Empirical Final

EMPERICAL STUDY ON CONSUMER PREFERENCES
AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS GREEN PACKAGING OF
FOODS AND BEVERAGES
COMPLETED UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF
“PROF. T.N.SWAMINATHAN”

Consumer preferences and attitudes towards green packaging of food and beverages
2 | P a g e
CONTENTS
1. ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................... 3
2. THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS..................................................................................................4
2.1 THEORY........................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.1 DEMOGRAPHICS ...........................................................................................................5
PSYCHOGRAPHICS................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 HYPOTHESIS .................................................................................................................... 7
3. SURVEY PROCEDURE – CHOICE OF METHOD .......................................................................8
3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 8
3.2 METHOD.................................................................................................................... 8
3.3 Questionnaire Link: ....................................................................................................8
4. RESULTS............................................................................................................................ 9
4.1 RELIABILITY................................................................................................................ 9
5. DISCUSSION .................................................................................................................... 11
6. APPENDIX ....................................................................................................................... 12
6.1 REFERENCES:............................................................................................................ 12
6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE...................................................................................................... 15

3 | P a g e
1. ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to collect and analyze data related to consumer attitude &
preferences towards buying green packaged foods and beverages in India. These attributes
will be observed based on different product parameters such as Eco-friendly appearance,
affordability and availability of such products in the market. Further we will try to determine
the level of sense of responsibility of consumers towards the environment that drives their
buying behavior for green packaged foods and beverages. India is an ideal market with a lot
of scope but a little research work done in the Indian context investigating the consumer
attitude and behavior towards green marketing. The purpose of this paper is to move away
from the traditional attitude-based studies of environmental consumer behavior and to
examine consumer choices between realistic product alternatives when consumers have to
balance their preferences over different product attributes. This paper stresses on
environmental behavior paradigm and models of consumer multi-attribute choice in a sense
that we interpret environmental choice as a trade-off situation between several choice
criteria. Our aim is to find the attributes which relate to perceived consumer effectiveness
and evaluate the extent to which consumer value environment-friendly packaging in their
product choices compared with other product characteristics and study the dimensions of
consumer that influence customer’s attitude and behavior in Indian market. Our desired
sample would consist of consumers from tier 1 and tier 2 cities. For our qualitative research
method, we have used “Historical Data & Artifacts”, to gather an in-depth understanding and
the reasons that govern, consumers’ attitude and preferences towards buying green
packaged foods and beverages in India,. Based on this research we came up with 11 distinct
independent variables. Our quantitative research methodology would consist of Survey
Research, where we propose to float a questionnaire of around 44 questions to the
respondents, which would determine and measure whether these 11 variables impact the
consumer attitude and preferences and if yes to what extent. It would take the respondents
approximately 20 minutes to efficiently fill the survey. The responses to our questionnaire
would serve as the primary source of data. Based on this primary data, along with the
available secondary research data this study would measure the impact of positioning of
green packaged foods and beverages in the Indian market

4 | P a g e
2. THEORY AND HYPOTHESIS
2.1 THEORY
While our current way of life in the industrial age is the cause of global warming, many
manufacturers are planting the seeds of change with environmentally-friendly packaging that
can help reduce its effects. The ongoing debate on marketing ethics and corporate social
responsibility either fails to give adaptable theoretical insights or lacks empirical foundation
(Hunt and Vitell, 1986; Laczniak, 1993; Laczniak and Murphy, 1993; Smith, 1995, 2001;
Thompson, 1995; Smith and Quelch, 1996; Gaski, 1999; Carrigan and Attala, 2001). The
essence of ethical marketing practices and corporate responsibility programmes lies in that
they help companies to generate a positive corporate image and increase customers’
willingness to purchase the company’s products (Pirsch et al., 2007). It has been proven
through researches that consumers do value environment friendly and ethical products but
their daily buying behaviour have been inconsistent (Uusitalo, 1989, 1990a; Alwitt and Pitts,
1996; Bech-Larsen, 1996). Researchers are also concerned about the factor which forces
consumer purchasing behaviour, whether it is the company’s social and ethical policies or it
is the growing environmental and ethical consciousness among consumers (Creyer and Ross,
1997; Shaw and Clarke, 1999; Boulstridge and Carrigan, 2000; Carrigan and Attala, 2001; De
Pelsmacker et al., 2005). Nowadays marketers are including a green approach in framing the
marketing programs. Taking up this responsibility, utmost care should be taken while framing
the marketing plans,strategies and policies soas to prevent the environment and nature from
any harm caused due to its operations not only today but also in future(A Rani 2012). Keeping
this in mind, companies are moving towards green packaging which avoids depletion of non-
renewable resources, minimizing wastage and usage of raw materials, reducing pollution and
energy consumption and consequently global warming and climatic changes resulting from
fossil fuel usage (EIO and CfSD 2013). The importance of the waste problem suggests that
environment-friendliness of product packaging should be added into consumer choice
models as a relevant product attribute (Rokka and Uusitalo 2008). In the choice of packaging
for a consumer – a choice made when a desired product comes in alternative packages –
functional package characteristics such as convenience of use, design and aesthetics have
been in the forefront. Many consumers fail to understand the connection between their
buying decision and various environmental consequences if there is no environmental
information, such as labels, to remind them of it. Other reasons include the lack of supply of
environment-friendly packaging options in the marketplace and consumers’ inability to
distinguish between the more and less environment-friendly package alternatives (Bech-
Larsen, 1996; Thøgersen, 1996). Often consumers also undervalue the impact of their own
‘marginal’ contribution to the problem (Uusitalo, 1989). Only recently did the environmental
consequences of packaging and the amount of household waste have become a major focus
of concentration (Prendergast et al., 1997; Thøgersen, 1999; Bone and Corey, 2000; Roper
and Parker, 2006). It is expected that a majority of the Indian consumers will search for value
for the money paid by them when it comes to purchasing a green product or service. It is also
likely that the Indian consumers will not be willing to pay premium only for greenness. Price-
sensitivity of Indian consumers is the main reason behind making such assumptions. A few of
such attributes of consumers are discussed below in details

5 | P a g e
2.1.1 DEMOGRAPHICS
Several studies have shown the previously mentioned positive relationship between income
and environmental attitudes and behaviours (Kinnear et al.,1974; McEvoy, 1972; Roper, 1990;
1992; Zimmer et al.,1994). On the other hand, a few studies have found the opposite, a
negative relationship between income and environmental concerns (Roberts, 1996b;
Samdahl and Robertson, 1989). Roberts (1996b) theorizes that the differences shown in
studies in the past may have been washed out by the overall growth in environmental
concerns across all income levels. He also cautions that although the relationship in his study
was significant, the amount of variance explained was small.
Level of education is another demographic variable that has been linked to environmental
attitudes and behaviour (Aaker and Bagozzi,1982; Anderson et al.,1974; Kinnear et al.,1974;
Leonard-Barton, 1981;McEvoy, 1972; Murphy et al.,1978; Newell and Green, 1997; Roberts,
1995; 1996b; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Roper, 1990; 1992; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989;
Schwartz and Miller, 1991; Tognacci et al.,1972; Van Liere and Dunlap, 1981; Zimmer et al.,
1994).The hypothesized relationship has been fairly consistent across these studies.
Specifically, education is expected to be positively correlated with environmental concerns
and behaviour.
Samdahl and Robertson (1989) found the opposite, that education was negatively correlated
with environmental attitudes, and Kinnear et al. (1974) found no significant relationship.
In nearly 30 years of research, many studies have considered the correlation between place
of residence and environmental concern. Of the studies ( Antil, 1984; Hounshell and Liggett,
1973; McEvoy, 1972; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989; Schwartz and Miller, 1991; Van Liere and
Dunlap, 1981; Zimmer et al., 1994) to address place of residence as a correlate of green
attitudes and behaviours, all but Hounshell and Liggett (1973) have found that those living in
urban areas are likely to show more favourable attitudes towards environmental issues.
PSYCHOGRAPHICS
Hine and Gifford (1991) investigated the effect of a fear appeal relating to the anti-pollution
movement on several different pro environmental behaviours. Among the significant
findings, the researchers found that political orientation was significantly correlated with one
of the lower-order responses, verbal commitment. Specifically, their findings suggest that
those with more liberal political beliefs are more likely to exhibit strong verbal commitment
than those with more conservative political views.
Based on Schwartz's norm-activation theory, Stern et al. (1993) examined the role that social-
altruism and egoism played in influencing green behaviour. Specifically, their discussion
centres on whether social altruism, a concern for the welfare of others, is the sole driver of
environmentally friendly market behaviour, or whether the positive effect of social-altruism

6 | P a g e
is countered by the negative influence of egoism, which inhibits willingness to incur extra
costs associated with environmentalism
Several studies (Antil, 1978; Berger and Corbin, 1992; Kinnear et al., 1974; Roberts, 1995;
1996b; Roberts andBacon, 1997; Webster, 1975; Weiner and Doescher, 1991) have addressed
the premise that consumers' attitudes and responses to environmental appeals are a function
of their belief that individuals can positively influence the outcome to such problems. This
attitude or beliefis referred to as perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE).Findings have been
fairly conclusive that PCE is positively correlated with ecologically conscious consumer
behaviour (ECCB). Recently, Roberts (1996b) found that this was the single strongest
predictor of ECCB, surpassing all other demographic and psychographic correlates examined.
The relationship between attitudes and behaviour is one that has been explored in a variety
of contexts. In the environmental literature, the question has been addressed by exploring
the relationship between the attitudinal construct, environmental concern, and various
behavioural measures and/or observations. Those studies (Antil, 1984; Kinnear et al., 1974;
Lepisto, 1974; Roberts, 1995; 1996b; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Van Liere and Dunlap, 1981)
examining environmental concern as a correlate of environmentally friendly behaviour have
generally found a positive correlation between the two.
The primary interest of packaging research has focused on communicative characteristics of
the package (e.g. labelling, functionality, colour, size) (Roper and Parker, 2006; Silayoi and
Speece, 2007). In a few cases where environmental packaging has been an issue, the studies
indicate that functional packaging characteristics influence consumers’ purchasing decisions,
whereas environmental characteristics do not seem to have any practical importance. Few
studies can be found where the environmental product packaging is explicitly studied at the
buying stage as one of the determinants of consumers’ product choice. Bech-Larsen (1996)
suggests that there
might be a group of consumers – albeit small – with strong preferences for green packaging,
and there might be a market for this type of packaging. Thøgersen (1999) have found that
many consumers failto understand the connection between their buying decisionand various
environmental consequences if there is no environmental information, such as labels, to
remind them of it. Other reasons include the lackof supply of environment-friendly packaging
options in the marketplace and consumers’ inability to distinguishbetween the more and less
environment-friendly package alternatives (Bech-Larsen, 1996; Thøgersen, 1996). Often
consumers also undervalue the impact of their own ‘marginal’ contribution to the problem
(Uusitalo, 1989).
India is an idealmarket with alot of scopebut alittle research work done in the Indian context
investigating the consumer attitude and behaviour towards green marketing. The purpose of
this paper is to move away from the traditional attitude-based studies of environmental
consumer behaviour and to examine consumer choices between realisticproduct alternatives
when consumers have to balance their preferences over different product attributes. This
paper stresses on environmental behaviour paradigm and models of consumer multi-
attribute choice in a sense that we interpret environmental choice as a trade-off situation

7 | P a g e
between several choice criteria. Our aim is to find the attributes which relate to perceived
consumer effectiveness and evaluate the extent to which consumer value environment-
friendly packaging in their product choices compared with other product characteristics and
study the dimensions of consumer that influence customer’s attitude and behaviour in Indian
market.
Based on historical data and findings from the literature review, we determined the following
factors that affect or influence consumer preference and attitude towards green packaged
products.
2.2 HYPOTHESIS
H1: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on level of education.
H2: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on Income.
H3: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent perceived consumer effectiveness.
H4: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on the price of the product.
H5: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on social altruism.
H6: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on governmental laws and policies.
H7: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on convenience of use of the product.
H8: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on design of the product package.
H9: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on aesthetics of the product package.
H10: Consumer preference and attitude is dependent on availability of the product.

8 | P a g e
3. SURVEY PROCEDURE – CHOICE OF METHOD
3.1 RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY
After extensive literature reviews & qualitative analysis, we had a good idea on how to
proceed with our survey. Ideally speaking, the best possible method would’ve been to go for
a mall survey as that gives us answers based on fresh memories rather than historical data.
But due to constraints, we had the next best alternative: float online questionnaires to a set
of people selected based on heterogeneity in age, gender & place of residence. This target
audience for the survey was working professionals or students who have knowledge of green
marketing and impact of product promotion and place on green consumer behavior or buying
propensity of consumer.
3.2 METHOD
 Sample Size: 151 samples
 Target Population Characteristics: Tier-1 and Tier-2 cities population
 Study Duration: 6 months (15th October, 2015 to 15th February, 2016)
 Reliability testing of the survey
 Regression modeling based on forward selection
 Hypothesis testing of the how independent variables affect the dependent variable
3.3 QuestionnaireLink:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1kxPrMUBuQ3C7oj6oCA6zTQR6v9sBJu74hzpQvuWSNo/vi
ewform?usp=send_form

9 | P a g e
4. RESULTS
 Overall Consistency of questionnaire denoted by Standardized Cronbach Alpha comes to
0.83
 Adjusted R-squared: 0.20
 Almost NIL clarifications were made during the undertaking of survey by 151
respondents.
 Consumer Attitude is highly dependent on Environmental Concern, Perceived Customer
Effectiveness and Governmental Laws.
 Consumer Preference is highly dependent on Price, Quality, Brand and Availability.
4.1 RELIABILITY
Cronbach's
Alpha
N of Items
.839 31
Item-Total Statistics
Scale Mean
if Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance if
Item Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha if Item
Deleted
EC1 100.39 110.677 .516 .830
EC2 100.56 112.399 .351 .835
EC3 102.69 118.817 -.017 .850
EC4 100.52 112.100 .440 .832
PCE1 100.92 111.089 .498 .831
PCE2 101.03 110.328 .467 .831
PCE3 101.46 111.455 .419 .833
PCE4 101.25 110.833 .414 .833
GL1 101.10 110.668 .456 .831
GL2 101.65 110.737 .389 .833

10 | P a g e
GL3 100.50 110.361 .500 .830
GL4 100.37 114.277 .280 .837
Price1 100.49 114.060 .330 .835
Price2 101.48 108.676 .456 .831
Price3 101.95 107.114 .579 .827
Price4 102.24 113.186 .249 .839
Quality1 104.14 116.123 .303 .837
Quality2 101.03 105.547 .678 .823
Quality3 100.76 110.429 .520 .830
Quality4 100.82 114.795 .237 .838
Quality5 100.45 111.181 .484 .831
Quality6 101.12 114.368 .289 .836
Avaibility1 101.25 112.025 .365 .834
Avaibility2 101.12 116.999 .117 .841
Avaibility3 101.54 107.647 .612 .826
Avaibility4 101.91 115.958 .171 .840
Brand1 101.32 113.287 .368 .834
Brand2 101.73 116.939 .106 .842
Brand3 101.37 113.563 .351 .835
Brand4 101.71 117.510 .119 .840
PriceR5 101.73 118.912 -.018 .849
ANOVA

11 | P a g e
Sum of
Squares
df Mean
Square
F Sig
Between People 563.471 146 3.859
Within
People
Between
Items
2685.874 30 89.529 144.329 .000
Residual 2716.964 4380 .620
Total 5402.839 4410 1.225
Total 5966.310 4556 1.310
Grand Mean = 3.38
5. DISCUSSION

12 | P a g e
6. APPENDIX
6.1 REFERENCES:
1. Antil, J.H. (1984), ``Socially responsible consumers: profile and implications for public
policy'', Journal of Macro Marketing, Vol. 4, Fall, pp. 18-39.
2. Alwitt, L.F. & Pitts, R.E. (1996) Predicting purchase intentions for an environmentally
sensitive product. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5, 49–64.
3. A.Rani (2012) “Aspects of green marketing: A prospect for India,International Journal
of Trade & Global Business Perspectives: Vol. 1, No. 1, 2012”
4. Aaker, D.A. and Bagozzi, R.P. (1982), ``Attitudes toward public policy alternatives to
reduce air pollution'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 1, pp. 85-94.
5. Anderson, W.T. Jr, Henion, K.E. and Cox, E.P. III (1974), ``Socially vs ecologically
responsible consumers'', AMA Combined Conference Proceedings, Vol. 36, Spring and
Fall, pp. 304-11.
6. Bech-Larsen, T. (1995) Consumers attitudes to food packaging – with a focus on
purchase decisions. Dissertation, Aarhus School of Business, Denmark.
7. Bech-Larsen, T. (1996) Danish consumers’ attitudes to the functional and
environmental characteristics of food packaging.Journal of Consumer Policy, 19, 339–
363.
8. Bech-Larsen, T. & Grunert, K.G. (2003) The perceived healthiness of functional foods:
a conjoint study of Danish, Finnish and American consumers’ perception of functional
foods. Appetite, 40, 9–14
9. Berger, I.E. and Corbin, R.M. (1992), ``Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in
others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviours'', Journal of Public
Policy &Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 79-88.
10. Boulstridge, E. & Carrigan, M. (2000) Do consumers really care about corporate
responsibility? Highlighting the attitude–behavior gap. Journal of Communication
Management, 4, 355–368.
11. Creyer, E.H.& Ross,W.T.(1997) The influence of firmbehaviour onpurchase intention:
do consumers really care about business ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14,
421–433.
12. Carrigan, M. & Attala, A. (2001) The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter
in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18, 560–577.

13 | P a g e
13. EIO and CfSD (2013) Eco-innovate! A guide to eco-innovation for SMEs and business
coaches. Eco-Innovation Observatory. Funded by the European Commission, DG
Environment, Brussels
14. Hounshell, P. and Liggett, L. (1973), `Àssessing the effectiveness of environmental
education'', Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 28-30.
15. Hine, D.W. and Gifford, R. (1991), ``Fear appeals, individual differences, and
environmental concern'', The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp.
36-41.
16. Hunt, S.D. & Vitell, S. (1986) A general theory of marketing ethics.Journal of
Macromarketing, 6, 5–16.
17. Kinnear, T.C., Taylor, J.R. and Ahmed, S.A. (1974), `Ècologicallyconcerned consumers:
who are they?'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, April, pp. 20-4.
18. Lepisto, L.R. (1974), `Àn empirical study of the effect of environmental product
attributes, convenience, and price on product preference and socially responsible
consumer behavior'', Doctoral dissertation, Department of Marketing, The
Pennsylvania State University.
19. Murphy, P.E., Kangun, N. and Locander, W.B. (1978), `Ènvironmentally concerned
consumers ± racial variations'', Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, October, pp. 61-6
20. McEvoy, J. III (1972), ``The American concern with the environment'', Social Behavior,
Natural Resources and the Environment.
21. Moisander, J. & Uusitalo, L. (1995) General attitudes in theory of reasoned action
framework: the influence of consumers’ pro environmental attitudes on their
commuting intentions. Proceedings of IAREP Conference, 3–5 August 1995, Bergen.
Published also by the Helsinki School of Economics W-123
22. Pirsch, J., Gupta, S. &Grau, S.L. (2007) A framework for understanding corporate social
responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 70,125–140.
23. Roberts, J.A. and Bacon, D.R. (1997), `Èxploring the subtle relationships between
environmental concern and ecologically conscious consumer behaviour'', Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 79-89.
24. Roberts, J.A. (1995), ``Profiling levels of socially responsible consumer behaviour: a
cluster analytic approach and its implications for marketing'', Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, Fall, pp. 97-117.

14 | P a g e
25. Roberts, J.A. (1996b), ``Green consumers in the 1990s: profile and implications for
advertising'', Journal of Business Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 217-31.
26. Roper, S. & Parker, C. (2006) “How (and where) the mighty have fallen: branded litter.
Journal of Marketing Management, 22, 473–487”
27. Rokka and Uusitalo (2008) “Preference for green packaging in consumer product
choices – Do consumers care?, INTERNATIONAL IJC · AUGUST 2008”
28. Stern, P.C., Dietz, T. and Kalof, L. (1993), ``Value orientations, gender, and
environmental concern'', Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 322-48
29. Schwartz, J. and Miller, T. (1991), ``The earth's best friends'', American Demographics,
Vol. 13, February, pp. 26-35.
30. Samdahl, D.M. and Robertson, R. (1989), ``Social determinants of environmental
concern: specification and test of the model'', Environment and Behavior, Vol. 21 No.
1, pp. 57-81.
31. Silayoi, P. & Speece, M. (2007) The importance of packaging attributes:a conjoint
analysis approach. European Journal of Marketing, 41,1495–1517
32. Uusitalo, L. (1986) Environmental Impacts of Consumption Patterns.Gower Publishing
Company Ltd., Aldershot.
33. Uusitalo, L. (1990a) Are environmental attitudes and behaviour inconsistent? Findings
from a Finnish study. Scandinavian Political Studies, 13, 211–226
34. Van Liere, K. and Dunlap, R. (1981), ``The social bases of environmental concern: a
review of hypotheses, explanations, and empirical evidence'', Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 181-97.
35. Weiner, J.L. and Doescher, T.A. (1991), ``A framework for promoting cooperation'',
Journalof Marketing, Vol. 55, April, pp. 38-47.
36. Webster, F.E. Jr (1975), ``Determining the characteristics of the socially conscious
consumer'', Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 2, December, pp. 188-96
37. Zimmer, M.R., Stafford, T.F. and Stafford, M.R. (1994), ``Green issues: dimensions of
environmental concern'', Journal of Business Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 63-74.
38. Zimmer, M.R., Stafford, T.F. and Stafford, M.R. (1994), ``Green issues: dimensions of
environmental concern'', Journal of Business Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 63-74.

15 | P a g e
6.2 QUESTIONNAIRE
Gender *
o Female
o Male
Age *
Place of Residence *
Education *
o 10th
o 12th
o Graduation
o Post Graduation
Monthly Income
o Greater than 50,000 INR
o Between 20,000 to 50,000 INR
o Below 20,000 INR
Are you aware of Green Packaging of products? *
o Yes
o No
Are you aware that the material used for green packaging is bio degradable? *
o Yes
o No
Are you aware that the cover of green packaged products can be recycled? *
o Yes
o No
I often think about the harm we are doing to the environment *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Neither Agree nor Disagree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am a person who cares about the environment *
o Strongly Agree

16 | P a g e
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am really not interested in environmental issues *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am extremely worried about the state of the world’s environment and what it will mean for
my future *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am very particular about what I buy *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I think my concern for the environment is a reflection of my personality *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I think people around me followthe things I buy
o Strongly Agree
o Agree

17 | P a g e
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
When I buy a product, I try to consider how any use of them will affect the environment and
other resources *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am aware of different government initiatives to save the environment *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am aware of different governmentalregulations on green packaging of products *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
The government should subsidize research on technology for recycling of waste products *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Government should enforce environmental rules and regulations *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree

18 | P a g e
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Green packaged products should be available at a low price *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
If green features of a product increases its price I am willing to pay more *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I always buy green packaged products even though it is expensive among all alternatives *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Buying a high price product makes me feel good about myself *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am not willing to make extra effort to find lower prices for green packaged product *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree

19 | P a g e
o Strongly Disagree
I am aware of various food quality standards of India (Like FPO, MMPO, Agmark, BIS &
FSSAI) *
o Yes
o No
I always look for quality standards seal on the products I buy *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
To me product information is of high importance *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Green products are not hazardous to health *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Product benefits should be mentioned on the packaging of green products *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Green products are high on nutrition value *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Neither Agree nor DIsagree
o Disagree

20 | P a g e
o Strongly Disagree
In general, for me to buy green packaged foods and beverages would be easy as compared to
the conventional ones *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Buying eco-friendly packaged foods and beverages would need extra effort *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
I am willing to put the extra effort to buy a green product *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Green packaged products at easily available in market *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
While buying green products I always go for an established brand *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree

21 | P a g e
I don’t prefer green products of newbrands *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
Established brands don’t sell artificial products in green packaging *
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree
New brands sell fresh products in green packaging only
o Strongly Agree
o Agree
o Disagree
o Strongly Disagree

Empirical Final

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Empirical Final (20)

Empirical Final