[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2812-d340320.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Liquid Foods in Environmentally Friendly Packaging? A Dual Attitudes Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Igor Popovic

    (School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Bart A. G. Bossink

    (Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Peter C. van der Sijde

    (Faculty of Social Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Christine Y. M. Fong

    (School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract
Considering that one of the key components of liquid food in environmentally friendly packaging is its higher price, it may not be appealing to all consumers. However, a growing body of evidence has shown that the sale of liquid food in environmentally friendly packaging is increasing. The purpose of this study was to analyze why consumers are willing to pay more for liquid food in environmentally friendly packaging. Drawing on the theory of dual attitudes by Wilson, Lindsey, and Schooler, this study proposes that consumer purchasing behavior can be explained through implicit and explicit attitudes. Moreover, a consumer’s ecoliteracy and ecofriendly lifestyle might be important predictors of consumer attitudes toward environmentally friendly packaging. Our conceptual model was tested on survey data from 11 countries, with a total of 7028 respondents. The study revealed that consumers’ willingness to pay a higher price for liquid food in environmentally friendly packaging could be predicted by their positive attitudes toward (a) the environmental friendliness of the packaging, (b) the brand of the liquid food, and (c) the affordability of the liquid food in the environmentally friendly packaging. Ecoliteracy and having an ecofriendly lifestyle were found to be important predictors of consumer attitudes toward environmentally friendly packaging. This study contributes to the literature that aims to explain consumers’ willingness to pay more for food in environmentally friendly packaging. It identifies how much more consumers are willing to pay for food in environmentally friendly packaging and why.

Suggested Citation

  • Igor Popovic & Bart A. G. Bossink & Peter C. van der Sijde & Christine Y. M. Fong, 2020. "Why Are Consumers Willing to Pay More for Liquid Foods in Environmentally Friendly Packaging? A Dual Attitudes Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2812-:d:340320
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2812/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2812/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neill, Clinton L. & Williams, Ryan B., 2016. "Consumer Preference For Alternative Milk Packaging: The Case Of An Inferred Environmental Attribute," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(3), pages 241-256, August.
    2. Vermeir, Iris & Verbeke, Wim, 2008. "Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 542-553, January.
    3. Bastian Popp & Herbert Woratschek, 2017. "Consumer–brand identification revisited: An integrative framework of brand identification, customer satisfaction, and price image and their role for brand loyalty and word of mouth," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(3), pages 250-270, May.
    4. Axsen, Jonn & TyreeHageman, Jennifer & Lentz, Andy, 2012. "Lifestyle practices and pro-environmental technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 64-74.
    5. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    6. Sheth, Jagdish N. & Newman, Bruce I. & Gross, Barbara L., 1991. "Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 159-170, March.
    7. Guo‐Ciang Wu, 2017. "Effects of Socially Responsible Supplier Development and Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation on Sustainable Development: Empirical Evidence from SMEs," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 661-675, November.
    8. Igor Popovic & Bart A. G. Bossink & Peter C. van der Sijde, 2019. "Factors Influencing Consumers’ Decision to Purchase Food in Environmentally Friendly Packaging: What Do We Know and Where Do We Go from Here?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Robert G Murphy & Adam Rohde, 2018. "Rational Bias in Inflation Expectations," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 44(1), pages 153-171, January.
    10. Babak Nemat & Mohammad Razzaghi & Kim Bolton & Kamran Rousta, 2019. "The Role of Food Packaging Design in Consumer Recycling Behavior—A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-23, August.
    11. Grunert, Suzanne C. & Juhl, Hans Jorn, 1995. "Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 39-62, March.
    12. Patricia A. Champ & Richard C. Bishop, 2006. "Is Willingness to Pay for a Public Good Sensitive to the Elicitation Format?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(2), pages 162-173.
    13. Neill, Clinton Lee & Williams, Ryan B, 2015. "Consumer Preference for Alternative Milk Packaging," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196651, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Monika Monika & Ferdi Antonio, 2022. "How Superhero Characters Shape Brand Alliances and Leverage the Local Brand: The Evidence from Indonesia," Businesses, MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Huidong Sun & Mustafa Raza Rabbani & Naveed Ahmad & Muhammad Safdar Sial & Guping Cheng & Malik Zia-Ud-Din & Qinghua Fu, 2020. "CSR, Co-Creation and Green Consumer Loyalty: Are Green Banking Initiatives Important? A Moderated Mediation Approach from an Emerging Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    3. Paul Hindley & O. Ashton Morgan, 2023. "The Role of Respondent Certainty and Attribute Non-Attendance on the Willingness to Pay for the Attributes of Recyclable Aluminum Bottled Water," Working Papers 23-06, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    4. Cherry C. I. Lau & Christina W. Y. Wong, 2024. "Achieving sustainable development with sustainable packaging: A natural‐resource‐based view perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 4766-4787, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Magdalena Grębosz-Krawczyk & Agnieszka Zakrzewska-Bielawska & Sylwia Flaszewska, 2021. "From Words to Deeds: The Impact of Pro-Environmental Self-Identity on Green Energy Purchase Intention," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Jaejin Lee & Jihye Kim, 2016. "The Effect of Consumer Characteristics on the Cause-Related Marketing Campaign: The Role of Personal Life Values," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(9), pages 1-82, August.
    3. Emel Yarimoglu & Gul Binboga, 2019. "Understanding sustainable consumption in an emerging country: The antecedents and consequences of the ecologically conscious consumer behavior model," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 642-651, May.
    4. Guang-Wen Zheng & Abu Bakkar Siddik & Mohammad Masukujjaman & Syed Shah Alam & Alvina Akter, 2020. "Perceived Environmental Responsibilities and Green Buying Behavior: The Mediating Effect of Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, December.
    5. Roh, Taewoo & Seok, Junhee & Kim, Yaeri, 2022. "Unveiling ways to reach organic purchase: Green perceived value, perceived knowledge, attitude, subjective norm, and trust," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    6. Kumar, Bipul, 2012. "Theory of Planned Behaviour Approach to Understand the Purchasing Behaviour for Environmentally Sustainable Products," IIMA Working Papers WP2012-12-08, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    7. Erifili Papista & Athanasios Krystallis, 2013. "Investigating the Types of Value and Cost of Green Brands: Proposition of a Conceptual Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 75-92, June.
    8. Yi-Man Teng & Kun-Shan Wu & Di-Man Huang, 2014. "The Influence of Green Restaurant Decision Formation Using the VAB Model: The Effect of Environmental Concerns upon Intent to Visit," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-20, December.
    9. William Sun, 2020. "Toward a theory of ethical consumer intention formation: re-extending the theory of planned behavior," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 260-278, December.
    10. Kumar, Bipul & Manrai, Ajay K. & Manrai, Lalita A., 2017. "Purchasing behaviour for environmentally sustainable products: A conceptual framework and empirical study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 1-9.
    11. Lidia Alexa & Andreea Apetrei & Juan Sapena, 2021. "The COVID-19 Lockdown Effect on the Intention to Purchase Sustainable Brands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    12. Fraccascia, Luca & Ceccarelli, Gaia & Dangelico, Rosa Maria, 2023. "Green products from industrial symbiosis: Are consumers ready for them?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    13. Moshood, Taofeeq D. & Nawanir, Gusman & Mahmud, Fatimah & Mohamad, Fazeeda & Ahmad, Mohd Hanafiah & AbdulGhani, Airin, 2022. "Why do consumers purchase biodegradable plastic? The impact of hedonics and environmental motivations on switching intention from synthetic to biodegradable plastic among the young consumers," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. Ruiz de Maya, Salvador & López-López, Inés & Munuera, José Luis, 2011. "Organic food consumption in Europe: International segmentation based on value system differences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1767-1775, August.
    15. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Adriano Profeta & Thomas Decker & Sergiy Smetana & Klaus Menrad, 2023. "Influencing Factors for Consumers’ Intention to Reduce Plastic Packaging in Different Groups of Fast-Moving Consumer Goods in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, May.
    16. Andreas Falke & Nadine Schröder & Claudia Hofmann, 2022. "The influence of values in sustainable consumption among millennials," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(6), pages 899-928, August.
    17. Debora Bettiga & Lucio Lamberti & Emanuele Lettieri, 2020. "Individuals’ adoption of smart technologies for preventive health care: a structural equation modeling approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 203-214, June.
    18. Mäntymäki, Matti & Salo, Jari, 2013. "Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An examination of Habbo Hotel," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 282-290.
    19. Farida Saleem & Ahmad Adeel & Rizwan Ali & Shabir Hyder, 2018. "Intentions to adopt ecopreneurship: moderating role of collectivism and altruism," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(2), pages 517-537, December.
    20. Hsu, Chia-Lin & Chang, Chi-Ya & Yansritakul, Chutinart, 2017. "Exploring purchase intention of green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 145-152.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2812-:d:340320. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.