Environmental Concern and Green Product Purchase: German Study

Respondents and Survey Design

The verification of the conceptual framework and hypotheses was carried out using a questionnaire survey. Primary data were gathered from a sample population of 270 respondents who were residents in Germany and who had previously purchased electronic goods. One of the major industries dedicated to decreasing its impact on the environment is the consumer electronics industry. This industry has applied several green initiatives focusing on environmental issues in manufacturing, clean delivery systems, energy efficiency, and product design.

The survey was conducted in 2016 between the months of August and September. Researchers collected the data by approaching interviewees directly, and participants were guaranteed that there would be no scale interference so as to minimize the possibility of influenced or biased answers.

The demographic composition of the survey respondents was as follows:

Age: 20–25: 5 (1.8%); 26–30: 86 (31.9%); 31–35: 112 (41.5%); 36 and above: 67 (24.8%)

Gender: Female: 148 (54.8%); Male: 122 (45.2%)

Education: Undergraduate: 1 (4%); Graduate: 84 (31.1%); Postgraduate: 166 (61.5%); Doctoral degree: 19 (7%)

Occupation: Private services: 188 (69.6%); Business: 38 (14.1%); Government job: 21 (7.8%); Self-employed: 23 (8.5%)

Table 1: Demographic composition of the respondents

As the table shows, respondents were drawn from a wide range of age groups. Most of them — 41.5% — were aged between 31 and 35. The smallest age group was the 20–25 group, which accounted for only 1.8% of the sample. Those aged 36 and above accounted for 24.8%, while those aged between 26 and 30 accounted for 31.9%.

When considering education levels, respondents who had completed a master's degree made up 61.5% of the sample, while those holding only an undergraduate degree made up just 4%. The remaining respondents held qualifications falling between a bachelor's and a doctoral degree.

Measurement Instruments and Scales

Respondents used a Likert scale to evaluate the aspects of self-expressive benefits, purchase intention, attitude, environmental knowledge, and environmental concern. The scale ranged from 1 to 5, with 5 representing "strongly agree" and 1 representing "strongly disagree."

This model provides quantitative values on the validity and reliability of the aspects utilized in the study. To assess convergent validity, factor loading, and composite reliability, the formulas presented by Cronbach's alpha and Average Variance Extracted (AVE) were applied (Ahmad & Thyagaraj, 2015).

On the validated scale, Environmental Concern comprised a total of sixteen items, Declared Purchase had 14 items, and Purchase Intention had 15 items. To evaluate the application of these scales, models similar to Likert were used with a 1-to-5 agreement/disagreement range, where 1 represents "complete disagreement" and 5 represents "complete agreement."

For the "Others" column, participants were also requested to score their overall concerns on the same 1-to-5 range. Frequency test data analysis was conducted using SPSS 15.0, while structural equation modeling was evaluated using SmartPLS 2.0 M3 and frequency tests (Ringle, Wende & Will, 2005).

EC_1: There should be punishment for firms that disrespect or damage the environment. EC_2: Toxic substances from agricultural inputs cause harm to the environment. EC_3: I understand that organic products cause no harm to the environment. EC_4: Environmental declarations indicate that manufacturers have some level of concern for the state of the environment. EC_5: My town's pollution concerns me. EC_6: I become concerned when I spot people polluting the streets. EC_7: I dispose of organic and inorganic wastes separately at home. EC_8: Humanity's survival may be threatened by deforestation. EC_9: I prefer biking or public transport. EC_10: By saving energy and water, I feel that I am helping to solve issues with natural resources. EC_11: By buying environmentally safe products, I feel that I am protecting the environment. EC_12: The atmosphere is damaged by carbon dioxide emissions. EC_13: Paper and plastic bags are harmful to the environment. EC_14: All paper and plastic bags should be recycled. EC_15: Chemical products like detergents designed for home use may harm the environment. EC_16: I reuse wrappers whenever I can.

Table 2: The scales utilized in the research — Environmental Concern

PI_1: I choose products that lead to the least pollution whenever possible. PI_2: I try not to use manufactured products that cause damage to the environment. PI_3: I purchase food lacking toxic environmental products. PI_4: I pay a premium for foods that lack toxic agricultural chemicals that can lead to environmental damage. PI_5: Price differences influence my purchase decisions when buying environmentally friendly products. PI_6: I am willing to pay a premium for environmentally friendly products. PI_7: I may prefer products that display the manufacturer's environmental certificates over those that do not. PI_8: Before purchasing, I verify whether a product is environmentally friendly. PI_9: I have made a decision to purchase concentrated products. PI_10: I have made a decision to purchase compacted products to help lower gas emissions. PI_11: I have made a decision to purchase products with fewer wrappings to reduce environmental impact. PI_12: I have made a decision to avoid products whose wrappings are non-biodegradable. PI_13: I have made a decision to purchase home chemicals such as biodegradable detergents. PI_14: I have made a decision to purchase refill products. PI_15: I have made a decision to buy goods in larger sizes and bundles to reduce the frequency of purchase.

Table 3: Scales utilized in the research — Purchase Intention

DP_1: When purchasing a product, I verify whether the producer respects the environment. DP_2: I usually purchase food lacking harmful chemicals, knowing that I am helping to conserve the environment. DP_3: I pay a premium to purchase products that respect the environment. DP_4: I purchase organic products because they are healthier. DP_5: I pay a premium for organic products. DP_6: I purchase goods with environmental certificates because they are environmentally conscious. DP_7: When making a purchase decision, I choose the product that does the least damage to the environment. DP_8: I usually purchase concentrated goods as they help in water and energy conservation. DP_9: I purchase compacted products to reduce gas emissions and because they are easier to transport. DP_10: I usually purchase products with the fewest wrappings. DP_11: I usually purchase environment-friendly home chemicals. DP_12: I purchase refill products to reuse past wrappings. DP_13: I usually purchase products with non-traditional packaging design to minimize solid waste. DP_14: I have switched from non-environmentally conscious products to those that respect the environment.

Table 4: Scales utilized in the research — Declared Purchase

Structural Equation Modeling Approach

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used as the main data analysis method. The model evaluated the cause-and-effect relationships between the various constructs and tested the hypotheses through the evaluation of path coefficients.

The Partial Least Squares Path Modeling (PLS-PM) construct measurement model was applied. A Mardia test was conducted to check the balance and similarity with the normal multivariate distribution (Hair et al., 2013), and the results showed significance (p < 0.001). The data collected from the matrix variables therefore did not demonstrate balance or similarity to the desired multivariate distribution.

The SEM measurement models used were those suited to Free Asymptotic Distribution. The applicable models include Weighted Least Squares (WLS), PLS-PM, and Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (Hair et al., 2013).

As described above, PLS 2.0 M3 software was used for data analysis. The model was tested for validity and adjusted in accordance with the requirements. Even so, the overall standard deviations, coefficients of variation, and averages provided by the sample population — with regard to the correction for discarded items — could result in low overall variability.

The R² statistic examines the portion of the variance explained by the constructs and indicates the quality of the adjustment model. Values of 0.25, 0.50, and 0.75 are considered weak, moderate, and strong respectively (Hair et al., 2013). The Average Variance Extracted (AVE) was required to be greater than 0.5 to satisfy the model's convergence criterion. The presence or absence of respondent bias was tested using Cronbach's alpha and Composite Reliability.

Communality (f²) was used to evaluate whether each construct contributed meaningfully to the adjustment of the model. Values of 0.35, 0.15, and 0.02 are deemed large, medium, and small respectively, and the accuracy of the adjustment model was evaluated using the Redundancy model.

The model quality criteria, including AVE, Composite Reliability, R², Cronbach's Alpha, Redundancy, and Communality, are presented in Table 5 below:

Table 5: Quality criteria of model adjustments — SEM specification — AVE and Composite Reliability

DP_Ind: AVE = 0.511, Composite Reliability = 0.893, R² = 0.409, Cronbach's Alpha = 0.864, Redundancy = 0.200, Communality = 0.373. DP_Other: AVE = 0.528, Composite Reliability = 0.870, R² = 0.323, Cronbach's Alpha = 0.820, Redundancy = 0.161, Communality = 0.328. EC_Ind: AVE = 0.555, Composite Reliability = 0.918, Cronbach's Alpha = 0.437, Communality = 0.437. IP_Ind: AVE = 0.521, Composite Reliability = 0.884, R² = 0.515, Cronbach's Alpha = 0.847, Redundancy = 0.258, Communality = 0.351. IP_Other: AVE = 0.527, Composite Reliability = 0.848, R² = 0.130, Cronbach's Alpha = 0.776, Redundancy = 0.065, Communality = 0.292. Reference values: AVE > 0.50; Composite Reliability > 0.70; f² 0.02 = small, 0.13 = medium, 0.26 = large; Cronbach's Alpha > 0.60; Redundancy and Communality should be positive.

References

Ahmad, A., & Thyagaraj, K. S. (2015). Consumer's intention to purchase green brands: The roles of environmental concern, environmental knowledge and self-expressive benefits. Current World Environment, 10(3). doi:10.12944/CWE.10.3.18

Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of some key hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(4), 607–627. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.41.4.607

Braga Junior, S. S., da Silva, D., Gabriel, M. L., & de Oliveira Braga, W. R. (2015). The relationship between environmental concern and declared retail purchase of green products. Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences, 170, 99–108.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications.

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Will, A. (2005). SmartPLS 2.0 M3 (beta). University of Hamburg.

Appendix: Survey Questionnaire

The following questionnaire items were administered to respondents, who rated each item on a 1–5 scale for both themselves ("YOU") and their perception of others ("OTHERS").

1. Do you believe that your purchase of green products is influenced by the opinions of relatives, friends, and other people around you? 2. I hold the belief that it is vital to evaluate the consequences a product may have before buying it. 3. There should be punishment for firms that cause damage to the environment. 4. Toxic substances in agricultural produce cause harm to the environment. 5. I understand that organic products do not cause harm to the environment. 6. Environmental declarations show that a manufacturer cares about the environment. 7. The pollution in my town concerns me. 8. I am concerned when I spot people littering the streets. 9. I dispose of organic and inorganic wastes separately at home. 10. Deforestation may greatly put human life at risk. 11. I prefer biking and public transport. 12. By saving energy and water, I feel I can help conserve natural resources. 13. I feel I help conserve the environment by purchasing environmentally safe products. 14. The atmosphere is damaged by carbon dioxide emissions. 15. Paper and plastic bags destroy the environment. 16. Paper and plastic bags should all be recycled instead of being discarded. 17. Chemical products used at home, such as detergents, cause harm to the environment. 18. I go for products that pollute the least whenever I can. 19. I try to avoid manufactured products that cause damage to the environment. 20. I purchase food without toxic agricultural chemicals to protect the environment. 21. I pay a premium for food products that do not use substances toxic to the environment. 22. Price differences affect my purchasing decisions for green products. 23. I may pay a premium to purchase organic products since they do not cause harm to the environment. 24. I may prefer products that display the manufacturers' environmental certificates. 25. I verify that a product I am about to buy does not cause harm to the environment. 26. I have made a decision to purchase concentrated products. 27. I have made a decision to purchase compacted products to lower emissions. 28. I have made a decision to purchase products with fewer wrappings to reduce usage of natural resources. 29. I have made a decision not to buy products whose wrappings are non-biodegradable. 30. I have made a decision to purchase home chemical products that are biodegradable or ecologically sound. 31. I have made a decision to purchase refill products so as to reuse packaging. 32. I have decided to purchase products in larger quantities to reduce purchase frequency. 33. When purchasing a product, I usually check whether the manufacturer is environmentally conscious. 34. I usually purchase foods with no agricultural toxins so as to conserve the environment. 35. I pay a premium for products to protect the environment. 36. I purchase organic products because they are healthier. 37. I pay a premium for organic products because they are healthier. 38. I purchase products with environmental certificates because they are ecologically correct. 39. I usually choose the product that leads to the least damage to the environment and to people when making a purchase decision. 40. To save energy and water, I usually purchase concentrated products. 41. I usually purchase compacted products to reduce emissions, as transporting them is easier. 42. I usually purchase those products with the fewest wrappers. 43. I usually purchase biodegradable or ecologically sound home chemicals such as detergents. 44. I purchase refill products to later reuse the wrapping. 45. I usually purchase products with unconventional packaging design as they may lead to less solid waste. 46. I have switched or stopped using various products for ecological reasons.