Investigating Relationship between Environmental Knowledge and Attitudes towards Electric Vehicles: An Emerging Economy Context
Vol 7, Issue 2, 2022, Article identifier:
VIEWS - 203 (Abstract) 143 (PDF)
Abstract
In order to investigate the impact of environmental information on the purchase of electric automobiles, the present research applied the Theory of Planned Behavior. Using primary data (n = 214), the proposed research model was validated using covariance-based structural equation modelling. The findings confirmed a positive relationship between attitudes towards electric vehicles and environmental knowledge. It was discovered that purchase intentions and perceived consumer effectiveness were significantly related. Control over availability also has a significant impact on buyers’ intentions. The study’s findings were unable to show a significant indirect relationship between environmental knowledge and purchase intentions. However, in this study, purchase behavior was significantly predicted by individuals’ purchase intentions. In particular, females were found to have stronger buy intentions than their male counterparts when it came to the effects of consumer perceived efficacy and control over availability (significant moderation of gender). The study’s empirical findings had a variety of theoretical and practical ramifications.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Michelsen G, Fischer D. Sustainability and Education. In: Hau MV, Kuhnke C (editors). Sustainable Development Policy: A European Perspective. London: Routledge; 2017.
2. Otto S, Pensini P. Nature-Based Environmentally Education of Children: Environmental Knowledge and Connectedness to Nature, Together, Are Related to Ecological Behavior. Global Environmental Change 2017; 47: 88-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.09.009.
3. Harmsen Consultancy BV. Netherlands: Harmsen Consultancy BV; 2012.
4. Gardner GT, Stern PC. Environmentally Problems and Human Behavior (2nd edn.). Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing; 2002.
5. Steg L, Vlek C. Encouraging Pro-Environmentally Behavior: An Integrative Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Environmentally Psychology 2009; 29(3): 309-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004.
6. Agarwal O. Compulsion to Choice: How Can Public Transport In India Be Transformed? Economic and Political Weekly 2019; 54(4): 23.
7. Gnann T, Stephens TS, Lin Z, et al. What Drives the Market for Plug-in Electric Vehicles?—A Review of International PEV Market Diffusion Models. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 2018; 93(3): 158-164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.055.
8. Parvatha Vardhini C. Ready for EVs?; 2019. Available from: https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/portfolio/big-story/ready-for- lectricvehicles/article26972421.ece.
9. Balakrishnan KD. The Impact of Air Pollution on Deaths, Disease Burden, and Life Expectancy Across the States of India: The Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet Planetary Health 2019; 3(1): 26-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30261-4.
10. Liao F, Molin E, van Wee B. Consumer Preferences for Electric Vehicles: A Literature Review. Transport Reviews 2017; 37(3): 252-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1230794.
11. Pandey N, Mishra A. Biorefineries and the Circular Bioeconomy for the Management of Agro-Industrial Byproducts: Review and A Bibliometric Analysis. In: Anal AK, Panesar PS (editors). Valorization of Agro-Industrial Byproducts: Sustainable Approaches for Industrial Transformation. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2022. p. 315-328.
12. Bera R, Maitra B. Research in Transportation Economics Assessing Consumer Preferences for Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV): An Indian Perspective. Research in Transportation Economics 2021; 90: 101161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2021.101161.
13. Wang S, Li J, Zhao D. The Impact of Policy Measures on Consumer Intention to Adopt Electric Vehicles: Evidence from China. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2017; 105: 14-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.08.013.
14. Chen Y. The Drivers of Green Brand Equity: Green Brand Image, Green Satisfaction, and Green Trust. Journal of Business Ethics 2010; 93(2): 307-319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0223-9.
15. Ko TG. Development of a Tourism Sustainability Assessment Procedure: A Conceptual Approach. Tourism Management 2005; 26(3): 431-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2003.12.003.
16. Gibbs D, Jonas AE. Governance and Regulation in Local Environmentally Policy: The Utility of a Regime Approach. Geoforum 2000; 31(3): 299-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(99)00052-4.
17. Ajzen I. The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1991; 50(2): 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
18. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1980.
19. Boldero J. The Prediction of Household Recycling of Newspapers: The Role of Attitudes, Intentions and Situational Factors. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1995; 25(5): 440-462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1995.tb01598.x.
20. Sharma K, Aswal C, Paul J. Factors Affecting Green Purchase Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review. Business Strategy and the Environment 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3237.
21. Ramayah T, Lee JWC, Lim S. Sustaining the Environment through Recycling: An Empirical Study. Journal of Environmentally Management 2012; 102: 141-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.02.025.
22. Khare A, Sadachar A. Green Apparel Buying Behaviour: A Study on Indian Youth. International Journal of Consumer Studies 2017; 41(5): 558-569. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12367.
23. Patel JD, Trivedi RH, Yagnik A. Self-Identity and Internal Environmental Locus of Control: Comparing Their Influences on Green Purchase Intentions in High-Context versus Low-Context Cultures. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 2020; 53: 102003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.102003.
24. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 1986; 19: 123-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60214-2.
25. Dash A. Determinants of EVs Adoption: A Study on Green Behavior of Consumers. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment 2021; 10(1): 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1108/SASBE-02-2019-0015.
26. Khalid B, Shahzad K, Shafi MQ, Paille P. Predicting Required and Voluntary Employee Green Behavior Using the Theory of Planned Behavior. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2022; 29(5): 1300-1314. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2270.
27. Begum RA, Siwar C, Pereira JJ, Jaafar AH. Attitude and Behavioral Factors in Waste Management in the Construction Industry of Malaysia. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2009; 53: 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.01.005.
28. Vermeir I, Verbeke W. Sustainable Food Consumption: Exploring the Consumer Attitude-Behavior Gap. Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 04/268. Gent: Ghent University; 2004.
29. Zeleny LC, Chua PP, Aldrich C. New Ways of Thinking about Environmentalism: Elaborating on Gender Differences in Environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues 2000; 56(3): 443-457. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00177.
30. Kumar K, Prakash A. Managing Sustainability in Banking: Extent of Sustainable Banking Adaptations of Banking Sector in India. Environment, Development and Sustainability 2020; 22: 5199-5217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00421-5.
31. Cheng S, Lam T, Hsu CHC. Negative Word-of-Mouth Communication Intention: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 2006; 30(1): 95-116. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348005284269.
32. O’Keefe PA, Chaffee KE, Horberg EJ, et al. Revisiting Multiple Pathways to Achievement: Re-Examining the Roles of Achievement Goals in Predicting Grades through Task Values. Learning and Individual Differences 2022; 98: 102186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2022.102186.
33. Jäger P. Two New Heteropodine Genera from Southern Continental Asia (Araneae: Sparassidae). Acta Arachnologica 2000; 49(1): 61-71. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.49.61.
34. Biel A, Thøgersen J. Activation of Social Norms in Social Dilemmas: A Review of the Evidence and Reflections on the Implications for Environmentally Behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology 2007; 28(1): 93-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2006.03.003.
35. Shaw PJ. Nearest Neighbour Effects in Kerbside Household Waste Recycling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2008; 52(5): 775-784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.11.004.
36. Atkinson JW. An Introduction to Motivation. Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc; 1964.
37. Baker J, Parasuraman A, Grewal D, Voss GB. The Influence of Multiple Store Environment Cues on Perceived Merchandise Value and Patronage Intentions. Journal of Marketing 2002; 66: 120-141. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.2.120.18470.
38. Wang IA, Chen PC, Chi NW. Mitigating Immediate and Lagged Effects of Customer Mistreatment on Service Failure and Sabotage: Critical Roles of Service Recovery Behaviors. Journal of Business Research 2023; 154: 113273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.08.037.
39. Straughan RD, Roberts JA. Environmentally Segmentation Alternatives: A Look at Green Consumer Behavior in the New Millennium. Journal of Consumer Marketing 1999; 16(6): 558-575. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769910297506.
40. Komyakova V, Jaffrés JB, Strain EM, et al. Conceptualisation of Multiple Impacts Interacting in the Marine Environment Using Marine Infrastructure as an Example. Science of the Total Environment 2022; 830: 154748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154748.
41. Grunert SC, Juhl HJ. Values, Environmentally Attitudes, and Buying Organic Foods. Journal of Economic Psychology 1995; 16(1): 39-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-4870(94)00034-8.
42. Sheppard BH, Hartwick J, Warshaw PR. The Theory of Reasoned Action: A Meta-Analysis of Past Research with Recommendations for Modifications and Future Research. Journal of Consumer Research 1988; 15(3): 325-343. https://doi.org/10.1086/209170.
43. Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD. User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unifying View. MIS Quarterly 2003; 27: 425-478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540.
44. Thogersen J. Consumer Decision-Making with Regard to Organic Food Products. In: Vaz MTDN, Vaz P, Nijkamp P, Rastoin JL (editors). Traditional Food Production Facing Sustainability: A European Challenge. Farnham: Ashgate; 2007.
45. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford; 1988.
46. Sidique SF, Joshi SV, Lupi F. Factors Influencing the Rate of Recycling: An Analysis of Minnesota Counties. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2010; 54(4): 242-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.08.006.
47. do Valle PO, Reis E, Menezes J, Rebelo E. Combining Behavioral Theories to Predict Recycling Involvement. Environment and Behavior 2005; 37(3): 364-396. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916504272563.
48. Vermeir I, Verbeke W. Sustainable Food Consumption among Young Adults in Belgium: Theory of Planned Behavior and the Role of Confidence and Values. Ecological Economics 2008; 64(3): 542-553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.03.007.
49. Sparks P, Shepherd R. Self-Identity and the Theory of Planned Behavior: Assessing the Role of Identification with Green Consumerism. Social Psychology Quarterly 1992; 55(4): 388-399. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786955.
50. Baker MJ, Churchill Jr GA. The Impact of Physically Attractive Models on Advertising Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research 1977; 14(4): 538-555. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377701400411.
51. Schlegelmilch BB, Bohlen GM, Diamantopoulos A. The Link between Green Purchasing Decisions and Measures of Environmentally Consciousness. European Journal of Marketing 1996; 30(5): 35-55. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569610118740.
52. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. Multivariate Data Analysis. New Delhi, ND: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2011.
53. Pallant J. SPSS Survival Manual—A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using Spss for Windows (Version 10). Buckingham: Open University Press; 2001.
54. Nunnally J, Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory (3rd edn.). New York: McGraw Hill; 1994.
55. West SG, Finch JF, Curran PJ. Structural Equation Models with Non-Normal Variables: Problems and Remedies. In: Hoyle RH (editor). Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues and Applications. Newbery Park, CA: Sage; 1995. p. 56-75.
56. Spector PE. Do Not Cross Me: Optimizing the Use of Cross-Sectional Designs. Journal of Business and Psychology 2019; 34(2): 125-137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-09613-8.
57. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB. Podsakoff NP. Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It. Annual Review of Psychology 2012; 63: 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.
58. Harman HH. Modern Factor Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1976.
59. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff Criteria for Fit Indexes in Covariance Structure Analysis: Conventional Criteria versus New Alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999; 6(1): 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.
60. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and Discriminant Validation by the Multitrait-Multimethod Matrix. Psychological Bulletin 1959; 56(2): 81-105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016.
61. Bagozzi RP, Yi Y. On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1988; 16(1): 74-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327.
62. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research 1981; 18(1): 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104.
63. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The Moderator–Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986 51(6): 1173.
64. Chan RYK, Lau LBY. Explaining Green Purchasing Behavior. Journal of International Consumer Marketing 2002; 14(2-3): 9-40. https://doi.org/10.1300/J046v14n02_02.
65. Auliandri TA, Thoyib A, Rohman F, Rofiq A. Does Green Packaging Matter as a Business Strategy? Exploring Young Consumers’ Consumption in an Emerging Market. Problems and Perspectives in Management 2018; 16(2): 376-384. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.16(2).2018.34.
66. Webster Jr FE. Determining the Characteristics of the Socially Conscious Consumer. Journal of Consumer Research 1975; 2(3): 188-196. https://doi.org/10.1086/208631.
67. Birgelen MV, Semeijn J, Keicher M. Packaging and Proenvironmental Consumption Behavior: Investigating Purchase and Disposal Decisions for Beverages. Environment and Behavior 2009; 41(1): 125-146. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916507311140.
68. Asadi S, Nilashi M, Samad S, et al. Factors Impacting Consumers’ Intention toward Adoption of Electric Vehicles in Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production 2021; 282: 124474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124474.
69. Spash CL, Urama K, Burton R, et al. Motives behind Willingness to Pay for Improving Biodiversity in a Water Ecosystem: Economics, Ethics and Social Psychology. Ecological Economics 2009; 68: 955-964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.09.013.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18063/esp.v7.i2.1527
(203 Abstract Views, 143 PDF Downloads)
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Vikas Gautam
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.