IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/grz/wpsses/2021-05.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Exploring the repair intention of consumers – the role of environmental, social and economic drivers

Author

Listed:
  • Ines Fachbach

    (Department of Operations and Information Systems, University of Graz)

  • Gernot Lechner

    (Department of Operations and Information Systems, University of Graz)

  • Marc Reimann

    (Department of Operations and Information Systems, University of Graz
    Newcastle Business School, Northumbria University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne)

Abstract

Repair is a central component of a circular economy to extend the operational phase of products. Yet, the number of repair service providers as well as demand for repair have declined over the last decades, while more products than ever before were sold. Thus, for a successful transition from a linear to a circular economy the demand for repair services must be boosted to promote repair business. A starting point to achieve this goal is to increase knowledge about the decision-making process of consumers related to repair. This is the aim of this study: we investigate consumers' intention (1) to make use of repair service providers, (2) to self-repair broken items, and (3) to use repair service providers incorporated in a repair network. An extensive literature research revealed a comprehensive set of influencing factors concerning repair decisions covering environmental, social, and economic aspects. Based on these insights, a quantitative online survey was designed, and distributed in Styria, Austria. By means of a structural equation model the acquired data of 900 respondents was analysed. The results emphasise the trade-off between acting environmentally friendly and economic aspects like repair cost and time, but also highlight the effect of government intervention–in the form of setting up a network and financial support for repair–on shaping this trade-off. Furthermore, past behaviour is found to strongly drive repair intention. Finally, disparities between urban and rural areas, as well as in the maximum accepted prices and times for repair of different product types were identified. As a result our research not only contributes to scientific literature by shedding light on the role of repair networks for repair decisions, and the trade-off between environmental, social and economic aspects. It is also relevant for supporting repair companies' decision making, as well as public authorities interested in promoting repair.

Suggested Citation

  • Ines Fachbach & Gernot Lechner & Marc Reimann, 2021. "Exploring the repair intention of consumers – the role of environmental, social and economic drivers," Working Paper Series, Social and Economic Sciences 2021-05, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Karl-Franzens-University Graz.
    • Handle: RePEc:grz:wpsses:2021-05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://static.uni-graz.at/fileadmin/sowi/Working_Paper/2021-05_Fachbach_Lechner_Reimann.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2021
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Buuren, Stef & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Karin, 2011. "mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 45(i03).
    2. Farrow, Katherine & Grolleau, Gilles & Ibanez, Lisette, 2017. "Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Marco Wolf & Shaun McQuitty, 2011. "Understanding the do-it-yourself consumer: DIY motivations and outcomes," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 1(3), pages 154-170, December.
    4. Walter R. Stahel, 2016. "The circular economy," Nature, Nature, vol. 531(7595), pages 435-438, March.
    5. Nathalie Lazaric & Fabrice Guel & Jean Belin & Vanessa Oltra & Sébastien Lavaud & Ali Douai, 2020. "Determinants of sustainable consumption in France: the importance of social influence and environmental values," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1337-1366, November.
    6. Gerner, Jennifer L & Bryant, W Keith, 1980. "The Demand for Repair Service during Warranty," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(4), pages 397-414, October.
    7. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    8. Andrew M. King & Stuart C. Burgess & Winnie Ijomah & Chris A. McMahon, 2006. "Reducing waste: repair, recondition, remanufacture or recycle?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(4), pages 257-267.
    9. John McCollough, 2010. "Consumer Discount Rates and the Decision to Repair or Replace a Durable Product: A Sustainable Consumption Issue," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 183-204.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ines Güsser-Fachbach & Gernot Lechner & Tomás B. Ramos & Marc Reimann, 2023. "Repair service convenience in a circular economy: a multi-stakeholder perspective," Working Paper Series, Social and Economic Sciences 2023-01, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Karl-Franzens-University Graz.
    2. Spandagos, Constantine & Baark, Erik & Ng, Tze Ling & Yarime, Masaru, 2021. "Social influence and economic intervention policies to save energy at home: Critical questions for the new decade and evidence from air-condition use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    3. Phu Nguyen-Van & Anne Stenger & Tuyen Tiet, 2021. "Social incentive factors in interventions promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-27, December.
    4. Gkargkavouzi, Anastasia & Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2019. "How do motives and knowledge relate to intention to perform environmental behavior? Assessing the mediating role of constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    5. Hasan Fehmi Topal & Dexter V. L. Hunt & Christopher D. F. Rogers, 2021. "Exploring Urban Sustainability Understanding and Behaviour: A Systematic Review towards a Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-33, January.
    6. Pasi Rönkkö & Sayed Mohammad Ayati & Jukka Majava, 2021. "Remanufacturing in the Heavy Vehicle Industry—Case Study of a Finnish Machine Manufacturer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    7. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2022. "Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    8. Florian Lüdeke‐Freund & Stefan Gold & Nancy M. P. Bocken, 2019. "A Review and Typology of Circular Economy Business Model Patterns," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(1), pages 36-61, February.
    9. Sebastian Kurten & David Winant & Kathleen Beullens, 2021. "Mothers Matter: Using Regression Tree Algorithms to Predict Adolescents’ Sharing of Drunk References on Social Media," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Sabbaghi, Mostafa & Esmaeilian, Behzad & Cade, Willie & Wiens, Kyle & Behdad, Sara, 2016. "Business outcomes of product repairability: A survey-based study of consumer repair experiences," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 114-122.
    11. Philippe Coent & Raphaële Préget & Sophie Thoyer, 2021. "Farmers Follow the Herd: A Theoretical Model on Social Norms and Payments for Environmental Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(2), pages 287-306, February.
    12. Tiening Cui & Mengdie He, 2023. "Study on the Influence of Social Norms and Public Orientation on Domestic Waste Classification Behavior-Taking Beijing’s Garbage Classification as an Example," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 13(2), pages 1-3.
    13. Saraji, Mahyar Kamali & Streimikiene, Dalia, 2022. "Evaluating the circular supply chain adoption in manufacturing sectors: A picture fuzzy approach," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    14. Guzzo, Daniel & Rodrigues, Vinicius Picanço & Mascarenhas, Janaina, 2021. "A systems representation of the Circular Economy: Transition scenarios in the electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    15. Marjolein C. J. Caniëls & Wim Lambrechts & Johannes (Joost) Platje & Anna Motylska-Kuźma & Bartosz Fortuński, 2021. "50 Shades of Green: Insights into Personal Values and Worldviews as Drivers of Green Purchasing Intention, Behaviour, and Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.
    16. Qiao, Kunyuan & Dowell, Glen, 2022. "Environmental concerns, income inequality, and purchase of environmentally-friendly products: A longitudinal study of U.S. counties (2010-2017)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    17. Daan Kabel & Mattias Elg & Erik Sundin, 2021. "Factors Influencing Sustainable Purchasing Behaviour of Remanufactured Robotic Lawn Mowers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Murat Okumah & Julia Martin-Ortega & Paula Novo & Pippa J. Chapman, 2020. "Revisiting the Determinants of Pro-Environmental Behaviour to Inform Land Management Policy: A Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Model Application," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-33, April.
    19. Louise Møller Haase & Line Sand Lythje, 2022. "User Strategies for Prolonging Product Lifetimes: A New Starting Point for Circular Conceptual Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    20. Mi, Lingyun & Zhu, Hanlin & Yang, Jie & Gan, Xiaoli & Xu, Ting & Qiao, Lijie & Liu, Qingyan, 2019. "A new perspective to promote low-carbon consumption: The influence of reference groups," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 100-108.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:grz:wpsses:2021-05. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editorial team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwgraat.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.