Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

What is the optimum social marketing mix to market energy conservation behaviour: An empirical study Low Sheau-Ting, Abdul Hakim Mohammed, Choong Weng-Wai* Centre for Real Estate Studies, Faculty of Geoinformation and Real Estate, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Skudai, Johor, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Received 18 February 2013 Received in revised form 30 September 2013 Accepted 2 October 2013 Available online 26 October 2013

This study attempts to identify the optimum social marketing mix for marketing energy conservation behaviour to students in Malaysian universities. A total of 2000 students from 5 major Malaysian universities were invited to provide their preferred social marketing mix. A choice-based conjoint analysis identified a mix of five social marketing attributes to promote energy conservation behaviour; the mix is comprised of the attributes of Product, Price, Place, Promotion, and Post-purchase Maintenance. Each attribute of the mix is associated with a list of strategies. The Product and Post-purchase Maintenance attributes were identified by students as the highest priority attributes in the social marketing mix for energy conservation behaviour marketing, with shares of 27.12% and 27.02%, respectively. The least preferred attribute in the mix is Promotion, with a share of 11.59%. This study proposes an optimal social marketing mix to university management when making decisions about marketing energy conservation behaviour to students, who are the primary energy consumers in the campus. Additionally, this study will assist university management to efficiently allocate scarce resources in fulfilling its social responsibility and to overcome marketing shortcomings by selecting the right marketing mix. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Social marketing Strategies energy conservation behaviour Choice-based conjoint

1. Introduction The world is afflicted with critical energy problems, including the depletion of energy resources, degradation of the ecosystem, rising energy prices, and climate change. The current unsustainable pattern is worrisome and the exhausted planet is yearning for a solution. The major challenge in pursuing global energy sustainability is that rising energy demand must be reduced. As Gyberg and Palm (2009) emphasise, our world must consume less energy to build a sustainable society. One option to consume less energy is energy conservation. A readily available path to energy sustainability today is to control the energy consumption of buildings (Zheng et al., 2010; Li and Colombier, 2009). In developing countries such as Malaysia, wasted energy in buildings is the norm (Muhieldeen et al., 2008). Globally, the energy consumption of the building sector is steadily increasing (Committee on Civil Engineering and Architecture Science Council of Japan, 2007; Saidur, 2009). Over the years, evidence has indicated that certain countries have made little progress in energy conservation, and a general reluctance to change user behaviour has been cited as the

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ60 16 717 6819; fax: þ60 7 5566163. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (L. Sheau-Ting), [email protected] (A.H. Mohammed), [email protected] (C. Weng-Wai). 0301-4797/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.10.001

primary reason behind rising energy demand globally (Nandi and Basu, 2008). Based on this realisation, the Malaysian Government is promoting energy conservation in buildings and particularly in government offices (Mansor, 2008). Additionally, the need to promote energy conservation practice in buildings in Malaysia has been emphasised as one of the actions central to the National Policy on Climate Change 2009 (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, 2009). Effective marketing of energy conservation might help foster energy conservation behaviour among users. Marketing has made remarkable achievements in influencing people’s purchasing decisions and has proven successful in encouraging people to buy products; thus, it can also encourage people to adopt desired behaviours, which is known as social marketing. Social marketing has been acknowledged as an effective approach in achieving voluntarily behavioural change (Mah et al., 2006; Stead et al., 2007); which “voluntary approach” is a plausible route towards a sustainable consumption (Shen and Saijo, 2009). The central pillar of marketing is to influence people to purchase something; if used wisely, it can also be used to influence people away from consumption. Social marketing derived from marketing concepts is thought to be a great approach to influence individuals to “purchase” energy conservation behaviour. The social marketing approach is actively being applied in health-related matters, such as public health (Morris and Clarkson, 2009; Quinn et al., 2009),

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

HIV testing (Olshefsky et al., 2007), family health (Glanz et al., 2008), However, minimal research has been conducted on marketing in the field of energy conservation; although it has received more attention recently, it has yet to be employed to its full potential. It should be noted that lessons might be learnt from successful applications of social marketing in other fields for application in consumption reduction behaviour (Peattie and Peattie, 2009). The evidence of success in other areas reflects its potential in the context of energy conservation. The social marketing literature provides limited exploration of the optimal combination for the social marketing mix that should be applied in a specific context, particularly to foster energy conservation behaviour. Limited resource allocation remains a major challenge for most organisations. Management remains uncertain about which parts of the mix are more important in fostering energy conservation behaviour. Nevertheless, decisions about the optimum marketing mix are thought to be among the most critical challenges in marketing (Balachandran and Gensch, 1974). Without identification of a specific set of strategies, it would be difficult to market effectively and efficiently over the long term. This study aims to identify the optimal combination and mix of social marketing strategies to market energy conservation behaviour effectively. As far as we know, this study is the first attempt to develop such a combination in marketing energy conservation behaviour. The scope of this research is limited to students from Malaysian universities. The layout of the remainder of this paper is organised as follows. First, a brief review of the literature on energy conservation in Malaysian universities and social marketing mix for energy conservation is presented, which is followed by the measures used to develop the optimum combination for the social marketing mix. Next, the results and findings are presented and discussed; the last section is the conclusion. 2. Energy conservation in Malaysian universities Energy conservation has attracted global attention and has emerged as a serious challenge to be met because of the recognition that burning fossil fuels is one of the main contributors to global warming (Kreith and Goswami, 2008; Liao et al., 2008). Energy conservation through behavioural intervention has been acknowledged as one of the cost-effective options to achieve significant energy reduction (Dietza et al., 2009; Allcott and Mullainathan, 2010). For example, improving energy use behaviour by thermostat control and switching off unnecessary lighting can reduce energy usage substantially. Occupant behaviour is among the significant factors correlates to overall energy consumed (Hester et al., 2012). Previous research shows that savings of up to 10% can be achieved by improving energy usage behaviour (Ouyang et al., 2009; Zografakis et al., 2008; Loozen and Moosdijk, 2001). In addition to the financial benefits derived from energy conservation behaviour, overall carbon emissions are also mitigated. This is consistent with the recent focus by the Government of Malaysia to become and remain green. It is undeniable that technological innovation contributes to a more comfortable, easy, and efficient lifestyle in many ways. Although technical innovation often provides solutions for reducing energy usage, it should not necessarily be regarded as the perfect solution to reduce overall energy consumption. For instance, people commonly tend to use appliances more often when they are labelled energy saving. However, the improvement in appliance efficiency may be offset by the greater frequency of appliance use (Peattie and Peattie, 2009). Malaysian universities with large areas of building construction that involve multiple categories of energy usage are one of the major contributors to increasing energy consumption in the

197

country. Promoting energy conservation is one of the current approaches to controlling universities’ utilities expenses (Marans and Edelstein, 2010). Compared with other industries, local universities have large areas of building construction with a large number of buildings equipped with energy-consuming facilities and inhabited by a large population. Most of the energy systems embedded in these facilities, such as lighting and air conditioning systems, are still operated manually; thus, recommending ways for students to use it effectively is imperative. It has been noted that educational facilities always consume a large amount of energy generated in a country (Muhieldeen et al., 2008). Ultimately, one of the challenges faced by universities throughout the world today is a growing energy budget caused by utilities costs that are rising faster than the inflation rate (Marans and Edelstein, 2010). High utilities costs are forcing university administrators to work to reduce overall energy consumption. The human factor is an important aspect of universities because the occupants consume a substantial amount of energy e 24 h a day and 7 days a week e with a high degree of control over electricity use (Petersen et al., 2007). In addition to the high probability of energy waste as a result of users’ energy use behaviour, the lack of direct financial responsibility for energy bills is another issue in Malaysian universities. The dormitory rental fees paid by students are inclusive of utilities. Thus, users have a sense of entitlement to consume energy in accordance with their preferences because there is no direct financial responsibility for energy consumption incurred (Finlinson, 2005; Petersen et al., 2007; Carrico and Riemer, 2011). Students tend to waste energy because they do not bear the high energy cost directly. In 2011, the Malaysian government granted the status of autonomy to the 5 major Malaysian universities. Universities with autonomy status have full authority over university administration and over university expenditure and income. Unfortunately, the community that occupies Malaysian universities tends to show poor energy conservation behaviour (Choong, 2008). Immediate action to reduce the increasing energy costs has become necessary to maintain educational quality and standards. A programme that can deliver an attractive rate of return at a minimum cost is always preferable over another. Promoting energy conservation behaviour within an organisational setting is among the programmes that may draw on economic incentives to yield a substantial energy reduction with little upfront expense (Carrico and Riemer, 2011). In addition to the energy bill savings gained from promoting energy conservation in universities, there are many extraordinary benefits still to be earned. The savings in monetary terms can be directed to other beneficial usages, such as upgrading campus facilities and the library database. By promoting energy conservation on campus, the university will contribute to reducing carbon emissions while simultaneously creating a healthy and environmentally friendly image. Globally, universities are committed to achieve sustainable campus operation, the establishment of International Sustainable Campus Network (ISCN) in year 2007 has strengthen the needs and provide a better connection for universities to exchange of ideas and best practices. Indeed, concerns among citizen for environment are not limited to wealthy country, nor on affluence-based postmaterialist values (Dunlap and York, 2008). Malaysia, a developing country voluntary agree to reduce its overall carbon emission by 40% by year 2000 during the United Nations Climate Change Conference 2009. Universities in Malaysia have a leadership role to help government achieve such targets, notably to project themselves as the role model in sustainability matters and educate society the needs of energy conservation. The government’s example in leading in energy conservation will encourage society to pay attention to the cause (Cai et al., 2009). Improving the students’ energy

198

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

conservation behaviour will make them more conscientious about not wasting energy during their lifetimes and nurture efficient energy use behaviour. The long-term benefits to be derived from this include making graduates more receptive to conservation and encouraging them to act as excellent educational agents to influence their family, friends, and community. Previous research was conducted to examine Malaysian students’ energy use behaviour. A survey performed by Choong (2008) in Malaysian universities reveals that the level of energy awareness and energy usage behaviour among the university community is poor. In addition, another study conducted by Muhieldeen et al. (2008) at the Universiti Putra Malaysia confirms that students’ behaviour is the main contributor to the large amount of energy waste in the university. To confirm the current energy scenario in universities, a preliminary study was conducted at the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. The aim of the preliminary study was to explore the level of knowledge and energy use behaviour in the university community. Generally, the results show that the community has poor energy knowledge and poor energy conservation behaviour as a matter of practice. Poor energy usage behaviour must be improved to contribute to a better environment and to lower energy costs, in addition to realising a more sustainable energy future (Gyberg and Palm, 2009). 3. Social marketing mix strategies Social marketing is a branch of commercial marketing that applies marketing concepts to social issues; which is defined as “the use of marketing principles and techniques to influence a target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or abandon a behaviour for the benefit of individuals, groups, or society as a whole”(Kotler et al., 2002). Social marketing is unique in that it promotes voluntary behaviour change (Domegan, 2008; Smith, 2002); changes in behaviour can be sustained for long periods of time only if it is voluntary. In the context of fostering energy conservation behaviour among students, the exchange process must involve giving the students what they want and avoiding the perception that management requires this behaviour from the students. If the students perform energy conservation behaviour under forces (e.g. rules and regulation enforced by the university) as promoted in traditional approach, the students will revert to their overt behaviour easily when the forces are not applicable. Considerable amount of energy may be conserved using other market mechanism such as policy enforcement and increase the energy price, this is however not the sustainable mechanism to cultivate long-lasting behaviour change particularly in the organizational setting such as Malaysian university of which the students do not have direct financial responsibility towards the university’ energy costs. Therefore, identifying the attributes that can facilitate change from the student’s point of view using social marketing approach that emphasises voluntary behaviour change is potentially realize a sustainable behaviour change. Regrettably, previous programmes in the Malaysian universities that promoted energy conservation relied primarily on the communication channel, such as poster and flyers. This may serve as one of the explanations for less successful programmes launched previously in Malaysian universities to foster energy conservation. Marketing is generally thought of as the persuasion process that influences a consumer to become involved in the exchange process. However, the exchange process is always controlled by the marketing mix (House, 1995). Similarly, social marketing has adapted commercial marketing techniques to promote behavioural change; therefore, the marketing mix plays a central role. The necessity to include all the 4 Ps of Product, Price, Place, and Promotion in the marketing mix for an intervention aimed at behavioural change has

been previously confirmed (Kotler et al., 2002; Phillipson et al., 2009). Thus, the 4 Ps from commercial marketing may serve as the foundation for developing the optimum social marketing mix strategies for energy conservation, and it is may be appropriate to add some additional strategies in specific contexts to yield the desired results. The present study proposes one additional attribute in the mix that should not be ignored e Post-purchase Maintenance. The following sections describe each part of the mix. 3.1. SMM1: product In the social marketing context, Product refers to the desired behaviour. Typically, students will buy the desired behaviour if they are satisfied with the associated benefits of embracing the particular behaviour. The first strategy of the Product mix consists of the associated benefits that may be derived from students utilising energy conservation behaviour, such as the financial benefits of reducing energy costs and the environmental benefits of reducing carbon emissions. The second aspect of the Product mix is the branding of energy conservation behaviour. A trusted brand image is able to attract the participation of students and persuade them to comply with guidelines and laws (Kotler and Lee, 2007). The importance of the branding strategy in intervention success has been acknowledged in various fields of application. Survey results show that branding the Red Dress in the Heart Truth programme that aimed at raising women’s heart disease awareness increased awareness and made the target audience more likely to consult their doctor for a check-up (Long et al., 2008). The third aspect is to provide a tangible object or services as support for students to engage in energy conservation behaviour. Although it is common sense to provide as much possible assistance to increase the likelihood of success, social marketers must choose the most powerful objects and services because of limited resources. 3.2. SMM2: price Price is defined as “the cost that the target market associates with adopting the new behaviour”(Kotler and Lee, 2008). The product in social marketing does not entail any cost of production; instead, it involves an implicit cost to perform the energy conservation behaviour. The first strategy of the Price attribute is monetary cost, it refers to the money spent to obtain the tangible objects to facilitate the adoption of the behaviour. Although students who live on campus have no control over the efficiency of the energy system, students may choose to purchase energy-efficient products, such as energy-efficient hairdryers and kettles. The remaining aspect of the Price attribute is the non-monetary cost that most social marketing interventions may involve (Peattie and Peattie, 2009). This aspect consists of barriers preventing students from performing energy conservation behaviour. Potential nonmonetary costs for students to engage in energy conservation behaviour include the psychological cost such as emotional disturbance may be experienced, the physical cost such as tiredness and reduction in comfort level (physical discomfort), the opportunity cost which about activity to be endured to perform the energy conservation practice, the social cost which referring to doubt and negative perception from peers due to not following the norms of the social group demonstrating that they are not a part of the group, time, and effort. To enhance product attractiveness, a social marketer should focus on reducing the possible monetary and nonmonetary costs associated with energy conservation behaviour. As with commercial marketing contexts, where consumers will resist purchasing a product if the price is too high (Klopper et al., 2006), students will resist engaging in energy conservation behaviour if the cost is too great.

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

3.3. SMM3: place Place for social marketing is defined as “where and when the target market will perform the desired behaviour, acquire any related tangible objects, and receive any associated services” (Kotler and Lee, 2008). The decision of whether to perform the behaviour, where to perform it, and whether to perform it frequently or infrequently is the decision of the energy users. Generally, the two important strategies in the Place mix for energy conservation behaviour are (1) accessibility to information about energy conservation, which is commonly known as the distribution channel, and (2) the surrounding environment that helps to facilitate the changed behaviour. Disseminating information is a common strategy used to foster energy conservation behaviour that serves to increase awareness and knowledge about the desired behaviour (Abrahamse et al., 2005). Convenience in obtaining information about energy conservation indicates accessibility to information, which is the point that university students may access information easily and comfortably with little effort and time. The greater the convenience in reaching the product, the more likely it is that the transaction will occur. In addition to distributing relevant information at the appropriate location, a surrounding environment that encourages the purchase of the energy conservation behaviour is also important to foster behavioural change. For example, the Heart Truth Road Show which was conducted in high-traffic shopping malls with a free heart-health-screening service and the distribution of relevant information, has successfully raised awareness among women about the risk of heart disease by approximately 15% one year after the intervention (Long et al., 2008). 3.4. SMM4: promotion In comparison with the other Ps (Product, Price, Place), Promotion is the most similar to its counterpart in commercial marketing. In social marketing, Promotion is defined as “persuasive communications designed and delivered to inspire your target audience to action” (Kotler and Lee, 2008). Promotion may include offering incentives to enhance the attractiveness of the desired behaviour, in addition to being undertaken through numerous communication channels (Mah et al., 2006). In the present context, motivation was added to Promotion as another important feature. The two strategies in the Promotion attribute of the mix are selection of the most appropriate communication channels and providing motivation that encourages the purchase of the energy conservation behaviour. Numerous communication channels have been used in various social marketing interventions aimed to foster the desired behavioural change, such as websites, printed materials, special events, and other promotional channels (Marshall et al., 2007; Quinn et al., 2009; Richards et al., 2009). Motivation might be providing an incentive to students that encourages purchasing the energy conservation behaviour. The American Psychological Association (2009) defines an incentive as “an external stimulus, such as a condition or an object, that enhances or serves as a motive for behaviour”. Incentive is, however, unlike a reward, which is something provided for an accomplished behaviour or a particular achievement (Yavuz, 2004; Zastrow and KirstAshman, 2009). For example, an incentive in terms of an invitation to an ice cream party was provided to college students for the dormitory that achieved the highest percentage of electricity use reduction in a study by Petersen et al. (2007). 3.5. SMM5: post-purchase maintenance Post-purchase Maintenance is proposed as the new attribute in the social marketing mix included specifically to foster energy

199

conservation behaviour. Post-purchase Maintenance may be interpreted as the activities to be performed after the energy conservation behaviour has been purchased by students. Its purpose is to maintain and retain changes that have been made by students to achieve a sustainable energy conservation behaviour change. The idea of behaviour “maintenance” is derived from the stages of change in the Transtheoretical model by proposed Prochaska and Diclemente (1982). A change that only lasts during the intervention period is insufficient; sustained change is required for a sustainable energy future. The present study proposes the following three strategies in this attribute of the mix: executing reinforcement, providing feedback, and providing reminders. Zastrow and Kirst-Ashman (2009) propose continuous reinforcement as the “most effective” strategy in stimulating a desired behaviour. In the present context, reinforcement is similar to the concept of reward, i.e., providing pleasurable consequences or a “pleasant” stimulus to strengthen behaviour (Weiten et al., 2009). For example, the marketer offers food vouchers to students who switch off unused corridor lighting. The second strategy is providing feedback, which means giving information to students concerning their energy consumption and energy savings to make them conscious about their energy use and savings status, which leads to motivation in striving for greater energy reduction. Fischer (2008) demonstrates that feedback is an effective tool that can result in a household energy reduction of approximately 5e12%. Reminders make up the third strategy proposed to be included in the Post-purchase Maintenance attribute. To maintain the adoption of the “purchased” energy conservation behaviour, people must be constantly reminded, and memory aids are required. Reminders cause the user to remember to perform practices that they otherwise might forget. “Numerous actions that promote sustainability are susceptible to the most human of traits: forgetting” (McKenzie-Mohr, 2011). “Forgetfulness is a common internal barrier” to behaviour change (Sustainability Office, 2006). Thus, reminders are important for prompting the user about information that they previously knew. 4. Methodology This study attempts to use a conjoint analysis (CA) to identify the most favourable attribute of the social marketing mix to attract and motivate students to practise energy conservation. The present study uses choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis instead of ratingbased CA. When using rating-based CA, all possible combinations of attributes must be displayed for the respondent. This type of technique is not suitable for a study such as this that involves a total of five attributes (Product, Price, Place, Promotion, and Post purchase Maintenance) that have two to three strategies in each attribute, making a total of 72 (3*2*2*2*3) possible combinations of attributes that would have to be formulated. In light of this, a CBC analysis was selected that shows a limited number of profiles at one time and asks respondents to indicate which profile they prefer. In addition to not overloading the respondents with information, this technique is also able to identify the relative preference that respondents place on rejected alternatives by showing a few profiles at one time (Orme, 2009). Subsequently, the underlying importance that students placed on each social marketing mix of strategies can be determined. The process of identifying the combination that students preferred most involves a complex decision-making process in which students choose the social marketing attribute they desire most and which attribute to trade-off with one another; the great value of CBC analysis is that it allows attributes to be measured conjointly by asking respondents to choose a set of attributes that they prefer. This more closely reflects the real world market in which products are typically offered in a package. This technique

200

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

I want to gain benefits I willing to pay nonmonetary costs I need a supportive environment I need motivation I need feedback

I want to gain benefits I willing to pay monetary costs I need access to energy information I need motivation I need reminder

None: I wouldn’t choose any of these

Fig. 1. Example of question design.

enables the analysis to “quantify the relative underlying value that respondents consciously or unconsciously place on each attribute in the decision making process” (Maellaro, 2008). CA has been a popular analytic method in the past decades for preference studies, particularly in marketing research. There have been many attempts to apply the conjoint method in energy-related research, such as by using CA to evaluate consumers’ preferred alternative energy conservation policies (Bennett and Moore, 1981), examining consumers’ preferences on service attributes offered by utility companies (Goett, 2000), identifying preferences in energy-saving measures (Poortinga et al., 2003; Banfi et al., 2008), estimating the individual utility function for refrigerators (Moxnes, 2004), assessing the acceptability and perceived effectiveness of energy policies based on the features of energy policies (Steg et al., 2006), identifying preferences on indoor daylight performance attributes (Cheung and Chung, 2008), and identifying preferences towards the environmental performance attributes of a green building (Chau et al., 2010). In this context, a total of five social marketing attributes associated with 12 social marketing mix strategies were identified in the literature. Each profile is composed of one strategy from each attribute of the social marketing mix. The questionnaire generated in the software will be submitted to the questionnaire efficiency test using Sawtooth Software. After the questionnaire has been pretested, the next stage is questionnaire fielding to collect raw data from respondents. Finally, the raw data gathered are subjected to CBC analysis to determine the optimum social marketing mix to market energy conservation behaviour to students in Malaysian universities. 4.1. Measures Questionnaire development was based on the CBC methodology using Sawtooth Software, and the questionnaires were generated using Sawtooth Software to gather the relevant responses. To generate the CBC questionnaire, the random method with balanced overlap was selected. In randomised design, every attribute level (social marketing mix strategies) is likely to occur with every other attribute level. Each attribute level occurs an equal number of times in the questionnaire (Maellaro, 2008). Based on Sawtooth Software’s user manual, a random design that provides a greater variety of task choices will allow the psychological context and order effects to be reduced. According to Johnson and Orme (2003), typical CBC studies usually include two to four profiles per question. In the present context, a total of 13 questions were generated with each question displaying three profiles (including a “none” option) with various combinations of social marketing mix strategies. The students were asked to choose from the displayed profiles those which they preferred most to encourage and enable them to practise energy conservation behaviour on campus consistently over an extended period of time. The “none” option is the choice for respondents who do not wish to choose among the profiles shown. As according to Johnson and Orme (2003), inclusion of a “none” option is more realistic because it mimics the general purchasing

process in which respondents are not forced to choose a combination of social marketing mix strategies that they do not like. Fig. 1 shows an example of question design in the questionnaire. A CBC study is often administered by computer and conducted online. This study used a paper and pencil CBC on the basis that all the respondents were in universities in Malaysia and easily reachable. Personal distribution and collection of the questionnaire can secure a sufficient number of respondents and ensure that the respondents understand the questionnaire, which minimises void questionnaires and secures more accurate responses. For the random design test conducted by computer, many possible versions of the questionnaire may be generated for each respondent to maintain accuracy. However, with a paper and pencil study such as the present study, a researcher is required to create several versions of the questionnaire instead of one for each respondent. A total of 100 versions of the CBC questionnaire were generated and distributed equally to the students in the five Malaysian universities because that is the minimum number of questionnaire versions recommended in the Sawtooth Software’s user manual for the computer-based randomised design. To ensure representativeness and that the distribution of questionnaire versions is balanced among the universities, each version of the questionnaire targets four responses from each of the five Malaysian universities; thus, each university will have received 100 versions of questionnaire (4*5*100 version). To ensure that the questionnaires generated are efficient in terms of design and profiles, questionnaire efficiency test and advance efficiency test were performed. The design test checks the efficiency of the main effects and provides an approximation of the relative efficiency of the CBC design for each attribute level (Orme, 2011). Questionnaire efficiency test is using Ordinary Least Squares which estimation is based on the design of choice tasks rather dummy respondent’s answers as in advanced efficiency test. In a design efficiency test, numbers of times for each level occurs within the design is counted and the optimally efficient design is achieve if the levels within attribute have appeared equal number of times. According to Orme (2011), the design efficiency is calculated by estimating the actual standard errors for attribute levels and then comparing with the ideal standard error that was estimated based on a design which was precisely orthogonal. The results of efficiency test shows the actual standard errors for all the attribute levels have limited differences which ranges from 0.0000 to 0.0003 in comparison to the ideal standard errors. This leading to the efficiency ratio of ranging from 1.0021 to 0.9931 with all the levels within attribute have appeared equal number of times, thus, this lead to the conclusion that the study design is optimally efficient. Unlike the design test, the advanced efficiency test is calculating using responses from dummy respondents predetermined by the researcher. The noteworthy data from the test are aggregate standard errors and D-efficiency. Aggregate standard errors reflect the precision for each parameter which derived from the random responses that are auto-generated by the software. D-efficiency summarizes the overall design precision based on how precise the design can estimate all the parameters in comparison to another

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

design (Orme, 2011). The general guidelines for the aggregate standard errors are the lower error reflects greater precision of the parameters while the larger value of D-efficiency showing the design is more efficient. For efficient design, the guidelines suggest standard errors for the main effects of less than 0.025 and standard errors for the interaction effects of less than 0.05. The present study design had main effects standard errors of 0.007 for all three attributes with two levels and 0.010 for the two three-level attributes. Similarly, standard errors for the interaction effects ranged from 0.008 to 0.011. Moreover, the D-efficiency (strength of the design) was 9372.53330. Thus, the CBC study design was efficient and qualified for the field.

worth utilities has two levels, upper level model and lower level model. For the upper level model, HB model assumes a multivariate normal distribution which characterised by a vector of means and a matrix of variances and covariances. Multivariate normal distribution is characterised by a vector of means and matrix of variances and covariances as given by Equation (1):

bi zNormalðf; DÞ

bi is a vector of part-worth utilities of the ith individual a is a vector of means of the distribution of individual partworth utilities D is a matrix of variances and covariances of the distribution of part-worth utilities across individuals For the lower level model (individual level), HB model uses the multinomial logit model to estimate the probability of the i person’s choosing the kth alternative. Each respondent will get their lower level model individually, but share the upper level model. For that, the probability that individual i select the kth alternative in a particular choice task may be expressed by Equation (2):

expðXk ‘ bi Þ   Pk ¼ P j exp Xj ‘bi

(2)

where: Pk is the probability of an individual choosing the kth alternative in a particular choice task Xj is a vector of attribute values describing the jth alternative in that choice task

4.3. Statistical analysis This study uses a choice-based conjoint analysis assisted by Sawtooth Software. Part-worth utilities (individual-level utilities) derived from a Hierarchy Bayes (HB) estimation were used to characterise the relative importance of the social marketing mix. Howell (2009) defines a utility as a “number representing the attractiveness of each feature in a conjoint study”. Generally, partworth utility is an indication of the preferences for each attribute level based on how often the levels are selected. Thereafter, the utility values for each level of attribute and the average importance of the social marketing mix were estimated. Similar methodology has been found in some recent studies. For example using CBC to estimate willingness to pay for automotive fuel E85 (Jensen et al., 2010); examine preferences for influenza vaccine attributes among children aged 8e12 years sampled from United States population (Flood et al., 2011); explore renewable energy investment behaviour from perspective of investors (Loock, 2012); measure consumer preference for beef labelling and packaging information attributes (Lagerkvist, 2013); identify hardware characteristics influence purchase decision of mobile devices (Kowalewski et al., 2013); as well to determine the consumers preferred electricity product (Kaenzig et al., 2013). In present study, the part-worth utilities are estimated using HB Model. HB model is estimated through an iterative process using Monte Carlo Markov Chain approach (Lagerkvist, 2013). Generally, HB procedures provide estimation at the individual-level, which provide individual utility value for each of the respondent rather compute from average part-worth utilities; accordingly, it is possibly able to capture respondent heterogeneity (Eggers and Sattler, 2009; Eggers and Eggers, 2011; Lagerkvist, 2013; Kaenzig et al., 2013). The HB model used to estimate individual part-

(1)

where:

4.2. Subject and procedures The subjects of this study were 2000 students from the following five Malaysian research universities: Universiti Malaysia, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, and Universiti Putra Malaysia. These are among the top universities in Malaysia with the largest constructed areas that accommodate the largest student populations. To ensure balanced responses from each of the universities, approximately 400 responses at each university were obtained. Questionnaires were distributed to the respondents face-to-face to ensure the integrity of the results. The overall response rate was approximately 65%, and 2000 valid responses were gathered out of the 3083 copies of the questionnaire distributed. Among the 2000 respondents, 808 respondents were male and 1192 respondents were female. In Malaysia, there are more female students in Malaysian universities than male students. As reported in a study by Ismail (2009), the gender proportion at the Universiti Putra Malaysia is approximately 68% female and 32% male.

201

The parameters to be estimated are: (i) the vector bi of partworth utilities for each individual; (ii) the vector of a of means of the distribution of part-worth utilities for each individual; (iii) the matrix D of the variances and covariances of that distribution. For greater details description on the HB model and estimation process, we recommend Sawtooth Software (2011). Then, a utility value for the levels of each attribute is estimated from the individual part-worth utilities. The average utility for the levels is derived from the average of individual part-worth utilities. To calculate the average importance of the attributes, the relative importance of attributes is computed individually, and then average across respondents to get the average importance values of the attributes. The individual importance scores for each attribute (SMM1 Product, SMM2 Price, SMM3 Place, SMM4 Promotion, SMM5 Post purchase Maintenance) is derived from the formula below (3):

Op

  max Up  min Up ¼ Pt   p¼1 max Up  min Up

(3)

where: Op is the importance of the particular attribute; max Up is the highest utility scores of the attribute; min Up is the lowest utility scores of the attribute. We find the absolute difference in utility between the level with the highest utility value and the level with the lowest utility value for the particular attribute, and then divide this by the sum of the differences for all five attributes and multiply by 100 to get a percent importance.

202

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

5. Results and findings Two important findings from the CBC analysis are the average utility values for the levels of each attribute and the calculation of the average importance of the attributes. The average utility values are calculated from the individual utilities estimates derived from the part-worth utility analysis. Part-worth utilities are used to estimate the relative strengths of preferences towards a product (Orme, 2011). In the present context, part-worth utilities were used to quantify students’ preferences for each social marketing mix strategy. The part-worth utility analysis indicates the student’s preferences allocated on each of the attribute levels and, therefore, the higher the utility values, the more the level is preferred by students in encouraging them to practise energy conservation on campus. The part-worth utility analysis for each respondent was built using 20,000 iterations and 10,000 draws, based on 26,000 choice tasks in total, for an average of 13 choice tasks per respondent. 5.1. Average utility values for the levels of each attribute Average utility values are calculated from the part-worth utilities estimates. Part-worth utilities are interval data and the utilities are scaled sum to 0 within each attribute. The negative value for the levels in an attribute does not indicate it is undesirable; instead, it indicates that it is slightly less desirable in comparison to the other levels within the attribute. The table below illustrates the utility values for each of the strategies of each social marketing attribute. (Table 1) The second column in the table shows the utility values for each attribute and the third column is the ranking of the preferred strategies within each social marketing mix from the student’s perspective. For the Product attribute, the students preferred “associated benefits” most; thus, the benefits associated with the practice of energy conservation, such as reducing carbon emissions, most motivate students to perform energy conservation on campus. For the Price attribute, students were more willing to pay nonmonetary costs instead of monetary costs in practising energy conservation. In the Place attribute, students perceived that they need a supportive environment more than accessibility to various sources of energy information for them to practise energy conservation behaviour on campus. In the Promotion attribute, the

Table 1 Average utility values for the strategies of each social marketing mix. Utility Values SMM1: product Associated benefits Branding strategy Tangible object/services

Ranking

14.30 5.31 8.99

1 2 3

SMM2: price Monetary costs Non-monetary costs

23.69 23.69

2 1

SMM3: place Distribution channel Supportive environment

10.17 10.17

2 1

SMM4: promotion Communication channels Motivation

5.77 5.77

2 1

13.39 2.01 15.40

3 2 1

SMM5: post-purchase maintenance Reinforcement Feedback Reminder

students preferred receiving motivation from management encouraging them to conserve energy rather than being motivated through the use of various communication channels. Lastly, the most desirable strategy in the Post-purchase Maintenance attribute was reminder, followed by feedback and reinforcement. It seems that students believe that they tend to forget and must be reminded regularly for them to continuously undertake energy conservation behaviour on campus. 5.2. Average importance of the attributes The average importance of the attributes aims to characterise the degree of importance of the attribute in influencing students to practise energy conservation. The relative importance totals 100% for a product. The average importance is calculated with reference to the ranges between the attribute’s part-worth utility values. Average importance is ratio data, where data may be interpreted to indicate that an attribute with an average importance value of 60 is twice as important as one with an attribute of 30. Fig. 2 shows the average importance of the social marketing mix from the students’ perspective. Among the social marketing mix, students seem to prefer the Promotion attribute and Place attribute less in assisting them to practise energy conservation. Both received approximately only half as much as the others, with an average importance of 11.62% and 11.59%, respectively. 6. Discussion The literature on social marketing remains in its initial stages. No mature set for social marketing mix has been proposed previously by other researchers specifically for use in marketing energy conservation. This is, however, the nature of social marketing mix, which focuses on the non-profit product and requires a set of its own marketing mix strategies for more appropriate application. A social marketing mix set for energy conservation was identified through the literature review. A total of five social marketing mix attributes together with their strategies were ascertained: Product, Price, Place, Promotion, and Post-purchase Maintenance. Each social marketing mix attribute is associated with strategies. A total of three strategies were ascertained for the Product attribute; associated benefits, branding strategy, and providing tangible objects/ services. For the Price, Place, and Promotion attributes, two strategies each were ascertained; monetary and non-monetary cost were determined for the Price attribute, accessibility to the augmented product and supportive surrounding environment were determined for the Place attribute, and promotion channel and motivation were determined for the Promotion attribute. Finally, Post-purchase Maintenance is associated with the following three strategies: reinforcement, feedback, and reminder. These are attributed to encouraging the students to practise energy conservation behaviour continuously and consistently. The results of the CBC study yield several insights. This study sheds light that on aspects of student perspectives that should inform management in making the right decisions in designing a social marketing mix combination to market energy conservation behaviour successfully to students in Malaysian universities. The CBC results indicated that the Product attribute was the most important attribute of the social marketing mix in the student’s choices in encouraging the practise of energy conservation on campus. Within the Product attribute, the benefits associated with energy conservation practice itself ranked as the main driver influencing their choice to undertake energy conservation behaviour. In addition to the associated benefits that might be derived from energy conservation behaviour, the branding strategy was the second most important strategy in fostering energy conservation

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

Attribute of Social Marketing Mix

Avg Importance

203

Standard Deviation

Ranking

SMM1 Product

27.12

13.52

1

SMM2 Price

22.65

16.01

3

SMM3 Place

11.62

9.21

4

SMM4 Promotion

11.59

9.09

5

SMM5 Post-purchase Maintenance

27.02

13.98

2

Total

100.00%

Fig. 2. Average importance of social marketing mix.

behaviour among the student community on campus (utility values of 5.31). Among the three levels in the Product attribute, students required assistance in terms of tangible objects or services the least. The students believe that they do not need much assistance with tangible objects or services in assisting them to practise energy conservation; instead, possible outcomes (associated benefits and better self-image) serve as the greater motivator for them to practise energy conservation behaviour on campus. Therefore, the associated benefits of energy conservation should be the prioritised strategy in marketing energy conservation behaviour to students in Malaysian universities. The newly proposed attribute of the social marketing mix in this context was chosen as the second most important. The significant effect of Post-purchase Maintenance attribute should not have come as a surprise. Students need regular reminders to remember to practise energy conservation behaviour that they have previously knowledge about. Students want to receive reinforcement whenever they have practised the behaviour and regular feedback on the amount of energy being conserved because this serves as the primary motivator for the continuous practise. Indeed, these have been confirmed as important strategies contributing to significant energy reduction in previous research. For example, the study by Fischer (2008) on household energy conservation showed that feedback resulted in approximately a 5e12% reduction in energy usage throughout the intervention. Subsequently, the study by Carrico and Riemer (2011) on university buildings, which provided feedback on energy consumption and progress on energy reduction, resulted in a 7% reduction in energy consumption. In addition, in a pilot study to reduce energy use at Tufts University conducted by Marcell et al. (2004), a reminder was acknowledged as one of the most effective strategies to encourage students to practise energy conservation at the university. The Price concern about the implicit cost of conserving energy was the third important attribute. This is the rationale for people to not perform the specific behaviour if it requires significant sacrifice, whether monetary or non-monetary. Between monetary and nonmonetary sacrifices, students are more willing to make nonmonetary sacrifices. The programme designed should assist with the reduction of monetary and non-monetary costs may incurred on the student’s side. The lower the costs incurred the more likely the students will purchase the energy conservation behaviour, the less likely it as a barrier for the students to perform energy conservation. The students perceived that they are willing to trade-off the monetary and non-monetary costs which could possibly be incurred in practising energy conservation for the associated benefits, a better self-image, a regular reminder, feedback as well as reinforcement from management. Therefore, strategies to lower the monetary and non-monetary costs involved should be given

lower priority in comparison with the other strategies under Product attribute and Post-purchase Maintenance attribute. Anyhow, Price attribute is rated as moderately important and has a higher weight than Promotion attribute and Place attribute. The remaining two less-preferred social marketing mixes are the Place attribute and the Promotion attribute. Overall, Place is chosen as the second least significant social marketing mix attribute with an average importance of 11.62%, and Promotion is the least significant with an average importance of only 11.59%. Although distribution of appropriate energy information as stipulated in the Place attribute is critically important from the marketers’ perspective to facilitate behaviour change, this is contrary to the energy users’ perspective. The energy users, the students, do not require too much energy information; instead, they need reminders, feedback, and reinforcement from management. Surprisingly, the Promotion attribute has been found as the least important attribute of social marketing mix in the energy conservation context. This stands in sharp contrast to commercial marketing, where the Promotion attribute is always considered the key consideration strategy in the marketing mix. The Promotion attribute only garnered an average importance of 11.59%, which is twofold lower than the Product, Post-purchase Maintenance, and Price attributes. This indicates that the promotion strategies using various communication channels (e.g., printed materials, special events, etc.) and motivation are less favourable in influencing students to practise energy conservation. From the perspective of energy users, promotional material has less effect in encouraging energy conservation behaviour. Therefore, the perception of Promotion as the key strategy in marketing seems to need revision; this is at least confirmed in the context of energy conservation behaviour among students in Malaysian universities. 7. Conclusion This research makes an initial attempt to suggest an optimum share of the social marketing mix and determine the relative weight of each of the social marketing strategies to promote energy conservation on university campuses in Malaysia. The identification of such an optimum combination of social marketing mix provides direction to management about which mix strategies are more important, which will, therefore, foster more effective resource allocation in addition to providing the right assistance to encourage the behaviour change. This is intended as a long-term mechanism to cultivate the student’s sustainable energy use behaviour. By using the social marketing approach, students’ preferences towards the social marketing mix that enable the practice of energy conservation behaviour on campus were captured. The results

204

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205

revealed that, in addition to the conventional marketing mixes (Product, Price, Place, and Promotion), Post-purchase Maintenance is also an important attribute of social marketing mix that should not be overlooked in encouraging effective behaviour change. In previous literature, a majority of the programmes that rely heavily on the Promotion attribute show that it does not necessary deliver results. This has been confirmed in the context of marketing energy conservation behaviour among the students in Malaysian universities. Marketers should not rely too much on the Promotion strategies such as distribution of printed material because the findings show that students do not have to be informed about energy conservation behaviour; instead, they must be reminded regularly, receive feedback on their efforts made, and be reinforced after they undertake the energy conservation behaviour on the campus. More importantly, the associated benefits that might be derived from the energy conservation practise serve as the main motivator for them to undertake energy conservation behaviour on campus. This study has its limitation which should be acknowledged. In consider the current research was designed for organizational setting, the university campus, hence caution must be applied, as the findings might not be transferable to all types of energy waste. The results are limited to its geographical context and it can be extended to other geographical context and other organizational setting with further investigation. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the Sawtooth Software for the analysis software support and Prof.T. Ramayah for the review. References Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., Rothengatter, T., 2005. A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. J. Environ. Psychol. 25 (3), 273e291. Allcott, H., Mullainathan, S., 2010. Behavior and energy policy. Science 327, 1204e 1205. American Psychological Association (APA), 2009. APA College Dictionary of Psychology. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. Balachandran, V., Gensch, D.H., 1974. Solving the “marketing mix” problem using geometric programming. Manage. Sci. 21 (2), 160e171. Banfi, S., Farsi, M., Filippini, M., Jakob, M., 2008. Willingness to pay for energysaving measures in residential buildings. Energy Econ. 30 (2), 503e516. Bennett, P.D., Moore, N.K., 1981. Consumers’ preferences for alternative energy conservation policies: a trade-off analysis. J. Consum. Res. 8, 313e321. Carrico, A.R., Riemer, M., 2011. Motivating energy conservation in the workplace: an evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education. J. Environ. Psychol. 31 (1), 1e13. Cai, W.G., Wu, Y., Zhong, Y., Ren, H., 2009. China building energy consumption: situation, challenges and corresponding measures. Energy Policy 37 (6), 2054e 2059. Chau, C.K., Ts,e, M.S., Chung, K.Y., 2010. A choice experiment to estimate the effect of green experience on preferences and willingness-to-pay for green building attributes. Building Environ. 45 (11), 2553e2561. Cheung, H.D., Chung, T.M., 2008. A study on subjective preference to daylight residential indoor environment using conjoint analysis. Building Environ. 43, 2101e2111. Choong, W.W., 2008. Conceptual Model of Energy Awareness Development Process. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy. UniversitiTeknologi Malaysia. Committee on Civil Engineering and Architecture Science Council of Japan, 2007. Policy Recommendations for Reducing Energy Consumption by the Building Sector (Japan). Dietza, T., Gardnerb, G.T., Gilliganc, J., Sternd, P.C., Vandenberghe, M.P., 2009. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106 (44), 18452e18456. Domegan, C.T., 2008. Social marketing: implications for contemporary marketing practices classification scheme. J. Business Ind. Marketing 23 (2), 135e141. Dunlap, R.E., York, R., 2008. The Globalization of Environmental Concern and the Limits of the Postmaterialist Values Explanation: Evidence from Four Multinational Surveys, vol. 49, pp. 529e563. Eggers, F., Eggers, F., 2011. Where have all the flowers gone? Forecasting green trends in the automobile industry with a choice-based conjoint adoption model. Technol. Forecast. Social Change 78, 51e62.

Eggers, F., Sattler, H., 2009. Hybrid individualized two-level choice-based conjoint (HIT-CBC): a new method for measuring preference structures with many attribute levels. Int. J. Res. Marketing 26, 108e118. Finlinson, S.M., 2005. Increasing Organizational Energy Conservation Behaviors: Comparing the Theory of Planned Behavior and Reasons Theory for Identifying Specific Motivational Factors to Target for Change. Ohio University, United States. Fischer, C., 2008. Feedback on household electricity consumption: a tool for saving energy? Energy Efficiency 1 (1), 79e104. Flood, E.M., Ryan, K.J., Rousculp, M.D., Beusterien, K.M., Block, S.L., Hall, M.C., Mahadevia, P.J., 2011. A survey of children’s preferences for influenza vaccine attribute. Vaccine 29, 4334e4340. Goett, A.A., Hudson, K., Train, K.E., 2000. Customer’s choice among retail energy suppliers: The willingness to pay for service attributes. Energy J. 21 (4), 1e28. Glanz, K., Rimer, B.K., Viswanath, K., Ebooks, C., 2008. Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken. Gyberg, P., Palm, J., 2009. Influencing households’ energy behaviour-how is this done and on what premises? Energy Policy 37 (7), 2807e2813. Hester, N., KeLi, Schramski, J.R., 2012. Dynamic modeling of potentially conflicting energy reduction strategies for residential structures in semi-arid climates. J. Environ. Manage. 97, 148e153. House, M., 1995. Marketing mix. In: Mellillo, J.V., Lavender, P. (Eds.), Market the Arts! Publication of ARTS Action Issues, New York, pp. 46e54. Howell, J., 2009. CBC/HB for Beginners. Retrieved Aug 15, 2011, from http://www. sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/CBCHBbeginners.pdf. Ismail, M., 2009. The gendered nature of careers: evidence from a Malaysian university. J. Int. Management Stud. 4 (2), 175e184. Jensen, K.L., Clark, C.D., English, B.C., Menard, R.J., Skahan, D.K., Marra, A.C., 2010. Willingness to pay for E85 from corn, switchgrass, and wood residues. Energy Econ. 32, 1253e1262. Johnson, R., Orme, B., 2003. Getting the Most from CBC. Retrieved August 6, 2011, from. Sawtooth Software, Inc. http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/ techpap/cbcmost.pdf Kaenzig, J., Heinzle, S.L., Wustenhagen, R., 2013. Whatever the customer wants, the customer gets? Exploring the gap between consumer preferences and default electricity products in Germany. Energy Policy 53, 311e322. Klopper, H.B., Berndt, A., Chipp, K., Ismail, Z., Roberts-Lombard, M., Subramani, D., Hern, L., 2006. Marketing: Fresh Perspectives. Pearson/Prentice Hall South Africa, Cape Town. Kotler, P., Lee, N., 2007. Marketing in the Public Sector: a Roadmap for Improved Performance. Wharton School Pub, Upper Saddle River, NJ. Kotler, P., Lee, N.R., 2008. Social Marketing: Influencing Behaviors for Good. Sage Publications, Los Angeles. Kotler, P., Roberto, N., Lee, N., 2002. Social Marketing: Improving the Quality of Life, second ed. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Kowalewski, S., Arning, K., Minwegen, A., Ziefle, M., Ascheid, G., 2013. Extending the engineering trade-off analysis by integrating user preferences in conjoint analysis. Expert Syst. Appl. 40, 2947e2955. Kreith, F., Goswami, D.Y., 2008. Energy Management and Energy Conservation Handbook. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton. Lagerkvist, C.J., 2013. Consumer preferences for food labelling attributes: comparing direct ranking and besteworst scaling for measurement of attribute importance, preference intensity and attribute dominance. Food Qual. Preference 29, 77e88. Li, J., Colombier, M., 2009. Managing carbon emissions in China through building energy efficiency. J. Environ. Manage. 90, 2436e2447. Liao, C.-W., Yao, K.C., Chin, D.F., 2008. Optimal planning of energy conservation for vocational high schools in Taiwan. In: Paper Presented at the 2nd International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control, ICICIC 2007. Retrieved July 14, 2011, from: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp? arnumber¼04427741. Long, T., Taubenheim, A.M., Wayman, J., Temple, S., Ruoff, B.A., 2008. The heart truth: using the power of branding and social marketing to increase awareness of heart disease in women. Social Marketing Q. 14 (3), 3e29. Loock, M., 2012. Going beyond best technology and lowest price: on renewable energy investors’ preference for service-driven business models. Energy Policy 40, 21e27. Loozen, A., Moosdijk, C.V.D., 2001. A consumer advise on energy efficient use and purchase of household appliances and lighting. In: Bertoldi, P., Ricci, A., Almeida, A.D. (Eds.), Energy Efficiency in Household Appliances and Lighting. Springer, Berlin, pp. 468e474. Mah, M.W., Deshpande, S., Rothschild, M.L., 2006. Social marketing: a behaviour change technology for infection control. Am. J. Infect. Control 34 (7), 452e457. Maellaro, R., 2008. Determining the Ideal Combination of Interpersonal Skills for MBA Graduates: a Conjoint Analysis Study of Hiring Manager Preferences. Doctor of Philosophy. Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara. Mansor, S.A., 21 October 2008. In: Keynote Speech at Powergen Asia 2008 Conference. Ministry of Energy Green Technology and Water, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Marans, R.W., Edelstein, J.Y., 2010. The human dimension of energy conservation and sustainability. Int. J. Sust. Higher Edu. 11 (1), 6e18. Marcell, K., Agyeman, J., Rappaport, A., 2004. Cooling the campus: experiences from a pilot study to reduce electricity use at Tufts University, USA, using social marketing methods. Int. J. Sust. Higher Edu. 5 (2), 169e189. Marshall, R.J., Petrone, L., Takach, M.J., Sansonetti, S., Wah-Fitta, M., BagnallDegos, A., et al., 2007. Make a kit, make a plan, stay informed: using social

L. Sheau-Ting et al. / Journal of Environmental Management 131 (2013) 196e205 marketing to change the population’s emergency preparedness behavior. Social Marketing Q. 13 (4), 47e64. McKenzie-Mohr, D., 2011. Fostering Sustainable Behavior: an Introduction to Community-based Social Marketing, third ed. New Society Publishers, Canada. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2009. National Policy on Climate Change. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, Malaysia. Morris, Z.S., Clarkson, P.J., 2009. Does social marketing provide a framework for changing healthcare practice? Health Policy 91 (2), 135e141. Moxnes, E., 2004. Estimating customer utility of energy efficiency standards for refrigerators. J. Econ. Psychol. 25 (6), 707e724. Muhieldeen, M.W., Adam, N.M., Salleh, E., Tang, S.H., Kwong, Q.J., 2008. Student behavior that leads to energy abuse at a teaching institution in Malaysia. In: Paper Presented at the International Seminar in Sustainable Environment and Architecture, Shah Alam, Malaysia. Nandi, P., Basu, S., 2008. A review of energy conservation initiatives by the government of India. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 12 (2), 518e530. Olshefsky, A.M., Zive, M.M., Scolari, R., Zuniga, M., 2007. Promoting HIV risk awareness and testing in Latinos living on the US-Mexico border: the Tu No Me conoces social marketing campaign. Aids Edu. Prev. 19 (5), 422e435. Orme, B., 2009. Which conjoint method should I use? (Technical Paper). Retrieved July 20, 2011, from. Sawtooth Software, Inc. http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/ download/techpap/whichmth.pdf Orme, B., 2011. SSI Web 7.0 User Manual: Software for Web Interviewing and Conjoint Analysis. Sawtooth Software, Inc, Sequim, WA. Ouyang, J., Gao, L.L., Yan, Y., Hokao, K., Ge, J., 2009. Effects of improved consumer behavior on energy conservation in the urban residential sector of Hangzhou, China. J. Asian Architect. Building Eng. 8 (1), 243e249. Peattie, K., Peattie, S., 2009. Social marketing: a pathway to consumption reduction? J. Bus. Res. 62 (2), 260e268. Petersen, J.E., Shunturov, V., Janda, K., Platt, G., Weinberger, K., 2007. Dormitory residents reduce electricity consumption when exposed to real-time visual feedback and incentives. Int. J. Sust. Higher Edu. 8 (1), 16e33. Phillipson, L., Jones, S.C., Wiese, E., 2009. Effective communication only part of the strategy needed to promote help-seeking of young people with mental health problems. Social Marketing Q. 15 (2), 50e62. Poortinga, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., Wiersma, G., 2003. Household preferences for energy-saving measures: a conjoint analysis. J. Econ. Psychol. 24, 49e64. Prochaska, J.O., Diclemente, C.C., 1982. Transtheoretical therapy: toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy: Theor. Res. Pract. 19 (3), 276e288.

205

Quinn, G.P., Thomas, K.B., Hauser, K., Rodriguez, N.Y., Rodriguez-Snapp, N., 2009. Evaluation of educational materials from a social marketing campaign to promote folic acid use among Hispanic women: insight from Cuban and Puerto Rican ethnic subgroups. J. Immigrant Minor. Health 11 (5), 406e414. Richards, J., Hackett, A., Duggan, B., Ellis, T., Forrest, D., Grey, P., 2009. An evaluation of an attempt to change the snacking habits of pre-school children using social marketing. Public Health 123 (1), 31e37. Saidur, R., 2009. Energy consumption, energy savings and emission analysis in Malaysian office buildings. Energy Policy 37 (10), 4104e4113. Sawtooth Software, 2011. The CBC/HB System for Hierarchical Bayes Estimation Version 5.0. Retrieved October 10, 2011, from. Sawtooth Software, Inc. http:// www.skimgroup.com/images/stories/technicalpapers/Sawtooth_products/ hbtech.pdf Shen, J., Saijo, T., 2009. Does an energy efficiency label alter consumers’ purchasing decisions? A latent class approach based on a stated choice experiment in Shanghai. J. Environ. Manage. 90, 3561e3573. Smith, W.A., 2002. Social marketing and its potential contribution to a modern synthesis of social change. Social Marketing Q. 8 (2), 46e48. Stead, M., Gordon, R., Angus, K., McDermott, L., 2007. A systematic review of social marketing effectiveness. Health Edu. 107 (2), 126e191. Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., Abrahamse, W., 2006. Why are energy policies acceptable and effective? Environ. Behav. 38 (1), 92e111. Sustainability Office, 2006. A Review of Community Based Social Marketing Research for the Reduction of Energy Consumption. Retrieved 4 May, 2010, from: http://sustainability.utoronto.ca/Assets/SustainabilityþDigitalþAssets/ Projects/rewire/rwlitpdf.pdf. Weiten, W., Lloyd, M.A., Dunn, D., Hammer, E.Y., 2009. Psychology Applied to Modern Life: Adjustment in the 21st Century. Wadsworth; Cengage Learning Distributor, Belmont, CA; London. Yavuz, N., 2004. The Use of Non-monetary Incentives as a Motivational Tool: a Survey Study in a Public Organization in Turkey. Master of Science. Middle East Technical University. Zastrow, C.H., Kirst-Ashman, K.K., 2009. Understanding Human Behavior and the Social Environment. Brooks/Cole Pub Co, Belmant, CA. Zheng, G., Jing, Y., Huang, H., Shi, G., Zhang, X., 2010. Developing a fuzzy analytic hierarchical process model for building energy conservation assessment. Renew. Energy 35 (1), 78e87. Zografakis, N., Menegaki, A.N., Tsagarakis, K.P., 2008. Effective education for energy efficiency. Energy Policy 36 (8), 3226e3232.