the ecological consumer’s profile in spain · the ecological consumer’s profile in spain paula...

AbstractThe aim of this study is to classify and, subsequently, characterize the ecological consumer in Spain. For his/her description, we use his/her ecological behavior besides a set of psych-ographic variables (knowledge about the environment, environmental concern, behavioral intention and values) and socio-demographic variables (gender, age, level of education and political ideology). First, all measuring instruments have been validated at a confirmatory level. Next, through a cluster analysis, conducted on a sample of 497 individuals selected by a non-probabilistic quota sampling, 3 groups of consumers have been obtained: the ecological, the involved-ecological, and the non-ecological. The identification and knowl-edge about these groups will be useful for the definition and development of the green marketing strategy in the company.

Keywords: Green marketing, segmentation, green consumer.

JEL codes: M14, M31, Q5.

Esic Market Economics and Business JournalVol. 46, Issue 2, May-August 2015, 241-268

The ecological consumer’s profile in Spain

Paula Álvarez-González*, M. Jesús López-Miguens and Encarnación González-Vázquez

Universidad de Vigo

El trabajo ha sido presentado previamente en el congreso AEDEM Internacional realizado en París (1-2 septiembre 2014).* Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 0212-1867 / e-ISSN 1989-3558© ESIC Editorial, ESIC Business & Marketing SchoolDOI: 10.7200/esicm.151.0462.1ihttp://www.esic.edu/esicmarket

Introduction

Ecological marketing, also known as green marketing, sustainable marketing or ecomarketing (Chamorro et al., 2006), defined as “a holistic management process responsible for identifying, anticipating and satisfying the needs of customers and

242 Paula Álvarez-González et al.

society in a profitable and sustainable way” (Peattie, 1995: 28) has sparked interest among researchers to understand the relationships among marketing, the environ-ment and society (Do Paço et al., 2009).

The green marketing in business has emerged due to many factors, both internal and external to the company (Vicente and Mediano, 2002; Fraj et al., 2007; López et al., 2008; Buil et al., 2009). From the internal point of view, recent studies suggest that the companies’ commitment to the environment brings benefits to the company in terms of cost savings, differentiation, customer’s and stakeholders’ satisfaction, improved productivity, enhanced financial performance, improved reputation and/or competitive advantages (Aragón et al., 2005; Molina et al., 2009; Fraj et al., 2011; Kotler et al., 2011; Plaza et al., 2011; Shirsavar and Fashjhamy, 2013) and therefore, increasingly, companies decide to develop their activities in an environmentally responsible way. The attitude and commitment of the management of the firm are also factors that influence the development of such strategies (López et al., 2008; Plaza et al., 2011).

From the external point of view, it is suggested the role of the environmental legislation which forces companies to introduce environmental protection aspects in their activities (Fraj et al., 2007), and the pressure from consumers and other stake-holders (Buil et al., 2009; Do Paço et al., 2009; Plaza et al., 2011). In this sense, consumers are concerned about the impact that environmental problems can have on their health and their safety and, therefore, they pressure on companies to incor-porate environmental considerations into their decision-making processes (Peattie, 2001; D’Souza et al., 2007; Paul y Rana, 2012). Thus, companies, in their attempt to understand the consumer and satisfy his/her needs, have been forced to reorient their philosophy, culture and strategies and to develop their activity searching sustainabili-ty and obtaining not only economic but also social and environmental benefits (Fraj and Martínez, 2005; Kotler et al., 2011; Izagirre et al., 2013).

In this context, the study of the consumer profile regarding his/her responsible behavior to the environment will be the starting point in the design and execution of the marketing strategies of the company (Fraj and Martínez, 2006; Akehurst et al., 2012). The study of the ecological consumer has attracted the attention of researchers in marketing and psychology from different countries such as Spain, where ecological behavior has become the main topic of research on green marketing in the past two decades (Chamorro et al., 2006). However, research on green consumer segmentation in Spain is scarce, most of it dates from the early years of this century (eg. Garcés et al., 1999; Fraj and Martínez, 2005; Fraj and Martínez, 2006), uses samples of stu-dents (eg. Barreiro et al., 2002), or is limited to a geographical area (eg. Sánchez et al., 2002), so it makes difficult to generalize the results. In addition, for the charac-terization of ecological consumers, these investigations are often limited to the use of socioeconomic and demographic variables (eg. Garcés et al, 1999; Sánchez, 2001), or the utilization of the personality of individuals (eg. Fraj and Martinez, 2006).

Therefore, the main objective of this research is to identify different segments of the Spanish population nowadays, regarding their environmental behavior and to know: how they behave; what they know about the environment; what level of

The ecological consumer’s profile in Spain 243

ecological concern they enclose; which future behavioral intentions they have; what values they possess; and what socio-demographic variables characterize them. In particular, our research presents four contributions: (1) updates the classification of the ecological consumer in Spain; (2) uses a sample of a general population, using data from individuals around the country extracted through a non probabilistic quota sampling, according to the age and sex percentages of the Spanish popula-tion. In addition, (3) uses behavioral variables including ecological and environ-mental actions in segmentation and (4) segments are described through behavioral, psychographic (knowledge, concern, intent and values) and socio-demographic variables (age, gender, level of education and political ideology), so the segmentation approaches to the market realities (Vicente and Mediano, 2002).

In order to do that, after this introduction, the article is divided into 5 sections. The first section includes a review of the theoretical framework that supports the research and the proposed hypothesis. In the following section, the main methodological aspects and the main results are discussed. Then the last section discusses the findings and implications for management, and presents limitations and future research.

Literature review and assumptions

Green consumer segmentation

Green consumer segmentation tries to classify consumers depending on their envi-ronmental behavior, that is, depending on what they do (Vicente and Mediano, 2002). In the reviewed literature, numerous studies pursue this purpose (Table 1). However, in the Spanish context, these studies are scarce. They concentrate in the years 1999 to 2006, they use samples of students or from a single geographical area, and segmenta-tion variables are limited to demographic and/or psychographic, purchasing behavior and consumption of organic food and products. For example, Sánchez et al. (2000) and Sánchez et al. (2002) classify individuals based on their consumption of organic products in: likely consumers, regular consumers, occasional consumers and non-con-sumers. Although their sample size is important, the sample is limited to two specific regions of Spain (Aragon and Navarra). Barreiro et al. (2002) use the level of knowl-edge and environmental awareness. They find 6 groups of individuals in a sample of students in Lugo. The main limitation we found in these studies is the difficulty to generalize the results. Meanwhile, Garcés et al. (1999) and Sánchez (2001) classified individuals based on their commitment and their degree of environmental aware-ness. Although the used sample is not limited to a single region and, in both cases, the size is more than 950 individuals, authors only use socioeconomic/ sociodemographic variables, obviating the potential influence of other variables. In this sense, Fraj and Martínez (2006) use a sample of general population and classify individuals into two groups (rational and emotional) based on their personality and motivations that lead them to display environmental behaviors, but they do not use any other variable to


describe the obtained groups in more detail. Internationally, we have found more recent studies which involve a larger number of variables in the segmentation and the characterization of individuals. For example, Paul and Rana (2012) classified the Indian consumer and Fernández et al. (2010) the Chilean consumer in terms of: con-sumer satisfaction and consumption of organic food. The description of the segments includes both demographic and psychographic variables, although in the case of the investigation of Paul and Rana (2012), the number of variables is more limited than in Fernández et al.’s (2010) research. Arroyo et al. (2012) analyzed the behavior of recycling in Mexico. They found groups of active recyclers, indifferent, negligent and no recyclers, and characterized these groups based on both demographic (age, educa-tion level, income level and gender) and psychographic variables (concern, knowledge and attitudes). In the same line of research, D’Souza et al. (2007) studied the con-sumer of organic products in Australia, Tilikidou and Delistavrou (2008) analyzed individuals involved in non-purchasing ecological behaviors (recycling, eco-friendly activities) in Greece, or Do Paço et al. (2009) identified the “green” consumer in Portugal, where the latter two studies use a sample size considerably higher than the first one. So, they achieve a comprehensive characterization of the Australian, Greek and Portuguese green consumer, respectively. Following these lines of research developed in other countries, the present study tries to advance the understanding of the ecological Spanish consumer, by classifying the Spanish population, first, by their behavior towards the environment, and subsequently, characterizing the obtained segments using a set of behavioral, psychographic and socio-demographic variables. The first variable defines how the consumers included in each group act, while the rest of variables clarify how they are and who they are, respectively.

Table 1. Research on ecological consumer segmentation

Year Author/s Sample Segments

2012 Paul and Rana

Segmentation criteria:Attitude/satisfaction towards the

purchase of organic food.Characterization variables:

Demographic, health benefits, availability and education.

463 individuals,

India

Cluster 1: Somewhat satisfiedCluster 2: Very satisfiedCluster 3: Dissatisfied / neutral

2012 Arroyo et al.

Segmentation criteria:Recycling behavior.

Characterization variables:Demographic: age, education level,

income level and gender.Psychographic: concern, knowledge,

attitudes.

167 individuals,

Mexico

Active recyclersIndifferentNegligentNo recyclers



2011 Kotler et al.

Segmentation criteria:Market green products and services.

Characterization variables:Beliefs about the benefits of the products,

motivation and values.

Unspecified TrendsettersValue-seekersStandard matchersCautious buyers

2010 Fernández et al.

Segmentation criteria:Consumption of organic food.

Characterization variables:Psychographic: Attitudes, values and

lifestyles.Demographic and socioeconomic: gender, age, education level, city, socioeconomic

group.

Number of individuals unspecified,

Chile

Group 1Group 2

2009 Do Paço et al.

Segmentation criteria:“Green” product buying behavior and

sensitivity to environmental issues.Characterization variables:

Demographic: gender, age, income, education, occupation.

Psychographic: values, ecological concern, attitudes toward the

environment, ecological knowledge.

887 individuals,

Portugal

The uncommittedThe green activistsThe undefined

2008 Tilikidou and Delistavrou

Segmentation criteria:non-purchasing ecological behaviors

(recycling behavior, pro-environmental post-purchasing behaviors and

pro-environmentalactivities).

Characterization variables:Demographic

AttitudesPersonality.

420 families,Greece

Higher involvement Lower involvement

2007 D’Souza et al.

Segmentation criteria:Purchase intention of green consumers

(price and quality dimensions)Characterization variables:

Psychographic: Beliefs/values on environment and knowledge

Demographic: age, gender, marital status, education, occupation.

155 individuals,Australia

11 clusters



2006 Fraj and Martinez

Segmentation criteria:Environmental behavior (real or actual

commitment)Characterization variables:

Personality: extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emotional stability,

openness to experience.

573 individuals,

Spain

Rational groupEmotional group

2002 Barreiro et al.

Segmentation criteria:Components of ecological behavior (level

of ecological knowledge and level of environmental concern)

Characterization variables:Socio-demographic: gender, age, marital

status, grade, location of the family home, size of municipality, net monthly household income and if he/she works.

346 students,

Lugo(Spain)

Green-skepticsInformed-carefreeGreen-institutionalHalf-heartedGreen-socialGreen- lackadaisical

2002 Sánchez et al.

Segmentation criteria:Level of consumption of organic

products, balanced life, health concerns.Characterization variables:

Socio-demographic: gender, age, education level, income.

400 individuals,Pamplona

(Spain)

Likely consumersRegular usersNonusers. Young-casual users

2001 Sánchez

Segmentation criteria:Degree of environmental concern.

Characterization variables:Socio-demographic characteristics:

gender, age, educational level, habitat size, professional occupation, income

level, political ideology.

956 surveysSpain

Favorable individualistic CommittedIndifferentMotivatedPotential activists

2000 Sánchez et al.

Segmentation criteria:Degree of green products buying.

Characterization variables:Socio-demographic: gender, age, economic

income, education level, family size.Psychographic: lifestyle, sensitivity to the

environment.

800 individualsAragon and

Navarra (Spain)

Regular consumptionOccasional consumptionLikely consumption Not consumption



1999 Garcés et al.

Segmentation criteria:Commitment to the environment

Characterization variables:Socioeconomic: age, education level,

income, social class.

1200 individuals,

Spain (CIRES survey)

Group 1: conscious individuals with acquired economic-status. Group 2: conscious individuals with inherited economic-statusGroup 3. No conscious individuals with a very stable economic-status

Source: Authors’ own.

Thus, the ecological behavior variable is used as the criterion for segmentation and, subsequently, in the description of the segments. The ecological behavior of an individual can be defined as performing actions which contribute towards environ-mental preservation and/or conservation or, at least, do not harm the environment (Kaiser et al., 1999).

Psychographic and socio-demographic variables were used to characterize the consumer segments following the recommendations of previous research that sug-gests socio-demographic variables are insufficient to characterize the ecological consumer if other characteristics of individuals are not taken into account (Diaman-topoulos et al., 2003; Fraj and Martínez, 2003). Psychographic variables have result-ed very effective to characterize the ecological consumer (Straughan and Roberts, 1999; Aguirre et al., 2003; Akehurst et al., 2012). Within the psychographic varia-bles, it highlights the role of knowledge, concern, intent and the values of individuals (Kaiser et al., 1999; Bamber and Möser, 2007).

Knowledge of the environment includes what people know about the environ-ment, the reactions that environmental impacts cause and the collective responsibil-ities which are needed for sustainable development (D’Souza et al., 2007; Mostafa, 2007). The literature suggests that consumers who are aware of environmental issues will be more motivated to behave in an environmentally friendly way (Peattie, 2001; D’Souza et al., 2007; Arroyo et al., 2012). For example, Arroyo et al. (2012) found that active recyclers had greater knowledge about the benefits of the recycling behavior.

Environmental concern is the degree to which an individual is aware of envi-ronmental issues, he/she recognizes the need to address them and is willing to take part in their solution (Dunlap et al., 2000; Arroyo et al., 2012). Individuals who have a greater environmental awareness are more willing to make green behaviors (Roberts, 1996; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Straughan and Roberts, 1999; Iman, 2011). Concern has been used both as segmentation variable (Barreiro et al., 2002) and as characterization variable of the different ecological segments (Sánchez, 2001; Do Paço et al., 2009).


Values indicate the importance that an individual gives to “different concepts or things” (Fraj et al., 2004: 63). These variables are related to the individual’s per-sonality and include internal values such as self-realization, happiness and fun, the sense of self-respect; and external values such as the sense of belonging, the sense of being respected and feeling safe. People who give little importance to the impact that products have on the environment, but a lot of importance to the impact products might have on themselves, usually hold the most conservative values. Therefore, the literature suggests that the altruistic, eco-centric and biospheric values are more likely in green consumers (D’Souza et al., 2007; Iman, 2011). Values are one of the variables most commonly used to characterize the ecological consumer (Fraj and Martínez, 2006; Do Paço et al., 2009; Fernández et al., 2010; Kotler et al., 2011).

In the literature on ecological behavior, behavior intention is understood as one’s predisposition towards actions that involve certain efforts and/or costs and is seen as the variable immediately antecedent to a particular behavior. This means that the deliberate character of a specific behavior, such as the ecological behavior, implies a prior intention to realize it (Castro, 2002). Garcés et al. (1999) used the willingness of individuals as segmentation variable and found that the ecological behavior of individuals is related to the disposition towards environmentally friendly behaviors.

Based on the above we propose the following hypothesis:

H1: The psychographic variables (knowledge, concern, intention and values) are relevant in explaining the ecological behavior of an individual.

Regarding the socio-demographic variables, Anderson and Cunningham (1972) were among the first to use them to characterize the ecological consumer. In their research they define green consumer -individuals that not only aim to satisfy their personal needs but are also conscious about the welfare of the society and the envi-ronment- as a woman, about 40 years old, with a level of education and socio-eco-nomic above the average. Since then, the importance and significance of the socio-de-mographic variables has been discussed without reaching a consensus on their importance and influence. The main socio-demographic variables used in previous works include gender, age, educational level and political ideology (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003; Mostafa, 2007; Arroyo et al., 2012).

With regard to the gender, many studies that include this variable find that the likelihood of behaving in an environmentally friendly way is greater in women than in men (Do Paço et al., 2009).

The variable age has been included in numerous studies on ecological behavior (Pato et al., 2005; Arroyo et al., 2012). Some studies identify the green consumer as a young (25-34 years) and middle-aged individual (45-54 years) (Garcés et al., 1999; Do Paço et al., 2009), meanwhile, others consider green consumer’s aged over the average (Roberts, 1996; Pato et al., 2005; D’Souza et al., 2007).

Regarding the level of education, in general, the literature assumes that con-sumers with a higher level of education have greater access to information and,


consequently, they develop greater sensitivity and environmental awareness which translates, with a higher probability, in pro-environmental behaviors (Vicente and Aldamiz, 2003; Mostafa, 2007; Do Paço et al., 2009; Akehurst et al., 2012). Of all the demographic variables, the level of education presents the most consistent rela-tionship (Straughan and Roberts, 1999).

With regard to political ideology, in some studies there is a perception that, in general, environmental issues are part of the “liberal” or progressive politics (Rob-erts, 1996) and therefore, individuals who share that ideology develop a greater commitment to environmental problems than people who hold the most conserva-tive ideology (Straughan and Roberts, 1999; Sánchez, 2001; Vicente and Aldamiz, 2003).

Therefore, we propose:

H2: The socio-demographic variables (gender, age, level of education and political ideology) are relevant in explaining the ecological behavior of an individual.

Methodology

Technical details of the investigation

The target population is made up of individuals aged 16 or over living in Spain. For sample selection, a non-probability quota sampling was used according to the percentages of people belonging to the different age and gender brackets of the Spanish population pyramid (INE, 2011). Thus, the composition of the sample brings near the general population (Table 2). These individuals were given a per-sonal survey based on a structured questionnaire. The fieldwork took place during the months of February to June 2011. After data cleaning, a total of 497 valid questionnaires have remained, on which we have made a series of analyses using statistical tools such as SPSS and AMOS. Table 3 shows the technical specifications of the research.

Table 2. Percentage of population by age and gender

Age 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74

Gender M F M F M F M F M F M F

Population universe* 6.9 6.6 10.4 9.9 11.3 10.7 9.4 9.4 7 7.3 5.1 5.8

Sample 7.6 6.6 11.1 9.9 8.9 11.3 9.7 9.9 5.8 6.4 6.4 6.4

* INE (2011).


Table 3. Technical details of the investigation

Sample unit Individuals aged 16 or over, resident in Spain

Geographical scope Spain

Instrument used for data collection Personal questionnaire

Sampling ProcedureQuoted by percentage of age and gender in the Spanish population pyramid

Sample size 497

Date of fieldwork February to June 2011

Statistical Software SPSS and AMOS


Variables

The questionnaire contains items of the scales for measuring psychographic and behavioral variables, and socio-demographic questions (Table 4).

Table 4. Variables of classification and characterization

Denomination Description Values

Ecological behaviorTranslation and adaptation of the GEB scale of Kaiser (1998)

7-point Likert scale

KnowledgeTranslation and adaptation of the scale used in the investigation of Kaiser et al. (1999)


ConcernNew Ecological Paradigm (NEP) of Dunlap et al. (2000), translated and adapted by Vozmediano and San Juan (2005)


ValuesTranslation and adaptation by Amérigo and González (2000) of the Schwartz (1992) and Stern and Dietz’s (1994) items


IntentionTranslation and adaptation of the scale used in the investigation of Kaiser et al. (1999)


Gender Gender of the individual Male/Female

AgeAge of the individual 16-24; 25-34; 35-44;

45-54; 55-64; 65-74

Level of education

Level of completed studies by the individual Without studies; primary studies; secondary studies; university studies; Master/Doctor studies


Denomination Description Values

Political ideologyDegree of affinity of the principles of the individual with the different political currents.

Right; center-right; center; center-left; left; no ideology.


As shown in Table 4, to measure concern and values we have used the versions translated and adapted to the Spanish context by previous research (Amérigo and González, 2000; Vozmediano and San Juan, 2005). For the rest of scales, we pro-ceeded to the translation from English into Spanish of the items by ensuring the conceptual sense of each one and not by doing a textual and literal translation (Gutiérrez et al., 2007).

Results

Sample

The final sample is composed of 246 men (49.5%) and 251 women (50.5%), aged between 16 and 74 years. More than 30% have university or higher education and those who express their political ideology (56.7%), most declare themselves as leftist (center-left and left). Regarding the psychographic variables, individuals have a medium-high level of knowledge and concern and, in general, they show biospheric (union with nature and protect the environment) and social-altruistic values (world peace and social justice) (Calvo et al., 2008).

Validation of the measuring instruments

Prior to the cluster analysis, the measurement scales were validated. To do that, we follow a process to verify the compliance of their psychometric properties which includes: content validity, dimensionality, reliability and convergent and discriminant validation.

First, to verify the content validity, we use the review of the specific literature and the opinions of experts in order to ensure the adequacy of the items that have been considered and the concepts that they represent. In that respect, three experts from the University of Vigo analyzed the items of each of the scales in relation to the compliance with the concept they represent, their understanding and simplicity (Vandecasteele and Geuens, 2010). These experts made suggestions that led us to the suppression and modification of those items that do not apply to the field of study and/or could lead to confusion (CE22: “I usually buy milk in returnable bottles”, because it isn’t applicable in the context of study, and CE27: “I don’t know whether I may use leaded gasoline in my car”, because it is an indicator of knowledge and not of behavior).


Second, to ensure the dimensionality of the scales, we begin from the theoretical conceptualizations presented to bring together, in the same construct or dimension, variables with a common meaning and independents from variables of the other groups. After checking that the values of the determinant of the correlation matrix for each scale are close to 0 and the KMO test takes values close to 1, we proceeded to perform an exploratory (EFA) and, then, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

The test results confirmed the multidimensional nature of the scales of ecological behavior and knowledge, and the unidimensional nature of the scales of concern, intent and values. Thus, ecological behavior has two dimensions related to ecological waste management –glass and paper–, and the environmental involvement of indi-viduals with problems related to the environment. Knowledge includes a dimension referred to the basic knowledge of individuals about common environmental prob-lems such as melting of the poles, CO2 and climate change and a second dimension related to the knowledge about specific problems such as the effects of toxic metals in the food chain and the human body. Environmental concern contains items related to the ecocentric beliefs of individuals, that is, the appreciation of nature and the feeling of being part of it. Regarding the behavioral intention, it includes items relat-ed to the attitude of individuals towards the use of the car. Finally, the values contain biospheric or ecocentric values (D’Souza et al., 2007; Calvo et al., 2008; Iman, 2011) and social-altruistic ones (Calvo et al, 2008), related to the respect for nature and concern for the welfare of others, respectively.

Once we have made the dimensional specifications of the constructs, we check the reliability of their indicators to determine whether there is consistency between items that measure a concept (Hair et al., 1999). We analyzed the Cronbach Alpha, the inter-item correlation, the composite reliability and the average variance extract-ed. All Cronbach Alpha coefficients approach or exceed the minimum level of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). The range of coefficients is between 0.682 (environmental con-cern) and 0,879 (values), and this range does not allow any improvement by the elimination of any indicator. In addition, all correlations present desirable magni-tudes in scales; and in terms of composite reliability and average variance extracted the obtained values in all cases exceed the minimum values of 0.70 (Luque, 2000) and 0.50 (Sharma, 1996), respectively (Table 5).

The convergent validity analysis refers to the degree to which indicators of the same scale are correlated. To do that, we analyze whether the factor loadings of all indicators exceed the value of 0.5 and if they are statistically significant (Hilde-brandt, 1987). As shown in Table 5, the convergent validity is found.

Finally, the discriminant validation tests the level of disagreement between two con-structs that from a theoretical point of view may seem similar (Hair et al., 1999). To do so, we have checked that correlations between different constructs are low (Hair et al., 1999), that the square of the correlation between each pair of constructs fails the extracted variance of each construct (Fornell and Larcker 1981); and that the confi-dence intervals for the correlation of the constructs do not contain the unit (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988). The results show the discriminant validity of all scales.

The ecological consumer’s profile in Spain 253Ta

ble

5. D

imen

sion

alit

y, r

elia

bilit

y an

d co

nver

gent

val

idit

y of

the

sca

les

of e

colo

gica

l be

havi

or,

know

ledg

e, c

once

rn,

beha

vior

al i

nten

tion

an

d va

lues

Con

stru

ctD

imen

sion

sIt

ems

Stan

d.

load

ings

Cro

nbac

h A

lpha

Poss

ib. O

f A

lpha

im

prov

emen

tIt

em-T

otal

C.R

.E

.V.

Eco

logi

cal b

ehav

ior

,721

Not

(,42

8-,5

79)

,930

,691

Eco

logi

cal w

aste

man

agem

ent

(GE

B)

,70

,826

Not

(,70

4)89

280

5

CE

4: I

col

lect

and

rec

ycle

use

d pa

per.

,92

CE

5: I

bri

ng e

mpt

y bo

ttle

s to

a r

ecyc

ling

bin.

,7

8

Env

iron

men

tal i

mpl

icat

ion

(IM

)66

0N

ot(,

492)

,838

722

CE

23: I

oft

en t

alk

wit

h fr

iend

s ab

out

prob

lem

s re

late

d to

the

env

iron

men

t.,7

6

CE

25: I

n th

e pa

st, I

hav

e po

inte

d ou

t to

som

eone

his

or

her

unec

olog

ical

be

havi

or.

,68

Kno

wle

dge

761

Not

(,47

4-,5

78)

,945

8,7

774

Bas

ic k

now

ledg

e (C

B)

722

Not

(,50

5-,5

89)

,910

6,7

725

CO

N1:

mel

ting

of

the

pola

r ic

e ca

ps m

ay r

esul

t in

a f

lood

ing

of s

hore

s an

d is

land

s.

,69

CO

N2:

fos

sil f

uels

_e.

g. g

as, o

il. p

rodu

ce C

O2

in t

he a

tmos

pher

e w

hen

burn

ed.

,71

CO

N8:

the

wor

ld c

limat

e w

ill p

roba

bly

mas

sive

ly c

hang

e if

CO

2 co

ntin

ues

to b

e em

itte

d in

to t

he a

tmos

pher

e in

as

huge

am

ount

s as

it is

now

.,7

0

Exp

erti

se k

now

ledg

e (C

EX

)68

7N

ot(5

25)

,878

9,7

842

CO

N4:

poi

sono

us m

etal

s ar

e in

trod

uced

into

the

foo

d ch

ain,

for

inst

ance

, via

gr

ound

wat

er.

,75

CO

N7:

poi

sono

us m

etal

s re

mai

n in

the

hum

an b

ody.

,70

254 Paula Álvarez-González et al.C

onst

ruct

Dim

ensi

ons

Item

s

Stan

d.

load

ings

Cro

nbac

h A

lpha

Poss

ib. O

f A

lpha

im

prov

emen

tIt

em-T

otal

C.R

.E

.V.

Env

iron

men

tal c

once

rn68

2N

ot(5

19)

,871

,771

PM5:

Hum

ans

are

seve

rely

abu

sing

the

env

iron

men

t.,7

04

PM7:

Pla

nts

and

anim

als

have

as

muc

h ri

ght

as h

uman

to

exis

t.,7

81

Inte

ntio

n,6

93N

ot(5

31)

,844

1,7

305

INT

6: I

wou

ld p

refe

r no

t to

dri

ve t

o w

ork

any

long

er.

,76

INT

7: I

wou

ld p

refe

r to

be

able

to

go s

hopp

ing

wit

hout

my

auto

mob

ile.

,72

Val

ues

,879

Not

(,56

3-,7

64)

,977

9,8

338

VA

L5:

A w

orld

in p

eace

(fr

ee o

f w

ar a

nd c

onfl

ict)

.,5

9

VA

L6:

Uni

on w

ith

natu

re (

inte

grat

e w

ith

Nat

ure)

.,7

2

VA

L9:

A b

eaut

iful

wor

ld (

beau

ty in

nat

ure

and

the

arts

).,6

4

VA

L10

: Soc

ial J

usti

ce (

corr

ect

inju

stic

e, c

are

for

the

wea

k).

,67

VA

L11

: Res

pect

for

the

ear

th (

harm

ony

wit

h ot

her

spec

ies)

.,7

7

VA

L14

: Pro

tect

the

env

iron

men

t (n

atur

e co

nser

vati

on).

,84

VA

L17

: Avo

id c

onta

min

atio

n (c

onse

rve

reso

urce

s).

,75

CR

: com

posi

te r

elia

bilit

y; E

V: E

xtra

cted

var

ianc

eSo

urce

: Aut

hors

’ ow

n.


Cluster Analysis

Once the exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses of the scale have been done, individuals were grouped through a cluster analysis. The objective of this analysis is to find groups of individuals with internal homogeneity and external heterogeneity based on their responsible ecological behavior that has been measured through the two dimensions obtained in the CFA -the ecological waste manage-ment and environmental involvement of individuals. Following the suggestions of Hair et al. (1999) and Lévy and Varela (2003), the cluster analysis was carried out in five stages. First, we select the relevant variable to identify the clusters following a deductive method, as its inclusion is based on existing work. Thus, as a criterion basis of segmentation we have selected the ecological behavior of the individual. All indicators follow the same response format (Likert 7-point), so that standardization was not necessary. The second step includes the choice of the cluster method. In our research we use the method of Ward and the squared Euclidean distance, as previous research in the study of the ecological consumer (Barreiro et al., 2002; Do Paço et al., 2009), due to the ability of this method to find very compact and of similar size conglomerates. Third, we determine the groups by observing the dendrogram. The dendrogram suggests considering between 3 and 6 clusters as a previous solution. Then, to know what solution provides a better allocation, we used, in the same way that Patsiotis et al. (2012), the K-means method to calculate the error sum of square for different solutions (Table 6). Results suggest the three-cluster solution as the most appropriate, as the error sum of square measure presents the main improvement from two to three clusters, decreasing at 41.91%. Thus, the resulting segments are comprised of 167, 183 and 147 individuals, respectively.

Table 6. K-Means Cluster Analysis for different solutions

Number of clusters 2 3 4 5 6

Composition (299-198)(167-183-

147)(156-155-102-84)

(130-106-86-69-106)

(111-102-42-72-91-

79)

Error sum of square 1,076 625 , 473 356 299

Percentage variation 41.91% 24.32% 24.74% 16.01%


In the fourth step, the obtained groups are validated by a discriminant analy-sis. To do that, as a dependent variable, we use a new variable related to the belong-ing of each individual to the created conglomerate. As independent variables, we use the factors derived from the factor analysis. Table 7, results of the classification or confusion matrix, shows that estimates of the discriminant model applied to


the obtained solution from the cluster analysis provided a percentage of correctly assigned cases of 96.8%; and the test of the equality of means Snedecor’s F (Table 8) suggest that both variables are significant for discrimination between groups.

Table 7. Results of the discriminant analysis classification

Number of initial cases

Predicted group membership Total

1 2 3

Original%

1 95.8 4.2 , 0 100.0

2 , 0 100 , 0 100.0

3 6.1 , 0 93.9 100.0

Correctly classified: 96.8% of original grouped cases


Finally, in the fifth stage, we describe the characteristics that define each of the groups to know if there are patterns or trends. To do this, we have used the factor scores, means and frequencies of the variables related to behavior and the variables of characterization: psychographic and socio-demographic. Cluster analysis results are shown in Table 8. Variables that present a higher positive or negative score, in absolute terms, allow us to explain the inclusion of individuals to the different groups.

The ecological consumer’s profile in Spain 257Ta

ble

8. R

esul

ts o

f cl

uste

r an

alys

is

Con

glom

erat

e M

edia

Tot

alSn

edec

or F

Sig.

12

3

Eco

logi

cal w

aste

man

agem

ent

(GE

B)

, 515

, 601

-1.3

3, 0

0073

6.99

4, 0

00

CE

4: I

col

lect

and

rec

ycle

use

d pa

per.

5,82

46,

026

2,12

24,

804

439.

268

, 000

CE

5: I

bri

ng e

mpt

y bo

ttle

s to

a r

ecyc

ling

bin.

6,

362

6,49

42,

959

5,40

443

2.18

5, 0

00

Env

iron

men

tal i

mpl

icat

ion

(IM

)-

679

1,03

4-

52, 0

0041

7.84

1, 0

00

CE

23: I

oft

en t

alk

wit

h fr

iend

s ab

out

prob

lem

s re

late

d to

th

e en

viro

nmen

t.2,

475

5,50

82,

753

3,67

424

1.64

9, 0

00

CE

25: I

n th

e pa

st, I

hav

e po

inte

d ou

t to

som

eone

his

or

her

unec

olog

ical

beh

avio

r. 2,

614

5,80

92,

931

3,88

419

7.20

8, 0

00

Bas

ic k

now

ledg

e (C

B)

- 00

422

8-

279

, 000

10.9

29, 0

00

CO

N1:

mel

ting

of

the

pola

r ic

e ca

ps m

ay r

esul

t in

a

floo

ding

of

shor

es a

nd is

land

s.

5,43

55,

817

5,39

25,

563

4,25

1, 0

15

CO

N2:

fos

sil f

uels

_e.

g. g

as, o

il. p

rodu

ce C

O2

in t

he

atm

osph

ere

whe

n bu

rned

.5,

945

6,13

75,

365

5,84

412

.061

, 000

CO

N8:

the

wor

ld c

limat

e w

ill p

roba

bly

mas

sive

ly c

hang

e if

C

O2

cont

inue

s to

be

emit

ted

into

the

atm

osph

ere

in a

s hu

ge

amou

nts

as it

is n

ow.

5,75

36,

016

5,40

85,

748

7.28

001

Exp

erti

se k

now

ledg

e (C

EX

), 0

62, 0

98-

192

, 000

3,95

702

0

CO

N4:

poi

sono

us m

etal

s ar

e in

trod

uced

into

the

foo

d ch

ain,

for

inst

ance

, via

gro

und

wat

er.

5,54

45,

562

5,19

05,

446

2,60

4, 0

75

CO

N7:

poi

sono

us m

etal

s re

mai

n in

the

hum

an b

ody.

5,06

05,

147

4,67

34,

978

3,45

8, 0

32

Env

iron

men

tal c

once

rn-

045

, 242

- 25

0, 0

0010

,489

, 000

PM5:

Hum

ans

are

seve

rely

abu

sing

the

env

iron

men

t.5,

814

6,32

25,

755

5,98

410

,228

, 000

PM7:

Pla

nts

and

anim

als

have

as

muc

h ri

ght

as h

uman

to

exis

t.6,

210

6,36

15,

784

6,13

97,

996

, 000

258 Paula Álvarez-González et al.C

ongl

omer

ate

Med

iaT

otal

Sned

ecor

FSi

g.1

23

Inte

ntio

n-

043

369

- 41

1, 0

0027

.723

, 000

INT

6: I

wou

ld p

refe

r no

t to

dri

ve t

o w

ork

any

long

er.

5,70

16,

211

4,90

45,

653

25,4

64, 0

00

INT

7: I

wou

ld p

refe

r to

be

able

to

go s

hopp

ing

wit

hout

my

auto

mob

ile.

5,07

35,

963

4,63

45,

271

15,1

36, 0

00

Val

ues

, 061

295

- 43

6, 0

0024

,268

, 000

VA

L5:

A w

orld

in p

eace

(fr

ee o

f w

ar a

nd c

onfl

ict)

.6,

530

6,64

26,

176

6,46

721

.685

, 000

VA

L6:

Uni

on w

ith

natu

re (

inte

grat

e w

ith

Nat

ure)

.5,

927

6,19

15,

589

5,92

421

.364

, 000

VA

L9:

A b

eaut

iful

wor

ld (

beau

ty in

nat

ure

and

the

arts

).5,

962

6,11

55,

623

5,91

89.

98, 0

00

VA

L10

: Soc

ial J

usti

ce (

corr

ect

inju

stic

e, c

are

for

the

wea

k).

6,30

16,

464

5,85

76,

230

10,2

58, 0

00

VA

L11

: Res

pect

for

the

ear

th (

harm

ony

wit

h ot

her

spec

ies)

.6,

164

6,36

35,

735

6,11

16,

559

002

VA

L14

: Pro

tect

the

env

iron

men

t (n

atur

e co

nser

vati

on).

6,15

06,

475

5,62

76,

115

12,8

47, 0

00

VA

L17

: Avo

id c

onta

min

atio

n (c

onse

rve

reso

urce

s).

6,24

06,

399

5,73

66,

149

13,2

7, 0

00

Freq

uenc

y (%

)C

ongl

omer

ate

Tot

alC

hi-s

quar

eSi

g.

12

3

Gen

der

2,93

823

0

Mal

e54

.5%

45.4

%49

.0%

49.5

%

Fem

ale

45.5

%54

.6%

51.0

%50

.5%

Age

14.8

5313

8

16-2

417

.4%

9.3%

17.0

%14

.3%

25-3

421

.6%

21.3

%19

.7%

20.9

%

35-4

422

.2%

23.5

%13

.6%

20.1

%

45-5

420

.4%

17.5

%21

.1%

19.5

%

The ecological consumer’s profile in Spain 259C

ongl

omer

ate

Med

iaT

otal

Sned

ecor

FSi

g.1

23

55-6

48.

4%14

.2%

14.3

%12

.3%

65-7

410

.2%

14.2

%14

.3%

12.9

%

Edu

cati

onal

leve

l31

.949

, 000

Wit

hout

stu

dies

14.4

%6.

0%13

.7%

11.1

%

Prim

ary

educ

atio

n (E

GB

/ E

SO)

29.3

%17

.0%

28.1

%24

.4%

Seco

ndar

y ed

ucat

ion

(BU

P / C

OU

/ FP

/ C

ycle

s / B

ache

lor)

34.7

%34

.1%

33.6

%34

.1%

Col

lege

(D

iplo

ma

/Bac

helo

r)20

.4%

35.2

%21

.9%

26.3

%

Mas

ter

/ Doc

tor

1.2%

7.7%

2.7%

4.0%

Polit

ical

ideo

logy

23,4

2300

9

Rig

ht7.

2%8.

2%10

.2%

8.5%

Cen

ter-

righ

t10

.8%

10.4

%5.

4%9.

1%

Cen

ter

6.0%

6.6%

9.5%

7.3%

Cen

tre-

left

12.7

%19

.2%

8.2%

13.7

%

Lef

t21

.1%

19.8

%12

.2%

18.0

%

Non

e42

.2%

35.7

%54

.4%

43.4

%

Sour

ce: A

utho

rs’ o

wn.


The above analysis suggests that both behavioral and psychographic variables are significant to classify and describe the ecological consumer and it confirms their importance, in line with recent research on the ecological consumers in other countries such as Portugal (eg. Do Paço et al., 2009; Akehurst et al., 2012), Mexico (Arroyo et al., 2012) or Australia (D’Souza et al., 2007). So, hypothesis 1 has been confirmed. Regarding the socio-demographic variables, results suggest that only the level of education and ideology are significant to distinguish the three identified groups and to characterize the ecological consumer. Then, Hypothesis 2 is not con-firmed for all variables. These results contrast with previous research that suggests both gender and age are related to ecological behavior (eg. Straughan and Roberts, 1999; Mostafa, 2007); and confirms the predictive power of the level of education and the political ideology.

The results show the existence of three different consumer groups:Group 1 includes 33.6% of the population, the ecological. It consists of a high-

er percentage of people who have primary or secondary education, and although many of them do not reflect their political ideology, a significant percentage opts for leftist ideology. They possess a basic and expert knowledge similar to the average population, they are concerned about the environment and their values reflect those concerns in search of a peaceful world, the preservation of resources and the social justice. Their degree of readiness on the use of the car is similar to the average pop-ulation. All these characteristics are reflected in their ecological behavior regarding waste management; however, they are not involved in environmental activities.

Group 2 are the involved-ecological and contains the highest percentage of peo-ple (36.8%). It is composed of the majority of people who have university and higher education and show a political ideology of left or center-left. They possess a higher level of basic and expert knowledge of the environment than the other groups, they are the most concerned about the environment and their values are fundamentally biospheric or ecocentric, related to the feeling of altruism, social justice and respect for nature. Also, they would be more willing than other groups to reduce the use of their car, and their ecological behavior includes ecological waste management and, unlike the previous group, also environmental implication.

The third group includes the non-ecological (29.6%). It is composed of indi-viduals with primary and secondary education, who do not manifest their political ideology. They have a level of knowledge about environmental problems and envi-ronmental concern lower than the other segments. They give lower importance to the values related to nature than other groups; and they are less willing to make efforts with regard to the use of their car in the future. All this is reflected in their ecological behavior. Thus, they have a more negative ecological behavior and they recycle less than the other groups. Neither do they support environmental activism.


Conclusions and practical implications

The objective of this research is to classify the current Spanish population regard-ing their environmental behavior, and describe the resulting groups according to their behavioral, psychographic and socio-demographic profile, by using a set of var-iables that have not been used together, as far as we know, in the most recent studies in the Spanish context. Our results suggest that the ecological behavior variables, the psychographic variables, that is, knowledge (basic and expert), environmental concern, behavioral intention and values, in addition to socio-demographic variables (level of education and political ideology), all of them are statistically significant to differentiate the three heterogeneous groups of consumers that have been identi-fied. By contrast, the socio-demographic variables -gender and age- have not proved to be discriminating between the groups.

According to our results, 36.8% of individuals behave in an environmentally friendly way, both in the ecological waste management dimension and in the envi-ronmental implication dimension. 33.6% of individuals develop recycling behaviors while 29.6% do not usually perform either of the analyzed green behaviors.

Results suggest that there are two consumer segments that may be of interest to companies that pursue the implementation of a green marketing strategy. They are the ecological and the involved-ecological consumers with a total of 66.40% of the population.

This is a significant percentage of the population that shows a high level of knowledge, concern about environmental issues, values and intention to purchase. So, companies that want to satisfy these consumers should apply practices of ethical marketing such as: to offer quality and safe products with biodegradable and recy-clable packaging and labels that do not mislead the consumer; to comply with the law; not to apply abusive prices; to protect the privacy of the customers; not to use aggressive sales strategies; to provide timely information to the customer for deci-sion-making; to be honest in all communications made by the company (Velasquez, 2006; Armstrong et al. , 2011), also in advertising, by ensuring it is not misleading as to “ distort the nature of the product by using deceptive simulations, using paid false testimonies, inserting the word guarantee when nothing is guaranteed, citing misleading prices, not revealing the flaws of a product, misleadingly attacking a competitor’s products or simulating known brands” (Velasquez, 2006).

Other actions could include the participation of some stakeholders in the boards, for example, consumer organizations, environmental organizations, and so on (Armstrong et al., 2011). It could also be developed an ethical code that includes the standards of conduct in the dealings with stakeholders. In this sense, Silos and Galiano (2011) recognized, in a report about the evolution of the social responsibili-ty of business in Spain, only 16.5% businesses have a written ethical code of conduct and 9.5% expect to write it in the future.

In addition, our results provide evidence about the characteristics of another seg-ment that does not perform ecological behaviors. In this segment, some actions could


be carried out in order to encourage recycling and/or environmental implication behaviors. For this segment called non-ecological, our proposals are aimed to the integration, in the strategic marketing planning, of issues that act on the knowledge and concerns of individuals about the environment, to lead the values that guide people’s life and their intentions, because all these issues have a direct and positive relationship on environmental behavior, as demonstrated in the literature (Kaiser et al., 1999).

First, we propose to provide information and education to the population, not only about ecological problems, but also about “the environmental features, advan-tages and benefits associated with the product and its real impact on ecological preservation.” (Akehurst et al., 2012: 984). In this sense, Welford (1995, cited in Raufflet et al., 2012: 151) notes: “to provide information about the product and the producer to the consumer, provide advice on how to use the product more efficiently and advice on the reuse, repair, recycling and disposal of that product”.

Another action could be that the company, through marketing stimuli, may orient the preferences of these consumers toward a more responsible behavior, for example, by advising the consumption of healthier products as ecological, and highlighting their attributes and benefits against other forms of consumption. However, for this action to be effective, the company must ensure that there are no trade barriers on price and availability of their products (Izaguirre et al., 2013). In this sense, respon-sible companies should adjust their prices for these products or services to be accessi-ble also to people with fewer resources, although, as Vicente y Aldamiz (2003) note, the application of a premium is still justified, in part, by the costs and the reduced rotation of these products.

All these measures have to be designed under a long-term perspective, which implies a strong commitment by the organization to incorporate environmental and/or social issues to the business philosophy. This might lead to the creation of a specific department.

Limitations and future research

Finally, we recognize as the main limitation of the study the used sampling pro-cedure. In particular, non-probabilistic quota sampling requires caution about the generalization of the results. As future research, it would be interesting to replicate the study with consumers from other countries and to do a comparative analysis of the ecological consumer in different territories. We also propose a classification of the Spanish population at later time points, in order to analyze their evolution.


References

Aguirre, M.S., Aldamiz-Echevarría, C., Charterina, J. and Vicente, A., 2003, “El consumidor ecológico. Un modelo de comportamiento a partir de la recopilación y análisis de la evidencia empírica”. Distribución y Consumo, Enero-febrero, pp. 41-53.

Akehurst, G., Afonso, C. and Gonçalves, H.M., 2012, “Re-examinig green purchase behavior and the green consumer profile: new evidences”. Management Decision, Vol. 50, No. 5, pp. 972-988.

Amérigo, M. and González, A., 2000, “Los valores y las creencias medioambientales en relación con las decisiones sobre dilemas ecológicos”. Estudios de Psicología, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 65-73.

Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W., 1988, “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach?”. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103, No. 3, pp. 411-423.

Anderson, W. T. and Cunningham, W., 1972, “The Socially Conscious Consumer”. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36, pp. 23-31.

Aragón, J.A., García, V.J. and Hurtado, N.E., 2005, “Un modelo explicativo de las estrategias medioambientales avanzadas para pequeñas y medianas empresas y su influencia en los resultados”. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empre-sa, Vol. 25, octubre, pp. 29-51.

Armstrong, G., Kotler, P.; Merino, M.J., Pintado, T. and Juan, J.M., 2011, Introduc-ción al Marketing. 3ed. Pearson Educación. Madrid.

Arroyo, P.E., Carrete, L.P. and Trujillo, A., 2012, “Segmentación de individuos con base en su perfil demográfico, conocimiento, actitudes y conducta del reciclaje en una economía emergente”. Panorama Socioeconómico, Año 30, Vol. 44, pp. 26-44.

Bamberg, S. and Möser, G., 2007, “Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psychosocial determinants of pro-environmental behavior”. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 14-25.

Barreiro, J.M., López, M.A., Losada, F. and Ruzo, E., 2002, “Análisis de las dimen-siones cognoscitiva y afectiva del comportamiento ecológico del consumidor”. Revista Galega de Economía, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 1-21.

Buil Carrasco, I., Fraj Andrés, E. and Mature Vallejo, J., 2009, “La influencia del factor medioambiental en las estrategias de marketing: un estudio aplicado al sector de bienes de consumo final”. EsicMarket, Vol. 134, pp. 155-180.

Calvo, A., Aguilar, M.C. and Berrios, M.P., 2008, “El comportamiento ecológi-co responsable: un Análisis desde los valores biosféricos, sociales-altruistas y egoístas”. Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Docencia (REID), No. 1, pp. 11-25.

Castro, R., 2002, “¿Estamos dispuestos a proteger nuestro ambiente? Intención de conducta y comportamiento proambiental”. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 107-118.


Chamorro, A., Miranda, F.J. and Rubio, S., 2006, “El estado de la investigación sobre marketing ecológico en España: Análisis de revistas españolas 1993-2003”. Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 137-156.

Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B.B., Sinkovics, R.R. and Bohlen, G.M., 2003, “Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation”. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56, No. 6, pp. 465-480.

Do Paço, A., Raposo, M. and Filho, W., 2009, “Identifying the green consumer: A segmentation study”. Journal of Targeting, Measurement & Analysis for Market-ing, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 17-25.

D’Souza, C., Taghian, M. and Khosla, R., 2007, “Examination of environmental beliefs and its impact on the influence of price, quality and demographic charac-teristics with respect to green purchase intention”. Journal of Targeting, Meas-urement & Analysis for Marketing, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 69-78.

Dunlap, R., Van Liere, K., Mertig, A. and Jones, R., 2000, “Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale”. Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56, pp. 425-444.

Fernández, C., Cea, J. and Paz, M., 2010, “Perfil de consumidor orgánico”. Trend Management, Ed, especial mayo, pp. 44-55.

Fornell, C. and Larcker D.F., 1981, “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, February, pp. 39-50.

Fraj, E. and Martínez, E., 2003, “Influencia de las características demográficas y socioeconómicas de los consumidores en la compra de productos ecológicos”. Estudios sobre consumo, Vol. 65, pp. 9-20.

Fraj, E. and Martínez, E., 2005, “El nivel de conocimiento medioambiental como factor moderador de la relación entre la actitud y el comportamiento ecológico”. Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 223-243.

Fraj, E. and Martínez, E., 2006, “Influence of personality on ecological consumer behavior”. Journal of Consumer Behavior, Vol. 5, pp. 167-181.

Fraj, E., Martínez, E. and Grande, I., 2004, “Un estudio exploratorio sobre las varia-bles psicográficas que influyen en el comportamiento del consumidor ecológico”. Revista de Economía y Empresa, Vol. 50, No. 21, pp. 61-87.

Fraj, E., Martínez, E. and Matute, J., 2007, “Perfil de las empresas industriales que desarrollan estrategias corporativas y de marketing medioambiental”. Universia Business Review, Primer trimestre, pp. 26-41.

Fraj, E., Martínez, E. and Matute, J., 2011, “Marketing y medio ambiente: Una aproximación a la situación de la industria española”. Universia Business Review, Tercer trimestre, pp. 156-183.

Garcés, C., Pedraja, M., Rivera, P. and Berné, C., 1999, “Estudio del perfil del con-sumidor comprometido con el medio ambiente”. Estudios sobre consumo, Vol. 51, pp. 113-124.


Gutiérrez, C., Veloza, M.M., Moreno, M.E., Durán, M.M., López, C. and Crespo, O., 2007, “Validez y confiabilidad de la versión en español del instrumento “Escala de medición del proceso de afrontamiento y adaptación” de Callista Roy”. Revista Aquichan, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 54-63.

Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C., 1999, Análisis Multivari-ante. 5ª edición. Ed. Prentice Hall.

Hildebrandt, L., 1997, “Consumer retail satisfaction in rural areas: A reanalysis of survey data”. Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 8, pp. 19-42.

Iman, N., 2011, “Green Behavior (and other special consumption practices): Green Behavior: concern for the self or others?”. AMA Summer Educators’ Conference Proceedings, Vol. 22, pp. 163-164.

INE, 2011, Base de datos: Proyecciones de población a corto plazo. 2011-2021. Población residente en España a 1 de enero, por sexo, edad y año. http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?type=pcaxis&path=/t20/e244/avance/p01/&file=pcaxis

Izagirre-Olaizola, J., Fernández-Sainz, A. and Vicente-Molina, M.A., 2013, “Ante-cedentes y barreras a la compra de productos ecológicos”. Universia Business Review, Segundo Trimestre, pp. 108-127.

Kaiser, F.G., 1998, “A general measure of ecological behavior”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 28, No. 5, pp. 395-442.

Kaiser, F.G., Wölfing, S. and Fuhrer, U., 1999, “Environmental attitude and ecologi-cal behaviour”. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 19, pp. 1-19.

Kotler, P., Kartajaya, H. and Setiawan, I., 2011, Marketing 3.0. Ed. LID Editorial. Madrid.

Lévy, J. P. and Varela, J., 2003, Análisis multivariable para las ciencias sociales. Madrid: Pearson Educación, S.A.

López, M. D., Molina, J. F. and Claver, E., 2008, “Análisis de los factores que condicionan la percepción del directivo sobre el medio ambiente. Un estudio Qual/Quan”. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, Vol. 37, pp. 123-172.

Luque, T., 2000, Técnicas de análisis de datos en investigación de mercados. Madrid: Ed. Pirámide, pp. 489-555.

Molina-Azorín, J., Claver-Cortés, E., López-Gamero, M. and Tarí, J., 2009, “Green management and financial performance: a literatura review”. Management Deci-sion, Vol. 47, No. 7, pp. 1080-1100.

Mostafa, M.M., 2007, “Gender differences in Egyptian consumers green purchase behaviour: the effect of environmental knowledge, concern and attitude”. Inter-national Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 220-229.

Nunnally, J.C., 1978, “Theory of measurement error”. In Lévy J.P. y Varela J. (2003), Psychometric theory (2nd ed.) 2003. New York: McGraw Hill.

Pato, C., Ros, M. and Tamayo, A., 2005, “Creencias y comportamiento ecológico: un estudio empírico con estudiantes brasileños”. Medio Ambiente y Comportam-iento Humano, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 5-22.


Patsiosis, A.G., Hughes, T. and Webber, D.J., 2012, “Adopters and non-adopters of internet banking: a segmentation study”. International Journal of Bank Market-ing, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 20-42.

Paul, J. and Rana, J., 2012, “Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food”. Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 29, No. 6, pp. 412-422.

Peattie, K., 1995, Environmental Marketing Management: Meeting the Green Chal-lenge. Pitman Publishing, London.

Peattie, K., 2001, “Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer”. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 187-199.

Plaza, J.A., De Burgos, J. and Belmonte, L.J., 2011, “Grupos de interés, gestión ambiental y resultado empresarial: una propuesta integradora”. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, Vol. 14, pp. 151-161.

Raufflet, E.; Lozano, J.F.; Barrera, E. and García, C., 2012, Responsabilidad social empresarial. Pearson Educación. México.

Roberts, J.A., 1996, “Green consumer in the 1990s: Profile and implications for advertising”. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 36, pp. 217-231.

Roberts, J.A. and Bacon, D.R., 1997, “Exploring the subtle relationships between environmental concern and ecologically conscious behavior”. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 79-89.

Sánchez, M., 2001, “Segmentación de la población española según su grado de con-cienciación ecológica mediante modelos de variables latentes”. Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 173-196.

Sánchez, M., Gil, J.M. and Gracia, A., 2000, “Segmentación del consumidor respecto al alimento ecológico: diferencias interregionales”. Revista de Estudios Regionales, Vol. 56, pp. 171-188.

Sánchez, M., Sanjuán, A.I., Gil, J.M., Gracia, A. and Soler, F., 2002, “Estudio de las preferencias de consumidores y distribuidores especializados respecto del producto ecológico”. Economía Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 93-114.

Schwartz, S. H., 1992, “Universals in the content and structure of values, theoretical advances and empirical test in 20 countries”. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 10, pp. 221-279.

Sharma, S., 1996, Applied multivariate techniques. New York: John Wiley&Sons, Inc.

Shirsavar, H.R.A and Fashkhamy, F., 2013, “Green Marketing: A New Paradigm to Gain Competitive Advantage in Contemporary Business”. Trends in Advanced Science and Engineering, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 12-18.

Silos, J. and Galiano, J. P., 2011. Informe Forética 2011. Evolución de la responsa-bilidad social de las empresas en España.

Stern, P.C. and Dietz, T., 1994, “The value basis of environmental concern”. Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 50, No. 3, pp. 65-84.

Straughan, R. and Roberts, J., 1999, “Environmental segmentation alternatives: A look at green consumer behavior in the new millennium”. Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 16, No. 6, pp. 558-575.


Tilikidou, I. and Delistavrou, A., 2008, “Types and influential factors of consumers’ non-purchasing ecological behaviors”. Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol.18, pp. 61-76.

Vandecasteele, B. and Geuens, M., 2010, “Motivated consumer innovativeness: Concept, measurement, and validation”. International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 308-318.

Velasquez, M., 2006, Ética en los negocios. Pearson Educación. México.Vicente, M.A. and Mediano, L., 2002, “Propuestas para una segmentación estratégi-

ca del mercado ecológico”. Cuadernos de Gestión, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 11-30.Vicente, M.A. and Aldamiz-Echevarría, C., 2003, “Aproximación al perfil sociode-

mográfico del consumidor ecológico a través de la evidencia empírica: propuestas para el desarrollo del mix de marketing”. Boletín Económico del ICE, nº 2777, pp. 25-39.

Vozmediano, L. and San Juan, C., 2005, “Escala Nuevo Paradigma Ecológico: propiedades psicométricas con una muestra española obtenida a través de Inter-net”. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 37-49.


Notes on Contributors

Name: Paula Álvarez-GonzálezPosition: Personal InvestigadorSchool / Faculty: Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y EmpresarialesUniversity: Universidad de VigoAddress: Campus Lagoas-Marcosende, 36310 Vigo (Pontevedra)Telephone: (+34) 986 818756Email: [email protected]

Name: M. Jesús López-MiguensPosition: Profesora Contratada DoctoraSchool / Faculty: Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y EmpresarialesUniversity: Universidad de VigoAddress: Campus Lagoas-Marcosende, 36310 Vigo (Pontevedra)Telephone: (+34) 986 813446Email: [email protected]

Name: Encarnación González-VázquezPosition: CatedráticaSchool / Faculty: Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y EmpresarialesUniversity: Universidad de VigoAddress: Campus Lagoas-Marcosende, 36310 Vigo (Pontevedra)Telephone: (+34) 986 812485Email: [email protected]

the ecological consumer’s profile in spain · the ecological consumer’s profile in spain paula...

Documents