. You may
discontinue completion of the survey at any time. The survey is intended to collect information
about your consumer purchasing habits, and no personally identifiable information will be
collected. If you have any questions about this survey, please contact Darcie Honabarger at
dh2498a@student.american.edu.
By clicking "Next" below, you are giving your consent to participate in this survey and will
begin the survey on the next screen.
1. Name the brands of cleaning products that you typically buy.
[open ended]
2. Name the brands of hair care products that you typically buy.
[open ended]
3. Name as many environmentally friendly cleaning product brands as you can think of.
[open ended]
4. In your household, which best describes your role in purchasing household cleaning
products?
- I am the person who makes all the purchases.
- I share purchasing responsibility with others in the household.
- I never make these purchases.
- Other – please specify.
5. Are you willing to pay a higher price for brand name food products?
- Yes
- No
- It depends on the price difference
- If there is a store promotion or coupon
- Other – please specify
43
6. Are you willing to pay a higher price for brand name cleaning products?
- Yes
- No
- It depends on the price difference
- If there is a store promotion or coupon
- Other – please specify
7. Are you willing to pay a higher price for brand name hair care products?
- Yes
- No
- It depends on the price difference
- If there is a store promotion or coupon
- Other – please specify
8. Are you willing to pay a higher price for a cleaning product that is more environmentally
friendly?
- Yes
- No
- It depends on the price difference
- If there is a store promotion or coupon
- Other – please specify
9. Have you ever purchased an environmentally friendly cleaning product?
- Yes
- No
- I'm not sure
10. Why did you purchase that environmentally friendly cleaning product?
[open ended]
11. How often do you do any of the following?
[answer choices are always, frequently, seldom, never]
a. Use biodegradable soaps or detergents
b. Avoid buying aerosol products
c. Purchase food products at a discount retail store (such as Target or Wal-Mart)
d. Read labels to see if a product’s contents are environmentally safe
e. Read labels to understand the nutritional value of the food products
f. Buy products made with or packaged in recycled materials
g. Buy products in packages that can be refilled
44
h. Avoid buying products from companies who do not have a reputation for being
environmentally responsible
i. Recycle bottles, cans, or glass
j. Recycle newspapers
k. Take your own reusable bags when you go shopping
l. Research products to better understand their environmental impact
m. Read labels on the food products you purchase
n. Read labels on the cleaning products you purchase
o. Read the ingredients on the hair products you use
p. Use coupons or store promotions to save money while shopping
q. Consider recommendations of other people (such as family or friends) when
purchasing cleaning products
r. Consider a company’s environmental reputation when purchasing cleaning
products
s. Search the Internet for product information prior to purchasing cleaning products
t. Purchase cleaning products based on their advertised effectiveness
u. Consider purchasing cleaning products advertised as environmentally friendly
v. Compare prices when shopping
w. Consider recommendations of other people when making purchases
x. Compare prices of competing brands of cleaning products
y. Compare the labels of products advertised as environmentally friendly to other
products
z. Purchase store brand products instead of name brands
12. New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) Scale Questions
Choose the option that corresponds with your feelings about each statement.
[answer choices are strongly agree, mildly agree, unsure, mildly disagree, strongly
disagree]
a. We are approaching the limit of the number of people the earth can support.
b. Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs.
c. When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences.
d. Human ingenuity will insure that we do not make the earth unlivable.
e. Humans are severely abusing the environment.
f. The earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them.
g. Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist.
h. The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern
industrial nations.
i. Despite our special abilities humans are still subject to the laws of nature.
j. The so-called ‘‘ecological crisis’’ facing humankind has been greatly
exaggerated.
45
k.
l.
m.
n.
The earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources.
Humans were meant to rule over the rest of nature.
The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset.
Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature works to be able to
control it.
o. If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major
ecological catastrophe.
In the next section, we are interested in your response to images for various consumer products.
Experimental Section #1—All respondents receive the same condition followed by a series
of questions.
Condition 1: Visual image of a food product.
Questions:
1. How likely are you to purchase this product?
- Very Likely
- Likely
- Undecided
- Unlikely
- Very Unlikely
2. Why?
[open ended]
3. What would make you more likely to buy this product?
[open ended]
4. Based on the product image, how favorably do you feel about this product?
- Strongly favorable
- Somewhat favorable
- Not sure
- Somewhat unfavorable
- Strongly unfavorable
5. What would make you feel more favorably about this product?
[open ended]
46
6. How likely would you be to recommend this product to someone else?
- Very Likely
- Likely
- Undecided
- Unlikely
- Very Unlikely
Experimental Section #2—Respondents will be randomly assigned to one of four conditions
followed by a series of questions.
Condition 1: Visual image of a cleaning product (no eco-label or language about being
environmentally friendly while also being effective).
Condition 2: Visual image of a cleaning product with an eco-label.
Condition 3: Visual image of a cleaning product that contains labeling on the package indicating
that the product is environmentally friendly while also being effective.
Condition 4: Visual image of a cleaning product that contains both an eco-label and labeling on
the package indicating that the product is environmentally friendly while also being effective.
Questions:
1. How likely are you to purchase this product?
- Very Likely
- Likely
- Undecided
- Unlikely
- Very Unlikely
2. Why?
[open ended]
3. What would make you more likely to buy this product?
[open ended]
4. Based on the product image, how favorably do you feel about this product?
- Strongly favorable
- Somewhat favorable
- Not sure
- Somewhat unfavorable
- Strongly unfavorable
47
5. What would make you feel more favorably about this product?
[open ended]
6. How likely would you be to recommend this product to someone else?
- Very Likely
- Likely
- Undecided
- Unlikely
- Very Unlikely
Experimental Section #3—All respondents receive the same condition followed by a series
of questions.
Condition 1: Visual image of a hair care product.
1. How likely are you to purchase this product?
- Very Likely
- Likely
- Undecided
- Unlikely
- Very Unlikely
2. Why?
[open ended]
3. What would make you more likely to buy this product?
[open ended]
4. Based on the product image, how favorably do you feel about this product?
- Strongly favorable
- Somewhat favorable
- Not sure
- Somewhat unfavorable
- Strongly unfavorable
5. What would make you feel more favorably about this product?
[open ended]
48
6. How likely would you be to recommend this product to someone else?
- Very Likely
- Likely
- Undecided
- Unlikely
- Very Unlikely
The final section of this survey contains general demographic questions.
1. What is your gender?
- Male
- Female
2. What is your age?
[open ended]
3. What is the highest level of education you have completed?
- Some high school
- High school graduate
- Some college
- Trade/technical/vocational training
- College graduate
- Some postgraduate work
- Post graduate degree
4. What is your total household income for one year?
- Less than $29,999
- $30,000 to $59,999
- $60,000 to $79,999
- $80,000 to $99,999
- $100,000 to $149,999
- $150,000 or more
- Prefer not to answer
5. Do you have children living at home?
- Yes
- No
49
6. Are you of Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino descent?
- Yes
- No
- Prefer not to answer
7. Which of the following races do you identify with most closely?
- White
- Black or African American
- American Indian or Alaska Native
- Asian American
- Other – please specify
- Prefer not to answer
50
APPENDIX B
Product Images Used in Experiment
Image 1: Control – A product with nothing but the product name.
Image 2: Eco-label – A product bearing an eco-label.
51
Image 3: Text – A product bearing language on the packaging indicating that it is both
environmentally friendly and effective.
Image 4: Eco-label and Text – A product bearing both an eco-label and language indicating that
it is environmentally friendly and effective.
52