Next Article in Journal
Developing a Sustainable Traffic Management Framework Using Machine Learning Models for Fuel Consumption Minimization at Closely Spaced Intersections
Next Article in Special Issue
Leveraging Spectral Clustering and Long Short-Term Memory Techniques for Green Hotel Recommendations in Saudi Arabia
Previous Article in Journal
Xanthan- and Gelatine-Based Composites Used as Nursery Groundcovers: Assessment of Soil Microbiology and Seedling Performance
Previous Article in Special Issue
Intentions of Green Behavior by Mountain Climbers at the Hallasan National Park and World Heritage Site
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

When Mindful Consumption Meets Green Purchase Intention: Empirical Evidence on How a Mindful Mindset Influences Tourists

by
Dongyi Ji
1,2,
Siwarit Pongsakornrungsilp
3,*,
Pimlapas Pongsakornrungsilp
4 and
Vikas Kumar
5
1
College of Graduate Studies, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand
2
School of Economics and Management, Guangxi Agricultural Vocational and Technical University, Nanning 530007, China
3
Department of Digital Marketing, Center of Excellence for Tourism Business Management and Creative Economy, School of Management, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand
4
Department of Tourism and Prochef, Center of Excellence for Tourism Business Management and Creative Economy, School of Management, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat 80160, Thailand
5
Faculty of Business, Law, and Social Sciences, Birmingham City University, Birmingham B5 5JU, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2025, 17(3), 1266; https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031266
Submission received: 22 December 2024 / Revised: 22 January 2025 / Accepted: 27 January 2025 / Published: 5 February 2025

Abstract

:
This study assessed the impact of mindful consumption on tourists’ green purchase intention and explore the mediating roles played by health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness. Through an online survey, multi-source data were collected from tourists across China, and SmartPLS SEM was used for analysis to accommodate the requirements of complex models and the testing of mediating effects. The findings indicate that mindful consumption directly enhances green purchase intention and exerts an indirect effect through the mediating roles of ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness. However, the impact of health consciousness on green purchase intention was insignificant. This study is the first to link mindful consumption to tourists’ green purchasing behavior, constructing a critical framework to explore how mindful consumption influences green purchase intention. Additionally, it verifies the partial mediating roles of ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness in this process. Tourism stakeholders can utilize the proposed framework to implement strategies that promote tourists’ green purchasing behavior, therefore fostering sustainable development.

1. Introduction

Global environmental issues are becoming increasingly severe, with challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource overconsumption posing significant threats to human society [1]. As an essential part of the global economy, the tourism industry has brought notable economic and social benefits, but it has also had a significant negative impact on the environment. Studies show that greenhouse gas emissions from tourism account for 8% of global emissions, significantly contributing to global warming [2]. Therefore, promoting the sustainable development of tourism and reducing its environmental impact is an urgent priority.
As a key component of sustainable behavior, green consumption has been widely discussed and recognized as a practical approach for reducing resource use and environmental impact [3]. In the tourism sector, research on green consumption and green purchasing behavior has been increasing [4]; however, much of this research has primarily focused on the selection of green hotels or the consumption of specific green products [5,6,7,8], lacking the systematic exploration of the purchase intention for a broader range of green products and the underlying psychological decision-making mechanisms.
To address these gaps, this study introduces the theory of mindful consumption (MC) and the norm activation model (NAM) to explore the impact of MC on tourists’ green purchase intention (GPI). The theory of MC posits that a mindful mindset (i.e., caring for oneself, the community, and nature) drives individuals to engage in mindful behaviors (such as consumption in moderation) [9]. The NAM further explains this psychological mechanism, suggesting that when individuals become aware of social issues and their impact on others, it triggers an internal sense of moral responsibility. Awareness of consequences and the admission of individual responsibility activate personal norms, which in turn motivate individuals to take corresponding pro-environmental actions [10].
The existing literature generally shows a significant positive relationship between MC and green purchase intention [11,12,13,14,15,16]. Previous studies have explored this relationship in various types of products including organic food [15], second-hand clothing [14,16], and sustainable sanitary products [12], highlighting that this relationship is mediated through multiple influencing mechanisms and external factors. However, these studies have primarily focused on traditional consumption contexts within specific product categories and did not fully examine the impact mechanisms of MC on diverse green tourism products in a tourism environment.
Tourism consumption is characterized by high experiential value, significant consumption levels, and prominent cultural attributes [17], making the relationship between MC and green purchase intention for tourism particularly distinctive. For instance, green products at tourist destinations not only reflect the environmental attributes of the products themselves, but also embody the local ecological values and cultural concepts. When tourists follow MC, they are more likely to form a deep emotional connection and cultural resonance with the local environment when selecting green products, an experience that is relatively difficult to achieve in everyday consumption. Therefore, exploring how this unique consumption environment shapes the relationship between MC and green purchase intention regarding tourism is vital for filling the research gaps, deepening the theoretical understanding, and developing more targeted sustainable strategies.
Benos et al. [18] noted that health consciousness (HC) (caring for oneself), ethical self-identity (EI) (caring for the community), and environmental consciousness (EC) (caring for nature) are high-level motivations of a mindful mindset, which can trigger purchase behavior regarding green products. This aligns with the activation process of personal norms in some studies applying the NAM. In these studies, health consciousness and environmental consciousness were considered as antecedent variables influencing the individuals’ awareness of consequences [19,20], while ethical self-identity explained the individuals’ acceptance of responsibility [21]. These factors serve as triggers for personal norms and associated green behaviors.
This study views health consciousness and environmental consciousness as specific manifestations of an awareness of consequences, with ethical self-identity being a variable reflecting the ascription of responsibility. It innovatively combines the theory of MC with the NAM to study the tourists’ green purchase intention in the tourism context. Specifically, the theory of MC focuses on the individuals’ internal mindful mindset and external mindful behaviors, but does not systematically construct the transition from a mindful mindset to mindful behavior. The NAM, on the other hand, explains the moral activation and action-taking process followed after individuals become aware of the consequences of their behavior. By combining the two, this study delved into the internal mechanisms by which a mindful mindset influences mindful behavior (green purchase intention) and revealed the role of the NAM through health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness—high-level motivations reflecting an awareness of consequences and acceptance of responsibility.
This theoretical integration not only expands the application of the theory of MC in the field of green consumption, but also offers a new perspective for the NAM, enhancing its applicability in explaining green purchase behavior. Unlike previous studies that primarily focused on traditional consumption contexts or single product categories [16,22,23], this research applies this integrated model to tourism, revealing the unique psychological mechanisms of short-term, non-local consumers and providing new insights for both theoretical research and practical application. In practice, this study offers actionable strategic recommendations for policymakers and tourism businesses, stimulating the tourists’ green purchase intention by strengthening their MC mindsets and promoting the sustainable development of tourism.
This study investigated how MC promotes tourists’ green purchase intentions, focusing on the roles of health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness. Specifically, it addresses the following questions: (1) Does MC influence tourists’ green purchase intentions? (2) How do health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness impact these intentions? (3) Do these factors mediate the relationship between MC and green purchase intentions? Addressing these questions fills gaps in the existing literature and offers theoretical and practical insights for sustainable tourism consumption.
The rest of thispaper is structured as follows. Section 2 reviews the theoretical background and the literature and presents the conceptual framework and hypotheses; Section 3 outlines the research methodology. The results, discussion, and conclusions are presented in the subsequent sections, along with suggestions for future research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Mindful Consumption

Mindfulness originates from a mental quality, and its theory has been developed through the study and application of psychological meditation methods [24] and social cognitive approaches [25]. Mindfulness emphasizes full awareness and self-regulation of present experiences [26].
MC applies mindfulness principles to consumer behavior, rooted in reflections on traditional consumption patterns and their environmental, social, and economic impacts [27]. As a customer-centric approach to sustainability, MC enhances the consumers’ awareness and care (for self, community, and nature) in decision-making, promoting mindful behavior, avoiding overconsumption, and reducing environmental harm [9]. MC has three dimensions: awareness (attentiveness to self, community, and nature), caring (sense of responsibility), and temperance (moderation and self-control) [28]. This shift in mindset and behavior helps consumers to make conscious choices that enhance social and personal well-being while minimizing environmental damage [9].
As a practice, MC increases the consumers’ awareness of internal and external stimuli during consumption, enabling them to make more deliberate decisions and reduce susceptibility to external influences [29]. MC has facilitated more sustainable decision-making in various fields by increasing self-awareness and social responsibility [27]. Manchanda et al. [13] found that mindful consumers exhibited more excellent care and were thus more likely to develop sustainable awareness. Bahl et al. [22] further examined how MC reduced habitual consumption, influencing the consumer purchase decisions.
Research on MC has primarily focused on areas with significant environmental impacts such as the fashion industry [30] and the second-hand clothing market [16]. In tourism and hospitality, mindful consumers are more inclined to seek meaningful local experiences and prefer green-practicing hotels [22]. However, despite existing studies, the question of how MC influences the consumers’ selection of environmentally friendly products, particularly in tourism, still needs to be explored. This study will fill this gap by investigating how MC affects the tourists’ green purchase intentions, expanding the application of MC theory.

2.1.1. Mindful Consumption and Green Purchase Intention

Mindfulness is a psychological state centered on fostering positive emotional experiences and deepening care for oneself and others. Its mechanism weakens automatic behavior patterns, promoting the development of compassion, self-control, and environmental values, thereby providing a strong internal drive for translating pro-environmental intentions into actual behavior [31].
MC is the extension and concretization of mindfulness in consumption [32], guiding consumers to reflect deeply on the environmental impacts of their actions and emphasizing holistic care for individuals, communities, and the natural environment [9]. The transformative power of MC lies in enhancing the consumers’ awareness, enabling them to recognize the long-term consequences of their behaviors, causing them to favor environmentally friendly consumption choices [29]. In practice, MC advocates for alertness to internal and external stimuli during consumption, considering the multidimensional impact of consumption on individuals, society, and the environment, thereby effectively curbing impulsive buying and overconsumption [33]. The concept and uniqueness of MC provide a solid theoretical foundation and practical pathway for stimulating tourists’ green purchase intentions.
Multiple studies have validated the significant association between mindfulness and sustainable behavior [28,29]. Recent research [16,30,31] has consistently shown that mindfulness and MC significantly enhance the consumers’ willingness to purchase environmentally friendly products such as organic food and second-hand clothing. These studies suggest that MC may also be a key factor in promoting tourists’ green purchase intentions in tourism.
Based on the above analysis, the following hypothesis can be formulated:
H1: 
MC positively influences tourists’ willingness to purchase green products.

2.1.2. Mindful Consumption and Health Consciousness

Health consciousness (HC) is a multidimensional concept involving the individuals’ awareness of their health and the actions that they can take to maintain or improve it. This encompasses disease prevention and overall physical and mental well-being [34]. Individuals with high health consciousness are typically more sensitive to health-related information, enabling them to recognize health risks and take preventive measures [35].
MC enhances the awareness of health needs, fostering health-oriented behaviors. Studies have shown that mindfulness improves self-reflection and health management, alleviates stress and anxiety, and promotes healthier behaviors [36]. Based on self-determination theory (SDT), MC stimulates intrinsic motivation, encouraging an understanding and improvement of one’s health [37].
Mindfulness positively correlates with health behaviors and indirectly promotes eco-friendly behavior by encouraging positive health practices [38]. Therefore, mindful consumers are more likely to perceive the long-term health impacts of their consumption choices and exhibit higher health consciousness. Based on this information, the following hypothesis can be proposed:
H2: 
MC positively influences tourists’ health consciousness.

2.1.3. Mindful Consumption and Ethical Self-Identity

Ethical self-identity (EI) refers to the internalization of moral beliefs and values into one’s self-concept, which are then reflected in consistent moral behavior and decision-making. It drives individuals to practice these values daily, influencing moral behavior [39].
Research shows that mindfulness, as a psychological process, can strengthen ethical self-identity, encouraging individuals to make more ethical and sustainable consumption choices [40]. By enhancing the individuals’ connection with nature and improving self-regulation, mindfulness promotes more rational product choices and reduces overconsumption [41]. This process reveals that mindfulness is both a personal practice and an important psychological mechanism driving ethical consumption.
According to the NAM, problem awareness triggers responsibility attribution, activating a sense of moral responsibility [42]. For MC, consumers become more sensitive to the long-term impacts of their consumption behavior, reinforcing their moral responsibility and ethical self-identity. Furthermore, mindfulness reduces the reliance on material possessions and enhances subjective well-being, aligning with the intrinsic value pursuits emphasized in ethical self-identity [31]. Based on this theoretical framework and related empirical research, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: 
MC positively influences tourists’ ethical self-identity.

2.1.4. Mindful Consumption and Environmental Consciousness

Environmental consciousness (EC) is a comprehensive concept encompassing an individual’s cognition, emotional experience, and sense of responsibility toward the natural environment. It reflects one’s attitude and willingness to take responsibility for environmental issues and engage in positive actions [43]. EC includes concern for environmental quality and a willingness to contribute to environmental protection [44].
Mindfulness enhances an individual’s awareness of both internal and external environments, increasing their sensitivity to the potential environmental impact of their consumption behavior [17,31]. Research suggests that mindful individuals are more likely to perceive the environmental effects of their behavior, and as a result, are more inclined to engage in environmentally friendly actions [45]. The intrinsic values promoted by mindfulness, such as altruism and compassion, encourage individuals to prioritize environmental protection in their consumption decisions [9].
Additionally, mindfulness practices significantly enhance the individuals’ awareness of and sense of responsibility regarding environmental issues, motivating them to engage in pro-environmental behaviors [34,42]. Mindfulness deepens the individuals’ care for the environment and strengthens their sense of responsibility, influencing their environmental attitudes and behaviors [46]. Based on this information, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: 
MC positively influences tourists’ environmental consciousness.

2.2. Green Purchase Intention

Green purchase intention refers to the consumers’ motivation and intention to choose green products based on environmental concerns and awareness [47]. It reflects the consumers’ decision-making processes being driven by an awareness of environmental protection and is an essential indicator for understanding sustainable consumption behavior. In tourism, the tourists’ green purchase intention demonstrates their consideration of environmental and related impacts when selecting tourism products and services.

2.2.1. Health Consciousness and Green Purchase Intention

With the significant increase in public health consciousness, highly health-sensitive consumer groups focus not only on the products’ direct health benefits, but also on the environmental friendliness of their ingredient compositions and production processes, which leads them to prefer healthy and eco-friendly options [48]. Multiple studies have confirmed that health consciousness is a key driving force, directly enhancing the consumers’ intention to purchase green products, particularly in health-oriented domains, such as organic foods and green furniture, where this effect is particularly pronounced [45,49]. The increase in health consciousness not only encourages greater positivity toward green products, but also translates this positive attitude into increased actual purchasing behavior [50]. Furthermore, health consciousness fosters trust in green brands, thereby indirectly enhancing their green purchasing intentions [47,48,51].
In light of this analysis, within the specific context of the tourism sector, we can reasonably hypothesize the following:
H5: 
Health consciousness positively influences tourists’ green purchase intention.

2.2.2. Ethical Self-Identity and Green Purchase Intention

The concept of identity is a core element of behavioral economic models, and its ability to predict consumer outcomes is widely acknowledged [52]. In studies concerning sustainable consumption, individual identity or self-concept lays a solid foundation for predicting pro-environmental intentions [53,54]. Previous research indicates that individuals who identify as green consumers manifest this identity through concrete actions, engaging in environmentally friendly behaviors [55,56]. When everyday products are closely linked to an individual’s identity, these items are more likely to be recycled than discarded, as discarding products associated with one’s identity may be perceived as a denial of self-concept [57].
Ethical self-identity is a significant avenue through which consumers express their personal values and self-concept in purchasing decisions, and is closely intertwined with individual moral beliefs, values, and personality traits [58]. As their moral judgment and ethical intensity increase, consumers are more inclined to choose green products that align with their moral standards when making purchasing decisions [11]. For consumers with a solid ethical self-identity, selecting green products satisfies their personal needs and reflects their intrinsic moral beliefs, significantly enhancing their intention to purchase green items [59]. In summary, those who deeply identify as moral consumers are more likely to feel a sense of duty to fulfill moral responsibilities including favoring green alternatives in their choices of consumer goods as a positive response to ethical obligations. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H6: 
Ethical self-identity positively influences tourists’ green purchase intentions.

2.2.3. Environmental Consciousness and Green Purchase Intention

The relationship between environmental consciousness and willingness to engage in green purchasing has been extensively studied [57,60]. One key finding is that environmental attitudes, as a crucial element of environmental consciousness, are strongly positively correlated with willingness to purchase green products [61]. Furthermore, increased environmental knowledge and heightened consumer efficacy significantly boost the intention to purchase green products [62]. The former reinforces the consumers’ positive perceptions of green products and deepens the positive correlation between these perceptions and purchasing intentions [6,49].
The theory of planned behavior (TPB) and the value–belief–norm (VBN) theory further clarify this relationship. Environmental attitudes, as a component of the TPB, can enhance individuals’ willingness to engage in green purchasing by increasing their environmental knowledge and sense of responsibility [59,63]. The VBN theory emphasizes that individuals’ environmental values [63] and beliefs [64] can stimulate their sense of environmental responsibility, subsequently influencing their purchasing decisions.
Within the tourism sector, research has similarly revealed the positive impact of environmental knowledge and caring attitudes on tourists’ willingness to engage in green purchasing [65], indicating that environmental consciousness is a significant driver of green choices in tourism consumption. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H7: 
Environmental consciousness positively influences tourists’ green purchase intentions.

2.3. Mediating Roles of Health Consciousness, Ethical Self-Identity, and Environmental Consciousness

When exploring the relationship between MC and the tourists’ willingness to purchase green products, health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness may play significant mediating roles. MC enhances self-awareness and self-control among tourists, thereby strengthening health consciousness, which increases their inclination to choose green products that benefit their health and the environment [35]. For instance, the increase in health consciousness during the pandemic significantly boosted the popularity of organic foods [66].
Concurrently, MC reduces an excessive reliance on material possessions, enhances life satisfaction, and encourages prosocial behavior [31], thus incorporating moral values and social responsibility into ethical self-identity [58]. This moral drive compels consumers to prefer environmentally friendly products during tourism consumption, reflecting their respect for and responsibility toward the environment [67].
Moreover, MC enhances environmental consciousness, making tourists more attentive to environmental protection and sustainable development [45]. Tourists conscious of environmental sustainability tend to favor eco-friendly products to counterbalance the detrimental impacts of their purchasing decisions on the environment [64]. Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:
H8a: 
Health consciousness mediates the relationship between MC and tourists’ green purchase intentions;
H8b: 
Ethical self-identity mediates the relationship between MC and tourists’ green purchase intentions;
H8c: 
Environmental consciousness mediates the relationship between MC and tourists’ green purchase intentions.

3. Research Methodology

This section demonstrates the research framework on MC and purchase intention, data collection tools and processes, and data analysis.

3.1. Research Hypotheses and Model

As illustrated in Figure 1, the research model and hypotheses represent the relationships between MC, health consciousness, ethical self-identification, environmental consciousness, and tourists’ willingness to make green purchases.

3.2. Questionnaire Design

This study adhered to a rigorous quantitative research paradigm and included a meticulously designed structured questionnaire. Its measurement indicators referenced statements from empirical studies published in scholarly journals to ensure the validity and reliability of the measurements. The first part of this questionnaire covered the participants’ demographic data, whereas the second part included specific information about the parameters of the indicators examined. The interval scale used a five-point Likert scale, where “1” stands for strong disagreement while “5” stands for strong agreement.
To comprehensively test the relationships between the variables in the research model, this study measured five core variables.
This study utilized the MC scale developed by Gupta and Sheth [28], which encompasses three dimensions: awareness, caring, and temperance. Compared to other studies that adapted mindfulness scales (e.g., Gupta & Verma [68]; Zahid et al. [16]), this scale is more closely aligned with the context of MC and has undergone rigorous theoretical and questionnaire validation. Specifically, the awareness dimension included three items such as “I care about the impact of my consumption on society/community”; the caring dimension included five items such as “I try to avoid damaging the environment in my daily life”; and the temperance dimension included three items such as “If an existing product is still usable, I will avoid purchasing the latest model”.
The measurement of green purchase intention was based on the five-item scale provided by Nekmahmud et al. [61] including items such as “When traveling, I am willing to choose greener and healthier tourism products/services”. Additionally, the studies by Liu et al. [69] and Panda et al. [70] were referenced to ensure the applicability of the measurement tool.
Health consciousness was measured using scales from Benos et al. [18] and Birch et al. [71], comprising three items such as “When traveling, I pay close attention to my health and consider health factors when purchasing products for others”.
The measurement of ethical self-identity was based on Daniel et al. [11] and Sparks and Shepherd [72] including three items such as “As a consumer, I consider myself a socially responsible person”.
Environmental consciousness was assessed using scales from Benos et al. [18] and Birch et al. [71] including three items such as “The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrialization” (see Appendix A).
In this study, MC was a second-order construct—a reflective–formative model. Given the imbalance in the number of indicators across the first-order dimensions, this study adopted a two-stage method as the strategy for estimating hierarchical latent variables, as it could more accurately address the issue of uneven indicator quantities [73]. To assess the validity and reliability of MC as a hierarchical latent variable, this study employed formative measurement and implemented the internal path weighting scheme [74]. Additionally, to ensure data quality, this study used the variance inflation factor (VIF) as a diagnostic tool for multicollinearity, with a VIF value exceeding 5.0 indicating significant multicollinearity issues [75].
To ensure better comprehension by the respondents, the questionnaire was translated into Chinese and back-translated to correct any potential language biases or misunderstandings. The initial Chinese version of the questionnaire was reviewed by three academic experts and two tourism industry professionals, who evaluated the wording, length, and other aspects. The questionnaire’s reliability and validity were tested using data from a pilot study of 50 respondents, leading to the revision of some items based on feedback to improve the accuracy and effectiveness.

3.3. Data Collection

This study employed a convenience sampling method targeting Chinese tourists. Convenience sampling is a method commonly used in exploratory research, and is particularly suitable for situations where sample acquisition is difficult and the research population is widely distributed [76]. Since this study aimed to investigate the green purchase intentions of tourists from across China using a broad distribution of research subjects and no clear sampling frame, convenience sampling is an effective approach that helped us to quickly obtain sufficient and diverse sample data.
The questionnaire was designed and distributed through the “Questionnaire Star” platform and promoted via the WeChat and QQ social media platforms. Responses were received from 16 provinces across China (covering more than half of the country’s regions), ensuring the representativeness and diversity of the sample. G*Power calculations indicated that for an F-test in linear multiple regression analysis with four predictors, a minimum sample size of 129 was required to achieve a power of 0.95 [77,78]. To ensure the accuracy of the sample, the questionnaire included screening questions (e.g., “Are you currently traveling?”) and verification questions (e.g., “Are you currently away from your hometown? Please specify your current location”) for cross-checking and logical consistency.
The survey was conducted online among tourists aged 18 or older who were currently traveling or planned to travel within the next two weeks or had just returned from a trip within the last two months. During the survey, 373 questionnaires were received, and after selection, 226 completed and valid responses that met the definition of “tourist” were retained as the research data samples. This sample size exceeded the minimum sample size calculated by G*Power and was deemed acceptable for data analysis using partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) [79].
This study used PLS-SEM for data analysis. Compared to covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM), PLS-SEM is more suitable for prediction-oriented research questions and exploratory analysis, especially for handling complex path models and relatively small sample sizes [80]. Given that this study’s model involved multiple variables and their complex relationships and the sample size was limited, PLS-SEM was considered the most appropriate data analysis method. This study utilized SmartPLS (v 4.1.0.0) for data analysis, while SPSS 26 was employed for frequency and descriptive analysis. In this study, 62.8% of respondents were female. Most respondents were aged between 30 and 50 years old (54.4%), followed by those aged 18 to 30 years old (30.1%). Most respondents held a university degree (65.5%) or a postgraduate degree (23.9%), with only 10.6% having an education level below high school. The respondents’ annual income distribution was as follows: 31% earned CNY 50,000–100,000, 22.1% earned CNY 30,000–50,000, 19% earned CNY 100,000–150,000, 17.3% earned less than CNY 30,000, and 10.7% earned over CNY 150,000.
This study incorporated cross-check validation questions, reverse items, and additional verification mechanisms to ensure data authenticity and validity. The questionnaire platform’s geolocation and response time tracking further verified the respondents’ answers, ensuring the reliability of the data and providing a solid foundation for subsequent analysis.
Harman’s single-factor test was used to check for common method bias (CMB) [81]. All measured variables were subjected to unrotated exploratory factor analysis, yielding five principal factors. The highest variance explained by a single factor was 37.185%, well below the 50% threshold, indicating that common method bias was not a significant issue and that the multidimensional structure of the data was preserved.

4. Results

4.1. Measurement Model

In this study, the independent variable, MC, was conceptualized as a higher-order formative construct comprising three first-order dimensions: awareness (A1~3), caring (C1~5), and temperance (T1~3). An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of the 11 items was performed, utilizing principle component analysis and varimax rotation afterward. The results (Table 1) show that these items can be viewed as two factors in a broader questionnaire. The cumulative percentage of the rotation sum of the squared loadings of those factors was 59.536%, which was acceptable, since the factor classification reasonableness and model explanatory power were confirmed [80]. Specifically, A1~3 and C1~3 formed one factor, referred to as “social and environmental consciousness” (SE), while C4, C5, and T1~3 constituted the second factor, named “personal and social resource conservation” (PR).
The results of this factor division reflect the coherence between the awareness of behavioral and environmental consequences and pro-environmental behavior within the Chinese cultural context. This coherence made it difficult to distinguish these two originally independent dimensions. Consequently, social and environmental consciousness were regarded as a unified factor. Furthermore, behaviors related to conserving social resources within the caring dimension were often categorized together with frugality in personal life, which is a common trait in Chinese culture. This cultural characteristic also contributed to the emergence of the “personal and social resource conservation” factor in the factor analysis.
This study empirically assessed the measurement model by examining reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity [82]. Internal consistency was tested using Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR), both of which exceeded 0.7, indicating strong internal consistency across the model [82]. For each variable, the external factors showed a loading of more than 0.6, while the AVE values for each were greater than 0.5. This revealed that the model had good convergent validity [78].
Regarding MC, the indicators did not reveal the manifestation of the latent variables because of the formation context of the formative constructs; thus, no reliability values are reported. As a second-order latent variable, the loadings of MC represent the path coefficients between it and the first-order constructs, as shown in Figure 2. Table 2 presents an indicator weight report with significance and multicollinearity to evaluate the validity of the second-order formative latent variable MC. The data analysis results indicate that the VIF values of all predictors were less than 5.0; therefore, there was no evidence of multicollinearity [75].
Additionally, discriminant validity was assessed to ensure clear differentiation between the constructs. The evaluation involved the Fornell–Larcker criterion and the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) ratio. As shown in Table 3, the square roots of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct exceeded their correlations with other constructs, confirming discriminant validity [83]. Furthermore, all HTMT values were below 0.85, meeting the standards for discriminant validity [84], thereby confirming this study’s discriminant validity.

4.2. Structural Model

To assess the structural model, we used the non-parametric bootstrapping method to calculate the path coefficients (β) and their corresponding t-values to test the validity of the research hypotheses. In addition to path coefficients, the model’s explanatory and predictive power were comprehensively evaluated using the coefficient of determination (R2), predictive relevance (Q2), and effect size (f2). R2 reflects the degree to which the model explains the dependent variable, Q2 reflects the model’s predictive relevance (Q2 > 0 signifies predictive capability), and f2 reflects the strength of the effect of each variable.
The results of the structural model analysis (see Table 4) showed that MC had a significant and strong positive effect on the tourists’ green purchase intention (GPI) (β = 0.521, p = 0.000, f2 = 0.396), indicating that the model had strong explanatory power and good predictive ability. Therefore, Hypothesis H1 is supported. Further analysis revealed that MC had significant positive effects on health consciousness (HC) (β = 0.299, p = 0.000, f2 = 0.098), ethical self-identity (EI) (β = 0.666, p = 0.000, f2 = 0.798), and environmental consciousness (EC) (β = 0.361, p = 0.000, f2 = 0.149), suggesting that Hypotheses 2, 3, and H4 are supported. Among these, the effect of MC on EI was the most significant, with strong explanatory power and effect size. However, HC did not have a significant effect on GPI (β = 0.002, p = 0.956, f2 = 0.000); thus, H5 is rejected. In contrast, EI (β = 0.192, p = 0.014, f2 = 0.043) and EC (β = 0.213, p = 0.001, f2 = 0.095) exhibited weak but significant positive effects on GPI, supporting Hypotheses 6 and 7.
The effect of mediators (Table 5) showed that MC mainly affected GPI via the EI (β = 0.128; p = 0.018) and EC (β = 0.077; p = 0.003) variables. It was confirmed that hypotheses H8b and H8c are accepted. In comparison, HC (β = 0.001; p > 0.05) did not mediate; thus, H8a was rejected. Moreover, according to Carrión et al. [85], the direct and indirect effect being in the same direction is known as complementary mediation. The opposite phenomenon is known as competitive partial mediation. Table 4 shows that there was a direct effect of MC on GPI (β = 0.521), and the indirect effects of EI and EC (β = 0.128 and 0.077, respectively) were all positive. Therefore, the resultant relationship between MC and GPI for Chinese tourists is a complementary partial mediation effect, which is shown by the EI and EC.

5. Discussions

This study offers insights into how MC influences tourists’ green purchase intentions and underlying mechanisms. The results revealed that MC significantly positively affects tourists’ green purchase intentions, health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness as well as indirectly influencing green purchase intentions through ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness. This suggests that MC plays a key role in promoting tourists’ green purchasing behavior (β = 0.521; p < 0.05), with ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness mediating this process.
This study’s findings are consistent with the existing literature. Previous research has shown that MC can effectively promote the intention to purchase second-hand clothing [14,16] and can reduce overconsumption [23]. Additionally, mindfulness enhances the consumers’ purchase intentions for organic food [15] and sustainable menstrual products [12]. These studies collectively suggest that MC has a positive effect on the purchase intention of green products. This study further validates this relationship in the context of tourism.
Moreover, this study’s results show that MC has an extremely significant impact on ethical self-identity (f2 = 0.798), indicating that the consumers’ ethical self-identity is significantly enhanced when engaging in MC. However, the influence of ethical self-identity on tourists’ green purchase intentions is relatively small, leading to a partial mediation effect with limited impact between MC and green purchase intention. This finding partially aligns with the research of Daniel et al. [11], who found that ethical self-identity mediates the relationship between mindfulness and green purchase intention. However, this study further revealed the marginal nature of the mediation effect, which may suggest that other overlooked variables play a more significant role in this relationship.
Although the influence of environmental consciousness is relatively limited, it still plays an important role in driving tourists’ green purchase intention. From the perspective of the research background, our findings may profoundly reflect the widespread dissemination and deep infiltration of environmental consciousness and sustainable development concepts throughout China. In recent years, the Chinese government has promoted development philosophies such as “lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets”, strengthened environmental protection regulations, and actively engaged in global environmental governance, improving environmental quality [86]. Simultaneously, green consumption has gradually emerged in China, increasing the public’s acceptance of eco-friendly products [8]. In this context, our findings are unsurprising.
However, the results regarding health consciousness are inconsistent with those of previous studies. While health consciousness is generally considered as an important driver of green purchase intention, this study found that its impact on tourists’ green purchase intention was not significant. This result warrants further exploration of its underlying reasons.
Firstly, the relationship between health consciousness and green purchase intention may vary significantly across different research contexts. In the existing literature, the significant impacts of health consciousness are often concentrated on specific types of green products such as organic food [51,87,88], short-supply-chain foods [18], or green furniture [89]. In these contexts, consumers clearly perceive health attributes as a core value of the product. However, in tourism-related studies, the definition and scope of green products are broader, encompassing not only products directly related to health, but also to other types of products such as green transportation, sustainable accommodation, and eco-friendly attractions. Additionally, in the tourism environment, the consumers’ focus is more on the experiential aspects of the product, and their attention to the product’s intrinsic value and utility characteristics may be diminished [90]. This situation may have led the respondents to fail to associate green tourism products with health when answering the questionnaire, therefore weakening the effect of health consciousness on green purchase intention.
Secondly, cultural factors may play a significant role in influencing the impact of health consciousness on green purchase intention. Chinese consumers are often influenced by societal cultural beliefs and values when purchasing green products, rather than relying solely on personal awareness. For example, Chinese culture emphasizes group identity and social values [91], which leads consumers to focus more on social norms or the behavior of others when making decisions. Within this cultural context, the low trust in green product certifications among consumers further highlights the influence of this group-oriented perspective. For instance, some studies have pointed out that Chinese consumers have low trust in organic food certifications [92]. This lack of trust in certifications may stem from collective perceptions, reflecting widespread concerns about market regulation and transparency. As a result, consumers may prefer to purchase products they subjectively perceive as healthy, rather than fully trusting green labels, thereby weakening the direct effect of health consciousness on green purchase intention.
Additionally, the health consciousness scale used in this study, based on Benos et al. [18], focuses on measuring health consciousness in the consumption context. While it aligns well with the tourism consumption background of this study, its limited number of measurement items may not fully capture the multidimensional nature of health consciousness. This characteristic may, to some extent, influence the depth of interpretation of the study’s results. Future research could consider adopting a more comprehensive and classic health consciousness scale or combining multiple measurement tools to further enrich the understanding of the relationship between health consciousness and green consumption behavior.
Overall, this study validates the direct effect of MC on green purchase intentions and clarifies, for the first time, the mediating roles of ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness. This enriches the application of MC in consumer behavior and expands the theoretical understanding of the mechanisms through which MC influences green purchasing, offering valuable practical insights for future green marketing strategies.
Although this study identified a significant positive effect of MC on tourists’ green purchase intentions, it is important to note that the respondents may have been influenced by social expectations when completing the questionnaire. Consumers may be inclined to express support for green consumption due to social norms or moral expectations, but this intention may not necessarily translate into actual green consumption behavior [93]. This intention–behavior gap should be considered when interpreting the results of this study.

5.1. Theoretical Implications

This study explored the mechanisms through which MC influences green purchase intentions in the tourism context, providing novel insights. First, previous research has primarily focused on the effects of MC on environmentally friendly behaviors [14,25,83] and sustainable awareness [23,84], with no studies verifying its positive impact on green purchase intentions yet, especially in the context of tourism. This study is the first to examine this relationship in a tourism setting, and the results show that MC is a key driver of tourists’ green purchase intentions. This finding not only broadens the application scope of MC, but also enriches the theoretical framework of green purchase intention, highlighting the critical role of the consumer’s psychological factors in sustainable tourism and green consumption research.
Second, this study integrated the NAM into the theoretical framework of MC to explore the mediating role of higher-order psychological motivations in the relationship between MC and green purchase intention. Specifically, health consciousness and environmental consciousness are conceptualized as representing an awareness of consequences, while ethical self-identity reflects the ascription of responsibility. The findings demonstrate that these psychological motivations significantly mediate the influence of MC on green purchase intention, further validating the explanatory power of NAM. Through empirical research in the context of Chinese tourism, this study provides the first evidence of NAM’s core mechanisms being applicable in a non-Western cultural setting, highlighting its cross-cultural theoretical flexibility and addressing a critical gap in the existing literature.
Third, as the measurement standards for MC have only recently gained recognition in high-level journals [28], some quantitative research still treats MC as a measurable latent variable [30,85]. This study is the first to apply Gupta et al.’s [21] MC scale, which includes the dimensions of awareness, care, and temperance, in the Chinese context, and verified the scale’s applicability in China. The measurement results revealed a two-dimensional structure that met the model testing standards, suggesting potential differences in how MC is understood and categorized across cultural contexts. Based on this information, this study adopted a new factor structure for subsequent analyses, making the research more aligned with the Chinese cultural context and providing empirical support for the cross-cultural applicability of the MC scale, enriching cross-cultural research in this field.
Finally, this study validated the positive influence of MC on health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness, supporting Benos et al. [18], who argued that these factors represent higher-order motivations reflecting a mindful mindset, which are strengthened through MC. More importantly, this study revealed the partial mediating effects of ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness on the relationship between MC and green purchase intentions, deepening our understanding of how MC drives green consumer behaviors and elucidating the psychological mechanisms through which a mindful mindset is translated into mindful behaviors. This theoretical contribution not only expands the research framework linking MC and green purchase intention, but also advances the application of NAM and MC theory in non-Western contexts, providing new perspectives for understanding the cultural dimensions of sustainable consumption.

5.2. Practical Implications

Our research findings provide significant insights for all stakeholders involved in green products in tourism destinations, particularly concerning green tourism project planners, green product manufacturers, and policymakers. Firstly, MC has a strong positive effect on the individuals’ willingness to purchase green products, reminding us of the importance of cultivating MC. Tourism activities inherently have a unique advantage in fostering mindfulness [94]. Tourism project planners can develop more activities that emphasize individual participation, deep introspection, and interaction with the environment (e.g., eco-experiences, nature retreats, yoga), providing tourists with more opportunities to cultivate mindfulness and establish a mindful mindset.
Secondly, the differing impacts of three variables reflecting a mindful mindset on the tourists’ willingness to purchase green products underscore the importance of reinforcing ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness in tourist interactions. Tourism experience activities serve as effective platforms for interaction between green product producers and tourists [95]. Green product producers can deepen the tourists’ understanding and engagement with the stories behind green products by organizing immersive marketing activities such as showcasing the company’s social responsibility, offering tours of the production process, and demonstrating ecological farming practices. They can also establish environmental story experience centers or use QR codes to narrate the eco-friendly journey of the products, thereby enhancing the tourists’ ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness. This approach optimizes the tourist shopping experience and effectively promotes green purchase intentions.
In addition, tourism planners, green product manufacturers, and policymakers can collaborate to launch integrated projects combining “green experiences + product sales”. These projects can incentivize tourists to purchase green tourism products through reward programs such as green points redeemable for environmental public welfare activities and green tourism certification systems. At the same time, social media platforms and dedicated apps can be used to create a green points system, allowing tourists to track their eco-friendly behaviors in real-time, participate in interactive tasks, and redeem points for green products or eco-friendly experience activities, further enhancing the tourists’ sense of participation and interaction. Governments can introduce tax reductions and subsidy measures to support scenic areas and hotels in adopting green products, promoting the development and dissemination of green tourism projects. Through multi-party collaboration and effective communication mechanisms, jointly planning environmental consciousness campaigns and green purchase incentive policies could promote the sustainable transformation of the tourism industry and the widespread adoption of green consumption behaviors.

6. Conclusions and Limitations

In conclusion, this study enhances our understanding of how MC influences tourists’ intentions to make environmentally friendly purchases. Our findings indicate that MC significantly promotes green purchase intentions through its positive impacts on health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness, with the latter two factors serving as mediators. This aligns with the existing literature demonstrating that MC can encourage green consumption behaviors and reduce overconsumption. This study also reflects growing environmental consciousness in China, supported by government initiatives promoting sustainable development and green consumption.
However, this study found that health consciousness did not have a significant impact on green purchase intention, inconsistent with some previous research findings. This highlights the complexity of consumer behavior regarding tourism. Future research could explore how situational design or communication strategies enhance the consumers’ perceptions of the health attributes of green tourism products to more clearly reveal the role of health consciousness in tourism.
Ultimately, this study validates the impact of MC on green purchase intentions and identifies the mediating roles of ethical self-identity and environmental consciousness, providing a comprehensive framework for understanding these dynamics. The findings offer practical implications for future green marketing strategies, emphasizing the importance of effectively leveraging MC to enhance eco-friendly purchasing behaviors.
Although this study yielded valuable findings among Chinese tourists, there are still certain limitations. Firstly, this study was based on the Chinese cultural context, and the values and economic and social backgrounds of different regions may affect the generalizability of the research conclusions. Cultural differences may moderate the relationship between MC and green purchase intention, meaning that the applicability of the findings in other countries or regions may be limited. Future research should validate this model in different cultural and regional contexts, especially in areas with significant differences in cultural values and consumption habits. Cross-cultural comparative studies could provide more targeted references for global tourism green marketing strategies.
Secondly, this study used online convenience sampling to collect data, with the sample primarily consisting of tourists who could fill out the questionnaire online. This may introduce self-selection bias, making it difficult for the sample to fully reflect the behavioral characteristics of tourists from different socio-economic backgrounds, age groups, and regions. Additionally, self-administered questionnaires may be influenced by social expectation effects, as the respondents may provide answers that align with social norms, therefore overestimating the green purchase intention. These biases may limit the generalizability of the research findings, particularly in cross-regional or cross-cultural studies. Future research could use more rigorous sampling methods, such as random sampling or quota sampling, and combine offline data collection, experimental designs, or behavioral tracking data to improve sample representativeness and more objectively reflect the tourists’ real green consumption behaviors, further validating the robustness of our conclusions.
Although the health consciousness scale used in this study aligned with the tourism consumption context, its measurement dimensions were relatively limited and may not have fully captured the respondents’ health consciousness. Future research could adopt a more comprehensive scale to more accurately reflect the tourists’ health consciousness. Additionally, this study employed a cross-sectional design, which limited its ability to infer causal relationships. Future studies could use longitudinal designs or experimental methods to dynamically observe changes in tourist behavior over time, providing deeper insights into the causal relationship between MC and green purchase intention. Moreover, adopting a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative and qualitative methods may offer a more systematic and in-depth understanding of how MC influences green consumption behavior.
Finally, although this study explored the mediating role of health consciousness, ethical self-identity, and environmental consciousness, other potential mediating variables such as subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, attitudes, and green trust werenot fully considered. Future research should further explore these key factors to build a more comprehensive theoretical framework to deepen our understanding of the relationship between MC and green purchase intention.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.J., S.P. and P.P.; Methodology, D.J., S.P. and P.P.; Software, D.J.; Validation, V.K.; Formal analysis, D.J., S.P. and P.P.; Investigation, S.P.; Resources, D.J.; Data curation, S.P.; Writing—original draft preparation, D.J., S.P. and P.P.; Writing—review and editing, V.K.; Visualization, D.J.; Supervision, S.P.; Project administration, D.J.; Funding acquisition, Not applicable. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee in Human Research Walailak University (protocol code WUEC-24-305-01 and date of approval: 28 August 2024).

Informed Consent Statement

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

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting the reported results in this study are openly available at https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/687vv29wsk/1. (accessed on 30 January 2025).

Acknowledgments

We thank all of the individuals for their participation. This project was conducted within the Reinventing Project for Enhancing Thai Universities into the International Education”, the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Measurement scales used in the survey.
Table A1. Measurement scales used in the survey.
ConstructsItemsSources
Mindful consumption
(Awareness)
A1. I care about the impact of my consumption on society/community.[28]
A2. I am aware that my consumption impacts society.
A3. Sharing my products with others means caring for society.
Mindful consumption
(Caring)
C1. I try to avoid damaging the environment in my daily life.[28]
C2. I satisfy my consumption needs without harming the environment.
C3. I buy products that are not harmful to others.
C4. Everyone should conserve water at home.
C5. Using public services (e.g., parks, transportation) is good for society.
Mindful consumption
(Temperance)
T1. I refrain from buying the latest product if the current product is working.[28]
T2. I try to minimize my consumption even in the case of abundance.
T3. I have a habit of minimizing the wastage of clothes.
Environmental consciousnessEC1: The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrialization.[18,71]
EC2: The so-called ecological crisis facing human kind has been greatly exaggerated.
EC3: Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs.
Ethical self-identityEI1: As a consumer I think of myself as socially responsible.[11]
EI2: I think of myself as someone concerned about a company’s activities that benefits the society.
EI3: As a consumer, I am orientated toward buying products that are made keeping the society’s welfare in mind.
Green purchase intentionGPI1: When traveling, I am willing to choose greener and healthier tourism products/services.[61,69,70]
GPI2: I plan to choose green travel products/services when traveling because they save energy.
GPI3: I will try to buy green travel products/services during my travels because they have better added value.
GPI4: I will purchase products/services that are considered less harmful to the environment.
GPI5: I will avoid buying products and services that are potentially harmful to the tourist places.
Health consciousnessHC1: When traveling, I pay close attention to my health and consider health factors when purchasing products for others.[18,71]
HC2: I take responsibility for the state of my health and the health of others for whom I shop for while traveling.
HC3: I am very involved with my health and the health of others for whom I shop for while traveling.

References

  1. Ukaogo, P.O.; Ewuzie, U.; Onwuka, C.V. Environmental pollution: Causes, effects, and the remedies. In Microorganisms for Sustainable Environment and Health; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 419–429. [Google Scholar]
  2. Harrisson, T. Tourism Responsible for 8% of Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Study Finds. Carbon Brief. Available online: https://www.carbonbrief.org/tourism-responsible-for-8-of-global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-study-finds (accessed on 22 September 2024).
  3. Saari, U.A.; Damberg, S.; Frömbling, L.; Ringle, C.M. Sustainable consumption behavior of Europeans: The influence of environmental knowledge and risk perception on environmental concern and behavioral intention. Ecol. Econ. 2021, 189, 107155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Vilkaite-Vaitone, N.; Tamuliene, V. Unveiling the Untapped Potential of Green Consumption in Tourism. Sustainability 2023, 16, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Fauzi, M.A.; Hanafiah, M.H.; Kunjuraman, V. Tourists’ intention to visit green hotels: Building on the theory of planned behaviour and the value-belief-norm theory. J. Tour. Futur. 2024, 10, 255–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Tan, L.L. Understanding consumers’ preferences for green hotels—The roles of perceived green benefits and environmental knowledge. J. Hosp. Tour. Insights 2023, 6, 1309–1327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wang, L.; Wong, P.P.W.; Narayanan Alagas, E. Antecedents of green purchase behaviour: An examination of altruism and environmental knowledge. Int. J. Cult. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2020, 14, 63–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Wu, H.; Wang, W.; Tao, Y.; Shao, M.; Yu, C. Understand the Chinese Z Generation consumers’ Green hotel visit intention: An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior Model. Heliyon 2024, 10, e25067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sheth, J.N.; Sethia, N.K.; Srinivas, S. Mindful consumption: A customer-centric approach to sustainability. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2011, 39, 21–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Onwezen, M.C.; Antonides, G.; Bartels, J. The Norm Activation Model: An exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behaviour. J. Econ. Psychol. 2013, 39, 141–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Daniel, C.; Gentina, E.; Kaur, T. Mindfulness and green purchase intention: A mediated moderation model uncovering the role of ethical self-identity. Ecol. Econ. 2023, 209, 107810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Lathabhavan, R.; Lathabhavan, R. Understanding the behavioural drivers of mindful consumption: A study on the use of sustainable menstrual products. J. Indian Bus. Res. 2024, 16, 308–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Manchanda, P.; Arora, N.; Nazir, O.; Islam, J.U. Cultivating sustainability consciousness through Mindfulness: An application of theory of mindful consumption. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2023, 75, 103527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Nawaz, S.; Jiang, Y.; Nawaz, M.Z.; Manzoor, S.F.; Zhang, R. Mindful consumption, ego-involvement, and social norms impact on buying SHC: Role of platform trust and impulsive buying tendency. SAGE Open 2021, 11, 215824402110566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tewari, A.; Srivastava, S.; Gangwar, D.; Verma, V.C. Young consumers’ purchase intention toward organic food: Exploring the role of Mindfulness. Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 78–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zahid, N.M.; Khan, J.; Tao, M. Exploring mindful consumption, ego involvement, and social norms influencing second-hand clothing purchase. Curr. Psychol. 2023, 42, 13960–13974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Akram, U.; Lavuri, R.; Bilal, M.; Hameed, I.; Byun, J. Exploring the roles of green marketing tools and green motives on green purchase intention in sustainable tourism destinations: A cross-cultural study. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2024, 41, 453–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Benos, T.; Burkert, M.; Hüttl-Maack, V.; Petropoulou, E. When mindful consumption meets short food supply chains: Empirical evidence on how higher-level motivations influence consumers. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022, 33, 520–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Liobikienė, G.; Poškus, M.S. The importance of environmental knowledge for private and public sphere pro-environmental behavior: Modifying the value-belief-norm theory. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yang, Q.; Al Mamun, A.; Naznen, F.; Siyu, L.; Makhbul, Z.K.M. Modelling the significance of health values, beliefs and norms on the intention to consume and the consumption of organic foods. Heliyon 2023, 9, e17487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Wu, B.; Yang, Z. The impact of moral identity on consumers’ green consumption tendency: The role of perceived responsibility for environmental damage. J. Environ. Psychol. 2018, 59, 74–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Barber, N.A.; Deale, C. Tapping Mindfulness to Shape Hotel Guests’ Sustainable Behavior. Cornell Hosp. Q. 2014, 55, 100–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Gadhavi, P.; Sahni, H. Analyzing the ‘Mindfulness’ of Young Indian Consumers in their Fashion Consumption. J. Glob. Mark. 2020, 33, 417–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kabat-Zinn, J. Mindfulness-Based Interventions in Context: Past, Present, and Future. Clin. Psychol. Sci. Pract. 2003, 10, 144–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Langer, E.J. Minding Matters: The Consequences of Mindlessness-Mindfulness. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 1989, 22, 137–173. [Google Scholar]
  26. Carson, S.H.; Langer, E.J. Mindfulness and self-acceptance. J. Ration.-Emot. Cogn.-Behav. Ther. 2006, 24, 29–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Milne, G.R.; Villarroel Ordenes, F.; Kaplan, B. Mindful Consumption: Three Consumer Segment Views. Australas. Mark. J. 2020, 28, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gupta, S.; Sheth, J. Mindful consumption: Its conception, measurement, and implications. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2023, 52, 1531–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bahl, S.; Milne, G.R.; Ross, S.M.; Mick, D.G.; Grier, S.A.; Chugani, S.K.; Chan, S.S.; Gould, S.; Cho, Y.N.; Dorsey, J.D.; et al. Mindfulness: Its transformative potential for consumer, societal, and environmental well-being. J. Public Policy Mark. 2016, 35, 198–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Garg, R.; Bansal, S.; Rathi, R.; Bhowmick, S. Mindful consumption—A systematic review and research agenda. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 459, 142373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Dhandra, T.K. Achieving triple dividend through Mindfulness: More sustainable consumption, less unsustainable consumption, and more life satisfaction. Ecol. Econ. 2019, 161, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kumar, R.; Prabha, V.; Kumar, V.; Saxena, S. Mindfulness in marketing and consumption: A review and research agenda. Manag. Rev. Q. 2023, 74, 977–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sermboonsang, R.; Tansuhaj, P.S.; Silpakit, C.; Chaisuwan, C. Mindfulness-based transformational learning for managing impulse buying. J. Educ. Bus. 2020, 95, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Parashar, S.; Singh, S.; Sood, G. Examining the role of health consciousness, environmental awareness and intention on purchase of organic food: A moderated model of attitude. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 386, 135553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Castellini, G.; Acampora, M.; Provenzi, L.; Cagliero, L.; Lucini, L.; Barello, S. Health consciousness and pro-environmental behaviors in an Italian representative sample: A cross-sectional study. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 8846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Donald, J.N.; Lomas, T.; Ekas, N.V.; Easterbrook, M.J.; Ciarrochi, J. Does your Mindfulness benefit others? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the link between Mindfulness and prosocial behaviour. Br. J. Psychol. 2019, 110, 101–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ryan, R.M.; Vansteenkiste, M. Self-determination theory. In The Oxford Handbook of Self-Determination Theory; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2023; pp. 3–30. [Google Scholar]
  38. Geiger, S.M.; Otto, S.; Schrader, U. Mindfully green and healthy: An indirect path from Mindfulness to ecological behavior. Front. Psychol. 2018, 8, 2306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Hertz, S.G.; Krettenauer, T. Does moral identity effectively predict moral behavior? A meta-analysis. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2016, 20, 129–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hanel, V.; Basil, D.Z. Socially conscious consumer behavior: The role of ethical self-identity and priming. Int. Rev. Public Nonprofit Mark. 2023, 20, 427–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Li, Y.; Wei, L.; Zeng, X.; Zhu, J. Mindfulness in ethical consumption: The mediating roles of connectedness to nature and self-control. Int. Mark. Rev. 2021, 38, 756–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Schwartz, S.H. Normative influences on altruism. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1977; Volume 10, pp. 221–279. [Google Scholar]
  43. Bonnett, M. Environmental consciousness, sustainability, and the character of philosophy of education. Stud. Philos. Educ. 2017, 36, 333–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Khan, A.N. Elucidating the effects of environmental consciousness and environmental attitude on green travel behavior: Moderating role of green self-efficacy. Sustain. Dev. 2024, 32, 2223–2232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hunecke, M.; Richter, N. Mindfulness, construction of meaning, and sustainable food consumption. Mindfulness 2019, 10, 446–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Maduku, D.K. How environmental concerns influence consumers’ anticipated emotions towards sustainable consumption: The moderating role of regulatory focus. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2024, 76, 103593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Paul, J.; Modi, A.; Patel, J. Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2016, 29, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Hong, Y.; Hu, J.; Chen, M.; Tang, S. Motives and antecedents affecting green purchase intention: Implications for green economic recovery. Econ. Anal. Policy 2023, 77, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Schutte, N.S.; Malouff, J.M. Mindfulness and connectedness to nature: A meta-analytic investigation. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2018, 127, 10–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Rana, J.; Paul, J. Consumer behavior and purchase intention for organic food: A review and research agenda. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2017, 38, 157–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Garg, S.; Narwal, K.P.; Kumar, S. Exploring the determinants of purchase intention of organic consumers for organic food items: An exploratory study in India. Br. Food J. 2023, 126, 1238–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Akerlof, G.A.; Kranton, R.E. Economics and identity. Q. J. Econ. 2000, 115, 715–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Geiger, S.M.; Grossman, P.; Schrader, U. Mindfulness and sustainability: Correlation or causation? Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2019, 28, 23–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Melo, P.C.; Ge, J.; Craig, T.; Brewer, M.J.; Thronicker, I. Does work-life balance affect pro-environmental behaviour? Evidence for the UK using longitudinal microdata. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 145, 170–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Lavuri, R.; Thaichon, P. Do extrinsic factors encourage shoppers’ compulsive buying? Store environment and product characteristics. Mark. Intell. Plan. 2023, 41, 722–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Talwar, S.; Jabeen, F.; Tandon, A.; Sakashita, M.; Dhir, A. What drives willingness to purchase and stated buying behavior toward organic food? A Stimulus–Organism–Behavior–Consequence (SOBC) perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 293, 125882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Trudel, R.; Argo, J.J.; Meng, M.D. The recycled self: Consumers’ disposal decisions of identity-linked products. J. Consum. Res. 2016, 43, 246–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Zollo, L. Ethical identity, social image and sustainable fashion: Still an impossible deal? A sociopsychological framework of ethical consumers’ attitude-behavior gaps. J. Consum. Mark. 2024, 41, 564–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Tian, Z.; Sun, X.; Wang, J.; Su, W.; Li, G. Factors affecting green purchase intention: A perspective of ethical decision making. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 11151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Shaw, D.; Shiu, E. The role of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer choice. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 2002, 26, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Nekmahmud, M.; Ramkissoon, H.; Fekete-Farkas, M. Green purchase and sustainable consumption: A comparative study between European and non-European tourists. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2022, 43, 100980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Kim, N.; Lee, K. Environmental consciousness, purchase intention, and actual purchase behavior of eco-friendly products: The moderating impact of situational context. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 5312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Laheri, V.K.; Lim, W.M.; Arya, P.K.; Kumar, S. A multidimensional lens of environmental consciousness: Towards an environmentally conscious theory of planned behavior. J. Consum. Mark. 2024, 41, 281–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Costa, C.S.R.; Costa, M.F.D.; Maciel, R.G.; Aguiar, E.C.; Wanderley, L.O. Consumer antecedents towards green product purchase intentions. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 313, 127964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Simanjuntak, M.; Nafila, N.L.; Yuliati, L.N.; Johan, I.R.; Najib, M.; Sabri, M.F. Environmental care attitudes and intention to purchase green products: Impact of environmental knowledge, word of mouth, and green marketing. Sustainability 2023, 15, 5445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Wang, H.; Ma, B.; Cudjoe, D.; Bai, R.; Farrukh, M. How does perceived severity of COVID-19 influence purchase intention of organic food? Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 3353–3367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Lu, L.-C.; Chang, H.-H.; Chang, A. Consumer personality and green buying intention: The mediate role of consumer ethical beliefs. J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 127, 205–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Gupta, S.; Verma, H. Mindful consumption behaviour: Scale development and validation. Asian J. Multidimens. Res. (AJMR) 2019, 8, 271–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Liu, M.T.; Liu, Y.; Mo, Z. Moral norm is the key: An extension of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) on Chinese consumers’ green purchase intention. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2020, 32, 1823–1841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Panda, T.K.; Kumar, A.; Jakhar, S.; Luthra, S.; Garza-Reyes, J.A.; Kazancoglu, I.; Nayak, S.S. Social and environmental sustainability model on consumers’ altruism, green purchase intention, green brand loyalty and evangelism. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 243, 118575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Birch, D.; Memery, J.; De Silva Kanakaratne, M. The mindful consumer: Balancing egoistic and altruistic motivations to purchase local food. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2018, 40, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Sparks, P.; Shepherd, R. Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: Assessing the role of identification with “green consumerism”. Soc. Psychol. Q. 1992, 55, 388–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Becker, J.-M.; Klein, K.; Wetzels, M. Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Plan. 2012, 45, 359–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M.; Mitchell, R.; Gudergan, S.P. Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2020, 31, 1617–1643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Howard, M.C.; Nitzl, C. Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 109, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Etikan, I.; Musa, S.A.; Alkassim, R.S. Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. Am. J. Theor. Appl. Stat. 2016, 5, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Buchner, A.; Lang, A.-G. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 2009, 41, 1149–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM); Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  79. Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M.; Danks, N.P.; Ray, S. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R: A Workbook; Springer Nature: Berlin, Germany, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  81. Gannon, M.; Rasoolimanesh, S.M.; Taheri, B. Assessing the mediating role of residents’ perceptions toward tourism development. J. Travel Res. 2021, 60, 149–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hair, J.F., Jr.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M.; Gudergan, S.P. Advanced Issues in Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  83. Fornell, C.; Larcker, D.F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 1981, 18, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Carrión, G.C.; Nitzl, C.; Roldán, J.L. Mediation analyses in partial least squares structural equation modeling: Guidelines and empirical examples. In Partial Least Squares Path Modeling; Latan, H., Noonan, R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 173–195. [Google Scholar]
  86. People’s Daily Commentary Department. Lucid Waters and Lush Mountains Are Mountains of Gold and Silver. People’s Daily Online. Available online: http://m.people.cn/n4/2022/0929/c25-20291536.html (accessed on 4 September 2024).
  87. Bazhan, M.; Shafiei Sabet, F.; Borumandnia, N. Factors affecting purchase intention of organic food products: Evidence from a developing nation context. Food Sci. Nutr. 2024, 12, 3469–3482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Gundala, R.R.; Singh, A. What motivates consumers to buy organic foods? Results of an empirical study in the United States. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0257288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Liang, H.; Wu, Z.; Du, S. Study on the impact of environmental awareness, health consciousness, and individual basic conditions on the consumption intention of green furniture. Sustain. Futur. 2024, 8, 100245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Hosany, S.; Sthapit, E.; Björk, P. Memorable tourism experience: A review and research agenda. Psychol. Mark. 2022, 39, 1467–1486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Ding, X.; Zhong, X.; Kang, T.; Wang, Y.; Li, J. Individualism vs. collectivism: Influences on attitudes in China toward the search for meaning in life. Curr. Psychol. 2024, 43, 14738–14750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Castro Campos, B.; Qi, X. A literature review on the drivers and barriers of organic food consumption in China. Agric. Food Econ. 2024, 12, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Conner, M.; Norman, P. Understanding the intention-behavior gap: The role of intention strength. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 923464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Chen, L.I.-L.; Scott, N.; Benckendorff, P. Mindful tourist experiences: A Buddhist perspective. Ann. Tour. Res. 2017, 64, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ripoll González, L.; Yanotti, M.B.; Lehman, K. Local focus: Farmers’ markets as an approach to sustainable tourism. In Planning and Managing Sustainability in Tourism. Tourism, Hospitality & Event Management; Farmaki, A., Altinay, L., Font, X., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; pp. 95–113. [Google Scholar]
Figure 1. Research framework.
Figure 1. Research framework.
Sustainability 17 01266 g001
Figure 2. Measurement analysis of the proposed framework.
Figure 2. Measurement analysis of the proposed framework.
Sustainability 17 01266 g002
Table 1. Rotated component matrix.
Table 1. Rotated component matrix.
Ingredient 1 (SE)Ingredient 2 (PR)
A10.771
A20.692
A30.575
C10.765
C20.792
C30.765
C4 0.541
C5 0.658
T1 0.875
T2 0.798
T3 0.751
Extraction method: principal component analysis. Rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalization. Only coefficients above 0.5 were retained.
Table 2. Convergent validity and construct reliability.
Table 2. Convergent validity and construct reliability.
ConstructItemsLoadingsCronbach’s AlphaCR AVE
SEA10.7930.8520.8910.577
A20.755
A30.622
C10.825
C20.78
C30.768
PRC40.7260.830.8810.597
C50.795
T10.865
T20.767
T30.7
ECEC10.7750.7340.850.655
EC20.875
EC30.773
EIEI10.8420.7860.8750.7
EI20.856
EI30.812
GPIGPI10.8480.8820.9140.682
GPI20.878
GPI30.823
GPI40.836
GPI50.736
HCHC10.8940.8410.9030.756
HC20.887
HC30.826
Formative ConstructItemsOuter Weightt-valuep-valueVIF
Mindful consumption (MC)Social and environmental consciousness (SE)0.6507.5890.0001.433
Personal and social resource conservation (PR)0.4835.0660.0001.433
Extraction method note: The item names are in the Appendix A. CR stands for composite reliability, and AVE represents the average variance extracted.
Table 3. Discriminate validity.
Table 3. Discriminate validity.
Fornell–Larcker CriterionHTMT Criterion
ECEIGPIHCPRSEECEIGPIHCPRSE
EC0.809
EI0.380.837 0.492
GPI0.4740.6220.826 0.5880.739
HC0.170.460.2830.87 0.2060.5710.319
PR0.2870.5820.5840.2840.773 0.3690.7180.6850.331
SE0.3410.5920.6850.2490.550.760.4230.7160.7950.2840.646
Table 4. Results of the hypothesis testing.
Table 4. Results of the hypothesis testing.
HypothesisβS.D.CI (5%, 95%)t-Valuep-ValueDecisionf2R2Q2
H1: MC -> GPI0.5210.071(0.376, 0.654)7.3800.000Accepted0.3960.6000.516
H2: MC -> HC0.2990.077(0.161, 0.459)3.8660.000Accepted0.0980.0900.114
H3: MC -> EI0.6660.040(0.588, 0.745)16.4730.000Accepted0.7980.4440.427
H4: MC -> EC0.3610.063(0.234, 0.485)5.7330.000Accepted0.1490.1300.065
H5: HC -> GPI0.0020.040(−0.071, 0.085)0.0550.956Rejected0.000
H6: EI -> GPI0.1920.078(0.047, 0.349)2.4710.014Accepted0.043
H7: EC -> GPI0.2130.062(0.087, 0.334)3.4090.001Accepted0.095
Table 5. Mediating analysis.
Table 5. Mediating analysis.
HypothesisβCI (5%, 95%)S.D.t-Valuep-ValueDecision
H8a: MC -> HC -> GPI0.001(−0.023, 0.031)0.0130.050.96Rejected
H8b: MC -> EI -> GPI0.128(0.031, 0.24)0.0542.3720.018Accepted
H8c: MC -> EC -> GPI0.077(0.031, 0.13)0.0253.0140.003Accepted
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

Ji, D.; Pongsakornrungsilp, S.; Pongsakornrungsilp, P.; Kumar, V. When Mindful Consumption Meets Green Purchase Intention: Empirical Evidence on How a Mindful Mindset Influences Tourists. Sustainability 2025, 17, 1266. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031266

AMA Style

Ji D, Pongsakornrungsilp S, Pongsakornrungsilp P, Kumar V. When Mindful Consumption Meets Green Purchase Intention: Empirical Evidence on How a Mindful Mindset Influences Tourists. Sustainability. 2025; 17(3):1266. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031266

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ji, Dongyi, Siwarit Pongsakornrungsilp, Pimlapas Pongsakornrungsilp, and Vikas Kumar. 2025. "When Mindful Consumption Meets Green Purchase Intention: Empirical Evidence on How a Mindful Mindset Influences Tourists" Sustainability 17, no. 3: 1266. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031266

APA Style

Ji, D., Pongsakornrungsilp, S., Pongsakornrungsilp, P., & Kumar, V. (2025). When Mindful Consumption Meets Green Purchase Intention: Empirical Evidence on How a Mindful Mindset Influences Tourists. Sustainability, 17(3), 1266. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17031266

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