請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/89846
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 陸怡蕙 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Yir-Hueih Luh | en |
dc.contributor.author | 梁丞叡 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Cheng-Jui Liang | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-09-22T16:22:22Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-11-09 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2023-09-22 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2023-08-10 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 中文參考文獻
田育志(2023)。雞糞化為黃金肥料,揭示畜牧永續新方向-從廢棄物到循環資源。豐年雜誌,73(6),36-41。 朱博湧、林裕淩及祁婉寧(2013)。Y世代消費者綠色服飾願付價格研究:以購物傾向,流行傾向與綠色消費型態為探討因素。行銷評論,10(1),19-42. 行政院農業委員會(2019)。動物福利白皮書。台北市。 吳文貴及何佳潔(2014)。碳標籤標示對消費者綠色購買意願之影響:碳標籤有用嗎?行銷科學學報,10(1),1-15。 李承傑及董旭英(2017)。偏最小平方法結構方程模型。科學發展(539),20-25。 李欣蓉、黃雅玲、蘇天明及蕭庭訓(2020)。肥水回田-畜牧糞尿水再利用-政策與效益案例分享。農政與農情337,61-65。 周孟萱(2009)。消費者對雞蛋偏好與對動物福利願付價格之研究-聯合分析法之應用。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 林永鴻(2018)。畜牧場沼渣沼液再利用及對作物的影響。高雄區農業專訊(104),20-21。 林谷合、彭耀平、彭彥群及鄧天強(2020)。運用社會資本與組織雙面兼具探討組織能力的價值創造過程:前置因素與結果因素。NTU Management Review,30(1)。 林岱瑾(2012)。少吃肉,友善畜牧:利益全球。看守台灣,14(2),16-25。 林鈺荏(2021)。畜牧糞尿水再利用減肥又節水。苗栗區農業專訊(93),17-20。 柯伊真(2015)。消費者之利他、利己主義對碳標章商品消費決策之影響。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 段雅馨(2022)。農業淨零2040達標有影無-淨零排放辦公室的超級任務。豐年雜誌,72(4),22-27。 洪兮雯及李佳蓉(2022)。消費者對於動物福祉友善豬肉之認知與願付價格分析。畜產研究,55(1),68-80。 張東生、林家安、葉俐廷及王柔文(2018)。探討利他主義、利他歸因、服務品質與關係品質如何促進社會企業之永續經營。中原企管評論,16(1),39-54。 張哲誌(2022)。地方養成記-創生產業正循環。豐年雜誌,72(2),18-19。 陳建穎(2022)。臺灣年輕族群的飲食消費行為及對食農教育的認知。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 張紹勳(2021)。偏最小平方法的結構方程模型(PLS-SEM):應用SmartPLS。台灣:五南。 黃建勲(2016)。瞭解等於行動?檢驗台灣民眾環境知識、友善環境價值及節能減碳行為。社會研究學報,2,59-80。 葉昇炎、鄭閔謙及程梅萍(2016)。畜牧糞尿水資源化再利用之發展沿革。農業生技產業季刊,(46),29-32。 廖文蘭(2022)。景觀餐廳顧客認知價值對行為意圖與額外願付價格之影響。戶外遊憩研究,35(1),85-128。 蔡宜真(2014)。消費者有機食品認知、利他主義與購買意願關係之研究。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 鄧雨萍。(2022)。年輕族群永續時尚產品購買意圖與行為之分析。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 鄭博元(2016)。消費者健康價值觀對有機餐廳消費行為意圖與願付價格之影響。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 鄭惠如及梁朝雲(2020)。消費者倫理與豬肉產銷履歷衍生之信任感和知覺品質對消費意願與願付價格之影響。台灣農學會報,21(2),91-117。 鍾雨紜(2015)社會聯盟與品牌認同-消費者利他主義的干擾效果。全國博碩士論文摘要檢索系統。 英文參考文獻 Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50(2), 179-211. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). A Bayesian analysis of attribution processes. Psychological bulletin, 82(2), 261. Ateş, H. (2020). Merging theory of planned behavior and value identity personal norm model to explain pro-environmental behaviors. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 24, 169-180. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16, 74-94. Baranowski, T., Cullen, K. W., Nicklas, T., Thompson, D., & Baranowski, J. (2003). Are current health behavioral change models helpful in guiding prevention of weight gain efforts? Obesity research, 11(S10), 23S-43S. Barber, N., Taylor, C., & Strick, S. (2009). Wine consumers’ environmental knowledge and attitudes: Influence on willingness to purchase. International Journal of Wine Research, 1(1), 59-72. Barton, M. D. (2000). Antibiotic use in animal feed and its impact on human healt. Nutrition research reviews, 13(2), 279-299. Bautista, R., Dui, R., Jeong, L. S., & Paredes, M. P. (2020). Does altruism affect purchase intent of green products? A moderated mediation analysis. Asia-Pacific Social Science Review, 20(1), 159-170. Becker-Leifhold, C. V. (2018). The role of values in collaborative fashion consumption-A critical investigation through the lenses of the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Cleaner Production, 199, 781-791. Bigge, M. L. (1971). Positive Relativism an Emergent Educational Philosophy. Biswas, A., & Roy, M. (2015). Leveraging factors for sustained green consumption behavior based on consumption value perceptions: testing the structural model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 95, 332-340. Bloemhof, J. M., Smeets, C. M., & van Nunen, J. A. (2005). Supply Chain Optimisation in Animal Husbandry. Springer. Bolisani, E., Bratianu, C., Bolisani, E., & Bratianu, C. (2018). The elusive definition of knowledge. Emergent knowledge strategies: Strategic thinking in knowledge management, 1-22. Boomsma, C., & Steg, L. (2014). The effect of information and values on acceptability of reduced street lighting. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 39, 22-31. Cambra-López, M., Marín-García, P. J., Lledó, C., Cerisuelo, A., & Pascual, J. J. (2022). Biomarkers and de novo protein design can improve precise amino acid nutrition in broilers. Animals, 12(7), 935. Cantril, H., & Allport, G. W. (1935). The psychology of radio. Chen, K., & Deng, T. (2016). Research on the green purchase intentions from the perspective of product knowledge. Sustainability, 8(9), 943. Cheng, G., Hao, H., Xie, S., Wang, X., Dai, M., Huang, L., & Yuan, Z. (2014). Antibiotic alternatives: the substitution of antibiotics in animal husbandry? Frontiers in microbiology, 5, 217. Cheung, M. F., & To, W. M. (2019). An extended model of value-attitude-behavior to explain Chinese consumers’ green purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50, 145-153. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340. Doran, R., & Larsen, S. (2016). The relative importance of social and personal norms in explaining intentions to choose eco‐friendly travel options. International Journal of Tourism Research, 18(2), 159-166. Eisler, M. C., Lee, M. R., Tarlton, J. F., Martin, G. B., Beddington, J., Dungait, J. A., Greathead, H., Liu, J., Mathew, S., & Miller, H. (2014). Agriculture: steps to sustainable livestock. Nature, 507(7490), 32-34. Fryxell, G. E., & Lo, C. W. (2003). The influence of environmental knowledge and values on managerial behaviours on behalf of the environment: An empirical examination of managers in China. Journal of business ethics, 46, 45-69. Greene, W. H. (2012). Econometric analysis, 71e. Stern School of Business, New York University. Gregory‐Smith, D., Manika, D., & Demirel, P. (2017). Green intentions under the blue flag: Exploring differences in EU consumers’ willingness to pay more for environmentally‐friendly products. Business Ethics: A European Review, 26(3), 205-222. Grunert, S. C. Value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy or demographics-attitude-behaviour hierarchy? The case of organic food in Denmark. Hauser, M., Nussbeck, F. W., & Jonas, K. (2013). The impact of food‐related values on food purchase behavior and the mediating role of attitudes: A swiss study. Psychology & Marketing, 30(9), 765-778. Henryks, J., & Pearson, D. (2010). Misreading between the lines: Consumer confusion over organic food labelling. Australian Journal of Communication, 37(3), 73-86. Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., & Tomera, A. N. (1987). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of environmental education, 18(2), 1-8. Hohashi, N., Honda, J., Shimada, N., & Michigami, S. (2016). An introduction to the concentric sphere family environment theory: Theory and intervention. Tokyo: Editex. Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1988). A structural equation test of the value-attitude-behavior hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 638-646. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.4.638 Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. Sage. Iyer, L. S. (2018). Knowledge, attitude and behaviour (KAB) of student community towards electronic waste-a case study. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 11(10). Jain, S. (2020). Assessing the moderating effect of subjective norm on luxury purchase intention: A study of Gen Y consumers in India. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 48(5), 517-536. Kahn Jr, P. H., & Lourenço, O. (2002). Water, air, fire, and earth: A developmental study in Portugal of environmental moral reasoning. Environment and Behavior, 34(4), 405-430. Kim, H.-S., & Damhorst, M. L. (1998). Environmental concern and apparel consumption. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 16(3), 126-133. Kim, M. J., & Hall, C. M. (2021). Do value-attitude-behavior and personality affect sustainability crowdfunding initiatives? Journal of Environmental Management, 280, 111827. Kim, M. J., Hall, C. M., & Kim, D.-K. (2020). Predicting environmentally friendly eating out behavior by value-attitude-behavior theory: does being vegetarian reduce food waste? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(6), 797-815. Kim, S. H., & Seock, Y.-K. (2019). The roles of values and social norm on personal norms and pro-environmentally friendly apparel product purchasing behavior: The mediating role of personal norms. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 51, 83-90. Kitano, S., Mitsunari, Y., & Yoshino, A. (2022). The impact of information asymmetry on animal welfare-friendly consumption: Evidence from milk market in Japan. Ecological Economics, 191, 107230. Kotchen, M. J., & Reiling, S. D. (2000). Environmental attitudes, motivations, and contingent valuation of nonuse values: a case study involving endangered species. Ecological Economics, 32(1), 93-107. La Barbera, F., & Ajzen, I. (2020). Control interactions in the theory of planned behavior: Rethinking the role of subjective norm. Europe's Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 401. Lahlou, F.-Z., Mackey, H. R., & Al-Ansari, T. (2021). Wastewater reuse for livestock feed irrigation as a sustainable practice: A socio-environmental-economic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 294, 126331. Larceneux, F., Benoit-Moreau, F., & Renaudin, V. (2012). Why might organic labels fail to influence consumer choices? Marginal labelling and brand equity effects. Journal of Consumer Policy, 35, 85-104. Leire, C., & Thidell, Å. (2005). Product-related environmental information to guide consumer purchases–a review and analysis of research on perceptions, understanding and use among Nordic consumers. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(10-11), 1061-1070. Levine, D. S., & Strube, M. J. (2012). Environmental attitudes, knowledge, intentions and behaviors among college students. The Journal of social psychology, 152(3), 308-326. Liere, K. D. V., & Noe, F. P. (1981). Outdoor recreation and environmental attitudes: Further examination of the Dunlap-Heffernan thesis. Rural Sociology, 46(3), 505. Lusk, J. L., Nilsson, T., & Foster, K. (2007). Public preferences and private choices: effect of altruism and free riding on demand for environmentally certified pork. Environmental and Resource Economics, 36, 499-521. Ma, C.-C., & Chang, H.-P. (2022). The Effect of Novel and Environmentally Friendly Foods on Consumer Attitude and Behavior: A Value-Attitude-Behavioral Model. Foods, 11(16), 2423. Martin, C., & Czellar, S. (2017). Where do biospheric values come from? A connectedness to nature perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 52, 56-68. McLeod, A. (2011). World livestock 2011-livestock in food security. Food and agriculture organization of the united nations (FAO). Mostafa, M. M. (2006). Antecedents of Egyptian consumers' green purchase intentions: A hierarchical multivariate regression model. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 19(2), 97-126. Mostafa, M. M. (2007). A hierarchical analysis of the green consciousness of the Egyptian consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 24(5), 445-473. Nagel, T. (1978). The possibility of altruism. Princeton University Press. Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology: Classic edition. Psychology press. Nguyen, H., & Le, H. (2020). The effect of agricultural product eco-labelling on green purchase intention. Management Science Letters, 10(12), 2813-2820. Nguyen, T. N., Lobo, A., & Greenland, S. (2017). Energy efficient household appliances in emerging markets: the influence of consumers' values and knowledge on their attitudes and purchase behaviour. International journal of consumer studies, 41(2), 167-177. Nketiah, E., Song, H., Obuobi, B., Adu-Gyamfi, G., Adjei, M., & Cudjoe, D. (2022). Citizens' willingness to pay for local anaerobic digestion energy: The influence of altruistic value and knowledge. Energy, 260, 125168. Norum, P. S. (2003). Examination of generational differences in household apparel expenditures. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 32(1), 52-75. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). An overview of psychological measurement. Clinical diagnosis of mental disorders: A handbook, 97-146. Oh, R., Fielding, K., Nghiem, L., Chang, C., Carrasco, L., & Fuller, R. (2021). Connection to nature is predicted by family values, social norms and personal experiences of nature. Global Ecology and Conservation, 28, e01632. Patwary, A. K., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Rabiul, M. K., Aziz, R. C., & Hanafiah, M. H. (2022). Linking environmental knowledge, environmental responsibility, altruism, and intention toward green hotels through ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 34(12), 4653-4673. Polonsky, M. J., Vocino, A., Grau, S. L., Garma, R., & Ferdous, A. S. (2012). The impact of general and carbon-related environmental knowledge on attitudes and behaviour of US consumers. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(3-4), 238-263. Pomar, C., Hauschild, L., Zhang, G.-H., Pomar, J., & Lovatto, P. A. (2009). Applying precision feeding techniques in growing-finishing pig operations. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 38, 226-237. Rahman, I., & Reynolds, D. (2016). Predicting green hotel behavioral intentions using a theory of environmental commitment and sacrifice for the environment. International journal of hospitality management, 52, 107-116. Rahman, I., & Reynolds, D. (2019). The influence of values and attitudes on green consumer behavior: A conceptual model of green hotel patronage. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 20(1), 47-74. Ramsey, C. E., & Rickson, R. E. (1976). Environmental knowledge and attitudes. The Journal of Environmental Education, 8(1), 10-18. Rao, A. R., & Monroe, K. B. (1988). The moderating effect of prior knowledge on cue utilization in product evaluations. Journal of consumer research, 15(2), 253-264. Regassa, T. H., Koelsch, R. K., Wortmann, C. S., Randle, R. F., & Abunyewa, A. A. (2009). Antibiotic use in animal production: Environmental concerns. Rex, E., & Baumann, H. (2007). Beyond ecolabels: what green marketing can learn from conventional marketing. Journal of Cleaner Production, 15(6), 567-576. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. Free press. Rokicka, E. (2002). Attitudes toward natural environment: A study of local community dwellers. International Journal of Sociology, 32(3), 78-90. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In Handbook of market research (pp. 587-632). Springer. Schrader, P. G., & Lawless, K. A. (2004). The knowledge, attitudes, & behaviors approach how to evaluate performance and learning in complex environments. Performance Improvement, 43(9), 8-15. Schultz, P. W., Gouveia, V. V., Cameron, L. D., Tankha, G., Schmuck, P., & Franěk, M. (2005). Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 36(4), 457-475. Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221-279). Elsevier. Scultz, W. (2002). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues-statis. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 391-406. Severson, R. L., & Kahn Jr, P. H. (2010). In the orchard: Farm worker children's moral and environmental reasoning. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(3), 249-256. Shen, Y.-C., & Chen, H.-S. (2020). Exploring consumers’ purchase intention of an innovation of the agri-food industry: A case of artificial meat. Foods, 9(6), 745. Shin, Y. H., Moon, H., Jung, S. E., & Severt, K. (2017). The effect of environmental values and attitudes on consumer willingness to pay more for organic menus: A value-attitude-behavior approach. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 33, 113-121. Sivapalan, A., von der Heidt, T., Scherrer, P., & Sorwar, G. (2021). A consumer values-based approach to enhancing green consumption. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 28, 699-715. Steg, L., Perlaviciute, G., & Van der Werff, E. (2015). Understanding the human dimensions of a sustainable energy transition. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 805. Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of social issues, 50(3), 65-84. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment and behavior, 25(5), 322-348. Stranieri, S., Ricci, E. C., Stiletto, A., & Trestini, S. (2023). How about choosing environmentally friendly beef? Exploring purchase intentions among Italian consumers. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 38, e2. Taufique, K. M. R., Vocino, A., & Polonsky, M. J. (2017). The influence of eco-label knowledge and trust on pro-environmental consumer behaviour in an emerging market. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 25(7), 511-529. Teng, Y.-M., Wu, K.-S., & Liu, H.-H. (2015). Integrating altruism and the theory of planned behavior to predict patronage intention of a green hotel. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 39(3), 299-315. Van Doorn, J., & Verhoef, P. C. (2015). Drivers of and barriers to organic purchase behavior. Journal of Retailing, 91(3), 436-450. Verma, V. K., Chandra, B., & Kumar, S. (2019). Values and ascribed responsibility to predict consumers' attitude and concern towards green hotel visit intention. Journal of Business Research, 96, 206-216. Wang, L., Zhang, Q., & Wong, P. P. W. (2022). Purchase intention for green cars among Chinese millennials: merging the value–attitude–behavior theory and theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 316. Wood, W., Kallgren, C. A., & Preisler, R. M. (1985). Access to attitude-relevant information in memory as a determinant of persuasion: The role of message attributes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21(1), 73-85. Xie, W. Y., Shen, Q., & Zhao, F. (2018). Antibiotics and antibiotic resistance from animal manures to soil: a review. European journal of soil science, 69(1), 181-195. | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/89846 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 全球已有許多國家及企業陸續對淨零排放(Net Zero Emissions)提出承諾,面對國際經貿情勢之快速變化,結合畜牧產業淨零碳排行動,我國行政院農業委員會(農委會)推行諸多產業升級政策,期望提升我國畜牧產業競爭力,同時並推行資源循環再利用以減少對環境資源之耗損。
本研究結合Homer and Kahle (1988)提出的價值-態度-行為模型(Value-Attitude-Behavior model, VAB model)及Wood et al. (1985)提出的知識-態度-行為模型(Knowledge-Attitude-Behavior, KAB model),且加以延伸、加入產品資訊構面,探討消費者之價值觀及態度對其購買友善環境畜產品意圖的影響,並接續檢視國人對於友善環境畜產品的願付溢價之影響因子。本研究透過線上問卷調查,以蒐集臺灣地區消費者對友善環境畜產品之購買意願及願付溢價相關資訊。本研究除利用偏最小平方結構方程模型(Partial Least-squares Structural equation model, PLS-SEM)檢視消費者價值觀、環境知識及產品資訊與購買友善環境畜產品意願之間的關係,並且應用序列機率模型(ordered probit model)之迴歸分析方法,以進一步了解國內消費者對友善環境畜產品之願付溢價比例的影響因子。 研究結果顯示,消費者的價值觀、對環境知識了解程度以及掌握的產品資訊,皆會透過其對態度之影響,進一步影響其對於友善環境畜產品的購買意圖,此結果說明態度在購買意圖影響因子及購買意圖之間扮演了中介變項(mediator variable)的角色。然而,在利他主義價值與購買意圖路徑之間,友善環境態度及永續的社會規範兩種態度構面並未產生顯著的中介效果,顯示利他主義價值並非是消費者決定是否購買友善環境畜產品之關鍵因素,而與利他主義相比,消費者的利己主義價值及永續的個人規範皆較強烈,顯見大多消費者仍以自身利益為主要考量。本研究亦發現,所有構面中,消費者對於產品資訊的掌握程度對於購買態度之影響最為顯著,表示消費者在選購友善環境畜產品時,會在意產品相關資訊的透明程度,因此,當消費者對產品資訊之掌握程度愈高,其購買意願就愈高。 本研究也發現,超過半數的消費者對於友善環境畜產品之願付溢價程度為5%(含)以下。因此,考量銷售及市場接受程度,對於友善環境畜產品之定價,建議溢價比例以不超過傳統生產模式所生產之畜產品定價之5%為佳。此外,本研究亦發現,相較服務業從事者,學生族群更願意為友善環境畜產品買單,而月收入超過新台幣三萬元的消費者,也都願意以溢價購買友善環境畜產品,尤其月收入愈高者,其願意為友善環境畜產品支付的溢價比例愈高。 整體而言,本研究的結果證實了消費者的價值觀、環境知識、產品資訊、態度與其對於友善環境畜產品的購買意願及支付溢價行為之間的關係,因此,本研究不僅為VAB模型以及KAB模型提出實證的支持,且證實了消費者的購買意圖與其願意支付溢價來購買友善環境畜產品之行為的關係。 綜合以上研究結果,本研究建議政府部門應建立友善環境生產指標及標章認證制度,作為畜牧業生產者之遵循依據。此外,農政主管機關宜輔導生產者加速轉型,加強其面對環境挑戰之競爭力。本研究亦建議,畜產品生產者可藉由標章認證及銷售業者之廣告宣傳,提升消費者對產品資訊之了解,並使其在選購時可有效辨識。此外,政府部門應加強國內之消費者教育,透過環境教育,不僅可以促使國人對農業、土地、環境及資源等一般知識的認識,更能藉此培養國內消費者關注他人、社會及環境福利之價值觀。 本研究的重要政策意涵在於,透過激發國內消費者之友善環境、環境永續發展的價值觀及態度,除了能提升國人購買友善環境畜產品之意願,也能進而在畜牧產業為環境盡一分心力的同時,為畜產市場帶來新的商機。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Many countries and businesses around the world have made commitments to achieve net zero emissions. In the face of rapid changes in international economic and trade situations, the Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan (COA) has implemented various industry upgrading policies in conjunction with the net zero carbon emissions action in the livestock industry. The aim is to enhance the competitiveness of our livestock industry and promote resource recycling to reduce environmental resource depletion.
This study combines the Value-Attitude-Behavior model (VAB model) proposed by Homer and Kahle (1988) and the Knowledge-Attitude-Behavior model (KAB model) proposed by Wood et al. (1985). It extends and incorporates the dimension of product knowledge/information to explore the influence of consumer values and attitudes on their intention to purchase environmentally friendly livestock products. Through an online questionnaire survey, this study collects data on Taiwanese consumers' intention to purchase and their willingness to pay a premium for environmentally friendly livestock products. The Partial Least-Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) method is employed to examine the relationships between consumer values, environmental knowledge, information about the products, and the intention to purchase environmentally friendly livestock products. The results of the study indicate that consumer values, the level of environmental knowledge, and the grasp of product information all have an impact on the intention to purchase environmentally friendly livestock products through their influence on attitudes. This finding suggests that attitudes play a mediating role between factors affecting purchase intention and purchase intention itself. However, in the path between altruistic values and purchase intention, the two attitude dimensions of environmental attitude and sustainable social norms do not produce significant mediating effects. This indicates that altruistic values are not the key factor determining whether consumers purchase environmentally friendly livestock products. Compared to altruism, consumers' egoistic values and sustainable personal norms are more influential, suggesting that most consumers still prioritize their own interests. The study also found that among all dimensions, consumers' grasp of product knowledge/information has the most significant impact on purchase attitudes. This implies that consumers care about the transparency of product-related information when choosing environmentally friendly livestock products. Thus, when consumers have a higher level of product information grasp, their willingness to purchase is higher. The study also found that over half of the consumers are willing to pay a premium of 5% or less for environmentally friendly livestock products. Therefore, considering sales and market acceptance, it is recommended to price environmentally friendly livestock products at no more than 5% above the price of conventionally produced livestock products. Additionally, the study found that students are more willing to pay for environmentally friendly livestock products compared to those employed in the service industry. Consumers with a monthly income exceeding NT$30,000 are also willing to pay a premium for environmentally friendly livestock products, and the willingness to pay a higher premium proportion increases with higher income. Overall, the results of this study confirm the relationships between consumer values, environmental knowledge, product knowledge/information, attitudes, willingness to pay a higher price for environmentally friendly livestock products, and actual purchasing behavior. It provides empirical evidence for the VAB model and the KAB model and also confirms the consistency between consumer purchase intentions and their willingness to pay a premium for environmentally friendly livestock products. Based on the above research findings, this study suggests that government agencies should establish friendly environmental production indicators and certification systems as guidelines for livestock industry producers. Furthermore, agricultural authorities should assist producers in accelerating their transformation and strengthening their competitiveness in the face of environmental challenges. The study also recommends that livestock producers enhance consumer understanding of product information through certification labels and advertising by sales agents, enabling consumers to effectively identify environmentally friendly products during their purchase. Additionally, government agencies should strengthen consumer education in the country, particularly through environmental education. This not only promotes public knowledge about agriculture, land, the environment, and resources but also cultivates the values of caring for others, society, and environmental welfare among domestic consumers. The significant policy implications of this study lie in stimulating domestic consumers' values and attitudes towards environmentally friendly practices and sustainable development. By doing so, it not only increases the willingness of people to purchase environmentally friendly livestock products but also contributes to the environment while opening up new business opportunities in the livestock market. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2023-09-22T16:22:22Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2023-09-22T16:22:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 目錄
謝辭 II 中文摘要 III ABSTRACT V 目錄 VIII 表目錄 X 圖目錄 XI 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景 1 第二節 研究動機與目的 2 第二章 文獻回顧 7 謝辭 II 中文摘要 III ABSTRACT V 目錄 VIII 表目錄 X 圖目錄 XI 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景 1 第二節 研究動機與目的 2 第二章 文獻回顧 7 第一節 畜牧產業環境友善作為 7 第二節 友善環境消費行為模型 12 第三節 消費者願付溢價 15 第三章 研究設計 17 第一節 研究架構及假說 17 第二節 路徑分析及迴歸分析方法 25 第二節 變數定義及問卷設計 29 第三節 資料來源與敘述統計 33 第四章 實證結果分析 37 第一節 偏最小平方結構方程模型實證分析 37 第二節 願付溢價迴歸分析 46 第五章 結論與建議 48 第一節 結論與建議 48 第二節 研究限制 51 參考文獻 52 表目錄 表 3-1 問卷題項內容參考來源彙整表 30 表 3-2 問卷題項內容彙整表 32 表 3-3 基本社會經濟特性及願付溢價定義 34 表 3-4 心理構面、購買意圖及及願付溢價敘述統計 35 表 4-1 信度分析表 37 表 4-2 因素負荷量表(效度) 38 表 4-3 區別效度分析表 40 表 4-4 路徑關係檢定表 40 表 4-5 中介效果關係檢定表 41 表 4-6 願付溢價 Oprobit 模型實證結果 47 圖目錄 圖 1-1 臺南後壁區順賢牧場以槽車載運沼液沼渣 3 圖 1-2 雲林褒忠鄉農場晃晃以沼液灌溉種植蒜頭 4 圖 1-3 臺南六甲區永順興牧場將生雞糞乾燥製成有機肥 5 圖 2-1 國內畜牧糞尿資源化方式 10 圖 2-2 石安牧場再生綠能廠之畜牧廢棄物循環利用運作模式 11 圖 3-1 友善環境畜產品購買意圖及願付溢價之概念性架構圖 18 圖 3-2 本研究各階段分析消費者對友善環境畜產品願付溢價行為之架構圖 25 圖 4-1 偏最小平方結構方程模型路徑關係圖 42 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 臺灣消費者對友善環境畜產品的購買意圖與願付溢價之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | A Study on Consumers’ Purchase Intention and Willingness to Pay a Premium for Environmentally- Friendly Livestock Products in Taiwan | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 111-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 方珍玲;邱敬仁 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Chen-Ling Fang;Ching-Ren Chiu | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 利環境消費行為,價值-態度-行為理論,知識-態度-行為理論,偏最小平方結構方程模型,序列機率模型, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Pro-environmental Consumption Behavior,Value-Attitude-Behavior Model,Knowledge-Attitude-Behavior Model,Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling,Ordered Probit Model, | en |
dc.relation.page | 58 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202302487 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2023-08-11 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 農業經濟學系 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 農業經濟學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-111-2.pdf | 3.94 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。