Environmental Awareness and Walking Behavior to the Grocery Store

Abstract

The relationship between environmental awareness and actionable change is complex. While extensive literature examines the links between green ideology and eco-friendly behavior, few studies focus on how green ideology influences transportation choices and the built environment. This study investigates the relationship between environmental awareness and walking behavior, addressing three research questions aimed at: identifying socio-demographic characteristics linked to a high level of environmental awareness; exploring how environmental awareness affects perceptions of walkability; and determining whether individuals committed to community environmentalism are more likely to walk to the grocery store. The findings reveal that higher income is associated with considerations of local air quality, noise, and the importance of positive environmental transportation choices. Car ownership negatively impacts the willingness to adjust routes or travel time to minimize environmental impact. Environmentally aware individuals perceive the grocery store as closer, feel safer walking, view sidewalks as more available and in a better condition, and notice more tree shading. Those who consider air quality and noise levels in their walking decisions are more likely to notice tree shading. Individuals committed to community environmentalism are significantly more likely to walk to the grocery store, underscoring the crucial role of environmental values in shaping transportation behaviors and walkability perceptions.

1. Introduction

Concerns over global climate change have propelled environmentalism to new heights in popular culture and the media [1]. This shift is evident as environmental themes increasingly permeate movies, television shows, and music, reflecting a growing societal awareness of sustainability and conservation. This heightened focus underscores a collective urgency to confront and mitigate the challenges posed by climate change [2].

Even if efforts to raise environmental consciousness prove successful, it remains uncertain whether green beliefs, value systems, and attitudes will lead consumers to adopt greener lifestyles [3]. The relationship between environmental awareness and actual behavior is complex and is influenced by a range of factors including socio-economic status, the accessibility of green alternatives, and ingrained habits. Research indicates that while many individuals express strong pro-environmental attitudes, this does not always translate into sustainable consumer behaviors [4]. Therefore, understanding and addressing these obstacles is crucial to bridging the gap between environmental awareness and actionable change.

Although a substantial and expanding body of literature explores the connections between green ideology and actual environmentally friendly behavior [5,6], few studies specifically examine the relationship between green ideology, transportation choices, and the built environment. Research on this nexus is crucial as it can reveal how green ideological beliefs influence decisions regarding transportation modes. Understanding these connections can inform policies and initiatives aimed at promoting sustainable transportation options and creating built environments that support eco-friendly lifestyles.

Walking to the grocery store, although it might be a once or twice-a-week activity, serves as a critical indicator of sustainable behavior [7]. This routine trip provides valuable insight into whether individuals with a high level of environmental awareness translate their values into practical, eco-friendly actions. The choice to walk instead of driving demonstrates a commitment to reducing one’s carbon footprint and promoting a healthier lifestyle. Walking to the grocery store can reveal the extent to which environmental awareness influences daily habits, highlighting the potential for a broader adoption of sustainable practices in other aspects of life.

Socio-demographic factors significantly impact an individual’s choice to walk to the grocery store. Age is particularly influential, with younger people typically more inclined to walk because they tend to have a better level of physical fitness and fewer mobility issues than older adults. Studies show that younger adults are more likely to walk to nearby destinations, such as grocery stores, integrating this activity into their daily routines [8]. Conversely, older adults may find walking less appealing due to reduced mobility, concerns about safety, and the physical effort required to carry groceries over distances. Research suggests that women and men experience their walking environments differently. Safety concerns significantly influence women’s willingness to walk, particularly during off-peak hours or in sparsely populated areas. Women often prioritize well-lit, busy routes and tend to avoid areas where they feel at risk of crime [9].

Race and ethnicity play a crucial role in shaping walking behaviors and the decision to walk, often due to differences in socio-economic status, cultural practices, and neighborhood environments. Studies indicate that minority and ethnic groups encounter specific challenges that impede walking, such as limited access to safe and well-maintained pedestrian pathways and increased traffic in their communities. For instance, African American and Hispanic individuals frequently live in areas with poor sidewalk conditions and higher rates of pedestrian-vehicle collisions, making walking less feasible and more hazardous [10].

Employment status greatly affects a person’s choice to walk, mainly due to the influence on available time and travel habits. Full-time employees often encounter time constraints that make it difficult to incorporate walking into their daily schedules, especially if it does not fit their commuting needs [11].

Education level significantly influences walking decisions, with higher educational attainment often linked to more frequent walking. Higher education increases awareness of the health benefits of walking, such as preventing chronic diseases and maintaining a healthy weight. Individuals with a higher level of education are more likely to be exposed to public health messages and understand the importance of lifestyle choices for overall well-being [12]. Income level also impacts walking behavior. Lower-income households often lack access to personal vehicles and tend to live in urban areas closer to amenities, making walking a more feasible and cost-effective option [13].

Car ownership greatly influences the decision to walk, typically decreasing the likelihood of choosing walking as the main mode of transportation. The convenience, speed, and flexibility that cars offer, especially for longer trips or in areas not designed for pedestrians, make driving more appealing. Even for short distances, car owners often see driving as a more time-efficient option [14].

Household size can significantly influence walking behaviors, with both positive and negative effects depending on family dynamics. Larger households, especially those with children, may find walking less convenient due to the complexity of coordinating schedules and managing the physical demands of accompanying young children or carrying groceries for multiple people [15]. In contrast, individuals in smaller households or those living alone often find it easier to incorporate walking into their routines due to fewer logistical constraints and the freedom to make independent travel decisions.

Residential self-selection is the process where people choose their homes based on lifestyle preferences, such as a desire to walk more [16]. This choice greatly influences walking habits, as individuals who enjoy walking often opt to live in walkable neighborhoods. Research shows that those who prioritize physical activity and environmental sustainability are more likely to live in areas with better walkability. As a result, these individuals tend to walk more frequently, not out of necessity but because it aligns with their lifestyle. Additionally, residential self-selection can lead to increased social interactions and community engagement, further promoting walking habits.

Social influence significantly impacts individual choices, such as the decision to walk. When social networks actively value and participate in walking, it can encourage others to do the same due to social conformity and the desire for approval [17]. This peer influence is especially strong when friends and family consistently choose walking over other transportation methods, normalizing the activity and integrating it into daily routines. Such social reinforcement is crucial for maintaining walking habits, even in less walkable environments.

Proximity to essential destinations like grocery stores, schools, workplaces, and recreational facilities greatly increases the likelihood of walking. Living close to these places reduces both travel time and costs, making walking a more attractive and practical choice. Studies have shown that shorter distances encourage more frequent walking because they are seen as convenient and easily incorporated into daily life [18]. Having amenities nearby can also cultivate a culture of walking, where it becomes a social norm and a health-promoting activity rather than merely a means of transportation.

Safety perception is crucial in determining whether individuals opt to walk as their mode of transportation. Feeling secure, whether from traffic hazards or crime, greatly influences pedestrian activity. Research indicates that areas with lower traffic speeds, visible pedestrian crossings, and adequate lighting significantly boost residents’ likelihood of walking [19].

The quality of road conditions plays a crucial role in influencing people’s decision to walk. Well-maintained, pedestrian-friendly roads enhance safety and accessibility, making walking a more attractive option. Studies indicate that smooth pavements, clear signage, and well-marked pedestrian crossings create a safer walking environment, thus boosting pedestrian activity [20].

Tree shading along walking routes can greatly impact the decision to walk by improving both the environmental and aesthetic appeal of pedestrian paths. Shaded paths offer relief from the heat, making walking more comfortable during hot days, and enhance the scenic beauty of the area, making walking a more attractive option. Research shows that shaded pathways are perceived as more inviting and enjoyable, thus increasing the likelihood of people walking for transportation or leisure [21].

Attitudes towards walking significantly influence whether people choose to walk. Positive perceptions–such as recognizing the health benefits, environmental advantages, and social enjoyment of walking–greatly increase the likelihood of individuals choosing this mode of transportation. Research shows that when walking is viewed as pleasant, relaxing, and health-promoting, people are more inclined to walk instead of using other transportation options [22].

The existing literature has established a clear connection between individuals with a green ideology and their propensity for green travel behavior, such as opting for walking. Studies have consistently shown that those who prioritize environmental sustainability are more likely to engage in eco-friendly travel practices. However, there remains a gap in our understanding regarding the socio-demographic characteristics of individuals who exhibit high levels of environmental awareness. Additionally, there is limited knowledge on how heightened environmental awareness influences perceptions of the walkability of the built environment. Understanding these nuances is crucial for developing targeted policies and interventions that promote sustainable travel behaviors across diverse populations.

The purpose of this study is to explore the intricate relationship between environmental awareness and walking behavior. Specifically, it aims to address three key research questions. First, it seeks to identify the socio-demographic characteristics associated with individuals who exhibit a high level of environmental awareness. Second, it examines how a heightened level of environmental awareness influences individuals’ perceptions of the walkability of their built environment. Finally, it investigates whether individuals committed to community environmentalism are more likely to choose walking as their mode of transportation to the grocery store. By addressing these questions, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of how environmental values shape transportation behaviors and perceptions of urban walkability.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study focused on Orlando, Florida, which offers a unique blend of urban characteristics ideal for studying the impact of environmental features on walking behaviors [23]. Orlando’s cityscape includes densely populated urban centers, sprawling suburban areas, and a variety of neighborhood designs, making it an exemplary case study. The city features a diverse array of urban forms, from the high-density, mixed-use developments of its downtown to predominantly residential, low-density suburban neighborhoods. This diversity in urban planning provides a rich context for thoroughly analyzing how different environments affect pedestrian activity (Figure 1).

2.2. Data Sources, Variables, and Measurements

This study utilized a cross-sectional survey approach, focusing on adults aged 18 and over living in different neighborhoods across Orlando. The sampling technique aimed to capture a representative sample of the population by leveraging both in-person and digital recruitment methods. Flyers containing a QR code linking to the online survey were strategically placed in Publix, a popular grocery store chain in the area, ensuring that the sample primarily consisted of active shoppers, thereby aligning with the study’s focus on transportation choices related to grocery shopping.

Publix was chosen as the outlet to conduct the research for several strategic reasons. First, Publix is a well-known and widely frequented grocery store chain in the area, making it an ideal location to reach a diverse population. By placing flyers with a QR code in Publix, it was possible to effectively target shoppers who are directly engaged in the behavior under study—grocery shopping. This approach ensured that the sample would include individuals who regularly visit grocery stores, which is relevant for understanding their transportation choices, such as walking. Additionally, Publix stores are located in various neighborhoods, making it possible to capture data from participants living in different areas with varying walkability and environmental conditions. This geographical diversity within the sample was crucial for analyzing how different built environments influence walking behavior.

To enhance the diversity and reach of the sample, additional recruitment efforts were implemented through social media advertisements and posts on local community boards. These efforts ensured that the survey reached a broad audience across different demographic and socio-economic backgrounds. The online survey was available from early April to the end of May 2024, providing ample time for participation. The combination of these targeted strategies resulted in a total of 975 valid responses. The criteria for participant selection were inclusive, focusing on adults who were likely to engage in the behaviors under study, such as walking to grocery stores, and who lived in a variety of urban, suburban, and potentially walkable environments within the Orlando area. This study was conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines and approvals provided by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Central Florida, ensuring that all the participants’ rights and privacy were protected throughout the research process.

The conceptual framework (Figure 2) illustrates the key factors influencing an individual’s decision to walk to the grocery store. Central to this framework is the behavior of walking, which is directly impacted by socio-demographic characteristics and residential self-selection. Social influence also plays a significant role in shaping walking behavior, indicating that the behavior of others can encourage or discourage walking as a transportation choice. Environmental awareness is crucial, as it shapes the perception of the built environment. Those with a higher level of environmental awareness are likely to perceive their surroundings as more walkable, influencing their decision to walk. The perception of the built environment further directly impacts walking behavior. Additionally, a positive attitude towards walking serves as a factor that increases the likelihood of choosing to walk to the grocery store. The framework thus highlights the interplay between individual, environmental, and social factors in shaping walking behavior.

Table 1. Variable list and descriptive statistics.

Domain	Variable	Mean (SD a) or % of “1” for Binary Variables
	Walking to the grocery store (binary; 1 = walk)	25.00%
Socio-demographic characteristics	Age of respondent (continuous)	45.21 (12.52)
	Gender of respondent (binary; 1 = male)	35.00%
	Race of respondent (binary; 1 = White)	45.00%
	Ethnicity of respondent (binary; 1 = Hispanic or Latino)	21.00%
	Employment status (binary; 1 = employed)	67.00%
	Education level (continuous; 1–5 [1 = no formal education; 2 = some high school; 3 = high school graduate; 4 = some college or technical school; 5 = college graduate or higher])	4.31 (1.15)
	Income level (continuous; 1–5 [1 = less than $20,000; 2 = $20,000–$40,000; 3 = $40,000–$60,000; 4 = $60,000–$80,000; 5 = more than $80,000])	4.15 (1.27)
	Car ownership (continuous)	2.02 (0.94)
	Valid driver’s license (binary; 1 = yes)	83.00%
	Household size (continuous)	3.02 (1.28)
	Frequency of visiting grocery stores (continuous; 1–4 [1 = less than once a week; 2 = once a week; 3 = 2–3 times a week; 4 = 4–6 times a week; 5 = daily])	2.85 (0.94)
Residential self-selection	Whether walking to the grocery store is important in choosing residential location (continuous; 1–5 [1 = not at all; 2 = slightly; 3 = moderately; 4 = significantly; 5 = decisively])	2.57 (1.38)
Environmental awareness	Concern about the environmental impact of your transportation choices (e.g., carbon footprint, air pollution) (continuous; 1–4 [1 = not concerned at all; 2 = slightly concerned; 3 = moderately concerned; 4 = very concerned])	2.45 (1.28)
	To what extent do local air quality and noise levels influence your decision to walk (continuous; 1–4 [1 = do not influence at all; 2 = slightly influence; 3 = moderately influence; 4 = greatly influence])	2.12 (0.83)
	Importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment (continuous; 1–4 [1 = not important at all; 2 = somewhat unimportant; 3 = somewhat important; 4 = very important])	2.63 (1.05)
	Willingness to adjust your route or travel time to minimize environmental impact (continuous; 1–4 [1 = very unwilling; 2 = somewhat unwilling; 3 = somewhat willing; 4 = very willing])	2.04 (0.98)
Social influence	Latent factor c: positive peer influence
	“I frequently observe my friends, family, or neighbors walking to the grocery store.”	2.10 (1.58)
	“There is a social expectation in my community to choose eco-friendly transportation modes for grocery shopping.”	1.78 (0.85)
	“My friends or family members have encouraged me to walk to the grocery store.”	1.55 (0.96)
Perceived built environments	Distance to the nearest grocery store from home (continuous; 1–5 [1 = more than 3 miles; 2 = 2 to 3 miles; 3 = 1 to 2 miles; 4 = 0.5 to 1 mile; 5 = less than 0.5 miles])	3.51 (1.28)
	Safety perception when walking to the grocery store (continuous; 1–5 [1 = very unsafe; 2 = somewhat unsafe; 3 = neutral; 4 = somewhat safe; 5 = very safe])	3.73 (1.59)
	Overall condition of the roads on the route to the grocery store (continuous; 1–5 [1 = very poor; 2 = poor; 3 = fair; 4 = good; 5 = excellent])	3.31 (1.87)
	Availability and condition of sidewalks leading to the grocery store (continuous; 1–5 [1 = non-existent; 2 = sporadically available; 3 = present but in poor condition; 4 = generally well-maintained but with some issues; 5 = well-maintained and fully accessible])	3.82 (1.17)
	Obstacles (i.e., construction, debris, or parked vehicles) on the walking path to the grocery store (continuous; 1–5 [1 = very frequently; 2 = frequently; 3 = occasionally; 4 = rarely; 5 = never])	3.29 (2.01)
	Presence of tree shading along the route to the grocery store (continuous; 1–5 [1 = no shading; 2 = minimal shading; 3 = moderate shading; 4 = substantial shading; 5 = complete shading])	3.05 (0.86)
Attitude toward walking to the grocery store	Latent factor c: positive attitude and experience
	“Walking to the grocery store is a convenient option for me.”	2.85 (2.01)
	“I enjoy the experience of walking to the grocery store.”	2.22 (1.32)
	“I prefer walking to the grocery store because it helps me stay physically active.”	2.18 (1.74)
	“I feel safe walking to the grocery store in the neighborhood.”	3.88 (0.65)
	“I am likely to choose walking over other modes of transportation for my next grocery store trip.”	1.98 (1.08)
	Latent factor c: barriers and concerns
	“Walking to the grocery store is too hot and sweaty.”	3.57 (1.33)
	“Carrying groceries is a major deterrent for me when considering walking or biking to the store.”	3.93 (1.07)
	“I find walking to the grocery store too time-consuming.”	3.85 (1.31)
	“I am worried about the traffic along the route when I consider walking to the grocery store.”	3.04 (1.02)
	“I feel that the sidewalks to the grocery store are poorly maintained.”	2.85 (1.68)

^a SD: Standard deviation; ^c All the latent factors were captured by a series of questions using the Likert scale based on a scale of 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 5 (“strongly agree”), unless otherwise noted.

provides an overview of the variables, their respective measurements, and descriptive statistics. Walking behavior in this study was measured using a binary indicator to capture whether participants walked to the grocery store. Respondents were asked directly if they chose walking as their mode of transportation when going to the grocery store, with responses coded as 1 for those who walked and 0 for those who did not. This straightforward approach allowed for a clear identification of walking behavior in the context of grocery shopping. The analysis includes a range of socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, race, ethnicity, employment status, educational level, income, car ownership, driver’s license status, household size, and the frequency of grocery shopping trips. Additionally, this study also accounts for residential preferences regarding proximity to grocery stores, social influences from peers, and community norms related to walking.

This study investigated various perceived built environment factors influencing walking behavior. These factors include the distance to the nearest grocery store, perceived safety, road and sidewalk conditions, the presence of obstacles, traffic-calming measures, and the availability of pedestrian-friendly signage and tree shading. Each of these elements was evaluated using a 5-point scale. Additionally, attitudes towards walking were assessed through participants’ responses to statements about convenience, enjoyment, physical benefits, and concerns such as carrying groceries, time constraints, and traffic safety. These attitude-related variables were measured on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”.

Environmental awareness in this study was measured using a series of scales designed to assess various dimensions of participants’ environmental concerns related to transportation choices. Respondents were asked to rate their concern about the environmental impact of their transportation decisions, such as their carbon footprint and air pollution, on a continuous scale ranging from 1 (not concerned at all) to 4 (very concerned). Additionally, the extent to which local air quality and noise levels influenced their decision to walk was measured on a similar scale ranging from 1 (do not influence at all) to 4 (greatly influence). The importance participants placed on making transportation choices that contribute positively to the local environment was also assessed, with responses ranging from 1 (not important at all) to 4 (very important). Furthermore, participants’ willingness to adjust their route or travel time to minimize environmental impact was measured, using a scale from 1 (very unwilling) to 4 (very willing). These scales ensured a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of environmental awareness among participants, allowing for a reliable analysis of its influence on perceptions of walkability and transportation choices.

2.3. Data Analysis

To address the first research question, ordinary linear regressions were performed to predict each of the four indicators of environmental awareness using socio-demographic variables as predictors.

For the second and third questions, this study employed structural equation modeling (SEM). For the second question, SEM is advantageous thanks to its ability to simultaneously examine complex relationships. It allows for the modeling of how heightened environmental awareness influences individuals’ perceptions of walkability, accounting for potential measurement errors and the interrelationships between multiple indicators of environmental awareness and walkability. For the third question, SEM is particularly useful in investigating whether a commitment to community environmentalism predicts the likelihood of choosing walking as a mode of transportation. This method makes it possible to explore indirect effects and mediating variables, offering a comprehensive understanding of how environmental values translate into specific transportation choices. Overall, SEM provides a robust framework for testing the hypothesized relationships and ensuring the validity and reliability of the study’s findings. Specifically, the analysis utilized the weighted least square mean and variance adjusted (WLSMV) estimation method. This approach is particularly advantageous for handling categorical data, providing more accurate standard error calculations within the SEM framework [24]. Since the primary variable of interest—walking to the grocery store—was binary, using traditional SEM with a maximum likelihood estimation could compromise efficiency and accuracy due to its assumption of continuous variables [25]. Therefore, WLSMV estimation was chosen as it is more appropriate for analyzing categorical outcomes, especially when response options are limited to Likert scales and data distributions deviate from normality. The statistical analyses were conducted using M-Plus 8.5 software [26].

3. Results

3.1. Research Question 1–Ordinary Linear Regression

In terms of research question 1: “What socio-demographic characteristics are associated with individuals who have a high level of environmental awareness? (

Table 2. Results from the ordinary linear regressions predicting four indicators of environmental awareness using socio-demographic variables.

	Concern about the Environmental Impact of Your Transportation Choices	To What Extent Do Local Air Quality and Noise Levels Influence Your Decision to Walk?	Importance of Transportation Choices Contributing Positively to the Local Environment	Willingness to Adjust Your Route or Travel Time to Minimize Environmental Impact
	Coefficient	Coefficient	Coefficient	Coefficient
Age (continuous)	0.12 *	0.08	0.09	0.10
Gender (1 = male)	−0.02	−0.05	−0.03	−0.04
Race (1 = White)	0.20 *	0.12	0.11	0.09
Ethnicity (1 = Hispanic or Latino)	0.09	0.07	0.06	0.08
Employment status (1 = employed)	0.10	0.09	0.07	0.08
Education level (continuous)	0.28 **	0.13	0.12	0.30 **
Income level (continuous)	0.15 *	0.22 *	0.18 *	0.12
Car ownership (continuous)	−0.11	−0.10	−0.12	−0.18 *
Valid driver’s license (1 = yes)	−0.05	−0.04	−0.06	−0.05
Household size (continuous)	0.02	0.03	0.02	0.01
Frequency of visiting grocery stores (continuous)	0.05	0.05	0.04	0.05

**: p < 0.01; * p < 0.05.

)”, the findings reported that older individuals tended to have a higher level of environmental awareness (coefficient = 0.12, p < 0.05). Gender did not significantly influence any of the environmental awareness measures. Being White was significantly associated with the importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment (coefficient = 0.20, p < 0.05), indicating a higher level of environmental awareness in this demographic. Hispanic ethnicity did not significantly influence any of the environmental awareness measures. Employment status did not significantly influence any of the environmental awareness measures.

Higher education levels were strongly associated with all four environmental awareness factors. For example, individuals with higher education levels showed greater concern about the environmental impact of transportation choices (coefficient = 0.28, p < 0.01) and a higher willingness to adjust routes (coefficient = 0.30, p < 0.01). Higher income levels were significantly associated with the extent to which local air quality and noise levels influence decisions (coefficient = 0.22, p < 0.05) and the importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment (coefficient = 0.18, p < 0.05). Car ownership was negatively associated with the willingness to adjust routes or travel time to minimize environmental impact (coefficient = −0.18, p < 0.05), indicating that individuals without cars are more willing to make environmentally friendly adjustments. Household size did not significantly influence any of the environmental awareness measures.

3.2. Research Questions 2&3–Structural Equation Modeling

Figure 3 presents the standardized results from the structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis, illustrating the relationships between walking to the grocery store and various factors, including socio-demographic characteristics, residential self-selection, social influence, environmental awareness, perceived built environments, and attitudes toward walking. For an SEM to be considered adequately fit, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) should be 0.08 or lower, and the comparative fit index (CFI) should be 0.9 or higher. This model achieves acceptable fit indices, with an RMSEA of 0.045 and a CFI of 0.93, indicating a robust model fit.

For research question 2–“How does a high level of environmental awareness influence individuals’ perceptions of the walkability of the built environment?”—the results showed that respondents who are highly concerned about the environmental impact of their transportation choices tend to perceive the grocery store as closer (coefficient = −0.08, p < 0.05), feel safer walking to the grocery store (coefficient = 0.22, p < 0.01), view sidewalks as more available and in a better condition (coefficient = 0.25, p < 0.01), and notice more tree shading along their route (coefficient = 0.21, p < 0.01). Additionally, respondents who consider air quality and noise levels to significantly influence their decision to walk are more likely to notice tree shading along their route (coefficient = 0.37, p < 0.01).

Respondents who believe it is important for transportation choices to positively impact the local environment perceive the road conditions as better maintained and of higher quality (coefficient = 0.35, p < 0.01). Respondents willing to adjust their route or travel time to minimize the environmental impact perceive the distance to the nearest grocery store as shorter (coefficient = 0.25, p < 0.05), notice fewer obstacles such as construction, debris, or parked vehicles (coefficient = −0.20, p < 0.05), and report a slightly higher presence of tree shading along their route (coefficient = 0.18, p < 0.05).

Regarding research question 3—“Are individuals who are committed to community environmentalism more likely to walk to the grocery store?”—respondents who expressed a high level of concern about the environmental impact of their transportation choices were significantly more likely to walk to the grocery store (coefficient = 0.38, p < 0.01). This suggests that individuals who prioritize minimizing the environmental footprint of their transportation are more inclined to choose walking as a mode of transportation. The perceived importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment was another significant predictor of walking behavior (coefficient = 0.029, p < 0.01). Respondents who valued the positive impact of their transportation choices on the local environment demonstrated a greater likelihood of walking to the grocery store, reinforcing the role of environmental values in influencing transportation modes. Moreover, the willingness to adjust one’s route or travel time to minimize the environmental impact also showed a significant positive association with walking to the grocery store (coefficient = 0.034, p < 0.05). This finding underscores the commitment of environmentally aware individuals to make practical adjustments in their daily routines to reduce their environmental impact, including opting for walking over other transportation modes.

Investigating the determinants of walking to the grocery store uncovers intriguing trends. Socio-demographic factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, race, employment status, education level, and income level do not play a significant role in predicting the likelihood of this behavior. However, car ownership markedly reduces the probability of choosing to walk to the grocery store, as indicated by a standardized coefficient of −0.201 and a p-value of less than 0.01. This result highlights the strong influence of having a vehicle on one’s transportation decisions. Conversely, prioritizing the proximity of a grocery store when selecting a place to live significantly boosts the likelihood of walking there, reflected by a standardized coefficient of 0.121 and a highly significant p-value of less than 0.05.

Positive peer influence has a significant impact on the likelihood of individuals choosing to walk to the grocery store. The analysis reveals that as the positive social influence from peers increases, the probability of opting for walking also rises, with a standardized coefficient of 0.101 and a p-value of less than 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship.

Regarding perceptions of the built environment, there is a notable decrease in the likelihood of choosing to walk as the distance from home to the grocery store increases, indicated by a negative standardized coefficient of −0.195 (p < 0.05). Conversely, the availability of well-maintained sidewalks plays a crucial role in promoting walking, with a standardized coefficient of 0.158 (p < 0.05).

The findings reveal that a favorable attitude towards walking, coupled with positive previous experiences, greatly increases the probability of individuals opting to walk to the grocery store. A standardized coefficient of 0.108 and a p-value below 0.05 indicate that those who have a positive perception of walking are significantly more inclined to choose this mode of transportation (

Table 3. Summary of key findings.

Research Question 1
Socio-Demographic Characteristic	Associated Environmental Awareness Measure	Coefficient
Age (continuous)	Higher environmental awareness	0.12 (p < 0.05)
Race (1 = White)	Importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment	0.20 (p < 0.05)
Education level (continuous)	All environmental awareness factors	0.28 (p < 0.01); 0.30 (p < 0.01)
Income level (continuous)	Local air quality and noise levels influence decisions; Importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment	0.22 (p < 0.05); 0.18 (p < 0.05)
Car ownership (continuous)	Willingness to adjust routes or travel time to minimize environmental impact (negative association)	−0.18 (p < 0.05)
Research Question 2
Environmental Awareness Measure	Associated Perception of Walkability	Coefficient
Concern about the environmental impact of transportation choices	Perceive grocery store as closer; feel safer walking to the grocery store; view sidewalks as more available and in a better condition; notice more tree shading along the route	−0.08 (p < 0.05); 0.22 (p < 0.01); 0.25 (p < 0.01); 0.21 (p < 0.01)
Influence of air quality and noise levels on decision to walk	More likely to notice tree shading along the route	0.37 (p < 0.01)
Importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment	Perceive road conditions as better maintained and of higher quality	0.35 (p < 0.01)
Willingness to adjust route or travel time to minimize environmental impact	Perceive distance to grocery store as shorter; notice fewer obstacles (e.g., construction, debris, parked vehicles); report a slightly higher presence of tree shading along the route	0.25 (p < 0.05); −0.20 (p < 0.05); 0.18 (p < 0.05)
Research Question 3
Factor	Association with Walking Behavior	Coefficient
Concern about the environmental impact of transportation choices	Significantly more likely to walk to the grocery store	0.38 (p < 0.01)
Importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment	Greater likelihood of walking to the grocery store	0.029 (p < 0.01)
Willingness to adjust route or travel time to minimize environmental impact	Positive association with walking to the grocery store	0.034 (p < 0.05)
Car ownership	Reduces the probability of walking to the grocery store	−0.201 (p < 0.01)
Proximity of grocery store when selecting a place to live	Increases the likelihood of walking to the grocery store	0.121 (p < 0.05)
Positive peer influence	Increases the probability of opting for walking	0.101 (p < 0.05)
Distance from home to grocery store	Decreases the likelihood of walking to the grocery store	−0.195 (p < 0.05)
Availability of well-maintained sidewalks	Promotes walking to the grocery store	0.158 (p < 0.05)
Favorable attitude towards walking and positive previous experiences	Greatly increases the probability of walking to the grocery store	0.108 (p < 0.05)

).

4. Discussion

4.1. Research Question 1

The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the socio-demographic characteristics associated with high levels of environmental awareness and their implications for policy development. The finding that older individuals exhibit a significantly higher level of environmental awareness aligns with several existing studies [27], which suggest that age positively correlates with environmental concern. This could be attributed to their greater life experience and exposure to environmental issues over time. Environmental education programs should target all age groups but emphasize younger individuals to build long-term environmental awareness. Integrating environmental education into school curriculums can foster a culture of sustainability from an early age.

The finding that being White is significantly associated with a higher level of environmental awareness, specifically regarding the importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment, aligns with some existing research [28] but also introduces important considerations for understanding environmental attitudes across different racial and ethnic groups. Communication strategies should be tailored to reach different demographic groups effectively. This ensures that the message of environmental sustainability is inclusive and resonates with a diverse audience.

The strong association between higher education levels and all four environmental awareness factors, including greater concern about the environmental impact of transportation choices and a higher willingness to adjust routes, is consistent with the existing literature that links education with heightened environmental consciousness. Education is often seen as a key determinant of environmental attitudes, as it equips individuals with the knowledge and critical thinking skills needed to understand complex environmental issues and their broader implications [29]. Individuals with higher education levels are more likely to be exposed to environmental topics through academic curricula, research, and discourse, which can foster a deeper understanding of the consequences of transportation choices on the environment. This understanding may translate into a stronger commitment to making environmentally responsible decisions, such as adjusting travel routes to minimize the environmental impact [30]. Promoting higher education can enhance the public understanding of environmental issues. Providing scholarships and funding opportunities for environmental studies could further encourage this trend, fostering a well-informed and environmentally conscious populace.

The association between higher income levels and a greater influence of local air quality and noise levels on decisions, as well as the importance placed on transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment, aligns with findings in existing research that link socio-economic status with environmental attitudes and behaviors. Individuals with higher income levels often have greater access to resources, including information, time, and alternative transportation options, which can enhance their ability to prioritize environmental considerations in their daily decisions [31].

The negative association between car ownership and the willingness to adjust routes or travel time to minimize the environmental impact is a notable finding that aligns with existing research on transportation behavior and environmental attitudes. Car ownership often represents a level of convenience and autonomy in transportation, which can reduce individuals’ motivation to make environmentally conscious decisions, such as altering their routes or travel times to minimize their environmental footprint [32]. This suggests that individuals without cars are more open to modifying their travel behavior for environmental reasons. Promoting car-free lifestyles could be beneficial. Enhancing public transportation infrastructure, creating pedestrian-friendly environments, and providing incentives for using alternative modes of transportation can encourage sustainable travel behavior.

4.2. Research Question 2

The findings from research question 2 reveal that high levels of environmental awareness significantly influence individuals’ perceptions of the walkability of the built environment. Specifically, respondents who are highly concerned about the environmental impact of their transportation choices tend to perceive the grocery store as closer, feel safer walking to the grocery store, view sidewalks as more available and in a better condition, and notice more tree shading along their route. Furthermore, those willing to adjust their route or travel time to minimize the environmental impact perceive the distance to the nearest grocery store as shorter, notice fewer obstacles such as construction, debris, or parked vehicles, and report a higher presence of tree shading. These findings align with existing research that suggests environmental awareness influences not only transportation choices but also how individuals perceive and interact with their urban environments [33]. A high level of environmental awareness appears to encourage a more mindful and engaged experience of the built environment, where individuals are more attuned to elements that support sustainable practices. This may also reflect a cognitive bias where those who are environmentally conscious are more likely to notice and value aspects of the environment that align with their values, such as walkability and green infrastructure. These findings highlight the practical adjustments that environmentally aware individuals are prepared to make to support their values. Public awareness campaigns emphasizing the environmental and health benefits of walking, as well as providing incentives for eco-friendly travel adjustments, can further promote sustainable transportation behaviors.

4.3. Research Question 3

The results of research question 3 indicate that individuals who are committed to community environmentalism are significantly more likely to walk to the grocery store. This aligns with existing research that suggests that individuals who prioritize environmental stewardship are more inclined to adopt behaviors that reduce their environmental footprint, such as choosing walking over driving for short trips [34]. This finding suggests that prioritizing the minimization of the environmental footprint of transportation is a key motivator for choosing walking as a mode of transportation. It highlights the need for policies and initiatives that support and encourage environmentally friendly transportation choices. Respondents who value the positive impact of their transportation choices on the local environment are more likely to walk to the grocery store. This underscores the role of environmental values in shaping transportation behavior and suggests that promoting the environmental benefits of walking can further encourage this behavior. Additionally, the willingness to adjust one’s route or travel time to minimize environmental impact showed a significant positive association with walking to the grocery store. This finding indicates that environmentally aware individuals are prepared to make practical adjustments in their daily routines, such as opting for walking over other modes of transportation, to reduce their environmental impact. This finding aligns with research indicating that individuals who are highly motivated by environmental concerns are more likely to engage in behaviors that may require extra effort or time, but which they perceive as beneficial for the environment [35]. Policies that support such adjustments can enhance the feasibility and attractiveness of walking. Policies that integrate walking and other sustainable transportation options with broader environmental and public health goals can create a more cohesive approach to sustainability. This could include developing comprehensive plans that link walking infrastructure with public transportation, green spaces, and urban development strategies aimed at reducing carbon footprints.

5. Conclusions

The purpose of this study was to investigate the link between environmental awareness and walking behavior, focusing on three key areas. Firstly, it aimed to identify the socio-demographic traits of individuals with a high level of environmental awareness. Secondly, it examined how increased environmental awareness affects perceptions of urban walkability. Lastly, it explored whether those committed to community environmentalism are more likely to walk to the grocery store. By addressing these questions, the study offers a detailed understanding of how environmental values influence transportation choices and perceptions of walkable environments.

The findings indicated that older individuals and those with higher education levels tend to have a higher level of environmental awareness. Additionally, higher income levels were linked to the influence of local air quality and noise levels on decisions and the importance of transportation choices contributing positively to the local environment. Interestingly, car ownership was negatively associated with the willingness to adjust routes or travel time to minimize environmental impact.

Regarding the influence of environmental awareness on perceptions of walkability, the results showed that respondents who are highly concerned about the environmental impact of their transportation choices perceive the grocery store as closer, feel safer walking to the grocery store, view sidewalks as more available and in a better condition, and notice more tree shading along their route. Additionally, those who consider air quality and noise levels significantly in their walking decisions are more likely to notice tree shading. These findings highlight the strong positive perceptions of the built environment among environmentally aware individuals. The positive perceptions of walkability among environmentally aware individuals suggest that enhancing the built environment to support sustainable transportation options could have a substantial impact on promoting walking as a mode of transportation. Urban planners should prioritize the development of well-maintained sidewalks, tree-shaded routes, and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure in both new and existing neighborhoods. These improvements can not only cater to the preferences of environmentally conscious individuals but also encourage a broader segment of the population to walk more frequently.

This study also found that individuals committed to community environmentalism are significantly more likely to walk to the grocery store. Respondents who expressed a high level of concern about the environmental impact of their transportation choices were significantly more likely to walk. Furthermore, those who valued the positive impact of their transportation choices on the local environment were more likely to walk. The willingness to adjust routes or travel time to minimize environmental impact was also positively associated with walking to the grocery store. These results suggest that environmental values and commitments play a crucial role in encouraging walking as a mode of transportation. Given that environmental values significantly influence the decision to walk, transportation policies should focus on promoting the environmental benefits of walking. This could include public awareness campaigns that highlight how choosing to walk instead of driving reduces air pollution, decreases carbon footprints, and enhances community well-being. Additionally, incentives such as subsidies for public transportation or community-based initiatives that reward walking could further encourage this behavior, particularly among those already inclined towards environmentalism.

This study has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. Firstly, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce bias, as respondents could overstate their environmental awareness or walking behavior due to social desirability. Secondly, the cross-sectional design limits the ability to establish causality between environmental awareness and walking behavior. Longitudinal studies would be beneficial to assess how environmental awareness and transportation behaviors evolve over time. Such research could provide insights into the long-term effectiveness of environmental education and infrastructure improvements in promoting sustainable transportation choices. Thirdly, external factors such as weather conditions and urban infrastructure variations were not controlled for, which could influence walking behavior independently of environmental awareness. Future research should consider utilizing data spanning an entire year to better account for and eliminate the influence of weather factors, leading to more robust and convincing conclusions. Furthermore, future research should also consider examining additional factors influencing the choice to walk, such as respondents’ physical condition and job types, to determine whether motivations like health benefits, rather than solely environmental concerns, play a role in their decision to walk. Finally, while this study focused on walking to the grocery store, future research could explore how environmental awareness influences a broader range of transportation behaviors, including biking, public transportation use, and carpooling. This would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the role that environmental values play in shaping overall transportation choices. Moreover, future research could explore the integration of advanced routing algorithms to better understand and predict users’ travel choices in complex transportation networks. Also, the use of deep learning techniques may lead to more accurate predictions. Approaches such as those applied in integrated origin–destination estimation and traffic sensor location problems, as well as residual neural networks for origin–destination trip matrix estimation, could offer significant improvements in modeling and forecasting transportation behaviors. These advancements would not only enhance the predictive power of transportation models but also provide more robust tools for urban planning and policymaking.

Despite its limitations, this study makes significant contributions to the understanding of how environmental awareness influences transportation behaviors and perceptions of walkability. By identifying key socio-demographic characteristics associated with a high level of environmental awareness, the study provides valuable insights for targeting educational and promotional efforts aimed at encouraging sustainable transportation choices. The findings also highlight the critical role of environmental values in shaping positive perceptions of walkable environments, suggesting that increasing environmental awareness can enhance urban planning and policy initiatives. Moreover, by demonstrating that individuals committed to community environmentalism are more likely to walk to the grocery store, this study underscores the potential for environmental advocacy to promote healthier, more sustainable lifestyles. These contributions provide a foundation for future research and policy development aimed at fostering environmentally friendly transportation behaviors.