Can Environmental Knowledge and Risk Perception Make a Difference? The Role of Environmental Concern and Pro-Environmental Behavior in Fostering Sustainable Consumption Behavior

Abstract

Sustainable consumption is one of the goals of the ‘Sustainable Development Goals 2030′ set by the United Nations. The study is primarily interested in how sustainable consumption behavior can be fostered through environmental knowledge, behaviors, and attitudes. For environmental concern, the role of environmental knowledge is considered significant. Therefore, academia is powered by the desire to impart environmentally friendly attitudes and behaviors to students for sustainable consumption. The main purpose of this study was to measure the influence of environmental knowledge and environmental risk perceptions on the environmental concerns of university students. Likewise, how environmental attitudes act as a moderator in the association between environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior was also taken into account. The unit of analysis was the students enrolled in the universities of China. Following a deductive approach and positivist paradigm, and using SmartPLS, we deployed a structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) technique to test the relationships. The results exhibited that environmental knowledge and environmental risk perceptions are positively and significantly related with environmental concerns. Similarly, environmental concerns and pro-environmental behavior are positively and significantly related to sustainable consumption behavior. Environmental attitude appeared as a moderator in the relationship between environmental concerns and pro-environmental behavior. The theory of planned behavior was considered as the supporting theory for the investigated model, thereby providing empirical evidence for the theory. The study provided important implications and future directions.

1. Introduction

The concept of sustainability emerged in the late 20th century in response to rising environmental concern. The community of higher education is one of the key players in environmental and sustainable development [1]. Higher education seeks to educate persons with the information, skills, and values necessary to contribute to the improvement of the world whilst also being accountable and competent. According to Corcoran and Wals [2], higher education may thus play a crucial role in transforming society toward sustainability. However, it is still debatable whether knowledge leads to changes in attitude and behavior. For example, Dave [3] found out that the relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental attitude is weak. According to Díaz et al. [4], attitude is the most significant driver of behavior, while Karimi et al. [5] assert that education programs should focus on the emotional (attitude) domain as opposed to depending only on the cognitive (knowledge) domain. Quoquab, Mohammad, and Sukari [6] believe that university students play a crucial role in the development of sustainable communities.

Although theories on sustainable consumer behavior have been established since the 1980s, additional research into the underlying structures is still necessary due to the complexity of the phenomena and the many ways in which they have been operationalized [6]. To assess the reliability of environmental concern as a predictor, for instance, researchers have been urged to examine the correlations between environmental concern and other factors rather than just one [7]. The micro-level focus of our research is on the individual level of environmental concern, which is a consequence of environmental knowledge and risk perception [8]. In past studies, the causal links and processes between environmental concern and the desire to engage in sustainable consumer behavior remained speculative [9]. Given the complexity of the relationship between environmental concern and sustainable consumption [6], additional models are required to account for the factors that influence individuals’ environmental concern and how that influences their intention to engage in sustainable consumption practices and their actual engagement in such practices [10]. There is a lack of study on the relationships between environmental knowledge, risk perception, and environmental concern, as well as on how environmental concern influences behavioral intentions and sustainable consumption. By hypothesizing that environmental concern drives behavioral intention, our theoretical model of sustainable consumer behavior extends upon earlier models.

Working with students is crucial because acquired information tends to be retained by young people, who are more receptive to new ideas and will pass them on to the next generation [11]. In terms of education, research, and community engagement, addressing sustainability concerns via universities is crucial because the implementation of solutions through higher education institutions (HEIs) will have a lasting impact on the environment and society [12]. By taking both the internal and external communities into account, it is feasible to foster trans-disciplinary relationships that result in largely beneficial outcomes for all parties concerned [11]. As reported in the studies by Lozano et al. [13] and Wang et al. [14], it has been determined that the participation of all stakeholders is crucial in order to obtain valuable firsthand knowledge, address challenges, and generate significant findings that facilitate transitions to a more sustainable future in HEIs. Higher education institutions are just as responsible as the rest of society for meeting the growing demand for goods and services, which is why a shift toward more environmentally friendly lifestyles will have long-term implications for the labor force of the next generation [15]. According to Janmaimool and Khajohnmanee [16], this type of knowledge, which includes resource systems and human-environment interactions, is necessary for responsible organizations to sustainably manage resources at the organizational level, as it allows them to better understand natural variability, unpredictability, and the relative causes and effective solutions of environmental change. Yusliza et al. [17] also discovered that students’ pro-environmental behaviors were substantially connected with their knowledge of the environmental system and their awareness of global environmental issues. According to Weiss et al. [18], “the acceptance and decisions of students are vital to promoting the implementation and development of sustainability courses and programs on a long-term basis.” This is because the attitude of students toward sustainability issues (and their need for education on the topic) puts institutions under pressure to develop sustainability curricula prior to implementation [18].

This research attempts to examine the higher education in China’s universities towards environmental knowledge, environmental concern, environmental risk perception, pro-environmental behavior, sustainable consumption, and environmental attitudes. It also seeks to determine if there is a correlation between the factors listed above and Chinese universities’ higher education. The literature on environmental concern in China has shown that its urban, well-educated, and wealthy residents are more concerned with protecting the environment than their rural, less-educated, and less-wealthy counterparts. Researchers also observe that the Chinese people’s actions do not reflect their concerns. China has emerged as a key actor and economic superpower on the international stage. Yet, as the economy has expanded, it has come at the expense of the environment. Foster et al. [19] and Huang and Yang [20] are only two of the studies that have looked at environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior in China. They also discovered that Chinese people are concerned about the environment in their own communities but do not take ecologically responsible actions. China has reached a turning point in its history, and it is not only because of the country’s booming economy. It is debatable among international economists whether China will be able to maintain its current rate of economic growth and successfully graduate from middle-income to high-income status.

Since 1978, when China started opening and reforming its economy, yearly GDP growth has averaged more than 9%, helping more than 800 million people to leave poverty. During this time period, access to healthcare, education, and other services has vastly increased [21]. China’s quality of life now is comparable to that of many affluent countries. Future measures to alleviate poverty must focus on helping the vast number of people who are still poor by the standards of middle-income countries, especially in urban areas. In order to achieve a high-quality and sustainable development path, China must address severe institutional and reform gaps that have not kept pace with the country’s rapid economic expansion [22]. There is a rising need for the government to take a more active role in ensuring that everyone has equitable access to public services and to foster a business-friendly environment. By the end of 2018, 16.9 million students were enrolled in 2663 HEIs, with nearly 4 million new students enrolling annually. In addition, China’s Ministry of Education claimed that the country’s higher education institutions had a gross enrollment rate (GER) of 48.1% in 2018, with a predicted increase through 2020 [23]. Increasingly, Chinese higher education institutions recognize the relevance of sustainable development [24], which makes sense given the increased number of HEIs and the growing public interest in sustainability issues. Higher education institutions in China consider campus sustainable development (SD) activities to be related to company and community participation [14]. The focus of Chinese universities is on promoting future innovation for the benefit of social development and environmental conservation [25].

Since the late 1990s, academics, policymakers, and the general public in China have been increasingly concerned about equal access to, and achievement in, higher education [26,27]. It is essential to address this topic now that China’s higher education system has entered a new era. In 2019, China’s higher education enrollment rate surpassed 50%, indicating the start of the major phase of popularization [28]. The fundamental aim in this era is the effective reform and expansion of higher education. Simply stated, China’s higher education system has progressed from the “extension development stage”, which was characterized by quantity and scale, to the “connotation development stage”, which is characterized by quality [29]. Compared to universities in developed countries, sustainable development (SD) in Chinese higher education institutions is still in its infancy, making the promotion of SD in these institutions an urgent and critical task for attaining campus sustainability [14]. The Chinese economy is growing rapidly, and with it, the number of higher education institutions (HEIs) and students studying in China. It is not surprising that private higher education institutions in China have separate financial sources and a different social reputation than public higher education institutions. Although a number of earlier studies analyzed the SD of HEIs in Western nations such as the United States and European countries [13,30], there are relatively few studies in China that compare SD in public and private HEIs from the perspective of students.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the revolutionary transition to sustainability may both tremendously benefit from educators’ efforts. For sustainability to develop, schools must provide students with the information and skills required to be productive members of society in the future [31]. The idea of sustainable development (SD) links the environment with economic and social growth [22]. According to the Brundtland Report, SD is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own need” [32]. SD is an approach to economic and social growth that prioritizes environmental conservation.

Recent years have seen significant progress in the conceptualization of key competencies for sustainable development [33,34], with sustainability education courses reflecting the developing science of sustainability’s interdisciplinary and collaborative nature. Sustainability programs in higher education seek to encourage capabilities such as foresight and anticipatory thinking, systems thinking, interdisciplinary cooperation, and student participation [13]. The purpose of a sustainable curriculum is to provide students with the necessary abilities to face the difficulties of the contemporary world and realize the objectives of the 2030 agenda. Students are prepared to apply their abilities in real-world situations via the facilitation of a variety of simple to complex learning activities in authentic assessment [35]. Assessments must be developed so that students can exhibit the desired abilities, taking into consideration the aspirational aspect of sustainability competencies, tying them to a motivation to act, and demonstrating application of the capacity embodied in knowledge and skills [36]. Significant indicators that students are engaged in authentic learning about sustainability [37] include congruence between skills, stated learning objectives, and assessment methodologies. While there has been progress in integrating sustainability into university educational programs, there is a paucity of data on the degree to which higher education institutions educate students in sustainability skills [38]. In fact, there is a clear need for the development and use of assessment techniques that might assist institutions in monitoring and taking responsibility for their environmental effects. There is evidence that education promotes pro-environmental behavior [39], and university enrolment has a substantial positive correlation with commitment to environmental sustainability compared to other adult transition paths [40]. More than 50% of Chinese higher education institutions (HEIs) have incorporated education for sustainable development (ESD) courses since 1997 [40].

Numerous institutions are now taking the issues of energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions seriously, and sustainability courses have been introduced to their curricula [41]. Universities, like other government organizations, must spend a considerable portion of their budgets on the acquisition of products and services. People may have a significant influence on the market for ecologically sustainable services and goods if they incorporate environmental concern into their purchasing choices [42]. It has been concluded that a lack of competent staff, a lack of senior management commitment, the participation of bureaucracy and economic stakeholders, and a lack of a culture supportive of the environment are important impediments to sustainable procurement. In addition, Leal Filho et al. [43] found that there is a paucity of academic resources that practitioners may use to implement sustainable procurement. A lack of qualified personnel is an additional barrier to implementing successful public procurement. Several studies, such as Yafi et al. [1] and Winter et al. [40], indicate that environmental training is an essential component of sustainable procurement. For successful implementation, businesses must comprehend the concept of sustainable public procurement as well as its associated government rules.

With more knowledge, people become more concerned about the environment and adopt more sustainable practices, according to research by Ramísio et al. [44]. People with more education seem to have a deeper understanding of the environment and be more driven to sustainable practices [45]. In order to create a low-carbon economy, higher education must generate, gather, and disseminate specialized knowledge and skills. Universities play a crucial role in societal change because they educate the leaders and decision-makers of the future with the skills they need to build a sustainable society and reduce the impact of human activities on the environment [46]. There has been a growing trend over the last two decades among universities to implement sustainable development [4].

Many researchers have since examined the impact of education on the pro-environmental behavior of university students in both developing and developed nations [4,16,47,48]. Similarly, other models have been used to investigate personal and social influences on pro-environmental behavior, such as values, environmental knowledge, attitudes, motives, and norms [49]. There is a lack of research that addresses the authors’ interest in how the role of the institution (an external factor) influences the aims (an internal factor) of students towards pro-environmental behavior. Given that individual behavioral change may be readily fostered among younger generations, educational institutions play an important role in encouraging pro-environmental behavior. In the field of education specifically, sustainability objectives and their potential effects on student enrollment make pro-environmental moves of interest to organizations. Increases in environmental education may pique students’ interest in adopting environmentally responsible lifestyles [50]. A number of studies have been conducted in this context to investigate environmental beliefs and actions among students, including those concerning food [51], digital environmental knowledge [52], student intention and loyalty towards green products, the interaction of gender differences with pro-environmental behavior, and even the use of emotions to encourage recycling [17].

Because future generations will be affected by environmental problems brought on by present actions, it is imperative that they have the environmental knowledge and skills to develop sustainable solutions [53]. Given that the goal of higher education is to produce responsible, competent persons with the information, skills, and values to contribute to a more ecologically sustainable and improving world [52,54], it plays a crucial role in promoting pro-environmental behavior and solutions. Many colleges have embraced sustainable development in recent years, but the movement has not yet reached all fields, scholars, and university officials [55]. This research focused on university students because they are future leaders, policymakers, scientists, customers, researchers, and entrepreneurs (political, social, environmental, economic, etc.). Universities prepare students for key social roles [56]. Society will have a better chance of making progress toward sustainability if the next generation has the ability to make environmentally positive decisions.

Nevertheless, there have been several studies on students and environmental issues [57]. Some of these studies investigated the impact of a few variables on the behavioral intentions of business students [58], the environmental beliefs of students majoring in various disciplines, or the level of general environmental concern among students, or simply used university students to define a general consumer profile [59]. However, we are unaware of any studies assessing the environmental knowledge of university students and their possible correlations with a set of environmental behavior traits (recycling of different types of waste, public transport use, and green purchasing). Higher education institutions (HEIs) are becoming more conscious that they are a vital component of society and must contribute meaningfully to sustainability and sustainable development [60]. Higher education institutions are guiding the transformation of our contemporary societies into what they will become through the teaching of future generations and the growth of research and collective knowledge [61]. Through education and practice, HEIs have the ability to change the collective global youth that is altering the globe. Education at higher education institutions strives to enlighten young minds, provide solutions to issues via research, and support and sustain an informed public.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Supporting Theory (Theory of Planned Behavior)

Various social science and environmental psychology research initiatives and ideas have been established to explain environmental activities [62]. The theory of planned behavior (TPB), developed from the theory of reasoned action [63], explains environmental behavior based on attitudes and subjective standards, mediated by behavioral intentions with apparent behavioral control. The TPB successfully explained environmental behavior, including travel mode choice [63], household, and general pro-environmental behavior [64]. Using the TPB, researchers have examined alternative transportation, waste recycling, water conservation, energy conservation, low carbon consumption, and other pro-environmental behaviors [65]. There has been an increase in the number of studies using the TPB to examine pro-environmental practices [66]. Thus, it is essential to have a greater understanding of the factors that impact the pro-environmental behaviors (PEBs) of individuals, particularly university students and recent graduates [17,19,20]. Environmental behavior models have been designed to explore essential aspects that impact behavioral choices and highlight critical concerns that environmental education, campaigns, and management must take into account in order to change human behavior. The norm activation model by Schwartz (1977) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) are examples of such models [67].

The positive or negative evaluation of an activity is the attitude towards that conduct. When people think highly of the results of their actions, they are more likely to continue taking those actions [63]. A person’s likelihood of engaging in a behavior changes (or does not change) depending on whether or not he or she feels that the action is acceptable to other people [63]. Better environmentally conscious spending and consumption habits are associated with social norms and altruistic attitudes in the context of sustainability (e.g., Pirchio et al. [68]). Concern for the environment and the consumption of eco-friendly goods have been connected to criteria such as education and income in the context of sustainability (e.g., Hasanzade [69]). There is a consensus in the consumer behavior-focused psychological literature that the TPB’s predictive ability is enhanced when complemented by other variables [5]. All these other concepts have to do with the environment while discussing sustainability [1].

According to Pryor [70], efforts to assess the link between attitudes and behaviors remained unsuccessful. Instead, the two psychologists defined attitudes as an individual’s “judgment of the questioned entity” [70]. They proposed, in their TPB, that researchers must examine the particular attitude towards a certain behavior in order to determine whether or not they are related. They maintained that attitudes and social forces shape intentions, which in turn drive behavior and action [16]. Behavioral belief is a subjective assumption of a certain behavior’s effect. The attitude towards the conduct is determined by the behavioral beliefs and the subjective values of the anticipated consequences.

2.2. Environmental Knowledge and Environmental Concern

Environmental knowledge is the capability to identify a range of environmental indicators, concepts, and behavioral patterns [71]. In the first linear regression models, knowledge was identified as the origin of environmental attitudes and behavior. The environmental knowledge of individuals has generally been investigated from two perspectives: objective and subjective [16]. Actual knowledge (objective knowledge) is the amount of information a person has about a product, topic, or thing. Subjective knowledge is what an individual believes they know [72]. In addition, Boz, Korhonen, and Koelsch Sand [73] did not find correlation between objective or subjective knowledge and recycling-based purchase choices. Therefore, if the most successful informational tactics are to be encouraged in education, it is vital to determine the forms of knowledge that effectively influence environmental behavior [74].

For an individual’s environmental behavior to be modified, they must develop their environmental knowledge, which is the broad understanding of environmental facts, ideas, and connections [75]. When people gain environmental knowledge, they become more concerned about environmental implications. Suárez-Perales et al. [76] observed that environmental knowledge increased environmental concern in adolescents. Adam et al. [77] found that, as people gain environmental knowledge, their environmental concern changes. Environmental concern influences green consumption [78]. It is associated with favorable product attitudes, recycling and conservation, and environmentally responsible purchases [71].

Education is one of the most effective ways to prepare young people to learn about environmental concern and halt environmental deterioration [79]. Students’ apathy toward the environment is related to a lack of understanding and interest in environmental concern, according to Harring and Jagers [79]. Students are well-informed and interested in environmental concerns, according to the study of Aminrad et al. [80]. Few studies have indicated that students’ environmental awareness is impacted by their conceptual comprehension [81]. Thus, we propose the first hypothesis:

H1. 

Environmental knowledge has a direct and positive effect on environmental concern.

2.3. Environmental Risk Perception and Environmental Concern

Risk refers to the possibility that an action or occurrence may have unintended consequences [82]. Risks are also related to occurrences with uncertain causes and symptoms [81]. In the mind of a person, risk perception is the interpretation and incorporation of sensory impressions or information about risks and consequences. Typically, experts relate a risk to the estimated average loss (damage) per unit of time. Non-experts, on the other hand, regard risks as complex, multidimensional phenomena that have a significant influence on the perceived risk magnitude in risky situations and in which the subjective anticipation of loss (damage) plays a secondary role [82]. People assess risk and risk perception in accordance with their own views and moral standards. In general, people do not like to be alerted to undefined hazards; they would rather ignore them if they believe they have no effective response to them (e.g., in cases of unavoidable risks, Chen, Han, and Wright [83]). Environmental risk assessments pertaining to public opinion concentrate on how individuals evaluate diverse technical and environmental hazards and respond to environmental risks, how these risks are presented and conveyed, and how risks are structured within social processes. The identification of public perceptions of environmental threats is the basis for a successful environmental risk management approach. However, recent research shows that it is only at the university level that students begin to develop an understanding of environmental issues. In their analysis of higher education in China, Blesia et al. [84] highlighted the role that higher education plays in educating people about environmental issues, increasing environmental awareness, and encouraging long-term behavioral changes. It is noteworthy, however, that there has been so little research and evaluation of the significance of environmental risk perceptions among Chinese university students.

H2. 

Environmental risk perception has a direct and positive effect on Environmental concern.

2.4. Environmental Concern and Pro- Environmental Behavior

Environmental concern is described by Gadenne et al. [85] as a strong attitude toward saving the environment. Concern for the environment is key to environmental research and a crucial component of consumer decision-making [42]. Customers who are more concerned about the environment are more likely to buy environmentally friendly products. Concern for the environment, according to Alibeli and Johnson [86] is the awareness of, and interest in, addressing environmental issues. Considering environmental impacts is crucial when making purchases. As a consequence of rising consumer concerns about environmental sustainability, academics have shifted their emphasis to this subject, which is now one of the most important topics of environmental research. Concern for the environment is defined by Diekmann and Franzen [87] as the recognition that environmental conditions are endangered by human resource usage and pollution.

The theory of planned behavior is a well-known theoretical extension of the idea of reasoned action that has been used to partly explain a wide range of social behaviors [19], including pro-environmental actions. In brief, the model proposes that one’s attitude and subjective norms all play a part in the decision-making processes that lead to actualized intents and actions. The TPB model has been found to be highly predictive of a number of pro-environmental behaviors (for example, Alzubaidi, Slade, and Dwivedi [88]). Moreover, research has shown that intent may aid in predicting activities related to one’s immediate surroundings. Wallis and Loy [89], for example, conducted a meta-analysis and found that intentions accounted for around 27% of the variance in pro-environmental actions.

The term pro-environmental behavior refers to a set of actions taken voluntarily and thoughtfully to protect the environment, either by reducing the negative environmental effect of one’s behaviors or by making positive changes to the environment itself [90]. Intentionality has been identified as an important variable in characterizing environmental behavior [76]. Although Foster et al. [19] differentiate between public- and private-sector environmental behavior, they nevertheless maintain that pro-environmental behavior must be deliberate and thought out. Two major theoretical frameworks, the theory of reasoned action (TRA) and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) [91], have been used to examine the motivations behind pro-environmental behavior. Like the TRA developed by Kumar and Nayak [92], the TPB assumes that people’s decisions to engage in particular behaviors are influenced by their beliefs about the consequences of those behaviors, the degree to which they feel they have control over their own actions, and the social pressures they feel to engage in specific behaviors.

As such, attitudes are defined as the result of a positive or negative judgment of the consequences of a specific behavior, together with an estimate of the probability of alternative outcomes [20]. Thus, people will engage in environmentally friendly practices if they believe they would benefit in some way (for example, by avoiding a fine or earning a reward), and they will also engage in such practices if they believe they have the potential to do so. Despite their differences, there is consensus among these models with regard to the most important factors in influencing environmental behavior: knowledge of environmental issues, environmental concern and guilt (so-called “moral norms”) [17,54], and evaluation of the potential consequences of actions [93].

H3. 

Environmental concern is positively associated with pro-environmental behavior.

2.5. Pro- Environmental Behavior and Sustainable Consumption

Pro-environmental acts are those “that intentionally aim to limit the detrimental effect of one’s actions on the natural and built world” [94]. It is generally agreed that pro-environmental conduct may be divided into two dimensions: individual activities in the private sphere and public actions in the form of environmental activism [30,75]. Hamzah and Tanwi, [95] identify three environmental factors—knowledge, attitude, and intention—as primary motivators of pro-environmental actions. Correia et al. [48] followed the TPB theoretical approach by employing four psychological determinants of pro-environmental behavior in four separate direct-effect models. These determinants were subjective norms—or behavioral expectations—behavioral control, attitude, and identity. Akhtar et al. [96] revealed that a student’s pro-environmental conduct rises with each subsequent year on campus. Consequently, they are more likely to demonstrate pro-environmental beliefs and good views toward sustainability [97]. These pro-environmental attitudes also manifest themselves in actions to protect the environment [98]. The TPB asserts, in simple words, that a consumer is more likely to act in a certain way if the behavior is advantageous to the customer [99].

Studies conducted in the past on sustainable consumption have sought to learn about present behaviors and the factors that contribute to its success [100]. Numerous works (e.g., [6,10]) have used the consumer’s point of view to better comprehend sustainable consumption. When designing educational initiatives with the goal of encouraging this kind of consumption, this knowledge is essential. “The use of goods and services that respond to basic needs and bring a better quality of life, while minimizing the use of natural resources, toxic materials, and emissions of waste and pollutants over the life cycle, so as not to jeopardize the needs of future generations” is the definition of sustainable consumption that has been used since the beginning of sustainable development [101]. A recent article by Brundiers et al. [33] argues that one of the most potent strategies for providing people with the required skills and competences to become sustainable consumers is education. Education should, thus, attempt to create critical competences that allow people to adapt this notion and then link it to their own lives, beyond just transmitting information targeted at attaining sustainable consumption. As such, higher education must connect the actions of students and propose, via pedagogical strategies, the appropriation of concepts drawn from the student’s own experience (i.e., active learning) in order to play a central role in education for sustainable consumption (ESC) [102].

A paper by Liobikienė and Poškus [74] explores the link between environmental knowledge and pro-environmental actions, as pro-environmental education is considered to be the essential strategy for influencing sustainable consumption. Sustainable development, and more especially sustainable consumption, benefit greatly from the pro-environmental education provided by institutions of higher learning [2,29]. Consideration should be given to pro-environmental attitudes because they may lead to actions [103]. Indeed, previous studies have revealed a statistical correlation between environmentally friendly ideas and ethical actions [52]. The literature on students’ pro-environmental behavior is mixed. In one line of research, students have been shown to care deeply about environmental issues (e.g., Michel [104]).

H4. 

Pro-environmental behavior is positively associated with sustainable consumption.

2.6. Environmental Attitude as Moderator between Environmental Concern and Pro- Environmental Behavior

According to Sockhill, Dean, and Fuller [105], an environmental attitude is a psychological inclination shown in a positive or negative appraisal of the natural world. Karimi et al. [5] revealed a positive association between environmental attitude and pro-environmental conduct, whereas other research finds a negative relationship. Attitude, defined as the degree to which the conduct is regarded as good or unfavorable by the person [106], is the most widely studied psychological characteristic. Moreover, some research shows just a modest connection between pro-environmental views and actions [107]. Empirical research reveals that one’s attitude is not a good predictor of pro-environmental actions [108]. Wijekoon and Sabri [109] illustrated how variations in the demographics of environmentally conscious customers among countries may be attributable to contextual variables such as the accessibility of green goods, environmental laws, or cultural influences. Pro-environmental conduct seems to be impacted by environmental attitudes, which vary from culture to culture, according to research by Karpudewan [98]. Different cultures have different ways of looking at environmental issues. In developed countries, environmental concerns have gained ground in relevance in recent decades. When attempting to predict environmental concern, it was originally evaluated as a component of personality traits [110].

Harring and Jagers [79] assessed it as one of the attitudinal factors for predicting behavior and found that it was a more accurate predictor than environmental concern. Some academics contend that, if a person feels that a given activity may alleviate an environmental issue, then that view should greatly impact the individual’s propensity to participate in that specific activity but not in another [22,26]. Pirchio et al. [68] highlighted environmental concern as one of the most influential factors of customers’ attitudes and propensity to buy items. Additionally, Cai et al. [72] indicated that concern for the environment would favorably influence customers’ sentiments. Even when analyzing a company’s aim to embrace cleaner technology, Said et al. [81] emphasized the significance of environmental awareness. This demonstrates the need for concentrating on the environment under two circumstances: firmness and personal goals and behaviors.

The influence of environmental concern on pro-environmental behavior has largely been the focus of monoculture research on pro-environmental consumer behavior. Some research (e.g., Yafi et al. [1]) finds a positive correlation between the two; however, some academics disagree, arguing that there is a “green gap” between environmental concern and pro-environmental action (e.g., Tseng [111]). This explains why environmental attitude has been shown to favorably alter environmental behavior [93,112]. When asked about pro-environmental initiatives including frequent recycling, conserving energy, reducing trash, and sustainable consumption patterns, the vast majority of participants said they were committed to participating in such initiatives [19]. The TPB predicts that those who perform pro-environmental activities would have a good environmental attitude, and this is supported by the data [113]. Furthermore, Shafiei and Maleksaeidi [114], Sabzehei et al. [115], and Liu et al. [67] all found that environmental attitude positively influenced students’ pro-environmental behavior. Environment concern is defined in this research as “the extent to which individuals are aware of, and support efforts to solve, environmental issues and/or demonstrate a desire to make personal contributions to, those solutions” [116]. Various theories may be found in the field of psychology, each providing an explanation for why people exhibit various behaviors and how those behaviors might be altered. It is generally accepted that people’s actions are impacted both by their own thoughts and the world around them [68]. Beliefs, values, attitudes, and emotions are all examples of internal influences. Awareness of environmental issues and the means to improve them is a key internal motivator for pro-environmental actions [19,21]. After the TPB, people’s views about the environment changed for the better due to a rise in environmental knowledge [42].

Acceptance of certain behavioral choices is influenced by attitude [20]. When investigating environment and attitudes, environmental considerations are crucial. Ahmed et al. [78] recognized that environmental concerns have a favorable effect on students’ attitudes, which in turn influences their purchasing propensity. Said et al. [81] looked into the indirect and direct effects of environmental concern and concluded that these concerns impacted people’s views and desire to take action (as shown in Figure 1). Therefore, we hypothesized:

H5. 

Environmental attitude acts as a moderator between environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior.

3. Methodology

3.1. Sampling, Procedure, and Technique

According to earlier scholars Ehrlich and Ehrlich [117], time and lack of resources limited our capacity to collect data from the whole population. Therefore, the data were congregated and examined through employing a purposive sampling technique [118]. The respondents of the study were the students enrolled in different undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral programs in public and private universities in China. Only those respondents who have studied or enrolled in environmental engineering, environmental science, environmental management, sustainable development, water and environment, or ecology courses participated in the study. The data were collected recently between June 2022 and September 2022. Because the data were collected at one time, the study is referred to as a cross-sectional study. First, respondents’ willingness was taken, and later participants who agreed were contacted to take their responses on questionnaires in a specified period of time. To conserve confidentiality of data, the universities’ names are not disclosed. A total of 430 questionnaires were distributed, and 298 duly filled questionnaires were returned, showing a 69.30% response rate. Furthermore, 13 questionnaires were omitted because these contained missing values and were not found suitable to be used for further analysis. Therefore, 285 valid responses were processed for the statistical analysis.

The demographic information is presented in

Table 1. Demographics.

Demographics	Categories	N 285	% Age
Gender	Male	182	63.86
	Female	103	36.14
Age	18–25	88	30.88
	26–40	125	43.86
	41–50	53	18.59
	Over 50	19	06.67
Study level	Undergraduate	91	31.93
	Master	131	45.96
	Doctoral	63	22.11
Year	First	94	32.98
	Second	71	24.91
	Third	88	30.88
	Fourth	32	11.23
Sector	Public	208	72.98
	Private	77	27.12

. Out of a total of 285 participants, 63.86% were male, and 36.14% were female. In terms of age, 30.88% belonged to the 18–25 years range, 43.86% belonged to the 26–40 years range, 18.59% belonged to the 41–50 years range, and 6.67% belonged to the over 50 years of age group. With respect to the education of the respondents, 31.93% were enrolled in undergraduate, 45.96% were enrolled in master’s, and 22.11% were enrolled in doctoral degrees. In terms of the year of their program, 32.98% were in their first year, 24.91% were in their second year, 30.88% of the respondents were in their third year, and 11.23% were in their fourth year. As far as type of university is concerned, 72.98% belonged to the public sector, and 27.12% belonged to the private sector.

The study employed quantitative methods using the partial least squares (PLS)−structural equation modelling (SEM) technique. Conventional respondents’ data were utilized because the PLS-SEM technique is exempted from a customary assumption test for the PLS-SEM method [119]. The nature of the studied constructs does not allow direct assessment; therefore, the PLS-SEM technique was employed [120]. Additionally, smart PLS provides a flexible approach to analysts regarding limitations of sample size and data normality issues [121]. PLS was used because it can run multiple equations and multifarious structural paths. Likewise, it is considered suitable when a model is supported by more than one theory. PLS is considered to be a prediction-oriented approach to SEM, and this feature made it suitable to be used for qualitative research; however, it is also appropriate to be used in confirmatory studies [122]. PLS-SEM has been criticized regarding its suitability for the obvious incongruity between confirmation and prediction. Therefore, researchers must be sure of the high predictive accuracy of their research model. However, this technique is widely used for measuring causal relationships as well [123]. PLS-SEM is a widely used multivariate data analysis method in the management sciences domain because it can be utilized for very small sample sizes [122,123,124,125,126]. Though this may be accurate for research models comprising only strong path coefficients and large effect sizes, a cautious approach should be taken in the case of weak path coefficients and small effects. The major issue in PLS-SEM is related to minimum sample size estimation. The study used the minimum sample size estimation “10-times rule” method [126], but it is criticized in the previous research for providing inaccurate estimations [127]. Nevertheless, Gregor [128] proclaimed that it is fit for testing direct relationships and predictions and suitable for theoretical explanations. EK and ERP are exogenous variables for environmental concern, and environmental concern is an exogenous variable for pro-environmental behavior, whereas sustainable consumption behavior acts as an endogenous variable. Environmental attitude plays the role of moderator. Next, the current study first deployed a PLS algorithm then later applied the bootstrapping procedure. Data were evaluated through measurement modelling followed by structural modelling.

3.2. Measures

Questionnaires were used to obtain the data, and all items of constructs were adopted from existing sources. To ensure the validity of the instrument, a pilot study was performed. The questionnaire encompasses 26 items in total. For the variable of environmental knowledge, a 3-item scale established by Vainio and Paloniemi [9] was used with an alpha reliability of 0.891. The Environmental Risk Perception construct was measured using a 3-underlying-item scale developed by Marquart-Pyatt [119] with an alpha reliability of 0.872. To measure the environmental concern, a 4-item scale, given by Vainio and Paloniemi [9], was used with an alpha reliability of 0.864. The moderating variable of Attitude was evaluated using constructs of environmental cognition and environmental indebtedness. Environmental cognition contained a 3-item scale which was adopted from Dunlap et al. [120], and the environmental indebtedness scale was analyzed using 3 items which were taken from Naito and Sakata [121]. An alpha reliability of 0.928 was obtained for the Attitude scale. Additionally, the Pro-environmental Behavior scale was evaluated with 6 items developed by Roberson and Carleton [129], with an alpha reliability of 0.891. The endogenous variable Sustainable Consumption Behavior encompassed 4 items that were developed by Wang [10] with an alpha reliability of 0.911 (see

Table 2. Measurement model.

Constructs	Measurement Items	Factor Loading	α	CR	AVE	Author
Environmental Knowledge	“How much do you feel you know about the causes of environmental problems?	0.92	0.891	0.932	0.821	Vainio and Paloniemi [9]
	How much do you feel you know about solutions to environmental problems?	0.904
	I find it hard to know whether the way I live is helpful or harmful.	0.893
Environmental Risk Perception	In general, do you think that … is…?	0.897	0.872	0.922	0.797	Marquart-Pyatt [119]
	Air pollution caused by cars.	0.912
	Air pollution caused by industry.	0.868
	Rise in the world’s temperature caused by climate change.	0.897
Environmental Concern	Generally speaking, how concerned are you about environmental issues? And how much do you agree or disagree with each of these statements?	0.856	0.864	0.908	0.711	Vainio and Paloniemi [9]
	We worry too much about the future of the environment and not enough about prices and jobs.	0.881
	People worry too much about human progress harming the environment.	0.843
	Many of the claims about environmental threats are exaggerated.	0.79
Environmental Attitude	The Earth is like a spaceship with very limited space and resources.	0.875	0.928	0.943	0.735	Dunlap et al. [120]
	The balance of nature is very fragile and easily upset.	0.895
	If everything goes on as it is, we will soon suffer a serious environmental disaster.	0.806
	If I keep taking from the environment without giving back, I feel I owe something.	0.893
	In order to enjoy the beautiful environment, I will try my best to do something beneficial to the environment.	0.838
	If I don’t do something good for the environment, I feel like I’m not good.	0.834
Pro-environmental Behavior	Recycling cans, bottles, and newspapers, etc., is inconvenient.	0.802	0.891	0.917	0.648	Roberson and Carleton [129]
	I hate having to wash out bottles for recycling.	0.862
	Conserving materials, energy, etc., is inconvenient.	0.794
	I hate remembering to turn off lights, computers, etc., to conserve energy/materials.	0.84
	Engaging in pro-environmental behaviors is inconvenient.	0.787
	I hate the time and effort it takes to engage in pro-environmental behaviors.	0.737
Sustainable Consumption Behavior	Make a special effort to buy fruit and vegetables grown without pesticides or chemicals.	0.911	0.911	0.937	0.789	Wang [10]
	Reduce the energy or fuel you use at home.	0.903
	Choose to save or re-use water.	0.894
	Avoid buying certain products.”	0.843

). All the items were analyzed by deploying a 5-point Likert scale with the following options: 1 (strongly disagree), 2 (disagree), 3 (neutral), 4 (agree), and 5 (strongly agree); the exception was environmental risk perception, which was analyzed by deploying another 5-point Likert scale with the following options: 1 (extremely dangerous), 2 (very dangerous), 3 (somewhat dangerous), 4 (not very dangerous), and 5 (not dangerous at all) for the environment. This instrument used in the study is considered fit to gather the data in quantitative methodology due to its efficiency and convenience.

3.3. Control Variable

This study deployed SPSS to execute a one-way ANOVA test for finding control variables that are likely to influence the final outcome and impact of antecedents, as one variable can be contaminated due to the effects of other variables. Therefore, the understudy variables must be controlled [130]. The analysis indicated that none of the variables, such as age, study level, and gender, exert a significant influence on outcome variables, and hence the study did not consider any of these variables as control variables for further analysis.

4. Results

4.1. Measurement Modelling

Three criteria, namely factor loadings, average variance extract, and composite reliability, were used to evaluate the measurement model. The results revealed that the cutoff value of Cronbach’s alpha is above 0.80 for all the variables used in the study, and a cutoff value of 0.8 and above is considered acceptable [131]. Therefore, the data establish reliability of scale for additional analysis. Refer to Table 2 to see all the findings for Cronbach’s alpha. The findings delineated that the factor loadings of all the items of understudy constructs meet the recommended threshold of 0.60 (see Figure 2). Similarly, all composite reliability values of understudy constructs meet the cutoff value of 0.70. Additionally, average variance extract values of all constructs are higher than the suggested cutoff value of 0.50 [124]. Therefore, our research model established convergent validity and qualifies for the next analysis of structural modelling.

4.2. Discriminant Validity

The studied latent variables are deliberated to have discriminant validity if these are not measuring the same concept and are distinctive from each other. In order to assess the discriminant validity, the Fornell–Larcker criterion (FLC) was utilized, which suggests upper-diagonal values should be higher than off-diagonal values. As seen in

Table 3. Discriminant Validity FLC.

Constructs	EA	EC	EN	ERP	PEB	SCB
EA	0.858
EC	0.630	0.843
EN	0.681	0.802	0.906
ERP	0.423	0.44	0.45	0.893
PEB	0.558	0.546	0.477	0.371	0.805
SCB	0.283	0.355	0.274	0.054	0.357	0.888

Abbreviations: Environmental Attitude (EA); Environmental Concern (EC); Environmental Knowledge (EN); Environmental Risk Perception (ERP); Pro-Environmental Behavior (PEB); Sustainable Consumption Behavior (SCB).

, it is confirmed that discriminant validity was found for all the latent variables.

4.3. Structural Modelling

The assessment of structural modelling was confirmed after calculating measurement modelling. Beta and t-values were considered as significant criteria for evaluating structural modelling. We calculated through bootstrapping to find path coefficients of the direct hypotheses in Smart PLS 3 [122]. Hypotheses were assessed by considering approved cutoff values (t > 1.645; p < 0.05). All hypotheses were supported because these meet the stated criterion (see Figure 3). The study investigated the amount of variance shown by all understudy variables by evaluating the level of R² for dependent latent constructs [123]. Though the acceptable assessment of R² depends on the research context [132], the threshold values of 0.26, 0.13, and 0.09 designate high, moderate, and low levels, correspondingly. Meanwhile, in the present study, the R² value for dependent latent constructs in the direct impact on EC is 0.552, signifying that EK and ERP calculate a 55.2% change in EC. Additionally, the R² for PEB is 0.374, signifying that EC predicts a 37.4% change in PEB. Similarly, the R² for SCB is 0.127, denoting that PEB calculates a 12.7% change in SCB.

Table 4. Coefficient of determination in the PLS method.

Constructs	R Square	R Square Adjusted	Q2
EC	0.552	0.549	0.436
PEB	0.374	0.37	0.223
SCB	0.127	0.124	0.091

Abbreviations: Environmental Concern (EC); Pro-Environmental Behavior (PEB); Sustainable Consumption Behavior (SCB).

shows that the research model establishes a good level of predictive accuracy. Next, to evaluate the predictive relevance (Q²), a cross-validation redundancy measure was deployed to calculate the relevance of studied variables [126]. Table 4 discloses the appropriate assessments and significance of the direct model, as the Q² value is larger than zero: Q² = 0.436 for the endogenous latent variable EC, and also, Q² = 0. 223 for PEB and Q² = 0.091 for SCB. The effect size (f²) is the effect of the exogenous variable on the endogenous variable to measure the extent of the effect of the latent exogenous variable which is evident to the latent endogenous variable [126]. Based on the assertion made by Cohen [132] regarding thresholds, the effect sizes of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represent small, medium, and large effects, correspondingly.

Table 5. Results of the structural equations model.

Hypotheses	Relationship among Constructs	Original Sample (O)	Mean	S.D.	T Values	F Square Values	p Values	Remarks
H1	EK -> EC	0.758	0.754	0.038	19.981	1.315	0.000	Supported
H2	ERP -> EC	0.099	0.102	0.039	2.514	0.022	0.012	Supported
H3	EC -> PEB	0.411	0.374	0.083	4.927	0.100	0.000	Supported
H4	PEB -> SCB	0.357	0.358	0.053	6.706	0.146	0.000	Supported
H5	EC×EA -> PEB	0.162	0.123	0.072	2.264		0.024	Supported

Abbreviations: Environmental Attitude (EA); Environmental Concern (EC); Environmental Knowledge (EN); Environmental Risk Perception (ERP); Pro-Environmental Behavior (PEB); Sustainable Consumption Behavior (SCB), Standard Deviation (S.D.).

indicates that the impact size for EK to EC is 1.315, ERP to EC is 0.022, EC to PEB is 0.1, and PEB to SCB is 0.146. Hence, the effect sizes of these exogenous variables on the endogenous variables are large, small, medium, and medium, correspondingly. The results presented in Table 5 reveal that H1 and H2, the direct impacts of EK and ERP on EC, are positive and significant (b = 0.758, p < 0.01) and (b = 0.099, p < 0.05). Furthermore, H3 and H4, the direct impacts of EC on PEB (b = 0.411, p < 0.01) and PEB on SCB (b = 0.357, p < 0.01), are also positive and significant. Therefore, all four direct hypotheses, H1, H2, H3, and H4, were accepted. Finally, the moderating effect of EA is positive and significant on the relationship between EC and PEB (b = 0.162, p < 0.05), representing that the moderating hypotheses H5 was accepted.

5. Discussion

The study advocates that both EK and ERP are positively and significantly related with environmental concern. Furthermore, EC is predicted to influence PEB, which further drives SCB. Additionally, EA acts as a moderator in the relationship between EC and PEB. Knowledge regarding environmental problems and solutions stimulates one’s thinking to be concerned about environmental issues. Knowledge of environmental threats brings the focus of leaders towards protecting their environment using suitable practices. This finding of positive association of EK and ERP with EC and PEBs is in line with the latest inquiry on the impact of motives and knowledge in seeking people’s intention to embrace and demonstrate pro-environmental behavior [133]. Similarly, our findings are consistent with those of Meyer [134], who proclaimed that EK has the potential to foster PEBs of individuals. Correspondingly, likely results are reported on the role of EK and ERP in former studies, which indicates that individuals with knowledge about environmental issues focus their concern towards protecting the environment and saving electricity, keeping future threats in view [119], and it further stimulates a higher level of SCB, as is consistent with previous research [57,74,84]. Although people deliberately indulge themselves in unsustainable actions, nevertheless they make their decisions on the basis of their knowledge regarding the probable destructive and detrimental effects of their behaviors and actions.

Perception about environmental risks and climate change creates concern about environmental issues which, in turn, regulates individuals’ behaviors to act positively for sustainable consumption. Our findings are consistent with preceding research demonstrating that, specifically, the feeling of threats raises emotional responses to the environment and its dilapidation, which produces engagement with environmental causes and solutions at the individual level [10]. It was also supported by previous scholars that the perception of environmental risks is positively associated with attitudes and behavior [135].

The devastating impact on the environment poses threats to the progress of humanity, which brings special attention for leaders to conserve materials and energy and also guide others to adopt PEB. Our model is aligned with preceding findings that EC influences PEB and SCB [136]. Based on a rationalist theory, individuals perform costs-and-benefits analysis of their actions for their personal interests, and sustainable behavior is not considered as advantageous personally [137]. The self-interest of individuals is more strongly influenced by energy-consuming behaviors than EC, but, in that specific study, EC was evaluated by using two statements on the environmental impact of power plants and a general concern about the long-term influence of environmental disruptions [9,69,79]. Conversely, in the current study, EC is assessed by using four items, which measure the concerns regarding detrimental influences on the environment and global concern on the whole. In this way, our study provides guidance for a richer understanding regarding the EC of the respondents. In the under-study model, EK and ERP played the role of predecessors of EC, which in turn drives pro-environmental behavior. We further affirm that EA moderates between EC and PEB. Keeping in view the fragile nature of the environment and environmental disaster, individuals feel indebted towards the environment and are engaged in beneficial activities for organizations.

Theoretical Implications

This paper adds to the theoretical understanding of the antecedents of pro-environmental behavior by providing a sequential link between knowledge and concern, all of which have previously been acknowledged in the literature [75]. Our findings provide useful information for influencing people’s actions. Furthermore, our research has stakeholder-oriented implications for the literature on cleaner production [99]. By increasing their awareness of environmental issues and taking action to protect the environment, citizens may put pressure on businesses to alter their production and management practices to become more environmentally friendly. Interesting management implications arise from this study, which benefit businesses, teachers, and people in the field of education and training. Current students should be prepared for future economic issues as future organizational actors. The advancement of society and economy relies heavily on the work of universities and other institutions of higher learning. Future leaders’ trainers and educators may influence the near-future growth of the partnership between businesses and the natural world. While the specifics of how this is accomplished may vary from university to university, all educators owe it to their pupils to equip them with the scientific understanding of environmental concern necessary to comprehend current policies and actively seek out new ones.

Thus, the number of higher education institutions incorporating environmental sustainability coursework into university curricula has increased significantly [11]. According to Solís-Espallargas et al. [138], even after completing their degrees, students feel unprepared to confront sustainability concerns. Although it would be desirable to demonstrate a clear, coherent causal relationship between education and pro-environmental behavior, such a link is difficult to establish consistently, according to prior research [16].

6. Conclusions

The study attempts to explain the mechanism of developing the sustainable consumption behavior that is direly needed in an era when, globally, organizations are striving hard to attain sustainable development goals. Universities are focusing their attention on how SDGs can be incorporated into their curricula. The present research sheds light on the fact that environmental knowledge and environmental risk perceptions are significant predictors of fostering environmental concern. It is further validated that those having high concerns for the environment will deliberately engage in pro-environmental behaviors that will, in turn, drive sustainable consumption behaviors. Additionally, environmental attitude strengthens the connection between environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior.

The study suggests significant practical implications for academia and policy makers. It advocates academia to initiate conferences, seminars, and improvement programs to educate and raise students’ levels of sustainability consciousness. Consequently, it is important to conduct seminars and faculty development programs aimed at teaching teachers to improve their role modelling [139]. Furthermore, implementing green practices on campus and providing community services to the relevant stakeholders might encourage people to behave in an environmentally conscious manner [140,141,142]. Curriculum development for all professions, including engineering, should prioritize reduced adverse environmental impact. Thus, universities may fulfil their role as educational institutions by providing the next generation with the education and skills they need to ensure the continued success of humanity. Students’ involvement in PEBs may be influenced by a variety of variables that should be thoroughly and methodically examined for future study suggestions. Also, it is important to come up with ways to set up environmental courses that will encourage students to take part in PEBs.

Students and instructors have argued that the top-down approach to sustainability lacks sufficient incentives. The viewpoints of students on sustainable development are not effectively reflected in university-designed policies and action plans. Rather, it is ideal to use a bottom-up approach that includes students, staff, and instructors making more choices together. Self-imposed sustainable plans and provisions are more precise and trustworthy than estimates offered by university administrations, which have less in-depth knowledge of courses, initiatives, and programs tackling sustainability issues as well as day-to-day sustainability on campus. The bottom-up strategy also contributes to the development of an environment that fosters effective and active dialogue between faculty and students. Several communication techniques, such as anonymous SD-related surveys, might be used in this context to construct a connection between university management and students. Motivating students to use SD may also be a top focus. Second, because students are less interested in sustainability-related coursework and research, colleges and universities can take advantage of opportunities to implement inclusive education by, for example, offering students a variety of sustainability-related electives and counting some sustainability-related credits toward their graduation.

The education sector should develop a culture and set norms of practicing environment friendly activities. To do this, they can initiate a sustainable development goals movement and launch a national summit. Policy makers should understand their role in building such a sustainable consumption behavior, and they can offer small incentives to their students and faculty for following set norms.

Like other studies, the present study also has some limitations. This study’s primary limitation is that data were only collected from 23 public and private universities in China. Additionally, more study is needed to identify the norms and environmental preferences of students at universities throughout the country and across the world. Although the data for this study were collected at a single point in time (a cross section), it is hoped that, in the future, time series data will be used to provide even more robust results. Due to time and cost restrictions, this research was restricted to China, and data were collected only through a field survey that ultimately influenced its generalizability to a larger context. The greatest problem faced by educational institutions is raising students’ levels of objective and subjective environmental awareness. Given the intricacy of the link between learning and application, sustainable development education in higher education must take this into account. The value of education in promoting sustainable consumption at the individual level is clear, and research into how alterations in consumption behavior could ultimately benefit society as a whole can be planned. Education has the power to change individual consumption behavior in a way that benefits the environment to a great extent.