CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5Environmental Sustainability in BusinessEnvironmental Education and SustainabilitySustainable Supply Chain Management

Motivating Factors Influencing Green Buying Behavior of Generation Z: An Application of Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)

Open access
Qazi, Hiba, Alam, Sadaf, Phulpoto, Amanullah·2023·Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
DOI 10.52131/pjhss.2023.1103.0646
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This study used the Theory of Planned Behavior as the theoretical foundation to investigate the motivating factors influencing Generation Z consumers' green purchasing behavior in Pakistan. Using a random sampling technique, the researchers gathered information from over 300 Gen Z consumers between the ages of 10 and 25 using a survey questionnaire. Utilizing a quantitative research approach, the study used Smart PLS 3.0 software and Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) to analyze the data. Green purchase intention, green buying behavior, green attitudes, perceived behavioral control, and green social norms were the variables examined. The results of the study indicate that there is a significant relationship between "green attitudes," "green social norms," and "green purchase intention” with green buying behavior, with a p-value of less than 0.05 and t-value where of more than 1.96. However, with a p-value larger than 0.05 and a t-value less than 1.96, green perceived behavior control was not a significant predictor. Overall, the study indicates that Pakistan's Generation Z customers are more concerned with environmental issues and are favorably inclined to buy eco-friendly goods. These findings have implications for managers who can create more environmentally friendly products specifically targeting Gen Z.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.52131/pjhss.2023.1103.0646

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The TPB constructs remain robust predictors of sustainable behavior, especially when social and self-efficacy factors are at play.

    “These findings are consistent with prior research (Paul et al. 2016;Yadav and Pathak 2017) and more recent studies specifically focusing on Gen Z (e.g., Qazi et al. 2023), confirming that TPB constructs remain robust predictors of sustainable behavior, especially when social and self-efficacy factors are at play.”

    From Does Greenwashing Wash Away Gen Z's Green Purchase Intention? (2025) · cites this paper as Qazi et al. 2023

    The Structural Model Assessment (section 4.4; page not provided) finds significant links from green attitude and social norms to purchase intention, and from intention to green buying behavior among Gen Z. But perceived behavioral control—the paper's measure closest to self-efficacy—was not a significant predictor of purchase intention. The findings therefore support the social-factor portion, not the claim about self-efficacy, and concern green buying rather than sustainable behavior generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 61

  1. Abid, N., Ikram, M., Wu, J., & Ferasso, M. (2021). Towards environmental sustainability: exploring the nexus among ISO 14001, governance indicators and green economy in Pakistan. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 27, 653-666. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.01.024 · DOI
  2. Abrar, M., Sibtain, M. M., & Shabbir, R. (2021). Understanding purchase intention towards eco- friendly clothing for generation Y & Z. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1997247. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1997247 · DOI
  3. Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (1999). Distinguishing perceptions of control from self-efficacy: Predicting consumption of a low-fat diet using the theory of planned behavior 1. Journal of applied social psychology, 29(1), 72-90. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559- 1816.1999.tb01375.x · DOI · Paper page
  4. Awuni, J. A., & Du, J. (2016). Sustainable consumption in Chinese cities: green purchasing intentions of young adults based on the theory of consumption values. Sustainable Development, 24(2), 124-135. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1613 · DOI
  5. Aydogdu, M., & Kaya, F. (2020). Factors affecting consumers' consumption of organic foods: A case study in GAP-Şanlıurfa in Turkey. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 22(2), 347-359.
  6. Budiman, S. (2021). The effect of social media on brand image and brand loyalty in generation Y. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(3), 1339-1347. doi:https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no3.1339 · DOI
  7. Casalegno, C., Candelo, E., & Santoro, G. (2022). Exploring the antecedents of green and sustainable purchase behaviour: A comparison among different generations. Psychology & Marketing, 39(5), 1007-1021. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21637 · DOI
  8. Chan, E. S., & Hon, A. H. (2020). Application of extended theory of planned behavior model to ecological behavior intentions in the food and beverage service industry. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 23(2), 169-191. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2020.1718402 · DOI
  9. Chang, H. H., & Chen, S. W. (2008). The impact of online store environment cues on purchase intention: Trust and perceived risk as a mediator. Online information review, 32(6), 818- 841. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520810923953 · DOI
  10. Chen, C.-C., Chen, C.-W., & Tung, Y.-C. (2018). Exploring the consumer behavior of intention to purchase green products in belt and road countries: An empirical analysis. Sustainability, 10(3), 854. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030854 · DOI
  11. Chen, S., Qiu, H., Xiao, H., He, W., Mou, J., & Siponen, M. (2021). Consumption behavior of eco-friendly products and applications of ICT innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 287, 125436. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125436 · DOI
  12. Chien, F., Ajaz, T., Andlib, Z., Chau, K. Y., Ahmad, P., & Sharif, A. (2021). The role of technology innovation, renewable energy and globalization in reducing environmental degradation in Pakistan: a step towards sustainable environment. Renewable Energy, 177, 308-317. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.05.101 · DOI
  13. Cohen, J. (1988). Set correlation and contingency tables. Applied psychological measurement, 12(4), 425-434. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168801200410 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. British journal of management, 17(4), 263-282. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 8551.2006.00500.x · DOI · Paper page
  16. Dragolea, L.-L., Butnaru, G. I., Kot, S., Zamfir, C. G., Nuţă, A.-C., Nuţă, F.-M., . . . Ştefănică, M. (2023). Determining factors in shaping the sustainable behavior of the generation Z consumer. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 11, 1096183. doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1096183 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Edmunds, J., & Turner, B. S. (2005). Global generations: social change in the twentieth century. The British journal of sociology, 56(4), 559-577. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468- 4446.2005.00083.x · DOI
  18. Ermolaeva, P. (2010). College Students' Green Culture: Reflecting on the Ideal Types of Environmental Awareness and Behavior Practices. Raziskave in Razprave, 3(3), 49.
  19. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Gansser, O. A., & Reich, C. S. (2023). Influence of the new ecological paradigm (NEP) and environmental concerns on pro-environmental behavioral intention based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Journal of Cleaner Production, 382, 134629. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134629 · DOI
  21. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: Global edition: Pearson Higher Education Upper Saddle River. In: NJ.
  22. Hair Jr, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis. Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd. In: Pearson Education, Inc., New Delhi.
  23. Haque, M. S. (2022). Inductive and/or Deductive Research Designs. In Principles of Social Research Methodology (pp. 59-71): Springer.
  24. Hassan, H., Hsbollah, H. M., & Mohamad, R. (2022). Examining the interlink of social media use, purchase behavior, and mental health. Procedia Computer Science, 196, 85-92. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.11.076 · DOI
  25. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43, 115-135. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Hocquette, É., Liu, J., Ellies-Oury, M.-P., Chriki, S., & Hocquette, J.-F. (2022). Does the future of meat in France depend on cultured muscle cells? Answers from different consumer segments. Meat Science, 188, 108776. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2022.108776 · DOI
  27. Islam, M. S. (2021). Online Shopping Behaviour among International Students from Belt & Road Countries in China. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 6(1), 63- 75. doi:https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2021.6.1.68 · DOI
  28. Ivanova, O., Flores-Zamora, J., Khelladi, I., & Ivanaj, S. (2019). The generational cohort effect in the context of responsible consumption. Management Decision, 57(5), 1162-1183. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-12-2016-0915 · DOI
  29. Kamalanon, P., Chen, J.-S., & Le, T.-T.-Y. (2022). "Why do we buy green products?" An extended theory of the planned behavior model for green product purchase behavior. Sustainability, 14(2), 689. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020689 · DOI
  30. Kim, H. M., Joo, K., & Hwang, J. (2022). Are Customers Willing to Pay More for Eco-Friendly Edible Insect Restaurants? Focusing on the Internal Environmental Locus of Control. Sustainability, 14(16), 10075. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610075 · DOI
  31. Kumar, N., Garg, P., & Singh, S. (2022). Pro-environmental purchase intention towards eco- friendly apparel: Augmenting the theory of planned behavior with perceived consumer effectiveness and environmental concern. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 13(2), 134-150. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2021.2016062 · DOI
  32. Larranaga, A., & Valor, C. (2022). Consumers' categorization of eco-friendly consumer goods: An integrative review and research agenda. Sustainable Production and Consumption. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.10.005 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Lavuri, R., Jindal, A., Akram, U., Naik, B. K. R., & Halibas, A. S. (2023). Exploring the antecedents of sustainable consumers' purchase intentions: Evidence from emerging countries. Sustainable Development, 31(1), 280-291. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2389 · DOI
  34. Lavuri, R., Jusuf, E., & Gunardi, A. (2021). Green sustainability: Factors fostering and behavioural difference between millennial and Gen Z: Mediating role of green purchase intention. Ekonomia i Środowisko. doi:https://doi.org/10.34659/2021/1/1 · DOI
  35. Liang, J., Li, J., & Lei, Q. (2022). Exploring the influence of environmental values on green consumption behavior of apparel: A chain multiple mediation model among Chinese Generation Z. Sustainability, 14(19), 12850. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912850 · DOI
  36. Lou, X., & Li, L. M. W. (2021). The relationship between identity and environmental concern: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 76, 101653. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101653 · DOI
  37. Majeed, A., Ahmed, I., & Rasheed, A. (2022). Investigating influencing factors on consumers' choice behavior and their environmental concerns while purchasing green products in Pakistan. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 65(6), 1110-1134. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2021.1922995 · DOI
  38. Mohajan, H. K. (2020). Quantitative research: A successful investigation in natural and social sciences. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 9(4), 50-79.
  39. Nunes, J. C., Ordanini, A., & Giambastiani, G. (2021). The concept of authenticity: What it means to consumers. Journal of Marketing, 85(4), 1-20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242921997081 · DOI
  40. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory New York. NY: McGraw-Hill.
  41. Ogiemwonyi, O. (2022). Factors influencing generation Y green behaviour on green products in Nigeria: An application of theory of planned behaviour. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 13, 100164. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2021.100164 · DOI
  42. Ogiemwonyi, O., & Harun, A. B. (2021). Theory of planned behaviour approach to understand pro-environmental behaviour among young green consumers in Malaysia. Israel Journal of Ecology and Evolution, 67(3-4), 168-181.
  43. Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model. International journal of electronic commerce, 7(3), 101-134. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2003.11044275 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Ru, X., Wang, S., Chen, Q., & Yan, S. (2018). Exploring the interaction effects of norms and attitudes on green travel intention: An empirical study in eastern China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197, 1317-1327. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.293 · DOI
  45. Sadik-Zada, E. R. (2021). Political economy of green hydrogen rollout: A global perspective. Sustainability, 13(23), 13464. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313464 · DOI
  46. Santos, S. C., & Liguori, E. W. (2020). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intentions: Outcome expectations as mediator and subjective norms as moderator. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 26(3), 400-415. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-07-2019-0436 · DOI
  47. Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2018). Generation Z: A century in the making: Routledge.
  48. Sethuraman, P. (2023). Social Media's Effect on Millennials and Generation Z's Green Purchasing Habits. International Journal of Professional Business Review: Int. J. Prof. Bus. Rev., 8(5), 16.
  49. Shao, J., Li, W., Aneye, C., & Fang, W. (2022). Facilitating mechanism of green products purchasing with a premium price-Moderating by sustainability-related information. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(3), 686-700. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2229ss · DOI
  50. Sotos-Martinez, V. J., Tortosa-Martínez, J., Baena-Morales, S., & Ferriz-Valero, A. (2023). Boosting Student's Motivation through Gamification in Physical Education. Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 165. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13020165 · DOI
  51. Sreen, N., Purbey, S., & Sadarangani, P. (2018). Impact of culture, behavior and gender on green purchase intention. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 41, 177-189. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.12.002 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309-317. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004 · DOI · Paper page
  53. Strydom, C., Meyer, N., & Synodinos, C. (2021). South African Generation Y students' intention towards ecopreneurship. Acta Commercii, 21(1), 1-12. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ac.v21i1.910 · DOI
  54. Sun, Z. Q., & Yoon, S. J. (2022). What Makes People Pay Premium Price for Eco-Friendly Products? The Effects of Ethical Consumption Consciousness, CSR, and Product Quality. Sustainability, 14(23), 15513. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315513 · DOI
  55. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Experimental designs using ANOVA (Vol. 724): Thomson/Brooks/Cole Belmont, CA.
  56. Taherdoost, H. (2022). What are different research approaches? Comprehensive Review of Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method research, their applications, types, and limitations. Journal of Management Science & Engineering Research, 5(1), 53-63.
  57. Thangavel, P., Pathak, P., & Chandra, B. (2022). Consumer decision-making style of gen Z: A generational cohort analysis. Global Business Review, 23(3), 710-728. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919880128 · DOI
  58. Tong, Q., Anders, S., Zhang, J., & Zhang, L. (2020). The roles of pollution concerns and environmental knowledge in making green food choices: Evidence from Chinese consumers. Food Research International, 130, 108881. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2019.108881 · DOI
  59. Vu, D. M., Ha, N. T., Ngo, T. V. N., Pham, H. T., & Duong, C. D. (2022). Environmental corporate social responsibility initiatives and green purchase intention: an application of the extended theory of planned behavior. Social Responsibility Journal, 18(8), 1627-1645. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-06-2021-0220 · DOI
  60. Watanabe, E. A. d. M., Alfinito, S., Curvelo, I. C. G., & Hamza, K. M. (2020). Perceived value, trust and purchase intention of organic food: a study with Brazilian consumers. British Food Journal, 122(4), 1070-1184. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2019-0363 · DOI
  61. Williams, A., & Hodges, N. (2022). Adolescent Generation Z and sustainable and responsible fashion consumption: exploring the value-action gap. Young Consumers, 23(4), 651- 666. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-11-2021-1419 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Qazi, H., Alam, S., & Phulpoto, A.
Affiliations
  • Aix-Marseille Université (FR)
  • Sukkur IBA University (PK)
ORCID
Venue
Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences
Publisher
International Research Alliance for Sustainable Development
Published
2023-09-30
Volume
11
Issue
3
ISSN
  • 2415-007X (ISSN-L)
  • 2709-801X
DOI
10.52131/pjhss.2023.1103.0646
OpenAlex
W4389479994
Cited by
5
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1
FWCI
1.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Education and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Sustainable Supply Chain Management
Keywords
green purchasing behavior, Generation Z, theory of planned behavior, green purchase intention, environmental attitudes, perceived behavioral control, sustainable products, green consumers, Pakistan

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review