Voluntary Simplicity and Green Buying Behavior: An Extended Framework

Abstract

Green consumption is usually understood in the context of green consumption values and receptivity to green communication. Voluntary simplicity, a related yet distinct construct that relies on ecological responsibility, has not been included in the same framework. This paper bridges this gap and extends the original model to consider green consumption and voluntary simplicity in a unified structure. Based on a study conducted in Romania, it was found that 70% of the variation in buying behavior is explained by a combination of direct and mediated influences. The main takeaway is that any serious attempt to encourage responsible buying has to rely on a reduction in the absolute level of consumer demand. This result has far-reaching implications because the current paradigm of economic growth and prosperity is tributary to consumerism. The question is not how to avoid curtailing consumption and substitute green products for those harming the environment, but rather how to make voluntary frugality palatable.

The Influence of Green Product Type, Message Framing, and Anticipated Pride on Green Consumption Behavior: An Event-Related Potential (ERP) Study

“…Previous studies have focused on measuring individuals' willingness to engage in green consumption through questionnaires [14][15][16]. However, the existence of social approval bias may lead to a separation between individual explicit subjective reporting and actual intrinsic neural responses [10,52].…”

“…2023, 13, 1427 2 of 20 green products, actual purchase behaviors are much lower [11][12][13]. Previous studies have primarily focused on exploring green consumption intentions [14][15][16]. According to the theory of planned behavior, attitude alone cannot directly and positively predict an individual's actual behavior [17][18][19].…”

Towards Pro-enviromental Psychology and Education: Personality Traits and Sociodemographic Correlates of Enviromental Identity and Voluntary Simplicity

“…Wyniki wykazały, że konstrukty te są silnie dodatnio ze sobą związane. Ich związek potwierdził słuszność wniosków wyciągniętych na podstawie doniesień dotyczących znaczenia tych konstruktów dla zachowań prośrodowiskowych, które wskazywały na przewidywane ich podobieństwo (Tam, 2013;Peyer, Balderjahn, Seegebarth, Klemm, 2017;Teeroovengadum, 2018;Albert, 2019;Freed i Wong, 2019;Kızılay i Tanık Önal, 2019;Lee, 2019;Pérez Ibarra, Tapia--Fonllem, Fraijo-Sing, Nieblas Soto, Poggio, 2020;Clayton i in., 2021;Rebouças i Soares, 2021;Druică, Vâlsan, Puiu, 2022). Prawdopodobnie dbanie o naturę jest tym elementem obu konstruktów, który je łączy.…”

Green Product Types Modulate Green Consumption in the Gain and Loss Framings: An Event-Related Potential Study

“…Therefore, although many consumers show a high willingness to purchase green products, their actual purchase behavior is low, that is, they show an “attitude–behavior gap” [ 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Previous studies have focused more on marketing methods to promote individual green purchase intention [ 12 , 13 , 14 ] or marketing methods that claim to be focused on promoting green purchase behavior, but in fact, the dependent variable still measures verbally reported willingness to buy green products at no cost to the individual (e.g., “I’ll buy green products even if they are more expensive than other products”) [ 15 , 16 ]. These studies ignored the existence of this “attitude–behavior gap”.…”