What motivates the adoption of green restaurant products and services? A systematic review and future research agenda

Abstract

Issues regarding green restaurants have received significant scholarly and practitioner attention in the last decade, particularly concerning why consumers adopt green restaurants. Although several reviews exist on green hospitality, a comprehensive review of the literature on consumers' green restaurant adoption is currently lacking.The following systematic literature review examines 50 research studies published on the consumer adoption of green restaurant services to address this gap accordingly. Through a detailed content analysis, the research profile and thematic analysis are presented. The review further identifies four key thematic foci: (a) consumer behavior variables studied, (b) antecedents internal to the consumer, (c) antecedents due to the perception of external factors, and (d) moderators. Limitations and gaps from each of the themes are offered with potential future research questions. The novelty of the review lies in the development of a "green restaurant adoption research framework" that cuts across multiple theoretical perspectives to summarize why consumers adopt green restaurant services.

Green process innovation: Where we are and where we are going

“…This methodology was chosen due to its interdisciplinary acceptance as the preferred method of reviewing studies, especially across different areas of management research (Talwar et al, 2020), and its ability to reproduce similar results (Seth et al, 2020). There are different suggestions in the literature about the steps to be followed while conducting the SLR to ensure that future similar studies can replicate or extend it (Dhir et al, 2020;Seth et al, 2020;Talwar et al, 2020;T. M. et al, 2021).…”

“…This methodology was chosen due to its interdisciplinary acceptance as the preferred method of reviewing studies, especially across different areas of management research (Talwar et al, 2020), and its ability to reproduce similar results (Seth et al, 2020). There are different suggestions in the literature about the steps to be followed while conducting the SLR to ensure that future similar studies can replicate or extend it (Dhir et al, 2020; Seth et al, 2020; Talwar et al, 2020; T. M. et al, 2021). The current study is in line with the arguments of these researchers; accordingly, we have utilised a four‐step process, which includes: Step I: Planning the review; Step II: Specifying the screening criteria; Step III: Data extraction; and Step IV: Data execution.…”

“…To address these RQs, we utilised stringent systematic review criteria set forth by Dhir et al (2020), Seth et al (2020), T. M. et al (2021) and Talwar et al (2020). RQ1 was addressed by extracting the research profiles of the selected studies after explaining the conceptual boundary, database selected, keywords used and shortlisting criteria.…”

The innovation ecosystem in rural tourism and hospitality – a systematic review of innovation in rural tourism

“…Consistent with existing systematic reviews (Khanra et al , 2020; T. M. et al , 2021; Talwar et al , 2020), we defined extensive inclusion and exclusion criteria.…”

“…This means that we actively excluded non-peer-reviewed works, such as conference proceedings, book chapters and blogs. Although these sources may have contained relevant literature, excluding the above “grey” literature is a standard procedure in SLRs (Calabrò et al , 2019; T. M. et al , 2021).…”