Natural Hazards

, Volume 95, Issue 1–2, pp 155–171 | Cite as

Can Chinese residential low-carbon consumption behavior intention be better explained? The role of cultural values

  • Xin Jiang
  • Zhihua DingEmail author
  • Rong Liu
Original Paper


For better implementation of emission reduction policies in China, this paper focuses on households, one of the major sources of carbon emission, and look into the forming mechanism of residential low-carbon consumption behavioral intention in China. Chinese cultural values (man-to-nature orientation values and collectivism values) are added to Theory of Planned Behavior model to better explain the residential low-carbon consumption behavioral intention in China, and to look into the specific role of cultural values in the model. Through the analysis on 948 samples from Jiangsu by using Mplus7.0, we found that: The original Theory of Planned Behavior model was verified, namely attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control had significant positive direct effect on low-carbon consumption behavioral intention. In the extended model, man-to-nature orientation values did not have significant direct effect on low-carbon consumption behavioral intention, but collectivism values had significant direct positive effect; both kinds of values were proved to have positive moderating effect on the influence of low-carbon consumption behavioral attitude on low-carbon consumption behavioral intention, but their regulating effect on the influence of subjective norms or perceived behavioral control on low-carbon consumption behavioral intention was not significant. After considering the effect of cultural values, the model’s explanatory power rose from 76.7 to 79.3% (moderated by collectivism values) and 81.1% (moderated by man-to-nature orientation values), suggesting a better explanation for the Chinese residents’ low-carbon consumption behavioral intention has been made. In the end, discussion for results was made and implications were proposed.


Low-carbon consumption behavioral intention The theory of planned behavior Collectivism values Man-to-nature orientation values 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the respected editors and the anonymous referees for their suggestions in this article. Special thanks are given to financial supports provided by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2018BSCXC13) and the Postgraduate Research and Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (KYCX18_1925).


  1. Ajzen I (1985) From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. Action control. Springer, Berlin, pp 11–39Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 50(2):179–211Google Scholar
  3. Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1980) Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson James C, Gerbing David W (1988) Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull 103(3):411–423Google Scholar
  5. Bentler PM (1992) On the fit of models to covariances and methodology to the bulletin. Psychol Bull 112(3):400Google Scholar
  6. Bentler PM, Dudgeon P (1996) Covariance structure analysis: statistical practice, theory, and directions. Annu Rev Psychol 47(1):563–592Google Scholar
  7. Bureau of Statistics of Jiangsu province (BSJS) (2017) Jiangsu statistical yearbook. Accessed 11 May 2018
  8. Chan RYK (2001) Determinants of Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Psychol Marketing 18(4):389–413Google Scholar
  9. Chekima B, Chekima S, Igau Oswald Aisat et al (2016) Sustainable consumption: the effects of knowledge, cultural values, environmental advertising, and demographics. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 23(2):210–220Google Scholar
  10. Chen MF (2016) Extending the theory of planned behavior model to explain people’s energy savings and carbon reduction behavioral intentions to mitigate climate change in Taiwan—moral obligation matters. J Clean Prod 112(3):1746–1753Google Scholar
  11. Dermody J, Koenig-Lewis N, Zhao AL et al (2017) Appraising the influence of proenvironmental self-identity on sustainable consumption buying and curtailment in emerging markets: evidence from China and Poland. J Bus Res. Google Scholar
  12. Dessai S, Adger WN, Hulme M et al (2004) Defining and experiencing dangerous climate change. Clim Change 64(1):11–25Google Scholar
  13. Ding Z, Wang G, Liu Z et al (2017) Research on differences in the factors influencing the energy-saving behavior of urban and rural residents in China—a case study of Jiangsu Province. Energy Policy 100:252–259Google Scholar
  14. Ding Z, Jiang X, Liu Z et al (2018) Factors affecting low-carbon consumption behavior of urban residents: a comprehensive review. Resour Conserv Recycl 132:3–15Google Scholar
  15. Elzen MD, Fekete H, Höhne N et al (2016) Greenhouse gas emissions from current and enhanced policies of China until 2030: can emissions peak before 2030? Energy Policy 89:224–236Google Scholar
  16. Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  17. Fornara F, Pattitoni P, Mura M et al (2016) Predicting intention to improve household energy efficiency: the role of value-belief-norm theory, normative and informational influence, and specific attitude. J Environ Psychol 45:1–10Google Scholar
  18. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: algebra and statistics. J Mark Res 18(3):382–388Google Scholar
  19. Geng J, Long R, Chen H (2016) A review of the influencing factors of residents’ travel mode choice. J Beijing Inst Technol (Soc Sci Ed) 18(5):1–9Google Scholar
  20. Hair JF Jr, Hult GTM, Ringle C et al (2016) A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  21. Han HS, Hsu LT, Sheu C (2010) Application of the theory of planned behavior to green hotel choice: testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Tour Manag 31(3):325–334Google Scholar
  22. Hao Y, Zhang ZY, Liao H, Wei YM, Wang S (2016) Is CO2 emission a side effect of financial development? An empirical analysis for China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23(20):21041–21057Google Scholar
  23. Hassan LM, Shiu E, Parry S (2016) Addressing the cross-country applicability of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB): a structured review of multi-country TPB studies. J Consum Behav 15(1):72–86Google Scholar
  24. Hofstede G (1980) Culture’s consequences: national differences in thinking and organizing. Sage, Beverly HillsGoogle Scholar
  25. Hu L, Bentler PM (1998) Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol Methods 3(4):424Google Scholar
  26. Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model Multidiscip J 6(1):1–55Google Scholar
  27. Hu H, Geertman S, Hooimeijer P (2016) Personal values that drive the choice for green apartments in Nanjing China: the limited role of environmental values. J Hous Built Environ 31(4):659–675Google Scholar
  28. Kirkman BL, Lowe KB, Gibson CB (2006) A quarter century of culture’s consequences: a review of empirical research incorporating Hofstede’s cultural values framework. J Int Bus Stud 37:285–320Google Scholar
  29. Kroeber AL, Kluckhohn C (1952) Culture: A critical review of concepts and definitions. Papers. Peabody Museum of Archaeology & Ethnology, Harvard UniversityGoogle Scholar
  30. Lao K, Wang Lu (2015) The effect of traditional Chinese culture value on consumer environmental protection behavior: focusing on green product purchase behavior. J Shanghai Univ Finance Econ 17(2):64–75Google Scholar
  31. Lee C, Green RT (1991) Cross-cultural examination of the Fishbein behavioral intentions model. J Int Bus Stud 22(2):289–305Google Scholar
  32. Lubell M, Zahran S, Vedlitz A (2007) Collective action and citizen responses to global warming. Polit Behav 29(3):391–413Google Scholar
  33. Mancha RM, Yoder CY (2015) Cultural antecedents of green behavioral intent: an environmental theory of planned behavior. J Environ Psychol 43:145–154Google Scholar
  34. Marsh HW, Hau KT (1996) Assessing goodness of fit: is parsimony always desirable? J Exp Educ 64(4):364–390Google Scholar
  35. Masud MM, Al-Amin AQ, Junsheng H et al (2016) Climate change issue and theory of planned behaviour: relationship by empirical evidence. J Clean Prod 113:613–623Google Scholar
  36. Nejat P, Jomehzadeh F, Taheri MM et al (2015) A global review of energy consumption, CO2 emissions and policy in the residential sector (with an overview of the top ten CO2 emitting countries). Renew Sustain Energy Rev 43:843–862Google Scholar
  37. Nunnaly JC (1978) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Pachauri R, La M (2015) IPCC, 2014: climate change 2014: synthesis report. contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. J Roman Stud 4(2):85–88Google Scholar
  39. Park SY (1998) A comparison of Korean and American gift-giving behaviors. Psychology & Marketing 15(6):577–593Google Scholar
  40. P-Jun VN (1987) Chinese values and the search for culture-free dimensions of culture. J Cross Cult Psychol 18(2):143–164Google Scholar
  41. Price JC, Walker IA, Boschetti F (2014) Measuring cultural values and beliefs about environment to identify their role in climate change responses. J Environ Psychol 37:8–20Google Scholar
  42. Riemer H, Shavitt S, Koo M et al (2014) Preferences don’t have to be personal: expanding attitude theorizing with a cross-cultural perspective. Psychol Rev 121(4):619–648Google Scholar
  43. Rokeach M (1973) The nature of human values. Free pressGoogle Scholar
  44. Shi H, Fan J, Zhao D (2017) Predicting household PM2.5-reduction behavior in Chinese urban areas: an integrative model of theory of planned behavior and norm activation theory. J Clean Prod 145:64–73Google Scholar
  45. Tanaka JS (1993) Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structure equation models. In: Testing structural equation models. Sage focus editions, pp 10–39Google Scholar
  46. Tarhini A, Hone K, Liu X et al (2016) Examining the moderating effect of individual-level cultural values on users’ acceptance of E-learning in developing countries: a structural equation modeling of an extended technology acceptance model. Interact Learn Environ 25:306–328Google Scholar
  47. Tian X, Chang M, Lin C et al (2014) China’s carbon footprint: a regional perspective on the effect of transitions in consumption and production patterns. Appl Energy 123(1):19–28Google Scholar
  48. Wang J, Wu L (2016) Research on household water conservation behavior’s response mechanism: extended model of theory of planned behavior based on taoism perspective. Collect Essays Finance Econ 207(5):105–112Google Scholar
  49. Wang P, Dai HC, Ren SY, Zhao DQ, Masui T (2015a) Achieving Copenhagen target through carbon emission trading: economic impacts assessment in Guangdong province of China. Energy 79:212–227Google Scholar
  50. Wang Z, Liu W, Yin J (2015b) Driving forces of indirect carbon emissions from household consumption in China: an input-output decomposition analysis. Nat Hazards 75(2):257–272Google Scholar
  51. Wang S, Fan J, Zhao D et al (2016) Predicting consumers’ intention to adopt hybrid electric vehicles: using an extended version of the theory of planned behavior model. Transportation 43(1):123–143Google Scholar
  52. Yau OHM (1988) Chinese cultural values: their dimensions and marketing implications. Eur J Mark 22(5):44–57Google Scholar
  53. Yin J, Qian L, Singhapakdi A (2018) Sharing sustainability: how values and ethics matter in consumers’ adoption of public bicycle-sharing scheme. J Bus Ethics 149(2):313–332Google Scholar
  54. Zeng R, Greenfield PM (2015) Cultural evolution over the last 40 years in China: using the Google Ngram Viewer to study implications of social and political change for cultural values. Int J Psychol 50(1):47–55Google Scholar
  55. Zhang X, Luo L, Skitmore M (2015) Household carbon emission research: an analytical review of measurement, influencing factors and mitigation prospects. J Clean Prod 103:873–883Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of ManagementChina University of Mining and TechnologyXuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations