TOPIC

REPORT ON ATTITUDE TOWARDS ECO PRODUCTS IN DILLI HAAT

SUBMITTED TO

Ms TAVISHI

Submitted by

Subhamoy das(12)

Atul sharma(11)

Pawas Mishra

Eshaan

1

INDEX

S. No Particulars Page No.

1 Abstract 3

2 Introduction 4

3 Literature Review 5-6

4 Data, Variable and Methodology 7

5 Questionnaire 8-11

6 Working & Analysis 12

7 Assumptions 12

8 Discriptive Analysis 12-15

9 Results 16

10 Value & Limitation 17

11 Conclusion & References 18

12 Appendix 19-22

2

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to examine the variables that affect the consumer attitude towards

green recyclable products, and then differentiate the consumer in two different group of male and

female on the basis of factors or variables.

Initially we selected 12 variables and prepared a Questionnaire to measure the attitude of

customers towards green recyclable products through these variables but 3 variables were of not

our use so we drop them. We conducted a questionnaire to identify variables. The Questionnaire

was designed based on Likert scale.

Keywords: Green Marketing, Consumer Satisfaction, Environmental Safety, Green Products,

Recyclable.

3

INTRODUCTION

As with most marketing and advertising jargon, the term “green” can be defined in many ways—it definition tweaked to support a particular message or point of view. In recent years, “green” has even made its way into the scientific lexicon (e.g., “green chemistry”). Yet, while the general consensus is that “green” refers, in some way, to environmentally-preferable attributes of a product, service, and/or technology, there is no single, universal definition of the term.This white paper examines what constitutes a green product, how the term “green” has been used and misused, and how green products can affect indoor environmental quality (IEQ) and human health. Additionally, this paper will explore federal and state government “green chemistry” initiatives, regulations, guidelines and how they are advancing product technology.Today, terms like “green” and “greener” have become buzzwords of choice to describe all thingssustainable and environmentally friendly. While they are often used interchangeably, each termactually means something different In their critical essay, Green Versus Sustainability: From Semantics to Enlightenment, Yanarella, Levine and Lancaster explain that “green” refers to individual products and processes, whereas “sustainable” relates to whole systems of which individual consumer products and other commercial materials are a part. “Green” also tends to focus on a single attribute of a product, rather than addressing the overall system in which a product is designed, constructed, purchased, used, or discarded. “Sustainable” encompasses the entire system from design through disposal. According to the authors, “Green evokes small incremental improvements in social practices, modern technology, and human habitats, while sustainability implies a revolution in organizing our personal and collective lives and inhabiting the planet” (Yaranella et al 2009). One of the earliest and most comprehensive definitions of “sustainable” comes from the 1994 Oslo Roundtable on Sustainable Production. Sustainable consumption was defined as “an umbrella term that brings together a number of key issues, such as meeting needs, enhancing quality of life, improving resource efficiency, minimizing waste, taking a life-cycle perspective, and taking into account the equity dimension” and providing “the same or better services to meet the basic requirements of life and the aspiration for improvement, for both current and future generations, while continually reducing environmental damage and risks to human health” (Hepting 2007). Finally, “environmentally friendly” refers to products or services that are not harmful to the outdoor environment or its inhabitants. However, for more than a decade, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued warnings about products or services marketed as environmentally friendly, environmentally safe, environmentally preferable or eco-safe, noting that products, packaging, and services have some environmental impact and that such marketing terms do not help consumers make informed choices (FTC 1999). A general lack of education about environmental issues and the media’s indiscriminate use of the terms have contributed to the confusion surrounding their definitions.Green recyclable products are those products which are bio-degradable and reusable the other characteristics of these products are they are non-toxic, non corrosive, and non allergenic due these characteristics these products have minimum or no harmful effect on the environment and therefore these are also known as hygienic products. These are also known as eco-friendly products made up of natural fibers and thus they help in saving the natural resources.

4

Green recycled products can be broadly defined into various categories such as:

Products That Conserve Natural Resources Products That Contribute to a Safe, Healthy Built Environment Products Made with Recycled, or Agricultural Waste Content-post and pre consumer

Product Products That Avoid Toxic or Other Emissions.

Some of the examples of green products are: cloth/paper/jute bags, recycled paper cartons, and recycled paper notebooks, cola in recycled cans, green building products i.e. AAC (Aerated Aerocon Cement Blocks, Flex-o-board) and other products which can be created through the recycling process.

OBJECTIVE

To study the attitude of consumers towards eco products in dilli haat

5

LITERATURE REVIEW

Consumers can degrade or uplift the environment, through their buying behavior, or more

precisely: how customers evaluate recycled (green products) individually and with respect to non

green products? When we buy products made from recycled materials, it is a crucial step in

supporting recycling programs and resource conservation. Resources are saved only when

recycled products are purchased. Olyne and Bryce (1990) highlight the fact that research at

individual level regarding factors that contribute towards the change in perception of consumer

for recycled products is important. The growing social and regulatory concerns for the

environment lead an increasing number of companies to consider green issues as a major source

of strategic change. In particular, this trend has major and complex implications on the

technological strategy of a company and on its product innovations. Even though it is increased

eco-awareness of Indian customers during the past few decades, there are some barriers to the

diffusions of more ecologically oriented consumption and production styles. Therefore,

companies are increasingly recognizing the importance of green marketing concepts. The

purpose of study was to investigate the attributes which influence perceptions of customers

towards purchasing eco- friendly products and their willingness to pay on green products.

The current rapid growth in the economy and the patterns of consumers’ consumption and

behavior worldwide are the main cause of environmental deterioration. As the environment

continues to worsen, it has become a persistent public concern in the developed countries and has

recently awakens developing countries to the green movement.

Consumers psychological benefit from the purchase was added as part of the purchase

utility in this research study . The theory assumes that consumers always try to maximize

their purchase utility which is the benefit received from the purchases good and the price

when they make purchase decisions. It has been found that manufacturers and marketers

have responded to this environmental trend . The introduction of new and green product

has grown by 100% per year since 1985. However the environmental trend cannot ensure

6

the success of the green market because consumers purchase behaviors and attitude have

not changed as quickly as their environmental awareness. Consumers receive both quality

benefits and psychological benefits by paying money and other costs such as time and

efforts for each purchase transaction. The quality benefit is the received quality from a

product itself or life improvement through using the product. On the other hand the

psychological benefit is the positive feeling about the purchase for example self image

built from buying a special product or a feeling of getting a deal due to the lower price.

Since consumers always try to maximize their purchase utility from the purchase of the

recycled product they should perceive more purchase utility from the purchase of

recycled products than the purchase of the ordinary product. Overall, environmental

quality would improve slightly, but the improvements would not necessarily be perceived

by the individuals making the purchase

Reusable alternative products points mostly to shopping bags. There are a number of reusable

shopping bags available instead polythene bags such as recyclable paper bags, jute bags, and

bags made from synthetic like polypropylene, polyethylene and nylon.

7

Data, Variables & Methodology

VARIABLES:

Dependent: In our research the dependent variables is categorical in nature i.e. either consumer will buy the green recycle product or they wouldn’t buy. We take dependent variable as purchase behavior and ask response on 5 point Likert scale, the responses on this are taken as ‘0’ for 1 and 2 and ‘1’ for 4 and 5, the response ‘3’ we did not consider in our study.

So we classify it as:

0 as consumers will not buy green recyclable products.

1 as consumer will buy green recyclable products.

Independent: To find the independent variables we conducted interviews. And we found the following independent variables. The independent variables are interval of ratio type.

S. No. Independent Variable Source Relationship with dependent variable

1 Price of product

Interview

Direct

2 Availability of product Inverse

3 Awareness level among consumer Direct

4 Safety Direct

5 Variety Direct

6 Quality (Attractiveness) Inverse

8

SAMPLE AND DATA:

Target population: Equal part of respondents are students from NEW DELHI as the students over here are from diverse background so it’s good for our study and another equal part of respondents are service people who are also from NEW DELHI

Sample size: We got total of 60 responses out of which 30 respondants are female and another 30 are male.

We are getting the data through the primary data source for which we have prepared a questionnaire that included a combination of open ended response question, fixed alternative question and Likert scale of 1-5 rating, which we have sent to our target population. The designed questionnaire is given as below.

Working and Analysis:

Assumptions

1. First we filter the data as per our need or suitability for model and coded it into excel for dependent variables.

Descriptive AnalysisWe conduct descriptive statistics in spss taking sample size as 60, with 30 each male and female respondants. Descriptive statistics is the discipline of quantitatively describing the main features of a collection of dataWe then conduct the group statistics taking group as gender and defining group as male and female respectively.We then conduct the independent sample t test. An independent sample t-test permits to compare two means with one grouping variable (for example gender) and a variable (for example satisfaction) and to demonstrate if there is a significant difference or not between these means i.e. are men and women have the same satisfaction concerning green products or is one of these two groups is more satisfied than the other? If the significance is above to (generally) 0.05 there is no difference, if it is inferior there is a difference.

9

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

i_like_to_go 60 1.00 5.00 3.3333 1.31054

i_like_the_varieties 60 1.00 5.00 3.2333 1.22636

i_prefer_buying 60 1.00 5.00 3.1833 1.26881

i_feel_comfortable 60 1.00 5.00 3.0667 1.28705

i_like_to_inform_others 60 1.00 5.00 3.2333 1.18417

i_am_aware 60 1.00 5.00 3.2167 1.20861

i_know_the_availability 60 1.00 5.00 3.1000 1.21711

i_am_aware_of_the_benefits 60 1.00 5.00 3.2333 1.21246

i_like_to_inform_benefits 60 1.00 5.00 3.2833 1.29001

i_like_the_quality 60 1.00 5.00 2.9333 1.26044

i_like_to_use_diff_varieties 60 1.00 5.00 2.9833 1.34658

i_am_aware_of_the_discoun

ts60 1.00 5.00 3.1333 1.24147

i_like_to_bargain 60 1.00 5.00 3.0833 1.29263

go_with_friends 60 1.00 5.00 2.9667 1.36502

go_with_family 60 1.00 5.00 3.1333 1.33362

age 60 17.00 47.00 26.5167 7.28707

gender 60 1.00 2.00 1.5000 .50422

occupation 60 1.00 2.00 1.4833 .50394

Valid N (listwise) 60

10

GROUP STATISTICS

gender N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

i_like_to_go male 30 3.1667 1.26173 .23036

female 30 3.5000 1.35824 .24798

i_like_the_varieties male 30 3.0667 1.28475 .23456

female 30 3.4000 1.16264 .21227

i_prefer_buying male 30 3.2667 1.20153 .21937

female 30 3.1000 1.34805 .24612

i_feel_comfortable male 30 3.0667 1.25762 .22961

female 30 3.0667 1.33735 .24417

i_like_to_inform_others male 30 3.1667 1.23409 .22531

female 30 3.3000 1.14921 .20982

i_am_aware male 30 3.1000 1.18467 .21629

female 30 3.3333 1.24106 .22659

i_know_the_availability male 30 3.2333 1.16511 .21272

female 30 2.9667 1.27261 .23235

i_am_aware_of_the_benefits male 30 3.3667 1.18855 .21700

female 30 3.1000 1.24152 .22667

i_like_to_inform_benefits male 30 3.4667 1.19578 .21832

female 30 3.1000 1.37339 .25075

i_like_the_quality male 30 2.6000 1.16264 .21227

female 30 3.2667 1.28475 .23456

i_like_to_use_diff_varieties male 30 2.9000 1.37339 .25075

female 30 3.0667 1.33735 .24417

i_am_aware_of_the_discoun

ts

male 30 2.8333 1.31525 .24013

female 30 3.4333 1.10433 .20162

i_like_to_bargain male 30 3.1000 1.39827 .25529

11

female 30 3.0667 1.20153 .21937

go_with_friends male 30 3.1667 1.34121 .24487

female 30 2.7667 1.38174 .25227

go_with_family male 30 3.1667 1.28877 .23530

female 30 3.1000 1.39827 .25529

age male 30 20.3000 2.74364 .50092

female 30 32.7333 4.53289 .82759

occupation male 30 1.0000 .00000 .00000

female 30 1.9667 .18257 .03333

Independent Samples Test

Levene's

Test for

Equality of

Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df

Sig.

(2-

tailed

)

Mean

Differenc

e

Std. Error

Differenc

e

95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper

i_like_to_go Equal

variances

assumed

.788.37

8-.985 58 .329 -.33333 .33847 -1.01085 .34418

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-.98557.68

8.329 -.33333 .33847 -1.01093 .34426

i_like_the_varieties Equal

variances

assumed

.006.93

9-1.054 58 .296 -.33333 .31635 -.96657 .29991

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-1.05457.43

1.296 -.33333 .31635 -.96671 .30004

12

i_prefer_buying Equal

variances

assumed

.251.61

9.506 58 .615 .16667 .32969 -.49329 .82662

Equal

variances

not

assumed

.50657.24

9.615 .16667 .32969 -.49347 .82680

i_feel_comfortable Equal

variances

assumed

.490.48

7.000 58 1.000 .00000 .33517 -.67091 .67091

Equal

variances

not

assumed

.00057.78

21.000 .00000 .33517 -.67096 .67096

i_like_to_inform_others Equal

variances

assumed

.371.54

5-.433 58 .667 -.13333 .30788 -.74962 .48295

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-.43357.70

8.667 -.13333 .30788 -.74969 .48302

i_am_aware Equal

variances

assumed

.669.41

7-.745 58 .459 -.23333 .31325 -.86036 .39370

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-.74557.87

5.459 -.23333 .31325 -.86039 .39372

i_know_the_availability Equal

variances

assumed

.107.74

5.847 58 .401 .26667 .31501 -.36390 .89724

Equal

variances

not

assumed

.84757.55

4.401 .26667 .31501 -.36401 .89734

13

i_am_aware_of_the_benefits Equal

variances

assumed

.000.99

0.850 58 .399 .26667 .31380 -.36146 .89480

Equal

variances

not

assumed

.85057.89

0.399 .26667 .31380 -.36149 .89482

i_like_to_inform_benefits Equal

variances

assumed

1.15

5

.28

71.103 58 .275 .36667 .33247 -.29884 1.03218

Equal

variances

not

assumed

1.10356.92

2.275 .36667 .33247 -.29911 1.03245

i_like_the_quality Equal

variances

assumed

.044.83

4-2.107 58 .039 -.66667 .31635 -1.29991 -.03343

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-2.10757.43

1.039 -.66667 .31635 -1.30004 -.03329

i_like_to_use_diff_varieties Equal

variances

assumed

.033.85

7-.476 58 .636 -.16667 .34999 -.86724 .53391

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-.47657.95

9.636 -.16667 .34999 -.86725 .53392

i_am_aware_of_the_discount

s

Equal

variances

assumed

1.27

8

.26

3-1.914 58 .061 -.60000 .31355 -1.22764 .02764

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-1.91456.31

4.061 -.60000 .31355 -1.22804 .02804

14

i_like_to_bargain Equal

variances

assumed

1.53

7

.22

0.099 58 .921 .03333 .33659 -.64043 .70710

Equal

variances

not

assumed

.09956.71

6.921 .03333 .33659 -.64076 .70742

go_with_friends Equal

variances

assumed

.113.73

81.138 58 .260 .40000 .35157 -.30374 1.10374

Equal

variances

not

assumed

1.13857.94

9.260 .40000 .35157 -.30376 1.10376

go_with_family Equal

variances

assumed

.454.50

3.192 58 .848 .06667 .34718 -.62830 .76163

Equal

variances

not

assumed

.19257.61

8.848 .06667 .34718 -.62839 .76173

age Equal

variances

assumed

7.57

2

.00

8

-

12.85

3

58 .000 -12.43333 .96738

-

14.3697

5

-

10.4969

1

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

12.85

3

47.73

4.000 -12.43333 .96738

-

14.3786

6

-

10.4880

1

occupation Equal

variances

assumed

4.29

1

.04

3

-

29.00

0

58 .000 -.96667 .03333 -1.03339 -.89994

Equal

variances

not

assumed

-

29.00

0

29.00

0.000 -.96667 .03333 -1.03484 -.89849

15

Results:

Since the model fulfill all assumption of discriminant analysis and at the same time found good

model for the study, we can drawn following inferences:

As the significance value is greater than p-value in case of question 2, there is a difference

between men and female over liking the varieties of eco products, similarly in preference of

buying, informing others, knowing the availability of eco products, being aware of the benefits

of eco products, liking the quality, usage of different varieties of eco products, going to dilli haat

for buying eco products with friends.

From group statistics we can infer that male members are more aware of the availability of eco

products in dilli haat than female members.

We can also similarly infer from analyzing the group statistics that more female members like

the quality of eco products in dilli haat than male members.

It can also be inferred that more female members like to use different varieties of eco products in

dilli haat than male members.

Female members are more interested in the discounts given on eco products in dilli haat than

male members.

Male members like to go to dilli haat with friends more than female members.

16

Value:

The project generated following values:

First of all this project gives us the practical exposure to carry out a research and it’s

different aspects like questionnaire design, methodology and tool, analysis and

interpretation of result.

The project can be used as a pilot study for the same purpose and can be exercise at

greater level outside the campus or in the company.

The project tells us about the factors which influence consumer preference towards green

recyclable products

Limitations:

There are following limitation of the project:

The respondents are similar in characteristics in terms of age, education, experience and

little exposure towards purchasing so the response might not be diverse in nature.

Since most of the respondents are students therefore we could not include other important

variables in our study e.g. income, age, education level etc.

Due to above reasons we cannot generalize the result it may vary significantly if the

respondents are really from diverse in nature.

17

Conclusion

The environment is under a serious threat. We all consumers or stockholders have to join

hands to come out of the situation. Marketers have initiated the process by introducing

“Green Marketing”. The retailers (in the organized sector) or the ones in Dilli Haat are

supporting the concept. Most of the retailers are of the opinion that green products are

liked by consumers but because of poor awareness and high prices have not been fully

adopted by them. As far as consumers are concerned the awareness level is increasing

and has started implementing them in their normal life.

ReferencesBooks Allaby, M. (1990).Green Facts: The Greenhouse Effects & Other Key Issues. London: Reed International Books Ltd. International Energy Agency.(2006). World Energy Outlook. Paris: OCED. Pandey, N.G. (2007). Environmental Management. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt Ltd. Panneerselvam, R. (2006). Research Methodology.New Delhi: Prentice Hall India Publishing. Polonsky, Jay. Michael, and T, Alma. (Eds). (2008). Ecological Imperatives and the Role of Marketing by Sheth, N. Jagdish., Parvatiyar, Atul.Environmental Marketing. New York: Haworth Press. Uberio, K. N. (2007) Environmental management. New Delhi: Excel Books.

Journals Chaudhary, R. And Bhattacharya, V. (2006, November), Clean Development Mechanism: Strategy for Sustainability and Economic Growth. Indian Journal for Environmental Protection.Vol. 27(10).Pg 919-922. Lyytimaki, J. And Tapoi, P. (2009, December), Climate change as reported in the press of Finland: From screaming headlines to penetrating background noise. International Journal of Environmental Studies.Vol. 66(6).Pg 723-735. Rana, Z. (2010, February). Challenge to Business – Changes in India’s Marketing Environment. Indian Journal of Marketing, Vol.40 (2). New Delhi. Sharma, A., & Joshi, G. (2006, March).Environmental Issues of India.Indian Journal of Environment Protection.Vol 26(3).Pg 263-267. Shah, Praneti.(2010, February).Awareness & Preference towards Carbon Credits – An Initiative to go for Green .Prabandhan: Indian Journal of Management, Vol. 3(2). New Delhi. Websites http://www.indianmba.com/Faculty_Column/FC832/fc832.html http://www.hindustantimes.com/business-news/ColumnsBusiness/Green-marketing/Article1-744451.aspx

18

APPENDIX

QUESTIONNAIRE

OBJECTIVE—TO STUDY THE PREFERRENCE FOR ECO PRODUCTS IN DELHI HAT IN DELHI

NAME-

AGE-

OCCUPATION-

LOCATION-

EMAIL ID-

1) I LIKE TO GO TO DILLI HAAT FOR BUYING ECO PRODUCTS

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

2) I LIKE THE VARIETIES AVAILABLE FOR ECO PRODUCTS IN DILLI HAAT

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

3) I PREFER BUYING ECO PRODUCTS FROM DILLI HAAT ONLY

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

4) I FEEL COMFORTABLE USING ECO PRODUCTS

19

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

5) I LIKE TO INFORM OTHERS ALSO FOR THE USAGE OF ECO PRODUCTS

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

6) I AM AWARE OF THE DIFFERENT SCHEMES GOVERNMENT HAS INTRODUCED OVER THE YEARS FOR ECO PRODUCTS

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

7) I KNOW THE AVAILABILITY OF ECO PRODUCTS IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF INDIA

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

8) I AM AWARE OF THE BENEFITS RELATED TO THE USAGE OF ECO PRODUCTS

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

9) I LIKE TO INFORM OTHERS ALSO ABOUT THE BENEFITS RELATED TO THE USAGE OF ECO PRODUCTS

20

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

10) I LIKE THE QUALITY OF ECO PRODUCTS AVAILABLE IN DILLI HAAT

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

11) I LIKE TO USE DIFFERENT VARIETIES OF ECO PRODUCTS

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

12) I AM AWARE OF THE VARIOUS DISCOUNT OFFERS AVAILABLE FOR ECO PRODUCTS IN DILLI HAAT

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

13) I LIKE TO BARGAIN ON PRICES TAGGED ON ECO PRODUCTS IN DILLI HAAT

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

14) I LIKE TO GO TO DILLI HAAT WITH MY FRIENDS

o STRONGLY AGREE

21

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

15) I LIKE TO GO TO DILLI HAAT WITH MY FAMILY MEMBERS

o STRONGLY AGREE

o AGREE

o NEUTRAL

o DISAGREE

o STRONGLY DISAGREE

22