This section illustrates how the variables which are Social value orientation, Trust, In group Identity, Expectation

of others Cooperation, Personal efficacy, Substitutability, Product preference and Attitude related to the dependent variable Green buyers and non green buyers.

Social value orientation

It can also refer to as social motives, social values, or value orientations. It is a social psychology motivational theory of choice behaviour in game situations advanced (David M. Messick and Charles G. McClintock in 1968). Unlike the traditional rational choice theory in mainstream economics, which assumes that all individuals make choices that maximize their own payoffs in social dilemma situations, social value orientations consider personality differences across individuals which leads to a range of preferences for ones own well-being and the well-being of others. Social value orientation has been found to affect cognitions and account for behaviour across a range of interpersonal decision making contexts, generally in the domain of negotiation settings and resource dilemmas (Roch et al., 2000; Roch & Samuelson, 1997; Samuelson, 1993) (De Dreu & Boles, 1998). It has also been identified as a covariate, interacting with different emotional states and influencing the propensity to cooperate (Zeelenberg, Nelissen, Breugelmans & Pieters, 2008). Social value orientations have even been identified in non-human primates (Burkart, Fehr, Efferson & van Schaik, 2007), indicating that some other species also show intrinsic preferences for social behaviour.

Trust
Emotionally, it is where someone exposes vulnerabilities to people, but believing they will not take advantage of the openness. Logically, it is where who have assessed the probabilities of gain and loss, calculating expected utility based on hard performance data, and concluded that the person in question will behave in a predictable manner (Govier 1993, Lehrer 1997, Foley 2001, McLeod 2002, Goering 2009).

One of the key current challenges in the social sciences is to re-think how the rapid progress of technology has impacted constructs such as trust. This is specifically true for information technology that dramatically alters causation in social systems.

In group Identity
According to Shruti & Denise (2009), a reference group is a person or a group that effect another person's decisions. Because of the importance of the influence, reference group has a strong impact on behaviour. Making group identity increase a person's awareness of being a member of the group which increases the level of his / her cooperation.

There seems no reason to suppose that the characteristics of groups formed by the precursors of Homo sapiens or early man would have been much different. Group behaviour for them would have been determined by the environment, living and nonliving in which the groups operated. Human cultural/genetic evolution has come to take the form of natural selection of the group, survival of the fittest group; war developed as a cultural mechanism in the competition of groups for space and raw materials; there is evidence of armed conflict as the early.

Expectation of others Cooperation

In many economic, political, and social situations where coordination is important, different social norms, with sharply varying consequences, may emerge and persist. Different norms regarding how much others should be trusted constitute one important example. As such norms are critical factors in the growth and prosperity of societies, it is essential to understand their formation and evolution. Several theories have suggested that even when altruistic acts are costly, altruists can gain if they are reciprocated directly or indirectly (Trivers, 1971). Theoretical models have shown repeatedly that direct, indirect, and strong reciprocity can overcome the short-term costs of altruistic behaviour and, under specific conditions, lead to long term fitness advantages of generous behaviour (Fishman, 2003); (Leimar and Hammerstein, 2001; Lotem, Fishman, and Stone, 1999; Mohtashemi and Mui, 2003; Nowak and Sigmund, 1998a, b).

Personal efficacy
The concept of personal efficacy lies at the centre of psychologist Albert Banduras social cognitive theory (Albert Bandura: A Social Learning Analysis 1973). Banduras theory emphasizes the role of observational learning, social experience, and reciprocal determinism in the development of personality. In the case of personal efficacy, those who felt they could have a big impact and those who thought most others could be trusted were more likely to be active in groups, more likely to be connected to multiple groups, more likely to spend more time in volunteer and group activities, and more likely to report positive personal and societal outcomes from their group experiences. A personal sense that one can have impact will likely propel some people into group activities aimed at personal fulfilment and civic engagement. In addition, the degree to which people are interested in others, can work with others, and can find benefits in social connection could also influence their willingness to become active in groups.

Substitutability
The word comes from substitute. This means, one takes the place of another. In short, its like a replacement.

Product preference
The degree to which consumers prefer one brand over another. In an attempt to build product preference advertising, the advertising must persuade a target audience to consider the advantages of a brand, often by building its reputation as a longestablished and trusted name in the industry (Adam Smith et. al. 1575). It comes by the loyalty a customer has toward a specific product or service. Some customers are fanatical about a certain product and will not switch or even consider another substitute. That being said, loyalty is sometimes very sensitive to price fluctuations. In the soft drink industry, many consumers will switch back and forth between Pepsi and Coke, depending on which is on sale. These consumers might prefer one product to the other, but are not absolutely loyal.

Attitude
An attitude is a hypothetical construct that represents an individual's degree of like or dislike for something. An attitude can be defined as a positive or negative evaluation of people, objects, event, activities, ideas, or just about anything in your environment (Zimbardo et al., 1999) The definition of attitude according to the Merriam Webster dictionary is "a mental position with regard to a fact or state; a feeling or emotion toward a fact or state." Another way to think of attitude is a mental habit that filters how you perceive the world around you and also the actions and behaviours you take in response. Actually attitudes are initially thoughts, whether conscious or not. If one thinks about an area in your life where you experience success, try and find where that success started. It no doubt first required a decision as to how you were going to act and behave in the world.

Green buyers and non green buyers

Some consumers are the same and an understanding of some of their common characteristics about environmental products and services are known as green consumer and people who are not concern about environmental issues are considered as non green consumer. Common attitudes and beliefs of these consumers as described as follows: 1. Commitment to green lifestyles 2. Critical of their own environmental practices and impact. 3. Looking for companies that incorporate green practices 4. Want environmental protection to be easy 5. Tend to distrust companies environmental claims 6. May have lack knowledge about environmental issues, but eager to learn (Paul Studemeister; Ph.D., RG, CEG 1991)

Accroding to Ellen L. Ackerman (1975) the world is becoming increasingly concerned about the environment. Studies have shown that the percentage of people who worry about the environment has increased from 62% to 77% between 2004 and 2006. More people are making their homes energy efficient, driving more fuel efficient cars, focusing more on recycling, and buying products that are healthier and less harmful to society and the environment.

Relationship between social value orientation and green buyer, non green buyer
The positive impact of buying green product comes from beliefs about the relationship of humanity and nature (Paul Studemeister). Environmentalism embraces the belief that humanity and the biophysical environment are interdependent, rejecting the view that humans are intended to dominate nature. This conceptualization allows people to vary in their levels of environmentalism based on the strength of their beliefs. Thus, environmentalism can have a variety of behavioural consequences. Product choice and purchase can be influences by environmentalism. Changes in lifestyle and other consumption behaviours, like walking or biking instead of driving, or repairing and reusing products are also possible, joining environmental organizations, and keeping abreast of current environmental developments. On the other side social gap is responsible for buying non green products. Marketers are not reinforcing the role of trust plays in solidifying collective action. They are not using the strong influence of reference groups in green buying, marketing communications managers should use spokespeople who are relatable.

Relationship between trust and green buyers, non green buyers

If consumers feel that they can protect the environment by "buying green," their support for buying green product will increase. Consumers will sacrifice luxury and performance to benefit from the perceived social status that comes from buying a product with a reduced environmental impact (Lehrer 1997). Green marketing is also involved here. Green marketing may prove to be a successful tool for marketers and provide modest benefits to renewable energy industries. But most green products on the market have no positive impact on the environment because most marketers are merely reselling renewable energy that other consumers are already paying for and that would continue to operate regardless of any resale to green consumers. Customers think that most of the premiums charged for green power are spent on marketing and advertising costs, not on renewable energy content.

Relationship between group Identity and green buyers, non green buyers
Group identity, in a social marketing literature, is usually conceived of as a persons identification with a social group with distinct symbols and characteristics (Denise
2009). It is a particular group identity, such as a conception of self as a green

consumer, involves a set of behavioural or personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of that group. Group identity has largely revolved around interpersonal psychological process, particularly motivational, perceptual, informational process and individual choice. Here word of mouth can influence the buyers. Many people will be interested in green buying and will become green buyer if they get the proper concept of green marketing. These customers are increasingly numerous and convinced that the quality of green products is greater than traditional products.

Relationship between expectation of others cooperation and green buyers, non green buyers
Cooperation is the willingness to increase both self and others' outcomes. Individuals
are more probable to cooperate if they expect others to do the same (Mohtashemi and

Mui, 2003). Therefore expectations of other cooperation treat differently between green
and non green buyers. This is because consumers under low efficacy conditions are doubtful about their impact of contribution and they have more tendencies for others opinions to make their own decisions. In other words, when consumers accepts that their contribution will be helpful (high efficacy), their expectation of others cooperation will be less. Therefore the influence of belief of others cooperation on green buying behaviour will be higher when perceived efficacy is low. So perceived efficacy can treat differently between green and non-green buying behaviour.

The framework presented the expectation of peoples cooperation is the strongest factors that discriminated between green and non green buyers. Group of people always contributes to the environmental consumerism literature by framing the attitude-behaviour gap as a social dilemma and draws on reference group theory to identify individual factors to help understand the gap and suggest ways in which to bridge it. People are more likely to cooperate if they expect others to do the same and not to choose cooperate in order to protect themselves. To build up a green buying expectation we need to work together. Social help and cooperation may affect lot for green buying products. In other side many people are not interested to cooperative about green buying. Without help of the people its very difficult to save the environment. The non green buyer has no such expectation, does not feel the pressure to conform and therefore choose to not cooperate in a social dilemma. Expectation of cooperation significantly identifies green buyer. For marketers, this finding present an opportunity to communicate that other consumer makes chaise. When people believe that other people similar to themselves make cooperative choices by buying green, they will be more likely to buy green as well. This finding is supported by the research in social dilemma that suggests that people are more likely to cooperate when they expect others to do the same and avoid cooperation to protect them from being perceived.

Relationship between personal efficacies and green buyers, non green buyers
Personal efficacy is the extent to which an individual believes his or her actions make a difference in achieving collective goals (van Lange et al, 1992). This construct was significant and showed moderate influence in discriminating between green and non green buyers. While both groups believe their actions make a difference, Green have much stronger believes than non green buyer. Green buyer buyers are less likely to defect in order to maximize self gain because they believe that their cooperation action will to contribute to betterment of the common good (Sen et al, 2001). Perceived efficacy is low the influence behaviour is high. Under low efficacy conditions consumers are not certain about their impact of their actions and tend to use others opinions to guide their behaviour. At the same time, when people believe their actions matter the likelihood of buying green products is less contingent on how other behave. The predictive influence of personal efficacy is also supported by research that has received much attention in environmental consumerism literature (Ellen et al, 1991; Kinnear et al, 1974). If the people are aware of the environment and do not waste the materials which are affected the nature then we can easily save the environment. As a result it identifies the influence of costs of the cooperation on individual decision to cooperate or withhold consumption. However the main thing of personal efficacy showed that only one of the two costs of cooperation variables was significant and contributed to the discrimination between green buyers and non green buyers. Especially the green buyers overwhelmingly exhibited a higher level of product preference for the green product than non green buyer. When people realize that their individual green behaviour matter, they will be less likely to defect. Therefore in developing marketing messages, emphasis should be placed on how an individuals action can contribute to the collective gain. These messages will reinforce beliefs that actions do matter because it makes them feel good about their actions and in turn strengthens perceived efficacy. Also when people believe their actions matter, the likely hood of buying green products becomes less contingent on how others behave. This indicates that people with strong levels of perceived efficacy can become role models for others who are more susceptible to reference group pressure.

Relationship between Substitutability and green buyers, non green buyers

Substitutability was not a significant discriminating factor in the analysis indicating that both green buyers and non-green buyers did not perceive the green product and the conventional product as substitutable. Both groups perceive the CFL and regular incandescent light bulbs as significantly different from each other. For green marketers, this result highlights the need to stress the benefits of green products. In the case of CFLs, positioning on product superiority, cost savings, energy conservation, and the lessened frequency of switching light bulbs are area that could be stressed. In addition, marketers should shift focus from price of the green product to consumer value. Substitutability was not significant in contributing to the discrimination between green and non-green buyers. Results from the study showed that the both green and non-green buyers perceived the green and conventional products as different and hence not Substitutability. The findings that failed to support the role of Substitutability on the individual decision to cooperate suggests that marketing practice that highlights the parity between the green and conventional product might be ineffective and cooperate in such social dilemmas might require restoring to a structural solution.

Relationship between product preference and green buyers, non green buyers
This is becoming increasingly true for green products. Many of today's enlightened consumers expect their products to be green. For the marketer of green products, understanding what product qualities actually causes a consumer open mind. These often-inscrutable qualities that cause someone to pick this over that are 'product of preference'. (Richard SeireeniBrand 2010). There may be many product characteristics that influence consumer choice: special features, performance, design, brand image, price, availability, etc. However, some of the talking points that are so highly valued by product makers are often dismissed by customers choice of buying

green or not to buy green. Product preference highlights differences rather than similarities between green and non-green products and emphasizes benefits associated with purchasing the green product or service. In green purchase behaviour if the cost is low and conventional alternatives are perceived as substitute for each other. When this perception is absent, the cost of cooperation is higher and the consumer is more likely to shun the green product and buy a conventional one instead. Another cost issue that influences decision-making is the knowledge that non-co-operators still benefit when others cooperate. But this concern over such freeloaders diminishes if green and conventional products are considered interchangeable. Green buyer always preferable then non green buyer. Green buyer always concern about the green product, and that helps the environment, but non green may not thing or purchase the green product because they are not aware of environment.

Relationship between attitude and green buyers, non green buyers

Attitudes determine for each individual what he will see and hear, what he will think and what he will do (Allport 1935). An Individual attitude thus may influence the individuals perception of the attitude object in the immediate situations. Consumer attitude suggests that people behaves in way consistent with their attitudes. However, research in environmental consumerism has produced inconclusive evidence in support of attitude theory. The goal of this research was to explain the attitude-behaviour inconsistency in green buying by framing it as a social dilemma to provide an understanding of why consumers do not purchase green products despite a positive attitude toward the environment. Attitudes indicate the positive and negative sides of the consumer who willing to buy green products. In here attitudes also acts very important role for the environment, if one people try to save the world about the destruction of pollution, need to buy or use green product. But if someone not willing to buy green products then the environment should go under threat. So its totally depends on peoples own attitude to go for green products or not.

10

Green purchasing is another word for the more technical term environmentally preferable purchasing. In a nutshell, our purchasing decisions can have substantial effects on the environment and society that are not always fully reflected in the pointof-purchase cost to the buyer. There are two groups: green buyers and non green buyers. People who are aware and are more committed and proactive about buying green, have a better understanding of what green means, and are more driven by environmental and health concerns, they are green buyers. People who never bought green products, who are not aware about green products are non green buyers.

Environmentalism embraces the belief that humanity and the biophysical environment are interdependent, rejecting the view that humans are intended to dominate nature. This conceptualization allows people to vary in their levels of environmentalism based on the strength of their beliefs. On the other side social gap is responsible for buying non green products. Marketers are not reinforcing the role of trust plays in solidifying collective action. They are not using the strong influence of reference groups in green buying; marketing communications managers should use spokespeople who are relatable.

If consumers feel that they can protect the environment by "buying green," their support for buying green product will increase. Consumers will sacrifice luxury and performance to benefit from the perceived social status that comes from buying a product with a reduced environmental impact. But most green products on the market have no positive impact on the environment because most marketers are merely reselling renewable energy that other consumers are already paying for and that would continue to operate regardless of any resale to green consumers. Customers think that most of the premiums charged for green power are spent on marketing and advertising costs, not on renewable energy content.

Group identity has largely revolved around interpersonal psychological process, particularly motivational, perceptual, informational process and individual choice. Here word of mouth can influence the buyers. 11

Many people will be interested in green buying and will become green buyer if they get the proper concept of green marketing. These customers are increasingly numerous and convinced that the quality of green products is greater than traditional products. Therefore expectations of other cooperation treat differently between green and non green buyers. Consumers accepts that their contribution will be helpful (high efficacy), their expectation of others cooperation will be less. Therefore the influence of belief of others cooperation on green buying behaviour will be higher when perceived efficacy is low.

In other side many people are not interested to cooperative about green buying. Without help of the people its very difficult to save the environment. The non green buyer has no such expectation, does not feel the pressure to conform and therefore choose to not cooperate in a social dilemma.

Personal efficacy showed moderate influence in discriminating between green and non green buyers. Green buyers are less likely to defect in order to maximize self gain because they believe that their cooperation action will to contribute to betterment of the common good. If the people are aware of the environment and do not waste the materials which are affected the nature then we can easily save the environment. When people realize that their individual green behaviour matter, they will be less likely to defect. Therefore in developing marketing messages, emphasis should be placed on how an individuals action can contribute to the collective gain. These messages will reinforce beliefs that actions do matter because it makes them feel good about their actions and in turn strengthens perceived efficacy. Also when people believe their actions matter, the likely hood of buying green products becomes less contingent on how others behave.

In substitutability, green buyers and non green buyers perceive the CFL and regular incandescent light bulbs as significantly different from each other. In the case of

12

CFLs, positioning on product superiority, cost savings, energy conservation, and the lessened frequency of switching light bulbs are area that could be stressed. The findings that failed to support the role of Substitutability on the individual decision to cooperate suggests that marketing practice that highlights the parity between the green and conventional product might be ineffective and cooperate in such social dilemmas might require restoring to a structural solution.

Product preference highlights differences rather than similarities between green and non-green products and emphasizes benefits associated with purchasing the green product or service. In green purchase behaviour if the cost is low and conventional alternatives are perceived as substitute for each other. Another cost issue that influences decision-making is the knowledge that non-cooperators still benefit when others cooperate. But this concern over such freeloaders diminishes if green and conventional products are considered interchangeable. Green buyer always preferable then non green buyer. Green buyer always concern about the green product, and that helps the environment, but non green may not thing or purchase the green product because they are not aware of environment.

Consumer attitude suggests that people behaves in way consistent with their attitudes. Attitudes indicate the positive and negative sides of the consumer who willing to buy green products. In here attitudes also acts very important role for the environment, if one people try to save the world about the destruction of pollution, need to buy or use green product. If someone not willing to buy green products then the environment should go under threat. So its totally depends on peoples own attitude to go for green products or not.

Well, going green is becoming one of the latest trends that everyone likes to follow and buying green is most important because of many reasons. The easiest reason for people to go green is that it helps the environment. The environment is such a broad

13

concept though, that we often forget the individual benefits to buying green. Choosing to recycle will help cut down on deforestation. Energy saving electronics will help us to conserve energy and our natural resources. Low flow shower heads cut down our use of water. Compact fluorescent light bulbs help reduce the amount of energy used in our household. Shopping is something we all have to do. We can make the choice to buy green and contribute to the growing momentum of this movement. In the past it was difficult to go green because there were not many alternatives to everyday products. Green products are typically more expensive than their non-environmentally friendly counter parts. Keep in mind as the demand for green products increases then the cost will eventually come down. In short buying green helps us to:

Improve safety and health of our patients, workers and the public. Reduce pollution Conserve natural resources and energy. Develop new, more environmentally friendly products. Stimulate new markets for recycled materials and create jobs Improve awareness of environmental stewardship.

Protect the research mission. Provide potential cost savings. Reduce liabilities. Comply with environmental laws and regulations.

In principle, it should be fairly easy for all public authorities to take the decision to buy green. Indeed, they should be encouraged to do this as it will not only benefit the environment but also the contracting authority by improving its public image.

14

15