IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i17p7297-d1463566.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Product Characteristics and Emotions to Bridge the Intention-Behavior Gap in Green Food Purchasing

Author

Listed:
  • Sara de Sio

    (Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 5, 40127 Bologna, Italy)

  • Giulia Casu

    (Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 5, 40127 Bologna, Italy)

  • Alessandra Zamagni

    (Ecoinnovazione Srl, Via della Liberazione, 6/c, 40128 Bologna, Italy)

  • Paola Gremigni

    (Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Viale Berti Pichat 5, 40127 Bologna, Italy)

Abstract

Promoting environmentally friendly behaviors is a pivotal strategy in addressing the climate crisis. The food industry’s impact on pollution and resource consumption underscores the importance of fostering eco-sustainable food consumption, which can significantly benefit the environment. However, despite the global surge in green purchase intentions, a noticeable discrepancy persists between these intentions and actual purchasing behavior. This study aimed to investigate the influence of various factors on the likelihood of purchasing green food. An online survey was administered to Italian adult consumers (n = 832, 66% female, aged 18–84 years), collecting sociodemographic data and assessing emotions related to green purchases, perceptions of green food characteristics, intention to buy green food, and frequency of green food purchases. Through cluster analysis, three distinct consumer categories emerged: Coherent Buyers (individuals willing to buy green food and actively doing so), Coherent Non-Buyers (individuals who have no intention to buy green food and do not buy it), and Non-Buyers with Favorable Intentions (individuals expressing willingness to buy green food but not following through with purchases). Results from multinomial logistic regression analysis revealed that several factors influenced the likelihood of being categorized in the other two categories, as opposed to the Coherent Buyers one. These factors included younger age, a lower sense of pride associated with purchasing green products, and considering healthiness, natural content, and eco-sustainability of food less important and familiarity of green food more important. These findings provide valuable insights for marketers and policymakers, facilitating efforts to bridge the gap between green food intentions and behaviors and promote a shift toward a more eco-sustainable dietary pattern.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara de Sio & Giulia Casu & Alessandra Zamagni & Paola Gremigni, 2024. "Product Characteristics and Emotions to Bridge the Intention-Behavior Gap in Green Food Purchasing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-20, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7297-:d:1463566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7297/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/17/7297/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary D. Thompson & Julia Kidwell, 1998. "Explaining the Choice of Organic Produce: Cosmetic Defects, Prices, and Consumer Preferences," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(2), pages 277-287.
    2. Hong Wang & Baolong Ma & Rubing Bai, 2019. "How Does Green Product Knowledge Effectively Promote Green Purchase Intention?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-13, February.
    3. Park, Hyun Jung & Lin, Li Min, 2020. "Exploring attitude–behavior gap in sustainable consumption: comparison of recycled and upcycled fashion products," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 623-628.
    4. Ricci, Elena Claire & Banterle, Alessandro & Stranieri, Stefanella, 2018. "Trust to Go Green: An Exploration of Consumer Intentions for Eco-friendly Convenience Food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 54-65.
    5. Szerena Szabo & Jane Webster, 2021. "Perceived Greenwashing: The Effects of Green Marketing on Environmental and Product Perceptions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(4), pages 719-739, July.
    6. Bernard, John C. & Zhang, Chao & Gifford, Katie, 2006. "An Experimental Investigation of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Non-GM Foods When an Organic Option Is Present," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 374-385, October.
    7. Govindasamy, Ramu & Italia, John, 1999. "Predicting Willingness-To-Pay A Premium For Organically Grown Fresh Produce," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 30(2), pages 1-10, July.
    8. Jing Xiao & Haifeng Li, 2011. "Sustainable Consumption and Life Satisfaction," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 323-329, November.
    9. Jan-Felix Palnau & Matthias Ziegler & Lena Lämmle, 2022. "You Are What You Eat and So Is Our Planet: Identifying Dietary Groups Based on Personality and Environmentalism," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-19, July.
    10. Feng Zhang & Chung L. Huang & Biing-Hwan Lin & James E. Epperson, 2008. "Modeling fresh organic produce consumption with scanner data: a generalized double hurdle model approach," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 510-522.
    11. Jianming Wang & Ninh Nguyen & Xiangzhi Bu, 2020. "Exploring the Roles of Green Food Consumption and Social Trust in the Relationship between Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Psychological Wellbeing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-14, June.
    12. Bernard, John C. & Zhang, Chao & Gifford, Katie, 2006. "An Experimental Investigation of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Non-GM Foods When an Organic Option Is Present," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(2), pages 1-12, October.
    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. McFadden, Jonathan R. & Huffman, Wallace E., 2017. "Willingness-to-pay for natural, organic, and conventional foods: The effects of information and meaningful labels," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 214-232.
    2. Schrock, Rebecca, 2010. "Determinants Of The Demand For Organic And Conventional Fresh Milk In Germany– An Econometric Analysis," 115th Joint EAAE/AAEA Seminar, September 15-17, 2010, Freising-Weihenstephan, Germany 116387, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Schroeck, Rebecca, 2011. "A Demand System Analysis of Organic and Conventional Fresh Milk in Germany Segmented by Consumer Groups," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115995, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. He, Na & Bernard, John C., 2011. "Differences in WTP and Consumer Demand for Organic and Non-GM Fresh and Processed Foods," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-15, August.
    5. Tamara Vlastelica & Milica Kostić-Stanković & Tamara Rajić & Jelena Krstić & Tijana Obradović, 2023. "Determinants of Young Adult Consumers’ Environmentally and Socially Responsible Apparel Consumption," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-18, January.
    6. Chen, Bo & Saghaian, Sayed, 2017. "Does Consumers’ Preference for Organic Foods Affect Their Store Format Choices?," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252827, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Kuhar, Ales & Juvancic, L., 2012. "Determinants of purchasing behaviour for organic and integrated fruits and vegetables in Slovenia," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14.
    8. Dangelico, Rosa Maria & Alvino, Letizia & Fraccascia, Luca, 2022. "Investigating the antecedents of consumer behavioral intention for sustainable fashion products: Evidence from a large survey of Italian consumers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    9. Eva Tebbe & Korbinian von Blanckenburg, 2018. "Does willingness to pay increase with the number and strictness of sustainability labels?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 41-53, January.
    10. Chad M. Baum & Robert Weigelt, 2019. "How Where I Shop Influences What I Buy: The Importance of the Retail Format in Sustainable Tomato Consumption," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Chai & Chad M. Baum (ed.), Demand, Complexity, and Long-Run Economic Evolution, pages 141-169, Springer.
    11. McFadden, Brandon R. & Malone, Trey, 2018. "How will mandatory labeling of genetically modified food nudge consumer decision-making?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 186-194.
    12. Erik Nelson & John Fitzgerald & Nathan Tefft, 2019. "The distributional impact of a green payment policy for organic fruit," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-25, February.
    13. Chad M. Baum, 2013. "The Missing Link between Research and Reality: the significance of the relationship between retail format and organic food consumption," Jena Economics Research Papers 2013-049, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    14. Kayode Ajewole & Elliott Dennis & Ted C. Schroeder & Jason Bergtold, 2021. "Relative valuation of food and non‐food risks with a comparison to actuarial values: A best–worst approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 52(6), pages 927-943, November.
    15. Pesek, John D., Jr. & Bernard, John C. & Gupta, Meeta, 2011. "Consumer Interest in Environmentally Beneficial Chicken Feeds: Comparing High Available Phosphorus Corn and Other Varieties," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1-15, August.
    16. Celine Michaud & Daniel Llerena & Iragael Joly, 2013. "Willingness to pay for environmental attributes of non-food agricultural products: a real choice experiment," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(2), pages 313-329, March.
    17. Durham, Catherine A., 2007. "The Impact of Environmental and Health Motivations on the Organic Share of Produce Purchases," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 36(2), pages 1-17, October.
    18. Astrid Jonas & Jutta Roosen, 2008. "Demand for milk labels in Germany: organic milk, conventional brands, and retail labels," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 192-206.
    19. Jerop, Rebecca, 2012. "Consumer Willingness to Pay for Dairy Goat Milk in Siaya County, Kenya," Research Theses 243449, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    20. Sae Eun Lee & Kyu-Hye Lee, 2024. "Environmentally sustainable fashion and conspicuous behavior," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.

    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:16:y:2024:i:17:p:7297-:d:1463566. 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.