I Don’t Buy It! A Critical Review of the Research on Factors Influencing Sustainable Fashion Buying Behavior

Abstract

Research on the factors influencing sustainable fashion consumption, particularly green apparel buying behavior (GABB), has grown significantly in the last decade. Understanding how to promote GABB while reducing fast-fashion consumption is of critical importance to researchers, marketers, and policymakers. However, deriving actionable insights requires robust methodologies. Therefore, the goal of this systematic narrative review was to analyze existing literature on GABB, to identify key drivers, and to critically examine the methodological approaches, applied theoretical backgrounds, and utilized geographical scope. Following a structured multi-stage review process—including a database search, screening, and synthesis—n = 15 empirical studies focusing on GABB were included. The identified drivers are categorized into five factors: sociodemographic, personal, behavioral, social influences, and product attributes. Additionally, the review identified methodological shortcomings, including a predominant reliance on self-reported data, a lack of experimental designs and longitudinal studies, and a limited sampling scope across studies. Addressing these limitations in future research is essential to develop practical interventions that encourage sustainable fashion consumption and guide effective marketing and policy strategies.

1. Introduction

Climate change is widely recognized as one of the most urgent ecological and social challenges of the 21st century [1]. To reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, global as well as regional efforts need to be implemented to mitigate the adverse consequences of climate change that are expected to continuously increase in severity [2]. As the fastest-warming continent, Europe is disproportionately vulnerable to climate impacts, which pose threats to food, water, and energy security, as well as to public health [3]. Within their European Green Deal strategy outline, the commission of the European Union (EU) has pledged to improve mechanisms of prevention against environmentally harmful products and advocates for the use of product passports [4]. To this end, the EU commission has introduced a standardized life cycle environmental performance assessment, named the Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) [5]. Labeling of products based on their PEF can guide consumer choices towards environmentally friendly product alternatives [6]. This is especially relevant since household consumption accounts for an estimated 65% of GHG emissions and around 50% to 80% of water, material, and land use [7]. Specifically, the textile industry is estimated to account for 20% of global wastewater production and 8% of GHG emissions, while only 1% of textiles is recycled [8,9]. Enabling sustainable consumer behavior can therefore contribute to the goals set in the European Green Deal. With the textile industry as the second largest global industrial sector, there is a rising interest in the sustainability of fashion production and consumption [10]. Furthermore, overall textile demand is projected to increase substantially in the future [11], highlighting the need for a required change in both the production and consumption paradigm of fashion products.

The concept of sustainability, and its application to sustainable product consumption, is defined differently across various contexts [12]. In the fashion industry, a key framework is the ‘triple bottom line’, which highlights the economic, environmental, and social impacts of businesses and their products [13]. The sustainability of a product is therefore defined through its economic viability (e.g., the ability to produce and distribute the product profitably), ecological viability (e.g., the use of natural resources at a rate that allows for their long-term regeneration and availability for future generations), and social viability (e.g., ensuring fair labor practices). Related ideas, such as ‘political consumption’ [14] and ‘ethical fashion’ [15] refer to choosing products with fewer negative impacts compared to conventional alternatives. Terms like ‘sustainable fashion’, ‘eco-fashion’, and ‘green fashion’ are often used interchangeably with ‘ethical fashion’.

As societal awareness of the climate crisis grows, apparel producers can leverage this interest by offering sustainable products [16]. However, a substantial body of research shows that interest in, or positive attitudes toward, sustainability do not necessarily result in sustainable behavior (e.g., [17,18]). In the field of behavioral psychology, this phenomenon, which describes an inconsistency between expressed attitudes and behavioral outcomes, is commonly known as the ‘attitude–behavior gap’. Particularly in sustainable consumption, consumers frequently purchase environmentally harmful products despite expressing a preference for greener alternatives [15]. While self-reported attitudes and intentions towards sustainable consumption are easily measurable through questionnaires, such methods often fail to fully explain the underlying drivers of sustainable behavior due to the attitude–behavior gap [19].

Therefore, this review aims to summarize and critically evaluate research examining green apparel buying behavior (GABB) within the textile industry. This refers to research that has explicitly operationalized tangible behavioral outcomes, as opposed to measuring antecedents of GABB, like green apparel buying intentions. Buying intentions are described as a desire or willingness to purchase a product (e.g., [20]), but similarly to reported attitudes, they do not necessarily result in behavioral outcomes either [21]. There have been prior reviews (e.g., [19,22]) that have summarized factors influencing sustainable apparel consumption (and its antecedents). Ref. [19] investigated consumer behavior concerning sustainable fashion, emphasizing theoretical frameworks and utilizing the Stimulus–Organism–Response (SOR) framework to categorize drivers of sustainable fashion behavior. Meanwhile, Ref. [22] explored various stages of the product lifecycle, including (pre)purchase, use, and disposal. In contrast, this research focuses on identifying key drivers of GABB, along with an in-depth analysis of common research designs and data collection methods in GABB. It reveals shortcomings in the research methodologies used in primary studies within this field. These insights are used to compile a catalog of actionable GABB drivers and their practical implications and to provide methodological recommendations for future research.

2. Materials and Methods

This systematic narrative literature review examines factors influencing GABB. This approach combines the rigor of systematic search and selection with the interpretative synthesis of narrative methods [23]. To ensure a comprehensive approach, a multi-stage process comprising a database selection, study identification, screening, and synthesis was applied.

A semi-structured search across four major academic databases (Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost) was conducted. These databases were selected due to their extensive coverage of multidisciplinary academic literature. The search was restricted to peer-reviewed, English-language studies to ensure the quality and comparability of the included studies. The following keywords and search terms were applied to capture a wide range of relevant studies: “sustainable clothing consumer attitudes and behaviour”; “sustainable textiles consumption factors”; “sustainable fashion behaviour”; “sustainable fashion consumer behaviour attitude”; “factors green fashion consum*”; (“sustainable” AND “textile” AND “consumer” AND “behavior”); (“sustainable” AND “buying” AND “behavior” AND “clothing” OR “textile”); (“sustainable” AND “textile” AND “consumption”).

The inclusion criteria focused on empirical studies that examined actual consumer behavior, specifically GABB. Studies measuring only behavioral intentions or conducting segmentation analyses without a direct focus on behavior were excluded, as they did not align with the scope of this review. This criterion ensured that the review is centered on actionable insights grounded in actual consumer behavior rather than hypothetical or segmented perspectives.

The initial database search resulted in n = 52 studies. A two-stage screening process was implemented to identify the most relevant studies. In the first stage, titles and abstracts were screened to filter out studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria. In the second stage, full-text articles were assessed for relevance and quality, with particular attention to the applied methodology and relevance to the research question. To ensure the reliability and validity of the review, all stages of the process were conducted by multiple reviewers, with discrepancies resolved through consensus discussions.

This process led to the selection of a final set of studies (n = 15) that were used to identify the key factors influencing GABB. These factors were categorized and analyzed to identify recurring themes and patterns. By synthesizing the findings, we constructed a framework, providing insights into the motivations, barriers, and external influences shaping GABB. The review process is depicted in Figure 1.

3. Results

3.1. Overview of Reviewed Studies

The final selection of this review consists of 15 articles on GABB, and a summary is provided in

Table 1. Overview of reviewed studies.

Author and Year	Topic	Method	GABB 1	CMB Addr. 2	Geo. Scope 3	Theory Bg.4
[25]	Investigates the difference between ethical and non-ethical consumers	Survey (n = 494)	Self-report - Single-item (GABB) - Binary scale - No time constraints	No	Korea	No specific behavior model used
[14]	Investigates factors affecting political consumption	Survey (n = 5204)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., boycott and buycott) - Binary scale - No time constraints	No	Europe (Germany, England, France, Sweden, Norway)	No specific behavior model used
[26]	Investigates factors affecting sustainable apparel buying behavior	Survey (n = 235)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., product types) - Likert scale - Time constraint (6 months)	No	USA	Theory of planned behavior
[27]	Investigates attitude–behavior gap	Survey (n = 1085, only women)	Self-report - Single-item (annual expenses for organic clothing/annual expenses for clothing) - Continuous scale - No time constraint (depends on subjective interpretation)	No	Germany	Value–attitude–behavior hierarchy
[15]	Investigates attitude–behavior gap and specifically explores barriers in sustainable fashion consumption	Interviews (n = 13)	No information on whether or how GABB was assessed	CMB not relevant	Germany	No specific behavior model used
[28]	Investigates which factors influence engagement or non-engagement in specific sustainable fashion consumption behaviors	Focus groups (n = 6)	Self-report - Multiple items (participants were required to select two sustainable fashion consumption behaviors they would commit to) - No time constraint	CMB not relevant	USA	Behavioral reasoning theory
[29]	Investigates factors influencing consumers’ choice of green clothing products	Survey (n = 496)	Self-report - Single-item (GABB purchase) - Rating scale (frequency) - No time constraint	Yes	Poland	Theory of Consumption Values
[30]	Investigates the attitude–behavior gap	Survey (n = 387)	Self-report - Multiple-items (e.g., product types) - Likert scale - No time constraint	Yes	Japan	Knowledge–attitude–behavior model and attitude–behavior–context theory
[31]	Investigates the intention–behavior gap	Survey (n = 464)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., purchase conditions) - Likert scale - No time constraint	Yes	Germany	Theory of Reasoned Action
[32]	Investigates factors that influence sustainable fashion consumption	Survey (n = 324)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., purchase conditions) - Scale not provided - No time constraint	No	Malaysia	Theory of Interpersonal Behavior
[33]	Investigates the relationship between intention and behavior	Survey (n = 1289)	Self-report - Single-item (GABB purchase) - Binary scale - Time constraint (6 weeks)	Yes	Germany	Theory of Planned Behavior
[34]	Investigates factors affecting conscious fashion consumption	Survey (n = 439)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., general GABB) - Likert scale - No time constraint	Yes	Serbia	Green consumption values
[35]	Investigates the attitude–behavior link	Survey (n = 218)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., frequency, self-perception) - Likert scale - No time constraint	No	Lithuania	No specific behavior model used
[36]	Investigates the effect of motivational themes on sustainable fashion consumption and examines the moderation effect of adoption barriers	Survey (n = 376)	Self-report - Multiple items (e.g., expenditure, frequency) - Rating scale - No time constraint	No	Spain	No specific behavior model used
[37]	Investigates differences between Gen Z and Gen Y in sustainable fashion consumption	Survey (n = 480)	Self-report - Single-item (GABB purchase) - Binary scale - No time constraint	No	Italy	No specific behavior model used

¹ GABB = Green Apparel Buying Behavior Measured, ² CM Addr. = Common Method Bias Addressed, ³ Geo. Scope = Geographical Scope, ⁴ Theory Bg. = Theoretical Background.

. Most of the studies examine the impact of multiple factors on GABB, predominantly utilizing cross-sectional survey designs. Sample sizes vary widely, ranging from 6 to 1085 participants. Nearly all of the reviewed publications were published after 2015, indicating an increased interest in the field. The majority of the data were collected in industrialized nations, with only two studies conducted in emerging economies. This trend is unsurprising, as individuals living in developed economies typically possess the financial means to afford sustainable products. Conversely, in areas with lower incomes, basic survival needs often overshadow environmental concerns [24].

Table 1 lists the author(s), year of publication, overall topic, theoretical background, and applied method, as well as how GABB was measured in the given paper, whether the common method bias (CMB) has been addressed, and the geographical scope of the given sample.

3.1.1. Theories and Models of Behavior

The majority of the studies included in this review explicitly reference a behavioral theory or model to explain the mechanisms and processes by which determining factors translate into behavior. Among these, the widely recognized Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) [38] is the most frequently cited framework.

As a successor to the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (n = 1), the TPB (n = 2) conceptualizes behavioral intention as a function of perceived behavioral control, subjective norms, and attitudes [39]. According to this theory, behavior is determined by behavioral intention and actual behavioral control [40]. The TPB delineates a structured, multi-stage process wherein broad external factors, such as demographic characteristics, exert indirect effects on more specific constructs, including normative beliefs. These beliefs, in turn, shape intermediate constructs such as subjective norms, which ultimately guide subsequent behavioral outcomes. The theory also assumes that individuals act as rational agents, aiming to maximize utility by weighing the positive and negative consequences of their actions [41]. However, empirical tests assessing the explanatory power of the TPB have produced mixed results, and it has been frequently criticized for neglecting the influences of habits and affective states on behavior [42]. A notable application of the TPB is presented in [26], who confirmed their hypotheses that individual financial resources and the accessibility of sustainable apparel stores positively influence perceived behavioral control, which subsequently impacts behavioral intention and buying behavior.

Another theoretical framework frequently applied in this field is the Theory of Consumption Values [43] (n = 2). This theory proposes that behavior is a function of independent consumption values (e.g., functional value, social value) that vary in their relative importance depending on the context. Within the reviewed literature, particular attention is given to green consumption values (e.g., biospheric value, altruistic value), which are often aggregated into a singular construct. These values are either analyzed independently (e.g., [34]) or alongside other consumption values (e.g., [29]). Similarly to the TPB, the Theory of Consumption Values assumes a rational and systematic decision-making process, making it less suited to account for habitual or involuntary actions. Furthermore, the theory has been criticized for assuming the independence of consumption values and for disregarding additional behavioral outcomes such as intention or satisfaction [44]. Some of these limitations are addressed through the value–attitude–behavior hierarchy model proposed by [45]. This model conceptualizes values as the most abstract level of social cognition, which function as prototypes for more specific attitudes toward a behavior. By positioning attitude as an intermediate outcome, this model enables the exploration of the attitude–behavior gap and provides a more nuanced analysis of the factors driving or hindering GABB [27].

As illustrated in Table 1, several other theoretical frameworks are cited in the given studies. These include, but are not limited to, the attitude–behavior-context theory [46], the knowledge–attitude–behavior model [47], and the Theory of Interpersonal Behavior [48]. While these frameworks are relevant across various psychological disciplines, they are applied only by singular studies in the context of GABB. For a more comprehensive discussion of the theoretical foundations underpinning behavior in GABB studies, see [19].

3.1.2. Methods

The studies reviewed predominantly rely on quantitative research methodologies, with surveys being the most common approach (n = 13). These surveys typically test behavioral theories, such as the TPB, or propose novel theoretical models, often applying structural equation modeling for data analysis. The survey sample sizes are substantial, with a median of n = 464. In addition to the quantitative studies, two studies adopt qualitative methods to explore barriers [15] and motivations [28] related to GABB. As it is characteristic of qualitative research, the sample sizes in these studies are relatively small, with n = 13 [15] and n = 6 [28]. Across all studies, the samples are predominantly composed of young women, with an average of 75.6% female participants and a mean age across samples of 23.8 years. It should be noted, however, that eight studies did not report the mean age of their samples.

All studies included in this review applied a cross-sectional research design. While [33] data were collected at two distinct time points, each variable was measured only once, which does not meet the criteria for a longitudinal study, defined as requiring repeated measurements of the same variables over time [49]. Consequently, their study is also classified as cross-sectional. Notably, none of the reviewed studies utilized experimental designs to examine the impact of potential drivers on GABB. This lack of experimental approach is distinct to the sustainable fashion context, as experimental designs are commonly applied in other domains of green and sustainable consumption to evaluate communication strategies or interventions (e.g., [50,51,52,53,54]).

In terms of operationalization, all quantitative studies relied on self-reports to measure GABB, although the methods varied significantly. The self-report measures can be categorized into single-item and multiple-item approaches. Among the five studies employing single-item measures, three different methods were observed. Some studies utilized binary outcome variables to indicate whether respondents had purchased green fashion (e.g., [37]), others assessed the frequency of GABB [29], and [27] measured the proportion of annual spending on green clothing relative to total clothing expenditure. Conversely, eight studies employed multiple-item measures, which provided a more nuanced understanding of GABB. These measures captured information about the types of products purchased (e.g., [30]) and the purchase contexts of GABB (e.g., [31]). However, most studies did not include time-bound recall periods (e.g., “within the last six months”). Additionally, reporting on reliability metrics was inconsistent across the reviewed studies.

With regard to geographical scope, the majority of studies (n = 14) collected data from a single country. The exception is [14], who conducted a multinational study involving five European countries: Sweden, Norway, Germany, France, and England. Most data collection occurred in Europe (n = 9), with Germany being the most frequently studied country (n = 5). The remaining studies were conducted in the United States (n = 3) and Asia (n = 3).

3.2. Factors Related to Green Apparel Consumption Behavior

The literature review identified a range of factors associated with GABB. Prior research on sustainable fashion consumption has organized these factors using specific theoretical frameworks, such as the SOR framework [19] and the framework of sustainable solutions [22]. Ref. [22] further categorized these factors into barriers and drivers. In contrast, this review adopts a broader approach, categorizing the identified factors into thematic groups, similar to the approach employed by [55]. This method provides greater flexibility by accommodating the inherent ambiguity of certain factors, allowing them to be analyzed without being rigidly classified as either drivers or barriers. Moreover, the use of broad categories enhances the accessibility and intuitiveness of the findings, making them particularly valuable for engaging a diverse range of stakeholders, including policymakers, consumers, and industry professionals. These groups constitute key target audiences when addressing complex challenges such as sustainability. Based on this rationale, the factors identified in this review are classified into the following categories:

• Sociodemographic Factors: Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of individuals.
• Personal Factors: Attributes related to the individual decision-maker, often shaped by life experiences.
• Social Influence: External pressures or social norms that influence behavior.
• Behavioral Factors: Habits and actions within the decision-making process.
• Product Attributes: Characteristics of the product that are largely independent of personal control or influence.

The most relevant factors and their associations with GABB are illustrated in Figure 2. These factors differ not only in semantic terms but also in the nature of their relationship with GABB. While certain variables are hypothesized to exert a direct causal influence on behavior, others operate through mediating mechanisms. For instance, the TPB posits that subjective norms, which are categorized as social influences, affect behavior indirectly by shaping behavioral intention, which is categorized as a behavioral factor. Similarly, variables such as age might only exhibit correlational or causal relationships when mediating factors, such as financial resources, are not controlled for. It is important to acknowledge that the simplified representation of these factors in Figure 2 does not depict the underlying complexities or the mediating pathways that influence their effects on GABB.

3.2.1. Sociodemographic Factors

Research on GABB frequently investigates sociodemographic factors, including age, gender, economic situation, and education. Ref. [27] characterized the typical sustainable fashion consumer as a middle-aged woman with a university degree. Similarly, Ref. [37] found that older age positively correlates with GABB, noting that Generation Y (individuals born between 1981 and 1996) exhibits a higher likelihood of purchasing clothing made from organic and sustainable materials compared to Generation Z (individuals born between 1997 and 2012). Ref. [14] explored the influence of sociodemographic variables on political consumption, a form of activism described as “voting with your money”, which encompasses behaviors such as buycotts, where consumers choose brands based on sustainability considerations. According to Ref. [14], a favorable economic situation enhances political consumption, whereas older age is associated with a reduced likelihood of acting as political consumers. In this context, gender and education were not found to have a significant impact.

3.2.2. Personal Factors

The factors identified as personal factors include both broad constructs, such as values, motivations, attitudes, and knowledge, and more specific considerations like perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE), perceived behavioral control (PBC), and green trust.

Drawing on Schwartz’s theory [56,57], Ref. [25] found that ethical consumers demonstrate a stronger adherence to the values of self-direction and universalism compared to non-ethical consumers. Similarly, Ref. [27] applied Schwartz’s framework to demonstrate that self-transcendence values, which emphasize collective welfare, positively influence sustainable fashion consumption, whereas self-enhancing values, which prioritize individual interests, exhibit no significant impact on behavior. This suggests that values promoting concern for others’ well-being are key drivers of GABB. While Schwartz’s theory provides a broad perspective on value orientation, evidence also highlights the role of more specific values in shaping GABB. For instance, green consumption values, derived from the theory of consumption values (see Section 3.2.5), reflect personal environmental concerns in purchasing decisions and are a major determinant of GABB [29,34]. Additionally, Ref. [14] reported that individuals who voted for green or left-leaning political parties are more likely to engage in political consumption. Furthermore, a sense of moral obligation to adopt green and altruistic behavior has been shown to correlate with higher levels of sustainable apparel consumption [32].

In general, values are conceptualized as guiding frameworks for appropriate behavior toward oneself and others, such as recognizing personal environmental responsibility. By contrast, motivation refers to the desire to act in a particular manner to achieve specific goals, such as reducing consumption through extending product lifespans and purchasing fewer items [58]. Despite their significance, motivations for GABB are rarely explored in the reviewed literature. Ref. [36] identified two primary motivational themes influencing GABB: reducing one’s fashion consumption and expressing self-image through clothing choices.

Attitude, a central construct in the TPB, plays a significant role in shaping behavioral intention. Numerous studies applying the TPB to GABB have confirmed the relationship between attitude and behavioral intention (e.g., [26,31,35,59]). Other studies have also documented a direct positive relationship between attitude and GABB [27,30,35]. Moreover, Ref. [25] found that ethical consumers exhibit a significantly stronger positive attitude toward purchasing ethical products compared to non-ethical consumers. However, a positive attitude toward sustainable clothing does not always translate into actual purchasing behavior, a discrepancy commonly referred to as the attitude–behavior gap [15,27,30].

Consumer knowledge about the environmental impact of the fast fashion industry is another key factor influencing GABB. While individuals may have some awareness of unethical production practices in fast fashion [15], they often lack a full understanding of the environmental harm caused by production methods and materials [36]. This knowledge gap poses a significant barrier to the adoption of GABB [15,36]. It remains unclear whether this gap stems from a conscious decision to disregard information or from simple unawareness [36]. On the other hand, Ref. [32] identified environmental awareness as a strong positive predictor of GABB. Furthermore, Ref. [30] found that consumers are more likely to engage in GABB when they can easily distinguish sustainable apparel from unsustainable alternatives.

PCE, defined as an individual’s belief in their ability to contribute to solving environmental issues through their actions [60], has been extensively studied for its role in encouraging pro-environmental behaviors [61,62]. In the context of GABB, low PCE has been identified as a barrier [15], while ethical consumers demonstrate higher levels of PCE compared to non-ethical consumers [25].

PBC, as conceptualized by [63], refers to an individual’s perception of the ease or difficulty associated with performing a specific behavior. Greater perceived access to resources and fewer perceived barriers enhance PBC. According to the TPB, PBC, along with behavioral intention, directly predicts behavioral achievement [38]. Ref. [26] demonstrated that PBC significantly influences both behavioral intention and actual purchasing behavior in the context of GABB.

Green trust, as defined by [64], is the willingness to rely on a product or brand based on beliefs in its credibility and capability to deliver environmental performance. A lack of green trust manifests as skepticism about sustainability claims or labels, which has been identified as a barrier to GABB [15,36]. Furthermore, skepticism about sustainability campaigns negatively moderates the relationship between the motivation to consume sustainably and actual behavior [36]. Conversely, green trust has been identified as a significant predictor of GABB [30].

3.2.3. Social Influence

Social influence refers to the phenomenon whereby an individual’s beliefs or behaviors are shaped by their social network, including constructs such as subjective and social norms [65]. Subjective norms refer to the perceived expectations of a social group regarding appropriate actions in specific contexts [32] and play a significant role in shaping perceptions of acceptable behavior, including sustainable consumption practices [55,62]. For example, consumers are more inclined to purchase sustainable fashion when their friends and family engage in similar behaviors [32].

Within the TPB, subjective norms exert an indirect effect on purchasing decisions by influencing behavioral intentions. While studies such as [26] provide empirical support for this link, others, including [31], report contrary findings.

Ref. [25] further identified face-saving and social responsibility as factors more strongly associated with ethical consumers compared to non-ethical consumers. The concept of “face”, deeply rooted in Chinese culture [25,66], pertains to an individual’s reputation, with face-saving referring to efforts aimed at preserving one’s social image. Social responsibility, on the other hand, encompasses individual actions aimed at benefiting society, such as engaging in sustainable consumption practices. While social influence was a less relevant factor, in the reviewed studies, other reviews concerning sustainable (fashion) consumption have highlighted the importance of social influence on sustainable consumption [19,22,55,62].

3.2.4. Behavioral Factors

Habits and past behaviors exert a significant influence on consumption choices [55]. Consequently, established consumption patterns often hinder sustainable buying behavior. For example, consumers frequently gravitate toward shopping at familiar retail outlets, many of which are fast-fashion brands [15]. However, certain behaviors, such as a preference for online and catalog shopping, have been found to positively influence GABB [27]. Additionally, a strong tendency toward information-seeking behaviors, such as checking the materials used in a clothing item, is positively associated with acting as a political consumer [14].

Within the framework of the TPB, behavioral intention is identified as the primary predictor of behavior. This relationship has been substantiated in the context of GABB [26,31,35]. Moreover, behavioral intention is typically stronger among ethical consumers compared to non-ethical consumers [25]. However, while the development of behavioral intention is a necessary prerequisite for GABB, it is not, by itself, sufficient [33]. Other factors, such as the perceived esthetic shortcomings of sustainable clothing and economic risks, including the high costs associated with purchasing sustainable fashion, can hinder the transformation of an intention into action, resulting in the widely observed intention–behavior gap [31,33].

3.2.5. Product Attributes

The identified product attributes of sustainable fashion include price, availability, image, and consumption values. These attributes can serve as either enablers or barriers to sustainable consumption. For instance, sustainable clothing, like other environmentally friendly products, is generally more expensive than conventionally produced alternatives. This cost difference arises from the use of superior and more expensive raw materials (e.g., organic cotton versus synthetic plastics) and higher labor costs. These higher prices are often perceived as a significant barrier to purchasing sustainable apparel [15]. Furthermore, some consumers are unable to afford organic or recycled clothing or find it difficult to justify the higher cost when sustainable fashion is perceived to offer comparable quality or style to more affordable conventional options [28]. Conversely, when consumers are motivated to align their purchasing behavior with their desired self-image, the higher price of sustainable clothing can enhance their motivation to purchase such items [36]. Despite the widely held notion that price is a barrier, some studies challenge its significance in sustainable consumption. For example, Ref. [27] found that price sensitivity, defined as the importance consumers attribute to price, does not significantly affect purchasing behavior. Similarly, Ref. [31] reported that perceived economic risk does not significantly moderate the relationship between purchase intention and actual purchasing behavior. While these findings suggest an ambiguous role for price, it is important to note that the studies primarily relied on surveys and qualitative methods, which may not fully capture the true impact of price, potentially contributing to inconsistent results.

Limited availability is another barrier to GABB. Ref. [36] reported that the absence of sustainable alternatives reinforces unsustainable consumption patterns, even among individuals highly motivated to purchase sustainable products. However, this effect is not always driven by actual availability limitations, as sustainable clothing options have expanded significantly in recent years. Instead, it may be attributed to a lack of awareness about where to purchase sustainable alternatives [14,15,28]. Additionally, some men perceive sustainable clothing as being exclusively for women, reinforcing the belief that such options are unavailable to them [15].

The perception of sustainable apparel as outdated or non-trendy also deters consumers [15]. Such perceptions suggest that sustainable clothing may not adequately support self-expression [28]. Esthetic concerns, such as whether sustainable clothing aligns with personal style or complements existing wardrobes, can negatively impact the relationship between purchase intention and actual behavior [31]. Furthermore, many consumers value the fast fashion industry for its rapidly changing styles and frequent collections, which enable continuous wardrobe updates to keep pace with current trends. In contrast, sustainable fashion emphasizes slower consumption cycles, promoting less frequent purchases and prioritizing longevity. For avid shoppers, this shift may result in a loss of satisfaction and instant gratification associated with acquiring inexpensive clothing [28]. Thus, a consumption-driven lifestyle may inherently conflict with sustainable purchasing behaviors.

However, while the higher cost of sustainable apparel is often perceived as a barrier, it is also seen as an indicator of superior quality and durability, enhancing the perceived value of sustainable fashion [28]. Interestingly, Ref. [27] presents a contrasting perspective, finding that fashion consciousness neither promotes nor inhibits GABB. They further report that a strong preference for durability may paradoxically reduce GABB, which they attribute to outdated stereotypes and limited consumer knowledge about sustainable fashion. These findings highlight the complex interplay between the perceived image of sustainable fashion and personal preferences.

The final product attribute is consumption values. According to the theory of consumption values, the perceived value of a product (social, emotional, functional, epistemic, and conditional) can influence purchase decisions [43]. Ref. [29] identified two specific values, emotional and conditional, that positively influence GABB. Their findings suggest that when individuals derive emotional satisfaction from green products, they are more likely to select them. Additionally, consumers are more inclined to purchase sustainable fashion under favorable conditions, such as discounted pricing.

4. Discussion

In summary, we reviewed 15 studies examining the factors influencing GABB, which can be grouped into five broad categories: sociodemographics, personal factors, behavioral factors, social influence, and product attributes.

Certain constructs are particularly prevalent in GABB research, including values, attitudes, knowledge, behavioral intention, price, availability, and the perceived image of sustainable fashion. However, other factors, such as motivational processes, perceived behavioral control, and social influence, remain underexplored, highlighting opportunities for further research. Additionally, certain constructs exhibit unambiguously positive or negative relationships with GABB, functioning either as drivers or barriers, such as knowledge, attitudes, availability, and PCE. In contrast, factors like the perceived image of green apparel, price, age, and gender yield more ambiguous evidence regarding their impact on GABB.

Before proceeding with theoretical implications and the methodological discussion of the reviewed studies, it is important to acknowledge a key limitation of this review. This review includes a modest number of studies (n = 15), in contrast to other reviews in this field like [19], which analyzed 88 studies, and [22], which reviewed 217 studies. The limited number is due to the narrower focus on studies explicitly examining the behavioral dimensions of GABB. Due to the limited scope, certain potential drivers of GABB or sustainable fashion behaviors are not addressed, which have been identified in the broader reviews by [19,22]. Those four key themes are as follows: (1) the influence of social media, influencers, and online communities; (2) the role of brand and corporate effects; (3) associations between sustainable fashion consumption and self-improvement or status enhancement; and (4) engagement in other sustainable behaviors.

A comparison between the drivers and barriers identified in this review and those outlined in previous studies is key to clarifying the theoretical contributions of this work. Many of the drivers and barriers listed here have been well researched and are found in a variety of frameworks that are used to explain sustainable behaviors in general. What differentiates the catalog of factors proposed here is the inclusion of habitual mechanisms that might drive daily purchasing behavior of consumers more than has been acknowledged so far, and the inclusion of purchasing intention as a behavioral antecedent, rather than an outcome.

First, unsustainable habits were identified as detrimental to GABB—a factor not included in [19]. Ref. [22] acknowledges habits as relevant. However, the only article to investigate habits regarding GABB is [15], a study with a qualitative design. Even though the empirical support for including this factor in behavioral frameworks to explain GABB is weak, habits have been shown to be an important factor driving human behavior [67]. Notably, many studies in the field draw on the TBP, which does not model habits. This reliance may help explain the lack of quantitative research investigating the role of habits in shaping GABB. Other reviews, such as Ref. [42], have already called for the integration of habits into theoretical frameworks that aim to explain sustainable consumption, or the lack thereof in general.

Second, this study categorizes behavioral intention as a determinant of GABB, rather than treating it as a standalone behavioral outcome. While Ref. [33] posits intention as an acceptable proxy to behavior, they acknowledge that it is insufficient to reliably induce behavior on its own. It is likely that intention acts as a mediator to behavior, for instance, Refs. [31,33] showed how social norms and knowledge, respectively, can predict behavior through the formation of intentions.

Finally, the framework presented should not be interpreted as an exhaustive list of relevant drivers and barriers. Instead, it aims to provide the most promising candidates for influencing the tangible outcomes of GABB and is intended to guide further empirical evaluation. For a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that are effective in producing GABB, studies that integrate factors from multiple categories presented here should be conducted.

4.1. Research Design

As previously outlined, none of the reviewed studies applied an experimental design to investigate GABB. Two studies employed qualitative research, and thirteen studies used cross-sectional designs. Qualitative studies are limited by small sample sizes and interpretive findings, reducing generalizability [68]. Quantitative research also has key limitations: It cannot rule out relationships masked by third variables, and only experimental designs can establish causality [49]. As such, despite the identification of theoretically relevant factors influencing GABB, the lack of experimental evidence limits understanding of their real impact on consumer behavior. This gap hinders the development of effective, evidence-based interventions for policymakers and marketers.

Although experiments investigating factors such as willingness to pay or purchase intentions for sustainable fashion exist (e.g., [69,70,71]), their relevance to GABB is limited. A key shortcoming is that these experiments typically do not involve real purchasing decisions—such as choosing between sustainable and several non-sustainable alternatives. Consequently, they fail to replicate real-world trade-offs, such as budget constraints or ethical dilemmas. Opting for sustainable fashion may align with personal values or offer moral satisfaction, but it often involves higher costs, creating a potential conflict for consumers.

Furthermore, none of the reviewed studies employed longitudinal designs to analyze how sustainable consumer behavior evolves over time. While unsurprising—given the broader scarcity of longitudinal research in the consumption domain [72]—this limits our understanding of behavioral change. For instance, Ref. [73] demonstrated a growing awareness of sustainable fashion among consumers, a trend that coincides with increased sustainability initiatives by fashion companies. This intersection raises important questions: Do consumers recognize and respond to these developments? Do they shift their purchasing behavior as sustainable options become more available? Moreover, longitudinal studies can provide evidence of causality [49]. For instance, they could reveal whether improvements in salary and living standards drive GABB. Combining longitudinal and experimental approaches could be especially fruitful. One potential design might test whether sustained exposure to anti-fast-fashion campaigns (e.g., posters or targeted ads) in one region leads to increased sustainable clothing purchases over time compared to a control region without such interventions.

4.2. Self-Reports

As previously noted, all surveys rely on self-reported data to measure GABB and related factors (such as knowledge), a methodology that entails several inherent challenges.

4.2.1. Methodological Problems with Self-Reports

A significant limitation of self-report measures in the context of GABB is that they do not constitute actual behavioral measures [74]. Whereas behavioral measures reflect observable actions—such as frequency or duration—self-reports capture individuals’ perceptions of their own behavior [75]. Consequently, studies investigating GABB through self-reports may not accurately reflect objective reality. For instance, individuals may overestimate their GABB due to a distorted perception of their behavior [76] or provide untruthful answers to present themselves in a favorable light, a phenomenon commonly referred to as social desirability bias [76,77,78].

Another critical issue with self-reports is the lack of standardization in GABB measures. Researchers often develop custom items or adapt questions from other sources without rigorous validation, resulting in substantial variability in what is being measured. This inconsistency complicates the comparison of findings across studies. Moreover, the quality and informational depth of these measures vary considerably. For example, binary measures assessing whether participants have ever purchased sustainable apparel (e.g., [37]) offer minimal differentiation among respondents—creating a ceiling effect [79,80]. In contrast, measures with constrained time frames (e.g., “purchased green apparel in the last six weeks”) and rating or metric-scaled answer formats provide greater differentiation. These approaches reduce the risk of confounding factors and allow for more robust comparisons across participants. For further discussion on survey and scale construction, see [81,82].

A final limitation of self-reports is the lack of clarity regarding intentionality and consumption context. Many studies fail to specify whether participants intentionally purchased sustainable fashion, leaving room for misinterpretation. For instance, someone might buy clothing made from recycled materials simply because they liked the design—rather than out of concern for sustainability. This is increasingly plausible given the growing integration of recycled materials by fast fashion brands (e.g., [83]). Furthermore, most measures do not assess GABB relative to fast-fashion consumption. If an individual frequently buys sustainable apparel but continues to buy fast fashion at the same rate, can they genuinely be considered a sustainable consumer? These gaps limit the insights into the factors driving GABB and reduce the effectiveness of findings in addressing unsustainable consumption patterns.

4.2.2. Common Method Bias (CMB)

Another critical issue with self-reports is Common Method Bias (CMB), a significant source of measurement error. CMB arises when multiple constructs are assessed using similar methods—such as Likert scales within a single survey—leading to systematic errors [84,85]. These systematic errors are problematic because they introduce alternative explanations for observed relationships that are unrelated to the hypothesized effects [84]. For example, CMB can distort parameter estimates, such as correlation coefficients, by introducing spurious associations between constructs (e.g., behavioral intention and behavior) that do not reflect true relationships [85,86]. This may arise from respondent-related factors, such as social desirability or the avoidance of cognitive dissonance, as well as measurement-related factors, including item order effects [85]. Notably, CMB can both inflate and deflate relationships [84,85,86]. Addressing CMB requires either procedural controls (ex ante) or statistical controls (ex post) [85]. Ex ante controls involve improvements to research design, such as introducing temporal separation between measurements or employing varied response anchors for different constructs [85,87]. Post hoc methods revolve around detecting CMB [87]. A recommended method is the use of a marker variable, which is theoretically unrelated to the constructs of interest. Any shared variance between the marker variable and the constructs is attributed to CMB [85,87]. For a detailed discussion of control methods, see [85,87].

Among the 13 surveys reviewed, none explicitly cited CMB as a rationale for their research design choices. Five studies addressed CMB using ex post controls in their analysis sections. Of those, four applied Harman’s single-factor test, the most widely used method for detecting CMB. Ref. [87] critiqued this approach as inaccurate, advocating for more robust methods, such as the marker variable technique. Six studies incorporated ex ante measures to mitigate CMB, albeit in some cases unintentionally. All six employed methodological separation, such as varying response formats for behavior-related and other variables. Ref. [33] also implemented temporal separation. In summary, while surveys are a central method in GABB research, the risks of CMB remain underacknowledged, and measures to prevent or detect CMB are inconsistently applied. This oversight may result in distorted findings, emphasizing the need for greater awareness and rigor in addressing CMB. For instance, researchers could incorporate alternative data sources, such as examining actual purchasing behavior, to complement self-reported data and reduce the impact of CMB.

4.3. No Comparison Between Product Types and Materials

Relatively few studies have investigated variations in purchasing behavior based on product types (e.g., [25]), materials, and manufacturing processes (e.g., [30]). Even when such data were collected, it was typically aggregated into a single GABB outcome variable. This approach neglects potentially valuable insights that could be gained from analyzing distinctions in purchasing behavior across different product categories, product materials, or manufacturing processes.

Consumers are likely to perceive products differently depending on the materials used or the manufacturing processes involved, often using these attributes as cues for sustainability. These perceptions may significantly influence GABB. For instance, Ref. [88] found that environmental sustainability cues elicit a more positive brand attitude than social sustainability cues. However, the impact of materials and manufacturing processes remains under-researched in the context of sustainable fashion. As a result, few actionable insights can currently be drawn for this sector. In contrast, related research in other domains—such as sustainable packaging—demonstrates how material choices can shape perception. A study on packaging materials revealed that altering packaging (e.g., by changing material) to reduce environmental impact can also affect perceptions of price and taste [89]. Additionally, Ref. [90] reported that food packaged in recycled plastic is often seen as lower in quality compared to items in recyclable packaging. These findings underscore the perceptual differences and behavioral implications associated with product materials and manufacturing choices.

Furthermore, the price gap between sustainable and conventional products has been identified as a significant barrier to GABB [15,28]. This price gap varies substantially between product types. For example, a T-shirt from a sustainable brand, composed of 50% organic cotton and 50% recycled cotton, is priced at €39.90 on their website, whereas a comparable T-shirt from a fast-fashion brand, made entirely from cotton, is offered at €14.99, a price difference of approximately €25. In contrast, the disparity is much greater for jeans, with sustainable options priced at €129.90, compared to €35.99 for a comparable fast-fashion pair, resulting in a difference of approximately €94. Such significant variations in price gaps are likely to have a considerable influence on consumer behavior, emphasizing the importance of product-specific analyses.

4.4. Geographical Scope and Sample Composition

The majority of the reviewed studies collected data from Western countries. Given that Western cultures are generally more individualistic [91], consumers from these regions are likely to exhibit distinct perspectives and purchasing behaviors regarding GABB compared to, for instance, Asian consumers, who tend to embody more collectivist cultural norms [91]. Additional factors such as income, education, and environmental awareness also vary significantly across regions, shaping consumers’ motivations and barriers in diverse ways. Notably, none of the reviewed studies were conducted in Latin America or the Middle East, highlighting a substantial geographic gap. Future research would therefore benefit from explicitly targeting these underrepresented regions to ensure a more globally representative understanding of sustainable fashion consumption.

Beyond expanding regional coverage, future research should also adopt more multinational research designs. Only one of the reviewed studies [12] employed a multinational approach, comparing consumer behavior across five European countries. All other studies relied solely on single-country data, limiting the field’s ability to examine cross-cultural variation and draw generalizable conclusions. Given that the promotion of GABB is a global challenge, the current predominance of Western, single-country studies hinders the development of effective, culturally sensitive interventions. For a more detailed discussion of cross-cultural differences in sustainable fashion consumption, see [19,92]. Furthermore, young to middle-aged women represent the most extensively studied consumer group in GABB research. Therefore, the existing findings are largely limited in their generalizability, as it is likely that different consumer segments, such as older men, exhibit distinct purchasing behaviors and are influenced by different factors when shopping. To develop a more holistic understanding of GABB, future studies should intentionally include a broader range of demographic groups, enabling more inclusive and targeted strategies to promote sustainable fashion consumption.

4.5. Practical Implications

Our analysis revealed various factors associated with GABB. Some of these factors offer clear opportunities for practical implementation by marketers and policymakers aiming to promote GABB. In the following

Table 2. Overview of practical implications.

Category	Factor	Practical Insights
Sociodemographic Factors	Age, Gender, Education	Tailor communication to specific target groups. Tailor communication strategies to resonate with specific target groups. For example, younger consumers may respond more positively to messages emphasizing activism and climate justice in the context of sustainable fashion. In contrast, older consumers may be more engaged by highlighting the durability, quality, and long-term cost savings of sustainable clothing.
	Economic Situation	Ensure that sustainable fashion is accessible regardless of an individual’s economic background. To make sustainable fashion more accessible across different economic situations, there are a variety of possibilities, such as (a) Offering entry-level options, such as providing B-grade items at lower prices. (b) Introducing targeted discounts for specific groups, including students or young adults. (c) Introducing incentives for GABB. For instance, customers could receive discounts when donating old clothing for recycling or when positively promoting their new sustainable purchases on social media.
Personal Factors	Knowledge and Awareness	Increase public knowledge and shift public discourse. Public awareness campaigns could be launched by governmental bodies (e.g., consumer protection), NGOs, and companies to highlight the environmental and social impacts of the fashion industry—such as water pollution, textile waste, and labor exploitation. These campaigns should be delivered through diverse channels, including social media, public transport ads, or posters. To increase personal relevance, these campaigns could also include interactive components, such as tools that help individuals assess how sustainable their current shopping habits are or recognize unsustainable choices. While such campaigns may not immediately influence individual consumption decisions, they can shift public discourse and make sustainability more accessible and familiar.
	Perceived Consumer Effectiveness	Empower consumers by making the positive impact of their choices visible and tangible. Strengthening consumers’ belief that their individual actions matter may significantly boost sustainable buying behavior. One strategy is to introduce visual dashboards, eco-impact meters, or product labels that clearly communicate the social and ecological benefits of a specific purchase (e.g., “This item saves 400 L of water compared to conventional alternatives”). In physical retail environments, this information can be displayed directly on hang tags or included on receipts—turning each purchase into a moment of positive reinforcement. By showing how each decision contributes to a larger cause, consumers are more likely to feel motivated, capable, and proud of making sustainable choices.
Social Influence	Subjective Norms	Leverage social proof at the Point-of-Sale to boost desirability and perceived popularity of sustainable items. Tap into consumers’ motivation to align with peer behavior by adding compelling tags on sustainable clothing such as “Customer Favorite”, “Trending Now”, or “Chosen by Thousands”. Reinforce this effect with dynamic cues like “X people are viewing this item right now” or “Y customers bought this in the past 24 hours”, creating a sense of urgency and belonging. These real-time signals may nudge hesitant buyers toward sustainable options by making them feel like the social norm.
Behavioral Factors	Information-Seeking Behavior	Make sustainability info easily accessible. At the point of sale, providing product-specific sustainability details may actively support consumers in their information-seeking process. One approach is to implement the PEF method, to calculate and present the environmental performance of each product on a three-level scale. Given the complexity of the PEF, a more accessible interim solution could rely on material-based scoring systems to communicate sustainability in a clear and intuitive way. These systems can be extended beyond the store, through public-facing exhibitions or interactive pop-up installations (e.g., outside retail spaces or in museums) to foster greater awareness and inform consumers.
Product Attributes	Perceived Esthetics	Promote a positive and desirable image of sustainable clothing. Collaborating with (fashion) influencers and leveraging social media campaigns can help present sustainable clothing as stylish and aspirational. By promoting the concept of “buying less, but better”—sustainable clothing can be positioned as a desirable alternative to the glorification of the overconsumption of fast fashion often seen on social media. There are multiple ways to design and expand such a social media campaign, such as (a) Partnering with influencers, especially micro-influencers for niche appeal, to promote fashion concepts like capsule wardrobes, which match with sustainable fashion consumption. (b) Designing products and packaging to be visually appealing and “share-worthy”, coupled with the brand’s sustainability message to increasing organic visibility on social platforms. (c) Producing high-quality content and lookbooks that show how sustainable pieces can be styled in versatile and trendy ways, targeting visual-first platforms like Instagram, Pinterest, and TikTok.

, those suggestions are presented by the overall category.

There is significant potential for overlap and synergy between the practical suggestions outlined in this review. In particular, integrating insights from multiple categories can enhance the overall effectiveness of intervention strategies. For instance, the implementation of easily accessible sustainability information—aimed at supporting information seeking behavior—can be enhanced by considering sociodemographic factors. By tailoring the intervention to different age groups, its relevance and comprehensibility can be significantly improved. For example, teenagers may respond more positively to simplified messaging, such as a single intuitive sustainability rating (e.g., a traffic light system or an overall eco-score). In contrast, adult consumers may value or require more detailed information, such as separate metrics for environmental and ethical aspects.

Furthermore, implementing one intervention may yield spillover effects that benefit other areas. For example, if a regulatory policy mandates the disclosure of a product’s environmental performance at the point of sale, this would not only support information-seeking behavior but also raise broader public awareness of the environmental costs of fast fashion. Over time, this could shift social norms, influence perceived consumer effectiveness, and contribute to more deliberate, sustainability-oriented consumption patterns.

In conclusion, while the proposed strategies offer a strong practical potential for promoting GABB, it is important to note that none of the studies included in our review employed experimental designs. As a result, we cannot infer causal relationships—such as whether increased environmental knowledge directly leads to behavioral change. Therefore, we strongly encourage policymakers and marketers to pilot and rigorously evaluate these interventions in real-world settings.

5. Recommendations for Future Research

Building on the insights gained from the reviewed studies, this section outlines key areas where future research can make meaningful contributions:

(1)

Limited capacity to establish causal relationships: Experimental designs remain rare in sustainable fashion research. We urge scholars to adopt such approaches to better capture causal effects. Future experiments should replicate real-world shopping scenarios, requiring participants to choose between sustainable and non-sustainable apparel with real consequences (e.g., monetary cost or moral satisfaction). These studies could incorporate the potential drivers identified in this review—such as product-specific environmental knowledge or PCE—and assess their impact on purchasing decisions. Notably, the previously mentioned PEF has already been evaluated in various experimental designs [6], offering a strong foundation for further research across both online and physical retail contexts.

(2)

Lack of longitudinal study: Longitudinal research is essential to understand how GABB and its drivers evolve over time. Such studies can also assess the long-term effectiveness of interventions, informing policymaking and strategic planning.

(3)

Reliance on self-reports: We encourage researchers to incorporate or substitute self-reports with behavioral measures wherever possible. Given the complexity and cost of behavioral tracking, self-reports will likely remain prevalent. Therefore, careful instrument design is critical. Researchers should minimize ceiling or floor effects by using well-constructed Likert or metric scales, time-bound questions, and multi-item measures that capture detailed consumption patterns (e.g., product categories, frequency, materials). For cross-sectional studies, it is equally important to address common method bias (CMB). Ex ante strategies such as temporal and methodological separation should be applied, and post hoc statistical controls like marker variables used to assess and mitigate bias.

(4)

Limited geographical scope: Most studies to date have focused on Western consumers. Future research should expand into underrepresented regions such as Latin America or the Middle East and undertake multinational studies. This would allow for the identification of cross-cultural differences and similarities in GABB, leading to more globally relevant interventions.

(5)

Limited generalizability of results: Current samples tend to underrepresent certain demographics, such as older men. Future studies should adopt more diverse sampling strategies to deepen understandings of sustainable fashion consumption across varied population groups.

By addressing these methodological and design improvements, future research can generate more robust insights into the factors driving GABB and provide actionable recommendations for both academia and industry.

6. Conclusions

In summary, this literature review revealed a growing research interest in the factors influencing GABB over the past decade. We have categorized the identified factors into five accessible categories: sociodemographic, personal, behavioral, social influences, and product attributes. For each category, we derived actionable insights for practitioners, grounded in theoretical understanding. In addition to synthesizing the findings, we critically examined the methodologies employed in the reviewed studies and identified several notable limitations. These include limited generalizability of results, heavy reliance on self-reported data, a narrow geographical focus, and a lack of experimental designs capable of establishing causal relationships. Addressing these issues will be crucial for advancing the field and developing effective strategies to promote sustainable consumer behavior.