Received: 19 October 2019 Revised: 20 March 2020 Accepted: 6 April 2020

DOI: 10.1002/bse.2510

RESEARCH ARTICLE

The impacts of perceived moral obligation and sustainability

self-identity on sustainability development: A theory of
planned behavior purchase intention model of sustainability-
labeled coffee and the moderating effect of climate change
skepticism

Mei-Fang Chen

Department of Business Management, Tatung

University, Taipei, Taiwan
Correspondence
Mei-Fang Chen, Department of Business
Management, Tatung University, 40 Chung-
Shan North Road, Section 3, Taipei, Taiwan.
Email: mfchen@ttu.edu.tw; mfchen5422@
gmail.com
Funding information
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, R.
O. C., Grant/Award Number: MOST
105-2410-H-036-003-MY3
Abstract
This study sought to elucidate the antecedents that may influence the effect of peo-
ple's purchase behavior on the Earth's sustainable development. It included people's
perceived moral obligation and sustainability self-identity in the theory of planned
behavior (TPB) model to investigate attitudes among the Taiwanese public's attitude
toward purchasing sustainability-labeled coffee and their purchase intentions. The
moderating effect of climate change skepticism is also considered in this study. A
total of 745 nationwide and self-reported questionnaire valid data was collected in
Taiwan. Hierarchical and moderated regression analysis results indicated that the
components of the TPB model had positive influences on the public's purchase inten-
tion. The public's perceived moral obligation and sustainability self-identity, proposed
for inclusion in the TPB model, had significant and positive influences on purchase
intention. The extended TPB model has higher explanatory power than that of the
original model. The positive relationship between sustainability self-identity and
intention to purchase sustainability-labeled coffee was moderated by climate change
skepticism. This study provides marketers and the players in the supply chain with a
comprehensive framework for understanding the influence of perceived moral obli-
gation and sustainability self-identity on purchase intention toward sustainability-
labeled products. In addition, this study responds to a call for a more thorough inves-
tigation of the effect of people's skepticism about climate change in the context of
ethical and sustainable consumption decision-making processes.

KEYWORDS

climate change skepticism, perceived moral obligation, sustainability development,

sustainability self-identity, sustainability-labeled coffee, theory of planned behavior (TPB)

1 | I N T RO D UC TI O N and social (Seyfang, 2009; WCED, 1987). This triple bottom line con-
cept provides individuals and political, social, and economic players
The broad and comprehensive definition of sustainability generally with decision-making and action guidelines that fundamentally pro-
connotes the following three dimensions: economic, environmental, mote environmental and social responsibility (Collins &

Bus Strat Env. 2020;1–14. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/bse © 2020 ERP Environment and John Wiley & Sons Ltd 1
2 CHEN
Kearins, 2010). Mankind is now facing a variety of serious sustainabil-
ity challenges. From the environmental perspective, global warming,
climate change, extreme weather, and the scarcity of resources are
increasingly serious problems. From the social perspective, social
problems related to inequality are also becoming more prevalent.
Consumers can purchase products that are less harmful to humans
and nature to take responsibility for society and the environment.
Sustainable consumption implies consuming in a manner in which the
opportunities for life and consumption by other people and future
generations are affected as little as possible (Solomon, Marshall, &
Stuart, 2015). In addition, marketers and the players in the supply
chain can make efforts to search for more sustainable supply chain
management practices (Sajjad, Eweje, & Tappin, 2015).
All mitigation practices and efforts that responsible consumers
and marketers engage in are based on the presumption that if people
believe anthropogenic climate change to be real, then they will be
motivated to engage in pro-environmental behaviors that help to miti-
gate it (Hornsey, Harris, Bain, & Fielding, 2016). A growing body of
evidence indicates that the catastrophic effects of long-term global
climate change are caused by increased greenhouse gas emissions
from human activity (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change, 2018); however, it is common for members of the public to
doubt the authenticity or severity of environmental degradation
(Zhou, 2015). A sizable minority of people do not believe that anthro-
pogenic climate change is happening or doubt that it is primarily cau-
sed by human activity. Such a sizable proportion of climate change
skeptics had long been considered an obstacle to the mitigation of
anthropogenic climate change (Pidgeon, 2012; Scruggs & trade, animal welfare, and others with claims of “sustainable
Benegal, 2012).
Studies have identified several psychological barriers that prevent
individuals from engaging in pro-environmental behavior
(Gifford, 2011; Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002; Lorenzoni, Nicholson-
Cole, & Whitmarsh, 2007). Gifford (2011) identified approximately
20 specific impediments and categorized them under the following
seven psychological constructs: limited cognition, ideologies, compari-
sons with others, sunk costs (investments), discredence, perceived
risks, and limited behavior. Although various schemas are sometimes
used to capture different constructs, the common thread is the con-
cept of climate change skepticism (Capstick & Pidgeon, 2014). In this
study, this concept was understood as the belief that climate change
is not occurring or that human activity is not a significant contributor.
A meta-analysis conducted by Hornsey, Fielding, McStay, Reser,
and Bradley (2016) revealed that political orientations tend to out-
perform other often-used variables, such as education and gender, as
determinants of attitudes toward climate change. Political ideology is
the key predictor of skepticism and pro-environmental engagement
(Corner, Markowitz, & Pidgeon, 2014; Hornsey, Harris, et al., 2016).
For example, similar to the current US president, Donald Trump, the
current Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, has long ignored
climate change and adopted pro-coal policies for cheap and accessible
power. Because Australia is currently experiencing one of its worst
ever bushfire seasons, and Morrison is facing serious criticism for his
pro-coal policies, he now acknowledges that climate change is real.
Global food systems nowadays face many serious environmental
challenges. How to overcome these environmental challenges of
scarce water resources, decaying soil health, and climate change so as
to feed and meet the nutritional needs of a growing population in the
coming years is a primary task (Green et al., 2018). Sustainable sourc-
ing practices undoubtedly play an increasing role in addressing the
social and environmental challenges in the agricultural supply chains
(Thorlakson, 2018). De Boer (2003) indicated that labels and certifica-
tion play a role in the pursuit of sustainable production and consump-
tion processes. Labels and certification are conceived as firm's claims
about some characteristics of their products. Sustainability labels have
become more differentiated from quality assurances to sustainable
consumption appeals, which can thus direct consumers' purchase
decision making. Sustainability labels provide consumers with the
opportunity to concern environment and ethics issues when they
make food choices. Meanwhile, sustainability labels help consumers
identify which brands have pro-environmental or prosocial attributes
(Valor, Carrero, & Redondo, 2014). Sustainability labels are a type of
self-evident appeals to sustainability that are directed toward con-
sumers. Grimmer and Woolley (2014) suggested that “sustainable
offerings would benefit from a stronger appeal to the emotionality of
customers to be more effective” (p. 16). Despite such green advertise-
ment or sustainability communication helping to attract consumers,
the communication content should not result in skepticism
(Grimmer & Woolley, 2014).
Many types of sustainable food label exist, such as labels indicat-
ing sustainable agriculture, organic agriculture, carbon footprints, fair
consumption,” and these labels are used to increase the value of prod-
ucts. Consumers primarily associate “sustainability” with environmen-
tal impacts such as the carbon, nitrogen, and water footprints impacts.
Therefore, sustainable labels provide consumers environmental
impacts information to make better sustainable food choices (Leach
et al., 2016). The numerous different labels may complement each
other or increase the competitiveness of product information in con-
sumers' minds (Padel et al., 2010). Meise, Rudolph, Kenning, and Phil-
lips (2014) argued that when consumers have all sustainability-related
attributes information, they will choose more value-differentiated
products with higher price after price/benefit trade-offs. Both the
sensory attributes and the sustainability labels are important to the
acceptance of cocoa and chocolate (de Andrade Silva, Bioto, Efraim, &
de Castilho Queiroz, 2017). Stöckigt, Schiebener, and Brand (2018)
indicate that if suppliers can provide clear sustainability information,
then consumers would make more contribution to sustainable devel-
opment. Moreover, according to Cho, Soster, and Burton (2018), extra
positive sustainability information provided for the product brand at
the retail point of purchase may result in higher product evaluations
and increase brand choice.
Although growing and trading coffee can contribute to economic
activities, it is crucial that the coffee industry also considers its impact
on the environment and society from cultivation to consumption to
ensure sustainability (Chen & Lee, 2015). In response to climate
change, coffee producers have adopted short- and long-term
CHEN
mitigation strategies as well as adaptation strategies to slow global
warming (International Coffee Organization, 2015). The Rainforest
Alliance Certified™ seal is one of the important sustainability labels
for coffee produce, which is to be audited annually by a stringent
standard of the impacts of environment, society, and economics, even
if the coffee farmers had already earned it before. The Carbon Foot-
print Label primarily provides the total carbon dioxide emissions infor-
mation associated with a product over its life, from production,
distribution, and use to disposal (Hornibrook, May, & Fearne, 2015). A
transition to a low-carbon society by sustainable food consumption
can help climate change mitigation (De Boer, De Witt, &
Aiking, 2016). Fair trade is a market mechanism to address social and
environmental problems. Fair trade labeling certification assures that
the farm workers can also benefit from the product at the end of the
coffee commodity supply chain (Marconi, Hooker,
DiMarcello, 2017; Taylor, Murray, & Raynolds, 2005). Fair Trade Inter-
national started from the coffee industry, and the Max Havelaar Seal
was licensed to those roasters and retailers who comply with the insti-
tution's fair trade criteria. Organic farming in the food sector is always
treated as a hopeful policy to improve sustainability (Aschemann-
Witzel & Zielke, 2017). Organic shade-grown coffee is an example of
an effective means of using organic agriculture for agroforestry
(Thrupp, 2000), which plays a role in climate change adaptation and
mitigation.
When consumers perform food choice task, they often do trade-
offs among multiple product attributes, for example, price, quantity,
duration of use, nutrition information, brand, and abovementioned
eco-labels. The “value–action” gap exists because even if consumers
are motivated to participate in sustainable consumption, they usually
have difficulties in making actual sustainable food choices and con-
sumption (e.g., Bray, Johns, & Kilburn, 2011; De Barcellos, Krystallis,
de Melo Saab, Kügler, & Grunert, 2011; De Boer, Boersema, &
Aiking, 2009; Krystallis, de Barcellos, Kügler, Verbeke,
Grunert, 2009; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2006). The theory of planned
behavior (TPB) model (Ajzen, 1991) consists of three focal compo-
nents: attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control.
Numerous studies have applied this theoretical TPB model to explore
consumers' willingness to participate in certain pro-environmental
behaviors (e.g., Bamberg, Ajzen, & Schmidt, 2003; Bamberg &
Schmidt, 2001; Chen, 2016; Lam, 1999; Terry, Hogg, & White, 1999)
and purchase behavior of environmentally sustainable products
(Kumar, Manrai, & Manrai, 2017; Lee, Jin, & Shin, 2018). In addition, a
meta-analysis conducted by Nardi, Jardim, Ladeira, and Santini (2019)
had verified that the application of the TPB model is robust to predict
food choice.
Relevant studies have indicated that the inclusion of perceived
moral obligation can greatly improve the explanatory or predictive
power of behavioral intentions (Bamberg & Moser, 2007; Beck &
Ajzen, 1991), including pro-environmental behaviors
(e.g., Chen, 2016; Lam, 1999; Shaw, Shiu, & Clarke, 2000; Tonglet,
Phillips, & Read, 2004). Moreover, several studies have indicated the
existence of the connection between identity and behavior
(e.g., Biddle, Bank, & Slavings, 1987; Eagly, Chaiken,
3
Jovanovich, 1993; Stets & Biga, 2003). Scholars have suggested that
the TPB model should be modified to incorporate a measure of self-
identity (e.g., Granberg & Holmberg, 1990; Sparks & Guthrie, 1998;
Sparks & Shepherd, 1992), especially in “ethical” study contexts
(e.g., Shaw et al., 2000; Sparks & Shepherd, 1992; Sparks, Shepherd, &
Frewer, 1995). Self-identity is a significant predictor of pro-
environmental behaviors, and in some cases, its predictive power is
even higher than the original components of the TPB model
(Fekadu & Kraft, 2001; Sparks et al., 1995; Sparks & Shepherd, 1992;
Terry et al., 1999).
According to the chain operator Starbucks Taiwan, the value of
Taiwan's annual coffee market is as high as NT$ 70 billion; however,
95% of Taiwan's coffee beans are from overseas. From 2004 to 2015,
this percentage increased by 160%. Moreover, from 2011 to 2015,
& coffee bean imports increased by 61%, equivalent to 2.85 billion cups
of coffee per year. An average of 122 cups of coffee was consumed
per person in 2015, compared with an average of 100 cups in 2013.
This equals a growth rate of more than 20%, indicating that the coffee
market is booming. In view of the impacts derived from coffee pro-
duction to consumption on environment and society and the growing
coffee consumption market in Taiwan, this study focused on the
aforementioned sustainable coffee labels to explore the Taiwanese
public's purchase intentions toward sustainability-labeled coffee
based on the TPB model. This study's main theoretical contribution is
its inclusion of a moderating effect of people's climate change skepti-
cism in the extended TPB model, which includes the public's per-
ceived moral obligation and their sustainability self-identity; this
inclusion increases the theoretical model's explanatory power, espe-
cially regarding the Taiwanese public's purchase intentions toward
sustainability-labeled coffee. Managerial implications and practical
suggestions to the coffee supply industry and retailers were provided
to enable these entities to accurately determine directions for the
& promotion and marketing communications of sustainability-labeled
coffee.
2 | T H EO RE T I CA L M O D E L A N D
HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT
2.1 | TPB model
The focal components of the TPB model are attitude, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioral control (Ajzen, 1991). Attitude is an
overall evaluation of the rational choice of the outcomes of per-
forming certain behaviors and the prediction of possible behavioral
intentions (Ajzen, 1991). Attitude has been proven to be strongly con-
nected to individuals' behavioral intentions and actual behaviors in
numerous contexts (e.g., Shaw et al., 2000; Shaw & Shiu, 2002; Sparks
et al., 1995).
Subjective norms are a function of an individual's personal norm
beliefs and his or her motivation to apply (Ajzen, 1991). Subjective
norms depend on the beliefs that other important people want the
& person to perform a behavior (normative beliefs) and how much social
4 CHEN
pressure this person perceives (motivation to comply). According to
Eagly et al. (1993), subjective norms are related to individuals' motiva-
tion to engage in an act, and these norms combine the views and
expectations of people around them whose opinion they consider
important. In addition, an individual's perceived social pressure also
determines of his or her behavioral intention (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).
Perceived behavioral control is an individual's belief that he or
she perceived the difficulty of performing a certain behavior. This
means that, sometimes, the decision is not under his or her control.
The belief that individuals have the resources and opportunities to
complete or perform actions should be considered, for example, suf-
ficient time and money, proficient skills, and the willingness of
others to cooperate (Ajzen, 1985). Therefore, perceived behavioral
control is included in the theory of reasonable action (TRA) as the
TPB model (Ajzen, 1985) to increase the power in predicting
whether an individual will perform a certain behavior or not. The
TPB model is especially for those complex behaviors in which diffi-
culties are frequently encountered (Ajzen & Madden, 1986; Mad-
den, Ellen, & Ajzen, 1992).
Studies have successfully applied the TPB model to explain con-
sumers' willingness to participate in certain pro-environmental behav-
iors (e.g., Bamberg et al., 2003; Bamberg & Schmidt, 2001;
Chen, 2016; Terry et al., 1999). Consumers' positive attitudes toward
sustainability labels can be transferred to those sustainability-labeled
products (Lotz, Christandl, & Fetchenhauer, 2013). Accordingly, this
study proposed the following research hypotheses:
H1. When an individual's attitude toward a sustainability-labeled cof-
fee is more positive, his or her purchase intention toward
sustainability-labeled coffee is higher.
H2. When an individual's subjective norms are more consistent with
a sustainability-labeled coffee than a nonlabeled coffee, his or
her purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee is
higher.
H3. When an individual's perceived behavioral control is stronger, his
or her purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee
is higher.
2.2 | Perceived moral obligation
Although the TPB model is highly useful for predicting behavior,
numerous researchers have dedicated themselves to improving its
explanatory power. Some scholars have combined the TPB model
with other research models, whereas others have incorporated other
critical factors into the TPB model. Ajzen (1991) and Beck and
Ajzen (1991) argue that perceived moral obligation can increase the
prediction power of the TPB model when examining behaviors related
to ethical issues. Ethical or green consumers often have moral or eco-
logical consciousness and tend to buy green products or other sus-
tainable products that do the least harm to the environment or
society (Harper & Makatouni, 2002; Laroche, Bergeron, & Barbaro-
Forleo, 2001).
Moral obligation is defined as a personal norm (Manstead, 2000).
Based on the personal responsibility and obligations of this norm, an
individual will demonstrate willingness and intention to perform a par-
ticular act. Perceived moral obligation refers to whether an individual
feels an obligation to perform an act in a moral context (Beck &
Ajzen, 1991). Studies have incorporated moral obligations into the
TPB model to predict people's intentions to conserve water
(Lam, 1999), recycle resources (Tonglet et al., 2004), conserve energy,
and reduce carbon (Chen, 2016). Mäkiniemi and Vainio (2013) indi-
cated that moral perception can increase the intention to make
climate-friendly food choices. Shaw et al. (2000) verified that includ-
ing ethical obligations and self-identity in the TPB model could predict
ethical consumers' purchase decision making. Accordingly, this study
proposed the following research hypothesis:
H4. When an individual's perceived moral obligation is stronger, his
or her purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee
is higher.
2.3 | Sustainability self-identity
Role identity can be defined as “a set of characteristics or expecta-
tions that simultaneously is defined by a social position in the commu-
nity and becomes a dimension of an actor's self” (Charng, Piliavin, &
Callero, 1988, p. 304). Pro-environmental identity can thus be concep-
tualized as an individual's lasting belief of his or her interdependent
relationship with the natural world (Clayton, 2012). Conner and
Armitage (1998, p. 1444) further defined self-identity as “[…] the
salient part of an actor's self which relates to a particular behavior. It
reflects the extent to which an actor sees him- or herself as fulfilling
the criteria for any societal role […]”. Therefore, an individual's pro-
environmental behavior is reconcilable with what he or she feels
toward environmentalism (Stets & Biga, 2003). Accordingly, a pro-
environmental self-identity can be described as follows: when a per-
son self-identifies as being pro-environment, then he or she will per-
form more pro-environmental behaviors. Pro-environmental self-
identity can be applied to describe and promote an individual's pro-
environmental behavior (Clayton & Opotow, 2003). This means that
when an individual has a stronger pro-environmental self-identity, he
or she will engage in more pro-environmental behaviors. Pro-
environmental self-identity is associated with moderate water usage,
domestic energy conservation, waste reduction, and eco-shopping
(Whitmarsh & O'Neill, 2010) and was verified to be a crucial predictor
of pro-environmental behaviors.
As mentioned earlier, sustainability broadly covers economic,
environmental, and social dimensions (Seyfang, 2009; WCED, 1987);
it provides decision-making and action guidelines for stakeholders on
how to be more environmentally and socially responsible (Collins &
Kearins, 2010). Accordingly, sustainability self-identity covers both
the environmental and ethical aspects of sustainability (Grunert,
CHEN
Hieke, & Wills, 2014). In addition to environmental protection, sus-
tainability labels in the case of coffee cultivation and production
involve more ethical concerns, such as child labor abuse and local
farmers' welfare. When people buy and consume coffee products,
how important their ethical considerations are regarding fair trade,
human rights, and other ethical issues will determine their purchase
decision making.
Studies have indicated that in some cases, self-identity is more
significant for predicting people's behavioral intentions than the origi-
nal three variables in the TPB model (Fekadu & Kraft, 2001; Sparks
et al., 1995; Sparks & Shepherd, 1992; Terry et al., 1999). According
to Shaw et al. (2000), moral obligations, self-identity, and perceived
behavioral control are more significant in decision-making behavior
than are attitudes and subjective norms. Dowd and Burke (2013) also
verified that relative to its nonextended counterpart, the extended
TPB (which includes moral attitude and ethical self-identity) has signif-
icantly increased predictive power when predicting people's intention
to purchase sustainably sourced food. Ethical consumers engage in
ethical consumption because certain ethical concerns have become a
crucial part of their self-identity (Shaw et al., 2000). Accordingly, this
study proposed the following research hypothesis:
H5. When an individual's sustainability self-identity is stronger, his or
her purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee is
higher.
2.4 | Climate change skepticism
Although many factors affect the climate, scientists have confirmed
that human activity is the main force responsible for most of the
warming observed over the past 50 years (IPCC, 2007). However,
studies have rarely considered the relationship between climate
change skepticism and other perceptual aspects of climate change.
Rahmstorf (2005) proposed a trend–attribution–impact classification
of climate change skepticism and argued that people's skepticism
about the trends, attributions, and impacts of climate change consti-
tutes the core concept of such skepticism because these three facets
of climate change are directly related. Such a classification is realistic
and useful and reflects the evidential claims of the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment
report. The Fourth Assessment Report published by the IPCC (2007)
also focused on perspectives regarding the trends in, causes of, and
impacts of climate change (Pachauri, Reisinger,, & Core Writing
Team, 2007). Consistent with Rahmstorf's (2005) argument, recent
studies have argued that climate change skepticism is a multi-
dimensional concept (Akter, Bennett, & Ward, 2012; Poortinga,
Spence, Whitmarsh, Capstick, & Pidgeon, 2011); this concept has key
dimensions that include trend, attribution, and impact skepticism,
where these dimensions are indicative of disbelief or questioning
regarding the process, causes, or effects of climate change, respec-
tively. A sizable proportion of people who accept trend claims may
still reject attribution claims, followed by another sizable proportion
5
who accept both or either of the trend and attribution claims but are
not convinced about the potential negative impact of climate change
(Akter et al., 2012).
Some people doubt the fact of human-induced climate change
and think that extreme weather and climate change are caused by
natural processes. Furthermore, such people may doubt that some
recent natural disasters, which have brought serious environmental
harm, were caused by anthropogenic climate change. Such uncer-
tainty can be a reason for people not taking pro-environmental
actions (Lorenzoni et al., 2007; Stoll-Kleemann, O'Riordan, &
Jaeger, 2001), because they generally prefer predictability rather
than uncertainty, which is a basic principle of prospect theory
(Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). Believing in anthropogenic climate
change causes people to consider whether to engage in various
pro-environmental behaviors. This belief may not be a sufficient
condition for behavioral change, but it is a necessary one.
According to Hornsey, Fielding, et al. (2016), climate change inter-
ventions can be especially successful at changing pro-environmental
motivation among attribution skeptics. Individuals who are skeptical
about anthropogenic climate change are less likely to engage in
pro-environmental behaviors. In fact, the spread of skepticism and
uncertainty related to climate change, including nonanthropogenic
climate change, are associated with a reduced willingness to miti-
gate negative environmental outcomes (Kortenkamp &
Moore, 2006). More specific scholarly evidence regarding climate
change skepticism has revealed that continued public skepticism in
the trends, causes, and consequences of climate change exerts a
strong influence on mitigation and adaptation behaviors (Akter
et al., 2012; Engels, Hüther, Schäfer, & Held, 2013). Furthermore,
climate change skeptics are less likely to support mitigation mea-
sures, such as emissions trading programs or investment in renew-
able energy (Akter et al., 2012).
Accordingly, this study further examined whether the relation-
ships between the constructs included in the extended TPB model
and people's intention to purchase sustainability-labeled coffee dif-
fer with climate change skepticism. Take the construct of an indi-
vidual's self-identity for example: a person who self-identifies as
someone who recycles will engage more in recycling behavior
(Mannetti, Pierro, & Livi, 2004); a person with a “green consump-
tion” self-identity will purchase more organic foods (Sparks &
Shepherd, 1992); and a person with an energy-saving self-identity
will conserve more energy (Van der Werff, Steg, & Keizer, 2011).
Therefore, in this study, a positive relationship should exist
between an individual's sustainability self-identity and his or her
purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee; however, if
an individual is skeptical about the trends, attribution, and impacts
of climate change, then such skepticism may have a significant
effect on such purchase intention. This means that the positive
relationship between an individual's sustainability self-identity and
his or her purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee
can become less positive or even negative depending on their
degree of climate change skepticism. Accordingly, this study pro-
posed the following research hypothesis:
6 CHEN

H6. When an individual's skepticism about climate change is stron- group of the sample (42.15%) lived in northern Taiwan. A chi-squared
ger, the positive relationships between the studied constructs test was conducted to check whether the sample was representative
and his or her purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled of the population (Table 1). Compared with Taiwan census data, the
coffee are weakened. residential area and age of respondents were statistically representa-
tive. Although the sample was not strictly statistically representative,
this study recruited respondents from various sociodemographic
3 | METHOD backgrounds. Thus, the research results can provide some insights
into this field of research.
3.1 | Data and sample

To test the proposed research framework and hypotheses, a nation-
wide and self-reported questionnaire was distributed in Taiwan in July
2018. People aged older than 20 years were the survey target. To
ensure that the survey sample was representative of the Taiwanese
population, stratified sampling was conducted according to the popu-
lation quota for each Taiwanese administrative division (Taiwan com-
prises four regions and 22 counties or cities) as well as demographic
variables (Ministry of Internal Affairs, 2017). The village leaders in
each counties or cities were contacted by phone according to the
population quota to request their willingness to distribute question-
naires. By mail, each leader received approximately 30 copies of the
questionnaire as well as written instructions with paid return enve-
lopes to help collect survey data based on the sociodemographic char-
acteristics of the area. This study distributed 2,000 questionnaires
and collected 745 valid questionnaires, for a response rate of 37.25%.
As shown in Table 1, the sample was 56.91% female and 76.64% of
the respondents were married. More than half of the respondents
(52.61%) were aged between 20 and 49 years. The majority (77.45%)
had completed senior high school education or above. The largest
3.2 | Measurement scales
The questionnaire was prefaced with a brief description of what “sus-
tainable product” means, as used in this study. Specifically, a sustain-
able product was defined as “a product that reduces the
environmental burden, considers all aspects of society, and better
meets customer needs relative to competing products.” In short, sus-
tainable products provide environmental, social, and economic bene-
fits while protecting people's health and the environment, including
the entire product life cycle from the acquisition of raw materials to
final disposal. “Sustainability-labeled product” means a product that
meets the above definition of a sustainable product and has obtained
one or more related certification labels. To measure the studied con-
structs, all multi-item measurement scales adopted in this study were
modified from validated scales developed in relevant studies. The
original English questionnaire items were translated into Chinese, and
some wordings were altered to tailor them to the study context. The
original three factors of the TPB model were measured with three
items, respectively, which were adopted and adapted from Vermeir

TABLE 1 Sample profile of the respondents

Items Classification No. Sample (%) Population (%) χ 2 tests p value

Residential area Northern Taiwan 314 42.15 45.57 5.591 0.1333
Central Taiwan 210 28.19 24.70
Southern Taiwan 203 27.25 27.35
Eastern Taiwan 18 2.42 2.38
Marital status Single 174 23.36 34.46 40.674 <0.0001
Married 571 76.64 65.54
Gender Male 321 43.09 49.16 10.993 0.0009
Female 424 56.91 50.84
Age 20–29 105 14.08 16.84 4.959 0.2916
30–39 146 19.60 19.54
40–49 141 18.93 19.26
50–59 153 20.54 18.99
Over 60 200 26.85 25.37
Education level Primary school 54 7.25 12.82 40.413 <0.0001
Junior high school 114 15.30 12.08
Senior/vocational high school 265 35.57 30.02
University/college 281 37.72 38.14
Graduate school 31 4.16 6.94

Note. χ 2
1, 0.05 = 3.841; χ 23, 0.05 = 7.815; χ 2
4, 0.05 = 9.488.
CHEN 7

and Verbeke (2008). Perceived moral obligation measured people's
perceptions of their moral obligation to reduce the impact of human-
caused climate change and global warming. The perceived moral obli-
gation scale was measured with four items, which were adopted from
Brody, Grover, and Vedlitz (2012) and adapted from Shaw et al. (2000).
The measure of sustainability self-identity was based on the self-
identity scale developed by Shaw et al. (2000) to measure people's
purchase of Fair Trade–labeled products, and consumers' ethical con-
cerns about food consumption were measured with reference to the
scale developed by Grunert et al. (2014). The 14-item measurement
scale reflected the respondents' ethical concerns and self-identity
toward sustainability-labeled products. Based on Rahmstorf's (2005)
trend–attribution–impact classification of climate change skepticism
and the measurement scale developed by Poortinga et al. (2011), four
items were used to measure people's climate change skepticism in this
study. Except for attitude toward purchasing, which was measured
using three bipolar adjectives on a 7-point scale (positive/negative,
wise/unwise, and meaningful/useless), the other investigated con-
structs were measured by a 7-point Likert scale (from strongly disagree
to strongly agree). Finally, consumers' purchase intention toward
sustainability-labeled coffee was measured by asking about their will-
ingness to purchase coffee with four different sustainability labels
(Rainforest Alliance Certified seal, Carbon Footprint Label, Fair Trade
Label, and Organic Certificates). This was also measured on a 7-point
Likert scale ranging from highly unwilling to highly willing. The studied
constructs and measurement items are presented in the Appendix.
4 | D A T A A N A L Y S I S A N D RE S U L T S
Three data analysis steps were performed. First, descriptive statis-
tics and correlations were computed between each independent
factor, dependent factor, and the moderator factor to assess simple
relationships. Second, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was per-
formed to test the reliability and validity of the multi-item latent
factors in the measurement model. Third, hierarchical and moder-
ated regression analysis was performed to examine the proposed
hypotheses.
4.1 | Reliability analysis
The descriptive statistics, correlation matrix, and Cronbach's alpha
coefficient are presented in Table 2. Cronbach's alpha coefficient is
the most commonly used criteria to assess the internal consistency
of indicators related to underlying factors. All Cronbach's alpha
coefficients shown in Table 2 were higher than the 0.70 rec-
ommended threshold of acceptability; therefore, the internal reli-
ability of each construct measurement was demonstrated
(Nunnally, 2010).
4.2 | Confirmatory factor analysis
CFA was performed to ensure the effectiveness of the measurement
model, and the results exhibited a good fit between the data and the
measurement model (chi-square/df = 994.51/399 = 2.49; goodness of
fit index [GFI] = 0.92, adjusted goodness of fit index [AGFI] = 0.90,
comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.98, normed fit index [NFI] = 0.96, non-
normed index [NNI] = 0.97, and root mean square error of approxima-
tion [RMSEA] = 0.04). Convergent validity is to ensure the measured
items belong to the same construct are related. Composite reliability
(CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) can be used as criteria for
assessing convergent validity with lowest acceptable values of 0.70
for CR and 0.50 for AVE (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). As shown in
Table 3, all CR values were higher than 0.90 and all AVE values were
higher than 0.70, demonstrating convergent validity. In addition, all
standardized loadings were higher than 0.70 and significant, above
the recommendation of 0.50 (Hair, Black, Babin, & Anderson, 2010),
thereby providing more evidence of convergent validity. Discriminant
validity is used to ensure that the measurement of one construct scale
is not a reflection of any of the other measurement scales. According
to Fornell and Larcker (1981), if the square roots of each AVE are
higher than the other adjacent pairwise correlation coefficients, then
discriminant validity is achieved. As presented in Table 2, the square
root of the AVE for each variable shown in the parentheses is higher
than the other adjacent pair-wise correlation coefficients, demonstrat-
ing discriminant validity.

TABLE 2 Descriptive statistics and correlation matrix

Constructs Mean SD F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7
Attitude toward purchasing (F1) 5.31 1.05 0.95 (0.93)
Subjective norms (F2) 4.84 1.06 0.48 0.93 (0.90)
Perceived behavioral control (F3) 4.18 1.12 0.28 0.30 0.90 (0.86)
Perceived moral obligations(F4) 5.43 1.04 0.45 0.34 0.34 0.94 (0.89)
Sustainability self-identity(F5) 5.13 1.17 0.36 0.28 0.34 0.56 0.97 (0.85)
Purchase intention (F6) 4.74 1.33 0.34 0.30 0.35 0.46 0.38 0.96 (0.93)
Climate change skepticism (F7) 3.80 1.35 −0.16 −0.04 0.10 −0.20 −0.14 −0.01 0.78

Note. The Cronbach's alpha values are shown in bold in the diagonal line, and the square roots of average variance extracted are shown in the parentheses.
8 CHEN

TABLE 3 Standardized loadings of indicators and convergent validity

Composite Average variance Standardized

Construct Indicators reliability extracted loadings t value
Attitude toward purchasing (F1) ATT 1 0.951 0.865 0.91 31.99
ATT 2 0.94 33.73
ATT 3 0.94 33.77
Subjective norm (F2) SN 1 0.930 0.817 0.89 30.35
SN 2 0.95 33.72
SN 3 0.87 29.24
Perceived behavioral control (F3) PBC 1 0.896 0.743 0.86 17.87
PBC 2 0.79 20.64
PBC 3 0.93 23.70
Perceived moral obligations (F4) PMO 1 0.935 0.784 0.85 28.15
PMO 2 0.89 30.24
PMO 3 0.90 31.13
PMO 4 0.90 31.23
Sustainability self-identity(F5) SSI 1 0.973 0.722 0.70 21.68
SSI 2 0.85 28.92
SSI 3 0.89 31.21
SSI 4 0.83 27.75
SSI 5 0.86 29.08
SSI 6 0.89 30.94
SSI 7 0.87 30.04
SSI 8 0.88 30.09
SSI 9 0.89 30.95
SSI 10 0.85 28.96
SSI 11 0.87 29.79
SSI 12 0.87 29.66
SSI 13 0.82 27.38
SSI 14 0.81 26.68
Purchase intention (F6) PB 1 0.960 0.856 0.92 30.33
PB 2 0.93 31.25
PB 3 0.96 32.73
PB 4 0.89 28.98

4.3 | Hierarchical and moderated regression analysis
The results of hierarchical and moderated regression are presented in
Table 4. Model 1 indicates that the original three factors of the TPB
model can explain 19.41% of the variance in the public's purchase
intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee. As expected, the
regression coefficients of attitude toward buying, subjective norms,
and perceived behavioral control were found to be significant in the
positive direction. Thus, H1, H2, and H3 are supported. Model 2 indi-
cates that when the public's perceived moral obligation and sustain-
ability self-identity are introduced into the TPB model, the extended
TPB model can explain 27.68% of the variance in the public's pur-
chase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee, which is better
than that of the original TPB model (19.41%). Furthermore, the
regression coefficients of perceived moral obligation and sustainability
self-identity were found to be significant in the positive direction.
Thus, H4 and H5 are supported. More specifically, all components in
the proposed extended TPB model have positive influences on pur-
chase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee. Consistent with
Sparks et al. (1995) and Shaw et al. (2000), this study confirmed that
the additional factors of perceived moral obligation and sustainability
self-identity included in the TPB model exert an influence on people's
ethical consumption. The empirical study results verify the extended
TPB model, providing strong support for the model's ability to predict
people's purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee.
Notably, the findings of Sparks et al. (1995) and Shaw et al. (2000)
have indicated that the addition of perceived moral obligation and
sustainability self-identity to the TPB structure results in a reduced
contribution of attitude. However, the present study discovered that
consumer attitude toward buying sustainability-labeled products can
CHEN 9

TABLE 4 Moderated regression analysis results

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

β p value β p value β p value β p value

Attitude toward purchasing 0.21*** <0.0001 0.09* 0.0183 0.10* 0.0104 0.01 0.9602
Subjective norms 0.12** 0.0016 0.08* 0.0356 0.07* 0.0422 0.01 0.9478
*** *** ***
Perceived behavioral control 0.26 <0.0001 0.18 <0.0001 0.16 <0.0001 0.10 0.3055
Perceived moral obligations 0.26*** <0.0001 0.27*** <0.0001 0.34** 0.0076
** ** **
Sustainability self-identity 0.12 0.0015 0.13 0.0011 0.42 0.0012
Climate change skepticism 0.06 0.0645 0.32 0.1584
Attitude toward purchasing × climate change skepticism 0.15 0.4943
Subjective norms × climate change skepticism 0.15 0.4953
Perceived behavioral control × climate change skepticism 0.11 0.5392
Perceived moral obligations × climate change skepticism −0.15 0.5561
Sustainability self-identity × climate change skepticism −0.53* 0.0187
R2 (%) 19.74 28.17 28.50 29.29
Adj. R2 (%) 19.41 27.68 27.92 28.23
*
p < 0.05.
**
p < 0.01.
***
p < 0.001.

exert a significant impact on their purchase intention toward
sustainability-labeled coffee. One possible explanation is that attitude
toward buying is more relevant to consumers' realistic purchasing
behaviors.
Climate change skepticism was introduced into Model 3 to exam-
ine whether it would influence the public's purchase intention toward
sustainability-labeled coffee. It was assumed that climate change
skepticism would have a negative impact on purchase intention
toward sustainability-labeled coffee; the results revealed a positive
direction but not statistically significant, as shown in Model 3. One
possible reason is that some people are uncertain and skeptical about
the trends, causes, and impacts of climate change. From a precaution-
ary viewpoint, performing actions that are beneficial to the environ-
ment and others is recommended just in case. Finally, the interaction
products of the predictor(s) and moderator were introduced into
Model 4. The moderating effect is supported if the interaction term is
statistically significant (Baron & Kenny, 1986). The results indicated
that there was only one interaction term, sustainability self-identity
and climate change skepticism, which, as expected, was significant in
the negative direction. Thus, H6 is partially supported. This implied
that climate change skepticism moderates the impact of an individual's
sustainability self-identity on his or her purchase intention toward
sustainability-labeled coffee. Spotlight analysis is an estimate and sta-
tistical test of the simple effect of one variable at specified values of
another variable (Spiller, Fitzsimons, Lynch, & McClelland, 2013).
Spotlight analysis was further conducted using SPSS software and a
process procedure (Hayes, 2017) with a bootstrapping replication
method to detect significant interactions between sustainability self-
identity and climate change skepticism. The analysis was based on
5,000 replications that yielded a 95% confidence interval ranging from
−.1631 to −.0477. The confidence interval excludes zero meaning
that the difference is statistically significant at the 95% level.
5 | C O N CL U S I O N S
The research findings revealed that in addition to the three focal com-
ponents of the original TPB model that positively influence people's
purchase intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee, the proposed
additional two factors of moral obligation perception and sustainabil-
ity self-identity positively affect people's purchase intention toward
this product. Moreover, climate change skepticism moderated the
positive relationship between sustainability self-identity and purchase
intention toward sustainability-labeled coffee, weakening it. The
empirical results implied that if people are uncertain or feel skeptical
about human-caused climate change, then even if they have sustain-
ability self-identity, they may have reduced purchase intention toward
sustainability-labeled coffee.
The research results provide the following theoretical contribu-
tions to the literature. First, the main contribution of this study is that
it proposed an extended TPB model, which provides a research frame-
work with a better prediction power for people's ethical consumption
of sustainability-labeled products. Second, the results imply that atti-
tude toward purchasing is a more effective predictor than attitude in
the ethical consumption context. Future studies are suggested to
employ attitude toward purchasing rather than attitude to increase
the prediction power of the extended TPB model. A third significant
contribution is this study's examination of the moderating role of peo-
ple's climate change skepticism, which extends findings on the compli-
cated role of this variable. This study responds to a call for a more
10
thorough investigation of the effect of people's skepticism about cli-
mate change in the context of ethical and sustainable consumption
decision-making processes.
From a practical perspective, this study provides coffee marketers
and the players in the supply chain with a comprehensive framework
for understanding the influence of perceived moral obligation and sus-
tainability self-identity on purchase intention toward sustainability-
labeled products. Instead of following self-interested motives, numer-
ous modern consumers perceive a greater moral obligation and are
more likely to have a sustainability self-identity toward the earth, soci-
ety, and others. Therefore, how to develop and provide more sustain-
able products to meet consumers' perception of moral obligation is
critical for marketers and the players in the supply chain. Sustainability
programs that protect the environment and safeguard human rights
include the Rainforest Alliance Certification, Carbon Footprint label,
and Fair Trade label. Moreover, how to cultivate and enhance the sus-
tainability self-identity of consumers is crucial. Thus, products that
claim to be sustainable should more specifically indicate what environ-
mental or ethical problems the product can solve in terms of practices.
Providing claims regarding environmental or ethical issues in products'
advertising campaigns may raise consumers' self-identity and transfer
the concerns and self-identity into actual sustainable consumption
behavior. Finally, as previously explained, most scientists confirm that
human activities are the cause of the world's increasingly extreme cli-
mate (IPCC, 2007); however, some people still refuse to recognize the
trends, causes, and impacts of climate change. If people believe that
extreme climate change is a natural process and that it is not the
responsibility of humankind or believe that the impact of climate
change will not lead to serious harm and damage, they are less willing
to participate in pro-environmental behaviors, including purchasing
sustainability-labeled products. Therefore, determining how people
can be convinced that human activities are the main cause of climate
change and persuaded to participate in more pro-environmental
behaviors has become a supreme challenge for relevant government
authorities and marketers and the players in the supply chain. Objec-
tive scientific evidence for climate change should be communicated to
the public in a comprehensible manner. The public should be more
comprehensively educated on concrete methods of reducing the
anthropogenic impact on the climate, including sustainable consump-
tion. By doing so, the coffee supply industry and retailers could help
consumers to make more contribution to sustainable development.
This study had some limitations, which should be considered
before generalizing the research results. The cross-sectional setting of
the collected data may have limited the inferences of causality
between the independent and dependent variables. Future longitudi-
nal data approaches may improve the potentiality of causality.
Another limitation of this study is that this study focused on a single
sustainability-labeled product (coffee). Further research could apply
the proposed research framework to other sustainability-labeled prod-
ucts, such as organic foods. A comparison of sustainable consumption
for various foods could generate more valuable theoretical and mana-
gerial insights. In addition, compared with Taiwan census data, the
collected sample was not strictly statistically representative. Thus, the
CHEN
limitations of this study must be considered when these results are
interpreted. Finally, this study included many types of sustainable cof-
fee labels, each one maybe chosen by different profiles of consumers.
For example, fair trade and carbon footprint are different sustainable
appeals to different consumers. It needs to be further explored in
future studies.
ACKNOWLEDG MENT
This work was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Science and
Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C. (MOST 105-2410-H-036-003-MY3).
CONFLIC T OF INT ER E ST
None.
OR CID
Mei-Fang Chen https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4219-9903
RE FE RE NCE S
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior
(pp. 11–39). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting
social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. J. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Atti-
tudes, intentions, and perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experi-
mental Social Psychology, 22(5), 453–474.
Akter, S., Bennett, J., & Ward, M. B. (2012). Climate change scepticism and
public support for mitigation: Evidence from an Australian choice
experiment. Global Environmental Change, 22(3), 736–745.
Aschemann-Witzel, J., & Zielke, S. (2017). Can't buy me green? A review
of consumer perceptions of and behavior toward the price of organic
food. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 51(1), 211–251.
Bamberg, S., Ajzen, I., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Choice of travel mode in the
theory of planned behavior: The roles of past behavior, habit, and rea-
soned action. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(3), 175–187.
Bamberg, S., & 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, 27,
14–25.
Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2001). Theory-driven subgroup-specific evalu-
ation of an intervention to reduce private car use. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 31(6), 1300–1329.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable dis-
tinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and sta-
tistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.51.6.1173
Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory
of plarmed behavior. Journal of Research in Personality, 25, 285–301.
Biddle, B. J., Bank, B. J., & Slavings, R. R. L. (1987). Norms, preferences,
identities and retention decisions. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(4),
322–337.
Bray, J., Johns, N., & Kilburn, D. (2011). An exploratory study into the fac-
tors impeding ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 98,
597–618.
Brody, S., Grover, H., & Vedlitz, A. (2012). Examining the willingness of
Americans to alter behavior to mitigate climate change. Climate Policy,
12, 1–22.
Capstick, S. B., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2014). What is climate change scepticism?
Examination of the concept using a mixed methods study of the UK
public. Global Environmental Change, 24, 389–401.
CHEN
Charng, H. W., Piliavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1988). Role identity and rea-
soned action in the prediction of repeated behavior. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 51(4), 303–317.
Chen, M. F. (2016). Extending the theory of planned behavior model to
explain people's energy savings and carbon reduction behavioral inten-
tions to mitigate climate change in Taiwan–Moral obligation matters.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(Part 2), 1746–1753.
Chen, M. F., & Lee, C. L. (2015). The impacts of green claims on coffee
consumers' purchase intention. British Food Journal, 117(1), 195–209.
Cho, Y. N., Soster, R. L., & Burton, S. (2018). Enhancing environmentally
conscious consumption through standardized sustainability informa-
tion. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 52(2), 393–414.
Clayton, S. (2012). Environment and identity. In S. Clayton (Ed.), The Oxford
handbook of environmental and conservation psychology (pp. 164–180).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Clayton, S., & Opotow, S. (2003). Introduction: Identity and the natural
environment. In S. Clayton, S. Opotow, S. Clayton, & S. Opotow (Eds.),
Identity and the natural environment: The psychological significance of
nature (pp. 1–24). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Collins, E. M., & Kearins, K. (2010). Delivering on sustainability's global and
local orientation. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(3),
499–506.
Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned
behavior: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 28(15), 1429–1464.
Corner, A., Markowitz, E., & Pidgeon, N. (2014). Public engagement with
climate change: The role of human values. Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Climate Change, 5(3), 411–422.
de Andrade Silva, A. R., Bioto, A. S., Efraim, P., & de Castilho Queiroz, G.
(2017). Impact of sustainability labeling in the perception of sensory
quality and purchase intention of chocolate consumers. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 141, 11–21.
De Barcellos, M. D., Krystallis, A., de Melo Saab, M. S., Kügler, J. O., &
Grunert, K. G. (2011). Investigating the gap between citizens' sustain-
ability attitudes and food purchasing behaviour: Empirical evidence
from Brazilian pork consumers. International Journal of Consumer Stud-
ies, 35(4), 391–402.
De Boer, J. (2003). Sustainability labelling schemes: The logic of their
claims and their functions for stakeholders. Business Strategy and the
Environment, 12(4), 254–264.
De Boer, J., Boersema, J. J., & Aiking, H. (2009). Consumers' motivational
associations favoring free-range meat or less meat. Ecological Econom-
ics, 68(3), 850–860.
De Boer, J., De Witt, A., & Aiking, H. (2016). Help the climate, change your
diet: A cross-sectional study on how to involve consumers in a transi-
tion to a low-carbon society. Appetite, 98, 19–27. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.appet.2015.12.001
Dowd, K., & Burke, K. J. (2013). The influence of ethical values and food
choice motivations on intentions to purchase sustainably sourced
foods. Appetite, 69, 137–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.
05.024
Eagly, A. H., Chaiken, S., & Jovanovich (1993). The psychology of attitudes.
Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
Engels, A., Hüther, O., Schäfer, M., & Held, H. (2013). Public climate-
change skepticism, energy preferences and political participation.
Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1018–1027.
Fekadu, Z., & Kraft, P. (2001). Self-identity in planned behavior perspec-
tive: Past behavior and its moderating effects on self-identity-
intention relations. Social Behavior and Personality, 29(7), 671–686.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models
with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Mar-
keting Research, 18(1), 39–50.
Gifford, R. (2011). Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitiga-
tion and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66(4), 290–302. https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0023566
11
Granberg, D., & Holmberg, S. (1990). The intention-behavior relationship
among US and Swedish voters. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53(1),
44–54.
Green, H., Broun, P., Cook, D., Cooper, K., Drewnowski, A., Pollard, D., …
Roulin, A. (2018). Healthy and sustainable diets for future generations.
Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 98(9), 3219–3224.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8953
Grimmer, M., & Woolley, M. (2014). Green marketing messages and con-
sumers' purchase intentions: Promoting personal versus environmental
benefits. Journal of Marketing Communications, 20(4), 231–250.
Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food
products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy,
44, 177–189.
Hair, J. F. Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivari-
ate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice
Hall.
Harper, G. C., & Makatouni, A. (2002). Consumer perception of organic
food production and farm animal welfare. British Food Journal, 104,
287–299.
Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional
process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications.
Hornibrook, S., May, C., & Fearne, A. (2015). Sustainable development and
the consumer: Exploring the role of carbon labelling in retail supply
chains. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24(4), 266–276.
Hornsey, M. J., Fielding, K. S., McStay, R., Reser, J. P., & Bradley, G. L.
(2016). Are people high in skepticism about anthropogenic climate
change necessarily resistant to influence? Some cause for optimism.
Environment and Behavior, 48(7), 905–928.
Hornsey, M. J., Harris, E. A., Bain, P. G., & Fielding, K. S. (2016). Meta-
analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change.
Nature Climate Change, 6(6), 622–626.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (IPCC, 2018). Global
Warming of 1.5 C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global
Warming of 1.5 C Above Pre-industrial Levels and Related Global
Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening
the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable
Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty.f ile:///F:/
Environmental%20Science%20and%20Pollution%20Research%20P-
MT%2020191009/
Online%20File%20Inventory%20for%20Revision%2020191125/
sr15_spm_final.pdf (accessed 27 November 2019)
International Coffee Organization, ICO. (2015). Developing a sustainable
coffee economy. http://www.ico.org/sustaindev_e.asp?section=
What_We_Do ().
IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.
In M. Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden, &
C. E. Handson (Eds.), Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of deci-
sion under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act envi-
ronmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?
Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.
Kortenkamp, K. V., & Moore, C. F. (2006). Time, uncertainty, and individual
differences in decisions to cooperate in resource dilemmas. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 603–615. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0146167205284006
Krystallis, A., de Barcellos, M. D., Kügler, J. O., Verbeke, W., &
Grunert, K. G. (2009). Attitudes of European citizens towards pig pro-
duction systems. Livestock Science, 126(1), 46–56.
Kumar, B., Manrai, A. K., & Manrai, L. A. (2017). Purchasing behaviour
for environmentally sustainable products: A conceptual framework
and empirical study. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
34, 1–9.
12
Lam, S. P. (1999). Predicting intentions to conserve water from the theory
of planned behavior, perceived moral obligation, and perceived water
right. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(5), 1058–1071.
Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting con-
sumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly prod-
ucts. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18, 503–520.
Leach, A. M., Emery, K. A., Gephart, J., Davis, K. F., Erisman, J. W., Leip, A.,
… Castner, E. (2016). Environmental impact food labels combining car-
bon, nitrogen, and water footprints. Food Policy, 61, 213–223.
Lee, H., Jin, Y., & Shin, H. (2018). Cosmopolitanism and ethical consump-
tion: An extended theory of planned behavior and modeling for fair
trade coffee consumers in South Korea. Sustainable Development,
26(6), 822–834.
Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2007). Barriers per-
ceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their
policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17(3), 445–459.
Lotz, S., Christandl, F., & Fetchenhauer, D. (2013). What is fair is good: Evi-
dence to consumer's fairness. Food Quality and Preference, 30,
139–144.
Madden, T. J., Ellen, P. S., & Ajzen, I. (1992). A comparison of the theory of
planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 18(1), 3–9.
Mäkiniemi, J. P., & Vainio, A. (2013). Moral intensity and climate-friendly
food choices. Appetite, 66, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.
2013.01.026
Mannetti, L., Pierro, A., & Livi, S. (2004). Recycling: Planned and self-
expressive behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24,
227–236.
Manstead, A. S. R. (2000). The role of moral norm in the attitude–behavior
relation. In D. J. Terry, & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Applied social research. Atti-
tudes, behavior, and social context: The role of norms and group member-
ship (pp. 11–30). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Publishers.
Marconi, N. G., Hooker, N. H., & DiMarcello, N. III (2017). What's in a
name? The impact of fair trade claims on product price. Agribusiness,
33(2), 160–174.
Meise, J. N., Rudolph, T., Kenning, P., & Phillips, D. M. (2014). Feed them
facts: Value perceptions and consumer use of sustainability-related
product information. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(4),
510–519.
Ministry of the Interior, Republic of China (Taiwan), Department of House-
hold Registration (2017), Statistics_End of Year (2017). Population by
Sex and 5 Year Age Group for Counties and Cities. Available at:
https://www.ris.gov.tw/app/en/3910
Nardi, V. A. M., Jardim, W. C., Ladeira, W., & Santini, F. (2019). Predicting
food choice: A meta-analysis based on the theory of planned behavior.
British Food Journal, 121(10), 2250–2264.
Nunnally, J. C. (2010). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: Tata
McGraw-Hill Education.
Pachauri, R. K., Reisinger, A., & Core Writing Team. (2007). Climate change
2007: Synthesis report—Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the
fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Geneva, Switzerland: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Padel, S., Niggli, U., Pearce, B., Schlüter, M., Schmid, O., Cuoco, E., …
Micheloni, C. (2010). Implementation Action Plan for Organic Food
and Farming Research. Technology Platform TP Organics, Brussels.
https://orgprints.org/19306/1/TPOrganics_
ImplementationActionPlan.pdf (accessed 27 November 2019).
Pidgeon, N. (2012). Public understanding of, and attitudes to, climate
change: UK and international perspectives and policy. Climate Policy,
12(sup 01), S85–S106.
Poortinga, W., Spence, A., Whitmarsh, L., Capstick, S., & Pidgeon, N. F.
(2011). Uncertain climate: an investigation of public scepticism about
anthropogenic climate change. Global Environmental Change, 21(3),
1015–1024.
CHEN
Rahmstorf, S. (2005). The climate sceptics weather catastrophes and
climate change: Is there still hope for us? Munich, Germany: Munich
Re Group.
Sajjad, A., Eweje, G., & Tappin, D. (2015). Sustainable supply chain man-
agement: Motivators and barriers. Business Strategy and the Environ-
ment, 24(7), 643–655.
Scruggs, L., & Benegal, S. (2012). Declining public concern about climate
change: Can we blame the great recession? Global Environmental
Change, 22(2), 505–515.
Seyfang, G. (2009). Low-carbon currencies: The potential of time banking
and local money systems for community carbon-reduction. In CSERGE
Working Paper EDM 09–04. CSERGE, School of Environmental Sci-
ences: University of East Anglia.
Shaw, D. S., & Shiu, E. (2002). The role of ethical obligation and self-
identity in ethical consumer choice. International Journal of Consumer
Studies, 26, 109–116.
Shaw, D. S., Shiu, E., & Clarke, I. (2000). The contribution of ethical obliga-
tion and self-identity to the theory of planned behaviour: An explora-
tion of ethical consumers. Journal of Marketing Management, 16,
879–894.
Solomon, M. R., Marshall, G. W., & Stuart, E. W. (2015). Marketing: Real
people, real choices 8th edition. Harlow, United Kingdom: Pearson Edu-
cation Limited.
Sparks, P., & Guthrie, C. A. (1998). Self-identity and the theory of planned
behavior: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice? Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 28(15), 1393–1410.
Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (1992). Self-identity and the theory of planned
behaviour: Assessing the role of identification with green consumer-
ism. Social Psychology Quarterly, 55(4), 388–399.
Sparks, P., Shepherd, R., & Frewer, L. J. (1995). Assessing and structuring
attitudes toward the use of gene technology in food production: the
role of ethical obligation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 16(3),
267–285.
Spiller, S. A., Fitzsimons, G. J., Lynch, J. G. Jr., & McClelland, G. H. (2013).
Spotlights, floodlights, and the magic number zero: Simple effects tests
in moderated regression. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(2),
277–288.
Stets, J. E., & Biga, C. F. (2003). Bringing identity theory into environmen-
tal sociology. Sociological Theory, 21(4), 398–423.
Stöckigt, G., Schiebener, J., & Brand, M. (2018). Providing sustainability
information in shopping situations contributes to sustainable decision
making: An empirical study with choice-based conjoint analyses. Jour-
nal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 43, 188–199.
Stoll-Kleemann, S., O'Riordan, T., & Jaeger, C. C. (2001). The psychology of
denial concerning climate mitigation measures: Evidence from Swiss
focus groups. Global Environmental Change, 11, 107–117.
Taylor, P. L., Murray, D. L., & Raynolds, L. T. (2005). Keeping trade fair:
governance challenges in the fair trade coffee initiative. Sustainable
Development, 13(3), 199–208.
Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & White, K. M. (1999). The theory of planned
behaviour: Self identity, social identity and group norms. British Journal
of Social Psychology, 38, 225–244.
Thorlakson, T. (2018). A move beyond sustainability certification: The evo-
lution of the chocolate industry's sustainable sourcing practices. Busi-
ness Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1653–1665.
Thrupp, L. A. (2000). Linking agricultural biodiversity and food security:
The valuable role of agrobiodiversity for sustainable agriculture. Inter-
national Affairs, 76(2), 283–297.
Tonglet, M., Phillips, P. S., & Read, A. D. (2004). Using the theory of
planned behaviour to investigate the determinants of recycling behav-
iour: A case study from Brixworth, UK. Resources, Conservation and
Recycling, 41(3), 191–214.
Valor, C., Carrero, I., & Redondo, R. (2014). The influence of knowledge
and motivation on sustainable label use. Journal of Agricultural and
Environmental Ethics, 27(4), 591–607.
CHEN 13

Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2011). Values, environmental iden- Zhou, M. (2015). Public environmental skepticism: A cross-national and
tity and pro-environmental behaviour. Paper presented at the IAREP multilevel analysis. International Sociology, 30(1), 61–85.
2011.
Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Explor-
ing the consumer “attitude-behavioural intention” gap. Journal of Agri-
cultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169–194.
How to cite this article: Chen M-F. The impacts of perceived
Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2008). Sustainable food consumption among
young adults in Belgium: Theory of planned behaviour and the role of moral obligation and sustainability self-identity on
confidence and values. Ecological Economics, 64(3), 542–553. sustainability development: A theory of planned behavior
WCED. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. purchase intention model of sustainability-labeled coffee and
Whitmarsh, L., & O'Neill, S. (2010). Green identity, green living? The role
the moderating effect of climate change skepticism. Bus Strat
of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across
diverse pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psy- Env. 2020;1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2510
chology, 30, 305–314.

APPENDIX A

TABLE A1 Constructs, scales sources, and measurement items

Attitude toward purchasing (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008)

My attitude toward purchasing sustainable labeled coffee is positive/negative.
My attitude toward purchasing sustainable labeled coffee is wise/unwise.
My attitude toward purchasing sustainable labeled coffee is meaningful/useless.
Subjective norms (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008)
My family who influences my buying behavior thinks I should purchase sustainable labeled coffee.
My friends who influence my buying behavior think I should purchase sustainable labeled coffee.
My society who influences my buying behavior thinks I should purchase sustainable labeled coffee.
Perceived behavioral control (Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008)
How easily you (believe you) could acquire sustainable labeled coffee.
How easily you (believe you) could find sustainable labeled coffee in your neighborhood.
How easily you (believe you) thought that these sustainable labeled coffee available.
Perceived moral obligations (Brody, Grover, and Vedlitz, 2012; Shaw, Shiu, and Clarke, 2000)
I have a moral obligation to reduce my impact on global warming and climate change.
I have an obligation to future generations to reduce my impact on global warming and climate change.
I feel that I have an ethical obligation to reduce some unfair trade practices.
I feel that I have an ethical obligation to reduce impacts on rainforest.
Sustainability self-identity (Shaw, Shiu, and Clarke, 2000; Grunert, Hieke, and Wills, 2014)
I think of myself as someone who is concerned about ethical issues, such as:
The use of child labor in food production
Deforestation of the rain forest
Starvation and malnutrition in the world population
The use of pesticides used in food production
Poor treatment of animals in food production
Environmental damage caused by human use of land and water
The amount of food that is wasted
Using too much of the world's natural resources for food production
Poor working conditions and wages for food producers
Packaging that is not recyclable
The amount of packaging used on products
Carbon emissions caused by food production
The amount of energy used when transporting food products
The amount of energy used when cooking food products
Climate change skepticism (Poortinga, Spence, Whitmarsh, Capstick and Pidgeon, 2011; Rahmstorf, 2005)

(Continues)
14 CHEN

TABLE A1 (Continued)

I am uncertain that climate change is really happening. (Trend skepticism)

Climate change is mainly caused by natural processes. (Attribution skepticism)
The seriousness of climate change is exaggerated. (Impact skepticism)
It is uncertain what the effects of climate change will be. (Impact skepticism)
Purchase intention
My willingness to purchase the rainforest labeled coffee.
My willingness to purchase the fair trade labeled coffee.
My willingness to purchase the footprint carbon labeled coffee.
My willingness to purchase the organic certified labeled coffee.