Green Intention versus Green Action: The Intention–Behavior Gap in Sustainable Fashion Consumption Among Generation Z
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.38035/ijam.v5i3.2335Keywords:
Green Intention, Green Action, Intention–Behavior Gap, Value–Action Mismatch, Sustainable Fashion, Generation ZAbstract
Generation Z consumers express strong concern for the environment, yet their sustainable fashion purchases often lag their stated intentions. Drawing on the theory of planned behavior, this study examines whether attitudes toward sustainability shape green action through green intention and whether value–action mismatch, operationalized as the gap between the expected and perceived value of sustainable clothing, weakens the conversion of intention into action. We analyzed survey data from 155 Generation Z consumers in Bandung, Indonesia, who had purchased from mass-market brands with sustainability practices, using partial least squares structural equation modeling. Attitude toward sustainability strongly predicted green intention, and green intention predicted green action. Green intention fully mediated the effect of attitude on action. Contrary to expectations, value–action mismatch neither predicted green action nor moderated the intention–action relationship, and its confidence interval makes a substantial weakening effect unlikely. The model explained 39.7% of the variance in green action, confirming a substantial intention–behavior gap. The findings indicate that strengthening attitudes is only effective if it leads to tangible intentions. Additionally, the gap between expectation and perception in environmental values does not explain why Generation Z's intentions do not translate into action. The study also highlights the measurement limitations of difference scores and identifies directions for future research
References
Adah, E. F., Nugroho, A., & Rachbini, W. (2025). Systematic Literature Review: Factors Influencing Generation Z’s Attitudes Toward Environmentally Friendly Products and Their Implications for Green Consumer Behavior. International Journal of Science and Society, 7(3), 129–145.
https://doi.org/10.54783/ijsoc.v7i3.1486
Aiken, L. S., West, S. G., & Reno, R. R. (1991). Multiple regression : testing and interpreting interactions.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t
Alisat, S., & Riemer, M. (2015). The environmental action scale: Development and psychometric evaluation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.05.006
Ardhia, R. W., & Mayangsari, L. (2020). A Study of Factors Influencing Indonesian Consumers’ Purchase Intention towards Its Local Fashion Brands. KnE Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v4i6.6669
Biswas, A. (2017). A consumption value-gap analysis for sustainable consumption. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(8), 7714–7725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-8355-9
Blaazer, E. (2024, November 8). The Gen Z dilemma: Eco-conscious but addicted to fast fashion. FashionUnited.
Carrington, M., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. (2010). Why Ethical Consumers Don’t Walk Their Talk: Towards a Framework for Understanding the Gap Between the Ethical Purchase Intentions and Actual Buying Behaviour of Ethically Minded Consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6
Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. In Routledge eBooks. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Colombo, S. L., Chiarella, S. G., Lefrançois, C., Fradin, J., Raffone, A., & Simione, L. (2023). Why Knowing about Climate Change Is Not Enough to Change: A Perspective Paper on the Factors Explaining the Environmental Knowledge-Action Gap. Sustainability, 15(20), 14859.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014859
Edwards, J. R. (2001). Ten Difference Score Myths. Organizational Research Methods, 4(3), 265–287.
https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810143005
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Haffar, G. E., Durif, F., & Dubé, L. (2020). Towards closing the attitude-intention-behavior gap in green consumption: A narrative review of the literature and an overview of future research directions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 275, 122556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122556
Hair, J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM).
Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2018). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ebr-11-2018-0203
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hosany, A. R. S., & Serdiuk, K. (2025). Understanding Gen Z Consumers: A Typology of (Un)sustainable Purchases. Psychology and Marketing, 42(11), 2820–2832. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.70013
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2016). Predictors of young consumer’s green purchase behaviour. Management of Environmental Quality An International Journal, 27(4), 452–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/meq-05-2015-0091
Kenny, D. A. (2018). Moderation.
https://davidakenny.net/cm/moderation.htm
Kock, N. (2015). Common Method Bias in PLS-SEM. International Journal of E-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2016). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS‐SEM: The inverse square root and gamma‐exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–261.
https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131
Margariti, K., Hatzithomas, L., & Boutsouki, C. (2024). Elucidating the Gap between Green Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior through the Prism of Greenwashing Concerns. Sustainability, 16(12), 5108.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125108
Ngo, Q., Nguyen, T.-D., & Phan, N.-B. (2025). Exploring green purchasing intentions and behaviours among Vietnamese Generation Z: A perspective from the theory of planned behavior. PLoS ONE, 20(5).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0323879
Ngo, T. T. A., Vo, C. N. A., Tran, N. L., Nguyen, K. V., Tran, T. D., & Trinh, Y. N. (2024). Factors influencing Generation Z’s intention to purchase sustainable clothing products in Vietnam. PLoS ONE, 19(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0315502
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 460. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405
Paul, J., Modi, A. G., & Patel, J. D. (2015). Predicting green product consumption using theory of planned behavior and reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 123–134.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006
Permadi, I., Nugroho, A., & Widyastuti, S. (2025). Bridging the Attitude-Behavior Gap in Green Consumption: A Systematic Literature Review and Integrative Framework. Indonesian Interdisciplinary Journal of Sharia Economics (IIJSE). https://doi.org/10.31538/iijse.v8i3.9201
Peter, J. P., Churchill, G. A., & Brown, T. J. (1993). Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(4), 655. https://doi.org/10.1086/209329
Pratama, W., Oktini, D. R., & Mahani, S. A. E. (2025). Pengaruh Lifestyle dan Kualitas Produk terhadap Keputusan Pembelian Barang Thrift pada PD Craptor. Bandung Conference Series Business and Management, 5(1), 565–574. https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsbm.v5i1.17962
Ridwan, A. (2025, May 20). Banyak Gen Z dan milenial mau bayar lebih untuk produk ramah lingkungan. Databoks Katadata. https://databoks.katadata.co.id/demografi/statistik/682c47b546cff/banyak-gen-z-dan-milenial-mau-bayar-lebih-untuk-produk-ramah-lingkungan
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2024). SmartPLS 4. SmartPLS. https://www.smartpls.com
Seyfi, S., Hall, C. M., Saarinen, J., Zaman, M., & Vo‐Thanh, T. (2024). Identifying constraints on Gen Z’s path toward ethical tourism consumption and practices. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 33(6), 1216–1234. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2024.2418967
Sheeran, P., & Abraham, C. (2003). Mediator of Moderators: Temporal Stability of Intention and the Intention-Behavior Relation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(2), 205–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202239046
Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L. (2016). The Intention–Behavior Gap. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(9), 503–518.
https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12265
Szabo, S., & Webster, J. (2020). Perceived Greenwashing: The Effects of Green Marketing on Environmental and Product Perceptions. Journal of Business Ethics, 171(4), 719–739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04461-0
Teerakapibal, S., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (2024). Mind the gap: identifying the chasm between environmental awareness, attitudes and action in fast fashion consumption. International Marketing Review, 42(1), 103–127.
https://doi.org/10.1108/imr-05-2024-0151
Testa, F., Sarti, S., & Frey, M. (2018). Are green consumers really green? Exploring the factors behind the actual consumption of organic food products. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 327–338.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2234
White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT Consumer Behaviors to be More Sustainable: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22–49.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649
Witek, L., & Kuźniar, W. (2023). Green Purchase Behaviour Gap: The Effect of Past Behaviour on Green Food Product Purchase Intentions among Individual Consumers. Foods, 13(1), 136.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ledy Yolanda, Muhammad Karisma Alam, Sabna Ainazah Fatikhah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish their manuscripts in this journal agree to the following conditions:
- The copyright on each article belongs to the author(s).
- The author acknowledges that the International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary (IJAM) has the right to be the first to publish with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors can submit articles separately, arrange for the non-exclusive distribution of manuscripts that have been published in this journal into other versions (e.g., sent to the author's institutional repository, publication into books, etc.), by acknowledging that the manuscript has been published for the first time in the International Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary (IJAM).
