| Literature DB >> 35457761 |
Sisi Wu1, Xuan Gong1, Yunfei Wang1, Jian Cao1,2.
Abstract
Consumer awareness of environmental protection is getting stronger. However, with the development of the logistics industry, the environmental pollution caused by express packaging has become increasingly severe. Therefore, it is of great importance to know consumer cognition and willingness about how to reduce the express packaging pollution. In this study, through the analysis of 561 questionnaires, we analyze the impact of consumer evaluation of recyclable express packaging and green express packaging on responsibility awareness of government, logistics enterprises, and e-commerce corporates, and analyze whether there is a positive correlation between consumer evaluation and reducing environmental pressure. We find that consumers are willing to use recyclable express packaging and green express packaging, especially the latter. Moreover, the government is supposed to play a central role in solving environmental pollution problems caused by express packaging. It is recommended that the government proposes some corresponding solutions, such as introducing a packaging tax policy, setting up an environmental fund, and developing environment-friendly packaging materials. Meanwhile, consumers expect logistics enterprises and e-commerce companies to cooperate with the government actively and switch to using environment-friendly express packaging in a timely manner.Entities:
Keywords: consumer cognition; environmental pollution; government responsibility; green express packaging; recyclable express packaging
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35457761 PMCID: PMC9029519 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19084895
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The region distribution of the questionnaire respondents.
Basic information of respondents.
| Item | Number | Proportion | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 252 | 45.5% |
| Female | 302 | 54.5% | |
| Age | 12 and below | 10 | 1.81% |
| 13–20 | 95 | 17.2% | |
| 21–30 | 193 | 34.8% | |
| 31–40 | 147 | 26.5% | |
| 41–50 | 97 | 17.5% | |
| 51–60 | 10 | 1.81% | |
| 61 and above | 2 | 0.36% | |
| Profession | Student | 146 | 26.4% |
| Retiree | 18 | 3.25% | |
| Manufacturing practitioner | 102 | 18.4% | |
| Transportation, warehousing, and postal and telecommunications practitioners | 32 | 5.78% | |
| Financial industry, real estate industry, insurance industry, and commercial service industry practitioners | 159 | 28.7% | |
| Others | 97 | 17.5% | |
| Monthly income (after tax) | Less than $547 | 283 | 51.1% |
| $547–$1094 | 181 | 32.7% | |
| $1094–$1563 | 54 | 9.75% | |
| $1563–$2344 | 20 | 3.61% | |
| More than $2344 | 16 | 2.89% | |
| Education | Elementary school and below | 15 | 2.71% |
| Junior high school | 46 | 8.30% | |
| High school | 155 | 28.0% | |
| Undergraduate | 240 | 43.3% | |
| Postgraduate degree and above | 98 | 17.7% | |
Reliability analysis and validity analysis of Q4 and Q7.
| Items | KMO | Bartlett’s χ2 | Bartlett’s Sig. | Cronbach’s α |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q4 | 0.901 | 2165.233 | 0.000 | 0.876 |
| Q7 | 0.910 | 2353.159 | 0.000 | 0.880 |
The importance ranking of three factors in Question 4.
| Factor | y | Ranking |
|---|---|---|
| Cost performance | 13.8 | 1 |
| Appearance | 11.0 | 2 |
| Environmental protection and practicality | 7.71 | 3 |
The importance ranking of three factors in Question 7.
| Factor | y | Ranking |
|---|---|---|
| Cost performance | 14.7 | 1 |
| Appearance | 11.8 | 2 |
| Environmental protection and practicality | 7.90 | 3 |
Figure 2Ranking of seven types of express packaging discards.
Figure 3The premium range consumers are willing to pay for green express packaging.
Figure 4Consumer cognition on the responsible subject for reducing express packaging pollution.
Respondents’ awareness of government responsibility.
| Questions/Options | Totally Disagree | A Little Disagree | Uncertain | Somewhat Agree | Totally Agree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced a tax policy | 2.26% | 3.99% | 18.9% | 52.3% | 22.6% |
| Set up environmental fund | 1.56% | 4.51% | 19.1% | 52.2% | 22.6% |
| Develop new materials | 1.56% | 3.99% | 19.1% | 50.7% | 24.7% |
| Enhance publicity on recycling | 2.26% | 4.17% | 20.0% | 49.0% | 24.7% |
Respondents’ awareness of logistics corporate responsibility.
| Questions/Options | Totally Disagree | A Little Disagree | Uncertain | Somewhat Agree | Totally Agree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reduce the use of plastic tape | 1.56% | 4.17% | 17.4% | 51.2% | 25.7% |
| Open the door-to-door recycling services | 1.91% | 3.82% | 17.7% | 50.0% | 26.6% |
| Guide customers to use recyclable or green packaging | 2.26% | 3.30% | 20.8% | 50.4% | 23.3% |
| Establish information systems for recycling | 1.91% | 2.95% | 18.1% | 52.4% | 24.7% |
Respondents’ awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility.
| Questions/Options | Totally Disagree | A Little Disagree | Uncertain | Somewhat Agree | Totally Agree |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Promise to use recyclable or green packaging | 1.74% | 4.34% | 17.9% | 53.5% | 22.6% |
| Establish recycling cooperation with logistics companies | 1.56% | 3.65% | 17.5% | 53.3% | 24.0% |
| Reward consumers for recycling | 1.74% | 2.78% | 15.6% | 54.7% | 25.2% |
Figure 5Consumers’ willingness to protect the environment.
Figure 6Consumers preferences for environment-friendly packaging in different cities.
Table of chi-square test results on urban.
| Value | Exact Sig. (2 Sided) | |
|---|---|---|
| Fisher’s exact test for city’s recyclable express packaging | 22.9 | 0.004 |
| Fisher’s exact test for city’s green express packages | 3.24 | 0.985 |
Table of chi-square test results on gender and other factors.
| Value | Sig. | |
|---|---|---|
| Continuity correction between gender and premium | 17.0 | 0.005 |
| Pearson chi-square between gender and number of packages | 19.5 | 0.001 |
| Pearson chi-square between the frequency of online shopping and the number of express packages | 635.2 | 0.000 |
Regarding the premium of green express packaging, the relationship between gender and acceptance.
| Item | <0.5% | 0.5–1% | 1.01–2% | 2.01–5% | 5.01–10% | >10% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 26.3% | 32.7% | 22.2% | 12.0% | 5.64% | 1.13% |
| Female | 34.8% | 39.4% | 14.8% | 7.74% | 2.26% | 0.97% |
Relationship between gender and number of express packages in a month.
| Quantity/Month | 0–1 | 2–5 | 6–10 | 11–15 | 16 or More |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 13.9% | 59.8% | 18.1% | 4.51% | 3.76% |
| Female | 8.39% | 49.4% | 28.7% | 8.39% | 5.16% |
Relationship between gender and frequency of shopping online.
| Item | 0–1 | 2–5 | 6–10 | 11–15 | 16 or More |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 13.2% | 57.1% | 15.8% | 8.65% | 5.26% |
| Female | 6.45% | 48.7% | 30.0% | 8.39% | 6.45% |
Figure 7Structural equation model.
Results of reliability and validity tests.
| Variables | Cronbach’s α | rho_A | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of recyclable packaging | 0.884 | 1.000 | ||
| Evaluation of existing problems | 0.859 | 0.877 | 0.905 | 0.706 |
| Evaluation of green packaging | 0.894 | 1.000 | ||
| Awareness of government responsibility | 0.885 | 0.887 | 0.921 | 0.743 |
| Awareness of logistics enterprise responsibility | 0.892 | 0.893 | 0.925 | 0.756 |
| Awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility | 0.859 | 0.860 | 0.914 | 0.780 |
| Relieve environmental pressure | 0.910 | 0.911 | 0.937 | 0.789 |
Result of hypotheses testing.
| Assumed Content | Hypothetical Result | Result | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of recyclable express packaging → Awareness of government responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 7.99 × 10−3 | Support |
| Evaluation of existing problems → Awareness of government responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 4.06 × 10−11 | Support |
| Evaluation of green courier packaging → Awareness of government responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 5.28 × 10−4 | Support |
| Evaluation of recyclable express packaging → Awareness of logistics enterprise responsibility (+) | Not Significant | 1.16 × 10−1 | Nonsupport |
| Evaluation of existing problems → Awareness of logistics enterprise responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 6.65 × 10−12 | Support |
| Evaluation of green courier packaging → Awareness of logistics enterprise responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 1.68 × 10−3 | Support |
| Evaluation of recyclable express packaging → Awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 4.71 × 10−3 | Support |
| Evaluation of existing problems → Awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 5.68 × 10−14 | Support |
| Evaluation of green courier packaging → Awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility (+) | Positive effect | 4.99 × 10−3 | Support |
| Awareness of government responsibility → Relieve environmental pressure (+) | Positive effect | 1.85 × 10−6 | Support |
| Awareness of logistics enterprise responsibility → Relieve environmental pressure (+) | Positive effect | 3.64 × 10−2 | Support |
| Awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility → Relieve environmental pressure (+) | Positive effect | 2.18 × 10−2 | Support |
‘+’ indicates positive correlation.
R2 test of four latent variables.
| Item | R2 | Adjusted R2 |
|---|---|---|
| Awareness of government responsibility | 0.411 | 0.407 |
| Awareness of logistics enterprise responsibility | 0.389 | 0.385 |
| Awareness of e-commerce corporate responsibility | 0.416 | 0.413 |
| Relieve environmental pressure | 0.389 | 0.385 |