Consumer Awareness of the Eco-Labeling of Packaging

• Autorzy: Jóźwik-Pruska Jagoda , Bobowicz Patrycja , Hernández César , Szalczyńska Magdalena

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/ftee-2022-0042

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The paper describes the results of research on consumer awareness and attitudes in the field of the ecology and labelling of packaging products. The research was divided into two parts. The first one was related to the perception of the respondents regarding ecology, while the second one was related to the classification of the cosmetics packaging products presented. The results obtained were analysed statistically. The correlation analysis performed showed the existence of a relationship between the variables selected (consumer attitudes). Strong correlations were noticed. The research showed that consumers equate labelling to the properties of products and packaging. The labelling of packaging and products can be ambiguous, which results in a problem with classifying waste to the appropriate segregation and collection system.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

society; packaging; ecology; awareness; eco trend; circular economy

• Wydawca: Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz - Łódzki Instytut Technologiczny
• Czasopismo: Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 30, no. 5
• Strony: 39--46
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 47 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Jóźwik-Pruska Jagoda

• Łukasiewicz Research Network-Łódź Institute of Technology, 19/27Skłodowskiej-Curie St., 90-570 Łódź, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4517-0057

autor

Bobowicz Patrycja

• Łukasiewicz Research Network-Łódź Institute of Technology, 19/27Skłodowskiej-Curie St., 90-570 Łódź, Poland

autor

Hernández César

• Łukasiewicz Research Network-Łódź Institute of Technology, 19/27Skłodowskiej-Curie St., 90-570 Łódź, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0842-5428

autor

Szalczyńska Magdalena

• Łukasiewicz Research Network-Łódź Institute of Technology, 19/27Skłodowskiej-Curie St., 90-570 Łódź, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6465-0692

Bibliografia

• 1. Council Directive (EU) 2019/904 of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment. Available from: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/904/oj.
• 2. PlasticEurope. Plastic – the facts 2020. An analysis of European plastics production, demand and waste data, [Internet]; 2020 [cited 2022 Feb]; Available from: https://plasticseurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Plastics_the_facts-WEB-2020_versionJun21_final.pdf
• 3. Alavi S, Thomas S, Sandeep KP, Kalarikkal N, Varghese J, Yaragalla S. Polymers for Packaging Applications. USA: CRC Press; 2014.
• 4. Ivonkovic A, Zeljko K, Talic S, Lasic M. Biodegradable Packaging in the Food Industry. J. Food Saf. Food Qual. 2017; 68(2): 26-38.
• 5. Moustafa H, Darwish NA, Nour MA, Youssef AM. Biodegradable Date Stones Filler for Enhancing Mechanical, Dynamic, and Flame Retardant Properties of Polyamide‐6 Biocomposites. Polym. Compos. 2018; 39(6): 1978-1987.
• 6. Moustafa H, Youssef AM, Darwish NA, Abou-Kandil AI. Eco-Friendly Polymer Composites for Green Packaging: Future Vision And Challenges. Compos B Eng. 2019; 172: 16.
• 7. Draskovic N. Packaging Convenience: Consumer Packaging Feature or Marketing Tool. IJMC 2010; 12(2): 267-274.
• 8. Galil BS, Genovesi P, Ojaveer H, Quílez-Badia G, Occhipinti A. Mislabeled: Eco-Labeling an Invasive Alien Shellfish Fishery. Biol. Invasions 2013; 15(11): 2363-2365.
• 9. D'Souza C, Taghian M, Lamb P. An Empirical Study on the Influence of Environmental Labels on Consumers. CCIJ 2006; 11(2): 162-173.
• 10. Van Amstel M, Driessen P, Glasbergen P. Eco-Labeling And Information Asymmetry: A Comparison of Five Eco-Labels in the Netherlands. J. Clean. Prod. 2008; 16(3): 263-276.
• 11. Campbell‐Johnston K, de Munck M, Vermeulen WJ, Backes C. Future Perspectives on the Role of Extended Producer Responsibility within a Circular Economy: A Delphi Study Using the Case of the Netherlands. Bus Strategy Environ. 2021; 30(8): 4054-4067.
• 12. Katowice City Hall, Department of Environmental Design, Eco-labels - it’s worth getting to know them (in Polish) [Internet], Katowice (POL): Urząd Miasta Katowice, [cited 2022 Feb], Available from: https://odpady.katowice.eu/ekoznaki-warto-je-poznac/.
• 13. Brécard D. Consumer Confusion Over the Profusion of Eco-Labels: Lessons from a Double Differentiation Model. Resour Energy Econ 2014; 37: 64– 84.
• 14. Thøgersen J, Haugaard P, Olesen A. Consumer Responses to Ecolabels. Eur J Mark. 2010; 44: 1787– 1810.
• 15. Moon SJ, Costello JP, Koo DM. The Impact of Consumer Confusion from Eco-Labels on Negative WOM, Distrust, and Dissatisfaction. Int J Advert 2017; 36(2): 246-271.
• 16. Harbaugh R, Maxwell J-W, Roussillon B. Label Confusion: The Groucho Effect of Uncertain Standards. Manage Sci 2011; 57(9): 1512–1527.
• 17. Carlsson F, García JH, Löfgren Å. Conformity and the Demand for Environmental Goods. Environ Resour Econ 2010; 47(3): 407-421.
• 18. Maniatis P. Investigating Factors Influencing Consumer Decision-Making while Choosing Green Products. J Clean Prod 2016; 132: 215-228.
• 19. Georgakarakou C, Riskos K, Tsourvakas G, Yfantidou I. What Features of Green Products Packaging are More Eye Catching? An Eye-Tracking Exploratory Study about Organic Agricultural Products. Int. J. Technol. Mark. 2020; 14: 93–124.
• 20. Taufique KR, Siwar C, Chamhuri N. Factors Affecting Consumers’ Perception of Eco-Labels: Evidence from Malaysia. In Proceedings of the Australia-Middle East Conference on Business and Social Sciences 2016, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
• 21. Crespi JM, Marette S. Eco-Labelling Economics: Is Public Involvement Necessary. Environment, information and consumer behawior 2005; 93-110.
• 22. Lindh H, Olsson A, Williams H. Consumer Perceptions of Food Packaging: Contributing to or Counteracting Environmentally Sustainable Development? Packag. Technol. Sci. 2016; 29: 3–23.
• 23. Lindh H, Williams H, Olsson A, Wikström F. Elucidating the Indirect Contributions of Packaging to Sustainable Development: A Terminology of Packaging Functions and Features. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2016; 29: 225–246.
• 24. Nordin N, Selke S. Social Aspect of Sustainable Packaging. Packag. Technol. Sci. 2010; 23: 317–326.
• 25. Steenis ND, van Herpen E, van der Lans IA, Ligthart TN, van Trijp HCM. Consumer Response to Packaging Design: The Role of Packaging Materials and Graphics in Sustainability Perceptions and Product Evaluations. J. Clean. Prod. 2017; 162: 286–298.
• 26. Wei S, Ang T, Jancenelle VE. Willingness to Pay More for Green Products: The Interplay of Consumer Characteristics and Customer Participation. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018; 45: 230-238.
• 27. Biswas A, Roy M. A Study of Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Green Products. JOAMS 2016; 4(3): 211-214.
• 28. Moon W, Florkowski W, Bruckner B, Schonhof I. Willingness to Pay for Environmental Practices: Implications for Eco-Labeling. Land Econ. 2002; 75(1): 88-102.
• 29. Gerrard C, Janssen M, Smith L, Hamm U, Padel S. UK Consumer Reactions to Green Certification Logos. Br Food J. 2013; 115(5): 727 – 742.
• 30. Mobile Institute. Green generation 2021. Together for the land, report (in Polish), [Internet]; 2021 [cited 2022 Feb]; Available from: https://s.mobileinstitute.eu/pub/429be3e5cbfd899f894d5d-86b453e6eca92750d9/GreenGeneration_WspolnieNaRzeczZiemi_2021.pdf
• 31. SW Research. Ecobarometer. On the road to a green society (in Polish), [Internet]; 2021 [cited 2022 Feb]; Available from: https://swresearch.pl/raporty/ekobarometr-pelna-wersja-raportu-ztrzeciego-pomiaru
• 32. Kantar. Earthlings design, suplement to report Earthlings attack. (in Polish), [Internet]; 2020 [cited 2022 Feb]; Available at: https://ziemianieatakuja.pl/
• 33. The Eco Gender Gap: 71% of Women try to live more ethically, compared to 59% of men. Mintel July 27th, 2018. Available from: https://www.mintel.com/press-centre/social-and-lifestyle/the-ecogender-gap-71-of-women-try-to-livemore-ethically-compared-to-59-of-men
• 34. Swim JK, Gillis AJ, Hamaty KJ. Gender Bending and Gender Conformity: The Social Consequences of Engaging in Feminine and Masculine Pro-Environmental Behaviors. Sex Roles. 2020; 82(5-6): 363-385.
• 35. Hunter LM, Hatch A, Johnson A. Cross-National Gender Variation In Environmental Behaviourrs. Soc. Sci. Q. 2004; 85(3): 677–694.
• 36. Dąbrowski A. The Economics of Responsibility. A culture of (In) responsibility. (in Polish). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN; 2021.
• 37. European Commission. Eco-labels, success stories, Olaf Tschimpke, President of NABU – The Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecolabel/green-week-2.html
• 38. Roberts JA, Bacon DR. Exploring the Subtle Relationships Between Environmental Concern and Ecologically Conscious Consumer Behavior. J. Bus. Res. 1997; 40:79–89.
• 39. Taufique KMR, Vocino A, Polonsky MJ. The Influence of Eco-Label Knowledge and Trust on Pro-Environmental Consumer Behaviourr in an Emerging Market. J. Strateg. Mark. 2017; 25: 511–529.
• 40. Cheung MF, To WM. An Extended Model of Value-Attitude-Behavior to Explain Chinese Consumers’ Green Purchase Behavior. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019; 50: 145–153.
• 41. Vermeir I, Verbeke W. Sustainable Food Consumption Among Young Adults in Belgium: Theory of Planned Behaviourr and the Role of Confidence and Values. Ecol. Econ. 2008; 64: 542–553.
• 42. Wu S-I, Chen J-Y. A Model of Green Consumption Behavior Constructed by the Theory of Planned Behavior. Int. J. Mark. Stud. 2014; 6: 119.
• 43. Claudy MC, Peterson M, O’driscoll A. Understanding the Attitude-Behavior Gap for Renewable Energy Systems Using Behavioral Reasoning Theory. J. Macromark. 2013; 33: 273–287.
• 44. Zhang Y, Bai X, Mills FP, Pezzey JCV. Examining the Attitude-Behavior Gap in Residential Energy Use: Empirical Evidence from A Large-Scale Survey In Beijing, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021; 295:126510.
• 45. Song Y, Qin Z, Yuan Q. The Impact of Eco-Label on the Young Chinese Generation: The Mediation Role of Environmental Awareness and Product Attributes in Green Purchase. Sustainability 2019; 11: 973.
• 46. Iraldo F, Griesshammer R, Kahlenborn W. The Future of Ecolabels. Int J Life Cycle Assess 2020; 25:833–839.
• 47. Brécard D. Consumer Misperception of Eco-Labels, Green Market Structure and Welfare. J Regul Econ. 2017; 51(3):340-364.