Abstract
Purpose
Global warming and climate change are significant barriers to food production due to rising temperatures and extreme weather events. Thus, some households have taken to producing organic food on their rooftop gardens to mitigate the aforementioned challenges, which could improve the green environment and reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Given the emergence of this trend, this study aims to predict organic food production intention and behaviour within urban rooftop home gardens using an integrated model of the value-belief-norm (VBN) theory and theory of planned behaviour (TPB).
Design/methodology/approach
Study data were collected from 352 households in two major Bangladeshi cities and analysed through SEM-PLS for model assessment and prediction.
Findings
Resultantly, biospheric and egoistic values led to an improved ecological worldview (EP). The EP, awareness of consequences (ACs) and social norms (SNs) predicted personal norms (PNs). In addition, PNs and SNs forecasted the intention to produce organic food in urban-area rooftop gardens. Strong intentions could promote and predict the adoption of organic food production in rooftop gardens. Based on the study outcomes, PN partially mediated the relationship between SN and the intention to produce organic food. Furthermore, the value–behaviour nexus performed serial mediation through beliefs, norms and intentions.
Practical implications
In this vein, the VBN framework provided a comprehensive guideline to encourage the intention and behaviour of organic food production in urban-area rooftops. Education and public policies potentially leveraged public beliefs and norms to engage in climate-friendly activities.
Originality/value
Cultivating organic herbs and vegetables on rooftop reduces dependency on industrially produced food and fertilised crops, making it a sustainable food choice and climate-mitigating activity. Thus, this study focuses on rooftop organic food production as a lens to examine pro-environmental intentions and behaviours. In addition, past studies have not emphasised the mediating roles of environmental beliefs, PN and intentions between the value–pro-environmental behaviour nexus. Such paths could be interesting to observe and add value to the VBN model. This study investigated the mediating roles of environmental beliefs, PN and intentions between the value–pro-environmental behaviour nexus and the role of PN between SN and pro-environmental behavioural intention with VBN farmwork.
Keywords
Citation
Hoque, M.E., Al Mamun, A. and Susanto, P. (2025), "Assessing how pro-environmental perspectives impact participation in rooftop organic agriculture in urban neighborhoods", International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 21-45. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCCSM-10-2023-0131
Publisher
:Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2024, Mohammad Enamul Hoque, Abdullah Al Mamun and Perengki Susanto.
License
Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
1. Introduction
Climate change, such as global warming and droughts has inevitably resulted in food production complexities (Schiermeier, 2018; Ebissa et al., 2023). The rising temperature also triggers precipitation patterns, prolonged droughts, higher heat wave frequencies, rising sea levels, glacier melting and an increase in natural disasters (Ajani and van der Geest, 2021). Such occurrences could create physical damage and adversely affect food systems and development processes worldwide. Climate change may also instigate food shortages and crises. Based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2022), food supply and safety would be adversely affected in the next 30 years without effective measures to address the food system susceptibility to climate change. The detrimental effects of climate change on food supply and quality are evident in current times. The IPCC recorded a 21% reduction in food industry production due to global warming. Specifically, high temperatures and heavy precipitation negatively impact soil health while high carbon dioxide levels diminish the nutritional value of crops. Man-made insecticides and fertilisers also influence climate change (Ansari et al., 2014; Kodaparthi et al., 2024; Samui et al., 2024). Food-related emissions are projected to exceed the 2°C global warming limit by 2050 with the perpetuation of current farming practices (Chen, 2020). Both food supply chain performance and food security would decline with the detrimental effects of climate change (IPCC, 2022, 2014). This situation renders food security a global concern that requires prompt action.
Urbanisation further complicates climate issues through deforestation, transportation, air pollution, loss of biodiversity and bad health effects (Trautwein et al., 2021). Millions of people worldwide are experiencing water shortage, air pollution and rising temperature with adverse impacts on human existence (Ünal et al., 2019; Ebissa et al., 2023). Consequently, relevant government bodies began promoting rooftop gardening and farming to realistically boost ecological services, resistance to climate change, urban food supply and social and economic engagement (Appolloni et al., 2021). Rooftop gardens significantly contribute to individuals’ psychological health, improve the physical environment and could be transformed into small-scale enterprises that increase household income (Sajjaduzzaman et al., 2005). Following Chowdhury et al. (2020), rooftop agriculture may optimise numerous ecosystem services, increase the biodiversity of metropolitan environments and mitigate food insecurity.
Food processing and production with synthetic pesticides and fertilisers are detrimental to health and cause several diseases (Dhankhar and Kumar, 2023; Mie et al., 2017; Pawar et al., 2024). Hence, households and others have resorted to producing their own organic food (see, Mie et al., 2017). As a type of integrated production management that promotes and improves the health of agroecosystems, including biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity, organic agriculture (Han et al., 2021) promotes the use of natural minerals and plant-based products without synthetic fertilisers and pesticides (Sharma and Singhvi, 2018). Organic food production adhered to the rule of sustainability (triple bottom line: environmental, economic and social integration). Based on the European Union Rural Review, conventional farming differs from its organic counterpart in terms of multi-annual crop rotation, efficient use of on-site resources, strict limits on the use of synthetic pesticides and fertilisers, livestock antibiotics, food additives, processing aids and other inputs, use of disease-resistant plants and animal species that adapt to local conditions and the prohibition of genetically modified organisms (European Network for Rural Development, 2014). Organic farming potentially offers ecologically efficient and socioeconomically favourable agriculture (Ferdous et al., 2021; Han et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2023), which motivates households to produce organic food on their rooftop gardens. A sound understanding of homeowners’ organic food intention and production in non-commercial urban home gardens offers pivotal insights for policymakers and businesses.
Bangladesh, a densely populated country with approximately 170 million people, has experienced a rapid growth of urban populations (46.6 million in 2011, 55.4 million in 2015 and 64.7 million in 2021) in recent decades (BBS, 2023). The urban areas in Bangladesh have immensely expanded in the past few decades to accommodate its rising population (Nahrin, 2019; Roy and Sowgat, 2020; Chowdhury et al., 2021). As such, urban expansion led to land loss, deforestation, transportation, air pollution, loss of biodiversity, negative health effects and low food production. A project entitled “Enhancing Urban Horticulture Production to Improve Food and Nutrition Security” by FAO was initiated in 2015 in collaboration with the Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE), Ministry of Agriculture, Bangladesh to promote urban horticulture (rooftop garden), increase the production of fresh and nutritious vegetables and fruits and create a positive environmental impact on urban areas, such as Dhaka and Chattogram Department of Agricultural Extension, 2020). Based on the Bangladesh Agriculture Information Service, Dhaka city comprises over 450,000 roofs, which cover over 4,500 hectares (Rizve, 2024). Although most of the urban rooftops were left bare, homeowners have begun constructing roof gardens for recreational and greening purposes. Intriguingly, over 30,000 rooftop gardens in this city only accounted for 7% of all rooftops (Rizve, 2024). A survey by the Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University disclosed that 41% of the rooftop garden owners in Dhaka are young, 30% are middle-aged and 29% are old (Islam, 2020). The DAE launched a three-year urban agricultural development initiative in 2018 to install 600 rooftop gardens in the capital city (Department of Agricultural Extension, 2020). Overall, urban-area house owners are motivated to construct rooftop gardens for organic food production (Islam et al., 2023).
Rooftop agriculture and gardening have received growing attention in Bangladesh as strategies to address food security, biodiversity loss and climate change impacts (Chowdhury et al., 2020; Islam et al., 2019, 2023; Bhuiyan and Ferdous, 2021; Sajjaduzzaman et al., 2005; Uddin et al., 2021). Some studies have examined how rooftop gardening can contribute to food availability during crises like the COVID-19 pandemic (Bhuiyan and Ferdous, 2021). Others have identified potential rooftop sites that could support gardening and assessed social and environmental benefits (Islam et al., 2023). However, existing research in Bangladesh has not explored rooftop gardening from the perspective of household gardeners and their motivations and intentions around organic food production. Understanding factors influencing the adoption of organic practices in urban home gardens could provide policymaking insight into promoting more sustainable local food systems. Therefore, the attempt bridges knowledge gaps concerning rooftop organic food production by predicting organic food production among rooftop gardeners in Bangladeshi cities with lens of value-belief-norm (VBN) and theory of planned behaviour (TPB).
Rooftop organic gardening in urban areas is an individual decision that helps address mitigation of climate change effects and allows people to live more lightly on the planet through their daily food choices and activities. Such behaviour is considered a form of pro-environmental behaviour. As a result, by adopting this pro-environmental behaviour, individuals can help lower their carbon footprint and contribute to more sustainable food systems (Yang et al., 2024b). Given that, VBN theory and TPB can predict what the factor affect pro-environment behaviour (see, Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2023; Mamun et al., 2023, Gao et al., 2024, Yang et al., 2024a). Parallel to past studies, beliefs, values, personal norms (PNs), social norms (SNs) and intentions are determinants of green environment and climate-friendly behaviours. Such works incorporated VBN (Stern, 2000) and TPB to justify green environmental and climate-friendly behaviours (Carfora et al., 2021; Chen, 2020; Gkargkavouzi et al., 2019; Wang et al., 2018; Wittenberg et al., 2018; Goh et al., 2017, Van der Werff et al., 2013a, 2013b). In line with the VBN hypothesis, a cause-effect relationship was identified among values, beliefs, norms and behaviour, which begins with environmental values and ends with climate-friendly behaviours. Several studies highlighted the mediating role of PN between SN and pro-environmental behavioural intention. Empirically, values led to an increase in EP. Thus, the causal chain of norm activation flowed from values to PNs through EP and specific beliefs (AC and AR), which increased pro-environmental intentions and behavioural decisions for environment-friendly initiatives. Regardless, no studies emphasised the mediating roles of environmental beliefs, PN and intentions between the value–pro-environmental behaviour nexus. Such paths could be interesting to observe and add value to the VBN model. This study investigated the mediating roles of environmental beliefs, PN and intentions between the value–pro-environmental behaviour nexus and the role of PN between SN and pro-environmental behavioural intention.
2. Theoretical underpinning
This study focused on sustainable food consumption (Brown et al., 2009; O'Connor et al., 2017; Tandon et al., 2020), green environmental behaviour (Afridi et al., 2021; Awais et al., 2022; Canlas et al., 2022) and green gardening (Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2023; Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2024a; Yang et al., 2024b). Research on sustainable food consumption and green environment behaviour disclosed beliefs, values, PN, SN and intention as the determinants of sustainable food consumption, green environmental behaviour and green gardening behaviour. Notably, these variables are crucial TPB (Ajzen, 1991) and VBN components (Stern, 2000). The VBN theory, which predicts the relationship between values, beliefs, norms and behaviour in causal associations, could justify the influence of human values on their environmental and green behaviours (Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2023; Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2024a; Yang et al., 2024b). Similarly, TPB could forecast green and environmental behaviour (Chen, 2020; Dowd and Burke, 2013; Vermeir and Verbeke, 2008). The VBN and TPB models are linked by the norms triggered by three forms of environmental beliefs: EP, AC and AR (Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2023; Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024;Yang et al., 2024a; Yang et al., 2024b). Past empirical studies either used TPB or VBN to predict pro-environmental activities.
Based on extensive discussions, the VBN model reflects a strong predictive potential to explain pro-environmental behaviour albeit with certain flaws. Other works asserted that personal values and environmental beliefs should be incorporated into the TPB paradigm (Chen, 2020; Gkargkavouzi et al., 2019; Goh et al., 2017). Hence, the integrated VBN–TPB model could demonstrate a higher prediction power than competing theoretical models (Carfora et al., 2021). These theories posited values, EP, AC, AR, SN and PN as predictors following an individual’s scheme from the higher hierarchy of values to the proximal antecedent of behavioural intention (Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2023; Mamun et al., 2023, Gao et al., 2024, Yang et al., 2024). In this vein, both TPB and VBN models could provide in-depth explanations. Past empirical works have also demonstrated that incorporating mediators akin to beliefs and norms strengthens the value-behaviour relationship rather than merely providing a direct correlation (Awais et al., 2022). Essentially, several studies investigated its predictiveness within integrated psychosocial models to justify sustainable food consumption and green environmental behaviour (Afridi et al., 2021; Awais et al., 2022; Brown et al., 2009; Canlas et al., 2022; O'Connor et al., 2017; Tandon et al., 2020). Al Mamun (2022a), (2022 b), Mamun et al. (2023), Gao et al. (2024) and Yang et al. (2024c) reflected the relative importance of biospheric and egoistic in influencing environmental beliefs. Hence, this study aimed to explain organic food intention and production in rooftop gardens by integrating VBN and TPB models. The conceptual framework in Figure 1 integrated VBN and TPB to bridge the literature gap.
3. Hypothesis development
3.1 Values
Values denote desirable and trans-situational goals that navigate one’s existence. The values differ by relative importance with long-term consistency (Hwang et al., 2021; Feather, 1995; Schwartz, 1992). A total of five specific values have been identified: altruistic, biospheric, egoistic, openness to change and traditional. Although altruistic, biospheric and openness to change values positively impacted EP, egoistic and conventional counterparts denoted a negative effect. Biospheric values (BV) emphasised the environment and biosphere with a fundamental concern about the quality of nature and the environment for its own sake (De Groot and Steg, 2010). The VBN theory assumed that BV directly and positively influenced general beliefs (Sharma and Gupta, 2020). Empirically, BV were strongly and consistently linked to environmental preferences, intentions and behaviours. Individuals with high BV are inclined to demonstrate pro-environmental preferences and intentions and act in an environmentally friendly manner (Afridi et al., 2021; Al Mamun, 2022a, 2022b; Ateş, 2020; Awais et al., 2022; Canlas et al., 2022; Van der Werff et al., 2013a, 2013b). Hence, EP increases with higher scores on BV orientations.
Egoistic values (EVs) denote individuals’ focus on safeguarding or enhancing their resources, interaction with other people and nature and emphasis on self-welfare (Al Mamun, 2022a, 2022b; Awais et al., 2022; Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024, Yang et al., 2023). The aim of EV is reflected in functional benefits and emotional rewards. Highly egoistic individuals consider how environmental decisions affect them personally. Such people would act pro-environmentally when the perceived benefits outweigh the perceived costs and vice versa (De Groot and Steg, 2010). In this case, organic food production in rooftop gardens fulfilled resource optimisation through interaction with nature where households solely emphasised personal health benefits. Thus, egoistic values potentially promote environmentally friendly and organic food production. Egoistic ideals have also been linked to green behaviour (Awais et al., 2022; Imaningsih et al., 2019; Shin et al., 2017).
This study developed the following hypotheses in the context of organic food production in rooftop gardens based on the aforementioned discussions:
The BV has positive effects on EP.
The EV has positive effects on EP.
3.2 Beliefs
Beliefs are generally recognised for one’s views of the natural environment and human behaviour. In such instances, the VBN theory highlights the pivotal role played by beliefs to develop PN and influence people’s behaviour (Al Mamun, 2022a, 2022b; Awais et al., 2022). This theory includes three belief types: EP, AC and AR (Stern, 2000). The EP characterises individuals’ environmental perceptions by exploring the human-nature link (Donmez-Turan and Kiliclar, 2021) and predicting PN (Al Mamun, 2022a, 2022b; Awais et al., 2022; Chua et al., 2016). The AC implies the integration of AC and AR, which increases the likelihood of feeling morally obliged to act (Ryan and Spash, 2012; Papagiannakis and Lioukas, 2017). It is essential to reflect AC as actors who recognise the implications of their actions develop positive norms or emotions of moral obligation towards the activity (Hörisch et al., 2020). The AC denotes people who believe they are accountable for taking action. Such individuals demonstrate personal moral values that recommend specific actions, which may lead to seeking information that raises their awareness of problems. Contrarily, some counterparts may hesitate to gauge the first stage of problem awareness as an internal strategic device to avoid taking responsibility (Edenbrandt et al., 2021). Upon making value-based predictions, EP forecasts how AC affects AR, which subsequently predicts how individuals act personally under the VBN theory (Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024, Yang et al., 2023). As all the impacts proved to be favourable (Stern, 2000), this study developed the following hypotheses in the context of organic food production in rooftop gardens:
The EP has positive effects on AC.
The AC has positive effects on AR.
The EP has positive effects on PN.
The AC has positive effects on PN.
The AR has positive effects on PN
3.3 Personal norms and social norms
The PN implies one’s self-expectations of specific acts (Wu et al., 2022). Active PN enables consumers to act pro-environmentally even at their personal cost (Shin et al 2018). Meanwhile, SN is perceived as external pressure on people’s decision-making process (Ajzen, 1991). Social pressure and daily circumstances significantly influenced individual behaviour (Al Mamun, 2022a, 2022b; Awais et al., 2022). The VBN model exclusively encompassed the impacts of ON on environmental behaviour, thus disregarding discussions on SN. In Al Mamun (2022a, 2022b) and Awais et al. (2022), SN may play a role in environmental and green behaviour. Al Mamun (2022a, 2022b) and Awais et al. (2022) have emphasised the SN ability to predict PN in addition to other characteristics. Resultantly, both PN and SN were positively correlated to environmental and green behaviour (Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024, Yang et al., 2023). The following hypotheses for organic food production in rooftop gardens were developed based on past literature:
The SN has positive effects on PN.
The PN has positive effects on intention towards organic food production in rooftop gardens.
The SN has positive effects on intention towards organic food production in rooftop gardens.
3.4 Organic food production behaviour
Intention is the most pivotal factor to determine how people behave in their immediate environments (Ajzen, 1991). Following Zhang et al. (2020), the intention to participate in climate-friendly initiatives encourages people to engage in conservative agricultural methods among Chinese farmers. Al Mamun (2022a, 2022b) and Mamun et al. (2023) highlighted that intention to participate in solid waste management promotes the actual behaviour of solid waste management. Hence, the intention to participate in climate-friendly initiatives and activities promotes people’s engagement in pro-environmental behaviour (Mamun et al., 2023; Gao et al., 2024, Yang et al., 2023). As strong household intentions would increase organic food production in rooftop gardens, the following hypothesis was developed:
Intention towards organic food production in rooftop gardens increase the adoption of organic food production.
3.5 Indirect effects
Individual actions are profoundly affected and shaped by the normative implications and social contexts in which they are embedded. Both SN and PN denote the two types of normative outcomes. The SN originates from external factors, such as other people’s actions, whereas PN originates from within (Awais et al., 2022). Recent studies have demonstrated a link between PN and SN, thus implying that the former may impact the latter (Al Mamun, 2022b; Awais et al., 2022). As PN perceivably affected the predictive ability of SN as a measure of behavioural intentions, the following hypothesis was developed:
The PN mediates the relationship between SN and intention towards organic food production in rooftop gardens.
As previously mentioned, biospheric and egoistic values contributed to an increase in EP. Resultantly, the causal chain of norm activation flows from values to PN through EP and specific beliefs (AC and AR), thus resulting in high pro-environmental intentions and behavioural decisions for environment-friendly initiatives. Hence, this indicates the causal chain establish by
VBN theory. Therefore, in this context, causal process promote intentions to produce organic food and engagement in rooftop organic food production. Therefore. in line with H1 to H8 and H10, the effect of values increase pro-environmental behaviour via beliefs, norms and intentions. Thus, this study believes that BV-pro-environmental behaviour and BV–pro-environmental behaviour nexuses are meditated by environmental beliefs, PN and intentions. In supporting, Ates (2020) demonstrated that the effect of BV on PN was meditated by environmental self-identity, whereas the impact of BV on pro-environmental behaviour was meditated by environmental self-identity and PN. Our proposition is further supported by theories related to the meditating role have been highlighted based on a three-variable system: “there are two causal paths feeding into the outcome variable: the direct impact of the independent variable and the impact of the mediator. There is also a path from the independent variable to the mediator” (Baron and Kenny, 1986, p. 1176). Hence, the following hypotheses were proposed:
The BV–pro-environmental behaviour nexus meditated via environmental beliefs, PN and intentions.
The EV–pro-environmental behaviour nexus meditated via environmental beliefs, PN and intentions.
4. Research methodology
This study aimed to investigate the effects of environmental values, beliefs and norms on rooftop organic food producers’ intentions and practices. Purposive sampling was employed for data collection purposes. Empirical data were gathered from households in three major Bangladeshi cities: Dhaka, Chattogram and Sylhet. These cities were selected given the density of buildings and populations. In addition, recent developments in urban agriculture have garnered much attention from researchers. Summarily, rooftop gardening offers recreational opportunities for urban dwellers amidst the monotony of city life.
Two consultation sessions involving Chittagong and Dhaka, respectively, were conducted with DAE staff members to address more representative areas for data collection before selecting them from both cities. More metropolitan areas from Dhaka and Chittagong were selected post-discussion to ensure a holistic representation of the location. The researchers selected ten areas: four from Chittagong and six from Dhaka. The urban regions in Dhaka encompass Gulshan, Mohammdpur, Mirpur, Paltan, Uttara and Tejgoan while the counterparts in Chittagong entailed Chowkbazar, Doubelmooring, Panchlaish and Patenga.
Notably, 383 households were invited to participate in this cross-sectional survey technique to evaluate and predict the theorised model and relationships. Respondent anonymity was maintained to catalyse response rates (Sekaran and Bougie, 2003; Wang and Doong, 2010). This study employed constructs and measuring items from past literature to establish instrument validity and reliability. All the measurement items were scored on a five-point Likert Scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. The construct measurement items are presented in Supplementary Table 1. Common method variance (Tehseen et al., 2017) and non-response bias (Park and Ryu, D, 2015) were also examined based on past study recommendations.
This study adopted PLS-SEM to analyse the measurement model, structural model and hypothesised relationships following its ability to assess both single-item constructs and complex models (Hair et al., 2017). Parallel to Hair et al. (2019), a two-step process was incorporated. The measurement model was evaluated for validity and reliability in step one to ensure the fulfilment of measurement quality criteria. Meanwhile, the structural model was assessed in stage two to evaluate path coefficients and predict the model with bootstrapping techniques. Both R-square (r2) and Q-square (Q2) served to assess the model quality. Blindfolding analysis was also used to determine predictive significance by computing the mean of Q2 for two latent constructs (Hair et al., 2019).
5. Results
5.1 Demographic analysis
Out of the 422 questionnaires disseminated to participating households, 352 counterparts were received with a 83.4% response rate. A total of 26 questionnaires were excluded from the sample owing to unreliable answers and missing information. A sample size of 352 proved adequate in PLS-SEM estimations with high power to produce path coefficients. Following Hair et al. (2019), PLS-SEM should be estimated with a sample size of at least 200 participants. Table 1 depicts the household members’ demographic characteristics. Essentially, 53.4% of the respondents were decision-makers in the family. Area-wise, 64.1% and 35.9% of the households were from Dhaka and Chittagong, respectively. Most of the individuals were employed in the private sector (41.4%). The majority of households had rooftop garden space of under 1,000 square feet (approximately 55%).
5.2 Measurement model results
This study assessed construct validity and reliability by estimating the measurement model based on internal consistency and reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. In considering convergent validity, the outer loadings of the indicators were evaluated together with the average variance extracted (AVE) (Hair et al., 2019). Table 2 summarises the estimated convergent validity outcomes. Specifically, the indicator loadings ranged between 0.680 and 0.963. Although an indicator item reflected loadings under the threshold value of 0.70, omitting it did not affect the other values. As such, the aforementioned indicators were retained. Hair et al. (2011) proposed considering the construct content validity and retaining all items with a value exceeding 0.50. The estimated AVE, which ranged from 0.0.686 to 0.903, exceeded the threshold value of 0.50 and ensured convergent validity (Hair et al., 2019).
The current study assessed the internal consistency of the measurement scales with the estimated value of composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha (see Table 2). The composite reliability value for the constructs ranged from 0.915 to 0.967, which exceeded the threshold value of 0.70. Meanwhile, the Cronbach’s alpha of the constructs ranged between 0.915 and 0.967, which exceeded the cut-off value of 0.70. Dijkstra-Hensele’s rho values for each study construct significantly exceeded the 0.70 threshold. The minimum rho value reflected 0.918 (Hair et al., 2019). Overall, composite reliability, Cronbach’s alpha and Dijkstra-Hensele’s rho validated the internal consistency of the study constructs.
The discriminant validity of the study constructs was assessed with the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT) (Hair et al., 2017). Hair et al. (2017, 2019) proposed using HTMT to ascertain discriminant validity when the indicator loading significantly varied from 0.60 to 0.90. In this instance, the construct indicator loadings varied from 0.680 to 0.963, thus indicating the superiority of HTMT in determining discriminant validity. Table 3 illustrates the HTMT estimation. The diagonal values of all constructs were under the threshold value of 0.85, which implies the establishment of discriminant validity. This study further assessed discriminant validity with loading and cross-loading values as presented in Supplementary Table 2. Based on the values, each construct reflected acceptable discriminant validity.
5.3 Structural model and path analysis
This study could adequately evaluate the structural model parameters as the constructs demonstrated satisfactory reliability and validity. The structural model was estimated in the following stage. Hair et al. (2019) suggested several structural model assessment steps involving collinearity, the significance of path coefficients (r2) and predictive relevance (Q2). The variance inflation factor (VIF) values were also assessed for collinearity pre-analysis. The estimated inner VIF value for endogenous constructs is presented in Table 3. As all the inner VIF values were under 3, collinearity was not an issue in this study (Hair et al., 2019).
Based on Table 4, the r2 for ecological worldview demonstrated that biospheric and egoistic values could explain 59.1% of EP changes, thus implying high explanatory power. The Q2 score of the model part reflected 0.435, which denoted strong predictive relevance. Meanwhile, the r2 value of 0.578 for AC suggested that EP could explain 57.8% of the variance involving AC. This construct depicted a Q2 value of 0.492, which implied high predictive relevance. The r2 value of 0.410 for AR indicated that AC may account for 41% of the variation in awareness of consequence (AC). This construct demonstrated a Q2 value of 0.318, which denoted strong predictive importance. Essentially, AR, AC, EP and SN attributed to 61.7% of the variation in PN with a Q2 value of 0.516, thus inferring a powerful predictive nature. The r2 value of 0.569 for intention towards organic food production indicated PN and SN with a Q2 value of 0.445 suggesting high predictive significance. The r2 value of 0.149 for intention towards organic food production indicated PN and SN with a Q2 value of 0.059 suggesting low predictive significance.
Table 4 presents the effect size (f2) values of each relationship. Based on Cohen (1988), effect sizes are trivial, minor, medium and substantial at 0.02, ≥ 0.02, ≥ 0.15 and ≥ 0.35, respectively. In observing the f2 values, both BV (f2 = 0.302) and EV (f2 = 0.224) reflected medium effects on EP. Similarly, EP (f2 values = 0.157) depicted medium impacts on AC. The AC (f2 values = 0.695) demonstrated a substantial influence on AR. Meanwhile, EP (f2 = 0.001) and AR (f2 = 0.001) denoted a trivial effect on PN. The AR (f2 values = 0.103) implied a minor effect on PN while SN (f2 values = 0.416) depicted a substantial effect on PN. Both SN (f2 values = 0.199) and PN (f2 values = 0.156) reflected medium effects on intention towards organic food production (IG). The IG effects on GO were medium (f2 values = 0.175).
Parallel to Hair et al. (2019), this study used PLS-SEM bootstrapping using a subsample of 5,000 with the bias-corrected accelerated bootstrap and two-tailed test to generate the significance of path coefficients. A 5% significance threshold with a p-value equivalent to or under 0.05 was chosen in this study. The path coefficients are classified in Tables 4 and 5. Based on the path coefficients, all the study hypotheses (excluding H5 and H7) were supported by empirical outcomes.
5. Discussion
The significant effects of BV (β = 0.456, t = 8.514, p < 0.0) and EV (β = 0.393, t = 7.010, p < 0.0) on EP reflected individuals’ belief and value system that promoted nature-oriented and environmental beliefs and values. Essentially, the study findings supported H1 and H2. The positive impacts of BV paralleled the VBN theory and past studies in promoting the human–nature link (Jansson et al., 2010; Lingqiong and Yan, 2021; Sharma and Gupta, 2020, Al Mamu et al., 2022a; Al Mamu et al., 2022 b). These findings are corroborated by Mamun et al. (2023) and Yang et al. (2024), who discovered that BV and EV had a beneficial impact on EP in relation to urban green gardening. As such, these findings provided a sound understanding of the ecological mindset of households through their BV. Households with higher BV tended to engage in pro-environmental by proactively producing organic food in rooftop gardens. The positive impacts of EV on environmental belief or EP proved intriguing as past studies strongly contended that egoistic individuals would consider how environmental decisions affected them personally, thus negatively affecting EP (De Groot and Steg, 2010). The reason underlying the positive effects of EV implied that the respondents already had their own rooftop gardens to produce organic food. Hence, the perceived benefits outweighed the perceived costs of organic food gardening on urban rooftops where self-centric values promoted pro-environmental beliefs. This finding provides potential scholars with novel evidence and empirical dimensions to extend current works.
The study findings supported the positive effect of EP on AC (β = 0.760, t =19.495, p < 0.0), thus indicating that ecological value raised the AC of environmental degradation and health concerns and supporting H3. These findings also paralleled past studies. In Al Mamun et al. (2022a, 2022a), individuals with pro-environmental ecological beliefs were more aware of environmental consequences. Perceivably, households with higher ecological beliefs proved highly conscious and aware of the implications of environmental and health issues owing to the AC towards organic food production. Such an assertion was validated by the study outcomes, which demonstrated the positive effects of AC concerning environmental degradation on AR (β = 0.640, t =14.341, p < 0.0) and supported H4. Household members’ understanding and awareness of the detriments underpinning environmental deterioration rendered them more responsible for engaging in pro-environmental and health initiatives. These conclusions corresponded to the VBN theory, Al Mamun et al. (2022a, 2022a) and Gkargkavouzi et al. (2019). These are supported by and Mamun et al. (2023) and Yang et al. (2024) who found positive effects of AC concerning urban green gardening on AR. Following the study findings, climate awareness increased one’s innate human responsibility to undertake climate-conserving measures in line with Fornara et al. (2016).
Our study results revealed that ecological worldview (β = −0.022, t = 0.327, p >0.05) had a negative and insignificant effect on PNs. This is opposite to hypothesis H5, which predicted a positive effect and contradicts the findings of Liobikienė and Poškus (2019) and Mamun et al. (2023). A possible cause for differences could be cultural differences in different regions. However, our findings are supported by Yang et al. (2024), who also found no significant effects of ecological worldview on PNs. The mixed findings on this relationship indicate that this complex chain should be further explored in different cultural settings.
The current study revealed a positive effect of AC concerning environmental issues on PN (β = 0.366, t = 4.494, p < 0.0) and supported H6. with the findings paralleled Al Mamun et al. (2022a, 2022a) and Gkargkavouzi et al. (2019) as AC impacted PN, which promoted organic food production in rooftop gardens. This conclusion offered pivotal directions for policymakers and environmental agencies. In a country resembling Bangladesh, annual climate destruction instigates the loss of millions of metric tons of grain, vegetables and fruits. Rooftop gardening could resolve such issues through greening processes and high air quality and food security. Household members should be provided with more awareness of environmental poverty through optimal practices that improve the environment and social resilience.
AR (β = 0.010, t = 0.228, p > 0.05) has an insignificant positive effect on PNs, which does not lend our support to hypothesis H7 that the ascription of responsibility increases the PNs towards pro-environmental behaviour. This finding is also opposite those of Mamun (2023) and Yang et al. (2024). Our findings indicate that feeling personally accountable for solving environmental concerns does not always lead to a personal inclination to participate in pro-environmental actions.
The SN resulted in PN (β = 0.517, t =7.575, p < 0.0) to facilitate organic food production on rooftop gardens and supported H8. The outcome corresponded to Al Mamun et al. (2022a) and Awais et al. (2022), who highlighted the SN ability to predict PN. Furthermore, individual psychological norms involving PN and SN improved the intention to produce organic food on rooftop gardens, which supported H9 and H10 following past studies. In line with Han (2015), SN increased the intention to engage in climate-friendly behaviours while Ünal et al. (2019) discovered that PN shaped the personal intention to protect the environment and engage in green behaviour. Al Mamun et al. (2022a) demonstrated that both PN and SN catalysed people’s intention to engage in ecological protection initiatives. Finally, the intention to produce organic food in rooftop gardens positively impacted the adoption of this initiative.
In terms of study contributions, the PN of a household denoted a meaningful mediator to examine the influence of VBN factors in predicting the intention to produce organic food in rooftop gardens. First, the mediation of PN between SN and organic food production intention in rooftop gardens supported H12. This mediation proved partial as SN indirectly impacted the organic food production intention in rooftop gardens. These results followed Al Mamun et al. (2022b) and Awais et al. (2022), which depicted a PN-SN link. This finding may impact environmental behavioural intention. In the study context, the PN of households also connected the social influence on organic food production intention in rooftop gardens. This situation offered pivotal insights that are supported by policies from different agencies to facilitate and promote household members to grow their own fruits and vegetables in home gardens.
The present study affirmed the mediating role of PN and ecological belief on organic food production intention in rooftop gardens and supported H13 and H14. In the casual path, BV and EV led to an enhanced EP under the VBN theory. Consequently, the causal chain of norm activation flowed from values to PN through EP and particular beliefs (AC and AR), which subsequently resulted in pro-environmental and health-related concerns and behavioural decisions. This finding proved crucial given the absence of a consensus on the features embedded in rooftop gardening, ecological importance and organic food production. Home gardeners produced organic food on their rooftops owing to positive environmental externalities, personal enjoyment and the health benefits of organic foods. As such, the meditating role of PN and ecological belief established a novel direction for VBN theory proponents.
5.1 Theoretical implications
This study primarily aimed to predict organic food intention and production in urban non-commercial rooftop gardens. The existing research in Bangladesh has not explored rooftop gardening from the perspective of household gardeners and their motivations and intentions around organic food production. Therefore, the attempt bridges knowledge gaps concerning rooftop organic food production by predicting organic food production among rooftop gardeners in Bangladeshi cities. Furthermore, previously, the VBN theory was substantially utilised to forecast broad pro-environmental (Brown et al., 2009; O'Connor et al., 2017; Tandon et al., 2020), green environmental behaviour (Afridi et al., 2021; Awais et al., 2022; Canlas et al., 2022) and green gardening (Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2023; Mamun et al., 2023; Yang et al., 2024a; Yang et al., 2024b). Recently, Mamun et al. (2023) and Yang (2024) utilised for green urban gardening. In this regard, based on empirical outcomes, the exogenous constructs in the model could explain a significant percentage of variance in endogenous variables. The f2 and Q2 values of the model implied acceptable predictive relevance. These results denoted high predictive potential to explain organic food intention and production in urban rooftop gardens. The proposed model efficacy in terms of predicting organic food production intention and behaviour within urban areas, comprehensiveness and relevance to future works through model expansion results in the achievement of goals that critically contribute to theoretical and practical implications.
In contrast to the studies conducted by Mamun et al. (2023), this research focused on investigating the influence of PN and ecological belief as mediators on the intention to produce organic food in rooftop gardens. Through this casual path, we have demonstrated that BV and EV resulted in an amplified EP. The causal chain of norm activation may be traced from values to PNs via environmental perception (EP) and specific beliefs (AC and AR). This sequence ultimately leads to the development of pro-environmental and health-related concerns, as well as behavioural choices. Our study investigation and empirical findings add novel direction for VBN theory proponents, where PN and ecological belief will play their meditating role.
5.2 Practical implications
Deforestation and health concerns are rising rapidly amidst urban expansion. As such, government agencies should demonstrate necessary environmental and health-concerned behaviours. Rooftop gardeners who are highly committed to their garden, reflect a sound ecological balance and fulfil their health needs produce more organic food on their rooftop gardens and promote them to relatives, friends and their immediate environment. Ultimately, the increase in urban rooftop organic food production would result in a greener and more environmentally friendly society. Government agencies, such as municipal authorities should launch awareness companies in their local area. In supporting this, our findings revealed that PNs to rooftop organic food production were promoted via environmental perception (EP) and specific beliefs (AC and AR). Such findings highlight that ecological worldviews with huge awareness with increased perceived responsibility towards the environment could shape PNs and pro-environmental behaviours. Therefore, awareness-building programs about the benefits of rooftop organic food production are necessary. At the same time, in promoting greener urban activities, such authorities may provide relevant concessions, including tax holiday schemes. Government bodies, such as forest, health and urban planning departments should collectively promote greener rooftop garden activities to outline the ultimate benefits for community members and households. Such agencies should also introduce optimal practices with inspirational communication approaches that promote greener behaviour and mitigate issues concerning climate and food safety. Simultaneously, the government should develop specific long-term support and reward measures to substitute short-term incentives. Likewise, community leaders, environmental and development groups and governments have the ability to create a thorough structure to encourage environmental principles and standards inside communities, so enabling society to effectively tackle social, economic and environmental challenges. In addition, the use of strategic community-based promotional initiatives and participatory learning methodologies may greatly enhance the interest and acceptance of rooftop organic food production.
5.3 Limitation and future research direction
This study encountered several limitations. As the current work focused on urban non-commercial home gardening, further research could consider exploring commercial rooftop food production. In addition, the current analysis only involved Bangladeshi rooftop gardeners. Potential scholars should perform comparative studies across other regions and nations to examine cultural beliefs concerning organic food production. The present data were gathered with a cross-sectional method. Thus, it would prove intriguing to outline the gradual evolvement of individual beliefs, values and behaviours regarding organic food production in home gardens and on rooftops. People’s concerns about risk attributes in products and actions may result in detrimental effects. Thus, future studies should assert the association of risk perceptions with personal factors to influence behavioural intentions (Hoque et al., 2018). Research on risk perceptions with the current model would prove interesting. Socio-demographic factors constituting age, gender and education could also be included as key factors in the study model.
6. Conclusion
This study aimed to predict organic food intention and production in urban, non-commercial rooftop gardens using an integrated model of the TPB and VBN theories. The results provided support for most of the hypothesised relationships and demonstrated the model’s ability to explain a significant portion of the variance in organic food intentions and production. Specifically, biospheric and egoistic values led to an improved ecological worldview (EP). The EP, AC and SN predict PNs. In addition, PNs and SNs predicted the intention to produce organic food in urban rooftop gardens. Strong intentions could encourage and predict the adoption of organic food production in rooftop gardens. Based on the study outcomes, PN partially mediated the relationship between SN and the intention to produce organic food. Furthermore, the value–behaviour nexus performed serial mediation through beliefs, norms and intentions. The mediating roles of PNs and ecological perception provided novel theoretical contributions. Overall, the results show that the integrated TPB-VBN model can be used to make predictions. They also have implications for promoting sustainable urban agriculture by making people more aware of the environment, having more social influence and feeling more responsible for growing organic food. Therefore, our study provides theoretical and practical implications.
Figures
Demographic characteristics
Categories | No Respondent | Frequency (%) | |
---|---|---|---|
Family decision-maker | Yes | 174 | 53.4 |
No | 152 | 46.6 | |
Occupations | Student | 10 | 3.1 |
Private job | 135 | 41.4 | |
Public job | 86 | 26.4 | |
Self-employed/business | 64 | 19.6 | |
Housewife | 31 | 9.5 | |
Rooftop garden space | 500–750 square feet | 94 | 28.8 |
751–1,000 square feet | 85 | 26.1 | |
1,000–1250 square feet | 77 | 23.6 | |
1,251–1500 square feet | 54 | 16.6 | |
1,500 and above square feet | 16 | 4.9 | |
Major cities | Dhaka | 209 | 64.1 |
Chittagong | 117 | 35.9 | |
Metro area | Chowkbazar | 28 | 8.6 |
Double mooring | 27 | 8.3 | |
Gulshan | 35 | 10.7 | |
Mohammadpur | 32 | 9.8 | |
Mirpur | 38 | 11.7 | |
Paltan | 36 | 11.0 | |
Panchlaish | 32 | 9.8 | |
Patenga | 30 | 9.2 | |
Uttara | 38 | 11.7 | |
Tejgaon | 30 | 9.2 |
Source: Authors’ own creation
Validity and reliability
Code | Factor loading |
Cronbach’s alpha |
Dijkstra-Hensele's rho | Composite reliability |
Average variance extracted |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ascription of responsibility | AR1 | 0.876 | 0.937 | 0.942 | 0.952 | 0.798 |
AR2 | 0.928 | |||||
AR3 | 0.880 | |||||
AR4 | 0.908 | |||||
AR5 | 0.873 | |||||
Awareness of consequences | AC1 | 0.912 | 0.957 | 0.959 | 0.967 | 0.855 |
AC2 | 0.942 | |||||
AC3 | 0.948 | |||||
AC4 | 0.931 | |||||
AC5 | 0.888 | |||||
Biospheric values | BV1 | 0.937 | 0.964 | 0.965 | 0.974 | 0.903 |
BV2 | 0.954 | |||||
BV3 | 0.947 | |||||
BV4 | 0.963 | |||||
Ecological worldview | EP1 | 0.891 | 0.916 | 0.918 | 0.937 | 0.749 |
EP2 | 0.834 | |||||
EP3 | 0.847 | |||||
EP4 | 0.870 | |||||
EP5 | 0.883 | |||||
Egoistic values | EV1 | 0.823 | 0.929 | 0.934 | 0.947) | 0.780 |
EV2 | 0.901 | |||||
EV3 | 0.911 | |||||
EV4 | 0.890 | |||||
EV5 | 0.889 | |||||
Intention towards organic food production | IG1 | 0.876 | 0.945 | 0.947 | 0.957 | 0.789 |
IG2 | 0.744 | |||||
IG3 | 0.936 | |||||
IG4 | 0.936 | |||||
IG5 | 0.919 | |||||
IG6 | 0.906 | |||||
Personal norms | PN1 | 0.902 | 0.954 | 0.955 | 0.965 | 0.846 |
PN2 | 0.926 | |||||
PN3 | 0.922 | |||||
PN4 | 0.921 | |||||
PN5 | 0.927 | |||||
Social norms | SN1 | 0.816 | 0.921 | 0.926 | 0.941 | 0.762 |
SN2 | 0.907 | |||||
SN3 | 0.919 | |||||
SN4 | 0.882 | |||||
SN5 | 0.835 | |||||
Adoption of organic food production methods | GO1 | 0.680 | 0.905 | 0.956 | 0.915 | 0.686 |
GO2 | 0.833 | |||||
GO3 | 0.801 | |||||
GO4 | 0.899 | |||||
GO5 | 0.908 |
Source: Authors’ own creation
Discriminant validity
GO | AR | AC | BV | EP | EV | IG | PN | SN | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) | |||||||||
GO | – | ||||||||
AR | 0.100 | – | |||||||
AC | 0.231 | 0.668 | – | ||||||
BV | 0.148 | 0.552 | 0.826 | – | |||||
EP | 0.213 | 0.519 | 0.808 | 0.749 | – | ||||
EV | 0.198 | 0.434 | 0.704 | 0.670 | 0.735 | – | |||
IG | 0.316 | 0.374 | 0.574 | 0.481 | 0.470 | 0.375 | – | ||
PN | 0.379 | 0.448 | 0.704 | 0.583 | 0.594 | 0.542 | 0.731 | – | |
SN | 0.336 | 0.401 | 0.653 | 0.534 | 0.626 | 0.527 | 0.757 | 0.780 | – |
Fornell-Larcker Criterion | |||||||||
GO | 0.828 | ||||||||
AR | 0.102 | 0.893 | |||||||
AC | 0.288 | 0.640 | 0.925 | ||||||
BV | 0.175 | 0.530 | 0.793 | 0.950 | |||||
EP | 0.244 | 0.485 | 0.760 | 0.707 | 0.865 | ||||
EV | 0.204 | 0.414 | 0.666 | 0.637 | 0.683 | 0.883 | |||
IG | 0.386 | 0.357 | 0.546 | 0.460 | 0.441 | 0.353 | 0.888 | ||
PN | 0.443 | 0.429 | 0.673 | 0.560 | 0.559 | 0.513 | 0.696 | 0.920 | |
SN | 0.395 | 0.379 | 0.613 | 0.504 | 0.576 | 0.486 | 0.709 | 0.733 | 0.873 |
Variance Inflation Factor Values | |||||||||
GO | |||||||||
AR | 1.696 | ||||||||
AC | 1.000 | 2.385 | |||||||
BV | 1.683 | ||||||||
EP | 1.000 | 2.484 | |||||||
EV | 1.683 | ||||||||
IG | 1.000 | ||||||||
PN | 2.159 | ||||||||
SN | 2.159 | 1.680 |
Ascription of responsibility = AR; awareness of consequences = AC; biospheric values = BV; ecological worldview = EP; egoistic value = EV; intention towards organic food production = IG; personal norms = PN; social norms = SN; adoption of organic food production methods = GO
Source: Authors’ own creation
Hypothesis testing
Hypothesis | Beta | CI-min | CI-max | t-value | p-values | f2 | r2 | Q2 | Decision | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | BV → EP | 0.456 | 0.377 | 0.550 | 8.514 | 0.000 | 0.302 | 0.591 | 0.435 | Supported |
H2 | EV → EP | 0.393 | 0.292 | 0.475 | 7.010 | 0.000 | 0.224 | Supported | ||
H3 | EP → AC | 0.760 | 0.691 | 0.815 | 19.495 | 0.000 | 1.370 | 0.578 | 0.492 | Supported |
H4 | AC → AR | 0.640 | 0.560 | 0.706 | 14.341 | 0.000 | 0.695 | 0.410 | 0.318 | Supported |
H5 | EP → PN | −0.022 | −0.132 | 0.087 | 0.327 | 0.372 | 0.001 | 0.617 | 0.516 | Rejected |
H6 | AC → PN | 0.366 | 0.263 | 0.539 | 4.494 | 0.000 | 0.103 | Supported | ||
H7 | AR → PN | 0.010 | −0.056 | 0.084 | 0.228 | 0.410 | 0.000 | Rejected | ||
H8 | SN → PN | 0.517 | 0.397 | 0.618 | 7.575 | 0.000 | 0.416 | Supported | ||
H9 | PN → IG | 0.381 | 0.276 | 0.486 | 5.779 | 0.000 | 0.156 | 0.569 | 0.445 | Supported |
H10 | SN → IG | 0.430 | 0.335 | 0.516 | 7.830 | 0.000 | 0.199 | Supported | ||
H11 | IG → GO | 0.386 | 0.310 | 0.442 | 9.783 | 0.000 | 0.175 | 0.149 | 0.059 | Supported |
Ascription of responsibility = AR; awareness of consequences = AC; biospheric values = BV; ecological worldview = EP; egoistic value = EV; intention towards organic food production = IG; personal norms = PN; social norms = SN; adoption of organic food production methods = GO
Source: Authors’ own creation
Indirect effects
Hypothesis | Beta | t-value | CI-min | CI-max | p-values | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H12 | SN → PN → IG | 0.197 | 5.737 | 0.143 | 0.255 | 0.000 |
H13 | BV → EP → AC → PN → IG → GO | 0.019 | 2.562 | 0.008 | 0.032 | 0.005 |
H14 | EV → EP → AC → PN → IG → GO | 0.016 | 2.359 | 0.007 | 0.029 | 0.009 |
Ascription of responsibility = AR; awareness of consequences = AC; biospheric values = BV; ecological worldview = EP; egoistic value = EV; intention towards organic food production = IG; personal norms = PN; social norms = SN; adoption of organic food production methods = GO
Source: Authors’ own creation
Supplementary material
The supplementary material for this article can be found online.
References
Afridi, S.A., Khan, W., Haider, M., Shahjehan, A. and Afsar, B. (2021), “Generativity and green purchasing behavior: moderating role of man-nature orientation and perceived behavioral control”, Sage Open, Vol. 11 No. 4, p. 21582440211054480.
Ajani, A. and van der Geest, K. (2021), “Climate change in rural Pakistan: evidence and experiences from a people-centered perspective”, Sustainability Science, Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 1999-2011.
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 179-211.
Al Mamun, A., Hayat, N., Masud, M.M., Makhbul, Z.K.M., Jannat, T. and Salleh, M.F.M. (2022a), “Modelling the significance of value-belief-norm theory in predicting solid waste management intention and behavior”, Frontiers in Environmental Science, Vol. 10, p. 906002, doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.906002.
Al Mamun, A., Hayat, N., Mohiuddin, M., Salameh, A.A., Ali, M.H. and Zainol, N.R. (2022b), “Modelling the significance of value-belief-norm theory in predicting workplace energy conservation behaviour”, Frontiers in Energy Research, Vol. 10, p. 15, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2022.940595.
Ansari, M.S., Moraiet, M.A. and Ahmad, S. (2014), “Insecticides: impact on the environment and human health”, Environmental Deterioration and Human Health: Natural and Anthropogenic Determinants, pp. 99-123.
Appolloni, E., Orsini, F., Specht, K., Thomaier, S., Sanye-Mengual, E., Pennisi, G. and Gianquinto, G. (2021), “The global rise of urban rooftop agriculture: a review of worldwide cases”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 296, p. 126556.
Ateş, H. (2020), “Merging theory of planned behavior and value identity personal norm model to explain pro-environmental behaviors”, Sustainable Production and Consumption, Vol. 24, pp. 169-180.
Awais, M., Fatima, T. and Awan, T.M. (2022), “Assessing behavioral intentions of solar energy usage through value-belief-norm theory”, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 33 No. 6.
Baron, R.M. and Kenny, D.A. (1986), “The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 51 No. 6, p. 1173.
BBS (2023), “Statistical yearbook of Bangladesh 2022 Bangladesh bureau of statistics”, available at: https://bbs.gov.bd/
Bhuiyan, M.A.R. and Ferdous, Z. (2021), “Human perspectives on rooftop gardening for ensuring food security in covid-19 situation in Dhaka city, Bangladesh”, Big Data in Agriculture (BDA), Vol. 3 No. 2, doi: 10.26480/bda.02.2021.74.78.
Brown, E., Dury, S. and Holdsworth, M. (2009), “Motivations of consumers that use local, organic fruit and vegetable box schemes in Central England and Southern France”, Appetite, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 183-188.
Canlas, I.P., Karpudewan, M. and Khan, N.S.M.A. (2022), “More than twenty years of value-belief-Norm theory of environmentalism: what has been and yet to be done?”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, Vol. 18 No. 2, p. e2269.
Carfora, V., Cavallo, C., Catellani, P., Del Giudice, T. and Cicia, G. (2021), “Why do consumers intend to purchase natural food? Integrating theory of planned behavior, value-belief-norm theory, and trust”, Nutrients, Vol. 13 No. 6, p. 1904.
Chen, M.F. (2020), “Selecting environmental psychology theories to predict people’s consumption intention of locally produced organic foods”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 455-468.
Chowdhury, M.M.I., Rahman, S.M., Abubakar, I.R., Aina, Y.A., Hasan, M.A. and Khondaker, A.N. (2021), “A review of policies and initiatives for climate change mitigation and environmental sustainability in Bangladesh”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 1133-1161.
Chowdhury, M.H., Eashat, M.F.S., Sarkar, C., Purba, N.H., Habib, M.A., Sarkar, P. and Shill, L.C. (2020), “Rooftop gardening to improve food security in Dhaka city: a review of the present practices”, International Multidisciplinary Research Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 17-21.
Chua, K.B., Quoquab, F., Mohammad, J. and Basiruddin, R. (2016), “The mediating role of new ecological paradigm between value orientations and pro-environmental personal norm in the agricultural context”, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, Vol. 28 No. 2.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
De Groot, J.I.M. and Steg, L. (2010), “Relationships between value orientations, self-determined motivational types and pro-environmental behavioural intentions”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 368-378.
Department of Agricultural Extension (2020), “Publication reports of projects, department of agricultural extension”, available at: https://dae.gov.bd/
Dhankhar, N. and Kumar, J. (2023), “Impact of increasing pesticides and fertilizers on human health: a review”, Materials Today: Proceedings.
Donmez-Turan, A. and Kiliclar, I.E. (2021), “The analysis of pro-environmental behaviour based on ecological worldviews, environmental training/knowledge and goal frames”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 279, p. 123518.
Dowd, K. and Burke, K.J. (2013), “The influence of ethical values and food choice motivations on intentions to purchase sustainably sourced foods”, Appetite, Vol. 69, pp. 137-144.
Ebissa, G., Yeshitela, K., Desta, H. and Fetene, A. (2023), “Urban agriculture and environmental sustainability”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 1-17.
Edenbrandt, A.K., Lagerkvist, C.J. and Nordström, J. (2021), “Interested, indifferent or active information avoiders of carbon labels: cognitive dissonance and ascription of responsibility as motivating factors”, Food Policy, Vol. 101, p. 102036.
European Network for Rural Development (2014), “EU rural review 18: organic farming”, available at: https://enrd.ec.europa.eu/publications/eu-rural-review-18-organicfarming_en (accessed 31 May 2022).
Feather, N.T. (1995), “Values, valences, and choice: the influences of values on the perceived attractiveness and choice of alternatives”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 68 No. 6, p. 1135.
Ferdous, Z., Zulfiqar, F., Datta, A., Hasan, A.K. and Sarker, A. (2021), “Potential and challenges of organic agriculture in Bangladesh: a review”, Journal of Crop Improvement, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 403-426.
Fornara, F., Pattitoni, P., Mura, M. and Strazzera, E. (2016), “Predicting intention to improve household energy efficiency: the role of value-belief-norm theory, normative and informational influence, and specific attitude”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 45, pp. 1-10.
Gao, J., Al Mamun, A., Yang, Q., Rahman, M.K. and Masud, M.M. (2024), “Environmental and health values, beliefs, norms and compatibility on intention to adopt hydroponic farming among unemployed youth”, Scientific Reports, Vol. 14 No. 1, p. 1592.
Gkargkavouzi, A., Halkos, G. and Matsiori, S. (2019), “Environmental behavior in a private-sphere context: integrating theories of planned behavior and value belief norm, self-identity and habit”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 148, pp. 145-156.
Goh, E., Ritchie, B. and Wang, J. (2017), “Non-compliance in national parks: an extension of the theory of planned behaviour model with pro-environmental values”, Tourism Management, Vol. 59, pp. 123-127.
Hair, J.F., Jr, Matthews, L.M., Matthews, R.L. and Sarstedt, M. (2017), “PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use”, International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 107-123.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2011), “PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet”, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 139-152.
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24, doi: 10.1108/ebr-11-2018-0203.
Han, H. (2015), “Travelers' pro-environmental behavior in a green lodging context: converging value-belief-norm theory and the theory of planned behavior”, Tourism Management, Vol. 47, pp. 164-177.
Han, G., Arbuckle, J.G. and Grudens-Schuck, N. (2021), “Motivations, goals, and benefits associated with organic grain farming by producers in Iowa, US”, Agricultural Systems, Vol. 191, p. 103175.
Hoque, M.E., Nik Hashim, N.M.H. and Razzaque, M.A. (2018), “Effects of communication and financial concerns on banking attitude-behaviour relations”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 38 Nos 13/14, pp. 1017-1042.
Hörisch, J., Wulfsberg, I. and Schaltegger, S. (2020), “The influence of feedback and awareness of consequences on the development of corporate sustainability action over time”, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 638-650.
Hwang, J., Cho, S. B. and Kim, W. (2021), “Consequences of psychological benefits of using eco-friendly services in the context of drone food delivery services”, Future of tourism marketing, Routledge, London, pp. 67-78.
Imaningsih, E.S., Tjiptoherijanto, P., Heruwasto, I. and Aruan, D.T.H. (2019), “Linking of egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric values to green loyalty: the role of green functional benefit, green monetary cost and green satisfaction”, The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 277-286.
IPCC (2014), “Climate change 2014: Synthesis report”, Contribution of Working Groups, I., II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds Core Writing Team, R. K. Pachauri, and L. A. Meyer (Geneva: IPCC), p. 151.
IPCC (2022), “Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability”, Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D.C., Tignor, M., Poloczanska, E.S., Mintenbeck, K., Alegría, A., Craig, M., Langsdorf, S., Löschke, S., Möller, V., Okem, A. and Rama, B. (Eds), Cambridge University Press.
Islam, M.J. (2020), “Rooftop gardening grows in pandemic”, The Business Standard, available at: www.tbsnews.net/environment/rooftop-gardening-grows-pandemic-158635
Islam, M., Al Nayeem, A., Majumder, A.K. and Elahi, K.T. (2019), “Study on the status of roof top gardening in selected residential areas of Dhaka city, Bangladesh”, Malaysian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 31-34.
Islam, S., Alam, M.R. and Rashid, K.J. (2023), “Identification of potential rooftops for gardening and contributions of RTGs to improve the socio-economic condition and promote a sustainable urban environment in the changing climatic condition of Bangladesh”, Urban Commons, Future Smart Cities and Sustainability, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 511-532.
Jansson, J., Marell, A. and Nordlund, A. (2010), “Green consumer behavior: determinants of curtailment and eco-innovation adoption”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 358-370.
Kodaparthi, A., Kondakindi, V.R., Kehkashaan, L., Belli, M.V., Chowdhury, H.N., Aleti, A., … and Chepuri, K. (2024), “Environmental conservation for sustainable agriculture”, Prospects for Soil Regeneration and Its Impact on Environmental Protection, Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, pp. 15-45.
Lingqiong, W. and Yan, Z. (2021), “How love of nature promotes green consumer behaviors: the mediating role of biospheric values, ecological worldview, and personal norms”, PsyCh Journal, Vol. 10 No. 3, doi: 10.1002/pchj.430.
Mamun, A.A., Hayat, N., Mohiuddin, M., Salameh, A.A. and Alam, S.S. (2023), “Green gardening practices among urban botanists: using the value-belief-norm model”, Sage Open, Vol. 13 No. 3, p. 21582440231187583.
Mie, A., Andersen, H.R., Gunnarsson, S., Kahl, J., Kesse-Guyot, E., Rembiałkowska, E., … and Grandjean, P. (2017), “Human health implications of organic food and organic agriculture: a comprehensive review”, Environmental Health, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 1-22.
Nahrin, K. (2019), “Environmental area conservation through urban planning: case study in Dhaka”, Journal of Property, Planning and Environmental Law, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 55-71.
O’Connor, E.L., Sims, L. and White, K.M. (2017), “Ethical food choices: examining people’s fair trade purchasing decisions”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 60, pp. 105-112.
Papagiannakis, G. and Lioukas, S. (2017), “Corporate environmental management: individual‐level drivers and the moderating role of charismatic leadership”, European Management Review, Vol. 15 No. 4, p. 932.
Park, T. and Ryu, D. (2015), “Drivers of technology commercialization and performance in SMEs: the moderating effect of environmental dynamism”, Management Decision, Vol. 53 No. 2.
Pawar, S., Ikram, M. and Khan, S. (2024), “Chapter–6 health and environmental impacts of agricultural pollution. A comprehensive exploration of soil”, Water, and Air Pollution in Agriculture, Vol. 103.
Razzaghi Borkhani, F., Khaleghi, B., Mirtorabi, M.S. and Mohammadi, Y. (2023), “Explaining farmers’ pro-environmental behaviors toward plant, soil and water conservation in Iran: an application of value–belief–norm theory”, International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 2539-2550.
Rizve, S. (2024), Gardening services shaping a greener Dhaka skyline. The Business Standard, available at: www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/gardening-services-shaping-greener-dhaka-skyline-807066
Roy, S. and Sowgat, T. (2020), “Dhaka: diverse, dense, and damaged neighbourhoods and the impacts of unplanned urbanisation”.
Ryan, A.M. and Spash, C.L. (2012), “The awareness of consequences scale: an exploration, empirical analysis, and reinterpretation”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 42 No. 10, pp. 2505-2540.
Sajjaduzzaman, M.K.M.A., Koike, M.A.S.A.O. and Muhammed, N. (2005), “An analytical study on cultural and financial aspects of roof gardening in Dhaka metropolitan city of Bangladesh”, Int J Agri Biol, Vol. 7, pp. 184-187.
Samui, S., Das, S.R., Pahari, A., Nandy, P., Nayak, B.K. and Das, S.K. (2024), “Prospect of organic agriculture in the present climate change scenario”, Climate Change Impacts on Soil-Plant-Atmosphere Continuum, pp. 229-253. Springer Nature Singapore, Singapore.
Schiermeier, Q. (2018), “Droughts, heatwaves and floods: how to tell when climate change is to blame”, Nature, Vol. 560 No. 7716, pp. 20-23.
Schwartz, S.H. (1992), “Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries”, Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol, Vol. 25, pp. 1-65.
Sekaran, U. and Bougie. R (2003) Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach, 4th ed., John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
Sharma, N. and Singhvi, R. (2018), “Consumers perception and behaviour towards organic food: a systematic review of literature”, Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 2152-2155.
Sharma, R. and Gupta, A. (2020), “Pro-environmental behaviour among tourists visiting national parks: application of value-belief-norm theory in an emerging economy context”, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 829-840.
Shin, Y.H., Moon, H., Jung, S.E. and Severt, K. (2017), “The effect of environmental values and attitudes on consumer willingness to pay more for organic menus: a value-attitude-behavior approach”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 33, pp. 113-121.
Shin, Y. H., Im, J., Jung, S.E., and Severt, K. (2018), “The theory of planned behavior and the norm activation model approach to consumer behavior regarding organic menus”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 69, pp. 21-29.
Stern, P. (2000), “Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior”, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 407-424.
Tandon, A., Dhir, A., Kaur, P., Kushwah, S. and Salo, J. (2020), “Why do people buy organic food? The moderating role of environmental concerns and trust”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 57, p. 102247.
Tehseen, S., Ramayah, T., and Sajilan, S. (2017), “Testing and controlling for common method variance: a review of available methods”, Journal of management sciences, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 142-168.
Trautwein, U., Babazade, J., Trautwein, S. and Lindenmeier, J. (2021), “Exploring pro-environmental behavior in Azerbaijan: an extended value-belief-norm approach”, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 2, doi: 10.1108/JIMA-03-2021-0082.
Uddin, M.J., Bhuiyan, M.K.R., Akhter, R., Moyazzama, K. and Ghosh, P. (2021), “Rooftop gardening in Chattogram city areas of Bangladesh-an empirical study”, Journal of Agricultural Science and Engineering Innovation (JASEI), Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 3-13.
Ünal, A.B., Steg, L. and Granskaya, J. (2019), “To support or not to support, that is the question: testing the VBN theory in predicting support for car use reduction policies in Russia”, Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 119, p. 73.
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. and Keizer, K. (2013a), “It is a moral issue: The relationship between environmental self-identity, obligation-based intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour”, Global environmental change, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 1258-1265.
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. and Keizer, K. (2013b), “The value of environmental self-identity: the relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 34, pp. 55-56.
Vermeir, I. and Verbeke, W. (2008), “Sustainable food consumption among young adults in Belgium: theory of planned behaviour and the role of confidence and values”, Ecological Economics, Vol. 64 No. 3, pp. 542-553.
Wang, H.C. and Doong, H.S. (2010), “Nine issues for Internet-based survey research in service industries”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 30 No. 14, pp. 2387-2399.
Wang, Z., Guo, D., Wang, X., Zhang, B. and Wang, B. (2018), “How does information publicity influence residents’ behaviour intentions around e-waste recycling?”, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 133, pp. 1-9.
Wittenberg, I., Blöbaum, A. and Matthies, E. (2018), “Environmental motivations for energy use in PV households: proposal of a modified norm activation model for the specific context of PV households”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 55, pp. 110-120.
Wu, J., Wu, H.C., Hsieh, C.M. and Ramkissoon, H. (2022), “Face consciousness, personal norms, and environmentally responsible behavior of Chinese tourists: evidence from a lake tourism site”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 50, pp. 148-158.
Yang, Q., Xinyue, L., Hoque, M.E., Al Mamun, A., Rahman, M.K. and Yao, J. (2023), “Modelling the mass consumption potential of organic food: evidence from an emerging economy”, Plos One, Vol. 18 No. 9, p. e0291089.
Yang, Q., Al Mamun, A., Naznen, F. and Masud, M.M. (2024a), “Adoption of conservative agricultural practices among rural Chinese farmers”, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Yang, Q., Wu, M., Al Mamun, A., Gao, J. and Masud, M.M. (2024b), “Organic food production among Chinese urban botanists”, Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Yang, C., Zhang, Y., Xue, Y., Wang, J., and Zhang, X. (2024c), “Exploring differences of farmers’ intention to adopt agricultural low-carbon technologies: an application of TPB and VBN combination”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, pp. 1-24.
Zhang, L., Ruiz-Menjivar, J., Luo, B., Liang, Z. and Swisher, M.E. (2020), “Predicting climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviors in agricultural production: a comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the value-belief-norm theory”, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 68, p. 101408.
Further reading
Badsar, M., Moghim, M. and Ghasemi, M. (2023), “Analysis of factors influencing farmers’ sustainable environmental behavior in agriculture activities: integration of the planned behavior and the protection motivation theories”, Environment, Development and Sustainability, Vol. 25 No. 9, pp. 9903-9934.
Dillon, D. and Lee, S.T. (2023), “Green spaces as healthy places: correlates of urban green space use in Singapore”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 20 No. 17, p. 6711.
Gao, J., Al Mamun, A., Yang, Q., Rahman, M.K. and Masud, M.M. (2024), “Environmental and health values, beliefs, norms and compatibility on intention to adopt hydroponic farming among unemployed youth”, Scientific Reports, Vol. 14 No. 1, p. 1592.
Vanhonacker, F., Van Loo, E.J., Gellynck, X. and Verbeke, W. (2013), “Flemish consumer attitudes towards more sustainable food choices”, Appetite, Vol. 62, pp. 7-16.
Wang, X. and Zhang, C. (2020), “Contingent effects of social norms on tourists’ proenvironmental behaviours: the role of Chinese traditionality”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 28 No. 10, pp. 1646-1664.
Acknowledgements
Funding: This study has not received any direct funding.
Declaration section: Conflicts of interest: There is no conflicts of interest.
Corresponding author
About the authors
Mohammad Enamul Hoque working as an Assistant Professor at BRAC Business School, BRAC University. His research interests are in the areas of applied economics and finance, green finance, climate finance, asset pricing, monetary economics and financial consumer behaviour. Hoque's work has appeared in the following journals: Borsa Istanbul Review, Cogent Economic and Finance, Economic Research, Energies, Energy Economics, International Journal of Emerging Markets, International Journal of Finance and Economics, International Journal of Financial Studies, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, Journal of Financial Service Marketing, Journal of Islamic Marketing, Mathematics, Prague Economic Paper, Renewable Energy and Service Industries Journal.
Abdullah Al Mamun has been working at the UKM – Graduate School of Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia since January 2022 as an Associate Professor. His research interests include development economics, entrepreneurship and environmental economics. He received 19 grants, published seven books and more than 200 articles and book chapters. He was the founding managing editor of the Journal of Entrepreneurship and Business, published by Universiti Malaysia Kelantan. He served as Special Issues Editor for the journals: Transnational Corporations Review and Journal of Sustainable Finance and Investment (Taylor and Francis); as a Member of the Editorial Review Board for the Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies (Emerald); and as an Article Editor for SAGE Open. He was the recipient of the University Excellent Service Award for Publication from 2014 to 2018 from Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Malaysia. He also received the Emerald Literati Award as Outstanding Reviewer in 2019.
Perengki Susanto is a Professor at the Department of Management, Faculty of Economics, Universitas Negeri Padang. His main areas of interest in research include strategic management and marketing. He has published journal articles in the fields of entrepreneurial orientation, social media capability, market orientation, marketing capabilities, e-money, strategic management challenges and SME research.