Abstract

The purpose of this study was to look at how green packaging, perceived consumer effectiveness, and social influence affect green consumption behaviour, as well as the moderating role of environmental awareness and the mediating role of green satisfaction. As consumers show signs of growing environmental consciousness and increased willingness to purchase green products. In order to gather information for this purpose, 290 Pakistani consumers of fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) were surveyed. The research hypotheses were evaluated for validity using the PLS-SEM technique. Green packaging, perceived consumer effectiveness, and social influence all positively influence green satisfaction. Furthermore, green satisfaction positively influences green consumption behaviour. Finally, the study discovered that environmental awareness does not influence the relationship between PCE and green satisfaction. The theoretical and managerial implications, research limitations, and future directions have all been addressed.

Key Words

Green Packaging, Perceived Consumer Effectiveness, Social Influence, Green Satisfaction, Environmental Awareness, Green Consumption Behavior

Introduction

Recent years have seen an increase in environmental pollution, mainly as a result of many developing countries' rapid economic growth. This has raised worries about the depletion of natural resources, raised pollution levels, and increased CO2 emissions (D. D. Nguyen, 2023). As a result, many nations have developed plans to protect the environment and lessen the negative effects that humans have on natural resources. One such plan places special emphasis on enlisting the help of manufacturing firms and environmental management organizations to encourage appropriate waste management techniques (Geng et al., 2009).  

People are adopting eco-friendly lifestyles to varying degrees of commitment as a result of the growing threats to the environment. All of these initiatives, no matter how big or small, add up to help save our planet. 

According to Lin and Huang (2012), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development defines "green products" as actions taken to reduce harmful environmental effects on land, water, and air. Nonetheless, the notion of "green consumption" or sustainable consumption has gained widespread recognition in recent times, with a focus on establishing ecologically sustainable consumption habits (Lorek, 2015). 

Consumers are currently exhibiting new standards for consumption and considering qualitative ethical factors when making product selections, such as production conditions, country of origin, communication channels, standard compliance, traceability, and ecological certification (Toukabri, 2023). 

Furthermore, using sustainable packaging helps businesses save resources and lessen their environmental impact. Because of their concerns for the environment, consumers are ready to buy green products.  

In recent decades, there has been an increase in public concern about environmental issues due to climate change and global warming. In an effort to preserve the earth's resources, companies and customers are opposing eco-friendly products because of worries about the environment, health, and financial security. In an effort to engage with customers and fulfil their social responsibility, businesses are implementing green marketing strategies (Nagaraju & Thejaswini, 2014). Businesses keep pushing recyclable and reusable packaging as well as other forms of green packaging since successful green marketing is becoming more and more crucial to the market. 

Green packaging is a growing business trend that aims to attract environmentally conscious customers. Consumers are becoming more aware of their environmental impact when making purchases. As a result, consumers are more likely to select eco-friendly products and services. Customers prioritize environmental concerns and are willing to pay more for eco-friendly products. Consumers are becoming increasingly aware of how their purchasing decisions affect the environment (Yeng et al., 2015). 

The environmental movement helped to advance the theory of green marketing and green marketing is credited with raising public awareness of environmental issues. The needs of customers, social issues, and businesses' long-term success are all elements that eco-friendly marketers must consider (Yang & Chai, 2022).

This study examines the mediating role of green satisfaction and the moderating effect of environmental awareness on green consumption behaviour in the context of the Pakistani FMCG market in an effort to close the research gap The business industry must think about green packaging as one of its competitive strategies. The emergence of environmental issues in recent years has increased public awareness of the importance of sustainable development. Pakistan, as an emerging market for green products and green packaged products, must also participate in the issue.

Literature Review

Green Packaging

Sustainable packaging is a relatively new concept that has gained traction in recent years. Addressing this issue is critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (Fonseca et al., 2020). Packaging serves two purposes: it protects food from damage and provides nutritional value to customers. It is a systematic approach to preparing goods for safe, efficient, and effective handling, transportation, distribution, storage, retailing, consumption, recovery, reuse, or disposal while maximizing consumer value (Moustafa et al., 2019). 

A package that is entirely composed of natural plants, recyclable or reusable, degrades slowly, and supports sustainable development is referred to as a "green package," sometimes known as an "ecological package" or an "environmentally friendly package." It does not endanger human health, animal health, or the environment during its whole life cycle. To put it briefly, green packaging is suitable packaging that is recyclable, reusable, degradable, and does not pollute the environment or people while a product is being used (Zhang & Zhao, 2012).

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness

The term "perceived consumer effectiveness," which first appeared in the 1970s, refers to the stable beliefs about the overall efficacy of consumer choices as being captured by the ability to influence outcomes (Kinnear et al., 1974). According to numerous studies, perceived consumer effectiveness has the greatest power to explain any psychological factor studied as an antecedent to environmentally friendly behaviour (Kinnear et al., 1974). People who believe their actions are effective are more likely to adopt environmentally friendly behaviours (Ellen et al., 1991). Research continuously associates high PCE with eco-aware behaviour (Straughan, 1999). Socially conscious consumers prioritize environmental improvement, especially in reducing pollution, despite some people doubting the effectiveness of individual actions (Castillo et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2022). 

Social Influence

Compared to market-based or regulatory policies, social influence—which is the impact of social environments on attitudes and behaviours—has the potential to significantly accelerate changes in green packaging practices (Schubert et al., 2021). It originates from common social identities among groups, forming shared opinions and actions that are considered proper and objective (Turner et al., 1994b). People in one's immediate surroundings have a significant impact on behaviour (Bearden et al., 1989), and social dissemination the process by which customers encourage one another to use a product is essential for the uptake of new products (Langley et al., 2012). Information transmission and emotion evocation are impacted by social factors like modelling and persuasion (Delre et al., 2010). Social group affiliations have an impact on people's purchasing decisions, especially when environmental awareness becomes the norm (Bertrandias & Elgaaied-Gambier, 2014; Bartels, 2011). Given the profound influence that people have on one another, consumer decisions should be viewed in the context of society (Wood & Hayes, 2012). Cultural and peer pressure, as well as socialization through media, organizations, and family, can all be forms of social influence (K. Lee, 2014). 

Environmental Awareness

Comprehending the environment encompasses an array of factors influencing attitudes, behaviours, and objectives; these factors are intimately associated with psychological elements that impact pro-environmental beliefs and actions (Wan et al., 2017). Ecologically conscious people are those who participate in pro-environmental activities (Yeh et al., 2016). Growing environmental consciousness promotes sustainable practices and behaviours and makes it easier to understand the importance of environmental conservation (Rini et al., 2016). In order to stimulate green activism and restore a better lifestyle through consumer environmental friendliness, organizations raise awareness of environmental issues (Rini et al., 2016). Environmental consciousness affects consumer willingness to pay and behaviour modelling (Shen, 2012; Chen & Tung, 2014). According to Panni's (2006) research, customers engage in more pro-social and pro-environmental behaviour the more knowledgeable they are about societal and environmental issues. 

Green Satisfaction

According to Kotler and Keller (2012), satisfaction is the measure of how well a product performs compared to expectations. 

Chen (2009) defines green satisfaction as a satisfying degree of consumption fulfilment that satisfies a customer's demands and expectations regarding sustainability, the planet, and going green. According to the definition of satisfaction, it is the degree to which a customer is happy with the performance that a product provides in meeting their needs and wants. In the context of green satisfaction, an environmental factor serves as the foundation for determining whether or not a customer is satisfied with a product. Chen (2010) used four items to measure green satisfaction, which is as follows: (1) You are satisfied that you chose this brand because of its environmental commitments; (2) You think that buying this brand is the right thing to do because of its environmental performance; (3) You are happy that this brand is environmentally friendly overall, and (4) You are pleased with this brand overall due to its environmental concern.

Green Consumption Behavior

According to Raukoff and Wu (2013), green consumption behaviour describes buyer actions taken during the buying, using, and disposing of commodities with the goal of reducing consumption's adverse environmental impacts while also preserving the ecosystem. Chen et al. (2013) define "green consumption behaviour" as a sustainable and conscientious mode of consumption in which customers, having become aware of environmental issues, understand the purpose of their purchases and reduce environmental losses. The term "green consumption behaviour" has not been widely used in the literature. While some academics refer to it as "green consumption," others use the term "ecological consumption. 

As green environmental protection becomes an important component of sustainable development, the consumption sector undergoes significant transformation, green consumption promotes eco-friendly activities, teaches consumers about ecology, and encourages environmentally conscious purchasing (fu et al., 2015).

Green Packaging and Green Consumption Behavior

An important part of sales is packaging. The

demand for environmentally friendly options is increasing as a result of the identification of packaging as a significant source of pollution (Seo et al., 2016). Considerable changes in packaging have resulted from consumers' greater access to information. Customers search for packaging that satisfies their needs because they are conscious of the packaging's negative effects on the environment and resource waste (Sandu et al 2014). Since consumers are conscious of the harm that packaging causes to the environment and the waste of resources, consumers search for appropriate substitutes that still fulfil their needs. Consumers also favour packaging that is recyclable after it is empty, minimizes waste, and uses recycled materials.

Eco-friendly packaging improves consumers' perceptions of product value. Despite the abundance of organic products on the market, few studies have been conducted to examine consumer attitudes toward them. More emphasis should be placed on consumer preferences for environmentally friendly packaging. Customers must become more mindful of how their actions harm the ecosystem if they are to become environmentally aware. This can be accomplished by educating themselves about the consequences of their actions and shifting their attitudes toward ecological products (Orzan et al., 2018).

Green Packaging and Green Satisfaction

According to Orzan et al. (2018) Internal and external factors, such as personal characteristics and the environment, influence the behaviour of green consumers. Consumer attitudes toward green products are consistent with traditional sustainability perspectives. Consumers understand which activities are green and which are not. However, they may be green for some activities but not others. Major brands' efforts to use sustainable packaging have a positive impact on consumer choices, but non-green packaging can turn people away (Kashif & Rani, 2021b). In line with businesses' environmental objectives, green packaging not only helps the environment but also enhances brand image and lowers costs (Mkik S. &., 2019). Because plastic packaging contains bisphenol A (BPA), there are health concerns and a need for sustainable alternatives (Manoj, 2010). By lowering waste, resource consumption, and carbon footprint, green packaging improves consumers' satisfaction with the environment and supports their environmentally conscious purchasing decisions (Pan et al., 2021).

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Green Satisfaction

Perceived Green Satisfaction (GS) gauges people's satisfaction with eco-friendly purchases, while Perceived Consumer Effectiveness (PCE) refers to people's perception of their ability to influence environmental issues positively through consumer choices (Hanss & Doran, 2019). According to Moutinho et al. (2011), PCE is dynamic and shapes pro-environmental behaviour based on individual actions and circumstances. 

When customers' expectations are met, they respond positively, and businesses need to understand and meet customer needs in order to satisfy customers (Demira?, 2020). Green customer satisfaction has emerged as a result of consumers' preference for products with low environmental impact and their concern for a company's overall environmental stance in today's environmentally conscious market (Martínez, 2015).

Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Green Consumption Behavior

According to Akehurst et al. (2012), perceived consumer effectiveness, or PCE, measures consumers' confidence in their capacity to help find environmental solutions. Green Consumption Behavior (GCB) is motivated by it; people who believe that their actions are effective are more likely to participate in green activities (Gruber & Schlegelmilch, 2014). A consumer exhibiting PCE, EA, and GCB, for example, would reuse water, practice GCB, and be aware of its environmental benefits (Kinnear et al., 1974). 

PCE is used as a personality variable to evaluate environmentally responsible consumption patterns (Balderjahn, 1988) and their environment significance (Kinner et al., 1974). It is different from environmental concerns. (Ellen, et al., 1991). PCE and attitude toward the environment were positively correlated (Kim, et al., 2003). Individuals with higher PCE are probably more concerned about the environment than people with lower PCE. Kang et al. (2013) and Ghvanidze et al. (2016) discovered that consumers with high PCE are more likely to buy green products.

Social Influence and Green Consumption Behavior

Understanding the green attitude-behaviour gap can help explain why consumers do not participate in green consumption behaviour (GCB), but it is also important to consider how the social environment influences GCB. According to Wood and Hayes (2012), consumer decisions should be viewed in a social context, because they can have a major effect on others. Bandura (1991) contends that people are both producers and products of their social systems, rather than passive participants. Individuals exercise some influence on their lives, but they are also autonomous, reflective in nature, proactive and self-correcting, shaped by a variety of sociocultural factors (Bandura, 1991). Consumers do not make independent decisions. Their behaviour is influenced by a frame of reference established by the social groups to which they belong (Merton et al., 1968). People frequently compare themselves to others in order to better understand their own perspectives and behaviours. Social comparison entails assessing information about others in relation to oneself (Festinger, 1954).

Social Influence and Green Satisfaction

Social influence is defined as the fact that spreading information leads individuals to think more about their interactions with others or social groups. The social influence theory of Deutsch and Gerard (1955) states that consumers copy the behaviours of others and that social norms and consensus direct public attention. According to Alzubaidi et al. (2021), social influence provides consumers with information and inspiration to adopt or model new, socially acceptable attitudes and behaviours. Although the term "environmental satisfaction" has different connotations in different academic disciplines, it essentially refers to how people feel about their personal interactions with the environment and government environmental regulations (Chen et al., 2019). According to this study, being "green" means that consumers are satisfied with their environmental responsibilities as well as their willingness to make contributions toward environmental protection. This phenomenon is considered to be a crucial part of the consumer-brand quality relationship and has been dubbed "green experience satisfaction" in recent research (Wu et al., 2018).

Moderating Effect of Environmental Awareness

Numerous studies have found a direct correlation between the desire to practice green marketing and environmental awareness (Ahn et al., 2012).

Previous studies have linked a range of motivators, such as environmental awareness, to pro-environmental consumer behaviour and intentions. Environmental knowledge, according to Chan (2001) and Haron et al. (2005), is the comprehension and evaluation of how environments affect society in addition to knowledge of environmental issues. Numerous research works have indicated the significance of environmental consciousness in motivating individuals to engage in more sustainable consumption (Wang, 2013). 

Laroche et al. (2001) discovered a strong relationship between environmental attitudes and behaviours and green literacy, or knowledge about the environment. According to Kennedy et al. (2009), one of the major barriers to pro-environmental behaviour is ignorance. A meta-analysis of previous research found that people who are more educated about climate change are more likely to act in ways that benefit the environment (Hines et al. 1987). According to research, understanding the environment is a powerful motivator for acting environmentally responsibly. As a result, examining where consumers use green products could be beneficial.

Mediating Effect of Green Satisfaction

When a brand or product meets the needs and objectives of the customer, satisfaction increases the level of delight in the consumer (Olsen, 2002). Customer satisfaction is essential for a long-lasting relationship (Zhang, 2005). Customer relationships only improve when satisfaction leads to a thorough decision that takes into account both psychological and economic factors (Geyskens et al., 1999). "A pleasurable level of consumption-cognate fulfilment to satisfy a customer's environmental desires, sustainable prospects, and green needs" is Chen's (2010) definition of "green satisfaction." Customers feel that they have made a positive impact on the sustainability of the environment when they purchase eco-friendly products (Khare, 2017).

Underpinning Theory

According to Carfora et al. (2021) the VBN theory, a person's moral norm is activated when he or she is willing to take responsibility for his or her actions and is aware of the consequences of those actions. The behavioural intention as defined by the personal norm—that is, the awareness of a duty to act in accordance with our moral principles—is measured in order to operationalize this theory. The attribution of responsibility—that is, a person's sense of obligation to the environment—then explains the personal norm. Furthermore, attribution of responsibility is based on knowledge of the consequences of human behaviour, which is derived from widespread environmental beliefs. 

The research was conducted within the framework of the value belief norm (VBN) theory because it is relevant to the constructs, i.e. green packaging, PCE, social influence, environmental awareness, green satisfaction, and green consumption behaviour.

Theoretical Framework

Figure 1



Methodology

For this study on FMCG consumers in Lahore, Pakistan, a positivist approach employing quantitative methods is chosen.

This research uses a fundamental, deductive approach and employs a cross-sectional time horizon with the individual consumer as the unit of analysis. We have used a Likert scale in our data collection questionnaire. Later on, we concentrated on the (PLS-SEM) method and employed SmartPLS software for statistical tests and procedures.

Table 1

Constructs

Classification

Frequency

Percent

Gender

Female

149

51.38

 

Male

141

48.62

Age

18 – 25

130

44.83

 

26 – 35

99

34.14

 

36 – 50

61

21.03

Education

Intermediate

28

7.59

 

Graduate

98

33.79

 

Post-Graduate

129

44.48

 

PhD

35

12.07




 

According to Hair et al. (2016), PLS-SEM is a well-liked option because of its simplicity and low data needs. Results Table 1 shows the study's descriptive statistics and inter-correlations of variables. An examination of this Table shows that demographic variables including gender, age, and educational level male respondents were 48.62%, female respondents were 51.38%, the respondents aged up to 25 years old were 44.83%, 18-25 years response rate was 130 (44.83%), 26-35 years response rate was 99 (34.14%) and 36-50 years response rate was 61 (21.03%). The respondent response rate according to education level Intermediate 7.59%, Graduate 33.79%, Post-Graduate 44.48%, PhD (12.07%).

Table 2

Constructs

N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

Perceived consumer effectiveness

290

2.17

4.83

3.8368

0.52670

Green Packaging

290

1.86

5.00

3.9922

0.50551

Environmental Awareness

290

1.80

5.00

3.7429

0.59853

Social influence

290

1.67

5.00

3.7339

0.58913

Green satisfaction

290

2.00

5.00

3.7087

0.69430

Green Consumption behaviour

290

2.25

5.00

3.8564

0.46871

These Descriptive statistics summarizing the variability, central tendency, and data distribution for each construct are shown in Table 2. 290 observations make up each construct. The range of minimum and maximum values is 1.67 to 2.25 and 4.83 to 5.00, respectively. The range of mean values is 3.7087 to 3.9922. The standard deviations show variation around the mean and range from 0.46871 to 0.69430.

Measurement Model Assessment

Figure 2



Table 3

Constructs

Items

Loading

Alpha

CR

AVE

Green packaging

GP1

0.787

0.759

0.729

0.593

 

GP2

0.993

       

GP3

0.741

       

GP4

0.785

       

GP5

0.849

       

GP6

0.996

       

GP7

0.767

     

Perceived consumer effectiveness

PCE1

0.724

0.742

0.755

0.522

 

PCE2

0.893

       

PCE3

0.755

       

PCE4

0.782

       

PCE5

0.907

       

PCE6

0.860

     

Social influence

SI1

0.770

0.756

0.721

0.568

 

SI2

0.753

       

SI3

0.710

     

Green satisfaction

GS1

0.815

0.771

0.749

0.633

 

GS2

0.762

       

GS3

0.782

     

Environmental awareness

EA1

0.728

0.948

0.958

0.683

 

EA2

0.782

       

EA3

0.887

       

EA4

0.640

       

EA5

0.781

     

Green Consumption Behavior

GCB1

0.787

0.952

0.743

0.566

 

GCB2

0.729

       

GCB3

0.854

       

GCB4

0.738

Table 3

Constructs

Items

Loading

Alpha

CR

AVE

Green packaging

GP1

0.787

0.759

0.729

0.593

 

GP2

0.993

       

GP3

0.741

       

GP4

0.785

       

GP5

0.849

       

GP6

0.996

       

GP7

0.767

     

Perceived consumer effectiveness

PCE1

0.724

0.742

0.755

0.522

 

PCE2

0.893

       

PCE3

0.755

       

PCE4

0.782

       

PCE5

0.907

       

PCE6

0.860

     

Social influence

SI1

0.770

0.756

0.721

0.568

 

SI2

0.753

       

SI3

0.710

     

Green satisfaction

GS1

0.815

0.771

0.749

0.633

 

GS2

0.762

       

GS3

0.782

     

Environmental awareness

EA1

0.728

0.948

0.958

0.683

 

EA2

0.782

       

EA3

0.887

       

EA4

0.640

       

EA5

0.781

     

Green Consumption Behavior

GCB1

0.787

0.952

0.743

0.566

 

GCB2

0.729

       

GCB3

0.854

       

GCB4

0.738

The validity and reliability of the measurement model were evaluated using both convergent and discriminant methods. Loadings, alpha reliability, AVE values, and other indicators were used to determine convergence validity. As mentioned in Table 3 and Fig. 2 every outer loading surpassed the significance and 0.70 threshold criterion (Hair et al., 2017). Also, alpha and CR values greater than 0.70 were considered acceptable for each construct (Hair et al., 2014). The AVE values for each construct exceeded 0.50 (Cheung & Wang, 2017).

The study also evaluated DV, CV, and IV; the results across constructs were satisfactory. The findings demonstrate that the measurement items sufficiently capture the underlying constructs, supporting the validity of the structural model.

Discriminant Validity

Table 4

Variables







EA







GCB







GP







GS







PCE







SI













Environmental Awareness













Green Consumption Behavior







0.421













Green Packaging







0.047







0.471













Green Satisfaction







0.248







0.319







0.644













Perceived consumer effectiveness







0.775







0.506







0.781







0.229













Social influence







0.718







0.457







0.527







0.218







0.768

It also determines the degree of difference between overlapping constructs. The HTMT correlation ratio, the Fornell and Larcker criterion, and indicator cross-loading can all be used to assess discriminant validity (Hair et al. 2014). 

According to Shafer et al. (2016), assessing discriminant validity entails examining the correlation after controlling for measurement error. Henseler et al. (2015) proposed using the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) correlation ratio with a 0.85 threshold value to evaluate discriminant validity in variance-based SEM (partial least squares). In Table 4, every variable had a value less than 0.85. HTMT values near one indicate a lack of discriminant validity. Using the HTMT as a criterion entails comparing it to an established threshold. If the HTMT exceeds this value, it indicates a lack of discriminant validity. A few researchers suggest a threshold of 0.85 (Fonseca, 2013).

Table 5

Variables

EA

GCB

GP

GS

PCE

SI

Environmental Awareness

0.619

         

Green Consumption Behavior

0.217

0.515

       

Green Packaging

0.605

0.129

0.541

     

Green Satisfaction

0.591

0.188

0.412

0.577

   

Perceived consumer effectiveness

0.407

0.153

0.524

0.287

0.587

 

Social influence

0.308

0.046

0.347

0.195

0.437

0.684

Table 5 shows the values for all constructs in the range of 0.619 to 0.684. To assess discriminant validity, Fornell and Larcker (1971) compared the square root of each AVE on the diagonal to the correlation coefficients (off-diagonal) for each construct in the relevant rows and columns. This measurement model has acceptable discriminant validity and supports construct discrimination.

Structure Equation Modelling (SEM) Analysis

Figure 3



Table 6

Hypothesis

Path Relations

Beta

SD

T

P-value

LL

UL

Remarks

H1

GP > GS

0.335

0.094

2.063

0.000

0.074

0.491

Accepted

H2

PCE > GS

0.658

0.054

18.645

0.000

0.543

0.765

Accepted

H3

SI > GS

0.305

0.091

20.626

0.002

0.763

0.943

Accepted

H4

GS > GCB

0.615

0.224

10.842

0.000

0.872

0.851

Accepted

H5

EA > GP > GS

0.597

0.074

2.875

0.000

0.648

0.647

Accepted

H6

EA > PCE > GS

0.048

0.054

0.913

0.163

-0.076

0.196

Rejected

H7

EA > SI > GS

0.544

0.079

11.889

0.001

0.429

0.648

Accepted

H8

GS > GP > GCB

0.374

0.052

19.851

0.000

0.537

0.782

Accepted

H9

GS > PCE > GCB

0.135

0.064

7.961

0.008

0.394

0.690

Accepted

H10

GS > SI > GCB

0.086

0.081

1.753

0.000

0.431

0.194

Accepted

SEM analysis was used to analyze structural construct relationships, and partial least squares were used to confirm the results. The findings indicate significant relationships between the constructs, which are supported by path coefficients and p-values. Both PCE (p=0.000, ?=0.658) and GP (p=0.000, ?=0.335) have a significant impact on GS. In a similar manner, other hypotheses (H3, H4, H5, H7, H8, H9, and H10) show noteworthy relationships. H6, on the other hand, which suggests a straight line from EA to PCE to GS, is rejected (p=0.163). These findings contribute to a better understanding of the factors that influence environmental attitudes and behaviours, thereby supporting sustainable strategies.

Discussion and Conclusion

Investigating the immediate effects of green packaging, perceived consumer effectiveness, social influence, and green consumption behaviour was the main goal of this study. It also looked at the mediating and moderating roles of environmental awareness and green satisfaction. The VBN theory was used to develop and test ten hypotheses. Support for the hypotheses was found in the study, which showed positive correlations between variables like PCE and green satisfaction, social influence and green satisfaction, and green packaging and green satisfaction. Furthermore, it was discovered that the relationship between PCE and green consumption behaviour, as well as the relationship between green packaging and green consumption behaviour, were mediated by green satisfaction. The study makes managerial recommendations, such as incorporating environmental education into the curriculum to encourage environmentally friendly consumption practices and utilizing green marketing techniques to increase public awareness of environmental issues. 

Limitations and Directions for Future Study

It is important to recognize the limitations of the study. First off, since the study only looked at Lahore and had a small sample size, its conclusions might not apply to other places. Therefore, in order to achieve greater generalizability, the study's scope must be expanded by enlarging its sample size and adding participants from a variety of geographic locations. Second, only the mediating and moderating effects of environmental awareness and green satisfaction were investigated in this study. To further enhance the theoretical framework, future research should take into account adding more variables like income levels, gender, convenience level, price sensitivity, and policy interventions. The addition of new constructs would greatly advance our knowledge of the variables affecting consumers' decisions to consume sustainably.

References

• Akehurst, G., Afonso, C., & Martins Gonçalves, H. (2012). Re‐examining green purchase behaviour and the green consumer profile: New evidences. Management Decision, 50(5), 972–988. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211227726  

• Alzubaidi, H., Slade, E. L., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2021). Examining antecedents of consumers’ pro-environmental behaviours: TPB extended with materialism and innovativeness. Journal of Business Research, 122, 685-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.01.017 
• Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C., & Lehmann, D. R. (1994). Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 53. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252310 
• Bandura, A. (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 248–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90022-L  
• Bartels, J., & Hoogendam, K. (2011). The role of social identity and attitudes toward sustainability brands in buying behaviors for organic products. Journal of Brand Management, 18(9), 697–708. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2011.3  
• Bearden, W. O., Netemeyer, R. G., & Teel, J. E. (1989). Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(4), 473. https://doi.org/10.1086/209186 
• Bertrandias, L., & Elgaaied-Gambier, L. (2014). Others’ environmental concern as a social determinant of green buying. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 31(6/7), 417–429. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCM-05-2014-0966  
• Chan, R. Y. K. (2001). Determinants of Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Psychology & Marketing, 18(4), 389–413. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.1013  
• Chen, M.-F., & Tung, P.-J. (2014). Developing an extended Theory of Planned Behavior model to predict consumers’ intention to visit green hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2013.09.006  
• Chen, Y.-S. (2010). The Drivers of Green Brand Equity: Green Brand Image, Green Satisfaction, and Green Trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(2), 307–319. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40605343  
• Chen, Y.-S., Lin, C.-L., & Chang, C.-H. (2014). The influence of greenwash on green word-of-mouth (green WOM): the mediation effects of green perceived quality and green satisfaction. Quality & Quantity, 48(5), 2411–2425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-013-9898-1  
• Delre, S. A., Jager, W., Bijmolt, T. H. A., & Janssen, M. A. (2010). Will It Spread or Not? The Effects of Social Influences and Network Topology on Innovation Diffusion. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(2), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00714.x  
• Ellen, P. S., Wiener, J. L., & Cobb-Walgren, C. (1991). The Role of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness in Motivating Environmentally Conscious Behaviors. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10(2), 102–117. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30000238  
•  Fonseca, L., Domingues, P., & Dima, A. M. (2020). Mapping the sustainable development goals relationships. Sustainability, 12(8), 3359. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12083359  
• Geng, Y., Zhu, Q., Doberstein, B., & Fujita, T. (2009). Implementing China’s circular economy concept at the regional level: A review of progress in Dalian, China. Waste Management, 29(2), 996–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2008.06.036  
• Ghvanidze, S., Velikova, N., Dodd, T. H., & Oldewage-Theron, W. (2016). Consumers' environmental and ethical consciousness and the use of the related food products information: The role of perceived consumer effectiveness. Appetite, 107, 311–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2016.08.097  
• Gruber, V., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (2014). How Techniques of Neutralization Legitimize Norm- and Attitude-Inconsistent Consumer Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 121(1), 29–45. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42921363 
• Hanss, D., & Doran, R. (2019). Perceived Consumer Effectiveness (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71062-4_33-1  
• Kang, J., Liu, C., & Kim, S. (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  
• Khare, A., Mukerjee, S., & Goyal, T. (2013). Social influence and green marketing: An exploratory study on Indian consumers. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 12(4), 361–381. http://dx.doi.org/10.1362/147539213X13875568505903  
• Kim, Y., & Choi, S. M. (2005). Antecedents of Green Purchase Behavior: An Examination of Collectivism, Environmental Concern, and PCE. ACR North American Advances. https://www.tcrwebsite.org/volumes/9156/volumes/v32/NA-32  
• Kashif, M., & Rani, T. (2021a). Customers’ Attitude Towards Green Packaging: A Case of Sapphire, Pakistan. Journal of Marketing Strategies, 3(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.52633/jms.v3i1.58  
• Kinnear, T. C., Taylor, J. R., & Ahmed, S. A. (1974). Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are They? Journal of Marketing, 38(2), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.2307/1250192  
•  Langley, D. J., Bijmolt, T. H. A., Ortt, J. R., & Pals, N. (2012). Determinants of Social Contagion during New Product Adoption. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(4), 623–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00929.x  
• Lee, K. (2014). Predictors of Sustainable Consumption among Young Educated Consumers in Hong Kong. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 26(3), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/08961530.2014.900249  
• Lin, P.-C., & Huang, Y.-H. (2012). The influence factors on choice behavior regarding green products based on the theory of consumption values. Journal of Cleaner Production, 22(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.002  
• Lorek, A. (2015). Current trends in the consumer behaviour towards eco-friendly products. Economic and Environmental Studies, 15(2), 115–129. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/178880  
• Martínez, P. (2015). Customer loyalty: exploring its antecedents from a green marketing perspective. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(5), 896–917. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-03-2014-0115 
• Manoj K.J. (2010). Unpacking the Packaging: Environmental Impact of Packaging Wastes. Journal of Environmental Research and Development, 4(4).
• Merton, R.K. and Rossi, A.S. (1968). Contributions to the Theory of Reference Group Behaviour. The Free Press, New York.
• Mkik, S., & Aomari, A. (2019). Green Packaging- as a Novel Marketing Trend: an Empirical Investigation of Moroccans Consumer's Environment Friendly Attitude.
• Moustafa, H., Youssef, A. M., Darwish, N. A., & Abou-Kandil, A. I. (2019). Eco-friendly polymer composites for green packaging: Future vision and challenges. Composites Part B: Engineering, 172, 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.05.048  
• Nguyen, D. D. (2023). Evaluating the Consumer Attitude and Behavioral Consumption of Green Products in Vietnam. Sustainability, 15(9), 7612. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097612  
• Orzan, G., Cruceru, A. F., Bălăceanu, C., & Chivu, R. (2018). Consumers’ behavior concerning sustainable packaging: An exploratory study on Romanian consumers. Sustainability, 10(6), 1787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061787  
• Pan, C., Lei, Y., Wu, J., & Wang, Y. (2021). The influence of green packaging on consumers’ green purchase intention in the context of online-to-offline commerce. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 23(2), 133–153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JSIT-11-2019-0242  
• Panni, M. F. A. K. (2006). Effect of consumerism towards customer attitudinal behaviour in food industry in Malaysia (Doctoral dissertation, Multimedia University). https://doi.org/10.1108/JSIT-11-2019-0242  
• Prakash, G., Choudhary, S., Kumar, A., Garza-Reyes, J. A., Khan, S. A. R., & Panda, T. K. (2019). Do altruistic and egoistic values influence consumers’ attitudes and purchase intentions towards eco-friendly packaged products? An empirical investigation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50, 163–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.011 
• Rini, A., Sukaatmadja, I., & Giantari, I. (2016). PENGARUH PENGETAHUAN LINGKUNGAN DAN KEPEDULIAN LINGKUNGAN TERHADAP SIKAP DAN NIAT BELI PRODUK HIJAU “THE BODY SHOP” DI KOTA DENPASAR. E-Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis Universitas Udayana, . https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eeb/article/view/23972  
• Raukoff, & Wu, J. (2013). Influence Mechanism of Green Consumption Behavior Based on Ajzen Planned Behavior Theory. Journal of Finance and Economics, 2, 91-100.
• Seo, S., Ahn, H.-K., Jeong, J., & Moon, J. (2016). Consumers’ attitude toward sustainable food products: Ingredients vs. packaging. Sustainability, 8, 1073. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101073  
• Schubert, I., de Groot, J. I. M., & Newton, A. C. (2021). Challenging the Status Quo through Social Influence: Changes in Sustainable Consumption through the Influence of Social Networks. Sustainability, 13(10), 5513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105513 
• Shen, J. (2012). Understanding the Determinants of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Eco-Labeled Products: An Empirical Analysis of the China Environmental Label. Journal of Service Science and Management, 05(01), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2012.51011  
• Straughan, R. D., & Roberts, J. A. (1999). Environmental segmentation alternatives: A look at green consumer behavior in the new millennium. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(6), 558–575. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769910297506  
• Toukabri, M. (2023). How to ensure a responsible and sustainable production consumption process? Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04241-6  
• Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & McGarty, C. (1994). Self and Collective: Cognition and Social Context. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(5), 454–463. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167294205002  
• Wan, Y. K. P., Chan, S. H. J., & Huang, H. L. W. (2017). Environmental awareness, initiatives and performance in the hotel industry of Macau. Tourism Review, 72(1), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-06-2016-0016 
• Wang, J. (2013). The effect of resource saving consciousness on resource saving behavior——an interactive effect and moderating effect model under the background of Chinese culture. Manag. World. 8, 77–90. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.580823 
• Wang, S.-T. (2014). Consumer characteristics and social influence factors on green purchasing intentions. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 32(7), 738–753. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-12-2012-0146  
• Wood, W., & Hayes, T. (2012). Social Influence on consumer decisions: Motives, modes, and consequences. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(3), 324–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2012.05.003  
• Wong, C. W., Lai, K. H., Shang, K. C., Lu, C. S., & Leung, T. K. P. (2012). Green operations and the moderating role of environmental management capability of suppliers on manufacturing firm performance. International journal of production economics, 140(1), 283-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2011.08.031  
• Wu, H. C., Cheng, C. C., Chen, Y. C., & Hong, W. (2018). Towards green experiential loyalty: driving from experiential quality, green relationship quality, environmental friendliness, green support and green desire. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(3), 1374-1397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2016-0596  
• Yan, D., Wang, C., Sun, T., & Wen, D. (2023). The impact of service experience on sustainable customer engagement: The mediation of green perceived value and customer satisfaction. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2685  
• Yang, S., & Chai, J. (2022). The influence of enterprises’ green marketing behavior on consumers’ green consumption Intention—Mediating role and moderating role. Sustainability, 14(22), 15478. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215478  
• Yeng, F., Yazdanifard, R., & Wong, K. (2015). Green marketing: A Study of Consumers Buying Behavior in Relation to Green Products. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 15(5). https://globaljournals.org/GJMBR_Volume15/2-Green-Marketing-A-Study.pdf  
• Yeh, S.-S., Ma, T., & Huan, T.-C. (2016). Building social entrepreneurship for the hotel industry by promoting environmental education. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(6), 1204–1224. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-03-2014-0122  
• Zhang, G., & Zhao, Z. (2012). Green Packaging Management of Logistics Enterprises. Physics Procedia, 24, 900–905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2012.02.135  
• Zhang, Y., Zhang, H.-L., Zhang, J., & Cheng, S. (2014). Predicting residents’ pro-environmental behaviors at tourist sites: The role of awareness of disaster’s consequences, values, and place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.06.001