Journal of Cleaner Production: Sushant Kumar, Rambalak Yadav

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 13

Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

The impact of shopping motivation on sustainable consumption: A


study in the context of green apparel
Sushant Kumar a, *, Rambalak Yadav b
a
Marketing Management, Indian Institute of Management Raipur, Naya Raipur, Chattisgarh, 493661, India
b
Marketing Management, Institute of Management Technology, Hyderabad, Telangana, 501218, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The study aims to investigate the impact of shopping motivation on consumers’ intention to buy green
Received 6 March 2020 apparel. The study adopted the theory of shopping motivation (utilitarian and hedonic motivation) as a
Received in revised form framework. Further, the moderating roles of gender and family income were also examined in all the
18 December 2020
studied relationships. Data were collected through a questionnaire survey and analyzed using structural
Accepted 1 February 2021
Available online 10 February 2021
equation modeling. The findings indicate a significant impact of information availability and customized
offerings on utilitarian motivation, along with a significant impact of adventure, authority, and status on
Handling Editor: Dr Sandra Caeiro hedonic motivation. Both shopping motivations, utilitarian and hedonic, influence purchase intention
regarding green apparel. Gender was found to have a moderating relationship for information availability
Keywords: with utilitarian motivation and for authority and status with hedonic motivation. The moderating effect
Green apparel of income was also confirmed. The findings will help managers and practitioners promote sustainable
Hedonic motivation consumption through green apparel. This may, in turn, foster the cleaner production and practices of
Purchase intention sustainable consumption, which is beneficial for the planet and people.
Sustainable consumption
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Shopping motivation
Utilitarian motivation

1. Introduction measures of which adopting sustainable consumption practices is


crucial. One of the most effective ways to adopt sustainable con-
The depletion of natural resources, climate change, global sumption is by increasing the consumption of green products.
population growth, and non-sustainable consumption practices Previous studies argue that green products are a prudent way to
have caused major environmental damage globally. The last decade minimise environmental damage (ElHaffar et al., 2020; Kumar
has seen greater focus on designing policies for sustainable pro- et al., 2019). Green products are products that have a reduced
duction (Chowdhury et al., 2020; Liobikiene_ and Bernatoniene, environmental impact compared to conventional products and
2017). However, the importance of sustainable consumption has offer similar benefits such as functional benefits (Biswas and Roy,
only been highlighted in the recent past to promote sustainable 2015; Jebarajakirthy et al., 2019). Despite the increase in aware-
development (Khan et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2021;Liobikiene_ and ness of the benefits of green products, individuals’ purchase
Dagiliute, 2016). Sustainable consumption aims to reduce the intention of these products has not changed (Sreen et al., 2018).
impact of goods or services on the environment by reducing the Studies have investigated the impact of several factors, such as
environmental impact of consumption (Kumar and Sreen, 2020). culture, values, policies, premium pricing, and demographics
Chen and Chai (2010) indicate that the non-sustainable consump- (Chekima et al., 2016; Jacobs et al., 2018;Liobikiene_ and
tion practices of individuals are directly reflected in 30e40% of Bernatoniene, 2017;Liobikiene_ and Dagiliute, 2016) on green pur-
environmental damage, which is primarily in the form of waste, a chasing but the question remains why consumers don’t adopt
by-product of urban lifestyles, and is growing at a rapid rate sustainable consumption practices.
(Hoornweg et al., 2013). This alarming situation calls for desperate Few studies have attempted to understand what leads to sus-
tainable consumption practices. Researchers claim that the moti-
vation to buy green products can influence consumers’ purchasing
decisions, yet limited empirical evidence is available (Kumar and
* Corresponding author.
Sadarangani, 2018a; To et al., 2007). Although consumers’ overall
E-mail addresses: 321kumarsushant@gmail.com (S. Kumar), rbyadav1988@
gmail.com, rbyadav1988@imthyderabad.edu.in (R. Yadav). expenditure on green products has increased recently, it has yet to

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126239
0959-6526/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

reach the green glass ceiling (Godelnik, 2012). This is reflected in 2. Review of the literature and hypotheses development
the global market share of green products, which is less than 4%
(Gleim et al., 2013). A small number of studies have attempted to 2.1. Sustainable consumption in the apparel industry
investigate the linkages between consumers’ motivation and green
purchase intention. This research aims to study the motivational A great deal of research has been carried out to understand the
factors responsible for green purchase intention and how con- negative environmental and social impacts of the apparel industry
sumers’ green purchase intention differs across gender and income. (Freudenreich and Schaltegger, 2020; Shrivastava et al., 2020). The
It is crucial for scholars to understand the specific psychological industry is known for standardizing mass production to provide
mechanism that underlies responsible consumption and leads to large quantities of cheap and trending apparel (Fletcher, 2010). The
pro-environmental behavior (Buerke et al., 2017; Cheng et al., fast fashion trend, characteristic of the apparel industry, utilizes
2020). This indicates a gap in the literature. Consumers are also faster response systems and an agile supply chain (Freudenreich
less willing to compromise on the functionality and utility of a and Schaltegger, 2020), promoting the idea of buying new
product for the sake of buying green products (Chen and Chang, apparel regularly (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). The literature
2013). Therefore, we have explored the influence of consumers’ on sustainable development in the apparel industry is primarily
shopping motivations (utilitarian and hedonic) on their green focused on sustainable supply chain management in support of
purchase intention, as shopping motivations are considered to be sustainable production. Also, a considerable body of literature has
closely related to consumer choices that lead to a particular focused on understanding consumption, particularly in the context
behavior (Cheng et al., 2020; Scarpi, 2012). of consumer choices to buy either a sustainable or conventional
Instead of studying green products in general, this study in- product (ElHaffar et al., 2020; Freudenreich and Schaltegger, 2020).
vestigates the purchase intention of green apparel for two reasons. Studies in this context focus on consumer awareness with the aim
First, Liobikiene_ and Bernatoniene_ (2017) analyzed several research of finding strategies to improve the current understanding of
articles, published between 2011 and 2017, on green purchase consumer knowledge to support sustainable consumption choices
behavior and identified that it differs across product categories. To (Harris et al., 2016).
gain greater insight, it is imperative to consider a specific product Studies argue that social and environmental awareness influ-
category instead of green products in general. Second, although a ence decisions (Sreen et al., 2018) in apparel-related consumption
few studies on sustainable consumption have explored specific (Gwozdz et al., 2017), along with other factors such as style, trend,
product categories, such as household products and food or fit. Only a tiny segment of consumers considers sustainability to
(Johnstone and Tan, 2015), only a small number have focused on be a prime criterion when evaluating alternatives in the process of
green apparel, which is surprising. The inherent issues with the buying apparel (Niinima € ki, 2010). With an increased understand-
apparel industry, such as environmental pollution, excessive use of ing of sustainable consumption, consumers are shifting toward
chemicals, and poisonous waste generation, have a significant voluntary consumption reduction (Bly et al., 2015). Also, customers
impact on the sustainable development of this industry (e.g., who practice mindfulness and exercise restraint in their apparel
Chowdhury et al., 2020; Clancy et al., 2015; Mair et al., 2016; consumption are still influenced by the hedonism of sensory ex-
Shrivastava et al., 2020). periences and the beauty of apparel (Jung and Jin, 2016). This study
Therefore, to fill above mentioned research gaps, the study in- argues that consumption is driven by a motivation to buy, and these
vestigates the influence of shopping motivation on purchase motivational factors can lead to the intention to buy green apparel.
intention of green apparel. This study adopted the theory of
shopping motivation, which suggests that shopping is motivated by 2.2. Consumer motivations
utilitarian or hedonic motivations (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; To
et al., 2007; Westbrook and Black, 1985). The utilitarian and he- Westbrook and Black (1985) define motivation as forces that
donic dimensions of motivation are influenced by multiple con- instigate a behavioral change to satisfy a need. Tauber (1972)
structs (Babin et al., 1994; Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Sebald indicated that people go shopping not only to buy products or
and Jacob, 2019), which this study investigated. services but also to gratify their personal and social motives. Per-
The study makes three novel contributions. First, it extends the sonal motives comprise role-play in which shopping is considered a
theory of shopping motivation (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; To responsibility, distraction, gratification, way to learn new trends,
et al., 2007; Westbrook and Black, 1985), a novel framework to sensory stimulation, and physical activity (Mehta et al., 2014). So-
explain consumer decision making on green apparel in a sustain- cial motives consist of the social experiences gained during shop-
able consumption context. Second, extant literature identifies in- ping by interacting with other shoppers or staff, peer group
ternal, social, and external factors that impact the green purchase attraction, status, and the authority one may exercise over staff or
intention (ElHaffar et al., 2020;Liobikiene_ and Bernatoniene, 2017). salespeople (Mehta et al., 2014; Kumar & Sadarangani, 2018a,
Studies on external factors focus on factors that are beyond con- 2018b). This indicates that consumers shop for utilitarian benefits
sumers’ control, such as price, convenience, brand, quality, and as well as for the satisfaction received during buying (To et al.,
supply (e.g., Chowdhury et al., 2020; Kanchanapibul et al., 2014; 2007) and that satisfaction is related to the fantasy, multisensory,
Kumar and Sreen, 2020). Studies on social factors include factors and emotional aspects of shopping (Holbrook and Hirschman,
such as social pressure, family, friends’ attitudes, and moral re- 1982; Sebald and Jacob, 2019). This view holds that consumption
sponsibility (e.g., Liobikiene_ et al., 2016; Suki, 2016), whereas is driven by the level of fun a customer has while using the product,
studies on internal factors include factors such as attitudes, beliefs, and the criteria for measuring success are aesthetic in nature
concerns, and consciousness (e.g., Chekima et al., 2016; Sreen et al., (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003). Scholars have developed typologies
2018; Kumar and Sreen, 2020). This study adds to the literature on of consumers based on shopping motivation and classified them
internal factors by examining the association between green pur- into either utilitarian or hedonic motivation (Arnold and Reynolds,
chase intention and motivation. Lastly, the study delineates the 2003; Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a).
moderating effect of gender and income on the sustainable con- Utilitarian motivation refers to motivation that is goal-oriented,
sumption of green apparel. Overall, the study offers a compre- rational, and mission critical (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982;
hensive understanding on motivation to purchase green apparel Kumar & Sadarangani, 2018a, 2018b). Hedonic motivation refers to
and contributes to the literature on sustainable consumption. forces that initiate the consumption behavior in search of fantasy,
2
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

happiness, enjoyment, and sensuality (Holbrook and Hirschman, 2.3.2. Information availability
1982; To et al., 2007). Consumers motivated by hedonic motiva- Information availability consists of the product or service in-
tion buy because they enjoy the process of shopping, whereas formation that shoppers seek while making a purchase decision
consumers motivated by utilitarian motivation buy because of the (Nystrand and Olsen, 2020). During online shopping, individuals
utility or the functional benefits of the products. Research has receive a wide range of information, including feedback from other
identified multiple antecedents of motivation, and this study fo- users, which is usually absent from store shopping (Khare and
cuses on antecedents that have been identified as influencing Rakesh, 2011). Thus, the role of store personnel becomes crucial
purchase intention (Babin et al., 1994; To et al., 2007). Thus, the in providing necessary information to consumers in shopping in a
present research used four antecedents of utilitarian motivation: store (Kumar and Kashyap, 2018). Consumers also attempt to
convenience, information availability, selection, and customized gather information on their own, which incurs costs in the form of
offerings, as well as four antecedents of hedonic motivation: trend, time, money, and inconvenience (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a;
social, adventure, and authority and status (Kumar and €
Ozen and Kodaz, 2016; Yu et al., 2018). Utilitarian shoppers use the
Sadarangani, 2018a; To et al., 2007). A brief summary of all the available information to evaluate alternatives and decide on pur-
study constructs is presented in Table 1. chases (Khare and Rakesh, 2011; Kumar and Kashyap, 2018). The
greater the availability of information, the greater the perceived
2.3. Research hypotheses control over a purchase decision (Khare and Rakesh, 2011). Con-
sumers motivated to buy green apparel may demand more infor-
2.3.1. Convenience mation about products, such as the environmental impact of an
Convenience is related to saving time and reducing physical and item. Based on the multiple dimensions of available information
mental effort (Berry et al., 2002; Gilboa and Mitchell, 2020). This about apparel, people may decide to buy green apparel. Therefore,
encompasses factors such as the distance to stores, availability of it can be hypothesized that.
products or services, and accessible hours for shopping (Holbrook, H1b. Information availability is positively associated with utili-
1999). Online shopping offers more convenience to utilitarian tarian motivations for green apparel purchase intentions.
shoppers than store shopping (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016; Lloyd et al.,
2014), and purchases are increasingly supported by technological
2.3.3. Selection
advancement, including easy transaction mechanisms, real-time
Selection refers to the ease of deciding on a purchase from
product information, and details of the environmental impact of
among an available assortment (Boardman and McCormick, 2018;
products (Lloyd et al., 2014; Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). Unlike
Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). Such assortments are widely
storefront shopping, online purchasing does not offer instant
available, easy to access, and convenient to maintain in online
satisfaction, which may be an inconvenience to consumers (Yu
stores (Cha and Park, 2017; Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). In online
et al., 2018). However, convenience in online purchasing is sup-
shopping systems, customers can see, compare, and decide on
ported by the freedom to buy at any time that is convenient for
purchases at their preferred time and location without visiting a
consumers (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). Consumers motivated by
physical store (Grewal et al., 2020), while a purchaser may have to
convenience may shop green apparel from either a nearby store or
travel to numerous physical stores to find the item that meets their
from online stores to reduce their physical and mental effort and, in
unique requirements. When buying green apparel for a distinctive
turn, support sustainable consumption. Therefore, it can be hy-
purpose, consumers who shop online do not have to travel a
pothesized that.
potentially great distance to physical stores to get the item
H1a. Convenience is positively associated with utilitarian moti- (Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2001). With online shopping, the item is
vations for green apparel purchase intentions. delivered to the consumer, and buyers can choose from a wider

Table 1
Summary of constructs.

S. Constructs Brief description Relevant studies


No.

1 Convenience Consumer’s perceived degree of avoidance of time and effort Berry et al. (2002); Gilboa and Mitchell (2020); Holbrook (1999); Kesari and Atulkar
associated with the entire shopping process (2016); Kumar and Sadarangani (2018a); Lloyd et al. (2014); Yu et al. (2018)
2 Information Availability of information to facilitate decision making of Khare and Rakesh (2011); Kumar and Kashyap (2018); Kumar and Sadarangani (2018a);
Availability purchase €
Nystrand and Olsen (2020); Ozen and Kodaz (2016); Yu et al. (2018)
3 Selection The ease while taking purchase decision from the assortment Boardman and McCormick (2018); Cha and Park (2017); Grewal et al. (2020); Kesari and
Atulkar (2016); Kumar and Kashyap (2018); Kumar & Sadarangani, (2018a);
Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2001); Yu et al. (2018)
4 Customized Changes in features as well as in the packaging, transaction, Dabbous and Barakat (2020); Kesari and Atulkar (2016); Kumar and Sadarangani
Offerings and shipment of market offering (2018a); Park and Ha (2016); To et al. (2007); Yu et al. (2018)
5 Utilitarian Derived from a task-oriented approach to shopping, focused Babin et al. (1994); Holbrook and Hirschman (1982); Katt and Meixner (2020); Kesari
Motivation on functionality and rationality and Atulkar (2016); Kumar and Sadarangani (2018a); Ozen€ and Kodaz (2016); Yu et al.
(2018)
6 Trend To appreciate the activity of purchasing to buy items Atulkar and Kesari (2017); Budisantoso et al. (2016); Kesari and Atulkar (2016); Kumar
endorsed by celebrity or aspirational items and Sadarangani (2018a); Mehta et al. (2014); To and Sung (2015); Yu et al. (2018)
7 Social Social connection recognized by consumers as hedonic Atulkar and Kesari (2017); Arnold and Reynolds (2003); Aydın (2019); Kesari and
pleasure during shopping Atulkar (2016); To et al. (2007); To and Sung (2015); Wu et al. (2018); Yu et al. (2018)
8 Adventure Sensual excitement experienced by consumers during the Arnold and Reynolds (2003); Atulkar and Kesari (2017); Katt and Meixner (2020); Kesari
shopping and Atulkar (2016); To and Sung (2015); To et al. (2007); Yu et al. (2018);
9 Authority positive feeling and belief to realize the state of social status Arnold and Reynolds (2003); Atulkar and Kesari (2017); Kesari and Atulkar (2016);
and Status of consumers while shopping Kumar and Sadarangani (2018a); To and Sung (2015); Yu et al. (2018)
10 Hedonic Stems from the joy, excitement, and emotional reward felt in Arnold and Reynolds (2003); Babin et al. (1994); Holbrook and Hirschman (1982); Katt
Motivation the shopping situation and Meixner (2020); Kesari and Atulkar (2016); Kumar and Sadarangani (2018a); Ozen €
and Kodaz (2016); To and Sung (2015); Yu et al. (2018)

3
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

range of available options (Kumar and Kashyap, 2018; Yu et al., shopping process, hedonic consumers may form groups of like-
2018). Whether in online stores or physical stores, firms can minded people to discuss trends in green apparel. Therefore, we
display a full inventory of green apparel that may motivate utili- can hypothesize that.
tarian consumers to purchase green apparel. Therefore, it can be
H3a. Trend is positively associated with hedonic motivations for
hypothesized that.
green apparel purchase intentions.
H1c. Selection is positively associated with utilitarian motivations
for green apparel purchase intentions.
2.3.7. Social
Social refers to the social connections that are recognized by
2.3.4. Customized offerings
consumers as a hedonic pleasure (Aydın, 2019; To et al., 2007).
Customization is a unique value that every store attempt to
Some consumers enjoy shopping while building social connections,
provide to customers (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a; Park and Ha,
as well as creating beautiful memories of shopping activities with
2016). Customized offerings refer to changes in product or service
friends and families (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Atulkar and
features as well as changes in the packaging, transaction, and
Kesari, 2017). Consumers usually ask opinions from their friends
shipment (Dabbous and Barakat, 2020; To et al., 2007). Utilitarian
and families to ensure that their purchases are liked by all (Kesari
shoppers put greater emphasis on the customization of offerings
and Atulkar, 2016). With online purchases, friends and family are
according to their wants and desires (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016).
replaced by online friends (To and Sung, 2015; Wu et al., 2018).
Customization is mostly sought in apparel, where changes in
Consumers may also seek advice from experts, either online or
product features are more frequent (Yu et al., 2018). Both online
offline, to get appreciation for their purchases (Aydın, 2019; Yu
stores and physical stores aim to present and deliver customization
et al., 2018). Green apparel represents an action that an individ-
as a value proposition. Utilitarian consumers motivated by
ual can take toward sustainable consumption, and thus green
customized offerings may prefer to buy green apparel (Kesari and
apparel may create more social connections. Therefore, we can
Atulkar, 2016). Also, customization of green apparel can induce a
hypothesize that.
sense of individuality and pride (Dabbous and Barakat, 2020;
Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a; Yu et al., 2018), and thus, these H3b. Social is positively associated with hedonic motivations for
purchases may support sustainable consumption. Therefore, it can green apparel purchase intentions.
be hypothesized that.
H1d. Customized offerings are positively associated with utili- 2.3.8. Adventure
tarian motivations for green apparel purchase intentions. Adventure refers to the sensual excitement that consumers
enjoy during shopping (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; To and Sung,
2.3.5. Utilitarian motivation 2015). Customers motivated by hedonic motivation value the pro-
Utilitarian consumers gather information to complete a task cess of shopping more than the product itself (Katt and Meixner,
(Babin et al., 1994; Yu et al., 2018). In the traditional information 2020; Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). During in-store shopping, the
processing purchase model, consumers are objective and rational process of visiting a store is considered adventurous and exciting
decision-makers who maximize utility by targeting tangible ben- (Atulkar and Kesari, 2017; Yu et al., 2018). In online shopping,
efits (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Ozen € and Kodaz, 2016). consumers experience excitement while interacting with the
Stores, both online and brick-and-mortar, can offer multitudes of website (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003). Going through aisles of green
information about the market offerings that aid utilitarian con- apparel allows these consumers to derive pleasure (see To et al.,
sumers in going through the logical steps of a purchase (Kumar and 2007). In a retail store, consumers may touch, feel, and try out
Sadarangani, 2018a). In the context of green apparel, information, the latest green apparel fashions, and therefore, we can hypothe-
along with other dimensions of utilitarian motivation such as size that.
convenience, is easily available in both online stores and retail
H3c. Adventure is positively associated with hedonic motivations
stores. In an online setting, information is just a click away, whereas
for green apparel purchase intentions.
in the brick-and-mortar store, a salesperson provides the required
information (Katt and Meixner, 2020; Kesari and Atulkar, 2016).
Utilitarian consumers have the availability of all the information 2.3.9. Authority and status
needed to make their decision on buying green apparel in both the Authority and status refer to a special feeling that consumers
online and retail environments. Therefore, it can be hypothesized receive when shopping (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). For online
that (Fig. 1). shopping, this special feeling can be evoked through greetings,
H2. Utilitarian motivations are positively associated with green customized treatment, or privilege in terms of free home delivery
apparel purchase intentions. or special discounts (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; Atulkar and
Kesari, 2017). In addition, when shopping online, authority and
status can be brought about by offering heavy discounts, gift
2.3.6. Trend
wrapping, free home delivery, or easy replacement (To and Sung,
Trend refers to a consumer’s motivation to cherish the shopping
2015). The sense of authority can be experienced in stores by
activity (Atulkar and Kesari, 2017; Budisantoso et al., 2016). Con-
asking a salesperson to describe and show a wide range of products
sumers motivated by trend love to get their shopping efforts
until the consumer is satisfied (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). Online
recognized by friends and family (Kesari and Atulkar, 2016). These
consumers have the authority to see an entire range of available
shoppers are heavily influenced by celebrity endorsements and
products at a convenient time and location (Yu et al., 2018). De-
aspirational items (To and Sung, 2015; Yu et al., 2018). By using
mand for green apparel may evoke a sense of authority over
attractive advertisements, firms are positioning green apparel as
salespersons, and consumers may experience authority and status.
aspirational items (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). Moreover, with
Therefore, we can hypothesize that.
the wider availability of information about new products and
trends, hedonic consumers draw pleasure from the shopping pro- H3d. Authority and status are positively associated with hedonic
cess (Budisantoso et al., 2016; Mehta et al., 2014), and in the motivations for green apparel purchase intentions.
4
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Fig. 1. Research model.

2.3.10. Hedonic motivation this context, males and females have varying levels of motivation to
Consumers with hedonic motivation show the intention to buy get involved in sustainable consumption practices by exhibiting
green apparel as a buying process that offers an opportunity to intentions to buy green apparel. However, Zelezny et al. (2000)
socialize and is considered a way to offer treats to oneself (Arnold found that females have stronger motivations toward environ-
and Reynolds, 2003; Babin et al., 1994; Holbrook and Hirschman, mental sustainability than males. Based on the above arguments, it
1982). Consumers motivated by hedonic motivation participate in becomes important to examine the moderating role of gender in
shopping for the sheer excitement and adventure of the shopping the context of the intention to purchase green apparel. Therefore, it
visit (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). Green apparel is trending, can be hypothesized that.
and celebrity endorsement makes it more aspirational for con-
H5. Gender significantly moderates the relationship between
sumers (see Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a; Yu et al., 2018). Online
antecedents of utilitarian and hedonic motivations and green pur-
shopping provides easy access to information and the gratification
chase intentions such that the influence of different antecedents of
of sensual excitement and pleasure (Katt and Meixner, 2020; Kesari
motivation (H5aeH5j) is moderated by gender.
and Atulkar, 2016). The sense of pleasure is a primary motivation
for hedonic consumers with both in-store and online shopping

(Ozen and Kodaz, 2016; To and Sung, 2015). Green apparel offers 2.3.12. Moderating effect of income
the enjoyment that consumers seek, which may support the The extant literature has indicated that income level can
intention to purchase green apparel. Therefore, we can hypothesize significantly draw attention and guide consumers toward pro-
that. environmental behaviors (Bohr, 2014; Lacroix, 2018; Zhou et al.,
H4. Hedonic motivation is positively associated with green 2020). However, increased income may also promote a more
apparel purchase intentions. relaxed approach toward pro-environmental behaviors (Lacroix,
2018; Liu et al., 2014). This indicates a mixed influence of income
on such pro-environmental actions. Mantovani, Tarola, and Vergari
2.3.11. Moderating effect of gender
(2017) found that a high-income level can promote the adoption of
Extant studies have examined the impact of gender on various
cleaner production technologies and foster sustainable consump-
environmental behaviors, with contradictory results (Chekima
tion. Similarly, Zhou et al. (2020) indicated that family income
et al., 2016). Scholars have found that females exhibit more pro-
positively moderates pro-environmental behavior. Thus, green
environmental behavior and stronger inclinations toward sustain-
apparel, which promotes sustainable consumption, is likely to be
able consumption by showing greater intention to buy green
moderated by family income levels. A high family income level may
products (Chekima et al., 2016; Kalamas et al., 2014). However,
indicate more pro-environmental behavior that may be exhibited
Diamantopoulos et al. (2003) argue that in comparison to females,
by increased intentions to purchase green apparel. Conversely, a
males have more information about environmental issues and act
low family income level may discourage consumers from buying
accordingly. Further, a few studies have not found any difference in
green apparel because green products are considered costlier than
the attitudes of male and female shoppers toward green products
conventional products (see Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a). Based
(Chekima et al., 2016). The context of the present study is India,
on the above arguments, it becomes important to examine the
where males and females are raised differently in the same family
moderating role of family income on the intention to purchase
environment (Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a; Sreen et al., 2018).
green apparel. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that.
Males are likely to be more assertive and less emotional than fe-
males, and other differences between males and females are also H6. Family income significantly moderates the relationship be-
reflected in the adoption of sustainable consumption practices. In tween antecedents of utilitarian and hedonic motivation and green
5
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

purchase intention, and therefore, the influence of different ante- Table 2


cedents of motivation (H6aeH6j) are moderated by family income. Demographic information.

Age Group (in years) N Percentage (%)


3. Research methodology 15e25 95 31.56
25e35 93 30.90
3.1. Questionnaire design and pilot study 35e45 88 29.24
45e55 19 6.31
55þ 6 1.99
The survey method was used to collect data from the study’s
Gender
respondents. The research items of each construct were adapted Female 137 45.51
from previous studies, where items were derived from Kumar and Male 164 54.49
Sadarangani (2018)for adventure and convenience; Parsons (2002) Educational background
Graduate 249 82.72
for authority and status; Han and Han (2001) for customized of-
Postgraduate 41 13.62
ferings; To et al. (2007) for social; Childers et al. (2002) and O’Brien Doctorate 11 3.65
(2010) for hedonic and utilitarian motivations, respectively; Family Income
Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2001) for information availability and se- Less than 300,000(INR) 4 1.33
lection; Brown et al. (2003) for green purchase intention; and 300,00e500,000(INR) 76 25.25
500,000e10,000,000(INR) 142 47.18
Arnold and Reynolds (2003) for trend discovery. Responses were
Greater than 1,000,000(INR) 79 26.25
collected on a five-point Likert scale where 1 meant strongly
disagree and 5 meant strongly agree.
Before finalizing the questionnaire, a pilot study was conducted
confirmatory factor analysis was performed to examine the reli-
with 42 respondents to ensure the flow of the questionnaire and its
ability and validity of the items and constructs. Finally, paths
length. Considering the suggestions from the pilot study, few
constituting the conceptual model were analyzed using structural
changes were made in the questionnaires to make it easier to un-
equation modeling. Model fit and hypotheses testing were per-
derstand from the respondent’s perspective.Furthermore, the
formed, and the results of the various methods are discussed in the
content validity of the questionnaire was assessed using a literature
next section.
review, which was also supported by the assessment of two uni-
versity professor. For each construct, Cronbach’s alpha value was
found to be greater than 0.77, indicating the reliability of the 3.4. Common method bias
research instruments. The results of a rotated component matrix
indicated that all items on the questionnaire except one (which was Before proceeding to the data analysis, the data were assessed
removed from the final questionnaire) were correctly loaded. The for common method bias, which can either amplify or reduce the
final questionnaire consisted of 30 research items. intensity of relationships (Podsakoff et al., 2003). We examined
common method bias using two methods. In the first method, we
3.2. Sample characteristics performed Harman’s single factor test, which represents the
maximum covariance between variables (Podsakoff et al., 2003).
Data were collected from consumers ranging in age from 15 to We found that one factor represented only 24% of the total variance,
65 years. This specific age group was selected because consumers of indicating that there was an absence of common method bias.
this age generally take an active part in decision-making for apparel Second, we followed the method proposed by Kock and Lynn
purchases. Data were collected online, with links to the survey (2012), which is a full collinearity test for assessing vertical and
posted on social media pages (e.g., Facebook) promoting green lateral collinearity (Kock, 2015), with a variance inflation factor
consumption. In addition, the survey questionnaire was provided to (VIF) value of less than 3.3 indicating absence of common method
a larger pool of respondents via direct email. Before the start of the bias. All the constructs of our model had VIF values in the range of
survey, the following screening question was asked: Have you been 1e2.8, indicating absence of common method bias (Kumar and
involved in the purchase decision to buy green apparel in the last Sadarangani, 2018a). Therefore, both methods indicated the
year? The replies that met the screening criteria by responding yes absence of common method bias in the data set.
were allowed to move forward and complete the survey. A token
gift was rewarded to each participant who completed the survey. 4. Results and findings
Along with the responses on research instruments, survey collected
demographic information such as gender, age, annual family in- 4.1. Measurement analysis
come, and educational background from respondents.
A total of 329 responses were received, and after the removal of At first, the internal consistency of all the items was examined
outliers and incomplete questionnaires, 301 responses were through Cronbach’s alpha. All items were found to have Cronbach’s
included in the analysis. For the sample size, we followed Kline alpha values greater than the recommended value of 0.70 (Hair
(2011), which suggested that there should be at least 10 re- et al., 2010). Next, measurement analysis was performed, which
sponses per item. Therefore, a minimum of 300 responses was includes the test for reliability and validity. The construct validity
required, considering the 30 items in the study. Finally, 301 re- analysis was assessed through composite reliability (CR), and all the
sponses were considered in the analysis, which met the priori constructs exceeded the recommended value of 0.70 (Hair et al.,
condition. Demographic information of the respondents is given in 2010), indicating the reliability of measurements. The convergent
Table 2. validity was assessed through standardized factor loading (Table 3)
and average variance extracted (AVE). Factor loading values for all
3.3. Data analysis items were greater than 0.7, indicating convergent validity (Hair
et al., 2010). The AVE score of all the studied variables exceeded
For data analysis, a three-step process was followed. First, the the cutoff value of 0.5 (Table 4; Fornell and Larcker, 1981; Hair et al.,
measures of each construct were examined to ensure that the 2010). This indicated that sufficient conditions for the convergent
research items could explain the variance in construct. Second, validity of the data were met.
6
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Table 3
Constructs, measurement items, and factor loading.

Constructs Measurement Items Loading Value

Adventure (ADV) Buying green apparel is stimulating 0.84


Buying green apparel is an adventure 0.88
While shopping green apparel, I forget other things 0.70
Authority & Status (AAS) While buying green apparel, I believe I am in control 0.72
I can exercise my authority while buying green apparel 0.93
Convenience (CON) Whenever I want, green apparel is available in online stores 0.95
I can always find green apparel at the nearest outlet/mall 0.75
Customized Offerings (CTO) Through customization, green apparel becomes more attractive and compatible to my likings. 0.71
Green apparel provides an option to customize my needs. 0.80
Customization of green apparel makes me feel as an important customer 0.82
Hedonic Motivation (HMN) Buying green apparel is fun 0.76
Buying green apparel is exciting 0.87
Buying green apparel is delightful 0.92
Buying green apparel is enjoyable 0.86
Buying green apparel is thrilling 0.81
Information Availability (INA) Information on green apparel is effortlessly available 0.93
Suggestions by family, friends, online media, and advertisements boost my information on green apparel 0.82
Selection (SEL) Stores help me to find more variations in green apparel 0.86
At any given place, I can find great selection of green apparel 0.81
Green Purchase Intention (GPI) In near future, I will purchase green apparel 0.72
Whenever I need apparel, very likely I will buy green apparel 0.81
Social (SOL) I share information on green apparel with friends, family, and social media 0.94
I exchange the experiences gained while buying green apparel with my family, friends, and online media 0.93
Trend Discovery (TDY) Green apparel is trending 0.81
I make friends while shopping by talking about green apparel 0.92
Utilitarian Motivation (UMN) Buying green apparel is effective 0.76
Buying green apparel is helpful 0.86
Buying green apparel is functional 0.85
Buying green apparel is practical 0.81
Buying green apparel is necessary 0.84

Table 4
Validity and reliability analysis.

a CR AVE ADV AAS CON CTO HMN INA SEL GPI SOL TDY UMN

ADV 0.83 0.85 0.66 0.81


AAS 0.87 0.83 0.70 0.30 0.84
CON 0.81 0.82 0.71 0.31 0.39 0.84
CTO 0.88 0.86 0.72 0.50 0.28 0.28 0.85
HMN 0.78 0.79 0.77 0.52 0.31 0.31 0.30 0.88
INA 0.82 0.84 0.68 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.25 0.26 0.82
SEL 0.86 0.81 0.66 0.41 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.25 0.81
GPI 0.83 0.84 0.74 0.44 0.29 0.28 0.26 0.52 0.28 0.28 0.86
SOL 0.79 0.72 0.69 0.39 0.28 0.27 0.35 0.29 0.31 0.29 0.24 0.83
TDY 0.80 0.78 0.78 0.49 0.35 0.34 0.53 0.27 0.26 0.23 0.31 0.25 0.88
UMN 0.89 0.87 0.72 0.59 0.41 0.29 0.35 0.60 0.23 0.33 0.56 0.21 0.31 0.85

Note: Cronbach Alpha (a) Composite Reliability (CR), Average Variance Extracted (AVE), Diagonal element (in bold) represent the square root of the AVE.

Next, discriminant validity was examined. The correlation co- the results indicated that out of 10, six hypotheses, H1b, H1d, H2,
efficients of the constructs were found to have values lower than H3c, H3d, and H4, were supported. Information availability (H1b:
the square root of the AVE of the corresponding value (Table 4). This b ¼ 0.30, p < 0.01) and customized offerings (H1d: b ¼ 0.35,
indicates that discriminant validity was established for the data, as p < 0.001) were significantly and positively associated with utili-
indicated by prior studies (Bagozzi and Yi, 2012; Fornell and tarian motivation. Also, adventure (H3c: b ¼ 0.54, p < 0.001) and
Larcker, 1981). Moreover, the correlation values were less than authority and status (H3d: b ¼ 0.27, p < 0.001) were significantly
0.70, indicating acceptance of discriminant validity. and positively associated with hedonic motivation. The relationship
Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) estimates the fitness of a between utilitarian motivation and green purchase intention (H2:
measurement model. Additionally, we performed structural equa- b ¼ 0.45, p < 0.001) was found to be significant and positive. Also,
tion modeling in R and estimated the model fitness values. The hedonic motivation and green purchase intention (H4: b ¼ 0.41,
goodness of fit index was measured with several parameters (i.e., p < 0.001) were positively and significantly related. However, H1a
X2/df ¼ 2.35, CFI ¼ 0.91, GFI ¼ 0.90, AGFI ¼ 0.90, NFI ¼ 0.90, (b ¼ 0.11, p > 0.05), H1c (b ¼ 0.05, p > 0.05), H3a (b ¼ 0.03, p > 0.05),
TLI ¼ 0.93, RMSEA ¼ 0.06, SRMR ¼ 0.04; Hu and Bentler, 1999). The and H3b (b ¼ 0.06, p > 0.05) were not supported by the results. A
reported values are well within the acceptable limit suggested by summary of the hypotheses results is given in Table 5 and Fig. 2.
Bagozzi and Yi (2012) and Hair et al. (2010).
4.3. Moderating effect of gender and income
4.2. Hypothesis testing
We examined the differences in perception between males and
A path analysis was performed to examine the hypotheses, and females on motivations toward green apparel purchase intentions.
7
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Table 5
Hypothesis testing results.

Hypothesis Path b p Hypothesis

H1a Convenience / Utilitarian Motivation 0.11 NS Not Accepted


H1b Information Availability / Utilitarian Motivation 0.30** <0.01 Accepted
H1c Selection / Utilitarian Motivation 0.05 NS Not Accepted
H1d Customized Offerings / Utilitarian Motivation 0.35*** <0.001 Accepted
H2 Utilitarian Motivation / Green Purchase Intention 0.45*** <0.001 Accepted
H3a Trend / Hedonic Motivation 0.03 NS Not Accepted
H3b Social / Hedonic Motivation 0.06 NS Not Accepted
H3c Adventure / Hedonic Motivation 0.54*** <0.001 Accepted
H3d Authority and Status / Hedonic Motivation 0.27*** <0.001 Accepted
H4 Hedonic Motivation / Green Purchase Intention 0.41*** <0.001 Accepted

Note: *** ¼ p < 0.001, ** ¼ p < 0.01, * ¼ p < 0.05.

Fig. 2. Tested model.

The moderation analysis showed that gender significantly moder- effects of gender, interaction graphs are presented in Fig. 3 and
ates the relationship between antecedents of motivation in the Fig. 4.
green apparel context. The relationship between information The study also investigated the moderating role of family in-
availability and utilitarian motivation (H5b: b ¼ 0.21, p < 0.05) is come (Table 7). Family income moderated the association between
also moderated by gender, as is the relationship between authority trend discovery and hedonic motivation (H6e: b ¼ 0.371, p < 0.001)
and status and hedonic motivation (H5h: b ¼ 0.24, p < 0.01). The and between adventure and hedonic motivation (H6g: b ¼ 0.231,
results are given in Table 6. In order to interpret the moderating p < 0.01). To interpret the moderating effect of family income,

Table 6
Moderation analysis for gender.

Hypothesis Path b p Moderation

H5a Convenience / Utilitarian Motivation 0.020 0.767 No


H5b Information Availability / Utilitarian Motivation 0.210* 0.011 Yes
H5c Selection / Utilitarian Motivation 0.070 0.536 No
H5d Customized Offerings / Utilitarian Motivation 0.040 0.764 No
H5e Trend / Hedonic Motivation 0.100 0.281 No
H5f Social / Hedonic Motivation 0.010 0.842 No
H5g Adventure / Hedonic Motivation 0.040 0.571 No
H5h Authority and Status / Hedonic Motivation 0.240** 0.004 Yes
H5i Utilitarian Motivation / Green Purchase Intention 0.120 0.274 No
H5j Hedonic Motivation / Green Purchase Intention 0.050 0.609 No

Note: *** ¼ p < 0.001, ** ¼ p < 0.01, * ¼ p < 0.05.

8
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Fig. 3. Moderating effect of gender on association between information availability Fig. 5. Moderating effect of family income on association between trend and hedonic
and utilitarian motivation. motivation.

Fig. 4. Moderating effect of gender on association between authority and status and Fig. 6. Moderating effect of family income on association between adventure and
hedonic motivation. hedonic motivation.

Table 7
Moderation analysis for family income.

Hypothesis Path b p Moderation

H6a Convenience / Utilitarian Motivation 0.107 0.485 No


H6b Information Availability / Utilitarian Motivation 0.089 0.506 No
H6c Selection / Utilitarian Motivation 0.001 0.921 No
H6d Customized Offerings / Utilitarian Motivation 0.019 0.864 No
H6e Trend / Hedonic Motivation 0.371*** 0.000 Yes
H6f Social / Hedonic Motivation 0.170 0.183 No
H6g Adventure / Hedonic Motivation 0.231** 0.003 Yes
H6h Authority and Status / Hedonic Motivation 0.100 0.319 No
H6i Utilitarian Motivation / Green Purchase Intention 0.019 0.848 No
H6j Hedonic Motivation / Green Purchase Intention 0.107 0.290 No

Note: *** ¼ p < 0.001, ** ¼ p < 0.01, * ¼ p < 0.05.

graphs are presented in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. purchase green apparel.


The first set of hypotheses examined the direct effect of ante-
cedents of motivations on utilitarian motivation, hedonic motiva-
5. Discussion tions, and green purchase intentions. Convenience and selection
showed non-significant associations with utilitarian motivation, in
There are limited studies explaining the association between line with prior studies (Cha and Park, 2017; Grewal et al., 2020;
consumers’ motivations and intentions to purchase green apparel. Kesari and Atulkar, 2016; Lloyd et al., 2014; Yu et al., 2018). One
The present study fills the research gap by proposing a conceptual possible reason for this result could be that utilitarian consumers
model that consists of four antecedents for both utilitarian moti- are goal directed and do not like to invest in activities that are not
vation and hedonic motivation with regard to intentions to
9
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

convenient. This indicates that convenience is taken for granted in increase in the slope of hedonic motivation level shown in Fig. 4.
today’s shopping context. Also, consumers are increasingly aware The last set of hypotheses investigated the moderating role of
of the role of store salespersons, who are trained to understand the income in all associations. Family income level was found to
customer’s needs and help them gratify a need by displaying a wide moderate the association between trend discovery and hedonic
array of choices. This indicates that consumers consider selection motivation which is supported by findings from prior studies in
an obvious antecedent that does not require specific mention while context of pro-environmental behavior (e.g., Lacroix, 2018; Zhou
shopping. et al., 2020). This study extends the moderating effects of income
A significant association between information availability, to the context of green apparel by suggesting that greater family
customized offerings, and utilitarian motivation was found, which income facilitates hedonic motivation and green apparel purchase
is supported by the body of literature from different contexts intentions. This indicates that among high-income families, an in-
(Kumar and Kashyap, 2018; Nystrand and Olsen, 2020; Ozen € and crease in trend discovery improves hedonic motivation more than
Kodaz, 2016; Park and Ha, 2016). Possible explanations for this in low-income families. This suggests that consumers with more
finding include information on green products being regularly disposable income are more involved in discovering trends in
highlighted in the media, especially the adoption of green con- apparel, which is reflected in increased hedonic motivation to
sumption practices, such as using green apparel. Further, custom- purchase green apparel (Fig. 5). The findings also suggest that both
ization in green apparel offers a chance for consumers to match it low- and high-income families seek adventure while shopping,
with conventional apparel. This motivates utilitarian consumers, which is reflected in enhanced hedonic motivation toward green
who compare conventional and green apparel in terms of apparel (Fig. 6).
functionalities.
The findings also indicate that trend and social are not signifi- 6. Implications
cantly associated with hedonic motivation, which is supported by
the extant literature of different contexts (Budisantoso et al., 2016; 6.1. Theoretical implications
Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a; To and Sung, 2015; To et al., 2007;
Yu et al., 2018). Trend is non-significant because consumers who The current research contributes to the literature on sustainable
are interested in green apparel may not be interested in discovering consumption and green consumption, specifically in the context of
the latest trends. Further, consumers perceive that the influence of green apparel purchase intentions, in the following ways. First, the
green communities is not strong enough for consumers to under- study contributes to the theory of motivation by applying the
stand its value in either online or offline shopping. In short, con- Westbrook and Black (1985) conceptualization of motivation the-
sumers believe that shopping for green apparel would not increase ory to understand consumers’ intentions to purchase green
their social network and social circle. apparel. Using shopping motivation to understand consumers’ in-
Conversely, the findings indicated a significant association be- tentions provides new insights into sustainable consumption given
tween utilitarian and hedonic motivation and purchase intention of that this framework comprises the hedonic and utilitarian moti-
green apparel. This relationship is positive, significant, and vations that are considered crucial in consumer decision-making
consistent with previous studies (Arnold and Reynolds, 2003; while shopping (Cheng et al., 2020; Scarpi, 2012). The study sug-
Kumar and Sadarangani, 2018a; To and Sung, 2015). This indicates gests that the applicability of shopping motivation in sustainable
that consumers adopting sustainable consumption practices are consumption, particularly in the context of green apparel, con-
more likely to maximize their utility by targeting the tangible tributes to the literature regarding motivations (e.g., Arnold and
benefits of green apparel. Utilitarian consumers indicate a greater Reynolds, 2003; Childers et al., 2002; Katt and Meixner, 2020).
intention to buy green apparel because buying green apparel seems Second, the study adds to the knowledge base on utilitarian and
like a logical solution to the problem of sustainability. Conversely, hedonic motivation. The novelty of this study lies in investigating
for hedonic consumers, the buying process is joyful and adven- the interplay between the motivational dimensions and the pur-
turous, offering sensual pleasure. What may influence these con- chase of green apparel, which is a unique contribution to the sus-
sumers is that green apparel is trending as celebrities are tainability marketing literature. The findings of this study
supporting green products in an attempt to save the planet. contribute to the body of literature with the indication that only
The second set of hypotheses investigated the moderating role specific antecedents of motivation were applicable in the context of
of gender in all associations. The findings indicated that gender green apparel purchase intentions (e.g., Atulkar and Kesari, 2017;
significantly moderates the association between information Kesari and Atulkar, 2016; Park and Ha, 2016). Third, the study ex-
availability and utilitarian motivation, and between authority and tends the understanding of green apparel by providing empirical
status and hedonic motivation (refer to Table 5). The findings are evidence in a less-studied cultural group of green buyers in the
consistent with previous studies (e.g., Chekima et al., 2016; Indian context.
Kalamas et al., 2014), which argued that gender influences the Finally, the research emphasizes personal and individual dif-
green purchase intention of generic products. The study extends ferences among consumers by examining the moderating in-
the argument to the context of green apparel by suggesting that fluences of gender and family income on consumers’ motivations
gender plays significant role on individual’s motivation and green and intentions to purchase green apparel. Emphasizing the
apparel buying intentions. This means that men and women moderating role will also be recognized as a significant contribu-
perceive the availability of information differently. Women were tion to the literature (e.g., Sreen et al., 2018) because researchers
found to show greater utilitarian motivation when they have more have asserted that moderators acknowledge the effect of individual
information, indicating that women assess all the available infor- differences in consumer behavior (Zhou et al., 2020). The study
mation before making a buying decision related to green apparel. contributes to the general understanding of sustainable consump-
This is reflected in a sharp increase in the utilitarian motivation tion practices (e.g., Bly et al., 2015; Harris et al., 2016), specifically by
level of women that came with an increase in the information level enhancing the understanding of green apparel purchase intentions.
when compared with men (Fig. 3). Also, men have less hedonic
motivation than women. But when men perceive an increase in 6.2. Practical implications
authority and status, their hedonic motivation level increases to a
greater level compared to women. This is reflected in the sharp The findings of the study will provide useful inferences for
10
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

marketers when devising suitable strategies in the context of green motivation, which implicates utilitarian and hedonic motivations as
apparel. First, marketers should ensure that all relevant informa- two types of motivation that play crucial roles in the shopping
tion about green apparel is easily available to consumers. Adopting decisions of individuals. The study examined the four antecedents
an efficient digital marketing strategy about green apparel can be a of both the utilitarian and hedonic dimensions and their relation-
good starting point (Wiederhold and Martinez, 2018). The more ships with intentions to purchase green apparel. The results indi-
clarity of information is available, the more it will assist consumers cated that both utilitarian and hedonic motivations play significant
in making decisions to purchase green apparel. Also, retail stores roles in intentions to purchase green apparel. The study also re-
should ensure that salespeople are up to date on information about ported moderating effects of gender and income in the context of
the green apparel available in the store, as a lack of information intentions to purchase green apparel. The study contributes to the
about green products can negatively affect consumers’ intentions novel understanding of sustainable consumption by extending the
toward green apparel purchases (Connell, 2010; Joshi and Rahman, theory of motivation to green consumerism.
2015). Despite being a rigorous study, the study suffers from few lim-
Second, given that the concept of green apparel is a relatively itations that should be addressed by future researchers. First,
new phenomenon, store managers should train their salespeople to although the study utilized a large data set collected from Indian
evoke a sense of authority and status among consumers who are consumers, the study suffers from the limitation of generalizability
shopping for green apparel. This can be achieved by making ser- of the findings to other contexts. Data from other countries could be
vices more easily available to customers and giving them options to collected to make the findings generalizable to the oriental context.
return and exchange the apparel. For example, easy replacement or In fact, a comparative study of two different regions (for example,
trial policies can evoke a sense of authority and status among one oriental and one occidental country) may further contribute to
consumers and motivate consumers to try green apparel (e.g. the findings. Extending to other countries will account for cultural
ElHaffar et al., 2020). factors in the study and offer more robust and generalizable find-
Third, marketers should also focus on offering consumers ings. Second, the study has focused only on educated respondents,
customized options for green apparel. Initiating the design cus- which may lead to biased findings given that educated respondents
tomization of apparel, where customers are given the option to are more prone to giving socially desirable answers when filling out
choose designs in their final stages (Senanayake and Little, 2010), the survey (Kaiser et al., 2008). Considering this, future researchers
creates curiosity among consumers and may motivate them to try a might emphasize a more random approach for collecting re-
new sustainable offering available in the market. spondents to get more generalized findings. Third, future studies
Fourth, managers should promote green apparel by highlighting could include more variables that may influence green apparel
the task it aims to complete. Green apparel aims to promote sus- buying behavior. We recommend using variables such as specific
tainable consumption, which can be highlighted through inte- cultural nuances, willingness to pay, and consumption values when
grated marketing communication. Furthermore, along with shoppers are considering green apparel. Also, future studies may
communication, the functionality, quality, and uniqueness of green include experimental designs or a mixed-method research design
apparel should also be promoted, as consumers will not buy green to utilize the advantages of both qualitative and quantitative
products solely for the sake of the environment; they also look for research approaches and bring greater insights into sustainable
functional benefits from the products (Chen and Chang, 2013). Such consumption.
promotions instigate a sense of responsibility toward the envi-
ronment when choosing products that will induce hedonic and CRediT authorship contribution statement
utilitarian motivations among consumers.
Fifth, managers should emphasize the other hedonic di- Sushant Kumar: participated in, Conceptualization, Data cura-
mensions of green apparel, which includes the application of pro- tion, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing - original
motional techniques to highlight attributes such as adventure, fun, draftWriting e original draft. Rambalak Yadav: participated in,
and joy in having green apparel. Also, the marketers should moti- Writing - review & editingWriting e review & editing, Methodol-
vate the current consumers of green apparel to share their purchase ogy, Project administration, Validation.
and consumption experiences with potential consumers through
social media networks (Ko and Jin, 2017). Further, managers should Declaration of competing interest
position green apparel as an aspirational product through celebrity
endorsements, which can persuade potential consumers (Nguyen The authors declare that they have no known competing
et al., 2019). financial interests or personal relationships that could have
Finally, marketers should emphasize store availability of infor- appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
mation regarding the quality, functioning, and eco-friendliness of
green apparel. Stores should ensure that their best and most
Acknowledgements
knowledgeable staff should be available in the women’s section
because females were identified as exhibiting more information-
None.
seeking behavior than their male counterparts (e.g. Chekima
et al., 2016). Also, salespeople should be trained to fulfill the de-
mands of male customers, who like to exert more authority while References
shopping. Further, marketers should try to advertise green apparel Arnold, M.J., Reynolds, K.E., 2003. Hedonic shopping motivations. J. Retailing 79 (2),
as aspirational items because high-income groups will have greater 77e95.
motivation to buy trendy green apparel that could help differen- Atulkar, S., Kesari, B., 2017. Satisfaction, loyalty and repatronage intentions: role of
hedonic shopping values. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 39, 23e34.
tiate them from others.
Aydın, G., 2019. Do personality traits and shopping motivations affect social com-
merce adoption intentions? Evidence from an emerging market. J. Internet
7. Conclusion, limitations, and scope for future research Commer. 18 (4), 428e467.
Babin, B.J., Darden, W.R., Griffin, M., 1994. Work and/or fun: measuring hedonic and
utilitarian shopping value. J. Consum. Res. 20 (4), 644e656.
The present study attempted to analyze consumers’ motivations Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y., 2012. Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural
to be involved in green purchasing by adopting the theory of equation models. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 40 (1), 8e34.

11
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Berry, L.L., Seiders, K., Grewal, D., 2002. Understanding service convenience. must peak this century. Nature News 502 (7473), 615.
J. Market. 66 (3), 1e17. Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M., 1999. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
Biswas, A., Roy, M., 2015. Green products: an exploratory study on the consumer analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model.: a
behaviour in emerging economies of the East. J. Clean. Prod. 87, 463e468. multidisciplinary journal 6 (1), 1e55.
Bly, S., Gwozdz, W., Reisch, L.A., 2015. Exit from the high street: an exploratory Jacobs, K., Petersen, L., Ho € risch, J., Battenfeld, D., 2018. Green thinking but
study of sustainable fashion consumption pioneers. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 39 (2), thoughtless buying? An empirical extension of the value-attitude-behaviour
125e135. hierarchy in sustainable clothing. J. Clean. Prod. 203, 1155e1169.
Boardman, R., McCormick, H., 2018. Shopping channel preference and usage mo- Jebarajakirthy, C., Balaji, M.S., Yadav, R., Gupta, M., 2019. Sustainable and responsible
tivations. J. Fash. Mark. Manag.: Int. J. 22 (2), 270e284. consumption: evidences from emerging economies. Int. J. Nonprofit Voluntary
Bohr, J., 2014. Public views on the dangers and importance of climate change: Sect. Mark. 24 (4), e1669.
predicting climate change beliefs in the United States through income moder- Johnstone, M.L., Tan, L.P., 2015. Exploring the gap between consumers’ green
ated by party identification. Climatic Change 126 (1e2), 217e227. rhetoric and purchasing behaviour. J. Bus. Ethics 132 (2), 311e328.
Brown, M., Pope, N., Voges, K., 2003. Buying or browsing? An exploration of Joshi, Y., Rahman, Z., 2015. Factors affecting green purchase behaviour and future
shopping orientations and online purchase intention. Eur. J. Market. 37 (11/12), research directions. International Strategic Management Review 3 (1e2),
1666e1684. 128e143.
Budisantoso, T., Bhati, A., Bradshaw, A., Tang, C.M., 2016. Hedonic shopping moti- Jung, S., Jin, B., 2016. Sustainable development of slow fashion businesses: customer
vation: does it really matter?. In: Development of Tourism and the Hospitality value approach. Sustainability 8 (6), 540.
Industry in Southeast Asia. Springer, Singapore, pp. 51e64. Kaiser, F.G., Schultz, P.W., Berenguer, J., Corral-Verdugo, V., Tankha, G., 2008.
Buerke, A., Straatmann, T., Lin-Hi, N., Müller, K., 2017. Consumer awareness and Extending planned environmentalism: anticipated guilt and embarrassment
sustainability-focused value orientation as motivating factors of responsible across cultures. Eur. Psychol. 13 (4), 288e297.
consumer behavior. Review of Managerial Science 11 (4), 959e991. Kalamas, M., Cleveland, M., Laroche, M., 2014. Pro-environmental behaviors for thee
Cha, S.S., Park, C., 2017. Consumption value effects on shopping mall attributes: but not for me: green giants, green Gods, and external environmental locus of
moderating role of on/off-line channel type. J. Distrib. Sci. 15 (6), 5e12. control. J. Bus. Res. 67 (2), 12e22.
Chekima, B., Wafa, S.A.W.S.K., Igau, O.A., Chekima, S., Sondoh Jr., S.L., 2016. Exam- Kanchanapibul, M., Lacka, E., Wang, X., Chan, H.K., 2014. An empirical investigation
ining green consumerism motivational drivers: does premium price and de- of green purchase behaviour among the young generation. J. Clean. Prod. 66,
mographics matter to green purchasing? J. Clean. Prod. 112, 3436e3450. 528e536.
Chen, T.B., Chai, L.T., 2010. Attitude towards the environment and green products: Katt, F., Meixner, O., 2020. Food waste prevention behavior in the context of he-
consumers’ perspective. Manag. Sci. Eng. 4 (2), 27e39. donic and utilitarian shopping value. J. Clean. Prod. 122878.
Chen, Y.S., Chang, C.H., 2013. Greenwash and green trust: the mediation effects of Kesari, B., Atulkar, S., 2016. Satisfaction of mall shoppers: a study on perceived
green consumer confusion and green perceived risk. J. Bus. Ethics 114 (3), utilitarian and hedonic shopping values. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 31, 22e31.
489e500. Khan, S.A.R., Sharif, A., Golpîra, H., Kumar, A., 2019. A green ideology in Asian
Cheng, Z.H., Chang, C.T., Lee, Y.K., 2020. Linking hedonic and utilitarian shopping emerging economies: from environmental policy and sustainable development.
values to consumer skepticism and green consumption: the roles of environ- Sustain. Dev. 27 (6), 1063e1075.
mental involvement and locus of control. Review of Managerial Science 14 (1), Khare, A., Rakesh, S., 2011. Antecedents of online shopping behavior in India: an
61e85. examination. J. Internet Commer. 10 (4), 227e244.
Childers, T.L., Carr, C.L., Peck, J., Carson, S., 2002. Hedonic and utilitarian motivations Kline, R.B., 2011. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Guilford,
for online retail shopping behavior. J. Retailing 77 (4), 511e535. New York, NY.
Chowdhury, M.M.H., Paul, S.K., Sianaki, O.A., Quaddus, M.A., 2020. Dynamic sus- Ko, S.B., Jin, B., 2017. Predictors of purchase intention toward green apparel prod-
tainability requirements of stakeholders and the supply portfolio. J. Clean. Prod. ucts. J. Fash. Mark. Manag.: Int. J. 21 (1), 70e87.
255, 120148. Kock, N., 2015. Common method bias in PLS-SEM: a full collinearity assessment
Clancy, G., Fro €ling, M., Peters, G., 2015. Ecolabels as drivers of clothing design. approach. Int. J. e-Collaboration 11 (4), 1e10.
J. Clean. Prod. 99, 345e353. Kock, N., Lynn, G., 2012. Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-
Connell, K.Y.H., 2010. Internal and external barriers to eco-conscious apparel based SEM: an illustration and recommendations. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. Online 13
acquisition. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 34 (3), 279e286. (7), 546e580.
Dabbous, A., Barakat, K.A., 2020. Bridging the online offline gap: assessing the Kumar, A., Kashyap, A.K., 2018. Leveraging utilitarian perspective of online shopping
impact of brands’ social network content quality on brand awareness and to motivate online shoppers. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 46 (3), 247e263.
purchase intention. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 53, 101966. Kumar, S., Sadarangani, P., 2018a. An empirical study on shopping motivation
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B.B., Sinkovics, R.R., Bohlen, G.M., 2003. Can among generation Y Indian. Global Bus. Rev. 0972150918807085.
socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of Kumar, S., Sadarangani, P.H., 2018b. Study of shopping motivation and buying
the evidence and an empirical investigation. J. Bus. Res. 56 (6), 465e480. behaviour among generation Y in India. J. Global Bus. 7, 341e353.
ElHaffar, G., Durif, F., Dube , L., 2020. Towards closing the attitude-intention- Kumar, S., Sreen, N., 2020. Role of internal and external values on green purchase.
behavior gap in green consumption: a narrative review of the literature and In: Green Marketing as a Positive Driver toward Business Sustainability. IGI
an overview of future research directions. J. Clean. Prod. 122556. Global, pp. 158e185.
Fletcher, R., 2010. Neoliberal environmentality: towards a poststructuralist political Kumar, S., Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Chakraborty, D., Kaur, P., 2021. What drives brand love
ecology of the conservation debate. Conserv. Soc. 8 (3), 171e181. for natural products? The moderating role of household size. J. Retailing Con-
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unob- sum. Serv. 58, 102329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102329.
servable variables and measurement error. J. Market. Res. 18 (1), 39e50. Kumar, S., Giridhar, V., Sadarangani, P., 2019. A cross-national study of environ-
Freudenreich, B., Schaltegger, S., 2020. Developing sufficiency-oriented offerings for mental performance and culture: implications of the findings and strategies.
clothing users: business approaches to support consumption reduction. J. Clean. Global Bus. Rev. 20 (4), 1051e1068.
Prod. 247, 119589. Lacroix, K., 2018. Comparing the relative mitigation potential of individual pro-
Gilboa, S., Mitchell, V., 2020. The role of culture and purchasing power parity in environmental behaviors. J. Clean. Prod. 195, 1398e1407.
shaping mall-shoppers’ profiles. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 52, 101951. Liobikiene, _ G., Bernatoniene, _ J., 2017. Why determinants of green purchase cannot
Gleim, M.R., Smith, J.S., Andrews, D., Cronin Jr., J.J., 2013. Against the green: a multi- be treated equally? The case of green cosmetics: literature review. J. Clean. Prod.
method examination of the barriers to green consumption. J. Retailing 89 (1), 162, 109e120.
44e61. Liobikiene, _ G., Dagiliu te,
_ R., 2016. The relationship between economic and carbon
Godelnik, R., 2012. 2012: four trends in sustainable consumption. Available at: footprint changes in EU: the achievements of the EU sustainable consumption
http://www.triplepundit.com/story/2012/2012-four-trends-sustainable-con- and production policy implementation. Environ. Sci. Pol. 61, 204e211.
sumption/59616. (Accessed 28 February 2020). Liobikiene, _ G., Mandravickaite, _ J., Bernatoniene,
_ J., 2016. Theory of planned behavior
Grewal, D., Noble, S.M., Roggeveen, A.L., Nordfalt, J., 2020. The future of in-store approach to understand the green purchasing behavior in the EU: a cross-
technology. J. Acad. Market. Sci. 48 (1), 96e113. cultural study. Ecol. Econ. 125, 38e46.
Gwozdz, W., Steensen Nielsen, K., Müller, T., 2017. An environmental perspective on Liu, J., Qu, H., Huang, D., Chen, G., Yue, X., Zhao, X., Liang, Z., 2014. The role of social
clothing consumption: consumer segments and their behavioral patterns. capital in encouraging residents’ pro-environmental behaviors in community-
Sustainability 9 (5), 762. based ecotourism. Tourism Manag. 41, 190e201.
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. A Lloyd, A.E., Chan, R.Y., Yip, L.S., Chan, A., 2014. Time buying and time saving: effects
Global Perspective. Prentice hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. on service convenience and the shopping experience at the mall. J. Serv. Market.
Han, J., Han, D., 2001. A framework for analyzing customer value of internet busi- Mair, S., Druckman, A., Jackson, T., 2016. Global inequities and emissions in Western
ness. J. Inf. Technol. Theor. Appl.: J. Inf. Technol. Theor. Appl. 3 (5), 25e35. European textiles and clothing consumption. J. Clean. Prod. 132, 57e69.
Harris, F., Roby, H., Dibb, S., 2016. Sustainable clothing: challenges, barriers and Mantovani, A., Tarola, O., Vergari, C., 2017. End-of-pipe or cleaner production? How
interventions for encouraging more sustainable consumer behaviour. Int. J. to go green in presence of income inequality and pro-environmental behavior.
Consum. Stud. 40 (3), 309e318. J. Clean. Prod. 160, 71e82.
Holbrook, 1999. Consumer Value: A Framework for Analysis and Research. Rout- Mehta, R., Sharma, N.K., Swami, S., 2014. A typology of Indian hypermarket shop-
ledge, London. pers based on shopping motivation. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag. 42 (1), 40e55.
Holbrook, M.B., Hirschman, E.C., 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: Nguyen, M.T.T., Nguyen, L.H., Nguyen, H.V., 2019. Materialistic values and green
consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. J. Consum. Res. 9 (2), 132e140. apparel purchase intention among young Vietnamese consumers. Young Con-
Hoornweg, D., Bhada-Tata, P., Kennedy, C., 2013. Environment: waste production sum. 20 (4), 246e263.

12
S. Kumar and R. Yadav Journal of Cleaner Production 295 (2021) 126239

Niinim€ aki, K., 2010. Eco-clothing, consumer identity and ideology. Sustain. Dev. 18 Calif. Manag. Rev. 43 (2), 34e55.
(3), 150e162. Wu, W., Huang, V., Chen, X., Davison, R.M., Hua, Z., 2018. Social value and online
Nystrand, B.T., Olsen, S.O., 2020. Consumers’ attitudes and intentions toward social shopping intention: the moderating role of experience. Inf. Technol.
consuming functional foods in Norway. Food Qual. Prefer. 80, 103827. People 31 (3), 688e711.
O’Brien, H.L., 2010. The influence of hedonic and utilitarian motivations on user Yu, H., Zhang, R., Liu, B., 2018. Analysis on consumers’ purchase and shopping well-
engagement: the case of online shopping experiences. Interact. Comput. 22 (5), being in online shopping carnivals with two motivational dimensions. Sus-
344e352. tainability 10 (12), 4603.

Ozen, H., Kodaz, N., 2016. Utilitarian or hedonic? A cross cultural study in online Zelezny, L.C., Chua, P.P., Aldrich, C., 2000. New ways of thinking about environ-
shopping. In: Thriving in a New World Economy. Springer, Cham, pp. 234e239. mentalism: elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. J. Soc. Is-
Park, J., Ha, S., 2016. Co-creation of service recovery: utilitarian and hedonic value sues 56 (3), 443e457.
and post-recovery responses. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 28, 310e316. Zhou, Z., Liu, J., Zeng, H., Zhang, T., Chen, X., 2020. How does soil pollution risk
Parsons, A.G., 2002. Non-functional motives for online shoppers: why we click. perception affect farmers’ pro-environmental behavior? The role of income
J. Consum. Market. 19 (5), 380e392. level. J. Environ. Manag. 270, 110806.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method
biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recom-
mended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879. Dr. Sushant Kumar is an Assistant Professor in Marketing Management department at
Scarpi, D., 2012. Work and fun on the internet: the effects of utilitarianism and the Indian Institute of Management Raipur. He completed his PhD from Indian Institute
hedonism online. J. Interact. Market. 26 (1), 53e67. of Management Shillong, Post graduate diploma in Project Management from Uni-
Sebald, A.K., Jacob, F., 2019. What help do you need for your fashion shopping? A versity of Hyderabad, and Bachelor of Technology from National Institute of Technol-
typology of curated fashion shoppers based on shopping motivations. Eur. ogy Durgapur. He has also completed International Climate Action Course COP22,
Manag. J. 38 (2), 319e334. Marrakesh, Morocco. His research interests include Consumer Behavior, Digital mar-
Senanayake, M.M., Little, T.J., 2010. Mass customization: points and extent of ketplaces, Life Course Study, Sustainability, Tourism, and Industrial Marketing. His
apparel customization. J. Fash. Mark. Manag.: Int. J. 14 (2), 282e299. research has appeared in the Journal of Destination Marketing and Management,
Sreen, N., Purbey, S., Sadarangani, P., 2018. Impact of culture, behavior and gender Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Benchmarking, Global business review,
on green purchase intention. J. Retailing Consum. Serv. 41, 177e189. Journal of global business among other outlets. He has also written case studies which
Shrivastava, A., Jain, G., Kamble, S.S., Belhadi, A., 2020. Sustainability through online is published with Ivey Publishing. He is Full Time Member of Association of North
renting clothing: circular fashion fueled by instagram micro-celebrities. J. Clean. America Higher Education International (ANAHEI), USA, Association for Consumer
Prod. 278, 123772. Research, USA, and Indian Academy of Management.
Suki, N.M., 2016. Green product purchase intention: impact of green brands, atti-
tude, and knowledge. Br. Food J. 118 (12), 2893e2910.
Tauber, E.M., 1972. Marketing Notes and communications: why do people shop? Dr. Rambalak Yadav is an Assistant Professor in Marketing Management at the
J. Market. 36 (4), 46e49. Institute of Management Technology, Hyderabad, India. He holds a Doctorate Degree in
To, P.L., Sung, E.P., 2015. Internet shopping: a study based on hedonic value and flow Marketing from Indian Institute of Technology (ISM), Dhanbad, India. His research
theory. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology 9 (7), interests lie in the area of green consumption, pro-environmental behavior and digital
2258e2261. marketing. Articles authored by him have been published in reputed international
To, P.L., Liao, C., Lin, T.H., 2007. Shopping motivations on Internet: a study based on journals, such as International Journal of Hospitality Management, Journal of Retailing
utilitarian and hedonic value. Technovation 27 (12), 774e787. and Consumer Services, Appetite, Ecological Economics, International Journal of
Wiederhold, M., Martinez, L.F., 2018. Ethical consumer behaviour in Germany: the Contemporary Hospitality Management, Food Quality and Preferences, International
attitude-behaviour gap in the green apparel industry. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 42 Journal of Bank Marketing and Journal of Cleaner Production etc. He has also edited
(4), 419e429. special issue in journal such as Journal of Strategic Markeing and International Journal
Westbrook, R.A., Black, W.C., 1985. A motivation-based shopper typology. of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing.
J. Retailing 61 (1), 78e103.
Wolfinbarger, M., Gilly, M.C., 2001. Shopping online for freedom, control, and fun.

13

You might also like