Wang Jian Ming, Li Yong Qiang
School of Business Administration, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, 310018, People's Republic of China.
China Institute of Regulation Research, Zhejiang University of Finance & Economics, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, 310018, People's Republic of China.
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2022 Sep 6;15:2477-2499. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S373123. eCollection 2022.
To explore the effects of "soft" behavioral intervention policies (eg, green emotions, social norms) and "soft" economic incentive policies (eg, high-intensity subsidies, low-intensity subsidies) and their combinations on the public's green product purchasing behavior.
An online questionnaire experiment was conducted on Chinese users using Credamo online questionnaire platform to explore the effects of different "soft" intervention policies on consumers' green purchasing behavior, and the sample data were examined using multiple regression. In Study 1, a total of 460 valid samples were collected to explore the differences in the effects of single intervention policies; in Study 2, a total of 556 valid samples were collected to explore the effects of a combination of soft policies.
In the area of green product purchasing, both behavioral interventions and economic incentives alone can promote green consumption behavior; economic incentives have a more positive impact on guiding consumers to green consumption; the combination of "soft" behavioral interventions and "soft" economic incentives has a positive impact on green consumption. The combination of "soft" behavioral intervention policies and "soft" economic incentive policies is more effective than the individual policies.
The experimental results of Study 1 show that the policy effects of both behavioral intervention policies and economic incentive intervention policies are evident for goods with different value attributes. Meanwhile, comparing the two types of soft intervention policies, we find that the effect of economic incentive intervention policies is stronger than that of soft behavioral intervention policies. In Study 2, the empirical analysis of the policy mix shows that the policy mix is more effective. The combination of "soft" economic incentive policies and "soft" behavioral intervention policies can effectively increase the salience of policy instruments, and the effect of policy combinations is greater than that of single policies.
探讨“软性”行为干预政策(如绿色情感、社会规范)和“软性”经济激励政策(如高强度补贴、低强度补贴)及其组合对公众绿色产品购买行为的影响。
使用Credamo在线问卷平台对中国用户进行在线问卷调查实验,以探究不同“软性”干预政策对消费者绿色购买行为的影响,并运用多元回归对样本数据进行检验。在研究1中,共收集了460个有效样本,以探究单一干预政策效果的差异;在研究2中,共收集了556个有效样本,以探究软性政策组合的效果。
在绿色产品购买领域,单独的行为干预和经济激励均可促进绿色消费行为;经济激励对引导消费者进行绿色消费具有更积极的影响;“软性”行为干预与“软性”经济激励的组合对绿色消费具有积极影响。“软性”行为干预政策与“软性”经济激励政策的组合比单一政策更有效。
研究1的实验结果表明,行为干预政策和经济激励干预政策对具有不同价值属性的商品的政策效果均很明显。同时,比较这两种软性干预政策,我们发现经济激励干预政策的效果强于软性行为干预政策。在研究2中,对政策组合的实证分析表明政策组合更有效。“软性”经济激励政策与“软性”行为干预政策的组合能够有效提高政策工具的显著性,且政策组合的效果大于单一政策。