Abstract
Purpose
This study explores the direct and indirect effects of two components of food-related consideration of future consequences (CFCs), including CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future, on sustainable food attitudes (SFA) via food-related health and environmental concerns.
Design/methodology/approach
Partial least squares structural equation modeling technique was used on a data set of 664 Vietnamese consumers collected in Central Vietnam to evaluate measurement and structural models.
Findings
CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future as well as health and environmental concerns have positive effects on SFA. Indirect effects of CFC-Immediate on SFA via health concerns and CFC-Future on SFA via health/environmental concerns are also discovered.
Research limitations/implications
Future studies should examine the impact of environmental values on CFCs, forming a more comprehensive understanding regarding the relationship between the two variables, especially by including a wider range of sustainable food types to gain diverse knowledge about sustainable food consumption.
Practical implications
Communicative messages should focus on both health and environmental concerns while emphasizing both immediate and more distant outcomes of sustainable food (fish) consumption for individuals with different dominant temporal orientations.
Originality/value
This study sheds light on the direct and hierarchical relationships among food-related CFCs, health and environmental concerns and SFA to better understand the intricate psychological process of sustainable food consumption.
Keywords
Citation
Tuu, H.H. and Khoi, N.H. (2024), "The role of food-related consideration of future consequences, health and environmental concerns in explaining sustainable food (fish) attitudes", Journal of Economics and Development, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 253-271. https://doi.org/10.1108/JED-01-2024-0003
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2024, Ho Huy Tuu and Nguyen Huu Khoi
License
Published in Journal of Economics and Development. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
1. Introduction
Sustainable food consumption (SFC) is a major issue in the food domain due to its radical impact on individuals (e.g. health concern), society and the environment (e.g. environmental concern) (Cerri et al., 2019). It is widely accepted as a social phenomenon and is thus likely to reflect individual social-psychological factors and environmental values, as suggested by the extended perspective of the value-belief-norm/attitudes (VBN) paradigm of pro-environmental behavior (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Stern, 2002; Stern et al., 1985). For example, SFC might be affected by the inclination to consider the outcomes in the near term (e.g. safety and social acceptance) and/or the more distant future (e.g. environmental and social well-being) of such behaviors (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Olsen et al., 2023). Also, consumers use sustainable foods due to the emphasis on living healthy and/or the desire to live in a less polluted/cleaner environment (Vermeir et al., 2020; Yadav, 2016). In this sense, future time perspective (Dassen et al., 2015; van Beek et al., 2013), such as consideration of future consequences (CFCs) (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Joireman et al., 2012), and environmental values (Schwartz, 1992), such as egotism (pro-self)/altruism (pro-other) (Kareklas et al., 2014; Prakash et al., 2019), can involve in the psychological process of forming sustainable food attitudes (SFA) (Arnocky et al., 2013; Olsen and Tuu, 2021) – a reliable predictor of SFC (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Olsen et al., 2023).
CFCs and egoistic/altruistic values are theoretically relevant to explain SFA since they reflect temporal conflicts (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Milfont et al., 2012) and social dilemmas (Khachatryan et al., 2013; Olsen and Tuu, 2021) that occur when evaluating sustainable food (Arnocky et al., 2013; Olsen et al., 2023). It is anticipated, however, that they would show weak or non-significant relationships with SFA since they are general and abstract while SFA is domain specific (Klöckner, 2013; Murphy et al., 2020). Previous studies (e.g. Joireman and Liu, 2014; Olsen and Tuu, 2021) have adopted the approach of domain-specific variables to establish and offer insights into the relationship among CFCs, environmental values and sustainable consumption attitudes/behaviors. Nonetheless, there still exist some gaps that need to be filled regarding the role of domain-specific CFCs and environmental values in the context of SFC.
Firstly, previous studies have not investigated the combined roles of domain-specific CFCs (e.g. food-related CFCs) and domain-specific egoistic/altruistic values (i.e. food-related egoistic/altruistic values) in explaining SFA. It is argued that individuals can be time-oriented in some life domains, but not in others (McKay et al., 2017; Murphy et al., 2020). Furthermore, while the two components of CFCs (CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future) are distinct and negatively related, they can both exist (Joireman et al., 2012), generating temporal conflict in food consumption and predicting subsequent sustainable behaviors (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Olsen et al., 2023). Thus, there is an urge to explore if and how the temporal conflicts in the food domain are associated with SFA.
Besides, while egoistic and altruistic values are also conceptually distinct and incompatible (Kareklas et al., 2014; Schwartz, 1992), they both exist together within individuals, showing social dilemmas in explaining SFC (Khachatryan et al., 2013; Olsen and Tuu, 2021). In terms of food consumption, food-related health concern reflects the pro-self concept, so it can be understood as egoistic in nature (Magnusson et al., 2003; Yadav, 2016). Meanwhile, food-related environmental concerns indicate a pro-other concept and thus are altruistic in nature (Ebreo et al., 2003; Yadav and Pathak, 2016). Following the thought of social dilemmas, there might be a conflict between food-related health and environmental concerns that subsequently influences SFA. However, there is currently a lack of understanding regarding the relationships among these variables. Also, a hierarchical relationship between food-related CFCs and health/environmental concerns, leading to the formation of SFA, has not been established, hindering the understanding of the intricate psychological process of sustainable consumption behaviors. According to the extended value-belief-norm (VBN) (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Stern, 2002), environmental values (e.g. food-related health and environmental concerns) are a significant determinant of pro-environment attitudes/behaviors (e.g. Steg et al., 2005). Furthermore, this framework proposes that environmental values are driven by social-psychological factors such as time orientation (Black et al., 1985). In this sense, the extended VBN suggests that environmental values mediate the effect of social-psychological variables on attitudes towards one’s sustainable actions. The current study, therefore, further discusses and validates the mediating mechanisms linking food-related CFCs and SFA via food-related health and environmental concerns.
This study, therefore, is based on the extended VBN (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Stern, 2002) to discuss and test the direct effects of two components of food-related CFCs (i.e. CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future), and two domain-specific egoistic/altruistic values (i.e. food-related health and environmental concerns, respectively) on SFA, providing knowledge regarding if and how each temporal component and environmental value are connected to SFC. This study also extends previous studies on temporal conflict and social dilemmas (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Khachatryan et al., 2013) and delves deeper into the psychological process forming SFA. As a result, the findings would bring more insight into policy development to promote sustainable consumption.
Fish is a typical kind of food that is consumed daily in various countries all over the world, such as South Korea (Lee and Nam, 2019), Indonesia (Fiandari et al., 2019), Japan (Kitano and Yamamoto, 2020), Spain (Bao et al., 2018), Norway (Rortveit and Olsen, 2009) and Vietnam (Thong and Olsen, 2012), among others. Fish, especially farmed fish, is good for health but also contains chemical contaminants causing health risks and environmental issues; therefore, fish is a main focus for sustainable aquaculture (Dube and Chanu, 2012; Reverter et al., 2020). Recently, there has been increasing attention to sustainable fish consumption (Honkanen and Young, 2015; Verain et al., 2016). Therefore, this study focuses on fish as a typical sustainable food product. Consequently, this study not only discusses and develops universal arguments for the relationships among food-related CFCs, environmental values and SFA but also focuses on consumers' attitudes toward sustainable fish consumption, providing not only general knowledge regarding the associations among variables but also specific insights into the consumption of fish.
After the introduction, the theoretical framework and hypothesis development will be presented, followed by methods used to conduct the present research and the estimated results. Subsequently, the implications, including theoretical implications for scholars and practical implications for businesses, will be proposed. Finally, some limitations and future research directions will be discussed.
2. Theoretical framework and hypothesis development
2.1 Sustainable food attitudes
Generally, attitudes are psychological tendencies expressed through the evaluation of a specific entity in either a favorable or an unfavorable manner (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993). In other words, attitudes allude to the positive or negative evaluation of the outcomes associated with performing a given behavior (Fishbein and Ajzen, 2010). Therefore, SFA can be defined as a tendency to respond with some degree of favorableness or unfavorableness to SFC based on the evaluation of the outcomes of such behavior (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993; Fishbein and Ajzen, 2010).
The VBN framework (Stern, 2002; Stern et al., 1985) has been widely adopted to explain sustainable/ethical behaviors (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Olsen et al., 2023). This framework expects that environmental values would form individual beliefs about the consequences of one’s actions regarding environmentally friendly behaviors (e.g. SFC), finally leading to norms/attitudes towards such actions. Furthermore, the extended perspective of the framework proposes that environmental values and attitudes are shaped by social-psychological factors that are “influenced by forces in … society […] that place people within the social structure, […] shape general social ideology, [and] […] offer people information and opinions relevant to environmental hazards … ” (Stern et al., 1985, p. 207) such as gender, political orientation and personality traits (Joireman and Liu, 2014).
2.2 Food-related CFCs
Originally, Strathman et al. (1994, p. 742) defined CFCs as “the extent to which individuals consider the potential distant outcomes of their current behaviors and the extent to which they are influenced by these potential outcomes”. Thus, they are a stable individual personality trait in the extent to which people consider distant versus immediate consequences of potential behaviors (Joireman et al., 2006, 2008, 2012). Previous studies have demonstrated that CFCs can predict diverse outcomes such as financial planning, health-related behavior and environmental concern (Joireman and King, 2016; McKay et al., 2017). However, as suggested by Dassen et al. (2015), “for the purposes of behavior prediction, CFC should be tailored to the behavior at interest and not be measured as a general construct” (p. 17). Accordingly, CFCs have been adapted to specific domains (McKay et al., 2017; Murphy et al., 2020), including food consumption (Dassen et al., 2015; Olsen and Tuu, 2017; van Beek et al., 2013).
Within this domain, food-related CFCs (i.e. CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future) reflect the extent to which people consider the potential distant outcomes of their current behaviors and are influenced by those potential outcomes (Joireman et al., 2012; Strathman et al., 1994) in food consumption (Olsen and Tuu, 2017, 2021). While CFCs have been considered as a personality trait or as an attitudinal construct (Kooij et al., 2018; Olsen et al., 2023), this study adopts the former view and treats CFCs as a stable individual difference which is consistent with previous studies that focus on general CFCs (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Joireman et al., 2012; Khachatryan et al., 2013) as well as the majority of prior studies in the food domain (Dassen et al., 2015; Olsen and Tuu, 2017; van Beek et al., 2013). Thus, following the extended perspective of the VBN framework, CFCs can activate environmental values (e.g. health and environmental concerns), which in turn lead to environmentally friendly behaviors (e.g. SFC).
2.3 Food-related egoistic and altruistic values
Value is defined as “a desirable trans-situational goal varying in importance, which serves as a guiding principle in the life of a person or other social entity” (Schwartz, 1992, p. 21). Rooted in human values, de Groot and Steg (2007) argue that environmental values reflect desirability and action tendencies for environmental situations as guiding principles for selecting or evaluating environment-related behavior, people and events. Until now, the structure of environmental values has developed to include four dimensions: altruistic, biospheric, egoistic and hedonistic values (de Groot and Steg, 2007; Steg et al., 2005). In line with the VBN framework, environmental values of egoism and altruism are the key determinants of positive attitudes of consumers towards and/or ethical buying behavior (Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav and Pathak, 2016).
While egoistic value leads individuals to act in their own interest (caring about social power, wealth, authority, influence and ambition), altruistic value fosters individuals to act for the welfare of others with little or no personal benefit (caring about people and society) (de Groot and Steg, 2007; Steg et al., 2005; Yadav, 2016). The two values are distinct and negatively correlated, both theoretically and practically, probably generating a social dilemma in a specific domain of life, such as SFC (Khachatryan et al., 2013; Olsen and Tuu, 2021), leading to the need to assess the role of the two values in the research context to develop a better understanding regarding the acceptance of SFC among consumers.
Food-related health concern can be understood as caring about health-related issues and safety problems for individuals and their families (Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav, 2016) related to food consumption. Health concern demonstrates the benefits to oneself (i.e. good health and better quality of life) and is thus consistent with the concept of pro-self that reflects egoistic value (Magnusson et al., 2003) in the context of ethical/organic consumption (Yadav, 2016; Yadav and Pathak, 2016). Meanwhile, food-related environmental concern is the degree to which people are aware of environmental problems related to food consumption and support efforts to solve them or indicate a willingness to contribute personally to their solution (Dunlap and Jones, 2002). Studies have argued that environmental concern reflects altruistic values in ethical/organic consumption settings (Kareklas et al., 2014; Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav, 2016). Furthermore, altruistic motives or values are essential for shaping individual beliefs about the environment, meaning that environmental consciousness is growing among individuals driven by their altruistic values (Yadav, 2016; Yadav and Pathak, 2016). Therefore, consistent with previous studies in the SFC context (Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav, 2016; Yadav and Pathak, 2016), health and environmental concerns can be considered manifestations of egoistic and altruistic values in the food domain.
2.4 Hypothesis development
2.4.1 Food-related health and environmental concerns and SFA
It is widely accepted that (food-related) health concern is one of the main motivations to engage individuals in environmentally friendly behaviors (Kushwah et al., 2019). Generally, compared to traditional food, the sustainable one is considered healthier and has a higher level of nutrition as its production does not use any chemical fertilizers and harmful pesticides (Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav, 2016). Sustainable food, therefore, can meet the individual requirements of being healthy and safe during food consumption, fostering positive evaluations and subsequently positive attitudes towards sustainable food (Smith and Paladino, 2021). This is in line with the postulation that suggests that health-conscious individuals are more likely to demonstrate eco-friendly behavior than others (Zanoli and Naspetti, 2002). The argument is also evident in different studies in ethical/green/organic settings (Kushwah et al., 2019). For example, previous research has shown that health concern can influence their attitudes toward green products (Kumar, 2019). Similarly, scholars have also proved that health concern is one of the main drivers of organic food (Yadav, 2016; Yadav and Pathak, 2016) and eco-friendly food (Prakash et al., 2019). Therefore, it is expected that health concern relating to food consumption (i.e. food-related health concern) fosters SFA in the current research context. This study proposes that
Food-related health concern has a positive effect on SFA.
Food-related environmental concern indicates an individual’s willingness to perform sustainable behaviors (e.g. SFC) to protect the natural environment with little thought of benefits for themselves (Ebreo et al., 2003). Environmental concern among individuals is more likely to foster positive attitudes toward SFC because it is pro-environmental and promotes the common good (Kareklas et al., 2014). Several studies have validated the association between environmental concern and ethical consumption attitudes/intentions/behaviors. For example, Smith and Paladino (2021) show a significant influence of environmental concern on individual attitudes towards buying organic food, which, in turn, promotes purchase intention. Prakash et al. (2019) demonstrate a similar relationship among environmental concern, attitudes and behavioral intention towards eco-friendly packaged products. Yadav (2016) and Yadav and Pathak (2016) validate that environmental concern fosters attitudes and finally leads to the purchase intention of organic food among young consumers. The findings of these studies are consistent with the argument that the main reasons for individual sustainable dietary choices are animal ethics, social responsibility and concern for the environment (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Olsen et al., 2023). Individuals who hold strong altruistic values such as environmental concern often avoid practices that harm society and act proactively for social benefit (Kareklas et al., 2014; Prakash et al., 2019). In this sense, it is expected that environmental concern relating to food consumption (food-related environmental concern) is more likely to foster positive attitudes toward SFC. Therefore, this study proposes that
Food-related environmental concern has a positive effect on SFA.
2.4.2 Food-related CFCs and SFA
Food-related CFCs (i.e. CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future) are personality traits reflecting the extent to which people consider the potential distant outcomes of their current behaviors and are influenced by those potential outcomes (Joireman et al., 2012) in food consumption (Olsen and Tuu, 2017, 2021). Individuals with a higher level of CFC-Immediate are more concerned with immediate benefits rather than benefits that will not occur for some time, while those with a higher level of CFC-Future believe certain behaviors are worthwhile because of future benefits and are more likely to put less importance on immediate benefits (Olsen and Tuu, 2017, 2021). In the food domain, CFCs demonstrate the tendency to evaluate food consumption in terms of near (e.g. safety and social acceptance) and/or distant (e.g. environmental and social well-being) outcomes of such action (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Olsen et al., 2023). Previous studies have demonstrated associations between (food-related) CFCs and healthy behaviors and/or organic food choice (Dassen et al., 2015; van Beek et al., 2013).
It is argued that individuals consume sustainable food for a wide range of reasons such as quality, perceptions of nutritional value and food safety, sensory appeal (i.e. taste), pleasure, social acceptance and/or a cleaner environment, animal welfare and supporting the local economy (Cerri et al., 2019; Kushwah et al., 2019; Vermeir et al., 2020), which can be categorized into immediate and future outcomes. In other words, SFC can meet both the immediate and future demands of individuals and thus is more likely to foster positive attitudes among individuals with dominance of either food-related CFC-Immediate or CFC-Future (Olsen and Tuu, 2021; Olsen et al., 2023). Therefore, this study proposes that
Food-related CFC-Immediate has a positive effect on SFA.
Food-related CFC-Future has a positive effect on SFA.
2.4.3 The mediating role of food-related health and environmental concerns
Previous review and meta-analysis studies have shown that CFCs are correlated with health and environmental values, beliefs and behaviors (e.g. Joireman and King, 2016; Milfont et al., 2012). However, previous research has demonstrated mixed results regarding the correlation between each component of CFCs and health and environmental decision-making. Within the health domain, CFC-Immediate is the only determinant predicting higher body mass index and smoking status and healthy eating (van Beek et al., 2013). Some authors find that CFC-Future is a stronger predictor of exercise (Joireman et al., 2012; van Beek et al., 2013) and healthy eating (Joireman et al., 2012) than CFC-Immediate. There also exists research showing that both components of CFCs are determinants of (un)healthy eating (Dassen et al., 2015; Olsen and Tuu, 2017). In the environmental domain, CFC-Future is the only predictor of environmental values and belief in global warming (Joireman and Liu, 2014), and CFC-Immediate is better than CFC-Future in explaining environmental motives (Arnocky et al., 2013). Khachatryan et al. (2013) find that both components have unique relationships with environmental values and preference, and Olsen and Tuu (2021) indicate that both CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future can predict the consumption of environmentally friendly food. The review of previous findings suggests that the best predictors (i.e. CFC-Immediate, CFC-Future or both) depend on the nature of the behaviors in question (Enzler, 2015). Furthermore, it can be expected that CFCs subscales would be associated with the relevant domain-specific values, beliefs and behaviors, showing differential associative patterns among CFCs and those variables (McKay et al., 2017; Olsen and Tuu, 2017).
According to the extended perspective of VBN, environmental values and attitudes are shaped by social-psychological factors (Stern et al., 1985). Joireman and Liu (2014) argue that social-psychological forces can include a wide range of social and psychological variables such as gender, political orientation and personality traits. As this study treats food-related CFCs as a stable personality trait (e.g. Dassen et al., 2015; Joireman and Liu, 2014; Joireman et al., 2012; Khachatryan et al., 2013; Olsen and Tuu, 2017; van Beek et al., 2013), it is argued that there might exist a chain of sequential effects from food-related CFCs to SFA via health/environment concerns as suggested by the extended VBN framework (Stern et al., 1985). This study, therefore, explores this potential hierarchical order to further consolidate the knowledge of if and how SFA can be formed. Consequently, it is expected that, in the SFC domain, the personality trait of CFCs, including CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future, is foundational to health and environmental concerns.
Food-related health concern reflects health-related issues and safety problems for individuals and their families (Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav, 2016) relating to food consumption not only because of short-term effects (e.g. digestive disorders) but also due to long-term effects (e.g. chemical substances causing diseases) (Magnusson et al., 2003). For example, sustainable food is believed to have greater nutritional value and to be produced in a natural way that does not involve the use of harmful chemical fertilizers (Prakash et al., 2019; Yadav and Pathak, 2016), which can improve individual health in both short and long term. Also, food-related environmental concern means that individuals are aware of environmental problems relating to food consumption and are ready to contribute/support efforts to solve them, protecting the environment (Dunlap and Jones, 2002). Therefore, it might not only include immediate issues such as food waste, single-use coverage and high use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in conventional food production but also involve more distant consequences, for example, gas emissions contributing to global warming, widespread use of antibiotics causing antibiotic resistance and habitat destruction (Kushwah et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2020; Vermeir et al., 2020). Given that the nature of food-related health and environmental concerns are influenced by both immediate and distant food consumption outcomes, these two variables could be affected by both CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future. Therefore, both CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future could affect them. In other words, it is expected that CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future will have a positive influence on food-related health and environmental concerns among individuals. Thus, this study proposes that
Food-related CFC-Immediate has positive effects on food-related health concern (a) and food-related environmental concern (b).
Food-related CFC-Future has positive effects on food-related health concern (a) and food-related environmental concern (b).
As discussed earlier, changes in food-related health and environmental concerns are more likely to influence SFA, with a higher level of these variables leading to a strong level of SFA. In this sense, it is expected that food-related health and environmental concerns are intermediary steps or necessary conditions, linking the indirect effect of food-related CFCs on SFA. This expectation is consistent with the extended perspective of VBN (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Stern, 2002), which generally establishes a serial chain of effects from social-psychological factors to environmental values leading to positive attitudes. Put differently, extended VBN has suggested the mediating role of environmental values linking the indirect impact of personality traits on attitudes. Also, these mediating effects are supported by the awareness model of CFCs, which suggests that CFCs impact attitudes toward a behavior through an awareness of the consequences of one’s behavior (CFCs → perceived consequences → behavior) (Joireman and King, 2016). Thus, this study proposes that
Food-related CFC-Immediate has indirect effect on SFA via food-related health concern (a) and food-related environmental concern (b).
Food-related CFC-Future has indirect effect on SFA via food-related health concern (a) and food-related environmental concern (b).
2.4.4 Control variables
Following previous studies (Olsen and Tuu, 2017; Olsen et al., 2023), the present research integrates age, gender, education and income as control variables in the proposed model. The proposed research model is presented in Figure 1.
3. Methods
3.1 Research sample
Fish is widely regarded as a healthy and sustainable dietary option (Forleo et al., 2022; Sacchettini et al., 2021). Fish consumption is deeply ingrained in the dietary preference and norms of Vietnamese people (Cong et al., 2013; Tuu et al., 2008). Indeed, fish is a traditional food and among the most selected foods of Vietnamese consumers (Figuié and Moustier, 2009; Thong and Olsen, 2012). This comes from the fact that Vietnam has a long coastline and abundant water resources, making fish an essential protein source in Vietnamese cuisine for centuries. Additionally, the preference for fresh seafood/fish of Vietnamese consumers, often sourced directly from local markets, supermarkets or coastal fishing villages, underscores the importance of quality and freshness in Vietnamese cuisine. This study seeks to investigate consumer perceptions of environmentally friendly fish products in coastal provinces of Central Vietnam which is a primary hub for fish production in the country (nhandan.vn, 2021).
The sample was collected at three coastal provinces of Central Vietnam: Phu Yen, Khanh Hoa and Ninh Thuan. This study adopted a non-probability sampling technique, specifically the convenience sampling method, to collect data. The respondents were local residents and domestic tourists visiting these coastal destinations. A screening question “Are you responsible for or influential in the food purchases for you/your family?” was used, and potential respondents who answered “No” were rejected. For eligible respondents, we explained the aim of the survey and emphasized that there was no right or wrong answer. We also mentioned that the responses would be encoded and used only for research purposes. Additionally, we briefly explained some keywords from the questionnaire, such as environmental problems, sustainable food and sustainable food (fish) consumption. Furthermore, the data collectors were always ready to explain questions and comments from respondents.
A questionnaire, which derived items from previous studies (Section 3.2), was used to collect data. We used different methods to distribute the questionnaire, including face-to-face interviews, self-administered surveys, emails and social networks. However, the main approaches were face-to-face interviews and self-administered surveys, which were used to collect data from the majority of local people and tourists. Emails and social networks were only used for a small number of local residents who requested the data collectors to send them the questionnaire via these channels. A total of 705 questionnaires were collected, from which we eliminated 5 questionnaires for lacking much information. We further screened and removed an additional 10 questionnaires for lacking over 15% of information. We also removed 26 questionnaires that were potential outliers. Thus, the final sample size was 664, and the response rate was 94.2%. The sample’s characteristics were 52.4% male, 64.5% married, and 94.6% had an education level from university graduate and below. The sample had an average participant age of 37 years, with a range spanning from 17 to 78 years. The average monthly income of the collected sample was US$ 400.
3.2 Measurements of the studied constructs
The measurement scales for the studied constructs were adopted from previous studies. More specifically, 14 items measuring food-related CFCs (seven items for CFC-Immediate and seven items for CFC-Future) were used from Joireman et al. (2012), adapted for food consumption context (e.g. Olsen and Tuu, 2017; Olsen and Tuu, 2021). Three items measuring food-related health concern were borrowed from Yadav (2016) and modified for the food consumption domain by adding the clause “Relating to food consumption, …” before each item. Three items measuring food-related environmental concern were utilized from Fujii (2006), also modified for the food consumption domain (e.g. I think environmental problems relating to food consumption are very important). Three items measuring SFA were adopted from Nystrand and Olsen (2020). This scale focuses specifically on sustainable fish consumption by adding the clause “Consuming sustainable fish makes me feel …”. All measurement scales use a seven-point Likert scale, ranging from 1: extremely disagree to 7: extremely agree.
3.3 Data analysis
This study employed partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) with SmartPLS version 4 and followed the guidance of Hair et al. (2021) to assess the measurement and structural models. More specifically, outer loadings, Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR) were used to assess reliability with a minimum value of 0.7. Convergent validity was evaluated using average variance extracted (AVE) with a minimum value of 0.5, and discriminant validity was appraised by the heterotrait-monotrait ratio of correlations (HTMT) matrix with a cutoff value of 0.85. The structural model tested the proposed hypotheses. The significance of the proposed hypotheses was evaluated by the variance inflation factor (VIF) with a maximum value of 3, path coefficient and p-value (5%). The bootstrap procedure with 5,000 sub-samples was adopted, and the confidence interval (CI) was used to assess the reliability of estimated hypotheses. The bootstrap procedure was also used to estimate the proposed indirect effects. Hair et al. (2021) have suggested that evaluating the model quality in PLS-SEM should use the coefficient of determination R2, Cohen’s f2 and the PLSPredict procedure to indicate exploratory power, effect sizes and predictive power of the research model. Therefore, the current study used these criteria to appraise the proposed model.
4. Results
4.1 The reliability and validity of constructs
The results, as presented in Table 1, indicated that all factor loadings, Cronbach’s alpha values and CR values were larger than 0.7, demonstrating that the reliability of the studied constructs was acceptable. Additionally, all the AVE values were greater than 0.5, demonstrating that their convergence validity was also ensured. The HTMT correlation matrix, as demonstrated in Table 2, demonstrated that all HTMT values were less than the cutoff value of 0.85. Thus, the discriminant validity of the studied constructs was validated. Also, the square root of the AVE of a studied construct was larger than all correlations between that construct and other constructs in the model, providing further evidence that discriminant validity was acceptable (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
4.2 Common method biases (CMB)
This study employed the common latent factor (CLF) approach (Podsakoff et al., 2003) justified for PLS-SEM (Liang et al., 2007) to check for common method biases (CMB) in the current study. Accordingly, a CLF whose indicators were all the indicators of the studied constructs was added to the model. The new model was estimated, and the results showed that most of the factor loadings of CLF were insignificant. Furthermore, the variance explained by CLF was very small compared to the studied construct, generating a proportion of 1:190. Therefore, it could be concluded that CMB was not serious in the present study. Moreover, the collinearity approach proposed by Kock and Lynn (2012) was also used to further test for CMB. Accordingly, a regression model was estimated with the studied constructs as independent variables and a randomly created one-item construct as the dependent variable. The testing results indicated that the VIF value for each estimated path was less than 3.3. Thus, it can be concluded that CMB was not a significant issue in the present study.
4.3 Hypothesis testing results
The testing results, as shown in Table 3, indicated that all VIF values ranged from 1.0 to 1.54 and were less than 3, implying that multicollinearity was not a serious problem in the current study. Among the proposed hypotheses, seven direct and three indirect hypotheses were supported by the collected data.
Direct effects: Health (H1: β = 0.23, p < 0.001) and environmental (H2: β = 0.23, p < 0.001) concerns had positive effects on SFA. Two components of CFCs, CFC-Immediate (H3: β = 0.14, p < 0.001) and CFC-Future (H4: β = 0.16, p < 0.001), also exerted positive impacts on SFA. CFC-Immediate had a positive influence on health concern (H5a: β = 0.21, p < 0.001) but not on environmental concern (H5b: β = 0.06, p > 0.05). Finally, CFC-Future had positive influences on both health concern (H6a: β = 0.29, p < 0.001) and environmental concern (H6b: β = 0.24, p < 0.001).
Indirect effects: CFC-Immediate had an indirect effect on SFA only via health concern (H7a: β = 0.05, p < 0.001), while CFC-Future had an indirect effect on SFA via both health concern (H8a: β = 0.07, p < 0.01) and environmental concern (H8b: β = 0.06, p < 0.001).
Control effects: Among the investigated control variables, gender (β = 0.16, p < 0.05) had a significant impact on SFA, while age (β = −0.06, p > 0.05), education (β = 0.05, p > 0.05) and income (β = −0.04, p > 0.05) did not exert significant influences on this variable.
The bootstrap procedure with 5,000 sub-samples was applied to assess the reliability of the estimations. The results indicated that the path coefficients of significant relationships had CIs that did not include the value of zero (0). Thus, it can be concluded that the estimated results were reliable.
Assessing model quality: Following the guidance of Hair et al. (2021), this study adopted the coefficient of determination R2, Cohen’s f2 and the PLSPredict procedure to evaluate the model quality estimated with PLS-SEM. The coefficient of determination (R2) was 0.268, indicating that the model can explain 26.8% of the variance of SFA. Cohen’s f2 ranged from 0.02 to 0.10, suggesting that the relationships among constructs seemed small. Finally, the results of the PLSpredict procedure, demonstrated in Table 4, showed that the values of the partial least square root mean square of error (PLS-SEM_MAE) were less than the maximum likelihood root mean square of error (LM_MAE) for two out of three items, demonstrating that the proposed model had medium predictive power.
5. Discussions
This study develops an integrated model to better understand temporal conflicts and social dilemmas on sustainable issues (Khachatryan et al., 2013; Milfont et al., 2012; Olsen and Tuu, 2021) in the specific domain of SFC (Arnocky et al., 2013). In particular, this study, under the lens of extended VBN (Joireman and Liu, 2014; Stern, 2002), discusses and investigates if and how food-related CFCs and health/environmental concerns, as well as their causal relationships, are related to SFA. The testing results support the roles of food-related CFC-Immediate/CFC-Future and health/environmental concerns in directly and indirectly predicting SFA. This study, therefore, fills the gap in knowledge regarding how food-related CFCs and health/environmental concerns directly and hierarchically affect SFA, contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of the psychological process of SFA formation.
5.1 Theoretical implications
In line with the VBN framework (Stern, 2002; Stern et al., 1985), environmental values of egoistic (pro-self)/altruism (pro-other) (Kareklas et al., 2014; Prakash et al., 2019) can predict sustainable attitudes/behaviors from converse perspectives (i.e. negative and positive) (Khachatryan et al., 2013; Olsen et al., 2023), implying that social dilemmas can exist in the domain of sustainable consumption. As demonstrated in the current study, food-related health concern reflecting egoistic value and food-related environmental concern characterizing altruistic value are positively associated with SFA, indicating that these two values, while reflecting social dilemmas in the specific domain of food consumption, both can foster SFA. The findings are consistent with previous studies in the setting of organic/green food consumption (Cerri et al., 2019; Testa et al., 2020; Vermeir et al., 2020), suggesting that domain-specific environmental values (e.g. food-related health and environmental concerns) might have a distinctive relationship pattern compared to abstract ones. Thus, this study contributes to the understanding of whether and how food-related health and environmental concerns can explain SFA, enriching the knowledge regarding how domain-specific values can be associated with and their roles in predicting SFC in general and sustainable fish consumption as a specific food. It shows that certain ethical/green behaviors, such as consuming sustainable food (fish), can align with both domain-specific pro-self and pro-other values and therefore are facilitated by those values. Additionally, this study calls for the further inclusion of different combinations of two types of domain-specific values to provide more insights into the psychological process that shapes SFA.
Two components of CFCs, CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future, can predict sustainable attitudes/behaviors in contradictory manners (i.e. negative and positive), suggesting that temporal conflict might exist in the domain of sustainable consumption (Enzler, 2015; Murphy et al., 2020). The current study shows that food-related CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future positively influence SFA, suggesting that general SFC as well as the consumption of sustainable fish are influenced by the consideration of both immediate and more distant outcomes. Therefore, while general CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future can be seen as temporal conflicts (Joireman et al., 2008, 2012), the two components of food-related CFCs are not necessarily contradicted but coexist in facilitating SFA, including attitudes toward sustainable fish. The finding is consistent with the previous argument that two components of CFCs exist together within individuals (Khachatryan et al., 2013; Olsen and Tuu, 2021) and their impacts on a behavior depend on the nature of the behavior in question (Enzler, 2015). This research further contributes by offering the understanding that domain-specific CFCs may have unique associative patterns with a certain behavior compared to general ones, urging more studies on this matter in the sustainable consumption domain.
The findings also indicate that food-related CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future have indirect effects on SFA (towards fish) through food-related health and environmental concerns. The results align with the extended perspective of VBN (Black et al., 1985; Stern, 2002), suggesting that social-psychological factors (e.g. food-related CFCs) can foster environmental values (e.g. food-related health and environmental concerns). These values, in turn, significantly determine pro-environment attitudes/behaviors. Therefore, the hierarchical relationship among food-related CFCs, health and environmental concerns and SFA is novel, providing scholars with a deeper and broader understanding of the intricate psychological process of sustainable consumption behaviors, including the consumption of sustainable fish. Furthermore, the findings suggest that food-related health and environmental concerns are necessary conditions for food-related CFCs to facilitate the consumption of sustainable food such as fish. Moreover, CFC-Immediate does not exert an indirect effect on SFA via environmental concern, suggesting that this concern is more related to the consideration of more distant rather than immediate outcomes. Thus, it is less likely to transfer the impact of CFC-Immediate on SFA. In a broader sense, environmental values can be expected to be the intermediaries linking personality traits to individual attitudes/behaviors regarding a specific sustainable food. Therefore, the proposed research model can be applied in future studies, aiming to investigate consumers’ attitudes toward various sustainable foods (e.g. meat, vegetables).
5.2 Practical implications
In addition to significant theoretical implications for scholars, the current study also sheds important practical implications for businesses that produce and sell sustainable food, such as fish, in order to increase consumers' positive attitudes towards their products. The findings indicate that both health and environmental concerns have a positive impact on SFA. Therefore, businesses should emphasize both of these values to enhance SFA (Olsen and Tuu, 2021). For instance, they can highlight issues related to human health and environmental harm associated with environmentally unfriendly produced food to encourage individuals who prioritize these values to engage more in activities that promote the consumption of sustainable food. Subsequently, businesses can develop a more effective communication strategy by emphasizing the healthy attributes (e.g. strong body) and/or environmental attributes (e.g. less pollution) of sustainable food such as fish to facilitate sustainable consumption.
The results also demonstrate that food-related CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future have positive effects on SFA. Therefore, a focus on both present and future consequences is important to increase the effectiveness of the businesses' communication campaign on sustainable food (fish) consumption. For example, demonstrating both short-term impacts (e.g. safety and social acceptance) and/or long-term impacts (e.g. environmental and social well-being) stemming from sustainable consumption may be an effective way to develop a promotional tendency to facilitate the consumption of sustainable food (fish) (Joireman et al., 2012). Furthermore, messages sent to individuals with a higher level of CFC-Immediate, emphasizing the immediate benefits of sustainable food (fish), may be more effective. On the other hand, messages sent to individuals with a higher level of CFC-Future emphasizing the future benefits of sustainable food could generate more desirable outcomes.
The results also reveal the indirect effects of food-related CFCs on SFA via food-related health and environmental concerns, indicating that these concerns are necessary conditions for CFCs to lead to SFA. Therefore, businesses should emphasize measuring food-related CFCs and health/environmental concerns when implementing communication strategies to promote sustainable food (fish) consumption. For individuals with a higher level of CFC-Immediate, it is significant to measure the level of health concern during communication as this concern is necessary for shaping their attitudes towards sustainable food, including fish, and ultimately influencing sustainable behaviors. In terms of individuals with a higher level of CFC-Future, both health and environmental concerns should be monitored to ensure that communication fits their tendency of putting more importance on future outcomes. In other words, different communicative messages should be designed for individuals with different dominant CFCs to foster the consumption of sustainable food (fish).
5.3 Limitations and future research
This study treats food-related CFCs as a personality trait and establishes a hierarchical path from CFCs to environmental values and finally to SFA based on the extended perspective of VBN theory (Stern et al., 1985). There also exists a view considering food-related CFCs as an attitudinal construct and thus supporting the role of the variable as an intermediary between environmental values and sustainable consumption behaviors (Olsen and Tuu, 2021). Indeed, both views have been proved to be theoretically sound (Olsen et al., 2023). Therefore, future studies should examine the impact of environmental values on food-related CFCs. It is expected that the outcomes of these studies can form a more comprehensive understanding regarding the relationship between the two variables in the domain of sustainable consumption. Second, while discussing and developing universal arguments about the relationships among investigated variables, this study focuses on sustainable fish when measuring consumers’ attitudes (c.f., Dassen et al., 2015; Olsen and Tuu, 2017). Future studies should examine more kinds of sustainable food (e.g. meat, vegetables) to form a diverse knowledge of SFC. Future studies should also consider adding more environmental values and contextual factors that can act as contingent conditions to better predict SFC attitudes and behaviors. Finally, future studies should collect data from different areas to increase the representativeness of the sample.
Figures
Figure 1
Proposed research model
Reliability and convergence validity of studied constructs
| Constructs and indicators | Factor loadings | Cronbach’s alpha | Composite reliability | Variance extracted |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Food-related CFC-Immediate: Relating to consuming food … | 0.97 | 0.97 | 0.84 | |
| I act only to satisfy immediate needs, and what happens in the future is less important | 0.89 | |||
| My convenience is an important factor in the decisions or actions I take | 0.94 | |||
| I usually ignore warnings about the future consequences of my food behavior because I think that the consequences are easily solved | 0.91 | |||
| I think that renouncing something now is unnecessary. What happens in the future can be taken care of when it comes | 0.92 | |||
| To me, obtaining present values or goals is always important first and foremost; future consequences will be solved later | 0.94 | |||
| My food consumption behavior depends on the results I get now in the present; I am not concerned about its long-term impact | 0.92 | |||
| Food-related CFC-Future: Relating to consuming food … | 0.94 | 0.95 | 0.74 | |
| I consider how things can be in the future and try to influence these things with my daily eating behavior | 0.86 | |||
| I am often engaged in using food to achieve results that do not appear before many years | 0.87 | |||
| I am willing to sacrifice my immediate happiness and well-being to achieve results in the future | 0.87 | |||
| I often think about the negative consequences of consuming food in the future, even though the negative outcome will not occur until after many years | 0.87 | |||
| I prioritize using food products that will be better for myself in the future rather than obtaining immediate consequences | 0.83 | |||
| When deciding to consume food products, I often think about how it affects me in the future | 0.87 | |||
| My present behavior is affected by the results that I receive in the future | 0.83 | |||
| Food-related health concern: Relating to food consumption, … | 0.81 | 0.89 | 0.72 | |
| I chose food carefully to ensure the good health | 0.88 | |||
| I didn’t consider myself as health-conscious consumer (reserved) | 0.82 | |||
| I think often about health-related issues | 0.85 | |||
| Food-related environmental concern | 0.91 | 0.94 | 0.85 | |
| Environmental problems relating to food consumption are very important | 0.92 | |||
| Environmental problems relating to food consumption cannot be ignored | 0.91 | |||
| We should care about environmental problems relating to food consumption | 0.93 | |||
| Sustainable food attitude: Consuming sustainable fish makes me feel … | 0.89 | 0.93 | 0.83 | |
| Good | 0.90 | |||
| Enjoyable | 0.92 | |||
| Wise | 0.91 |
Source(s): Authors' own work
HTMT correlation matrix
| Constructs | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Food-related CFC-Immediate | 0.92 | −0.04 | 0.20 | 0.05 | 0.21 |
| 2. Food-related CFC-Future | 0.06 | 0.86 | 0.28 | 0.24 | 0.26 |
| 3. Food-related health concern | 0.22 | 0.30 | 0.85 | 0.52 | 0.43 |
| 4. Food-related environmental value | 0.06 | 0.23 | 0.60 | 0.92 | 0.39 |
| 5. SFA | 0.22 | 0.27 | 0.49 | 0.42 | 0.91 |
Note(s): SFA: sustainable food attitudes; HTMT and Fornell and Larcker (1981) correlations are below and above the diagonal, respectively; square root values of average variance extracted are on the diagonal
Source(s): Authors' own work
Results of testing hypotheses
| Hypotheses | VIFs | Std. β | t-value | Bootstrap | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct effects | |||||
| H1: Health concern → SFA | 1.54 | 0.23 | 4.64*** | [0.13; 0.32] | Support |
| H2: Environmental concern → SFA | 1.41 | 0.23 | 4.96*** | [0.14; 0.33] | Support |
| H3: CFC-Immediate → SFA | 1.09 | 0.14 | 4.05*** | [0.07; 0.21] | Support |
| H4: CFC-Future → SFA | 1.15 | 0.16 | 4.22*** | [0.09; 0.23] | Support |
| H5a: CFC-Immediate → health concern | 1.00 | 0.21 | 6.89*** | [0.15; 0.27] | Support |
| H5b: CFC-Immediate → environmental concern | 1.00 | 0.06 | 1.59ns | [−0.01; 0.13] | Not support |
| H6a: CFC-Future → health concern | 1.00 | 0.29 | 6.99*** | [0.21; 0.37] | Support |
| H6b: CFC-Future → environmental concern | 1.00 | 0.24 | 6.05*** | [0.16; 0.31] | Support |
| Indirect effects | |||||
| H7a: CFC-Immediate → health concern → SFA | 0.05 | 3.86*** | [0.03; 0.08] | Support | |
| H7b: CFC-Immediate → environmental concern → SFA | 0.01 | 1.52ns | [−0.002; 0.03] | Not support | |
| H8a: CFC-Future → health concern → SFA | 0.07 | 3.93*** | [0.04; 0.10] | Support | |
| H8b: CFC-Future → environmental concern → SFA | 0.06 | 3.54*** | [0.03; 0.09] | Support | |
| Control variables | |||||
| Age → SFA | 1.14 | −0.06 | 1.83ns | [−0.12; 0.003] | – |
| Gender → SFA | 1.04 | 0.16 | 2.36* | [0.03; 0.29] | – |
| Education → SFA | 1.13 | 0.05 | 1.44ns | [−0.02; 0.12] | – |
| Income → SFA | 1.23 | −0.04 | 1.03ns | [−0.11; 0.04] | – |
| R2 (%) | SFA: 26.8 | ||||
| f2 | f2 Health concern → SFA: 0.05; f2 Environmental concern → SFA: 0.05 f2 CFC-Immediate → SFA: 0.02 f2 CFC-Future → SFA: 0.03 f2 CFC-Immediate → Health concern: 0.05 f2 CFC-Future → Health concern: 0.10 f2 CFC- Future → Environmental concern: 0.06 | ||||
Note(s): SFA: sustainable food (fish) attitudes; ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05; ns non-significant
Source(s): Authors' own work
PLSpredict procedure
| Construct | Indicator | PLS-SEM_MAE | LM_MAE | Q2_predict |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sustainable food attitudes | SFA1 | 1.041 | 1.062 | 0.073 |
| SFA2 | 1.021 | 1.006 | 0.074 | |
| SFA3 | 1.027 | 1.032 | 0.106 |
Note(s): MAE: mean absolute error; LM: linear regression model
Source(s): Authors' own work
References
Arnocky, S., Milfont, T.L. and Nicol, J.R. (2013), “Time perspective and sustainable behavior”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 556-582, doi: 10.1177/0013916512474987.
Bao, M., Pierce, G.J., Strachan, N.J.C., Martínez, C., Fernández, R. and Theodossiou, I. (2018), “Consumers' attitudes and willingness to pay for Anisakis - free fish in Spain”, Fisheries Research, Vol. 202, pp. 149-160, doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2017.06.018.
Black, J.S., Stern, P.C. and Elworth, J.T. (1985), “Personal and contextual influences on househould energy adaptations”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 70 No. 1, pp. 3-21, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.70.1.3.
Cerri, J., Thøgersen, J. and Testa, F. (2019), “Social desirability and sustainable food research: a systematic literature review”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 71, pp. 136-140, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2018.06.013.
Cong, L.C., Olsen, S.O. and Tuu, H.H. (2013), “The roles of ambivalence, preference conflict and family identity: a study of food choice among Vietnamese consumers”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 92-100, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.08.015.
Dassen, F.C., Houben, K. and Jansen, A. (2015), “Time orientation and eating behavior: unhealthy eaters consider immediate consequences, while healthy eaters focus on future health”, Appetite, Vol. 91, pp. 13-19, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.03.020.
de Groot, J.I.M. and Steg, L. (2007), “Value orientations to explain beliefs related to environmental significant behavior”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 330-354, doi: 10.1177/0013916506297831.
Dube, K. and Chanu, T.I. (2012), “Organic aquaculture: way to sustainable production”, in Goswami, U.C. (Ed.), Advances in Fish Research, Narendra Publishing House, Delhi, pp. 219-229.
Dunlap, R.E. and Jones, R.E. (2002), “Environmental concern: conceptual and measurement issues”, in Dunlap, R.E. and Michelson, W. (Eds), Handbook of Environmental Sociology, Greenwood Press, London, pp. 482-524.
Eagly, A.H. and Chaiken, S. (1993), The Psychology of Attitudes, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College, New York.
Ebreo, A., Vining, J. and Cristancho, S. (2003), “Responsibility for environmental problems and the consequences of waste reduction: a test of the norm-activation model”, Journal of Environmental Systems, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 219-244, doi: 10.2190/eqgd-2daa-kaaj-w1dc.
Enzler, H.B. (2015), “Consideration of future consequences as a predictor of environmentally responsible behavior: evidence from a general population study”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 47 No. 6, pp. 618-643, doi: 10.1177/0013916513512204.
Fiandari, Y.R., Surachman, S., Rohman, F. and Hussein, A.S. (2019), “Perceived value dimension in repetitive fish consumption in Indonesia by using an extended theory of planned behavior”, British Food Journal, Vol. 121 No. 6, pp. 1220-1235, doi: 10.1108/bfj-07-2018-0429.
Figuié, M. and Moustier, P. (2009), “Market appeal in an emerging economy: supermarkets and poor consumers in Vietnam”, Food Policy, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 210-217, doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2008.10.012.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (2010), Predicting and Changing Behavior: The Reasoned Action Approach, Psychology Press, New York, NY.
Forleo, M.B., Romagnoli, L. and Palmieri, N. (2022), “Are Italian consumers of canned tuna fish sensitive to environmentally sustainable product attributes?”, British Food Journal, Vol. 125 No. 2, pp. 608-625, doi: 10.1108/bfj-08-2021-0893.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50, doi: 10.2307/3151312.
Fujii, S. (2006), “Environmental concern, attitude toward frugality, and ease of behavior as determinants of pro-environmental behavior intentions”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 262-268, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.09.003.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2021), A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 3rd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Honkanen, P. and Young, J.A. (2015), “What determines British consumers' motivation to buy sustainable seafood?”, British Food Journal, Vol. 117 No. 4, pp. 1289-1302, doi: 10.1108/bfj-06-2014-0199.
Joireman, J. and King, S. (2016), “Individual differences in the consideration of future and (more) immediate consequences: a review and directions for future research”, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 313-326, doi: 10.1111/spc3.12252.
Joireman, J. and Liu, R.L. (2014), “Future-oriented women will pay to reduce global warming: mediation via political orientation, environmental values, and belief in global warming”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 40, pp. 391-400, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.005.
Joireman, J., Strathman, A. and Balliet, D.P. (2006), “Considering future consequences: an integrative model”, in Sanna, L.J. and Chang, E.C. (Eds), Judgments Over Time: The Interplay of Thoughts, Feelings, and Behaviors, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, pp. 82-99.
Joireman, J., Balliet, D., Sprott, D., Spangenberg, E. and Schultz, J. (2008), “Consideration of future consequences, ego-depletion, and self-control: support for distinguishing between CFC-immediate and CFC-future sub-scales”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 15-21, doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2008.02.011.
Joireman, J., Shaffer, M.J., Balliet, D. and Strathman, A. (2012), “Promotion orientation explains why future-oriented people exercise and eat healthy: evidence from the two-factor consideration of future consequences-14 scale”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 38 No. 10, pp. 1272-1287, doi: 10.1177/0146167212449362.
Kareklas, I., Carlson, J.R. and Muehling, D.D. (2014), “‘I eat organic for my benefit and yours’: egoistic and altruistic considerations for purchasing organic food and their implications for advertising strategists”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 18-32, doi: 10.1080/00913367.2013.799450.
Khachatryan, H., Joireman, J. and Casavant, K. (2013), “Relating values and consideration of future and immediate consequences to consumer preference for biofuels: a three-dimensional social dilemma analysis”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 97-108, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.01.001.
Kitano, S. and Yamamoto, N. (2020), “The role of consumer knowledge, experience, and heterogeneity in fish consumption: policy lessons from Japan”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 56, 102151, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102151.
Klöckner, C.A. (2013), “A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour—a meta-analysis”, Global Environmental Change, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 1028-1038, doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.014.
Kock, N. and Lynn, G. (2012), “Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: an illustration and recommendations”, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 13 No. 7, pp. 546-580, doi: 10.17705/1jais.00302.
Kooij, D., Kanfer, R., Betts, M. and Rudolph, C.W. (2018), “Future time perspective: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 103 No. 8, pp. 867-893, doi: 10.1037/apl0000306.
Kumar, A. (2019), “Exploring young adults' e-waste recycling behaviour using an extended theory of planned behaviour model: a cross-cultural study”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 141, pp. 378-389, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.10.013.
Kushwah, S., Dhir, A., Sagar, M. and Gupta, B. (2019), “Determinants of organic food consumption. A systematic literature review on motives and barriers”, Appetite, Vol. 143, 104402, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2019.104402.
Lee, M.K. and Nam, J. (2019), “The determinants of live fish consumption frequency in South Korea”, Food Research International, Vol. 120, pp. 382-388, doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2019.03.005.
Liang, H., Saraf, N., Hu, Q. and Xue, Y. (2007), “Assimilation of enterprise systems: the effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 59-87, doi: 10.2307/25148781.
Magnusson, M.K., Arvola, A., Hursti, U.K.K., Åberg, L. and Sjödén, P.O. (2003), “Choice of organic foods is related to perceived consequences for human health and to environmentally friendly behaviour”, Appetite, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 109-117, doi: 10.1016/s0195-6663(03)00002-3.
McKay, M.T., Perry, J.L., Cole, J.C. and Magee, J. (2017), “Adolescents consider the future differently depending on the domain in question: results of an exploratory study in the United Kingdom”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 104, pp. 448-452, doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.09.002.
Milfont, T.L., Wilson, J. and Diniz, P. (2012), “Time perspective and environmental engagement: a meta-analysis”, International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 47 No. 5, pp. 325-334, doi: 10.1080/00207594.2011.647029.
Murphy, L., Cadogan, E. and Dockray, S. (2020), “The consideration of future consequences: evidence for domain specificity across five life domains”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. 663-678, doi: 10.1177/0146167219873478.
nhandan.vn (2021), “Vietnam's central provinces make efforts to revive fishing industry”, available at: https://en.nhandan.vn/vietnams-central-provinces-make-efforts-to-revive-fishing-industry-post107238.html (accessed 30 March 2024).
Nystrand, B.T. and Olsen, S.O. (2020), “Consumers' attitudes and intentions toward consuming functional foods in Norway”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 80, 103827, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2019.103827.
Olsen, S.O. and Tuu, H.H. (2017), “Time perspectives and convenience food consumption among teenagers in Vietnam: the dual role of hedonic and healthy eating values”, Food Research International, Vol. 99 No. 1, pp. 98-105, doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2017.05.008.
Olsen, S.O. and Tuu, H.H. (2021), “The relationships between core values, food-specific future time perspective and sustainable food consumption”, Sustainable Production and Consumption, Vol. 26, pp. 469-479, doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2020.12.019.
Olsen, S.O., Tuu, H.H. and Tudoran, A.A. (2023), “Comparing time focus with time importance for measuring future time perspectives in the context of pro-environmental values and outcomes”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 14, 945487, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.945487.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
Prakash, G., Choudhary, S., Kumar, A., Garza-Reyes, J.A., Khan, S.A.R. and Panda, T.K. (2019), “Do altruistic and egoistic values influence consumers' attitudes and purchase intentions towards eco-friendly packaged products? An empirical investigation”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 50, pp. 163-169, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.05.011.
Reverter, M., Tapissier-Bontemps, N., Sarter, S., Sasal, P. and Caruso, D. (2020), “Moving towards more sustainable aquaculture practices: a meta-analysis on the potential of plant-enriched diets to improve fish growth, immunity and disease resistance”, Reviews in Aquaculture, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 537-555, doi: 10.1111/raq.12485.
Rortveit, A.W. and Olsen, S.O. (2009), “Combining the role of convenience and consideration set size in explaining fish consumption in Norway”, Appetite, Vol. 52 No. 2, pp. 313-317, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2008.11.001.
Sacchettini, G., Castellini, G., Graffigna, G., Hung, Y., Lambri, M., Marques, A., Perrella, F., Savarese, M., Verbeke, W. and Capri, E. (2021), “Assessing consumers' attitudes, expectations and intentions towards health and sustainability regarding seafood consumption in Italy”, Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 789, 148049, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148049.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), “Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries”, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 1-65, doi: 10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6.
Smith, S. and Paladino, A. (2021), “Eating clean and green? Investigating consumer motivations towards the purchase of organic food”, Australasian Marketing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 93-104, doi: 10.1016/j.ausmj.2010.01.001.
Steg, L., Dreijerink, L. and Abrahamse, W. (2005), “Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: a test of VBN theory”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 415-425, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.003.
Stern, P.C. (2002), “New environmental theories: toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 407-424, doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00175.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T. and Black, J.S. (1985), “Support for environmental protection: the role of moral norms”, Population and Environment, Vol. 8 Nos 3-4, pp. 204-222, doi: 10.1007/bf01263074.
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D.S. and Edwards, C.S. (1994), “The consideration of future consequences: weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 66 No. 4, pp. 742-752, doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.66.4.742.
Testa, F., Pretner, G., Iovino, R., Bianchi, G., Tessitore, S. and Iraldo, F. (2020), “Drivers to green consumption: a systematic review”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 4826-4880, doi: 10.1007/s10668-020-00844-5.
Thong, N.T. and Olsen, S.O. (2012), “Attitude toward and consumption of fish in Vietnam”, Journal of Food Products Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 79-95, doi: 10.1080/10454446.2012.653778.
Tuu, H.H., Olsen, S.O., Thao, D.T. and Anh, N.T.K. (2008), “The role of norms in explaining attitudes, intention and consumption of a common food (fish) in Vietnam”, Appetite, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 546-551.
van Beek, J., Antonides, G. and Handgraaf, M.J.J. (2013), “Eat now, exercise later: the relation between consideration of immediate and future consequences and healthy behavior”, Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 54 No. 6, pp. 785-791, doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2012.12.015.
Verain, M.C.D., Sijtsema, S.J. and Antonides, G. (2016), “Consumer segmentation based on food-category attribute importance: the relation with healthiness and sustainability perceptions”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 48, pp. 99-106, doi: 10.1016/j.foodqual.2015.08.012.
Vermeir, I., Weijters, B., De Houwer, J., Geuens, M., Slabbinck, H., Spruyt, A., Van Kerckhove, A., Van Lippevelde, W., De Steur, H. and Verbeke, W. (2020), “Environmentally sustainable food consumption: a review and research agenda from a goal-directed perspective”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11, p. 1603, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01603.
Yadav, R. (2016), “Altruistic or egoistic: which value promotes organic food consumption among young consumers? A study in the context of a developing nation”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 33, pp. 92-97, doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.08.008.
Yadav, R. and Pathak, G.S. (2016), “Intention to purchase organic food among young consumers: evidences from a developing nation”, Appetite, Vol. 96, pp. 122-128, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.09.017.
Zanoli, R. and Naspetti, S. (2002), “Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food”, British Food Journal, Vol. 104 No. 8, pp. 643-653, doi: 10.1108/00070700210425930.
Further reading
Fisher, H., Erasmus, A.C. and Viljoen, A.T. (2016), “Young adults' consideration of their food choices a propos consequences for their future health”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 475-483, doi: 10.1111/ijcs.12273.
Verain, M.C., Dagevos, H. and Antonides, G. (2015), “Sustainable food consumption. Product choice or curtailment?”, Appetite, Vol. 91, pp. 375-384, doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2015.04.055.
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by the Vietnam Ministry of Education and Training under grant number CT2022.05.TSN.01.