Description
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the idea of green atmospherics and propose a
conceptual framework for green service environment factors and a typology for green consumers.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
How green should you go? Understanding the role of green atmospherics in service environment evaluations
Nicole Bieak Kreidler Sacha J oseph-Mathews
Article information:
To cite this document:
Nicole Bieak Kreidler Sacha J oseph-Mathews, (2009),"How green should you go? Understanding the role of green atmospherics in
service environment evaluations", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 3 Iss 3 pp. 228 - 245
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506180910995414
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:07 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 85 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3625 times since 2009*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Yi-Chun Huang, Minli Yang, Yu-Chun Wang, (2014),"Effects of green brand on green purchase intention", Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 32 Iss 3 pp. 250-268http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-10-2012-0105
Yu-Shan Chen, Ching-Hsun Chang, (2012),"Enhance green purchase intentions: The roles of green perceived value, green perceived
risk, and green trust", Management Decision, Vol. 50 Iss 3 pp. 502-520http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251741211216250
Yu-Shan Chen, Ching-Hsun Chang, (2013),"Towards green trust: The influences of green perceived quality, green perceived risk, and
green satisfaction", Management Decision, Vol. 51 Iss 1 pp. 63-82http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251741311291319
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
How green should you go? Understanding
the role of green atmospherics in service
environment evaluations
Nicole Bieak Kreidler and Sacha Joseph-Mathews
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce the idea of green atmospherics and propose a
conceptual framework for green service environment factors and a typology for green consumers.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper takes the form of a conceptual piece. and offers a new
approach to green consumerism. Green atmospherics goes beyond many of the typical factors
explored in previous service environment studies. The paper examines how many terms commonplace
in the design and architectural literature can be translated into the marketing arena. Factors such as
daylighting, recycling, offgassing, insulation, optimal energy performance and design for the
environment are discussed.
Findings – The paper proposes that ‘‘going green’’ goes beyond having recyclable or even sustainable
products, to an ideology that incorporates improving worker morale and retention, and giving back to
the communities they are located in. Additionally, the paper makes a case for classifying green
consumers based on a psychographic segmentation approach compared to the more traditional
socioeconomic classi?cation.
Originality/value – This paper offers a conceptual framework for assessing green atmospherics within
service environments and proposes a green consumer typology that references ‘‘stimuli’’ versus
‘‘socio-demographics’’ for categorization. A new categorization is proposed and the importance of this
topic to consumers, practitioners and researchers are discussed.
Keywords Perception, Service levels, Service industries, Conservation, Recycling, Sustainable design
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
In today’s marketplace one would be hard pressed to ?nd a more utilized buzz word than
‘‘green’’. Organic, natural, holistic, sustainable, responsible, however, or whatever you want
to call it, the movement is catching on. Whether we are talking about a type of spa, a line of
beauty care products, organic produce, a more responsible way of vacationing, a type of
construction, or even auto production; many industries are recognizing that it actually pays
to go green. Interestingly, this trend in green consumerism is not limited to any one industry
or product type. In fact almost all industries contain players who are stepping up their green
initiatives. The marketplace is rampant with businesses that have now become involved in
the effort to ?nd ways to produce and sell products or provide services that promote
conscious and ethical consumption.
Fortune Magazine lists the top ten green companies worldwide, including organizations
such as Honda, Continental Airlines, Hewlett Packard, and S.C. Johnson to name a few.
However, even beyond this listing, many corporations have invested billions in their greening
efforts. According to Environmental Leader (2007, 2008) Toyota Motor Sales recently
achieved its goal of zero waste to land?ll and Subaru is well on its way to zero waste to land?ll
in many of their US plants. In 2007 Bayer committed $1.46 billion US to a group-wide climate
program aimed at cutting CO
2
emissions from its production facilities, and in February 2008
PAGE 228
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009, pp. 228-245, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 DOI 10.1108/17506180910995414
Nicole Bieak Kreidler is
Assistant Professor and
Chair, School of
Professions, Interior
Design, La Roche College,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
USA.
Sacha Joseph-Mathews is
Assistant Professor,
Eberhardt School of
Business, University of the
Paci?c, Stockton,
California, USA.
Received: March 2009
Revised April 2009
Accepted: April 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Crate and Barrel released their eco-friendly, family friendly line of furniture. 3M has
continually made considerable contributions to innovation and sustainable products and
practices, and carpet manufacturer- Interface has set the standard in corporate ethics and
company turnarounds by striving to create a totally sustainable company by 2020. In 2008
Bank of America pledged over 20 billion to encourage development of environmentally
sustainable business practices and GE, Wal-Mart, and Unilever are all currently engaged in
signi?cant greening efforts.
Yet, despite the pervasiveness of green initiatives in the marketplace, the academic arena
does not extensively focus on these initiatives. Instead, the majority of the existing work has
looked at how green consumer behavior can be segmented. Speci?cally, extant literature
has examined behavior related to environmental consciousness (e.g., Buttel, 1979;
Schlegelmilch et al., 1996; Shrum et al., 1995; Wall, 1995), age (e.g., Roberts, 1996;
Samdahl and Robertson, 1989), income and education (Aaker and Bagozzi, 1982;
Arbuthnot, 1977; Jolibert and Baumgartner, 1981; Weigel, 1977), gender (Arbuthnot, 1977;
McEvoy, 1972; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989), geographic
location (e.g., Gooch, 1995; Pickett et al., 1993; Schwartz and Miller, 1991; Tremblay and
Dunlap, 1978; Zimmer et al., 1994), political orientation (Hine and Gifford, 1991; Roberts,
1996), sensitivity to price and quality (D’Souza et al., 2007), perceived consumer
effectiveness (Kinnear et al., 1974; Antil, 1983; Berger and Corbin, 1992; Webster, 1975),
and multiple personality variables, such as alienation, dogmatism and locus of control (e.g.,
Balderjahn, 1988; Crosby et al., 1981; Henion and Wilson, 1976; Kinnear et al., 1974). This
study is interested in a somewhat different perspective on the green initiatives currently
underway. While still interested in consumer behavior and perceptions, the focus of this
research is oriented to the actions of service providers and how these actions will be
perceived by various consumer segments.
Most of the green initiatives currently operational in the marketplace typically fall into two
categories. On one hand, businesses focus on integrating green features into the design or
characteristics of individual products. For example, creating a car that has a higher miles
per gallon (MPG) designation or developing a laundry detergent that is eco-friendly. On the
other hand, a larger portion of resources commits to a reduction in waste and energy usage,
building green and limiting CO
2
emissions fromproduction. Ideally, ‘‘green behavior’’ should
go beyond simply creating a biodegradable or recyclable product to a more holistic
incorporation of sustainable values into a corporation’s core principles and values.
Over the last decade, many green companies began building and retro?tting existing
structures using sustainable and green materials with concerted efforts to implement
recycling and energy conservation initiatives. The trend is so substantial that retailers like
Wal-Mart, who traditionally have been criticized for being unfriendly to the environment, have
made strides to conserve energy, commit to zero waste policies, and spent signi?cant
amounts of money to retro?t lighting and cooling systems in order to create store
environments that are environmentally conscious (Addison, 2008). In 2006 CEO Lee Scott
pledged to invest over $500 million US to reduce energy consumed in stores by 30 percent,
solid waste by 25 percent and double the fuel ef?ciency of the company’s vehicle ?eet over
the next ten years (Financial Times, 2008). Recently, Wal-Mart launched a media campaign
touting their sustainable products, and green initiatives (Yohn, 2008).
Nike, Interface, Anheuser-Busch, and Ikea are all examples of corporations who are leading
the initiative to be more socially responsible in their renovation and construction practices. In
essence, these organizations have acknowledged that they have a responsibility to both the
environment and to the communities where their products are produced and distributed.
Some of these companies have sought out Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) certi?cation for the buildings in which they manufacture, distribute and sell their
merchandise. This certi?cation is based on a building’s compliance with standards
pertaining to water management, site planning, energy conservation, material use, and
indoor environmental air quality. LEEDcompliance is highly regarded by many organizations
who consider themselves forward thinking and socially responsible. According to the US
Green Building Council (www.usgbc.com), the bene?ts of green building are numerous.
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 229
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Based on data provided by the Council, LEED certi?ed buildings have a 8-9 percent
decrease in operating costs, 7.5 percent increase in building values, 6.6 percent increase in
ROI, 3.5 percent increase in occupancy, and a 3 percent increase in rent.
Yet despite the signi?cant attempt by companies worldwide to reduce their carbon footprint
and engage in more sustainable practices, academic research does not test their efforts for
their impact on consumers and consumer perceptions. The question begs answering, do
these ‘‘green’’ initiatives in service environments in?uence consumers, and if so, how do
these ‘‘green’’ initiatives affect the meanings consumers associate with particular retailers
and organizations? Do consumers consider organizations that spend large sums to create
green interior environments to be more socially responsible than ones who do not? While we
know people pay more for an organic tomato and spend top dollar on free range chickens,
are they just as willing to pay more for a product which is sold within a service environment
that boasts zero emissions, practices daylighting, and uses recycled building materials?
The service environment translates into a physical expression of the brand, designed to
highlight its unique brand personality and create an atmosphere that intensely appeals to its
clientele (Joseph and Singh, 2004). Appealing environments often encourage approach
behaviors, whereas unappealing environments often encourage avoidance behaviors. In
essence, the in-store service environment is the last component in the mix that ensures
previous positioning efforts are solidi?ed in the minds of the consumer. The right in-store
design maintains consistency with the speci?c created store/brand personality (Chain Store
Age, 2003). If consumers for organic products do seek a different type of supplier, and a
different type of product, does it not seem logical that this desire would also be present for
the type of environment where these products are sold? Similarly, if it is true that consumers
expect speci?c types of environments from retailers who promote their environmental
obligations, who are these consumers? What exactly are these consumers looking for, and
more importantly how can we assess if a retailer, organization or service provider is excelling
on this front?
To analyze these green environments, we are proposing a new direction for Baker’s (1986)
SOR paradigm. Based on the traditional SOR framework, the new categorization will offer a
comprehensive examination of speci?cally green-oriented service environmental
features/cues. In the past, researchers have used Baker’s (1986) model to examine
typical environmental factors such as aisle space, carpeting, lighting, wall color, music,
scent, staff, crowding, clutter, etc. and their resulting impact on consumer behavior. As a
contrast, the focus for creating a ‘‘green’’ environment has centered on reducing a building’s
ecological footprint through incorporating forward thinking materials, ?nishes and
processes. While wall color may be an important aesthetic variable in creating green
interior environments, the absence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the paint is
just as, if not much more, relevant. While traf?c ?ow and department location are signi?cant,
far more central to creating a green interior environment is the use of renewable energy and
natural lighting. This research suggests that green environments differ from non-green
environments, and atmospherics within a green environment should be examined differently.
With such a huge demarcation in the type of design and construction efforts utilized in green
building and interior design, there seems to be an opportunity to create a typology that can
measure the effectiveness of the effort as perceived by the individual utilizing the given
environment. Previous studies have con?rmed relationships between the physical
environment and perceived service quality (Baker et al., 1994), store image (Yalch and
Spagenberg, 1990) future purchase intentions (Baker et al., 1992), store performance
(Kumar and Karande, 2000), and brand attitude formation (Akhter et al., 1994). Building on
extant literature, this study explores how traditional atmospherics can be modi?ed for green
service environments.
To compliment our green environment categorization, we will also propose a new typology
for classi?cation of the types of consumers who will buy within these environments. While
most green environments will be inhabited by the employees of companies that have
undertaken these initiatives there has also been an ongoing movement by service providers
PAGE 230
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
and retailers to build and renovate green retail outlets. A signi?cant body of work currently
exists that focuses almost entirely on outlining the multiple variables that typically
characterize green consumers. But this type of research has primarily used
socio-demographic indicators to segment or identify environmentally conscious
consumers (Peattie, 2001). Many researchers concur that this approach has been mildly
successful at best, often yielding contradicting results (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003; Peattie,
1995; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996; Wedel and Kamakura,
2000). This study will segment green consumers based on environmental consciousness
and involvement instead of the more traditional demographic segmentation pro?les.
Consumers will be categorized based on their attitude towards sustainable products and
their level of commitment to and involvement in a sustainable lifestyle.
This study’s purpose is twofold. First, the study proposes a framework to identify the various
types of consumers who use ‘‘green’’ products, or participate in ethical consumption, and by
extention are the most obvious users of ‘‘green interior environments’’. Second, the study
offers a typology based on the SOR framework put forward by Baker (1986) that is speci?c to
green atmospherics. The impetus here is to create a framework that merges terminology
used by marketers, architects, designers and environmental psychologists.
Conceptual background
What is green?
In order to clearly outline who green customers are, and the most appealing types of green
service environments, we need to ?rst de?ne the term green. In the literature (both popular
press and in some instances academic) there has been a tendency to use the terms green
and sustainable interchangeably. However, there are very distinct differences between the
two. A green product is one that is either partially or totally recyclable. The product should
either be totally or partially created from recycled or rapidly renewable materials and also
recyclable or biodegradable. In sharp contrast, sustainable speaks to the lifecycle and
origins of a product. A product is only sustainable if the entire lifecycle of the product from
raw material to disposal is a closed loop, rather than a linear or take-make-waste process
where at the end of a product’s life it is discarded in a land?ll. According to treehugger.com,
green is de?ned as a product or service that is both environmentally and socially
responsible. It is accountable to and respectful of the places and people that provide and
use them (McLaren, 2006). Whereas sustainable is de?ned as the ability to meet the needs
of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
(Brundtland, 1987).
Green consumers
According to a 2008 report by Nielsen, one in ?ve US consumers are ‘‘passionate,
environmentally-socially-responsible stewards’’. The report states that organic labeled
products represent more than $4.4 billion in sales in grocery, drug, and mass merchandiser
stores, excluding Wal-Mart. These ?ndings mirror a 2008 study by Yankelovich that
suggested 22 percent of all consumers feel they can make a difference when it comes to the
environment (Greenbiz.com). As the notion of buying green becomes more of a mainstream
ideology, and with such signi?cant numbers of consumers willing to purchase products that
are environmentally friendly, it is no surprise that marketers, managers and researchers are
interested in tapping into this segment. As a result, several studies both in the practitioner’s
press and academia have focused attention on better de?ning this consumer group.
This consumer segment has demonstrated that it is by no means a homogenous group. In
fact, several studies have demonstrated that consumers of environmentally friendly
products/services do not all see green in the same way (Greenbiz.com; Lohas.com). Some
customers will only buy certain green products while other customers are obsessed with
green shopping for every product fromice creamto clothing. In the academic arena, most of
the current literature on green consumerism uses socio-demographic variables to classify
the various consumer segments (Peattie, 2001), while the popular press has classi?ed green
consumerism more along the lines of bene?ts sought. The body of work in academia on
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 231
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
green segmentation has yielded mixed responses and although the general consensus is
that the typical green consumer is an af?uent, educated, liberal female who lives in a city,
with children in elementary school (Ottman, 1993), there is still a signi?cant amount of
debate in the literature as to characteristics of a ‘‘typical’’ green consumer.
The work of Eagly (1987) suggests that women tend to evaluate the impact of their actions on
others and as such are more likely to be environmentally conscious. Several other authors
have not been able to ?nd a signi?cant relationship between gender and green behavior
(e.g., Arbuthnot, 1977; Brooker, 1976; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989; Tognacci et al., 1972).
The ?ndings are mixed on the effect of income and education on environmental awareness.
Some studies con?rm a signi?cant direct effect of these variables on green behavior (e.g.,
Anderson and Cunningham, 1972; Roberts and Bacon, 1997), while others counter these
?ndings with non-signi?cant effects (e.g., Anderson et al., 1974; Antil, 1978; Van Liere and
Dunlap, 1981).
With such a diverse set of ?ndings, researchers agree to disagree. Despite the varying
results when using socio-demographic variables to identify green consumers, some
agreement does occur in the literature. Most researchers agree that psychographic
variables are more predictive of environmental consciousness and green consumer
behavior than socio-demographic variables (Roberts, 1996; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996).
Several studies using both demographic and psychographic variables to explain green
purchasing behavior consistently found higher predictive and explanatory power with
psychographic variables (e.g., Roberts, 1996; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996). A review of the
existing body of work in this area includes examining the role of perceived consumer
effectiveness (Antil, 1978; Berger and Corbin, 1992; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Webster,
1975), political orientation (Hine and Gifford, 1991), altruism (Stern et al., 1993), and
environmental concern (Antil, 1983; Kinnear et al., 1974; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Van
Liere and Dunlap, 1981) on green purchasing behavior. Based on these study ?ndings we
have chosen to make use of psychographic segmentation. Building on a segmentation
currently utilized by the Natural Marketing Institute, we propose a framework that segments
consumers based on their attitude to sustainable products and their level of commitment to
and involvement in a sustainable lifestyle.
According to the Natural Marketing Institute web site (www.lohas.com), there is a speci?c
market segment that focuses on health and ?tness, the environment, personal development,
sustainable living, and social justice. The acronym commonly used to describe this
consumer group is LOHAS or lifestyles of health and sustainability. Based on 2005 data
collected by the Natural Marketing Institute, there are three other market segments that
companies involved in green marketing should be aware of. These are NOMADICS (a group
with far less concern for the environment but still a moderate commitment to speci?c LOHAS
behaviors, such as, recycling), CENTRISTS (a group not very interested in LOHAS attitudes
and behaviors) and INDIFFERENTS (a group which ?nds LOHAS behaviors to be completely
irrelevant). The 2005 survey, which involved over 8000 respondents, indicated that
Lohasians represent 23 percent of the general population, compared to 38 percent for
Nomadics, 27 percent for Centrists and 12 percent for Indifferents (www.lohas.com). While
this conceptualization does offer some insight into the various green consumer segments,
rather than delve deeply into the various facets of green, it deals more with the wider market
segment and looks at segments that range fromvery green to not green at all. Lohasians and
Nomadics are almost on two ends of the green spectrum and there are some more subtle
differences within the larger green consumer market, which are not adequately addressed.
In contrast, the typology aims to offer a better description of the many different types of
green consumers. We have identi?ed four groups within a matrix that ranges fromlowto high
sustainable involvement on one axis and attitude towards sustainability on the other axis.
Figure 1 outlines the proposed various green market segments. A true-blue green de?nes
the consumer who is willing to sacri?ce everything in the name of sustainability whereas a
lean green is willing to participate in sustainable activities as long as it will not cost them
money. A surface green understands the concept of sustainability, but it is too much for them
to participate in sustainable activities. These surface greens associate themselves with
PAGE 232
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
products that say ‘‘sustainable’’ or ‘‘green’’ without doing further research on issues or
exerting any extra effort in recycling. Finally, there is the craven green, a person who wants to
be green and ?nds the notion of being green attractive, but is comfortable with the way
things are and lacks con?dence in stepping outside of their traditional lifestyle or buying
behavior.
These categories offer a spectrum for categorizing green consumers and by extension, an
opportunity for retailers and green service suppliers to tailor their various products to the
level of green consumer that best suits their product speci?cations. With such a wide
spectrum of green products on the market, retailers that are not hard and fast green retailers
can now attract consumers that are not die-hard green consumers but are still very
interested in some level of green product and or service.
In such a competitive marketplace, a superior understanding of niche markets can only aid a
retailer’s ability to reach and cater to this diverse audience. Yet, a more detailed
segmentation is only the ?rst step in successfully catering to green consumers. The ?elds of
environmental psychology and marketing both agree that the surrounding physical
environment is a major component in many purchase decisions (Bitner, 1992). Retailers
often manipulate service environments to reinforce brand meaning, distinguish themselves
from the competition and in many instances to prolong shopping time and ultimately,
in?uence shopping decisions. With such a proven link between environments and shopping
experiences, we make the case that uniquely green environments can emphasize, highlight
and complement green products and or services. As the notion of green becomes
conventional, the issue of green environments will gain signi?cance in the literature and
researchers will need to ?nd ways to determine how much of a green environment is
necessary to truly compliment speci?c types of green products and services:
P1. Green consumers can identify green from non-green service environments.
Atmospherics and the SOR paradigm
Researchers evaluate service environments on the effect of ambience, design, and social
factors on consumer purchase intentions. The notion of service environments ?rst began
with Kotler (1973). Coined as atmospherics, it was de?ned as the effort to design buying
environments, which will produce speci?c emotional effects in the buyer that enhances
his/her purchase probability. About the same time, a body of work evolved in environmental
psychology known as the stimulus, organism, response theory; ?rst developed by
Mehrabian and Russell in 1974. Based on this early work, Donovan and Rossiter then
introduced the theory to retail environments in 1982, and it was adapted to service
Figure 1 Proposed ‘‘green’’ market segments
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 233
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
environments by Baker in 1986 and then Bitner in 1990 and 1992. Bitner (1992) proposed the
categorization of ambient, design and layout and artifacts, whereas Baker (1986)
categorized service environments based on ambient, design and layout and social cues.
To date, there have been more studies con?rming Baker’s conceptualization (e.g., Baker
et al., 1992, 2002; Babin and Darden, 1996; Hui and Bateson, 1991; Wake?eld and Blodgett,
1999; Wang et al., 2007). Based on this trend in the data, this research uses Baker’s (1986)
adaptation as a skeleton to build a framework that introduces ‘‘green’’ to service
environment literature.
Environmental psychologists suggest that people react to their environment in two basic
ways: approach and avoidance (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974). Approach behaviors
include positive behaviors such as a desire to stay, explore, spend money, and browse in a
particular environment. Avoidance, on the other end of the spectrum, includes negative
behaviors such as a desire to leave a particular environment. Consumers exhibiting
avoidance tend to stay away fromcertain settings. Throughout the literature both employees
and customers have been proven to function in, and relate better to, an environment they
perceive to be aesthetically pleasing. Marketing academics seek to de?ne how these
environments are most effective from a consumer standpoint. Some of these environmental
effects have been examined in great detail in terms of the resulting impact on consumer
behavior.
Clutter has been positively linked to avoidance and negatively linked to satisfaction (Bitner,
1990). Color has been linked to approach (consumer liking) and positive perceptions of
products or merchandise (Bellizzi et al., 1983). Crowding has been shown to change a
consumer’s satisfaction, enjoyment of the shopping environment and use of in-store
information (Eroglu and Machleit, 1990; Harrell et al., 1980). Store music has been shown to
in?uence the amount of time consumers spend in stores, traf?c ?ow, sales, arousal and the
perception of visual stimuli in the retail store (e.g., Dube et al., 1995; Milliman, 1982; Yalch
and Spagenberg, 1993). Other physical factors such as layout and design (Smith and
Burns, 1996) and in-store lighting (Baker et al., 1994), have all been shown to impact
consumer behavior in some way.
The above-mentioned literature all concur that the physical environment within a store or
service setting serves as a meaningful entity to customers and perceptions of these
environments often shape their experiences within said settings (Baker, 1986; Baker et al.,
2002; Bitner, 1990, 1992; Gibson, 1979). Researchers have demonstrated that overall
atmospherics can be manipulated to create lasting brand meaning in the eyes of the
customers (Baker, 1986; Bitner, 1986, 1992; Booms and Bitner, 1982; Kotler, 1973; Shostack,
1977). In turn, marketers and managers can fashion speci?c brand images/perceptions
through direct manipulation of atmospherics (such as product displays, lighting, sounds,
power aisles, spacious display areas and bold clear signage) in an effort to create a unique
experience for the consumer. These unique experiences can, in turn, contribute to an overall
positive consumer response, which can manifest itself in positive purchase behavior.
Customers often use physical environments as a proxy for information relating to products
including product quality and price, and environment evaluations also often in?uence
perceptions of the service provider (Baker et al., 2002). Imagine walking into a shabby,
poorly lit doctor’s of?ce with vinyl ?oors and worn furniture. Now juxtapose that image to a
modern, well lit, of?ce with new furniture, wood plank ?ooring and high ceilings with a thick
crown molding. Both environments offer suggestions about the type of service to be
expected, as well as the quality and price of these services. Which image would you like your
service to be associated with?
Green retailers are just as likely to utilize their respective environments to in?uence
consumer behavior, as are their non-green counterparts. More and more manufacturers of
green products are recognizing that customers place greater value on the manufacturer’s
green claims when there is the perception that these manufacturers and service providers
have embraced green within their core values. Companies like Toyota, Frito Lay and
Stoneyhill Farms have found ways to integrate green initiatives into their core
PAGE 234
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
values/business strategies and consumers are responding to this (Environmental Leader,
2008). For example, Wholefoods has had tremendous success with their ?agship store in
Austin, Texas. The store is a clear example of the lengths even green retailers go to in order
to in?uence their consumers. Consumer senses are heightened by scents, sights and
sounds. Departments are designed to create easy traf?c ?ow, there is ample seating to
encourage relaxation and checkout kiosks were created to minimize congestion and
maximize time utilization.
P2. Green consumers demonstrate stronger approach behaviors to green
environments than non-green ones.
P3. Consumers perceive green environments as physical interpretations of a ?rm’s
deeper core social responsibility strategies.
Green environments offer a unique component when compared to non-green physical
surroundings. While non-green environments are typically evaluated solely based on
physical cues which are apparent to the average consumer, green environments involve
signi?cant behind the scenes initiatives that are not obvious to most consumers. In today’s
marketplace millions are spent on behind the scenes green initiatives. These behind the
scenes initiatives are often important to consumers as they suggest a company commitment
to sustainability and reinforce notions of quality and environmental consciousness, both
important attributes for many green consumers. Contrary to the many developments in the
business world, there has been little or no investigation into green service environments from
a marketing standpoint. There has also been no attempt to integrate current marketing
frameworks with those used in technical ?elds such as interior design and architecture
where there has been an ongoing discussion on the role of green in creating building
interiors and exteriors. This research seeks to amalgamate theories across ?elds, focusing
the effort not only on surface environmental cues (which are more commonly examined in the
marketing ?eld), but also on examining the use of green in the building process.
As we initiate the subject of green within the atmospheric framework, we hope to
immediately add new layers of measurement to the literature. Green and sustainable are
terms that often create frustration for businesses. This frustration results from a lack of
knowledge about the terms and the basic assumption that these newproducts, technologies
and services are going to cost signi?cant amounts of money. The proposed framework
hopes to encourage retailers to allocate their funds into areas where they believe their
customers will appreciate green attributes.
When introducing green elements to the marketing mix, a framework of attributes emerges
for businesses that have interest in greening themselves. These green dimensions generate
numerous attributes to examine as we are no longer measuring a singular attribute. An
attribute within a green interior environment immediately begins to ask a series of questions;
is the product certi?ed through a third-party, is it sustainable, can it be recycled, is it natural,
is it biodegradable, what percentage of recycled content does it contain? These questions
provide signi?cance to the design and therefore will substantiate reasoning for the retailer to
incorporate the attribute within their interior environment.
Each of Baker’s dimensions (ambience, design and layout, social factors) can be modi?ed in
terms of green service environments. In introducing these green elements, the focus is on a
system of many individual components within the broader framework. Each one of these
components contributes to the greater whole – enhancing the performance of the
environment, positively affecting occupants’ health, comfort, and perception of space.
Ambient factors
Baker (1986) de?nes ambiance as those factors that exist below the level of customers’
immediate awareness, so they may be less than totally conscious of these conditions in the
environment (p. 79). In the traditional sense, ambient cues have been examined in the
literature using noise, scent, lighting and, to a lesser extent, temperature. However, the most
relevant cue for green service providers would be the atmosphere of the interior
environment. Table I outlines the differences between traditional cues and green cues and it
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 235
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
also demonstrates the more extensive environmental impact green cues can have above
and beyond traditional ambient atmospherics.
The ?rst component within this factor is air quality. Air quality is typically expressed through
temperature, humidity, air circulation, and ventilation. Increasing air quality results in a more
comfortable and noticeably healthier interior through monitoring air exchange with the
outdoor environment and controlling the level of humidity in an interior environment.
Therefore, the air quality of the environment includes temperature/humidity control (heating
and cooling) and ventilation. Temperature can be easily controlled through installation of a
thermostat that will regulate the interior environment consistently throughout the day.
Ventilation allows for proper heating and cooling of a space as well as the introduction of
fresh air. This process could take place by simply installing operable windows or through a
more complicated technology of using a fresh air exchange system. From a green
perspective, retailers have many options when it comes to the ef?cient use of energy in
conditioning their space. Geothermal heat pumps, advanced variable-air-volume (VAV)
systems, and new automated control systems are all examples of ways that retailers can
recoup signi?cant monies in the greening of their environments.
Noise is a component of all interior environments, not speci?c to traditional or green
environments. Noise can be controlled through the use of insulation and acoustic barriers.
The control of noise is not necessarily a ‘‘green’’ attribute, but through careful selection of
materials an increased ef?ciency rating may be attained therefore resulting in the
conservation of energy and resources.
Scent is also not speci?c to a green or traditional environment. For purposes in this paper,
scent can be a trigger for an asthmatic reaction and can also be associated with harmful
off-gassing. Careful attention must be paid to the speci?cation of materials. Materials that
are speci?ed within a green environment usually contain zero or low VOCs. The off-gassing
of materials is what is toxic to interior environments. Off-gassing results from the release of
volatile chemicals into the air through evaporation. Many materials and ?nishes have the
ability to off-gas, although natural materials off-gass less. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) warns about the health effects of reduced indoor air quality (IAQ) from the
off-gassing of VOCs (www.epa.gov).
Cleanliness is another attribute Baker’s (1986) original framework de?nes, however, since
then this element has not been extensively tested. In her paper she referred to most ambient
factors as those that exist in the subconscious. Cleanliness is often something we take for
granted until we are confronted with an environment that does not meet our standards.
Service providers need to actively engage themselves in new cleaning systems in a green
environment. This is not an easy feat as all housekeeping personnel must be re-educated on
Table I Green ambient service environmental cues
Service
environment factor
Traditional cue (Baker,
1986) Green cue Environmental impact
Ambient Air quality (temperature,
humidity, circulation,
ventilation)
Optimal energy performance, thermal
barriers, insulation use, reduction in CFC’s
(chloro?uorocarbons used in cooling),
appropriate HVAC controls, appropriate
HVAC zoning, use of renewable energy
Energy conservation, limited energy use,
reduction of carbon footprint
Noise Use of appropriate insulation and acoustic
barriers
Energy conservation, reduction of carbon
footprint
Scent Off-gassing of materials Use of zero or low VOC materials,
reduction of carbon footprint
Cleanliness Biodegradable cleaning agents,
recycling, composting
Reduction of carbon and global footprint
Lighting Energy Star rating, daylighting,
optimization of energy, renewable energy
resources
Energy conservation, reduction of carbon
and ecological footprint
PAGE 236
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
how to use these products. Several organizations are devoted to educating service
providers about green cleaners. One of the most signi?cant databases of green cleaning
resources is cleangredients.org. This organization is supported through the EPA and was
initiated through the practices of greenblue.org.
The attribute, cleanliness informs recycling and composting as these practices associate
with cleaning and organization of an interior environment. Through actively recycling and
composting of materials and spent food items, a service provider is reducing the output of
materials into the waste stream. These activities can signi?cantly reduce their footprint and
increase revenue to their bottom line.
The study includes lighting as an ambient factor. Baker (1986) does not list lighting in her
initial table but she does discuss lighting as an ambient cue in her discussion. Lighting is
typically de?ned as an ambient cue within other service environment literature (Baker et al.,
1994). Ef?cient lighting of an interior environment is a science in and of itself. The use of
natural light or daylighting and the amount (footcandles) and type of light (color) that is
dispersed from a light ?xture are some of the concerns lighting designers take into account
when planning an interior environment.
Daylightingis the practice of usingnatural light to illuminate interior environments. It optimizes
the amount of natural light a retailer can take advantage of and is supplemented by arti?cial
light whentheuseof natural light isnot optimal. Fromagreenstandpoint, theuseof daylighting
becomes a green factor because it reduces reliance on arti?cial illumination therefore
reducing energy use.. There are also some very interesting statistics stating that productivity,
wellness, andattentiveness areall increasedthroughtheuseof daylighting. Whendaylighting
is not available, arti?cial lighting will be optimized in order to create an environment that
promotes contentment. The type of lighting that is optimized within a green environment is
important, as it needs to get the most light out of the least amount of energy. Typically, the type
of ballasts, lamps andoptics used in lighting a space are very important when a retailer wants
to create a speci?c type of environment for their products. Each one of these parts works to
create the ambience of the space through the intensity and color of the lighting it emits.
Another variable for measurement of ‘‘greenness’’ (when discussing lighting ?xtures and
equipment/appliances) is the use of Energy Star ratings. The EPA’s main goals for the Energy
Star program are to develop performance-based speci?cations that determine the most
ef?cient products in a particular category (www.epa.gov). The EPA has designated over 50
different categories of product ratings and has the information published on their web site
and identi?able through the use of their logo on qualifying products.
From a service environment standpoint ambient factors exist in the background, they are not
readily noticeable to consumers unless they are absent or exist at an unpleasant level
(Baker, 1986). The environmental impact of this factor is not readily identi?able to
consumers. As a result, it is much easier to communicate and test the effect of these cues on
consumer perceptions. We believe that green consumers are more aware of environments
with respect to sustainability and energy ef?ciency, therefore consumers will be more aware
of the steps service providers take to address sustainability and energy ef?ciency.
Undoubtedly, retailers and service providers will have to ?nd ways to inform their consumers
of the greening steps they are taking in these environments; in many instances this can be
done through proper signage. However, actually pointing out green cues can also serve the
same purpose. For example, signage around a thermostat could indicate to consumers that
a particular retailer is constantly monitoring their environment in order to save energy and
limit emissions; an important factor for today’s socially and environmentally conscious
consumer:
P4. Green ambient cues are positively related to green consumer approach behaviors.
Design and layout
Baker (1986) de?nes design cues in terms of stimuli that exist at the forefront of our
awareness. In this construct, the most relevant cues for green service providers would
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 237
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
include interior and exterior building materials, applied ?nishes, furniture, ?xtures, lighting
and signage. The ?rst components within this factor to be addressed are materials and
?nishes. As outlined in Table II, materials are typically exposed whereas ?nishes are often
applied. All of the materials and ?nishes presented are to meet at least one of the following
criteria in order to be de?ned as green; low emitting (zero or low VOCs), rapidly renewable,
recycled, reused, and biodegradable.
Rapidly renewable refers to resources that have short harvest cycles as opposed to
petroleum based products that are non-renewable or old growth forests that take decades,
possibly centuries until harvest. Bamboo, cork, wool, straw, hulls, and sorghum are all
materials that are being manufactured into architectural and design materials to be used
both structurally and decoratively. These materials are being veneered to make ?ooring, as
well as wallpapers, and manufactured into panels in order to make cabinetry. From a green
perspective, the materials and ?nishes used would be more important factors than general
elements such as wall color or ?ooring.
Recycled is a term that more retailers may be familiar with. This term can refer to products
such as carpet, tile and insulation. There are many carpet companies that recycle used
carpet through a process that separates the backing from the yarn, recycles the yarn and
then manufactures the new yarn into carpet. Tile can be manufactured from many different
types of recycled products. Some of these products can include light bulbs, ceramic, and
aluminum. The difference between reused and recycled is that the reused product comes
from an existing application and is used most of the time in a similar application. Wood
?ooring may be used as ?ooring again or as an application on a wall or ceiling treatment. The
?nal term to introduce is biodegradable. Biodegradable refers to products that compost
quickly without any type of plastic residues.
Green design cues would focus on the overall design and layout of the environment. It is
important to recognize the impact these green materials can have on consumers who are
Table II Green design and layout service environmental cues
Service
environment factor Traditional cue (Baker, 1986) Green cue Environmental impact
Design: aesthetic Architecture Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing, rapidly renewable
materials
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Color Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, off-gassing
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Scale N/a N/a
Materials Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Style N/a N/a
Accessories Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing, DfE (designed for the
environment), rapidly renewable materials
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Design: functional Layout N/a N/a
Comfort Identi?ed in ambient Identi?ed in ambient
Signage Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing, rapidly renewable
materials, renewable energy resources
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability. Energy
conservation
* lighting Energy star rating, optimization of energy,
renewable energy resources
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Energy conservation
PAGE 238
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
often unaware of the advantages of using green products. In many instances, the various
cues may not be identi?ed as being green by the consumer. Instead, these green
atmospherics are relevant more to the providers of service environments. Consumers will
only be aware of the environmental impact if the owner or management identi?es the bene?ts
of the environment.
Layout, ?ow and clutter are dimensions that Baker identi?ed as design functionality.
Considering the focus of this paper we are going to concentrate on the physical, tangible
aspects of design rather than ?ow and spatial arrangements. While the same descriptors
(low emitting – zero or low VOCs, rapidly renewable, recycled, reused, and biodegradable)
are terms that need to be addressed with these items, two more terms can be included. They
are design for disassembly and design for environment (DfE).
Design for disassembly enables the particular product and its parts to be easily reused,
remanufactured or recycled at the end of its life. DfE is a comprehensive, holistic approach
to the design of a product or building (www.MBDC.com). This design practice takes into
account the characteristics of functionality and disposal of a product before the actual
design is initiated. This process is an intelligent optimization of resources – both before,
during, and after a product’s lifespan.
Lighting is a factor that is addressed as an ambient cue as well as a functional design cue.
As an ambient cue, lighting is discussed as something that exists in the background, not
immediately noticeable. As a functional design cue, lighting begs a consumer’s attention.
Highlighting a piece of art, calling out a detail within the interior environment, or possibly
directing a consumer to a location are all examples of lighting that is used functionally. Green
cues and environmental impact remain the same for lighting, the difference remains in the
way lighting is used:
P5. Green design and layout cues are positively related to approach behaviors.
Social factors
Aside from ambient and design factors, social factors of the atmospheric framework will
have to be addressed in terms of green as well. Table III outlines some of the differences
between the more traditional social cues and green social cues. Our focus here will pertain
to three levels of social interaction. The ?rst level will speak to the social interactions between
the service provider/environment producer and their surrounding community/society. We will
examine issues like zero waste to land?lls, recycling efforts, as well as community outreach
and volunteering. These activities often indicate the level of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) consumers typically attribute to a corporation. Actual physical environments can
further reinforce these meanings and initiatives.
Retailers are usually perceived as positive contributors to their respective communities when
they provide access to recycling of products that may not be addressed by local waste
management companies. These items may include small electronics, compact ?uorescent
bulbs, ink cartridges and plastic shopping bags. The in-store efforts could be as simple as
offering speci?c bins for paper plastic and cans. For example, Walmart places bins at the
store’s entrance to encourage the recycling of plastic bags. Nike outlet stores have a
recycling program for used sneakers and Of?ce Depot has bins for the recycling of ink
cartridges. By providing these services, retailers are not only serving their greater
community but they are also communicating their level of commitment to green initiatives
and by extension facilitating buying opportunities for shoppers who may only enter the store
for the prime purpose of recycling.
The second level of social environmental cues pertains to employee/customer interactions
as well as employee/employee interactions. Here, the social cues will focus on how the
employee reinforces the atmosphere created by the physical environment. In an
examination of review responses on yelp.com (an online forum for reviewing
products/services), several reviewers commented on how a particular retail environment
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 239
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
was so warm, personable, friendly and wholesome. Many reviewers felt that it recreated a
warm, small-town, green grocer atmosphere despite the fact that it was 80,000 sq. ft. Some
reviewers talked about how the employees went out of their way to provide superb service.
Perhaps the best measure of success will be how well individual employees embrace the
mantra of their employer and echo the holistic, high quality service experience the provider
is implying in their pricing and positioning in the market. The emphasis here will be to go
beyond mere external customer service, but to also demonstrate to customers the high level
of internal customer service employees demonstrate to their peers. Customers may expect
employees to embrace the mantra of the employer in dealing with each other as well as the
customers. For example, 360 evaluations in yearly reviews, complete department support
for individual promotions and evidence of several group activities outside of the workplace
are more indicative of a family than merely a job. We are suggesting that green customers
respond to similar thinking and expect that people who work for a green service provider will
also embrace green, sustainability and holistic living not only in their dealings with
customers, but in all aspects of their life. These consumers look to employees for some
tangible demonstration of this belief system.
The third level of social environmental cues pertains to customer interactions with other
customers. We are suggesting that having like-minded consumers, who share similar values
and beliefs pertaining to the environment and social responsibility, also affects the overall
service environment. In many instances these proposals would allow consumers to
participate in exercises with other customers who share green values. The initiatives can
take many forms such as service providers facilitating shuttle transportation and car-pooling
services. Programs are aimed at lowering carbon footprints through networking (for
rideshare), recycling drives, and tree planting exercises in an effort to build internal social
atmosphere/environments within their retail setting:
P6. Green social cues are positively related to approach behaviors.
Table III Green social service environmental cues
Service
environment factor
Traditional cue (Baker,
1986) Green cue Environmental impact
Social N/a Relationship between service
provider/retailer and their surrounding
community
For example:
Recycling programs
CSR efforts
Community outreach
Volunteering
Zero waste to land?lls, improved
community relations and investment
Increased volunteerism
Carbon footprint reduction
Energy conservation
Environmental sustainability
Employee to customer
relationship – service
quality
Relationship between employee and
customer and employee and employee
For example: 360 evaluation HR practices
Multiple employee activities outside of the
workplace
Employee initiated
Volunteering and support programs
Community outreach
Partner program or CSR efforts
Improved internal SQ
Increased internal and external
satisfaction levels and by extension
reduced stress
Better environments
Improved community relations and
investment
Increased volunteerism
Carbon footprint reduction
Energy conservation
Environmental sustainability
Customer to customer
relationship
Relationships amongst customers
For example:
C2C notice boards for carpooling,
volunteering, shuttle services and other
customer-related ‘‘green’’ initiatives
Improved community relations and
investment
Increased volunteerism
Carbon footprint reduction
Energy conservation
Environmental sustainability
PAGE 240
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Managerial implications
The managerial implications of green atmospherics are quite signi?cant. The implications
can generally be placed into two categories. The ?rst category deals with the implications
that are based on cost reductions, while the second has to do with enhanced brand equity.
The implementation of green exterior and interior elements allows retailers and service
providers to signi?cantly reduce their bottom line and emphasize to the consumer their
commitment to social responsibility, health and the environment. This perception of being a
good corporate citizen often translates into enhanced brand equity and by extension, the
ability to charge a premium.
Most perceived organic, natural or green retailers are able to charge a premium for their
products based on the perception that sustainability and organic production methods cost
more. The environmental improvements help compliment these perceptions and reinforce a
consistent image in the mind of the consumer as to the level of commitment retailers have to
the environment and healthy living. The implication is that it is possible for some elements to
have greater bene?ts than others. The social factors such as visible recycling containers and
community sponsorship/involvement help consumers to readily identify the retailer’s efforts
to be a good corporate citizen and enhance the overall image of that retailer and their brand
equity. This is an important factor in today’s competitive environment where retailers are
constantly looking for ways to standout in the marketplace and differentiate themselves from
the competition. These improvements allow them a differentiation point that signi?cantly
distinguishes these retailers from other competitors.
The implementation of green atmospherics and environmental upgrades can set a retailer
apart from the competition in terms of ambience, design and layout as well as social
elements. Daylighting facilitates comfort and relaxation within a store environment thereby
allowing approach behaviors often discussed in the environmental psychology discipline. At
the same time, the presence of other like-minded consumers who also care about their
carbon footprint and limiting emissions can also help to promote and reinforce a particular
brand personality in the minds of the consumer.
The other obvious bene?t of green initiatives pertains to cost reduction achievements. As
mentioned earlier, building and creating green interiors may be initially expensive but can
facilitate signi?cant savings through energy conservation and recycling efforts in the future.
Most marketers know and understand that signi?cant savings in overhead costs often
translates into higher pro?t margins in the long run. With such a wide range of managerial
implications, mangers should look deeper at the option of ‘‘Adopting Green’’.
Future research
This typology is the ?rst step in understanding how green environments accentuate a
consumer’s experience within the market. There is still a need for greater academic
investigation into how green consumers react to this environment, as well as the speci?c
elements they focus on, or expect. There is also a needto showhowconstruction and design,
withagreenandsustainableemphasis, canimpact thebottomlinebothintermsof cost savings
andrevenue generation. Morestudies are neededto ascertain the link between green service
environments and consumer behavior, perceived brand equity, brand loyalty, customer
service quality and ultimately, pro?t margins and sales revenues. Researchers need to delve
deeper into understanding the various green consumer segments and how these segments
are in?uencing mainstream consumer behaviors and perceptions of green as the green
movement isasigni?cant social phenomenon. Thisstudysuggeststhat thereisagreat needto
test and develop theory pertaining to sustainable and green buying behavior as a whole.
Conclusion
Green is in service environments and the research that is put forth in this paper attempts to
categorize and position future research opportunities to further understand the importance
of this topic to consumers and services alike. Green buying is no longer simply a phase or
insigni?cant niche market. A wide cross section of today’s consumers is interested in buying
green, using sustainable products and being socially responsible. Organizations, retailers
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 241
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
and service providers are all aware of the earning potential commonly associated with green
initiatives and choices, but academics have been slow to test most of this green movement
on consumer behavior. This typology will offer a more accurate tool for assessing the
effectiveness of green interior environments on in?uencing purchase decisions. It will allow
businesses to allocate their funds into areas where they believe their customers will
appreciate environmental upgrades instead of investing blindly into costly green
renovations. Such a tool will allow managers and marketers to better tailor interior and
exterior design to compliment their image, highlight their products and increase their pro?t
margins. Green design allows cost savings through environmental upgrades to the
organization while facilitating a commitment to social responsibility. With such tremendous
initial investments more research is necessary to determine how these monies are being
recouped not only froman energy standpoint, but also certainly in terms of corporate image,
consumer perception and brand equity.
References
Aaker, D.A. and Bagozzi, R. (1982), ‘‘Attitudes toward public policy alternatives to reduce air pollution’’,
Journal of Marketing & Public Policy, Vol. 1, pp. 85-94.
Addison, B. (2008), ‘‘Green beyond the shelf’’, Home Channel News, Vol. 34 No. 6, p. 44.
Akhter, S.H., Andrews, C.J. and Durvasula, S. (1994), ‘‘The in?uence of retail store environment on brand
related judgments’’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 67-76.
Anderson, T.W., Henion, K.E. and Cox, E.P. (1974), ‘‘Socially vs ecologically concerned consumers’’,
AMA Combined Conference Proceedings, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 304-11.
Anderson, W.T. and Cunningham, W.H. (1972), ‘‘Gauging foreign product promotion’’, Journal of
Advertising Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, February, p. 29.
Antil, J. (1978), "The construction and validation or an instrument to measure socially responsible
consumption behavior: a study of the socially responsible consumer", unpublished doctoral dissertation,
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Antil, J. (1983), ‘‘Uses of response certainty in attitude measurement’’, in Bagozzi, R.P. and Tybout, A.M.
(Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, Association for Consumer Research, Ann Abor, MI,
pp. 409-15.
Arbuthnot, J. (1977), ‘‘The roles of attitudinal and personality variables in the prediction of environmental
behavior and knowledge’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 217-32.
Babin, B.J. and Darden, W.R. (1995), ‘‘Consumer self-regulation in a retail environment’’, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 47-70.
Babin, B.J. and Darden, W.R. (1996), ‘‘Good and bad shopping vibes: spending and patronage
satisfaction’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 201-6.
Baker, J. (1986), ‘‘The role of environment in marketing services: the consumer perspective’’,
in Czpeil, J.A., Congam, C. and Shanaham, J. (Eds), The Services Marketing Challenge: Integrated for
Competitive Advantage, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 79-84.
Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. (1994), ‘‘The in?uence of store environment on quality
inferences and store image’’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, Fall, pp. 328-40.
Baker, J., Levy, M. and Grewal, D. (1992), ‘‘An experimental approach to making retail store environment
decisions’’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68, Winter, pp. 445-60.
Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Voss, G. (2002), ‘‘The in?uence of multiple store
environmental cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions’’, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 66, April, pp. 120-41.
Balderjahn, I. (1988), ‘‘Personality variables and environmental attitudes as predictors of ecologically
responsible consumption patterns’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 51-6.
Bellizzi, J.B.A., Ayn, E., Crowley, A.E. and Hasty, R.W. (1983), ‘‘The effects of color in store design’’,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 59, Spring, pp. 21-45.
Berger, I.E. and Corbin, R.M. (1992), ‘‘Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as
moderators of environmentally responsible behavior’’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 11
No. 2, pp. 79-89.
PAGE 242
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Bitner, M.J. (1986), ‘‘Consumer responses to the physical environment in service settings’’, in
Venkatesan, M., Schmalensee, D.M. and Marshall, C. (Eds), Creativity in Services Marketing, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 89-93.
Bitner, M.J. (1990), ‘‘Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings and employee
responses’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 69-82.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), ‘‘Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and
employees’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 2, April, pp. 57-71.
Booms, B.H. and Bitner, M.J. (1982), ‘‘Marketing services by managing the environment’’, Cornell Hotel
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 23, May, pp. 35-9.
Brundtland, G. (Ed.) (1987), Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and
Development, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Brooker, G. (1976), ‘‘The self-actualizing socially conscious consumer’’, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 107-12.
Buttel, F.H. (1979), ‘‘Age and environmental concern: a multivariate analysis’’, Youth Sociology, Vol. 10
No. 3, pp. 237-56.
Chain Store Age (2003), ‘‘Fixtures improve shopping experience’’, Vol. 79, July, pp. 78-80.
Crosby, L.A., Gill, J.D. and Taylor, J.R. (1981), ‘‘Consumer/voter behavior in the passage of the Michigan
container law’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, Spring, pp. 19-32.
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B., Sinkovics, R. and Bohlen, G. (2003), ‘‘Can socio-demographics
still play a role in pro?ling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation’’,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 465-80.
D’Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P. and Peretiatkl, R. (2007), ‘‘Green decisions: demographics and
consumer understanding of environmental labels’’, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 31
No. 4, pp. 371-6.
Dube, L., Chebat, J.C. and Morin, S. (1995), ‘‘The effects of background music on consumers’ desire to
af?liate in buyer-seller interactions’’, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 12, July, pp. 305-19.
Eagly, A. (1987), Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-role Interpretation, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Environmental Leader (2007), ‘‘Think green champions help Toyota reach zero waste to land?ll’’,
January 23, available at: www.environmentalleader.com/2007/01/23/think-green-champions-help-
toyota-reach-zero-waste-to-land?ll/
Environmental Leader (2008), ‘‘Subaru among companies nearing zero-waste’’, February 19, available
at: www.environmentalleader.com/2008/02/19/subaru-among-companies-nearing-zero-waste/.
Eroglu, S.A. and Machleit, K. (1990), ‘‘An empirical study of retail crowding: antecedents and
consequences’’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 2, pp. 201-21.
Financial Times (2008), ‘‘Transcript: Walmart’s Lee Scott’’, April 6, available at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/
397effaa-028f-11dd-9388-000077b07658.html?nclick_check ¼ 1
Gibson, P. (1979), ‘‘How about something a bit smaller?’’, Forbes, Vol. 123 No. 2, January, p. 80.
Gooch, G.D. (1995), ‘‘Environmental beliefs and attitudes in Sweden and the Baltic states’’,
Environmental Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 513-39.
Harrell, G.D., Hutt, M.D. and Anderson, J.C. (1980), ‘‘Path analysis of buyer behavior under conditions of
crowding’’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, February, pp. 45-51.
Henion, K.E. and Wilson, W.R. (1976), ‘‘The ecologically concerned consumer and locus of control’’, in
Henion, K.E. and Kinnear, T.C. (Eds), Ecological Marketing, American Marketing Association, Chicago,
IL.
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.
Hui, M.K. and Bateson, J.E.G. (1991), ‘‘Perceived control and the effects of crowding and consumer
choice on the service experience’’, The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, September,
pp. 174-84.
Jolibert, A. and Baumgartner, G. (1981), ‘‘Toward a de?nition of the consumerist segment in France’’,
The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 114-7.
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 243
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Joseph, S.M. and Singh, R.K. (2004), What We Say Vs What We Do – The Relationship between Service
Environment and Brand Personality in Retailing, Society for Market Advances, St Petersburg, FL.
Kinnear, T.C., Taylor, J.R. and Ahmed, S.A. (1974), ‘‘Ecologically concerned consumers: who are they?’’,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, April, pp. 20-4.
Kotler, P. (1973), ‘‘Atmospherics as a marketing tool’’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49, Winter, pp. 48-64.
Kumar, V. and Karande, K. (2000), ‘‘The effect of retail store environment on retailer performance’’,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 167-81.
McEvoy, J. III (1972), ‘‘The American concern with environment’’, in Burch, W.R. Jr, Cheek, N.H. Jr and
Taylor, L. (Eds), Social Behavior, Natural Resources and the Environment, Harper and Row, New York,
NY.
McLaren, W. (2006), ‘‘Eco tip: what makes a product (or service) ‘green’?’’, available at: www.
treehugger.com/?les/2006/10/ecotip_what_mak.php (accessed June 28, 2008).
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Milliman, R.E. (1982), ‘‘Using background music to affect the behavior of supermarket shoppers’’,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 86-91.
Ottman, J. (1993), Green Marketing: Challenges and Opportunities for the New Marketing Age,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Peattie, K. (1995), Environmental Marketing Management: Meeting the Green Challenge, Pitman,
London.
Peattie, K. (2001), ‘‘Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer’’, Business Strategy
and the Environment, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 187-99.
Pickett, G.M., Kangun, N. and Grove, S.J. (1993), ‘‘Is there a general conserving consumer? A public
policy concern’’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 234-43.
Roberts, J.A. (1996), ‘‘Green consumers in the 1990s: pro?le and implications for advertising’’, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 217-31.
Roberts, J.A. and Bacon, D.R. (1997), ‘‘Exploring the subtle relationships between environmental
concern and ecologically conscious behavior’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 79-89.
Samdahl, D.M. and Robertson, R. (1989), ‘‘Social determinants of environmental concern: speci?cation
and test of the model’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 57-81.
Schlegelmilch, B., Bohlen, G.M. and Diamantopoulos, A. (1996), ‘‘The link between green purchasing
decisions andmeasures of environmental consciousness’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 5,
pp. 35-55.
Schwartz, J. and Miller, T. (1991), ‘‘The Earth’s best friends’’, American Demographics, Vol. 13 No. 2,
February, pp. 26-35.
Shostack, G.L. (1977), ‘‘Breaking free from product marketing’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41, April,
pp. 73-80.
Shrum, L.J., McCarty, J.A. and Lowrey, T.M. (1995), ‘‘Buyer characteristics of the green consumer and
their implications for advertising strategy’’, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 71-82.
Smith, P. and Burns, D.J. (1996), ‘‘Atmospherics and retail environments: the case of the power aisle’’,
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 7-17.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T. and Kalof, L. (1993), ‘‘Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern’’,
Environmental Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 322-48.
Tognacci, L.N., Weigel, R.H., Wideen, M.F. and Vernon, D.T.A. (1972), ‘‘Environmental quality: how
universal is public concern?’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 73-86.
Tremblay, K.R. and Dunlap, R.E. (1978), ‘‘Rural-urban residence and concern with environmental
quality: a replication and extension’’, Rural Sociology, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 474-91.
Van Liere, K.D. and Dunlap, R.E. (1981), ‘‘Environmental concern: does it make a difference? How it is
measured?’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 651-76.
Wake?eld, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1999), ‘‘Customer response to intangible and tangible service
factors’’, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 51-68.
PAGE 244
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Wall, G. (1995), ‘‘General versus speci?c environmental concern: a western Canadian case’’,
Environmental Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 294-316.
Wang, L., Baker, J., Wagner, A. and Wake?eld, K. (2007), ‘‘Can a retail website be social?’’, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 143-57.
Webster, F.E. (1975), ‘‘Determining the characteristics of the socially conscious consumer’’, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 188-97.
Wedel, M. and Kamakura, W.A. (2000), Market Segmentation – Conceptual and Methodological
Foundations, 2nd ed., Kluwer, Boston, MA.
Weigel, R.H. (1977), ‘‘Ideological and demographic correlates of proecology behaviour’’, Journal of
Social Psychology, Vol. 103 No. 1, pp. 39-47.
Yalch, R. and Spagenberg, E. (1990), ‘‘Effects of store on shopping behavior’’, Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 7, Spring, pp. 55-63.
Yalch, R. and Spagenberg, E. (1993), ‘‘Using store music for retail zoning: a ?eld experiment’’, in
McAlister, L. and Rothschild, M.L. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, Association for
Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 632-6.
Yohn, D.L. (2008), ‘‘A big, green, reluctant hug for retailings’ 800-lb. gorilla’’, Brandweek, Vol. 49 No. 18,
p. 61.
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.
Further reading
Davis, T.R. (1984), ‘‘The in?uence of the physical environment in of?ces’’, The Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 271-84.
Harrington, D. (2008), ‘‘2006 Rapidly renewable revolution’’, Eco-tech, January-February, p. 62,
available at: www.eco-structure.com (accessed June 25, 2008).
Larson, D. (2002), ‘‘Building a brand’s personality from the consumer up’’, Direct Marketing, Vol. 65,
October, pp. 17-21.
McCracken, G. (1989), ‘‘Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement
process’’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 310-21.
Meyers-Levy, J. and Tybout, A.M. (1989), ‘‘Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation’’, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-55.
Shocker, A.D., Srivastava, R.K. and Ruekert, R.W. (1994), ‘‘Challenges and opportunities facing brand
management; an introduction to the special issue’’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31, May,
pp. 149-58.
Spangenberg, E.R., Crowley, A.E. and Henderson, P. (1996), ‘‘Improving the store environment: do
olfactory cues affect evaluations and behaviors?’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, April, pp. 67-80.
Turley, L.W. and Ronald, E. (2000), ‘‘Milliman Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a review of the
experimental evidence’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49, August, pp. 193-211.
Wener, R.E. (1985), ‘‘The environmental psychology of service encounters’’, in Czepiel, J., Solomon, M.
and Surprenant, C. (Eds), The Service Encounter, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 101-12.
Wineman, J.D. (1982), ‘‘Of?ce design and evaluation’’, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 271-98.
Corresponding author
Nicole Bieak Kreidler can be contacted at: [email protected]
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 245
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Prashant Kumar. 2016. State of green marketing research over 25 years (1990-2014). Marketing Intelligence & Planning 34:1,
137-158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. Baris Yilmazsoy, Harald Schmidbauer, Angi Rösch. 2015. Green segmentation: a cross-national study. Marketing Intelligence
& Planning 33:7, 981-1003. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Prashant Kumar, Bhimrao M Ghodeswar. 2015. Factors affecting consumers’ green product purchase decisions. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning 33:3, 330-347. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Nelson A. Barber, Young Hoon Kim, Sean Barth. 2014. The Importance of Recycling to U.S. Festival Visitors: A Preliminary
Study. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 23, 601-625. [CrossRef]
5. Violeta Sima, Ileana Georgiana GheorgheGreen Customer Satisfaction 61-86. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_908057001.pdf
The purpose of this paper is to introduce the idea of green atmospherics and propose a
conceptual framework for green service environment factors and a typology for green consumers.
International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research
How green should you go? Understanding the role of green atmospherics in service environment evaluations
Nicole Bieak Kreidler Sacha J oseph-Mathews
Article information:
To cite this document:
Nicole Bieak Kreidler Sacha J oseph-Mathews, (2009),"How green should you go? Understanding the role of green atmospherics in
service environment evaluations", International J ournal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 3 Iss 3 pp. 228 - 245
Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17506180910995414
Downloaded on: 24 January 2016, At: 22:07 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 85 other documents.
To copy this document: [email protected]
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3625 times since 2009*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
Yi-Chun Huang, Minli Yang, Yu-Chun Wang, (2014),"Effects of green brand on green purchase intention", Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, Vol. 32 Iss 3 pp. 250-268http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-10-2012-0105
Yu-Shan Chen, Ching-Hsun Chang, (2012),"Enhance green purchase intentions: The roles of green perceived value, green perceived
risk, and green trust", Management Decision, Vol. 50 Iss 3 pp. 502-520http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251741211216250
Yu-Shan Chen, Ching-Hsun Chang, (2013),"Towards green trust: The influences of green perceived quality, green perceived risk, and
green satisfaction", Management Decision, Vol. 51 Iss 1 pp. 63-82http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00251741311291319
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:115632 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit
www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than
290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional
customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
How green should you go? Understanding
the role of green atmospherics in service
environment evaluations
Nicole Bieak Kreidler and Sacha Joseph-Mathews
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce the idea of green atmospherics and propose a
conceptual framework for green service environment factors and a typology for green consumers.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper takes the form of a conceptual piece. and offers a new
approach to green consumerism. Green atmospherics goes beyond many of the typical factors
explored in previous service environment studies. The paper examines how many terms commonplace
in the design and architectural literature can be translated into the marketing arena. Factors such as
daylighting, recycling, offgassing, insulation, optimal energy performance and design for the
environment are discussed.
Findings – The paper proposes that ‘‘going green’’ goes beyond having recyclable or even sustainable
products, to an ideology that incorporates improving worker morale and retention, and giving back to
the communities they are located in. Additionally, the paper makes a case for classifying green
consumers based on a psychographic segmentation approach compared to the more traditional
socioeconomic classi?cation.
Originality/value – This paper offers a conceptual framework for assessing green atmospherics within
service environments and proposes a green consumer typology that references ‘‘stimuli’’ versus
‘‘socio-demographics’’ for categorization. A new categorization is proposed and the importance of this
topic to consumers, practitioners and researchers are discussed.
Keywords Perception, Service levels, Service industries, Conservation, Recycling, Sustainable design
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
In today’s marketplace one would be hard pressed to ?nd a more utilized buzz word than
‘‘green’’. Organic, natural, holistic, sustainable, responsible, however, or whatever you want
to call it, the movement is catching on. Whether we are talking about a type of spa, a line of
beauty care products, organic produce, a more responsible way of vacationing, a type of
construction, or even auto production; many industries are recognizing that it actually pays
to go green. Interestingly, this trend in green consumerism is not limited to any one industry
or product type. In fact almost all industries contain players who are stepping up their green
initiatives. The marketplace is rampant with businesses that have now become involved in
the effort to ?nd ways to produce and sell products or provide services that promote
conscious and ethical consumption.
Fortune Magazine lists the top ten green companies worldwide, including organizations
such as Honda, Continental Airlines, Hewlett Packard, and S.C. Johnson to name a few.
However, even beyond this listing, many corporations have invested billions in their greening
efforts. According to Environmental Leader (2007, 2008) Toyota Motor Sales recently
achieved its goal of zero waste to land?ll and Subaru is well on its way to zero waste to land?ll
in many of their US plants. In 2007 Bayer committed $1.46 billion US to a group-wide climate
program aimed at cutting CO
2
emissions from its production facilities, and in February 2008
PAGE 228
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009, pp. 228-245, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1750-6182 DOI 10.1108/17506180910995414
Nicole Bieak Kreidler is
Assistant Professor and
Chair, School of
Professions, Interior
Design, La Roche College,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,
USA.
Sacha Joseph-Mathews is
Assistant Professor,
Eberhardt School of
Business, University of the
Paci?c, Stockton,
California, USA.
Received: March 2009
Revised April 2009
Accepted: April 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Crate and Barrel released their eco-friendly, family friendly line of furniture. 3M has
continually made considerable contributions to innovation and sustainable products and
practices, and carpet manufacturer- Interface has set the standard in corporate ethics and
company turnarounds by striving to create a totally sustainable company by 2020. In 2008
Bank of America pledged over 20 billion to encourage development of environmentally
sustainable business practices and GE, Wal-Mart, and Unilever are all currently engaged in
signi?cant greening efforts.
Yet, despite the pervasiveness of green initiatives in the marketplace, the academic arena
does not extensively focus on these initiatives. Instead, the majority of the existing work has
looked at how green consumer behavior can be segmented. Speci?cally, extant literature
has examined behavior related to environmental consciousness (e.g., Buttel, 1979;
Schlegelmilch et al., 1996; Shrum et al., 1995; Wall, 1995), age (e.g., Roberts, 1996;
Samdahl and Robertson, 1989), income and education (Aaker and Bagozzi, 1982;
Arbuthnot, 1977; Jolibert and Baumgartner, 1981; Weigel, 1977), gender (Arbuthnot, 1977;
McEvoy, 1972; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989), geographic
location (e.g., Gooch, 1995; Pickett et al., 1993; Schwartz and Miller, 1991; Tremblay and
Dunlap, 1978; Zimmer et al., 1994), political orientation (Hine and Gifford, 1991; Roberts,
1996), sensitivity to price and quality (D’Souza et al., 2007), perceived consumer
effectiveness (Kinnear et al., 1974; Antil, 1983; Berger and Corbin, 1992; Webster, 1975),
and multiple personality variables, such as alienation, dogmatism and locus of control (e.g.,
Balderjahn, 1988; Crosby et al., 1981; Henion and Wilson, 1976; Kinnear et al., 1974). This
study is interested in a somewhat different perspective on the green initiatives currently
underway. While still interested in consumer behavior and perceptions, the focus of this
research is oriented to the actions of service providers and how these actions will be
perceived by various consumer segments.
Most of the green initiatives currently operational in the marketplace typically fall into two
categories. On one hand, businesses focus on integrating green features into the design or
characteristics of individual products. For example, creating a car that has a higher miles
per gallon (MPG) designation or developing a laundry detergent that is eco-friendly. On the
other hand, a larger portion of resources commits to a reduction in waste and energy usage,
building green and limiting CO
2
emissions fromproduction. Ideally, ‘‘green behavior’’ should
go beyond simply creating a biodegradable or recyclable product to a more holistic
incorporation of sustainable values into a corporation’s core principles and values.
Over the last decade, many green companies began building and retro?tting existing
structures using sustainable and green materials with concerted efforts to implement
recycling and energy conservation initiatives. The trend is so substantial that retailers like
Wal-Mart, who traditionally have been criticized for being unfriendly to the environment, have
made strides to conserve energy, commit to zero waste policies, and spent signi?cant
amounts of money to retro?t lighting and cooling systems in order to create store
environments that are environmentally conscious (Addison, 2008). In 2006 CEO Lee Scott
pledged to invest over $500 million US to reduce energy consumed in stores by 30 percent,
solid waste by 25 percent and double the fuel ef?ciency of the company’s vehicle ?eet over
the next ten years (Financial Times, 2008). Recently, Wal-Mart launched a media campaign
touting their sustainable products, and green initiatives (Yohn, 2008).
Nike, Interface, Anheuser-Busch, and Ikea are all examples of corporations who are leading
the initiative to be more socially responsible in their renovation and construction practices. In
essence, these organizations have acknowledged that they have a responsibility to both the
environment and to the communities where their products are produced and distributed.
Some of these companies have sought out Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) certi?cation for the buildings in which they manufacture, distribute and sell their
merchandise. This certi?cation is based on a building’s compliance with standards
pertaining to water management, site planning, energy conservation, material use, and
indoor environmental air quality. LEEDcompliance is highly regarded by many organizations
who consider themselves forward thinking and socially responsible. According to the US
Green Building Council (www.usgbc.com), the bene?ts of green building are numerous.
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 229
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Based on data provided by the Council, LEED certi?ed buildings have a 8-9 percent
decrease in operating costs, 7.5 percent increase in building values, 6.6 percent increase in
ROI, 3.5 percent increase in occupancy, and a 3 percent increase in rent.
Yet despite the signi?cant attempt by companies worldwide to reduce their carbon footprint
and engage in more sustainable practices, academic research does not test their efforts for
their impact on consumers and consumer perceptions. The question begs answering, do
these ‘‘green’’ initiatives in service environments in?uence consumers, and if so, how do
these ‘‘green’’ initiatives affect the meanings consumers associate with particular retailers
and organizations? Do consumers consider organizations that spend large sums to create
green interior environments to be more socially responsible than ones who do not? While we
know people pay more for an organic tomato and spend top dollar on free range chickens,
are they just as willing to pay more for a product which is sold within a service environment
that boasts zero emissions, practices daylighting, and uses recycled building materials?
The service environment translates into a physical expression of the brand, designed to
highlight its unique brand personality and create an atmosphere that intensely appeals to its
clientele (Joseph and Singh, 2004). Appealing environments often encourage approach
behaviors, whereas unappealing environments often encourage avoidance behaviors. In
essence, the in-store service environment is the last component in the mix that ensures
previous positioning efforts are solidi?ed in the minds of the consumer. The right in-store
design maintains consistency with the speci?c created store/brand personality (Chain Store
Age, 2003). If consumers for organic products do seek a different type of supplier, and a
different type of product, does it not seem logical that this desire would also be present for
the type of environment where these products are sold? Similarly, if it is true that consumers
expect speci?c types of environments from retailers who promote their environmental
obligations, who are these consumers? What exactly are these consumers looking for, and
more importantly how can we assess if a retailer, organization or service provider is excelling
on this front?
To analyze these green environments, we are proposing a new direction for Baker’s (1986)
SOR paradigm. Based on the traditional SOR framework, the new categorization will offer a
comprehensive examination of speci?cally green-oriented service environmental
features/cues. In the past, researchers have used Baker’s (1986) model to examine
typical environmental factors such as aisle space, carpeting, lighting, wall color, music,
scent, staff, crowding, clutter, etc. and their resulting impact on consumer behavior. As a
contrast, the focus for creating a ‘‘green’’ environment has centered on reducing a building’s
ecological footprint through incorporating forward thinking materials, ?nishes and
processes. While wall color may be an important aesthetic variable in creating green
interior environments, the absence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the paint is
just as, if not much more, relevant. While traf?c ?ow and department location are signi?cant,
far more central to creating a green interior environment is the use of renewable energy and
natural lighting. This research suggests that green environments differ from non-green
environments, and atmospherics within a green environment should be examined differently.
With such a huge demarcation in the type of design and construction efforts utilized in green
building and interior design, there seems to be an opportunity to create a typology that can
measure the effectiveness of the effort as perceived by the individual utilizing the given
environment. Previous studies have con?rmed relationships between the physical
environment and perceived service quality (Baker et al., 1994), store image (Yalch and
Spagenberg, 1990) future purchase intentions (Baker et al., 1992), store performance
(Kumar and Karande, 2000), and brand attitude formation (Akhter et al., 1994). Building on
extant literature, this study explores how traditional atmospherics can be modi?ed for green
service environments.
To compliment our green environment categorization, we will also propose a new typology
for classi?cation of the types of consumers who will buy within these environments. While
most green environments will be inhabited by the employees of companies that have
undertaken these initiatives there has also been an ongoing movement by service providers
PAGE 230
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
and retailers to build and renovate green retail outlets. A signi?cant body of work currently
exists that focuses almost entirely on outlining the multiple variables that typically
characterize green consumers. But this type of research has primarily used
socio-demographic indicators to segment or identify environmentally conscious
consumers (Peattie, 2001). Many researchers concur that this approach has been mildly
successful at best, often yielding contradicting results (Diamantopoulos et al., 2003; Peattie,
1995; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996; Wedel and Kamakura,
2000). This study will segment green consumers based on environmental consciousness
and involvement instead of the more traditional demographic segmentation pro?les.
Consumers will be categorized based on their attitude towards sustainable products and
their level of commitment to and involvement in a sustainable lifestyle.
This study’s purpose is twofold. First, the study proposes a framework to identify the various
types of consumers who use ‘‘green’’ products, or participate in ethical consumption, and by
extention are the most obvious users of ‘‘green interior environments’’. Second, the study
offers a typology based on the SOR framework put forward by Baker (1986) that is speci?c to
green atmospherics. The impetus here is to create a framework that merges terminology
used by marketers, architects, designers and environmental psychologists.
Conceptual background
What is green?
In order to clearly outline who green customers are, and the most appealing types of green
service environments, we need to ?rst de?ne the term green. In the literature (both popular
press and in some instances academic) there has been a tendency to use the terms green
and sustainable interchangeably. However, there are very distinct differences between the
two. A green product is one that is either partially or totally recyclable. The product should
either be totally or partially created from recycled or rapidly renewable materials and also
recyclable or biodegradable. In sharp contrast, sustainable speaks to the lifecycle and
origins of a product. A product is only sustainable if the entire lifecycle of the product from
raw material to disposal is a closed loop, rather than a linear or take-make-waste process
where at the end of a product’s life it is discarded in a land?ll. According to treehugger.com,
green is de?ned as a product or service that is both environmentally and socially
responsible. It is accountable to and respectful of the places and people that provide and
use them (McLaren, 2006). Whereas sustainable is de?ned as the ability to meet the needs
of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs
(Brundtland, 1987).
Green consumers
According to a 2008 report by Nielsen, one in ?ve US consumers are ‘‘passionate,
environmentally-socially-responsible stewards’’. The report states that organic labeled
products represent more than $4.4 billion in sales in grocery, drug, and mass merchandiser
stores, excluding Wal-Mart. These ?ndings mirror a 2008 study by Yankelovich that
suggested 22 percent of all consumers feel they can make a difference when it comes to the
environment (Greenbiz.com). As the notion of buying green becomes more of a mainstream
ideology, and with such signi?cant numbers of consumers willing to purchase products that
are environmentally friendly, it is no surprise that marketers, managers and researchers are
interested in tapping into this segment. As a result, several studies both in the practitioner’s
press and academia have focused attention on better de?ning this consumer group.
This consumer segment has demonstrated that it is by no means a homogenous group. In
fact, several studies have demonstrated that consumers of environmentally friendly
products/services do not all see green in the same way (Greenbiz.com; Lohas.com). Some
customers will only buy certain green products while other customers are obsessed with
green shopping for every product fromice creamto clothing. In the academic arena, most of
the current literature on green consumerism uses socio-demographic variables to classify
the various consumer segments (Peattie, 2001), while the popular press has classi?ed green
consumerism more along the lines of bene?ts sought. The body of work in academia on
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 231
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
green segmentation has yielded mixed responses and although the general consensus is
that the typical green consumer is an af?uent, educated, liberal female who lives in a city,
with children in elementary school (Ottman, 1993), there is still a signi?cant amount of
debate in the literature as to characteristics of a ‘‘typical’’ green consumer.
The work of Eagly (1987) suggests that women tend to evaluate the impact of their actions on
others and as such are more likely to be environmentally conscious. Several other authors
have not been able to ?nd a signi?cant relationship between gender and green behavior
(e.g., Arbuthnot, 1977; Brooker, 1976; Samdahl and Robertson, 1989; Tognacci et al., 1972).
The ?ndings are mixed on the effect of income and education on environmental awareness.
Some studies con?rm a signi?cant direct effect of these variables on green behavior (e.g.,
Anderson and Cunningham, 1972; Roberts and Bacon, 1997), while others counter these
?ndings with non-signi?cant effects (e.g., Anderson et al., 1974; Antil, 1978; Van Liere and
Dunlap, 1981).
With such a diverse set of ?ndings, researchers agree to disagree. Despite the varying
results when using socio-demographic variables to identify green consumers, some
agreement does occur in the literature. Most researchers agree that psychographic
variables are more predictive of environmental consciousness and green consumer
behavior than socio-demographic variables (Roberts, 1996; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996).
Several studies using both demographic and psychographic variables to explain green
purchasing behavior consistently found higher predictive and explanatory power with
psychographic variables (e.g., Roberts, 1996; Schlegelmilch et al., 1996). A review of the
existing body of work in this area includes examining the role of perceived consumer
effectiveness (Antil, 1978; Berger and Corbin, 1992; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Webster,
1975), political orientation (Hine and Gifford, 1991), altruism (Stern et al., 1993), and
environmental concern (Antil, 1983; Kinnear et al., 1974; Roberts and Bacon, 1997; Van
Liere and Dunlap, 1981) on green purchasing behavior. Based on these study ?ndings we
have chosen to make use of psychographic segmentation. Building on a segmentation
currently utilized by the Natural Marketing Institute, we propose a framework that segments
consumers based on their attitude to sustainable products and their level of commitment to
and involvement in a sustainable lifestyle.
According to the Natural Marketing Institute web site (www.lohas.com), there is a speci?c
market segment that focuses on health and ?tness, the environment, personal development,
sustainable living, and social justice. The acronym commonly used to describe this
consumer group is LOHAS or lifestyles of health and sustainability. Based on 2005 data
collected by the Natural Marketing Institute, there are three other market segments that
companies involved in green marketing should be aware of. These are NOMADICS (a group
with far less concern for the environment but still a moderate commitment to speci?c LOHAS
behaviors, such as, recycling), CENTRISTS (a group not very interested in LOHAS attitudes
and behaviors) and INDIFFERENTS (a group which ?nds LOHAS behaviors to be completely
irrelevant). The 2005 survey, which involved over 8000 respondents, indicated that
Lohasians represent 23 percent of the general population, compared to 38 percent for
Nomadics, 27 percent for Centrists and 12 percent for Indifferents (www.lohas.com). While
this conceptualization does offer some insight into the various green consumer segments,
rather than delve deeply into the various facets of green, it deals more with the wider market
segment and looks at segments that range fromvery green to not green at all. Lohasians and
Nomadics are almost on two ends of the green spectrum and there are some more subtle
differences within the larger green consumer market, which are not adequately addressed.
In contrast, the typology aims to offer a better description of the many different types of
green consumers. We have identi?ed four groups within a matrix that ranges fromlowto high
sustainable involvement on one axis and attitude towards sustainability on the other axis.
Figure 1 outlines the proposed various green market segments. A true-blue green de?nes
the consumer who is willing to sacri?ce everything in the name of sustainability whereas a
lean green is willing to participate in sustainable activities as long as it will not cost them
money. A surface green understands the concept of sustainability, but it is too much for them
to participate in sustainable activities. These surface greens associate themselves with
PAGE 232
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
products that say ‘‘sustainable’’ or ‘‘green’’ without doing further research on issues or
exerting any extra effort in recycling. Finally, there is the craven green, a person who wants to
be green and ?nds the notion of being green attractive, but is comfortable with the way
things are and lacks con?dence in stepping outside of their traditional lifestyle or buying
behavior.
These categories offer a spectrum for categorizing green consumers and by extension, an
opportunity for retailers and green service suppliers to tailor their various products to the
level of green consumer that best suits their product speci?cations. With such a wide
spectrum of green products on the market, retailers that are not hard and fast green retailers
can now attract consumers that are not die-hard green consumers but are still very
interested in some level of green product and or service.
In such a competitive marketplace, a superior understanding of niche markets can only aid a
retailer’s ability to reach and cater to this diverse audience. Yet, a more detailed
segmentation is only the ?rst step in successfully catering to green consumers. The ?elds of
environmental psychology and marketing both agree that the surrounding physical
environment is a major component in many purchase decisions (Bitner, 1992). Retailers
often manipulate service environments to reinforce brand meaning, distinguish themselves
from the competition and in many instances to prolong shopping time and ultimately,
in?uence shopping decisions. With such a proven link between environments and shopping
experiences, we make the case that uniquely green environments can emphasize, highlight
and complement green products and or services. As the notion of green becomes
conventional, the issue of green environments will gain signi?cance in the literature and
researchers will need to ?nd ways to determine how much of a green environment is
necessary to truly compliment speci?c types of green products and services:
P1. Green consumers can identify green from non-green service environments.
Atmospherics and the SOR paradigm
Researchers evaluate service environments on the effect of ambience, design, and social
factors on consumer purchase intentions. The notion of service environments ?rst began
with Kotler (1973). Coined as atmospherics, it was de?ned as the effort to design buying
environments, which will produce speci?c emotional effects in the buyer that enhances
his/her purchase probability. About the same time, a body of work evolved in environmental
psychology known as the stimulus, organism, response theory; ?rst developed by
Mehrabian and Russell in 1974. Based on this early work, Donovan and Rossiter then
introduced the theory to retail environments in 1982, and it was adapted to service
Figure 1 Proposed ‘‘green’’ market segments
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 233
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
environments by Baker in 1986 and then Bitner in 1990 and 1992. Bitner (1992) proposed the
categorization of ambient, design and layout and artifacts, whereas Baker (1986)
categorized service environments based on ambient, design and layout and social cues.
To date, there have been more studies con?rming Baker’s conceptualization (e.g., Baker
et al., 1992, 2002; Babin and Darden, 1996; Hui and Bateson, 1991; Wake?eld and Blodgett,
1999; Wang et al., 2007). Based on this trend in the data, this research uses Baker’s (1986)
adaptation as a skeleton to build a framework that introduces ‘‘green’’ to service
environment literature.
Environmental psychologists suggest that people react to their environment in two basic
ways: approach and avoidance (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974). Approach behaviors
include positive behaviors such as a desire to stay, explore, spend money, and browse in a
particular environment. Avoidance, on the other end of the spectrum, includes negative
behaviors such as a desire to leave a particular environment. Consumers exhibiting
avoidance tend to stay away fromcertain settings. Throughout the literature both employees
and customers have been proven to function in, and relate better to, an environment they
perceive to be aesthetically pleasing. Marketing academics seek to de?ne how these
environments are most effective from a consumer standpoint. Some of these environmental
effects have been examined in great detail in terms of the resulting impact on consumer
behavior.
Clutter has been positively linked to avoidance and negatively linked to satisfaction (Bitner,
1990). Color has been linked to approach (consumer liking) and positive perceptions of
products or merchandise (Bellizzi et al., 1983). Crowding has been shown to change a
consumer’s satisfaction, enjoyment of the shopping environment and use of in-store
information (Eroglu and Machleit, 1990; Harrell et al., 1980). Store music has been shown to
in?uence the amount of time consumers spend in stores, traf?c ?ow, sales, arousal and the
perception of visual stimuli in the retail store (e.g., Dube et al., 1995; Milliman, 1982; Yalch
and Spagenberg, 1993). Other physical factors such as layout and design (Smith and
Burns, 1996) and in-store lighting (Baker et al., 1994), have all been shown to impact
consumer behavior in some way.
The above-mentioned literature all concur that the physical environment within a store or
service setting serves as a meaningful entity to customers and perceptions of these
environments often shape their experiences within said settings (Baker, 1986; Baker et al.,
2002; Bitner, 1990, 1992; Gibson, 1979). Researchers have demonstrated that overall
atmospherics can be manipulated to create lasting brand meaning in the eyes of the
customers (Baker, 1986; Bitner, 1986, 1992; Booms and Bitner, 1982; Kotler, 1973; Shostack,
1977). In turn, marketers and managers can fashion speci?c brand images/perceptions
through direct manipulation of atmospherics (such as product displays, lighting, sounds,
power aisles, spacious display areas and bold clear signage) in an effort to create a unique
experience for the consumer. These unique experiences can, in turn, contribute to an overall
positive consumer response, which can manifest itself in positive purchase behavior.
Customers often use physical environments as a proxy for information relating to products
including product quality and price, and environment evaluations also often in?uence
perceptions of the service provider (Baker et al., 2002). Imagine walking into a shabby,
poorly lit doctor’s of?ce with vinyl ?oors and worn furniture. Now juxtapose that image to a
modern, well lit, of?ce with new furniture, wood plank ?ooring and high ceilings with a thick
crown molding. Both environments offer suggestions about the type of service to be
expected, as well as the quality and price of these services. Which image would you like your
service to be associated with?
Green retailers are just as likely to utilize their respective environments to in?uence
consumer behavior, as are their non-green counterparts. More and more manufacturers of
green products are recognizing that customers place greater value on the manufacturer’s
green claims when there is the perception that these manufacturers and service providers
have embraced green within their core values. Companies like Toyota, Frito Lay and
Stoneyhill Farms have found ways to integrate green initiatives into their core
PAGE 234
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
values/business strategies and consumers are responding to this (Environmental Leader,
2008). For example, Wholefoods has had tremendous success with their ?agship store in
Austin, Texas. The store is a clear example of the lengths even green retailers go to in order
to in?uence their consumers. Consumer senses are heightened by scents, sights and
sounds. Departments are designed to create easy traf?c ?ow, there is ample seating to
encourage relaxation and checkout kiosks were created to minimize congestion and
maximize time utilization.
P2. Green consumers demonstrate stronger approach behaviors to green
environments than non-green ones.
P3. Consumers perceive green environments as physical interpretations of a ?rm’s
deeper core social responsibility strategies.
Green environments offer a unique component when compared to non-green physical
surroundings. While non-green environments are typically evaluated solely based on
physical cues which are apparent to the average consumer, green environments involve
signi?cant behind the scenes initiatives that are not obvious to most consumers. In today’s
marketplace millions are spent on behind the scenes green initiatives. These behind the
scenes initiatives are often important to consumers as they suggest a company commitment
to sustainability and reinforce notions of quality and environmental consciousness, both
important attributes for many green consumers. Contrary to the many developments in the
business world, there has been little or no investigation into green service environments from
a marketing standpoint. There has also been no attempt to integrate current marketing
frameworks with those used in technical ?elds such as interior design and architecture
where there has been an ongoing discussion on the role of green in creating building
interiors and exteriors. This research seeks to amalgamate theories across ?elds, focusing
the effort not only on surface environmental cues (which are more commonly examined in the
marketing ?eld), but also on examining the use of green in the building process.
As we initiate the subject of green within the atmospheric framework, we hope to
immediately add new layers of measurement to the literature. Green and sustainable are
terms that often create frustration for businesses. This frustration results from a lack of
knowledge about the terms and the basic assumption that these newproducts, technologies
and services are going to cost signi?cant amounts of money. The proposed framework
hopes to encourage retailers to allocate their funds into areas where they believe their
customers will appreciate green attributes.
When introducing green elements to the marketing mix, a framework of attributes emerges
for businesses that have interest in greening themselves. These green dimensions generate
numerous attributes to examine as we are no longer measuring a singular attribute. An
attribute within a green interior environment immediately begins to ask a series of questions;
is the product certi?ed through a third-party, is it sustainable, can it be recycled, is it natural,
is it biodegradable, what percentage of recycled content does it contain? These questions
provide signi?cance to the design and therefore will substantiate reasoning for the retailer to
incorporate the attribute within their interior environment.
Each of Baker’s dimensions (ambience, design and layout, social factors) can be modi?ed in
terms of green service environments. In introducing these green elements, the focus is on a
system of many individual components within the broader framework. Each one of these
components contributes to the greater whole – enhancing the performance of the
environment, positively affecting occupants’ health, comfort, and perception of space.
Ambient factors
Baker (1986) de?nes ambiance as those factors that exist below the level of customers’
immediate awareness, so they may be less than totally conscious of these conditions in the
environment (p. 79). In the traditional sense, ambient cues have been examined in the
literature using noise, scent, lighting and, to a lesser extent, temperature. However, the most
relevant cue for green service providers would be the atmosphere of the interior
environment. Table I outlines the differences between traditional cues and green cues and it
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 235
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
also demonstrates the more extensive environmental impact green cues can have above
and beyond traditional ambient atmospherics.
The ?rst component within this factor is air quality. Air quality is typically expressed through
temperature, humidity, air circulation, and ventilation. Increasing air quality results in a more
comfortable and noticeably healthier interior through monitoring air exchange with the
outdoor environment and controlling the level of humidity in an interior environment.
Therefore, the air quality of the environment includes temperature/humidity control (heating
and cooling) and ventilation. Temperature can be easily controlled through installation of a
thermostat that will regulate the interior environment consistently throughout the day.
Ventilation allows for proper heating and cooling of a space as well as the introduction of
fresh air. This process could take place by simply installing operable windows or through a
more complicated technology of using a fresh air exchange system. From a green
perspective, retailers have many options when it comes to the ef?cient use of energy in
conditioning their space. Geothermal heat pumps, advanced variable-air-volume (VAV)
systems, and new automated control systems are all examples of ways that retailers can
recoup signi?cant monies in the greening of their environments.
Noise is a component of all interior environments, not speci?c to traditional or green
environments. Noise can be controlled through the use of insulation and acoustic barriers.
The control of noise is not necessarily a ‘‘green’’ attribute, but through careful selection of
materials an increased ef?ciency rating may be attained therefore resulting in the
conservation of energy and resources.
Scent is also not speci?c to a green or traditional environment. For purposes in this paper,
scent can be a trigger for an asthmatic reaction and can also be associated with harmful
off-gassing. Careful attention must be paid to the speci?cation of materials. Materials that
are speci?ed within a green environment usually contain zero or low VOCs. The off-gassing
of materials is what is toxic to interior environments. Off-gassing results from the release of
volatile chemicals into the air through evaporation. Many materials and ?nishes have the
ability to off-gas, although natural materials off-gass less. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) warns about the health effects of reduced indoor air quality (IAQ) from the
off-gassing of VOCs (www.epa.gov).
Cleanliness is another attribute Baker’s (1986) original framework de?nes, however, since
then this element has not been extensively tested. In her paper she referred to most ambient
factors as those that exist in the subconscious. Cleanliness is often something we take for
granted until we are confronted with an environment that does not meet our standards.
Service providers need to actively engage themselves in new cleaning systems in a green
environment. This is not an easy feat as all housekeeping personnel must be re-educated on
Table I Green ambient service environmental cues
Service
environment factor
Traditional cue (Baker,
1986) Green cue Environmental impact
Ambient Air quality (temperature,
humidity, circulation,
ventilation)
Optimal energy performance, thermal
barriers, insulation use, reduction in CFC’s
(chloro?uorocarbons used in cooling),
appropriate HVAC controls, appropriate
HVAC zoning, use of renewable energy
Energy conservation, limited energy use,
reduction of carbon footprint
Noise Use of appropriate insulation and acoustic
barriers
Energy conservation, reduction of carbon
footprint
Scent Off-gassing of materials Use of zero or low VOC materials,
reduction of carbon footprint
Cleanliness Biodegradable cleaning agents,
recycling, composting
Reduction of carbon and global footprint
Lighting Energy Star rating, daylighting,
optimization of energy, renewable energy
resources
Energy conservation, reduction of carbon
and ecological footprint
PAGE 236
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
how to use these products. Several organizations are devoted to educating service
providers about green cleaners. One of the most signi?cant databases of green cleaning
resources is cleangredients.org. This organization is supported through the EPA and was
initiated through the practices of greenblue.org.
The attribute, cleanliness informs recycling and composting as these practices associate
with cleaning and organization of an interior environment. Through actively recycling and
composting of materials and spent food items, a service provider is reducing the output of
materials into the waste stream. These activities can signi?cantly reduce their footprint and
increase revenue to their bottom line.
The study includes lighting as an ambient factor. Baker (1986) does not list lighting in her
initial table but she does discuss lighting as an ambient cue in her discussion. Lighting is
typically de?ned as an ambient cue within other service environment literature (Baker et al.,
1994). Ef?cient lighting of an interior environment is a science in and of itself. The use of
natural light or daylighting and the amount (footcandles) and type of light (color) that is
dispersed from a light ?xture are some of the concerns lighting designers take into account
when planning an interior environment.
Daylightingis the practice of usingnatural light to illuminate interior environments. It optimizes
the amount of natural light a retailer can take advantage of and is supplemented by arti?cial
light whentheuseof natural light isnot optimal. Fromagreenstandpoint, theuseof daylighting
becomes a green factor because it reduces reliance on arti?cial illumination therefore
reducing energy use.. There are also some very interesting statistics stating that productivity,
wellness, andattentiveness areall increasedthroughtheuseof daylighting. Whendaylighting
is not available, arti?cial lighting will be optimized in order to create an environment that
promotes contentment. The type of lighting that is optimized within a green environment is
important, as it needs to get the most light out of the least amount of energy. Typically, the type
of ballasts, lamps andoptics used in lighting a space are very important when a retailer wants
to create a speci?c type of environment for their products. Each one of these parts works to
create the ambience of the space through the intensity and color of the lighting it emits.
Another variable for measurement of ‘‘greenness’’ (when discussing lighting ?xtures and
equipment/appliances) is the use of Energy Star ratings. The EPA’s main goals for the Energy
Star program are to develop performance-based speci?cations that determine the most
ef?cient products in a particular category (www.epa.gov). The EPA has designated over 50
different categories of product ratings and has the information published on their web site
and identi?able through the use of their logo on qualifying products.
From a service environment standpoint ambient factors exist in the background, they are not
readily noticeable to consumers unless they are absent or exist at an unpleasant level
(Baker, 1986). The environmental impact of this factor is not readily identi?able to
consumers. As a result, it is much easier to communicate and test the effect of these cues on
consumer perceptions. We believe that green consumers are more aware of environments
with respect to sustainability and energy ef?ciency, therefore consumers will be more aware
of the steps service providers take to address sustainability and energy ef?ciency.
Undoubtedly, retailers and service providers will have to ?nd ways to inform their consumers
of the greening steps they are taking in these environments; in many instances this can be
done through proper signage. However, actually pointing out green cues can also serve the
same purpose. For example, signage around a thermostat could indicate to consumers that
a particular retailer is constantly monitoring their environment in order to save energy and
limit emissions; an important factor for today’s socially and environmentally conscious
consumer:
P4. Green ambient cues are positively related to green consumer approach behaviors.
Design and layout
Baker (1986) de?nes design cues in terms of stimuli that exist at the forefront of our
awareness. In this construct, the most relevant cues for green service providers would
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 237
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
include interior and exterior building materials, applied ?nishes, furniture, ?xtures, lighting
and signage. The ?rst components within this factor to be addressed are materials and
?nishes. As outlined in Table II, materials are typically exposed whereas ?nishes are often
applied. All of the materials and ?nishes presented are to meet at least one of the following
criteria in order to be de?ned as green; low emitting (zero or low VOCs), rapidly renewable,
recycled, reused, and biodegradable.
Rapidly renewable refers to resources that have short harvest cycles as opposed to
petroleum based products that are non-renewable or old growth forests that take decades,
possibly centuries until harvest. Bamboo, cork, wool, straw, hulls, and sorghum are all
materials that are being manufactured into architectural and design materials to be used
both structurally and decoratively. These materials are being veneered to make ?ooring, as
well as wallpapers, and manufactured into panels in order to make cabinetry. From a green
perspective, the materials and ?nishes used would be more important factors than general
elements such as wall color or ?ooring.
Recycled is a term that more retailers may be familiar with. This term can refer to products
such as carpet, tile and insulation. There are many carpet companies that recycle used
carpet through a process that separates the backing from the yarn, recycles the yarn and
then manufactures the new yarn into carpet. Tile can be manufactured from many different
types of recycled products. Some of these products can include light bulbs, ceramic, and
aluminum. The difference between reused and recycled is that the reused product comes
from an existing application and is used most of the time in a similar application. Wood
?ooring may be used as ?ooring again or as an application on a wall or ceiling treatment. The
?nal term to introduce is biodegradable. Biodegradable refers to products that compost
quickly without any type of plastic residues.
Green design cues would focus on the overall design and layout of the environment. It is
important to recognize the impact these green materials can have on consumers who are
Table II Green design and layout service environmental cues
Service
environment factor Traditional cue (Baker, 1986) Green cue Environmental impact
Design: aesthetic Architecture Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing, rapidly renewable
materials
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Color Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, off-gassing
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Scale N/a N/a
Materials Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Style N/a N/a
Accessories Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing, DfE (designed for the
environment), rapidly renewable materials
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Design: functional Layout N/a N/a
Comfort Identi?ed in ambient Identi?ed in ambient
Signage Responsible use of materials, percent of
recycled content, sustainably harvested
wood, off-gassing, rapidly renewable
materials, renewable energy resources
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability. Energy
conservation
* lighting Energy star rating, optimization of energy,
renewable energy resources
Reduction of carbon, global and
ecological footprint
Environmental sustainability
Energy conservation
PAGE 238
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
often unaware of the advantages of using green products. In many instances, the various
cues may not be identi?ed as being green by the consumer. Instead, these green
atmospherics are relevant more to the providers of service environments. Consumers will
only be aware of the environmental impact if the owner or management identi?es the bene?ts
of the environment.
Layout, ?ow and clutter are dimensions that Baker identi?ed as design functionality.
Considering the focus of this paper we are going to concentrate on the physical, tangible
aspects of design rather than ?ow and spatial arrangements. While the same descriptors
(low emitting – zero or low VOCs, rapidly renewable, recycled, reused, and biodegradable)
are terms that need to be addressed with these items, two more terms can be included. They
are design for disassembly and design for environment (DfE).
Design for disassembly enables the particular product and its parts to be easily reused,
remanufactured or recycled at the end of its life. DfE is a comprehensive, holistic approach
to the design of a product or building (www.MBDC.com). This design practice takes into
account the characteristics of functionality and disposal of a product before the actual
design is initiated. This process is an intelligent optimization of resources – both before,
during, and after a product’s lifespan.
Lighting is a factor that is addressed as an ambient cue as well as a functional design cue.
As an ambient cue, lighting is discussed as something that exists in the background, not
immediately noticeable. As a functional design cue, lighting begs a consumer’s attention.
Highlighting a piece of art, calling out a detail within the interior environment, or possibly
directing a consumer to a location are all examples of lighting that is used functionally. Green
cues and environmental impact remain the same for lighting, the difference remains in the
way lighting is used:
P5. Green design and layout cues are positively related to approach behaviors.
Social factors
Aside from ambient and design factors, social factors of the atmospheric framework will
have to be addressed in terms of green as well. Table III outlines some of the differences
between the more traditional social cues and green social cues. Our focus here will pertain
to three levels of social interaction. The ?rst level will speak to the social interactions between
the service provider/environment producer and their surrounding community/society. We will
examine issues like zero waste to land?lls, recycling efforts, as well as community outreach
and volunteering. These activities often indicate the level of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) consumers typically attribute to a corporation. Actual physical environments can
further reinforce these meanings and initiatives.
Retailers are usually perceived as positive contributors to their respective communities when
they provide access to recycling of products that may not be addressed by local waste
management companies. These items may include small electronics, compact ?uorescent
bulbs, ink cartridges and plastic shopping bags. The in-store efforts could be as simple as
offering speci?c bins for paper plastic and cans. For example, Walmart places bins at the
store’s entrance to encourage the recycling of plastic bags. Nike outlet stores have a
recycling program for used sneakers and Of?ce Depot has bins for the recycling of ink
cartridges. By providing these services, retailers are not only serving their greater
community but they are also communicating their level of commitment to green initiatives
and by extension facilitating buying opportunities for shoppers who may only enter the store
for the prime purpose of recycling.
The second level of social environmental cues pertains to employee/customer interactions
as well as employee/employee interactions. Here, the social cues will focus on how the
employee reinforces the atmosphere created by the physical environment. In an
examination of review responses on yelp.com (an online forum for reviewing
products/services), several reviewers commented on how a particular retail environment
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 239
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
was so warm, personable, friendly and wholesome. Many reviewers felt that it recreated a
warm, small-town, green grocer atmosphere despite the fact that it was 80,000 sq. ft. Some
reviewers talked about how the employees went out of their way to provide superb service.
Perhaps the best measure of success will be how well individual employees embrace the
mantra of their employer and echo the holistic, high quality service experience the provider
is implying in their pricing and positioning in the market. The emphasis here will be to go
beyond mere external customer service, but to also demonstrate to customers the high level
of internal customer service employees demonstrate to their peers. Customers may expect
employees to embrace the mantra of the employer in dealing with each other as well as the
customers. For example, 360 evaluations in yearly reviews, complete department support
for individual promotions and evidence of several group activities outside of the workplace
are more indicative of a family than merely a job. We are suggesting that green customers
respond to similar thinking and expect that people who work for a green service provider will
also embrace green, sustainability and holistic living not only in their dealings with
customers, but in all aspects of their life. These consumers look to employees for some
tangible demonstration of this belief system.
The third level of social environmental cues pertains to customer interactions with other
customers. We are suggesting that having like-minded consumers, who share similar values
and beliefs pertaining to the environment and social responsibility, also affects the overall
service environment. In many instances these proposals would allow consumers to
participate in exercises with other customers who share green values. The initiatives can
take many forms such as service providers facilitating shuttle transportation and car-pooling
services. Programs are aimed at lowering carbon footprints through networking (for
rideshare), recycling drives, and tree planting exercises in an effort to build internal social
atmosphere/environments within their retail setting:
P6. Green social cues are positively related to approach behaviors.
Table III Green social service environmental cues
Service
environment factor
Traditional cue (Baker,
1986) Green cue Environmental impact
Social N/a Relationship between service
provider/retailer and their surrounding
community
For example:
Recycling programs
CSR efforts
Community outreach
Volunteering
Zero waste to land?lls, improved
community relations and investment
Increased volunteerism
Carbon footprint reduction
Energy conservation
Environmental sustainability
Employee to customer
relationship – service
quality
Relationship between employee and
customer and employee and employee
For example: 360 evaluation HR practices
Multiple employee activities outside of the
workplace
Employee initiated
Volunteering and support programs
Community outreach
Partner program or CSR efforts
Improved internal SQ
Increased internal and external
satisfaction levels and by extension
reduced stress
Better environments
Improved community relations and
investment
Increased volunteerism
Carbon footprint reduction
Energy conservation
Environmental sustainability
Customer to customer
relationship
Relationships amongst customers
For example:
C2C notice boards for carpooling,
volunteering, shuttle services and other
customer-related ‘‘green’’ initiatives
Improved community relations and
investment
Increased volunteerism
Carbon footprint reduction
Energy conservation
Environmental sustainability
PAGE 240
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Managerial implications
The managerial implications of green atmospherics are quite signi?cant. The implications
can generally be placed into two categories. The ?rst category deals with the implications
that are based on cost reductions, while the second has to do with enhanced brand equity.
The implementation of green exterior and interior elements allows retailers and service
providers to signi?cantly reduce their bottom line and emphasize to the consumer their
commitment to social responsibility, health and the environment. This perception of being a
good corporate citizen often translates into enhanced brand equity and by extension, the
ability to charge a premium.
Most perceived organic, natural or green retailers are able to charge a premium for their
products based on the perception that sustainability and organic production methods cost
more. The environmental improvements help compliment these perceptions and reinforce a
consistent image in the mind of the consumer as to the level of commitment retailers have to
the environment and healthy living. The implication is that it is possible for some elements to
have greater bene?ts than others. The social factors such as visible recycling containers and
community sponsorship/involvement help consumers to readily identify the retailer’s efforts
to be a good corporate citizen and enhance the overall image of that retailer and their brand
equity. This is an important factor in today’s competitive environment where retailers are
constantly looking for ways to standout in the marketplace and differentiate themselves from
the competition. These improvements allow them a differentiation point that signi?cantly
distinguishes these retailers from other competitors.
The implementation of green atmospherics and environmental upgrades can set a retailer
apart from the competition in terms of ambience, design and layout as well as social
elements. Daylighting facilitates comfort and relaxation within a store environment thereby
allowing approach behaviors often discussed in the environmental psychology discipline. At
the same time, the presence of other like-minded consumers who also care about their
carbon footprint and limiting emissions can also help to promote and reinforce a particular
brand personality in the minds of the consumer.
The other obvious bene?t of green initiatives pertains to cost reduction achievements. As
mentioned earlier, building and creating green interiors may be initially expensive but can
facilitate signi?cant savings through energy conservation and recycling efforts in the future.
Most marketers know and understand that signi?cant savings in overhead costs often
translates into higher pro?t margins in the long run. With such a wide range of managerial
implications, mangers should look deeper at the option of ‘‘Adopting Green’’.
Future research
This typology is the ?rst step in understanding how green environments accentuate a
consumer’s experience within the market. There is still a need for greater academic
investigation into how green consumers react to this environment, as well as the speci?c
elements they focus on, or expect. There is also a needto showhowconstruction and design,
withagreenandsustainableemphasis, canimpact thebottomlinebothintermsof cost savings
andrevenue generation. Morestudies are neededto ascertain the link between green service
environments and consumer behavior, perceived brand equity, brand loyalty, customer
service quality and ultimately, pro?t margins and sales revenues. Researchers need to delve
deeper into understanding the various green consumer segments and how these segments
are in?uencing mainstream consumer behaviors and perceptions of green as the green
movement isasigni?cant social phenomenon. Thisstudysuggeststhat thereisagreat needto
test and develop theory pertaining to sustainable and green buying behavior as a whole.
Conclusion
Green is in service environments and the research that is put forth in this paper attempts to
categorize and position future research opportunities to further understand the importance
of this topic to consumers and services alike. Green buying is no longer simply a phase or
insigni?cant niche market. A wide cross section of today’s consumers is interested in buying
green, using sustainable products and being socially responsible. Organizations, retailers
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 241
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
and service providers are all aware of the earning potential commonly associated with green
initiatives and choices, but academics have been slow to test most of this green movement
on consumer behavior. This typology will offer a more accurate tool for assessing the
effectiveness of green interior environments on in?uencing purchase decisions. It will allow
businesses to allocate their funds into areas where they believe their customers will
appreciate environmental upgrades instead of investing blindly into costly green
renovations. Such a tool will allow managers and marketers to better tailor interior and
exterior design to compliment their image, highlight their products and increase their pro?t
margins. Green design allows cost savings through environmental upgrades to the
organization while facilitating a commitment to social responsibility. With such tremendous
initial investments more research is necessary to determine how these monies are being
recouped not only froman energy standpoint, but also certainly in terms of corporate image,
consumer perception and brand equity.
References
Aaker, D.A. and Bagozzi, R. (1982), ‘‘Attitudes toward public policy alternatives to reduce air pollution’’,
Journal of Marketing & Public Policy, Vol. 1, pp. 85-94.
Addison, B. (2008), ‘‘Green beyond the shelf’’, Home Channel News, Vol. 34 No. 6, p. 44.
Akhter, S.H., Andrews, C.J. and Durvasula, S. (1994), ‘‘The in?uence of retail store environment on brand
related judgments’’, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 67-76.
Anderson, T.W., Henion, K.E. and Cox, E.P. (1974), ‘‘Socially vs ecologically concerned consumers’’,
AMA Combined Conference Proceedings, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 304-11.
Anderson, W.T. and Cunningham, W.H. (1972), ‘‘Gauging foreign product promotion’’, Journal of
Advertising Research, Vol. 12 No. 1, February, p. 29.
Antil, J. (1978), "The construction and validation or an instrument to measure socially responsible
consumption behavior: a study of the socially responsible consumer", unpublished doctoral dissertation,
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Antil, J. (1983), ‘‘Uses of response certainty in attitude measurement’’, in Bagozzi, R.P. and Tybout, A.M.
(Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10, Association for Consumer Research, Ann Abor, MI,
pp. 409-15.
Arbuthnot, J. (1977), ‘‘The roles of attitudinal and personality variables in the prediction of environmental
behavior and knowledge’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 217-32.
Babin, B.J. and Darden, W.R. (1995), ‘‘Consumer self-regulation in a retail environment’’, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 71 No. 1, pp. 47-70.
Babin, B.J. and Darden, W.R. (1996), ‘‘Good and bad shopping vibes: spending and patronage
satisfaction’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 201-6.
Baker, J. (1986), ‘‘The role of environment in marketing services: the consumer perspective’’,
in Czpeil, J.A., Congam, C. and Shanaham, J. (Eds), The Services Marketing Challenge: Integrated for
Competitive Advantage, American Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 79-84.
Baker, J., Grewal, D. and Parasuraman, A. (1994), ‘‘The in?uence of store environment on quality
inferences and store image’’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, Fall, pp. 328-40.
Baker, J., Levy, M. and Grewal, D. (1992), ‘‘An experimental approach to making retail store environment
decisions’’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 68, Winter, pp. 445-60.
Baker, J., Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D. and Voss, G. (2002), ‘‘The in?uence of multiple store
environmental cues on perceived merchandise value and patronage intentions’’, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 66, April, pp. 120-41.
Balderjahn, I. (1988), ‘‘Personality variables and environmental attitudes as predictors of ecologically
responsible consumption patterns’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 51-6.
Bellizzi, J.B.A., Ayn, E., Crowley, A.E. and Hasty, R.W. (1983), ‘‘The effects of color in store design’’,
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 59, Spring, pp. 21-45.
Berger, I.E. and Corbin, R.M. (1992), ‘‘Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as
moderators of environmentally responsible behavior’’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 11
No. 2, pp. 79-89.
PAGE 242
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Bitner, M.J. (1986), ‘‘Consumer responses to the physical environment in service settings’’, in
Venkatesan, M., Schmalensee, D.M. and Marshall, C. (Eds), Creativity in Services Marketing, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 89-93.
Bitner, M.J. (1990), ‘‘Evaluating service encounters: the effects of physical surroundings and employee
responses’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 69-82.
Bitner, M.J. (1992), ‘‘Servicescapes: the impact of physical surroundings on customers and
employees’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 2, April, pp. 57-71.
Booms, B.H. and Bitner, M.J. (1982), ‘‘Marketing services by managing the environment’’, Cornell Hotel
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 23, May, pp. 35-9.
Brundtland, G. (Ed.) (1987), Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and
Development, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Brooker, G. (1976), ‘‘The self-actualizing socially conscious consumer’’, Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 107-12.
Buttel, F.H. (1979), ‘‘Age and environmental concern: a multivariate analysis’’, Youth Sociology, Vol. 10
No. 3, pp. 237-56.
Chain Store Age (2003), ‘‘Fixtures improve shopping experience’’, Vol. 79, July, pp. 78-80.
Crosby, L.A., Gill, J.D. and Taylor, J.R. (1981), ‘‘Consumer/voter behavior in the passage of the Michigan
container law’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, Spring, pp. 19-32.
Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B., Sinkovics, R. and Bohlen, G. (2003), ‘‘Can socio-demographics
still play a role in pro?ling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation’’,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56 No. 6, pp. 465-80.
D’Souza, C., Taghian, M., Lamb, P. and Peretiatkl, R. (2007), ‘‘Green decisions: demographics and
consumer understanding of environmental labels’’, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 31
No. 4, pp. 371-6.
Dube, L., Chebat, J.C. and Morin, S. (1995), ‘‘The effects of background music on consumers’ desire to
af?liate in buyer-seller interactions’’, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 12, July, pp. 305-19.
Eagly, A. (1987), Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social-role Interpretation, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Environmental Leader (2007), ‘‘Think green champions help Toyota reach zero waste to land?ll’’,
January 23, available at: www.environmentalleader.com/2007/01/23/think-green-champions-help-
toyota-reach-zero-waste-to-land?ll/
Environmental Leader (2008), ‘‘Subaru among companies nearing zero-waste’’, February 19, available
at: www.environmentalleader.com/2008/02/19/subaru-among-companies-nearing-zero-waste/.
Eroglu, S.A. and Machleit, K. (1990), ‘‘An empirical study of retail crowding: antecedents and
consequences’’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 2, pp. 201-21.
Financial Times (2008), ‘‘Transcript: Walmart’s Lee Scott’’, April 6, available at: www.ft.com/cms/s/0/
397effaa-028f-11dd-9388-000077b07658.html?nclick_check ¼ 1
Gibson, P. (1979), ‘‘How about something a bit smaller?’’, Forbes, Vol. 123 No. 2, January, p. 80.
Gooch, G.D. (1995), ‘‘Environmental beliefs and attitudes in Sweden and the Baltic states’’,
Environmental Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 513-39.
Harrell, G.D., Hutt, M.D. and Anderson, J.C. (1980), ‘‘Path analysis of buyer behavior under conditions of
crowding’’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17, February, pp. 45-51.
Henion, K.E. and Wilson, W.R. (1976), ‘‘The ecologically concerned consumer and locus of control’’, in
Henion, K.E. and Kinnear, T.C. (Eds), Ecological Marketing, American Marketing Association, Chicago,
IL.
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.
Hui, M.K. and Bateson, J.E.G. (1991), ‘‘Perceived control and the effects of crowding and consumer
choice on the service experience’’, The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, September,
pp. 174-84.
Jolibert, A. and Baumgartner, G. (1981), ‘‘Toward a de?nition of the consumerist segment in France’’,
The Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 114-7.
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 243
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Joseph, S.M. and Singh, R.K. (2004), What We Say Vs What We Do – The Relationship between Service
Environment and Brand Personality in Retailing, Society for Market Advances, St Petersburg, FL.
Kinnear, T.C., Taylor, J.R. and Ahmed, S.A. (1974), ‘‘Ecologically concerned consumers: who are they?’’,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38, April, pp. 20-4.
Kotler, P. (1973), ‘‘Atmospherics as a marketing tool’’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 49, Winter, pp. 48-64.
Kumar, V. and Karande, K. (2000), ‘‘The effect of retail store environment on retailer performance’’,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49 No. 2, pp. 167-81.
McEvoy, J. III (1972), ‘‘The American concern with environment’’, in Burch, W.R. Jr, Cheek, N.H. Jr and
Taylor, L. (Eds), Social Behavior, Natural Resources and the Environment, Harper and Row, New York,
NY.
McLaren, W. (2006), ‘‘Eco tip: what makes a product (or service) ‘green’?’’, available at: www.
treehugger.com/?les/2006/10/ecotip_what_mak.php (accessed June 28, 2008).
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Milliman, R.E. (1982), ‘‘Using background music to affect the behavior of supermarket shoppers’’,
Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 No. 2, pp. 86-91.
Ottman, J. (1993), Green Marketing: Challenges and Opportunities for the New Marketing Age,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Peattie, K. (1995), Environmental Marketing Management: Meeting the Green Challenge, Pitman,
London.
Peattie, K. (2001), ‘‘Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer’’, Business Strategy
and the Environment, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 187-99.
Pickett, G.M., Kangun, N. and Grove, S.J. (1993), ‘‘Is there a general conserving consumer? A public
policy concern’’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 234-43.
Roberts, J.A. (1996), ‘‘Green consumers in the 1990s: pro?le and implications for advertising’’, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 217-31.
Roberts, J.A. and Bacon, D.R. (1997), ‘‘Exploring the subtle relationships between environmental
concern and ecologically conscious behavior’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 79-89.
Samdahl, D.M. and Robertson, R. (1989), ‘‘Social determinants of environmental concern: speci?cation
and test of the model’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 57-81.
Schlegelmilch, B., Bohlen, G.M. and Diamantopoulos, A. (1996), ‘‘The link between green purchasing
decisions andmeasures of environmental consciousness’’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 5,
pp. 35-55.
Schwartz, J. and Miller, T. (1991), ‘‘The Earth’s best friends’’, American Demographics, Vol. 13 No. 2,
February, pp. 26-35.
Shostack, G.L. (1977), ‘‘Breaking free from product marketing’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41, April,
pp. 73-80.
Shrum, L.J., McCarty, J.A. and Lowrey, T.M. (1995), ‘‘Buyer characteristics of the green consumer and
their implications for advertising strategy’’, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 71-82.
Smith, P. and Burns, D.J. (1996), ‘‘Atmospherics and retail environments: the case of the power aisle’’,
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 7-17.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T. and Kalof, L. (1993), ‘‘Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern’’,
Environmental Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 322-48.
Tognacci, L.N., Weigel, R.H., Wideen, M.F. and Vernon, D.T.A. (1972), ‘‘Environmental quality: how
universal is public concern?’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 73-86.
Tremblay, K.R. and Dunlap, R.E. (1978), ‘‘Rural-urban residence and concern with environmental
quality: a replication and extension’’, Rural Sociology, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 474-91.
Van Liere, K.D. and Dunlap, R.E. (1981), ‘‘Environmental concern: does it make a difference? How it is
measured?’’, Environmental Behavior, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 651-76.
Wake?eld, K.L. and Blodgett, J.G. (1999), ‘‘Customer response to intangible and tangible service
factors’’, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 51-68.
PAGE 244
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
Wall, G. (1995), ‘‘General versus speci?c environmental concern: a western Canadian case’’,
Environmental Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 294-316.
Wang, L., Baker, J., Wagner, A. and Wake?eld, K. (2007), ‘‘Can a retail website be social?’’, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 143-57.
Webster, F.E. (1975), ‘‘Determining the characteristics of the socially conscious consumer’’, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 188-97.
Wedel, M. and Kamakura, W.A. (2000), Market Segmentation – Conceptual and Methodological
Foundations, 2nd ed., Kluwer, Boston, MA.
Weigel, R.H. (1977), ‘‘Ideological and demographic correlates of proecology behaviour’’, Journal of
Social Psychology, Vol. 103 No. 1, pp. 39-47.
Yalch, R. and Spagenberg, E. (1990), ‘‘Effects of store on shopping behavior’’, Journal of Consumer
Marketing, Vol. 7, Spring, pp. 55-63.
Yalch, R. and Spagenberg, E. (1993), ‘‘Using store music for retail zoning: a ?eld experiment’’, in
McAlister, L. and Rothschild, M.L. (Eds), Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, Association for
Consumer Research, Provo, UT, pp. 632-6.
Yohn, D.L. (2008), ‘‘A big, green, reluctant hug for retailings’ 800-lb. gorilla’’, Brandweek, Vol. 49 No. 18,
p. 61.
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.
Further reading
Davis, T.R. (1984), ‘‘The in?uence of the physical environment in of?ces’’, The Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 271-84.
Harrington, D. (2008), ‘‘2006 Rapidly renewable revolution’’, Eco-tech, January-February, p. 62,
available at: www.eco-structure.com (accessed June 25, 2008).
Larson, D. (2002), ‘‘Building a brand’s personality from the consumer up’’, Direct Marketing, Vol. 65,
October, pp. 17-21.
McCracken, G. (1989), ‘‘Who is the celebrity endorser? Cultural foundations of the endorsement
process’’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 310-21.
Meyers-Levy, J. and Tybout, A.M. (1989), ‘‘Schema congruity as a basis for product evaluation’’, Journal
of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-55.
Shocker, A.D., Srivastava, R.K. and Ruekert, R.W. (1994), ‘‘Challenges and opportunities facing brand
management; an introduction to the special issue’’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 31, May,
pp. 149-58.
Spangenberg, E.R., Crowley, A.E. and Henderson, P. (1996), ‘‘Improving the store environment: do
olfactory cues affect evaluations and behaviors?’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60, April, pp. 67-80.
Turley, L.W. and Ronald, E. (2000), ‘‘Milliman Atmospheric effects on shopping behavior: a review of the
experimental evidence’’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 49, August, pp. 193-211.
Wener, R.E. (1985), ‘‘The environmental psychology of service encounters’’, in Czepiel, J., Solomon, M.
and Surprenant, C. (Eds), The Service Encounter, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA, pp. 101-12.
Wineman, J.D. (1982), ‘‘Of?ce design and evaluation’’, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 271-98.
Corresponding author
Nicole Bieak Kreidler can be contacted at: [email protected]
VOL. 3 NO. 3 2009
j
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CULTURE, TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY RESEARCH
j
PAGE 245
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected]
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
This article has been cited by:
1. Prashant Kumar. 2016. State of green marketing research over 25 years (1990-2014). Marketing Intelligence & Planning 34:1,
137-158. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
2. Baris Yilmazsoy, Harald Schmidbauer, Angi Rösch. 2015. Green segmentation: a cross-national study. Marketing Intelligence
& Planning 33:7, 981-1003. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. Prashant Kumar, Bhimrao M Ghodeswar. 2015. Factors affecting consumers’ green product purchase decisions. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning 33:3, 330-347. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
4. Nelson A. Barber, Young Hoon Kim, Sean Barth. 2014. The Importance of Recycling to U.S. Festival Visitors: A Preliminary
Study. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management 23, 601-625. [CrossRef]
5. Violeta Sima, Ileana Georgiana GheorgheGreen Customer Satisfaction 61-86. [CrossRef]
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d
b
y
P
O
N
D
I
C
H
E
R
R
Y
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
Y
A
t
2
2
:
0
7
2
4
J
a
n
u
a
r
y
2
0
1
6
(
P
T
)
doc_908057001.pdf