Next Article in Journal
Relationships between Tree Species Diversity and Aboveground Biomass Are Mediated by Site-Dependent Factors in Northeastern China Natural Reserves on a Small Spatial Scale
Previous Article in Journal
Innovations of Express Companies: Adoption of Protective Wearable Artificial Intelligence Devices by Couriers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 19
10.3390/su16198376
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Agricultural Food Retailers’ ESG Activities on Purchase Intention: The Mediating Effect of Consumer ESG Perception

by
Pan-Ting Song
1,
Batsuuri Oyunbazar
2 and
Tae-Won Kang
1,*
1
Department of Supply Chain and Logistics, Kunsan National University, Gunsan 54150, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Global Start-Up, Kunsan National University, Gunsan 54150, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(19), 8376; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198376
Submission received: 1 July 2024 / Revised: 14 August 2024 / Accepted: 12 September 2024 / Published: 26 September 2024
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In recent years, climate issues have become a common challenge for all mankind. It is urgent and important to protect the environment, promote green transformation, and realize sustainable development. Consequently, increasing attention is being paid to ESG (environmental, social, and governance) actions. This study empirically investigated the effect of companies’ ESG activities on the ESG perceptions and purchase intentions of agricultural food consumers in Hebei Province, China, using structural equation modeling. The results of the study show that, firstly, the environmental and social factors of ESG activities had a significant positive effect on consumer ESG perception while governance had a non-significant effect on consumer ESG perception. Secondly, the environmental, social, and governance components of ESG activities had a significant positive effect on purchase intention. Thirdly, there was a significant mediating effect of consumer ESG perception (environmental and social, excluding governance). The theoretical contribution of this study is to reveal the important role of consumers’ ESG perceptions and to emphasize the unique contribution of governance factors in purchase intentions. In addition, this study supports the effect of ESG activities on agri-food consumer behavior through empirical data, which provides a new theoretical perspective on agri-food retailers’ ESG practices and helps to further promote the green transformation of Chinese agricultural food retailers.

1. Introduction

With the continuous advancement of the industrialization process, the development of the global economy has inevitably caused a series of environmental problems, and global climate warming has continued to intensify [1]. Protecting the environment, promoting the green transition, and realizing sustainable development are urgent tasks. The power of companies and social capital is indispensable in the process of accelerating green transformation and growth. A robust and responsible environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investment system is essential for the green transformation and sustainable development of enterprises [2]. ESG activities create sustainable growth for companies by reducing the negative impact of the corporate ecosystem on the environment and society and improving governance efficiency. With the growing interest in ESG activities, companies are implementing various ESG strategies to target the environment and society [3].
In recent years, ESG activities have gained increasing attention in China. Under the guidance of the national “Carbon peak and carbon neutrality” goal, more and more enterprises are actively responding to the opportunities and challenges of sustainable development, integrating social responsibility management into company management and operations to create comprehensive value for the economy, society, and environment and for stakeholders. Liu et al. (2024) [4] provided evidence that environmental information disclosure can promote corporate green innovation from the perspective of foreign investors. It has become a trend for companies to carry out environmental protection activities and actively disclose environmental information to cater to the needs of investors. Research by Xu et al. (2021) [5] shows that companies with higher corporate social responsibility scores have lower debt financing costs. This shows that enterprises have an obvious internal driving force to carry out social responsibility-related activities. Therefore, efforts to implement ESG practices are important, as they have helped to establish a new development perspective towards ESG activities. However, some companies do not fully recognize the importance of ESG practices. Some companies may even avoid ESG practices to save money. According to the 2023 Commerce and Retail Industry Grade Rating Analysis Report, as of the end of June 2023, the ESG release rate of A-share listed companies in China’s commerce and retail industry was only 31.73%, with a low overall disclosure level, which shows that the awareness and ability of companies in the commerce and retail industry in terms of disclosure needs to be improved. In order to evaluate the comprehensive performance of companies in green offices, green packaging, green logistics, etc., the report conducted statistics on the green operation of companies in the commerce and retail industry, and the results showed that about 60% of the companies scored in the lowest grade, which shows that the green operation performance of companies is average from an overall point of view. The performance in social responsibility was in the middle to upper level [6]. Therefore, it is essential to conduct empirical research to understand the implications of ESG activities for companies and to enhance their interest in adopting ESG practices.
Meanwhile, with the increasingly prominent role of ESG disclosure, a growing number of scholars have begun to study the relationship between ESG activities and corporate development. Existing research mainly focuses on the improvement of the ESG system [6], the improvement of information disclosure [7,8,9], and the discussion of the relationship between ESG investment guidance and corporate value and risk [10,11,12,13,14], etc. In terms of empirical analysis, most studies focus on explaining the positive relationship between a company’s ESG rating and its profitability with data [15]. At present, most of the studies focus on ESG disclosure standards, and a few address the overall situation and effectiveness of ESG disclosure. This study is conducted from the perspective of empirical analysis and theory, focusing on the impact of ESG activities on a certain aspect of corporate financial performance. Existing research on the impact of ESG activities mostly focuses on institutional investors [16], government policies [17], the internal technological innovation of companies [18,19], etc. This study adopts a bottom-up perspective and selects end consumers as the medium through which to explore how ESG activities affect consumers. Purchasing intention, as a manifestation of ESG economic performance, is adopted as the dependent variable in this study. In the field of agri-food retailers, there is not enough research on the impact of ESG activities on purchase intentions, so it is necessary to enrich the relevant research by conducting empirical studies.
The purpose of this study is to investigate how the ESG activities of agri-food retailers affect consumers’ purchase intention through empirical analysis. Agri-food retailers refer to companies that sell agricultural and food products, while the respondents in this study were consumers in Hebei Province, China, who had purchased products from these companies. We investigate whether consumer ESG perception has a mediating effect on the relationship between corporate ESG activities and consumer purchase intention. Second, the data should be supported by empirical analysis to raise the perception of the importance of ESG activities. Third, through sufficient empirical analysis, it should explain the need for ESG reform and further promote the green transformation of Chinese agri-food retailers. Fourth, this study aims to provide a theoretical reference to the field of ESG activities and the purchase intention of agri-food retailers.
This study adopts a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis methods. On the one hand, the research hypotheses were designed by organizing, summarizing, and inducing from the related literature. On the other hand, data were collected using questionnaires for empirical analysis to test the research model. The first introductory of this study describes the background of the study, the purpose, the research methodology, and the composition of the article. Section 2, Literature Review, defines ESG activities, consumer ESG perceptions, and purchase intentions based on the literature. Section 3 provides a detailed description of the research hypotheses, the research model, and the research methodology. Section 4 reports the results of data analysis. Section 5 summarizes the findings of the study and presents the implications of the study as well as the shortcomings of the study.

2. Literature Review

2.1. ESG Activities

The concept of ESG activities was first proposed by the UN Global Compact in 2004, and it is an investment philosophy and corporate evaluation standard that combines environmental, social, and governance aspects [2,20,21,22,23]. The ESG perspective is a new type of evaluation system that focuses on corporate sustainability. The theory of sustainable development considers the three elements of society, economy, and environment together, and believes that enterprises should not only take into account their interests but also the environment and society so that they can achieve long-term economic development. Sacrificing the environment and society will inevitably hinder the sustainable development of enterprises [19].
According to stakeholder theory, individual stakeholders contribute to the enterprise in various ways, and with their support, the enterprise can continue to survive and develop. The enterprise’s ESG activities are designed to address the interests and concerns of each stakeholder [24].
On the environmental level, uncertain environmental factors can present numerous opportunities for enterprises. Perceiving and seizing these opportunities provides strong conditions for the future growth of the business. The uncertainty of the environment increases the difficulty of corporate strategy development, and the increase in costs can cause a decrease in performance. Therefore, firms must consider the environment as an important factor [25]. By strictly adhering to environmental norms and proactively disclosing corporate environmental information, enterprises can enhance the legitimacy of their operations, which may improve their eligibility for government subsidies. After fulfilling their environmental responsibilities, enterprises maintain an advantage over their competitors and achieve the effect of improving corporate performance.
At the social level, in response to the need for coordinated economic, social, and environmental development, enterprises and stakeholders have formed a natural symbiotic and coexisting relationship [26]. This requires enterprises to assume social responsibility. Effective employee relations can significantly impact various aspects of a business. For instance, strong employee relations improve employee efficiency, attract talent, and ensure high product quality and reliable after-sales service. These improvements, in turn, contribute to increased customer loyalty [27]. Enterprises can enhance employee satisfaction by improving compensation and working conditions, which helps reduce employee turnover and disengagement while boosting overall enthusiasm and productivity. When enterprises care about employees’ interests and align their goals and values with those of the organization, employees develop a stronger sense of pride and identity with the company. As a result, they are more likely to work diligently and with greater commitment. This is good for corporate reputation, but also for the enterprise to attract better employees, and to win the trust of partners. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) can enhance the market value of a company [28,29]. In addition, the value created by CSR is a non-monetary value that cannot be converted into money, and its goal conflicts with economic value [3]. Although Zhou et al. (2021) [30] concluded through the analysis of Chinese listed companies that corporate charitable donations can achieve short-term performance, they are not conducive to long-term corporate market development. On the contrary, the research of Xiong et al. (2023) [31] shows that investors are more likely to choose companies that engage in social responsibility to ensure returns on their investments. This study believes that taking the initiative to undertake social responsibilities will cost the company economic costs in the short term, but it will establish a good image for the company and attract more consumer support. This is conducive to the long-term sustainable development of the enterprise. Therefore, it is necessary for companies to carry out ESG social activities and assume social responsibilities.
In terms of governance, a good governance structure allows managers to utilize their talents, reduces management costs, improves decision-making efficiency, and ultimately promotes the sustainable and healthy development of the enterprise [27]. Human capital management ability and skill level are important factors affecting the efficiency of enterprises. Arik & Mutlu (2015) [32] provide evidence for the role of corporate governance practices on business performance.

2.2. Consumer ESG Perception

Consumer perception is the degree of a specific consumption motivation [33]. Lee et al. (2022) [34] define consumer ESG perception as the degree of mental and physical effort and attention a consumer puts into it. Understanding consumer perception can be considered from the perspective of internal and external factors. Internal factors refer to our motivations and expectations, while external factors refer to the physical characteristics of the stimulus [35]. Consumers’ ESG perception can be simply understood as their views on corporate ESG activities [36]. Consumers attach higher value to higher perception. By engaging and participating in ESG activities, consumers can better understand a company’s efforts in social and environmental aspects. As a result, consumers have a favorable impression of the company. When consumer evaluations of a company’s reputation are high, consumers are more likely to purchase the company’s products. For example, in the study of Otto et al. (2021) [37], it is believed that consumers’ behavior of judging packaging materials based on criteria such as circular economy is a manifestation of consumer cognition. Consumers will evaluate the environmental friendliness of video packaging and perceive it.

2.3. Purchase Intention

Lee (2023) [38] stated that purchase intention is a variable that predicts purchase behavior and the active behavior of a consumer before making a purchase is called purchase intention. Intention is an indicator that a consumer will be able to purchase a predicted product or service in the future, based on the spirit of moving forward with the purchase [39]. According to Oh et al. (2023) [40], intention is a kind of psychological state, attitude, and behavior before the purchase behavior occurs. Consumers’ purchase intention is an important consideration for companies. Jeong (2023) [41] and Kwon (2023) [42] stated that the intention to use a particular product or service is the consumer’s intention to make a purchase.

3. Research Methods

The formulation of the hypotheses in this study draws on the Stimulus–Organism–Response (SOR) model and the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). The SOR model suggests that a person’s information processing begins with a physical stimulus [43]. Individuals are exposed to external stimuli that, through mental processes, result in behavioral responses. A stimulus refers to changes in the external environment. In this study, the stimulus to the consumer refers to the ESG activities of the company. Consumers’ perception of ESG activities is exactly the internal response of the individual, i.e., the organism. Consumer purchase intention as the final behavior of an individual corresponds to the “reaction” in the SOR model.
The theory of rational behavior focuses on analyzing how attitudes consciously affect individual behavior, and focuses on the process of attitude formation based on cognitive information [44]. This study emphasizes the effect of supervisory norms on behavioral intentions. Subjective norms are the degree to which people perceive that they want to use a new system, depending on the degree to which the individual trusts what others think should be done and the degree to which he or she is in agreement with the opinions of others. In this study, the external stimulus, by affecting consumers’ ESG perceptions, makes them develop subjective norms, which motivate them to consider whether or not to buy the agri-food retailer’s products.

3.1. Hypothesis

3.1.1. Relationship between ESG and Consumer ESG Perception

A company’s achievements in environmental protection, social responsibility, and corporate management are favorable for increasing stakeholders’ ESG perception of the company [2]. As part of the stakeholders, consumers are the beneficiaries and judges of ESG activities. The results of ESG campaigns have been shown to increase consumer ESG perception. Bae et al. (2022) [45] examined the impact of corporate ESG activities on consumer and ESG perception using Samdasu, Jeju (a well-known brand of bottled mineral water produced in Jeju City, South Korea) as an example and found that the social value of ESG activities has a significant impact on consumer ESG perception. Goh (2023) [46] found that environmental protection management in ESG activities enables consumers to evaluate companies’ attitudes positively. Jeong et al. (2021) [47] verified the impact of corporate CSR activities on ESG perception within the supply chain. From their study, we can draw the implication that companies’ ESG activities help to increase stakeholders’ ESG perception. Kim et al. (2022) [48] examined the mediating effect of consumer satisfaction on the relationship between ESG management and corporate performance and found that ESG management positively affects consumer ESG perception. In particular, environmental and social responsibility positively affects consumer ESG perception, but the effect of governance on consumer ESG perception is not confirmed.
Based on the above research, this study proposes the following hypotheses regarding the relationship between ESG activities and consumer ESG perception.
H1-1. 
The environment of ESG activities has a positive impact on consumer ESG perception.
H1-2. 
The society of ESG activities has a positive effect on consumer ESG perception.
H1-3. 
The governance of ESG activities has a positive effect on consumer ESG perception.

3.1.2. Relationship between ESG and Purchase Intention

Koh et al. (2022) [49] found that ESG activities influence purchase intention through attitudes, using a sample of Korean consumers. Park (2023) [50] studied the impact of corporate ESG activities on purchase intention, focusing on food service companies. The results showed that corporate ESG activities have a significant impact on purchase intention, with this effect being mediated by expressions of love. Kim et al. (2023) [3], focusing on retailers, demonstrated that corporate ESG management affects purchase intention through attitudes. Jeong (2023) [41] found that the ESG activities of domestic airlines had a significant positive effect on purchase intention. Ko et al. (2023) [51] studied the impact of corporate ESG activities on purchase intention using Starbucks in Shandong, China, as an example. The results showed that social and governance factors had a significant impact on purchase intention, while environmental protection had little impact on purchase intention. Maus and Ko (2023) [52] studied the impact of ESG activities on the purchase intention of Generation MZ consumers and found that ESG activities of Korean companies had a positive impact on the purchase intention of Chinese MZ consumers. (Generation MZ refers to those born after 1981, who have been exposed to digital technology and the Internet from an early age, and are highly dependent on social media and online platforms in their lives. MZ is often used to describe this generation of young people in terms of their consumption habits, values, and lifestyle.) Li et al. (2022) [53] concluded that ESG factors have a positive impact on sales revenue through a study of corporate dynamic finance through panel data on China’s A-share listed companies. Although Bilyay-Erdogan & Öztürkkal (2023)’s [54] research does not directly prove that environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors have a positive impact on purchase intentions, they provide new evidence on the impact of ESG participation on company performance. Purchasing intention often drives purchasing behavior, and consumer purchasing behavior will inevitably have the same impact on company performance. Therefore, their research can also provide theoretical support for this study from the side.
On the basis of the above research, this study proposes the following hypotheses about the relationship between ESG activities and purchase intention. Among them, environmental ESG activities refer to ESG activities carried out by companies to protect the environment, including energy saving and emission reduction, resource recycling, environmental protection, and other measures. Social ESG activities refer to public welfare activities carried out by companies to fulfill their social responsibilities, such as community building, charitable donations, and employee welfare. The governance of ESG activities refers to measures taken by companies in corporate governance, such as transparency, anti-corruption, and board independence.
H2-1. 
The environment of ESG activities has a positive effect on purchase intention.
H2-2. 
The society of ESG activities has a positive effect on purchase intention.
H2-3. 
The governance of ESG activities has a positive effect on purchase intention.

3.1.3. The Mediating Effect of Consumer ESG Perception

Consumers tend to have more confidence in socially responsible companies, feel more secure when developing relationships, and are more likely to accept products [33]. With the public becoming increasingly environmentally conscious, consumer engagement can help consumers realize their environmental values, which in turn can make them feel more satisfied and increase their purchase intentions. The higher the consumer ESG perception, the higher the purchase intention [34]. Kim (2023) [55] found that Gen Z consumers have a strong preference for products from companies with ESG activities and are willing to support these companies. Consumers with higher levels of ESG perception prefer products from companies that conduct ESG events.
Considering the above literature, we propose a set of hypotheses regarding the use of consumer ESG perception as a mediating variable in this paper.
H3. 
Consumer ESG perception has a positive effect on purchase intention.
H4-1. 
Consumer ESG perception has a mediating effect between environment and purchase intention.
H4-2. 
Consumer ESG perception has a mediating effect between society and purchase intention.
H4-3. 
Consumer ESG perception has a mediating effect between governance and purchase intention.

3.2. Research Model

Based on the above studies, this study set up a research model as illustrated in Figure 1. The model includes ESG activities as independent variables, purchase intention as a dependent variable, and consumer ESG perception as a mediating variable.

3.3. Measurement Tool

To examine the relationship between environmental, social, and governance factors, consumer ESG perceptions, and purchase intention, this study used SPSS26.0 for demographic characteristics statistics, reliability analysis, exploratory factor analysis, and correlation analysis, and AMOS23.0 for confirmatory factor analysis, path analysis, and mediation effect analysis. Referring to previous studies, all variables were set to four questions, and the questionnaire was designed with a Likert 5-point scale for each question. The specific contents of the questionnaire are summarized in Table 1 below.
In this study, consumers purchasing agricultural products in Hebei Province were selected as the research subjects. In order to ensure that the respondents were genuine consumers of agri-food products, a screening questionnaire was used in the data collection process of this study. Specifically, respondents were asked to answer whether or not they had purchased agri-food products within the last six months, and only those who were confirmed to have met this criterion were included in the study. In this study, stratified sampling was used to select 10 municipal districts in Hebei Province and 40 questionnaires were distributed in each district. Consumers in each urban area were selected using non-probability sampling. The companies involved in this study are from the list of the top 100 Chinese agri-food companies in 2023. The questionnaire issuance period is from 30 June 2023 to 30 July 2023, for a total of 1 month. A total of 400 questionnaires were distributed, 326 valid questionnaires were returned, and the validity rate was 81.5%. In this study, reliability, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, correlation analysis, path analysis, and mediating effect analysis of the collected data were performed using AMOS26.0.

4. Research Results

4.1. Demographic Analysis

Table 2 shows the demographic characteristics of the 326 valid samples we obtained. The majority of the respondents were female, and the majority of the purchasers of agricultural products were also female, which is consistent with the actual situation. Most of the respondents were in the age group of 30–50 years. Consumers purchased products from agri-food retailers mostly once a week on average, with more than half spending an average of 500–1000 per month in this area. More detailed information is shown in Table 2.

4.2. Exploratory Factor Analysis

Reliability is a measure of the consistency of data results. For testing the validity of the data we used exploratory factor analysis. Potential factor structure was identified by analyzing the correlations between variables. The factor loadings in our study were estimated using principal component analysis (PCA). We applied the Varimax with Kaiser Normalization method for rotation, and the results converged after five iterations. According to Table 3, the reliability coefficient of each variable is above 0.7, indicating that the reliability quality of the questionnaire is higher. The KMO is 0.867, which is higher than 0.8, and Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity result also meets the criterion of p-value less than 0.05, which demonstrates that the research data collected in this study meet the criteria for factor analysis. The absolute value of the factor loadings should be higher than 0.4, and the convergence effect between each measured item and each factor is better than this in the data collected in this study.

4.3. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

To further verify whether the model was modified we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis. CFA can test detailed hypotheses, and CFA models can be directly incorporated into structural equation modeling (SEM) [62]. The average variance extraction (AVE) and combined reliability (CR) were used to analyze the polymerization effect (convergence effect). Generally speaking, in order to achieve a higher aggregation effect, the average variance extraction value should be greater than or equal to 0.5, and at the same time, the combined reliability value of the data cannot be smaller than 0.7, as shown in Table 4. This time, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis on a total of five factors and 20 analysis items. As shown in the table below, the RMR, GFI, NFI, CFI, and other indicators all meet the recommendations of scholars, and the AVE values corresponding to the five factors are all greater than 0.5, and the CR values are all greater than 0.7, indicating that the convergence effect of the data analyzed this time is good.

4.4. Correlation Analysis

Correlation analysis is an analytical method to determine the degree of correlation between two numerical variables [63]. The correlation analysis examined the correlation between the three ESG activities of environment, social, and governance, consumer ESG perception, and purchase intention. The p-value less than 0.05 indicates that the correlation is significant. A positive correlation coefficient indicates a positive correlation, while a negative correlation coefficient indicates a negative correlation. According to the results in Table 5, there is a correlation between environmental, social, and governance factors, consumer ESG perception, and purchase intention, and they are all positively related.

4.5. Path Analysis

According to Hair’s (2017) [64] research, we chose the covariance SEM model to test the hypothesis. Table 6 shows the hypothesis testing results between variables in the structural equation model. χ2/DF = 1.369, GFI = 0.939, AGFI = 0.920, CFI = 0.976, NFI = 0.916, TLI = 0.971, RMSEA = 0.034, and all indicators meet the test criteria. The environmental (β = 0.349, p < 0.05) and social (β = 0.311, p < 0.05) factors of ESG activities have a significant positive effect on consumer ESG perception, but governance (β = 0.032, p = 0.658 > 0.05) does not have a positive effect on consumer ESG perception. We hypothesize that H1-1 and H1-2 are supported. Hypothesis H1-3 is not supported. All three dimensions of ESG activities, environmental (β = 0.359, p < 0.05), social (β = 0.340, p < 0.05), and governance (β = 0.232, p < 0.05), have a positive impact on purchase intention. Hypotheses H2-1, H2-2, and H2-3 can be accepted. Consumer ESG perception (β = 0.212, p < 0.05) has a positive effect on purchase intention. Hypothesis H3 is confirmed.

4.6. Mediating Effect Analysis

Mediating effects were considered to exist if both total and indirect effects were significant. If there is a mediating effect, it is defined as partial mediation when the direct effect is significant, and full mediation when the direct effect is not significant. In this study, the number of bootstrap samples was set to 2000, and the confidence interval was 95% [65]. The results of the mediating effect are shown in Table 7.
Environment has a significant effect on purchase intention (β = 0.433, p < 0.01), environment has a significant direct effect on purchase intention (β = 0.359, p < 0.01), and environment has a significant indirect effect on purchase intention through consumer involvement. Therefore, we conclude that consumer ESG perception has a partial mediating effect between environment and purchase intention.
The total effect of society on purchase intention (β = 0.406, p < 0.01) is significant, and the direct effect (β = 0.340, p < 0.01) limits the indirect effect (β = 0.066, p < 0.01) of society on purchase intention through consumer involvement, so consumer ESG perception has some mediating effect between society and purchase intention.
The total effect of governance on purchase intention (β = 0.239, p < 0.01) is significant, the direct effect of governance on purchase intention (β = 0232, p < 0.01) is significant, and the indirect effect of governance on purchase intention through consumer participation (β = 0.007, p > 0.0) is not significant. Therefore, we conclude that consumer ESG perception does not have a mediating effect between governance and purchase intention.

5. Research Conclusions

5.1. Summary of Findings and Implications

As mitigating the effects of climate warming becomes a global challenge, the demand for businesses and society to realize sustainable development continues to grow. In this context, countries, enterprises, and even society as a whole have maintained a high level of interest in ESG activities. However, although ESG activities have received much attention in China, its development is still in its infancy. In order to promote the further development of ESG practices in China and increase the motivation of enterprises to implement ESG practices, research on ESG activities is needed. Therefore, this study conducts an empirical study of ESG activities as an independent variable, purchase intention as a dependent variable, and consumer ESG perception as a mediating variable among agri-food consumers in Hebei Province, China. The results of the study are summarized as follows.
The results show that, first, the environment and society of a company’s ESG activities have a significant positive effect on consumer ESG perception, while governance does not have a significant positive effect on consumer ESG perception. The results of examining the impact of environment and society on consumer ESG perception are consistent with the views of previous studies [2,45,49,51]. We believe that the reason why governance does not have a significant impact on consumers’ ESG perception may be because consumers pay more attention to impacts that directly affect them. The social and environmental factors through which companies implement ESG practices are more easily recognized by consumers, and consumers are not necessarily employees of companies, so the benefits of governance cannot be directly felt by consumers. Second, environmental, social, and governance factors for a company’s ESG activities have a significant positive effect on purchase intention. This result is consistent with the findings of the studies mentioned in the research hypothesis above [3,49,50,51,52]. This study provides further supporting evidence on the impact of ESG activities on purchase intentions. Third, consumer ESG perception has a significant positive effect on purchase intention. Fourth, consumer ESG perception has a partial mediating effect between environmental factors, social factors, and purchase intention, and a full mediating effect between governance factors and purchase intention. The findings of this study are consistent with those of Tripopsakul & Puriwat (2022) [33], Lee et al. (2022) [34], and Kim (2023) [55].
The findings show the need for companies to implement ESG practices. Competition for companies is no longer just about products, but about business models. In order for companies to maintain their competitive advantage, they need to develop inclusively and sustainably. This requires companies to consider not only the quality of their products or services, but also environmental, social, and governance aspects. Enterprises should focus on environmental protection in the production process and pursue green retailing. Green retailing can be reflected in commodities and business methods. Enterprises should actively introduce green goods and promote the retailing of green goods. Regarding the operation method, on the one hand, for the upstream, retail enterprises should be committed to the establishment of a green supply chain, and for the downstream, retail enterprises should publicize and guide the consumers on green consumption. For agri-food retailers specifically, we recommend that agri-food retailers actively promote green commodities and adopt environmentally friendly measures in production and supply chain management, as well as guide consumers to green consumption through publicity. This will help enhance company image and market competitiveness.
In addition to the protection of the environment, enterprises should also establish a good corporate image and do their part to participate in public welfare. Economic benefits come from society and should be returned to society, so as to maintain a good balance and achieve sustainable development. Agri-food retailers should actively participate in public welfare activities to build a good corporate image and give back to the community. This will not only contribute to the sustainable development of the company, but also enhance consumers’ trust and loyalty to the company.
The internal governance of the enterprise should also be people-oriented, and cannot just focus on economic interests and disregard the value of the staff, as this will inevitably reduce the staff’s motivation to work, and ultimately have a negative impact on the economic interests of the enterprise. In order to avoid such a thing, the enterprise should pay attention to the needs of employees, protect the legitimate rights and interests of employees, increase employee benefits to enhance employee satisfaction and improve employee motivation, and ultimately allow employees to become a part of the enterprise to achieve sustainable development. Agri-food retailers should focus on the legitimate rights and interests of employees, improve employee welfare, and enhance employee satisfaction and motivation. This not only helps the internal governance of the company, but also promotes the long-term development of the company.
Consumer ESG perception also plays an important role in purchase intention. Raising consumer perception of ESG activities can start from three aspects: government, business, and society. First, governments should focus on improving ESG-related laws and regulations, adopting reasonable ESG rating criteria, and overseeing the disclosure of ESG activities by listed companies. Companies should actively engage in ESG activities. Companies should take the initiative to disclose their ESG activities in a proactive, sincere, and timely manner. Social media should play a role in promoting ESG activities and guiding the consumer perception of ESG activities. As a medium that connects government enterprises and consumers, each medium can help more consumers understand the meaning of ESG activities, raise the perception of ESG activities, encourage consumers to support ESG activities in real life, and motivate enterprises to design and implement ESG activities.
This study contributes to both theoretical and practical aspects. Firstly, this study complements the research on ESG activities by empirically analyzing the effect of agricultural consumers’ ESG perceptions on the relationship between ESG activities and purchase intention in a specific context, providing some theoretical references for future research. Secondly, by combining the SOR model with the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and applying it to the field of ESG research in this study, we innovatively explain how a company’s ESG activities affect its purchase intentions through consumers’ perceptions. This theoretical integration provides a new perspective that contributes to a deeper understanding of the mechanisms by which ESG activities affect consumer behavior. Thirdly, this study provides practical guidance for agri-food retailers to understand which ESG activities (environmental, social, or governance) are more effective in increasing consumers’ purchase intentions. This is an important reference for companies when developing ESG strategies.

5.2. Limitations and Future Research

Although this study has some points of contribution in theory and practice, there are still some limitations. First, the survey respondents were limited to consumers in Hebei Province, which has a certain geographical bias. Perhaps the findings would have been more convincing if the respondents had been expanded to different provinces. Second, the research area of this study is agri-food enterprises, and it is yet to be studied whether enterprises in other areas are in the same situation.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.-W.K.; Methodology, P.-T.S.; Validation, P.-T.S.; Investigation, B.O.; Data curation, P.-T.S.; Writing—original draft, P.-T.S.; Writing—review & editing, T.-W.K.; Visualization, B.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

According to the Kunsan National University’s requirement, for this kind of study that does not involve any direct interaction with human subjects, medical interventions, or the use of animal subjects, IRB approval was not required in advance.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hao, Y.; Lu, Z.; Ning, C.; Li, J.; Wei, Z. Do CEOs Realize the Negative Impact of Air Pollution? Evidence from Voluntary CEO Turnovers. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 60, 1956–1970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Yang, X.; Qin, J. Research on the impact of ESG performance on corporate value of listed companies. Sci. Technol. Econ. 2023, 36, 96–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kim, Y.; Pyo, J.M.; Cha, S.S. Effects of ESG Management of Retail Companies on Consumer Values and Attitudes. Retail Sci. Res. (JDS) 2023, 21, 113–119. [Google Scholar]
  4. Liu, H.; Tang, X.; Liu, L.Y.; Lai, H. Foreign Institutional Investors and Corporate Green Innovation: Evidence from an Emerging Economy. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2024, 60, 2096–2109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Xu, H.F.; Xu, X.D.; Yu, J.L. The impact of mandatory CSR disclosure on the cost of debt financing: Evidence from China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2021, 57, 2191–2205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Truant, E.; Borlatto, E.; Crocco, E.; Bhatia, M. ESG performance and technological change: Current state-of-the-art, development and future directions. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 429, 139493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Alsayegh, M.F.; Abdul Rahman, R.; Homayoun, S. Corporate Economic, Environmental, and Social Sustainability Performance Transformation through ESG Disclosure. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Darnall, N.; Ji, H.; Iwata, K.; Arimura, T.H. Do ESG reporting guidelines and verifications enhance firms’ information disclosure? Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2022, 29, 1214–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. He, W.; Qin, S.; Liu, Y.; Wu, J.G. CSR and idiosyncratic risk: Evidence from ESG information disclosure. Financ. Res. Lett. 2022, 49, 102936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tsang, S.; Fan, Y.; Feng, Z.P.; Li, Y. Examining supply chain vulnerability via an analysis of ESG-Prioritized firms amid the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 139754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Vilas, M.; Andreu, L.; Sarto, J.L. Cluster analysis to validate the sustainability label of stock indices: An analysis of the inclusion and exclusion processes in terms of size and ESG ratings. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 330, 129862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, Z.H.; Liao, K.Z.; Zhang, Y. Does ESG Screening Enhance or Destroy Stock Portfolio Value? Evidence from China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2022, 58, 2927–2941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Xue, J.; Wang, H.; Yang, Y.; Linnenluecke, M.K.; Jin, K.; Cai, C.W. The adverse impact of corporate ESG controversies on sustainable investment. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 427, 139237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zhang, X.K.; Zhao, X.K.; He, Y. Does it pay to be responsible? The performance of ESG investing in China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2022, 58, 3048–3075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Xiao, X.; Liu, X.; Liu, J. ESG Rating Dispersion and Expected Stock Return in China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 3422–3437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yang, B.; Guo, C.; Fan, Y. Institutional investor networks and ESG performance: Evidence from China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2024, 60, 113–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Gong, G.M.; Yang, N.; Yang, M.; Xiao, L. Do Government-Based Customers Promote Green Innovation? Evidence from China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2024, 60, 2081–2095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Kong, D.; Liu, B. Digital technology and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 2967–2993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lou, Z.C. Literature review on ESG related research. Times Econ. Trade 2021, 18, 65–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Luo, Y.; Tian, N.; Wang, D.; Han, W. Does Digital Transformation Enhance Firm’s ESG Performance? Evidence from an Emerging Market. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 60, 825–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Deng, P.; Wen, J.; He, W.; Chen, Y.E.; Wang, Y.P. Capital market opening and ESG performance. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 3866–3876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hu, J.; Han, Y.; Zhong, Y. How Corporate Digital Transformation Affects Corporate ESG Performance: Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies. Ind. Econ. Rev. 2023, 54, 105–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wang, X.; Luan, X.; Zhang, S. Corporate R&D investment, ESG performance and market value—Adjustment efficiency of firms with steady digitization level. Sci. Res. 2023, 41, 896–904+915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Stoelhorst, J.W.; Vishwanathan, P. Beyond primacy: A stakeholder theory of corporate governance. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2024, 49, 107–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hui, J.J. The impact of listed companies’ ESG performance on corporate financial performance: The moderating role of media attention. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2022, 13, 459–472. [Google Scholar]
  26. Yi, L.; Li, T.; Huang, Q.; Wang, Z.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, T. Research on the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Sustainable Performance: A Multi-dimensional Balance Perspective. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 1919–1935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Peng, Q.; Chen, J.; Yin, J.M. ESG performance, innovation capability and firm performance. Friends Acc. 2023, 703, 11–17. [Google Scholar]
  28. Yang, K.; Song, L.; Zhao, X.X.; Wang, Y.W. Overseas Investment, Corporate Social Responsibility and Market Value: Based on the Host Country Heterogeneity Perspective. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 60, 436–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yin, J.; Yang, X. How Does Corporate Social Responsibility Affect Corporate Cash Holdings? Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 3201–3219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Zhou, L.J.; Qiu, H.; Zhang, X.Y. How Does the Market React to Corporate Philanthropic Behavior? —Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic Shock. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2021, 57, 1613–1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Xiong, W.; Dong, M.; Xu, C. Institutional investors and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from China. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 3281–3292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Arik, E.; Mutlu, E. Post–Initial Public Offering Operating Performance and Its Determinants: Initial Public Offering Characteristics and Corporate Governance Practices. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2015, 51 (Suppl. S2), S62–S83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Tripopsakul, S.; Puriwat, W. Understanding the Impact of ESG on Brand Trust and Customer Engagement. J. Hum. Earth Future 2022, 3, 430–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Lee, D.H.; Lee, J.H.; Lee, C.J.; Kang, D.S. The effects of consumer involvement level in sports team green marketing activities on public relatedness, team image, and behavioral intention: A focus on baby boomers. Korean J. Sports Ind. Manag. 2022, 27, 38–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Agyekum, C.K.; Haifeng, H.; Agyeiwaa, A. Consumer perception of product quality. Microeconomics Macroeconomics 2015, 3, 25–29. [Google Scholar]
  36. Öberseder, M.; Schlegelmilch, B.B.; Murphy, P.E. CSR practices and consumer perceptions. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 1839–1851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Otto, S.; Strenger, M.; Maier-Nöth, A.; Schmid, M. Food packaging and sustainability–Consumer perception vs. correlated scientific facts: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 298, 126733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lee, J.Y. The effects of shopping motivation and store attributes on satisfaction, purchase intention, and switching intention in online fashion shopping malls. Hanbok Cult. 2023, 26, 159–173. [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhang, B.Y.; Oh, K.H. The impact of Chinese consumers’ lifestyle on athleisure wear pursuit benefits and purchase intention. J. Korean Soc. Apparel Des. 2023, 25, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  40. Oh, Y.H.; Lee, K.S.; Park, S.J.; Kim, D.H. Effects of fresh food delivery package attributes on consumer attitude and purchase intention. Culin. Sci. Hosp. Res. 2023, 29, 57–71. [Google Scholar]
  41. Jeong, T.Y. A study on the relationship between ESG management, social distance, and purchase intention of domestic airlines. Hotel Resort Res. 2023, 22, 353–371. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kwon, J.B.; Jeong, J.K. A study on consumption value, satisfaction, and continuance purchase intention of health consciousness and RTH-HMR. J. Korean Rest. Ind. Assoc. 2023, 19, 117–136. [Google Scholar]
  43. Qi, X.; Ploeger, A. An integrated framework to explain consumers’ purchase intentions toward green food in the Chinese context. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 92, 104229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lim, W.M.; Weissmann, M.A. Toward a theory of behavioral control. J. Strateg. Market. 2023, 31, 185–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bae, D.; Lee, E.; Lee, S. The Effect of ESG Activities on Social Value, Satisfaction, and Recommend Intention—Focus on JEJU SAMDASOO. J. Ind. Innov. 2022, 38, 101–111. [Google Scholar]
  46. Goh, M.H. Effects of airline eco-friendly ESG management perceptions on corporate reputation, attitude, and customer citizenship behavior on SNS using text mining technique—Applying SOR model. Korean J. Airline Manag. 2023, 21, 3–23. [Google Scholar]
  47. Jeong, Y.H.; Kim, S.H.; Park, J.K.; Choi, D.H. A study on improving SCM performance through CSR activities: Focusing on the mediating effect of satisfaction with partners in the supply chain. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2021, 12, 1751–1766. [Google Scholar]
  48. Kim, H.S.; Lee, Y.J.; Choi, J.W.; Park, D.H. The impact of ESG management on financial performance: The mediating effect of customer satisfaction. J. Prof. Manag. 2022, 25, 159–176. [Google Scholar]
  49. Koh, Y.J.; Lee, J.H.; Park, S.K.; Kim, M.H. Perceived ESG (environmental, social, governance) and consumers’ responses: The mediating role of brand credibility, brand image, and perceived quality. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Park, J.Y.; Seo, J.W. A structural relationship study of ESG management activities of restaurant companies on brand image, love mark, and purchase intention. Hotel Resort Res. 2023, 22, 259–278. [Google Scholar]
  51. Ko, Y.H.; Lee, K.S.; Park, H.J.; Kim, S.J. The impact of corporate ESG management on brand equity and purchase intention: Focusing on Starbucks in Shandong Province, China. Trade Res. 2023, 19, 347–368. [Google Scholar]
  52. Maus, S.-Y.; Ko, E.Y. The impact of corporate ESG campaigns on Generation MZ’s brand attitudes-Focusing on ESG advertisements of SK Group, Hana Financial Group, and Hanwha Group. Brand Des. Res. 2023, 21, 177–188. [Google Scholar]
  53. Li, C.; Wu, M.; Huang, W. Environmental, social, and governance performance and enterprise dynamic financial behavior: Evidence from panel vector autoregression. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 281–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bilyay-Erdogan, S.; Öztürkkal, B. The role of environmental, social, governance (ESG) practices and ownership on firm performance in emerging markets. Emerg. Mark. Financ. Trade 2023, 59, 3776–3797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Kim, E.H. The moderated mediating effects of consumer ESG perceptions and engagement level on the relationship between corporate credibility, ESG advertising message comprehension, and product attitude. Humanit. Soc. 2023, 14, 1857–1872. [Google Scholar]
  56. Heo, Y.J.; Kim, S.Y.; Lee, J.K.; Park, M.H. Development and validation of ESG management scale from consumer perspective. Consum. Res. 2023, 34, 99–127. [Google Scholar]
  57. Zhou, Y.H.; Zhang, X.Y.; Liu, P.Z.; Li, R. Does ESG impact firms’ sustainability performance? The mediating effect of innovation performance. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Bae, Y.H.; Kim, S.J.; Lee, J.K.; Park, M.H. The impact of ESG on brand trust and word of mouth in food and beverage companies: Focusing on Jeju Island tourists. Sustainability 2023, 15, 2348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Puriwat, W.; Tripopsakul, S. From ESG to DESG: The impact of DESG (digital environmental, social, and governance) on customer attitudes and brand equity. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Batsuuri, O.; Punsag, A.; Munkhbaatar, N.; Batbayar, B. The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction and repurchase intention: Focusing on supermarkets in Mongolia. Trade Res. 2020, 16, 227–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Song, J.H.; Kim, M.H.; Lee, J.K.; Park, D.S. The effects of live-streaming commerce anchor attributes on perceived value and purchase intention: Focusing on Chinese agricultural market. J. Soc. Circ. Manag. 2021, 24, 5–22. [Google Scholar]
  62. Hoyle, R.H. Confirmatory factor analysis. In Handbook of Applied Multivariate Statistics and Mathematical Modeling; Tinsley, H.E.A., Brown, S.D., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2000; pp. 465–497. [Google Scholar]
  63. Bujang, M.A.; Baharum, N. Sample size guideline for correlation analysis. World 2016, 3, 37–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Matthews, L.M.; Matthews, R.L.; Sarstedt, M. PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. Int. J. Multivar. Data Anal. 2017, 1, 107–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Mallinckrodt, B.; Abraham, W.T.; Wei, M.; Russell, D.W. Advances in testing the statistical significance of mediation effects. J. Couns. Psychol. 2006, 53, 372–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 08376 g001
Figure 1. Research model.
Figure 1. Research model.
Sustainability 16 08376 g001
Table 1. Measurement tool design.
Table 1. Measurement tool design.
VariablesQuestionSourceNumber of Items
EnvironmentWorking to reduce carbon and greenhouse gas emissionsHeo et al., (2023) [56] Zhou et al., (2023) [57] Bae et al., (2023) [58]4
Working to reduce hazardous chemicals
Commitment to biodiversity conservation
Developing environmentally friendly products
SocialImproving community infrastructureHeo et al., (2023) [56] Zhou et al., (2023) [57] Tripopsakul & Puriwat, (2022) [33]4
Support our suppliers
Ensure employee safety
Ensure the well-being of our employees
GovernanceIncreasing shareholder returnHeo et al., (2023) [56] Zhou et al., (2023) [57]4
Transparently disclose board activities
Put rules and systems in place
Strengthen risk controls
Consumer ESG PerceptionI’m proud of companies’ ESG effortsTripopsakul & Puriwat, (2022) [33]4
I support companies’ ESG activities
I want to participate in my organization’s ESG activities
I am aware of other organizations’ ESG activities
Purchase IntentionI would choose to buy products from companies that practice ESG activitiesPuriwat & Tripopsakul, (2022) [59] Batsuuri et al. (2020), [60]
Song et al. (2021) [61]		4
I would like to buy products from companies with ESG activities.
I would recommend others to buy products from companies with ESG activities.
I would like to buy products from companies with ESG activities.
Table 2. Demographic results (N = 326).
Table 2. Demographic results (N = 326).
VariablesGroupFrequencyRatio (%)
SexMale11334.7
Female21365.3
Age20–307523.0
30–4010331.6
40–508124.8
More than 506720.6
Educational BackgroundHigh school and below8225.2
Undergraduate course18155.5
Graduate student6319.3
Monthly Consumption Frequency1–3 times5617.2
3–5 times14042.9
More than 5 times13039.9
Monthly Consumption Level (yuan)Less than 50010532.2
500–100016951.8
More than 10005216.0
Income (yuan)Under 3000309.2
3000–60006219.0
6001–10,00016049.1
More than 10,0007422.7
Table 3. Exploratory factor analysis results.
Table 3. Exploratory factor analysis results.
VariablesCodes12345Cronbach’s α
Consumer ESG
Perception		M110.801 0.094 0.129 0.037 0.120 0.825
M140.790 0.065 0.061 0.109 0.160
M120.782 0.160 0.121 −0.002 0.092
M130.729 0.182 0.122 0.076 0.199
EnvironmentX110.074 0.793 −0.027 0.043 0.118 0.822
X140.150 0.789 0.054 0.103 0.156
X120.173 0.788 0.008 0.008 0.081
X130.083 0.752 0.057 0.028 0.258
SocialX210.073 0.016 0.804 0.021 0.161 0.816
X220.070 0.058 0.763 0.176 0.160
X230.185 0.027 0.751 0.111 0.218
X240.115 −0.018 0.749 0.228 0.067
GovernanceX31−0.029 0.136 0.165 0.791 0.063 0.810
X320.118 −0.017 0.111 0.785 0.063
X330.131 0.009 0.064 0.776 0.218
X34−0.006 0.059 0.162 0.735 0.197
Purchase
Intention		Y110.134 0.128 0.091 0.227 0.780 0.799
Y140.198 0.190 0.234 0.099 0.724
Y120.154 0.199 0.144 0.173 0.688
Y130.185 0.216 0.287 0.114 0.624
Eigen Value2.679 2.675 2.646 2.615 2.394
Explained Variance (%)13.395 13.375 13.232 13.073 11.969
Cumulative Variance (%)13.395 26.770 40.002 53.075 65.045
KMO = 0.867, Bartlett = 2560.598, df = 190, Sig = 0.000
Table 4. Confirmatory factor analysis results.
Table 4. Confirmatory factor analysis results.
VariablesCodesStandardized EstimateStandard ErrorCRAVE
EnvironmentX110.709 0.414 0.822 0.536
X120.721 0.351
X130.731 0.349
X140.767 0.331
SocialX210.711 0.377 0.816 0.526
X220.732 0.349
X230.762 0.345
X240.695 0.376
GovernanceX310.736 0.384 0.811 0.518
X320.687 0.391
X330.754 0.356
X340.699 0.354
Consumer
ESG
Perception		M110.750 0.349 0.825 0.541
M120.729 0.347
M130.734 0.339
M140.728 0.357
Purchase
Intention		Y110.715 0.343 0.800 0.500
Y120.679 0.360
Y130.689 0.360
Y140.743 0.305
χ2 = 218.996, DF = 160, χ2/DF = 1.369, GFI = 0.939, AGFI = 0.920, NFI = 0.916, CFI = 0.976, RMR = 0.029, RMSEA = 0.034
Table 5. Correlation analysis results.
Table 5. Correlation analysis results.
MSDXEXSXGMPPI
Environment3.746 0.714 1
Social3.844 0.704 0.121 *1
Governance4.015 0.703 0.158 **0.350 **1
Consumer ESG Perception3.893 0.706 0.330 **0.308 **0.191 **1
Purchase Intention3.880 0.654 0.440 **0.463 **0.402 **0.439 **1
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.
Table 6. Path analysis results.
Table 6. Path analysis results.
HypothesisPathStandardized EstimateSECRPResults
H1-1XE → MP0.3490.0715.119***Supported
H1-2XS → MP0.3110.084.183***Supported
H1-3XG → MP0.0320.0710.4420.658Not Supported
H2-1XE → PI0.3590.065.524***Supported
H2-2XS → PI0.340.0674.927***Supported
H2-3XG → PI0.2320.0563.704***Supported
H3MP → PI0.2120.0583.250.001Supported
χ2= 218.996, DF = 160, χ2/DF = 1.369, GFI = 0.939, AGFI = 0.920, CFI = 0.976, NFI = 0.916, TLI = 0.971, RMSEA = 0.034
*** p < 0.000.
Table 7. Results of the mediating effect analysis.
Table 7. Results of the mediating effect analysis.
XGXSXEMP
Consumer ESG PerceptionDirect Effects0.0320.311 **0.349 **
Indirect Effects
Total Effects0.0320.311 **0.349 **
Purchase IntentionDirect Effects0.232 **0.340 **0.359 **0.212 **
Indirect Effects0.0070.066 **0.074 **
Total Effects0.239 **0.406 **0.433 **0.212 **
** p < 0.01.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Song, P.-T.; Oyunbazar, B.; Kang, T.-W. The Impact of Agricultural Food Retailers’ ESG Activities on Purchase Intention: The Mediating Effect of Consumer ESG Perception. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198376

AMA Style

Song P-T, Oyunbazar B, Kang T-W. The Impact of Agricultural Food Retailers’ ESG Activities on Purchase Intention: The Mediating Effect of Consumer ESG Perception. Sustainability. 2024; 16(19):8376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198376

Chicago/Turabian Style

Song, Pan-Ting, Batsuuri Oyunbazar, and Tae-Won Kang. 2024. "The Impact of Agricultural Food Retailers’ ESG Activities on Purchase Intention: The Mediating Effect of Consumer ESG Perception" Sustainability 16, no. 19: 8376. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198376

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop