The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-1335.htm

Pro-
How national cultural values environmental
affect pro-environmental consumer
behavior
consumer behavior
Katja Soyez 623
Faculty of Business and Economics, Technische Universitat Dresden,
Received 8 March 2011
Dresden, Germany Revised 23 August 2011
13 January 2012
9 May 2012
Abstract Accepted 25 June 2012
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to link national cultural values to personal pro-environmental
value orientations, in order to investigate why the salience of pro-environmental value orientations
differs cross-culturally. A value-based model is proposed and tested in a multinational study.
Design/methodology/approach An empirical investigation of 1,096 consumers was conducted in
five nations with a different cultural profile on the two cultural dimensions in-group collectivism and
assertiveness. The paper applies multi-group structural equation modelling to test the moderating
effect of culture on the impact of pro-environmental values on attitudes and subjective norms.
Findings The study reveals that the influence of a pro-environmental value orientation differs
substantially, according to national cultural values. While an ecocentric value orientation is important
in the US, Canadian, German, and Australian samples which hold individualistic values, an
anthropocentric value orientation is salient in the Russian sample, characterized by collectivistic
values. The hypothesized influence of the national cultural value assertiveness, however, could not be
established decisively.
Research limitations/implications First, the present study considers culture as a national value
on an aggregated level. Future studies should take into account cultural values at different levels of
aggregation. Second, since only one collectivistic society is the object of the investigation, the results
are limited in terms of generalizability.
Practical implications In order to address the ecocentric value orientation in the analyzed
individualistic societies, marketers should emphasize benefits for the environment in the USA,
Canada, Australia, and Germany. By contrast, the positive consequences for humankind in general and
future generations should be stressed in the collectivistic Russian sample.
Originality/value The paper contributes to the literature by integrating both individual and
national perspectives on the value-based drivers of environmental concern. The study also provides
insight into pro-environmental consumer behavior in an emerging market (namely Russia), which has
so far been neglected in cross-cultural research.
Keywords Pro-environmental value orientation, National cultural values, In-group collectivism,
Anthropocentric value orientation, Ecocentric value orientation, Theory of planned behaviour,
Consumer behaviour, United States of America, Canada, Germany, Australia, Russia
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Alarming documents like the fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007) underscore the urgency of environmental
problems. Consequently, most people agree that humankind has to change its behavior
fundamentally in order to minimize further environmental damage. Consumers play
a pivotal role in this context. Dietz et al. (2009), for example, showed that the
implementation of a nationwide action plan (e.g. carpooling or purchasing efficient International Marketing Review
Vol. 29 No. 6, 2012
appliances) would eliminate 20 percent of direct household CO2 emissions in the USA. pp. 623-646
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
This example demonstrates powerfully that if political actors and companies offer the 0265-1335
right choices, consumers can act as gatekeepers of sustainable development, through DOI 10.1108/02651331211277973
IMR their behavior and buying decision. New consumer segments, such as the so-called
29,6 neo-greens or the LOHAS (lifestyle of health and sustainability) are on the rise in
many countries and provide evidence of this development. However, a far greater
proportion of the population does not exhibit the adequate behavioral patterns,
such as purchasing environmentally friendly products (Scott, 1999). Moreover, some
studies provide evidence that pro-environmental behavior varies considerably across
624 nations and cultures (Deng et al., 2006; Milfont et al., 2006). Thus, the question arises
as to what drives environmentally friendly behavior cross-culturally and why these
cross-cultural differences prevail. The results of the present study can assist
manufacturers and sellers in marketing ecological products according to the needs and
preferences of consumers within a global marketplace. The findings of the study enable
companies to encourage consumers to buy ecological products and thus increase the
profitability and competitiveness of multinational companies selling or manufacturing
pro-environment products.
That pro-environmental attitudes antecede a specific form of behavior is well
established in social psychological research (e.g. Bamberg and Moser, 2007). Moreover,
several scholars have revealed that environmental attitudes and behaviors are deeply
rooted in personal human values (Dunlap et al., 1983). Furthermore, this individual
belief system is influenced by national cultural values (Rokeach, 1973; Schwartz, 1994).
Although the influence of national cultural values on consumer attitudes and behavior
has been explored in several domains (e.g. complaint behavior: Chelminski and Coulter,
2007, innovative buying behavior: Dwyer et al., 2005), very little is known about the
impact of national cultural values on specific pro-environmental value orientations and
attitudes (Leonidou and Leonidou, 2011). Thus, for multinational companies, no
guidance is available on the salience of pro-environmental value orientations in
different cultures. However, both producers and retailers of ecological products need to
understand the underlying value structure that triggers pro-environmental behavior
cross-culturally, so as to adapt their marketing strategies effectively to cultural
peculiarities.
The present paper aims to fill this gap and explicitly links cultural values at the
national level to individual pro-environmental value orientations, in order to investigate
why the salience of pro-environmental value orientations differs cross-culturally. First,
three central pro-environmental value orientations are identified in a literature review
and integrated into the underlying theoretical framework of the theory of planned
behavior so as to capture the individual value-attitude-behavior relationship. Second,
national cultural values are derived from the Global Leadership and Organizational
Behavior Effectiveness Research Program (GLOBE) (House et al., 2004) and integrated
into the value-based model as moderating variables. Therefore, the two cultural
dimensions of in-group collectivism and assertiveness, which are theoretically related
to environmentalism, are investigated. Thus, the present paper contributes
substantially to the literature by integrating national and individual perspectives on
the value-based drivers of environmental concern.
The theoretical model is tested in a multinational study, comparing five national
samples which differ with respect to the cultural dimensions of in-group collectivism
and assertiveness. The study comprises samples from the USA, Canada, Australia,
Germany and Russia. While a large body of literature focusses on pro-environmental
value orientations in English- or Spanish-speaking societies, Eastern European
cultures have so far been neglected in cross-cultural research. Considering the
environmental and economic impact of these nations (e.g. increasing CO2 emission,
market growth), there is a clear need for research on environmentalism in those areas. Pro-
Thus, the present paper pays special attention to one emerging Eastern European environmental
market, namely Russia.
consumer
2. Theoretical background and hypotheses behavior
2.1 Individual pro-environmental value orientations
Values can be conceptualized at different levels of aggregation and with different levels 625
of specificity. National-cultural values are collectively held values at a general level.
They reflect the different solutions that societies evolve to the problems of regulating
human activities (Schwartz, 1994, p. 92). By contrast, domain-specific values are
individually held beliefs which describe the psychological dynamics of conflict and
compatibility that people experience in the course of pursuing their different values in
everyday life (Schwartz, 1994, p. 92). According to this taxonomy, environmentalism is
commonly considered as an individual or personal domain-specific value orientation
(e.g. Steenkamp and de Jong, 2010).
In the following paragraph, a brief overview is given on different ways to
conceptualize pro-environmental value orientations. Reviewing previous literature,
three main approaches to capturing pro-environmental value orientations can be
identified, those of Dunlap and van Liere (1978), of Stern et al. (1993) and of Thompson
and Barton (1994).
Dunlap and van Liere (1978) were the first to conceptualize a pro-environmental
value orientation as a general world view. In line with Ingleharts (1977)
post-materialism hypothesis, they argue that over time, members of industrial
societies experience a value change from materialism to post-materialism. Thus, pro-
environmental values become more important, because individuals develop an
understanding of their interrelationship with the ecosystem. That is, humankind
influences nature substantially. The new environmental paradigm (NEP) attempts to
measure this newly emerging environmentalism, which emphasizes unity with nature.
Stern et al. (1993) introduced a second approach comprising three value dimensions.
The socio-altruistic dimension is based on norm-activation theory (Schwartz,
1977). Socio-altruistic values are expressed through the view that environmental
deterioration might have negative consequences for humankind in general. Stern
et al. (1993) extended Schwartzs theory, by postulating that individuals care not only
for others, but also consider the perceived costs of a specific behavior. Thus, egoistic
values reflect self-interest. Finally, biospherically oriented individuals value nature
for its own sake. The tripartite value model of Stern et al. (1993) reflects the intense
debate on environmentalism, capturing all three classes of valued objects: other people,
the self and non-human objects.
Third, the approach of Thompson and Barton (1994) describes three value
dimensions and partly reflects the concept of Stern et al. (1993). The ecocentric
value orientation corresponds conceptually with the biospheric dimension of the Stern
measure. The anthropocentric value orientation is related to the socio-altruistic value
orientation. Furthermore, Thompson and Barton (1994) introduced a third dimension
of environmental apathy. Apathetic individuals consider environmental problems to be
overrated and do not care about the environment.
Comparing the approach of Dunlap and van Liere (1978) with those of Stern et al.
(1993) and of Thompson and Barton (1994), three central value orientations emerge:
ecocentric value orientation, anthropocentric value orientation and environmental
apathy. It becomes clear that the distinction between whether an individual protects
IMR nature because of the benefits for humankind or for natures sake, is a central issue
29,6 in the research on the pro-environmental value orientation. Additionally,
environmental apathy, a dimension reflecting a general doubt about the importance
of environmental problems, should be considered.
According to social adaptation theory, values and attitudes are social cognitions
that facilitate adaptation to the environment. Homer and Kahle (1988) describe values
626 as the most abstract social cognitions, which reflect the most basic characteristics of
adaptation and thus form attitudes and behaviors. In other words, general values
influence specific values and thereby, attitudes and behaviors (Rokeach, 1973).
The present paper captures the attitude-behavior-relationship by drawing on the
well-established theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1991). According to this theory,
behavior results from behavioral intention, which in turn arises from a combination of
personal attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioral control. Whereas the
subjective-norms construct describes perceived social pressure, perceived behavioral
control captures the barriers that hinder consumers from pursuing a particular action.
Following Steg and Vlek (2009), the theory of planned behavior is suitable for
explaining high-cost behavior, since it considers a wide range of influencing factors,
especially perceived behavioral control, and thus helps to overcome the attitude-
behavior gap. In the following analysis, the theory of planned behavior is adapted to
organic food consumption, which is commonly considered as a kind of ecological
behavior (Grunert and Juhl, 1995), that is likely to cause considerable behavioral costs
(e.g. search costs).
Only, recently, Oreg and Katz-Gerro (2006) extended the theory of planned behavior
by general values, such as post-materialism and harmony. Although values are
a powerful instrument for understanding consumer behavior (Okazaki and Mueller,
2007), the effect of general values on specific pro-environmental attitudes turned out to
be rather weak. Thus, the present paper proposes specific pro-environmental value
orientations as predictors of environmentally friendly attitudes.
By revealing the underlying value structure that triggers attitudes, it becomes clear
why an individual exhibits a certain ecological behavior. The integrative model
introduced in the present paper captures the three described value orientations (i.e.
ecocentric value orientation, anthropocentric value orientation and environmental
apathy) as predictors of environmentally friendly attitudes toward organic food. While
ecocentric and anthropocentric value orientations influence pro-environmental
attitudes positively, apathetic individuals doubt that specific actions are necessary
to protect the environment. Furthermore, it can be assumed that the three-value
orientations influence the relevant subjective norms concerning organic food for
a given individual. According to the theory of social comparison (Festinger, 1954), an
individual has a need to compare himself with relevant others, in order to evaluate the
consequences of his own behavior. Consequently, only if the relevant group shares a
certain value orientation, do subjective norms become important, leading to a specific
behavior. Thus, it is hypothesized that:

H1. An anthropocentric value orientation has a positive influence on attitudes

toward organic food (H1a) and on subjective norms concerning organic food
(H1b).

H2. An ecocentric value orientation has a positive influence on attitudes toward

organic food (H2a) and on subjective norms concerning organic food (H2b).
 H3. Environmental apathy has a negative influence on attitudes toward organic Pro-
food (H3a) and on subjective norms concerning organic food (H3b). environmental
2.2 National cultural values and pro-environmental value orientations consumer
2.2.1 Previous literature. Although it is an established fact that general values behavior
contribute to the formulation of specific values and thereby influence attitudes and
behavior (Homer and Kahle, 1988), few studies have linked cultural values at national 627
or individual levels to specific pro-environmental values. In previous research, three
main cultural theories served as a conceptual framework. One stream of research
analyzed the influence of individual cultural values on pro-environmental values,
attitudes and behavior. Ingleharts theory of post-materialism serves as a framework
for several empirical studies. According to this theory, in postindustrial societies,
a shift from materialistic to post-materialistic values can be observed. Postindustrial
societies are characterized by security and prosperity and a high proportion of citizens
with advanced education (Bell, 1973). Thus, higher order values are becoming more
important (i.e. quality of environment and self-development). Steger et al. (1989) found
evidence supporting a positive influence of post-materialistic values on specific
pro-environmental value orientations. Oreg and Katz-Gerro (2006) showed that
post-materialism influences pro-environmental attitudes positively across 27 nations,
and the studies of Gelissen (2007) and Kemmelmeier et al. (2002) revealed that
post-materialism is positively related to several pro-environmental behaviors.
In a similar approach, Schultz and Zelezny (1999) explored the link between
general personal values and specific pro-environmental values. In an empirical study
in 14 English- and Spanish-speaking countries, they provide evidence that the
Schwartz self-transcendence values are positively associated with ecocentrism,
whereas self-enhancement values are positively related with anthropocentrism.
A second stream of research conceptualizes culture at an aggregated level and
applies Hofstedes concept of culture (e.g. Deng et al., 2006; Leung and Rice, 2002) as the
underlying theoretical framework and relate the individualism/collectivism dimension
to environmental values and attitudes. Milfont et al. (2006), for example, found among
individualistic Europeans, a positive influence of an ecocentric value orientation on
pro-environmental behavior. By contrast for Asian respondents, anthropocentric value
orientations are additionally important.
A third stream of studies does not explicitly ascribe cross-national differences
to underlying cultural values (e.g. de Groot and Steg, 2007; Schultz et al., 2000).
However, cultural values can be applied to explain the results of the cross-national
investigations. De Groot and Steg (2007), for example, found evidence that in Sweden,
which is a feminine society, altruistic values lead to greater awareness of the
consequences of a specific behavior.
Analyzing the findings of previous research, the following shortcomings are
evident. Most of the studies draw on traditional cultural models, thereby neglecting
new or newly refined cultural dimensions (Yaprak, 2008). Furthermore, previous
studies analyze only parts of the value-attitude-behavior relationship and focus either
on the influence of general values on pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors,
neglecting specific pro-environmental value orientations (e.g. Oreg and Katz-Gerro,
2006) or, conversely, analyze the influence of specific pro-environmental value
orientations on attitudes and behavior, without explicitly taking into account general
values at individual or national levels (e.g. de Groot and Steg, 2007). One notable
exception is the recent study of Steenkamp and de Jong (2010), which proposes a
IMR comprehensive framework comprising national cultural values (e.g. survival and
29,6 self-expression), general values (e.g. universalism) and domain-specific values
(e.g. materialism and environmentalism). Despite this comprehensive model,
Steenkamp and de Jong (2010) do not develop a theoretical foundation for the
moderating effect of national cultural values on the relationship between general and
specific values and attitudes. Another critical point in most previous studies is the
628 design and selection of country samples. Most studies have been conducted with
respect to a limited number of countries. As Nasif et al. (1991) pointed out, comparing
only two countries does not enable the attribution of differences in attitudes or
behaviors to one or more cultural dimensions. Moreover, researchers have focussed
mainly on English- or Spanish-speaking areas (e.g. Schultz and Zelezny, 1999). Thus,
the results are subject to a western bias. Other, non-western cultures have been
neglected so far.
The present study therefore aims to overcome these shortcomings. First, a five
nation setting, comprising samples from four continents, enables comparing the effect
of cultural dimensions derived from the framework of the GLOBE project. Based on
established cultural frameworks (e.g. Hofstede, 2001; Triandis, 1988), the theory-driven
concept of project GLOBE is the most recent approach to describing societal cultures,
which overcomes several shortcomings of traditional concepts (Engelen and Brettel,
2011). The interdisciplinary research team of the GLOBE project established construct
validity, tested for cross-cultural equivalence, unidimensionality and reliability of the
instrument. Second, the theoretical model presented here integrates values at national
and individual levels, so as to explain the evolution of pro-environmental attitudes and
norms, and thereby behavior. Third, the paper aims to extend beyond western cultures,
by adding one non-western society (i.e. the Russian Federation), which has rarely been
the object of cross-cultural research.
2.2.2 Influence of in-group collectivism and assertiveness. Based on the literature
review, the present paper investigates the moderating influence of two cultural
dimensions derived from the GLOBE project: in-group collectivism and assertiveness.
In-group collectivism represents a newer and more precise conceptualization of
the well-known cultural dimension of individualism/collectivism, which is probably
the most important and influential cultural dimension in cross-cultural research
(Triandis, 1988, p. 60). Although it has been studied intensively in various domains
(e.g. advertising: Hatzithomas et al., 2011; product diffusion: Dwyer et al., 2005), Van de
Vijver and Leung (2000) warn that interest in this important dimension might be
waning. Since it is closely related to the gross national product, it might help us to
understand the psychological consequences or causes of economic development. With
respect to the cultural concept of the GLOBE study, researchers distinguish between
societal collectivism (institutional) and in-group collectivism. Since the present study
focusses on personal values and specific consumer behaviors in the private domain,
in-group collectivism is selected which is closely related to Hofstedes individualism
scale (r 0.82, Gelfand et al., 2004, p. 475).
In-group collectivism describes the extent to which individuals express loyalty and
cohesiveness with regard to their peer groups or families (Gelfand et al., 2004, p. 463).
Individuals in collectivistic societies value strong bonds within their social group and
aim at distributing resources equally. They focus on collective achievement and
interpersonal relationships (Hofstede, 2001). According to Markus and Kitayama
(1991), within collectivistic societies, the interdependent self prevails, perceiving
a person as an interdependent entity, which cannot be separated from others.
In individualistic societies on the other hand, the independent self dominates. A person Pro-
is a sovereign entity within the society. According to Bond (1996), individuals in environmental
collectivistic societies emphasize benevolence. Individualism, on the other hand, is
related to universalism (Feather, 1994). Both benevolence and universalism are part consumer
of the Schwartz (1992) value survey and can be considered as two different types of behavior
pro-social concern. Presumably, both values are linked to environmentalism, but for
different reasons. The motivational goal of benevolence values is to enhance the 629
welfare of people from the in-group (Schwartz, 1992). Consequently, benevolent
individuals protect the environment for altruistic reasons (e.g. caring for others).
Universally oriented individuals, on the other hand, seek to appreciate and enhance the
welfare of all people and to protect nature. Following this reasoning, the present paper
states that in collectivistic societies, where individuals emphasize benevolence,
an anthropocentric value orientation influences attitudes and subjective norms more
strongly than in individualistic societies. By contrast, in individualistic societies, where
universalism is more important, people presumably seek to protect the environment for
ecocentric reasons. Therefore:

H4. In collectivistic societies, an anthropocentric value orientation exerts a stronger

effect on attitudes (H4a) and on subjective norms (H4b), than in individualistic
societies.

H5. In individualistic societies, an ecocentric value orientation exerts a stronger

effect on attitudes (H5a) and on subjective norms (H5b), than in collectivistic
societies.

Some scholars believe that the cultural dimension individualism/collectivism has been
overemphasized in north American social science research at the expense of other
important dimensions, such as masculinity/femininity (Hofstede, 2006). Although
the literature indicates that masculinity/femininity is linked to pro-environmental
values and behavior (e.g. Zelezny et al., 2000), this dimension has not been extensively
researched in the domain of environmentalism. Thus, the present study analyzes
assertiveness as a second cultural dimension, which partly captures Hofstedes
masculinity/femininity dimension. According to Hofstede (2001, p. 281), the masculinity/
femininity dimension not only captures the importance of gender roles in a society, but
also the meaning of assertiveness in interpersonal relationships (e.g. materialism, winning).
By contrast, the authors of the GLOBE study argue that in Hofstedes original
operationalization, there are no indicators which cover the assertiveness dimension
and thus the instrument lacks face validity (Den Hartog, 2004, p. 412f). Consequently,
House et al. (2004) suggest conceptualizing gender roles (gender egalitarianism) and
assertiveness as distinct dimensions. In the present paper, it is hypothesized that
assertiveness moderates the influence of pro-environmental value orientations on attitudes,
as well as on subjective norms.
Assertiveness is the degree to which individuals are confrontational and aggressive
in their social relationships. In societies which score low on assertiveness individuals
tend to value people and relationships; they prefer cooperation and sympathize with
the weak (Den Hartog, 2004, p. 405). The national cultural value assertiveness is
theoretically anchored in the Big Five model of personality traits and is assumed to
influence agreeableness and extraversion (Goldberg, 1990). Agreeable people are
trustworthy and caring, softhearted and tolerant. Thus, the paper hypothesizes that
IMR caring about nature stems from an anthropocentric value orientation in low-
29,6 assertiveness societies. By contrast, high assertiveness influences the Big Five trait of
extraversion. In various studies, extraversion is positively correlated with economic
success and economic security (e.g. Judge et al., 1999). Economic success lowers the risk
of social decline and ensures a high standard of living. According to Maslows (1954)
hierarchy of needs, once subordinate needs (physiological and safety) are fulfilled,
630 high order needs become important (i.e. self-actualization). Presumably, in high
assertiveness societies, the need for self-actualization is responsible for the influence of
an ecocentric value orientation. Thus, it is hypothesized that an ecocentric value
orientation exerts a stronger influence in countries with high levels of assertiveness,
than in countries with low levels of assertiveness. Figure 1 summarizes the hypotheses
in the theoretical framework:

H6. In low-assertiveness societies, an anthropocentric value orientation exerts

a stronger effect on attitudes (H6a) and on subjective norms (H6b) than in
high-assertiveness societies.

H7. In high-assertiveness societies, an ecocentric value orientation exerts a

stronger effect on attitudes (H7a) and on subjective norms (H7b), than in
low-assertiveness societies.

3. Methodology
3.1 Design
In order to test the hypotheses empirically, a cross-sectional survey is conducted in five
nations (USA, Canada, Australia, Germany and Russia). The five countries analyzed
yield a distinct cultural profile. American, Canadian, Australian and German society is
more individualistic than Russian society. Canada and Russia, however, score
significantly lower on the assertiveness dimension than the other countries (House
et al., 2004, p. 742). By selecting five countries which differ on at least two cultural
dimensions, the paper follows the recommendation of van de Vijver and Leung (1997,

Anthropocentric H1a/b
value orientation

Attitudes

Ecocentric H2a/b
value orientation

Behavioral
Subjective norms Behavior
intention
Environmental H3a/b
apathy

Perceived
behavioral control

H4/5 H6/7

In-group
Assertiveness
collectivism

Note: For reasons of clarity correlations among the exogenous

Figure 1.
Theoretical framework variables (anthropocentric, ecocentric value orientation
environmental apathy) are not displayed
p. 28), that the more country groups compared, the more clearly differences can be Pro-
ascribed to an underlying cultural dimension. More specifically, they argue that environmental
researchers should contrast one cultural group containing one country, with another
containing at least two countries. Comparing five nations which differ on two cultural consumer
dimensions fulfills these requirements and enables contrasting the influence of behavior
in-group collectivism and assertiveness to some extent. Specifically, the present design
enables a comparison of the following groups (i.e. low assertiveness and collectivistic, 631
low assertiveness and individualistic, high assertiveness and individualistic).

3.2 Measures
A scale introduced by Soyez et al. (2009) measures the degree of pro-environmental
value orientation and is available in English, Russian and German (Appendix).
The constructs for the theory of planned behavior originate from Ajzen (1991). In the
present paper, a direct measurement approach is applied. Four independent bilingual
(German/English and German/Russian) translators converted the German scales
into Russian and English. In a next step the same persons translated the items
back into German. Discrepancies were discussed within each translator group. In an
iterative process, a second round of translation back-translation with subsequent
discussion followed. Thus, semantic equivalence could be ensured (Brislin, 1970). To
determine whether some subjects respond in a socially desirable way, a shortened
version of Crowne and Marlowes (1960) social desirability scale is applied which
has already been used in the domain of organic food consumption (Adlwarth, 1983).
In order to measure the moderating effect of culture, the paper draws on data from the
cultural framework of the GLOBE study (House et al., 2004).

3.3 Sample
Samples are drawn by using quotas (age and sex) to ensure socio-demographic
comparability. To rule out confounding effects, data were collected in comparable
urban areas. 1,166 consumers completed oral interviews. Of the total sample, 48 were
dropped because the respondents tended to answer in a socially desirable manner
(USA 10, CAN 9, AUS 11, GER 7, RU 11). A further 22 subjects were
excluded, because they did not complete the interview. After data cleansing, 1,096
interviews were used in the following analysis (USA 169, CAN 283, AUS 214,
RU 204, GER 226). The average age (USA: M 40.2, SD 13.6; CAN: M 40.4,
SD 12.5; AUS: M 42.2, SD 13.3; GER: M 42.1, SD 10.8; RU: M 46.2,
SD 11.6) and the share of female participants (USA, 59 percent; CAN, 51 percent;
AUS, 50 percent; GER, 50 percent; RU, 55 percent) were reasonably similar in all five
data sets. w2 tests did not reveal any differences between the country samples.

3.4 Procedure
In order to test the theoretically derived model, the paper follows the procedure
suggested by Garcia and Kandemir (2006). In the first step, the cross-cultural
equivalence of the measurement instrument is tested. Second, the dimensionality,
reliability and validity of the latent constructs are assessed by applying
country-specific confirmatory factor analysis with AMOS 17.0. Third, the
hypotheses are tested by applying single-group structural equation modeling to the
complete model. Fourth, the moderating effect of culture is examined. According to Garcia
and Kandemir (2006), the modeling of a moderator depends on the type of moderation, the
measurement level and the relevant theory. In the literature, a distinction is
IMR drawn between two types of moderators, those of form and of strength. Whereas
29,6 moderators of form are modeled mainly through multiplicative interaction
effects (Sharma et al., 1981), those of strength should be modeled using multi-group
structural equation analysis (Myers et al., 2000). Since culture is measured at the
country level and it is hypothesized that cultural values influence the strength of
relationships, the present paper applies a multi-group analysis and compares the
632 structural paths.
Moreover, the present study proposes a four-step procedure to test the effect of each
cultural dimension independently and to analyze possible interaction effects of the two
cultural dimensions. According to their cultural profile, each nation is characterized
by a combination of the following conditions: high/low assertiveness and high/low
in-group collectivism. The country selection of the present study enables a comparison
of the following three groups: high assertiveness and low in-group collectivism
(USA, Australia and Germany), low assertiveness and low in-group
collectivism (Canada) and low assertiveness and high in-group collectivism (Russia).
In a first step, the main effect of in-group collectivism is tested by comparing Russia
(high in-group collectivism) with the USA, Canada, Australia and Germany (low in-
group collectivism). In a second step, the main effect of assertiveness is tested by
comparing Russia and Canada (low assertiveness) with the USA, Australia and
Germany (high assertiveness). Steps 1 and 2 correspond with hypotheses H4-H7.
In a third and fourth step, the interaction effect of the two cultural dimensions is
analyzed additionally, by comparing groups which differ on one dimension and are
interchangeable on another.

3.5 Cross-cultural equivalence

Each culture is characterized by a unique pattern of values, attitudes and behaviors.
Thus, researchers must address the issue of equivalence, before interpreting cross-
cultural data. Following the procedure suggested by Byrne et al. (1989), the first
equivalence of the pro-environmental value orientation is assessed. When the global fit
indices of the baseline model are examined, the three-factor model is supported for all
five country samples (Table I). Thus, configural invariance can be assumed. In the
following analysis, models with increasing constraints are estimated to assess the
equivalence of measurement weights, structural variances and covariances, and
measurement residuals. Although the analysis proves configural invariance,
neither full metric invariance, nor a full invariance of variances/covariances and
measurement residuals could be established. Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998)
argue that the assumption of full invariance does not typically hold in practice
and suggest examining partial invariance. The partial analysis reveals that 33.3
percent of the parameters were invariant across the five samples. Moreover, an in-depth
pair-wise country comparison reveals that there is a large share of invariant
parameters in the data set ranging from 47.6 to 80.0 percent. Thus, the analysis
provides evidence of partial metric invariance and partial invariance of factor
variances and covariances.
Second, equivalence of the theory of planned behavior is tested by repeating the
procedure proposed by Byrne et al. (1989). Besides configural invariance of the
measurement model, the data supports full metric invariance across the five samples
(w2(20) 26.16, p40.05; Table I). Moreover, the analysis proves partial invariance of
factor variances and covariances. These results of Steps 1 and 2 indicate that the
subsequent cross-country comparisons are viable.
 Global fit Incremental fit
Pro-
Model Constraints w2
df 2
w /df RMSEA NNFI CFI w2diff dfdiff environmental
consumer
Pro-environmental value orientation
1 None (baseline model) 235.46*** 120 1.96 0.03 0.95 0.96 behavior
2 Measurement weights 311.69*** 144 2.16 0.03 0.93 0.95 76.16*** 24
3 Structural covariances/ 402.46**** 168 2.40 0.04 0.92 0.93 633
variances 167.00*** 48
4 Measurement residuals 541.63*** 204 2.70 0.04 0.89 0.89 306.17*** 84
Theory of planned behavior
1 None (baseline model) 313.09*** 135 2.32 0.04 0.97 0.98
2 Measurement weights 339.25*** 155 2.19 0.03 0.97 0.98 26.16 20
3 Structural covariances/ 413.23*** 175 2.36 0.04 0.97 0.97
variances 100.14*** 40
4 Measurement residuals 866.50*** 247 3.51 0.05 0.94 0.93 553.42*** 112
Notes: df, degrees of freedom; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; NNFI, non-normed Table I.
fit index; CFI, comparative fit index; confirmatory factor analysis, maximum likelihood estimation. Measurement invariance
*po0.05; **po0.01; ***po0.001 tests for latent constructs

4. Results
4.1 Structure of pro-environmental value orientation
In the first step, the dimensionality, reliability and validity of the pro-environmental
value orientation is tested, applying a confirmatory factor analysis. Following
Anderson and Gerbing (1988), a separate analysis was performed for each country.
The recommended fit statistics for the maximum likelihood estimation (Hu and
Bentler, 1999) indicate a sound solution for all samples. The ratio of w2 values and
corresponding degrees of freedom is below 2.5 in all samples. The standardized root
mean square residual (SRMR) and the root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA) fall below the threshold of 0.08. Only in the US sample is the RMSEA
slightly above the required cut-off value (RMSEAUSA 0.088). The non-normed fit
index (NNFI) and the comparative fit index (CFI) exceed the desired threshold of 0.90
across all samples.
As Table II indicates, all items load significantly on their respective factors and
exceed factor loadings of 0.50. According to Fornell and Larcker (1981), convergent
validity is achieved. Additionally, composite reliability (CR) is 40.60 in all samples
(Bagozzi and Yi, 1988). The average variance extracted (AVE) meets the required
threshold of 0.50 in all but three cases. Only the ecocentric value orientation in the
German sample (AVE 0.40), the anthropocentric value orientation in the Canadian
(AVE 0.49) and in the Russian sample (AVE 0.49) fall slightly below the threshold
of 0.50 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
The confirmatory factor analysis provides evidence that the structure of the
pro-environmental value orientation is stable in all five samples. However, the German
and the Russian model fit the data slightly better. All latent variables yield moderate
correlations. Only in the Russian sample do the value orientations correlate at a high
level. To test discriminant validity, a w2-difference test was performed (Byrne et al.,
1989). The test reveals that in each group, the three pro-environmental value
orientations discriminate one from the other. In addition, discriminant validity was
established following Fornell and Larcker (1981). The AVE for each value orientation
IMR Russian
29,6 USA Canada Australia Germany Federation

Ecocentric value orientation

Destruction 0.96 0.78 0.75 0.63 0.83
Value 0.71 0.77 0.79 0.74 0.63
634 Preservation 0.46 0.68 0.70 0.51 0.69
Anthropocentric value orientation
Well-being 0.66 0.64 0.58 0.67 0.78
Standard of living 0.81 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.76
Quality of life 0.72 0.65 0.87 0.70 0.54
Environmental apathy
Exaggeration 0.81 0.58 0.74 0.78 0.74
Disbelief 0.91 0.83 0.84 0.81 0.77
Overestimation 0.72 0.81 0.67 0.63 0.71
Correlations
Ecocentric anthropocentric 0.29** 0.30*** 0.32** 0.34** 0.75***
Ecocentric apathy 0.57*** 0.59*** 0.45*** 0.38*** 0.67***
Anthropocentric apathy 0.00 0.03 0.09 0.20* 0.52***
AVE CR AVE CR AVE CR AVE CR AVE CR
Ecocentric 0.54 0.77 0.56 0.79 0.56 0.79 0.40 0.67 0.52 0.76
Anthropocentric 0.53 0.77 0.49 0.74 0.57 0.80 0.52 0.77 0.49 0.74
Environmental 0.66 0.85 0.56 0.79 0.56 0.79 0.56 0.79 0.55 0.78
Table II.
Measurement model pro- Notes: Country-specific analysis, maximum likelihood estimation, all factor loadings are significant
environmental value ( po0.05). CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted. *po0.05; **po0.01;
orientation ***po0.001

exceeds the squared correlation of that factor with all other factors in the total sample.
To sum up, all analyses show that the postulated three factorial structure of pro-
environmental value orientation is adequate.
Before testing the complete model, a confirmatory factor analysis is applied to test
the measurement model of the theory of planned behavior. The global fit indices
indicate a good model fit for all five samples. The ratio of w2 values and corresponding
degree of freedom is below 2.5 in all samples, except for Australia (2.6) and Canada
(3.0). Both SRMR and RMSEA fall below the threshold of 0.08 in all country samples,
except the USA (RMSEAUSA 0.09). CFI and NFI exceed 0.95 in all samples. Moreover,
all factor loadings correlate highly with the corresponding construct (ranging from
0.72 to 0.99). CR ranges from 0.74 to 0.95 across the five samples and the AVE ranges
from 0.59 to 0.87. AVE exceeds the squared correlations among all constructs. The
Fornell-Larcker test thus proves discriminant validity for all constructs of the theory of
planned behavior in each country sample.

4.2 Testing the influence of pro-environmental value orientations

In a next step, the total model is tested for each country. The various global fit
measures indicate an excellent fit of the complete model. The ratio of w2 values and
degrees of freedom is below 2.5 in all samples. Both SRMR and RMSEA fall below the
threshold of 0.08. CFI and NFI exceed the threshold of 0.90. Table III summarizes the
structural relationship of the model for each country sample. Despite some country-
specific deviations, the results of this study confirm the value of the theory of planned
 Russian
Pro-
USA Canada Australia Germany Federation environmental
consumer
Influence of value orientations
Anthropocentric-attitudes (H1a) 0.06e 0.01e 0.02e 0.06e 0.41**abcd behavior
Anthropocentric-subjective norms 0.06e 0.10de 0.08e 0.18be 0.46***abcd
(H1b) 635
Ecocentric-attitudes (H2a) 0.06d 0.06d 0.03d 0.32***abc 0.18
Ecocentric-subjective norms (H2b) 0.26**e 0.28**e 0.27*e 0.39***e 0.21abcd
Apathy-attitudes (H3a) 0.12 0.04 0.14 0.31***e 0.01d
Apathy-subjective norms (H3b) 0.20*d 0.14 0.00e 0.10ae 0.30**cd
Theory of planned behavior
Intention-behavior 0.91*** 0.57*** 0.49*** 0.83*** 0.67***
Attitudes-intention 0.56*** 0.57*** 0.28*** 0.68*** 0.41***
Subjective norms-intention 0.21* 0.20** 0.38*** 0.08c 0.12
Behavioral control-intention 0.26*** 0.23*** 0.27*** 0.25*** 0.43***
Behavioral control-behavior 0.16* 0.11ad 0.11***0.04 0.15*
R2 intention (%) 80.2 73.1 58.0 72.1 53.6
R2 behavior (%) 67.6 41.1 30.7 66.1 58.6

Notes: Structural equation modeling, country-specific analysis, maximum likelihood estimation.

a
Significantly different from the American sample; bsignificantly different from the Canadian Table III.
sample; csignificantly different from the Australian sample; dsignificantly different from the Path coefficients of the
German sample; esignificantly different from the Russian sample. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po0.001 structural model

behavior as a conceptual framework for predicting organic food consumption cross-

culturally. More interestingly, the influence of pro-environmental value orientations on
attitudes and subjective norms differ substantially across the nations analyzed. An
anthropocentric value orientation is a significant antecedent of pro-environmental
attitudes (g 0.41) and subjective norms (g 0.46) in the Russian sample, although no
influence is observed in the German and the three Anglo samples. Accordingly, H1a
and H1b are supported in the Russian sample only. The analysis of the ecocentric value
orientation yields a different picture. The ecocentric value orientation significantly
influences attitudes toward organic food in the German sample (g 0.32). This
relationship is not significant in either the Russian or the three Anglo samples. Thus,
H2a is supported in the German sample. In all but the Russian sample, ecocentric value
orientations influence subjective norms positively. Accordingly, H2b is supported
in the German and the three Anglos samples. In contrast to the hypotheses,
environmental apathy or skepticism has a negative influence on attitudes only in the
German sample (H3a). In the Russian and the American sample, apathy only
influences subjective norms negatively (H3b). Thus, individuals who doubt the need to
care for the environment attach greater importance to the opinion of others in the
Russian and the US-American samples. Thus, H3 is partly supported.

4.3 Testing the moderating effect of national cultural values

Following the step-wise procedure introduced before, the main effect of in-group
collectivism is tested first by comparing the Russian sample, which is characterized by
high in-group collectivism, with the individualistic samples for the USA, Canada,
Australia and Germany. Table IV (Steps 1-4) displays the results. In addition, pair-wise
country comparisons aim to identify differences at the country level (Table III).
IMR Dw2 (df) p Groups to be compared
29,6
Step 1 (testing the y) Russia vs Canada, USA,
Australia, Germany
High in-group Low in-group
Main effect of individualism collectivism collectivism
Anthropocentric-attitudes (1)**a
636 Anthropocentric-subjective norms
8.45 0.41*** 0.08
10.42 (1)**a 0.46*** 0.02
Ecocentric-attitudes 0.28 (1) 0.08 0.18
Ecocentric-subjective norms 7.45 (1)**a 0.21 0.29***
Step 2 (testing the y) Russia, Canada vs USA, Australia,
Germany
Low High
Main effect of assertiveness assertiveness assertiveness
Anthropocentric-attitudes 4.75 (1)*b 0.12* 0.02
Anthropocentric-subjective norms 5.13 (1)*b 0.17** 0.01
Ecocentric-attitudes 0.69 (1) 0.18** 0.10
Ecocentric-subjective norms 1.40 (1) 0.17* 0.30***
Step 3 (testing the y) Canada vs USA, Australia,
Germany
Low in-group Low in-group
collectivism collectivism
Effect of assertiveness under the Low High
condition of high individualism assertiveness assertiveness
Anthropocentric-attitudes 0.03 (1) 0.01 0.02
Anthropocentric-subjective norms 1.34 (1) 0.10 0.01
Ecocentric-attitudes 0.25 (1) 0.06 0.10
Ecocentric-subjective norms 0.07 (1) 0.28** 0.30***
Step 4 (testing the y) Canada vs Russia
Low Low
assertiveness assertiveness
Effect of in-group collectivism under the Low in-group High in-group
condition of low assertiveness collectivism collectivism
Anthropocentric-attitudes 7.02 (1)**c 0.01 0.41***
Anthropocentric-subjective norms 6.67 (1)**c 0.10 0.46***
Ecocentric-attitudes 0.41 (1) 0.06 0.08
Ecocentric-subjective norms 6.11 (1)**c 0.28** 0.21
Notes: Multi-group analysis, maximum likelihood estimation. aRussia and a group consisting of
Table IV. Canada, USA, Australia and Germany differ significantly; ba group consisting of Russia and Canada
Moderating effect of differs significantly from a group consisting of the USA, Australia and Germany; cCanada differs
culture significantly from Russia. *po0.05; **po0.01; ***po0.001

An anthropocentric value orientation influences attitudes positively in the collectivistic

Russian sample, whereas no effect is observed in the individualistic group comprising
four country samples (Step 1, Table IV). A w2-difference test reveals that this difference
is significant (w2(1) 8.45, po0.01). A series of pair-wise comparisons reveal that there
is no statistical difference among the four individualistic samples, but that all differ
significantly from the collectivistic Russian sample. Accordingly, H4a is supported.
In a similar vein, anthropocentric value orientations antecede subjective norms in the
collectivistic Russian sample, which differs significantly from the individualistic
samples (w2(1) 10.42, po0.01). Thus, H4b is supported. Neither in the collectivistic
Russian sample nor in the individualistic sample, does an ecocentric value orientation
influence pro-environmental attitudes. A pair-wise analysis, however, reveals that Pro-
in the German sample, an ecocentric value orientation leads to pro-environmental environmental
attitudes. German consumers differ significantly from their American (w2(1) 7.09,
po0.01), Canadian (w2(1) 6.35, po0.05) and Australian counterparts (w2(1) 8.99, consumer
po0.001), but not from their Russian ones (w2(1) 1.94, p 0.16). Accordingly, H5a behavior
cannot be supported. Furthermore, an ecocentric value orientation influences
subjective norms positively in the individualistic group, but not in the collectivistic 637
country. A series of pair-wise comparisons reveals that there is no statistical difference
among the four individualistic samples, but that they all differ significantly from the
collectivistic Russian sample. Thus, H5b is supported.
In a second step, the main effect of assertiveness is assessed by comparing
Russia and Canada (low assertiveness) with the USA, Australia and Germany
(high assertiveness). In order to test H6 and H7, low-assertiveness countries are
contrasted with high assertiveness ones (Step 2, Table IV). Table IV shows that in low
assertiveness countries, an anthropocentric value orientation influences attitudes and
subjective norms positively, whereas in high-assertiveness countries, no significant
influence is observed. The pair-wise analysis, however, reveals some differences
between the two low assertiveness countries, Russia and Canada. Despite a low degree
of assertiveness, Canadian respondents do not have a positive attitude toward organic
food for anthropocentric reasons. Accordingly, H6a is only supported in the Russian
sample. In a similar vein, an influence of an anthropocentric value orientation on
subjective norms could only be found in the Russian sample. Thus, H6b is only partly
supported. No significant difference could be found with regard to the influence of
ecocentric value orientation on attitudes and subjective norms between low and
high assertiveness groups. Accordingly, H7a and H7b are not supported. The
pair-wise analysis shows that only in the high-assertiveness country of Germany, does
the ecocentric value orientation significantly influence attitudes. An ecocentric value
orientation influences subjective norms positively in the Canadian sample, but no
influence is evident in the Russian one.
Below, possible interactions between the two cultural dimensions are assessed in
Steps 3 and 4 (Table IV). Given the low in-group collectivism condition of the USA,
Canadian, Australian and German samples, a test is conducted to determine whether
countries with a high assertiveness profile (USA, Australia and Germany) differ from the
low assertiveness Canadian sample. The analysis reveals that the Canadian sample does
not differ either with respect to the impact of anthropocentric value orientation on
attitudes and subjective norms nor on the influence of ecocentric value orientation
on attitudes and subjective norms from the USA, Australian and German sample. Given
a low assertiveness condition of Canada and Russia, Step 4 enables testing whether there
is an effect of the in-group collectivism dimension on the influence of pro-environmental
value orientations on attitudes and subjective norms. The multi-group analysis shows
that Russia and Canada differ with regard to anthropocentric value orientation on
attitudes (w2(1) 7.02, po0.01) and subjective norms ( w2(1) 6.67, po0.01) and with
regard to the influence of ecocentric value orientations on subjective norms (w2(1) 6.11,
po0.01). Thus, the tests for investigating the presence or absence of an interaction
between the cultural dimensions considered were inconclusive.

5. Discussion
The present study shows that pro-environmental value orientations influence attitudes
toward organic food and subjective norms to differing extents across the analyzed
IMR nations. As hypothesized, the anthropocentric value orientation is a crucial driver
29,6 of pro-environmental attitudes and subjective norms in Russian society, which is
characterized by high in-group collectivism and low assertiveness. In the
Russian sample, people tend to protect the environment for altruistic reasons.
Russian consumers develop pro-environmental value attitudes and subjective norms,
because of their concern for others. The analyzed individualistic nations form
638 pro-environmental attitudes and subjective norms for ecocentric reasons, irrespective
of whether they display high (USA, Germany and Australia) or low assertiveness
(Canada) at a national level. Despite the similarities, there are some interesting
differences among the individualistic samples. The pro-environmental attitudes and
subjective norms of German respondents originate from ecocentric value orientations
or in other words, a concern about nature itself. A similar positive influence of the
ecocentric value orientation on attitudes and norms was expected in the three
individualistic Anglo samples. However, the ecocentric value orientation is only linked
to subjective norms in the Anglo samples. This result emphasizes the importance
of social norms for Anglo consumers in the context of organic food. Thus,
environmentalism is an expression of being what society wants them to be or in other
words, there is a strong social pressure to act green.
While the data supports the relevance of the national value in-group collectivism,
the results with regard to assertiveness are not as clear. Given a condition of low
in-group collectivism, assertiveness turns out to have no moderating effect on the
influence of pro-environmental value orientations on attitudes and subjective norms in
either Canada or the USA, Australia and Germany. In turn, keeping assertiveness
constant, the individualistic Canadian sample differs significantly from the
collectivistic Russian sample. While an anthropocentric value orientation influences
attitudes and subjective norms in the Russian sample, subjective norms in the
Canadian one stem from ecocentric value orientations. Thus, the present study
provides evidence of the moderating effect of in-group collectivism, but not decisively
on the moderating effect of assertiveness.
Depicting the cultures analyzed in the value map of the world value survey
(Inglehart and Welzel, 2010), reveals another interesting aspect. According to the
value map, Australia, the USA and Canada belong to the English-speaking cluster,
characterized by their common language. The protestant cluster, with Germany as one
representative, is very closely located. By contrast, Russia is part of the orthodox
ex-communist cluster. Whereas both the English speaking and the protestant cluster
are characterized by self-expression values, the orthodox cluster is associated with
survival values. The fact that one might have to protect nature, in order to secure
natural resources, so as to survive or maintain a certain standard of living,
helps understand the reasons for the anthropocentric value orientation of Russian
consumers. Conversely, the ecocentric value orientation of the German and the three
English-speaking samples can be interpreted as a form of self-expression. Wanting,
rather than having to protect nature, is the key difference. Whereas Germany takes
a middle position on the survival-self-expression dimension, the English-speaking
samples are located close to the self-expression values. Considering the importance of
social norms in the Anglo samples and the dominance of self-expression values,
pro-environmental behavior is a means of expressing a green self, accepted by the
relevant social group in the Anglo samples.
The present study yields another interesting finding. Pro-environmental value
orientations display the same structure in the five country samples examined.
However, the relationships between the value orientations differ. For instance, while Pro-
only moderate correlations are found in the American, Canadian, German and environmental
the Australian samples, the Russian sample yields higher correlations between the
three-value orientations. This difference is most likely a function of the fact that consumer
environmental concerns have become a topic of heightened public interest in the highly behavior
industrialized countries considered in this research (USA, Canada, Australia and
Germany), during the last four decades. Conversely, in Russia, a society in the middle of 639
an economic transformation, debate on protecting the environment has developed
only recently. Presumably, Russian respondents do not yet distinguish clearly between
different kinds of pro-environmental value orientation. In his post-materialism
hypothesis, Inglehart (1977) predicts a shift from materialistic to post-materialistic
values (e.g. increasing pro-environmental value orientation). Thus, with increasing
economic prosperity, environmental protection becomes more important and
consequently, individuals might develop a more detailed knowledge structure and
start to differentiate between the various reasons for protecting the environment. Thus,
the correlations between the value orientations might become weaker over time in
Russian society and at the same time, the influence of ecocentric value orientations
might be on the rise. Furthermore, one could argue that the very different, former
political system of Russia is responsible for the importance of the anthropocentric
value orientations in the Russian sample. However, the German data was surveyed in
East Germany, a region with a similar historical background to that of the former
Soviet Union. Despite these historic similarities, the cultural profile of East Germany
and Russia, and the impact of the cultural values, differ quite clearly. This indicates
that it is not the common former political system, but inherent societal cultural values
that drive consumer behavior.
To sum up, the results of the five-nation study indicate that individuals establish
pro-environmental attitudes and subjective norms, because of different underlying pro-
environmental value orientations. Furthermore, the research shows that the influence
of pro-environmental value orientations differs according to national cultural values.
The present study sheds light on the question of which national cultural values
influence the relationship between pro-environmental value orientations, attitudes and
subjective norms at an individual level. While the study indicates an influence of
in-group collectivism, assertiveness is evidently not equally important.

6. Further research and limitations

Although the study yields insights into the interplay of national values and individual
pro-environmental value orientations, some limitations have to be taken into account.
As conceptual limitations, it should be emphasized that national culture has been
operationalized by drawing on secondary data from the GLOBE study. This has the
benefit that common method bias is avoided. However, only two cultural dimensions
out of nine were chosen. Other studies might investigate how other cultural values at
national and individual levels relate to individual pro-environmental value orientations
(e.g. Schwartz values). Only multi-level studies are able to answer the question of how
cultural values at aggregated national levels and individual levels interact and how
they influence pro-environmental value orientations and thereby behavior. Hierarchical
linear modeling is a promising method for multi-level studies, but requires
larger sample sizes at the highest level. Further research should also consider the
environmental apathy dimension in greater detail. Not caring about the environment or
general skepticism can be interpreted as low involvement or non-involvement in the
IMR environmental domain. Gregory and Leo (2003), for example, provide evidence that
29,6 personal involvement develops when individuals become aware of the consequences
of their behavior and thus are more likely to act in an environmentally friendly
manner.
Some methodological limitations are also evident. The Russian Federation is the
only collectivistic country in the investigation. At the same time, Russia is a nation
640 undergoing a political and economic transformation process. Further research should
establish a comprehensive research design including more than one collectivistic
society and additionally control for the socio-economic status. Thus, the influence
of anthropocentric value orientations should be analyzed in other developed
collectivistic societies (e.g. Japan) to rule out the influence of economic status on
environmentalism. Moreover, research on environmentalism should focus explicitly
on emerging markets (e.g. China, India, South Africa) to gain insight into the
consumer behavior of rapidly changing economies, which exert an enormous
environmental impact. Since the analysis of the assertiveness dimension reveals
contradictory results, further research should compare other countries which differ
on this dimension. Moreover, the data was obtained by recruiting respondents
from urban areas only. Presumably, the reasons for organic food consumption behavior
vary by region within countries as well. Urban consumers might buy organic food
because they follow an ecocentric trend or want to perform a certain lifestyle. Rural
consumers on the other hand might consume organically grown food because they
want to support local farmers and are thus anthropocentrically motivated. Further
studies should analyze consumers from rural areas to ensure the generalizability of the
results. As pointed out above, values are relatively stable over time. However, their
influence on attitudes and norms could indeed change over time. Thus, it would be
useful to conduct longitudinal studies investigating the moderating influence of
cultural values on the impact of specific pro-environmental values on attitudes and
subjective norms.
Another limitation of the present study is the specificity of the theory of planned
behavior. Although the trend toward organic food is linked to a broader concern for the
environment, there are certainly other reasons for buying organic food (e.g. concern for
health, animal welfare or supporting local industry). Several studies, however, show
that protecting the environment is among the most important reasons to buy organic
food (e.g. Magnusson et al., 2001). Further studies, though, should apply the value-
based theory of planned behavior to other types of green behavior (e.g. preference for
products manufactured according to eco-standards). The analyzed behavior or product
category might also influence the predictive power of value orientations. Presumably,
the salience of value orientations depends on the specific type of behavior. The
intention to buy organic food, for example, might be triggered primarily by ecocentric
value orientations, while the intention to buy fair trade products is presumably caused
by an anthropocentric value orientation.
The present study provides evidence that additional cultural values might help us
to understand when certain value orientations become salient. Further research should
explore whether the value-based theory of planned behavior applies to different kinds
of behaviors in different cultures, so as to simultaneously control for the effect of
culture and the type of belief. Furthermore, by establishing which values are salient in
a particular culture, researchers should focus their attention on the implementation of
green marketing strategies and evaluate whether the relevant pro-environmental value
orientations are being addressed.
7. Implications Pro-
The results of the present study emphasize that marketers should adapt, rather environmental
than standardize, their product and communication policy, so as to address the
different value structure of consumers worldwide. The present study indicates consumer
that manufacturers and sellers of environmentally friendly products should behavior
address consumers in individualistic and collectivistic societies in a different
manner. Communication campaigns (especially advertising), branding strategies, 641
product design or packaging should focus on benefits for the environment itself, so
as to address the dominant ecocentric value orientations in individualistic societies.
By contrast, the positive consequences for others should be stressed in collectivistic
countries. Thus, the positive consequences of pro-environmental behavior for future
generations, or the welfare of society in general, should be emphasized.
By their very nature, values are relatively stable. Yet, it is possible to make a certain
pro-environmental value orientation more salient for a particular person, so that he is
encouraged to behave in a certain way (i.e. purchase organic food, donate money, etc.).
Therefore, abstract values become more concrete through emphasizing the
consequences of a specific behavior. Acting on ecocentric or anthropocentric value
orientations is more likely when consumers receive information about why they should
engage in specific actions. Thus, information campaigns initiated by political actors,
non-governmental organizations or companies are necessary to increase awareness of
environmental problems, improve public knowledge of the environmental impacts of a
certain behavior and enable people to visualize the advantages and disadvantages of
behavioral alternatives.
Moreover, the study reveals the importance of social norms in the Anglo samples.
Both manufacturers and sellers need to address the role of social groups, by providing
references or using testimonials to emphasize that pro-environmental behavior is
socially accepted. By stressing the anthropocentric value orientation in Russian
society, a consumer-induced demand pull might accelerate the distribution of
environmentally friendly products, which could overcome situational barriers such as
low availability or higher prices.

References
Adlwarth, W. (1983), Formen und Bestimmungsgrunde prestigegeleiteten Konsumentenverhaltens,
Florentz, Munchen.
Ajzen, I. (1991), The theory of planned behaviour, Organisational Behaviour and Human
Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), Structural equation modeling in practice: a review
and recommended two-step approach, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-23.
Bagozzi, R.P. and Yi, Y. (1988), On the evaluation of structural equation models, Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 74-94.
Bamberg, S. and Moser, G. (2007), Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new
meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour, Journal of
Environmental Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 14-25.
Bell, D. (1973), The Coming of Postindustrial Society, Basic Books, New York, NY.
Bond, M.H. (1996), Chinese values, in Michael, H. (Ed.), The Handbook of Chinese Psychology,
Oxford University Press, Hong Kong, pp. 208-22.
Brislin, R.W. (1970), Back-translation for cross-cultural research, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-216.
IMR Byrne, B.M., Shavelson, R.J. and Muthen, B. (1989), Testing for the equivalence of factor
covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance,
29,6 Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 105 No. 3, pp. 456-66.
Chelminski, P. and Coulter, R.A. (2007), The effects of cultural individualism and self-confidence
on propensity to voice: from theory to measurement practice, Journal of International
Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 94-118.
642 Crowne, D.P. and Marlowe, D. (1960), A new scale of social desirability independent of
psychopathology, Journal of Consulting Psychology, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 349-54.
de Groot, J.I.M. and Steg, L. (2007), Value orientations and environmental beliefs in five
countries: validity of an instrument to measure egoistic, altruistic and biospheric value
orientation, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 318-32.
Deng, J., Walker, G.J. and Swinnerton, G. (2006), A comparison of environmental values and
attitudes between Chinese in Canada and Anglo-Canadians, Environment and Behavior,
Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 22-47.
Den Hartog, D.N. (2004), Assertiveness, in House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W.
and Gupta, V. (Eds), Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The Globe Study of 62
Societies, SAGE Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 395-436.
Dietz, T., Gardner, G.T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P.C. and Vandenbergh, M.P. (2009), Household actions
can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions, Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 106 No. 44, pp. 8452-56.
Dunlap, R.E. and van Liere, K.D. (1978), The new ecological paradigm: a proposed
measuring instrument and preliminary results, Journal of Environmental Education,
Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 10-19.
Dunlap, R.E., Grieneeks, J.K. and Rokeach, M. (1983), Human values and pro-environmental
behavior, in Conn, W.D. (Ed.), Energy and Material Resources: Attitudes, Values, and
Public Policy, Westview, Boulder, CO, pp. 145-68.
Dwyer, S., Mesak, H. and Hsu, M. (2005), An exploratory examination of the influence of national
culture on cross-national product diffusion, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 13
No. 2, pp. 21-7.
Engelen, A. and Brettel, M. (2011), Assessing cross-cultural marketing theory and research,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 64 No. 5, pp. 516-23.
Feather, N.T. (1994), Values and national identification: Australian evidence, Australian Journal
of Psychology, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 35-40.
Festinger, L. (1954), A theory of social comparison processes, Human Relations, Vol. 7 No. 2,
pp. 117-40.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1,
pp. 39-50.
Garcia, R. and Kandemir, D. (2006), An illustration of modelling moderating variables in cross-
national studies, International Marketing Review, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 371-89.
Gelfand, M.J., Bhawuk, D.P.S., Nishii, L.H. and Bechtold, D.J. (2004), Individualism and
collectivism, in House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (Eds),
Culture, Leadership, and Organizations: The Globe Study of 62 Societies, SAGE
Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 437-512.
Gelissen, J. (2007), Explaining popular support for environmental protection: a multilevel
analysis of 50 nations, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 392-415.
Goldberg, L.R. (1990), An alternative description of personality: the big five factor structure,
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 1216-29.
Gregory, G.D and Leo, M.D. (2003), Repeated behavior and environmental psychology: the role Pro-
of personal involvement and habit formation in explaining water consumption, Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 1261-96. environmental
Grunert, S. and Juhl, H.J. (1995), Values, environmental attitudes, and buying of organic foods, consumer
Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-62. behavior
Hatzithomas, L., Zotos, Y. and Boutsouki, C. (2011), Humor and cultural values in print
advertising: a cross-cultural study, International Marketing Review, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 57-80. 643
Hofstede, G. (2001), Cultures Consequences, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA,
London and New Delhi.
Hofstede, G. (2006), What did GLOBE really measure? Researchers minds versus respondents
minds, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 37 No. 6, pp. 882-96.
Homer, P.M. and Kahle, L.R. (1988), A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behavior
hierarchy, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 9, pp. 638-46.
House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (2004), Culture, Leadership, and
Organizations: The Globe Study of 62 Societies, SAGE Publications Ltd, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hu, L. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling: A
Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55.
Inglehart, R. (1977), The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western
Publics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Inglehart, R. and Welzel, C. (2010), Changing mass priorities: the link between modernization
and democracy, Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 551-67.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007), Climate Change 2007: The Physical
Science Basis, Summary for Policy Makers, IPCC, Geneva.
Judge, T.A., Higgins, C.A., Thoresen, C.J. and Barrick, M.R. (1999), The big five personality
traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span, Personnel Psychology,
Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 621-52.
Kemmelmeier, M., Krol, G. and Young, H.K. (2002), Values, economics, and proenvironmental
attitudes in 22 societies, Cross-Cultural Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 256-85.
Leonidou, L. and Leonidou, C.N. (2011), Research into environmental marketing/management: a
bibliographic analysis, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45 Nos 1/2, pp. 68-103.
Leung, C. and Rice, J. (2002), Comparison of Chinese-Australian and Anglo-Australian environmental
attitudes and behavior, Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 251-62.
Magnusson, M.K., Arvola, A., Hursti, U.-K.K., berg, L. and Sjoden, P.-O. (2001), Attitudes
towards organic foods among Swedish consumers, British Food Journal, Vol. 103 No. 3,
pp. 209-26.
Markus, H.R. and Kitayama, S. (1991), Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion,
and motivation, Psychological Review, Vol. 98 No. 2, pp. 224-53.
Maslow, A. (1954), Motivation and Personality, Harper, New York, NY.
Milfont, T.L., Duckitt, J. and Cameron, L.D. (2006), A cross-cultural study of environmental
motive concerns and their implications for proenvironmental behavior, Environment and
Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 745-67.
Myers, M.B., Calantone, R.J., Page, T.J. and Taylor, C.R. (2000), An application of multiple-group
causal models in assessing cross-cultural measurement equivalence, Journal of
International Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 108-21.
Nasif, E.G., Al-Daea, H., Ebrahimi, B. and Thibodeaux, M.S. (1991), Methodological problems in
cross-cultural research: an updated review, Management International Review, Vol. 31
No. 1, pp. 79-91.
IMR Okazaki, S. and Mueller, B. (2007), Cross-cultural advertising research: where we have been and
where we need to go, International Marketing Review, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 499-518.
29,6
Oreg, S. and Katz-Gerro, T. (2006), Predicting proenvironmental behavior cross-nationally:
values, the theory of planned behavior, and value-belief-norm theory, Environment and
Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 462-83.
Rokeach, M. (1973), The Nature of Human Values, Free Press, New York, NY.
644 Schultz, P.W. and Zelezny, L. (1999), Values as predictors of environmental attitudes:
evidence for consistency across 14 countries, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 19
No. 3, pp. 255-65.
Schultz, P.W., Unipan, J.B. and Gamba, R.J. (2000), Acculturation and ecological worldview among
Latino Americans, The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 22-7.
Schwartz, S.H. (1977), Normative influences on altruism, in Berkowitz, L. (Ed.), Advances in
Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, NY, pp. 221-79.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances
and empirical tests in 20 countries, in Zanna, M. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, Academic Press, Orlando, FL, Vol. 25, pp. 1-65.
Schwartz, S.H. (1994), Beyond individualism/collectivism: new cultural dimensions of value, in Kim, U.,
Triandis, H.C., Kagiteibasi, C., Choi, S.C. and Yoon, G. (Eds), Individualism and Collectivism:
Theory, Method and Applications, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 85-119.
Scott, D. (1999), Equal opportunity, unequal results: determinants of household recycling
intensity, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 267-90.
Sharma, S., Durand, R.M. and Gur-Arie, O. (1981), Identification and analysis of moderator
variables, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 291-300.
Soyez, K., Hoffmann, S., Wunschmann, S. and Gelbrich, K. (2009), Pro-environmental value
orientation across cultures: development of a German and Russian scale, Social
Psychology, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 222-33.
Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. and Baumgartner, H. (1998), Assessing measurement invariance in
cross-national consumer research, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 78-90.
Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. and de Jong, M.G. (2010), A global investigation into the constellation
of consumer attitudes toward global and local products, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 74
No. 6, pp. 18-40.
Steg, L. and Vlek, C. (2009), Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and
research agenda, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 309-17.
Steger, M.A.E., Pierce, J.C. and Steel, B.S. (1989), Political culture, postmaterial values, and the
new environmental paradigm: a comparative analysis of Canada and the United States,
Political Behaviour, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 233-54.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T. and Kalof, L. (1993), Value orientations, gender, and environmental
concern, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 322-48.
Thompson, S.C.G. and Barton, M.A. (1994), Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the
environment, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 149-57.
Triandis, H.C. (1988), Collectivism and individualism: a reconceptualization of a basic concept in
cross-cultural psychology, in Verma, G.K. and Bagley, C. (Eds), Cross-Cultural Studies of
Personality, Attitudes, and Cognitions, Macmillan, London, pp. 60-95.
van de Vijver, F. and Leung, K. (1997), Methods and Data Analysis for Cross-Cultural Research,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
van de Vijver, F.J.R. and Leung, K. (2000), Methodological issues in psychological research on
culture, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 33-51.
Yaprak, A. (2008), Culture study in international marketing: a critical review and suggestion for
future research, International Marketing Review, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 215-29.
Zelezny, L.C., Chua, P.P. and Aldrich, C. (2000), Elaborating on gender differences in Pro-
environmentalism, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 443-57.
environmental
Further reading consumer
Steenkamp, J.-B.E.M. and Gielens, K. (2003), Consumer and market drivers of the trial behavior
probability of new consumer packaged goods, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30
No. 3, pp. 368-84. 645
.
Appendix

Construct (English version)

Ecocentric value orientation

Nature is valuable for its own sake
It makes me sad to see natural environments destroyed
One of the most important reasons to conserve is to preserve wild areas
Anthropocentric value orientation
Nature is important because of what it can contribute to the pleasure and welfare of humans
We need to preserve resources to maintain a high quality of life
One of the most important reasons to conserve is to ensure a continued high standard of living
Environmental apathy
Environmental threats such as deforestation and ozone depletion have been exaggerated
I do not think the problem of depletion of natural resources is as bad as many people make it out to be
Too much emphasis has been placed on conservation
Attitudes
I believe that organic food has many good attributes
Organic food appeals to me
I like organic food
Subjective norms
Most of the people who are important to me would support me if I bought organic food next time
Most of the people who are important to me think that I should buy organic food next time
Price tolerance
Even though organic food is more expensive than conventional food, I would buy it next time, because
its higher costs are not affecting my buying decision
Intention
If I buy groceries next time, I will also buy organic food
In the future I am going to buy organic food
I intend to buy organic food next time
Behavior
I consumed organic food, last month
Social desirability
I am always willing to admit it when I make a mistake (16)
I have never deliberately said something that hurts someones feelings (33)
I have never been irked when people expressed ideas very different from my own (26)
I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable (21)
There have been times when I was quite jealous of the good fortune of others (28)
It is sometimes hard for me to go on with my work if I am not encouraged (3)

Notes: A seven-point scale from 1 (totally not agree) to 7 (totally agree) has been used for all
indicators, except the social desirability indicators, which are scaled as true/false. The numbers of the
social desirability scale refer to the paper of Crowne and Marlowe (1960). Following Adlwarth (1983)all
subjects with the answer pattern true/true/true/true/false/false are excluded from the data set because Table AI.
respondents tend to answer in a socially desirable manner Measures
IMR About the author
Katja Soyez holds a PhD and is a Post-doctoral Fellow and Lecturer of Marketing at the
29,6 Technische Universitat Dresden. Her current research interests focus on international consumer
behavior, sustainability, green marketing, consumer innovativeness and adoption of innovation.
Her research appeared in the Journal of Business Research and Social Psychology. Katja Soyez can
be contacted at: katja.soyez@tu-dresden.de
646

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.