Analyzes factors influencing green consumption behaviors in Chinese consumers, suggesting ways to enhance eco-friendly practices.
Purpose: This study aims to analyze the factors promoting green consumption among Chinese consumers. Based on previous research, it utilizes analytical/ predictive techniques to identify the factors that significantly influence the shift towards green consumption behaviors among Chinese consumers. Research design, data, and methodology: To analyze the green consumption behaviors of Chinese consumers, factors influencing green consumption were identified through a review of existing literature, followed by an analysis of recent policies related to green consumption in China. This study employs the decision tree model f or analysis, u sing the CHAID algorithm, known f or i ts p redictive power, after conducting surveys to collect data suitable for the model and validating their reliability and validity. Results: The most significant factor affecting green consumption behaviors among Chinese consumers was found to be ‘trust in green products,’ followed by ‘self-efficacy.’ It was observed that groups with high self-efficacy showed an increase in green consumption up to 82.5%. The third key factor identified was ‘policy awareness,’ with groups scoring high on all three factors exhibiting green consumption behaviors over 86%. Conversely, groups scoring low on these factors showed a 84% likelihood of not engaging in green consumption behaviors. Implications: To encourage green consumption among Chinese consumers, it is essential to enhance trust in green products, particularly through eco-friendly efforts across the product lifecycle. Additionally, policy incentives and penalties must effectively drive the transition to green consumption. It is anticipated that green consumption will spread societally when producers increase trust in green products, individuals foster positive perceptions and utility of green products, and governments utilize various policy instruments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ji et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: