NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Oliver JD, Lee SH, 2010. Hybrid car purchase ... Shamdasani P, Chon Lin G, Richmond D, 1993. Explo
International Journal of Management and Humanity Sciences. Vol., 3 (2), 1349-1357, 2014 Available online at http://www.ijmhsjournal.com ISSN 2322-424X©2014
The impact of green perceived value and green perceived risk on green purchase behavior of Iranian consumers 1
2
Hamed Dehghanan, and Ghasem Bakhshandeh*
1- Assistant Professor in Department of Management and Accounting, Allameh Tabataba'i University 2- Master Student in Business Administration (Marketing), Allameh Tabataba'i University *Corresponding author E-mail:
[email protected] Abstract One way to help environment is using green products, means those products that are compatible with environment. In order to measure and be aware of this subject, explore of tendency scale for purchasing and consumption of green products among consumers of each country is a necessary and helpful act. Therefore this research has been paid to indirect effect of green perceived value and green perceived risk of green purchase behavior of Iranian consumers. For these reason 412 individuals of Refah and Etka chain stores consumers were chosen in Bandar Abbas city, and developed research model was analyzed with gathering of questionnaire data by SME method. Results showed that green perceived value has positive and direct effect on green trust and green purchase intention, and green perceived risk has negative and direct effect on green trust and green purchase intention. Green trust also has positive and direct effect on green purchase intention. Finally direct effect of green purchase intention on green purchase behavior was positive. This means green perceived value and perceived risk are effective on green purchase behavior of Iranian consumers. Key words: Green Marketing, GPV, GPR, GT, GPI, GPB Introduction At recent ten years, paying attention to environment is increased and environment is introduced as an important phenomenon all around the world (Jian and Kaur, 2004) and environmental pollutions that are appeared because of human beings productions and consumptions are problems that are known as threat frequently for humans by active organizations in this field (Ra’naei Kordshooli and Allahyarri Bozenjani, 2012). It seems that environmental problems, citizen, organizations and institute’s all around the word cause more concerns nowadays than 30 years ago(Papadopoulos et al., 2010). Increasing of concern and general information related to health and protection of environment cause those consumers consider environmental problems in their purchases (Nakhaeei and Kheyri, 2012) and cause some progressive companies be in pressure in order to design and create benevolent environmental programs (Min and Galle, 2001). Evidences show that many of consumers have this readiness to pay more cost for actual protection of environmental for products that consider environmental standards (Kotler and Armstrong, 1999). Although some companies have established steps for productions compatible with environment (Cao, 2001), it should be considered that production of green products is necessary condition for protection of environment, but isn’t sufficient condition. When it is possible to attempt for environment that green products are used by consumers. So being aware of green purchase behavior of Iranian consumers as one of the effective steps in supporting of sustainable development and attending to environment is necessary. It can be referred about innovation of this article in two kind of scientific and applied innovation. Scientific innovation is in a way that offered as developed one by using of two models (Ali et al., 2011) and (Chen and Chang, 2012) ,and applied innovation is in a way that the most green marketing in Iran is attended to explore the green purchase intention (Ramzanian et al., 2010; Nakhaeei and Kheyri, 1391; Ra’naei Kordshooli and Allahyarri Bozenjani, 2012)and it paid less scientific and exact attention to green purchase behavior of Iranian consumers. This research tries to review that whether effective prefixes on green purchase intention cause to green purchase behavior or not? According to this case by gathering data of consumer’s purchases from chain stores in Iran, their
Intl. J. Manag. Human. Sci. Vol., 3 (2), 1349-1357, 2014 green purchase behavior will be explored. So on, we express developed model theoretical base and will offer them by research theoretical literature and studies accomplished in this field. Literature review and proposed model Green purchase behavior Green product can be categorized as a product that will not pollute the earth or deplore natural resources and can be recycled or conserved (Shamdasani et al., 1993). Green purchase behavior can be translated to the act of consuming products that are conservable, beneficial for the environment and responding to environmental concern (Lee, 2009). Green purchase behavior refers to purchasing and consuming products that have minimal impacts on the environment (Mainieri and barnett, 1997). Green purchase behavior according to Mostafa (2007) is “the consumption of products that are: Benevolent/beneficial to the environment; Recyclable/ conservable; or Sensitive/responsive to ecological concerns. There are different terms used interchangeably with green purchase behavior, such as green buying behavior (Kim, 2002; Kim and Choi, 2003; 2005), pro-environmental purchase behavior (Soutar et al., 1994; Tilikidou, 2007) and environmentally responsible purchase behavior (Follows and Jobber, 2000).
Author/s Oliver and Lee (2010)
Table 1. Some studies on green product purchase. Product Sample Findings Self-image congruence; propensity to seek information about green products; perceived USA, 1083 US, 783 Hybrid cars S.Korea Korean drivers social value associated with buying of hybrid cars (−ve in the USA.)
Location
230 buyers
Older buyers with higher income likely to buy and pay higher premium; do not perceive green products to have low quality; agree that green consumption could help improve environmental quality
Tsay (2010)
Taiwan
Green products in general
Van Birgelen et al. (2009)
Germany
Beverages
176 samples
Environmental awareness of consumers; ecofriendly attitude; taste and price cannot tradeoff in favor of environmental friendly packaging
Gupta and Ogden (2009)
USA
Green products
321 subjects
Trust in collective action in-group identity; expectation of others’ cooperation; perceived efficacy
Thailand
Electronics
137 electronic companies
Product performance; price; organization’s environmental concerns; trading partners; health safety issues
210 Swedish and Norwegian retail stores
Less focus on the product type; low price sensitivity; mostly women; married couples; secondary education; less advanced plans concerning purchase; preference for warranty
Salam (2008)
Roos and Nyrud (2008)
Scandinavia Wood flooring
Pickett-Baker Supermarket UK 52 mothers and products Ozaki (2008) Della Lucia et al. Brazil Organic coffee 144 consumers (2007) Source: T. Ramayah et al. (2010)
Consumer confidence in the performance of the green products; pro-environmental beliefs Familiar brand name; high price negates intention to purchase; printed information
The positive effect of GPV on GT Perceived value is de?ned as a consumer’s overall evaluation of the net bene?t of a product or service based on a consumer’s appraisal (Bolton and Drew, 1991; Patterson and Spreng, 1997).perceived value is also important in in?uencing customer trust (Kim et al., 2008). Chen (2010) de?nes “green trust” as “a willingness to dependence on one object based on the belief or expectation resulted from its credibility, benevolence, and ability about environmental performance”. Past research posits that there is a positive relationship between perceived value and customer trust, since high level of perceived value can increase
1350
Intl. J. Manag. Human. Sci. Vol., 3 (2), 1349-1357, 2014 post-purchase con?dence of the product (Sweeney et al., 1999; Eid, 2011; Sirdeshmukh et al., 2002).Chen and Chang (2012) also proved positive effect of GPV on GT. H1: GPV is positively associated with GT. The negative effect of GPR on GT Perceived risk is a subjective evaluation by consumers associated with possible consequences of wrong decisions (Peter and Ryan, 1976). If consumers perceive high risk towards a product, they would be reluctant to trust the product (Mitchell, 1999). Previous research argues that perceived risk negatively in?uences customer trust (Koehn, 2003; Eid, 2011). Chen and Chang (2012) also have proved negative effect of GPV on GT. H2: GPR is negatively associated with GT. The positive effect of GPV on GPI Green purchase intention is conceptualized as the probability and willingness of a person to give preference to products having eco-friendly features over other traditional products in their purchase considerations (Ali and Ahmad, 2012). Perceived value is one of the most signi?cant factors affecting purchase intentions (Zeithaml, 1988). Prior literature demonstrates that perceived value of customers positively impact their purchase intentions (Cronin et al., 1997; Patterson and Spreng, 1997; Brady and Robertson, 1999; Eggert and Ulaga, 2002; Tam, 2004; Gounaris et al., 2007). In this way, Chen and Chang (2012) also have proved positive effect of GPV on GPI. H3: GPV is positively associated with GPI. The negative effect of GPR on GPI The reduction of perceived risk leads to the increase of purchase probability and to the rise of customer purchase intentions, so perceived risk is negatively associated with purchase intentions (Wood and Scheer, 1996; Mitchell, 1999; Chang and Chen, 2008). Previous literature indicates that the reduction of perceived risk can increase customer purchase intentions (Wood and Scheer, 1996; Chen and Chang, 2012). H4: GPR is negatively associated with GPI. The positive effect of GT on GPI Past literature posits that customer trust is a determinant of consumer purchase intentions (Schlosser et al., 2006). Previous research shows that customer trust would positively in?uence customer purchase intentions (Schlosser et al., 2006). Lu et al. (2010) indicate that customer trust positively affects customer purchase intentions. Chen (2010) and Chen and Chang (2012) indicate that green trust would in?uence consumers’ purchase behaviors in the environmental era. H5: GT is positively associated with GPI. The positive effect of GPI on GPB According to Beckford et al. (2010) and Chan (2001) research studies, green purchase intention is a significant predictor of green purchase behavior, which means that purchase intention is positively affecting the probability of a customer decision that he will buy green products .Another research also has been done in Pakistan achieved positive effect of GPI on GPB (Ali et al., 2011) H6: GPI is positively associated with GPB.
H3 +
GPV H1 +
H5 +
GT
H6 +
GPI
GPB
H2
-
GPR
H4
-
Source: Chen and Chang (2012) and Ali et al (2011)
1351
Intl. J. Manag. Human. Sci. Vol., 3 (2), 1349-1357, 2014
Methodology and measurement Statistical society in this research is consisted of those who purchase from big chain stores Refah and Etkah in Iran. For this purpose at first by using cluster sampling (regional), Refah and Etka chain stores were chosen in Bandar Abbas city and then by using of judgmental sampling, 443 questionnaires were distributed among members in two stores that have little familiarity with green products, but finally collected only 412 filled questionnaires. Time of data gathering is from 1/4/92 to 8/4/92, that researcher has distributed several questionnaires and gathered them while consumers exit from store, and has been aware that consumers do not fill questionnaire again in different days. Questionnaires have been used to obtain data for above hypothesis tests. This questionnaire had two parts. The first part contains demographics variables and the second part contains those variables measuring research structures. In the second part, related question to GPI, GPV, GT and GPR structure is extracted from Chen and Chang (2012) research and related questions of GPB structure is extracted from Lee (2009) research. Scale of measuring of all questions of questionnaire second part, is five-point spectrum of Likert. Validity and reliability Obtained result of factor loading analysis was used in order to analyze the internal structure of questionnaire and determine the validity, and both kind of convergent and discriminate validity were examined. Convergent validity is appointed when applied that all standardized loading factor(SLF) related to every measurement variables and also amount of average variance extracted(AVE) for each structure be more than .05 (Fornell and Larker, 1981). As it is seen in table 2, amount of factor loading and AVE index for this research in more than 0.05. Discriminate validity is appointed when amount of AVE index for every structure should be more than correlation coefficient square of that structure than the other structures (Fornell and Larker, 1981) .As it has been seen, amount of AVE index related to every structure is greater than correlation coefficient square of that structure. Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient is used for reliability measurement that should be more than 0.07 (Nunnally, 1978). Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient for all structure is shown in table 2 that all of them are greater than 0.07 in order to be acceptable.
1352
Intl. J. Manag. Human. Sci. Vol., 3 (2), 1349-1357, 2014 Table 2. The Standardized factor loading and the Cronbach’s alpha coef?cients and AVEs SFL GPV This product’s environmental functions provide very good value for you. 0.87 This product’s environmental performance meets your expectations. 0.79 You purchase this product because it has more environmental concern than other products. 0.86 You purchase this product because it is environmental friendly. 0.82 You purchase this product because it has more environmental bene?t than other products. 0.74 GPR There is a chance that there will be something wrong with environmental performance of this product. 0.79 There is a chance that this product will not work properly with respect to its environmental design. 0.75 There is a chance that you would get environmental penalty or loss if you use this product. 0.88 There is a chance that using this product will negatively affect the environment. 0.82 Using this product would damage your green reputation or image. 0.76 GT You feel that this product’s environmental reputation is generally reliable. 0.84 You feel that this product’s environmental performance is generally dependable. 0.72 You feel that this product’s environmental claims are generally trustworthy. 0.81 This product’s environmental concern meets your expectations. 0.86 This product keeps promises and commitments for environmental protection. 0.80 GPI You intend to purchase this product because of its environmental concern. 0.77 You expect to purchase this product in the future because of its environmental performance. 0.83 Overall, you are glad to purchase this product because it is environmental friendly. 0.84 GPB You often buy organic products. 0.87 You often buy products that are labeled as environmentally-safe. 0.75 You often buy products that are against animal-testing. 0.82 You often buy products that contain no or fewer chemical ingredients. 0.80 When You consider buying a product, You will look for a certi?ed environmentally-safe or organic stamp 0.72 You often buy products that support fair community trades. 0.76 You often buy products that use recycled/recyclable packaging. 0.88 Note: SFL: Standardized factor loading, CA: Cronbach’s alpha, AVE: Average variance extracted
CA AVE 0.729 0.59
0.819 0.69
0.884 0.67
0.812 0.63
0.781 0.52
Means and correlation ratios among constructs are shown in table 3. There are positive correlations among green perceived value, green trust, green purchase intentions and green purchase behavior, while there are negative correlations between green perceived risk and the other constructs.
GPV GPR GT GPI GPB
1353
Table 3. Means and correlations of the constructs Means GPV GPR GT GPI 3.27 1.00 3.12 -0.425 1.00 2.96 0.314 -0.368 1.00 3.59 0.518 -0.351 0.432 1.00 3.16 0.472 -0.3.26 0.419 0.613
GPB
1.00
Intl. J. Manag. Human. Sci. Vol., 3 (2), 1349-1357, 2014 Results Goodness of fit for different tests and the results of investigations are performed that is summarized in Table 4. Table 4. Statistical test results for goodness of fit Attribute Value Acceptable region 1423.58 df
642 2.217
Less than 3
RMSEA NFI NNFI CFI IFI GFI AGFI
0.718 0.93 0.91 0.98 0.95 0.97 0.92
Less than 0.1 Greater than 0.9 Greater than 0.9 Greater than 0.9 Greater than 0.9 Greater than 0.9 Greater than 0.8
In addition, the results of test results on different hypotheses are demonstrated in table 5.
Hypothesis The effect of GPV on GT The effect of GPR on GT The effect of GPV on GPI The effect of GPR on GPI The effect of GT on GPI The effect of GPI on GPB Note: *p
