IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i14p8673-d864355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relationship between Personal Values and Intentions to Purchase Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: Application of the Dual Concern Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Ha-Won Jang

    (College of Hotel and Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea)

  • Meehee Cho

    (College of Hotel and Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Korea)

Abstract

This study examines consumers’ intentions to purchase plant-based meat alternatives (PBMA), which have been created to protect animal rights, the global environment, and consumers’ health. Data from 319 Korean consumers were analyzed to establish a causal relationship among personal values (egoistic, biospheric, and social-altruistic), the dual concern theory (anticipated positive effect and empathetic concern), and PBMA purchase intentions. Multigroup analysis was performed for all paths according to generation, divided into Generation MZ and the older generation; “MZ” is a compound term referring to millennials and Generation Z, who have grown up in a digital environment; this collective generation comprises individuals born after 1980. Our analysis revealed that, among personal values, biospheric and social-altruistic values had positive effects on both anticipated positive effect and empathetic concern. In turn, these aspects positively influenced PBMA purchase intentions. Particularly, anticipated positive effect had a strong influence. Finally, a moderating effect was confirmed for two paths, and only Generation MZ demonstrated the enhancing influence of biospheric value on both anticipated positive effect and empathetic concern. This study has several implications and contributes to the sustainable growth and development of PBMA and the overall food service industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Ha-Won Jang & Meehee Cho, 2022. "Relationship between Personal Values and Intentions to Purchase Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: Application of the Dual Concern Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-16, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8673-:d:864355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8673/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/14/8673/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina, 2022. "How much does it take? Willingness to switch to meat substitutes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Roberts, Russell D, 1984. "A Positive Model of Private Charity and Public Transfers," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 92(1), pages 136-148, February.
    3. Kim, Minseong & Koo, Dong-Woo, 2020. "Visitors’ pro-environmental behavior and the underlying motivations for natural environment: Merging dual concern theory and attachment theory," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    4. Ramona Weinrich, 2019. "Opportunities for the Adoption of Health-Based Sustainable Dietary Patterns: A Review on Consumer Research of Meat Substitutes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    5. Warr, Peter G., 1982. "Pareto optimal redistribution and private charity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 131-138, October.
    6. Gillian Rice, 2006. "Pro-environmental Behavior in Egypt: Is there a Role for Islamic Environmental Ethics?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 65(4), pages 373-390, June.
    7. Min-Seong Kim & Brijesh Thapa & Hany Kim, 2017. "International Tourists’ Perceived Sustainability of Jeju Island, South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Butts, Marcus M. & Lunt, Devin C. & Freling, Traci L. & Gabriel, Allison S., 2019. "Helping one or helping many? A theoretical integration and meta-analytic review of the compassion fade literature," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 16-33.
    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. Kim, Minseong & Koo, Dong-Woo, 2020. "Visitors’ pro-environmental behavior and the underlying motivations for natural environment: Merging dual concern theory and attachment theory," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    2. Arthur C. Brooks, 2001. "Private Philanthropy and the Economics of Public Radio," Center for Policy Research Working Papers 41, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University.
    3. Eva Macková & Vojtech Stanek, 2005. "Teoretické prístupy k ekonomike dobrovoľníctva ako fenoménu sociálnej práce [Theoretical approaches to the economics of volunteering as a social labour phenomenon]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2005(5), pages 634-645.
    4. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Arbel, Yuval & Bar-El, Ronen & Schwarz, Mordechai E. & Tobol, Yossef, 2019. "To What Do People Contribute? Ongoing Operations vs. Sustainable Supplies," IZA Discussion Papers 12180, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Richard G. Frank & David S. Salkever, 1988. "Altruism, Rivalry and Crowding-Out in the Nonprofit Firm's Supply of Charity Services: The Case of Hospitals," NBER Working Papers 2753, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jen Shang & Rachel Croson, 2009. "A Field Experiment in Charitable Contribution: The Impact of Social Information on the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(540), pages 1422-1439, October.
    8. Dennis Coates, 1998. "Public Sector Crowding Out of Private Provision of Public Goods: the Influence of Differences in Production Costs," Public Finance Review, , vol. 26(5), pages 460-479, September.
    9. Makoto Kakinaka & Koji Kotani, 2011. "An interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations on voluntary contributions to a public good in a large economy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 29-41, April.
    10. Spector, Lee C, 1999. "Macroeconomic Models and the Determination of Crowding Out," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 54(1-2), pages 84-98.
    11. Gandullia, Luca & Lezzi, Emanuela & Parciasepe, Paolo, 2020. "Replication with MTurk of the experimental design by Gangadharan, Grossman, Jones & Leister (2018): Charitable giving across donor types," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    12. Paolo Casini & Lore Vandewalle & Zaki Wahhaj, 2017. "Public Good Provision in Indian Rural Areas: The Returns to Collective Action by Microfinance Groups," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(1), pages 97-128.
    13. Chan, Kenneth S. & Godby, Rob & Mestelman, Stuart & Andrew Muller, R., 2002. "Crowding-out voluntary contributions to public goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 305-317, July.
    14. Ledyard, John O., "undated". "Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research," Working Papers 861, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
    15. Miguel A. Puchades-Navarro, 2013. "Voluntary provision of public goods," Chapters, in: Francisco Cabrillo & Miguel A. Puchades-Navarro (ed.), Constitutional Economics and Public Institutions, chapter 16, pages 297-312, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. repec:zbw:rwirep:0349 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Duncan, Brian, 2004. "A theory of impact philanthropy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 2159-2180, August.
    18. Diego Nocetti, 2014. "On the private exchange of charitable gifts," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(1), pages 73-83.
    19. Bolton, Gary E. & Katok, Elena, 1998. "An experimental test of the crowding out hypothesis: The nature of beneficent behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 315-331, November.
    20. Tomáš Sigmund, 2015. "Vztah etického a ekonomického chování [The relationship of ethical and economic behaviour]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(2), pages 223-243.
    21. Richard Steinberg, 1986. "Charitable Giving as a Mixed Public/Private Good: Implications for Tax Policy," Public Finance Review, , vol. 14(4), pages 415-431, October.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:14:p:8673-:d:864355. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.