BOĞAZİÇİ UNIVERSITY / MBA
Sustainability Campaigns and Consumer Involvement: Effects
of Altruism, Locus of Control and Long-term Orientation
Zeynep Balanlı
Özlem Hesapçı Sanaktekin
INTRODUCTION
The importance of sustainability is relatively a new apprehension in
developing economies (Mazlum, 2004). Awareness for sustainability
problems are mostly created by the efforts of non-governmental
organizations (NGOs). This paper aims to find out how NGO sustainability
campaigns affect behavioristic patterns of Turkish consumers. Most of the
prior research reveals findings from developed countries. The current study
is conducted in Turkey, a country of an important emerging market. Its
rapid industrialization and concerted efforts towards modernization make it
a significant context for observing the developments of sustainable
consumption.
The main aim of the research is to find out the effects of NGO campaigns on
consumers in terms of attitude, and behavior; and discover any relationship
between this effect and sustainable personality factors such as altruism,
locus of control and long-term orientation. Results revealed clearly that only
altruistic personality trait has a positive effect on consumers in terms of
behavior. Locus of control and long-term orientation and demographics are
not correlated with environmental behavior and attitude of consumers.
CONTENTS
LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 3
THE CASE OF TURKEY ............................................................................................................................ 4
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUMER BEHAVIOR ................................................................................... 5
HYPOTHESES ................................................................................................................................................ 7
METHOD ................................................................................................................................... 8
A.
CAMPAIGNS ........................................................................................................................................... 8
B.
MEASURES ............................................................................................................................................. 9
C.
SAMPLE ................................................................................................................................................. 10
RESULTS................................................................................................................................. 11
A.
PLASTIC CAPS CAMPAIGN.............................................................................................................. 11
B.
GREENPEACE FISH CAMPAIGN................................................................................................ 11
C.
GENERAL FINDINGS ......................................................................................................................... 12
CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS ................................................... 13
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 14
2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Although the definition of sustainable development is discussed to be vague; it has different
definitions in different contexts and changed over time since Brundtland Commission defined
it in 1987 (Redclift, 2005). Established by the United Nations, Brundtland Comission united
countries to define a map for the global environmental concerns. The comission released a
report in 1987 which defined “sustainable development” and considered as the first definition
of the sustainability concept. In his article, Redclift examines the development and evolution
of sustainability concept from Brundtland Report’s definition onward. Accoring to Redclift,
by 2000s, sustainability concept refers to development of the world we live, by not only
concerning the present time but also considering future generations. It has environmental,
social and economic aspects which aim to achieve sustainability in all of them. Sustainable
development involves governments, NGOs, corporations and consumers. In addition, since
sustainable development is a broader subject which involves global problems, there is a need
for managing sustainability globally.
The sustainable development concept has influenced the corporations with increasing
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) engagements. Many business organizations are formed
to support contributions of corporations to sustainable development (Smith, 2003). Some of
the widespread organizations include World Business Council for Sustainable Development
(WBCSD), International Business Leaders Forum (IBLF), Business for Social Responsibility
(BSR) and Business in the Community (BITC). The CSR activities of firms have affected the
consumers in terms of attitude and purchasing behavior in sustainability issues (Becker-Olsen
et al., 2006).
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) – another actor of sustainable development - play a
significant role in political life and political changes in developing economies (Clarke, 1998).
In his research, Clarke has analyzed NGOs and people organizations (Pos) in developing
economies located mostly in Asia and Latin America. According to him, the recognition of
NGOs and their involvement in socio-economic programs initiated after the recession in 1980.
Many examples from India, Brazil, Bangladesh, Chile, Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand
show that there is a correlation between political change and proliferation of NGOs and POs.
The significant roles of NGOs are highly visible in promoting economic development and
mobilizing broadly-based popular support for the governments. The democratization role of
NGOs is ambiguous but yet it is significant that NGOs and POs strengthen civil society and
the institutionalization between the society and the state. As much as for the developed world,
the influential importance of NGOs cannot be underestimated in developing countries since
their role in politics and economy is substantial.
Wade’s study on developing countries’ strategies states that although NGOs have little impact
on social and political strategies; they are still effective in starting out initiatives (Wade,
2003). Another study about developing economies state that “bridging organizations” is very
important in social and economic development and NGOs are one of the main bridges that
function as intermediary mechanisms (Brown, 1991). Examples of such “bridges” are proven
as initiators of CSR activities (Becker-Olsen et al., 2006) and multinational enterprise (MNE)
– NGO collaborations (Dahan et al., 2010).
NGOs contributions in sustainable development cannot be underestimated since there are
many success stories in literature that link sustainability solutions to NGO initiatives (Vivian,
2008; Korten, 1990). Korten suggests that the goal of sustainable development can be
achieved with the promotion of NGO activities. However, Vivian’s article claims that
3
although there may be a link between NGO activities and sustainable development, such
correlations have not yet proven to be right. Vivian also adds that there are not yet analyses
about the correlation between NGO promotions and sustainable development in a broader
level but only regional case studies exists. Therefore, it is very hard to make a general
statement about the contribution of NGO promotions in sustainable development. Vivian’s
study also shows a case study in Zimbabwe where she analyses the effects of rural
development NGOs in sustainable development. Her findings indicate that NGO promotions
can become effective in finding solution to environmental problems but they are no “magic
bullets” that solve everything in a first and only attempt.
THE CASE OF TURKEY
Turkey is considered as a developing economy as a Third World country. Like many
developing economies, Turkey was involved with sustainability issues and developed
awareness towards sustainable development later than western countries. Although some
participants of the Brundtland Comission were from developing economies, Turkey was not
one of them. However, the environmental problems and concerns have always been on the
agenda of many institutions and organizations in Turkey.
In Turkey’s history, it seems that Brundtland Report has affected Turkey’s policies on
sustainable development and environmental problems (Mazlum, 2004). There are no
strategies for sustainable development in 1970s and 1980s but only adressed environmental
problems by the government. After the release of Brundtland Report (1987) and the
subsequent Rio Summit (1992) Turkish government realizes the need for combining
economic and environmental protection priorities in development (Mazlum, 2004).
Sustainable development is introduced in five year development plans (FYDP) first time in
the 6th FYDP for years 1990-1994. However, even with the 9th FYDP for 2007-2013 years,
the government fails to implement policies to achieve sustainability (Ministry of
Development, 2012). Ministry of Development itself even criticizes the current state and
reports the failures in internalizing and implementing applications that are coherent with the
sustainability policies.
The formation of NGOs is also relatively a late attempt in Turkey. Except Turkish Red
Crescent (Red Cross of Turkey) there were no NGOs in Turkey until mid 1960s. NGOs that
work for development of education, social life and health start to generate from 1970s
onward. However, the first NGO that works for environmental development is founded in
1990 as ÇEKÜL - Foundation for the Protection and Promotion of the Environment and
Cultural Heritage. As of today, Turkey has six primary NGOs that work for the solution of
environmental problems.
Third Sector Foundation of Turkey (TÜSEV) has published a report about the NGO structure
in Turkey in 2011 (TÜSEV, 2011). The report is based on an international index called
CIVICUS Civil Society Index (Sivil Toplum Endeksi Projesi - STEP). According to the
research, the number of NGOs in respect to population and total participation level of the
society is relatively very low in Turkey when compared to other 52 countries in the index.
Although the major participation (either financial or voluntary based participation) in NGOs
is from the younger generation (younger than 25 years old) as 21%, it is still a very low level
of participation in the international index. But, the difference is mostly caused by the lack of
participation of this group in political issues. Women’s participation is also very low in
Turkey in all three categories of NGOs; social, political, and political activist. According to
4
the findings of the research, the socio-economic level does not affect the participation levels
in NGOs.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUMER BEHAVIOR
Environmental issues and concerns are a vital part of sustainable development since the
development of the world is highly affiliated with nature and environment. The environmental
concern of consumers has attracted many researchers’ attention. There are numerous studies
which try to find the correlated measures for environmentally concerned behavior types.
Although researchers try to correlate demographic characteristics with sustainable consumer
behavior, it is very hard to define a pattern for behavior and demographics in all studies. A
detailed empirical study on green consumer profiles debate inadequateness of demographics
to explain green consumers (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003). Their analyses include more than
130 researches about demographics and environmentally concerned behavior types. The
results indicate that demographics and attitude correlate in a way where as they do not reveal
correlations with knowledge and behavior. In align with this article, a research on
environmental attitude and behavior confirms no significant correlation with age, income
level and education but indicates a significant difference in gender and home owners vs.
renters (Mainieri et al., 1997). In addition, a research conducted in 1989 shows that
environmental support, perception and behavior do not correlate with any demographic
characteristics but rather correlate with political ideologies (Samdahl & Robertson, 1989). On
the other hand, different behavior types and measures show dissimilar results in some
researches. Another study on environmental consciousness and demographics indicates that
although a significant pattern is hard to describe; age, income level and ethnicity are slightly
correlated with consciousness (Krause, 1993). In another study, only age is found to be
correlated with attitude towards environmental labels on products (D’Souza, Taghian, Lamb
& Peretiatko, 2007). Researches conducted in different cultures may also reveal dissimilar
results. Contrary to many western researches mentioned above, a research conducted in Egypt
indicates that men are more concerned than women in environmental issues (Mostafa, 2007).
However, gender does not reveal any significant difference in environmental knowledge and
attitude. Although it is very hard to define a global demographic pattern for environmental
consumer behavior, demographics are still used for profiling cluster of consumer groups in
terms of quality and price expectancies for environmental products (D’Souza, Taghian &
Khosla, 2007).
Other than demographics, researchers have tried to find out correlations with other behavioral
patterns to justify environmental consumer behavior. A recent case study for cloth diapers in
Malaysia seeks to find a relation between environmental values and green purchase intention
and attitude. The findings suggest that environmental consequences do not have a significant
effect on attitude and purchase intention but, conservation has a positive effect on attitude
(Ramayah, Lee & Mohamad, 2010). Another study has found out that locus of control and
alienation have a significant effect on ecological concerns where as only race and income
correlates among demographic characteristics (Schwepker & Cornwell, 1991).
The characteristics of environmentally concerned consumers have also been on the agenda of
Turkey. Young generations are found to be even more sensitive about environmental issues
(Erdoğan, 2009). Erdoğan’s research among 1295 undergraduate students from four different
universities in Turkey aims to measure the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) scale which
is constructed by Dunlap et al. in 2000. The results show that 56% of university students hold
pro-NEP views; a high agreement to NEP’s environmental statements. However, 25% of
students hold pro-DSP views which states that they mostly disagree with the NEP statements.
5
Although the disagreement level is also high, the author suggests that cultural and historical
differences among populations cause different interpretations and misunderstandings of
statements. Another research with a younger profile (6th, 7th, 8th & 10th grade students) in
Turkey indicates that both gender and school type (private vs. public) affects the
environmental attitude of students (Tuncer et al., 2005).
Furthermore, recent researches have conducted that Turkish consumers have a tendency to be
more sensitive about environmental problems. A research among 1000 residents in Istanbul
has been conducted to measure the environmental sensitivity of consumers (Bodur and
Sarıgöllü, 2005). The findings of the research show that less educated and poor income
consumers tend to have less sensitivity and concerns in environmental issues. However, the
research shows that there is no difference in sensitivity to environmental problems regards to
age and gender. Other than demographics, locus of control, a personality trait, was also
measured and found out that active concerned consumers are to have internal locus of control
where as passive concerned have external locus of control traits. However, strong effects of
locus of control in environmental concern were not significant. On the other hand, the
classification built by the authors indicate that there are more than active concerned (30%)
and passive concerned (43%) than there are unconcerned (27%) consumers.
Locus of control is found to be explanatory in defining environmental consumer behavior in
many researches which some of them are mentioned above. Locus of control is the belief in
people whether they can control their lives (internal locus of control) or environmental factors
control their lives which they cannot influence (external locus of control). LoC was developed
by Rotter in 1954 and adapted to Turkish by Dağ in 1991 (Rotter, 1954; Dağ, 1991). People
with external locus of control believe that they have none or less control on their lives and
they cannot have an impact on the events surrounding them. External LoC people usually do
not engage in environmentally concerned behavior since they think that they cannot have an
impact on the consequences. Dağ’s research in 1991 among 532 students revealed LoC mean
value of 10,37 with 1-21 range. Females believed slightly more in external LoC rather than
males.
Long-term orientation is another personality trait that may be used of explaining
environmental consumer behavior. Long-term orientation is defined as “fostering virtues
oriented towards future rewards” (Hofstede Centre, 2012). Long-term oriented people believe
that context, time and situation matter in finding the truth. They can adapt traditions easily
when conditions change. The opposite side, short-term oriented people are more conservative
in traditions, want to achieve quick rewards as results of their actions and saving for future is
not common among them. LTO was added to original Hofstede dimensions on culture in 1988
(Hofstede & Bond, 1988; Hofstede, 1991). Long-term oriented people’s anticipation for the
future rewards can make them behave more environmentally concerned in certain situations
or as a reaction to NGO campaigns. Since it is relatively a more recent dimension, there are
no widespread researches on long-term orientation of Turkish culture.
Altruism may also be linked with environmental consciousness and behavior. Altruism is the
opposite of selfishness and doing good to others without expecting any rewards. Rushton et
al.’s “Self-Report Altruism Scale” is used to measure altruism personality trait (Rushton et al.,
1981). The self-report altruism scale is found to be significantly and positively related with
social responsibility (Rushton et al., 1981). As the altruism trait level increases, people’s
social responsibility increases. A study in Turkey found that as people tend to believe more in
internal locus of control, their altruism and courtesy levels also increased (Basım & Şeşen,
2006).
6
In order to overcome the challenges in environmental problems for sustainable development,
consumers’ mindsets have to be changed. The changes in consumer behavior and attitude are
the main research areas for many scholars. If the reason behind attitudes and behaviors are
explained, then there is a chance for influencing other consumers as well to make them
contribute to the environmental problems world faces today. The intermediary and bridging
functions of NGOs in developing countries cannot be underestimated. Although NGO
participations are low in Turkey, there has not been any research conducted to measure the
participation levels in particular with NGO campaigns. This paper aims to research the effects
of particular NGO campaigns on consumer behavior with respect to personality traits in
Turkey.
HYPOTHESES
H1 – Since it is relatively a more recent dimension, there are no widespread researches on
long-term orientation of Turkish culture. Long-term oriented people’s anticipation for the
future rewards can make them behave more environmentally concerned in certain situations
or as a reaction to NGO campaigns. Therefore;
H1a  Long-term oriented consumers will show more positive behavior towards the
sustainable NGO campaigns in terms of attitude.
H1b  Long-term oriented consumers will show more positive behavior towards the
sustainable NGO campaigns in terms of behavior.
H2 – The self-report altruism scale is found to be significantly and positively related with
social responsibility (Rushton et al., 1981). If as the altruism trait level increases, people’s
social responsibility increases, altruistic people’s behavior in response to environmental NGO
campaigns should also be positively correlated. Therefore;
H2a  Altruistic consumers will show more positive behavior towards the sustainable NGO
campaigns in terms of attitude.
H2b  Altruistic consumers will show more positive behavior towards the sustainable NGO
campaigns in terms of behavior.
H3 – People with external locus of control believe that they have none or less control on their
lives and they cannot have an impact on the events surrounding them. External LoC people
would not engage in environmentally concerned behavior since they think that they cannot
have an impact on the consequences. Therefore;
H3a  Internal locus of control oriented consumers will show more positive behavior
towards the sustainable NGO campaigns in terms of attitude.
H3b  Internal locus of control oriented consumers will show more positive behavior
towards the sustainable NGO campaigns in terms of behavior.
H4 – Demographics are found to be insufficient to explain environmentally concerned
behaviors of consumers (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003). But still, attitude of consumers are
somehow correlated with education (Bodur & Sarıgöllü, 2005) and most researches find a
difference in attitudes of gender types (Mainieri et al., 1997; Mostafa, 2007; Tuncer et al.,
2005). Therefore;
7
H4a  Demographics will have a correlation with attitude of consumers but not with
behavior.
METHOD
An exploratory research is conducted to list all widespread NGO campaigns in Turkey. The
results show that there were 24 campaigns that were initiated by NGOs and reached
significant number of people in terms of their media activities in recent years. Among these
campaigns 11 of them reflect environmental concerns, 6 of them social, 4 of them educational
and 3 of them are campaigns for health issues.
In order to select the NGO campaigns that have already created awareness on society, an
online pilot study was conducted with 89 respondents. All of the respondents were +18 years
old and residents in Turkey for at least two years. (Appendix 1) The results showed that 72%
remembered an educational campaign for female students in rural areas called “Baba Beni
Okula Gönder” campaign. Second most remembered campaign was an environmental
campaign for recycling plastic bottle caps with 66% recalling rate. The third one was
Greenpeace’s environmental campaign for avoiding consumption of small sized fish with
50% recalling rate.
The most recalled educational campaign was eliminated because it was not directly related
with environmental concerns and did not have a direct effect on consumer behavior. Two
environmental campaigns (Plastic Caps and Greenpeace’s Fish campaigns) were selected to
conduct further research.
An online study for measuring personality factors (i.e. locus of control, long-term orientation
and altruism) and behavior towards campaigns was conducted with 177 respondents. Locus of
control was measured with Rotter’s scale which was adapted to Turkish by Dağ in 1991.
Long-term orientation was measured with Hofstede’s original LTO survey module developed
in 1994. Altruism was measured with Rushton’s Self-report Altruism Scale and translated to
Turkish. It is structured with 20 questions on a five level Likert scale asking participants how
often they have accomplished specific actions. (Appendix 2) Participants were asked to
identify the two NGO campaigns that were selected and if they did not recall any of them,
they were directed to the demographics questions. They were only asked questions about the
campaigns which they were able to identify.
Participants’ knowledge about the campaigns, their attitude towards the campaigns and
behavioral outcomes were reported in a five level Likert scale.
The link for the online survey was emailed to the participants and asked to share it with their
contact lists. The survey was also shared on social media platforms.
A. CAMPAIGNS
PLASTIC CAPS CAMPAIGN
Plastics caps campaign is a simple recycling campaign which people send the plastics bottle
caps they collect to a certain address and caps are sold to recycling firms. The money
established from these transactions is used for buying a wheelchair for the needy. The unusual
characteristic about this environmental campaign is that it is not really an NGO campaign. It
8
is an initiative started by a group of academicians in Ege University Dentistry Faculty in
İzmir, Turkey. It has started in 2011 and with mass media’s interest in the campaign; it
became widespread in a very short time. Due to its organizational structure it may be called
People’s Organization (PO) but this initiative was never a sub-group of an NGO.
Unfortunately the campaign ended in the beginning of 2013 due to problems with the
logistics, recycling suppliers and Dean of the dentistry faculty. In two years time, the
campaign collected 280 tonnes of plastic bottle caps and transported 2,039 wheelchairs to
needy disabled people. With a rough calculation made, the campaign received 19,178 bottle
caps per day in two years time. Plastic caps campaign is probably one of the most participated
environmental campaign in Turkey.
GREENPEACE FISH CAMPAIGN
The campaign has a catchy title in Turkish called “Seninki Kaç Santim?” meaning “How long
is yours?” The campaign first started in social media in 2010. In a very short time Greenpeace
collected 700,000 signatures and started applying to governmental units to ban fishing small
sized fish. The intense interest in social media also drew mass media’s attention to the
campaign. By 2012, Greenpeace achieved great success by changing some laws on fishing.
The secondary aim of the campaign was to create awareness among public. The awareness
was surely achieved since 50% of the pilot study respondents recalled the campaign but this
study will also measure if it has achieved learning on consumer behavior. Today, the
campaign still continues with a less active approach.
B. MEASURES
LONG-TERM ORIENTATION
Hofstede’s LTO calculation is revised in 1999. The old calculation designed in 1994
contained 4 questions and the results could range from minimum -198 to maximum 302. The
revised version of LTO contains 2 questions and the results can range from minimum -40 to
maximum 120. Both versions of LTO is measured in this research and found out that old and
new versions have a mean value of 54.3 and 66.2 respectively. However, the standard
deviation values are high in both measurement and old and new versions have 77.3% and
33.1% CV respectively. Since the variance in the old LTO measurement is too high, new
version is used in this research as LTO. The LTO value of 66.2 within -40 to 120 range can be
considered as long-term oriented since the mid-value is 40. This is an indication that the
sample is mostly expecting rewards in future, not conservative, and more flexible in many
ways.
ALTRUISM
On a 0-80 scale, the mean value for the altruism is 34.75. Rushton’s samples in US have a
mean value between 52-57. The altruism level of the Turkish sample seems low when
compared to samples in US. The least practiced actions are “helping for a stranger’s car when
it’s broken”, “doing volunteering work for a charity” and “giving a lift to a stranger.” Most
common actions that are performed more often are “offering the seat on a bus or a train to a
stranger”, “delaying an elevator and holding the door open for a stranger” and “giving
directions to a stranger”. The more convenient and easy to perform actions are the ones that
are more often practiced by the participants. The least practiced actions are probably very
hard for participants to perform since they all live in big cities.
9
LOCUS OF CONTROL
Rotter’s locus of control scale contains 29 questions with each of them having two answer
choices. Six of the questions are fake which constructs 0-23 range of possible scores. The
mean value of the participants is 11.6. The higher the locus of control score the more external
control belief arises where as the lower scores indicate internal control beliefs. Dağ’s study on
students has resulted in a mean value of 10.4 for locus of control (Dağ, 1991). This sample
has slightly more belief in external control like luck, fate and uncontrollable events.
Altruism
Range 0-80
LoC
LTO_new
0-23
-40-120
N
177
177
177
μ
34.75
11.56
66.22
Std. Error of μ
0.79
0.31
1.65
σ
10.56
4.14
21.95
CV
30.4%
35.8%
33.1%
Table 1 – Descriptive statistics of measures
C. SAMPLE
The population for the sampling is defined as the Turkish consumers who are older than 18
years old and reside in Turkey at least for the last two years by February 2013. Convenience
sampling of 177 consumers are used for the research. The demographic characteristics of the
sample are given below in Table 2.
Gender
Female 66.3%
Male 33.8%
Age
21-30 42.8%
31-40 42.1%
41-50 6.3%
50 + 8.8%
Demographic Statistics of Sample
Net Income
Education
0 - 850,00 TL 6.3%
Elementary school
851,00 - 1.500,00 TL 12.5%
High school
1.501,00 - 3.000,00 TL 25.0%
Undergraduate
3.001,00 - 4.500,00 TL 24.3%
Graduate
4.501,00 - 6.000,00 TL 13.8%
Phd or above
6.001,00 - 7.500,00 TL 6.2%
7.501,00 - 9.000,00 TL 5.6%
Table 2 – Demographic
9.001,00 TL or more 6.3%
Statistics
0.6%
6.3%
55.6%
33.1%
4.4%
10
RESULTS
A. PLASTIC CAPS CAMPAIGN
Total of 89.2% of the participants stated that they were familiar about this campaign. Their
knowledge level about the campaign was asked in a 5 level Likert scale and the mean value is
computed as 3.01. This means that majority of the campaign recognizants did not know any
details about the campaign but also their knowledge was not insufficient. Attitude was
measured with three questions that stated if they thought the campaign was right, if they liked
the campaign and if they thought the campaign would be effective in finding a solution for the
problem. The first and second attitude statements had mean values of 4.17 and 4.24
respectively which mean that majority liked the campaign and found the campaign
reasonable. However, the third measure indicated a lower mean value (3.95) which indicated
the campaign’s ineffectiveness in finding a solution. The behavior was measured in four
questions to understand whether they were trying to inform others about the campaign,
collecting the bottle caps and sending them to the required address. Majority did not send the
bottle caps by themselves but instead gave the caps to a collection point. The mean value of
collecting bottle caps was high, 3.82, which indicated that the sample’s involvement is also
high. To measure further learning, when asked which recyclable products they were
collecting, only 5% answered that they are not collecting any. 59% of the participants are
collecting bottle caps. Glass, paper and battery are collected for recycling by 46%. Other
plastics and food carton are collected by 32% and 28% respectively.
B. GREENPEACE FISH CAMPAIGN
78.9% of the participants recalled the Greenpeace fish campaign and answered the questions
related with the campaign. Their knowledge about the campaign has a mean score of 3.56
which means that majority of the participants agreed that they are informed about the
campaign. Their attitude towards the campaign is higher than the plastic caps campaign but
like the caps campaign, the least score in attitude is in believing the campaign will be
effective in finding a solution for the problem. In both campaigns’ attitude questions, this
statement scores the lowest. This can be explained with the external locus of control tendency
in the sample. As people will believe more in external control, they will not believe such
campaigns can really be effective in finding solutions for the problems. The behavior
measures of the campaign score lower than the attitude just like the plastic caps campaign.
The least practiced behaviors are warning the fishmongers and restaurants that sold small
sized fish according to the campaign. The involvement of the participants in consuming fish is
also measured by asking them how often they eat fish. 46% stated that they consumed fish
less than once in a week and 29% stated they consumed once in a week.
Plastic Caps
Greenpeace
μ
Attitude
4.12
Behavior
3.35
Attitude
4.29
Behavior
3.07
σ
0.88
1.02
0.61
1.06
CV
21%
30%
14%
35%
Table 3 – Descriptive statistics of the behavioral outcomes towards NGO campaigns
11
Although the attitude scores higher for the Greenpeace fish campaign, the environmental
behavior is less likely to be practiced than the plastic caps campaign.
C. GENERAL FINDINGS
Pearson’s correlation is conducted to understand the relations between the dependent and
moderating variables. The results show that only altruism was correlated with consumer
behavior when Greenpeace fish campaign was considered. The relation between altruism and
consumer behavior towards the campaign is positively correlated meaning that the more
altruistic people are the more they tend to participate in the environmental campaign. In
addition, a positive correlation between attitude and behavior is significant. (Table 4)
LoC
Altruis
m
Pearson
1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
177
Altruism
Pearson
.153*
1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.043
N
177
177
LTO
Pearson
.095
.021
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.206
.782
N
177
177
Fish attitude Pearson
-.051
-.009
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.558
.914
N
135
135
Fish
Pearson
-.091
.258**
behavior
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.292
.003
N
135
135
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Fish
attitude
LTO
Fish
behavior
LoC
1
177
-.053
1
.540
135
-.098
135
.407**
1
.256
135
.000
135
135
Table 4 – Correlations between personality traits and consumer behavior in
Greenpeace fish campaign
The only significant correlation between the personality traits and consumer behavior is seen
between altruism and plastic caps campaign behavior. There is a positive correlation between
those which indicates that more altruistic people tend to collect and send caps and inform
others more about the campaign. Less significant correlations are seen between locus of
control and attitude and behavior. However, these correlations are also positive therefore they
suggest that external control believers tend to show more positive attitude and behavior
towards the campaign. This does not make sense since external control believers would think
that their actions would not change anything or they would have no impact on environmental
problems. The significant positive correlation between attitude and behavior is also seen here.
(Table 5)
Only significant correlation between demographics and consumer behavior in NGO
campaigns is a positive correlation between fish behavior and age (Correlation 0.280
12
significant at 0.01 level). Older people have a tendency to participate for the Greenpeace fish
campaign. In order to explain this relation, the correlation between involvement level and age
is analysed. If older people were eating fish more often than younger adults then this
correlation would have been justified. However, the frequence for eating fish and age levels
do not correlate. The Pearson analysis and One-way Anova tests show that there is no
significant difference in age levels and fish eating habits. This means that older adults were
more motivated to change their consumer behavior for the Greenpeace fish campaign.
LoC
Altruism
Pearson Correlation
1
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
177
Altruism
Pearson Correlation
.153*
1
Sig. (2-tailed)
.043
N
177
177
LTO
Pearson Correlation
.095
.021
Sig. (2-tailed)
.206
.782
N
177
177
Cap_attitude
Pearson Correlation
.167*
.038
Sig. (2-tailed)
.047
.653
N
142
142
Cap_behavior
Pearson Correlation
.166*
.306**
Sig. (2-tailed)
.048
.000
N
142
142
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
LTO
Cap_attitude
Cap_behavior
LoC
1
177
.112
.186
142
-.013
.873
142
1
142
.529**
.000
142
1
142
Table 5 - Correlations between personality traits and consumer behavior in plastic
caps campaign
CONCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Only one of the hypotheses was proved. Altruism was correlated with behavior for both
campaigns. However, altruism was not correlated with consumer attitude towards
environmental campaigns. Therefore we can only accept H2b. Among the other personality
traits, long-term orientation had no relation with consumer behavior on NGO campaigns (H1a
and H1b rejected). Locus of control was only correlated with consumers in terms of behavior
and attitude in plastic caps campaign. More research is needed to conclude about locus of
control (H3a and H3b) since it was not correlated at all in the other campaign. In addition, the
positive attitude in correlation is suspicious since the higher scales in locus of control means
people believe more in external factors than themselves as a mean to control their lives and
the environment. Demographics also did not play a significant role in explaining consumer
behavior. Only age was correlated with the Greenpeace fish campaign behavior. However,
H4a suggested that it would be correlated with attitude but none of the demographics
characteristics were correlated with attitude. Therefore we have to reject H4a too.
In addition, correlations in plastics caps campaign are more significant than in Greenpeace
fish campaign. This may be due to the fact that more participants acknowledged the plastic
caps campaign and therefore more data was collected in plastic caps campaign.
The limited sample size is the main obstacle of the study. Since the questionnaire was too
long, many participants failed to complete it successfully. Limited number of responses led to
13
variance problems in many of the collected data. The data was only collected online via
internet which means that the sample consisted only of consumers who have access to
internet.
The differences between the behaviors towards the two campaigns were also seen. Further
research might include why consumers are responding differently to two environmental NGO
campaigns. The attitude towards the fish campaign was higher than the plastic caps campaign
but the behavior was not as positive as the plastic caps campaign. This may be due to the
convenience and easiness of the plastic caps campaign. The learning and applying might be
easier for the consumers where on the other one they had to learn sizes of the many fish which
they need to be careful about. The characteristics of campaigns which affect the consumer
behavior might be an interesting study to understand the reasons behind success of
environmental NGO campaigns.
REFERENCES
Basım, H. N., & Şeşen, H. (2006). Kontrol Odağının Çalışanların Nezaket ve Yardım Etme Davranışlarına
Etkisi: Kamu Sektöründe Bir Araştırma. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 16(2), 159-168.
Becker-Olsen, K. L., Cudmore, B. A., & Hill, R. P. (2006). The impact of perceived corporate social
responsibility on consumer behavior. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 46-53.
Bodur, M., & Sarigöllü, E. (2005). Environmental Sensitivity in a Developing Country Consumer Classification
and Implications. Environment and Behavior, 37(4), 487-510.
Brown, L. D. (1991). Bridging Organizations and Sustainable Development. Human Relations, 44(8), 807-831.
Clarke, G. (1998). Non‐Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Politics in the Developing World. Political
studies, 46(1), 36-52.
Dağ, İ. (1991). Rotter’in İç-Dış Kontrol Odağı Ölçeği (RİDKOÖ)’nin üniversite öğrencileri için güvenirliği ve
geçerliği. Psikoloji Dergisi, 7(26), 10-16.
Dahan, N. M., Doh, J. P., Oetzel, J., & Yaziji, M. (2010). Corporate-NGO collaboration: co-creating new
business models for developing markets. Long Range Planning, 43(2), 326-342.
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Sinkovics, R. R., & Bohlen, G. M. (2003). Can socio-demographics
still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. Journal
of Business Research, 56(6), 465-480.
D'Souza, C., Taghian, M., & Khosla, R. (2007). Examination of environmental beliefs and its impact on the
influence of price, quality and demographic characteristics with respect to green purchase intention. Journal of
Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 15(2), 69-78.
D’Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P., & Peretiatko, R. (2007). Green decisions: demographics and consumer
understanding of environmental labels. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(4), 371-376.
Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental
attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of social
issues, 56(3), 425-442.
Erdoğan, N. (2009). Testing the new ecological paradigm scale: Turkish case. African Journal of Agricultural
Research, 4(10), 1023-1031.
Hofstede Centre (2012), Long-term versus short-term orientation (LTO). Retrieved June 7, 2013 from
http://geert-hofstede.com/dimensions.html
Hofstede, G., & Bond, M. H. (1988). The Confucius connection: From cultural roots to economic
growth. Organizational dynamics, 16(4), 4-21.
14
Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: McGraw-Hill U.K.
Korten, D. (1990). Getting to the twenty-first century: voluntary action and the global agenda. West Hartford,
CT: Kumarian.
Krause, D. (1993). Environmental Consciousness An Empirical Study. Environment and Behavior, 25(1), 126142.
Mainieri, T., Barnett, E. G., Valdero, T. R., Unipan, J. B., & Oskamp, S. (1997). Green buying: The influence of
environmental concern on consumer behavior.The Journal of social psychology, 137(2), 189-204.
Mazlum, S. C. (2004). The politics of sustainable development: sustainability planning in the UK and Turkey.
In The European Union and the Mediterranean(pp. 629-653). European Documentation and Research Centre,
University of Malta.
Ministry of Development, T. R. (2012) Rio’dan Rio’ya: Türkiye’de Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmanın Mevcut Durumu
[From Rio to Rio: Current Sustainable Development in Turkey]
Mostafa, M. M. (2007). Gender differences in Egyptian consumers’ green purchase behaviour: the effects of
environmental knowledge, concern and attitude. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(3), 220-229.
Ramayah, T., Lee, J. W. C., & Mohamad, O. (2010). Green product purchase intention: Some insights from a
developing country. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 54(12), 1419-1427.
Redclift, M. (2005). Sustainable development (1987–2005): an oxymoron comes of age. Sustainable
development, 13(4), 212-227.
Rotter, J. B. (1954). Social learning and clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N. J. Prentice-Hall.
Rushton, J. P., Chrisjohn, R. D., & Cynthia Fekken, G. (1981). The altruistic personality and the self-report
altruism scale. Personality and individual differences, 2(4), 293-302.
Samdahl, D. M., & Robertson, R. (1989). Social determinants of environmental concern specification and test of
the model. Environment and Behavior, 21(1), 57-81.
Schwepker Jr, C. H., & Cornwell, T. B. (1991). An examination of ecologically concerned consumers and their
intention to purchase ecologically packaged products. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 77-101.
Smith, N. C. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility: not whether, but how. Center for Marketing Working
Paper, (03-701).
Tuncer, G., Ertepinar, H., Tekkaya, C., & Sungur, S. (2005). Environmental attitudes of young people in Turkey:
Effects of school type and gender. Environmental Education Research, 11(2), 215-233.
TÜSEV (2011) Türkiye Ülke Raporu II [Turkey Country Report II]
Vivian, J. (1994). NGOs and sustainable development in Zimbabwe: No magic bullets. Development and
Change, 25(1), 167-193.
Wade, R. H. (2003). What strategies are viable for developing countries today? The World Trade Organization
and the shrinking of ‘development space’. Review of international political economy, 10(4), 621-644.
15