N

Green Consumers in the 1990s: Profile and Implications for Advertising

James A. Roberts BAYLORUNiVERSiTY

ELSEVIER

The passage of time and incipient change call .for another look at the demographic and attitudinal correlates of ecologically conscious consumer behavior (ECCB). As concern for the environment becomes a universal phenomenon, surely the profile of the ecologically conscious consumer has evolved along with this fundamental shift in public attitude. From the responses of 582 adult consumers to a nationwide survey (n = 1,302), a profile of the ecologically conscious consumer was developed. The findings suggest that ecologically conscious consumers of the 1990s differ from their predecessors. Demographics explained only 6 % of the variation in the sample's ECCB. However, the addition of attitudinal variables increased R2 to 45%. The consumers' belief&at they, as individuals, can help solve environmental problems (perceived consumer effectiveness) wasfound to be the best predictor ofECCB, j BUSNRES 1996. 36.217-231

ucts were environmentally safe, 57% sought products and packaging made from recycled materials, and 34% said they had boycotted a company that was careless toward the environment (Roper, 1992). Vandermerwe and Oliff (1990) note the following shifts in consumer behavior that support the growth and diffusion of green marketing and ecologically conscious consumer behavior (ECCB):
Green products rapidly diffuse from small niche markets to mass markets. Wal-Mart, McDonald's, Coke, Procter and Gamble, Mobil and many others market "environmentally friendly" products and services (Advertising Age, 1991). Large numbers of consumers profess a preference for green firms. Many state they are willing to pay more for green products and services. Social investing and the sale of green shopping guides and environmental magazines are additional proofs of the growth in the green market segment. Consumers accept, even demand, recycled products. Hume and Strand (1990) found that concern for the environment appeared across all demographic categories. The range in demand for green products has widened, from unbleached coffee filters to "environmentally friendly" diapers and biodegradable paint. The number of new green product introductions has grown dramatically from 24 (0.5% of all new product introductions) in 1985 to 810 (13.4% of all new product introductions) in 1991 (Ottman, 1994).

nce again there is renewed sensitivity toward the environment and toward social consciousness. In contrast to the 1960s and 1970s, however, when the emphasis went largely to political solutions to environmental and social ills, the current sensitivity focuses on consumer purchase behavior (Wells, 1990). Trend spotters and forward thinkers agree that the 1990s will be the green decade-that environmentalism will be a major worldwide force (Kirkpatrick, 1990). Recent surveys suggest that concerns for the environment and society has mushroomed. For example, 79% of Americans consider themselves environmentalists, 82% state they have recycled, 83% state they have changed their shopping habits to help protect the environment, and 67% state they would be willing to pay 5 to 10% more for environmentally compatible products (Coddington, 1990). Hume and Strand (1990) reported on a Gallup Poll of 1,000 randomly selected U.S. adults. They found that nine out of 10 respondents said they would be willing to make a special effort to buy products from companies trying to protect the environment. As of 1992, 54% of Americans read labels to see if prod-

Address correspondence to James A. Roberts, Marketing Department, Baylor University, RO. Box 98007, Waco, TX 76798-8007. Journal of Business Research 36, 217-231 (1996) 1996 Elsevier Science Inc. 655 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10010

Increased media coverage between 1984 and 1988 foreshadowed this increase in environmental concern. Because the issues that receive the most attention on the news are espoused as the most important by the viewing public, this "agenda setting" capability of television news coverage can be a powerful factor for change. Studies indicate that media coverage can change the public's thought and behavior in as little as two weeks. The key factor is exposure. The more people know or are exposed to a particular event (e.g., environmental deterioration), the more they will act on that knowledge by lending
ISSN 0148-2963/96/$1500 SSDI 0148-2963(95)00150-6

218

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

J.A. Roberts

or withdrawing support. A Media Monitor study found that the number of network news stories on environmental issues doubled to 453 in 1989 over 1988, and that this increase triples the number of environmental stories in 1987 (Research Alert, 1990). According to theJ. Walter Thompson Advertising Agency (Greenwatch, 1991), the number of green television and print advertisements more than quadrupled between 1989 and 1990, from 41 to 212,

Objectives
Much of the research into the demographic and attitudinal correlates of ECCB took place in the early 1970s. Recent surveys suggest that environmental concern has mushroomed in the last several years. The passage of time and incipient change in public attitudes toward the environment require a profile that identifies the ecologically conscious consumer of the 1990s. It is probable that fundamental shifts in public concern for the environment have changed the type of consumer who holds such attitudes. No longer do green concerns affect only the affluent. However, expressed concern does not translate directly into consumer behavior; advertisers must be able to locate and understand the ecologically conscious consumer market segment. This study's objectives are based on the belief that the demographic and attitudinal characteristics of the ecologically conscious consumer have changed. A second precipitating factor for the present research is that although environmental concern has become something of a populist notion, only a subset of the environmentally concerned segment acts on these new attitudes in the consumer marketplace. Thus, this study's primary objective is the elucidation of the demographic and attitudinal correlates of the subset who perform ECCBs. Demographic characteristics were included in the present analysis because they are commonly used as market segmentation criteria and in planning mass communication efforts. Attitudinal variables are investigated because they are valuable as input into the creative process. Without an accurate profile of the ecologically conscious consumer of the 1990s, attempts to reach this segment will fail. A second objective will be to discuss the implications for advertisers that arise from an improved understanding of the demographic and attitudinal profile of the ecologically conscious consumer. Current advertising and marketing efforts that rely upon past research overlook fundamental changes in the profile of the green consumer. A third objective will be to estimate the size of the market segment(s) for ecologically conscious products and services. Recent research suggests that consumers react differently to green appeals and that the opportunity exists for marketers to practice differentiated marketing, selling different products with different appeals to different segments.

Not Everyone Sees "Green" in Green Marketing

Despite the increase in environmental concern, the present situation appears analogous to the "green" movement in England. Consumers professed their willingness to spend more for green products, but British supermarkets were overstocked with products that the same consumers later claimed were too expensive (Pearce, 1990). A recent study by Simmons Market Research Bureau (1991), believed to be the first to link buying behavior with consumer attitudes on the environment, found that people in the U.S. do not actually buy the products they claim to prefer. High concern over the environment was found, but behaviors consistent with such concern were lacking. Berger and Corbin (1992) contend that this gap between attitude and behavior is reminiscent of the situation during the energy crisis of the late 1970s. Numerous studies found that attitudinal variables could not explain actual behaviors. Consumption in the U.S. has never been so high (Durning, 1990); yet, paradoxically, the U.S. public's concern for the environment is also very high (Stisser, 1994). Many researchers cite reasons for this attitude-behavior gap: Green products are too expensive (Magrath, 1992). Price, quality, and convenience are still the most important decision factors; then green appeal may sway consumers. In other words, it can be a competitive advantage to have a green product, but not if the other factors are compromised (Ottman, 1994). Cynicism is also a culprit. Only 30% of U.S. adults believe comparative environmental competitive claims (Stisser, 1994). Until advertisers stop using gimmicks, there is little hope for consumerism to make a real contribution to a better environment (Pearce, 1990). Consumers are confused about green products (Carlson et al., 1992; Schlossberg, 1991). Businesses hesitate to offer green products because of strict state enforcement of deceptive claims and because of scrutiny from various environmental organizations (Magrath, 1992). Ultimately, we must investigate consumer behavior because it is such behavior, not expressed concern, that will help correct the problems currently facing the environment and create markets for green products and services.

Literature Review
Demographic Correlates of ECCB
Previous attempts to profile the socially/ecologically responsible consumer have provided inconsistent results (see Table 1). These results may derive from: (1) overuse of borrowed scales from other disciplines, (2) disparate operationalizations of th~ dependent variable "socially responsible consumption," (3) use of convenience samples, (4) poor scale construction and testing, and (5) lack of replication. The confluence of these factors

Green Consumers in the 1990s

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

219

has resulted in what can be termed a schizophrenic profile of the demographic characteristics of the green consumer. These listed shortcomings have allowed the green consumer to remain a mystery; this hinders our understanding of a potentially valuable segment of society. Despite the inconsistency of earlier findings concerning the demographic correlates of ECCB, marketers have adopted an upscale profile of the ecologically conscious consumer: high income, more education, and prestigious occupation (see Table 1). However, the green consumer of the 1990s cannot be so narrowly defined. When public opinion on an issue like environmental concern changes so dramatically as in the shifts noted earlier, we must expect changes in the demographic bases of opinion. In addition, the potential gap between attitude and behavior requires a closer look at the role demographics can play in identifying the ecologically conscious consumer.

Liberalism
Democrats and liberals are more concerned about environmental quality than are their Republican and conservative counterparts (Van Liere and Dunlap, 1980). The rise of widespread public support for environmental reform in the late 1960s and 1970s led to the argument that environmental concern transcended political affiliations. Recent studies, however, have questioned the consensus quality of environmental politics. Support for environmental reform varies by political groupings (Samdahl and Robertson, 1989). Dunlap (1975) noted three reasons to expect a split along traditional ideological and partisan lines: (1) environmental reforms generally are opposed by business and industry because of the costs involved; (2) environmental reforms entail extending government activities and regulations; and (3) environmental reforms often require innovative action. Noting traditional Republican-Conservative favoritism toward business, opposition to big government, and suspicion of drastic change, it is hypothesized that there will be significant differences in environmental concern between liberals and conservatives. In studies where measures of liberalism have been included, they have been found to be positively related to environmental concern (Anderson and Cuningham, 1972; Anderson et al., 1974; Crosby et al., 1980; Mitchell, 1983; Tognacci et al., 1972; Van Liere and Dunlap, 1981). Time, however, has turned "liberalism on its head." With the new role of Republicans as change agents, the relationship between liberalism and environmental concern and consumer behavior has been diluted. It appears that conservatives are now as likely to seek change as liberals in many venues. Environmental issues may be one such venue.

Selected Attitudinal Correlates of ECCB

In addition to the methodological concerns, the passage of time and subsequent cultural changes require further investigation into the attitudes of the ecologically conscious consumer. The following proposed correlates have exhibited the most promise and descriptive power.

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness (PCE)

Perceived consumer effectiveness is a measure of the subject's judgment in the ability of individual consumers to affect environmental resource problems (Antil, 1978). Webster (1975) found that this variable was the only one of 10 independent variables to be a significant predictor for all three of his dependent variables. Kinnear et aL (1974) found that when consumers perceive that individuals can be increasingly effective in pollution abatement, they will show more concern for the environment. Both Tucker (1978) and Henion (1976) found consumers with an internal locus of control (conceptually similar to high perceived consumer effectiveness) exhibited a greater tendency to show socially responsible attitudes and behavior. Webster ( 1975) found that the socially conscious consume r feels strongly that he or she can do something about pollution and tries to consider the social impact of his or her purchases. Current research (Berger and Corbin, 1992; Weiner and Doescher, 1991) indicates that consumers' levels of PCE do affect their likelihood of performing ECCBs. Despite these results, further research is needed to investigate the relationship between PCE and ECCB. Public opinion on self-efficacy may have changed as a result of increased media coverage of environmental disasters and a heightened sense that environmental problems are large and complex and should be the responsibility of government and big business (Maibach, 1993).

H2: A consumer's degree of liberalism will positively affect

his or her performance of ecologically conscious consumer behaviors.

Environmental Concern (EC)

Ecological (Kinnear et al., 1974) and environmental (Van Liere and Dunlap, 1980, 1981) concern have often been used as surrogates for social responsibility. That ecologically conscious consumers will score higher on a measure of environmental concern should not be a great surprise. These concepts are closely related, and one would expect that if one is concerned about the environment, this concern may lead to more ECCB (Antil, 1984). Lepisto (1974) found environmental concern to be a significant predictor of ECCB, positing that the more attractive the environment, the more an altruistic act is likely to be performed. However, as stated earlier, a general increase in environmental concern across the population strongly suggests that this important relationship be investigated. Only a small portion of U.S. consumers act on these concerns in the marketplace. As Maibach (1993) points out, environmental concern may be high, but many consumers feel that preservation of the environment is the responsibility of government and/or big

HI: Perceived consumer effectiveness will positively affect

the performance of ecologically conscious consumer behaviors.

Table 1. Summary of Relevant Demographic Research

Nature of Relation of Demographic Characteristics to Dependent Variables Sample SES
N1 NI NI N1 + N1 NS + Male + + N1 NI NS NS NS NS NS NS + NI NI Female + + +

1,4 I,,,a

Dependent Variable Operationalization Age POR Sex Education Income Occupation

8-item SRS 734 Wisconsin adults

Study

Construct

Berkowitz and Lutterman (1968)

Social responsibility

kOe-

Kassarjian (1971)

NS
NS + NS + +

kS
"..4 Na kO

Concern for air pollution 8-item SRS 412 Austin, Texas consumers National sample of 1,503 Americans 141 residents of Boulder, Colorado Questions on EC 8 attitudinal scales of components of environmental concern 65 Item measure of EK and attitudes 1,881 sixth grade students (906 girls) NI NI NS Female 550 residents of a southwestern city 8 - i t e m S R S a n d use of recycling service NI

Open-ended measure of air pollution

242 Santa Monica households

Anderson and Cunningham (1972)

Socially conscious consumer

McEvoy (1972)

Environmental concern (EC)

Tognacci et al. (1972)

Environmental concern

Hounshell and Liggett (1973)

Environmental knowledge (EK) and attitude (EA)

NI

N1

Anderson et al. (1974)

Ecologically responsible consumer

NI NI NS NI

4.

NI NI

4. NS

NS 4-

4NS

Kinnear et al. (1974) 8-itemecological concern index 500 Canadian consumer mail panel members 249 residents of a southwestern city NI NI Self-report of willingness to pay for control of air pollution 8-item SCC index 227 residents of a small New England town 99 female shoppers of grocery chain in Chicago NS

EcologiCal concern

Reizenstein, Hills, and Philpot (1974)

Willingness to pay for control of air pollution

NI

Male

4-

4-

Webster (1975)

Socially conscious consumer Observation of detergent purchase, self-report of purchase of lead free gasoline Use of recycling center 8-item Likert scale

4-

NI

Female

NS

4-

NS

Brooker (1976)

User-nonuser of environmentally compatible products

N1

NS

NI

NS

NI

NI

N1

Arbuthnot (1977)

Pro-environmental behavior

145 Athens, Ohio area residents 548 Adult residents of Wisconsin

N1

+ NS

N1 NI

NS NS

(+/-) 4-

4NS

NI NS >

Buttell and Flinn (1978)

Awareness of environmental problems

g a

('3 O

3 5 1,078 urban and rural students N1 NI N1 NI N1 NI

D

Leftridge (1978)

Perception of environmental issues Six environmental concern scales VALS Survey 40 item SR consumption scale 690 members of Market Facts Consumer Mail panel 2,131 residents of Illinois + NI + NS NS NS + NS NS 1,600 consumers nationwide + + NI NS + 806 Washington state residents NI + Female + NS + NS

Student's reaction to slides of urban and rural environmental issues

~o tad o
NS + NS

Vanliere and Dunlap (1981)

Environmental concern

Mitchell (1983)

Societally conscious

Antil (1984)

Socially responsible consumer

Sandahl and Robertson (1989)

Environmental concern

Measures of environmental concerns, support for environmental regulations and ecological behaviors Recycled in past year Various 1-item measures of relevant consumer behavior Various 1-item measures of relevant consumer behavior 6-item self-report scale of conserving behavior 460 residents of southwestern U.S. university town National sample of U.S. consumers National sample of U.S. consumers NS 197 households in Illinois + N1 + N1 NI

NS

Vining and Ebreo (1990)

Recycler

NS Female

NS +

+ +

NS +

Roper (1990)

Ecologically conscious consumer behavior

Roper (1992)

Ecologically conscious consumer behavior

NS

NI

Female

Pickett, Kangun, and Grove (1993)

Conserving consumer

NS

NI

NI

NS

NS

NS

NI

Abbreviations: NI - Not Investigated, NS - Not Significant, SES - S o c i o - e c o n o m i c status, POR - Place of residence, + - Positively c o r r e l a t e d w i t h d e p e n d e n t variable(s), - - Negatively c o r r e l a t e d w i t h d e p e n d e n t variable(s).

kOe--

b3 ~
".,.d i b.J

1'4 1,4

222

J Bush Res 1996:36:217-231

J.A. Roberts

business, or that the costs of complying are too high. Price, quality, convenience, and consumer cynicism and confusion over environmental claims all may intervene between environmental concern and consumer behavior.
H3: Environmental concern will positively affect the performance of ecologically conscious consumer behaviors.

Table 2. Selected Subject Characteristics of National Sample

Characteristics
Sex

Percentage of Sample

Percentage of Populationa

X2

Male Female Age 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65 or over Education Not a high school graduate High school graduate Some college College degree Master's degree Doctorate Income <$5,000 $ 5,000-$ 9,999 $10,000-$14,999 $15,000-$24,999 $25,000-$34,999 $35,000-$49,999 $50,000-$74,999 $75,000 or over
~' Based o n 1 9 9 0 census data I, p < 0 0 1

495 50.5 5 9 10 23 16 14 23

48.8 51.2 11 11 12 22 14 12 18

0.02

Methodology
Sample
The scale used to measure ECCB was sent as part of a questionnaire to a random (cluster) sample of 1,503 adult U.S. consumers (Roberts, 1991). The USA was divided into six typical testmarket regions (Moskowitz, Katz, and Levering, 1983). One city from each region was chosen from a list of cities considered representative of the typical consumers in each region. Zip codes were then randomly selected from each city, and respondents were selected at random from each zip code. The sample was designed so that results could be generalized to the U.S. adult consumer population. Of the 1,302 deliverable questionnaires, a total of 605 usable responses was returned, a response rate of 46%. Of the 605 questionnaires, 23 were returned after the present study had begun and were not included in the analysis. The encouraging response rate is the result of the use of multiple mailings and the current interest in environmental issues.

6.02

5 24 35 23 10 3 1 5 5 17 18 28 15 11

21 37 25 12 4 1 5 9 9 18 16 18 15 10

43.8@

Sample Characteristics
The average age of the sample was 49 years old with a standard deviation of 17 years. Sex was equally balanced, and good variation was found for the remaining characteristics of education, income, and occupation (see Table 2 for selected subject characteristics). A X2 goodness-of-fit test was used to compare the present sample's demographic distribution to that of the population. The results of this analysis show the sample is similar to the U.S. population in regard to its age, income, and composition of males and females (see Table 2). This finding, combined with the results of a check for nonresponse bias (reported next), provides support for the generalizability of the study's findings.

14.06

age was significantly different between the two groups of respondents. Older respondents returned their questionnaire more quickly. The average score on the dependent variable of interest (ECCB scale) was similar for the two groups. The results of this procedure provide a measure of confidence in generalizing the study's findings to the population at large.

Dependent Measure
Ecologically conscious consumers are defined as those who purchase products and services which they perceive to have a positive (or less negative) impact on the environment. The ECCB scale contains a wide variety of behaviors chosen from the domain of ECCB. The use of a behavioral measure was essential because of the potential gap between environmental attitudes and behavior. Some items were selected from existing scales and others were developed to reflect the changing nature of ecologically conscious consumption in the 1990s. The dependent variable of interest was designed to measure ECCB. A factor analysis using Quartimax rotation of the initial 30 items identified two factors. See Tables 3 and 4 for a list of scale items, factor loadings, and variance accounted for by each factor. The first factor, which captured 46% of the vari-

Nonresponse Bias Check

Although a secondary objective, a sample's representativeness of the population from which it was drawn should be assessed. In addition to the previous X2 analysis, a procedure suggested by Armstrong and Overton (1977) for gauging nonresponse bias was used. The procedure consists of comparing the characteristics and responses of early respondents (first 67% received) to late respondents (last 33% received) through t-tests of mean values. Variables included in this procedure consisted of education, occupation, age, sex, income, and score on the ECCB scale. This check for nonresponse bias rests on the assumption that late respondents are more similar to nonrespondents. Of the five demographic characteristics investigated, only

Green Consumers in the 1990s

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

223

Table 3. ECCB Scale Items and Factor Loadings a

Correlation with Factor 1 Factor 2

1. I normally make a conscious effort to limit my use of products that are made of or use scarce resources. 2. 1 always try to use electric appliances (e.g., dishwasher, washer, and dryer) before 10 a.M. and after 10 P.M. 3. 1 will not buy products that have excessive packaging. 4. When there is a choice, I always choose the product that contributes to the least amount of pollution. 5. If I understand the potential damage to the environment that some products can cause, I do not purchase these products. 6. I have switched products for ecological reasons. 7. I use a recycling center or in some way recycle some of my household trash. 8. 1 make every effort to buy paper products made from recycled paper. 9. I use a low-phosphate detergent (or soap) for my laundry. 10. I have convinced members of my family or friends not to buy some products that are harmful to the environment. 11. 1 have purchased products because they cause less pollution. 12. I do not buy products in aerosol containers. 13. Whenever possible, I buy products packaged in reusable containers. 14. When 1 purchase products, I always make a conscious effort to buy those products that are low in pollutants. 15. When 1 have a choice between two equal products, I always purchase the one less harmful to other people and the environment. 16. 1 will not buy a product if the company that sells it is ecologically irresponsible. 17. 1 buy toilet paper made from recycled paper. 18. I buy kleenex made from recycled paper. 19. I buy paper towels made from recycled paper. 20. 1 try only to buy products that can be recycled. 21. To reduce our reliance on foreign oil, I drive my car as little as possible. 22. I do not buy household products that harm the environment. 23. To save energy, I drive my car as little as possible. 24. I try to buy energy efficient household appliances. 25. I have tried very hard to reduce the amount of electricity 1 use. 26. 1 have purchased a household appliance because it uses less electricity than other brands. 27. I have replaced light bulbs in my home with those of smaller wattage so that 1 will conserve on the electricity I use. 28. I have purchased light bulbs that were more expensive but saved energy. 29. 1 usually purchase the lowest priced product, regardless of its impact on society, b 30. 1 buy high efficiency light bulbs to save energy.
" Only' factor loadings of 0.3 or higher are reported. This item did not load on either factor at the 4-_ 0 3 level or h i g h e r

0.72 0.52 0.62 0.80 0.74 0.81 0.64 0.83 0.64 0.77 0.84 0.66 0.77 0.87 0.79 0.61 0.70 0.66 0.73 0.84 0.63 0.74 0.50 0.46 0.51 0.47 0.57 O.50 0.48 0.33

0.39 0.47 0.41 0.55 0.41 0.53 0.58

ance, included a variety of c o n s u m e r b e h a v i o r s w h o s e intent was to protect the e n v i r o n m e n t . The second factor contained eight items and explained 6% of the variance. F r o m an examination of these eight items, it is clear they share a c o m m o n o b j e c t i v e - s a v i n g money. These items w e r e r e m o v e d resulting in a 22-item measure of ECCB. Coefficient alpha for the 22-

Table 4. Results of Factor Analysis of ECCB Scale

Factor Eigenvalue Percent of Variance

1 2

13.77 1.89

45.9 6.3

item scale was 0.96. The response categories w e r e in a 5-point Likert-type format a n c h o r e d by "always true" (5) and "never true" (1) as relevant to the given behavior. Higher scores indicate greater levels of ECCB. A confirmatory factor analysis was p e r f o r m e d to test for discriminant validity a m o n g PCE, EC, liberalism, and ECCB. A full m o d e l was estimated with each of the four factors correlating freely. O n e by one each of the factor intercorrelations (phi's, in LISREL 7) was fixed to 1.0, and related intercorrelations were set equal (e.g., w h e n phi{l,2} = 1.0, phi{l,3} = phi{2,3} and phi{l,4} = phi{2,4}). Each of these restricted, nested models was then c o m p a r e d to the full m o d e l via a X2 difference test. All of these restricted models resulted in significantly p o o r e r fits, with the closest o c c u r r i n g w h e n the correlation b e t w e e n

224

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

J.A. Roberts

PCE and ECCB was fixed at one, but even this resulted in a significant reduction in fit (X 2 with three degrees of freedom = 58.11, p < .0000). Thus, the constructs do appear to be distinct.

Independent Measures
The three individual difference variables used in the present study were perceived consumer effectiveness, liberalism, and environmental concern (see Appendix for individual scale items). Six demographic measures were also included. 1. Perceived consumer effectiveness is a measure of the subject's judgment in the ability of individual consumers to affect environmental/resource problems (Antil, 1978). Previous research has found PCE to be a valid construct with the ability to distinguish between high and low ecologically conscious consumers (Antil, 1978; Kinnear et al., 1974; Webster, 1975). The scale included four Likerttype items. Alpha for the scale = 0.72. 2. Liberalism is a political ideology that falls on the "left" dimension of the broad left-right cleavage. The scale included six Likert-type items. Alpha for the scale = 0.80. 3. Environmental concern is a measure of the individual's concern for the environment. The 12-item new environmental paradigm (NEP) scale was originally developed by Dunlap and Van Liere (1978) and later tested by Noe and Snow (1990). After extensive testing, Noe and Snow (1990) concluded the NEP scale was an advanced tool for measuring environmental concern. The scale includes 12 Likert-type items. Alpha for the scale = 0.84. The demographic variables of age, sex, education, income, and occupational prestige were utilized as independent variables in developing a profile of the ecologically conscious consumer. These were the standard demographic measures for such variables. The measure of occupation measured the "prestige" of the respondent's occupation. The scale was developed in the sociology literature using regression analysis and can be considered interval in nature. This makes it appropriate for use in regression analyses.

As can be seen in Table 6, sex, income, education, and age were found to be significant predictors of ECCB. Women scored higher on the dependent measure. Age and education were positively correlated and income negatively correlated with ECCB. However, R2 was only 6%. The question remains whether the statistically significant relationship found between certain demographics and ECCB is manageriallly significant? The n e x t regression analyses involved the addition of PCE, EC, and liberalism into the regression equation. The results of this regression can be found in Table 7. It is apparent that the addition of the attitudinal variables aids greatly in explaining variation in ECCB. W jumped from 0.06 to 0.45. Age, sex, and income were the only significant demographic predictors of ECCB in the full model. PCE is by far the most effective variable in explaining variation in the sample's ECCB. In a separate stepwise regression analysis, using all the demographic and attitudinal variables, PCE entered into the equation first and explained 33% of the variation in ECCB. The next most important variables (in order) included environmental concern, age, liberalism, income, and sex.

Discussion Demographic Analysis

Earlier research into the demographic correlates of ECCB provided mixed results. An upscale profile of the ECC (high income, education, and occupation) was suggested by many (Anderson and Cunningham, 1972; Berkowitz and Lutterman, 1968; Balderjahn, 1988; Cornwell and Schwepker, Jr., 1992; McEvoy, 1972; Tognacci et al., 1972; Webster, 1975). Very few studies (Antil, 1978; Kassarjian, 1971) found demographics ineffective in distinguishing between differing levels of ECCB. A recent poll conducted by the Roper organization (1992) found evidence that ecologically conscious consumers are likely to be more educated, earn more money, and be female. Balderjahn (1988) also argued that the ecologically conscious consumer belongs to the upper social classes. Although the Roper poll, Balderjahn, and earlier studies that developed an upscale profile of the ecologically conscious consumer have a certain intuitive appeal, the present research found no support for ECCB as the domain of a privileged few. During the present research, five demographic variables were included in the analysis (sex, age, income, education, and occupation). Of these, age, sex, education, and income were found to be significantly related to ECCB. No significant relationship appeared between occupation and ECCB. In addition to this, income was negatively related to ECCB. An R2 of 0.06 casts doubt on the efficacy of demographics in distinguishing between those exhibiting differing levels of ECCB. The following discusses, interprets, a n d - w h e r e possibleexplains the descriptive power of the demographics results. Nonsignificant findings are discussed because of the importance these have in developing a complete profile of the ecologically conscious consumer.

Method of Analysis
The primary method of analysis was a hierarchical model of multiple regression using the ECCB scale as the dependent variable. The attitudinal and demographic variables were used as predictor variables in developing a profile of the ecologically conscious consumer. The initial regression analysis included only the demographic variables. The full model included both the demographic and attitudinal variables as predictors of ECCB.

Results
The results of the regression analyses can be found in Tables 5, 6, and 7. Table 5 contains a correlation matrix of the variables used in the regression analyses.

Green Consumers in the 1990s

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

225

Table 5. Correlation Matrix of Variables Used in Regression Analyses

Correlation (# of Cases) ECCB Age Sex Education Occupation Income SES PCE EC Liberalism

ECCB Age Sex Education Occupation Income SES PCE EC Liberalism

1.0 0.08 a (544) 0.17b (555) -0.01 (548) -0.05 (547) -0.17 b (537) -0.10 a (530) 0.588 (548) 0.47 b (531) 0.318 (537)

1.0 -0.108 (581) -0.20 b (569) -0.03 (567) -0.178 (557) -0.188 (549) -0.138 (566) -0.08 a (549) -0.06 (558) 1.0 -0.118 (570) -0.01 (568) -0.17 b (558) -0.138 (550) 0.148 (567) 0.09 a (550) 0.16 b (559) 1.0 0.548 (568) 0.358 (559) 0.818 (554) 0.11 b (557) 0.04 (539) 0.16 b (550) 1.0 1.0 (557) 0.80 b (554) 0.06 (556) -0.018 (538) -0.23 b (551)

0.72b (554) 0.03 (546) -0.12 (528) -0.35 b (544)

1.0 0.08 a (539) -0.04 (521) -0.34 b (539)

1.0

0.438 (540) 0.168 (548)

1.0 0.39 b (533) 1.0

a p < .05. 6 p < .01.

Age and ECCB

Age was significantly related to ECCB in all analyses. Older consumers performed more ECCBs. Dychtwald and Gable (1990) offered a possible explanation for such a finding. Middle age was found to be a time when personal and social responsibilities peak. Middle age is also typically a period when donations to charity rise, another indication of people's increased sense of involvement and responsibility in their communities. A second explanation for a positive relationship between age and ECCB could be cohort differences. Samdahl and Robertson (1989) agree that the effect of age lies in cohort effects, rather than biological maturity, but are uncertain whether older cohorts reflect the "depression-era" ethic of conservation (as their study supported), or whether younger cohorts demonstrate an increased socialization into environmental awareness as suggested by Mohai and Twight (1987). Keep in mind that the con-

tribution of age (although significant) in explaining ECCB was limited. This calls into question the efficacy of using age as a variable by which to segment the market for ecologically conscious products and services.

Sex and ECCB

In every analysis, females performed more ECCBs. This is consistent with Eagly's (1987) social role theory, current subscription rates for environmental magazines, and research by the Roper organization (1992) that found females contributing a majority of the two most environmentally concerned consumer groups. It seems likely that gender-role expectations and the

Table 7. Results of Regression Analysis - Full Model (Dependent Variable - ECCB)

Variable Regression Coefficient Beta Significance

Table 6. Results of Regression Analysis - Demographic Variables (Dependent Variable - ECCB) Variable Regression Coefficient Beta Significance

Attitudinal variables PCE EC Liberalism

0.179 0.023 0.022

0.48 0.19 0.13 0.17 0.08 -0.08 0.06 -0.04

< 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0010 < 0.0001 0.0247 0.0292 O.1688 0.3057

Sex Income Education Age Occupation

0.28 -0.049 0.083 0.005 -0.013

0.17 -0.15 0.12 0.09 -0.06

0.0001 0.0018 0.0269 0.0308 0.2601

Demographic variables Age 0.008 Sex O.128 Income -0.027 Education 0.040 Occupation -0.009

R 2 - 0.06, f = 7.29,Sig <.0001, df- 5, 531.

R 2 - 45, f - 5252, Significance= < O001,df- 8, 519.

226

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

J.A. Roberts

acquisition of sex-typed skills and beliefs (Eagly, 1987) lead women to consider the impact of their decisions on others more often than do males. This gender gap is particularly important because women still do more of the household shopping (Schwartz and Miller, 1991).

Income and ECCB

Finding a negative relationship between income and ECCB casts doubt on the theory of the ecologicallly conscious consumer belonging to the upperclass. Environmental deterioration may have reached the point where consumers from the lower socioecQnmic strata are becoming involved. Increased media coverage of such deterioration may have prompted these groups to act. This finding contradicts most existing research. Antil (1978) and Kassarjian (1971) found no relationship between income and ECCB. Some caution must be advised in interpreting this study's findings because of the relatively small amount of variance explained by the income variable. Although statistically significant, it explained only 2% of the variation in the dependent variable in a separate step-wise regression analysis.

the variable PCE. Perceived consumer effectiveness was a highly significant predictor variable and had the highest beta coefficient in the full-model regression analysis. This supports earlier findings by Antil (1978), Kinnear et al. (1974), and Webster (1975). The more people believe they can abate environmental resource problems, the more they are likely to perform ECCBs. On the other hand, consumers who do not believe they can effectively fight environmental deterioration are unlikely to perform ECCBs.

Environmental Concern and ECCB

EC explained an additional 5% of the variation in the sample's ECCB in the step-wise regression analysis. It should not be surprising that ecologically conscious consumers will score higher on a measure of EC than those not so environmentally concerned. The surprise lies in EC's second-place ranking as a descriptor of ECCB. It appears that one's judgment of the individual's ability to abate environmental destruction (PCE) explains more of why a person performs ECCBs than does one's concern for the environment itself. Upon further reflection, it seems logical that if people feel they can have a positive impact on any situation, they are more likely to act. If people are concerned about the environment, but feel that their actions cannot cause change, they will be less likely to participate in such activities.

Education, Occupation, and ECCB

A significant relationship appeared between ECCB and one's level of education. This supports the majority of studies in this area that have found a positive relationship between education and environmental Concern and/or ECCB. However, when attitudinal variables were entered into the regression equation, education became nonsignificant as a predictor of ECCB. Although a statistically significant relationship appeared between education and ECCB in the initial regression, the managerial significance of the relationship is questionable. Research by Kassarjian (1971) and Antil (1984) found that education and/or occupation were not significant predictors of ECCB. Occupation was not significantly related to ECCB in any of the analyses. It is possible that as the media devote more time to environmental issues, and as consumers increasingly confront environmental blight, ECCB may transcend socioeconomic categories.

Liberalism and ECCB

Liberalism's power in explaining ECCB was limited. One's degree of liberalism explained only an additional 2% of variation in the respondents' ECCB. Democrats and liberals have historically been more concerned about environmental and social issues than their Republican and conservative counterparts. Dunlap (1975) noted three reasons to expect a split along traditional ideological lines: (1) environmental reforms generally are opposed by business and industry because of the costs involved; (2) environmental and social reforms entail an extension of governmental activities and regulations; and (3) environmental reforms often require innovative action. Given traditional Republican-Conservative favoritism toward business, opposition to big government, and suspicion of drastic change, one expects differences in environmental concern between liberals and conservatives. The belief that liberals are more prone to act in an ecologically conscious manner is supported in the present study.

Attitudinal Analysis
Consistent both with logic and with the findings of many others (Antil, 1978; Anderson and Cunningham, 1972; Berger and Corbin, 1992; Ellen et al., 1991; Kinnear et al., 1974; Kassarjian, 1971) attitudinal variables have been found to predict or explain ECCB better than demographic measures. The present study supports such a contention. R2 increased from a high of 6% with use of demographics only to 45% with the inclusion of attitudinal variables. The hypothesized attitudinal correlates of ECCB will be discussed in order of their importance in explaining variation in the sample's ECCB.

Advertising Implications
Market Segmentation Strategy
A major implication for marketers is that a segment of ECCs exists in a size large enough to warrant their attention (see Table 8). Of equal importance, a substantial segment that exhibits little or no concern about the environment also exists. This is consistent with recent surveys by the Roper organization (1990, 1992). Roper (1992) found that approximately 20% of the U.S.

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and ECCB

A separate step-wise regression analysis for the present study found that 33% of the variation in ECCB can be explained by

Green Consumers in the 1990s

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

227

Table 8. Breakdown of the Sample's Average Score in the ECCB

Scale (n - 558)
Average Score 1 -1.49 1.5-1.99 % of Sample 3.9

2.0-2.49 2.5-2.99 3.0-3.49 3.5-3.99 4.0-4.49 4.5-5.0

6.5 ll.5 20.3 23.5 18.6 11.5 4.3

All q u e s t i o n s w e r e r e c o r d e d o n the f o l l o w i n g 5 - p o i n t scale as it related to the res p o n d e n t ' s c o n s u m e r b e h a v i o r : 1 - n e v e r true; 2 - rarely true: 3 - s o m e t i m e s true; 4 = m o s t l y true; 5 - always t r u e Note: A h i g h e r s c o r e designates a h i g h e r level of E C C B

population are considered "true-blue" greens. These people hold strong pro-environmental beliefs and live them. They are three times more likely than other consumers to avoid buying products from companies with questionable environmental reputations, and twice as likely to buy green products. Approximately 16% of the present sample "mostly" to "always" performed various ECCBs. Approximately 42% of the sample "sometimes" to "mostly" performed various ECCBs. This group appears similar to Roper's "Sprouts" who engage in pro-environmental behaviors but are less willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products and services. With approximately 90 million households in the U.S., the size of these two groups provides a significant market segment for purveyors of ecologically conscious products and services. On the other end of the continuum, 42% of the present sample "never," "rarely," or "sometimes" performed ECCBs. These groups find their equivalents in the "Grousers" or "Basic-Browns" identified in the Roper (1992) survey, and provide evidence that an ample segment of society takes little notice of how their consumer spending affects the environment. There appears to be an opportunity for marketers to successfully practice differentiated marketing, selling different products with different appeals to different segments. The relative weak showing of demographic correlates of ECCB suggests that dealing with ECCB is a complex problem. The market segments are still not well defined, especially in terms of demographic variables, more commonly used as initial criteria in segmenting markets and planning mass communication efforts. However, females and older consumers seem somewhat more receptive to environmental claims in product advertising. Income's negative relationship with ECCB suggests that marketers and researchers may hold misconceptions about the economic status of green consumers. Keep in mind that income only accounts for 1% of unique variance in ECCB. The managerial significance of this relationship is suspect and requires additional study. The lack of a relationship between ECCB and level of education or occupational prestige (in the full

model), and the inverse relationship of income and ECCB, suggests that the market for these types of products is widening. The weak or nonexistent associations depicted between the demographic variables and ECCB provide important information for advertisers and marketers. The inability of demographics to explain ECCB suggests that ECCB may not be a general behavioral pattern, but one that is behavior-specific. This is consistent with the findings of Balderjahn (1988) who found that each ECCB has its own cluster of predictors. As stated by Pickett et al. (1993), public policy-makers must exercise caution when attempting to extend environmental initiatives from one environmentally conscious behavior to another. For example, those consumers who purchase recycled paper products may not be the same consumers who purchase low-phosphate detergents. Kassarjian (1971 ) may have assessed the situation correctly nearly 20 years ago. He concluded that it would be best to gauge consumer behavior by examining attitudes toward a particular issue-e.g., buying recycled paper products. He rejected segmenting the market based on demographic characteristics when attempting to locate the segment of the market that would be most receptive to environmentally based claims.

Message Strategy
Advertising directed toward the ecologically conscious consumer market segment would be advised to stress the ability of the individual consumer to fight environmental deterioration. PCE contributed the most (33%) to explaining variation in the sample's ECCB. The most striking aspect of the relationship between PCE and ECCB is that a person's concern for the environment (R 2 = 5 % ) is not nearly as important in explaining ECCB as is PCE. New communication strategies must be identified in order to motivate consumers to shop in an ecologically conscious manner. A common approach has been to use a sick baby appeal as a basis for communications in social marketing. The sick baby appeal focuses on the importance of the issue and the severity of the need for help (Fine, 1990; Obermfller, 1992). Ellen et al. (1991) and Fine (1990) propose that for some issues for which level of concern is already high (e.g., environmental concern), the sick baby appeal may reduce perceived consumer effectiveness ("It's so bad, I can't do anything about it"). The suggested communication strategy is a well baby appeal, which stresses the significance of individual action and includes information about the specific actions that would help solve the problem. The advertiser must provide regular, positive feedback that shows individuals are making a difference and that reinforces behavior through focusing on consumer successes rather than failures (Ellen et al., 1991). It must be emphasized that the goal will be achieved (Weiner and Doescher, 1991). This approach should bolster levels of PCE and hence, ECCB. Because of the global scope of environmental problems and the tendency for the individual consumer to feel overwhelmed,

228

J Bush Res 1996:36:217-231

J.A. Roberts

promotional campaigns that exhort "Think globally-act locally" have emerged. Based upon this study's findings, this type of appeal should be effective in enhancing PCE and thus, behavior. Scope reduction from global to local (Fine, 1990; Wiener and Doescher, 1991) has been advocated as an effective strategy when dealing with a host of social concerns. With the current high levels of concern for the environment across the population, the potential benefit from enhancing concern may be illusory. Many scholars have suggested that the major promotional task is to induce people to act on their concern (Gill, Crosby, and Taylor, 1986; Vining and Ebreo, 1990). This is consistent with the ongoing shift of advertising dollars from mass media advertising efforts to consumer sales promotions and direct response advertising (Nowak and Phelps, 1994). Integrated marketing/advertising efforts that stress communication and behavioral objectives concurrently seem particularly appropriate in the present situation. It is suggested that advertisers use blended communications that have elements of both brand/image advertising and also include response devices such as mail-in promotional offers, 800/900 telephone numbers, explicit offers, premiums, and coupons. These blended efforts enable advertisers to directly measure the behavioral effects of a marketing/advertising communication effort. Advertisers attempting to encourage ECCB have several blended strategies from which to choose. Because of the strength of the relationship between PCE and ECCB, advertising communications that show individuals making a difference in combating environmental ills that include a direct response device are more likely to solicit the desired behavior change. A second strategy would be to increase or reignite already high levels of environmental concern and then provide a direct response device for acting on that concern. A review of pertinent green literature offers additional insights when constructing communication strategies directed toward green consumers. Advertising must be believable as cynicism grows regarding ecological claims. As many as 47% of consumers do not believe ecological claims used in advertising (Fierman, 1991). Only 30% of U.S. adults believe comparative environmental claims (Stisser, 1994). Advertisers are also warned to make only claims that can be substantiated. Environmental lobbies have been known to attack false or poorly documented claims laeding to negative backlash and contributing to consumer confusion (Magrath, 1992). This situation is worsened by the fact that (in many circumstances) there is no universal agreement as to what is best for the environment. Although liberalism was found to be positively related to ECCB, its low explanatory power (W ~ 2%) calls into question the efficacy of using liberal themes in environmental advertising. Republicans and conservatives have become more supportive of spending on the environment through the 1980s

(Howell and Laska, 1992). It appears that as ECCB cuts across socioeconomic boundaries, the relationship between liberalism and ECCB will continue to weaken.

Conclusion
The major contributions of this study were the investigation of the potential demographic and attitudinal correlates of ECCB in the 1990s and the subsequent discussion of the implications for advertisers of ecologically conscious products and services. Past results based on poorly conceptualized or questionably valid scales, coupled with the passage of time and incipient change, clearly called for a recasting of past analyses of the demographic and attitudinal correlates of ECCB. The increase in media coverage of environmental deterioration, both locally and globally; the recent influx of "environmentally compatible" products to the marketplace; and the integration of ecological issues into both our educational and political systems suggest that the traditional profile of the ecologically conscious consumer may be outdated. All of these developments have no doubt sensitized the American public to the plight of the environment and call into question the formerly accepted efficacy of demographics as predictors of ECCB. The strength of the relationship found between PCE and ECCB has important advertising implications. The effect of environmental concern on ECCB (though significant) was slight, which suggests that other factors play a more important role in explaining a consumer's likelihood of performing such behaviors. It still appears that price, quality, convenience, and value are the most important buying criteria (Fierman, 1991; Magrath, 1992; Mandese, 1991; Stisser, 1994; Whittemore, 1991). To date, PCE has been identified as the most promising variable in explaining variation in ECCB. Future research should focus on the possible antecedents of PCE and on development of the most effective strategies for combating negative PCE (Ellen et al., 1991). Although PCE was found to be strongly associated with a general measure of ECCB, additional insight could be gained from treating PCE as a situational variable and investigating the role it plays in a host of specific green consumer behaviors. The results of this research could have important implications for advertisers and marketers alike. From my review of relevant literature, other factors that affect the consumer purchase decision process for ecologically conscious products and services provide fruitful areas for future research. These areas include message believability; consumer confusion over green advertising; and the relative impact of price, convenience, quality, and value on the purchase decision process for green products and services.

Green Consumers in the 1990s

J Busn Res

229

1996:36:217-231

Appendix Scale Items for Independent Variables

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness (PCE) Scale
It is worthless for the individual consumer to do anything about pollution. When I buy products, I try to consider how my use of them will affect the environment and other consumers. Since one person cannot have any effect upon pollution and natural resource problems, it doesn't make any difference what I do. Each consumer's behavior can have a positive effect on society by purchasing products sold by socially responsible companies.

Environmental Concern (EC) Scale

Plants and animals exist primarily to be used by humans. We are approaching the limit of the number of people the earth can support To maintain a healthy economy, we will have to develop a steady-state economy where industrial growth is controlled. The earth is like a spaceship with only limited room and resources. Humans need not adapt to the natural environment because they can remake it to suit their needs. There are limits to growth beyond which our industrialized society cannot expand. The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset. When humans interfere with nature, it often produces disastrous consequences. Humans must live in harmony with nature in order to survive. Mankind is severely abusing the environment. Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs. Mankind was created to rule over the rest of nature.

Liberalism Scale
The profits of the big industries should be controlled by the federal government. I am for a federal health insurance program covering men and women of all ages. If unemployment is high, the government should spend to create jobs. A government-administered health insurance program is necessary to insure that everyone receives adequate medical care. I am for less government regulation of business. I am for revising the tax structure so that the burden falls more heavily on corporations and persons with large incomes.

References
AdvertisingAge, Spurts and Starts: Corporate Role in '90s Environmentalism Hardly Consistent. (October 28, 1991): GR14-16. Anderson, Jr., W. Thomas, and Cunningham, William H., The Socially Conscious Consumer.Journal of Marketing 36 (July 1972): 23-31. Anderson, Jr., W. Thomas, Henion, Karl E., and Cox, III, Eli P., Socially vs. Ecologically Responsible Consumers. AMA Combined Conference Proceedings 36 (Spring and Fall 1974): 304-311. Antil, John H., The Construction and Validation of an Instrument to Measure Socially Responsible Consumer Behavior: A Study of the Socially Responsible Consumer. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Marketing, The Pennsylvania State University, 1978. Antil, John H., Socially Responsible Consumers: Profile and Implications for Public Policy. Journal of MacroMarketing 4 (Fall 1984): 18-39. Arbuthnot, Jack, The Roles of Attitudinal and Personality Variables in the Prediction of Environmental Behavior and Knowledge. Environment and Behavior 9 (1977): 217-232. Armstrong, J. Scott, and Overton, Terry S., Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys.Journal of Marketing Research 14 (August 1977): 396-402. Balderjahn, lngo, Personality Variables and Environmental Attitudes

as Predictors of Ecologically Responsible Consumption Patterns.

Journal of Business Research 17 (August 1988): 51-56.

Berger, Ida E., and Corbin, Ruth M, Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Faith in Others as Moderators of EnvironmentallyResponsible Behaviors.Journal of Public Policy& Marketing 11 (2) (1992): 79-88. Berkowitz, Leonard, and Lutterman, Kenneth G., The Traditional Socially Responsible Personality. Public Opinion Quarterly 32 (Summer 1968): 169-185. Brooker, George, The Self-Actualizing Socially Conscious Consumer. J~Jurnal of Consumer Research 3 (September 1976): 107-112. Buttel, Frederick H., and Flinn, William L., The Politics of Environmental Concern: The lmpacts of Party Identification and Political Ideology on Environmental Attitudes. Environmentand Behavior 10 (1) (1978): 17-37. Carlson, Les, Kangun, Norman, and Grove, Stephen J., A Content Analysis of Environmental Advertising Claims, in ProceedingsoJthe 1992 Conference of The American Academy of Advertising, Leonard N. Reid, ed., San Antonio, TX. 1992, p. 118. Coddington, Walter, lt's No Fad: Environmentalism ls Now a Fact of Corporate Life. Marketing News October 15, 1990, p. 7. Cornwell, Betinna T., and Schwepker, Jr., Charles H., Attitudes and

230

J Bush Res 1996:36:217-231

J.A. Roberts

Intentions Regarding Ecologically Packaged Products: Subcultural Variations, in Proceedings of The 1992 American Academy of Advertising, Leonard N. Reid, ed., San Antonio, TX. 1992, p. 119. Crosby, Lawrence, Taylor, James, and Kinnear, Thomas, The Role of Ecological Concern in the Passage of the Michigan Container Law, in Marketing in the 80s-Changes and Challenges, Educators' Conference Proceedings, Richard Bagozzi et al., eds., American Marketing Association, Chicago. 1980, pp. 448-451. Dunlap, Riley E., The Impact of Political Orientation on Environmental Attitudes and Actions. Environment and Behavior 7 (4) (1975): 428-454. Dunlap, Riley E., and Van Liere, Kent D., 1978: The New Environmental Paradigm.Journal of Environmental Education 9 (4) (1978): 10-19. Durning, Alan, Limiting Consumption: Toward a Sustainable Culture. The Futurist 25 (July-August 1991): 11-15. Dychtwald, Ken, and Gable, Greg, Portrait of a Changing Consumer. Business Horizons 33 (January-February 1990): 62-73. EcoSource, Ecological Concerns Escalating across the World. (March/April 1991): 17. Eagly, Alice, Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social Role Interpretation, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. 1987. Ellen, Pam Scholder, Weiner, Joshua Lyle, and Cobb-Walgreen, Cathy, The Role of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness in Motivating Environmentally Conscious Behaviors. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 10 (2) (1991): 102-117. Fierman, Jaclyn, The Big Muddle in Green Marketing, Fortune (June 3, 1991): 91-101. Fine, Seymour, Social Marketing, Allyn & Bacon, Inc. Boston, MA. 1990. Freeman, Laurie, The Greening of America II: Savy Marketers Keep Aboard the Environmental Cause. Advertising Age (November 13, 1990): 514. Gill, James D., Crosby, Lawrence A., and Taylor, James R., Ecological Concern, Attitudes, and Social Norms in Voting Behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly 50 (4) (1986): 537-554. Greenwatch, J. Walter Thompson Company, 3 (Spring/Summer 1991). Henion, Karl E., The Effect of Ecologically Relevant Information on Detergent Sales. Journal of Marketing Research 9 (February 1972): 10-14. Henion, Karl E, Ecolo~cal Marketing, Grid, Inc., Columbus, OH. 1976. Hounshell, P., and Liggett, L., Assessing the Effectiveness of Environmental Education.Journal of Environmental Education 5 (2) (1973): 28-30. Howell, Susan E., and Laska, Shirley B., The Changing Face of the Environmental Coalition. Environment and Behavior 24 (January 1992): 134-144. Hume, Scott, Strand, Patricia, Fisher, Christy, Fitzgerald, Kate, and Freeman, Laurie, Consumers Go Green. Advertising Age (September 25, 1989): 3-5. Kassarjian, Harold H., Incorporating Ecology into Marketing Strategy: The Case of Air Pollution.Journal of Marketing 35 (July 1971 ): 61-65. Kinnear, Thomas C., Taylor, James R., and Ahmed, Sadrudin A., Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are They? Journal of Marketing 38 (April 1974): 20-24. Kirkpatrick, David, Environmentalism. Fortune (February 12, 1990): 44-52. Leftridge, Leonard Alan, Rural and Urban Secondary Student Perceptions of Environmental Issues: Relevance to Environmental Edu-

cation Curriculum Development. Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University, 1978. Lepisto, Lawrence Roland, An Empirical Study of the Effect of Environmental Product Attributes, Convenience, and Price on Product Preference and Socially Responsible Consumer Behavior. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Marketing, The Pennsylvania State University, 1974. Maibach, Edward, Social Marketing for the Environment: Using Information Campaigns to Promote Environmental Awareness and Behavior Change. Health Promotion International 8 (3) (1993): 209-224. McGrath, Allan J., Marketin' of the Green. Sales & Marketing Management (October 1992): 31-32. Mandese, Joe, New Study Finds Green Confusion. Advertising Age, (October 21, 1991): 1, 56. McEvoy, II1,J., The American Concern with the Environment, in Social Behavior, Natural Resources, and the Environment, Harper and Row, New York. 1972. Mitchell, Arnold, The Nine American Lifestyles, Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., New York. 1983. Mohai, P., and Twight, B. W., Age and Environmentalism: An Elaboration of the Buttel Model Using National Survey Evidence. Social Forces 68 (4) (1987): 798-815. Moskowitz, Milton, Katz, Michael, and Levering, Robert, Everybody's Business Scoreboard, Harper and Row, San Francisco. 1983. Noe, Francis P., and Snow, Rob, The New Environmental Paradigm and Further Scale Analysis. Journal of Environmental Education 21 (4) (1990): 20-26. Nowak, Glen J., and Phelps, Joseph, Conceptualizing the Integrated Marketing Communications' Phenomenon: An Examination of Its Impact on Advertising Practices and Its Implications for Advertising Research. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising 16 (Spring 1994): 49-66. Obermiller, Carl, The Baby Is Sick/The Baby Is Well: A Test of Environmental Communication Appeals, in Proceedings of the 1993 Conference of The American Academy of Advertising, Esther Thorson, ed., 1994. p. 279. Ottman, Jacquelyn A., Green Marketing, NTC Business Books, Chicago, 1L. 1994. Pearce, Fred, The Consumers Are Not So Green. New Scientist (,June 16, 1990): 13, 14. Pickett, Gregory M., Kangun, Norman, and Grove, StephenJ., Is There a General Conserving Consumer? A Public Policy Concern.Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 12 (2) (1993): 234-243. Research Alert, Environmentalism and Americans: A Guide to the Foremost Trend of Our Time, Research Alert, Long Island City, NY. 1990. Riezenstein, Richard C., Hills, Gerald E., and Philpot, John W., Willingness to Pay for Control of Air Pollution: A Demographic Analysis, in 1974 Combined Proceedings, Ronald C. Curhan, ed., American Marketing Association, Chicago. 1974, pp. 323-328. Roberts,James A., The Development of a Profile of the Socially Responsible Consumer for the 1990s and Its Marketing Management and Public Policy Implications. Doctoral dissertation, Marketing Department, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. 1991. Roper Organization, The Environment: Public Attitudes and Individual Behavior. Commissioned by S. C. Johnson and Son, Inc. 1990. Roger Organization, Environmental Behavior, North America: Canada, Mexico, United States. Commissioned by S. C. Johnson and Son, Inc. 1992. Samdahl, Diane M., and Robertson, Robert, Social Determinants of En-

Green Consumers in the 1990s

J Busn Res 1996:36:217-231

231

vironmental Concern: Specification and Test of the Model. Environment and Behavior 21 (1) (1989): 57-81. Schlossberg, Howard, Canadians Are Serious about Their Environment-and Ours, Too. Marketing News March 19, 1990, p. 16. Schlossberg, Howard, Americans Passionate about the Environment? Critic Says That's Nonsense. Advertising Age, September 16, 1991, p. 8. Schwartz, Joe, and Miller, Thomas, The Earth's Best Friends. American Demographics 13 (February 1991): 26-35. Simmons Market Research Bureau, Study of Media and Markets, Syndicated Division of Simmons. 1991. Stisser, Peter, A Deeper Shade of Green. American Demographics 16 (March 1994): 24-29. Tognacci, Louis N., Weigel, Russell H., Wideen, Marvin F., and Vernon, David T., Environmental Quality: How Universal Is Public Concern? Environment and Behavior 4 (March 1972): 73-86. Tucker, Jr., Lewis R., The EnvironmentallyConcerned Citizen: Some Correlates. Environment and Behavior 10 (3) (1978): 389-417. Van Liere, Kent D., and Dunlap, Riley E., The Social Bases of Environ-

mental Concern: A Review of Hypotheses, Explanations, and Empirical Evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly 44 (1980): 181-197. Van Liere, Kent D., Environmental Concern: Does It Makes a Difference How It's Measured. Environment and Behavior 13 (10) (1981): 651-676. Vandermerwe, Sandra, and Oliff, Michael D, Customers Drive Corporations Green. Long Range Planning 23 (December 1990): 10-16. Vining, Joanne, and Ebreo, Angel& What Makes a Recycler? A Comparison of Recyclers and Nonrecyclers. Environment and Behavior 22 (1) (1990): 55-73. Webster, Jr., Frederick E., Determining the Characteristics of the Socially Conscious Consumer. Journal of Consumer Research 2 (December 1975): 188-196. Weiner, Joshua Lyle, and Doescher, Tabitha Ann, A Framework for Promoting Cooperation.Journal of Marketing 55 (April 1991): 38-47. Wells, Richard P., Environmental Performance Will Count in the 1990s. Marketing News, March 19, 1990, p. 22. Whittemore, Meg, Meeting Consumer Needs of the 90s. Nation's Business (March 1991): 45-46.