Exploring the impact of a dualistic model of harmony on sustainable consumption behavior: the mediating role of ethical evaluation
Vol 9, Issue 8, 2024, Article identifier:
VIEWS - 129 (Abstract) 83 (PDF)
Abstract
Due to consumers’ sustainable consumption behaviors are influenced by different cultural and individual values. However, few research examines the influence of interpersonal harmony values in collective culture on sustainable consumption behaviors, especially combined with moral and ethical research. Referring to Values-Beliefs-Behavior Theory, this paper aims to construct a theoretical model to explore the impact of a dualistic model of harmony on sustainable consumption behavior. Meanwhile, the aims of this study is to explore the mediating effect of ethical evaluation on the relationship of different interpersonal harmony orientations on sustainable consumption behavior. The sample were selected the consumers who had lived in Chinese urban areas for at least the past six months and had experience using sustainable brands. A total of 800 online questionnaires were distributed and496 valid responses were recovered. The results reveal that two difference types of interpersonal harmony values positively influence sustainable consumption behavior, but the mediating role of ethical evaluation differs significantly between them. Specifically, harmony enhancement can activate consumers’ intrinsic moral beliefs, leading to sustainable consumption behavior. However, the intrinsic moral beliefs of consumers with disintegration avoidance are not directly activated, but they may still engage in sustainable consumption through other means. The findings of this study provide insights into how perceptions of interpersonal harmony values can transform into sustainable consumption behavior. Our research provides managers with advice, considering how to guide consumers to increase their harmony culture value and civic moral awareness in sustainable consumption.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Sharma R, Jha M. Values influencing sustainable consumption behaviour: Exploring the contextual relationship. Journal of Business Research 2017; 76: 77-88. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.010
2. Aktan M, Kethüda Ö. The role of environmental literacy, psychological distance of climate change, and collectivism on generation Z's collaborative consumption tendency. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2024; 23(1): 126-140. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2159
3. Peggy MN, Cheung CT, Lit KK, et al. Green consumption and sustainable development: The effects of perceived values and motivation types on green purchase intention. Business Strategy and the Environment 2024; 33(2): 1024-1039. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3535
4. Fang C. The influence of host characteristics on impulsive online purchases by consumers: Examining the effects of flow experience and independent self-construal. Environment and Social Psychology 2024; 9(5): 1-13. doi:https://esp.apacsci.com/index.php/esp/article/view/2293
5. Quoquab F, Mohammad J, Sukari NN. A multiple-item scale for measuring "sustainable consumption behaviour" construct: Development and psychometric evaluation. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics 2019; 31(2): 1-26. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/APJML-02-2018-0047
6. Dangelico RM, Nonino F, Pompei A. Which are the determinants of green purchase behaviour? A study of Italian consumers. Business Strategy and the Environment 2021; 30(5): 2600-2620. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2766
7. Matharu M, Jain R, Kamboj S. Understanding the impact of lifestyle on sustainable consumption behavior: a sharing economy perspective. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal 2020; 32(1): 20-40. doi:https ://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-02-2020-0036
8. Sharma N, Lal M, Goel P, et al. Being socially responsible: How green self-identity and locus of control impact green purchasing intentions? Journal of Cleaner Production 2022; 357: 1-17. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102820
9. Javidan M, House RJ, Dorfman PW, et al. Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE's and Hofstede's approaches. Journal of international business studies 2006; 37: 897-914. doi:https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400234
10. Nangia P, Bansal S, Thaichon P. Doing more with less: An integrative literature review on responsible consumption behaviour. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2024; 23(1): 141-155. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2163
11. Agostini M, Zomeren MV. Toward a comprehensive and potentially cross-cultural model of why people engage in collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of four motivations and structural constraints. Psychological Bulletin 2021; 147(7): 667-700. doi:https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2022-08521-001
12. He A, Liu M. The chain-mediated effect of ecological values on sustainable consumption behavior. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University(Social Sciences) 2021; 41(1): 61-68. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.15896/j.xjtuskxb.202101007
13. Halder P, Hansen EN, Kangas J, et al. How national culture and ethics matter in consumers' green consumption values. Journal of Cleaner Production 2020; 265: 1-33. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121754
14. Chakraborty S, Sadachar A. Can a connection with the indigenous cultural values encourage sustainable apparel consumption? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal 2023; 27(1): 80-99. doi:https ://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-07-2021-0191
15. Moraes C, Kerrigan F, McCann R. Positive shock: A consumer ethical judgement perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 2020; 165: 735-751. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-018-4092-y
16. Verplanken B, Holland RW. Motivated decision making: effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology 2002; 82(3): 434–447. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.434
17. Stern PC, Dietz T. The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of Social Issues 1994; 50(3): 65-84. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb02420.x
18. Omrane A, Khan MA. A comparative analysis of six national cultures under the umbrella of the Hofstede’s model. Environment and Social Psychology 2024; 9(3): 1-22. doi:https://esp.apacsci.com/index.php/esp/article/view/1618
19. Lu J, Yu C-s, Liu C, et al. Comparison of mobile shopping continuance intention between China and USA from an espoused cultural perspective. Computers in Human Behavior 2017; 75: 130-146. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.002
20. Farh J, Zhong C, Organ DW. Organizational citizenship behavior in the People's Republic of China. Organization Science 2004; 15(2): 241-253. doi:https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1030.0051
21. Chen L, Ye Z, Shafait Z, et al. The effect of abusive supervision on employee creativity: The mediating role of negative affect and moderating role of interpersonal harmony. Frontiers in Psychology 2022; 13: 1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.796355
22. Wei S. Economic-environmental effects of differentiated carbon tax policies in north and south countries: Sequential game analysis based on carbon emission responsibility perspective. Journal of Xi’an Jiaotong University(Social Sciences) 2020; 40(5): 111-118. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.15896/j.xjtuskxb.202005011
23. Zhao AL, Dermody J, Koenig‐Lewis N, et al. Cultivating sustainable consumption: The role of harmonious cultural values and pro‐environmental self‐identity. Journal of Consumer Behaviour 2024; 23(2): 1014-1031. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000256
24. Leung K, Koch PT, Lu L. A dualistic model of harmony and its implications for conflict management in Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Management 2002; 19: 201-220. doi:https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016287501806
25. WCED. World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. Oxford University Press. 1987.https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/5987our-common-future.pdf (accessed on OCT 1987)
26. Quoquab F, Mohammad J. Managing sustainable consumption: is it a problem or panacea?: Springer; 2017.
27. Chen T, Leung K, Li F, et al. Interpersonal harmony and creativity in China. Journal of Organizational Behavior 2015; 36(5): 648–672. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2001
28. Fabio AD, Tsuda A. The psychology of harmony and harmonization: Advancing the perspectives for the psychology of sustainability and sustainable development. Sustainability 2018; 10(12): 1-15. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124726
29. Zhao X, Lynch J, John G, et al. Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths about Mediation Analysis. Journal of Consumer Research 2010; 37(2): 197-206. doi:https: //doi.org/10.1086/651257
30. Kim Y, Choi SM. Antecedents of green purchase behavior: An examination of collectivism, environmental concern, and PCE. Advances in Consumer Research 2005; 32: 592-599. doi:https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Yeonshin-Kim-2/publication/233894746
31. Leonidou LC, Leonidou CN, Kvasova O. Antecedents and outcomes of consumer environmentally friendly attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Marketing Management 2010; 26: 1319-1344. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2010.523710
32. Chou CJ. Hotels' environmental policies and employee personal environmental beliefs: Interactions and outcomes. Tourism Management 2014; 40: 436-446. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.08.001
33. Zhang ZX. Negative expectations, conflict avoidance, and inhibitive advice: Conceptualization process in theoretical construction. Tourism and Hospitality Prospects 2022; 6(1): 1-23. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.12054/lydk.bisu.192
34. Hwang KK. Chinese relationalism: Theoretical construction and methodological considerations. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 2000; 30(2): 155-178. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00124
35. Kotlar J, De Massis A. Goal setting in family firms: Goal diversity, social interactions, and collective commitment to family-centered goals. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 2013; 37(6): 1263-1288. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12065
36. Ianole-Călin R, Francioni B, Masili G, et al. A cross-cultural analysis of how individualism and collectivism impact collaborative consumption. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2020; 157: 1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104762
37. Pan Y, Gao L, Zhang X, et al. Consumer values in the context of Chinese culture: Scale development and comparison. Management World 2014; 04: 90-106. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2014.04.010
38. Wu L, Zhu Y, Zhai J. Understanding waste management behavior among university students in China: environmental knowledge, personal norms, and the theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in Psychology 2022; 12: 1-13. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.771723
39. Wang S, Wang J, Wan L, et al. Social norms and tourists’ pro-environmental behaviors: Do ethical evaluation and Chinese cultural values matter? Journal of Sustainable Tourism 2023; 31(6): 1413-1429. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2022.2049805
40. Sorokin P. Social and cultural dynamics: A study of change in major systems of art, truth, ethics, law and social relationships: Routledge; 2017 . pp. 16–25
41. Hunt SD, Vitell S. A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing 1986; 6(1): 5-16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/027614678600600103
42. Bernardi RA, Long SP. Family Values, Competition And The Environment: An International Study Of Business Ethics. International Business & Economics Research Journal 2004; 3(1): 1-12. doi:https://doi.org/10.19030/iber.v3i1.3650
43. Jaeger L. In the Interests of All Mankind: The Long Road from National Energy Concepts to Global Policy. Ways Out of the Climate Catastrophe: Springer, Cham.; 2021. p. pp 219–234.
44. Li Q, Zhong X. Characteristics of Confucian culture and its impact on enterprise human resource management. Productivity Research 2006; 3: 231-233. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.19374/j.cnki.14-1145/f.2006.03.095
45. Zhang ZX, Wei X. Superficial harmony and conflict avoidance resulting from negative anticipation in the workplace. Management and Organization Review 2017; 13(4): 795-820. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2017.48
46. Liu C, Li L, Li H, et al. Supervisor–employee task conflict and supervisor ostracism: The moderating effect of interpersonal harmony values. Applied Psychology 2023; 72(3): 971-997. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12416
47. Sweeney B, Arnold D, Pierce B. The impact of perceived ethical culture of the firm and demographic variables on auditors’ ethical evaluation and intention to act decisions. Journal of Business Ethics 2010; 93: 531-551. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0237-3
48. Yin J, Qian L, Singhapakdi A. Sharing Sustainability: How Values and Ethics Matter in Consumers’ Adoption of Public Bicycle-Sharing Scheme. Journal of Business Ethics 2016; 149: 313-332. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3043-8
49. Rahman O, Fung BC, Chen Z. Young Chinese consumers’ choice between product-related and sustainable cues—The Effects of Gender Differences and Consumer Innovativeness. Sustainability 2020; 12(9): 1-23. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093818
50. Balderjahn I, Buerke A, Kirchgeorg M, et al. Consciousness for sustainable consumption: scale development and new insights in the economic dimension of consumers’ sustainability. AMS review 2013; 3: 181-192. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-013-0057-6
51. Moulins JL, Toti JF. How to measure ethical consumption behavior? RIMHE : Revue Interdisciplinaire Management, Homme & Entreprise 2016; 24: 45-66. doi:https://hal.science/hal-01468872
52. Wiederhold M, Martinez LF. Ethical consumer behaviour in Germany: The attitude-behaviour gap in the green apparel industry. International Journal of Consumer Studies 2018; 42(4): 419-429. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12435
53. Tomșa M-M, Romonți-Maniu A-I, Scridon M-A. Is sustainable consumption translated into ethical consumer behavior? Sustainability 2021; 13(6): 1-14. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063466
54. Groening C, Sarkis J, Zhu Q. Green marketing consumer-level theory review: A compendium of applied theories and further research directions. Journal of cleaner production 2018; 172: 1848-1866. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.12.002
55. Hasan S, Wooliscroft B, Ganglmair-Wooliscroft A. Drivers of Ethical Consumption: Insights from a Developing Country. Journal of Macromarketing 2023; 43(2): 175-189. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/02761467231168045
56. Dai Q, Cao Z, Shen G. Consumer moral decision-making under B2C e-commerce model: The moderating effect of self-monitoring. Journal of Technology Economics 2015; 34(01): 117-124. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.3969/j.issn.1002-980X.2015.01.017
57. Leary RB, Vann RJ, Mittelstaedt JD, et al. Changing the marketplace one behavior at a time: Perceived marketplace influence and sustainable consumption. Journal of Business Research 2014; 67(9): 1953-1958. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.11.004
58. Qiu H. Moral norms and tourists’ willingness for civilized tourism behavior: An extended TPB model. Zhejiang Social Sciences 2016; 3: 1-8. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.14167/j.zjss.2016.03.017
59. Wu J, Zheng R. Compilation of the Psychological Harmony Scale for College Students. Chinese Journal of Health Psychology 2011; 19(5): 622-624. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2011.05.022
60. Bagozzi RP, Yi Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 1988; 16: 74-94. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02723327
61. Cohen I, Huang Y, Chen J, et al. Pearson Correlation Coefficient. Noise Reduction in Speech Processing 2009; 2: 1-4. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00296-0_5
62. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research 1981; 18(1): 39-50. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
63. Robinson C, Schumacker RE. Interaction effects: centering, variance inflation factor, and interpretation issues. Multiple Linear Regression Viewpoints 2009; 35(1): 6-11. doi:http://glmj.org/archives/MLRV_2009_35_1.pdf#page=8
64. Costa Pinto D, Herter MM, Rossi P, et al. Going green for self or for others? Gender and identity salience effects on sustainable consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies 2014; 38(5): 540-549. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12114
65. Wang Z, Zhang B, Yin J, et al. Determinants and policy implications for household electricity-saving behaviour: Evidence from Beijing, China. Energy Policy 2011; 39(6): 3550-3557. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.055
66. Lindén A-L, Carlsson-Kanyama A, Eriksson B. Efficient and inefficient aspects of residential energy behaviour: What are the policy instruments for change? Energy policy 2006; 34(14): 1918-1927. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2005.01.015
67. Xu S, Chu C, Zhang Y, et al. Entangled stakeholder roles and perceptions of sustainable consumption: An evaluation of sustainable consumption practices in Tianjin, China. Journal of Environmental Management 2018; 223: 841-848. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.07.007
68. Dong X, Yang Z, Li Y. Influencing factors of urban residents’ sustainable consumption behavior. Urban Problems 2012; (10): 55-61. doi:https://link.cnki.net/doi/10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.2012.10.014
69. 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): 1173–1182. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
70. Cheung GW, Lau RS. Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods 2008; 11(2): 296-325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107300343
71. Preacher KJ, Hayes AF. SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2004; 36: 717-731. doi:https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/bf03206553
72. Chen C-S. What is the impact of green strategy on enterprises? Exploring the mediating effect of green assets and green technology. International Journal of Business 2022; 27(1): 1-17. doi:https://ijb.cyut.edu.tw/var/file/10/1010/img/927/V27N1-5.pdf
73. Pollex J. Regulating Consumption for Sustainability? Why the European Union Chooses Information Instruments to Foster Sustainable Consumption. European Policy Analysis 2017; 3(1): 185-204. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1005
74. Lau WK, Nguyen LD, Pham LN, et al. The mediating role of harmony in effective leadership in China: From a Confucianism perspective. Asia Pacific Business Review 2023; 29(3): 546-569. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2021.1948216
75. Kastner K, Matthies E. On the importance of solidarity for transforming social systems towards sustainability. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2023; 90: 102067. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.102067
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i8.2924
(129 Abstract Views, 83 PDF Downloads)
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Yuanlai Xin , Chun-Shuo Chen , Shujuan Tu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.