IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ssfesf/199239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumers’ environmental awareness towards children’s furniture in Shanghai and Shenzhen, China

Author

Listed:
  • Wan, M.
  • Toppinen, A.
  • Chen, J.

Abstract

China’s rapid economic growth has increased consumers’ disposable income evidently. With the improvement of living standards, Chinese people have increasingly concerned about their life quality, especially when buying consumable commodities like food, toys and clothing as well as durable goods like furniture for their children. In the past 10 years, the Chinese children's furniture market has developed rapidly, making up 9% of total furniture market in China in 2010. However, the children under 14 years old only account for 16% of the total population in China (The present market…China 2012). The disproportion between low market share and high population rate presents a tremendous potential market for furniture producers to develop the children’s furniture industry. Along with people’s intensified environmental consciousness, more and more Chinese parents have realized the growing importance of healthy and eco-friendly products, e.g., furniture, to children’s growth. Despite some studies on the role of the lifestyle of health and sustainability (LOHAS) and the environmentally conscious consumerism in China (Dagevos et al. 2011, Sirieix et al. 2011), there is a lack of research on the analysis of consumers’ environmental awareness towards children’s furniture in China. The purpose of this study is to contribute to filling this gap. In the empirical part, the survey was conducted with a quantitative approach and data were collected using a structured questionnaire in a sample of 320 consumers of 20-60 years old in two coastal metropolitan cities of China (Shanghai and Shenzhen in China) from December 2012 to January 2013. The data reveal 67% of females and 33% of males of 299 valid sample respondents. Since 63% of respondents were in the age group of 31-40 years old and 23% were in the range of 20-30 years old, the data set represents fairly young urban population. Results indicate that 83% of respondents chose solid wood as the primary raw material for children’s furniture. From the Chinese consumers’ perspective, natural, non-poisonousness and scentless material, adoption of environmental certification and verification of legal origin of wood are five key attributes of eco-friendly furniture. And the choice of eco-friendly children’s furniture is connected to consumers’ lifestyle of health and sustainability. Results also indicate that respondents with higher education had better knowledge and stronger awareness of environmental protection and sustainable lifestyle, and respondents with higher income were less price-sensitive and more aware of sustainable lifestyle. Although environmental awareness has increasingly become an important concern among Chinese consumers, they have low brand awareness and their price expectations on solid wood furniture are below current market levels. Despite these concerns, Chinese children’s furniture presents a growing high-end market potential for both furniture producers and wood raw material suppliers.

Suggested Citation

  • Wan, M. & Toppinen, A. & Chen, J., 2014. "Consumers’ environmental awareness towards children’s furniture in Shanghai and Shenzhen, China," 2014, Number 45, May 22-24, 2014, Uppsala, Sweden, Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, vol. 2014(45), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ssfesf:199239
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.199239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/199239/files/Minli_%20W%20et%20al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.199239?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hansmann, Ralf & Koellner, Thomas & Scholz, Roland W., 2006. "Influence of consumers' socioecological and economic orientations on preferences for wood products with sustainability labels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 239-250, April.
    2. Toivonen, Ritva Marketta, 2012. "Product quality and value from consumer perspective—An application to wooden products," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 157-173.
    3. Axsen, Jonn & TyreeHageman, Jennifer & Lentz, Andy, 2012. "Lifestyle practices and pro-environmental technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 64-74.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Toivonen, R. & Toppinen, A. & Valkeapaa, A. & Ramo, A.K., 23. "Consumer perceptions on responsibility of wood product suppliers in Finland," Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, issue 44, May.
    2. Toppinen, Anne & Röhr, Axel & Pätäri, Satu & Lähtinen, Katja & Toivonen, Ritva, 2018. "The future of wooden multistory construction in the forest bioeconomy – A Delphi study from Finland and Sweden," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 3-10.
    3. Huang, Youlin & Qian, Lixian, 2021. "Consumer adoption of electric vehicles in alternative business models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    4. Thøgersen, John, 2017. "Housing-related lifestyle and energy saving: A multi-level approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 73-87.
    5. Mohd Yusoff Yusliza & Amirudin Amirudin & Raden Aswin Rahadi & Nik Afzan Nik Sarah Athirah & Thurasamy Ramayah & Zikri Muhammad & Francesca Dal Mas & Maurizio Massaro & Jumadil Saputra & Safiek Mokhli, 2020. "An Investigation of Pro-Environmental Behaviour and Sustainable Development in Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    6. Herberz, Mario & Hahnel, Ulf J.J. & Brosch, Tobias, 2020. "The importance of consumer motives for green mobility: A multi-modal perspective," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 102-118.
    7. Green, Erin H. & Skerlos, Steven J. & Winebrake, James J., 2014. "Increasing electric vehicle policy efficiency and effectiveness by reducing mainstream market bias," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 562-566.
    8. Odland, Severin & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Corbett, Meghan & Pardy, Aaron, 2023. "What policies do homeowners prefer for building decarbonization and why? An exploration of climate policy support in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Liu, Yajie & Dong, Feng & Li, Guoqing & Huang, Jianheng & Yang, Shanshan & Wang, Yulong, 2023. "Public willingness to support the policy of banning gasoline vehicles sales and its internal mechanism," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    10. Andre L. Carrel & Lee V. White & Christina Gore & Harsh Shah, 2024. "Subscribing to new technology: consumer preferences for short-term ownership of electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 875-909, June.
    11. Tarmo Räty & Anne Toppinen & Anders Roos & Maria Riala & Anders Q. Nyrud, 2016. "Environmental Policy in the Nordic Wood Product Industry: Insights Into Firms’ Strategies and Communication," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 10-27, January.
    12. Kilchling, Petra & Hansmann, Ralf & Seeland, Klaus, 2009. "Demand for non-timber forest products: Surveys of urban consumers and sellers in Switzerland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 294-300, July.
    13. Mohammed Laeequddin & Waheed Kareem Abdul & Vinita Sahay & Aviral Kumar Tiwari, 2022. "Factors That Influence the Safe Disposal Behavior of E-Waste by Electronics Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, April.
    14. Qian, Xiaodong & Gkritza, Konstantina, 2024. "Spatial and temporal variance in public perception of electric vehicles: A comparative analysis of adoption pioneers and laggards using twitter data," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 150-162.
    15. Bob Foster & Zikri Muhammad & Mohd Yusoff Yusliza & Juhari Noor Faezah & Muhamad Deni Johansyah & Jing Yi Yong & Adnan ul-Haque & Jumadil Saputra & Thurasamy Ramayah & Olawole Fawehinmi, 2022. "Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behaviour in the Workplace," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Jose Esteves & Daniel Alonso-Martínez & Guillermo de Haro, 2021. "Profiling Spanish Prospective Buyers of Electric Vehicles Based on Demographics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-22, August.
    17. Ratchaneekorn Dansirichaisawat, 2014. "Discovering Environmental Attitude and Lifestyle Segmentation of Green Consumers: a Conceptual Model for Research," Journal of Social and Development Sciences, AMH International, vol. 5(2), pages 102-110.
    18. Long, Zoe & Axsen, Jonn & Kitt, Shelby, 2020. "Public support for supply-focused transport policies: Vehicle emissions, low-carbon fuels, and ZEV sales standards in Canada and California," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 98-115.
    19. Simone Wurster & Rita Schulze, 2020. "Consumers’ Acceptance of a Bio-circular Automotive Economy: Explanatory Model and Influence Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, March.
    20. Best, Rohan & Burke, Paul J. & Nishitateno, Shuhei, 2019. "Understanding the determinants of rooftop solar installation: evidence from household surveys in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Marketing;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:ssfesf:199239. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssfeeea.html .

    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.