Factors associated with Finnish, German and UK consumers' intentions to
test, buy and recommend reusable fast-moving consumer goods packaging
Angelos Balatsas-Lekkas *, Harri Luomala , Kyosti Pennanen
University of Vaasa, School of Marketing and Communication, Finland
A R T I C L E I N F O
Editor: Prof. Konstantinos Tsagarakis
Keywords:
Reusable packaging
Consumers' intentions
Perceived value
Emotions
Theory of Planned Behavior
A B S T R A C T
This study investigates factors connected with consumers' intentions to test, buy and recommend reusable
packaging for Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCGs) by extending the Theory of Planned Behavior model with
positive and negative emotions as facilitators of intentions and all behavioral determinants (i.e. attitude, sub-
jective norm, perceived behavioral control). In addition, the connection of five perceived value dimensions
(functional, emotional, social, price, environmental sustainability) and attitudes is explored. A conceptual model
and relevant hypotheses were tested with consumers from Finland, Germany, and the UK (total N ˆ 2400)
through Partial Least Squares - Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Main results show that positive emo-
tions have a key role in consumers' assessment of reusable FMCG packaging: They have a direct and strong
influence on intentions and also influence perceived behavioral control and subjective norms. Additionally, none
of the examined perceived values had a significant connection with consumers' attitudes. Consumers' adoption of
reusable FMCG packaging solutions can be encouraged through positive emotional experiences related to
packaging reuse. Behavioral change and marketing strategies can support consumers' experiences by considering
affect (e.g., positive emotions), cognition (e.g., perceived behavioral control), and social expectations (e.g.,
subjective norms) as influential factors.
1. Introduction
Fast-Moving Consumer Goods (FMCGs) are retail products such as
food, personal, and household care items with a short lifespan. Single-
use packages are often used to protect and enable transportation of
FMCGs (Dopico-Parada et al., 2021). This comes with a problem as
single-use packages entail severe environmental burden; they generate
36 % of solid waste and are responsible for 40 % of annual plastic waste
globally, which is projected to reach 380 Mt. per year in 2060 from 142
Mt. in 2019 (OECD, 2022). Consequently, pressure and interest to
improve the packaging environmental sustainability are on the rise. For
instance, EU member states have committed to make environmentally
sustainable packaging the new norm (European Commission, 2022).
Consumers are also aware and concerned about the environmental
impact of household products and have raised their expectations to-
wards the FMCG industry to use more sustainable packaging alternatives
(Otto et al., 2021). Finally, businesses are setting goals to adopt practices
and invest in sustainable packaging optimization in order to meet con-
sumer demands and improve packaging efficiency (Morashti et al.,
2022).
Ways to maintain the use and value of FMCG packaging before final
disposal is key in reducing packaging waste. Packaging reuse is one way
to achieve this (Greenwood et al., 2021; Otto et al., 2021). For FMCGs,
reusable packaging refers to the repeated packaging refill and/or return
by consumers for the same purpose as it was originally designed
(Muranko et al., 2021). Due to the problems with single-use packaging,
reusable packaging has gained interest and received support from pol-
icymakers. Examples are the recent provisional agreement on revamped
rules to reduce, reuse and recycle packaging, increase safety and boost
the circular economy in European Union (European Parliament, 2024)
and the Plastics Bill in the United Kingdom (UK Parliament, 2022).
Consumers' commitment to packaging reuse is an essential element
for establishing environmentally sustainable FMCG packaging. Without
commitment by consumers to buy and use FMCGs in reusable packaging
systems, the environmental benefits of packaging reuse cannot be real-
ized by value chain actors (e.g. packaging industry, brand owners, re-
tailers) and risks for making significant capital investments on reuse
systems without equal returns arise (Kunamaneni et al., 2019;
* Corresponding author at: University of Vaasa, P.O. Box 700, 65101 Vaasa, Finland.
E-mail addresses: angelos.balatsas.lekkas@uwasa.fi (A. Balatsas-Lekkas), harri.luomala@uwasa.fi (H. Luomala), kyosti.pennanen@uwasa.fi (K. Pennanen).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Sustainable Production and Consumption
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/spc
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.10.011
Received 1 July 2024; Received in revised form 2 October 2024; Accepted 12 October 2024
Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
Available online 24 October 2024 2352-5509/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Institution of Chemical Engineers. This is an open access article under the CC BY license 
( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). 
Greenwood et al., 2021; Miao et al., 2023). Reuse poses challenges to
consumers unseen with the current sustainable packaging disposal
manners, such as recycling. Packaging reuse requires sustained rela-
tionship between consumers and FMCG packaging. In recycling, FMCG
packages are disposed after usage whereas reuse is based on the
continuous refill and return of packages. Depending on the reuse model,
consumers may refill and return FMCG packaging at their homes and/or
at retail points (see Muranko et al., 2021 for a review of consumer-led
FMCG reuse models). Furthermore, recycling is familiar to consumers
whereas packaging reuse for FMCGs is just gaining momentum (Bradley
and Corsini, 2023). Above-mentioned differences suggest that there
might not be a “one-size-fits-all” solution for consumers to deal with
FCMG packaging in environmentally friendly way and that different
changes are needed by consumers to perform each behavior (White
et al., 2019). Due to consumers' different role in recycling versus reuse,
consumer research on recycling, for instance, may not fully apply to
understanding consumers' responses to packaging reuse. Since reusable
FMCG packaging systems do not yet exist, it is of utmost importance for
both practitioners and researchers to gain a specific understanding of
consumers' intentions to consume FMCGs in reusable packaging.
Literature offers some understanding of consumers' views on pack-
aging reuse. In general, consumers seem to understand the environ-
mental sustainability benefits and perceive the idea of reusable
packaging positively (e.g. Babader et al., 2016; Miao et al., 2023).
However, concerns have been identified in forms of lack of convenience
(e.g. Bashir et al., 2020), low packaging quality (Lofthouse et al., 2009,
2017), and high price (e.g. Miao et al., 2023). As reusable FMCG
packaging solutions are not widely available in the market (Greenwood
et al., 2021), consumers' behavior remains unknown (Branca et al.,
2024; Greenwood et al., 2021). Nevertheless, consumers' intentions,
which are fundamental antecedents of the behavior (Ajzen, 1991) have
received some attention in studies on reusable fabric bags (Ertz et al.,
2017), home cleaning products (Bashir et al., 2020), and take-away
coffee cups (Keller et al., 2021). Currently, knowledge exists for some
specific products, but broader understanding on consumers' intentions
and related factors towards the reusable FMCG packaging is missing.
Overall, despite an ever-growing significance of sustainable packaging
in the supply chain, consumers' behavior has received limited attention
(Morashti et al., 2022). Due to the novelty of reusable packaging, con-
sumer research in the domain is in its infancy, explorative, and lacking
solid theoretical approaches (few exceptions being Ertz et al., 2017;
Keller et al., 2021; Song et al., 2023). This leads to scattered knowledge
on how to support consumers in switching from single-use to reusable
FMCG packaging. For example, are there factors beyond environmental
sustainability that influence consumers' intentions to use reusable
packaging? What are the underlying bases for consumers' attitude for-
mation towards packaging reuse? Answers to these questions could
enable formation of strategies, which ultimately could play a role in
convincing consumers to favor reusable FMCG packaging.
The aim of this study is to analyse the factors connected with con-
sumers' intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in reusable
packaging. The study takes as its backbone the Theory of Planned
Behavior (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) developed for explaining consumers' in-
tentions and behaviors towards specific objects, also in sustainable
consumption context (e.g. Paul et al., 2016; Randall et al., 2024). TPB
was chosen as the main theoretical framework since it has proven ca-
pacity in explaining variation in consumers intentions in various sus-
tainable consumption contexts, such as food (e.g. Randall et al., 2024),
energy (e.g. Wong et al., 2024), transportation (e.g. Si et al., 2020),
tourism (Han et al., 2017) and packaging (e.g. Santos et al., 2021). TPB
allows for a more comprehensive and theoretically founded under-
standing of behavioral intentions as compared to majority of previous
studies in reuse domain, which have adopted explorative or descriptive
approaches to consumers' general reactions, perceived enablers, and
barriers of reusable FMCG packaging (e.g. Babader et al., 2016; Green-
wood et al., 2021; Miao et al., 2023; Bashir et al., 2020; Magnier and Gil-
Perez, 2023).
Application of TPB is not new in pro-environmental consumption
(see review by Yuriev et al., 2020) or even in the relatively new pack-
aging reuse (e.g. Ertz et al., 2017) domain. However, the core constructs
of TPB are cognition-driven concepts (Yuriev et al., 2020), lacking the
equally, or in some cases even more important, affective side of con-
sumers' decision making (Shiv and Fedorikhin, 1999; Russel et al.,
2017), found important also in environmentally sustainable consump-
tion contexts such as food (Onwezen et al., 2022) and sustainable
packaging (Koenig-Lewis et al., 2014; Lombardi et al., 2024). This
neglect is visible in the TPB studies focusing on green consumption (few
exceptions being e.g. Carrus et al., 2008, Russel et al., 2017 and Lam
et al., 2022) despite its potentially strong exploratory power. In addi-
tion, the attitude, one of the main contributors to consumers' behavioral
intentions in TPB is often left unexplained or the explanations do not
apply conceptually solid and holistic approaches to capture as much
variance behind the attitude formation as possible. For these reasons, in
this study, the TPB model is extended with the concepts of positive and
negative emotional responses and perceived value (Sweeney and Soutar,
2001). Positive and negative emotions are included in the proposed
model as facilitators of consumers' attitudes, subjective norms,
perceived behavioral control, and intentions related to reusable pack-
aging, in order to integrate the affective side of decision-making and
better explain consumers' responses towards packaging reuse. Perceived
value concept allows a theoretically established approach to capture
crucial factors influencing consumers' attitude formation through five
dimensions (functional, social, emotional, environmental, price). These
extensions are especially important in approaching novel research topics
such as packaging reuse to gain holistic understanding of the relevant
factors behind consumers' decisions. The model is empirically tested and
validated with survey data from three European countries; Finland,
Germany, and the UK (Total N ˆ 2400). It is expected that the results of
the study shed light in the relative role of cognitions and affections in
formation of consumers' intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs
in reusable packaging. Such knowledge is important as it serves building
blocks for designing the content for further research focusing on the
ways to nudge consumers towards packaging reuse as well as for
example public campaigns with similar aims.
2. Literature review, conceptual model and hypotheses
development
This section is structured as follows: Section 2.1 reviews literature
about consumers' perceptions, challenges and expectations related to
reusable packaging and Section 2.2 examines factors predicting con-
sumers' intentions and behavior. Section 2.3 presents the conceptual
model used in this study, followed by a detailed development of relevant
hypotheses.
2.1. Consumers' perceptions on reusable packaging
Consumers' views towards reusable packaging seem to be mixed. On
the positive side, packaging reuse is inherently perceived environmen-
tally sustainable (e.g. Miao et al., 2023; Magnier and Gil-Perez, 2023).
For instance, Dutch consumers perceived a reusable packaging system
for food refill as an opportunity to reduce their plastic packaging con-
sumption and waste (Miao et al., 2023). In addition to environmental
sustainability, functionality (e.g. convenience, product protection) and
price have positive influence on consumers' views and seem to shape
their expectations. For example, Norwegian consumers who perceived a
home cleaning refill solution as inexpensive, convenient and of high
quality were more inclined to use and recommend it to others (Bashir
et al., 2020).
On the negative side, some consumers have expressed concerns
regarding lack of convenience (e.g. Lofthouse et al., 2017; Kunamaneni
et al., 2019; Bashir et al., 2020), inferior quality (e.g. Miao et al., 2023),
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
211 
and high prices (e.g. Lofthouse et al., 2017; Miao et al., 2023). Con-
cerning expectations, UK consumers expected that certain refill types (e.
g. dispensed products and deposit systems) are or should be cheaper
than the conventional solutions, due to the general perception that re-
fills cost less in terms of production and transportation (Lofthouse et al.,
2017). Also, Dutch consumers who tried an experimental reusable
packaging system for food refills expressed their expectations related to
product protection, such as that reusable packages should be safe for
storing food and scratch-proof over multiple reuse cycles (Miao et al.,
2023). Finally, some indications exist that reusable packaging may spark
perceptions of emotional and social value for consumers. For instance, in
the UK some packaging refill types were considered as “fun to use”
(Lofthouse et al., 2009, 2017) while Dutch consumers referred to posi-
tive feelings and increased social value in connection the positive
environmental impact of reusable packaging systems (Miao et al., 2023).
2.2. Consumers' behaviors and intentions related to reusable packaging
Some experimental studies have focused on consumers' packaging
reuse behaviors in contexts of food take-away and beverage refill (e.g.
Dorn and Stockli, 2018; Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024; Miao et al.,
2023) and warm beverage cups (e.g. Poortinga and Whitaker, 2018;
Novoradovskaya et al., 2021; Nicolau et al., 2022). Packaging reuse
behaviors are influenced by knowledge related to the reuse systems (e.g.
Miao et al., 2023), social environment (see Dorn and Stockli, 2018),
environmental messaging (see Poortinga and Whitaker, 2018) and in-
terventions referring to environmental sustainability, possible financial
benefits and psychological ownership (see Novoradovskaya et al.,
2021). For instance, a study of reusable take-away boxes for food in
Switzerland showed that choices of reusable boxes at restaurants were
more likely to occur for customers when others around them bought or
used their own reusable boxes (Dorn and Stockli, 2018). Findings from a
pilot with reusable take-away pizza boxes in Finland showed that con-
sumers perceived functional, environmental, social and emotional value
related to the use of the boxes and that such value was sustained over the
study period (i.e. two months) (Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024). How-
ever, the study took no stand on whether the value perceptions drive
consumers' attitude formation and consequently the behaviors.
Some validated behavioral models have been used to study con-
sumers' intentions (e.g. Ertz et al., 2017; Keller et al., 2021; Song et al.,
2023). Drawing on Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), Ertz et al. (2017)
demonstrated that its main constructs (i.e. attitude, perceived behav-
ioral control, and subjective norms) adequately predict Western and
Asian consumers' intentions to use reusable coffee mugs, thermal bot-
tles, and fabric bags. The same study showed that culture moderates the
relationship between some of the predictors and intentions. For
instance, attitude was found as a significantly stronger predictor of in-
tentions for Westerners than Asians to use reusable containers (e.g.
shopping bags). Keller et al. (2021) applied the stage model of self-
regulated behavioral change (SSBC) to predict intentions towards
reuse alternatives to single-use coffee cups (i.e. own reusable cups and
deposit-based system). The study found that awareness of environ-
mental consequences and related emotions, ascription of responsibility,
social norms and goal feasibility explained increased intentions among
consumers from the city of Darmstadt (Germany) to refrain from using
single-use coffee cups and that perceived behavioral control strongly
predicted consumers' choices of reusable alternatives. Finally, Song et al.
(2023) extended the Norm Activation Model (NAM) with the construct
of subjective norms to predict Shanghaies consumers' intentions to use
reusable express packaging. The results showed that subjective norms
have a direct and significant influence to intentions alongside personal
norms (which is the only direct predictor of intentions in the main
model).
2.3. Conceptual model and hypotheses development
The current study examines Finnish, German, and UK consumers'
intentions to test, buy and recommend reusable FMCG packaging by
extending the TPB model by Ajzen (1991) with the constructs of
perceived value and emotional response towards reusable packaging.
Fig. 1 presents the conceptual model for this study. The model in-
cludes the basic TPB expectations: attitudes, subjective norm, and
perceived behavioral control are connected with consumers' intentions
to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in reusable packaging (cf. Ajzen,
1991). It is to be noted that while the original TPBmodel posits intention
as the antecedent of actual behavior (Ajzen, 1991), this study focuses on
intentions as the lack of FMCGs in reusable packaging in retail shops
prevents the study of the actual self-reported behaviors. On top of the
standard TPB constructs, positive and negative emotional responses
towards reusable packaging are included as shapers of consumers' atti-
tudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control and intentions to
test, buy and recommend FMCGs in reusable packaging. Finally, con-
sumers' perceived value is expected to facilitate consumers' attitude
formation. Next, rationale for the proposed connections and formal
hypotheses are discussed.
2.3.1. Intentions, attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral
control related to reusable packaging
In TPB, intentions capture the motivational factors that influence a
behavior and indicate people's willingness to try and put effort in order
to perform the behavior in question (Ajzen, 1991). Intention to perform
a behavior is the immediate antecedent of that behavior; the stronger the
intention, the more likely it is that the behavior will follow (Ajzen,
2020). In reusable packaging context, consumers' intentions have been
approached from intentional use, recommendation, and repurchase
perspectives. For instance, use intentions have been studied for hot
beverage cups (e.g. Ertz et al., 2017; Keller et al., 2021), and some
cleaning products (Bashir et al., 2020) whereas recommendation and
repurchase intentions have been studied for all-purpose cleaner sprays
and Greek style yogurt (Magnier and Gil-Perez, 2023).
Attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control form the
core of TPB model and determine intentions (Ajzen, 1991, 2020). Atti-
tude towards the behavior refers to a person's favorable or unfavorable
evaluations concerning the behavior's likely outcomes (Ajzen, 2020). As
a consequence of the formed unfavorable/favorable attitude, the TPB
expects negative/positive correlation with the intentions to perform the
behavior of interest (Ajzen, 1991). The role of attitudes in explaining the
behavioral intentions has been established in several environmentally
sustainable consumption domains (Yuriev et al., 2020). The same ap-
plies to packaging reuse. For instance, Ertz et al. (2017) and Keller et al.
(2021) showed that positive attitudes correlate positively with con-
sumers' intentions towards reuse. Thus,
H1. Consumers' positive attitude towards the reusable packaging is
associated with higher intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in
reusable packaging.
Subjective Norm (SN) refers to a person's expectation that an
important individual (e.g. spouse) and/or group (e.g., friends, family,
coworkers) approves or disapproves the behavior in question, thus
adding the social aspect to the TPB model as determinant of behavioral
intentions (Lam et al., 2022). TPB expects that stronger perceived
approval (or advocating influence) of the behavior leads to increased
behavioral intentions (Ajzen, 1991). Literature on packaging reuse in-
dicates that others' views can make a difference. For instance, Miao et al.
(2023) in their qualitative study with Dutch consumers found that the
participants associated positive social value in packaging reuse. Similar
results were found in a Finnish field experiment dealing with consumers'
views on reusable take-away pizza packaging (Tenhunen-Lunkka et al.,
2024). However, the previous examples did not establish the connection
between SN and intentions, but the basic premise that increased SN
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
212 
leads to increased intentions has been confirmed in wider sustainable
consumption domain (e.g. Randall et al., 2024; Si et al., 2020) and in
earlier studies dealing with consumers' packaging reuse (Ertz et al.,
2017; Keller et al., 2021; Song et al., 2023). Similarly,
H2. Consumers' perception of prevailing positive subjective norms is
associated with higher intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in
reusable packaging.
Perceived behavioral control (PBC) refers to one's perception over
the ease or difficulty to perform the behavior of interest. PBC considers
two aspects. First, it taps into the person's internal control, meaning
one's perceived abilities and resources, such as money and time, to
perform the behavior of interest (Kidwell and Jewell, 2003; Carrus et al.,
2008). Second, it considers the external control referring to external
barriers to perform the behavior (e.g. in the case of reuse, availability of
the solutions) (Kidwell and Jewell, 2003). TPB posits that the weaker/
stronger the perceived PBC is, the weaker/stronger the behavioral in-
tentions are (Ajzen, 1991). The research carried out in packaging reuse
has corroborated this TPB premise on PBC. The research has shown that
increased PBC has a positive association with consumers' intentions to-
wards different reuse solutions such as to-go coffee cups, thermal bot-
tles, and shopping bags (Ertz et al., 2017; Keller et al., 2021). Thus,
H3. Consumers' perceived positive behavioral control is associated
with higher intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in reusable
packaging.
2.3.2. Positive and negative emotions and intentions towards reusable
packaging
Consumers make their decisions based on cognition, affection, or
combination of both (White et al., 2019). With new objects, such as
reusable packaging, the emotional response becomes important as
consumers often lack the knowledge and resources to evaluate the object
through cognition and thus base their intentions on the initial affective
reaction (Shiv and Fedorikhin, 1999; Valor et al., 2022). Indeed, within
sustainable innovation domain, emotional responses have been found to
connect with consumers' intentions, even being the strongest predictor
among various factors (e.g. Onwezen et al., 2022).
In brief, emotions can be defined as “short-term affective responses
to appraisals of particular stimuli, situations or events having reinforc-
ing potential” (Gibson, 2006, p. 54). In the context of reusable pack-
aging, some indications hint that positive and negative emotions might
have a role to play. A study on alternatives to single-use coffee cups
found that positive emotions related to the reduced use of single-use
coffee cups and negative emotions related to the environmental conse-
quences of single-use coffee cups had a positive influence to German
consumers' intentions to shift from single-use to reusable alternatives
(Keller et al., 2021). Furthermore, research in sustainable packaging
suggests that positive and negative emotions can have direct effects on
intentions (e.g. Koenig-Lewis et al., 2014; Lombardi et al., 2024).
There are also some attempts to integrate consumers' emotional re-
sponses with TPB in the broader green consumption arena. Carrus et al.
(2008) studied use of public transportation and recycling. Among other
constructs, they included anticipated negative and positive emotions
into their extended TPB model. As a result, their study indicates that
both emotions play a role in explaining consumers' views on public
transportation and negative emotions on recycling. Interestingly, the
results of Carrus et al. (2008) show that in their model with emotions,
the attitudes do not connect to intentions, suggesting important role for
emotions. Lam et al. (2022) extended TPB with positive and negative
anticipated emotions towards the use of air conditioning along with
consumers' affective connection to nature to explain consumers' in-
tentions (and further behavior). Their results showed that once these
three affective constructs were included in the model, attitude lost its
explanatory power and the explained variance in the model increased
close to 20 percentage points. This result explicitly states that emotional
response towards sustainable consumption could be highly relevant.
Fig. 1. Conceptual model and hypothesized relationships between the constructs. In the model, ‡ stands for positive expected relationship between the constructs
while - is used to show a negative expected relationship.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
213 
Similar notions have been done in other contexts and studies as well
(Richards et al., 2021; Martini et al., 2024). Taken together, as
emotional appraisals seem to be important and some indications exist
that emotions might play a role in packaging reuse context (Keller et al.,
2021), the following is hypothesized:
H4a. Consumers' positive emotional responses towards reusable
packaging is associated with higher intentions to test, buy and recom-
mend FMCGs in reusable packaging.
H4b. Consumers' negative emotional responses towards reusable
packaging is associated with lower intentions to test, buy and recom-
mend FMCGs in reusable packaging.
2.3.3. Relationship of positive and negative emotions with TPB
determinants of intentions: attitude, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioral control
As described in the previous sub-section, consumers' emotional re-
sponses towards the appraised behavior may have significant effect on
behavioral intentions (e.g. Lam et al., 2022). However, emotional re-
sponses can also affect the other core constructs of TPB. In terms of the
attitude, it could be argued that positive emotional appraisals should
contribute favorably to consumers overall attitude towards the specific
behavior. This type of argument is supported by the emotion theories,
which postulate that positive emotional appraisal in general leads to
more positive cognitive evaluations (such as attitude) of the object
(Bagozzi et al., 1999; Watson and Spence, 2007).
Emotions and social influences are intertwined together (van Kleef
and Co^te, 2022). Therefore, the logic of emotion theories could stem for
the subjective norms as well. It can be argued that the result of con-
sumers' positive emotional appraisal would lead to positive thoughts on
how others view the behavior in question. This might not be the case
with vice products such as tobacco or alcohol, but sustainable con-
sumption is often viewed positively in the societies (e.g. White et al.,
2019). Emotional responses can have influence on consumers' perceived
behavioral control, too. For instance, a study on sustainable consump-
tion choices (Antonetti and Maklan, 2014) shows that the positive
emotion “pride” and the negative emotion “guilt” were connected to
consumers' perceived effectiveness. Another study (Winterich and Haws,
2011) showed that especially future-focused emotion of hopefulness was
in connection to consumers' self-control in snack choices.
With regards to sustainable consumption domain, the study of Berki-
Kiss and Menrad (2022) considers emotional responses and their con-
nections to all core TPB constructs. In that study, the basic TPB frame-
work was extended by adding the constructs of emotions and perceived
consumer effectiveness as predictors to consumers' behavioral intentions
to buy Fairtrade cut roses. The results of the study suggest that emotions
and subjective norms are the two most influential determinants of
intention to purchase Fairtrade roses. Moreover, the emotions signifi-
cantly influenced all the determinants of behavioral intention intro-
duced to the extended model. This augmentation also increased the
explanatory performance of the model. For the present study, their test
of hypothesis 4 is highly important. Berki-Kiss and Menrad (2022, p.85)
report: “When considering the effects of emotions in more detail, the
statistically significant path coefficients leading from emotions to atti-
tude (0.728), to subjective norm (0.645), to behavioral control (0.562)
and to perceived consumer effectiveness (0.698) indicate the strongest
effects resulting in high and statistically significant effect sizes.” Thus,
the following is hypothesized:
H5. Consumers' positive emotional responses towards reusable pack-
aging are associated with higher attitudes (a), subjective norms (b) and
perceived behavioral control (c) related to reusable FMCG packaging.
H6. Consumers' negative emotional responses towards reusable pack-
aging are associated with lower attitudes (a), subjective norms (b) and
perceived behavioral control (c) related to reusable FMCG packaging.
2.3.4. Perceived value and attitudes towards reusable packaging
Perceived value is defined as the “consumer's overall assessment of
the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and
what is given” (Zeithaml, 1988, p.14). From the TPB perspective, the
concept is relevant as it directly touches the attitude formation. That is,
the result of the value assessment has been found to shape consumers'
attitudes, i.e. supporting the formation of favorable or unfavorable view
on the behavior under scrutiny (Boksberger and Melsen, 2011; Lee et al.,
2019; Roh et al., 2022). Consumers can associate various types of value
in the products. Sweeney and Soutar (2001) divide perceived value into
four dimensions: 1) functional value, which refers to the perceived
quality and expected performance of the product, 2) emotional value,
which refers to the utility derived from the feelings or affective states
that a product generates, 3) price value, which refers to the utility
derived from the product due to the reduction of its perceived short term
and longer-term costs and, 4) social value, which refers to the utility
derived from the product's ability to enhance social self-concept.
The concept of perceived value is important from packaging reuse
research perspective as well. When the results from the earlier explor-
ative studies are viewed through this conceptual lens, most of them can
be organized under the four dimensions. For example, several studies in
reusable packaging domain touch the functional value. Consumers'
quality and convenience perceptions of packaging reuse have emerged
(Lofthouse et al., 2009; Kunamaneni et al., 2019; Bashir et al., 2020;
Miao et al., 2023; Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024). Further, consumers
have been found to have positive or negative perceptions about the
packaging functionality. For instance, reusable packaging for a home
cleaning product in Norway (Bashir et al., 2020) was perceived as
burdensome (i.e. inconvenient) and several product refill types in the UK
were perceived as convenient and/or that they were easy to refill and
use (Lofthouse et al., 2009). Some indications exist that consumers
associate emotional value to reusable packaging. For instance, a recent
study (Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024) showed that a reusable take-away
pizza packaging solution sparked emotional value among Finnish con-
sumers. Also, Babader et al. (2016) found that consumers associated
pleasant feelings with packaging reuse. In another study, UK consumers
considered some packaging refill types as “fun to use” referring to a
value with emotional tone (Lofthouse et al., 2009).
Price of reusable packaging influences consumers' perceptions and
expectations. Packaging refill has been perceived by consumers as
cheaper compared to the single-use packaging (Lofthouse et al., 2009,
2017). In the case of reusable packaging systems, consumers have been
expecting reduced product prices as a reward to their waste-reduction
efforts and for returning the packaging (Miao et al., 2023). Finally, a
study in UK showed that use of reusable coffee cups increased when an
explicit price charge of 25 pence was introduced for single-use coffee
cups (Poortinga and Whitaker, 2018). These indications point that price
is an important value for consumers in packaging reuse. Some findings
from the broader sustainable packaging domain suggest that product
packaging may be connected to consumers' perception of social value,
which in turn can associate with their attitudes. For instance, social
value had a significant positive impact to consumers' attitudes towards
environmentally sustainable packaging (Wahab et al., 2021). Also,
buying eco-designed packaging might be disapproved by others, but
may also lead to an appreciation and respect by others (Magnier and
Crie, 2015). Furthermore, recycling of glass jars may offer to consumers
a positive image among others of being an environmentally responsible
person (Kunamaneni et al., 2019). With regards to packaging reuse
domain, Finnish consumers who used reusable take-away pizza pack-
aging perceived it as making a positive impression and positively
contributing to how others viewed them (Tenhunen-Lunkka et al.,
2024). Finally, Dutch consumers referred to enhanced social value in
connection with the use of a reusable packaging system for dry food
products (Miao et al., 2023). These findings indicate that heightened
social value associated with reusable packaging can contribute to higher
attitudes.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
214 
Considering the wide range of perceived value consumers are found
to associate with reusable packaging, and the conceptual premise that
perceived value serves as antecedent of attitudes, it is hypothesized as
follows:
H7a. Consumers' positive perceived functional value of reusable
packaging is associated with a higher attitude towards FMCGs in reus-
able packaging.
H7b. Consumers' positive perceived emotional value of reusable
packaging is associated with a higher attitude towards FMCGs in reus-
able packaging.
H7c. Consumers' positive perceived price value of reusable packaging
is associated with a higher attitude towards FMCGs in reusable
packaging.
H7d. Consumers' positive perceived social value of reusable packaging
is associated with a higher attitude towards FMCGs in reusable
packaging.
The theory of perceived value does not touch upon a value which is
unique to the environmentally sustainable products, i.e. the environ-
mental sustainability value. The existence of this value is well-
documented in several studies dealing with consumers and reusable
packaging (Babader et al., 2016; Bashir et al., 2020; Kunamaneni et al.,
2019; Miao et al., 2023; Tenhunen-Lunkka et al., 2024). From the
perceived value perspective, these associations refer to the utility
derived from the expected contribution of reusable packaging to envi-
ronmental sustainability. Along with the other value dimensions, it is
expected that the increased perception of environmental sustainability
contributes to elevated attitudes towards reusable packaging. Thus,
H7e. Consumers' positive perceived environmental sustainability
value of reusable packaging is associated with a higher attitude towards
FMCGs in reusable packaging.
3. Methods
Partial Least Squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was
applied to examine the conceptual model and the hypotheses. The aim of
PLS-SEM is to analyse connections and associated path strengths be-
tween independent and dependent variable(s) (Guenther et al., 2023).
PLS-SEM further offers possibility to analyse the relative strength of the
independent variables in explaining the variance in the dependent
variable (Hair et al., 2017a, 2017b). Covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) is
an alternative to PLS-SEM. In contrast to PLS-SEM, CB-SEM estimates
model-based covariance matrix with as little difference as possible from
the observed covariance matrix in the data. Thus, CB-SEM is about
fitting the theoretical model to the data to confirm the proposed theory
(Guenther et al., 2023).
One criterion to choose between the SEM methods lays in the nature
of the data. PLS-SEM is developed for composite model data while CB-
SEM restricts in a data that follow common factor model (e.g. Sarstedt
et al., 2023). Despite the theoretical expectations, in applied research
the data do not always follow the common factor model, but might
actually be composite-based suggesting the use of PLS-SEM (e.g. Sarstedt
et al., 2016). Regardless, PLS-SEM is found robust in analysing common
factor model data too, although it produces some biases, however those
being smaller than the biases produced by CB-SEM in cases of data
following composite model (Sarstedt et al., 2023). The data model is
difficult to identify in practice, which supports the application of PLS-
SEM. Finally, PLS-SEM has been found suitable method for estimating
models, which aims for extending some established theories (TPB in this
study) with new theoretical concepts (perceived value and emotional
response towards reusable packaging) (Hair et al., 2019). This is because
PLS-SEM comes with higher statistical power than CB-SEM, allowing
more sensitive observations of theoretically justified, yet empirically
unestablished connections between constructs. Taking all the above
considerations into account, PLS-SEM was considered more feasible
than CB-SEM for this study purposes.
3.1. Data collection and sample
Data were collected in Finland, Germany, and the UK at the end of
2022 through an online survey, administered by a professional market
research agency. In each country, 800 respondents were recruited from
the agency's panels, aiming for an equal gender distribution and
including individuals aged 18 and above. A diverse sample of in-
dividuals, varying in age, gender, education, self-reported income and
area of residence, was included to capture key similarities and differ-
ences across the populations studied. For instance, the majority of
people in all countries included in the study live outside the capital
cities, in both urban and rural areas.
The country choice was based on a following logic. First, all countries
have had established and well-known reusable FMCG packaging system
in the past. In Finland, the reusable beverage bottles (Palpa, currently
recycling system), in the UK the reusable milk bottles (Magnier and Gil-
Perez, 2023), and in Germany the beverage bottle reuse system (Pfand,
currently recycling system). This choice was deemed important as it
enabled that the study participants might have at least some touch point
with the study topic. Second, the study included countries that are
advanced in circular economy. This was considered important as the
implementation of the FMCG packaging reuse system requires knowl-
edge in both business and technological innovations and collaboration
between the key stakeholders such as companies, policymakers, and the
consumers (Sundqvist et al., 2024). Finland is considered as an open-
minded market for sustainable innovations and also one of the leaders
in circular economy initiatives (Marino and Pariso, 2020). Germany is
found very advanced in circular economy topics and offers incentives for
reuse (Marino and Pariso, 2020). There are also initiatives to advance
circular economy and reuse in the UK (the Plastics Bill in the United
Kingdom (UK Parliament, 2022). Third, two major Western European
markets (Germany and the UK) were included in the study as they
provide large potential for environmental sustainability impact, if reuse
system for FMCG is to be developed and implemented in the future.
Therefore, understanding the consumers' views from these countries is
important. Finland, instead, is a geographically large and sparsely
populated country in Northern Europe. However, Finland is a homoge-
neous society in which few dominant actors (e.g. two dominant retail
chains and food producers) are able to implement reuse system
throughout the country if they found it valuable. Such environment
could offer good grounds for the first large scale reuse system initiatives
in Europe making understanding of the Finnish consumers' perspectives
valuable.
Prior to data collection, study approval was granted by the Ethics
Committee for Human Sciences at the University of Vaasa (294/
00.10.01/2022). Following the Finnish ethical principles of research
within social sciences (Finnish National Board on Research Integrity
TENK Guidelines, 2019), an invitation to the study was sent to pro-
spective participants by the market research agency via email with
reference to the study objectives, research consortium, funding body,
the organization responsible for the research, estimated answering time
and responsible researchers' contact information. Based on the above-
mentioned information, prospective participants with minimum age of
18 years were able to either accept or reject the study invitation. Par-
ticipants who accepted the invitation gave their informed consent and
were admitted to the study by clicking the survey link. Responses were
given anonymously. The questionnaire used in the study can be found in
the supplementary material section (S1).
Samples for each study country are described in Table 1. With
regards to gender, male and female participants were roughly equal in
all countries. In terms of age, UK participants aged 18–35 outnumbered
Germans. The share of Finnish participants aged 36–50 was significantly
lower than in other countries, while the share of Germans aged 51–64
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
215 
was significantly higher than in Finnish and UK sample. For the par-
ticipants aged 65 and above, the Finnish sample had higher share than in
the other two countries. Regarding education, the share of highly
educated participants in UK was significantly larger than in the other
countries. For secondary education, the share of German participants
was significantly higher as compared to the other two countries and, as
for compulsory education, Finnish sample was significantly higher than
UK and Germany. Regarding self-reported income levels, the share of
German participants differed from the other countries for high income
and from Finland for middle income. For low income levels, the share of
Finnish sample was higher than in UK sample. Regarding residential
area, the share of Finnish participants living in capital area was signif-
icantly higher from UK sample. For other urban areas, the share of those
participants in UK was higher than in German sample and for rural areas
the share of German participants was the highest.
3.2. Survey design
As consumers might be unfamiliar with reusable packaging, a brief
description in layman language was developed in order to minimize
misunderstanding/misinterpretation of the concept. In line with the
reusable packaging definition provided by the European Union (1994)
(European Parliament and Council, 94/62/EC), the following text was
developed for the study and remained visible to the participants
throughout the entire study:
“The idea of reusable packaging is that packages of frequently
bought products continue to be used for long periods of time for the
same purpose that they were originally designed and produced. The
reusable packages are refilled or returned multiple times. Between the
uses, packages are cleaned, refurbished and put back to use.”
The survey's items were developed by following previous literature
and tailored according to the needs of this study (all scales and indi-
vidual items are presented in Table 2). Intention scale consisted of three
items, all adapted from Zerbini et al. (2019) and measured participants'
intentions to test, buy, and recommend products in reusable packaging.
Participants gave their responses on a 5-point Likert scale (1 ˆ
completely disagree, 5 ˆ completely agree).
Attitude scale measured participants' degree of (un)favorable eval-
uations towards the reusable packaging use. Participants gave their re-
sponses on a 5-point semantic differential scale (e.g. 1 ˆ very bad, 5 ˆ
very good), with all three items adapted from Ertz et al. (2017).
Perceived Behavioral Control (PBC) scale measured participants'
perceptions over a set of factors that can facilitate or hinder the use of
reusable packaging: availability of own resources, information and so-
lutions in frequently visited retail shops, and the ability to use and
control the usage of reusable packaging. The scale consisted of five items
developed for this study, adapted from other sustainable behavior
studies (e.g. Paul et al., 2016) measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 ˆ
completely disagree, 5 ˆ completely agree).
Subjective Norms (SN) scale measured participants' beliefs on the
extent that close others (family, friends, co-workers) would approve the
usage of reusable packaging (i.e. injunctive normative beliefs) and
would use reusable packaging themselves (i.e. descriptive normative
beliefs), in line with recommendations made by Ajzen (2020). The scale
consisted of four items developed for the purposes of this study, with two
items referring to injunctive normative beliefs and two items referring to
descriptive normative beliefs. The scale applied 5-point semantic dif-
ferential items (e.g. 1 ˆ would not appreciate at all if I use reusable
packaging, 5 ˆ would appreciate a lot if I use reusable packaging).
Participants' positive and negative emotional responses towards
reusable packaging were measured with three items each: fear, guilt,
and irritation for negative emotions and pride, hope, and joy for positive
emotions. Except irritation, all other emotions used in this study have
been proposed to be relevant for pro-environmental behaviors (White
et al., 2019). Irritation was included here based on the assumption that
consumers' involvement to reusable packaging through actions of refill
and return of packaging may be perceived burdensome in comparison to
treatment of conventional packaging (e.g. throw to general trash,
recycle). Participants were asked to give their responses on a 5-point
Likert scale (1 ˆ not at all, 5 ˆ extremely).
Items for the perceived value were adapted from Walsh et al. (2014)
to measure the functional, emotional, price, and social value dimensions
of reusable packaging. Items for measuring the environmental value
dimension were adapted from Koenig-Lewis et al. (2014). For all
perceived value dimensions two or more items were used and measured
on a 5-point Likert scale (1 ˆ completely disagree, 5 ˆ completely
agree).
The questionnaire was initially designed in English and then back-
translated into Finnish and German. Potential method bias issues con-
cerning participants' ability to respond accurately were addressed by
Table 1
Characteristics of the Finnish, UK and German samples including relative shares of the sample by gender, age group, education, self-reported income, and place of
residence. Differences between the countries were tested with Chi-square – test with Bonferroni correction. Significant differences between the countries are denoted
with different superscript letters.
Sample characteristics (%) Finland (N ˆ 800) UK (N ˆ 800) Germany (N ˆ 800) Total (N ˆ 2400) Chi-square df p
Gender 7.366 4 0.118
Female 52.3a 50.6a 51.2a 51.4
Male 47.4a 48.6a 48.8a 48.3
Other 0.3ab 0.8b 0.0a 0.3
Age group 51.430 6 <0.001
18–35 28.1ab 29.5b 24.0a 27.2
36–50 22.4a 30.0b 27.9b 26.8
51–64 19.1a 16.8a 27.1b 21.0
65‡ 30.4a 23.7b 21.0b 25.0
Education 79.522 6 <0.001
Higher education 49.6a 65.3b 54.8a 56.6
Secondary education 39.4a 26.9b 41.3a 35.8
Compulsory education 10.4a 6.4b 3.5c 6.8
Something else 0.6a 1.4a 0.4a 0.8
Self-reported income 33.380 4 <0.001
High income 2.8a 3.3a 6.3b 4.1
Middle income 54.2a 57.7ab 62.3b 58.1
Low income 43.0a 39.0a 31.4b 37.8
Residence 79.641 4 <0.001
Capital 22.9a 17.8b 20.0ab 20.2
Other urban area 57.8a 58.2a 42.9b 53.0
Rural area 19.3a 24.0a 37.1b 26.8
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
216 
Table 2
Constructs, items, descriptive statistics, item loadings, Cronbach's Alpha (CA), construct reliability (CR), convergent validity (AVE) and variance inflation factor (VIF) scores for each country. All values referring to latent
variable means, standard deviations, reliability and convergent validity indicators are without the items removed from the analyses.
Construct/item Finland Germany UK
Mean (SD) Item
loading
CA CR AVE VIF Mean (SD) Item
loading
CA CR AVE VIF Mean (SD) Item
loading
CA CR AVE VIF
Intentions 3.86 (0.98) 0.92 0.93 0.87 3.06 4.11 (0.90) 0.89 0.89 0.81 1.50 3.94 (0.92) 0.88 0.89 0.81 2.73
INT1: I intend to test products in reusable
packaging
3.96 (1.02) 0.93 4.16 (0.96) 0.90 3.83 (1.05) 0.86
INT2: I am interested in buying products in
reusable packaging
3.93 (1.05) 0.95 4.15 (0.98) 0.93 4.11 (0.99) 0.92
INT3: I would recommend products in reusable
packaging to my friends
3.70 (1.10) 0.92 4.02 (1.04) 0.88 3.90 (1.05) 0.91
Attitude 3.93 (1.13) 0.83 0.85 0.75 1.46 4.19 (1.08) 0.82 0.82 0.73 1.01 4.12 (1.06) 0.83 0.84 0.75 1.28
ATT1: Is very bad /good idea 3.94 (1.30) 0.88 4.18 (1.29) 0.83 4.14 (1.23) 0.86
ATT2: Is unwise/wise 4.05 (1.22) 0.89 4.18 (1.25) 0.87 4.03 (1.27) 0.87
ATT3: I am against/ in favor of it 3.82 (1.40) 0.83 4.22 (1.26) 0.86 4.21 (1.18) 0.87
Subjective Norms 3.65 (0.91) 0.90 0.90 0.78 1.83 3.93 (0.90) 0.87 0.87 0.71 1.34 3.91 (0.95) 0.90 0.90 0.77 1.93
SN1: Would not appreciate at all/appreciate a lot if
I use reusable packaging
3.69 (1.01) 0.88 4.06 (1.06) 0.85 3.87 (1.07) 0.88
SN2: Would not support me at all/strongly support
me if I use reusable packaging
3.69 (1.05) 0.88 3.88 (1.11) 0.86 3.96 (1.10) 0.87
SN3: Would not even/ absolutely try using
reusable packaging at all
3.67 (1.05) 0.89 3.91 (1.05) 0.85 3.98 (1.07) 0.88
SN4: Would not regularly/ would regularly use
reusable packaging
3.53 (1.04) 0.88 3.88 (1.04) 0.82 3.82 (1.08) 0.89
Perceived Behavioral Control 3.72 (0.83) 0.83 0.86 0.66 1.70 3.94 (0.78) 0.79 0.82 0.61 1.32 3.75 (0.89) 0.85 0.86 0.68 1.45
PBC1: I have the resources to use reusable
packaging
3.76 (1.00) 0.85 3.97 (0.96) 0.84 3.70 (1.05) 0.86
PBC2: I can find reusable packaging solutions in
the shops where I usually do my shopping. This
item was dropped from the analysis
3.20 (1.07) 0.61 3.35 (1.20) 0.61 3.06 (1.21) 0.65
PBC3: I am fully informed on how to use reusable
packaging
3.38 (1.11) 0.75 3.56 (1.11) 0.70 3.44 (1.13) 0.77
PBC4: I have the ability to use reusable packaging 4.04 (0.93) 0.85 4.23 (0.92) 0.83 4.02 (1.01) 0.83
PBC5: It is totally within my control to use
reusable packaging
3.69 (1.04) 0.74 4.02 (1.00) 0.74 3.82 (1.12) 0.81
Positive Emotions 3.27 (1.03) 0.90 0.90 0.83 1.94 3.34 (1.04) 0.85 0.87 0.77 1.05 3.44 (1.03) 0.87 0.87 0.79 2.29
PE1: Pride 3.08 (1.15) 0.90 3.00 (1.25) 0.84 3.43 (1.18) 0.88
PE2: Hope 3.40 (1.13) 0.92 3.63 (1.16) 0.88 3.59 (1.13) 0.89
PE3: Joy 3.32 (1.10) 0.92 3.40 (1.13) 0.92 3.30 (1.15) 0.90
Negative Emotions 1.70 (0.79) 0.79 0.86 0.70 1.19 1.56 (0.79) 0.82 0.86 0.73 1.17 1.63 (0.87) 0.85 1.08 0.76 1.27
NE1: Fear 1.71 (0.97) 0.83 1.51 (0.87) 0.88 1.63 (1.01) 0.85
NE2: Guilt 1.60 (0.86) 0.77 1.62 (0.95) 0.79 1.55 (0.92) 0.82
NE3: Irritation 1.78 (1.00) 0.91 1.56 (0.94) 0.89 1.73 (1.04) 0.94
Functional value 3.90 (0.83) 0.81 0.83 0.72 1.84 4.00 (0.80) 0.80 0.83 0.72 1.07 3.94 (0.80) 0.78 0.79 0.69 2.77
FV1: Sounds convenient 3.84 (0.99) 0.86 4.07 (0.99) 0.86 3.83 (1.05) 0.83
FV2: Seems well thought 4.14 (0.98) 0.89 3.98 (0.91) 0.90 4.09 (0.89) 0.87
FV3: Would protect the product 3.72 (0.96) 0.80 3.95 (0.94) 0.78 3.92 (0.93) 0.79
Emotional value 3.39 (0.97) 0.85 0.85 0.87 1.18 3.87 (0.87) 0.75 0.77 0.80 1.89 3.87 (0.93) 0.78 0.79 0.82 2.73
EV1: Would be something that I enjoy 3.34 (1.04) 0.94 3.67 (1.00) 0.87 3.78 (1.03) 0.91
EV2: Would make me feel good 3.44 (1.04) 0.93 4.10 (0.95) 0.92 3.95 (1.01) 0.91
Price value 3.71 (0.98) 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.02 3.86 (0.93) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.17 3.94 (0.99) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.79
PV1: Seems expensive (REV.) This item was dropped
from the analysis
2.95 (0.94) 0.61 3.07 (0.99) 0.46 3.01 (1.02) 0.41
PV2: Could offer value for money 3.71 (0.98) 1.00 3.86 (0.93) 1.00 3.94 (0.99) 1.00
(continued on next page)
A
.
B
alatsas-Lekkas
et
al.
Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
217 
following suggestions made by MacKenzie and Podsakoff (2012). For
instance, double-barreled questions were avoided and possible ambi-
guity of survey items was addressed by the use of simple syntax. Par-
ticipants' potential unfamiliarity with reusable packaging was addressed
through a short description written in layman language. In order to
avoid participants' potential memory challenges, the description
remained visible to them when answering all survey questions related to
reusable packaging topic (see S1, questions Q1-Q6). Potential social
desirability bias (i.e. participants' response to survey by providing so-
cially acceptable answers rather than their true beliefs or intentions) was
addressed at study admission phase and during survey design. Prior to
study admission and consent provision, prospective participants were
informed by the data collection agency that researchers responsible for
the study will receive the data in anonymized form, with no names or
contact information included in the data (see S1 in Supplementary in-
formation). In survey phase, a neutral tone was adopted for the formu-
lation of all questions and the description of reusable packaging in
layman language so to avoid any leads that participants could perceive
as “correct” responses.
3.3. Data analysis
The data analysis was conducted following the logic by Hair et al.
(2017a): 1) measurement model evaluation, 2) structural model evalu-
ation and hypotheses testing (path co-efficient strength and significance,
effect sizes) through bootstrapping with 5000 subsamples and 95 %
confidence interval, and 3) evaluation of the predictive validity of the
model via PLSpredict algorithm with 10 folds and 10 repetitions. Eval-
uations of the measurement and structural model were conducted for
each country, separately. Due to large sample size (N ˆ 800 per coun-
try), effect sizes along with path significance were considered in hy-
potheses testing to rule out correlations without any actual relevance.
Following the evaluation of the measurement model, a measurement
invariance of composite models (MICOM) procedure was performed in
order to evaluate whether multigroup analysis (PLS-MGA) to evaluate
the country differences could be carried out. All statistical analyses were
performed with SmartPLS 4 software (version 4.0.8.4) (Ringle et al.,
2022).
4. Results
This section presents the results of the study, including the evalua-
tion of the measurement model in Section 4.1. The main results of the
structural model evaluation, along with the validation or rejection of the
developed hypotheses are presented in Section 4.2.
4.1. Measurement model evaluation
The measurement model evaluation was based on the loadings of the
individual items to the constructs, the internal consistency of the con-
structs, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Except for two
items, all individual items were acceptable, as their outer loadings were
either close to or >0.70 (Hair et al., 2017a). Item PBC2 from Perceived
Behavioral Control construct and item PV1 from Price Value construct
showed lower than 0.70 loadings to their respective constructs. Before
deciding whether to retain or omit the items, their influence on the
constructs' convergent validity (AVE) was examined. Dropping PBC2
improved the AVEs in all countries (Finland: 0.59 to 0.66, Germany:
0.56 to 0.61 and the UK: 0.62 to 0.68). For the Price value measurement,
the AVEs were 0.61 for Finland, 0.56 for Germany, and 0.56 for the UK.
All of the AVEs with original items are within acceptable limits, but since
Perceived behavioral control construct had better convergent validity
without PBC2, it was dropped. Also, PV1 was dropped as the loadings
were poor especially in the German and the UK data. Dropping PV1
resulted in a single-item measurement for price value. In principle,
single-item measures are not advisable in PLS-SEM (Hair et al., 2017a),Ta
b
le
2
(c
on
tin
ue
d
)
C
on
st
ru
ct
/i
te
m
Fi
nl
an
d
G
er
m
an
y
U
K
M
ea
n
(S
D
)
It
em
lo
ad
in
g
C
A
C
R
A
V
E
V
IF
M
ea
n
(S
D
)
It
em
lo
ad
in
g
C
A
C
R
A
V
E
V
IF
M
ea
n
(S
D
)
It
em
lo
ad
in
g
C
A
C
R
A
V
E
V
IF
So
ci
al
va
lu
e
3.
21
(0
.9
0)
0.
77
0.
77
0.
81
1.
76
3.
32
(0
.9
3)
0.
68
0.
83
0.
74
1.
60
3.
51
(0
.9
3)
0.
76
0.
81
0.
80
1.
87
SV
1:
W
ou
ld
im
pr
ov
e
th
e
w
ay
I
am
pe
rc
ei
ve
d
by
ot
he
rs
3.
03
(1
.0
1)
0.
89
3.
03
(1
.1
2)
0.
78
3.
32
(1
.0
7)
0.
86
SV
2:
W
ou
ld
m
ak
e
a
go
od
im
pr
es
si
on
on
ot
he
r
pe
op
le
3.
41
(0
.9
8)
0.
91
3.
60
(1
.0
2)
0.
94
3.
71
(1
.0
2)
0.
93
E
nv
ir
on
m
en
ta
l
su
st
ai
na
bi
li
ty
va
lu
e
4.
15
(0
.9
2)
0.
82
0.
83
0.
85
2.
11
4.
36
(0
.8
7)
0.
86
0.
86
0.
88
1.
45
4.
34
(0
.8
4)
0.
79
0.
80
0.
83
1.
84
E
SV
1:
W
ou
ld
be
an
en
vi
ro
nm
en
ta
ll
y
fr
ie
nd
ly
op
ti
on
4.
28
(0
.9
5)
0.
91
4.
37
(0
.9
2)
0.
94
4.
45
(0
.8
5)
0.
90
E
SV
2:
W
ou
ld
he
lp
to
fi
gh
t
ag
ai
ns
t
cl
im
at
e
ch
an
ge
4.
01
(1
.0
3)
0.
93
4.
34
(0
.9
3)
0.
94
4.
24
(0
.9
9)
0.
92
C
A
ˆ
C
ro
nb
ac
h'
s
al
ph
a,
C
R
ˆ
C
om
po
si
te
re
li
ab
il
it
y,
A
V
E
ˆ
A
ve
ra
ge
va
ri
an
ce
ex
tr
ac
te
d,
V
IF
ˆ
V
ar
ia
nc
e
in
fl
at
io
n
fa
ct
or
,
R
E
V
.
ˆ
R
ev
er
se
d
it
em
.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
218 
but can be applied in cases when the measurement is unambiguous and
lacks true dimensionality potentially leading to homogeneous multi-
item construct as is the case with price value (cf. Diamantopoulos
et al., 2012).
The latent variables were considered reliable since all Cronbach's
alpha values (CA) exceeded 0.60, and composite reliabilities (CR) were
above 0.70 (Hair et al., 2017a). The average variance extracted (AVE)
was higher than 0.50 for all constructs, indicating acceptable convergent
validity (Hair et al., 2017a).
In order to detect common method bias issues, a full collinearity
assessment was conducted. As suggested by Kock and Lynn (2012),
variance inflation factor (VIF) scores were obtained by applying the
random variable technique. Since all VIFs resulting from the full
collinearity test were lower than 3.3, the model was considered free of
common method bias (Kock and Lynn, 2012; Kock, 2015).
The constructs, items, descriptive statistics, item loadings, construct
reliability, convergent validity and variance inflation factor (VIF) scores
are reported in Table 2.
The discriminant validity was assessed through Heterotrait-
Monotrait Ratio for each country (HTMT) (Tables 3–5). HTMT evalua-
tion indicated a proper discriminant validity since majority of the var-
iables received a score below the value of 0.90 (Hair et al., 2017a). In
two countries (Germany and the UK) the score between functional value
and emotional value variables marginally exceeded the 0.90 threshold.
As variables are conceptually different from one another (see Table 2), a
possible merging of the constructs was deemed unfeasible and possible
elimination of items was avoided due to a potential negative effect of
this action to the content validity of the constructs (Hair et al., 2017a).
4.2. Measurement invariance of composite models (MICOM)
The measurement invariance of composite models (MICOM) pro-
cedure was conducted in order to examine the configural and compo-
sitional invariance of the constructs included in the model (Henseler
et al., 2016; Hair et al., 2017a; Cheah et al., 2023). Configural invariance
was achieved since the same scales were used and the same analytical
procedures were followed for the evaluation of the measurement models
for all groups (i.e. Finland, Germany and the UK). Compositional
invariance was assessed by performing a pairwise evaluation with per-
mutation technique (Cheah et al., 2023). Compositional invariance was
not achieved (Table 6) since the original correlation value for Attitude
construct fell outside the upper and lower bounds of confidence intervals
in two comparisons (Finland vs. Germany and UK vs. Finland). Ac-
cording to Henseler et al. (2016, p. 423), if measurement invariance
problems occur in configural and compositional invariance, a multi-
group analysis cannot be conducted and models must be estimated and
interpreted for each group separately. Following the above recommen-
dation, structural models were estimated and reported separately for
each country and no comparisons were made.
4.3. Structural model evaluation and hypotheses testing
The main results of the structural model evaluation are presented in
Table 7. The hypotheses were validated or rejected according to the
significance of the path beta coefficient and the effect size. The results
show that TPB constructs (i.e. Attitude, SN and PBC) had expected re-
lationships with intentions to test, buy and recommend products in
reusable packaging. Effect sizes of PBC were high in all countries, while
effect sizes of Attitudes were small in Finland and non-significant in
Germany and the UK. Effect sizes of SN were medium in Finland, small
in Germany, and non-significant in the UK. Thus, H1 was accepted in
Finland and rejected in Germany and the UK, H2 was accepted in
Finland and Germany and was rejected in the UK, and H3 was accepted
in all countries. Positive emotions and negative emotions had expected
relationships with all TPB constructs (i.e. intentions, attitudes, subjec-
tive norms and perceived behavioral control). Effect sizes of positive
emotions to SN, PBC and intentions were high whereas non-significant
for attitudes, in all countries. Thus, H4a, H5b and H5c were confirmed
in all countries and H5a was rejected in all countries. With regards to
effect sizes of negative emotions, in Finland they were medium to in-
tentions and high to PBC, SN and attitude, in Germany they were non-
significant to attitude, medium to SN and intentions, and high to PBC
whereas in UK they were non-significant to attitude, small to PBC, me-
dium to intentions and high to SN. Thus H4b, H6b and H6c were
confirmed in all countries, and H6a was confirmed only in Finland.
Hypothesis 7a, which stated that perceived functional value of
reusable packaging has a positive relationship with attitude towards
products in reusable packaging, was not confirmed in any country.
Hypothesis 7b, postulating that perceived emotional value of reusable
packaging has a positive relationship with attitude towards products in
reusable packaging was not confirmed in any country. The hypothesized
positive relationships of price value (H7c) and social value (7d) of
reusable packaging with attitudes towards products in reusable pack-
aging were rejected in all countries. Finally, hypothesis 7e, which
assumed a positive relationship between environmental sustainability
value of reusable packaging and attitude towards products in reusable
packaging was not confirmed in any country. With regards to H7a-e, all
effect sizes were non-significant.
Finally, the predictive power and relevance of the model were
assessed. According to the R2 value, the model was able to explain 58 %
of the variance in Finland, 48 % in Germany, and 54 % in the UK
regarding intentions to test, buy, and recommend products in reusable
Table 3
Discriminant validity. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). Finland.
Functional
value
Emotional
value
Price
value
Social
value
Environmental
sustainability
value
Intentions Attitude Subjective
norms
Perceived
behavioral
control
Positive
emotions
Negative
emotions
Functional value –
Emotional value 0.809 –
Price value 0.799 0.653 –
Social value 0.653 0.766 0.592 –
Environmental
sustainability
value
0.899 0.652 0.651 0.597 –
Intentions 0.842 0.77 0.65 0.645 0.733 –
Attitude 0.554 0.48 0.41 0.379 0.46 0.581 –
Subjective norms 0.571 0.573 0.498 0.496 0.483 0.64 0.581 –
Perceived
behavioral
control
0.627 0.565 0.46 0.448 0.524 0.669 0.514 0.606 –
Positive emotions 0.586 0.741 0.534 0.681 0.523 0.676 0.425 0.552 0.537 –
Negative
emotions
0.529 0.342 0.363 0.232 0.406 0.469 0.457 0.395 0.486 0.201 –
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
219 
packaging. Therefore, the in-sample predictive power of the model was
confirmed. Regarding the out-of-sample predictive relevance, as the
Q2predict was greater than zero (0.50 in Finland, 0.38 in Germany and
0.47 in the UK), the predictive relevance of the model was established
(cf. Hair et al., 2017a).
5. Discussion
The discussion section is organized as follows: Section 5.1 draws on
the results of this study and discusses their implications in understand-
ing consumers' intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in reus-
able packaging. Section 5.2 suggests potential areas for future consumer
research in the reusable packaging domain. Section 5.3 addresses
practitioners, policymakers and consumers by suggesting how the re-
sults of this study can support them to engage consumers in reuse of
FMCG packaging. Section 5.4. discusses the limitations of this study.
5.1. Implications for research
This study examined factors connected with consumers' intentions to
test, buy and recommend products in reusable packaging. The study
applied the Theory of Planned Behavior model and extended it with
concepts of positive and negative emotions and perceived value. The
proposed model was validated and the hypotheses tested with large
datasets from Finland, Germany, and the UK. The study results show that
positive emotions play a multiple role in consumers' evaluative assess-
ment of reusable FMCG packaging through 1) a direct and strong in-
fluence on intentions to test, buy and recommend FMCGs in reusable
packaging and 2) an influence on perceived behavioral control and
subjective norms.
To elaborate the results further, attitudes did not have connection to
intentions in other study countries than Finland, despite it being the
main predictor of intentions in the original TPB (Ajzen, 1991). Although
this is surprising, similar results are found in earlier studies focusing on
environmentally sustainable behaviors. For instance, Carrus et al.
(2008) in their study dealing with recycling and use of public trans-
portation found that attitudes did not correlate with intentions towards
these actions. More recent examples are by Russel et al. (2017) in food
waste behavior context and by Lam et al. (2022) in the context of using
air conditioning. The common denominator for these examples is the
addition of an emotional construct among the other TPB determinants of
consumers' intentions. With regards to the present study, which focuses
on consumers' decision-making with unfamiliar objects (e.g. Shiv and
Fedorikhin, 1999), it can be speculated that consumers based their
evaluations on the positive and negative emotional “gut feelings”, thus
making the more cognitive attitudinal evaluations redundant in shaping
their intentions. In addition, buying FMCGs in reusable packaging may
make consumers to feel responsible towards the environment and that
their choices can have a positive impact resulting in positive emotional
state. Indeed, these types of positive emotional reactions have been
Table 4
Discriminant validity. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). Germany.
Functional
value
Emotional
value
Price
value
Social
value
Environmental
sustainability
value
Intentions Attitude Subjective
norms
Perceived
behavioral
control
Positive
emotions
Negative
emotions
Functional value –
Emotional value 0.908 –
Price value 0.677 0.628 –
Social value 0.664 0.748 0.48 –
Environmental
sustainability
value
0.814 0.799 0.558 0.475 –
Intentions 0.708 0.807 0.49 0.578 0.574 –
Attitude 0.412 0.455 0.279 0.211 0.391 0.446 –
Subjective norms 0.471 0.493 0.304 0.394 0.35 0.561 0.524 –
Perceived
behavioral
control
0.542 0.506 0.339 0.41 0.389 0.575 0.385 0.495 –
Positive emotions 0.517 0.694 0.333 0.638 0.362 0.615 0.293 0.443 0.392 –
Negative
emotions
0.293 0.256 0.178 0.139 0.323 0.286 0.255 0.186 0.312 0.103 –
Table 5
Discriminant validity. Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT). The UK.
Functional
value
Emotional
value
Price
value
Social
value
Environmental
sustainability
value
Intentions Attitude Subjective
norms
Perceived
behavioral
control
Positive
emotions
Negative
emotions
Functional value –
Emotional value 0.922 –
Price value 0.721 0.639 –
Social value 0.728 0.832 0.507 –
Environmental
sustainability
value
0.825 0.767 0.631 0.612 –
Intentions 0.826 0.874 0.612 0.676 0.758 –
Attitude 0.515 0.454 0.295 0.323 0.455 0.478 –
Subjective norms 0.622 0.589 0.415 0.491 0.506 0.633 0.58 –
Perceived
behavioral
control
0.604 0.546 0.437 0.45 0.457 0.586 0.358 0.561 –
Positive emotions 0.675 0.81 0.446 0.739 0.545 0.719 0.374 0.597 0.513 –
Negative
emotions
0.286 0.195 0.138 0.094 0.335 0.288 0.258 0.236 0.15 0.086 –
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
220 
reported by studies in the field (e.g. Miao et al., 2023; Keller et al.,
2021).
Meanwhile, the PBC and SN remained as significant predictors of the
intentions (except for the SN in the UK). In contrast to attitudes, this
might be explained by the fact that PBC and SN evaluations do not
directly focus on reusable packaging as such. Instead, they refer to one's
own skills to apply packaging reuse (PBC) and to other people's approval
and use (SN) related to reusable packaging. These evaluations might be
easier for the consumers to make. Overall, when comparing the de-
terminants' explanatory power towards intentions, especially the posi-
tive emotional response dominated as seen in the effect sizes of small for
PBC, SN, and negative emotions and medium for positive emotions (cf.
Hair et al., 2017a, 2017b).
This study analyzed the role of emotional reactions in shaping other
TPB constructs than just intentions. The results show that positive and
negative emotions have a significant influence on subjective norm and
perceived behavioral control, but no influence on the attitudes (except
for the negative emotions in Finland). When the effect sizes are
observed, the influence of positive emotions was stronger than negative
emotions. In general, it might be that the positive emotional response
towards the reusable packaging could make consumers to feel more
confident in their skills applying it, contributing to PBC evaluations.
Table 6
Assessment of compositional invariance between groups (i.e. countries)
involved in the study.
Compositional invariance
Country pairs
under assessment
Construct Original
correlation
Confidence
interval
Finland vs.
Germany
Negative emotions 0.999 [0.999; 0.995]
Positive emotions 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Attitude 0.997 [1.000; 0.999]
Intentions 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Perceived behavioral
control
1.000 [1.000; 0.998]
Subjective norm 1.000 [1.000; 0.999]
Emotional value 0.998 [1.000; 0.998]
Environmental
sustainability value
1.000 [1.000; 0.999]
Functional value 1.000 [0.999; 0.998]
Price value 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Social value 0.993 [0.998; 0.999]
UK vs. Finland
Negative emotions 0.998 [0.999; 0.994]
Positive emotions 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Attitude 0.997 [1.000; 0.999]
Intentions 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Perceived behavioral
control
1.000 [1.000; 0.999]
Subjective norm 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Emotional value 1.000 [1.000; 0.999]
Environmental
sustainability value
1.000 [1.000; 0.998]
Functional value 1.000 [0.999; 0.998]
Price value 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Social value 0.999 [0.999; 0.995]
Germany vs. UK
Negative emotions 0.995 [0.998; 0.992]
Positive emotions 0.999 [1.000; 0.999]
Attitude 0.999 [1.000; 0.998]
Intentions 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Perceived behavioral
control
1.000 [0.999; 0.998]
Subjective norm 1.000 [1.000; 0.999]
Emotional value 0.999 [0.999; 0.997]
Environmental
sustainability value
1.000 [1.000; 0.998]
Functional value 1.000 [0.999; 0.997]
Price value 1.000 [1.000; 1.000]
Social value 0.998 [0.997; 0.985]
Table 7
Results of the structural model evaluation.
Path (hypothesis) Finland Germany The UK Decision
Attitude→ Intention to
test, buy and
recommend products
in reusable
packaging (H1‡)
0.14
[5.03] ***
0.11
[3.51] ***
0.10
[3.20] ***
Accept in
Finland.
Reject in
Germany and
the UK
f2 0.03
[2.44]*
0.02
[1.67]ns
0.02
[1.57]ns
Subjective norms →
Intention to test, buy
and recommend
products in reusable
packaging (H2‡)
0.17
[5.15] ***
0.19
[5.45] ***
0.16
[3.73] ***
Accept in
Finland and
Germany.
Reject in the
UK.
f2 0.04
[2.45]*
0.04
[2.60]**
0.03
[1.74]ns
Perceived behavioral
control → Intention
to test, buy and
recommend products
in reusable
packaging (H3‡)
0.22
[6.36] ***
0.21
[5.55] ***
0.19
[5.57] ***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.07
[3.01]**
0.07
[2.60]**
0.06
[2.72]**
Positive emotions →
Intention to test, buy
and recommend
products in reusable
packaging (H4a‡)
0.35
[11.15]
***
0.38
[10.96]
***
0.42
[12.34]
***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.20
[5.04]***
0.22
[4.66]***
0.26
[5.41]***
Negative emotions →
Intention to test, buy
and recommend
products in reusable
packaging (H4b-)
 0.15
[5.74] ***
 0.16
[5.92] ***
 0.16
[5.93] ***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.04
[2.64]**
0.04
[2.79]**
0.05
[2.87]**
Positive emotions →
Attitude (H5a‡)
0.16
[3.89]***
0.12
[2.79]**
0.12
[2.25]*
Reject in all
countries
f2 0.02
[1.83]ns
0.01
[1.33]ns
0.01
[1.06]ns
Positive emotions →
Subjective norms
(H5b‡)
0.45
[14.80]
***
0.39
[11.13]
***
0.52
[17.51]
***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.28
[5.71]***
0.19
[4.60]***
0.39
[6.21]***
Positive emotions ➔
Perceived behavioral
control (H5c‡)
0.41
[12.89]
***
0.34
[10.17]
***
0.43
[13.14]
***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.24
[0.548]***
0.14
[4.47]***
0.24
[5.28]***
Negative emotions →
Attitude (H6a-)
 0.24
[7.21] ***
 0.13
[3.75] ***
 0.13
[4.02] ***
Accept in
Finland.
Reject in
Germany and
the UK
f2 0.07
[3.37]***
0.02
[1.78]ns
0.02
[1.88]ns
Negative emotions →
Subjective norms
(H6b-)
 0.26
[8.62] ***
 0.18
[5.70] ***
 0.22
[7.77] ***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.10
[3.84]***
0.04
[2.62]**
0.07
[3.51]***
(continued on next page)
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
221 
Similar rationale applies to SN as well. It is logical that once consumer
perceives something positive, it contributes positively to considerations
on how other would view the behavior, especially when the object is
generally socially acceptable. This phenomena can be emphasized in
sustainable consumption domain as there are findings that some con-
sumers even use green consumption as a vehicle to elevate their own
social status (Babutsidze and Chai, 2018).
Perceived values were hypothesized to have connections to con-
sumers' attitudes towards the reusable packaging in FMCGs. No signif-
icant connections, even with small effect sizes, were discovered. This is
surprising as it has been considered that specific value evaluations of the
object contribute highly to attitude formation (Boksberger and Melsen,
2011; Roh et al., 2022). Overall, these results might be explained in a
similar manner as was the case with the attitude-intention relationship.
Consumers might have not been able to perform proper value evaluation
as the topic is novel to them, thus the shallow evaluation has no
contribution to the attitude formation.
Further explanations can be given to the lack of significant correla-
tions between specific value types and attitudes. For the price value, one
explanation could be that consumers were uncertain about the impact of
reusable packaging to the price of FMCGs due to the general level of
description provided to them. In previous research, concerns and ex-
pectations over price have been observed for reusable packaging
solutions applied to certain FMCGs, including home cleaning (e.g.
Kunamaneni et al., 2019; Bashir et al., 2020), personal care (e.g. Loft-
house et al., 2017) and food (e.g. Miao et al., 2023) products. Thus, price
might become more relevant to consumers when reference is made to
certain products. In this study, consumers faced a generic description of
the packaging reuse. Regarding the relationship between social value
and attitude, it might be that the novelty of reusable packaging might
have challenged participants to associate it with intangible value as-
pects, such as social status and self-image. However, if more concrete
example of packaging reuse would have been offered to the study par-
ticipants, the situation might have been different. For instance, a recent
study found that some Swedish consumers associated the return of
beverage containers to vending machines and redemption of deposit fee
with being low economic status and greed (Kremel, 2023). Environ-
mental sustainability is the key driver of reusable packaging initiatives.
Although the descriptive statistics showed that consumers in this study
rated the environmental sustainability value relatively high (above 4 on
a 5-point scale), it did not connect with attitudes. This means that
consumers' see the value but it has no relevance to their attitudes. This
has been found in other studies as well. For instance, a study by Lee and
Park (2020) on sustainable beauty product packaging found that envi-
ronmental sustainability value had the least positive effect on con-
sumers' evaluations, among self-expression, emotional aesthetic,
functional values. Moreover, moderate effects of sustainability percep-
tions have been observed for consumers' attitudes towards sustainable
food packaging (Steenis et al., 2017). When it comes to functional and
emotional value, participants in all countries scored relatively high in
their descriptive value perceptions but no connection to their attitudes
were established. Again, due to the lack of knowledge and experience,
these evaluations might have been made on a shallow basis, thus no
effect on the attitude formation. Interestingly, the emotional value
perception did not function similarly as the positive emotional response
in its connection to the intentions. This might be explained how the
emotional value was measured in comparison to positive emotions. The
items used referred to more concrete issues such as it would be some-
thing to enjoy, which might have complicated consumers' evaluations
due to the lack of reference experiences in the past, simultaneously
inflating the effect on attitude formation.
This study extended the standard TPB model with positive and
negative emotions and the concept of perceived value. Emotions have
been applied in connection with TPB in earlier studies focusing on pro-
environmental behaviors (Yuriev et al., 2020). To the authors' knowl-
edge, this is the first study to connect emotions to TPB constructs other
than intentions, include perceived value in the model, and apply it in the
reusable packaging domain. Our results corroborated some of the find-
ings from the earlier TPB or TPB-inspired studies in the reusable pack-
aging domain (Ertz et al., 2017; Song et al., 2023). The main difference
in our study was that the connection between attitudes and intentions
was absent, which is most likely due to the inclusion of the emotional
constructs in the model. This is an important issue as it bears different
implications to the research. First, it highlights the importance of
considering the affective concepts while trying to delve into the reasons
behind consumers' intentions and potential behavioral responses to-
wards packaging reuse. This is in line with results from other fields of
environmentally sustainable consumption, such as food (Onwezen et al.,
2022). Second, as the environmental sustainability is often used to
justify the development of new innovations, the results of our study
highlight that consumers might not find it as the main driver for their
intentions. Therefore, research focusing on consumers should place
greater emphasis on the affective side of decision-making to develop
effective communication strategies that encourage consumers to choose
the environmentally sustainable option over less sustainable
alternatives.
Table 7 (continued )
Path (hypothesis) Finland Germany The UK Decision
Negative emotions →
Perceived behavioral
control (H6c-)
 0.34
[10.93]
***
 0.27
[8.29] ***
0.13
[4.07] ***
Accept in all
countries
f2 0.16
[4.93]***
0.09
[3.72]***
0.02
[1.93]*
Functional value →
Attitude towards
reusable packaging
(H7a‡)
0.18
[2.88] ***
0.09
[1.69]ns
0.23
[3.92] ***
Reject in all
countries
f2 0.01
[1.33]ns
0.00
[0.77]ns
0.02
[1.85]ns
Emotional value →
Attitude towards
reusable packaging
(H7b‡)
0.08
[1.64]ns
0.16
[2.92] **
0.06
[0.95] ns
Reject in all
countries
f2 0.00
[0.75]ns
0.01
[1.37]ns
0.00
[0.37]ns
Price value → Attitude
towards reusable
packaging (H7c‡)
0.01
[0.14] ns
0.03
[0.62]ns
 0.04
[1.02] ns
Reject in all
countries
f2 0.00
[0.01]ns
0.00
[0.20]ns
0.00
[0.41]ns
Social value→ Attitude
towards reusable
packaging (H7d‡)
0.00
[0.08] ns
 0.07
[1.98] *
 0.03
[0.68] ns
Reject in all
countries
f2 0.00
[0.00]ns
0.00
[0.98]ns
0.00
[0.25]ns
Environmental
sustainability value
→ Attitude towards
reusable packaging
(H7e‡)
0.06
[1.23] ns
0.10
[2.05] *
0.13
[2.85] **
Reject in all
countries
f2 0.00
[0.53]ns
0.01
[0.91]ns
0.01
[1.36]ns
R2 (Intention to test,
buy and recommend
products in reusable
packaging)
0.58
[19.00]***
0.48
[14.15]***
0.54
[19.20]***
[] ˆ T statistics. * ˆ p  .05, *** ˆ p  .001, ns ˆ not significant, ⠈ Beta
coefficient, f2 ˆ Effect size.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
222 
5.2. Implications for future research
Understanding consumers' intentions towards reusable FMCG pack-
aging contributes to a research agenda aimed at supporting consumers
in moving away from a ‘single-use culture’ and towards embracing the
sustained value of goods and their packaging (e.g. Greenwood et al.,
2021; Muranko et al., 2021). The results of this study show that con-
sumers' intentions are shaped by affect (e.g. positive emotions), cogni-
tion (e.g. behavioral control) and social expectations (e.g. subjective
norms). These findings align with the understanding of factors driving
consumers' sustainable consumption (White et al., 2019) and serve as a
building block for further research on promoting packaging reuse, a
topic yet untouched in the literature. As minimum cognitive effort and
habit drive consumers' choices of FMCGs (Kunamaneni et al., 2019),
packaging and its design serve as important mediums to communicate
reuse benefits to consumers. This can be done, for instance, through
packaging labels. As environmental sustainability seems inherently
linked to consumers' views on packaging reuse, one way to promote
reuse could be to emphasize these aspects on packaging labels. On the
other hand, as the results of this study and others (Lee and Park, 2020;
Steenis et al., 2017; Bashir et al., 2020) show, environmental sustain-
ability may neither be the only nor the most effective content for the
communication. Instead, emphasizing multiple benefits, embracing
positive emotional experiences and highlighting control potential over
central aspects of reuse behavior (e.g. disposal) may work better. The
concepts of warm glow and psychological ownership might offer some
support in facilitating positive emotional experiences by emphasizing
different benefits. For instance, warm glow could be used to facilitate
feelings of pleasure and satisfaction in connection to the contribution of
packaging reuse to the common good and the planet (Hartmann et al.,
2017). Psychological ownership theory could be used to increase con-
sumers' feelings of emotional attachment to reusable packaging (Tari
and Trudel, 2024). Both concepts could be applied by means of pack-
aging design. For instance, psychological ownership could be activated
by prompting consumers to give a nick name to the packages or
demonstrate through graphic design how reuse can increase consumers'
control over packaging disposal and waste management matters.
Consumers' interest and product experiences can be further influ-
enced through packaging design. For instance, visual packaging design
elements (e.g. font style, graphics, color, texture, labeling) could be used
to communicate benefits associated to reusable packaging from different
angles (e.g. environmental sustainability in cognitive, affective, or social
terms). Depending on the availability of solutions to the markets, the
effect of such designs could be tested online or in real-life settings. For
instance, an online study could reveal which designs varying in depic-
tion of benefits lead to increased hypothetical choices and willingness to
pay for reusable packaging solutions (e.g. take-away salad boxes).
Moving closer to real-life settings, focus could be on consumers' expe-
rience and real choices. For instance, controlled experiments with
products could show whether packaging design influences product
evaluations (e.g. taste for foods and effectiveness for home cleaning or
personal hygiene) and experiments in retail or food service environ-
ments contexts could be used to study the potential effect of packaging
design on actual choices.
The study took place in three European countries. In future research,
it would be advisable to carry out studies in wider geographical and
cultural settings. For instance, studies could compare consumer views in
industrialized countries (e.g. EU, Japan, South Korea, US, Canada,
Australia). Often the sustainable innovations emerge first in those areas
with sufficient purchasing power, but cultural differences might exist (e.
g. Ertz et al., 2017). On the other hand, plastic packaging waste problem
is worsein developing countries, so need for new solutions is critical
there. It could be expected that consumers' views gathered from devel-
oped countries could be applied in developing countries. Thus, adding
more cultural variety in the future studies would be beneficial.
5.3. Implications for the industry, policymakers, and consumers
Reusable FMCG packaging is an important topic for product manu-
facturers, packaging producers and retailers because consumers become
increasingly aware of the negative impact of single-use packaging and
are on the lookout for sustainable alternatives. Offering FMCGs in
reusable packaging may support consumers to permanently reconcile
with some of their concerns (e.g. increasing household packaging waste,
environmental impact) and support interested value chain actors to
build a competitive advantage over conventional approaches, which
might be environmentally threatening (e.g. single-use plastic pack-
aging). Overall, study results show that reusable FMCG packaging idea is
positively viewed by consumers. More specifically, feelings of joy, pride
and hope highly contribute to their intentions to test, buy, and recom-
mend such solutions. The main message of such result to companies
interested in implementing reusable FMCG packaging solutions is that
attention should be paid to all aspects that may facilitate a support a
positive emotional experience for consumers, instead of just focusing on
the environmental sustainability aspect.
Consumers' adoption of reusable FMCG packaging depends on the
availability of such solutions in mass retail settings (e.g. supermarkets)
along with effective marketing strategies. The results of this study hint
that the content of the marketing strategies should be emotional by
tense, i.e. associating the marketing communication towards the con-
sumers with positive emotions. To be more concrete, White et al. (2019)
propose that emotions joy and pride can trigger consumers' sustainable
consumption. This could be done through product labelling with visual
content indicating e.g. joy extended with congruent narrative such as
“Choice of a happy day”. Further, subjective norms had positive
connection to consumers' intentions in Finland and Germany; consumers
seem to care about the others' views on their use of reusable packaging.
The social meanings can be integrated with affective ones through the
concept warm glow. Briefly, warm glow refers to a positive affective
state resulting from a good deed to others such as a nearby person, local
environment, or the planet (Hartmann et al., 2017). In earlier studies,
warm glow has been found to contribute to sustainable consumption (e.
g. Bazaraa et al., 2022). As with emotions, the concept could be har-
nessed in marketing communication related to reusable packaging. The
message could include socially charged visuals (e.g. a person hugging a
planet) boosted with a suitable narrative (e.g. “Do good for others - Feel
good yourself”). While the above proposition touches consumers' af-
fective side, their cognitive side also matters. Marketing strategies such
as information campaigns, advertising, packaging labels can be used to
inform consumers about the general meaning of packaging reuse and
validated contributions to environmental sustainability (e.g. reduction
of CO2 emissions, avoidance of microplastics). For example, an infor-
mation campaign with a cognitive content could be designed with the
aim to emphasize the environmental impact of reusable packaging from
different angles (e.g. single-use packaging waste reduction, resource
conservation, greenhouse gas emission reduction). It is to be noted
though that this might resonate only with consumers who inherently
value environmental aspects in their consumption decisions.
Packaging reuse has gained interest and support among policy-
makers in the European Union (European Parliament, 2024). Perhaps
the main result of this study for policymakers is that the participants'
attitudes and intentions towards packaging reuse were leaning towards
positive. This signals that consumers do not reject the idea in a first
place. On the other hand, the results also showed that positive and
negative emotions play a strong role in shaping consumers' attitudes and
intentions. This result warrants for careful actions in introducing the
packaging reuse. For instance, Sundqvist et al. (2024) propose that
consumer campaigns might be one way to accelerate consumers' interest
towards packaging reuse. However, the content of the campaign should
be carefully designed in such way that consumers' initial reaction to-
wards reusable packaging includes a positive emotional response. In
practice, this could be done by including well-known and positively
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
223 
viewed celebrities or social media influencers in the campaigns. The
matter of content applies to other initiatives as well. For instance, the
recent EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation initiative caused
some negatively-tensed public discussion and confusion among con-
sumers (and other stakeholders) in Finland as it would jeopardize the
well-functioning beverage bottle return and deposit system. These kinds
of negative connotations to policymakers' actions might harm the gen-
eral attitudes towards reuse and carry over to specific applications such
as reusable packaging to FMCGs or take-away foods.
Consumers are the ones who eventually finance the reusable pack-
aging system. Therefore, their views on the topic are extremely impor-
tant. Our descriptive results showed that consumers perceived value in
packaging reuse and had positive attitudes and intentions towards it. On
the other hand, the results hint that consumers might have difficulties in
comprehending packaging reuse. This is visible in the non-existing
connections between the perceived value and attitudes, suggesting
that the value evaluations do not actually shape the attitudes. In addi-
tion, the fact that the emotional responses were the dominant predictors
of the TPB constructs implies that consumers based their intentions and
attitudes on “gut feeling” rather than informed evaluations. This is a
typical feature of consumers' initial decision-making concerning new
ideas and concepts (e.g. Shiv and Fedorikhin, 1999). The problem is that
emotion-based decisions might not lead to constant behavior once the
(neutral or negative) experiences contributing to the cognitive elabo-
rations come to play. In order to diversify consumers' decision-making in
the initial stages, more information should be provided. This informa-
tion should not be focused on functional aspects, such as environmental
sustainability only, as it might backfire in its capability to attract only
those consumers having a congruent view. Rather, the whole spectrum
of perceived value could be applied. For instance, packaging reuse could
be framed as fun, socially approved, reasonably priced, and as conve-
nient as it ever could be. If the “gut feelings” are positive and the ex-
periences align with the realistic and informed expectations, the chances
of making packaging reuse a constant habit would most likely increase.
5.4. Limitations
The study has limitations. Firstly, the sample in all countries is biased
towards well-educated consumers with moderate income, who live in
urban areas and capital cities. It is possible that such bias had an effect
on the results, for instance, reuse of packaging materials increases as
education level does (Escario et al., 2020). On the other hand, the first
attempts to implement reuse systems most likely take place in densely
populated areas for which the results are applicable. Another limitation
related to the sample is the reliance of this study on an online survey.
Specifically, individuals without Internet access or those less likely to
participate in online surveys might have been underrepresented in this
study. This limitation may delimit the generalizability of the study's
findings, particularly for demographic groups that are less active in
online environments. A more diverse sampling method, such as
combining online surveys with offline data collection (e.g. paper-pencil
and telephone questionnaires) could have ensured more diverse data.
Secondly, the examined model was confined to the measurement of
intentions to test, buy and recommend reusable FMCG packaging. This is
because reusable FMCG packaging solutions are rarely available in retail
shops (Greenwood et al., 2021). As known, intentions do not always
predict behaviors very accurately and, on average, they account for only
about 25 % of the variance in behavior (Ajzen, 2020). Therefore, it is
unknown the extent that the study's results may explain actual pack-
aging reuse behavior. Thirdly, the model was able to explain a little>50
% of the variance in intentions to test, buy and recommend reusable
FMCG packaging. While its predictive power can be characterized as
sufficient for the consumer behavior research (Hair et al., 2017a), it is
evident that there are other influential factors unknown for this study.
For instance, personal norms (i.e. a person's sense of ethical obligation to
act or refrain from acting in a specific way) can be a relevant predictor of
behavioral intentions (Song et al., 2023). Fourthly, despite the data was
collected from three European countries, the generalizability of the
findings to other cultures can be questioned, even within Europe. The
three countries included represent wealthy and modern Western Euro-
pean societies with to some extent low cultural distance. The situation
might be different for example in Eastern Europe. Kaasa et al. (2016)
showed that Poland differs culturally from Germany. This might natu-
rally cause variation in consumers' views. As reusable packaging might
often carry food, also food cultures might affect how consumers see
reusable packaging. A study including Norwegian and French consumers
found that Norwegian consumers appreciated convenience in food while
the French pleasure and taste (Varela et al., 2022). It could be speculated
that reusable packaging as carrier of food might have effect on the food
perceptions. For instance, French might consider that packaging which
is used over and over again might indicate lower quality of the food and
even a risk of contamination. Consumers' concerns of food contamina-
tion as a barrier for packaging reuse have been reported in the literature
due to potential wear and tear of the packaging or improper use of the
packaging by other consumers (Miao et al., 2023). Finally, there is
variation within Europe on how open consumers are for new in-
novations. A study by Truong (2013) found significant differences be-
tween French, German, and UK consumers in the predictors of their
attitudes towards technological innovations. The results showed
between-country variation in novelty, value, and risk perceptions' cor-
relations with the attitudes. The samemight apply to reusable packaging
as well. In some countries consumers might be more open to such
innovation than in others.
6. Conclusions
The current study focused on understanding the factors connected
with consumers' intentions towards reusable FMCG packaging. A con-
ceptual model was developed for the study, by extending the Theory of
Planned Behavior with positive (pride, hope, joy) and negative (sadness,
guilt, irritation) emotions as facilitators of intentions and perceived
value dimensions (functional, emotional, price, social and environ-
mental sustainability) as facilitators of attitudes. The model was
empirically tested and validated with survey data from three European
countries; Finland, Germany, and the UK (total N ˆ 2400). The main
results show that positive emotions have a direct and strong influence on
consumers' intentions to test, buy, and recommend FMCGs in reusable
packaging and also influence perceived behavioral control and subjec-
tive norms. Additionally, none of the perceived values had a significant
connection with consumers' attitudes towards FMCGs in reusable
packaging.
Future consumer research in the packaging reuse domain should
support consumers to sustain the value of goods and their packaging
through reuse by considering affect (e.g. positive emotions), cognition
(e.g. behavioral control), and social expectations (e.g. subjective norms)
as influential factors. Packaging itself can serve as an epistemic object as
it can support researchers to test and validate the best ways to shift
consumers towards reuse. Various design elements (e.g., graphics, color,
texture, labeling) offer opportunities to experiment with promoting
packaging reuse and enhancing consumers' interest, experiences, and
choices.
Companies interested in implementing reusable FMCG packaging
solutions should conceive, test, and apply marketing strategies that
embrace consumers' positive emotional experiences from multiple an-
gles. These strategies should support positive emotions at general level,
a positive affective state (e.g., satisfaction, pleasure) linked to good
deeds for humankind, the planet, and the environment, increase confi-
dence in usage and demonstrate validated contributions to environ-
mental sustainability. Such strategies, whether implemented
individually or in combination, could be applied through packaging,
product, and label design, as well as interventions at physical and digital
points of sale, such as information campaigns.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
224 
Policymakers can support the introduction and consumer adoption
of reusable packaging by carefully selecting spokespersons (e.g., celeb-
rities and influencers with positive social outlooks) who can inspire
consumers and embrace their positive feelings and responses.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Angelos Balatsas-Lekkas: Writing – original draft, Methodology,
Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. Harri Luomala:
Writing – review & editing, Methodology, Investigation, Conceptuali-
zation. Kyosti Pennanen: Writing – review & editing, Supervision,
Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisi-
tion, Formal analysis, Conceptualization.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by Business Finland under
4everPack project [grant number 3018/31/2021]. The funding body
had no role in study design, in data collection, data analysis, interpre-
tation of data, writing of the manuscript or in the decision to submit the
article for publication.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.spc.2024.10.011.
Data availability
Data will be made available upon request.
References
Ajzen, I., 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50
(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
Ajzen, I., 2020. The theory of planned behavior: frequently asked questions. Human
Behavior and Emerging Technologies 2 (4), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.1002/
hbe2.195.
Antonetti, P., Maklan, S., 2014. Exploring postconsumption guilt and pride in the context
of sustainability. Psychol. Mark. 31 (9), 717–735. https://doi.org/10.1002/
mar.20730.
Babader, A., Ren, J., Jones, K., O., & Wang, J., 2016. A system dynamics approach for
enhancing social behaviours regarding the reuse of packaging. Expert Syst. Appl. 46,
417–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.10.025.
Babutsidze, Z., Chai, A., 2018. Look at me saving the planet! The imitation of visible
green behavior and its impact on the climate value-action gap. Ecol. Econ. 146,
290–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.10.017.
Bagozzi, R., Gopinath, M., Nyer, P.U., 1999. The role of emotions in marketing. J. Acad.
Mark. Sci. 27 (2), 184–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070399272005.
Bashir, H., Jørgensen, S., Pedersen, L.J.T., Skard, S., 2020. Experimenting with
sustainable business models in fast moving consumer goods. J. Clean. Prod. 270,
122302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122302.
Bazaraa, D., A., Mahrous, A. A., & Elsharnouby, M. H. (2022). How manipulating
incentives and participation in green programs affect satisfaction: the mediating role
of warm glow. J. Clean. Prod., 362, 132306. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2022.132306.
Berki-Kiss, D., Menrad, K., 2022. The role emotions play in consumer intentions to make
pro-social purchases in Germany – An augmented theory of planned behavior model.
Sustainable Production and Consumption 29, 79–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
spc.2021.09.026.
Boksberger, P., E., & Melsen, L. (2011). Perceived value: a critical examination of
definitions, concepts and measures for the service industry. J. Serv. Mark., 25, 3, pp.
229–240. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/08876041111129209.
Bradley, C., G., & Corsini, L. (2023). A literature review and analytical framework of the
sustainability of reusable packaging. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 37,
pp. 126–141. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2023.02.009.
Branca, G., Resciniti, R., Babin, B., J., 2024. Sustainable packaging design and the
consumer perspective: a systematic literature review. Ital. J. Mark. 2024, 77–111.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43039-023-00084-1.
Carrus, G., Passafaro, P., Bonnes, M., 2008. Emotions, habits and rational choices in
ecological behaviours: the case of recycling and use of public transportation.
J. Environ. Psychol. 28 (1), 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.09.003.
Cheah, J., H., Amaro, S., & Roldan, J. L. (2023). Multigroup analysis of more than two
groups in PLS-SEM: A review, illustration, and recommendations. J. Bus. Res., 156,
113539. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113539.
Diamantopoulos, A., Sarstedt, M., Fuchs, C., Wilczynski, P., Kaiser, S., 2012. Guidelines
for choosing between multi-item and single-item scales for construct measurement: a
predictive validity perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 40,
434–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0300-3.
Dopico-Parada, A., Lopez-Miguens, M.J., Alvarez-Gonzalez, P., 2021. Building value with
packaging: development and validation of a measurement scale. Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services 63, 102685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jretconser.2021.102685.
Dorn, M., Stockli, S., 2018. Social influence fosters the use of a reusable takeaway box.
Waste Manag. 79, 296–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.07.027.
Ertz, M., Huang, R., Jo, M., S., Karakas, F., & Sarigollü, E., 2017. From single-use to
multi-use: study of consumers’ behavior toward consumption of reusable containers.
J. Environ. Manage. 193, 334–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jenvman.2017.01.060.
Escario, J.J., Rodriguez-Sanchez, C., Casalo, L.V., 2020. The influence of environmental
attitudes and perceived effectiveness on recycling, reducing, and reusing packaging
materials in Spain. Waste Manag. 113, 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2020.05.043.
European Commission (2022). European Green Deal: Putting an end to wasteful
packaging, boosting reuse and recycling, Press release. Retrieved from: https://ec.
europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_7155 Accessed Jun 28, 2024.
European Parliament (2024). Deal on new rules for more sustainable packaging in the
EU. Press release. Retrieved from: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/pr
ess-room/20240301IPR18595/deal-on-new-rules-for-more-sustainable-packaging-
in-the-eu Accessed Jun 28, 2024.
European Union (1994). (European parliament and council directive 94/62/EC).
Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uriˆCELEX
:01994L0062-20150526&fromˆen Accessed Jun 28, 2024.
Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK Guidelines (2019). The ethical
principles of research with human participants and ethical review in the human
sciences in Finland. Publications of the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity
TENK 3/2019. Retrieved from: https://www.tenk.fi/sites/tenk.fi/files/Ihmistietei
den_eettisen_ennakkoarvioinnin_ohje_2019.pdf. Accessed Jun 28, 2024.
Gibson, E., L. (2006). Emotional influences on food choice: sensory, physiological and
psychological pathways. Physiol. Behav., 89, 1, pp. 53–61. doi:https://doi.org/10.10
16/j.physbeh.2006.01.024.
Greenwood, S., C., Walker, S., Baird, H., M., Parsons, R., Mehl, S., Webb, T., L., Slark, T.,
A., Ryan, J., A, & Rothman, R., H. (2021). Many happy returns: combining insights
from the environmental and behavioural sciences to understand what is required to
make reusable packaging mainstream. Sustainable Production and Consumption 27,
pp. 1688–1702. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.03.022.
Guenther, P., Guenther, M., Ringle, C., M., Zaefarian, G., & Cartwright, S., 2023.
Improving PLS-SEM use for business marketing research. Ind. Mark. Manag. 111,
127–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.03.010.
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G., T., M., Ringle C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017a). A Primer on Partial
Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), second edition, SAGE
Publications Inc, USA.
Hair Jr, J. F., Matthews, L., M., Matthews, R., L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017b). PLS-SEM or CB-
SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of
Multivariate Data Analysis, 1, 2, pp. 107–123. doi:https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDA.
2017.087624.
Hair, J., F., Risher, J., J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C., M. (2019). When to use and how to
report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev., 31, 1, pp. 2–24. doi:https://doi.org/1
0.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
Han, H., Meng, B., Kim, W., 2017. Emerging bicycle tourism and the theory of planned
behavior. J. Sustain. Tour. 25 (2), 292–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09669582.2016.1202955.
Hartmann, P., Eisend, M., Apaolaza, V., D’Souza, C., 2017. Warm glow vs. altruistic
values: how important is intrinsic emotional reward in proenvironmental behavior?
J. Environ. Psychol. 52, 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.05.006.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C., M., & Sarstedt, M., 2016. Testing measurement invariance of
composites using partial least squares. Int. Mark. Rev. 33 (3), 405–431. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304.
Kaasa, A., Vadi, M., Varblane, U., 2016. A new dataset of cultural distances for European
countries and regions. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 37, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ribaf.2015.11.014.
Keller, E., Kohler, J., K., Eisen, C., Kleihauer, S., & Hanss, D., 2021. Why consumers shift
from single-use to reusable drink cups: An empirical application of the stage model
of self-regulated behavioural change. Sustainable Production and Consumption 27,
1672–1687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.001.
Kidwell, B., & Jewell, R., D. (2003). An examination of perceived behavioral control:
internal and external influences on intention. Psychol. Mark., 20, 7, pp. 625–642.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10089.
Kock, N., 2015. Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment
approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration 11 (4), 1–10. https://doi.org/
10.4018/ijec.2015100101.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
225 
Kock, N., Lynn, G., 2012. Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based
SEM: An illustration and recommendations. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 13 (7), 546–580.
https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00302.
Koenig-Lewis, N., Palmer, A., Dermody, J., Urbye, A., 2014. Consumers’ evaluations of
ecological packaging–rational and emotional approaches. J. Environ. Psychol. 37,
94–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.009.
Kremel, A. (2023). Consumer Behaviour in a Circular System–How Values Promote and
Hinder the Participation of Young Adults in the Swedish Deposit-Refund System for
Beverage Packaging. Circ. Econ. Sustain. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s43615-02
3-00333-7.
Kunamaneni, S., Jassi, S., Hoang, D., 2019. Promoting reuse behaviour: challenges and
strategies for repeat purchase, low-involvement products. Sustainable Production
and Consumption 20, 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2019.07.001.
Lam, T., W., L., Tsui, Y., C., J., Fok, L., Cheung, L., T., O., Tsang, E., P., K., & Lee, J., C-K.
(2022). The influences of emotional factors on householders' decarbonizing cooling
behaviour in a subtropical Metropolitan City: An application of the extended theory
of planned behavior. Sci. Total Environ., 807, 150826. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scitotenv.2021.150826.
Lee, J., Park, K., 2020. Because it is green or beautiful? Consumer’s perceived value of a
unique type of sustainable packaging, store evaluation, and store patronage
intentions. In: International Textile and Apparel Association Annual Conference
Proceedings, vol. 77. Iowa State University Digital Press, p. 1. https://doi.org/
10.31274/itaa.12190.
Lee, S., Sung, B., Phau, I., Lim, A., 2019. Communicating authenticity in packaging of
Korean cosmetics. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 48, 202–214. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.02.011.
Lofthouse, V., A., Bhamra, T., A., & Trimingham, R., L. (2009). Investigating customer
perceptions of refillable packaging and assessing business drivers and barriers to
their use. Packaging Technology and Science: An International Journal, 22, 6, pp.
335–348. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/pts.857.
Lofthouse, V., A., Trimingham, R., L., & Bhamra, T., A. (2017). Reinventing refills:
guidelines for design. Packag. Technol. Sci., 30, 12, pp. 809–818. doi:https://doi.
org/10.1002/pts.2337.
Lombardi, A., Califano, G., Caracciolo, F., Del Giudice, T., Cembalo, L., 2024. Eco-
packaging in organic foods: rational decisions or emotional influences? Org. Agric.
14, 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13165-023-00442-5.
MacKenzie, S., B., & Podsakoff, P., M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing:
causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. J. Retail., 88, 4, pp. 542–555. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001.
Magnier, L., Crie, D., 2015. Communicating packaging eco-friendliness: An exploration
of consumers’ perceptions of eco-designed packaging. Int. J. Retail Distrib. Manag.
43 (4/5), 350–366. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRDM-04-2014-0048.
Magnier, L., Gil-Perez, I., 2023. Should the milkman return? The effect of a reusable
packaging on product perceptions and behavioural intentions. Food Qual. Prefer.
112, 105037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2023.105037.
Marino, A., Pariso, P., 2020. Comparing European countries’ performances in the
transition towards the circular economy. Sci. Total Environ. 729, 138142. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138142.
Martini, M., La Barbera, F., Schmidt, S., Rollero, C., Fedi, A., 2024. Differentiating
emotions in the theory of planned behaviour: evidence of improved prediction in
relation to sustainable food consumerism. Br. Food J. 126 (2), 698–714. https://doi.
org/10.1108/BFJ-05-2023-0357.
Miao, X., Magnier, L., Mugge, R., 2023. Switching to reuse? An exploration of consumers’
perceptions and behaviour towards reusable packaging systems. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling 193, 106972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resconrec.2023.106972.
Morashti, J., A., An, Y., & Jang, H. (2022). A systematic literature review of sustainable
packaging in supply chain management. Sustainability, 14, 9, 4921. doi:https://doi.
org/10.3390/su14094921.
Muranko, _Z., Tassell, C., Zeeuw van der Laan, A., Aurisicchio, M., 2021. Characterisation
and environmental value proposition of reuse models for fast-moving consumer
goods: reusable packaging and products. Sustainability 13 (5), 2609. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su13052609.
Nicolau, J.L., Stadlthanner, K.A., Andreu, L., Font, X., 2022. Explaining the willingness of
consumers to bring their own reusable coffee cups under the condition of monetary
incentives. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 66, 102908. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102908.
Novoradovskaya, E., Mullan, B., Hasking, P., Uren, H.V., 2021. My cup of tea: behaviour
change intervention to promote use of reusable hot drink cups. J. Clean. Prod. 284,
124675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124675.
OECD (2022). Global Plastics Outlook: Economic Drivers, Environmental Impacts and
Policy Options. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/f9c3a6c4-en/
index.html?itemIdˆ/content/component/f9c3a6c4-en Accessed Jun 28, 2024.
Onwezen, M., C., Verain, M., C., & Dagevos, H. (2022). Positive emotions explain
increased intention to consume five types of alternative proteins. Food Quality and
Preference, 96, 104446. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2021.104446.
Otto, S., Strenger, M., Maier-Noth, A., Schmid, M., 2021. Food packaging and
sustainability–consumer perception vs. correlated scientific facts: A review. J. Clean.
Prod. 298, 126733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126733.
Paul, J., Modi, A., Patel, J., 2016. Predicting green product consumption using theory of
planned behavior and reasoned action. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 29, 123–134.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2015.11.006.
Poortinga, W., Whitaker, L., 2018. Promoting the use of reusable coffee cups through
environmental messaging, the provision of alternatives and financial incentives.
Sustainability 10 (3), 873. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030873.
Randall, T., Cousins, A., L., Neilson, L., Price, M., Hardman, C., A., & Wilkinson, L., L.,
2024. Sustainable food consumption across Western and non-Western cultures: A
scoping review considering the theory of planned behaviour. Food Quality and
Preference 105086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2023.105086.
Richards, D., K., Fetterman, A., K., Krebs, M., C., Neugebauer, J., Ray, D., G., &
Sassenberg, K. (2021). Positive and negative emotions predict weight loss intentions
and behaviors beyond theory of planned behavior constructs. Eating and Weight
Disorders-Studies on Anorexia, Bulimia and Obesity, 26, pp. 829–838. doi:https://do
i.org/10.1007/s40519-020-00917-4.
Ringle C., M., Wende, S., & Becker, J-M (2022). SmartPLS 4, Oststeinbek: SmartPLS.
Retrieved from https://www.smartpls.com.
Roh, T., Seok, J., Kim, Y., 2022. Unveiling ways to reach organic purchase: green
perceived value, perceived knowledge, attitude, subjective norm, and trust. J. Retail.
Consum. Serv. 67, 102988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102988.
Russel, S., V., Young, W., C., Unsworth, K., L., & Robinson, C. (2017). Bringing habits and
emotions into food waste behavior. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 125, pp.
107–114. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.06.007.
Santos, V., Gomes, S., Nogueira, M., 2021. Sustainable packaging: does eating organic
really make a difference on product-packaging interaction? J. Clean. Prod. 304,
127066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127066.
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J., F., Ringle, C., M., Thiele, K., O., & Gudergan, S., P., 2016.
Estimation issues with PLS and CBSEM: where the bias lies! J. Bus. Res. 69 (10),
3998–4010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.007.
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J., F., Jr., & Ringle, C., M (2023) “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet” –
retrospective observations and recent advances, J. Mark. Theory Pract., 31, 3, pp.
261–275. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2022.2056488.
Shiv, B., Fedorikhin, A., 1999. Heart and mind in conflict: the interplay of affect and
cognition in consumer decision making. J. Consum. Res. 26 (3), 278–292. https://
doi.org/10.1086/209563.
Si, H., Shi, J., G., Tang, D., Wu, G., & Lan, J. (2020). Understanding intention and
behavior toward sustainable usage of bike sharing by extending the theory of
planned behavior. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 152, 104513. doi:https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104513.
Song, J., Cai, L., Yuen, K., F., &Wang, X., 2023. Exploring consumers’ usage intention of
reusable express packaging: An extended norm activation model. Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services 72, 103265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jretconser.2023.103265.
Steenis, N., D., Van Herpen, E., Van Der Lans, I., A., Ligthart, T., N., & Van Trijp, H., C.
(2017). Consumer response to packaging design: the role of packaging materials and
graphics in sustainability perceptions and product evaluations. J. Clean. Prod., 162,
pp. 286–298. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.036.
Sundqvist, H., Åkerman, M., Petanen, P., Lahtinen, J., Mouazan, E., 2024. From niche
support to system building—perceptions of the transformation potential of policy
measures on packaging reuse. Environ. Innov. Soc. Trans. 52, 100896. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.eist.2024.100896.
Sweeney, J., C., & Soutar, G., N. (2001). Consumer perceived value: the development of a
multiple item scale. Journal of retailing, 77, 2, pp. 203–220. doi:https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0022-4359(01)00041-0.
Tari, A., Trudel, R., 2024. Affording disposal control: the effect of circular take-Back
programs on psychological ownership and valuation. J. Mark. 88 (3), 110–126.
https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429231196576.
Tenhunen-Lunkka, A., Balatsas-Lekkas, A., Mouazan, E., Palola, S., Ngo, T., Salo, M.,
Hylkila, E., Sundqvist, H., Luomala, Pennanen, K., Sorvari, K., Petanen, P., &
Lahtinen, H., J., 2024. Implementing a circular business model for reusable
packaging: multidisciplinary learnings from reusable pizza packaging. Sustainable
Production and Consumption 48, 62–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
spc.2024.05.006.
Truong, Y., 2013. A cross-country study of consumer innovativeness and technological
service innovation. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 20 (1), 130–137.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.10.014.
UK Parliament (2022). Plastics (Recycling, Sustainability and Pollution Reduction) Bill.
Retrieved from: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3364 Accessed Dec 13, 2023.
Valor, C., Antonetti, P., Crisafulli, B., 2022. Emotions and consumers’ adoption of
innovations: An integrative review and research agenda. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 179, 121609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121609.
van Kleef, G.A., Co^te, S., 2022. The social effects of emotions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 73,
629–658. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-010855.
Varela, P., Arvisenet, G., Gonera, A., Myhrer, K., S., Fifi, V., & Valentin, D., 2022. Meat
replacer? No thanks! The clash between naturalness and processing: An explorative
study of the perception of plant-based foods. Appetite 169, 105793. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.appet.2021.105793.
Wahab, S., N., Osman, L., H., Koay, S., B., & Long, K. T. (2021). Exploring green
packaging acceptance in fast moving consumer goods in emerging economy: the case
of Malaysia. Logforum, 17, 4, pp. 503–517. doi:10.17270/J.LOG.2021.616.
Walsh, G., Shiu, E., Hassan, L., M., 2014. Replicating, validating, and reducing the length
of the consumer perceived value scale. J. Bus. Res. 67 (3), 260–267. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.05.012.
Watson, L., & Spence, M., T. (2007). Causes and consequences of emotions on consumer
behaviour. A review and integrative cognitive appraisal theory. Eur. J. Mark., 41, 5/
6, pp. 487–511. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710737570.
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.
Winterich, K., P., & Haws, K., L. (2011). Helpful hopefulness: the effect of future positive
emotions on consumption. J. Consum. Res., 38, pp. 505–524. doi:https://doi.org/10
.1086/659873.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
226 
Wong, G., Z., Wong, K., H., Lau, T., C., Lee, J., H., & Kok, Y., H. (2024). Study of
intention to use renewable energy technology in Malaysia using TAM and TPB.
Renew. Energy, 221, 119787. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119787.
Yuriev, A., Dahmen, M., Paille, P., Boiral, O., Guillaumie, L., 2020. Pro-environmental
behaviors through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 155, 104660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
resconrec.2019.104660.
Zeithaml, V., A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end
model and synthesis of evidence. J. Mark., 52, 3, pp. 2–22. doi:https://doi.
org/10.1177/002224298805200302.
Zerbini, C., Vergura, D., T., & Latusi, S., 2019. A new model to predict consumers’
willingness to buy fair-trade products. Food Res. Int. 122, 167–173. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.foodres.2019.04.008.
A. Balatsas-Lekkas et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 52 (2024) 210–227 
227