The Impact of ESG Management by Automobile Companies on Consumer Purchase Intention

Abstract

Amid rising sustainability demands, the automotive industry must understand how its Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) management influences consumer purchase decisions for high-involvement products. This study investigates this relationship by examining the mediating roles of brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust. To test the research model, we analyzed survey data from Korean automotive market consumers using partial least-squares structural equation modeling. The findings reveal that governance transparency and social responsibility significantly enhance corporate trust and brand value, which are the primary drivers of purchase intention. In contrast, environmental initiatives do not directly foster trust, and the effect of perceived quality is fully mediated by brand value and corporate trust. This study advances value-driven consumption theory by demonstrating that non-financial ESG dimensions—especially governance and social responsibility—can supersede functional quality in shaping purchase decisions in high-involvement contexts. These findings suggest that automakers should prioritize governance and social initiatives as strategic levers to build trust and strengthen long-term consumer loyalty.

1. Introduction

1.1. Research Background and Motivation

Traditionally, corporate management has been viewed as contributing to society by maximizing profits, creating employment, and paying taxes. However, mounting concerns about the sustainability of capitalism—driven by crises such as global warming and widening wealth inequality—have intensified demands for corporate social responsibility [1]. In response, firms have shifted their management paradigm toward ESG management, extending beyond a narrow focus on financial outcomes [2]. ESG management aims to promote sustainable growth while generating positive environmental and social impacts [3,4].

In the Korean automotive market, the industry has long faced criticism for its environmental footprint. Consequently, consumer interest has expanded beyond traditional determinants such as performance, design, and price to incorporate ESG management [5]. Consumers increasingly evaluate how their purchases relate to environmental issues, social responsibility, and transparent governance, thereby affirming their role as socially responsible actors [6]. In turn, automakers pursue sustainability and seek to enhance purchase intention by advancing ESG management—including development of electric and hydrogen vehicles [7], expanding renewable energy use, ensuring fair labor practices, and contributing to local communities [8]. Through these initiatives, firms build corporate trust and strengthen brand value, illustrating how ESG management has become a core strategy for long-term competitiveness [9].

While prior research primarily focused on the relationship between ESG performance and financial outcomes from the investor perspective [10], recent studies have begun to examine ESG’s consumer side effects in high-involvement markets. For example, recent research shows that ESG practices strengthen brand image, brand trust, and perceived quality, which in turn drive favorable consumer responses [11]. Similarly, sustainability perceptions have been found to significantly enhance brand value [12], and ESG management has been shown to strengthen brand image, attitude, attachment, and loyalty, highlighting its role as a strategic driver of consumer–brand relationships [13]. Together, these studies suggest that ESG management influences not only functional evaluations such as perceived quality but also the psychological drivers of purchase intention, including brand value and corporate trust, particularly in categories such as the automotive industry, where purchase decisions are high-involvement and risk-sensitive.

Finally, situating the study in the Korean automotive market offers broader implications for ESG–consumer behavior research. Korea presents a distinctive case where a rapidly evolving ESG policy environment intersects with a concentrated market dominated by two domestic brands [14]. Recent empirical studies indicate that in high-involvement contexts, consumers differentiate between ESG dimensions and place particular emphasis on authenticity and perceived ethicality when interpreting ESG signals [15,16]. These findings extend prior research—largely focused on Western, low-involvement consumption settings—by offering comparative evidence on how ESG signaling operates in durable-goods markets across diverse cultural and regulatory environments.

1.2. Research Questions

Building on the identified research gaps, this study addresses the following overarching research question:

“To what extent does ESG management influence consumer purchase intention in the automotive industry, and through which psychological mechanisms—brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust—does this effect occur?”

RQ1: How does ESG management in the automotive industry influence consumer purchase intention through the mediating role of brand value?

RQ2: To what extent does perceived quality mediate the relationship between ESG management and consumer purchase intention?

RQ3: How does corporate trust—encompassing ability, benevolence, and integrity—mediate the relationship between ESG management and purchase intention?

RQ4: What insights does the Korean automotive market provide for extending ESG–consumer behavior research to global contexts, particularly in high-involvement, durable-goods industries?

2. Theoretical Background

The proposed research model is grounded in several complementary theoretical perspectives that together explain how ESG management influences consumer behavior. Stakeholder theory provides the normative basis by positing that firms must balance the interests of multiple stakeholders beyond shareholders, making ESG management a legitimate expression of corporate responsibility [17]. Signaling theory offers a behavioral lens, suggesting that ESG management acts as a credible market signal that reduces information asymmetry and communicates unobservable firm qualities such as reliability, benevolence, and long-term orientation. These ESG signals shape brand-related judgments and influence purchase intention [18,19].

Trust theory further explains how ESG management strengthens corporate trust by reinforcing perceptions of ability, benevolence, and integrity, which are key determinants of relational confidence [20]. In parallel, the literature on brand value and perceived quality clarifies why these perceptions serve as critical mediators that translate corporate actions into behavioral intentions [21,22,23]. Finally, the theory of reasoned action provides the theoretical justification for using purchase intention as a behavior-proximal outcome variable [24].

By integrating these perspectives, the present study develops a theoretically grounded research model in which ESG management serves as an upstream determinant of brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust, which in turn shape purchase intention. This integration consolidates existing findings across multiple streams of literature and extends value-driven consumption theory by demonstrating that non-financial ESG dimensions—particularly governance and social responsibility—can supersede functional quality in influencing high-involvement purchase decisions.

2.1. ESG Management

ESG management serves as a key criterion for evaluating a company’s non-financial performance and was developed to assess how faithfully a firm fulfills its social responsibilities. In the past, financial indicators such as sales and profits were regarded as the primary basis for investment decisions [25]. ESG management thus refers to the integration of non-financial value factors—such as environmental responsibility, social responsibility, and transparent governance—into a firm’s pursuit of profit maximization, thereby contributing to the creation of sustainable enterprises and societies. The environmental dimension of ESG management is defined as a set of responsible business practices aimed at reducing the negative environmental impact of corporate activities. These practices include responding to climate change, conserving and efficiently using resources, and producing eco-friendly products. Among these, the most critical aspect is addressing climate change, which typically involves reducing greenhouse gas emissions and setting carbon reduction and carbon neutrality targets [26,27].

Resource recycling has become a key strategy for firms seeking to address resource depletion. Recent studies confirm that recycling plays a vital role in reducing raw material usage and minimizing waste generation. Energy efficiency and recycling are integral to the environmental dimension of ESG management, supporting green product development and the adoption of environmental technologies [28]. Similarly, firms are developing innovative technologies to produce eco-friendly products that minimize environmental impact and enhance long-term performance [29]. Fulfilling environmental responsibilities goes beyond regulatory compliance and functions as a strategic asset that strengthens competitiveness. Investments in carbon reduction and renewable energy adoption not only cut costs over time but also improve brand image.

Globally, automakers are striving to meet increasingly stringent carbon emission standards. While regulations vary by region, the shared objective is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and combat climate change. The European Union has announced plans to reduce the average carbon emissions of new vehicles to below 70 g/km by 2030 and to ban the sale of internal combustion engine vehicles entirely after 2035. In the United States, federal fuel economy standards have been tightened to 52 mpg by 2026, and California, along with 17 other states, plans to prohibit internal combustion engine vehicle sales by 2035 through separate emission regulations. China, the world’s largest automotive market, is expanding electric and hybrid vehicle adoption under its New Energy Vehicle (NEV) policy, requiring manufacturers to meet quotas or purchase carbon credits. In South Korea, the government is progressively reducing greenhouse gas emission standards to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. The average emissions of new vehicles must be reduced to below 70 g/km by 2030, supported by subsidies and infrastructure investment to accelerate the adoption of electric and hydrogen vehicles [30].

The social dimension of ESG management refers to corporate initiatives that go beyond economic profit to create societal value and benefit the public good. It involves managing the social impact of corporate activities and addressing the needs of diverse stakeholders. Social responsibility is defined as a company’s obligation to shareholders, employees, communities, and other stakeholders [31]. Corporate social responsibility can be framed as a duty to meet stakeholder expectations and contribute to broader social development, and it can also be viewed as an ethical commitment to minimize unethical conduct and maximize long-term benefits through the three ESG dimensions [32,33].

Labor and human rights protections form a key component of the social dimension, requiring respect for the fundamental rights of all stakeholders across global supply chains. This includes fostering diversity and inclusion, ensuring fair labor conditions, maintaining safe working environments, and providing equal employment opportunities regardless of gender, race, age, or disability. Adequate compensation, prevention of excessive working hours, and compliance with international labor standards are essential for eliminating child labor and forced labor. Co-prosperity with local communities is also vital, as companies can strategically mobilize resources to support education, healthcare, and poverty alleviation programs that promote sustainable development. Such activities go beyond philanthropy and represent a commitment to shared value creation [33].

Supply chain responsibility is another crucial component, as companies are increasingly expected to monitor the social and environmental impact of their entire value chain. Responsible sourcing prevents environmental degradation and safeguards human rights. Firms must establish transparent ethical standards for suppliers, implement monitoring systems, and take corrective actions, including contract termination if violations occur. In the labor-intensive automotive industry, guaranteeing legal working conditions and social responsibility across supplier networks fosters corporate trust, stabilizes supply chains, and reduces costs over time [34].

The governance dimension of ESG management is concerned with transparency and ethical conduct in corporate management. Key elements include board composition and independence, executive ethics, internal control systems, and relationships with shareholders and stakeholders [35]. Strengthening the board’s role is critical for aligning ESG-related risks and opportunities with corporate strategy. Many companies are forming dedicated ESG committees or integrating ESG oversight into existing audit committees to enhance expertise and efficiency. Board diversity across gender, ethnicity, and professional background should be encouraged, and directors with ESG expertise should be appointed to provide strategic guidance [14].

Internal control systems are essential for managing risk and ensuring reliable ESG-related data. Because ESG indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions are more complex to measure than financial metrics, accurate data collection and third-party verification are needed to ensure credibility. Continuous monitoring by internal audit departments helps identify performance gaps and implement improvements. Firms with robust ESG performance have been shown to have fewer internal control weaknesses, highlighting the importance of governance for long-term trustworthiness [35]. Ethical management provides the moral foundation of ESG. Companies must institutionalize anti-corruption, fair trade, human rights, and data protection standards into corporate culture by implementing comprehensive codes of ethics and delivering regular training, thereby creating sustainable value that transcends compliance.

2.2. ESG and Consumer Behavior

ESG management is increasingly recognized as a strategic and ethical commitment that shapes consumer perceptions of corporate responsibility and long-term orientation [11]. Recent studies show that ESG practices function as credible signals that reduce information asymmetry and communicate unobservable qualities such as reliability, integrity, and commitment to sustainability [15]. These signals activate psychological mechanisms—shaping brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust—that ultimately guide consumer purchase intention.

From a consumer behavior perspective, ESG management contributes to the formation of brand value. Corporate ESG communications and disclosures act as intentional identity signals, which consumers interpret as brand image. When the brand identity expressed through ESG aligns with consumer perceptions, ESG becomes part of a coherent brand narrative that strengthens brand relevance and differentiation. Conversely, when the two diverge, as in cases of greenwashing, corporate trust and brand evaluations deteriorate [36]. ESG also provides quality-relevant cues. Third-party certifications, responsible-sourcing labels, and eco-design claims serve as extrinsic quality signals [22], especially when objective product performance is difficult to evaluate prior to purchase [37]. By signaling process discipline and operational ability, ESG management helps consumers form favorable quality perceptions. Furthermore, ESG practices foster corporate trust by demonstrating stakeholder care, procedural fairness, and governance transparency, which reduce perceived opportunism and enhance credibility. These practices signal ability, benevolence, and integrity—the three dimensions of trust identified by Mayer et al. [20]—and play a central role in shaping consumer confidence [38].

The three ESG dimensions contribute in complementary ways. In Korean consumer settings, perceived social and governance ESG initiatives (such as labor rights, diversity, and ethical codes) have been shown to significantly enhance brand credibility, image, and perceived quality; the environmental dimension, by contrast, often lacks a direct effect unless perceptions of authenticity and awareness are elevated [39]. In cross-brand studies, ESG performance—especially in environmental and social domains—positively correlates with brand value, though the moderating role of digitalization level is observed, such that governance effects are weaker under certain conditions [40]. Similarly, automotive brands use ESG signals associated with product features, internal practices, and reputation to influence brand appraisals in interconnected markets [41].

These dynamics are particularly salient in high-involvement contexts such as the Korean automotive market, where purchase decisions involve substantial financial commitment and elevated safety expectations. Under such conditions, consumers rely heavily on brand-level social and governance signals to reduce perceived risk and strengthen purchase confidence.

In conclusion, ESG management operates as a system of signals that aligns corporate values with consumer perceptions. When strategically embedded into corporate identity and disclosure, ESG clarifies brand meaning, enhances perceived quality and trust, and reduces uncertainty through transparent governance.

2.3. Brand Value

A brand is a multifaceted construct that encompasses psychological, emotional, and cultural connections between consumers and firms. Beyond physical attributes, a brand conveys identity, represents consumer experiences, and helps individuals express their values [42,43]. Technically, it refers to the combination of names, symbols, and designs that distinguish a product or service [44], but it is equally the sum of experiences and associations that shape consumer perceptions. Brand value arises from these accumulated interactions and typically includes brand image, favorability, loyalty, and awareness, which together serve as strategic assets enabling premium pricing, customer retention, and marketing efficiency.

Brand image reflects the overall set of associations and emotions consumers hold toward a brand, while favorability captures the valence of those emotions and their influence on purchase intention [45]. Brand loyalty goes beyond repeat purchasing to include attitudinal commitment and trust. True loyalty emerges from consistently positive experiences rather than habit alone, making it critical for sustaining brand value [44].

In the automotive industry, where vehicles are high-involvement and high-cost goods, brand value plays a decisive role in shaping consumer choice. Strong brands signal quality, safety, and service reliability, reducing purchase risk and reinforcing the producer–consumer relationship [46]. Leading brands such as BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Tesla leverage branding to communicate core values—driving pleasure, luxury, and innovation—thereby differentiating themselves in a competitive market [45].

Ultimately, a strong brand enhances credibility, lowers entry barriers in global markets, and serves as a proxy for corporate integrity. When aligned with broader social values such as ESG management, brands become platforms for sustainable growth and long-term competitiveness. Automotive firms must therefore integrate strategic brand management with ESG initiatives to strengthen consumer trust and secure an enduring market advantage.

Recent empirical evidence reinforces that ESG performance directly contributes to brand value, not only through traditional functional quality signals but through reputation, trust, and sustainability perception. Perceived sustainability has been found to significantly boost brand value via enhanced brand reputation [12]. ESG strategies that integrate environmental, social, and governance practices have been shown to influence consumer perceptions of credibility and operational integrity, thereby elevating the overall brand value [47]. Among ESG dimensions, the environmental component tends to show a stronger positive association with brand value, whereas governance effects are more contingent on transparency and stakeholder visibility [48]. These findings suggest that for firms to enhance ESG-driven brand value, the quality, visibility, and perceived authenticity of ESG efforts are crucial.

2.4. Perceived Quality

Perceived quality can be defined as the consumer’s subjective evaluation of the overall excellence or superiority of a product or service [49], and it is conceptually distinct from objective quality. Recent work in product development and automotive design likewise frames perceived quality as a subjective judgment that integrates functional performance with design and experiential cues [50,51]. Thus, perceived quality is shaped by expectations and experiences rather than technical specifications alone, indicating an inherently interactional and psychological nature [49,51].

One central component is functional quality, i.e., the extent to which a product meets performance-related expectations such as durability, safety, reliability, and ease of use. Contemporary empirical studies show that functional characteristics strongly drive customer satisfaction and downstream outcomes [52,53]; in high-involvement categories, consistent functional performance also reduces uncertainty and perceived purchase risk indirectly via higher trust [23]. At the same time, perceived quality encompasses not only functional attributes but also psychological and symbolic dimensions—such as design aesthetics, brand associations, and user experience—that significantly shape consumer evaluations even when objective performance differences are minimal. Recent research in the automotive and product-design fields confirms that visual design cues (e.g., color harmony, material finish) and experiential touchpoints strongly influence quality judgments by activating affective and cognitive responses [50,54]. These symbolic and experiential factors deepen consumers’ overall evaluations, steering behavior and brand choice beyond purely technical specifications.

Perceived quality extends beyond measurable technical performance to encompass symbolic and psychological dimensions such as design aesthetics, material finish, color harmony, and user experience. Recent research in automotive design highlights that interior color–material–finish (CMF) combinations and exterior–interior color harmony significantly shape visual attention, affective responses, and subjective quality evaluations, even when objective performance metrics remain constant [54,55]. Beyond aesthetics, consumers also factor in service experience, perceived safety, and long-term reliability when forming quality judgments, particularly in high-involvement categories such as automobiles. Studies in premium goods and FMCG markets similarly show that symbolic cues—such as brand reputation, sustainability credentials, and experiential touchpoints—enhance perceived quality by triggering positive affect and reinforcing self-concept, underscoring that quality is as much a psychological construct as a technical one [56].

Moreover, perceived quality serves as a foundational driver of trust and loyalty. Consistent product and service experiences reduce perceived risk and foster consumers’ willingness to rely on the firm, ultimately strengthening long-term relational bonds. Empirical evidence confirms that perceived quality influences brand loyalty both directly and indirectly through trust, and that this mediating effect is especially pronounced in automotive and consumer electronics sectors, where purchases entail high financial and psychological commitment [57]. This dual pathway underscores the strategic importance of managing not only functional performance but also symbolic and experiential elements—such as design coherence, service transparency, and sustainability messaging—to reinforce perceived quality, build trust, and ultimately drive purchase intention.

2.5. Corporate Trust

Trust is commonly defined as the willingness of a trustor to be vulnerable to the actions of another party (the trustee), based on the expectation that the trustee will perform a particular action that is important to the trustor, regardless of the ability to monitor or control that action [20]. Three distinct targets of trust have been identified: interpersonal trust, institutional trust, and technological trust [58]. Interpersonal trust refers to trust developed through direct interactions between individuals—such as with friends, colleagues, supervisors, or family members—and serves as a crucial element in everyday social exchanges. Institutional trust denotes trust in collective entities, such as companies or organizations, and is strongly influenced by perceptions of leadership, transparency, and fairness within those institutions. Lastly, technological trust has emerged with the advancement of digital technologies, encompassing trust in systems such as online platforms, artificial intelligence, and other digital infrastructures.

Among the most widely cited conceptualizations of trust are the three dimensions of ability, benevolence, and integrity [20,59]. Ability refers to the perceived competence of the trustee to perform tasks effectively, encompassing technical expertise, professional knowledge, and problem-solving capacity. Trust develops when the trustee demonstrates the capability to fulfill expected roles reliably. Benevolence captures the extent to which a trustee is perceived to act with goodwill and in the interest of the trustor, beyond mere compliance or self-interest. Recent research on sustainable branding shows that trust strengthens when consumers view corporate ESG actions as authentic contributions to social and environmental well-being rather than symbolic gestures [60]. Integrity reflects adherence to principles that the trustor considers acceptable, such as honesty, fairness, and behavioral consistency. Integrity-based trust is reinforced when firms align words with actions and maintain transparency. Conversely, breaches of integrity—such as misleading claims or greenwashing—can rapidly erode trust and inflict lasting reputational harm [61].

Recent evidence links perceived ESG directly to consumer trust formation and downstream choice. Perceived ESG enhances brand credibility, brand image, and perceived quality, which in turn improve consumers’ evaluations and behavioral intentions—mechanisms that conceptually overlap with institutional trust in the firm [39]. Empirical work also shows that ESG activities increase brand trust and positive word-of-mouth in consumer markets [62]. In parallel, governance transparency and board oversight strengthen the credibility of ESG investments, providing integrity cues that support trust [35,61].

A growing stream warns that greenwashing erodes trust: consumers’ detection of misleading ESG/green claims reduces brand credibility and willingness to buy, underscoring the need for verifiable, transparent disclosure [63,64]. In high-involvement mobility contexts, trust is a necessary condition for adoption intentions—operating alongside attitude and control beliefs—which aligns with our model’s role of trust as a gateway from ESG signals to purchase intention [65]. Together, these findings reinforce the view that well-substantiated ESG practices function as ability–benevolence–integrity signals that reduce uncertainty and build durable consumer trust.

2.6. Purchase Intention

Purchase intention is defined as a psychological process in which a consumer forms the intention to buy a specific product or service. It represents a behavioral intention shaped by attitudes, beliefs, and expectations and serves as a key predictor of actual purchasing behavior. The more positive the purchase intention, the higher the likelihood that it will lead to actual purchase. Purchase intention reflects consumer expectations and needs before purchase, and when these expectations are satisfied, they frequently translate into actual behavior. Understanding purchase intention is therefore essential for firms seeking to design effective marketing strategies.

Before a purchase occurs, a consumer’s decision-making process must precede it. Purchase intention is thus defined as the likelihood that planned future behavior, as shaped by beliefs and attitudes, will lead to an actual purchase. It is widely used as a proxy for observed behavior and provides a reliable measure that helps marketers devise effective strategies [66]. The factors influencing purchase intention are diverse and often emerge through complex interactions. One of the most influential factors is product quality: consumers are more likely to buy when they believe that the product meets or exceeds expectations. Durability, performance, and reliability are the central attributes of product quality. Zeithaml [24] found that higher product quality leads to more favorable consumer evaluations and directly affects purchase intention.

Another key factor is the price–performance ratio. Consumers assess whether a product’s price reflects its perceived value. Products offering higher value relative to price tend to generate stronger purchase intentions. Even when two products share similar attributes, consumers prefer the one perceived to be more cost-effective [67]. Brand image and corporate trust also play critical roles in shaping purchase intention. A positive brand image enhances purchase intention because consumers prefer brands they trust. This trust is reinforced when firms fulfill social responsibilities and maintain consistent product quality. The greater the trust in a brand, the stronger the resulting purchase intention [43].

In recent years, consumers have increasingly prioritized ethical values and social contributions in their purchase decisions. Ethical consumption and the pursuit of sustainable brands have grown in importance [6]. In the automotive industry, vehicles represent more than transportation tools—they embody consumers’ values, lifestyles, and social status. Consumers weigh multiple considerations when making automotive purchases, including quality, price, brand reputation, corporate trust, and social responsibility. Quality typically encompasses performance, safety, durability, and fuel efficiency, which are directly experienced during use. Price is also critical, especially given the substantial financial investment involved, and consumers often evaluate cars through a total cost of ownership (TCO) lens that aggregates purchase price, taxes/registration, insurance, fuel, maintenance, and depreciation; recent comparative evidence shows that TCO meaningfully shapes relative value assessments across markets and use conditions [68].

Brand plays a role beyond functional value, offering symbolic meaning and serving as a source of trust. Automobiles belong to a category with strong brand loyalty, and brand image exerts a powerful influence on consumer behavior [69]. In the luxury segment, brand image is often tied to social status. Brand reputation also affects resale value, which significantly influences consumer decisions from a long-term perspective. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is becoming an increasingly relevant determinant of purchase intention, as consumers now evaluate not only product attributes but also the extent to which companies contribute positively to society. Efforts such as developing eco-friendly technologies, reducing carbon emissions, and supporting local communities play a major role in building corporate trust and enhancing brand image [11].

Corporate trust ultimately exerts a decisive influence on purchase decisions. In high-involvement categories such as automobiles, trust is critical given its relationship with long-term maintenance and after-sales service. Firms known for reliable after-sales support are more likely to retain consumer trust, whereas those that violate trust or lack transparency risk brand damage and reduced purchase intention. Trust also drives positive word-of-mouth, repeat purchases, and long-term loyalty, making it a cornerstone of sustainable success.

Importantly, purchase intention is widely recognized as a validated proximal predictor of subsequent buying behavior [70]. In marketing research, measures of purchase intention correlate strongly with future sales, with predictive validity especially high for durable goods, brand-specific measures, and shorter forecasting horizons—conditions that align closely with the automotive context [71]. A cumulative review further concludes that, while imperfect, purchase intention remains the single most informative attitudinal predictor of actual purchase and is thus widely employed for forecasting and consumer research [72]. Meta-analytic findings integrating the Theory of Reasoned Action also confirm a robust intention–behavior link across consumption domains [73]. Taken together, these findings justify the use of purchase intention as a behavior-proximal outcome variable in high-involvement categories, while acknowledging that actual purchases will always exhibit variance beyond stated intentions [71,72].

3. Research Design

3.1. Research Model

This study investigates the impact of ESG management in the automotive industry on consumer purchase intention. Rather than focusing solely on a direct relationship, the model examines how ESG management shapes intermediate consumer perceptions—specifically brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust—which in turn influence behavioral intentions. By integrating these constructs, the study conceptualizes ESG management not merely as an external compliance requirement but as a system of ESG signals that consumers interpret as indicators of corporate ability, benevolence, and integrity.

The proposed research model thus illustrates the structural relationships among ESG management, brand value, perceived quality, corporate trust, and purchase intention, as depicted in Figure 1. This conceptualization provides a theoretically grounded framework for understanding how ESG management translates into consumer-level outcomes, emphasizing both direct and mediated effects on purchase intention in a high-involvement category such as the automotive industry.

3.2. Hypotheses Development

Building on the proposed research model, this study investigates how the three ESG dimensions—environmental management, social responsibility, and transparent governance—affect consumer purchase intention in the automotive industry. Rather than treating ESG management as a single aggregate construct, the study disaggregates it into the three ESG dimensions to examine their individual and potentially distinct effects on brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust. Prior research suggests that ESG management functions as a system of signals that communicate a firm’s ability, benevolence, and integrity, thereby shaping consumers’ perceptions of brand-related attributes and influencing their behavioral intentions.

Accordingly, the hypotheses for this study are formulated in three stages. First, we hypothesize that each ESG dimension will positively affect brand value (H1-1 to H1-3), perceived quality (H2-1 to H2-3), and corporate trust (H3-1 to H3-3), reflecting the multi-channel influence of ESG management on consumer perception. Second, we posit that perceived quality serves as an antecedent to both brand value (H4) and corporate trust (H5), highlighting its central role as a driver of downstream perceptions. Finally, we hypothesize that brand value (H6), perceived quality (H7), and trust (H8) each exert a positive effect on consumer purchase intention. Together, these hypotheses capture both the direct and indirect pathways through which ESG management is expected to shape consumer behavior. The complete set of hypotheses is summarized in

Table 1. Hypotheses development.

H1-1	Environmental management in ESG will have a positive effect on brand value.
H1-2	Social responsibility activities in ESG will have a positive effect on brand value.
H1-3	Transparent and ethical governance in ESG will have a positive effect on brand value.
H2-1	Environmental management in ESG will have a positive effect on perceived quality.
H2-2	Social responsibility activities in ESG will have a positive effect on perceived quality.
H2-3	Transparent and ethical governance in ESG will have a positive effect on perceived quality.
H3-1	Environmental management in ESG will have a positive effect on trust.
H3-2	Social responsibility activities in ESG will have a positive effect on trust.
H3-3	Transparent and ethical governance in ESG will have a positive effect on trust.
H4	Perceived quality will have a positive effect on brand value.
H5	Perceived quality will have a positive effect on corporate trust.
H6	Brand value will have a positive effect on consumers’ purchase intention.
H7	Perceived quality will have a positive effect on consumers’ purchase intention.
H8	Trust will have a positive effect on consumers’ purchase intention.

.

3.2.1. ESG Management and Brand Value

Prior studies suggest that ESG management plays a significant role in enhancing brand value by shaping brand-relevant consumer inferences and market trust. On the consumer side, perceived ESG—especially its social and governance dimensions—improves brand credibility, brand image, and quality perceptions, thereby setting the stage for higher brand value [39,74]. Social responsibility initiatives also reinforce brand favorability and loyalty when they exhibit strong cause–brand fit and authentic motives [75,76]. On the capital-market side, governance transparency and mandatory ESG disclosure improve price discovery and investor confidence, consistent with lower information asymmetry—mechanisms that ultimately support firm and brand value [77]. Recent evidence directly ties ESG performance to brand value growth across brands and years, with digitalization often strengthening this relationship [40].

Research on ESG signaling shows that automakers that actively communicate ESG achievements achieve stronger brand valuations, suggesting ESG can be leveraged strategically for brand building [41]. In contrast, analyses of the Volkswagen diesel scandal demonstrate that ESG failures erode trust and spill over to damage peer brands’ reputations and industry-wide credibility [78].

In summary, ESG management across environmental, social, and governance dimensions strengthens brand favorability, loyalty, and awareness, which in turn contribute to higher overall brand value. This pattern is consistent with consumer-side mechanisms (credibility, image, perceived quality) and market-side mechanisms (disclosure quality, investor confidence) documented in the literature [39,40,77].

3.2.2. ESG Management and Perceived Quality

Prior research shows that firm-level sustainability investments shape consumers’ quality judgments even when objective performance remains unchanged. Foundational work on corporate associations demonstrates that responsible corporate conduct shifts overall company evaluations, which in turn spill over to product evaluations and perceived quality [79]. Building on this mechanism, subsequent studies indicate that when consumers perceive a company’s social initiatives as authentic and well-fitting to the brand’s motives, they infer higher credibility and evaluate offerings more favorably [75].

Recent evidence that explicitly considers ESG corroborates these pathways. In a large survey of Korean consumers, perceptions of the social and governance dimensions of ESG had direct positive effects on brand credibility, brand image, and perceived quality, while the environmental dimension showed no direct effect unless credibly communicated—implying that visibility and authenticity condition the environmental–quality link [39]. Complementary research connects responsibility signals to downstream brand outcomes: CSR/ESG initiatives strengthen global brand equity through key stakeholders, clarifying why credible responsibility cues frequently appear as higher perceived quality in consumers’ minds [80]. At the market level, responsibility can also enhance value via improved customer evaluations, reinforcing the relevance of perceptual mechanisms such as perceived quality [9].

Taken together, ESG management enhances perceived quality by signaling responsibility, integrity, and reliability. Social initiatives cultivate normative and emotional associations that elevate quality judgments; governance practices reassure consumers about consistency and accountability; and environmental programs contribute when they are both salient and trustworthy to consumers. Accordingly, we propose that environmental management, social responsibility, and transparent governance each exert a positive effect on perceived quality, with the environmental effect more contingent on communication credibility and consumer inference processes.

3.2.3. ESG Management and Trust

ESG management builds trust by signaling responsibility, integrity, and long-term orientation. Well-communicated and authentic ESG activities raise brand trust and lead to favorable downstream outcomes such as purchase intentions and word-of-mouth [15,62]. Environmental stewardship contributes to “green trust” when initiatives are visible and verifiable, yet this domain remains vulnerable to greenwashing. Recent studies have found that detecting or even suspecting greenwashing significantly lowers trust and reduces willingness to pay for sustainable options, highlighting the importance of transparent communication and third-party validation [81].

Governance transparency complements these consumer-side mechanisms by building investor trust. Post-2020 evidence shows that strong ESG performance and disclosure correlate with more resilient stock prices during crises, improved price discovery under mandatory disclosure, and lower cost of capital, reflecting reduced information asymmetry [77,82].

Taken together, ESG management acts as a multi-dimensional trust signal: environmental initiatives foster credibility when specific and auditable, social responsibility activities demonstrate benevolence and relational stability, and governance practices assure stakeholders of accountability. These findings support H3-1 through H3-3, which posit the positive effects of environmental management, social responsibility, and transparent governance on trust.

3.2.4. Perceived Quality and Brand Value

Perceived quality captures consumers’ subjective judgments about a product’s or service’s overall excellence, while brand value represents an intangible asset that yields sustained competitive advantage in the marketplace [22,43]. Foundational brand-equity research positions perceived quality as a core driver that strengthens brand image, fosters loyalty, and increases willingness to pay [45,83]. These effects arise not only from intrinsic performance but also from extrinsic cues—design, reputation, and communications—that shape quality inferences and positive associations [22,45].

Recent work reinforces the centrality of perceived quality within contemporary brand-equity models. A comprehensive review reconstructs perceptual brand equity and reaffirms perceived quality as a principal component of customer-based brand equity [84]. In high-involvement categories such as automobiles, perceived quality directly predicts purchase intention and feeds value perceptions [85]. At the outcome level, refined models connect brand-equity dimensions to performance via brand attitudes and word-of-mouth, underscoring quality’s contribution to behavioral loyalty [86]. Related evidence shows that value-related perceptions closely tied to quality continue to influence brand equity and downstream commitment [87]. Quality cues often interact with sustainability signals to amplify brand value. Consumers will tolerate or even endorse price premiums when “green” offerings credibly convey quality and functional benefits, although acceptance depends on how trade-offs are framed [88].

In summary, perceived quality remains a pivotal antecedent of brand value. When consumers repeatedly encounter high quality—across functional and symbolic dimensions—loyalty strengthens, price sensitivity falls, and long-term brand relationships deepen in competitive, sustainability-oriented markets [84,85,86].

3.2.5. Perceived Quality and Trust

Perceived quality reflects consumers’ subjective evaluation of a product’s or service’s overall excellence and serves as a critical antecedent of corporate trust. High perceived quality signals a firm’s ability, strengthens expectations of benevolence by demonstrating commitment to deliver on promises, and reinforces perceptions of integrity through consistent performance and transparent communication [89]. Empirical research shows that multisensory quality cues, such as recognized taste or safety awards, amplify the link between perceived quality and brand trust, ultimately shaping purchase intentions [89].

In high-involvement contexts such as the automotive industry, service quality, technical reliability, and safety performance play a pivotal role in reducing consumer uncertainty and fostering long-term trust relationships [90]. The trust effect becomes even more salient during mobility transitions: trust is nearly a prerequisite for technology acceptance in electric car-sharing, and positive quality experiences are essential to sustaining that trust [91].

Taken together, perceived quality provides both functional and symbolic evidence that reduces perceived risk and builds confidence in the firm’s ability, benevolence, and integrity. Functional quality signals—durability, safety, and service reliability—enhance commitment, while symbolic and experiential quality cues—design coherence, reputation, and transparent ESG disclosures—deepen emotional bonds and stabilize trust over time.

3.2.6. Brand Value and Purchase Intention

Brand value—encompassing trust, awareness, favorability, and loyalty—acts as a key psychological driver of purchase intention. Positive emotional attitudes toward a brand provide psychological rewards and perceived reliability, making consumers more likely to choose it [45,92]. Strong brand value signals consistent quality, reduces decision-making uncertainty, and fosters confidence in purchase choices [38,43].

Empirical research consistently shows that high brand value enhances loyalty and lowers price sensitivity, thereby strengthening consumer–brand relationships [83]. Trust and consistency—dimensions of brand credibility—further reinforce purchase intention [93]. In the automotive sector, where purchase decisions are high-cost and high-risk, brand value serves as a heuristic that simplifies decision-making. Reputations for durability and safety, as in Toyota, Honda, or Volvo, are used strategically to boost consumer confidence [94].

Recent research extends these findings to ESG contexts. ESG-aligned brand equity has been found to reduce perceived risk and foster loyalty in high-involvement categories [39]. When ESG is perceived as integral to brand identity, consumers display stronger purchase intentions and higher long-term commitment [81]. Global brand studies confirm that strong brand value mitigates uncertainty in volatile markets and amplifies the effect of positive word-of-mouth on purchase behavior [87].

Taken together, brand value functions as both a psychological driver and a strategic asset linking corporate actions—including ESG initiatives—to consumer purchase behavior, underscoring its importance for competitive, high-involvement markets.

3.2.7. Perceived Quality and Purchase Intention

Perceived quality has consistently been identified as a decisive antecedent of purchase intention. Consumers assess quality not only through functional attributes—such as performance, durability, and reliability—but also through symbolic cues, including brand image, design, and advertising. When perceived quality exceeds expectations, it enhances satisfaction and strengthens purchase intention [22,38]. Value-based judgments—how consumers trade off price against perceived quality—further predict willingness to purchase [95]. Service research confirms that perceived service quality fosters trust and satisfaction, both of which translate into stronger purchase intentions [96].

Recent studies have extended these findings to high-involvement categories such as automobiles. Consistently high perceived quality reduces uncertainty, strengthens brand credibility, and increases consumers’ willingness to pay premium prices [97]. Empirical evidence also shows that quality perceptions interact with sustainability signals: consumers interpret superior quality as indicative of responsible and ethical corporate behavior, reinforcing brand preference and purchase intention [39,81]. In automotive contexts, perceived quality mitigates purchase risk and strengthens choice confidence, making it a central driver of conversion and long-term commitment [87].

In summary, perceived quality drives purchase intention by signaling reliability, consistency, and value, while also enhancing trust and lowering perceived risk—mechanisms that are particularly salient for high-cost, high-involvement purchases such as automobiles.

3.2.8. Trust and Purchase Intention

Corporate trust is widely recognized as a central determinant of purchase intention. Trust reduces perceived risk, provides consumers with confidence in their decisions, and serves as the psychological foundation for commitment—effects critical in both offline and online contexts [59]. In digital commerce, where consumers cannot directly inspect products, secure systems, reliable information, and transparent processes become essential for trust formation and subsequent purchase behavior [98]. Social mechanisms such as peer reviews and user-generated content further build trust and positively shape purchase decisions [99].

Recent research extends these findings to technology-intensive and high-involvement markets. Trust plays a mediating role in the adoption of sharing economy services and AI-driven recommendation systems, significantly influencing user conversion and retention [100]. ESG-related studies further show that transparent governance and verifiable sustainability disclosures act as integrity signals that strengthen trust and purchase intention [82].

In summary, corporate trust functions as both a risk-reduction mechanism and a credibility signal that underpins purchase decisions. By consistently fulfilling promises, maintaining transparency, and aligning with consumers’ ethical and social expectations, firms can strengthen not only immediate purchase intention but also long-term loyalty and advocacy.

3.3. Operational Definitions of the Variables

This study examines the impact of ESG management in automobile companies on consumers’ purchase intentions. The three core elements of ESG management—eco-friendly management, social responsibility, and transparent governance—are designated as independent variables. In addition, brand value, perceived quality, and trust are set as mediating variables to analyze their effects on purchase intention. The survey was conducted online through a professional research firm. Based on prior literature, the concepts, definitions, and empirical findings for each variable were reviewed, and the operational definitions are summarized in

Table 2. Operational definitions of the variables.

Variable			Operational Definition	Relevant Studies
IV	Environment (Eco-friendly Management)		Managerial activities that consider environmental sustainability in the production and use of products and services.	Albitar et al. [101] Park, Y., & Han, S. [102]
	Social (Social Responsibility)		Efforts to protect workers’ rights and foster capacity development, pursue shared growth with partner companies, protect consumer rights, and carry out social contribution activities for the local community and the underprivileged.
	Governance (Transparency)		Establishing governance that protects shareholders’ rights, includes a board of directors with proper management and supervisory functions, and involves appointing external auditors with expertise and independence, ensuring transparent disclosure of corporate management information.
MV	Brand Value		The comprehensive value of a brand reflected in awareness, favorability, and loyalty.	Keller [45] Chaundhuri & Holbrook [23]
	Perceived Quality		Customer evaluation of the excellence of a product.	Zeithaml [22]
	Trust	Ability	The belief that a company has the skills or capabilities necessary to meet customer needs.	Gefen & Straub [59] Mayer et al. [20]
		Benevolence	The belief that the company prioritizes customers with goodwill.
		Integrity	The belief that the company adheres to principles and norms and behaves ethically and morally.
DV	Purchase Intention		The psychological process reflecting the intention to purchase a product or service.	Fishbein & Ajzen [45]

.

4. Empirical Analysis

4.1. Research Design and Data Analysis

This study employed a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach to empirically examine the impact of ESG management on consumers’ purchase intentions, with brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust serving as mediating variables. The measurement instrument was developed by adapting and refining scales from prior research, resulting in a total of 48 items. ESG management was operationalized through three dimensions—environmental, social, and governance—comprising 18 items. The mediators were measured using validated multi-item scales: brand value (5 items), perceived quality (5 items), and corporate trust (15 items), with trust further divided into three sub-dimensions: ability, customer orientation, and integrity. Purchase intention was assessed using 5 items adapted from prior literature on consumer behavior. All constructs were measured on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”) (Appendix A)

Demographic variables—including gender, age, position, education level, ESG knowledge, and vehicle ownership brand—were also collected to control for potential heterogeneity effects in the structural model.

To establish the adeuacy of the measurement model, a series of validity and reliability analyses were conducted. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was first performed using SPSS 22.0, with principal component analysis as the extraction method. A minimum factor loading threshold of 0.50 was applied, and Varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization was used to enhance factor interpretability and minimize multicollinearity. The EFA results confirmed that all measurement items adequately loaded on their respective constructs, demonstrating strong convergent validity. These results provided a robust foundation for subsequent confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) to test the hypothesized relationships.

4.2. Data Collection and Sample Characteristics

The survey was administered through a professional research agency between 25 July and 2 August 2024. Of the 320 distributed questionnaires, 5 were excluded due to insincere or incomplete responses, resulting in a final sample of 315 valid cases for analysis.

The demographic profile of the respondents is summarized in

Table 3. Demographic characteristics.

Category		Frequency	Percentage (%)
Gender	Female	99	31.4%
	Male	216	68.6%
Age	20s	48	15.2%
	30s	98	31.1%
	40s	99	31.4%
	50 and above	70	22.2%
Position	Staff	37	11.7%
	Assistant Manager/Manager	171	54.3%
	Deputy General Manager/Team Leader	94	29.8%
	Executive	12	3.8%
	Other	1	0.3%
Education	Bachelor’s Degree	276	87.6%
	Graduate School (Enrolled)	5	1.6%
	Graduate School (Graduated)	34	10.8%
Level of ESG Knowledge	Somewhat Knowledgeable	161	51.1%
	Knowledgeable	121	38.4%
	Very Knowledgeable	33	10.5%
Owned Vehicle	Hyundai	177	56.2%
	Kia	57	18.1%
	Mercedes-Benz	23	7.3%
	BMW	18	5.7%
	Toyota (Lexus)	6	1.9%
	Ford	1	0.3%
	Volvo	9	2.9%
	Renault	11	3.5%
	Chevrolet	8	2.5%
	Other	5	1.6%

. By gender, 216 participants (68.6%) were male and 99 (31.4%) were female. The age distribution was relatively balanced, with 15.2% in their twenties, 31.1% in their thirties, 31.4% in their forties, and 22.2% aged fifty or above. In terms of occupational status, assistant managers and managers represented the largest group (54.3%), followed by department heads and team leaders (29.8%), entry-level employees (11.7%), and executives (3.8%). With respect to educational attainment, the majority of respondents held a bachelor’s degree (87.6%), while 1.6% were enrolled in graduate school and 10.8% had completed graduate-level education.

Regarding knowledge of ESG management, most participants reported moderate (51.1%) or good (38.4%) familiarity, and 10.5% indicated very good knowledge. This distribution suggests that respondents were sufficiently informed to provide meaningful evaluations of ESG-related constructs, thereby enhancing the validity of the results.

To ensure the representativeness of the sample, official automotive sales statistics were referenced from AAA Fourin’s Asian Automobile Analysis [14]. According to this report, total new vehicle sales in South Korea in 2023 reached 1,743,366 units, with Hyundai accounting for 635,506 units (43.7%) and Kia 565,826 units (32.5%), jointly representing 76.2% of the domestic market. In the present survey, Hyundai and Kia owners comprised 74% of respondents, a distribution closely aligned with the national market composition. This alignment reinforces the external validity of the study, indicating that the sample profile closely reflects the structure of South Korea’s automotive market [14].

A frequency analysis was performed to summarize these demographic characteristics, and the results are presented in Table 3.

4.3. Exploratory Factor Analysis and Trust Second-Order Measurement

To assess the suitability of the measurement items, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted using SPSS 22.0. Principal component analysis (PCA) with Varimax rotation was applied, setting the minimum factor loading at 0.50. In the initial analysis of 43 items (excluding the dependent variable), several items were removed due to low loadings: environmental item 3, social item 3, brand value item 5, perceived quality items 3 and 4, and three trust items (ability 1, benevolence 5, integrity 2). The remaining items showed satisfactory loadings and clear factor separation, supporting their validity for confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Trust was conceptualized as a second-order construct composed of ability, benevolence, and integrity. CFA results confirmed that each first-order dimension significantly loaded onto the higher-order factor, with model fit indices (χ²/df, CFI, TLI, RMSEA) meeting recommended thresholds [103]. This hierarchical structure improved parsimony and coherence of the research model.

Table 4. Second-order CFA results for corporate trust.

Factor		Measurement	Loading	Error	t-Value	CR	AVE	Cronbach α
Second	First
Trust	Ability (TAIP)	ABT5	0.760			0.821	0.534	0.827
		ABT4	0.754	0.080	12.712
		ABT3	0.725	0.075	12.221
		ABT2	0.715	0.074	12.063
	Benevolence (TBIP)	BEN4	0.760			0.838	0.564	0.849
		BEN3	0.754	0.063	14.318
		BEN2	0.725	0.060	14.317
		BEN1	0.715	0.054	14.740
	Integrity (TIIP)	INT5	0.760			0.833	0.556	0.861
		INT4	0.754	0.061	15.320
		INT3	0.725	0.065	14.755
		INT1	0.715	0.052	15.161

summarizes the finalized measurement model.

4.4. Evaluation of the Research Model

To examine how ESG management affects purchase intention, this study applied structural equation modeling (SEM) using SmartPLS 4.0. The measurement model was first assessed for internal consistency reliability, followed by convergent and discriminant validity.

Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach’s α and composite reliability (CR), with a recommended threshold of 0.70 or higher [103]. As shown in

Table 5. Evaluation of internal consistency reliability.

Latent Variable	Cronbach’s α	CR (rho_a)	CR (rho_c)	AVE
	>0.70	>0.70	>0.70	>0.50
Eco-Friendly Management	0.786	0.786	0.875	0.701
Social Responsibility	0.764	0.768	0.864	0.679
Governance	0.772	0.776	0.868	0.686
Brand Value	0.865	0.866	0.908	0.711
Perceived Quality	0.844	0.845	0.906	0.762
Trust	0.862	0.869	0.916	0.785
Purchase Intention	0.819	0.819	0.892	0.734

, all constructs exceeded these criteria, confirming that the items consistently measure their intended latent variables and providing a sound basis for further validity testing.

Convergent validity assesses whether indicators for the same latent variable are highly correlated. Using the reflective measurement model in SmartPLS 4.0, convergent validity was evaluated through outer loadings and Average Variance Extracted (AVE).

Items with loadings below 0.50 were removed to improve construct validity. Specifically, ENV1, ENV2, ENV5, SOC4–SOC6, GOV1, GOV2, GOV5, and PUR2–PUR4 were excluded. After refinement, all remaining items exceeded the 0.50 loading threshold, and AVE values for each construct were above 0.50, confirming satisfactory convergent validity. Detailed results are summarized in

Table 6. Convergent validity evaluation results.

Variable	Indicator	Outer Loading	AVE	Variable	Indicator	Outer Loading	AVE
		>0.70	>0.50			>0.70	>0.50
Environmental Management	ENV1	0.833	0.701	Perceived Quality	QUA1	0.878	0.762
	ENV2	0.852			QUA2	0.858
	ENV5	0.826			QUA5	0.882
Social Responsibility	SOC4	0.802	0.679	Trust	TAIP	0.829	0.785
	SOC5	0.815			TBIP	0.919
	SOC6	0.855			TIIP	0.906
Governance	GOV1	0.824	0.686	Purchase Intention	PUR2	0.860	0.734
	GOV2	0.826			PUR3	0.859
	GOV5	0.835			PUR4	0.852
Brand Value	BRA1	0.853	0.711
	BRA2	0.821
	BRA3	0.849
	BRA4	0.851

.

Discriminant validity evaluates whether latent variables are empirically distinct from one another. Following the Fornell–Larcker criterion, discriminant validity is established when the square root of each construct’s AVE is greater than its correlations with other constructs, indicating low multicollinearity. The results, shown in

Table 7. Discriminant validity analysis results based on the Fornell–Larcker criterion.

	Purchase Intention	Brand Value	Social Responsibility	Trust	Perceived Quality	Governance	Environmental Management
Purchase Intention	0.857
Brand Value	0.767	0.843
Social Responsibility	0.654	0.688	0.824
Trust	0.809	0.774	0.728	0.886
Perceived Quality	0.682	0.789	0.612	0.764	0.873
Governance	0.619	0.663	0.692	0.701	0.592	0.829
Environmental Management	0.572	0.630	0.673	0.611	0.559	0.649	0.837

The diagonal values represent the square roots of the Average Variance Extracted (AVE).

, confirm that all constructs satisfied this criterion.

The model’s explanatory power was evaluated using the coefficient of determination (R²), which indicates the proportion of variance explained for each endogenous construct. As shown in

Table 8. Model explanatory power and goodness-of-fit results.

Category	Variable	R2	Criterion	Result
Model Explanatory Power Evaluation	Purchase Intention	0.704	R2 < 0.25: Weak 0.25 ≦ R2 < 0.75: Moderate 0.75 ≦ R2: Strong	Adequate
	Brand Value	0.712		Adequate
	Trust	0.719		Adequate
	Perceived Quality	0.445		Adequate
Model Goodness-of-Fit Evaluation	Indicator	Value	Evaluation Criteria
	SRMR	0.054	<0.080	Adequate
	d_ULS	0.728	>0.050	Adequate
	d_G	0.466	>0.050	Adequate
	NFI	0.817	>0.800	Adequate

, R² values for Purchase Intention (0.704), Brand Value (0.712), Trust (0.719), and Perceived Quality (0.445) all exceed the recommended threshold, confirming adequate explanatory power. Model fit indices (SRMR = 0.054, d_ULS = 0.728, d_G = 0.466, NFI = 0.817) also meet recommended criteria, indicating an overall good fit.

4.5. Common Method Bias (CMB) Test in PLS

Because this study collected data for both independent and dependent variables from the same respondents at a single point in time, common method bias (CMB) could artificially inflate correlations among variables [104]. To address this risk, the study employed the full collinearity variance inflation factor (VIF) approach, which is now widely recommended in PLS-SEM research as a robust diagnostic tool. This procedure involves regressing each latent construct on all others and computing VIF values, with scores below 3.3 generally indicating no serious CMB concern [105].

As shown in

Table 9. CMB test results.

Variable	R2	VIF	Kock (>3.3)	Hair (>5.0)
Trust	0.785	4.658	TRUE	FALSE
Brand_Value	0.750	3.993	TRUE	FALSE
Purchase_Intention	0.706	3.406	TRUE	FALSE
Perceived_Quality	0.679	3.111	FALSE	FALSE
Social_Management	0.645	2.813	FALSE	FALSE
Governance_Management	0.596	2.474	FALSE	FALSE
Environmental_Management	0.542	2.181	FALSE	FALSE

, three constructs—Trust (4.658), Brand Value (3.993), and Purchase Intention (3.406)—exceeded the strict 3.3 cutoff, suggesting a potential risk under the conservative criterion. However, all constructs remained well below the more widely accepted threshold of 5.0 [103], indicating that multicollinearity is not severe and that CMB does not pose a substantial threat to the validity of the measurement model.

4.6. Path Analysis and Hypothesis-Testing Results

The path analysis of the structural model showed that twelve of the fourteen hypotheses were supported, while two were not supported, as summarized in

Table 10. Structural model path analysis and hypothesis-testing results.

Hypothesis Path			Path Coefficient	t-Value	p-Value	Result
H1	H1-1	Eco-Friendly Management → Brand Value	0.114	2.431	0.015 *	Supported
	H1-2	Social Responsibility → Brand Value	0.190	3.555	0.000 ***	Supported
	H1-3	Governance → Brand Value	0.149	3.152	0.002 **	Supported
H2	H2-1	Eco-Friendly Management → Perceived Quality	0.182	2.738	0.006 **	Supported
	H2-2	Social Responsibility → Perceived Quality	0.310	4.766	0.000 ***	Supported
	H2-3	Governance → Perceived Quality	0.259	3.798	0.000 ***	Supported
H3	H3-1	Eco-Friendly Management → Trust	0.026	0.555	0.579	Rejected
	H3-2	Social Responsibility → Trust	0.283	5.248	0.000 ***	Supported
	H3-3	Governance → Trust	0.227	4.016	0.000 ***	Supported
H4		Perceived Quality → Brand Value	0.521	10.833	0.000 ***	Supported
H5		Perceived Quality → Trust	0.442	7.500	0.000 ***	Supported
H6		Brand Value → Purchase Intention	0.360	3.835	0.000 ***	Supported
H7		Perceived Quality → Purchase Intention	−0.018	0.236	0.814	Rejected
H8		Corporate Trust → Purchase Intention	0.545	5.283	0.000 ***	Supported

Note: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.

. Overall, the significant paths were consistent with prior empirical findings, lending support to the theoretical framework. The two non-significant paths, however, merit closer examination and will be discussed further in the interpretation section to explore possible theoretical and contextual explanations.

As shown in Figure 2, the first rejected hypothesis posited that environmental responsibility would positively influence trust. Although prior studies reported that eco-friendly practices enhance brand trust, the present findings suggest that consumers increasingly view environmental initiatives as baseline obligations rather than meaningful differentiators. Recent research further indicates that perceived greenwashing erodes brand credibility and undermines long-term trust [64], while narrative-driven, two-sided communication can mitigate skepticism [106]. These results highlight the prevalence of green skepticism and the need for authenticity, transparency, and compelling narratives for ESG efforts to effectively build trust.

The second rejected hypothesis proposed that perceived quality directly influences purchase intention. Although prior research emphasized perceived quality as a key driver of purchase behavior, the present findings suggest that this relationship is now largely indirect. Contemporary studies indicate that consumers increasingly rely on trust and brand credibility as mediators that translate quality signals into behavioral intentions [97]. In high-involvement sectors such as the automotive industry, consistently high quality has become a baseline expectation rather than a differentiator. This means that quality, on its own, no longer significantly shifts purchase decisions. Instead, consumers interpret quality cues in conjunction with ESG and reputational signals. Credible ESG performance strengthens brand image and trust, which in turn drive purchase intention more strongly than quality alone [39,81]. This shift implies that while quality remains necessary for maintaining consumer confidence, its direct effect on purchase intention has weakened. Its influence now primarily operates through higher-order constructs—such as trust, credibility, and perceived corporate integrity—that have become the decisive drivers in contemporary consumer decision-making.

Collectively, these non-supported paths reveal a shift in ESG-related consumer behavior: environmental efforts must transcend compliance and be communicated credibly to restore trust, while brand signaling and ESG performance now outweigh pure quality as determinants of purchase intention.

4.7. Verification of Potential Bias Between Vehicle Ownership Groups

To address potential sample bias—given that 75% of respondents were Hyundai/Kia owners—this study conducted a two-step multi-group analysis (MGA) comparing domestic (Hyundai/Kia) and foreign brand owners.

First, measurement invariance of composite models (MICOM) was tested [107]. As shown in

Table 11. Results of measurement invariance of composite models (MICOM) between domestic and foreign brand owners.

Variables	Correlation Value	Permutation	p-Value	Result
Eco-Friendly Management	1.000	0.999	0.731	Not Supported
Social Responsibility	0.999	0.999	0.525	Not Supported
Governance	0.998	0.999	0.160	Not Supported
Brand Value	1.000	1.000	0.266	Not Supported
Perceived Quality	1.000	1.000	0.915	Not Supported
Trust	1.000	1.000	0.467	Not Supported
Purchase Intention	1.000	1.000	0.717	Not Supported

, full invariance was established, confirming that both groups interpreted the constructs equivalently and allowing valid structural comparisons [108].

Second, PLS-MGA was performed to assess path differences [109]. As summarized in

Table 12. Multi-group analysis (MGA) results: path coefficient differences between domestic and foreign brand owners.

Hypothesis	Hypothesis Path	Group 1 Path Coefficient	Group 2 Path Coefficient	Difference	p-Value	Result
H1-1	Eco-Friendly Management → Brand Value	0.099	0.097	0.002	0.985	Not Supported
H1-2	Social Responsibility → Brand Value	0.154	0.331	−0.177	0.271	Not Supported
H1-3	Governance → Brand Value	0.078	−0.114	0.192	0.081	Not Supported
H2-1	Eco-Friendly Management → Perceived Quality	0.189	0.214	−0.025	0.838	Not Supported
H2-2	Social Responsibility → Perceived Quality	0.317	0.315	0.001	0.994	Not Supported
H2-3	Governance → Perceived Quality	0.285	0.252	0.033	0.799	Not Supported
H3-1	Eco-Friendly Management → Trust	0.227	0.02	0.207	0.061	Not Supported
H3-2	Social Responsibility → Trust	0.313	0.109	0.205	0.206	Not Supported
H3-3	Governance → Trust	0.161	0.38	−0.219	0.101	Not Supported
H4	Perceived Quality → Brand Value	0.317	0.507	−0.19	0.417	Not Supported
H5	Perceived Quality → Trust	0.473	0.603	−0.13	0.255	Not Supported
H6	Brand Value → Purchase Intention	0.464	0.438	0.026	0.852	Not Supported
H7	Perceived Quality → Purchase Intention	0.117	−0.29	0.407	0.013 *	Supported
H8	Corporate Trust → Purchase Intention	0.481	0.618	−0.137	0.665	Not Supported

Note: Group 1 = Hyundai/Kia brand vehicles, Group 2 = Non-Group 1 brand vehicles. * p < 0.05.

, only the Perceived Quality → Purchase Intention path showed a significant difference (p = 0.013). This suggests that while measurement bias is absent, the importance of quality as a purchase driver varies by brand origin—domestic brand owners rely more heavily on quality cues, whereas foreign brand owners may weigh image and trust more strongly [110].

5. Results

5.1. Research Findings

This study empirically examined how ESG management affects consumer purchase intention through the mediating roles of brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust, thereby both confirming prior theoretical expectations and offering new empirical insights.

First, ESG management was found to significantly enhance brand value (RQ1). Consumers interpreted environmental, social, and governance practices as credible ESG signals of corporate responsibility, which strengthened brand favorability, loyalty, and recognition. These findings reinforce the view that ESG serves as a key driver of the symbolic and emotional brand assets that ultimately shape purchase decisions.

Second, although ESG management positively influenced perceived quality, its effect on purchase intention was not statistically significant (RQ2). This suggests that consumers increasingly regard quality as a baseline expectation rather than a differentiator, particularly as technological gaps narrow within the automotive sector. Accordingly, perceived quality operates indirectly—its effect on purchase intention is transmitted primarily through brand value and corporate trust. This finding underscores the rising primacy of relational and symbolic factors over purely functional attributes.

Third, ESG management exerted a significant positive influence on corporate trust, especially through transparent governance and social responsibility initiatives (RQ3). However, environmental practices did not directly strengthen trust, reflecting a growing green skepticism in which consumers view eco-friendly initiatives as minimum obligations and penalize insincere or performative efforts (i.e., greenwashing). This highlights the importance of authenticity and transparency in building trust.

Fourth, a comparative assessment of mediating effects (RQ4) showed that brand value and trust are stronger conduits of ESG’s influence on purchase intention than perceived quality. This hierarchy indicates that, in high-involvement product categories such as automobiles, symbolic capital (brand value) and relational capital (trust) outweigh functional quality as determinants of consumer decisions.

Finally, situating the analysis within the Korean automotive market provides unique insights into how ESG signals are interpreted in a concentrated market with a rapidly evolving regulatory environment. This extends the scope of ESG–consumer behavior research, which has been predominantly Western-focused, and contributes to the global discourse on sustainable consumption.

In summary, the findings demonstrate that ESG management primarily drives purchase intention through brand value and trust, rather than through direct quality perceptions. The two unsupported hypotheses further reveal an evolving consumer landscape in which baseline environmental initiatives and product quality are insufficient. Instead, authenticity, transparency, and trust emerge as critical success conditions for firms aiming to convert ESG efforts into behavioral outcomes.

5.2. Implications

5.2.1. Theoretical Implications

First, this study contributes to the consumer behavior literature by moving beyond the traditional CSR focus to examine the broader construct of ESG management. By empirically establishing a causal link between ESG practices and purchase intention in a high-involvement market, it reinforces and extends theories of value-driven consumption.

Second, the study advances brand theory by demonstrating that brand value is not solely a marketing outcome but is shaped by a firm’s ethical, governance, and social signals. This provides theoretical support for conceptualizing brand value as a psychological mediator that connects corporate ESG commitments with consumer attitudes and behavioral intentions.

Third, the findings offer a reinterpretation of perceived quality, positioning it not as a direct driver of purchase intention but as an indirect influence channeled through brand value and corporate trust. This reframes perceived quality as part of a broader evaluative mechanism shaped by ESG perceptions, aligning with contemporary views that consumers integrate functional, symbolic, and relational cues in decision-making.

Fourth, this study refines trust theory by showing that environmental responsibility alone does not automatically generate trust due to the prevalence of green skepticism. Instead, governance transparency and social responsibility exert stronger effects, offering a more nuanced understanding of the differentiated impacts of ESG dimensions on trust formation.

Finally, by situating the analysis within the Korean automotive market, this research extends consumer and ESG theory beyond Western, low-involvement contexts. It provides comparative insights that enrich the global discourse on sustainable consumption and illustrate how ESG signaling operates in concentrated markets under rapidly evolving regulatory regimes.

5.2.2. Practical Implications

This study offers several important implications for managers, marketers, and policymakers seeking to leverage ESG management as a strategic driver of consumer behavior.

First, strategic communication of ESG initiatives is essential. Firms should articulate their ESG commitments with authenticity, transparency, and evidence of long-term dedication. Clear narratives—supported by measurable outcomes and third-party verification—help prevent consumer skepticism and build symbolic brand assets that foster trust and loyalty.

Second, automotive firms must move beyond compliance-driven environmentalism by embedding ESG principles into core product development, supply chain management, and brand positioning. Proactively communicating initiatives such as carbon-neutral manufacturing, renewable energy adoption, and ethical labor practices can differentiate a brand in a competitive market and strengthen consumer attachment.

Third, given that many consumers now regard environmental actions as a baseline expectation, companies should prioritize governance and social responsibility efforts. Transparent governance structures, fair labor practices, diversity programs, and meaningful contributions to local communities are particularly effective at building the relational capital and corporate trust necessary for sustaining competitive advantage.

Finally, policymakers can support this process by encouraging standardized ESG reporting, incentivizing verifiable sustainability practices, and fostering industry-wide collaboration to promote credibility and comparability of ESG efforts.

5.3. Limitations and Directions for Future Research

While this study provides robust evidence of the causal pathways linking ESG management to purchase intention, several limitations open opportunities for further investigation.

First, the cross-sectional design constrains the ability to draw conclusions about temporal causality. Future research should employ longitudinal designs or analyze actual purchasing data to validate the directionality of effects over time.

Second, the study relied on self-reported consumer perceptions, which may be subject to bias. Future work could integrate objective ESG performance metrics (e.g., MSCI or Refinitiv ratings) with perceptual data to offer a more holistic assessment of the ESG–consumer behavior link.

Third, the study’s focus on the Korean automotive industry limits its generalizability. Comparative research across different industries and cultural settings would help identify whether the observed patterns hold in diverse market contexts and regulatory environments.

Fourth, the multi-group analysis revealed a structural difference between domestic and foreign brand owners, with the path from perceived quality to purchase intention significant only for the latter group. This suggests that brand origin moderates the relationship between quality perceptions and purchase behavior. Future studies should treat brand origin as a potential contingency factor and investigate its interaction effects more systematically.

Fifth, the unsupported hypotheses—specifically the non-significant effects of environmental responsibility on trust and perceived quality on purchase intention—represent not merely study limitations but important insights into evolving consumer behavior. They point to the rise of green skepticism and a cognitive shift in which consumers increasingly prioritize trust and brand credibility over incremental quality gains. Future research should further explore these attitudinal shifts and their implications for ESG strategy.

In summary, future research can advance this line of inquiry by (1) employing longitudinal or experimental designs, (2) combining objective ESG performance indicators with perceptual measures, (3) conducting cross-industry and cross-cultural comparisons, (4) exploring the moderating effects of brand origin, and (5) deepening the investigation of green skepticism and the changing role of quality. These extensions would enhance both the theoretical rigor and practical relevance of ESG–consumer behavior research.

5.4. Conclusions

This study investigated how ESG management shapes consumer purchase intention in the automotive industry by incorporating brand value, perceived quality, and corporate trust as mediating mechanisms. Drawing on stakeholder theory, signaling theory, and trust theory, we developed a theoretically grounded research model that conceptualizes ESG as an upstream determinant of consumer decision-making. Empirical results showed that ESG primarily influences purchase intention through symbolic capital (brand value) and relational capital (trust), while perceived quality exerts an indirect effect. These findings provide novel insight into the predominance of intangible assets over functional quality in high-involvement purchase contexts.

The study contributes to theory by extending value-driven consumption and trust frameworks, revealing that governance and social responsibility are stronger drivers of trust than environmental initiatives, thus reflecting the rise of green skepticism. It also advances global ESG–consumer research by presenting evidence from a concentrated, high-involvement market with a rapidly evolving regulatory environment.

Nonetheless, the findings are context-specific, reflecting consumer attitudes in the Korean automotive market, where two domestic brands dominate. Therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution and regarded as a foundation for comparative research rather than universally generalizable conclusions. Future studies should test whether these patterns persist across diverse cultural and market contexts—such as North America or Europe—where consumer expectations, regulatory regimes, and competitive dynamics differ. Such work would further validate and refine the theoretical and practical implications offered by this research.