Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

In this study, the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is extended to examine factors influencing consumer purchase intentions toward sustainable fashion products. This extended model integrates environmental knowledge, environmental concern, and self-efficacy. A survey targeting Korean men and women aged 21 to 65 was conducted using convenience sampling, resulting in 238 valid responses. Regression analysis revealed that attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, and environmental knowledge significantly affect consumers’ intentions to purchase sustainable fashion, with attitude being the most influential factor. Contrary to expectations, environmental concern did not significantly impact purchase intentions. Additionally, the study finds that women are more inclined to purchase sustainable fashion products, and individuals with experience in textile fashion demonstrate a higher likelihood of such purchases. These findings offer valuable insights for businesses and policymakers in developing strategies to promote sustainable fashion products and enhance their adoption among consumers.

Plain language summary

Purpose This study expands the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to assess factors influencing Korean consumers’ sustainable fashion purchase intentions, incorporating environmental knowledge, concern, and self-efficacy with traditional TPB components, and exploring the impact of demographics. Design/Methodology/Approach Utilizing a survey of 238 Korean adults and regression analysis, the research evaluates how expanded TPB variables and demographic factors shape intentions to buy sustainable fashion. Findings Attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, and environmental knowledge notably influence sustainable fashion purchase intentions. However, environmental concern shows no significant effect. Women and those with textile-fashion experience are more inclined to buy sustainable fashion. Originality/Value This research offers new insights into sustainable fashion consumer behavior in Korea, challenging traditional beliefs about demographic impacts on environmental consciousness. It provides valuable guidance for marketers and policymakers in promoting sustainable fashion, emphasizing the need for tailored strategies considering cultural and demographic factors.

Keywords

sustainable fashion theory of planned behavior extended theory of planned behavior purchase intention

Introduction

The emergence of fast fashion, epitomized by brands such as Zara, H&M, and Uniqlo, has reshaped the global fashion landscape over recent centuries. Characterized by affordable, widely available, and rapidly produced garments, fast fashion has catered to a burgeoning demand for diverse styles (Niinimäki et al., 2020). This trend has been facilitated by global supply chain expansions, enabling the relocation of fiber, textile, and clothing production to regions with lower labor costs. While this has made clothing production more cost-effective, it has also raised significant concerns regarding its environmental and societal impacts (Bick et al., 2018).

The environmental toll of fast fashion is alarming. The industry is responsible for generating 1.92 million tons of clothing waste annually and accounts for 10% of global carbon emissions, surpassing the combined emissions of all international aviation and maritime transport. Additionally, the fashion industry contributes to 20% of global wastewater and the release of half a million tons of microplastics into the oceans annually (UNEP, 2018; United Nations, 2019). Beyond environmental degradation, the industry also imposes human costs, predominantly affecting women in developing countries who face poor working conditions and rights violations.

In response to these growing concerns, a paradigm shift is evident in consumer behavior, with a growing awareness of the environmental and social implications of their fashion choices (Hiller Connell & Kozar, 2017; Paco & Raposo, 2009; Shim et al., 2018; Yang & Ha-Brookshire, 2019). This shift has given rise to the concept of sustainable fashion, which emphasizes environmentally and ethically responsible production methods. Sustainable fashion aims to address the myriad problems associated with fast fashion and create a positive interaction between consumers and fashion products, focusing on harmlessness, recyclability, ethical production, and longevity (Henninger et al., 2016).

Despite the awareness of sustainable fashion’s importance, a gap persists between consumer perception and actual consumption behavior, especially in the context of fast fashion (McNeill & Moore, 2015). This dichotomy underscores the need for a deeper understanding of the factors influencing consumers’ attitudes and behaviors toward sustainable fashion, particularly in specific cultural contexts like Korea. Korean consumers’ purchase intentions for sustainable fashion have been relatively underexplored, particularly concerning the psychological antecedents that drive these behaviors.

Recent research applying an extended theory of planned behavior model to sustainable fashion consumption has revealed varying influences of attitudes (Brandão & Costa, 2021; Saricam & Okur, 2019), subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, suggesting these may differ based on consumer characteristics and cultural contexts. However, these studies have not fully explored the impact of specific demographic factors such as gender, age, and textile-fashion experience on consumer behavior.

Given this backdrop, this study aims to fill these gaps by focusing on the Korean market. It seeks to investigate how environmental knowledge, concern, self-efficacy, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control influence Korean consumers’ intentions to purchase sustainable fashion. Additionally, it aims to understand the relationship between demographic factors like gender, age, and fashion-related experience and consumer behavior. Finally, this study intends to offer actionable marketing strategies to promote sustainable fashion consumption among Korean consumers, thus contributing to the broader goal of fostering environmentally and socially responsible behavior within the fashion industry.

Literature Review

Sustainable Fashion

The concept of sustainable fashion, though increasingly recognized in the textile and apparel industries, lacks a definitive definition. It initially centered on organic fashion, a term Maloney et al. (2014) describe as involving the use of natural materials processed without harmful chemicals. This approach, which marries environmental care with practical fashion needs, represents a significant development in sustainable fashion.

Building on the foundation of organic fashion, the concept evolved to embrace eco-fashion, as introduced by Joergens (2006). Eco-fashion extends beyond organic fashion’s principles, encompassing environmentally responsible manufacturing practices. This approach advocates for clothing production that benefits both society and the environment, integrating sustainable practices throughout the entire fashion supply chain, from sourcing to distribution (Chan & Wong, 2012). This evolution further broadened to include ethical fashion, as defined by Domeisen (2006), which combines eco-fashion’s environmental focus with a commitment to humane manufacturing practices. In this research, sustainable fashion encompasses a range of practices, including recycled, safe, ethically made, durable, and eco-friendly items, integrating green, ethical, organic, and eco-fashion concepts.

Consumer perspectives on sustainable fashion are complex. Studies like those by Casadesus-Masanell et al. (2009) and Roberts (1996) show varied willingness among consumers to pay a premium for sustainability. Mostafa (2007) notes that environmental consciousness influences purchasing decisions. In addition, Minton and Rose (1997) emphasize that moral characteristics significantly impact pro-environmental behaviors.

On the industry side, companies are increasingly adopting sustainable practices. Patagonia, for instance, uses organic cotton and environmentally friendly materials (Maloney et al., 2014). The fashion industry, despite criticisms, is shifting toward sustainable fibers and ethical labor practices (McNeill & Moore, 2015). However, aligning marketing with sustainability remains a challenge due to global issues like climate change (Ferdous, 2010).

In conclusion, sustainable fashion represents a critical shift in both consumer behavior and industry practices, aiming to balance environmental responsibility with ethical and economic considerations. This movement reflects a collective drive toward a more conscious fashion industry.

Theory of Planned Behavior

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) is an essential social psychology framework for predicting individual behaviors, evolving from the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). TRA, developed by Ajzen and Fishbein (1975), posits that behavior is driven by intentions influenced by personal attitudes and subjective norms. While significant, TRA was criticized for its assumption of voluntary behavior and its limitations in scenarios where individuals’ control over choices is constrained (Liao et al., 2007).

Ajzen (1985) addressed these limitations by adding Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) to the TPB model. PBC assesses an individual’s perception of the difficulty of a specific behavior, influenced by internal abilities and external circumstances (Ajzen, 1991). This concept reflects the understanding that control over behavior varies, impacting decision-making processes. Deng (2013) demonstrated that PBC significantly affects ethical purchase intentions, highlighting its relevance in consumer behavior.

Further research by Agag and Colmekcioglu (2020) reinforced the importance of PBC in determining consumer behavior, particularly in choices regarding eco-friendly products. This shows PBC’s crucial role in areas like sustainable fashion, where decisions are influenced by personal capacity and external factors.

In TPB, attitude and subjective norm, alongside PBC, form the basis of behavioral intentions. Attitude is the individual’s consistent response toward a behavior, while subjective norm involves perceived social pressures (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1975). The influence of subjective norms, however, varies across cultures and is generally less predictable compared to attitude and PBC (Dean et al., 2012; Hosta & Zabkar, 2021).

Finally, purchase intention, a central element in TPB, reflects the likelihood of consumers’ buying behavior, shaped by attitudes, subjective norms, and PBC. It serves as a reliable indicator of future behavior, linking beliefs and actual actions (Aaker, 1997; Jaiswal & Kant, 2018). TPB, with the integration of PBC, offers a nuanced understanding of consumer decisions in contexts like sustainable fashion, balancing personal beliefs, societal influences, and perceived control.

Extended Theory of Planned Behavior

The Extended Theory of Planned Behavior (E-TPB) enhances the original TPB framework by introducing additional variables such as environmental knowledge, self-efficacy, and price sensitivity. This modification, advocated by researchers like Ajzen (1991) and Perugini and Bagozzi (2001), is designed to address the limitations of TPB in predicting behaviors solely based on attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavior control, thereby enriching its applicability in consumer behavior studies.

Central to E-TPB is the inclusion of environmental knowledge, which plays a critical role in influencing eco-friendly consumer behaviors. Research by Paul et al. (2016) demonstrate that consumers with greater awareness of environmental impacts are more inclined toward sustainable consumption. This knowledge significantly shapes consumer decisions, suggesting that a deep understanding of environmental issues positively impacts green purchasing behavior.

Specifically, environmental concern, defined as the level of individual concern toward environmental issues, also profoundly influences environmentally conscious behaviors. Research by Mostafa (2007) indicates that heightened environmental concern correlates with a greater propensity to engage in eco-friendly practices, including purchasing behavior.

Furthermore, self-efficacy, or an individual’s confidence in their ability to effect change, is identified as a pivotal factor in sustainable consumer behavior. Higher self-efficacy is linked to more environmentally conscious purchasing decisions, as it instills a belief in individuals that their actions can contribute significantly to reducing pollution and promoting sustainability (Ahmad et al., 2022; Roberts, 1996; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008).

The E-TPB model, therefore, offers a more comprehensive understanding of consumer behavior in sustainable fashion. By integrating these additional variables, the model not only enhances the explanatory power of TPB but also provides valuable insights into the factors that drive consumer purchase intentions toward sustainable fashion products.

Hypothesis Development

In exploring consumer behaviors toward sustainable fashion products, this study leverages the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior (E-TPB), integrating additional variables to deepen our understanding of these behaviors. The E-TPB framework includes factors such as environmental knowledge, environmental concern, and self-efficacy, each playing a pivotal role in shaping consumer purchase intentions.

Understanding the role of environmental knowledge in sustainable fashion consumption is crucial. Studies indicate that an individual’s knowledge about the environment and its preservation positively influences their consumption choices (Kautish & Khare, 2022; Ko & Jin, 2017). This relationship suggests that increased awareness and understanding of environmental impacts lead to more responsible consumer behaviors. Consequently, we hypothesize:

H1: Environmental knowledge has a positive effect on consumers’ purchase intention toward sustainable fashion consumption

The concept of environmental concern also emerges as a significant predictor of sustainable fashion consumption. The increasing global awareness of the environmental consequences of consumption habits has led to a shift in consumer attitudes (Moser, 2016). As consumers become more concerned about their environmental impact, they are more likely to engage in environmentally responsible purchasing behaviors (Mostafa, 2007). Therefore, the study proposes:

H2: Environmental concern has a positive effect on consumers’ purchase intention toward sustainable fashion consumption

Moreover, self-efficacy, or the belief in one’s ability to effect change, is identified as a key determinant of sustainable consumer behavior. Studies have shown that higher self-efficacy leads to more environmentally conscious purchasing decisions (Ahmad et al., 2022; Roberts, 1996; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008). This suggests that when individuals believe their actions can contribute to reducing pollution and promoting sustainability, they are more likely to purchase sustainable fashion products. Therefore, this research posits:

H3: Self-efficacy has a positive effect on consumers’ attitude toward sustainable fashion consumption

Continuing from the initial hypotheses on environmental knowledge, concern, and self-efficacy, the study further explores the role of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control in influencing sustainable fashion consumption.

The positive influence of attitude on sustainable fashion purchase intention is a well-established concept in behavior-related studies. A positive attitude toward sustainable fashion, which includes favorable views and feelings toward eco-friendly clothing, is expected to increase the likelihood of purchasing such products. This hypothesis is supported by evidence from multiple studies, including those by Faircloth et al. (2001) and Hsu et al. (2017) all highlighting the crucial role of attitude in shaping purchase intentions. Therefore, the study proposes:

H4: Attitude toward sustainable fashion positively affects purchase intention toward sustainable fashion products.

Subjective norms, encompassing the perceived social pressures and expectations regarding sustainable fashion consumption, are also hypothesized to influence purchase intentions. This aspect of the TPB model reflects the social influence on an individual’s behavior. Studies like those by Vermeir and Verbeke (2006) and Sobuj et al. (2021) demonstrate that subjective norms significantly impact the intention to purchase eco-friendly products. Hence, the following hypothesis is posited:

H5: Subjective norm toward sustainable fashion positively affects purchase intention toward the sustainable fashion products.

Lastly, perceived behavioral control, involving an individual’s perception of their ability to perform sustainable fashion purchasing, is considered a critical factor. The concept encompasses the internal belief in one’s skills and the external availability of resources and support. Studies by White Baker et al. (2007) and Laroche et al. (2002) suggest that higher perceived control over sustainable fashion choices enhances the likelihood of purchasing these products. Consequently, the study hypothesizes:

H6: Perceived behavioral control toward sustainable fashion positively affects purchase intention toward the sustainable fashion products.

Based on the hypotheses developed above, this study proposes a conceptual framework as illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

The proposed model for purchase intention toward sustainable fashion.

Methodology

Sampling and Data Collection

This study explores the factors influencing Korean consumers’ intentions to buy sustainable fashion products using a quantitative approach. We utilized convenience sampling, a method that selects easily accessible participants, for its efficiency in reaching a diverse respondent pool, as outlined by Emerson (2015). Our target demographic comprises South Korean men and women aged 21 to 65, aiming to capture a broad range of consumer behaviors toward sustainable fashion, beyond the commonly studied younger generations.

We distributed half of our questionnaires to individuals affiliated with textile and fashion-related organizations, including industry and research associations, to investigate the link between textile fashion experience and sustainable fashion purchasing behavior. The data collection involved 250 online surveys distributed via email and social media platforms, yielding 238 responses. Prior to the survey, we obtained written informed consent from all participants.

Constructs and Measurement Items

This research incorporates seven principal constructs derived from a comprehensive literature review (measurement items are as shown in Table 1). Additionally, key demographic characteristics such as age, gender, and experiences related to sustainable fashion are examined. Measurement items focus on sustainable purchasing behavior. Excluding demographic questions, all constructs are measured using a 5-point Likert scale.

Table 1.

Measurement Items.

Construct	Items	Researchers
Environmental knowledge	I know that I buy products and packages that are environmentally safe.I know more about recycling than the average person.I know how to select products and packages that reduce the amount of waste ending up in landfills.I understand the environmental phrases and symbols on product packages.I am knowledgeable about environmental issues.	Mostafa (2007)
Environmental concern	If all of us, individually, contributed to environmental protection, it would have a significant effect.Everyone is responsible for protecting the environment in their everyday life.Preserving and protecting the environment should be one of our priorities.We should take responsibility for environmental issues, as we are the cause of environmental damage.	De Canio et al. (2021)
Self-efficacy	It is worth it for the individual consumer to make efforts to preserve and improve the environment.When I buy products, I tend to try to consider how my use of them will affect the environment.Since each individual can have any effect upon environmental problems, what I do can make meaningful difference.By purchasing products made in an environmentally friendly way, each consumer’s behavior can have a positive effect on the environment and society.	Kang et al. (2013).
Attitude	Purchasing sustainable fashion products is good.Purchasing sustainable fashion products is wise.Purchasing sustainable fashion products is supportive.Purchasing sustainable fashion products is favorable.Purchasing sustainable fashion products is positive.	Armitage and Conner (1999)
Subjective norm	People who are important to me support my purchasing sustainable fashion products.People who are important to me want me to purchase sustainable fashion products.People who are important to me think I should purchase sustainable fashion products.People who are important to me affect the purchase of sustainable fashion products.	Hu et al. (2021).
Purchase intention	I intend to purchase sustainable fashion products.I plan to purchase sustainable fashion products.I want to purchase sustainable fashion products.	Ko and Jin (2017)

Findings

Sample Characteristics

The sampling strategy adopted for this research is convenience sampling. As described by Emerson (2015), convenience sampling is a non-probability sampling method that involves selecting participants who are readily accessible. This approach is chosen for its practicality and efficiency in reaching a diverse range of respondents. The target demographic for this study includes men and women aged between 21 and 65 living in South Korea with an interest in sustainable fashion. This age range is selected to encompass a broader perspective on consumer behavior toward sustainable fashion, extending beyond the often-studied groups of millennials or Generation Z.

In addition to the general public, half of the questionnaires were distributed among textile and fashion-related organizations, such as the Textile Industry Association, Fashion Industry Association, Textile Dyeing Technology Institute, and Textile Materials Research Institute. This is to explore the potential relationship between textile fashion-related experiences and purchasing behavior for sustainable fashion.

Data collection was carried out through online survey forms, disseminated via platforms such as email, Facebook, Instagram, and Messenger. A total of 250 questionnaires were distributed, from which 238 responses were received (Table 2).

Table 2.

Characteristics of Respondents.

Category	Group	Frequency (n)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	120	50.4
Gender	Female	118	49.6
Age	21–30	64	26.9
	31–40	49	20.6
	41–50	77	32.4
	Over 50 years old	48	20.2
Experience related to textile or fashion	Yes	112	47.1
Experience related to textile or fashion	No	126	52.9
Experience of purchasing sustainable fashion	Yes	157	66.0
Experience of purchasing sustainable fashion	No	81	34.0
Total		238	100

Validity and Reliability

In the initial phase of this study, the focus was on evaluating the validity of the measurement items. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) played a pivotal role in assessing construct validity. Key to interpreting EFA results are factor loadings and eigenvalues. Factor loadings indicate the correlation between variables and factors, essential for understanding construct relationships. Eigenvalues, representing the variance explained by each factor, determine a factor’s relative importance. Factors with eigenvalues below 1.0 were deemed insufficient in explaining variance.

Additionally, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were employed to assess factor analysis adequacy. The KMO measure, ranging from 0 to 1, indicates sample suitability for factor analysis, with values closer to 1 signifying better suitability. A value of 0.5 or higher is generally acceptable.

In this research, EFA was conducted using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) for factor extraction and Varimax rotation for factor independence. From the original 29 items, two (SE 1 and SE 2) were removed due to low factor loadings, which could diminish effectiveness. The final EFA included 27 items.

The results were promising: the KMO value was .916, suggesting the sample was representative of 91.6% of the total population. Bartlett’s test yielded a significant Chi-Square value, supporting factor analysis viability. Seven factors with eigenvalues over 1 were extracted, with factor loadings of at least 0.5 and a cumulative variance explanation of 75.385%, affirming the measurement items’ validity (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Exploratory Factor Analysis Results for Measurement Items.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy.						0.917
Bartlett’s test of sphericity		Approx. Chi-square				4,963.413
		df				406
		Sig.				.000
		Factor loading
Factor	Item	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Attitude (AT)	AT 4	0.853	0.22	0.059	0.107	0.13	0.022	−0.023
	AT 5	0.791	0.134	0.223	0.239	0.02	0.125	0.115
	AT 1	0.779	0.218	0.142	0.159	0.171	0.105	0.125
	AT 3	0.776	0.118	0.236	0.231	0.041	0.095	0.077
	AT 2	0.745	0.107	0.327	0.305	0.01	0.08	0.228
Environmental knowledge (EK)	EK 1	0.153	0.819	0.117	−0.072	−0.008	0.049	0.09
	EK 3	0.136	0.778	0.276	0.171	0.063	−0.021	0.017
	EK 5	0.215	0.776	−0.063	0.107	0.184	0.02	0.188
	EK 4	0.131	0.764	0.044	−0.011	0.093	0.223	−0.177
	EK 2	0.12	0.749	0.107	0.157	0.116	0.076	0.156
Subjective norm (SN)	SN 2	0.201	0.092	0.872	0.052	0.166	0.026	0.018
	SN 3	0.21	0.147	0.87	0.075	0.113	0.058	0.125
	SN 4	0.08	0.126	0.75	0.051	0.127	0.333	0.169
	SN 1	0.308	0.063	0.75	0.148	0.18	0.035	−0.075
Environmental concern (EC)	EC 1	0.151	0.047	−0.019	0.839	0.031	0.189	−0.187
	EC 2	0.247	0.035	0.112	0.819	−0.051	0.048	0.092
	EC 3	0.218	0.047	0.154	0.794	−0.027	−0.039	0.287
	EC 4	0.206	0.171	0.065	0.742	0.11	−0.01	0.343
Perceived behavioral control (PCB)	PBC 3	0.12	0.023	0.014	0.037	0.849	−0.186	−0.066
	PBC 2	0.083	0.192	0.29	−0.05	0.764	0.337	0.091
	PBC 4	0.078	0.216	0.26	−0.049	0.733	0.216	0.051
	PBC 1	0.166	0.058	0.241	0.159	0.599	0.464	0.159
Purchase intention (PI)	PI 3	0.57	0.184	0.132	0.114	0.218	0.528	0.031
	PI 1	0.494	0.232	0.306	0.131	0.214	0.522	0.131
	PI 2	0.335	0.265	0.4	0.168	0.253	0.505	0.097
Self-efficacy (SE)	SE 4	0.385	0.176	0.13	0.36	0.058	0.032	0.631
Self-efficacy (SE)	SE 3	0.176	0.178	0.162	0.427	0.087	0.336	0.568
Eigenvalue		4.51	3.552	3.552	3.302	2.582	1.587	1.269
Rotation sums of squared loadings	% of Variance	16.705	13.155	13.155	12.23	9.562	5.878	4.7
Rotation sums of squared loadings	%	16.705	29.861	43.016	55.246	64.808	70.685	75.385

Note. Bold and italicized values indicate the highest factor loadings for each measurement item.

Next, we conducted reliability test for assessing the consistency and stability of measurement scales. The results showed that the Cronbach’s alpha values for each construct ranged from a minimum of .687 to a maximum of .924, indicating overall satisfactory reliability (see Table 4).

Table 4.

Reliability Analysis Result for Measured Constructs.

Factor	Number of measurement items	Cronbach’s alpha
Environmental knowledge	5	.868
Environmental concern	4	.869
Self-efficacy	2	.687
Attitude	5	.924
Subjective norm	4	.894
Perceived behavioral control	4	.836
Purchase intention	3	.848

Correlations Among Constructs

Table 5 details the correlation analysis results for each variable. Focusing on the correlations with purchase intention for sustainable fashion, a key aspect of this study, all variables demonstrated significant positive correlations at the p < .001 level. Notably, the strongest correlation was observed between attitude and purchase intention (r = .689, p < .001), while the weakest was between environmental concern and purchase intention (r = .385, p < .001). Other correlations included subjective norms and purchase intention (r = .588, p < .001), perceived behavioral control and purchase intention (r = .562, p < .001), self-efficacy and purchase intention (r = .562, p < .001), and environmental knowledge and purchase intention (r = .478, p < .001). These findings suggest that higher levels of these variables are associated with increased consumer purchase intention for sustainable fashion products.

Table 5.

Pearson’s Correlation Analysis Results.

Constructs	EK	EC	SE	AT	SN	PBC	PI
EK	1
EC	.230***	1
SE	.377***	.632***	1
AT	.411***	.506***	.562***	1
SN	.317***	.258***	.400***	.487***	1
PBC	.330***	.136*	.302***	.330***	.466***	1
PI	.478***	.385***	.543***	.689***	.588***	.562***	1
Mean	3.48	4.46	4.18	4.25	3.46	3.70	3.87
Std. D	0.807	0.597	0.663	0.645	0.852	0.743	0.711

Note. EK = environmental knowledge; EC = environmental concern; SE = self-efficacy; AT = attitude; SN = subjective norm; PBC = perceived behavioral control; PI = purchase intention.

p < .05. ***p < .001.

Hypotheses Test Results

In this study, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the impact of six factors from the extended TPB model on consumer purchase intentions for sustainable fashion products. The analysis results, presented in Table 6, demonstrate the regression model’s suitability with an F-value of 72.871 (p < .001). The model’s explanatory power is indicated by an R square value of .654 (adjusted R square = .645), suggesting that the six independent variables from the extended TPB model account for 65.4% (64.5% adjusted) of the variance in purchase intentions for sustainable fashion products. The Durbin-Watson value of 1.949 implies no significant correlation among residuals, affirming the model’s appropriateness. Furthermore, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values, all below 2.1, indicate an absence of multicollinearity within the model.

Table 6.

Multiple Regression Analysis Results for Measured Variables.

	Unstandardized coefficients		Standardized coefficients	t	p	Collinearity Statistics
Constructs	B	Std. error	β	t	p	VIF
(Constant)	−0.365	0.243		−1.499	.135
Environmental knowledge	0.109	0.039	.124	2.788**	.006	1.311
Environmental concern	−0.004	0.062	−.004	−0.073	.942	1.802
Self-efficacy	0.133	0.06	.124	2.221*	.027	2.083
Attitude	0.432	0.058	.392	7.411***	<.001	1.866
Subjective norm	0.153	0.04	.183	3.809***	<.001	1.551
Perceived behavioral control	0.258	0.043	.270	5.972***	<.001	1.366
F (p) = 72.871*** (.000),R = .809, R square = .654, Adjusted R square = .645, Durbin-Watson value = 1.949

p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.

Upon examining the coefficients of the variables in Table 6, it was found that environmental knowledge (β = .124, p < .01), self-efficacy (β = .124, p < .05), attitude (β = .392, p < .001), subjective norm (β = .214, p < .001), and perceived behavioral control (β = .270, p < .001) all yield statistically significant effects. This suggests that these factors—attitude toward sustainable fashion products, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, and environmental knowledge—positively influence consumers’ purchase intentions for sustainable fashion products. Notably, attitude toward sustainable fashion (β = .392) emerges as the most influential variable affecting the purchase intention of sustainable fashion products.

Specifically, the regression analysis revealed notable findings regarding the factors influencing purchase intentions for sustainable fashion products. Environmental knowledge was found to significantly affect purchase intentions, evidenced by a t-value of 2.910, a p-value below .01, and a positive β coefficient of .124. This suggests a strong link between awareness of environmental issues and the inclination to buy sustainable fashion.

On the other hand, environmental concern did not show a significant impact on purchase intentions. The analysis yielded a t-value of 7.411 and a p-value of .942, indicating that despite concerns about the environment, it doesn’t necessarily translate into a higher intention to purchase sustainable fashion products.

The study also confirmed the positive influence of self-efficacy in the environmental context on purchase intentions, with a t-value of 2.221 and a p-value lower than .05, accompanied by a positive β coefficient of .124. This implies that individuals’ belief in their ability to contribute to environmental sustainability positively sways their purchasing decisions.

Furthermore, the role of attitude toward sustainable fashion products was significantly highlighted, as indicated by a t-value of 7.411, a p-value under .001, and a high β value of .392. This underscores the crucial influence of positive attitudes on the intention to purchase sustainable fashion.

Subjective norm was also found to have a considerable positive effect, with a t-value of 3.809 and a p-value below .001, along with a β coefficient of .183. This result points to the impact of social influences and perceived social pressures on purchasing decisions.

Lastly, perceived behavioral control positively impacted purchase intentions, as evidenced by a t-value of 5.972, a p-value less than .001, and a β coefficient of .270. This suggests that the more control consumers feel they have over purchasing sustainable fashion, the more likely they are to do so.

Comparative Analysis Based on Demographic Characteristics

In addition, independent samples t-tests and cross-tabulation tests were performed to investigate whether there were differences in purchase intention and purchase experience for sustainable fashion based on group characteristics such as gender, age, and fashion-related experience.

First of all, an independent samples t-test was conducted to examine the influence of gender on purchase intention. As shown in Table 7, the results showed a statistically significant difference at t = −3.654, p < .001, indicating that there is a difference in purchase intention by gender. In detail, the average purchase intention score for men was 3.714, while for women it was 4.04, indicating that women had a higher purchase intention for sustainable fashion products compared to men.

Table 7.

Differences in Purchase Intention by Gender Group.

		Purchase intention			T (p)
Category		N	M	SD	T (p)
Gender	Male	120	3.71	0.689	−3.654***
Gender	Female	118	4.04	0.697	−3.654***

***

p < .001.

Furthermore, Cross-tabulation analysis using the Chi-Square Test was conducted to explore the relationship between gender and purchase experience for sustainable fashion. According to Table 8, the frequency of purchase experience among female respondents was 69.5%, which was 7.0 percentage points higher than that of male participants (62.5%). However, statistical analysis results using Pearson Chi-Square = 1.295 and p = .255 (p > .05) suggest that there is no significant relationship between gender and purchasing experience toward sustainable fashion products.

Table 8.

Differences in Purchasing Experience by Gender Group.

			Experience of purchasing sustainable fashion		Total
Category			Yes	No	Total
Gender	Male	Frequency (n)	75	45	120
	Male	Percentage (%)	62.5%	37.5%	100.0%
	Female	Frequency (n)	82	36	118
	Female	Percentage (%)	69.5%	30.5%	100.0%

Note. Pearson Chi-Square = 1.295, p = .255.

Another independent sample t-test was conducted to investigate the effect of textile fashion-related experiences on purchase intention. According to Table 9, t = 1.544, p = .124 (p > .05) indicates that there is no statistical correlation between fashion-related experience and purchase intention for sustainable fashion. In addition, the difference in purchase intention between the two groups was only 0.15.

Table 9.

Differences in Purchase Intention by Fashion-Related Experience.

		Purchase intention			T (p)
Category		N	M	SD	T (p)
Experience related to textile-fashion	Yes	112	3.95	0.687	1.544 (0.124)
Experience related to textile-fashion	No	126	3.80	0.724	1.544 (0.124)

Moreover, a cross-tabulation (chi-square test) was conducted to examine the relationship between textile fashion-related experiences and sustainable fashion purchasing experiences. As displayed in Table 10, the analysis resulted in a chi-square value of 12.926 with p < .001 level, it can be concluded that there is a correlation between textile fashion-related experiences and sustainable fashion purchasing experiences. Specifically, participants with textile fashion-related experiences had a purchase experience rate of 77.7%. In contrast, respondents without textile fashion-related experiences had a purchase experience rate of 55.6%. This is because an individual with a major or job related to textile fashion can acquire a wide range of information about sustainable fashion products, which could contribute to relatively higher product knowledge. This finding is consistent with the research of Kautish and Khare (2022), which indicated that knowledge of sustainable fashion products positively influences consumers’ purchase intention and behavior.

Table 10.

Relationship Between Textile Fashion-Related Experience and Sustainable Fashion Purchasing Experience.

			Experience of purchasing sustainable fashion		Total
Category			Yes	No	Total
Experience related to textile fashion	Yes	Frequency (n)	87	25	112
	Yes	Percentage (%)	77.7%	22.3%	100.0%
	No	Frequency (n)	70	56	126
	No	Percentage (%)	55.6%	44.4%	100.0%
Total		Frequency (n)	157	81	238
Total		Percentage (%)	66.0%	34.0%	100.0%

Note. Pearson Chi-Square = 12.926, p = < .001.

A one-way ANOVA analysis was conducted to determine whether there was a difference in the average purchase intention between age groups. As shown in Table 11, F = 0.596, p = .618 (p > .05) suggested that there is no significant difference between age group and purchase intention for sustainable fashion.

Table 11.

Differences in Purchase Intention by Age Group.

		Purchase intention			F (p)
Category		N	M	SD	F (p)
Age	21–30	64	3.85	0.77	0.596 (.618)
	31–40	49	3.79	0.703
	41–50	77	3.87	0.709
	51–65	48	3.98	0.647

When it comes to the relationship between actual purchasing experience and age group, the results of the Pearson Chi-Square test (χ² = 1.548, p = .213, p > .05) showed that there is no significant difference, as illustrated in Table 12. Despite no statistically significance, a trend was observed among the respondents. Older generations, particularly those aged 50 and above, showed a higher frequency of purchasing sustainable fashion, with 75.0% in their 50s and older, 66.2% in their 40s, 65.3% in their 30s, and 59.4% in their 20s. This trend suggests that while older consumers are more inclined toward eco-friendly purchases, as noted by Ham et al. (2022), younger consumers exhibit lower purchasing experiences, possibly due to financial constraints, as explained by Aydin (2025). This highlights a discrepancy between the environmental attitudes of younger generations and their actual purchasing behaviors.

Table 12.

Differences in Purchasing Experience by Age Group.

			Experience of purchasing sustainable fashion		Total
Category			Yes	No	Total
Age	21–30	Frequency (n)	38	26	64
	21–30	Percentage (%)	59.4%	40.6%	100.00%
	31–40	Frequency (n)	32	17	49
	31–40	Percentage (%)	65.3%	34.7%	100.00%
	41–50	Frequency (n)	51	26	77
	41–50	Percentage (%)	66.2%	33.8%	100.00%
	Over 51 years old	Frequency (n)	36	12	48
	Over 51 years old	Percentage (%)	75.0%	25.0%	100.00%

Note. Pearson Chi-Square = 1.548, p = .213.

Conclusion

Discussions

In our research, we enhanced the TPB by integrating environmental knowledge, concern, and self-efficacy to examine their effect on sustainable fashion purchase intentions. Our findings revealed that, consistent with previous studies (De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Jeong & Kim, 2022; Kang et al., 2013), attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control, self-efficacy, and environmental knowledge significantly influenced these intentions. Our study diverges from Hosta and Zabkar (2021), suggesting subjective norms are more impactful in Asian cultures, as supported by the work of Dean et al. (2012) and Han and Stoel (2017).

Contrary to some prior research (Mostafa, 2007; Saleki et al., 2019), environmental concerns didn’t significantly affect purchase intentions, aligning with Newton et al. (2015). This might be due to the young generation’s financial constraints, despite their environmental awareness (Cheung & To, 2019; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006).

We also found that women have higher sustainable fashion purchase intentions than men, likely due to their greater environmental empathy. Additionally, those with textile fashion experience were more inclined to purchase sustainable fashion, indicating the importance of specific knowledge (Kautish & Khare, 2022).

Interestingly, older age groups showed more frequent sustainable fashion purchases than younger ones, challenging previous assumptions about the environmental consciousness of younger consumers (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003). This suggests that older generations, with a higher sense of responsibility, might be more inclined toward sustainable behaviors (Johnson & Chang, 2006).

Overall, despite high purchase intentions among younger groups, there was a notable gap between their intentions and actual purchasing behaviors, possibly due to financial limitations (Chung & To, 2019). This highlights the need to address these barriers for effective sustainable purchasing behavior.

Theoretical Implications

This study contributes several theoretical implications to the field of consumer behavior, particularly in sustainable fashion. Firstly, the research demonstrates the applicability of expanded environmental knowledge and self-efficacy variables within the TPB model. Our findings align with existing literature, highlighting the significant influence of attitude, perceived behavioral control, and subjective norms on purchase intention, with attitude being the most impactful (De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Jeong & Kim, 2022; Kang et al., 2013).

Notably, this study diverges from previous research in its findings regarding subjective norms. Unlike prior studies, subjective norms emerged as the third most influential factor in shaping purchase intentions for sustainable fashion in our Korean sample. This finding supports the notion that the impact of subjective norms varies across cultures, being more pronounced in collectivistic societies like Korea compared to Western countries (Dean et al., 2012; Han & Stoel, 2017).

Furthermore, our study intriguingly found that environmental concerns did not significantly influence purchase intentions for sustainable fashion. This suggests that there might be barriers preventing environmental concerns from translating into purchasing behavior, a notion supported by Cheung and To (2019) and Vermeir and Verbeke (2006).

The research also sheds light on societal characteristics influencing sustainable fashion purchase intentions and experiences. It was observed that women, with their heightened empathy and environmental interest, exhibit stronger intentions to purchase eco-friendly products. Additionally, individuals with textile fashion experience, who possess greater knowledge about sustainable products, tend to show more active purchasing behavior in this domain (Kautish & Khare, 2022).

Contrary to popular belief that younger generations are more inclined toward environmentally friendly products, our findings reveal that older age groups are more actively purchasing sustainable fashion. This contradicts the assertions by Diamantopoulos et al. (2003) and Johnson and Chang (2006), suggesting that older generations, with their higher sense of interdependence and social responsibility, are more inclined toward environmentally friendly behaviors.

Managerial Implications

Despite the common belief that fast fashion has a harmful effect on the environment, consumption of sustainable fashion has not yet become widespread. This research can aid marketers and policymakers in comprehending consumer behavior concerning sustainable fashion, as well as devising tactics to foster positive attitudes and enhance purchase behavior. In particular, the following strategies can be suggested: imparting information and education on the environmental and social effects of the fashion industry and the advantages of sustainable fashion products can aid consumers in comprehending the significance of making sustainable choices. Furthermore, collaborating with global influencers to promote sustainable fashion products can help increase attitudes and purchasing behavior.

Based on the finding that the older generation has a higher purchase behavior for sustainable fashion, one possible marketing strategy is to target this demographic with campaigns that highlight the importance of sustainability and the positive impact that their purchasing decisions can have on the environment. This could include emphasizing the role that older generations can play as leaders and influencers in promoting sustainable fashion to their peers and younger generations. Besides, it would be recommended to implement segmentation and targeting strategies based on age and to develop products that cater to the interests and needs of each generation. Additionally, providing a range of reward programs could help boost brand loyalty and encourage repeat purchases toward sustainable fashion products.

Limitations and Future Research

This study, utilizing the extended TPB model, aimed to understand factors influencing consumers’ intentions to purchase sustainable fashion products. However, it encountered certain limitations, suggesting directions for future research.

A primary limitation was the focus on measuring purchase intentions rather than actual behaviors. While previous studies (Jaiswal & Kant, 2018; Jeong & Kim, 2022) suggest a strong correlation between intentions and behaviors in the context of the TPB, an attitude-intention-action gap, especially in sustainable fashion, was observed. This gap was particularly evident among younger consumers, indicating a disparity between their expressed intentions and actual purchases. Future research should, therefore, empirically examine actual purchase behaviors to better understand the predictive power of these variables.

Additionally, while the study expanded the TPB model by including environmental knowledge, concern, and self-efficacy, it did not find a direct influence of high environmental concerns on sustainable fashion purchase intentions or experiences. Future studies might benefit from exploring additional variables like sustainable fashion product knowledge and perceived value to enhance the model’s predictive accuracy.

Lastly, the study sought to explore sustainable fashion consumer behavior across various age groups. Despite observing differences in purchasing experience by age, no significant relationship between age and purchase intention was established. This finding contrasts with existing literature, where Ham et al. (2022) present differing views on age-related green purchasing behaviors. Future research should further investigate this relationship, ensuring adequate sample sizes for statistical significance. These insights could aid marketers in developing age-specific strategies for promoting sustainable fashion.

Footnotes

As previously mentioned,this study did not receive specific IRB permission from the university institution.

ORCID iD

Jeyoung Son

Ethical Considerations

This study did not receive specific IRB permission from the university institution. As it was conducted through a simple survey process,we declare that IRB approval was not obtained for this study.

Author Contributions

Professor Jiwon Lee,the first author,focused on setting up the overall research idea and drafting the initial manuscript. Significant effort was devoted to establishing the theoretical background and formulating the hypotheses. Co-author Myungwoo Kim contributed by designing the survey,collecting data,and performing data analysis. Additionally,Myungwoo Kim collaborated with Professor Jiwon Lee in drafting the manuscript. Finally,corresponding author Jeyoung Son reviewed the overall statistical methodology and hypotheses,and revised the manuscript.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article: Publication of this work was supported by HELP University,Malaysia [Publication Charge Support Grant 24-05-009].

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Aaker

J. L.

(1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224379703400304

Agag

Colmekcioglu

(2020). Understanding guests’ behavior to visit green hotels: The role of ethical ideology and religiosity. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 91, 102679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102679

Ahmad

Rosli

N. T.

Quoquab

(2022). Environmental quality awareness, green trust, green self-efficacy and environmental attitude in influencing green purchase behaviour. International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 38(1), 68–90. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijoes-05-2020-0072

Ajzen

(1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Kuhl

Beckmann

(Eds.) Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Springer.

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t

Ajzen

Fishbein

(1975). A Bayesian analysis of attribution processes. Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076477

Armitage

C. J.

Conner

(1999). Predictive validity of the theory of planned behaviour: The role of questionnaire format and social desirability. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 9(4), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1298(199907/08)9:4<3.0.co;2-5

Aydin

(2025). Thresholds of sustainability: Necessary and sufficient conditions for green buying behavior. Sustainability, 17(11), 4965. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17114965

Bick

Halsey

Ekenga

C. C.

(2018). The global environmental injustice of fast fashion. Environmental Health, 17(1), 92–94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-018-0433-7

10.

Brandão

Costa

A. G. D.

(2021). Extending the theory of planned behaviour to understand the effects of barriers towards sustainable fashion consumption. European Business Review, 33(5), 742–774. https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-11-2020-0306

11.

Casadesus-Masanell

Crooke

Reinhardt

Vasishth

(2009). Households' willingness to pay for “green” goods: evidence from Patagonia's introduction of organic cotton sportswear. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(1), 203–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-9134.2009.00212.x

12.

Chan

Wong

C. W. Y.

(2012). The consumption side of sustainable fashion supply chain: Understanding fashion consumer eco-fashion consumption decision. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 16(2), 193–215. https://doi.org/10.1108/13612021211222824

13.

Cheung

M. F. Y.

W. M.

(2019). An extended model of value-attitude-behavior to explain Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50, 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.006

14.

Dean

Raats

M. M.

Shepherd

(2012). The role of self-identity, past behavior, and their interaction in predicting intention to purchase fresh and processed organic food 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(3), 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00796.x

15.

De Canio

Martinelli

Endrighi

(2021). Enhancing consumers' pro-environmental purchase intentions: the moderating role of environmental concern. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 49(9), 1312–1329. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-08-2020-0301

16.

Deng

(2013). Factors influencing ethical purchase intentions of consumers in China. Social Behavior and Personality, 41(10), 1693–1703. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2013.41.10.1693

17.

De Pelsmacker

Driesen

Rayp

(2005). Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for fair-trade coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), 363–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2005.00019.x

18.

Diamantopoulos

Schlegelmilch

B. B.

Sinkovics

R. R.

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, 56(6), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0148-2963(01)00241-7

19.

Domeisen

(2006). When ethics meet fashion. International Trade Forum, 3, 2.

20.

Emerson

R. W.

(2015). Convenience sampling, random sampling, and snowball sampling: How does sampling affect the validity of research? Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 109(2), 164–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482x1510900215

21.

Faircloth

J. B.

Capella

L. M.

Alford

B. L.

(2001). The effect of brand attitude and brand image on brand equity. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 9(3), 61–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2001.11501897

22.

Ferdous

A. S.

(2010). Applying the theory of planned behavior to explain marketing managers' perspectives on sustainable marketing. Journal of international consumer marketing, 22(4), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2010.505883

23.

Ham

C. D.

Chung

U. C.

Kim

W. J.

Lee

S. Y.

S. H.

(2022). Greener than others? Exploring generational differences in green purchase intent. International Journal of Market Research, 64(3), 376–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/14707853211034108

24.

Han

T. I.

Stoel

(2017). Explaining socially responsible consumer behavior: A meta-analytic review of theory of planned behavior. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 29(2), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2016.1251870

25.

Henninger

C. E.

Alevizou

P. J.

Oates

C. J.

(2016). What is sustainable fashion? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 20(4), 400–416. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfmm-07-2015-0052

26.

Hiller Connell

K. Y.

Kozar

J. M.

(2017). Introduction to special issue on sustainability and the triple bottom line within the global clothing and textiles industry. Fashion and Textiles, 4, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-017-0100-6

27.

Hosta

Zabkar

(2021). Antecedents of environmentally and socially responsible sustainable consumer behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(2), 273–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04416-0

28.

Hsu

C. L.

Chang

C. Y.

Yansritakul

(2017). Exploring purchase intention of green skincare products using the theory of planned behavior: Testing the moderating effects of country of origin and price sensitivity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.10.006

29.

Jia

Xie

(2021). Passport to a mighty nation: Exploring sociocultural foundation of Chinese public’s attitude to COVID-19 vaccine certificates. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(19), 10439. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph181910439

30.

Jaiswal

Kant

(2018). Green purchasing behaviour: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation of Indian consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.11.008

31.

Jeong

Kim

(2022). A study on the factors influencing of consumers’ purchase intention and purchase behavior for sustainable fashion products: Based on expanded theory of planned behavior. Journal of Fashion Business, 26(5), 105–121. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12060179

32.

Joergens

(2006). Ethical fashion: Myth or future trend? Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 10(3), 360–371. https://doi.org/10.1108/13612020610679321

33.

Johnson

R. E.

Chang

(2006). “I” is to continuance as “we” is to affective: The relevance of the self-concept for organizational commitment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(5), 549–570. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.364

34.

Kang

Liu

Kim

(2013). Environmentally sustainable textile and apparel consumption: The role of consumer knowledge, perceived consumer effectiveness and perceived personal relevance. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 37(4), 442–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12013

35.

Kautish

Khare

(2022). Antecedents of sustainable fashion apparel purchase behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 39(5), 475–487. https://doi.org/10.1108/jcm-04-2020-3733

36.

S. B.

Jin

(2017). Predictors of purchase intention toward green apparel products: A cross-cultural investigation in the USA and China. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 21, 70–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfmm-07-2014-0057

37.

Laroche

Tomiuk

Bergeron

Barbaro-Forleo

(2002). Cultural differences in environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of Canadian consumers. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 19(3), 267–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1936-4490.2002.tb00272.x

38.

Liao

Chen

J. L.

Yen

D. C.

(2007). Theory of planning behavior (TPB) and customer satisfaction in the continued use of e-service: An integrated model. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(6), 2804–2822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2006.05.006

39.

Maloney

Lee

M. Y.

Jackson

Miller-Spillman

K. A.

(2014). Consumer willingness to purchase organic products: Application of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 5(4), 308–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2014.925327

40.

McNeill

Moore

(2015). Sustainable fashion consumption and the fast fashion conundrum: Fashionable consumers and attitudes to sustainability in clothing choice. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 39(3), 212–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12169

41.

Minton

A. P.

Rose

R. L.

(1997). The effects of environmental concern on environmentally friendly consumer behavior: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Research, 40(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0148-2963(96)00209-3

42.

Moser

S. C.

(2016). Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: what more is there to say? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change, 7(3), 345–369. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.403

43.

Mostafa

M. M.

(2007). Gender differences in Egyptian consumers’ green purchase behaviour: The effects of environmental knowledge, concern and attitude. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(3), 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2006.00523.x

44.

Newton

J. D.

Tsarenko

Ferraro

Sands

(2015). Environmental concern and environmental purchase intentions: The mediating role of learning strategy. Journal of Business Research, 68(9), 1974–1981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.007

45.

Niinimäki

Peters

Dahlbo

Perry

Rissanen

Gwilt

(2020). The environmental price of fast fashion. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 1(4), 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-0039-9

46.

Paco

Raposo

(2009). “Green” segmentation: An application to the Portuguese consumer market. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 27, 364–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500910955245

47.

Paul

Modi

Patel

(2016). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006

48.

Perugini

Bagozzi

R. P.

(2001). The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviours: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(Pt 1), 79–98. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466601164704

49.

Roberts

J. A.

(1996). Green consumers in the 1990s: Profile and implications for advertising. Journal of Business Research, 36(3), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(95)00150-6

50.

Saleki

Quoquab

Mohammad

(2019). What drives Malaysian consumers' organic food purchase intention? The role of moral norm, self-identity, environmental concern and price consciousness. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 9(5), 584–603. https://doi.org/10.1108/JADEE-02-2019-0018

51.

Saricam

Okur

(2019). Analysing the consumer behavior regarding sustainable fashion using theory of planned behavior. In Muthu

S. S.

(Ed.), Consumer behaviour and sustainable fashion consumption (pp. 1–37). Springer Singapore.

52.

Shim

Kim

(2018). An exploratory study on up-cycling as the sustainable clothing life at home. Fashion and Textiles, 5, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-018-0129-1

53.

Sobuj

Khan

A. M.

Habib

M. A.

Islam

M. M.

(2021). Factors influencing eco-friendly apparel purchase behavior of Bangladeshi young consumers: Case study. Research Journal of Textile and Apparel, 25(2), 139–157. https://doi.org/10.1108/rjta-10-2019-0052

54.

UNEP. (2018). The apparel industry’s environmental impact in 6 Graphics. World Resources Institute. https://www.wri.org/insights/apparel-industrys-environmental-impact-6-graphics

55.

United Nations. (2019). UN launches drive to highlight environmental cost of staying fashionable. https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/03/1035161

56.

Vermeir

Verbeke

(2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer “attitude-behavioral intention” gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-005-5485-3

57.

Vermeir

Verbeke

(2008). Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values. Ecological Economics, 64, 542–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.03.007

58.

White Baker

Al-Gahtani

S. S.

Hubona

G. S.

(2007). The effects of gender and age on new technology implementation in a developing country: Testing the theory of planned behavior (TPB). Information Technology and People, 20(4), 352–375. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840710839798

59.

Yang

Ha-Brookshire

J. E.

(2019). Truly sustainable or not? An exploratory assessment of sustainability capability of textile and apparel corporations in China from the moral responsibility perspective. Fashion and Textiles, 6, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40691-019-0172-6