Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Insights For Measuring Environmental Awareness
Insights For Measuring Environmental Awareness
Dajana Mrčela
Saponia Plc., Kandit Ltd.
Matije Gupca 2,
31000 Osijek, Croatia
[email protected]
Phone: +38531513513
viduals think that nature should be protected for its studies dealing with generalised pro-environmental
value in maintaining and improving the quality of behaviour, sector-related pro-environmental behav-
human life. These are primary sources of environ- iour (most often recycling), behaviour with regard
mental awareness as an attitude. to transportation (use of environmentally friendly
Environmental awareness may precede pro-envi- types and means of transportation), and energy
ronmental behaviour. However, even when people conservation and pro-environmental purchase be-
are environmentally aware, they do not necessar- haviour (Roberts, 1995: 98). Such studies are some-
ily behave in a pro-environmental manner. An en- times focused on assessment of the situation and on
vironmentally aware consumer is not necessarily a predicting the adoption of a certain type of consum-
green consumer – in order to become a green con- ers’ behaviour, while in other cases they are focused
sumer, one must behave in a certain manner. Envi- on discovering impact factors and correlations be-
ronmental awareness is the first step in becoming tween attitudes and behaviours as well as certain
a green consumer (Carlson, 2004: 46). We can say incentives and behaviours.
that environmental awareness is operationalised It is also necessary to define consumer behaviour.
through the form of environmentally motivated, i.e. Consumer behaviour represents a process of obtain-
pro-environmental behaviour. ing and consuming products, services and ideas by a
There are basically two types of attitudes used to consumer unit. It also includes post-purchase pro-
predict pro-environmental behaviour, namely at- cesses encompassing evaluation and post-purchase
titudes towards nature itself and attitudes towards behaviour. It should be noted that a “consumer unit”
pro-environmental behaviour, i.e. certain pro-envi- is either an individual or a family (household) mak-
ronmental activities. ing an expenditure decision (Kesić, 1999: 2). When
discussing consumer behaviour in terms of green
If environmental awareness (attitude) is supported marketing, it is particularly important to emphasize
by actual pro-environmental behaviour, we may the above-mentioned “consumption” (acceptance)
use the term environmental responsibility. In other of ideas, and behaviour in accordance with those
words, environmental awareness consists of a posi- ideas. This also involves behaviour that is not neces-
tive attitude toward the environment and appropri- sarily directly related to purchase and consumption
ate environmentally relevant behaviour. of certain products, because such a connection is
Studies in the area of marketing often used to equate often indirect, and behaviour also relates to certain
socially responsible consumer behaviour with envi- other activities such as recycling, energy conserva-
ronmentally aware consumer behaviour. Leigh et al. tion, participation in environmental protection ac-
(1988) highlighted that consumers’ environmental tivities, etc. This is often the case when the agent of
awareness represents a subset of the category of green marketing is not an economic entity, but one
social responsibility. Socially responsible behaviour of the other social participants, such as an environ-
can affect particular groups within the society (e.g. mental organisation or the state.
women, minorities, migrant workers, labour unions In order to explain the relationship between attitude
etc.) or promote causes (e.g. rights of homosexuals, (environmental awareness) and behaviour, psychol-
religious affiliation, avoidance of “sin” stocks, reduc- ogists have developed several models aimed at ex-
tion of weapons production, etc.). In other words, plaining what constitutes environmental awareness,
it is important not to interpret socially responsible which are inherent factors and what are the inter-
and environmentally aware consumers as a single relations between those factors. A popular theory
market segment with a unique profile. Based on the called “theory of planned behaviour” is often used
foregoing, Roberts (1995) defines the socially re- as a starting point.
sponsible consumer as a consumer who purchases
products and services perceived by him/her as hav- The “theory of planned behaviour” (TPB) originates
ing a positive (or less negative) impact on the envi- from the “theory of reasoned action” (TRA) (Fishbein
ronment or who uses his/her purchasing power in and Ajzen, 1975). The TRA aimed to foresee human
order to express concern for a certain social issue. behaviour by proposing that the behaviour of a per-
son is affected by behavioural intentions, which are
Different studies encompassed different types and primarily affected by attitudes toward the act and by
aspects of pro-environmental behaviour, but also subjective norms. Thus, the TRA has two compo-
all combinations thereof. Consequently, there are nents: the attitude toward the act which is the func-
tion of perceived consequences and subjective norms Different types of interpretation can also pose a
which are a function of beliefs about the significance problem, particularly when providing a generalisa-
of referents, and motivation to act in accordance with tion of conclusions. For example, in studies that ex-
those referents. These associations were supported amine behaviour in connection with recycling, the
by numerous articles related to consumer behaviour variable is called pro-environmental behaviour. In
and social psychology (e.g. Ryan, 1982; Sheppard et other words, behaviour connected with recycling is
al., 1988). An extension of the TRA is the “theory of generalised, and conclusions about an individual’s
planned behaviour” (TPB), proposed by Ajzen (1991). level of pro-environmental behaviour are made on
The TPB added the concept of perceived behavioural that basis. Simultaneously, numerous studies deal
control to the TRA as a third predictor of intention. with the differences between factors which influ-
ence individual groups of behaviour: the purchase
of environmentally-friendly products, activities
connected with recycling, participation in environ-
3. Measuring environmental awareness mental clean-up actions, support for green political
parties, donating money to environmental associa-
Studies relating to environmental awareness and de- tions and initiatives, etc.
termination and correlation factors that influence it Apart from the above-mentioned, comparison of
do not always provide consistent results. One of the the results of different studies is made even more
main problems that researchers face is the question difficult due to cultural and historical differences
whether they (researchers) and their respondents between various countries. Literature often men-
understand the concept of environmental aware- tions the generally present difference between the
ness in the same way. Conflicting research results as western and eastern world when it comes to fun-
well as an exceptionally large number of influencing damental attitudes of man towards nature. In west-
variables have led to the assumption that research- ern developed countries, the philosophy of man’s
ers do not always share the same concept of envi- domination over nature prevails, and it is based on
ronmental awareness (Carlson, 2004: 81). early philosophical thought (Plato, Aristotle) and
Van Liere and Dunlap (1981) differentiate between Christian postulates (that God made man the ruler
so-called substantive variations (content-related) of nature). In contrast, the philosophy of harmony
and theoretical variations between individual meas- between man and nature, based on Taoism and
urement instruments, i.e. measurement scales. Buddhism, prevails in the Eastern countries. Con-
Content-related variations comprise differences of sidering that those differences can have a significant
range in which measurement scales cover different impact on attitudes toward the environment, as well
environmental issues, such as pollution, popula- as on one’s understanding of the very concepts in-
tion issues, wildlife preservation etc. It is not clear volved, comparison of data or non-critical accept-
whether the attitudes toward different issues are ance of, for example, measurement scales, can lead
equally reflected in a broader concept of environ- to errors and misinterpretation of results.
mental awareness. Another source of variations Another challenge involved in these measurements
is theoretical conceptualisation, which comprises is something Yankelovich refers to as the “Mushi-
implicit or explicit assumptions on what com- ness Index”. It is a measuring instrument developed
prises a respondent’s expression of environmental by Daniel Yankelovich himself more than a quarter-
awareness. Different studies covered, for example, century ago. It measures the firmness of one’s opin-
perceived seriousness of environmental issues, ion on a topic, i.e. the degree to which consumers
knowledge on environmental issues and problems, are aware (able to clearly acknowledge their atti-
support for reforms, participation in environmen- tudes) and sure about how they think. Yankelovich
tal behaviour etc. In their own study, the authors found that the vast majority of people do not have
mentioned above found an inconsistency between very well-articulated and firm views regarding the
individual measurement scales in terms of both environment (Makower and Pike, 2009: 44-45).
substantive differences and theoretical conceptu-
alisations. This indicates that a great deal of atten- When talking about measuring behaviour, one of
tion is required to combine different variables into a the main issues is the fact that most environmental-
unique measurement instrument. ly relevant behaviour (electricity conservation, wa-
ter conservation, recycling, planned purchase etc.)
takes place within the household (out of research- Focus on the cognitive component in most of the
ers’ sight), and measurement often relies on behav- studies is the result of earlier studies that dem-
iour described by the consumers themselves. How- onstrated that there is a significant influence of
ever, people are not necessarily aware of the impact knowledge and awareness of attitudes towards the
that their behaviour has on the environment. They environment. Those early studies are based on the
may unconsciously take action which increases or assumption that knowledge influences attitudes,
reduces their impact on the environment, without and attitudes influence behaviour. It is the so-called
being aware of it (whether by doing something that linear model. However, it should be noted that there
has a positive impact on the environment, (e.g. use is no general consensus on that issue. Some stud-
of catalytic converter in their car) or something that ies reveal only limited influence of cognitive factors
has a negative impact (e.g. use of detergent harm- (such as knowledge on the environment), and show
ful for the environment), leading to differences be- significant influence of affective factors in the pro-
tween actual and measured environmental respon- cess of making environmentally conditioned pur-
sibility (Gatersleben et al., 2002: 335). chase decisions (Hartman et al., 2005: 12). There
are certain approaches found in recent studies that
reject some of the components of attitude and take
into account just the other two or even just one of
3.1 Measuring components of environmental the components.
awareness
uate products and services (Finisterra do Paco and vironmental Education and Training Foundation
Raposo, 2008: 131-132). (NEETF), speak in favour of the foregoing. The re-
Gambro and Switzsky (1996) define environmental search indicates a large gap between self-assessed
knowledge as a student’s ability (author’s comment: levels of knowledge and levels of knowledge meas-
it was a research among adolescents) to understand ured by means of objective measurement. Accord-
and evaluate the society’s influence on the ecosys- ing to the ninth report published within the said
tem, and this knowledge is expressed by recognis- research, 70% of respondents estimated that they
ing environmental issues and understanding their knew “quite a lot” or “a lot” about environmental
causes, implications and results. issues. However, the results they achieved in an en-
vironmental knowledge quiz were much poorer (if
Consumer knowledge on environmental issues is a one were to express those results in school grades,
variable that is relatively difficult to measure. Due only a third of the respondents would get a pass-
to the specificities related to the particular coun- ing grade, and only one tenth would get the highest
tries where research is conducted, scales are applied grade) (Kufrin, 2003: 4-5).
which measure the consumers’ own perception
on environmental issues (e.g. as in the studies by When talking about objective measurement of
Schlegelmilch et al. (1996)), instead of internation- knowledge, there are multiple problems. First of
ally tested scales which measure specific knowledge all, the very nature of ecology which encompasses
(such as the scale developed by Maloney, Ward and complex interactions between living organisms and
Braught (1975)). Scales which measure the con- their environment is what makes understanding of
sumers’ perception do not necessarily provide a this issue complex. Furthermore, regardless of the
realistic view on the actual level of knowledge, but current situation, it can be said that an average per-
their advantage is the fact that they are universally son does not know a lot about the environment (au-
applicable and comparable, easier to develop, and thor’s comment: this was true back in the seventies,
they sometimes give more appropriate results, de- but the situation has not changed until today). That
pending on research objectives (e.g. if the objective is why it is difficult to develop a measuring instru-
is to measure the perceived level of knowledge as a ment with enough high-probability (“easy”) ques-
measure of the respondents’ self-esteem in that re- tions (Maloney and Ward, 1973: 585). Furthermore,
gard (rather than his/her actual knowledge), which the process of determining relevant environmental
may also be an important factor of pro-environ- issues (topics) which should be considered when
mental behaviour). measuring knowledge is exceptionally complex. The
manner of asking questions (and offering answers)
These types of scales are often found in public opin- is also relevant, as well as the research method itself
ion polls and even in Eurobarometer studies (prob- (opportunity to “cheat”) which can influence the rel-
ably the most extensive modern public opinion poll) evance of the measured level of knowledge.
which also monitor environmental issues on a regu-
lar basis. However, Kufrin (2003) claims that self-as- There is no established pattern for the relationship
sessment of consumers’ awareness of environmen- between knowledge and pro-environmental behav-
tal issues cannot replace an adequate measurement iour. In the meta-analysis of 128 previous studies,
instrument for objective measurement of that vari- Hines et al. (1987) found a mean correlation of 0.30
able. An obvious weakness of such measurement between the following variables: knowledge on en-
is the fact that different respondents will base their vironmental issues and pro-environmental behav-
assessments on different criteria – we do not have iour. This moderate but statistically significant cor-
a valid reason to assume that all of their scales are relation was later also confirmed by Grunert’s study
“calibrated” in the same manner, that their level of (1993) on purchase of green or organic food prod-
self-criticism is identical, etc. The author concludes ucts, and also by the model suggested by Chan and
that, as a rule, researchers usually use objective tests Lau (2000). On the other hand, Maloney and Ward
of environmental awareness in their studies, and re- (1973) found no significant correlation between
spondents’ self-assessment is rarely applied. those variables. A study conducted by Arbuthnot
and Lingg (1975) should also be noted, since it
Results of a research titled “National report card on found a negative correlation. In brief, we can con-
environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviour”, clude that the prevailing attitude is that there is a
regularly conducted in the USA by the National En- positive correlation between those variables, which
Various studies (Chan and Lau (2000), Fraj and Mar- inducing the consumer to consciously look into the
tinez (2007), Maloney and Ward (1973), Schlegelm- issues important to him/her. It is also possible that,
ilch et al. (1996)) confirmed that affective variables if the consumer knows more, i.e. if he/she is more
are a relatively consistent predictor of pro-environ- informed about poor environmental conditions,
mental behaviour, including consumer behaviour extinction of some species, distortion of original
and buying of green products. In their meta-analy- natural beauties, it would result in emergence of
sis, Hines et al. (1987) confirmed the mean correla- positive emotions towards the environment never
tion of 0.37 between those two variables. felt before. Nevertheless, it should be noted that we
It is often indicated that attitudes based on the af- are talking about interferences between variables,
fective component are more reliable predictors and not about variables conditioning one another,
(so-called leading variables) of pro-environmental given that, as mentioned, these variables can be
behaviour because such attitudes are less complex; present and influence behaviour independent of
they are shaped more quickly and are more homog- one another.
enous in comparison with attitudes based on a com- Dunlap and Van Liere (1978) developed the widely
plex set of different supportive and non-supportive accepted scale under the name “New Environmen-
components. Less complex attitude contributes to tal Paradigm”, developed in order to measure what
less exposure to external or situational factors. people feel regarding the environment. The so-
Smith and Haugtvedt (1995: 164) claim that a cer- called “NEP scale”, based on 12 variables, was first
tain context can make some factors of a complex considered to be one-dimensional, but later three
attitude become essential, resulting in behaviour factors were established: the balance of nature, the
that may be inconsistent with the general attitude belief that growth should be limited and the belief
orientation. An example for this may be an indi- that human beings are a part of nature (Cotrell,
vidual who has a positive attitude towards environ- 2003).
mentally friendly products, but at the same time, The “affect subscale” developed by Maloney, Ward
he/she believes they are generally more expensive. and Braught (1975) is also often applied for meas-
When price temporarily becomes the most impor- uring the affective component of environmental
tant factor for that individual, the mentioned belief awareness. In this subscale, different emotional
can have a disproportional effect on his/her behav- reactions towards the environment and environ-
iour, so that the individual will buy a product that is mental issues are measured by giving answers to
less environmentally friendly without even check- questions such as: “I get frustrated and angry when
ing the price of the environmentally friendly alter- I think about how industry pollutes the environ-
native. On the other hand, an individual whose at- ment” or “It scares me to think that most of the food
titude towards environmentally friendly products is I eat is contaminated with pesticides”.
based purely on positive feelings for such products By applying the aforementioned scale, as well as the
will be less influenced by prices, because no nega- two other subscales, “verbal commitment” and “ac-
tively evaluated attributes are integrated in his/her tual commitment”, Fraj and Martinez (2007) showed
attitude. that pro-environmental behaviour is determined by
Chan and Lau (2000) confirmed in their study that affective variables (emotions towards the environ-
even people with a low level of knowledge on eco- ment) and that affective variables better explain
logical issues can exhibit a strong emotional attach- pro-environmental behaviour in comparison with
ment to the environment. Moreover, they proved attitude towards environmental activities (“verbal
that knowledge and emotional variables have a commitment”). At the same time, emotions repre-
completely independent influence on certain be- sent a significant variable that determines one’s at-
haviour and it is therefore justifiable to treat them titude towards environmental activities.
as independent variables. Smith and Haugtvedt (1995: 165) explain the di-
However, it should be pointed out that certain in- rect influence of affective variables on behaviour by
teraction between these variables can potentially claiming that people will more often engage in ac-
appear. In other words, it is possible that expressed tivities they enjoy than in those that result in dissat-
emotions towards the environment affect the in- isfaction. Therefore, we can expect that individuals
crease of knowledge on environmental issues by who experience positive affective states as a result
3.2 Attitude – behaviour gap From a theoretical point of view, different attitude
concepts are used in research, which make it diffi-
cult to compare the results of related research. On
According to Newhouse (1990), inconsistency be-
the other hand, methodological flaws that affect the
tween attitudes and behaviour most frequently oc-
observed attitude-behaviour relationship pertain to
curs when measurements of general attitudes are
the lack of measurement correspondence (attitudes
applied for prediction of specific (concrete) behav-
and behaviour are not measured on the same level
iour. Namely, the variables that measure attitudes
of specificity) and the lack of consideration of situ-
towards specific behaviours (attitudes towards ac-
ational influences on the observed behaviour. These
tivities) are better predictors of pro-environmental
influences are considered either as moderating fac-
behaviour than those that measure general attitudes
tors affecting the relationship between environmen-
towards the environment (Bodur and Sarigöllü,
tal attitude and behaviour or as direct influence on
2005: 504). It is also necessary to take into consid-
behaviour. Both approaches assume a rather arbi-
eration the possibility that consumers’ attitudes to-
trary selection of possible influencing factors.
wards different environmental issues may differ, just
like their attitudes towards different environmental A survey carried out in 27 Member States of the
behaviour. European Union in 2007 showed that the trans-
formation of willingness (intention) into actual
Kaiser et al. (1999) provide three reasons (one
pro-environmental behaviour is one of the main
theoretical and two methodological) that affect the
challenges of green marketing. When asked the fol-
predictive power of the concept of the pro-environ-
lowing question: “Please tell me whether you totally
mental attitude.
agree, tend to agree, tend to disagree or totally disa-
gree with the following statement: You are ready to
Graph 1 Willingness to buy environmentally fri- buy environmentally friendly products even if they
endly products even if they are slightly more ex- cost a little bit more”, the respondents answered as
pensive shown in Graph 1.
Source: European Commission (2008), “Eurobarometer: Attitudes of European citizens towards the envi-
ronment”, Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm (Accessed on: June 20,
2015)
From Graph 1 we can conclude that three-quarters Table 1 illustrates even better the relationship be-
(75%) of respondents are willing to buy environ- tween intention and behaviour. It seems that 15% of
mentally friendly products. However, in the second respondents who are willing to buy environmentally
part of the same survey on what respondents had friendly products have actually done so, while the
actually done in the past month for environmental biggest share (59%) pertains to those who expressed
reasons (Graph 2), only 17% of them reported that the willingness to buy such products, but (due to
they had bought an environmentally friendly prod- different reasons) have not crossed the threshold of
uct marked with an environmental label. inertia and actually done so.
Source: European Commission (2008), “Eurobarometer: Attitudes of European citizens towards the envi-
ronment”, Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm (Accessed on: June 20, 2015)
Table 1 Relationship between willingness to buy sacrifice – thus creating an alibi for one’s own con-
environmentally friendly products and actual sciousness. For example, “Since I started sorting
actions waste for recycling, I have been acting responsibly
toward the environment, so it is not necessary to
Purchasing use my car less or participate in the work of envi-
No ronmental associations” (Bratt, 1999: 28). It is pos-
envi- Willingness Willingness
willingness
ronmental + action + no action sible to quite justifiably assume that certain people
+ no action
products will attempt to apply their environmental attitudes
% of total
15% 59% 18%
in actions that require less effort and less cost.
sample
Consequently, one can conclude that before mak-
ing decisions on introducing measures to encour-
Source: European Commission (2008), “Eurobaro- age certain forms of pro-environmental behaviour
meter: Attitudes of European citizens towards the (on state, or local or regional level) it is necessary
environment”, Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/ to consider the influences of those measures on
public_opinion/index_en.htm (Accessed on: June other forms of behaviour. For example, based on
20, 2015) his study, Bratt (1999) claimed that introduction
of an organized collection of paper for recycling
Leinberger (in Holt and Holt, 2004: 32) gives four (front-of-house service) reduced to some extent the
reasons for refraining from taking real actions de- recycling of other materials which still required go-
spite the awareness of the need to preserve the en- ing to places foreseen for that purpose, i.e. to spe-
vironment: cial containers. This could be explained by the fact
that once paper has been handed over for recycling
1. I am too busy to make any changes, (through organized collection), the perceived use-
2. Environmental products are too expensive, fulness of transporting other wastes to specialized
containers is reduced (due to relatively larger costs
3. Large economic operators are the ones who
per waste unit or due to previously described cog-
should take actions, not people like me,
nitive dissonance, i.e. alibi for one’s consciousness).
4. Others are not sacrificing anything; there is little Therefore, the motivation, and consequently the be-
I can do alone. haviour itself, is somewhat reduced.
It can be seen that the first two reasons pertain to
external, i.e. situational influences, while the other
two present attitudes, i.e. influences acting from the
inside (consumer’s consciousness). 3.3 Social desirability and sample issues
What is more, it is often indicated that certain dis-
crepancies between attitudes towards the environ- Influences such as social desirability or other forms
ment and behaviour can be described by cognitive of (conscious or unconscious) bias in giving answers
dissonance. Cognitive dissonance is a mental state, can result in inaccurate representation of actual be-
often a conflict, in which a person experiences two haviour. Although some studies, like studies con-
or more contradictory beliefs or cognitively pro- ducted by Gatersleben et al. (2002), Chan and Lau
cesses a lot of information. In an individual, it usu- (2000) and Kaiser et al. (1999), demonstrate that the
ally leads to a feeling of psychological discomfort influence of social desirability is not especially sig-
that lasts until the person resolves the issue. nificant when it comes to environmental awareness,
the fact remains that a consumer might be aware of
Based on survey results, we can conclude that peo- a certain answer being socially more desirable and
ple often experience cognitive dissonance with adjust his/her answers accordingly, which may then
regard to their behaviour towards environmental differ from his/her actual attitudes and/or behav-
issues. If the conflict between environmental atti- iour.
tudes and behaviour really leads to perceived dis-
sonance, a strategy used to reduce it could be to The mentioned bias is assumed in most studies; al-
channel one’s concern for the environment through though there is evidence that the respondents (re-
specific behaviours that require less or no special gardless of their demographic backgrounds) were
completely ready to express their apathy concerning
environmental issues, as well as to explain the rea- Armstrong and Overton (1977) offered a way of
sons for such an attitude, without even thinking of including systematic error in result interpretation.
giving socially desirable answers. One of the stud- The procedure involves comparing the so-called
ies showing such results is the study conducted by “early” and “late” respondents, i.e. respondents who
Chau and Lau (2000). participated in the survey at first request and those
One of the ways to reduce the potential bias of re- who needed an extra incentive or follow-up letter,
spondents is to instruct the fieldworkers to explain assuming that late respondents are more similar to
to the respondents clearly the importance of hon- those who did not participate in the survey. That
estly expressing their true attitudes and to empha- way one can make assumptions about the charac-
size the fact that their answers would be analysed teristics of those who did not participate. On the
and reported only on a collective basis (Chan and other hand, in their research, Kinnear et al. (1974)
Lau, 2000: 345). Apart from that, there are specific sent questionnaires to existing panel members (Ca-
interventions in creating the measurement instru- nadian Family Opinion-University of Western On-
ment and/or during interpretation of research re- tario Consumer Panel). Consequently, they were
sults. able to compare the socio-economic background of
respondents and non-respondents, finding no sig-
For example, while creating the measurement in- nificant differences between them.
strument, it is possible to incorporate a subscale
measuring social desirability effects in the prelimi- In numerous studies, the problem of sample size
nary questionnaire, and then exclude from the final and representativeness were among the most signif-
version all those variables that are classified (based icant limitations. Namely, due to a multitude of dif-
on factor analysis) together with the factor mark- ferent influences on environmental awareness itself
ing social desirability, and to exclude the subscale and its operationalization in terms of pro-environ-
itself (Carlson, 2004). Another version of this is to mental behaviour, one often requires relatively large
include the mentioned subscale in the final version samples of respondents (on national or even inter-
of the questionnaire, and then to exclude the ques- national level) to obtain realistic information. This
tionnaires in which the effect of social desirability is results from the fact that the level of environmental
present at a level that exceeds the previously estab- awareness can differ in certain regions, depending
lished maximum (Carlson, 2004: 77). By applying on region-specific environmental issues, dominant
a scale of 32 questions that measures the influence industries, level of development and other.
of social desirability in respondents’ answers, Kaiser In addition, the existence of actual or assumed
et al. (1999) measured the influence on each of the differences between certain socio-demographic
measured variables separately (pro-environmental groups makes it harder to apply a student sample,
knowledge, environmental values, intention of pro- which is often used in marketing research due to a
environmental behaviour, general pro-environmen- very simple reason - availability. All of the above sig-
tal behaviour). However, the preliminary testing nificantly increases the costs of conducting research
showed that social desirability did not influence or and represents an obstacle for application of certain
had only a marginal influence on all measured vari- methodology that requires data collection continu-
ables. ity.
Furthermore, it is necessary to take into account the
influence of systematic error resulting from unwill-
ingness to participate in the survey (non-response
4. Conclusion
bias). It can be assumed that those who are more
interested in environmental issues, being thus more
environmentally aware, will be more willing to All the described issues and limitations of research
participate. This is particularly the case in surveys in no way diminish the value of researching or mon-
conducted via post or in other extensive types of itoring the level of environmental awareness or the
research that require more time being invested by value of pro-environmental actions taken. However,
the respondents (as it is often the case with envi- they represent factors that have to be taken into
ronmental awareness research due to the complex- account when creating measurement instruments,
ity of the issue which includes various aspects of the analysing research results and interpreting them.
respondents’ personality and behaviour). That way, one could minimize the influence of those
issues and limitations and contribute to quality, uni- design and in making conclusions, implications and
versality and comparability of the obtained results, resulting strategies. In addition, it should be men-
developed models and defined laws. tioned that issues related to social desirability and
Based on the analysis of relevant theoretical cogni- sample issues are sometimes underemphasized in
tions and empirical research results, the key issues scientific research, especially when the research
can be categorized in three groups: issues in meas- purpose is to determine variable correlations and
uring different components of attitude (cognitive, predictors. These variable interdependencies can
affective and conative component), issues concern- be established on smaller convenient samples but
ing the attitude – behaviour gap and issues con- commenting on practical implications of such re-
cerning the influence of social desirability and the sults should be limited, especially concerning the
research sample. When designing research meth- direction of the variable influences.
odology and interpreting the results all of the three We can conclude that significant progress has been
categories of issues should be taken into account in achieved in that sense in recent years. Accordingly,
order to provide the best possible answer to a spe- the use of the term “environmental awareness” has
cific research question. evolved from being just a declarative buzzword of
It is important to bear in mind the complexity of at- various speakers and instead it is used in actual
titude structure and its components, so that during strategic objectives on different levels of society. In
each stage of research design and implementation, order to continue this progress, it is necessary to
one can have a clear idea of which attitude compo- continuously work in various scientific and other
nent is being measured or interpreted. In addition spheres to ensure its manageability in all relevant
to this, it is necessary to take into account the poten- aspects and areas. There is a lack of research in
tial interaction and different direction of correlation the area of quantification and measurement of in-
between a particular component of attitude as being tensity of influence of particular issues, such as the
the independent variable with a dependent variable. influence of socially desirable answers on research
The attitude-behaviour gap is particularly impor- results and the intensity of influence of a certain
tant to consider when interpreting research results variable. Also, efforts should be made in further de-
and defining theoretical and practical implications. velopment of tools and methodological insights for
It is important to have a clear picture and the same explaining and minimizing the attitude-behaviour
definition of the dependent variable during research gap.
References
1. Ajzen, I. (1991), “The Theory of Planned Behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 179-211.
2. Arbuthnot, J., Lingg, S. (1975), “A Comparison of French and American Environmental Behaviors,
Knowledge and Attitudes”, International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 275-281.
3. Armstrong, J. S., Overton, T. S. (1977), “Estimating Non-Response Bias in Mail Surveys”, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 396-402.
4. Bodur, M., Sarigöllü, E. (2005), “Environmental Sensitivity in a Developing Country: Consumer Clas-
sification and Implications”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 487-510.
5. Bratt, Ch. (1999), “Consumers’ Environmental Behavior: Generalized, sector-based, or compensa-
tory?”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 28-44.
6. Carlson, D. H. (2004), “Environmental Concern in South Africa: The Development of a Measurement
Scale”, masters paper, University of South Africa.
7. Chan, R. Y. K., Lau, L. B. Y. (2000), “Antecedents of green purchases – a survey in China”, Journal of
Consumer Marketing, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 338-357.
8. Cottrell, S. P. (2003), “Influence of Sociodemographics and Environmental Attitudes on General Re-
sponsible Environmental Behavior Among Recreational Boaters”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 35,
No. 3, pp. 347-375.
9. Culiberg, B., Rojšek, I. (2008), “Understanding environmental consciousness: a multidimensional per-
spective”, in Grbac, B., Meler, M. (Eds.), Vrijednost za potrošače u dinamičnom okruženju, Ekonomski
fakultet Sveučilišta u Rijeci, CROMAR – Hrvatska zajednica uduga za marketing, Rijeka, pp. 131-139.
10. Dembkowski, S., Hanmer-Lloyd, S. (1994), “The Environmental Value-Attitude-System Model: A
Framework to Guide the Understanding of Environmentally-Conscious Consumer Bahaviour”, Journal
of Marketing Management, Vol. 10, No. 7, pp. 593-603.
11. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D. (1978), “The New Environmental Paradigm”, Journal of Environmental
Education, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 10-19.
12. European Commission (2008), “Eurobarometer: Attitudes of European citizens towards the envi-
ronment”, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/index_en.htm (Accessed on: June 20,
2015)
13. Finisterra do Paco, A. M., Raposo M. L. B. (2008), “Determining the Characteristics to Profile the
“Green” Consumer: An Exploratory Approach”, International Review on Public and Nonprofit Market-
ing, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 129-140.
14. Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and
Research. MA: Addison-Wesley.
15. Fraj, E., Martinez, E. (2007), “Ecological Consumer Behaviour: An Empirical Analysis”, International
Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 26-33.
16. Gagnon Thompson, S. C., Barton, M. A. (1994), “Ecocentric and Anthropocentric Attitudes Toward
the Environment”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 149-157.
17. Gambro, J. S., Switzky, H. N. (1996), “A National Survey of High School Students’ Environmental
Knowledge”, Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 28-33.
18. Gatersleben, B., Steg, L., Vlek, C. (2002), “Measurement and Determinants of Environmentally Signifi-
cant Consumer Behavior”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 335-362.
19. Grunert S. C. (1993), “Everybody Seems Concerned About the Environment but is this Concern Re-
flected in (Danish) Consumers’ Food Choice?”, European Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 1, No.
1, pp. 428-433.
20. Hartmann, P., Apaolaza Ibáñez, V. (2006), “Green Value Added, Marketing Intelligence & Planning”,
Vol. 24, No. 7, pp. 673-680.
21. Hartmann, P., Apaolaza Ibáñez, V., Forcada Sainz, F. J. (2005), “Green Branding Effects On Attitude:
Functional Versus Emotional Positioning Strategies”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 23, No.
1, pp. 9-29.
22. Hines, J. M., Hungerford H. R., Tomera, A. N. (1987), “Analysis and synthesis of research on respon-
sible environmental behaviour: a meta-analysis”, Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 18, No. 2,
pp. 1-8.
23. Holt, E. A., Holt, M. S. (2004). Green pricing resource guide. 2nd edition. Prepared for American Wind
Energy Association, Ed. Holt & Associates, Inc.
24. Jain, S. K., Kaur, G. (2004), “Green Marketing: An Attitudinal and Behavioural Analysis of Indian Con-
sumers”, Global Business Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 187-205.
25. Kaiser, F. G., Wölfing, S., Fuhrer, U. (1999), “Environmental attitude and ecological behaviour”, Journal
of environmental psyhology, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 1-19.
26. Kesić, T. (1999). Ponašanje potrošača. Zagreb: Adeco.
27. Kinnear, T. C., Taylor, J. R., Ahmed, S. A. (1974), “Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are
They?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 20-24.
28. Kufrin, K. (2003), “Mjerenje ekološke informiranosti: konceptualni i operacionalni pristupi i problemi
dosadašnjih istraživanja”, Socijalna ekologija, Vol. 12, No. 1-2, pp. 1-26.
29. Leigh, J. H., Murphy, P. E., Enis, B. M. (1988), “A New Approach to Measuring Socially Responsible
Consumption Tendencies”, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 5-20.
30. Makower, J., Pike, C. (2009). Strategies for the Green Economy – Opportunities and Challenges in the
New World of Business. New York: McGraw-Hill.
31. Maloney, M. P., Ward, M. P. (1973), “Ecology: Let’s Hear from the People. An Objective Scale for the
Measurement of Ecological Attitudes and Knowledge”, American Psychologist, Vol. 28, No. 7, pp. 583-
586.
32. Maloney, M. P., Ward, M. P., Braught, G. N. (1975), “A Revised Scale for the Measurement of Ecological
Attitudes and Knowledge”, American Psychologist, Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 787-790.
33. Newhouse, N. (1990), “Implications of attitude and behaviour research for environmental conserva-
tion”, Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 26-32.
34. Roberts, J. A. (1995), “Profiling Levels of Socially Responsible Consumer Behaviour: A Cluster Ana-
lytic Approach and its Implications for Marketing”, Journal of Marketing – Theory and Practice, Fall,
pp. 97-117.
35. Ryan, M. J. (1982), “Behavioral intention formation: the interdependency of attitudinal and social influ-
ence variables”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 263-278.
36. Schahn, J., Holzer, E. (1990), “Studies of Individual Environmental Concern: The Role of Knowledge,
Gender, and Background Variables”, Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp. 767-786.
37. Schlegelmilch, B. B., Bohlen, G. M., Diamantopoulos, A. (1996), “The link between green purchasing
decisions and measures of environmental consciousness”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30, No.
3, pp. 35-55.
38. Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., Warshaw, P. R. (1988), “The theory of reasoned action: a meta-analysis
of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research”, Journal of Consumer
Research, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 325-343.
39. Smith, S. M., Haugtvedt, C. P. (1995), “Implications of Understanding Basic Attitude Change Processes
and Attitude Structure for Enhancing Pro-Environmental Behaviors”, in Polonsky, M. J., Mintu-Wim-
satt, A. T. (Eds.), Environmental Marketing: Strategies, Practice, Theory and Research, Binghamton,
The Harworth Press Inc.
40. Stone, G., Barnes, J. H., Montgomery, C. (1995), “ECOSCALE: A Scale for the Measurement of Envi-
ronmentally Responsible Consumers”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 12, No. 7, pp. 595-613.
41. Van Liere, K., Dunlap, R. (1981), “Environmental Concern: Does it Make a Difference How It’s Meas-
ured?”, Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 651-676.
42. Wagner, S. A. (2003). Understanding Green Consumer Behaviour – A Qualitative Cognitive Approach.
London: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Marija Ham
Dajana Mrčela
Martina Horvat
Sažetak
U posljednja dva desetljeća, upravljanje i podizanje opće razine ekološke svjesnosti na svim razinama
suvremenoga društva postao je jedan od društvenih ciljeva koji je dosegao nikada ranije viđenu razinu
društvenoga i političkoga konsenzusa. S obzirom da je moguće upravljati samo onim što se može izmjeriti,
mjerenje ekološke svjesnosti utemeljeno na znanstvenim kriterijima dobiva sve više pozornosti znanstveni-
ka različitih disciplina. S razvojem discipline, otkrivene su brojne zakonitosti, razvijeni modeli i definira-
na ograničenja koja je potrebno uzeti u obzir, međutim nedostaje literature koja bi istraživačima pružila
pregled dosadašnjih spoznaja i ponudila svojevrsnu „check-listu“ za istraživače.
Svrha je ovoga istraživanja utvrditi i raspraviti o ključnim pitanjima koja je potrebno uzeti u obzir prilikom
oblikovanja mjernih instrumenata, analize rezultata istraživanja te same interpretacije. Na temelju ana-
lize relevantnih teorijskih spoznaja i rezultata empirijskih istraživanja, rad pruža pregled ključnih pitan-
ja i kategorizira ih u tri skupine: pitanja prilikom mjerenja različitih sastavnica stava, pitanja vezana uz
neusklađenost stavova i ponašanja i pitanja vezana uz utjecaj društvene poželjnosti i uzorka istraživanja.
Ukoliko se sva ova pitanja uzmu u obzir, moguće je uračunati i minimizirati njihov negativan utjecaj i do-
prinijeti kvaliteti, univerzalnosti i usporedivosti dobivenih rezultata kao i razvijenih modela i definiranih
zakonitosti.
Ključne riječi: ekološka svjesnost, mjerenje, pitanja, sastavnice stava