Exploring the New Wave of Sustainable Travelers: What Guides Travelers in Their Decisions?

Abstract

An increasing number of tourist accommodations are proactively altering their operations to incorporate more sustainable practices, reflecting the massive interest in consumers’ green purchasing. Despite the widespread interest in eco-friendly consumer behavior, few studies have applied the value-belief-norm (VBN) theory to the tourist accommodation sector, and its cross-cultural validity remains underexplored. Specifically, this study incorporated green trust into the original VBN model to gain a comprehensive understanding of consumers’ decision-making processes. Data was collected through an online survey from 2038 tourists in Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. Structural equation modeling was applied to test the hypotheses, revealing significant causal relationships between the constructs of green consumer values, subjective knowledge, attitude, personal norms, green trust, and green purchasing behavior. Personal norms were found to play a crucial role in influencing green trust, which in turn impacts green purchasing behavior in all three countries. These findings underscore the importance of tourism businesses in strengthening environmental education, fostering trust through eco-labeling and certifications, and developing market-specific strategies that align with travelers’ values and norms.

Plain Language Summary

What Drives Sustainable Travel Choices? Understanding How Tourists Choose Eco-Friendly Accommodations

As more tourists choose eco-friendly travel options, many accommodations are adopting sustainable practices. However, little is known about the factors that guide travelers’ decisions to select these green accommodations. This study aimed to explore how tourists’ values, beliefs, and personal norms influence their decision to choose sustainable accommodations. The study collected responses from 2,038 tourists in Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. Researchers used a survey to gather information on factors such as green values, knowledge, attitudes, trust in sustainability practices, and personal norms, and then analyzed the data using a statistical model. The findings show that personal norms—what travelers believe is the right thing to do—are crucial in shaping their trust in the sustainability of accommodations. Green trust, in turn, was found to play an important role in influencing the decision to choose eco-friendly accommodations. These results highlight the importance of understanding tourists’ values and personal beliefs when promoting sustainable travel choices. This study provides valuable insights for the tourism industry, suggesting that encouraging travelers’ personal norms and trust in green practices could help increase the demand for sustainable accommodation options across different countries.

Keywords

eco-consciousness sustainable tourism value-belief-norm theory subjective knowledge green purchasing

Introduction

The tourism industry has recently undergone a transformative shift, as travelers increasingly prioritize sustainability in their travel choices. As environmental degradation and society’s awareness of climate change continue to rise, there is a critical demand for environmentally friendly practices in tourism (He et al., 2024; Kortsch & Händeler, 2024; Waris et al., 2024). Recent data indicates that 75% of global travelers are willing to travel more sustainably (Global Sustainable Tourism Council, 2024), underscoring the significance of this new wave of eco-conscious traveler behavior. The changes toward a more sustainable tourism industry not only reflect evolving traveler preferences but also present challenges and opportunities for the tourism industry (Fauzi et al., 2024).

Sustainable travel encompasses a range of measures aimed at reducing the environmental impact of the tourism industry while simultaneously fostering economic and social advantages for local communities (Kiatkawsin & Han, 2017). The integration of sustainability principles into various facets of tourism, including accommodations, transportation, and the industry as a whole, has become pivotal in the decision-making processes of travelers (Han, 2015; Khan et al., 2024; Lind et al., 2015; L.Wang et al., 2024).

This study specifically examines the domain of sustainable touristic accommodations, deliberately setting aside other facets of the tourism product spectrum. Sustainable accommodation refers to facilities that emphasize environmentally responsible practices, support local communities, and enhance the overall tourist experience while reducing negative environmental and societal impacts (Midgett et al., 2020; Pavić et al., 2019). The emphasis on sustainable accommodations is warranted by their significant representation within the tourism industry (Midgett et al., 2020) and the growing consumer demand for such options (Islam, 2024).

As travelers increasingly strive to align their choices with their values, comprehending the underlying factors driving sustainable accommodation choices has become essential. Prior studies (Ahn & Kwon, 2020; Jian et al., 2020) have demonstrated that factors such as environmental concerns, green trust, uncertainty, value, cost, attitudes, emotional predispositions, and other determinants influence the evolution of sustainable accommodations. Understanding these factors is imperative for tourism businesses and policymakers in order to promote sustainable accommodation practices that yield benefits for the environment and local communities. However, the majority of the research has relied on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to explain the green purchasing behavior exhibited by tourists (Bashir et al., 2019; Eunike et al., 2025; Fauzi et al., 2024; Nguyễn et al., 2025; Pan et al., 2022; Sági et al., 2025; Sann et al., 2024; Ulker-Demirel & Ciftci, 2020). While TPB has offered valuable insights, its main focus is rational decision-making and the theory has been criticized that TPB factors may be insufficient to explain human behavior and decision-making (Gulati et al., 2025). In contrast, the value-belief-norm (VBN) theory, has been recognized as an alternative theoretical framework for understanding consumers’ green behaviors, as it highlights how values and moral obligations translate into actions (Al Mamun et al., 2024; M. Chen, 2015; Elakkad et al., 2025; Hidalgo-Crespo et al., 2023; Khan et al., 2024; Mamun et al., 2023; Ocloo et al., 2024; Sonkar et al., 2025; Su et al., 2022; Waris et al., 2024). This moral and normative focus enhances the relevance of VBN in sustainability contexts, where decisions are rarely based on utilitarian cost-benefit arguments and are instead more connected to value-based motivations. Yet, applications of VBN in tourism, particularly in the context of sustainable tourist accommodations, have remained limited, despite growing evidence of VBN’s capability to predict eco-friendly behavior (Denley et al., 2020; Gupta & Sharma, 2019; Landon et al., 2018; Megeirhi et al., 2020). This restricts the understanding of how normative processes shape accommodation choices, leaving an important theoretical gap. Furthermore, while previous research have acknowledged green trust as a determinant of sustainable consumption (Balaji et al., 2019; Choi et al., 2015; Fauzi et al., 2024; Jian et al., 2020), it has typically been modeled separately from VBN sequence. This leaves unanswered questions about how green trust itself is shaped by personal norms and cognitive factors? And does it mediate the path from moral obligations to actual green purchasing? Taken together, these gaps highlight the need for a comprehensive model that integrates green trust into the VBN framework and applies it to the sustainable accommodation sector.

The aim of this study is to develop a comprehensive model that provides an in-depth understanding of travelers’ sustainable decision-making processes, employing an expanded version of the VBN theory as its theoretical foundation. It is anticipated that this approach will facilitate a nuanced examination of how value systems and belief structures influence travelers’ decisions, ultimately promoting sustainable accommodation choices.

In the subsequent sections of this paper, we will delve into the pertinent literature concerning VBN theory. Following this, a conceptual model and corresponding hypotheses will be introduced. Subsequently, the research methods will be outlined. This will be followed by the presentation of the empirical study’s results. Finally, the discussion and conclusions will be presented.

Literature Review

VBN theory serves as a fundamental framework for evaluating behavior and behavioral intentions within the realm of sustainable purchasing (Kortsch & Händeler, 2024). It extends the Norm Activation Theory (NAT), which has been effectively applied to pro-environmental behavior (Stern et al., 1999). VBN delves into the role of personal moral inclinations in shaping specific behaviors (Al Mamun et al., 2022; Fornara et al., 2020; Khan et al., 2024). The VBN theory establishes a causal chain between norms, beliefs, values, and behaviors, positing that individuals’ values influence their beliefs, influencing the norms directly impacting their pro-environmental conduct (Choi et al., 2015; Hidalgo-Crespo et al., 2023; Ocloo et al., 2024; Raghu & Rodrigues, 2022). While previous research has tested either the full or partial models of the VBN theory (Al Mamun et al., 2022; Awais et al., 2022; Gupta & Sharma, 2019; Johansson et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2022; Le et al., 2021; C.-P. Wang et al., 2023), limited efforts have been made to expand the model by incorporating additional variables to better explain green behavior. Therefore, to enhance the predictive capability of green consumption behavior, this study introduces subjective knowledge and green trust as supplementary predictors of green purchasing behavior. Prior literature has underscored the relevance of these variables in forecasting consumer behavior (Ahn & Kwon, 2020; Çakır Yıldırım & Karaarslan Semiz, 2019; Fauzi et al., 2024; Han, 2015; Jian et al., 2020; Zasada et al., 2020). The hypothesized model, which is grounded in the VBN theory, is depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework.

In considering the trajectory of an individual’s life, values play a pivotal role in establishing essential benchmarks. They form the cohesive bedrock of one’s social and personal identities (Hitlin, 2003). Values represent an inherent system of preferences that steer human conduct and are characterized by the significance assigned to a particular entity or action (Fornara et al., 2020). Understanding value orientations is crucial in discerning tourists’ inclination toward sustainable lodging (Waris et al., 2024). The conventional iteration of the VBN theory posits that values can be egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric (Hidalgo-Crespo et al., 2023; Waris et al., 2024). Through an extensive review of the literature, it has become evident that these two value bases are somewhat expansive and can be applied across various domains (De Dominicis et al., 2017; Venugopal & Shukla, 2019; Xu et al., 2021). Considering that different value bases can lead to varying environmental action levels (Venugopal & Shukla, 2019), we sought to identify a more pertinent value base specifically for predicting choices concerning sustainable tourism accommodations. Our focus shifted to green consumer values, which explicitly target the environmental domain, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the cognitive processes that shape tourists’ behavior. Green consumption values are defined as the inclination to reflect the value of environmental protection through purchasing and consumption practices (Haws et al., 2014). These values present a refined and meaningful foundation for analyzing the motivated choices associated with sustainable accommodation. It is our aspiration that this modification of the VBN theory will enhance its explanatory efficacy.

According to the VBN theory, an individual’s fundamental values wield substantial influence over their beliefs (Batool et al., 2024; Ocloo et al., 2024). Beliefs are a critical intermediary between values and personal norms (Stern et al., 1999). Traditionally, the beliefs component comprised awareness of consequences, ascription of responsibility, and ecological worldview (Ikhsan et al., 2023; Sharma & Gupta, 2020). However, this study narrows the focus of the beliefs component to two primary elements: subjective knowledge and attitude. In the context of environmental psychology, subjective knowledge pertains to an individual’s self-perception regarding their knowledge base (Tassiello & Tillotson, 2020). Attitudes encompass a synthesis of responsibility and ecological worldview. According to Ajzen (1991), attitude can be defined as the degree to which an individual holds a positive or negative evaluation of a particular behavior. This construct is shaped by past experiences and is intimately connected to an individual’s assessment of the outcomes associated with specific behaviors (Kashif et al., 2018). By integrating subjective knowledge and attitude, this study modernizes the traditional beliefs component, emphasizing constructs directly relevant to sustainable accommodation.

Subjective knowledge acts as a proxy for awareness of consequences, representing individuals’ perceived understanding of environmental issues and their potential impacts. Mere knowledge of environmental issues is insufficient; individuals must also possess a sense of understanding and confidence regarding these issues (Rizkalla & Erhan, 2020). It is more likely that individuals with stronger green values will have higher engagement with information and a stronger sense of subjective knowledge about environmental issues (Thøgersen, 2000). Building on previous research and the conceptual foundation of the VBN theory (Batool et al., 2024; Ocloo et al., 2024), we expect that green consumer values will have a significant impact on subjective knowledge as a component of beliefs. Therefore, we posit the following hypothesis:

H1: Green consumer values exert a positive influence on subjective knowledge.

The VBN theory posits that values serve as a foundational element in forming beliefs (Batool et al., 2024; Ikhsan et al., 2023; Ocloo et al., 2024). Empirical evidence from previous studies supports the notion that attitudes, as a component of beliefs, are significantly influenced by green consumer values. For instance, research conducted by Woo and Kim (2019) indicates that green consumer values have a substantial impact on consumer attitudes. Furthermore, Kautish and Sharma (2019) reinforce this perspective by demonstrating that green consumer values function as a predictor of attitude. In light of this, we hypothesize that:

H2: Green consumer values exert a positive influence on attitude.

According to the VBN theory, beliefs related to subjective knowledge play a pivotal role in shaping personal norms (Choi et al., 2015; Ocloo et al., 2024). This influence stems from the idea that subjective knowledge regarding environmental issues heightens awareness of one’s impact on the environment (Han, 2015), subsequently reinforcing personal norms. Heightened awareness of the consequences of one’s actions fosters a sense of responsibility for environmental impact and encourages individual-level changes (Çakır Yıldırım & Karaarslan Semiz, 2019; Zasada et al., 2020). Individuals who perceive themselves as possessing knowledge about environmental issues are more likely to assume greater responsibility. This notion is supported by a study conducted by Dursun et al. (2019), which revealed a significant impact of subjective knowledge on personal norms as part of the psychological barriers to energy conservation behavior. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:

H3: Subjective knowledge exerts a positive influence on personal norms.

Attitude plays a crucial role in shaping personal norms. D’Souza et al. (2020) found that consumers are more likely to participate in fair trade consumption as a means of differentiating themselves from others. This research supports the idea that positive attitudes can effectively activate personal norms. In emphasizing the significance of attitude as a fundamental component of beliefs, it is pertinent to highlight the findings of Ikhsan et al. (2023), who demonstrated that pro-environmental beliefs exert a positive influence on personal norms. Consequently, it can be anticipated that attitude will positively affect personal norms. This leads to the following hypothesis:

H4: Attitude exerts a positive influence on personal norms.

Trust is defined operationally as the belief that one has in a trustee’s ability to uphold commitments and fulfill responsibilities (Hagen & Choe, 1998). In this context, “green trust,” as conceptualized by Guerrero and Pacheco (Guerreiro & Pacheco, 2021), relates specifically to consumers’ confidence in the environmental performance of particular products, services, or brands. Unlike general trust, which reflects broad confidence in systems, institutions, or sustainability initiatives overall, green trust specifically targets particular environmental claims. This confidence takes on added significance in situations marked by high risk and uncertainty, as noted by Choi et al. (2015). Consequently, green trust becomes a pivotal element in consumer decision-making processes, functioning as a mediating mechanism that translates personal norms and knowledge into actual behavior. This highlights its crucial role in promoting sustainable consumption and encouraging environmentally responsible choices (Guerreiro & Pacheco, 2021).

Existing literature emphasizes the importance of subjective knowledge in developing consumer trust. Hoque and Alam (2018) have demonstrated that subjective knowledge, when combined with trust, plays a vital role in comprehending consumer behavior regarding green products. Furthermore, research conducted by Hossain et al. (2022) has illustrated a significant and positive correlation between environmental knowledge and green trust. Thus, we propose the following hypothesis:

H5: Subjective knowledge positively impacts green trust.

The VBN theory explicitly connects personal norms with behavior. Consumers who feel a moral obligation to engage in sustainable practices, as dictated by their personal norms, are more likely to translate these norms into concrete actions (Mamun et al., 2023), such as green purchasing. Empirical evidence (Gupta & Sharma, 2019; Kortsch & Händeler, 2024; Lee et al., 2023; Shanmugavel & Balakrishnan, 2023; C.-P. Wang et al., 2023; Waris et al., 2024) supports the association between stronger personal norms and higher rates of sustainable purchasing behaviors. Shanmugavel and Balakrishnan (2023), Lee et al. (2023) found that personal norms play a significant role in developing positive behavioral intentions toward e-vehicles (Shanmugavel & Balakrishnan, 2023). Similarly, Waris et al. (2024) and C.-P. Wang et al. (2023) discovered a positive influence of personal norms on visiting green hotels. Kortsch and Handeler (2024) also confirmed the significant impact of personal norms on green purchasing behavior. Based on the literature, the following hypothesis has been posited:

H6: Personal norms positively impact green purchasing behavior.

Based on our expectations, personal norms are anticipated to exert influence on various personal characteristics, notably trust. As individuals internalize their personal norms with respect to sustainability, it is conceivable that they will be more inclined to place trust in products and services that are congruent with these norms (Jimenez & Iyer, 2016; Kostritsa & Sittler, 2017). The link between personal norms and green trust is underpinned by the idea that individuals are predisposed to trust entities that reflect their ethical principles (Uslaner, 1999), thus establishing trust as a consequence of robust personal norms.

Empirical studies have corroborated this relationship (Balaji et al., 2019; Y.Chen & Chang, 2012; Yang et al., 2024). For instance, Y. Chen and Chang (2012) demonstrated that reducing the perceived risk associated with sustainable products can significantly enhance green trust. Moreover, Yang et al. (2024) provided evidence that personal norms exert a notable influence on green trust, specifically in the context of organic food. Similarly, Balaji et al. (2019) reinforced this notion by illustrating that personal norms have a substantial impact on green trust toward green hotels. While this study focuses on personal norms, we acknowledge that other factors, such as social norms or consumers’ past experiences with sustainable products, may also play a role in shaping trust. Consequently, we propose the following hypothesis:

H7: Personal norms exert a positive influence on green trust.

Trust in green products is believed to have a substantial effect on purchasing decisions. When consumers perceive that the products align with their environmental values and norms, they are likely to purchase (Fauzi et al., 2024). This assertion is supported by research indicating that trust can mitigate perceived risks associated with green products and elevate the probability of engaging in green purchasing behavior (Balaji et al., 2019; Choi et al., 2015; Fauzi et al., 2024; Sparks & Browning, 2011). Taking into account these findings, the following hypothesis has been formulated:

H8: Green trust positively influences green purchasing behavior.

Methods

Sample and Data Collection

The research data was collected between 2023 and 2024 using an online panel provided by the research company “Intraresearch.” An online survey was administered to tourists from Lithuania, Spain, and Norway, with participants selected from these three countries based on their cultural diversity. The choice of Lithuania, Spain, and Norway was based on their unique cultural profiles, providing a solid foundation for meaningful comparison. According to Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (The Culture Factor Group, 2025), Spain scores very high in uncertainty avoidance and relatively high in power distance, indicating that a preference for structure, rules, and social hierarchy may shape consumer behavior. Norway is characterized by strong individualism, high indulgence, and low motivation toward achievement and success, reflecting a culture where autonomy, personal freedom, and enjoyment are valued, with less emphasis on competition or material success. High uncertainty avoidance and low indulgence in Lithuania suggest a more cautious and restrained approach to sustainable consumption. The selection of the three culturally different contexts broadens the empirical base of sustainable tourism.

All participants were assured that the study was conducted solely for academic purposes and that their data would be kept confidential. Additionally, they were informed of their ability to request information regarding the study’s results. A total of 2,038 usable questionnaires were obtained after accounting for missing and unengaged cases. These responses were ultimately included in the analysis.

The gender ratio was female-skewed in all the countries (Table 1). The majority of respondents in Lithuania were in the 50 to 59 age group (25.5%), while in Spain, the dominant age group was 40 to 49 years old (30.8%). In Norway, the majority of respondents were in the youngest age group, 18 to 29 years old (27.5%). Regarding education, the majority of respondents in Lithuania and Spain had a university degree, accounting for 38.3% and 43.0% of the study participants, respectively. In Norway, 38.1% of research participants had secondary or vocational education. The sample was predominantly composed of full-time employees. A significant proportion of the Lithuanian sample reported their income to be up to €24,999. The majority of the Spanish and Norwegian samples were comprised of respondents with incomes ranging from €25,000 to €49,999.

Table 1.

Demographic Data of the Participants.

Characteristic	Lithuania, % (n = 1,030)	Spain, % (n = 507)	Norway, % (n = 501)
Gender
Female	56.4	53.1	56.3
Male	43.4	46.7	43.5
Other	0.2	0.2	0.2
Age
18–29	19.4	14.8	27.5
30–39	17.7	21.1	22.4
40–49	19.3	30.8	20.4
50–59	25.5	22.9	16.6
60+	18.1	10.5	13.2
Education
Primary or below	0.5	2.0	4.6
Secondary or vocational	31.3	33.3	38.1
University degree	38.3	43.0	33.7
Postgraduate master	27.6	18.3	19.0
Doctor	2.3	3.4	4.6
Occupation
Full-time employee	67.6	68.2	51.7
Part-time employee	10.9	9.5	15.6
Student	5.1	7.3	9.2
Other	16.4	15.0	23.6
Income (in 2023)
Low (€0–€24,999)	54.3	39.4	21.4
Medium (€25,000–€49,999)	17.3	52.4	55.9
High (€75,000+)	3.6	4.7	13.8
Prefer not to answer	24.9	3.4	9.0

Measures

The measurement items used to assess model constructs in this study were adapted from previous research that has established and validated measures for studying consumer purchasing behavior (Table A1 in Appendix A). All the items were designed to highlight green hotels as the most popular and knowledgeable option for sustainable accommodations. However, in the questionnaire, respondents were informed they could consider any other sustainable accommodation options while answering the questions. The items for green consumer value (consisting of five items) were developed based on a study conducted by Haws et al. (2014). Representative items include statements such as “I consider the potential environmental impact of my actions when making many of my decisions” and “I am willing to be inconvenienced to take actions that are more environmentally friendly.” Subjective knowledge was measured using items derived from the research of Jaiswal and Kant (2018). Sample items included “I am very knowledgeable about environmental issues” and “I understand the environmental phrases and symbols.” Personal norms were assessed using items suggested by Choi et al. (2015), with sample items including “Instead of a conventional hotel, staying at a green hotel will make me feel like a morally obliged person” and “Saving the environment should be the first priority for a person like me.” Green trust was measured using five items from Y.-S. Chen (2010), with sample items including “I feel that environmental commitments of sustainable hotels are generally reliable” and “I feel that environmental concern of sustainable hotels meets my expectation.” The attitude was assessed using a scale recommended by Han et al. (2010), with sample items including “Staying at a green hotel is desirable” and “Staying at a green hotel is enjoyable.” To measure green purchasing behavior, a scale proposed by Chin et al. (2018) was used, with sample items including “I have a positive attitude toward booking green hotels in tourism destinations” and “I switch to other brands for ecological reasons in tourism destinations.”

All constructs in the study were measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly disagree, 5 = Strongly agree). The data collection instrument also included demographic profiles such as gender, age, education, occupation, and income.

The survey instrument was first developed in English and then translated into Lithuanian, Spanish, and Norwegian through a rigorous translation-back translation methodology (Klotz et al., 2023; Ozolins et al., 2020). Before the commencement of the online survey, a pretest was administered to 20 graduate students who had recently experienced an overnight stay at a tourist accommodation. The survey was refined based on the feedback received during the pretest, focusing on improving linguistic and conceptual clarity.

Data Analysis

In the measurement analysis, the partial least squares (PLS) method was used, which has gained significant popularity in the past few decades (Ali et al., 2018; Guenther et al., 2023). PLS-SEM is well suited for estimating complex models with multiple constructs, indicators, and structural paths, while relaxing the assumption of multivariate normality (Vasilica-Maria et al., 2023). Although the sample size of the study was sufficient for covariance-based (CB) SEM, we selected PLS-SEM as we intended to maximize explained variance and assess the predictive relevance of the extended VBN framework. In this context, PLS-SEM was chosen as an effective alternative to CB-SEM, which is more focused on model fit, whereas PLS-SEM emphasizes prediction (Manley et al., 2021).

The data underwent analysis using SmartPLS 4. In light of the multicultural composition of the dataset, we implemented a methodological framework in which the model was assessed independently across three distinct national contexts: Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. This approach entailed partitioning the dataset into three independent subsamples, thereby facilitating an empirical validation of the proposed relationships within each specific cultural milieu. Such a strategy not only enhances the robustness of our findings but also underscores the contextual nuances that may influence the dynamics under investigation.

To ensure a comprehensive approach, a two-stage analytical procedure was followed. This involved initially testing the measurement model to validate the instruments, followed by evaluating the structural model to test the hypothesized relationships.

Results

Common Method Bias

The study utilized Likert-type scales to gather various measures from a single source, prompting concerns about potential common method variance (Podsakoff et al., 2003). To assess this, Harman’s single-factor test was conducted using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), loading all variables into a single factor. The results revealed that the total variation explained by a single factor was 49.978%, falling below the established threshold of 50% (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Based on these findings, it can be inferred that common method variance is unlikely to be a significant issue in the study. Furthermore, an assessment of multicollinearity using the variance inflation factor (VIF) revealed values ranging from 1.000 to 1.725, well below the conservative threshold of 3.3, indicating that the dataset was not affected by multicollinearity (Hair et al., 2019). Therefore, the results suggest that the potential impact of common method bias on the study’s outcomes was unlikely. Additionally, we implemented procedural remedies during the survey design (randomized item order, varied scale anchors) to further reduce the likelihood of bias.

Measurement Model

In the initial phase, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted, resulting in the exclusion of several indicators with inadequate factor loadings (FL). As a result, one item pertaining to green consumer values (“It is important to me that the products I use do not harm the environment”) and one related to green purchasing behavior (“I am aware of the environmental impact of the hotels I book”) were removed. The remaining items exhibited factor loadings exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.708 (Hair et al., 2012).

In the Lithuanian, Spanish, and Norwegian samples, the Cronbach’s α values for the latent variables were found to be high, as indicated in Table 2. This suggests that the internal consistency is satisfactory.

Table 2.

Factor Loadings, Reliability, and Convergent Validity of the Constructs.

Variable	α	FL	CR	AVE
Lithuania
Green consumer values	.907	0.829–0.898	0.931	0.729
Subjective knowledge	.851	0.717–0.838	0.889	0.617
Personal norms	.911	0.878–0.902	0.938	0.790
Green trust	.873	0.743–0.862	0.908	0.664
Attitude	.941	0.789–0.891	0.952	0.738
Green purchasing behavior	.909	0.792–0.910	0.933	0.735
Spain
Green consumer values	.877	0.793–0.845	0.910	0.670
Subjective knowledge	.868	0.798–0.816	0.904	0.653
Personal norms		0.866–0.886	0.930	0.770
Green trust	.915	0.850–0.882	0.936	0.747
Attitude	.937	0.816–0.869	0.949	0.725
Green purchasing behavior	.917	0.853–0.910	0.938	0.751
Norway
Green consumer values	.894	0.798–0.858	0.922	0.702
Subjective knowledge	.860	0.774–0.823	0.899	0.640
Personal norms	.881	0.802–0.879	0.918	0.738
Green trust	.883	0.797–0.867	0.914	0.682
Attitude	.926	0.797–0.845	0.940	0.693
Green purchasing behavior	.901	0.799–0.868	0.927	0.717

In evaluating the internal consistency reliability, or the degree to which a set of items consistently reflects the underlying construct, we utilized the recommended approach of reporting composite reliability (CR), as suggested by Guenther et al. (2023). All CR scores exceeded the threshold of 0.70 (Hair & Sarstedt, 2019), ensuring the measurement constructs’ reliability.

Conducting a check for convergent validity, we relied on the average variance extracted (AVE). The AVE for all constructs surpassed the recommended minimum value of 0.50 (Guenther et al., 2023), indicating that each construct explains more than half of its items’ variance.

For the assessment of discriminant validity, we employed the Fornell-Larcker criterion and the heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio of correlations. Comparing the AVE scores of each factor with the squared correlations between each pair of factors confirmed the model’s discriminant validity. As indicated in Table 3, no correlation exceeded the square root of the AVE, providing strong evidence for discriminant validity.

Table 3.

Fornell-Larcker Criterion.

Variable	Green consumer values	Subjective knowledge	Personal norms	Green trust	Attitude	Green purchasing behavior
Lithuania
Green consumer values	0.854
Subjective knowledge	0.696	0.786
Personal norms	0.684	0.549	0.889
Green trust	0.614	0.585	0.697	0.815
Attitude	0.697	0.574	0.776	0.685	0.859
Green purchasing behavior	0.706	0.681	0.697	0.705	0.693	0.857
Spain
Green consumer values	0.819
Subjective knowledge	0.712	0.808
Personal norms	0.680	0.598	0.877
Green trust	0.575	0.544	0.633	0.864
Attitude	0.677	0.611	0.751	0.700	0.852
Green purchasing behavior	0.733	0.682	0.733	0.630	0.684	0.867
Norway
Green consumer values	0.838
Subjective knowledge	0.667	0.800
Personal norms	0.646	0.546	0.859
Green trust	0.558	0.552	0.618	0.826
Attitude	0.697	0.563	0.756	0.652	0.832
Green purchasing behavior	0.727	0.632	0.757	0.676	0.763	0.847

According to Henseler et al. (2015), who introduced the HTMT ratio, it is suggested that the result should be lower than the more conservative threshold of 0.85 or the more liberal threshold of 0.90. As indicated in Table 4, the HTMT values are below the threshold of 0.85, thus confirming that discriminant validity has been achieved.

Table 4.

HTMT Criterion.

Variable	Green consumer values	Subjective knowledge	Personal norms	Green trust	Attitude
Lithuania
Subjective knowledge	0.750
Personal norms	0.751	0.577
Green trust	0.683	0.644	0.722
Attitude	0.753	0.598	0.835	0.749
Green purchasing behavior	0.773	0.738	0.763	0.787	0.740
Spain
Subjective knowledge	0.808
Personal norms	0.762	0.668
Green trust	0.637	0.605	0.697
Attitude	0.745	0.672	0.817	0.756
Green purchasing behavior	0.811	0.757	0.806	0.686	0.736
Norway
Subjective knowledge	0.747
Personal norms	0.726	0.617
Green trust	0.624	0.628	0.700
Attitude	0.764	0.619	0.834	0.718
Green purchasing behavior	0.806	0.711	0.849	0.756	0.831

The findings indicate that, overall, the constructs conformed to the prescribed standards for measurement reliability and validity. The measurement model fulfills the requisite quality benchmarks, prompting us to shift our focus toward evaluating the structural model.

Structural Model

In the assessment of a structural model, it is imperative to conduct a thorough analysis of key statistical indicators, with particular attention to the determination coefficient R². R² holds significant importance as a criterion for evaluating the results of the structural model (Guenther et al., 2023). The R² values reveal that in all three samples, personal norms and green purchasing behavior account for the largest share of the variance (Table 5). To gauge a model’s predictive capabilities, it is recommended to utilize Stone-Geisser’s Q² criterion, which is based on the blindfolding procedure (Guenther et al., 2023). The Q² values for all constructs exceeded 0, thereby establishing the predictive relevance of the model.

Table 5.

Variance Explained (R²) and Predictive Scores (Q²) of the Structural Models.

Variable	Lithuania		Spain		Norway
Variable	R ²	Q ²	R ²	Q ²	R ²	Q ²
Subjective knowledge	.476	.474	.507	.502	.444	.440
Attitude	.484	.483	.458	.452	.485	.481
Personal norms	.615	.455	.595	.448	.591	.409
Green trust	.494	.361	.443	.312	.449	.299
Green purchasing behavior	.596	.435	.583	.451	.642	.459

In accordance with the suggestion of Guenther et al. (2023), the standardized root mean square (SRMR) was utilized to assess the model’s goodness of fit. The SRMR for each sample remained below the recommended threshold of 0.08 (Guenther et al., 2023). Specifically, in the context of Lithuania, the SRMR was 0.070, while for Spain and Norway, it was 0.046 and 0.051, respectively.

The path coefficient analysis conducted in this study aimed to test the conceptual model by calculating path coefficients for each country. The results, as presented in Table 6, clearly illustrate the structure of the hypothesized relationships.

Table 6.

Hypothesis Testing Results.

Path	Lithuania			Spain			Norway			Decision
Path	Path coeff.	t Statistics	p Value	Path coeff.	t Statistics	p Value	Path coeff.	t Statistics	p Value	Decision
H1: Green consumer values → Subjective knowledge	0.690	31.562	.000	0.712	23.119	.000	0.666	21.413	.000	Supported
H2: Green consumer values → Attitude	0.696	33.000	.000	0.677	17.923	.000	0.696	21.300	.000	Supported
H3: Subjective knowledge → Personal norms	0.151	5.,388	.000	0.220	4.236	.000	0.174	4.468	.000	Supported
H4: Attitude → Personal norms	0.689	26.405	.000	0.617	13.113	.000	0.657	19.974	.000	Supported
H5: Subjective knowledge → Green trust	0.324	10.817	.000	0.256	4.566	.000	0.308	6.393	.000	Supported
H6: Personal norms → Green purchasing behavior	0.413	14.478	.000	0.558	11.839	.000	0.548	13.141	.000	Supported
H7: Personal norms → Green trust	0.473	16.327	.000	0.481	9.307	.000	0.450	9.357	.000	Supported
H8: Green trust → Green purchasing behavior	0.437	14.732	.000	0.276	5.910	.000	0.337	8.065	.000	Supported

The examination of the influence of green consumer values on subjective knowledge yielded significant findings across three distinct samples: Lithuania (β = .690, p = .000), Spain (β = .712, p = .000), and Norway (β = .666, p = .000) (Figure 2). These results indicate a strong and consistent effect of values on subjective knowledge across all countries, therefore, providing substantial support for Hypothesis 1. Moreover, the analysis revealed that green consumer values positively affected attitudes in all three countries, with particularly pronounced effects observed in Lithuania and Norway (β = .696, p = .000), as opposed to Spain (β = .677, p = .000), thereby validating Hypothesis 2. These results suggest that values are a robust predictor of attitudes toward sustainable accommodations and may be relatively unaffected by cultural differences.

Figure 2.

SEM results with standardized path coefficients.

The research further identified a significant, albeit more modest in size, positive relationship between subjective knowledge and personal norms, with the strongest effect reported in Spain (β = .220, p < .000), followed by Lithuania (β = .151, p < .000) and Norway (β = .174, p < .000), thus affirming Hypothesis 3. Additionally, Hypothesis 4 was robustly supported through high path coefficients among the three nations: Lithuania (β = .689, p = .000), Spain (β = .617, p = .000), and Norway (β = .657, p = .000), highlighting the impact of attitudes on personal norms.

Subjective knowledge was also demonstrated to have a significant and positive influence on green trust across all samples, with values of β = .324 (p = .000) for Lithuania, β = .256 (p = .000) for Spain, and β = .308 (p = .000) for Norway. These moderate coefficients substantiate Hypothesis 5.

The analysis emphasized the role of personal norms as a critical determinant of green purchasing behavior, with varying effects observed: Spain (β = .558, p = .000), Lithuania (β = .413, p = .000), and Norway (β = .548, p = .000), thereby supporting Hypothesis 6. Strong and statistically significant path coefficients were also identified between personal norms and green trust in all three countries: Lithuania (β = .473, p = .000), Spain (β = .481, p = .000), and Norway (β = .450, p = .000), further validating Hypothesis 7. Finally, the data confirmed a significant effect of green trust on green purchasing behavior (H8), with a notably stronger influence in Lithuania (β = .437, p = .000) compared to Norway (β = .337, p = .000) and Spain (β = .276, p = .000). these findings suggest that trust is an important driver of behavior.

To enhance our understanding of the influence of personal norms on green purchasing behavior, we analyzed the total effects of personal norms across different countries. In Lithuania, the total effect of personal norms on green purchasing behavior was found to be significant, with a coefficient of β = .620 and a p-value of .000. Similarly, in Spain, the total effect was also significant, demonstrating a coefficient of β = .691 and a p-value of .000. Furthermore, Norway exhibited a significant total effect of personal norms on green purchasing, with a coefficient of β = .700 and a p-value of .000. These findings underscore the substantial role personal norms play in influencing green purchasing decisions in these countries.

Based on the analysis, it is evident that all causal relationships explaining green purchasing behavior are supported in our study. The VBN theory is found to be equally valid in Lithuania, Spain, and Norway in terms of explaining tourists’ choices of sustainable accommodation. Finally, the proposed extension of VBN to include the impact of green trust also appears to be supported.

Discussion

The extension of the VBN theory to diverse contexts and cultures is crucial for enhancing its overall generalizability, as highlighted in previous research (Hong et al., 2024; Lebrument et al., 2024; Lima et al., 2024). This study builds upon that foundation by validating an extended VBN framework within the contexts of three previously unexplored countries: Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. Beyond cross-cultural validation, the contribution of the study lies in the theoretical refinement of the VBN framework. Specifically, the study reveals not only expected relationships but also subtle differences in the strength of paths across the three countries. By integrating green trust as a pivotal construct, this model contributes to a deeper understanding of how individual values and beliefs are translated into environmentally responsible behaviors, particularly within the sustainable accommodation sector. Whereas green trust has been previously examined as a direct antecedent of purchase intention, our model integrated it as a mediator shaped by subjective knowledge and personal norms. This reconceptualization highlights the role of moral obligations and cognitive evaluations in forming trust, thereby strengthening the explanatory power of the VBN framework. Furthermore, the inclusion of subjective knowledge and attitude as determinants of personal norms and green trust, this study demonstrates the joint power of both cognitive and attitudinal factors in driving pro-environmental decision making in sustainable accommodation sector. Our findings support each hypothesis, confirming the relationships proposed within the extended framework of VBN. Notably, the strong positive impact of green consumer values on subjective knowledge (H1) across all the countries involved in the study reinforces the foundational premise of VBN theory, suggesting that individuals’ beliefs are influenced by their values. The research outcomes affirm that tourists who espouse more vital green values tend to perceive themselves as more knowledgeable regarding environmental issues. Furthermore, we observed minor coefficient variations, which may be attributable to differing levels of sustainability awareness or environmental education across the countries analyzed.

The strong positive impact of green consumer values was found on attitude (H2). This impact was consistently strong across three countries—Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. The evidence suggests that individuals who possess more vital green values are inclined to exhibit more favorable attitudes toward sustainable accommodation options. Notably, this pattern of results remains stable despite the varying cultural contexts of the countries studied. Consequently, it can be inferred that green consumer values may serve as a universal determinant of attitudes regarding sustainable practices.

The study emphasizes the importance of subjective knowledge and attitude in influencing personal norms (H3, H4). The results affirm that travelers’ moral obligation to engage in sustainable behavior is contingent on their knowledge of environmental issues and attitudes. The findings are consistent with previous literature suggesting an increasing environmental awareness (Hidalgo-Crespo et al., 2023) and its impact on developing enhanced pro-environmental norms (Dursun et al., 2019).

The notable influence of subjective knowledge on green trust in all three countries (H5) indicates that tourists who regard themselves as more knowledgeable about sustainability issues are more inclined to exhibit higher confidence in sustainable accommodations. However, the comparatively weaker impact of subjective knowledge on green trust observed in Spain is noteworthy, as prior studies often found trust to be a strong determinant of pro-environmental behavior (Hoque & Alam, 2018; Hossain et al., 2022). This unexpected finding may reflect higher consumer skepticism toward green claims or a greater reliance on social and normative cues in shaping trust.

The strong positive influence of personal norms on green purchasing behavior (H6) in Lithuania, Spain, and Norway further substantiates the notion that moral obligations drive choices related to sustainable accommodations. This association was most pronounced in Spain, possibly attributable to the cultural and religious milieu that fosters heightened community involvement in sustainabiage lity initiatives (Huete-Alcocer et al., 2024; Robina-Ramírez & Roets, 2024). This finding is consistent with prior research indicating the substantial impact of personal norms on green purchasing behaviors (Gupta & Sharma, 2019; Kortsch & Händeler, 2024; Lee et al., 2023; Shanmugavel & Balakrishnan, 2023; C.-P. Wang et al., 2023; Waris et al., 2024).

The strong relationship between personal norms and green trust (H7) underscores the pivotal role those personal norms play in cultivating trust. The substantial path coefficients indicate that individuals with a strong sense of obligation to engage in sustainable behavior are more inclined to trust sustainable accommodations.

The research findings confirm the positive influence of green trust on green purchasing behavior (H8), thereby validating the relationships proposed in the expanded version of the VBN theory. The results suggest that consumers with a higher level of trust in sustainable accommodations are more inclined to opt for such accommodations. This finding underscores the importance of sustainable tourism accommodations in bolstering trust to promote the selection of sustainable accommodations.

The post hoc analysis indicated a statistically significant total effect of personal norms on green purchasing behavior across all three countries: Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. These findings emphasize the critical importance of personal norms in influencing sustainable tourism decisions in varied cultural contexts.

The study presents four notable theoretical contributions to the field of sustainable tourism. Firstly, it utilizes the VBN framework to assess tourists’ preferences for sustainable accommodation within Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. This application of the VBN model underscores its robustness and highlights its potential for investigating travelers’ choices concerning sustainable accommodations across varying cultural landscapes.

Secondly, by adapting the VBN framework to incorporate green consumer values as a foundational element, the study enriches the applicability of the VBN model to contemporary sustainability research. This enhancement facilitates a more nuanced understanding of pro-environmental behavior, specifically within the realm of sustainable tourism.

Thirdly, integrating subjective knowledge and attitude as belief components represents a modernized and practical adaptation of the VBN theory. This incorporation aligns with the foundational tenets of the VBN framework and enhances its relevance in addressing contemporary consumer behavior challenges related to sustainability.

Finally, the study extends the VBN model by introducing the concept of green trust, which is pivotal in encouraging the selection of sustainable accommodation services. By emphasizing the significance of consumer confidence in sustainability claims, the findings reveal crucial relationships among personal norms, green trust, and green purchasing behavior. This suggests that green trust functions as a vital link between internalized moral obligations and the behavior of tourists when selecting sustainable accommodation options.

The research findings offer valuable insights for stakeholders in the tourism industry. Firstly, the influence of subjective knowledge on shaping personal norms suggests that raising awareness about environmental issues is crucial in promoting sustainable behavior. Therefore, educational campaigns informing travelers about the environmental impact of their choices are imperative for tourism businesses. Secondly, considering the strong impact of personal norms on green trust to encourage sustainable consumer behavior, tourism businesses need to foster transparency and credibility in their sustainability claims. Accommodation providers should consider obtaining endorsements and certifications from recognized environmental organizations to enhance their credibility. For providers of sustainable accommodation, it is imperative to effectively communicate their environmentally friendly initiatives in a manner that aligns with the values and knowledge of prospective tourists. The observed variations in the strength of relationships across the three countries indicate the necessity for market-specific strategies. In particular, the influence of personal norms appears more pronounced in Spain and Norway, suggesting an opportunity for targeted marketing campaigns that emphasize moral responsibility and collective action. Furthermore, initiatives aimed at enhancing subjective knowledge through environmental education and media outreach may play a crucial role in fostering green trust and influencing purchasing behavior in Lithuania. Particularly, stakeholders are encouraged to implement national eco-labeling campaigns, promote certifications from reputable environmental organizations, and launch targeted marketing communication programs aimed at explaining the environmental benefits of sustainable accommodation. Such initiatives that strengthen subjective knowledge could be helpful in bridging the gap between green consumer values and green purchasing behavior in the Lithuanian tourism market.

Conclusions

The study sheds light on the intricate interconnections among values, beliefs, norms, trust, and purchasing behavior within the context of the sustainable accommodation. Empirical evidence demonstrates that the causal links between green consumer values, subjective knowledge, attitude, personal norms, green trust, and green purchasing behavior align with predictions from previous literature. Therefore, this study strongly supports the applicability of the VBN model in elucidating tourists’ green purchasing behavior in Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. At the same time, the results revealed notable cross-country differences in specific relationships. The strongest influence of personal norms on behavior in Spain may stem from high uncertainty avoidance and power distance, which enhance the importance of moral and normative obligations. In Norway, pronounced individualism, high indulgence, and low achievement motivation suggest that sustainable choices are more likely driven by personal responsibility and lifestyle preferences rather than normative pressure. In Lithuania, higher uncertainty avoidance and lower indulgence contribute to a more cautious and restrained approach to sustainability-related decisions. These sociocultural interpretations reinforce the exploratory strength of the extended VBN framework and highlight the significance of cultural contexts in analyzing green purchasing behavior.

It is important to note certain limitations of this study. Firstly, although the extended VBN framework explained nearly 60% of the variance in green purchasing behavior, we cannot rule out the possible influence of other potentially influential factors, such as perceived quality, price sensitivity, or social influence that were not included in the study. Future studies should incorporate additional factors to capture a broader range of influences on green purchasing behavior. Secondly, the research focuses exclusively on green purchasing behavior in the context of sustainable accommodations. Consequently, the findings may not universally apply to other tourism industry segments. Future studies could explore additional touristic services and products to provide a more comprehensive understanding of green consumer behavior. Additionally, it is pertinent to acknowledge that the study was conducted in Lithuania, Spain, and Norway. Therefore, conducting similar research in countries with significantly different cultural backgrounds would be beneficial in gaining a more global perspective and providing deeper insights into cross-cultural nuances. In light of this, future researchers are encouraged to utilize the VBN theory to investigate consumer behavior across diverse contexts and critically assess its validity and limitations. Another key limitation stems from demographic differences between samples, notably the higher proportion of younger people in Norway compared to Lithuanian and Spanish populations. Additionally, the sample included a slightly higher percentlabelingof women and highly educated respondents. These demographic imbalances may have strengthened some of the specific relationships predicted by the framework. Therefore, future research should consider examining age, gender, and education as potential moderators. Finally, the study has a methodological limitation—the survey relied solely on self-reported measures of green purchasing behavior, which included both intention-based items and past self-reported actions. Although such measures are common in sustainability research, they may not always align with actual behavior. Future research, therefore, could supplement this self-reported data with longitudinal studies or experimental designs to more accurately capture sustainable purchasing behavior.

Footnotes

Appendix A

Table A1.

Measurement Scales.

Variable	Items	Source
Green consumer values	I consider the potential environmental impact of my actions when making many of my decisions	Haws et al. (2014)
	My purchase habits are affected by my concern for our environment
	I am concerned about wasting the resources of our planet
	I would describe myself as environmentally responsible
	I am willing to be inconvenienced in order to take actions that are more environmentally friendly
Subjective knowledge	I am very knowledgeable about environmental issues	Jaiswal and Kant (2018)
	I know more about recycling than the average person
	I know how to select products that reduce the amount of landfill waste
	I understand the environmental phrases and symbols
	I know that I choose environmentally safe options
Personal norms	Staying at a green hotel and using environment-friendly products/services would make me a better person	Choi et al. (2015)
	Instead of a conventional hotel, staying at a green hotel will make me feel like a morally obliged person
	Saving the environment should be the first priority for a person like me
	Regardless of what other people do, I feel staying at green hotels is a moral obligation
Green trust	I feel that environmental commitments of sustainable hotels are generally reliable	Y.-S. Chen (2010)
	I feel that environmental performance of sustainable hotels is generally dependable
	I feel that the environmental argument of sustainable hotels is generally trustworthy
	I feel that environmental concern of sustainable hotels meets my expectation
	I feel that sustainable hotel keep promises and commitment for environmental protection
Attitude	For me, staying at a green hotel when traveling seems to be a good choice	Han et al. (2010)
	Staying at green hotel is desirable
	Staying at green hotel is pleasant
	Staying at green hotel is wise
	Staying at green hotel is favorable
	Staying at green hotel is enjoyable
	Staying at green hotel seems positive to me
Green purchasing behavior	I book green hotels specifically because of their “green” characteristics in tourism destinations	Chin et al. (2018)
	I have a favorable attitude toward booking green hotels in tourism destinations
	I am willing to pay more for green hotels in tourism destinations
	I switch to the other brands for ecological reasons in tourism destinations
	I have avoided booking a hotel because it had potentially harmful environmental effects on the tourism destinations

ORCID iD

Neringa Vilkaite-Vaitone

Ethical Considerations

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and VILNIUS TECH Code of Academic Ethics, which outlines the ethical standards for academic research (the institution does not have a dedicated ethics committee or a specific department responsible for granting ethics approval for research studies).

Consent to Participate

All participants provided written informed consent prior to participating. Before beginning the questionnaire, participants confirmed their informed consent by proceeding with the survey.

Author Contributions

Neringa Vilkaite-Vaitone: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Data Curation, Validation, Formal analysis, Writing—original draft. Vilma Tamuliene: Methodology, Editing, Supervision.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The dataset analyzed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Ahn

Kwon

(2020). Green hotel brands in Malaysia: Perceived value, cost, anticipated emotion, and revisit intention. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(12), 1559–1574. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2019.1646715

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Al Mamun

Hayat

Mohiuddin

Salameh

A. A.

Zainol

N. R

. (2022). Modelling the energy conservation behaviour among Chinese households under the premises of value-belief-norm theory. Frontiers in Energy Research, 10, Article 954595. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.954595

Al Mamun

Nurul Hassan Reza

Ahmad

Wan Mohd Hirwani Wan

Lili

. (2024). Predicting attitude and intention to reduce food waste using the environmental values-beliefs-norms model and the theory of planned behavior. Food Quality and Preference, 120, Article 105247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105247

Ali

Rasoolimanesh

S. M.

Sarstedt

Ringle

C. M.

Ryu

(2018). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30(1), 514–538. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2016-0568

Awais

Fatima

Awan

T. M.

(2022). Assessing behavioral intentions of solar energy usage through value-belief-norm theory. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 33(6), 1329–1343. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-09-2021-0227

Balaji

M. S.

Jiang

Jha

(2019). Green hotel adoption: A personal choice or social pressure? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(8), 3287–3305. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-09-2018-0742

Bashir

Khwaja

M. G.

Turi

J. A.

Toheed

(2019). Extension of planned behavioral theory to consumer behaviors in green hotel. Heliyon, 5(12), Article e02974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02974

Batool

Wani

M. D.

Shah

S. A.

Dada

Z. A.

(2024). Theory of planned behavior and value-belief norm theory as antecedents of pro-environmental behaviour: Evidence from the local community. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 34(5), 693–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2023.2205912

10.

Çakır Yıldırım

Karaarslan Semiz

. (2019). Future teachers’ sustainable water consumption behavior: A test of the value-belief-norm theory. Sustainability, 11(6), Article 1558. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061558

11.

Chen

(2015). An examination of the value-belief-norm theory model in predicting pro-environmental behaviour in T aiwan. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 18(2), 145–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12096

12.

Chen

Chang

(2012). Enhance green purchase intentions: The roles of green perceived value, green perceived risk, and green trust. Management Decision, 50(3), 502–520. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741211216250

13.

Chen

Y.-S.

(2010). The drivers of green brand equity: Green brand image, green satisfaction, and green trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(2), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0223-9

14.

Chin

C.-H.

Chin

C.-L.

Wong

W. P.-M.

(2018). The implementation of green marketing tools in rural tourism: The readiness of tourists? Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 27(3), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2017.1359723

15.

Choi

Jang

Kandampully

(2015). Application of the extended VBN theory to understand consumers’ decisions about green hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.08.004

16.

De Dominicis

Schultz

P. W.

Bonaiuto

. (2017). Protecting the environment for self-interested reasons: Altruism is not the only pathway to sustainability. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 1065. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01065

17.

Denley

T. J.

Woosnam

K. M.

Ribeiro

M. A.

Boley

B. B.

Hehir

Abrams

(2020). Individuals’ intentions to engage in last chance tourism: Applying the value-belief-norm model. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(11), 1860–1881. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1762623

18.

D’Souza

Apaolaza

Hartmann

Gilmore

(2020). Fairtrade nexus between just-world beliefs and normative antecedents. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 38(7), 991–1005. https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-04-2020-0170

19.

Dursun

İ.

Tümer Kabadayı

Tuğer

A. T

. (2019). Overcoming the psychological barriers to energy conservation behaviour: The influence of objective and subjective environmental knowledge. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 43(4), 402–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12519

20.

Elakkad

Barakat

M. R.

Obrecht

(2025). The dynamics of green behaviour in Egypt and Jordan: Financial attitude, price sensitivity and greenwashing effects. Sustainability, 17(16), Article 7434. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17167434

21.

Eunike

I. J.

Silalahi

A. D. K.

Phuong

D. T. T.

Tedjakusuma

A. P.

(2025). Towards a holistic model of green consumerism by integrating ethical obligations, collective efficacy, and environmental concerns in sustainable purchase behavior. Sustainable Futures, 9, Article 100746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.100746

22.

Fauzi

M. A.

Hanafiah

M. H.

Kunjuraman

(2024). Tourists’ intention to visit green hotels: Building on the theory of planned behaviour and the value-belief-norm theory. Journal of Tourism Futures, 10(2), 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-01-2022-0008

23.

Fornara

Molinario

Scopelliti

Bonnes

Bonaiuto

Cicero

Admiraal

Beringer

Dedeurwaerdere

De Groot

Hiedanpää

Knights

Knippenberg

Ovenden

Horvat

K. P.

Popa

Porras-Gomez

Smrekar

Soethe

Bonaiuto

(2020). The extended Value-Belief-Norm theory predicts committed action for nature and biodiversity in Europe. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 81, Article 106338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2019.106338

24.

Global Sustainable Tourism Council. (2024). Booking.com’s 2024 sustainable travel report. https://www.gstcouncil.org/booking-sustainable-travel-report-2024/

25.

Guenther

Ringle

C. M.

Zaefarian

Cartwright

(2023). Improving PLS-SEM use for business marketing research. Industrial Marketing Management, 111, 127–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.03.010

26.

Guerreiro

Pacheco

(2021). How green trust, consumer brand engagement and green word-of-mouth mediate purchasing intentions. Sustainability, 13(14), Article 7877. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147877

27.

Gulati

Sharma

Vrat

(2025). Examining attributes of Indian travelers’ revisitation intent toward sustainable hotels. Journal of Advances in Management Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAMR-10-2024-0384

28.

Gupta

Sharma

(2019). Pro—Environmental behaviour of adventure tourists: An applicability of value belief norm theory. Tourism, 67(3), 253–267.

29.

Hagen

J. M.

Choe

(1998). Trust in Japanese Interfirm Relations: Institutional Sanctions Matter. The Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 589. https://doi.org/10.2307/259296

30.

Hair

J. F.

Risher

J. J.

Sarstedt

Ringle

C. M.

(2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

31.

Hair

J. F.

Sarstedt

(2019). Factors versus composites: Guidelines for choosing the right structural equation modeling method. Project Management Journal, 50(6), 619–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819882132

32.

Hair

J. F.

Sarstedt

Pieper

T. M.

Ringle

C. M.

(2012). The use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in strategic management research: A review of past practices and recommendations for future applications. Long Range Planning, 45(5–6), 320–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.008

33.

Han

(2015). Travelers’ pro-environmental behavior in a green lodging context: Converging value-belief-norm theory and the theory of planned behavior. Tourism Management, 47, 164–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.09.014

34.

Han

Hsu

L.-T. (Jane)

Sheu

(2010). Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the effect of environmental friendly activities. Tourism Management, 31(3), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.03.013

35.

Haws

K. L.

Winterich

K. P.

Naylor

R. W.

(2014). Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(3), 336–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.11.002

36.

Sun

Zhao

Chen

Waygood

E. O. D.

Shu

(2024). Impact of social-psychological factors on low-carbon travel intention: Merging theory of planned behavior and value-belief-norm theory. Heliyon, 10(6), Article e28161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28161

37.

Henseler

Ringle

C. M.

Sarstedt

(2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

38.

Hidalgo-Crespo

Velastegui-Montoya

Amaya-Rivas

J. L.

Soto

Riel

(2023). The role of personality in the adoption of pro-environmental behaviors through the lens of the value-belief-norm theory. Sustainability, 15(17), Article 12803. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151712803

39.

Hitlin

(2003). Values as the core of personal identity: Drawing links between two theories of self. Social Psychology Quarterly, 66(2), 118. https://doi.org/10.2307/1519843

40.

Hong

Al Mamun

Masukujjaman

Yang

(2024). Significance of the environmental value-belief-norm model and its relationship to green consumption among Chinese youth. Asia Pacific Management Review, 29(1), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2023.10.002

41.

Hoque

M. Z.

Alam

Md.N

. (2018). What determines the purchase intention of liquid milk during a food security crisis? The role of perceived trust, knowledge, and risk. Sustainability, 10(10), Article 3722. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103722

42.

Hossain

Nekmahmud

Md.

Fekete-Farkas

(2022). How do environmental knowledge, eco-label knowledge, and green trust impact consumers’ pro-environmental behaviour for energy-efficient household appliances? Sustainability, 14(11), Article 6513. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116513

43.

Huete-Alcocer

López-Ruiz

V. R.

Alfaro-Navarro

J. L.

Nevado-Peña

(2024). The role of environmental, economic, and social dimensions of sustainability in the quality of life in Spain. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 19(4), 1997–2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-024-10317-w

44.

Ikhsan

R. B.

Br Sinukaban

L. D.

Dinegoro

R. C.

Annur

R. R.

Fernando

(2023). The impact of pro-environment belief and personal norm toward the beauty purchase behavior. MIX: JURNAL ILMIAH MANAJEMEN, 13(2), 268. https://doi.org/10.22441/jurnal_mix.2023.v13i2.002

45.

Islam

M. F.

(2024). Exploring key drivers of tourism sustainability practices and their impact on sustainable competitive performance in the accommodation industry. International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy (2687-2293), 6(1), 28–44. https://doi.org/10.36096/ijbes.v6i1.465

46.

Jaiswal

Kant

(2018). Green purchasing behaviour: A conceptual framework and empirical investigation of Indian consumers. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 41, 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2017.11.008

47.

Jian

I. Y.

Yang

M. X.

Zeng

K. J.

(2020). The impacts of fear and uncertainty of COVID-19 on environmental concerns, brand trust, and behavioral intentions toward green hotels. Sustainability, 12(20), Article 8688. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208688

48.

Jimenez

Iyer

G. S.

(2016). Tax compliance in a social setting: The influence of social norms, trust in government, and perceived fairness on taxpayer compliance. Advances in Accounting, 34, 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2016.07.001

49.

Johansson

Rahm

Gyllin

(2013). Landowners’ participation in biodiversity conservation examined through the value-belief-norm theory. Landscape Research, 38(3), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2012.673576

50.

Kashif

Zarkada

Ramayah

(2018). The impact of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control on managers’ intentions to behave ethically. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 29(5–6), 481–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2016.1209970

51.

Kautish

Sharma

(2019). Value orientation, green attitude and green behavioral intentions: An empirical investigation among young consumers. Young Consumers, 20(4), 338–358. https://doi.org/10.1108/YC-11-2018-0881

52.

Khan

Zhang

Khan

I. U.

Khan

S. U.

Mehmood

(2024). Tourists’ pro-environmental behaviour in an autonomous vehicle’s adoption: Aligning the integration of value-belief-norm theory and the theory of planned behaviour. Current Issues in Tourism, 28(4), 604–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2024.2325491

53.

Kiatkawsin

Han

(2017). Young travelers’ intention to behave pro-environmentally: Merging the value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory. Tourism Management, 59, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.06.018

54.

Kim

Lee

C.-K.

Suess

(2022). Predicting preventive travel behaviors under the COVID-19 pandemic through an integration of Health Belief Model and Value-Belief-Norm. Tourism Management Perspectives, 43, Article 100981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2022.100981

55.

Klotz

A. C.

Swider

B. W.

Kwon

S. H.

(2023). Back-translation practices in organizational research: Avoiding loss in translation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 108(5), 699–727. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001050

56.

Kortsch

Händeler

(2024). Explaining sustainable purchase behavior in online flight booking—Combining value-belief-norm model and theory of planned behavior. Gruppe. Interaktion. Organisation. Zeitschrift Für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO), 55(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-024-00735-7

57.

Kostritsa

Sittler

(2017). The impact of social norms, trust, and fairness on voluntary tax compliance in Austria. Management, 12(4), 333–353. https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-4231.12.333-353

58.

Landon

A. C.

Woosnam

K. M.

Boley

B. B.

(2018). Modeling the psychological antecedents to tourists’ pro-sustainable behaviors: An application of the value-belief-norm model. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(6), 957–972. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1423320

59.

T. H.

H. C.

Huang

W.-S.

Liou

G.-B.

Huang

C.-C.

Hsieh

C.-M.

(2021). Determinants of tourists’ intentions to agrotourism in vietnam from perspectives of Value—Belief—Norm theory. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 38(9), 881–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2021.1985040

60.

Lebrument

Zumbo-Lebrument

Rochette

(2024). Application of the VBN theory to understand residents’ participation in the smart city: The case of French metropolises. Urban Studies, 62(5), 954–975. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980241269808

61.

Lee

S. S.

Kim

Roh

(2023). Pro-environmental behavior on electric vehicle use intention: Integrating value-belief-norm theory and theory of planned behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 418, Article 138211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138211

62.

Lima

P. A. B.

Falguera

F. P. S.

Silva

H. M. R. D.

Maciel

Mariano

E. B.

Elgaaied-Gambier

(2024). From green advertising to sustainable behavior: A systematic literature review through the lens of value-belief-norm framework. International Journal of Advertising, 43(1), 53–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2023.2199668

63.

Lind

H. B.

Nordfjærn

Jørgensen

S. H.

Rundmo

(2015). The value-belief-norm theory, personal norms and sustainable travel mode choice in urban areas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 44, 119–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.001

64.

Mamun

A. A.

Hayat

Mohiuddin

Salameh

A. A.

Alam

S. S.

(2023). Green gardening practices among urban botanists: Using the value-belief-norm model. SAGE Open, 13(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231187583

65.

Manley

S. C.

Hair

J. F.

Williams

R. I.

McDowell

W. C.

(2021). Essential new PLS-SEM analysis methods for your entrepreneurship analytical toolbox. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 17(4), 1805–1825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00687-6

66.

Megeirhi

H. A.

Woosnam

K. M.

Ribeiro

M. A.

Ramkissoon

Denley

T. J.

(2020). Employing a value-belief-norm framework to gauge Carthage residents’ intentions to support sustainable cultural heritage tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(9), 1351–1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1738444

67.

Midgett

Deale

C. S.

Crawford

Weber

Bendickson

(2020). A cross-case analysis of barriers to sustainability in small tourism accommodation enterprises in Dare County, North Carolina. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 20(2), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358419831425

68.

Nguyễn

T. N.

Phan

M. D. T.

Thi Anh Nguyet

(2025). The impact of environmental factors on green purchase intention and green purchase behavior: The moderating role of price sensitivity. Management, 1, 597–624. https://doi.org/10.58691/man/205146

69.

Ocloo

K. A.

Oduro-Ofori

Amaka-Otchere

A. B. K.

Doe

Dankyi

S. K.

Atanga

(2024). Extending the boundaries of the value-belief-norm theory to off-farm livelihood preferences—Perceptions of food crop farmers in the savanna ecological zone, Ghana. African Geographical Review, 44(2), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376812.2024.2356157

70.

Ozolins

Hale

Cheng

Hyatt

Schofield

(2020). Translation and back-translation methodology in health research—A critique. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 20(1), 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2020.1734453

71.

Pan

Teng

Y.-M.

K.-S.

Wen

T.-C.

(2022). Anticipating Z-generation tourists’ green hotel visit intention utilizing an extended theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1008705. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1008705

72.

Pavić

Blešić

Petrović

M. D.

Radovanović

M. M.

Prišenk

(2019). Can the quality of hospitality services play a role in sustainable equestrian tourism in Slovenia? Mediations, effects, and implications. Sustainability, 11(21), Article 6155. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216155

73.

Podsakoff

P. M.

MacKenzie

S. B.

Lee

J.-Y.

Podsakoff

N. P.

(2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

74.

Raghu

S. J.

Rodrigues

L. L. R.

(2022). Solid waste management behavior among the student community: Integrating environmental knowledge and situational factors into the theories of planned behavior and value belief norm. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 65(10), 1842–1874. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2021.1949969

75.

Rizkalla

Erhan

T. P.

(2020). Sustainable consumption behaviour in the context of millennials in Indonesia—Can environmental concern, self-efficacy, guilt and subjective knowledge make a difference? Management: Journal of Sustainable Business and Management Solutions in Emerging Economies, 25(3), 43. https://doi.org/10.7595/management.fon.2020.0001

76.

Robina-Ramírez

Roets

A. O. S. B

. (2024). Green transitions for changing behaviour through environmental community engagement at religious schools. Journal of the Sociology and Theory of Religion, 16(1), 233–259. https://doi.org/10.24197/jstr.1.2024.233-259

77.

Sági

Daragmeh

Kuci

(2025). A study of consumers’ purchase intentions for green clothing in Kosovo. Journal of East European Management Studies, 30(1), Article 39412. https://doi.org/10.31083/JEEMS39412

78.

Sann

Jansom

Muennaburan

(2024). An extension of the theory of planned behaviour in Thailand cycling tourism: The mediating role of attractiveness of sustainable alternatives. Leisure Studies, 43(1), 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2023.2182346

79.

Shanmugavel

Balakrishnan

(2023). Influence of pro-environmental behaviour towards behavioural intention of electric vehicles. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 187, Article 122206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122206

80.

Sharma

Gupta

(2020). Pro-environmental behaviour among tourists visiting national parks: Application of value-belief-norm theory in an emerging economy context. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25(8), 829–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1774784

81.

Sonkar

Singh

Singh Dubey

(2025). Examining the consumer behavior and preferences of generation Y and generation Z toward green cosmetics in the Indian market. Journal of Global Marketing, 90, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2025.2518091

82.

Sparks

B. A.

Browning

(2011). The impact of online reviews on hotel booking intentions and perception of trust. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1310–1323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.12.011

83.

Stern

P. C.

Dietz

Guagnano

G. A.

Kalof

(1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6(2), 81–97.

84.

Ren

Cui

Hou

Wen

(2022). Do Value Orientations and Beliefs Play a Positive Role in Shaping Personal Norms for Urban Green Space Conservation? Land, 11(2), Article 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11020262

85.

Tassiello

Tillotson

J. S.

(2020). How subjective knowledge influences intention to travel. Annals of Tourism Research, 80, Article 102851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2019.102851

86.

The Culture Factor Group. (2025). Country comparison tool [dataset]. https://www.theculturefactor.com/country-comparison-tool

87.

Thøgersen

(2000). Psychological determinants of paying attention to eco-labels in purchase decisions: Model development and multinational validation. Journal of Consumer Policy, 23(3), 285–313. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007122319675

88.

Ulker-Demirel

Ciftci

(2020). A systematic literature review of the theory of planned behavior in tourism, leisure and hospitality management research. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 43, 209–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.04.003

89.

Uslaner

E. M.

(1999). Trust but verify: Social capital and moral behavior. Social Science Information, 38(1), 29–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901899038001002

90.

Vasilica-Maria

Jiménez Sánchez

Á.

Ehrlich

J. S.

(2023). Revisión del uso del PLS-SEM en las investigaciones sobre neuromarketing [A review of the use of PLS-SEM in neuromarketing research]. Index Comunicación, 13(2), 119–146. https://doi.org/10.33732/ixc/13/02Arevie

91.

Venugopal

Shukla

(2019). Between hesitation and decisiveness—Understanding consumers’ ego, altruism, and eagerness to pay for renewable energy. Sustainable Development, 27(5), 932–944. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1955

92.

Wang

C.-P.

Zhang

Wong

P. P. W.

Wang

(2023). Consumers’ green purchase intention to visit green hotels: A value-belief-norm theory perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1139116. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1139116

93.

Wang

Zhang

Wong

P. P. W.

(2024). Reexamination of consumers’ willingness to stay at green hotels: Rethinking the role of social identity theory, value-belief-norm theory, and theory of planned behavior. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 33(4), 547–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2023.2292639

94.

Waris

Iqbal

Ahmed

Hashim

Ahmed

(2024). Values and information publicity shape tourists’ intentions to visit green hotels: An application of the extended value-belief norms theory. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 35(4), 780–798. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-04-2023-0130

95.

Woo

Kim

Y. G.

(2019). Consumer attitudes and buying behavior for green food products: From the aspect of green perceived value (GPV). British Food Journal, 121(2), 320–332. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-01-2018-0027

96.

Chi

(2021). Altruism, environmental concerns, and pro-environmental behaviors of urban residents: A case study in a typical Chinese city. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 643759. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.643759

97.

Yang

Al Mamun

Masukujjaman

Gao

Masud

M. M.

(2024). Modelling the intention and production of organic food using environmental value-belief-norm model. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 15, 962–981. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-024-00984-4

98.

Zasada

Weltin

Zoll

Benninger

S. L.

(2020). Home gardening practice in Pune (India), the role of communities, urban environment and the contribution to urban sustainability. Urban Ecosystems, 23(2), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-019-00921-2