IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i23p6877-d293741.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Proposing a Value Field Model for Predicting Homebuyers’ Purchasing Behavior of Green Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China

Author

Listed:
  • Yajing Zhang

    (College of Economy and Management, Nanjing Institute of Technology, Nanjing 211167, China)

  • Jingfeng Yuan

    (College of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)

  • Lingzhi Li

    (School of Civil Engineering, Nanjing University of Technology, Nanjing 211816, China)

  • Hu Cheng

    (College of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)

Abstract

Understanding the motivations that stimulate homebuyers’ green purchasing behavior can increase market demand for green products, especially considering the comparably low market share of green products worldwide. In this context, various studies have been conducted examining consumers’ intentions to pay for green products. Nevertheless, there is still limited research on evaluating homebuyers’ purchasing behavior toward green residential buildings. This study argues that the value of green residential buildings (GRBs) affects their adoption, and thus exerts an invisible force on homebuyers’ purchasing behavior. It also finds that field theory provides a scientific perspective on this phenomenon. Thus, this paper proposes a value field model for evaluating homebuyers’ GRB purchasing behavior based on physical field theory and psychology field theory. In particular, physical field theory provides the measurement formula, while psychological field theory explains the effect of the force stimulating homebuyers’ purchasing intention, and ultimately influencing their purchasing behavior. The initial model consisted of a field source (green perceived value), target charge (GRB demand), distance (psychological distance), and value field factor. As the value field factor was calculated to be approximately equal to 1, the final model is a composite of a field source (green perceived value), target charge (GRB demand), and distance (psychological distance). The results validate the construction of the value field model on the basis of field theory. This research contributes to the body of knowledge by analyzing GRB value and provides a clearer understanding of how GRBs and the environment combine to fulfill homebuyers’ requirements and influence their GRB purchasing behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Yajing Zhang & Jingfeng Yuan & Lingzhi Li & Hu Cheng, 2019. "Proposing a Value Field Model for Predicting Homebuyers’ Purchasing Behavior of Green Residential Buildings: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-31, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:23:p:6877-:d:293741
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/23/6877/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/23/6877/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yadav, Rambalak & Pathak, Govind S., 2017. "Determinants of Consumers' Green Purchase Behavior in a Developing Nation: Applying and Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 114-122.
    2. Niamh Murtagh & Aeli Roberts & Richard Hind, 2016. "The relationship between motivations of architectural designers and environmentally sustainable construction design," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 61-75, January.
    3. Julie Cidell & Miriam A. Cope, 2014. "Factors explaining the adoption and impact of LEED-based green building policies at the municipal level," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(12), pages 1763-1781, December.
    4. Li, Qianwen & Long, Ruyin & Chen, Hong, 2018. "Differences and influencing factors for Chinese urban resident willingness to pay for green housings: Evidence from five first-tier cities in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 299-313.
    5. Luay N. Dwaikat & Kherun N. Ali, 2016. "Measuring the Actual Energy Cost Performance of Green Buildings: A Test of the Earned Value Management Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Kaili Yieh & Jiun-shan Chen & Maggie Wei, 2012. "The Effects of Technology Readiness on Customer Perceived Value: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 177-183, June.
    7. Changsu Kim & Weihong Zhao & Kyung H. Yang, 2008. "An Empirical Study on the Integrated Framework of e-CRM in Online Shopping: Evaluating the Relationships Among Perceived Value, Satisfaction, and Trust Based on Customers' Perspectives," Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), IGI Global, vol. 6(3), pages 1-19, July.
    8. Gefen, David, 2000. "E-commerce: the role of familiarity and trust," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 725-737, December.
    9. Xianbo Zhao & Bon-Gang Hwang & Sui Pheng Low, 2013. "Critical success factors for enterprise risk management in Chinese construction companies," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(12), pages 1199-1214, December.
    10. Aizenman, Joshua & Jinjarak, Yothin, 2014. "Real estate valuation, current account and credit growth patterns, before and after the 2008–9 crisis," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 48(PB), pages 249-270.
    11. Khalid Alzahrani & Adrienne Hall-Phillips & Amy Z. Zeng, 2019. "Applying the theory of reasoned action to understanding consumers’ intention to adopt hybrid electric vehicles in Saudi Arabia," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 199-215, February.
    12. Ghebreegziabiher Debrezion & Eric Pels & Piet Rietveld, 2007. "The Impact of Railway Stations on Residential and Commercial Property Value: A Meta-analysis," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 161-180, August.
    13. Zhang, Li & Wu, Jing & Liu, Hongyu, 2018. "Policies to enhance the drivers of green housing development in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 225-235.
    14. Deirdre Shaw & Robert McMaster & Terry Newholm, 2016. "Care and Commitment in Ethical Consumption: An Exploration of the ‘Attitude–Behaviour Gap’," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 136(2), pages 251-265, June.
    15. Tobias Dippold & Jan Mutl & Joachim Zietz, 2014. "Opting for a Green Certificate: The Impact of Local Attitudes and Economic Conditions," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 36(4), pages 435-474.
    16. Li Zhang & Hongyu Liu & Jing Wu, 2017. "The price premium for green-labelled housing: Evidence from China," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(15), pages 3524-3541, November.
    17. Paul, Justin & Modi, Ashwin & Patel, Jayesh, 2016. "Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 123-134.
    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. Zhang, Li & Wu, Jing & Liu, Hongyu, 2018. "Policies to enhance the drivers of green housing development in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 225-235.
    2. Weimin Ma & Zitong Ren & Hua Ke, 2022. "Green Housing Subsidy Strategies Considering Consumers’ Green Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, February.
    3. Jessica Müller & Ángel Acevedo-Duque & Sheyla Müller & Prateek Kalia & Khalid Mehmood, 2021. "Predictive Sustainability Model Based on the Theory of Planned Behavior Incorporating Ecological Conscience and Moral Obligation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    4. Xiaoyun Zhang & Feng Dong, 2020. "Why Do Consumers Make Green Purchase Decisions? Insights from a Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-25, September.
    5. Muhammad Rizwan Ali & Muhammad Shafiq & Murad Andejany, 2021. "Determinants of Consumers’ Intentions towards the Purchase of Energy Efficient Appliances in Pakistan: An Extended Model of the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Rambabu Lavuri & Abhinav Jindal & Umair Akram & Bhukya Koteswara Rao Naik & Alrence Santiago Halibas, 2023. "Exploring the antecedents of sustainable consumers' purchase intentions: Evidence from emerging countries," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 280-291, February.
    7. Yu Hao & Yingting Wang & Qiuwei Wu & Shiwei Sun & Weilu Wang & Menglin Cui, 2020. "What affects residents' participation in the circular economy for sustainable development? Evidence from China," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 1251-1268, September.
    8. Jana Hojnik & Mitja Ruzzier & Tatiana S. Manolova, 2020. "Sustainable development: Predictors of green consumerism in Slovenia," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(4), pages 1695-1708, July.
    9. Nketiah, Emmanuel & Song, Huaming & Obuobi, Bright & Adu-Gyamfi, Gibbson & Adjei, Mavis & Cudjoe, Dan, 2022. "Citizens' willingness to pay for local anaerobic digestion energy: The influence of altruistic value and knowledge," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    10. Hsiao-Ping Chang & Chun-Chieh Ma & Han-Shen Chen, 2019. "Climate Change and Consumer’s Attitude toward Insect Food," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Changjoon Lee & Soyoun Lim & Byoungchun Ha, 2021. "Green Supply Chain Management and Its Impact on Consumer Purchase Decision as a Marketing Strategy: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-16, October.
    12. Zaremohzzabieh, Zeinab & Ismail, Normala & Ahrari, Seyedali & Abu Samah, Asnarulkhadi, 2021. "The effects of consumer attitude on green purchase intention: A meta-analytic path analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 732-743.
    13. Erni Rusyani & Rambabu Lavuri & Ardi Gunardi, 2021. "Purchasing Eco-Sustainable Products: Interrelationship between Environmental Knowledge, Environmental Concern, Green Attitude, and Perceived Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, April.
    14. Qing He & Haiyang Zhao & Lin Shen & Liuqun Dong & Ye Cheng & Ke Xu, 2019. "Factors Influencing Residents’ Intention toward Green Retrofitting of Existing Residential Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-23, August.
    15. Jana Hojnik & Mitja Ruzzier & Maja Konečnik Ruzzier, 2019. "Transition towards Sustainability: Adoption of Eco-Products among Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-29, August.
    16. Tiantian Gu & Enyang Hao & Lan Ma & Xu Liu & Linxiu Wang, 2022. "Exploring the Determinants of Residents’ Behavior towards Participating in the Sponge-Style Old Community Renewal of China: Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Han-Shen Chen & Chia-Hsing Liang & Shu-Yi Liao & Hung-Yu Kuo, 2020. "Consumer Attitudes and Purchase Intentions toward Food Delivery Platform Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Catarina Roseira & Sandrina Teixeira & Belem Barbosa & Rita Macedo, 2022. "How Collectivism Affects Organic Food Purchase Intention and Behavior: A Study with Norwegian and Portuguese Young Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-19, June.
    19. Bin Wang & Jionghua Li & Ao Sun & Yongming Wang & Dianting Wu, 2019. "Residents’ Green Purchasing Intentions in a Developing-Country Context: Integrating PLS-SEM and MGA Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    20. Taneja, Shilpa & Ali, Liaqat, 2021. "Determinants of customers’ intentions towards environmentally sustainable banking: Testing the structural model," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:23:p:6877-:d:293741. 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.