1 s2.0 S0261517722000796 Main

Tourism Management 93 (2022) 104566
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman
A meta-analysis of antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention

of tourists and hospitality consumers
Mao-Tang (Brian) Lin, Dan Zhu, Claire Liu, Peter B. Kim *
Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Several empirical studies have examined factors that influence consumer pro-environmental behavior intentions
Pro-environmental behavior in tourism and hospitality contexts, given the importance placed on environmental protection by our society.
Antecedents However, little effort has been made to provide a holistic picture of consumer pro-environmental behavioral
Cross-culture
intention associated with its antecedents in a tourism and hospitality context. The present study meta-analyzed
Research context
Tourism
the relationships between pro-environmental behavior intention and 21 major antecedents, based on 194
Hospitality empirical studies in the tourism and hospitality context. It further investigated whether national cultures
Moderator (individualism and collectivism) and research contexts (tourism vs. hospitality) moderate these relationships.
Meta-analysis The results showed (1) that factors of personal norm and anticipated positive emotion have a potent influence on
consumers’ pro-environmental behavioral intention, and (2) some relationships between pro-environmental
behavioral intention and its antecedents varied between collectivist/individualist national culture and
research contexts. The implications of the findings are discussed for researchers and professionals in tourism and
hospitality.
1. Introduction Pham et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2020).

Given the influence that consumer behavior in the tourism and
Encourage people to behave in an environmentally friendly way has hospitality industry has on the environment, researchers have advanced
attracted the attention of researchers over the past few decades (Dong their interest in exploring factors that encourage such consumers to
et al., 2020; Han, 2021) as changing an individual’s behavior can behave more sustainably, as understanding of such factors is more
considerably reduce environmental stress and lead to the protection and effective in triggering behavioral change (Han, 2021; Michie et al.,
sustainability of natural resources (Han, 2015; Margetts and Kashima, 2008). A large body of research uses pro-environmental behavioral
2017). In tourism and hospitality, sustainability, as an objective, has intention (PEBI) as a proxy for PEB in the tourism and hospitality
also achieved wide acceptance by academic researchers, policymakers, context (Dolnicar et al., 2019). This is based on the notion that behav
and practitioners due to the negative impact of tourism development ioral intention is a leading driver of actual behavior, informed by the
(Liu et al., 2014; Sharpley, 2000; Xu et al., 2020). Although tourism theory of planned behavior (TPB; Ajzen, 1985). This theory posits that
activities benefit the economic development of a nation, these same behavioral intention is an individual’s willingness to perform a partic
activities can be harmful to the environment (Xu et al., 2020). According ular behavior (Ajzen, 1991). Therefore, it follows that PEBI can be
to Scott et al. (2008) tourism contributes to 5% of the world’s carbon regarded as ‘the readiness to protect and improve the environment or
dioxide, making it the fifth largest polluting industry. A report from the society’ and, as such, is a critical precursor of PEB. Although previous
United Nations Environment Programme revealed that 4.8 million studies have identified a substantial number of antecedents that affect
tonnes of trash is produced by tourist and hospitality consumers per PEBI of consumers in the tourism and hospitality context, knowledge of
year, with solid waste accounting for 14%, posing a serious threat to the these relationships is limited in three aspects. First, individual studies
environment (Somani, 2019). Adopting pro-environmental behavior existing have failed to provide a holistic picture of PEBIs in a tourism
(PEB) can reduce environmental impacts in areas where tourist and and hospitality context; their research on PEBIs is fragmented and var
hospitality consumers play an important role (Bratanova et al., 2012; ied, and each study only investigated a couple of specific antecedents in
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: pkim@aut.ac.nz (P.B. Kim).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2022.104566
Received 9 September 2021; Received in revised form 12 May 2022; Accepted 13 May 2022
Available online 3 June 2022
0261-5177/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.-T.(B. Lin et al. Tourism Management 93 (2022) 104566
relation to PEBs in tourism and hospitality (e.g., He et al., 2018). 2. Theoretical background
Second, the relationships between tourist and hospitality consumer
PEBIs and their antecedents vary substantially, or have even demon 2.1. Pro-environmental behavior of tourists and hospitality consumers
strated conflicting and mixed results in previous studies. For example,
previous literature has identified both positive (ρ = 0.47; Su et al. To date, there has been no agreement regarding the definition of
(2018)) and negative (ρ = − 0.21; Agyeiwaah et al. (2021)) correlations sustainable consumer behavior (Han, 2021). In the literature on envi
between visitor satisfaction and PEBIs, and both strong (ρ = 0.58; Lee & ronmental behavior, terms such as ‘environmentally responsible
Jan 2018) and weak (ρ = 0.167; Kim and Koo, 2020), correlations in the behavior’ (Berger and Corbin, 1992), ‘environmentally sustainable
relationship between biospheric value and PEBIs. These findings have behavior’ (Cheng et al., 2011), ‘green behavior’ (Zou and Chan, 2019),
led to confusion and the dissemination of misleading information for ‘ecological behavior’ (Kaiser et al., 1999) and ‘PEB’ (Lange and Dewitte,
both researchers and practitioners. It is thus necessary to conduct a 2019) are often used interchangeably to identify human behaviors that
quantitative review of tourists’ and hospitality consumers’ PEBIs to benefit the natural environment (Han, 2021; Larson et al., 2015). For
summarize the antecedents and, more importantly, to evaluate effect example, Cottrell and Graefe (1997) point out that environmentally
sizes. According to Hunter and Schmidt (2004), meta-analysis is a responsible behavior is understood to be a person’s ecological concerns
rigorous method used to synthesize results from multiple studies, thus and knowledge, and willingness to protect the environment. Similarly,
improving the statistics of the effect size of an association. Unfortu Hartig et al. (2001) claim that ecological behavior reflects an in
nately, despite the popularity of examining the antecedents of PEBIs in dividual’s attitudes or perceptions toward environmental degradation
tourism and hospitality studies, there has been a paucity of research that and the environmental impact of human activity.
has systematically reviewed the findings of these studies. To our Although sustainable consumer behavior has been examined in
knowledge, only two studies have examined PEBs in the hospitality and divergent terms, previous research indicates that the concept of PEB is
tourism field, with a limited sample size using meta-analytical tech parallel to all of these terms and covers all behaviors that enhance
niques (Gao et al., 2016; Nisa et al., 2017). In addition to the use of environmental quality (Han, 2021; Larson et al., 2015; Steg and Vlek,
insufficient sample sizes, the scope of previous studies has also been 2009). Simply put, Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) defined PEB as
relatively narrow, being primarily concerned only with a range of ‘behavior that consciously seeks to minimize the negative impact of
particular drivers of PEB of hotel and restaurant consumers. To sum one’s actions on the natural and built world’ (p. 240). In the tourism and
marize, by not including enough articles in both tourism and hospitality hospitality field, Lee et al. (2013) state that pro-environmental tourists
contexts to provide robust and broad-ranging findings, both studies are those who attempt to reduce negative impacts on the environment
failed to conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis of the antecedents of by putting effort into environmental preservation/conservation during
PEBIs. their tourism activities. The present review considers PEB to be ‘an ac
Third, the variability in effect sizes across the PEBI studies also tion that minimizes negative effects on the environment or society’.
provides evidence of potential moderators. Previous research on PEBIs Given that PEBI is a major antecedent of PEB (Ajzen, 1985), the term
of tourists and hospitality consumers has been carried out in differing ‘PEBI’ has been used in this review and established as an inclusion cri
cultural backgrounds and research contexts, and while tourism and terion for the selection of articles. In the following section, the ante
hospitality studies have looked at several moderators between the an cedents of PEBI that have been identified in existing tourism and
tecedents and PEBIs (e.g., Liu et al., 2020), the moderating roles of hospitality literature are reviewed.
cultural differences and research contexts (i.e., tourism vs. hospitality)
in literature, are still sparse. Additional effort is required to uncover 2.2. Antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention
latent moderators (e.g., culture and research contexts) in order to more
effectively forecast the PEBs of tourists and hospitality consumers (Gao Based on empirical evidence and a range of theories, the main an
et al., 2016). tecedents related to PEBI can be classified into the following five cate
The primary purpose of the present study is to overcome the limi gories: ‘self-efficacy’, ‘affect’, ‘norms and values’, ‘environmental
tations listed above using a meta-analysis to review the antecedents of mindset’ and ‘place perceptions and evaluations’. As each category has
PEBI in the tourism and hospitality context. Specifically, we have its own unique attribute, they are all distinct from each other.
assessed the magnitude of effect sizes between the PEBIs and their an
tecedents, and examined the effect of moderators (i.e., collectivist/ 2.2.1. Self-efficacy
individualist national culture, and differences between tourism and Antecedents associated with ‘self-efficacy’ (i.e., perceived behavioral
hospitality industries) on this relationship. The meta-analytical results control and perceived effectiveness) have been widely discussed in
of this study provide empirical support for theories and extend current consumer research. They relate to a person’s self-perception of ability
knowledge in the literature. Not only does this confirm the theoretical and have been found to be a potent influence on PEB (Ajzen, 1991;
relations between constructs but also identifies gaps that require further Straughan and Roberts, 1999; White et al., 2019). Self-efficacy theory
examination. More importantly, valuable insights into the PEBs of and the theory of planned behavior (TPB) suggest that how people
tourists and hospitality consumers can guide practitioners in the consider their actions to be effective in the intended impact, can affect
employment of more influential and effective strategies when promoting their behaviors (Bandura, 1977). This proposition is also supported by
PEBs. tourism and hospitality studies that have found that when tourists and
The present study is structured as follows. A review of relevant hospitality consumers believe that their abilities can make a difference
theoretical literature related to the conceptualization of PEB and its to the environment (i.e., perceived behavioral control), they are more
related theories and antecedents; an explanation of the methods and likely to behave sustainably (Agag, 2019; Han, 2015; Han and Yoon,
analytical techniques used in this study; an interpretation of the results 2015).
of the study; a summary of the theoretical implications and future
research directions based on the main findings; and the practical im 2.2.2. Affect
plications and limitations of this study. When participating in PEB, the ‘affect’ reflects the expected emotion
a person would experience when participating in this activity. In this
category, anticipated emotions, both positive and negative, have been
shown to affect consumer PEB. According to Taufik and Venhoeven
(2018), a belief in feeling good about PEBs (i.e., anticipated positive
emotion) can motivate people to engage in such behavior. On the
2
contrary, Rees et al. (2015) noted that the higher the anticipated notion of ‘place attachment’, which suggests that connectedness or
negative emotion experienced by a person due to not behaving sus interaction with a particular place forms a sense of responsibility for the
tainably, the stronger the intention to choose the sustainable option. place (Giuliani, 2003; Tuan, 1977). People who have a positive
Similarly, regulatory focus theory shows that when people pursue goals, perception of a particular place are more likely to have intentions or
they either focus on positive values to approach pleasure, or consider the commitments to purchase the product or visit the destination
consequences to avoid bad feelings (Higgins, 1998). Previous tourism (Abou-Shouk et al., 2018; Vada et al., 2019). For this reason, tourism
and hospitality research has also confirmed that emotions have an and hospitality researchers have applied drivers associated with place
impact on PEBIs. In an investigation of hotel guests, Han and Hyun perceptions and evaluations (e.g., visitor satisfaction, and green image)
(2018) identified that anticipated emotions can influence the willing to predict PEBIs; e.g., Eid et al. (2020) identified that consumers with a
ness of a consumer to conserve water and reuse towels, because they feel strong impression relating to the sustainability of a hotel (i.e., green
morally responsible or proud to participate in PEBs. image) tended to increase their intentions to visit a green hotel.
Therefore, it can be claimed that a person’s perceptions and ties to
2.2.3. Norms and values places or events can play a key role in predicting PEBI.
The group of antecedents represents a person’s beliefs or values To summarize, researchers in tourism and hospitality have identified
about the accepted standard of behavior within the group, and/or a relationships between PEBIs and their antecedents (see Fig. 1). How
moral obligation to take a specific action (Collado et al., 2019). Ante ever, while numerous factors associated with PEBIs have been explored
cedents related to norms and values (e.g., social norm and altruistic and revealed, holistic reviews remain limited and insufficient. To bridge
value) indicate that tourists and hospitality consumers perform PEB this gap, it is necessary to use meta-analytical evidence to examine the
because they feel a responsibility to reduce the environmental impact. strength of the relationships between PEBI and their antecedents.
Existing theories also support the relationship between norms and Therefore, this present study states the first research question:
values and PEBIs. Value-belief norm theory (an extension of norm Research Question 1. What is the magnitude and heterogeneity of the
activation theory), posits that personal values serve as fundamental relationships between PEBIs of tourists and hospitality consumers and
principles to influence a person’s obligations or responsibilities toward their antecedents?
PEBs (Schwartz, 1977; Stern et al., 1999). Social norm theory and TPB
state that people tend to perform or not perform a specific behavior due 2.3. Moderating effect – collectivist/individualist national culture and
to social pressure and expectations (Ajzen, 1991; Perkins and Berkowitz, research context
1986). In the tourism and hospitality literature, norms and values are
also cited as the main determinants that influence PEBI. For example, Given the variance in effect sizes across studies, we have considered
Liu et al. (2019) discovered that the intentions of a tourist to participate the moderating effect on the relationships between antecedents and
in PEBs can be improved as a result of the desire to be accepted into a PEBIs from tourist and hospitality consumers to draw a more compre
group or society, and Vaske et al. (2015) confirmed that when tourists hensive picture of the relationship. The two moderators analyzed in the
have strong perceptions of responsibility for the environment, their present study are ‘collectivist/individualist national culture’ and
willingness to use transport that causes less pollution will increase. ‘research context’ (i.e., tourism vs. hospitality).
Similarly, Teng et al. (2015) revealed that when consumers considered
the welfare of others (i.e., altruistic values), they placed more emphasis 2.3.1. Collectivist/individualist national culture
on the environment, which could then lead them to patronize a green According to the theory of cultural dimensions developed by Hof
hotel. Thus, tourism and hospitality consumers with strong perceptions stede (2001), two different aspects of culture, ‘individualism’ and
of responsibility towards the environment will increase their willingness ‘collectivism’, reflect cultural values in Western and eastern countries
to behave in a more sustainable way. where people show different construal of themselves (Hofstede, 2001;
Markus and Kitayama, 1991; Triandis, 1989). People with an individu
2.2.4. Environmental mindsets alistic orientation have an independent self-view. They tend to value the
The term ‘environmental mindset’ describes a person’s perceptions uniqueness of their own self to achieve personal benefits and aspirations.
relating to the environment and the natural world; antecedents include Alternately, collectivists see themselves as being an integral part of their
environmental self-identity and environmental awareness. The rela social group to preserve social harmony. They have an interdependent
tionship between environmental mindsets and PEBIs can be explained self-view and value their obligations and responsibilities, thereby
by a number of theories. For example, TPB suggests that an individual’s avoiding problems with people.
attachment to a particular behavior is influenced by whether their The culture of a nation plays an important role in the formation of
evaluation of the desired behavior is favorable or unfavorable (Ajzen, PEBs because it influences people’s beliefs and attitudes (McCarty and
1991), while cognitive dissonance theory postulates that feelings of Shrum, 2001; Morren and Grinstein, 2016; Serenari et al., 2013). In
tension occur when beliefs or attitudes are incongruent with behavior. tourism and hospitality, previous studies have suggested that the rela
Thus, people tend to behave according to their beliefs to avoid mental tionship between PEBI and its antecedents may vary from the afore
discomfort. These theories support the notion that people with a higher mentioned cultural orientations (i.e., individualism and collectivism;
environmental mindset are more likely to behave pro-environmentally. Filimonau et al., 2018; He and Filimonau, 2020). For example, tourist
Tourism and hospitality studies also suggest that antecedents such as and hospitality consumers with collectivistic orientation tend to
environmental attitude, and the environmental knowledge associated demonstrate stronger environmental mindsets and PEBIs, than in
with an environmental mindset, are the key drivers of PEBIs (Kiatkawsin dividualists (Cho et al., 2013; Morren and Grinstein, 2016). This is
and Han, 2017; Wong et al., 2020). In fact, Kiatkawsin and Han (2017) because individualists (focusing on personal gain) are more likely to
revealed that when young tourists believe that humans have a serious have lower environmental concerns and attitudes than collectivists,
impact on the environment, this attitude or awareness triggers them to while people with collectivistic values consider the expectations of
take action to protect the environment. others before expressing their concerns about the environment (Cho
et al., 2013; Morren and Grinstein, 2016). Filimonau et al. (2018) and
2.2.5. Place perceptions and evaluations He and Filimonau (2020) state that although the links between collec
The category ‘place perceptions and evaluations’ involves the tivist/Individualist national culture and the PEBIs of tourists and hos
interaction between a person’s image, feelings and beliefs about a place pitality consumers have been acknowledged and have received
(e.g., travel destinations, hotels, restaurants, and attractions). The in increasing attention, the empirical evidence is still insufficient. They call
fluence of place perceptions and evaluations on PEBI is supported by the for more research to examine the impact of culture on PEBs in the
3
Fig. 1. Five categories of antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention.
tourism and hospitality context. Given the impact of collectivist/indi 2010). Specifically, tourism refers to the duration of traveling to a
vidualist national culture on PEBI of tourists and hospitality consumers, destination outside of the usual environment. According to Reisinger
the present study evaluates the ways in which collectivist/individualist et al. (2001), tourism services usually do not have physical objects, so
national culture influences the magnitude of effect sizes between ante consumers tend to have intangible experiences. On the other hand,
cedents and PEBI. consumers in hospitality settings can experience more tangible services,
Research Question 2. Does the relationship between PEBIs of tourists such as food, beverages, and hotel rooms. Therefore, it can be seen that
and hospitality consumers and their antecedents vary by collectivist/ the services provided by the hospitality industry are more tangible than
individualist national culture? those of the tourism industry (Ladeira et al., 2016).
According to Wakefield and Blodgett (1999), consumers in a hedonic
2.3.2. Research context context such as that of tourism and hospitality react differently to
The relationship between PEBI and its predecessors could vary in intangible and tangible services, and these differences subsequently
magnitude between the two research contexts (tourism versus hospi influence their emotional experience and subsequent behavioral in
tality) due to different levels of construction. Ladeira et al. (2016) noted tentions. Moreover, Ding and Keh (2017) claim that when consumers
that there are differences between the concepts of tourism and those of evaluate intangible services, they tend to rely on a high construal level.
hospitality, due to the fact that services provided by the hospitality in This is because intangible attributes are untouchable and cannot be seen
dustry are considered more tangible than those of the tourism industry. or felt, so people can only focus on general impressions and think
Tourism can be loosely defined as ‘activities where people travel outside abstractly about an event, idea, or object (Ding and Keh, 2017; Liberman
of their local areas for leisure or business purposes, for a duration not et al., 2007). Conversely, when evaluating a tangible service, a low
longer than one year’ (Jani and Han, 2013; Pizam, 2009), while hos construal level (i.e., where people think concretely and pay attention to
pitality can be categorized as businesses such as accommodation, res detail) will be more salient (Ding and Keh, 2017; Liberman et al., 2007).
taurants, and convention events that provide goods and services not only Therefore, consumers who experience services provided by the hospi
for tourists, but also for local residents. (Jani and Han, 2013; McCabe, tality industry, as opposed to the tourism industry, are more likely to
4
focus on a low construction level (vs. high). Tourism Management, Journal of Travel Research, Current issues in Tourism,
Based on construal level theory, previous studies have also suggested International Journal of Hospitality Management) and non-tourism and
that a person’s construal level can influence their cognition and moti hospitality journals (e.g., Journal of Cleaner Production, Journal of
vations towards PEBI (Chen, 2020; Shabnam et al., 2021). For example, Retailing and Consumer Services, and Sustainability).
Chen (2020) noted that people with a low construal level have a greater
concern for the environment, which increases PEBI. Tourism and hos 3.2. Inclusion criteria and study selection
pitality studies relating to PEBIs have focused on a wide range of con
texts (e.g., national parks, hotels, and restaurants). Consumers in these The studies included in the present review met the following four
contexts can be classified into two categories (tourism or hospitality), criteria. (1) They had to be empirical, measuring PEBIs quantitatively.
and as discussed above, can demonstrate different levels of construction Works in the form of secondary research (e.g., reviews, conceptual pa
in tourism and hospitality contexts, which affects how they react and pers, article summaries) and qualitative research were excluded. (2)
engage in a sustainable way. For these reasons, it is vital to examine They were required to be conducted in a tourism or hospitality context,
whether there is a variation in effect size between studies in the tourism although studies published in non-tourism journals could also be
and hospitality context. In light of the different attributes of research included if they utilized tourism or hospitality samples. (3) The research
contexts found in the literature (tourism versus hospitality), the had to report a Pearson correlation between an antecedent variable and
following research question is posed: PEBI. Studies that focused only on actual PEBs were excluded. (4) The
Research Question 3. Does the relationship between pro- studies had to be written in English.
environmental behavioral intention and its antecedents vary between By taking into account the inclusion criteria mentioned above, two of
the tourism and hospitality contexts? the authors of the present study conducted the study selection process
(see Fig. 2). The initial database search generated more than 18,000
3. Methods studies. The next step involved screening the title and keywords of these
latent articles and removing duplicates. This resulted in the exclusion of
3.1. Literature search around 16,000 works (K = 1980 studies remained). Furthermore, ab
stracts were checked and irrelevant articles were rejected (1402 studies
The electronic databases ‘EBSCO Hospitality and Tourism Complete’ were excluded in this step, K = 578). A full text review of the remaining
and ‘Google Scholar’, which included peer-reviewed journal articles, studies yielded the final sample, which met all inclusion criteria (K =
conference papers, dissertations, and books, were used to identify rele 194).
vant studies. Search terms included combinations of ‘environmental’,
‘green’, ‘environmentally friendly’, ‘ecotourism’, ‘ecological’, ‘sustain 3.3. Coding
able’, ‘behavior’, ‘tourism’, ‘hospitality’, ‘hotel’, ‘restaurant’ and
‘travel’. The works detected by the search had been published in both Microsoft Excel 2019 was used to enter the coded data. The coding of
tourism and hospitality journals (e.g., Journal of Sustainable Tourism, the selected studies was performed by the leading and second authors.
Fig. 2. Chart showing the studies selection process.
5
The percentage of overall initial agreement between the coders was Hunter and Schmidt (2004). The national culture of the individu
above 90%; coding discrepancies were resolved by rechecking against al/collectivist and the research contexts of the individuals were divided
the original documents and discussion with the other authors. into the following two subgroups: individualism vs. collectivism; and
Three types of data were recorded during the coding process. First, tourism versus hospitality. For example, based on Hofstede’s cultural
each sample was coded for specific study characteristics (e.g., author dimensions, we checked the location of the study and coded individu
names, year of publication, paper source). Background information was alistic culture as 0 and collectivistic culture as 1. Thus, a Z-test can be
recorded for later analysis (e.g., country and research context). Subse conducted for moderating testing.
quently, the relationship between PEBI and their antecedents was coded.
To maintain consistency, the antecedent variables were coded according 4. Results
to predefined antecedent categories. For example, ‘destination attrac
tiveness’ is defined as people’s perceptions of the destination to fulfill 4.1. Antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention
tourists’ goals or needs (Mayo and Jarvis, 1981). ‘Social norm’ refers to
rules and beliefs standards accepted by a particular social group, which To achieve the first research objective, data from 194 independent
in turn guide people to behave or not behave in a certain way (Ajzen, works were aggregated to examine the relationship between PEBIs and
1991; Cialdini and Trost, 1998). Before conducting the meta-analysis, the 21 antecedents. These antecedents were further refined down to the
the previous literature was carefully reviewed and checked to deter five categories, ‘self-efficacy’, ‘affect’, ‘norms and values’, ‘environ
mine whether the definitions of the antecedents were equivalent be mental mindset’, and ‘place perceptions and evaluations’, based on the
tween studies. Finally, statistical information (i.e., sample size, theories referred to in Section 2.2. Statistically significant Q-statistics
reliability values and correlation coefficients) was coded to allow for were found for all the antecedents, indicating significant heterogeneity
meta-analysis. among effect sizes for the relationships between PEBIs and their
Several issues arose and received special attention during the coding antecedents.
process. It was noted that some authors utilized the same dataset and
reported the same findings in more than one publication. In cases like 4.1.1. Self-efficacy
this, the correlation in question was only coded once. Following the The two antecedents of ‘perceived behavioral control’ and ‘perceived
practice of previous meta-analytical reviews (Kanjanakan et al., 2021; effectiveness’ were related to the concept of self-efficacy. Although
Zhu et al., 2020), for samples that did not report reliability values for ‘perceived behavioral control’ (k = 43) was the antecedent most
their independent or dependent variables, the average reliability of such examined, the antecedent variable ‘perceived effectiveness’ demon
variables was calculated from the remaining samples that used similar strated a relatively stronger influence on PEBIs (ρ = 0.6).
measurements. To avoid secondary sampling errors (see Hunter and
Schmidt, 2004), synthesized correlations with less than three individual 4.1.2. Affect
studies were not included in the meta-analysis. This standard has also Table 1 illustrates that ‘affect’ had a significant influence on PEBI.
been followed by previous meta-analytical reviews (e.g., Park and Min, Both antecedents in this subgroup were found to have positive effects on
2020). Furthermore, the definitions of the 21 major antecedents in this PEBIs. Twenty-one studies investigated the correlations of expected
review were distinct from each other. These definitions were followed to positive-emotion PEBIs, generating a large corrected effect size (ρ =
ensure conceptual validity and definitional equivalence between 0.65). On the contrary, the correlation between anticipated negative
studies. emotion and PEBI was examined in 17 studies and produced a weak
corrected correlation (p = .20).
3.4. Data analysis
4.1.3. Norms and values
The meta-analysis of the present study was carried out using the The antecedents that focus on obligations and norms were drawn
random-effects meta-analytic procedures suggested by Hunter and from 18 or more independent works. Personal norm was not only the
Schmidt (2004). Using this method, the observed correlations of each factor investigated most frequently (k = 44) but also the strongest pre
independent research item were able to be checked, any sampling errors dictor (ρ = 0.65). In regard to magnitude, it is also worth noting that,
and unreliable measurements were corrected, and the effect size esti except for ‘egoistic value’, all other antecedents (e.g., social norm,
mates were synthesized. Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test the reli altruistic value and biospheric value) were positively and strongly
ability of the values, sample size, and effect size reported in each related to PEBI, with a ρ of around 0.5.
primary study. As the current review aimed to examine the relationship
between antecedents and PEBI, the effect size index (Pearson’s corre 4.1.4. Environmental mindsets
lation (r)) was measured/calculated when combining individual effect All ‘environmental mindset’ antecedent variables had a significant
sizes in different independent studies. positive influence on PEBIs. These antecedents were drawn from seven
Cohen’s (1988) criterion was adopted to evaluate the direction and or more independent works. Regarding magnitude, apart from ‘envi
magnitude of each corrected effect size. To confirm the statistical sig ronmental awareness’ (ρ = 0.42), each environmental mindset-related
nificance of the corrected effect size, 95% confidence intervals for each antecedent was a powerful predictor of PEBIs (ρ ≥ 0.5).
were calculated. A corrected correlation was deemed significant if the
95% confidence intervals excluded zero. Two analytical techniques were 4.1.5. Place perceptions and evaluations
applied to examine the variability in correlations attributable to mod Regarding place perceptions and evaluations, all the antecedent
erators, i.e., the heterogeneity of corrected effect sizes. First, 80% variables had a significant positive influence on PEBI. ‘Place attachment’
credibility intervals were calculated for each correlation. According to was the antecedent examined the most frequently (k = 21), followed by
Whitener (1990), if a credibility interval is large and includes zero, it is ‘visitor satisfaction’ (k = 13) and ‘green image’ (k = 11). Among these
likely that the moderators are operating. Second, Q statistics were antecedents, ‘place attachment’ (ρ = 0.55), ‘green image’ (ρ = 0.52) and
calculated to assess and discover the presence of moderators. Significant ‘green trust’ (ρ = 0.52) had relatively greater effects on PEBIs.
Q-statistics signal that latent moderators are operating.
Additionally, the moderating role of the collectivist/individualist 4.2. Moderator analysis
national culture and research context was investigated to explain the
heterogeneity of the sample. Specifically, the moderating effects of the Given that a considerable amount of variability and heterogeneity in
two categorical variables were tested using the Z-test recommended by effect sizes was found for the meta-analyzed relationships between the
6
Table 1
Meta-analysis of antecedents of pro-environmental behavior intention.
Antecedents K N r ρ SDρ 95%CI 80% CR Q
Self-efficacy
Perceived behavioral control 43 19228 0.44 0.51 0.22 [0.50, 0.53] [0.29, 0.75] 746***
Perceived effectiveness 4 1714 0.50 0.60 0.16 [0.56, 0.65] [0.43, 0.80] 48***
Affect
Anticipated positive emotion 21 8618 0.55 0.65 0.10 [0.63, 0.67] [0.52, 0.78] 152***
Anticipated negative emotion 17 6767 0.18 0.20 0.52 [0.18, 0.23] [-0.28, 0.69] 821***
Norms and values
Personal norm 44 19891 0.57 0.65 0.16 [0.64, 0.66] [0.43, 0.88] 1045***
Social norm 39 17228 0.43 0.49 0.23 [0.47, 0.50] [0.24, 0.74] 818***
Ascription of responsibility 25 9559 0.43 0.50 0.27 [0.48, 0.52] [0.17, 0.83] 727***
Biospheric value 22 9387 0.45 0.51 0.20 [0.49, 0.53] [0.29,0.72] 353***
Egoistic value 22 10732 0.27 0.31 0.47 [0.29, 0.34] [-0.21, 0.85] 1613***
Altruistic value 18 8481 0.44 0.51 0.22 [0.49, 0.53] [0.28, 0.75] 332***
Environmental mindsets
Environmental attitude 44 19588 0.48 0.53 0.19 [0.52, 0.55] [0.33, 0.75] 754***
Environmental awareness 39 15844 0.38 0.42 0.31 [0.41, 0.44] [0.12, 0.74] 1028***
Environmental concern 39 17963 0.44 0.50 0.22 [0.49, 0.51] [0.28, 0.72] 675***
Environmental knowledge 11 5007 0.43 0.50 0.23 [0.48, 0.53] [0.26, 0.76] 218***
New environmental paradigm 9 3894 0.47 0.55 0.19 [0.52, 0.58] [-0.32, 0.78] 155***
Environmental self-identity 7 2278 0.48 0.55 0.19 [0.52, 0.59] [0.32, 0.79] 106***
Place perceptions and evaluations
Visitor satisfaction 13 5959 0.42 0.48 0.25 [0.46, 0.50] [0.21, 0.76] 321***
Place attachment 21 9884 0.48 0.55 0.18 [0.53, 0.56] [0.36, 0.72] 277***
Green image 11 4625 0.47 0.52 0.23 [0.50, 0.55] [0.22, 0.82] 336***
Green trust 6 3171 0.45 0.52 0.19 [0.48, 0.54] [0.27, 0.75] 142***
Destination attractiveness 4 1645 0.35 0.43 0.24 [0.38, 0.48] [0.29, 0.56] 19***
Note. K = number of studies, N = cumulative sample size, r = mean correlation, ρ = average corrected correlation, SDρ = standard deviation of ρ, CI = confidence
interval, CR = credibility interval, Q = Cochran’s Q statistics, ***p < .001.
antecedents and PEBIs, the potential moderating role of collectivist/ hospitality studies, the present study has sought to comprehensively and
individualist national culture and research contexts was investigated meta-analytically summarize the antecedents of this concept. Based on
(Research Objective 2). The findings of the moderator analysis are 194 empirical studies, this meta-analytical review provides informative
shown in Tables 2 and 3. As mentioned above, following Park and Min conclusions for the variance in effect sizes across individual studies. All
(2020), the moderating effect was only examined using antecedents relationships between the PEBIs and the 21 antecedents have positive
with at least three associations in each subgroup. effect sizes. However, not all the antecedents have a large magnitude in
First, the findings of the Z-test revealed that collectivist/individualist effect sizes, which means that there is a differentiation in the overall
national culture moderated the relationship between PEBI and their an associations. Based on our findings, this section discusses the theoretical
tecedents (see Table 2). Specifically, the corrected relationship between implications, directions for future research, practical implications, and
anticipated negative emotion and PEBIs was stronger and only signifi research limitations.
cant in the collectivistic culture (individualistic: ρ = − .02 vs. collectiv
istic: ρ = 0.31, z = − 1.97, p < .05). The average corrected relationship
between environmental attitude and PEBIs was significant in both 5.1. Theoretical implications
individualistic and collectivistic cultures, with the relationship also
being stronger in collectivistic culture (individualistic: ρ = .58 vs. This study makes a valuable contribution to multiple theories and the
collectivistic: 0.48, z = − 1.89, p < .05). On the contrary, we found that existing literature associated with PEBs by providing additional empir
the ‘personal norm’ (individualistic: ρ = 0.71 vs. collectivistic: 0.59, z = ical evidence. It found that TPB has been the dominant theory employed
3.01, p < .01) and the ‘green image’ (individualistic: ρ = 0.62 vs. in previous research to predict PEBI in tourism and hospitality studies
collectivistic: 0.45, z = 1.98, p < .05) were more strongly related to PEBI (Dolnicar et al., 2019), therefore highlighting the importance of con
in individualistic culture than in collectivistic culture. firming the effect of this theory using meta-analysis. According to TPB
Second, comparisons were also made between PEBI and their ante and previous meta-analytical work (Ajzen, 1991; Klöckner, 2013), the
cedents in tourism and hospitality research contexts (see Table 3). The following three related factors, ‘environmental attitude’, ‘social norm’
research contexts moderated the relationships of PEBI with ‘anticipated and ‘perceived behavioral control’, were positively correlated with
positive emotion’ (tourism: ρ = 0.62 vs. hospitality: 0.69, z = − 1.67, p PEBI. These links imply that TPB can serve as an effective model for
< .1), ‘environmental attitude’ (tourism: ρ = 0.51 vs. hospitality: 0.55, z promoting or understanding PEBs. The present study also observed that
= − 1.72, p < .1), ‘environmental awareness’ (tourism: ρ = 0.39 vs. there is a positive correlation between ‘environmental self-identity’ and
hospitality: 0.52, z = − 1.94, p < .05) and ‘environmental concern’ PEBIs. This result supports self-congruity theory and identity-based
(tourism: ρ = 0.44 vs. hospitality: 0.54, z = − 1.70, p < .1) with the motivation theory by showing that people prefer to act in a way that
correlations being stronger in the hospitality context than in tourism. is consistent with their identities (Oyserman, 2009; Sirgy, 1986).
Conceptually, when tourist and hospitality consumers see themselves as
5. Discussion environmentally friendly people, they are more likely to engage in PEBs.
This finding also sets a clear direction for further investigation. As Sirgy
Although PEBIs have been explored in a number of tourism and (1986) noted, self-congruity theory demonstrates that an individual’s
self-identity includes four components: the actual self, the ideal self, the
7
Table 2
Subgroup analysis: National cultures (individualistic vs. collectivistic) as a moderator.
Antecedents and subgroups K N r Р SDρ 95%CI 80% CR Z
Self-efficacy
Perceived behavioral control

Individualistic 16 7793 0.45 0.52 0.23 [0.50, 0.54] [0.26, 0.78] 0.49
Collectivistic 25 10370 0.44 0.52 0.20 [0.50, 0.54] [0.32, 0.72]
Affect
Anticipated positive emotion

Collectivistic 12 5478 0.53 0.63 0.12 [0.61, 0.65] [0.47, 0.79]
Anticipated negative emotion
Individualistic 6 2162 − 0.02 − 0.02 0.67 [-0.07, 0.03] [-0.52, 0.48] − 1.97*
Collectivistic 10 4325 0.27 0.31 0.43 [0.28, 0.34] [-0.14, 0.77]
Norms and values
Personal norm
Individualistic 18 8449 0.63 0.71 0.14 [0.69, 0.72] [0.48, 0.93] 3.01**
Collectivistic 23 10565 0.51 0.59 0.17 [0.58, 0.61] [0.39, 0.81]
Social norm
Individualistic 16 7125 0.41 0.46 0.24 [0.44, 0.48] [0.22, 0.71] − 0.29
Collectivistic 20 8441 0.46 0.52 0.21 [0.50, 0.54] [0.28, 0.75]
Ascription of responsibility
Individualistic 11 3945 0.40 0.46 0.36 [0.43, 0.49] [-0.02, 0.95] − 0.40
Collectivistic 13 5338 0.45 0.52 0.18 [0.50, 0.54] [0.34, 0.70]
Altruistic value
Collectivistic 25 10370 0.44 0.52 0.20 [0.50, 0.54] [0.32, 0.72]
Biospheric value
Individualistic 7 3388 0.46 0.52 0.15 [0.49, 0.55] [0.38,0.65] 0.80
Collectivistic 12 4956 0.43 0.49 0.23 [0.46, 0.51] [0.22,0.75]
Egoistic value
Individualistic 8 5173 0.17 0.19 0.58 [0.16, 0.23] [-0.45, 0.85] − 1.03
Collectivistic 14 5559 0.37 0.42 0.33 [0.40, 0.45] [0.04, 0.81]
Environmental attitude
Individualistic 15 7347 0.44 0.48 0.22 [0.46, 0.50] [0.26, 0.70] − 1.89*
Collectivistic 27 11176 0.52 0.58 0.16 [0.56, 0.59] [0.39, 0.77]
Environmental awareness
Collectivistic 24 9714 0.34 0.38 0.35 [0.36, 0.54] [0.03, 0.74]
Environmental concern
Collectivistic 23 10285 0.41 0.47 0.23 [0.45, 0.49] [0.26, 0.67]
Place perceptions and evaluations
Green image
Individualistic 5 2020 0.56 0.62 0.19 [0.58, 0.65] [0.31, 0.92] 1.98*
Collectivistic 6 2605 0.40 0.45 0.25 [0.41, 0.48] [0.17, 0.72]
interval, CR = credibility interval, Z = Fisher’s Z statistics, *p < .05, **p < .01.
social self, and the ideal social self and the effect of different types of state that strong negative feelings (i.e., guilt) could result in irritability,
self-identity on behaviors and decision making can vary. Therefore, it is which in turn could reduce the influence of guilt on prosocial behaviors.
meaningful to have complete empirical evidence of the potential vari To this end, the effect of anticipated negative emotion on PEBIs may be
ation of these factors in PEB. indirect and could be mediated or moderated by other factors.
The results of the present analysis revealed that affective factors had Regarding the relationship of PEBIs with environmental mindsets, all
positive effects on PEBIs of tourists and hospitality consumers. Similarly, dimensions were positively associated with PEBIs, suggesting that
regulatory focus theory claims that people tend to either seek pleasure or tourism and hospitality consumers with more knowledge, concern and
minimize negative feelings when achieving goals (Higgins, 1998). As awareness related to environmental issues, demonstrate a greater pos
sumptions from previous studies and meta-analysis also emphasized that sibility of behaving sustainably. These findings are consistent with
both anticipated positive and negative emotions have a significant effect previous meta-analytical reviews (e.g., Klöckner, 2013). However, it is
on PEBIs because they evaluate the performance of specific behavior to important to note that an environmental attitude in the current analysis
derive pleasure or avoid bad feelings (Bamberg and Möser, 2007; Han identifies a smaller effect size than previous meta-analytic studies in a
et al., 2019). Of interest, the current review indicated that the antici non-tourism context (Bamberg and Möser, 2007; Klöckner, 2013). The
pated positive emotion (ρ = 0.65) showed a much stronger correlation differences can be explained by Becken (2007) and Miao and Wei (2013)
with PEBIs than the anticipated negative emotion (ρ = 0.20). The reason who indicate that tourists are less likely to be environmentally friendly
that anticipated negative emotion does not show a strong correlation than local residents. Furthermore, there is a phenomenon termed the
with pro-environmental behaviors may be due to constraints on be ‘attitude-behavior gap’ where tourists and hospitality consumers use
haviors, such as no access to public transport or the absence of a recy enjoyment or relaxation as excuses not to perform PEB (Juvan and
cling bin (Bissing-Olson et al., 2016). In addition, Peloza et al. (2013) Dolnicar, 2014; Wearing et al., 2002). For these reasons, we suggest that
8
Table 3
Subgroup analysis: research context (tourism vs. hospitality) as a moderator.
Antecedents and subgroups K N r ρ SDρ 95%CI 80% CR Z
Self-efficacy
Perceived behavioral control

Tourism 28 10361 0.43 0.51 0.22 [0.49, 0.53] [0.29, 0.73] − 0.90
Hospitality 15 8867 0.46 0.52 0.21 [0.51, 0.54] [0.28, 0.77]
Norms and values
Personal norm
Tourism 28 11255 0.57 0.67 0.17 [0.66, 0.68] [0.42, 0.92] − 0.08
Hospitality 16 8636 0.56 0.63 0.13 [0.61, 0.64] [0.43, 0.82]
Social norm
Tourism 21 7814 0.40 0.45 0.25 [0.43, 0.47] [0.20, 0.70] − 1.32
Hospitality 18 9414 0.46 0.52 0.21 [0.50, 0.54] [0.27, 0.76]
Altruistic value
Tourism 11 4768 0.40 0.47 0.25 [0.45, 0.50] [0.21, 0.74] − 1.22
Hospitality 7 3713 0.48 0.56 0.17 [0.53, 0.59] [0.37, 0.76]
Biospheric value
Tourism 14 5548 0.43 0.49 0.22 [0.46, 0.51] [0.24,0.73] − 1.47
Hospitality 8 3839 0.49 0.54 0.14 [0.52, 0.57] [0.37,0.71]
Egoistic value
Tourism 11 4549 0.25 0.29 0.43 [0.26, 0.32] [-0.13, 0.72] − 1.09
Hospitality 11 6183 0.29 0.33 0.50 [0.31, 0.36] [-0.27, 0.95]
Affect
Anticipated positive emotion

Tourism 12 5138 0.52 0.62 0.122 [0.59, 0.64] [0.46, 0.77] − 1.67˟
Hospitality 9 3480 0.59 0.69 0.04 [0.67, 0.72] [0.65, 0.74]
Anticipated negative emotion
Tourism 11 4481 0.24 0.28 0.42 [0.24, 0.31] [-0.09, 0.64] 1.06
Hospitality 6 2286 0.06 0.06 0.68 [0.02, 0.11] [-0.61, 0.74]
Environmental attitude
Tourism 23 8468 0.46 0.51 0.18 [0.49, 0.53] [0.34, 0.68] − 1.72˟
Hospitality 21 11120 0.50 0.55 0.19 [0.54, 0.57] [0.32, 0.79]
Environmental awareness
Tourism 32 12379 0.35 0.39 0.34 [0.38, 0.41] [0.06, 0.74] − 1.94*
Hospitality 7 3465 0.47 0.52 0.15 [0.49, 0.54] [0.37, 0.66]
Environmental concern
Tourism 18 7931 0.39 0.44 0.26 [0.42, 0.47] [0.20, 0.70] − 1.70˟
Hospitality 21 10032 0.48 0.54 0.17 [0.52, 0.56] [0.36, 0.73]
Environmental knowledge
Tourism 5 1899 0.36 0.41 0.30 [0.37, 0.46] [0.10, 0.73] − 1.41
Hospitality 6 3108 0.48 0.56 0.17 [0.53, 0.60] [0.40, 0.75]
interval, CR = credibility interval, Z = Fisher’s Z statistics, ˟ p < .10, *p < .05.
the contextual effect can act as a possible moderator to the effect of Thus, only the altruistic and biospheric values corroborate previous
environmental mindsets on PEBIs, and therefore, interventions that theoretical propositions. The assumption reached from the findings is
target environmental mindsets to elicit PEBs should be used with that while traveling, consumers behave or purchase sustainably to create
caution. Furthermore, our findings support the assumptions of norm benefits such as health and an increase in positive image (Bouman et al.,
activation theory, wherein pro-social/pro-environmental behaviors are 2018; Karp, 1996). This may also suggest that some factors (e.g.,
influenced by a sequential process through an awareness of conse anticipated positive emotion) may mediate the effect of egoistic value on
quences, ascription of responsibility, and personal norm to perform the PEBIs.
behaviors (Schwartz, 1977). The effect size of the ‘personal norm’ (ρ = The present analysis also identified the positive relationship between
0.65) was relatively stronger than those of the ‘ascription of re antecedents of ‘place perceptions and evaluations’ (e.g., place attach
sponsibility’ (ρ = 0.50) and ‘environmental awareness’ (ρ = 0.42), ment and green image) and PEBIs. These findings support the theory of
which implies that when tourist and hospitality consumers are aware of place image and place attachment (Selby and Morgan, 1996), which
the environmental consequences of their behavior, they tend to become holds that individuals’ behaviors are influenced by their perceptions and
morally responsible and feel an obligation to behave sustainably. their relationships with firms, products, and destinations (Hidalgo and
As PEBs reflect a positive image of human beings (Venhoeven et al., Hernandez, 2001; Stylidis et al., 2014). Therefore, how tourists and
2016), previous studies and meta-analytical reviews have stated that hospitality consumers react to and feel about a specific place or product
self-transcendence values (e.g., altruistic and biospheric values) posi (e.g., the green image of a product) can increase their willingness to act
tively affect PEBs, whereas self-enhancement values (e.g., egoistic and sustainably. These findings draw attention to potential strategies for the
hedonic values) are either negatively or not at all associated with PEBs promotion of PEBs. For example, practitioners can highlight their own
(Hurst et al., 2013; Klöckner, 2013). In contradiction to a section of the environmental practices or use a green label on their products.
results, it was found that all self-transcendence values were positively The moderation analysis in the study also contributes significantly to
related to PEBIs, which indicated that tourist and hospitality consumers the literature. It confirms that the relationships between four of the
who engage in PEBs are doing so not only due to consideration of the antecedents and the PEBI varied between national cultures (i.e., indi
well-being of others or of the ecosystem, but also due to self-interest. vidualistic versus collectivistic). The effect of anticipated negative
9
emotion or environmental attitude on PEBI was stronger in collectivistic amount of water and electricity consumers can save if they perform
cultures than in individualistic cultures. These results are aligned with PEBs.
previous studies suggesting that collectivists are cooperative and Our results also show that raising awareness of the emotions people
prevention-focused and therefore tend to have a stronger consideration experience relating to PEBs can significantly influence tourism and
of others and of the environment and prefer to avoid the bad feelings hospitality consumers to participate in PEBs, rather than triggering
associated with not behaving sustainably (Lockwood et al., 2005; Mor anticipated negative emotions. For this reason, it is recommended that
ren and Grinstein, 2016). In contrast, the two factors, ‘personal norm’ tourism and hospitality professionals work to improve expected con
and ‘green image’ show a stronger correlation with the PEBIs of tourism sumer feelings (e.g., pride and joy) toward PEBs, so that they will be
and hospitality consumers with individualistic orientation, compared more inclined to achieve these feelings by actively engaging with sus
with collectivists. However, previous literature argues that, compared to tainable practices (Taufik and Venhoeven, 2018). As an example, a
individualists, people in a collectivistic culture are more likely to take destination or hotel manager could create a poster with a mirror
personal obligation or environment into account, leading to PEB (Cho depicting the positive results and feelings associated with performing
et al., 2013; Chwialkowska et al., 2020). Our results show a different PEBs. When consumers see their reflection in the mirror, positive emo
story. They are in line with studies that underline the fact that acting tions can be activated and could lead to subsequent PEBs. In terms of
pro-environmentally can increase self-image and social status for indi norm variables, we found that the ‘personal norm’ is the strongest factor
vidualistic gains (Griskevicius et al., 2010; Venhoeven et al., 2016). influencing BP, suggesting that a person’s moral obligation can act as a
Therefore, we assume that individualists also prefer to follow norms and major catalyst for triggering BP. To make personal norms salient,
consider the green image that benefits their interests (Abadeer, 2015). practitioners and policy makers must create promotional messages to
From the above discussion, the present study suggests that researchers enhance the sense of responsibility for environmental problems (Han
should be cautious when considering the impact of cultural contexts on et al., 2020). In addition, educational activities that emphasize the
PEBs and their antecedents. ethical duty of environmental protection could be provided to develop
This study also found that the research context (tourism versus obligation-based motivation and elicit PEBs (Esfandiar et al., 2020; Han
hospitality) acted as a moderator on the effect of previous studies on et al., 2020).
PEBI. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first analysis to report The findings of the current analysis also indicate that PEBIs are
such findings. As reported earlier, the relationship between the ante positively influenced by how people relate to a place. When tourism and
cedents (i.e., ‘anticipated positive emotion’, ‘environmental attitude’, hospitality consumers have a strong bond to a specific destination or
‘environmental awareness’ and ‘environmental concern’) and PEBI is location, they have a stronger commitment to protect or preserve that
stronger in the hospitality context than in that of tourism. This may be location. Policymakers and destination managers could design cam
because services and environments tend to be more tangible in the paigns that convey to their prospective customers the notion that their
hospitality industry than the tourism industry (Ladeira et al., 2016). favorite place should be protected by sustainable behavior. In addition
Indeed, tourism refers to the sum of the activities where people travel or to this, workers in establishments such as theme parks, museums, and
stay in places that are not in their usual environment (McCabe, 2010). information centers could actively promote a sense of belonging to foster
Research focusing on the tourism context also tends to examine PEBI rapport with visitors (Ramkissoon et al., 2013). PEBIs are also positively
generally by measuring the willingness to protect the environment. related to a person’s perception of businesses, products, or services that
Hospitality provides services that are more tangible, including food, are associated with environmental commitments and concerns. Tourism
beverages, and accommodation (Ladeira et al., 2016; McCabe, 2010). As and hospitality operators could promote the role of companies in
noted by Wakefield and Blodgett (1999), consumers respond differently implementing sustainability. For example, restaurants could emphasize
to tangible and intangible services. The more tangible the service or their use of fair trade or organic products. Hotels could display sus
environment, the stronger the emotions consumers feel, which leads to tainability certification to show their commitment to the environment.
the corresponding behaviors. Furthermore, Ding and Keh (2017) indi All these tangible attributes can be used to project a green image, which,
cate that when services and experiences are tangible (vs. intangible), in turn, would increase PEBIs for consumers.
consumers tend to focus on low construal level (vs. high). Compared to The moderator analysis in the present study also illustrates signifi
high-level construction, people in low-level construal show stronger cant results that deserve attention. Regarding the ‘cultural influence’,
motivations to perform PEB (White et al., 2019). Therefore, the findings anticipated negative emotions and environmental attitudes show a
extend the current knowledge and provide theoretical insights by stronger influence on PEBI in collectivistic cultures than it does in
identifying the critical role of the research context (tourism versus individualistic cultures. On the contrary, the effects of ‘personal norm’
hospitality) in PEBIs. and ‘green image’ on PEBI are more powerful in individualistic cultures
than in collectivistic cultures. Therefore, strategies targeting these fac
5.2. Practical implications tors to induce PEBs should be used cautiously to avoid compromising
their effectiveness. For example, in an individualistic culture, practi
The practical implications of the present meta-analysis can benefit tioners should be cautious when focusing on the negative emotions of
tourism and hospitality practitioners and policymakers in several ways. consumers to trigger PEB, as effectiveness can be reduced. Furthermore,
Tourism and hospitality consumers with stronger environmental self- the findings suggest that the relationship between PEBI and their ante
identity are more likely to perform PEB, therefore, it is vital to employ cedents (i.e., ‘anticipated positive emotion’, ‘environmental attitude’,
strategies that can boost the environmental self-identity of people. Sta ‘environmental awareness’ and ‘environmental concern’) are stronger in
pleton (2015) states that environmental self-identity can be recon the hospitality context than in that of tourism. Hospitality practitioners
structed or manipulated by situational cues or education. Thus, are able to apply these factors to promote PEBs. A potential approach
marketers and destination managers can use educational programs and could be for hotel staff to reinforce sustainability communication
other information to increase the consumer’s environmental personally, or by an environmental appeal using a loss-framed message
self-identity, before the consumer purchases products or visits the sites. paired with detailed information (Grazzini et al., 2018; León and Araña,
Furthermore, the findings highlight the fact that when tourism and 2020).
hospitality consumers are confident that they can have a positive in
fluence on the environment, their intentions to behave sustainably in 5.3. Directions for future research
crease. Practitioners can also emphasize how consumers can make a
difference in their performance of a specific behavior (Wang et al., Recommendations for future research are identified and discussed
2018). For example, hotel managers can offer information on the below. The current analysis provides evidence that ‘self-efficacy’,
10
‘affect’, ‘norms and values’, ‘environmental mindset’, and ‘place per benefit if more studies were carried out on individualistic cultures or on
ceptions and evaluations’ were all positively correlated with PEBI. The cross-cultural comparisons. The current meta-analytical work also found
six antecedents most influenced were ‘environmental self-identity’, that the research context (tourism versus hospitality) moderated the
‘perceived effectiveness’, ‘anticipated positive emotion’, ‘personal effect of antecedents on PEBIs. The present study attempted to identify
norm’, ‘new environmental paradigm’ and ‘place attachment’, with 0.5. the cause of the heterogeneity between studies, but not all the moderator
Determinants with proven effectiveness such as these can guide future tests were significant. This may be because the limited sample size of
researchers in building their theoretical frameworks and predicting subgroups leads to secondary sampling bias (Park and Min, 2020).
PEBIs. However, the results could serve as a basis for future research on
The findings also identified that the linkages between some ante whether consumers react or behave inconsistently in different settings
cedents and PEBIs are still unclear due to an inadequate number of and national cultures. We recommend that future studies focus on these
studies (k < 3). For example, factors such as ‘health awareness’, ‘past potential moderators so more empirical evidence can extend the
environmental behaviors’, ‘destination reputation’ and ‘destination knowledge of PEBI in the tourism and hospitality field. Again, re
loyalty’ have been found to have positive correlations with PEBI, but searchers should be cautious when interpreting the findings of this
receive little attention (Han et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2019; Shin et al., review.
2019; Su et al., 2018). Although meta-analyses with a small number of Most of the empirical studies included in the meta-analysis of this
studies can provide a more accurate estimate than single studies, the study were carried out using a cross-sectional design. These studies
results could still be misleading (Hunter and Schmidt, 2004). Future tended to collect data on a single time point by asking tourism and
research, hence, could further investigate these determinants with a hospitality consumers to report their feelings or perceptions. Hence, the
larger sample (cf., data saturation). results can only identify correlations between constructs, rather than
Variables that have been overlooked and should be taken into ac causal conclusions. To determine cause-and-effect relationships, future
count by future research were also revealed. Very few studies have researchers are suggested to conduct experimental or longitudinal
considered individual attributes such as age, education, political research. In terms of the experimental study, the advantage is that it can
orientation, religion, and personality. Because people are heteroge control extraneous effects and be useful in testing theories and providing
neous, an understanding of the differences in socio-demographics could more practical guidance on the design of interventions practices to
identify which types of people are environmentalists and likely to ex promote PEBs (Fong et al., 2016; Viglia and Dolnicar, 2020). The lon
press a greater willingness to engage in PEBs (Dietz et al., 1998; Patel gitudinal study is also important because it allows researchers to
et al., 2017). Another factor to consider is that most tourism and hos investigate the influence of factors on PEB across contexts and over time
pitality studies focus on internal factors to predict PEBs, while external (Prati et al., 2017; Wu et al., 2021). For these reasons, it would be
factors have elicited less attention (Uysal and Jurowski, 1994). Ac meaningful to have more experimental or longitudinal studies to reduce
cording to Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002), external factors including the common-method bias in cross-sectional studies. In addition to the
institutional, economic, social, and cultural factors can also affect PEBs. research design, future researchers are encouraged to measure actual
For example, if access to infrastructure is poor, (e.g., lack of public PEBs instead of PEBIs. Although behavioral intention is the main pre
transportation), people are less likely to use the service. cursor to actual behavior, behavioral intentions may not always be
There could be more focus on the effect of self-enhancement values consistent with actual behavior due to the difference between what
(e.g., hedonic and utilitarian value) on PEBIs of tourists and hospitality people say and what they actually do (Miller, 2003). More importantly,
consumers. Although theorizing from previous studies and meta- the measure of actual behavior is crucial to ensure high external validity.
analyzes has claimed that self-enhancement values tend to have a
negative association with PEBs (Bouman et al., 2018; Hurst et al., 2013; 5.4. Limitations
Klöckner, 2013), the current meta-analytic review indicates that egoistic
value is positively related to PEBIs. Additionally, it has revealed that The present study has several limitations. First, although 194 inde
anticipated positive emotion is the strongest antecedent of PEBIs. It is pendent studies were included in the meta-analysis, fewer than 10
reasonable, therefore, to note that acting pro-environmentally may also studies examined a range of variables (e.g., ‘environmental self-iden
achieve personal benefit and interest, which could lead to subsequent tity’, ‘green trust’, ‘perceived effectiveness’), which may undermine the
PEBs. precision of the findings, i.e., if factors are analyzed from only a few
Although most studies have focused on the antecedents that predict individual studies, it can reduce the homogeneity of the effect size.
PEBIs of tourists and hospitality consumers, the knowledge of which Therefore, caution is advised in interpreting the findings.
factors constrain or inhibit the mechanism of PEBs is still fragmentary. Second, although the process of article selection was systematic and
As Blake (1999) and Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) argued, most rigorous, some of the potential studies may not have been included in
frameworks targeting PEBs postulate that people decide rationally and the present meta-analytic review, the reason being that only three
thus fail to consider the constraints or barriers that cause them to refrain electronic databases (i.e., EBSCO Hospitality, Tourism Complete, and
from behaving sustainably. Moreover, Yoon et al. (2013, p. 460) state Google Scholar) were chosen to obtain the relevant studies. As well as
that “there is a strong need to consider the role of constraints in this, non-English literature was excluded. Thus, other antecedents of
attitude-behavior relationships” in PEBs. Therefore, future research is PEBIs in tourism and hospitality may have been overlooked. Future re
encouraged as a way to address this limitation in providing a better views are suggested to include works written in other languages and to
understanding of PEBIs. collect articles from a wider range of databases.
Given that the heterogeneity of effect sizes was identified in the Third, it was observed that most of the articles included in the pre
relationship between PEBIs and their antecedents, boundary conditions sent review were conducted in collectivistic culture. This may influence
that could strengthen or weaken the relationship are also worthy of the generalizability of the results and may have distorted the results
study. For example, temporal distance may moderate the relationship related to the relationship between PEBI and their antecedents in
between PEBI and their antecedents because it plays a pivotal role in a different cultural characteristics. Consequently, more studies on PEBIs
person’s perception of an event. People may be less likely to take sus are required to consider the limitations and carry out research in indi
tainable actions when they consider sustainability issues to be future- vidualistic cultures. Only two moderators (i.e., culture and research
focused (Hardisty and Weber, 2009; White et al., 2019). Furthermore, context) were investigated. Therefore, due to the heterogeneity of the
the results provide potent evidence that an investigation of cultural in effect sizes, future research is warranted that explores other boundary
fluences should be considered for future research; currently, most PEBI conditions for the impact of the antecedents on PEBIs (e.g., measure
studies have been carried out in collectivistic cultures. It would be of ment scales).
11
Lastly, since most of the studies in the current meta-analysis used Berger, I. E., & Corbin, R. M. (1992). Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others
as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviors. J. Publ. Pol. Market., 11(2),
self-reported and cross-sectional designs to explore the antecedents of
79–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/074391569201100208
PEBI, the validity of our results could be subject to common-method Bissing-Olson, M. J., Fielding, K. S., & Iyer, A. (2016). Experiences of pride, not guilt,
bias: causal relationships between variables were not examined in our predict pro-environmental behavior when pro-environmental descriptive norms are
review. Therefore, as reiterated throughout this research, our findings more positive. J. Environ. Psychol., 45, 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jenvp.2016.01.001
should be interpreted with care. Additionally, the focus of this study Blake, J. (1999). Overcoming the ‘value-action gap’ in environmental policy: tensions
only identified the corrected correlations between PEBI and its pre between national policy and local experience. Local Environ., 4(3), 257–278. https://
decessors. We encourage future research to adopt meta-analytic struc doi.org/10.1080/13549839908725599
Bouman, T., Steg, L., & Kiers, H. A. (2018). Measuring values in environmental research:
tural equation modeling for testing the efficacy of a particular theory a test of an environmental portrait value questionnaire. Front. Psychol., 9, 564.
and synthesizing the complex relationship between variables in pre https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00564
dicting PEB. Despite limitations, the current study provides valuable Bratanova, B., Loughnan, S., & Gatersleben, B. (2012). The moral circle as a common
motivational cause of cross-situational pro-environmentalism. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.,
information on the antecedents of PEBI in tourism and hospitality set 42(5), 539–545. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1871
tings and provides a holistic picture of PEB for researchers and Chen, M.-F. (2020). Effects of psychological distance perception and psychological
practitioners. factors on pro-environmental behaviors in Taiwan: application of construal level
theory. Int. Sociol., 35(1), 70–89.
Cheng, T., Woon, D. K., & Lynes, J. K. (2011). The use of message framing in the
Credit author statement promotion of environmentally sustainable behaviors. Soc. Market. Q., 17(2), 48–62.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15245004.2011.570859
Cho, Y.-N., Thyroff, A., Rapert, M. I., Park, S.-Y., & Lee, H. J. (2013). To be or not to be
Brian Lin: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Meth green: exploring individualism and collectivism as antecedents of environmental
odology, Writing – original draft. Dan Zhu: Investigation, Formal behavior. J. Bus. Res., 66(8), 1052–1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft. Claire Liu: Conceptu jbusres.2012.08.020
Chwialkowska, A., Bhatti, W. A., & Glowik, M. (2020). The influence of cultural values
alization, supervising, Writing – original draft. Peter B. Kim: Concep on pro-environmental behavior. J. Clean. Prod., 268, 122305. https://doi.org/
tualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122305
Cialdini, R. B., & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social Influence: Social Norms, Conformity and
Compliance.
Impact statement Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (second ed.).
Routledge.
Collado, S., Staats, H., & Sancho, P. (2019). Normative influences on adolescents’ self-
The tourism and hospitality industry has an important role to play in reported pro-environmental behaviors: the role of parents and friends. Environ.
changing an individual’s behavior towards sustainability and the pro Behav., 51(3), 288–314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517744591
tection of natural resources. The meta-analytical findings of this study Cottrell, S. P., & Graefe, A. R. (1997). Testing a conceptual framework of responsible
environmental behavior. J. Environ. Educ., 29(1), 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/
identified several antecedents that could have a powerful influence on 00958969709599103
the behavioral intentions of tourists and hospitality consumers. An un Dietz, T., Stern, P. C., & Guagnano, G. A. (1998). Social structural and social
derstanding of the ways that these antecedents can affect consumer psychological bases of environmental concern. Environ. Behav., 30(4), 450–471.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506297831
behavior can offer guidance to practitioners and policymakers in their
Ding, Y., & Keh, H. T. (2017). Consumer reliance on intangible versus tangible attributes
mission to achieve pro-environmental goals. In addition, the present in service evaluation: the role of construal level. J. Acad. Market. Sci., 45(6),
study revealed the critical role that national cultures and research 848–865. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0527-8
Dolnicar, S., Knezevic Cvelbar, L., & Grün, B. (2019). A sharing-based approach to
contexts play in either strengthening or weakening the link between
enticing tourists to behave more environmentally friendly. J. Trav. Res., 58(2),
antecedents and a consumer’s pro-environmental behavioral intentions. 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517746013
This suggests that triggers for pro-environmental behaviors may vary by Dong, X., Liu, S., Li, H., Yang, Z., Liang, S., & Deng, N. (2020). Love of nature as a
cultures and contexts. These findings make a valuable contribution to mediator between connectedness to nature and sustainable consumption behavior.
J. Clean. Prod., 242, 118451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118451
the current pool of knowledge related to sustainable tourism. * Eid, R., Agag, G., & Shehawy, Y. M. (2020). Understanding guests’ intention to visit
green hotels. J. Hospit. Tourism Res., 45(3), 494–528. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1096348020947800.
* Esfandiar, K., Dowling, R., Pearce, J., & Goh, E. (2020). Personal norms and the
Declaration of competing interest adoption of pro-environmental binning behavior in national parks: an integrated
structural model approach. J. Sustain. Tourism, 28(1), 10–32.
None. * Filimonau, V., Matute, J., Mika, M., & Faracik, R. (2018). National culture as a driver of
pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral intentions in tourism. J. Sustain.
Tourism, 26(10), 1804–1825. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1511722.
References Fong, L. H. N., Law, R., Tang, C. M. F., & Yap, M. H. T. (2016). Experimental research in
hospitality and tourism: a critical review. Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag., 28(2),
246–266. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2014-0506
Abadeer, A. S. (2015). Norms in collectivist versus individualist societies. In Norms and
Gao, Y. L., Mattila, A. S., & Lee, S. (2016). A meta-analysis of behavioral intentions for
Gender Discrimination in the Arab World (pp. 85–101). Springer. https://doi.org/
environment-friendly initiatives in hospitality research. Int. J. Hospit. Manag., 54,
10.1057/9781137395283_5.
107–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.01.010
Abou-Shouk, M. A., Zoair, N., El-Barbary, M. N., & Hewedi, M. M. (2018). Sense of place
Grazzini, L., Rodrigo, P., Aiello, G., & Viglia, G. (2018). Loss or gain? The role of message
relationship with tourist satisfaction and intentional revisit: evidence from Egypt.
framing in hotel guests’ recycling behavior. J. Sustain. Tourism, 26(11), 1944–1966.
Int. J. Tourism Res., 20(2), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2170
https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1526294
* Agag, G. (2019). Understanding the determinants of guests’ behavior to use green P2P
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M., & Van den Bergh, B. (2010). Going green to be seen: status,
accommodation. Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag.. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-
reputation, and conspicuous conservation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 98(3), 392. https://
09-2018-0755.
doi.org/10.1037/a0017346
* Agyeiwaah, E., Dayour, F., Otoo, F. E., & Goh, B. (2021). Understanding backpacker
* Han, H. (2015). Travelers’ pro-environmental behavior in a green lodging context:
sustainable behavior using the tri-component attitude model. J. Sustain. Tourism, 29
converging value-belief-norm theory and the theory of planned behavior. Tourism
(7), 1193–1214.
Manag., 47, 164–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.09.014.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In Action
Han, H. (2021). Consumer behavior and environmental sustainability in tourism and
Control (pp. 11–39). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2.
hospitality: a review of theories, concepts, and latest research. J. Sustain. Tourism, 29
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process., 50
(7), 1021–1042. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1903019
(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
* Han, H., Chua, B.-L., & Hyun, S. S. (2020). Eliciting customers’ waste reduction and
Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a
water saving behaviors at a hotel. Int. J. Hospit. Manag., 87, 102386. https://doi.org/
new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior.
10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102386.
J. Environ. Psychol., 27(1), 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.12.002
* Han, H., Hwang, J., Lee, M. J., & Kim, J. (2019). Word-of-mouth, buying, and sacrifice
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
intentions for eco-cruises: exploring the function of norm activation and value-
Psychol. Rev., 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
attitude-behavior. Tourism Manag., 70, 430–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Becken, S. (2007). Tourists’ perception of international air travel’s impact on the global
tourman.2018.09.006.
climate and potential climate change policies. J. Sustain. Tourism, 15(4), 351–368.
https://doi.org/10.2167/jost710.0
12
* Han, H., & Hyun, S. S. (2018). What influences water conservation and towel reuse * Liu, A., Ma, E., Qu, H., & Ryan, B. (2020). Daily green behavior as an antecedent and a
practices of hotel guests?. Tourism Manag., 64, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. moderator for visitors’ pro-environmental behaviors. J. Sustain. Tourism, 28(9),
tourman.2017.08.005. 1390–1408. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1741598.
* Han, H., Olya, H. G., Cho, S.-b., & Kim, W. (2018). Understanding museum vacationers’ *Liu, J., Wu, J. S., & Che, T. (2019). Understanding perceived environment quality in
eco-friendly decision-making process: strengthening the VBN framework. J. Sustain. affecting tourists’ environmentally responsible behaviors: a broken windows theory
Tourism, 26(6), 855–872. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1377210. perspective. Tourism Manag. Perspect., 31, 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
* Han, H., & Yoon, H. J. (2015). Hotel customers’ environmentally responsible tmp.2019.05.007
behavioral intention: impact of key constructs on decision in green consumerism. Int. Liu, J., Qu, H., Huang, D., Chen, G., Yue, X., Zhao, X., & Liang, Z. (2014). The role of
J. Hospit. Manag., 45, 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.11.004. social capital in encouraging residents’ pro-environmental behaviors in community-
Hartig, T., Kaiser, F. G., & Bowler, P. A. (2001). Psychological restoration in nature as a based ecotourism. Tourism Manag., 41, 190–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
positive motivation for ecological behavior. Environ. Behav., 33(4), 590–607. tourman.2013.08.016
https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160121973142 Lockwood, P., Marshall, T. C., & Sadler, P. (2005). Promoting success or preventing
* He, L., & Filimonau, V. (2020). The effect of national culture on pro-environmental failure: cultural differences in motivation by positive and negative role models. Pers.
behavioral intentions of tourists in the UK and China. Tourism Manag. Perspect., 35, Soc. Psychol. Bull., 31(3), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271598
100716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100716. Margetts, E. A., & Kashima, Y. (2017). Spillover between pro-environmental behaviors:
* He, X., Hu, D., Swanson, S. R., Su, L., & Chen, X. (2018). Destination perceptions, the role of resources and perceived similarity. J. Environ. Psychol., 49, 30–42.
relationship quality, and tourist environmentally responsible behavior. Tourism https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.07.005
Manag. Perspect., 28, 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2018.08.001. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: implications for cognition,
Hardisty, D. J., & Weber, E. U. (2009). Discounting future green: money versus the emotion, and motivation. Psychol. Rev., 98(2), 224. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
environment. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen., 138(3), 329. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016433 295X.98.2.224
Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place attachment: conceptual and empirical Mayo, E. J., & Jarvis, L. P. (1981). The Psychology of Leisure Travel: Effective Marketing and
questions. J. Environ. Psychol., 21(3), 273–281. https://doi.org/10.1006/ Selling of Travel Services. CBI Publishing Company.
jevp.2001.0221 McCabe, S. (2010). Marketing Communications in Tourism and Hospitality. Routledge.
Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: regulatory focus as a motivational McCarty, J. A., & Shrum, L. (2001). The influence of individualism, collectivism, and
principle. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 30, 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601 locus of control on environmental beliefs and behavior. J. Publ. Pol. Market., 20(1),
(08)60381-0 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.20.1.93.17291
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and * Miao, L., & Wei, W. (2013). Consumers’ pro-environmental behavior and the
Organizations across Nations. Sage. underlying motivations: a comparison between household and hotel settings. Int. J.
Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias Hospit. Manag., 32, 102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2012.04.008.
in Research Findings. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Michie, S., Johnston, M., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., & Eccles, M. (2008). From theory to
Hurst, M., Dittmar, H., Bond, R., & Kasser, T. (2013). The relationship between intervention: mapping theoretically derived behavioral determinants to behavior
materialistic values and environmental attitudes and behaviors: a meta-analysis. change techniques. Appl. Psychol., 57(4), 660–680. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-
J. Environ. Psychol., 36, 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.09.003 0597.2008.00341.x
Jani, D., & Han, H. (2013). Personality, social comparison, consumption emotions, Miller, G. A. (2003). Consumerism in sustainable tourism: a survey of UK consumers.
satisfaction, and behavioral intentions: how do these and other factors relate in a J. Sustain. Tourism, 11(1), 17–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580308667191
hotel setting? Int. J. Contemp. Hospit. Manag., 25(7), 970–993. https://doi.org/ Morren, M., & Grinstein, A. (2016). Explaining environmental behavior across borders: a
10.1108/IJCHM-10-2012-0183 meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol., 47, 91–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Juvan, E., & Dolnicar, S. (2014). The attitude–behavior gap in sustainable tourism. Ann. jenvp.2016.05.003
Tourism Res., 48, 76–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2014.05.012 Nisa, C., Varum, C., & Botelho, A. (2017). Promoting sustainable hotel guest behavior: a
Kaiser, F. G., Ranney, M., Hartig, T., & Bowler, P. A. (1999). Ecological behavior, systematic review and meta-analysis. Cornell Hospital. Quater., 58(4), 354–363.
environmental attitude, and feelings of responsibility for the environment. Eur. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965517704371
Psychol., 4(2), 59. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.4.2.59 Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: implications for action-readiness,
Kanjanakan, P., Zhu, D., Doan, T., & Kim, P. B. (2021). Taking stock: a meta-analysis of procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. J. Consum. Psychol., 19(3), 250–260.
work engagement in the hospitality and tourism context. J. Hospit. Tourism Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.008
10963480211066958. Park, J., & Min, H. (2020). Turnover intention in the hospitality industry: a meta-
Karp, D. G. (1996). Values and their effect on pro-environmental behavior. Environ. analysis. Int. J. Hospit. Manag., 90, 102599. https://doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.10
Behav., 28(1), 111–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916596281006 2599.
*Kiatkawsin, K., & Han, H. (2017). Young travelers’ intention to behave pro- Patel, J., Modi, A., & Paul, J. (2017). Pro-environmental behavior and socio-demographic
environmentally: merging the value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory. factors in an emerging market. Asia. J. Busi. Ethic., 6(2), 189–214. https://doi.org/
Tourism Manag., 59, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.06.018 10.1007/s13520-016-0071-5
* Kim, M., & Koo, D.-W. (2020). Visitors’ pro-environmental behavior and the underlying Peloza, J., White, K., & Shang, J. (2013). Good and guilt-free: the role of self-
motivations for natural environment: merging dual concern theory and attachment accountability in influencing preferences for products with ethical attributes.
theory. J. Retailing Consum. Serv., 56, 102147. J. Market., 77(1), 104–119. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0454
Klöckner, C. A. (2013). A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental Perkins, H. W., & Berkowitz, A. D. (1986). Perceiving the community norms of alcohol
behavior—a meta-analysis. Global Environ. Change, 23(5), 1028–1038. https://doi. use among students: some research implications for campus alcohol education
org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.014 programming. Int. J. Addict., 21(9–10), 961–976. https://doi.org/10.3109/
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally 10826088609077249
and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ. Educ. Res., 8(3), Pham, N. T., Tučková, Z., & Jabbour, C. J. C. (2019). Greening the hospitality industry:
239–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401 how do green human resource management practices influence organizational
Ladeira, W. J., Santini, F.d. O., Araujo, C. F., & Sampaio, C. H. (2016). A meta-analysis of citizenship behavior in hotels? A mixed-methods study. Tourism Manag., 72,
the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction in tourism and hospitality. 386–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.12.008
J. Hospit. Market. Manag., 25(8), 975–1009. https://doi.org/10.1080/ Pizam, A. (2009). What is the hospitality industry and how does it differ from the tourism
19368623.2016.1136253 and travel industries? Int. J. Hospit. Manag., 2(28), 183–184. https://doi.org/
Lange, F., & Dewitte, S. (2019). Measuring pro-environmental behavior: review and 10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.01.001
recommendations. J. Environ. Psychol., 63, 92–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Prati, G., Albanesi, C., & Pietrantoni, L. (2017). The interplay among environmental
jenvp.2019.04.009 attitudes, pro-environmental behavior, social identity, and pro-environmental
Larson, L. R., Stedman, R. C., Cooper, C. B., & Decker, D. J. (2015). Understanding the institutional climate. A longitudinal study. Environ. Educ. Res., 23(2), 176–191.
multi-dimensional structure of pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol., 43, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2015.1118752
112–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.004 *Ramkissoon, H., Smith, L. D. G., & Weiler, B. (2013). Testing the dimensionality of place
* Lee, T. H., & Jan, F.-H. (2018). Ecotourism behavior of nature-based tourists: an attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental
integrative framework. J. Trav. Res., 57(6), 792–810. behaviors: a structural equation modelling approach. Tourism Manag., 36, 552–566.
Lee, T. H., Jan, F.-H., & Yang, C.-C. (2013). Conceptualizing and measuring https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.003
environmentally responsible behaviors from the perspective of community-based Rees, J. H., Klug, S., & Bamberg, S. (2015). Guilty conscience: motivating pro-
tourists. Tourism Manag., 36, 454–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. environmental behavior by inducing negative moral emotions. Climatic Change, 130
tourman.2012.09.012 (3), 439–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1278-x
* Lee, Y.-K., Pei, F., Ryu, K.-S., & Choi, S. (2019). Why the tripartite relationship of place Reisinger, Y., Kandampully, J., Mok, C., & Sparks, B. (2001). Unique characteristics of
attachment, loyalty, and pro-environmental behavior matter?. Asia Pac. J. Tourism tourism, hospitality, and leisure services. Serv. Q. Manag. Hospital. Tour. Leisure, 1(1),
Res., 24(3), 250–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2018.1564344. 15–47.
León, C. J., & Araña, J. E. (2020). Tourist sustainable behavior and personal Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 10,
communication. Ann. Tourism Res., 85(C). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 221–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5
annals.2020.102897 Scott, D., Amelung, B., Ceron, J.-P., Dubois, G., Gössling, S., Peeters, P., & Simpson, M. C.
Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal level theory and consumer (2008). Climate Change and Tourism: Responding to Global Challenges. World Tourism
behavior. J. Consum. Psychol., 17(2), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408 Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme.
(07)70017-7 Selby, M., & Morgan, N. J. (1996). Reconstruing place image: a case study of its role in
destination market research. Tourism Manag., 17(4), 287–294. https://doi.org/
10.1016/0261-5177(96)00020-9
13
Serenari, C., Bosak, K., & Attarian, A. (2013). Cross-cultural efficacy of American low- * Xu, F., Huang, L., & Whitmarsh, L. (2020). Home and away: cross-contextual
impact programs: a comparison between Garhwal guide beliefs on environmental consistency in tourists’ pro-environmental behavior. J. Sustain. Tourism, 28(10),
behavior and American outdoor travel norms. Tourism Manag., 34, 50–60. https:// 1443–1459. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1741596.
doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.03.010 Zhu, D., Kim, P. B., Milne, S., & Park, I. (2020). A meta-analysis of the antecedents of
Shabnam, S., Quaddus, M., Roy, S. K., & Quazi, A. (2021). Consumer belief system and career commitment. J. Career Assess. 106907272095698 https://10.1177/1069072
pro-environmental purchase intention: does psychological distance intervene? 720956983.
J. Clean. Prod., 129403. Zou, L. W., & Chan, R. Y. (2019). Why and when do consumers perform green behaviors?
Sharpley, R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: exploring the theoretical An examination of regulatory focus and ethical ideology. J. Bus. Res., 94, 113–127.
divide. J. Sustain. Tourism, 8(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.04.006
09669580008667346
* Shin, Y. H., Im, J., Jung, S. E., & Severt, K. (2019). Motivations behind consumers’
organic menu choices: the role of environmental concern, social value, and health
Further reading
consciousness. J. Qual. Assur. Hospit. Tourism, 20(1), 107–122. https://doi.org/
10.1080/1528008X.2018.1483288. * Kim, H. L., & Hyun, S. S. (2021). The anchoring effect of aviation green tax for
Sirgy, M. J. (1986). Self-congruity: toward a Theory of Personality and Cybernetics. Praeger sustainable tourism, based on the nudge theory. J. Sustain. Tourism, 29(7),
Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group. 1082–1097. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1820017.
Somani, S. (2019). How ‘trashy’ Tourism Threatens World-Famous Destinations. https://gl * Kim, M. J., & Hall, C. M. (2020). Can sustainable restaurant practices enhance customer
obalnews.ca/news/5434818/tourism-pollution-world-famous-destinations/. loyalty? The roles of value theory and environmental concerns. J. Hospit. Tourism
Stapleton, S. R. (2015). Environmental identity development through social interactions, Manag., 43, 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.03.004.
action, and recognition. J. Environ. Educ., 46(2), 94–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/ * Landon, A. C., Woosnam, K. M., & Boley, B. B. (2018). Modeling the psychological
00958964.2014.1000813 antecedents to tourists’ pro-sustainable behaviors: an application of the value-belief-
Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behavior: an integrative norm model. J. Sustain. Tourism, 26(6), 957–972. https://doi.org/10.1080/
review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol., 29(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/ 09669582.2017.1423320.
10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004 * Moghimehfar, F., & Halpenny, E. A. (2016). How do people negotiate through their
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999). A value-belief-norm constraints to engage in pro-environmental behavior? A study of front-country
theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Hum. Ecol. campers in Alberta, Canada. Tourism Manag., 57, 362–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/
Rev., 81–97. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24707060. j.tourman.2016.07.001.
Straughan, R. D., & Roberts, J. A. (1999). Environmental segmentation alternatives: a * Nimri, R., Patiar, A., Kensbock, S., & Jin, X. (2020). Consumers’ intention to stay in
look at green consumer behavior in the new millennium. J. Consum. Market., 16(6), green hotels in Australia: theorization and implications. J. Hospit. Tourism Res., 44
558–575. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363769910297506 (1), 149–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348019862602.
Stylidis, D., Biran, A., Sit, J., & Szivas, E. M. (2014). Residents’ support for tourism * Pan, Y. T., Yang, K. K., Wilson, K., Hong, Z. R., & Lin, H. S. (2020). The impact of
development: the role of residents’ place image and perceived tourism impacts. museum interpretation tour on visitors’ engagement and post-visit conservation
Tourism Manag., 45, 260–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.05.006 intentions and behaviors. Int. J. Tourism Res., 22(5), 593–603. https://doi.org/
*Su, L., Swanson, S. R., & Chen, X. (2018). Reputation, subjective well-being, and 10.1002/jtr.2358.
environmental responsibility: the role of satisfaction and identification. J. Sustain. * Sharma, R., & Gupta, A. (2020). Pro-environmental behavior among tourists visiting
Tourism, 26(8), 1344–1361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1443115 national parks: application of value-belief-norm theory in an emerging economy
Taufik, D., & Venhoeven, L. (2018). Emotions and pro-environmental behavior. In context. Asia Pac. J. Tourism Res., 25(8), 829–840. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Environmental Psychology: an Introduction (pp. 189–197). https://doi.org/10.1002/ 10941665.2020.1774784.
9781119241072.ch19 * Zhao, X., Wang, X., & Ji, L. (2020). Evaluating the effect of anticipated emotion on
*Teng, Y.-M., Wu, K.-S., & Liu, H.-H. (2015). Integrating altruism and the theory of forming environmentally responsible behavior in heritage tourism: developing an
planned behavior to predict patronage intention of a green hotel. J. Hospit. Tourism extended model of norm activation theory. Asia Pac. J. Tourism Res., 25(11),
Res., 39(3), 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348012471383 1185–1198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2020.1837892.
Triandis, H. C. (1989). The self and social behavior in differing cultural contexts. Psychol.
Rev., 96(3), 506. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.3.506
Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and Place: the Perspective of Experience. University of Minnesota
Mao-Tang (Brian) Lin is a Ph.D. candidate at School of Hos
Press.
pitality and Tourism, Auckland University of Technology, New
Uysal, M., & Jurowski, C. (1994). Testing the push and pull factors. Ann. Tourism Res., 21
Zealand. His research interests include sustainable tourism,
(4), 844–846.
tourism and hospitality marketing, persuasive communication,
Vada, S., Prentice, C., & Hsiao, A. (2019). The influence of tourism experience and well-
and consumer behavior.
being on place attachment. J. Retailing Consum. Serv., 47, 322–330. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jretconser.2018.12.007
* Vaske, J. J., Jacobs, M. H., & Espinosa, T. K. (2015). Carbon footprint mitigation on
vacation: a norm activation model. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour., 11, 80–86. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jort.2015.05.002.
Venhoeven, L. A., Bolderdijk, J. W., & Steg, L. (2016). Why acting environmentally-
friendly feels good: exploring the role of self-image. Front. Psychol., 7, 1846. https://
doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01846
Viglia, G., & Dolnicar, S. (2020). A review of experiments in tourism and hospitality. Ann.
Tourism Res., 80, 102858. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102858
Wang, J., Wang, S., Xue, H., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2018). Green image and consumers’
word-of-mouth intention in the green hotel industry: the moderating effect of
Millennials. J. Clean. Prod., 181, 426–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Dan Zhu is a PhD candidate at School of Hospitality and
jclepro.2018.01.250 Tourism, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand.
Wakefield, K. L., & Blodgett, J. G. (1999). Customer response to intangible and tangible His major research interests include vocational psychology,
service factors. Psychol. Market., 16(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520- meta-analysis and marketing in the contexts of tourism and
6793(199901)16:1<51::AID-MAR4>3.0.CO;2-0 hospitality.
Wearing, S., Cynn, S., Ponting, J., & McDonald, M. (2002). Converting environmental
concern into ecotourism purchases: a qualitative evaluation of international
backpackers in Australia. J. Ecotourism, 1(2–3), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14724040208668120
White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be
more sustainable: a literature review and guiding framework. J. Market., 83(3),
22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649
Whitener, E. M. (1990). Confusion of confidence intervals and credibility intervals in
meta-analysis. J. Appl. Psychol., 75(3), 315–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-
9010.75.3.315
* Wong, I. A., Wan, Y. K. P., Huang, G. I., & Qi, S. (2020). Green event directed pro-
environmental behavior: an application of goal systems theory. J. Sustain. Tourism,
1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1770770.
Wu, J. S., Font, X., & Liu, J. (2021). The elusive impact of pro-environmental intention on
holiday on pro-environmental behavior at home. Tourism Manag., 85, 104283.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104283
14
Claire Liu is a senior lecturer in the School of Hospitality and Peter B. Kim is a professor in the School of Hospitality and
Tourism at Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand. Tourism and an associate director of New Zealand Tourism
She obtained her PhD in tourism management from Massry Research Institute at the Auckland University of Technology.
University in New Zealand. Her research areas include sus He received his PhD from the Pamplin College of Business at
tainable tourism management, SMEs and tourism entrepre the Virginia Tech University. His research focuses on service
neurship, Chinese outbound tourist behaviours, and tourism management and marketing in the contexts of hospitality and
and hospitality education. tourism.
15

1 s2.0 S0261517722000796 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0261517722000796 Main

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 s2.0 S0261517722000796 Main

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tourism Management 93 (2022) 104566

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

A meta-analysis of antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention

1. Introduction Pham et al., 2019; Xu et al., 2020).

Fig. 1. Five categories of antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention.

Fig. 2. Chart showing the studies selection process.

Norms and values

Place perceptions and evaluations

Perceived behavioral control

Anticipated positive emotion

Norms and values

Place perceptions and evaluations

Perceived behavioral control

Norms and values

Anticipated positive emotion

You might also like