COVİD-19 DÖNEMİNDE YENİ EKOLOJİK PARADİGMANIN SOSYAL SORUMLU TÜKETİM DAVRANIŞINA ETKİSİ

Öz

Pandeminin yaşandığı ve dünyanın sarsıldığı bu dönemde, doğa ve insan yaşamının sürdürülebilirliğiyle ilgili değerlerin sahiplenilmesi gerekliliği dikkat çekerken, tüketimde farkındalığı artırmakla ilgili konular, insan-çevre ilişkisi hakkında daha yüksek düzeydeki değerleri ve içinde yaşadığımız dünya hakkındaki kapsayıcı inançları temsil eden sosyal sorumlu davranışlara odaklanılmasına sebep olmuştur. Covid-19 döneminde yeni ekolojik paradigmanın sosyal sorumlu tüketim davranışına etkisini belirlemek amacıyla bu çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak, bir ekolojinin kuramsal yönünü ortaya koyabilmek için insanların dünya görüşlerini ölçmeyi amaçlayan yeni ekolojik paradigma ölçeği ile sosyal sorumlu tüketim davranışı ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Araştırma ilişkisel nicel araştırma niteliğindedir. Araştırmanın ana kütlesini İstanbul ilinde yaşamakta olan 479 tüketici oluşturmaktadır. Kolayda örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak, çevrimiçi anket tekniğiyle araştırmanın verileri toplanmıştır. Araştırma kapsamındaki verilerin faktör analizi için uygunluğu belirlenmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki ilişkilerin incelenmesi için korelasyon analizi ve ilişkilerin modellenmesi için ise regresyon analizi uygulanmıştır, Etki düzeyini ortaya koymak için de yapısal eşitlik modelinden yararlanılmıştır. Yeni ekolojik paradigma alt boyutlarından doğanın dengesi, muafiyet karşıtı ve anti- antroposentrizm bağımsız değişkenlerin anlamlı düzeylerde sosyal sorumlu tüketim davranışıyla ilişkili olduğu görülmüştür. Ekolojik sınırlar ve ekolojik kriz boyutlarının ise sosyal sorumlu tüketim davranışına etki etmediği bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sosyal Sorumlu Tüketim
• Yeni Ekolojik Paradigma
• Covid-19

The Effect of New Ecological Paradigm On Socially Responsible Consumption Behaviour in the Covid-19 Era

Öz

In this period when the pandemic is experienced and the world is shaken, the necessity of owning the values related to nature and the sustainability of human life draws attention, while the issues related to raising awareness in consumption have led to a focus on socially responsible behaviors that represent higher values about the human-environment relationship and inclusive beliefs about the world we live in. To determine the effect of the new ecological paradigm on socially responsible consumption behavior in the Covid-19 period, the new ecological paradigm scale which aims to measure people's worldviews in order to reveal the theoretical side of an ecology and the socially responsible consumption behavior scale were used as data collection tools in this study. The research is relational quantitative research. The main mass of the research consists of 479 consumers living in Istanbul. The data of the research were collected by using the easy sampling method and the online survey technique. The suitability of the data within the scope of the research for factor analysis was examined, and the structural equation model was used to measure the effects between variables. It has been observed that the balance of nature, anti-exemption, and anti-anthropocentrism independent variables, which are sub-dimensions of the new ecological paradigm, are associated with socially responsible consumption behavior at significant levels in the Covid 19 period. It was found that the sub-dimensions of ecological crisis and ecological borders did not affect socially responsible consumption behavior.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Socially Responsible Consumtion Behavior
• New Ecological Paradigm
• Covid-19

Kaynakça

1. Anderson, W.T.; Cunningham, W.H. (1972). The Socially Conscious Consumer. Journal of Marketing, 36, 23.
2. Antil, J. and Bennet, B. (1979). Construction and validation of a scale to measure socially responsible consumption behavior. The conserver society: American Marketing Ass., 51-68.
3. Antil, J. (1984). Socially responsible consumers: Profile and implications for public policy. Journal of Macromarketing, 5(2), 18-39.
4. Baumgartner, H., Homburg, C. (1996). Applications of structural equation modeling in marketing and consumer research: A review. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13(2), 139-161.
5. Becchetti, L., Salustri, F. (2019). The vote with the wallet game: Responsible consumerism as a multiplayer prisoner’s dilemma. Sustainability, 11, 1109.
6. Browne, M. and Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit (Ed.), Testing Structural Equation Models içinde (136-162). California: Sage Publication.
7. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni SPSS Uygulamaları ve Yorum. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
8. Castaño, L., Perdomo-Ortiz, J., Ocampo:, León, W.F. (2016). Socially responsible consumption: An application in Colombia. Business Ethic And European Review, 25, 460-481.

9. Chandler, E. W., & Dreger, R. M. (1993). Anthropocentrism: Construct validity and measurement. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality,8, 169–188.
10. Chatzidakis, A.; Shaw, D. (2018). Sustainability: Issues of Scale, Care and Consumption. British Journal of Management, 29, 299- 315.
11. Cohen, M.J. (2020). Does the COVID-19 outbreak mark the onset of a sustainable consumption transition? Sustainability: Science, Practice, and Policy, 16 (1), 1 – 3.
12. Cohen, M.J., (2019). Introduction to the special section: innovative perspectives on systems of sustainable consumption and production. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 15 (1), 104 – 110.
13. Collivignarelli, M.C., Abba, A., Bertanza, G., Pedrazzani, R., Ricciardi, P., Miino, M.C. (2020). Lockdown for COViD-19 in Milan: What are the effects on air quality? Sci Total Environ.,732:139280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139280.
14. Degli Esposti, P., Mortara, A., Roberti, G. (2021). Sharing and sustainable consumption in the era of COVID-19. Sustainability, 13(4), 1903.
15. Dunlap, R. E., and Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The “new environmental paradigm”: A proposed measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education, 9, 10–19.
16. Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, D., Mertig, A. G. and Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3), 425-442.
17. Dunlap, R. E. (2002). Environmental sociology: A personal perspective on its first quarter century. Organization and Environment, 15, 10-36.
18. Dutheil, F., Baker, J. S., Navel, V. (2020). COVID-19 as a factor influencing air pollution? Environmental Pollution (Barking, Essex: 1987), 263, 114466.
19. Eckhardt, G.M., Belk, R., Devinney, T.M. (2010). Why don’t consumers consume ethically? Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9, 426- 436.
20. Eizenberg, E., Jabareen, Y. (2017). Social Sustainability: A New Conceptual Framework. Sustainability, 9, 68.
21. Ellis, R. J., and Thompson, F. (1997). Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest. American Political Science Review, 91, 885–897.
22. Erciş, A. ve Türk, B. (2016). Etik çerçevesinde tüketim, tüketici ve çevre: Ekolojik okuryazarlığın moderatör rolü. Çukurova Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 20(2), 1-24.
23. Fischer, D.; Böhme, T.; Geiger:M. (2017). Measuring young consumers’ sustainable consumption behavior: Development and validation of the YCSCB scale. Young Consumer, 18, 312- 326.
24. Furman, A. (1998). A note on environmental concern in a developing country: Results from an İstanbul Survey, Environment & Behavior, 30, 520–534.
25. Gregory-Smith, D.; Manika, D.; Demirel, P. (2017). Green intentions under the blue flag: Exploring differences in EU consumers’ willingness to pay more for environmentally-friendly products. Bus. Ethic A Eur. Rev. 26, 205- 222.
26. Harrison, R.T., Newholm, T., Shaw, D. (2005). The Ethical Consumer. London: SAGE Publications.
27. Hines, J., Hungerford, H. R. and Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8.
28. Howard, G. S., Delgado, E., Miller, D. and Gubbins: (1993). Transforming values into actions: Ecological preservation though energy conservation. Counseling Psychologist, 21, 582-596.
29. Hu, L. and Bentler, P. (1999). Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.
30. Ingenbleek, P.T.M.; Meulenberg, M.T.; Van Trijp, H.C. (2015). Buyer social responsibility: A general concept and its implications for marketing management. Journal of Marketing Management, 31, 1428- 1448.
31. Johnson, B., Eagly, A. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull., 106, 290.
32. Jribi, S., Ismail, H., Doggui, D., Debbabi, H. (2020) COVID-19 virus outbreak lockdown: what impacts on household food wastage? Environ Dev Sustain, 22:3939–3955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00740-y.
33. Kline, R. B. (2011). Structural equation modeling. Newyork: The Guilford Press.
34. Kolk, A., Van Tulder, R. (2010). International business, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. International Business Review, 19, 119- 125.
35. Kurtuluş, K. (2010). Araştırma Yöntemleri. İstanbul: Türkmen Kitabevi.
36. Lagerkvist, C., Edenbrandt A., Tibbelin I., Wahlstedt, Y. (2020). Preferences for sustainable and responsible equity funds- A choice experiment with Swedish private investors. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 28, 1-12.
37. Leigh, J., Murphy, P., Enis, B. (1988). A new approach to measuring socially responsible consumption tendencies, Journal of Macromarketing, 8(1), p.5-21.
38. Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. Global( sixth edition). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
39. Mainieri, T., Barnett, E. G., Valdero, T. R., Unipan, J. B. and Oskamp: (1997). Green buying: The influence of environmental concern on consumer behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 189-204.
40. Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G. and Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. London: Sage Publication.
41. Mohr, L.A., Webb, D.J., Harris, K.E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35, 45-72.
42. Moon, J. (2007). The contribution of corporate social responsibility to sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 15, 296- 306.
43. Orlitzky, M., Siegel, D.S., Waldman, D.A. (2011). Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Sustainability. Business Society., 50, 6–27.
44. Qaisar, A., Parveen:, Yaacob, H. (2021). Covid-19 and dynamics of environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility in Malaysia. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 56199-56218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14612-z.
45. Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut economics, seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist London: Random House Business Books.
46. Sarkis J., Cohen M.J., Dewick P., Schroder P. (2020). A brave new world: Lessons from the Covid-19 pandemic for transitioning to sustainable supply and production. Resour Conserv Recycl 159:104894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104894
47. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of Psychological Research, 8(2), 23-74.
48. Shobeiri:, Rajaobelina, L., Durif, F., Boivin, C. (2016). Experiential Motivations of Socially Responsible Consumption. International Journal of Marketing Research, 58, 119- 139.
49. Severo, E. A., De Guimarães, J. C. F., Dellarmelin, M. L. (2021). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental awareness, sustainable consumption and social responsibility: Evidence from generations in Brazil and Portugal. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286, 124947.
50. Singh, N. (2009). Exploring socially responsible behaviour of Indian consumers: An empirical investigation. Social Responsibility Journal, 5(2), 200-211.
51. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., and Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment and Behavior, 25, 322–348.
52. Stern, P.C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 523-530.
53. Tabachnick, B. G. and Fidell, L.S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (sixth ed.). Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
54. Thiyagarajan: ve Shanthi, P. (2013). Socially responsible consumer behaviour and ıts effectiveness on advertisiments in India, Sociology Study, 3(5), 387-394.
55. Thompson: C. G., and Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment, Journal of Environmental Psychology,14, 149-158
56. Van Liere, K. D. and Dunlap, R. E. (1981). Environmental concern: Does it make a difference how it’s measured? Environment and Behavior, 13, 651-676.
57. Vitell:J. (2014). A case for consumer social responsibility (CnSR): Including a selected review of consumer ethics/social responsibility research. Journal of Business Ethic, 130, 767- 774.
58. Wang, Q. and Su, M. (2020). A preliminary assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on environment- A case study of China. Sci Total Environ 728:138915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138915
59. Webster, F. (1975). Determining the characteristics of the socially conscious consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 2 (3), 188-196.
60. Xiao, C., Dunlap, R.E., Hong, D. (2019). Ecological worldview as the central component of environmental concern: Clarifying the role of the NEP. Soc. Nat. Resour., 32, 53-72.
61. Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1991). Consumer behavior: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Business Horizon, 34, 51-58.