From Knowledge to Action: The Power of Green Communication and Social Media Engagement in Sustainable Food Consumption

Abstract

Understanding what drives sustainable consumer behavior is crucial for effective green marketing strategies. We set out to explore the mechanisms explaining the relationships between environmental attitudes, perceived environmental knowledge, and green consumption values on consumer behaviors, specifically the mediating roles of receptivity to green communication and social media engagement with environmentally friendly firms. We also investigated the moderating role of information seeking in these relationships. Data were collected through a survey of 610 Greek respondents between May and July 2024 and analyzed using IBM SPSS and AMOS version 23. Findings show significant and positive paths between green consumption values and receptivity to green communication, e-word-of-mouth intention, food behavior, and other environmental behaviors, while receptivity to green communication and social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms has a significant and positive impact on e-word-of-mouth intention and food behavior. Findings reveal that credible and detailed communication is essential for engaging information-seeking consumers, who are more critical of green messages.

1. Introduction

As environmental concerns continue to grow, consumers are increasingly drawn to brands that demonstrate a commitment to sustainability. Recent studies show that 65% of consumers prefer to buy from environmentally responsible companies [1] and are willing to pay for a 9.7% sustainability premium for eco-friendly products [2]. Despite this growing trend, the challenge for businesses lies in effectively engaging these consumers and encouraging sustainable behaviors, as many companies struggle to convey their environmental messages in a way that resonates and leads to meaningful action. Understanding what drives consumers to not only support but also advocate for green practices is crucial for businesses aiming to bridge the intention–behavior gap in sustainable consumption.

Green behavior has been described as “the choice and use of goods that are safe for both human health and the environment, reducing waste that causes environmental pollution and ensuring human health” [3]. The idea that consumers’ food choices influence the environment and the ethical aspect of it is a major factor in the purchase of green food [4,5]. Since consumer behavior affects how businesses operate, consumers are believed to be the key to sustainable development [6]. At the same time, there are other behavioral indicators of consumers’ devotion to the environment than their purchasing habits, such as their social media behaviors. Social media’s fast expansion has given users new avenues to obtain content and exchange insights about experiences and products, resulting in electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) [7,8]. Due to the collaborative, user-centered atmosphere that social media has produced and the ability for customers to interact with company information, eWOM behavior has been encouraged [9].

This study delves into the factors that shape consumer attitudes towards green behaviors, such as environmental attitudes, perceived knowledge, and green consumption values, and how these factors influence receptivity to green communication, social media engagement with eco-friendly firms, and ultimately, behavioral intentions like e-word-of-mouth and sustainable food choices. By examining these dynamics, this research provides actionable insights for managers looking to harness the power of green marketing, enhance consumer engagement, and build stronger, more sustainable brand relationships in an increasingly eco-conscious marketplace. Specifically, we aim to answer the following research questions: (1) What factors influence consumers’ attitudes, engagement, and behaviors toward environmentally friendly practices? (2) How do consumers’ responses to green communication and their engagement with sustainable brands on social media impact their behavioral intentions? (3) What mediating roles do green communication and social media engagement play in shaping consumers’ environmentally conscious food behaviors?

Our study is structured as follows: In Section 2, we provide underlying theories, a literature review of the variables, and develop the hypotheses. In Section 3, we describe our measures, data, and sample, while in Section 4, we explain the modeling and report the results. Section 5 discusses the issue, and Section 6 presents conclusions, theoretical and managerial implications, future directions for research, and limitations.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Underlying Theories

The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) focuses on the cognitive determinants that guide behavior. According to this theory, individuals’ behaviors are influenced by their attitudes toward the behavior, the social pressures they perceive (subjective norms), and their perceived ability to perform the behavior (perceived behavioral control) [10]. In the context of this framework, positive environmental attitudes lead individuals to be more open to green communication and engage with environmentally friendly content. These attitudes, coupled with perceived environmental knowledge, shape their intentions to participate in behaviors such as eWOM, green food choices, and other environmentally responsible actions. TPB effectively explains how attitudes and perceived control over behavior can lead to specific environmental actions, showing how internal cognitive factors drive the decision-making process and ultimately guide behavior in line with environmental values.

Social Cognitive Theory highlights the reciprocal interaction between personal and environmental factors in shaping behavior [11]. Personal factors like environmental attitudes, perceived environmental knowledge, and green consumption values drive individuals’ receptivity to green communication and their engagement with environmentally friendly firms on social media. These personal beliefs influence their motivation and self-efficacy in adopting pro-environmental behaviors. Environmental factors—such as receptivity to green communication and social media engagement—provide external cues that reinforce or shape these personal factors. For instance, exposure to green communication strengthens environmental attitudes, making individuals more likely to engage in behaviors like eWOM and sustainable food choices. Social media engagement further enhances environmental knowledge, encouraging more consistent green behaviors.

2.2. Literature Review and Hypothesis Development

2.2.1. Environmental Attitude

Several marketing disciplines have researched attitudes, as they are seen to be among the most crucial factors in analyzing the behavior of consumers. Given its connection to consumer behavior, Ajzen’s research on The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) has shown that attitude is seen as a predictor of customers’ intention to buy [12]. Environmental attitude refers to clients’ attitudes toward environmental procurement and their assessments of their purchasing behavior [13]. This environmental purchasing behavior includes consumers’ environmental worries during the search, purchase, usage, evaluation, and disposal of products, as well as customers’ environmental issues after making green product purchases. Consumers’ environmental behavior is influenced by factors such as the quantity of water or energy needed to use a product, its environmental effect assessment, and how it is disposed of after use [14].

A series of studies have indicated that consumers’ attitudes regarding the environment influence their buying decisions and behavior [15]. Lee [16] discovered a tenuous link between green buying behavior and environmental attitudes. Positive consumer attitudes toward green food are significantly influenced by environmental concerns, namely customers’ awareness of environmental issues and willingness to address them [17]. Since environmental concerns benefit society, the factors influencing environmentally conscious consumer behavior can be viewed as altruistic elements that shape attitudes toward sustainable practices [18]. Brochado [19] demonstrated that responsible consumption is predicted by consumer involvement in other environmental behaviors, such as environmental activism. This seems to be true when considering attitude’s character, one of the primary indicators of environmentally friendly behavior [18].

However, other studies have shown different results. Armstrong [20] found that attitudes may not necessarily translate into actual actions, particularly for complex or expensive activities, like being environmentally sensitive and having environmental behavior. According to Bamberg’s [21] study, there is little connection between environmental behavior and attitude.

Several outcomes can arise from environmental attitudes as well. Chu [22] approved that there is no significant relationship between attitude and social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms, but there is a positive connection between attitude and e-word-of-mouth intention. Also, Latip’s [23] research showed that receptivity to green communication is not a moderator factor of environmental attitude toward green food intention. Considering the contradictory results, the relationship between consumer environmental attitudes and consumer behavior needs to be further studied to attain sustainable consumption. We put forth the following hypotheses:

H1: 

Consumers’ environmental attitude (EA) has a significant effect on (a) receptivity to green communication (RGC), (b) social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE), (c) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI), (d) food behavior (FB), and (e) other environmental behavior (OEB).

2.2.2. Perceived Environmental Knowledge

An important factor in explaining environmental behavior is environmental knowledge, which reflects people’s awareness of environmental problems and a basic understanding of the facts, theories, and connections of the natural world and its main ecosystems [24]. Environmental knowledge is therefore a crucial variable in our research since it affects consumers’ behavior [25]. Environmental knowledge is defined by Yadav and Pathak [26] as having a thorough awareness of environmental concerns such as pollution, recycling, energy efficiency and utilization, and renewable energy.

Customers are more likely to react positively toward green products if they have longer-term environmental knowledge [27]. According to Lombardi [28], consumers’ purchasing decisions change when they know more about sustainable issues. Also, Hoek [29] and Stranieri [30] show that people with a high level of sustainability knowledge are more inclined to consume green food. The study by Liu [31] agreed that environmental knowledge significantly positively affects environmental behavior, but only when mediating environmental attitude. Nevertheless, other research suggested that there is not a clear connection between environmental behavior and environmental knowledge. For example, according to Taufique [25], there is a knowledge–attitude–behavior gap since consumers may not always adopt environmental behavior when they have environmental knowledge. Also, young people with a high level of environmental knowledge are better able to comprehend the environmental information shared by brands on social media (greenfluencers), and they can put that knowledge to use by engaging in high-effort environmental activism [32]. Joshi and Rahman [33] discovered little correlation between the decision to buy green and an understanding of sustainability-related concerns. We propose the following hypotheses:

H2: 

Perceived environmental knowledge (PEK) has a significant effect on (a) receptivity to green communication (RGC), (b) social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE), (c) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI), (d) food behavior (FB), and (e) other environmental behavior (OEB).

2.2.3. Green Consumption Values

Green consumption values refer to the tendency of people to demonstrate their support for environmental conservation through their consumption and purchase patterns [34]. A popular argument for the rise of green consumption, according to Spielmann [35], is the moral and social values it espouses (e.g., doing what is best for the greater good and leaving the planet a better place for future generations). Consumers who buy sustainable products are likely to act altruistically, i.e., pro-environmentally [35]. When the attributes of the two products are similar, consumers frequently choose green products over non-green ones [36]. This suggests that intangible benefits like promoting environmental sustainability are included in the functional value of green products. According to research by Lin and Zhou [37], consumers’ intentions to purchase green products are positively impacted by their views of green value. Functional value has been shown to influence consumer behavior [38]. In addition, Mason’s [39] recent analysis discovered that consumption values positively moderate customer behavior. Green consumers have a positive attitude about consuming green foods for both their health and the environment; thus, social and environmental values play a major influence on the buying behavior of green products [40]. Mohd Suki [41] discovered that green consumption is associated with environmentally conscious consumers. While Corboș [42] showed a positive impact between green consumption values and receptivity to green communication. Therefore, we hypothesize:

H3: 

Green consumption values (GCV) have a significant effect on (a) receptivity to green communication (RGC), (b) social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE), (c) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI), (d) food behavior (FB), and (e) other environmental behavior (OEB).

2.2.4. Receptivity to Green Communication (RGC)

Receptivity to green communication (RGC) describes how customers react to green marketing communications. According to Bailey [43], receptivity to green advertising “is the extent to which consumers pay attention to and are favorably disposed and responsive to advertising that uses green messages in the marketing of products or a company itself”. It is an important tool for eco-friendly marketing, messaging, and advertising campaigns that affect consumers’ purchase intentions. Marketers employ communication strategies to connect with customers, foster relationships, increase customer loyalty, and increase customer equity [44]. Receptive consumers support brands that support environmental causes by endorsing green communication [45]. People are more likely to respond favorably to firms that use green messaging in their advertising and to pay attention to messages in advertising that address environmental issues [46]. Their perception of advertising is influenced by using green messaging, which they believe is a valuable and important tool for promoting a company’s products [47]. When firms incorporate green messaging in their advertisements, consumers respond favorably and are willing to buy products that are represented as ecologically friendly. Therefore, receptivity to green communication influences consumer behavior [48].

One important component of green marketing is green advertising, which highlights the environmentally friendly features of goods and services [49]. Additionally, information regarding the relative environmental benefits that a brand delivers in comparison to its non-green competitors is the basis for green advertising, which ought to work better for technology-intensive items [50]. More receptive customers are more likely to pay attention to green advertising messages and buy eco-labeled products [51]. Understanding consumer intentions to purchase products bearing an eco-label was the goal of Sun and Wang’s [52] study. According to their findings, intention is positively influenced by one’s reactivity to green advertising. Similar results showed the study of Tewari [45] and Latip [23] that receptivity to green communication influences positively buying intention. A brand’s legitimacy and trustworthiness are enhanced by receptivity to green communication and higher positive word-of-mouth intention [53]. Consumers who see a brand as authentic and trustworthy are more likely to promote it to others, creating positive word-of-mouth and fostering a circle of environmentally conscious behavior [43,51]. However, Nguyen-Viet and Nguyen Anh’s [3] study showed a non-significant relationship between receptivity to green communication and word-of-mouth intention. Based on this discussion, we propose the following hypotheses.

H4: 

Receptivity to green communication (RGC) has a significant effect on (a) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI), (d) food behavior (FB), and (e) other environmental behavior (OEB).

2.2.5. Social Media Consumers’ Engagement with Environmentally Friendly Firms

Social media engagement is described as “a consumer’s positively valenced brand-related cognitive, emotional, and behavioral activity during or related to focal consumer/brand interactions” by Hollebeek [54]. Consumers use social media to communicate their desires for advertised things, as well as to share their joy and feelings from interactions with brands. Social media engagement includes posts and the degree to which consumers participate in them [55]. Industry professionals frequently utilize these measures, which are claimed to be more detailed than the total number of followers: “likes”, “comments”, “re-tweets”, and “follows” [56]. Consumers’ satisfaction and enjoyment are increased when they share content with others. Consequently, this may elicit responses from other customers and raise overall engagement and the number of followers [57]. Additionally, Guerreiro and Pacheco [58] presented the positive relationship between social media consumers’ engagement and e-word-of-mouth intention.

Consumers’ social media engagement positively impacts their environmental behavior [59]. Kurisu [60] proposed that there exist measures that support environmental preservation and others that foster individuals’ awareness of environmental issues. Also, consumer engagement mediates between attitude and environmentally friendly goods, as demonstrated by research by Piligrimienė [61] and its impact on environmentally friendly goods. We formulated the following hypotheses:

H5: 

Social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE) has a significant effect on (a) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI), (d) food behavior (FB), and (e) other environmental behavior (OEB).

2.2.6. Receptivity to Green Communication (RGC) and Social Media Consumers’ Engagement with Environmentally Friendly Firms (SMCEE) as Mediators

Customers’ receptivity to green communication, describing their favorable attitude toward green marketing communication [45], impacts as they react and respond to the green consumption value of products. Receptivity to green communication has a significant overall effect on consumer behavior that is greater than the effect reported by Do Paco [48]. The research of Corboș [42] investigated the mediating role of receptivity to green consumer communication between different forms of values and consumer behavior; the results showed partial mediation in two forms of values (functional and emotional). This implies that sensitivity to green communication significantly impacts consumer behavior. Cao [62] studied the positive mediating impact of receptivity to green communication on consumer adaptation to new green behavior. Consequently, we expect the mediated relationship and propose the following hypotheses:

H6: 

Receptivity to green communication (RGC) positively mediates between environmental attitude (EA) and (a) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI) and (b) food behavior (FB).

H7: 

Social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE) positively mediates between perceived environmental knowledge (PEK) and (a) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI), (b) food behavior (FB), and (c) other environmental behavior (OEB).

H8: 

Receptivity to green communication (RGC) positively mediates between green consumption values (GCV) and food behavior (FB).

2.2.7. Information Seeking as Moderator

A person engages in information-seeking behavior when they try to find information that supports their viewpoint. Making notes during conversations and posing questions are two examples of information-seeking activities [63]. Furthermore, information seeking occurs when someone realizes they do not know enough to handle or solve a situation [64]. Information seeking is crucial for raising consumer awareness and helping them decide how to behave and what to buy according to their values and standards [65].

Many studies in different academic sectors have used information seeking as an important moderator factor of consumer behavior [66,67]. Kim and Han’s [68] and Zhang’s [69] research demonstrated that information seeking is a significant factor in consumers’ attitudes about information sources, which means that if brands provide detailed, comprehensive information in their posts or advertisements, consumers will positively react. People who adopt environmentally conscious behaviors might have to seek information before buying because circular packaging’s attributes and associated environmental benefits are not always obvious. Therefore, personal characteristics influence the likelihood of buying circular packaging but also have an indirect effect mediated by information seeking [65].

H9a: 

Information seeking (IS) moderates the association of environmental attitude (EA) on (a) receptivity to green communication (RGC), (b) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI) through the mediator of receptivity to green communication (RGC), and (c) food behavior (FB) through the mediator of receptivity to green communication (RGC).

H10a: 

Information seeking (IS) moderates the association of perceived environmental knowledge (PEK) on (a) e-word-of-mouth intention (EWOMI) through the mediator of social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE), (b) food behavior (FB) through the mediator of social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE), and (c) other environmental behavior (OEB) through the mediator of social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (SMCEE).

H11: 

Information seeking (IS) moderates the association of green consumption values (GCV) and receptivity to green communication (RGC).

3. Methodology

3.1. Measurement and Data Collection

A literature research process was used to determine the measurement items selected from previous studies. This paper adopted Kumar’s [70] scale for environmental attitude (three items), Mostafa’s [71] scale for perceived environmental knowledge (five items), measuring environmental products and signs, and Haws [34] scale for green consumption values (five items), which assess participants’ propensity to take the environmental impact of their consumption and buying behavior. Receptivity to green communication (seven items) was taken by Bailey’s [43] study, and social media consumers’ environmental engagement (eight items) was used from the study of Chu [22]. Therefore, e-word-of-mouth intention, a four-item scale, was measured by Eberle [72], food behavior used a four-item scale based on the study of Thogersen [73], and other environmental behavior was measured by a five-item scale supported by Larson [74], Testa [65]. The items are reported in Appendix A,

Table A1. Measurement items and standardized factor loadings in CFA.

Factors	Factors Loading
Environmental attitude (EA)
EA1. I believe that my use of environmentally sustainable products will help reduce pollution and also help improve the environment.	0.883
EA2. I believe that my use of environmentally sustainable products will help in reducing the wasteful use of natural resources.	0.910
EA3. I believe that my use of environmentally sustainable products will help in conserving natural resources.	0.920
Perceived environmental knowledge (PEK)
PEK1. I know that I buy products and packages that are environmentally safe.	0.677
PEK2. I know more about recycling than the average person.	0.746
PEK3. I know how to select products and packages that reduce the amount of waste ending up.	0.875
PEK4. I understand the environmental phrases and symbols on the product package.	0.810
PEK5. I am very knowledgeable about environmental issues.	0.844
Green consumption values (GCV)
GCV1. It is important to me that the products I use do not harm the environment.	0.801
GCV2. I consider the potential environmental impact of my actions when making many of my decisions.	0.819
GCV3. I am concerned about wasting the resources of our planet.	0.766
GCV4. I would describe myself as environmentally responsible.	0.734
GCV5. I am willing to be inconvenienced in order to take actions that are more environmentally friendly.	0.715
Receptivity to Green Communication (RGC)
RGC1. I tend to pay attention to advertising messages that talk about the environment.	0.781
RGC2. The use of green messages in ads affects my attitude toward the ads.	0.842
RGC3. I respond favorably to brands that use green messages in their advertising.	0.874
RGC4. I am the kind of consumer who responds favorably when brands use green messages in their ads.	0.871
RGC5. I think that green advertising is valuable.	0.840
RGC6. Green advertising is a necessary form of advertising.	0.785
RGC7. I tend to pay attention to green advertising messages.	0.870
Social Media Consumers’ environmental engagement (SMCEE)
SMCEE1. Posting personal experiences related to the firm’s green activities.	0.896
SMCEE2. Friending, liking, or following the firm’s green activities.	0.837
SMCEE3. Posting or sharing thoughts about the firm’s green activities.	0.892
SMCEE4. Posting or sharing photos, videos, or gifs created by others that relate to the firm’s green activities.	0.886
SMCEE5. Posting or sharing photos, videos, or gifs created by you that relate to the firm’s green activities.	0.898
SMCEE6. Receiving messages or information from the firm regarding its green activities.	0.832
SMCEE7. Forwarding someone else’s discussion on the firm’s green activities to other people.	0.847
SMCEE8. Joining groups dedicated to the firm’s green activities.	0.854
E-word-of-mouth intention (EWI)
EWI1. I will invite friends to learn more about the firm’s green activities on social media.	0.887
EWI2. I will recommend the firm’s green activities on social media to my friends.	0.878
EWI3. I will talk about the firm’s green activities on social media.	0.894
EWI4. I will talk positively about the firm’s green activities on social media.	0.851
Food behavior (FB)
FB1. I support brands that support the environment.	0.906
FB2. I compare labels to select the most nutritious food.	0.716
FB3. I compare product information labels to decide which brand to buy.	0.713
FB4. I like to know what I am buying, so I often ask questions in stores where I shop for food.	0.888
Other environmental behaviors (OEB)
OEB1. I talk to others about environmental issues.	0.674
OEB2. I work with others to address environmental problems or issues.	0.851
OEB3. I participate as a volunteer in initiatives aimed at improving the natural environment in my community.	0.907
OEB4. I visit natural sites in the area where I live to support initiatives to protect the natural heritage.	0.774
OEB5. I make donations and/or sign petitions to support environmental protection.	0.736

. The measurement items for the moderator information seeking, a three-item scale, were adopted from Leonidou and Skarmeas [75], Appendix A,

Table A2. Measurement items of moderator.

Factors	Factors Loading
Information seeking (IS)
IS1. I would search for more information about the product’s environmental attributes (e.g., performance, design, and packaging characteristics).	0.914
IS2. I would seek information about the product’s environmental attributes from additional sources (e.g., websites, discussion groups, and friends).	0.943
IS3. I would carefully examine all the information about the environmental attributes of a product and its packaging (e.g., eco-labels, certifications, recyclability, and recycled content).	0.929

. All measurement items were measured using a 5-point Likert scale from “strongly disagree–(1)” to “strongly agree–(5)”.

The questionnaire included sections from the above scale items and a section on demographic characteristics. An enclosed brief cover letter served as an introduction to the research for potential Greek respondents. Moreover, 610 fully completed questionnaires were returned in response to an online poll in Greece between 1 May 2024 and 15 July 2024. The software for data analysis was IBM SPSS and IBM SPSS AMOS version 23.

3.2. Sample Profiles

Considering the sample characteristics, 20.3% were male and 79.7% of the sample were female. The age groups of the sample were 18–34 years old (32.6%), 35–54 years old (53.9%), and 55+ years old (13.4%). The sample was generally well-educated, with bachelor’s degree holders accounting for 45.7%, followed by master’s degree holders (31.1%), high school degree holders (17.4%), and Ph.D. degree holders (5.7%). The private employees were the largest group of reported occupations with 27.3%, followed by civil servants at 26.6%, freelancers at 17.9%, university students at 11.8%, unemployed at 5.6%, households at 5.6%, and retired at 3.3%. Finally, the higher group of annual income ranges from EUR 10,001–20,000 (30.3%), up to EUR 10,000 (22.6%), EUR 20,001–30,000 (20.8%), EUR 30,001–40,000 (13.3%), EUR 40,001–50,000 (7.2%), and over EUR 50,000 (5.7%) (

Table 1. Demographic information.

Sample Features		Frequency N	Percentage %
Gender	Male	124	20.3%
	Female	486	79.7%
Age	18–34	199	32.6%
	35–54	329	53.9%
	55+	82	13.4%
Educational Level	High school degree	106	17.4%
	Bachelor’s degree	279	45.7%
	Master’s degree	190	31.1%
	Ph.D. degree	35	5.7%
Occupation	Civil servant	162	26.6%
	Private employee	179	27.3%
	Freelancer	109	17.9%
	Retired	20	3.3%
	Households	34	5.6%
	Student	72	11.8%
	Unemployed	34	5.6%
Annual Income (EUR)	Up to 10,000	138	22.6%
	10,001–20,000	185	30.3%
	20,001–30,000	127	20.8%
	30,001–40,000	81	13.3%
	40,001–50,000	44	7.2%
	Over 50,000	35	5.7%

Source: authors’ results.

).

4. Results

4.1. Principle Component Analysis (PCA)

Principle component analysis (PCA) was used by permitting all objects to load freely into the appropriate factors and allowing for the removal of inconsistent items; this procedure helps refine the dimensions of the items. After the principal component analysis was performed on the 41 measurement items, eight factors named—environmental attitude, three items; perceived environmental knowledge, five items; green consumption values, five items; receptivity to green communication, seven items; social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms, eight items; e-word-of-mouth intention, four items; food behavior, four items; and other environmental behaviors, five items—accounted for 77.553% of the variance in the data. All of the items’ factor loads were more than 0.546, which means that factor analysis results were generally good as the items should have a minimum of 0.5 loadings [76]. Furthermore, the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measurement of the sampling adequacy score was 0.957, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity level at p < 0.001 supported the factorability of the data [77]. We examined each latent construct’s Cronbach’s alpha before evaluating the structural model. The Cronbach’s alpha of all the items is 0.966, considered a strong internal consistency.

4.2. Confirmatory Factor Analysis

Anderson and Gerbing [78] suggested a two-step method that we adopted in this survey. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was employed in the first step to assess the validity of the study model data. All employed research measures were tested, including environmental attitude, perceived environmental knowledge, green consumption values, green communication, social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms, e-word-of-mouth intention, food behavior, and other environmental behaviors.

The statistics for goodness-of-fit suggest that the study model has a satisfactory fit to the data (x² = 1680.101, df = 730, χ²/df = 2.193, RMSEA = 0.044, CFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.959, IFI = 0.963). The results of the confirmatory factor analysis indicate significant loadings. Specifically, factor loadings (0.674 to 0.920) are higher than 0.5, indicating that the items’ convergent validity is sufficient [79]. To view the complete list of items and loadings, see Appendix A, Table A1. To assess the internal reliability of the constructs, composite reliability (CR) was also computed; CR scores varied from 0.878 to 0.961, all of which were higher than the minimum threshold of 0.7 [80]. Each component’s average variance extracted (AVE), which varied from 0.590 to 0.818, surpassed the minimal threshold of 0.5 [80]. Hence, reliability and convergent validity existed at the level of the measurement model,

Table 2. Summary of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results.

	AVE	EA	PEK	GCV	RGC	SMCEE	EWOMI	FB	OEB
EA	0.818	0.931 a
PEK	0.630	0.457 b	0.894
GCV	0.590	0.601	0.693	0.878
RGC	0.703	0.516	0.395	0.558	0.943
SMCEE	0.754	0.276	0.439	0.370	0.525	0.961
EWOMI	0.770	0.398	0.452	0.491	0.634	0.766	0.931
FB	0.658	0.333	0.374	0.467	0.578	0.546	0.569	0.884
OEB	0.628	0.257	0.419	0.386	0.394	0.559	0.508	0.431	0.893

Note 1: Goodness-of-fit statistics: χ² = 1680.101, df = 730, χ²/df = 2.193, RMSEA = 0.044, CFI = 0.963, TLI = 0.959, IFI = 0.963. Note 2: EA = Environmental attitude, PEK = Perceived environmental knowledge, GCV = Green consumption values, RGC = Receptivity to green communication, SMCEE = Social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms, EWOMI = E-word-of-mouth intention, FB = Food behavior, OEB = Other environmental behaviors. ^a Composite reliability (CR) values are along the diagonal. ^b Correlations.

.

4.3. Structural Equation Modeling

In the second step, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used to analyze the data gathered and assess the proposed connections between each component. SEM is a technique for evaluating a theory’s validity using statistical estimations [81]. The goodness-of-fit statistics of the structural model showed satisfactory fit (χ² = 1659.628, df = 725, χ²/df = 2.289, RMSEA = 0.046, CFI = 0.961, GFI = 879, TLI = 0.955, IFI = 0.961). All the indicators have a good fit criterion.

The hypothesis testing found that environmental attitude was significantly and positively impacting receptivity to green communication (β = 0.198, p < 0.001), while it appeared to not affect social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms, e-word-of-mouth intention, food behavior, or other environmental behaviors (β = 0.115, p > 0.05; β = 0.008, p > 0.05; β = −0.083, p > 0.05; β = −0.061, p > 0.05). Hence, H1a is supported, but H1b, H1c, H1d, and H1e are not supported. Perceived environmental knowledge was significantly and positively affecting social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (β = 0.574, p < 0.001), as the impact on food behavior was significant and negative (β = −0.173, p < 0.05), which confirms the establishment of H2b and H2d. Also, the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and receptivity to green communication, e-word-of-mouth intention, and other environmental behaviors was not significant (β = −0.066, p > 0.05; β = −0.081, p > 0.05; β = 0.057, p > 0.05). Therefore, H2a, H2c, and H2e are not supported by the data. Significant and positive paths emerged between green consumption values and receptivity to green communication, e-word-of-mouth intention, food behavior, and other environmental behaviors (β = 0.528, p < 0.001; β = 0.307, p < 0.001; β = 0.425, p < 0.001; β = 0.247, p < 0.001). However, the relationship between green consumption values and social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms is not statistically significant (β = −0.061, p < 0.05). Hence, our study supports H3a, H3c, H3d, and H3e but does not support H3b. The results reveal that receptivity to green communication has a significant and positive impact on e-word-of-mouth intention and food behavior (β = 0.317, p < 0.001; β = 0.411, p < 0.001), but it has not a significant impact on other environmental behaviors (β = 0.034, p < 0.05). H4a and H4b are confirmed, but H4c is not confirmed. The effect of social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms on e-word-of-mouth intention, food behavior, and other environmental behaviors was positive and significant (β = 0.586, p < 0.001; β = 0.335, p < 0.001; β = 0.347, p < 0.001), which means that H5a, H5b, and H5c are accepted. The conceptual model’s suggested paths are displayed in

Table 3. Results of direct hypotheses testing.

Direct Relationships	Standardized Coefficient	t-Value	Results
H1a: Environmental attitude → Receptivity to green communication	0.198	4.244 ***	Supported
H1b: Environmental attitude → Social media consumers’ environmental engagement	0.115	1.653	Not supported
H1c: Environmental attitude → E-word-of-mouth intention	0.008	0.197	Not supported
H1d: Environmental attitude → Food behavior	−0.083	−1.137	Not supported
H1e: Environmental attitude → Other environmental behaviors	−0.061	−1.268	Not supported
H2a: Perceived environmental knowledge → Receptivity to green communication	−0.066	−1.073	Not Supported
H2b: Perceived environmental knowledge → Social media consumers’ environmental engagement	0.574	6.005 ***	Supported
H2c: Perceived environmental knowledge → E-word-of-mouth intention	−0.081	−1.300	Not supported
H2d: Perceived environmental knowledge → Food behavior	−0.173	−2.452 *	Supported
H2e: Perceived environmental knowledge → Other environmental behaviors	0.057	0.817	Not supported
H3a: Green consumption values → Receptivity to green communication	0.528	5.721 ***	Supported
H3b: Green consumption values → Social media consumers’ environmental engagement	−0.061	−0.462	Not supported
H3c: Green consumption values → E-word-of-mouth intention	0.307	3.415 ***	Supported
H3d: Green consumption values → Food behavior	0.425	4.188 ***	Supported
H3e: Green consumption values → Other environmental behaviors	0.247	2.465 *	Supported
H4a: Receptivity to green communication → E-word-of-mouth intention	0.317	6.208 ***	Supported
H4b: Receptivity to green communication → Food behavior	0.411	7.129 ***	Supported
H4c: Receptivity to green communication → Other environmental behaviors	0.034	0.603	Not Supported
H5a: Social media consumers’ environmental engagement → E-word-of-mouth intention	0.586	16.581 ***	Supported
H5b: Social media consumers’ environmental engagement → Food behavior	0.335	9.269 ***	Supported
H5c: Social media consumers’ environmental engagement → Other environmental behaviors	0.347	9.136 ***	Supported

Note: χ² = 1659.628, df = 725, χ²/df = 2.289, RMSEA = 0.046, CFI = 0.961, GFI = 879, TLI = 0.955, IFI = 0.961. * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001.

.

4.4. Mediating and Moderating Results

Additionally, the study model’s elements were tested for the type of mediation by conducting an indirect impact assessment. The significance level of the mediation hypothesis is evaluated in this study using bias-corrected and accelerated bootstrap confidence intervals based on 5000 bootstrap runs [82]. We used two mediators (receptivity to green communication and social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms) to observe their effects on the variables. Specifically, the results from the bootstrapping method showed that receptivity to green communication has a fully mediating role in the relationship between environmental attitude and e-word-of-mouth intention (β = 0.131, p < 0.05) and the relationship between environmental attitude and food behavior (β = 0.120, p < 0.01). Hence, H6a and H6b are supported. Furthermore, social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms indirectly impacted perceived environmental knowledge and e-word-of-mouth intention (β = 0.315, p < 0.001); perceived environmental knowledge and food behavior (β = 0.165, p < 0.01); and perceived environmental knowledge and other environmental behavior (β = 0.197, p < 0.001); accordingly, H7a, H7b, and H7c are confirmed to have a full mediation role. Also, receptivity to green communication is a partial mediator of green consumption values and food behavior (β = 0.197, p < 0.05), which means that H8 is supported. The summary of indirect results is presented in

Table 4. Results of indirect hypotheses testing.

Indirect Relationships	Direct Effect	Indirect Effect	p-Value	LLCI	ULCI	Results
H6a: Environmental attitude → Receptivity to green communication → E-word-of-mouth intention	0.008	0.131	0.015	0.026	0.226	Full mediation
H6b: Environmental attitude → Receptivity to green communication → Food behavior	−0.083	0.120	0.003	0.042	0.192	Full mediation
H7a: Perceived environmental knowledge → Social media consumers’ environmental engagement → E-word-of-mouth intention	−0.081	0.315	0.000	0.188	0.458	Full mediation
H7b: Perceived environmental knowledge → Social media consumers’ environmental engagement → Food behavior	−0.173	0.165	0.003	0.060	0.280	Full mediation
H7c: Perceived environmental knowledge → Social media consumers’ environmental engagement → Other environmental behavior	−0.057	0.197	0.000	0.118	0.300	Full mediation
H8: Green consumption values → Receptivity to green communication → Food behavior	0.425	0.197	0.018	0.039	0.358	Partial mediation

, and the direct and indirect paths are shown in Figure 1.

After the mediating effect, this study examined the moderating effect of information-seeking between the constructs. Specifically, the results showed that information-seeking negatively moderates the effect of environmental attitudes on receptivity to green communication (β = −0.716, p < 0.01), supporting H9a. In other words, consumers seek more environmental information, decreasing the impact of their environmental attitudes on receptivity to green communication. Moreover, the index of moderated mediation confirmed the negative moderated role of information-seeking in the indirect relationship between environmental attitude and e-word-of-mouth intention by receptivity to green communication (β = −0.0138, p < 0.01) as well as the relationship between environmental attitude and food behavior through receptivity to green communication (β = −0.0202, p < 0.01), supporting H9b and H9c. In contrast, information-seeking has a positively moderated mediation role in the indirect relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and e-word-of-mouth intention by social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (β = 0.0370, p < 0.05), as well as the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and food behavior by social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (β = 0.0143, p < 0.01) and also the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and other environmental behavior by social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms (β = 0.0262, p < 0.05). Thus, H10a, H10b, and H10c are confirmed. Regarding H11, we predicted that information-seeking negatively moderates the indirect effect of green consumption values on receptivity to green communication (β = −0.0641, p < 0.05). This means that increasing information-seeking decreases the impact of green consumption values on receptivity to green communication. The results of moderated tests are presented in

Table 5. Results of moderating effects.

Hypothesis	β	LLCI	ULCI	Results
H9a: EA * IS → RGC	−0.0716 **	−0.1172	−0.0261	Supported
H9b: EA * IS → RGC → EWOMI (Moderated Mediation)	−0.0138 **	−0.0262	−0.0028	Supported
H9c: EA * IS → RGC → FB (Moderated Mediation)	−0.0202 **	−0.0369	−0.0040	Supported
H10a: PEK * IS →SMCEE → EWOMI (Moderated Mediation)	0.0370 *	0.0040	0.0759	Supported
H10b: PEK * IS →SMCEE → FB (Moderated Mediation)	0.0143 **	0.0013	0.0296	Supported
H10C: PEK * IS →SMCEE → OEB (Moderated Mediation)	0.0262 *	0.0018	0.0546	Supported
H11: GCV * IS → RGC	−0.0641 *	−0.1152	−0.0131	Supported

Note: EA = Environmental attitude, PEK = Perceived environmental knowledge, GCV = Green consumption values, IS = Information seeking, RGC = Receptivity to green communication, SMCEE = Social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms, EWOMI = E-word-of-mouth intention, FB = Food behavior, OEB = Other environmental behaviors. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

.

5. Discussion

This study set out to explore how consumers’ environmental attitudes, perceived knowledge, and green consumption values influence their receptivity to green communication, engagement with environmentally friendly firms on social media, and subsequent pro-environmental behaviors, while also examining the mediating roles of green communication and social media engagement in these relationships.

The current study provides nuanced insights into how environmental attitudes (EA) influence consumer behavior, highlighting both agreements and contradictions with existing research. This study shows a significant positive effect of environmental attitude on receptivity to green communication, suggesting that consumers with strong environmental attitudes are more likely to be receptive to eco-friendly messages. This aligns with prior findings indicating that environmentally aware consumers respond well to green communication efforts. While Latip [23] found that receptivity to green communication does not moderate the relationship between environmental attitude and green food intention, the current study shows that a positive environmental attitude directly enhances receptivity to green messaging, emphasizing the importance of targeting environmentally conscious consumers with well-crafted communication strategies. In contrast, this study finds no significant relationship between environmental attitude and social media engagement with environmentally friendly firms. This is consistent with Chu [22], who also found that positive environmental attitudes do not necessarily lead to higher engagement with green brands on social media. This suggests that other factors, such as content relevance or platform characteristics, may be more influential in driving social media engagement than attitudes alone. Similarly, this study reports no significant impact of environmental attitude on e-word-of-mouth intention, differing from Chu [22], who found a positive correlation. This discrepancy might be due to differences in context or sample characteristics, suggesting that while consumers may be willing to discuss environmental issues, this does not always lead to proactive sharing behavior online. This study finds no significant link between environmental attitude and food behavior, contrasting with Yarimoglu [17], who found that environmental concern positively influences attitudes toward green food. This suggests that despite positive attitudes, other factors like cost and convenience may overshadow environmental considerations in food choices, highlighting the need to address these barriers to promote sustainable consumption effectively. Lastly, this study finds no significant effect of environmental attitude on other environmental behaviors (−0.061, −1.268), aligning with Bamberg [21] and Armstrong [20], who noted that attitudes alone are insufficient predictors of complex or high-effort behaviors. This indicates that additional factors, such as habit and perceived control, play a crucial role in translating attitudes into consistent environmentally friendly actions. In summary, while environmental attitudes positively influence receptivity to green communication, they do not consistently translate into proactive behaviors like social media engagement, e-word-of-mouth, or sustainable food choices.

The complex role of perceived environmental knowledge in shaping consumer behavior is also explored in the context of this study. The findings provide complex insights and comparisons with existing literature. This study finds no significant relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and receptivity to green communication, suggesting that high environmental knowledge does not necessarily increase receptivity to green messaging. This contrasts with Knupfer [32], who noted that knowledgeable individuals are more engaged with green content, such as that from “greenfluencers.” The discrepancy could be due to different contexts or the nature of the green communication assessed, indicating that other factors, such as emotional engagement, might be more influential in determining receptivity. In contrast, perceived environmental knowledge significantly impacts social media engagement with environmentally friendly firms. This supports Knupfer’s [32] finding that individuals with high environmental knowledge are more likely to engage in environmental activism on social media. It suggests that well-informed consumers are more active in supporting sustainable brands online, highlighting the value of targeting these consumers with social media campaigns. No significant relationship is found between perceived environmental knowledge and e-word-of-mouth intention, which contradicts Liu [31], who found a positive link when mediated by environmental attitude. This suggests that even knowledgeable consumers may not always share their knowledge online, possibly due to factors like perceived efficacy or reluctance to appear preachy. Surprisingly, perceived environmental knowledge has a negative effect on food behavior, implying that individuals with higher knowledge may be less likely to choose environmentally friendly food. This contradicts Hoek [29] and Stranieri [30], who found a positive link between knowledge and green food consumption. This may be due to higher standards or a focus on other sustainability issues like reducing plastic use. It suggests that knowledge alone is insufficient for promoting green food choices and that other motivational factors need to be addressed. This study finds no significant effect of perceived environmental knowledge on other environmental behaviors, aligning with Joshi and Rahman [33], who found little correlation between knowledge and green behavior. This supports the knowledge–attitude–behavior gap noted by Taufique [25], indicating that while knowledge is necessary, it is not enough to drive consistent environmentally friendly actions without the support of other factors like attitudes and perceived control. In summary, while environmental knowledge influences social media engagement, it does not consistently translate into other pro-environmental behaviors.

This study also explored the impact of green consumption values on various consumer behaviors, providing insights into their influence. This study finds that green consumption values significantly influence receptivity to green communication, suggesting that consumers who prioritize environmental conservation are more open to green marketing messages. This aligns with Corboș [42], who found a positive relationship between green consumption values and receptivity to green communication. Contrary to expectations, this study finds no significant relationship between green consumption values and social media engagement. This contrasts with the broader understanding that individuals with strong green values would engage more with eco-friendly brands on social media. The lack of correlation suggests that factors like content quality and platform-specific behaviors may play a larger role in social media engagement than green values alone. Green consumption values have a significant positive effect on e-word-of-mouth intention, consistent with Lin and Zhou [37], who found that positive perceptions of green value encourage sharing experiences. Consumers with high green consumption values are more likely to advocate for green products within their social circles, highlighting their potential as brand ambassadors to enhance green messaging reach and credibility. This study also shows a significant positive impact of green consumption values on food behavior. This supports findings by Connolly and Prothero [40] and Mohd Suki [41], who noted that green consumers consider both health and environmental factors in their food choices. It suggests that consumers with strong green consumption values are more inclined to choose sustainable food options like organic or locally sourced products, offering valuable insights for promoting sustainable food consumption. Finally, this study finds that green consumption values significantly influence other environmental behaviors, consistent with Mason [39], who noted that green consumption values positively affect various pro-environmental actions. This indicates that individuals with strong green consumption values are not only likely to engage in green purchasing but also adopt broader sustainable behaviors. In summary, while green consumption values positively influence receptivity to green communication, e-word-of-mouth, food behavior, and other environmental actions, their effect on social media engagement is limited.

Furthermore, this study finds a significant positive relationship between receptivity to green communication and e-word-of-mouth intention, indicating that consumers who are receptive to green messaging are more likely to share their positive experiences and promote eco-friendly brands. This aligns with findings from Nguyen-Viet and Nguyen Anh [53] and Bailey [43], who noted that favorable responses to green communication enhance brand trustworthiness and encourage word-of-mouth. However, this contradicts Nguyen-Viet and Thanh Tran [3], who found no significant relationship. The discrepancy suggests a need for further research on factors like message credibility and consumer involvement that influence when receptivity to green communication leads to word-of-mouth. Receptivity to green communication also positively influences food behavior, showing that consumers who are more receptive to green messaging are more likely to choose sustainable food options. This finding is consistent with Sun [51] and Tewari [45], who found that attention to green advertising increases the likelihood of purchasing eco-labeled products. The strong effect of receptivity to green communication on food behavior suggests that green communication can effectively promote sustainable dietary choices. This study finds no significant effect of receptivity to green communication on other environmental behaviors, contrasting with Chang [46] and Gahlot Sarkar [50], who suggested that green communication should broadly encourage sustainable actions. This limitation may be due to green communication’s focus on specific product choices rather than more ingrained behaviors like energy conservation or recycling. In summary, while receptivity to green communication effectively promotes e-word-of-mouth and sustainable food choices, its impact on broader environmental behaviors is limited.

Our study also examined how social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms affects sustainable consumption behaviors. This study finds a significant positive relationship between social media consumers’ engagement and e-word-of-mouth intention. This aligns with Guerreiro and Pacheco [58], who noted that higher social media engagement leads to increased word-of-mouth promotion. Consumers who actively engage with green brands on social media are more likely to share their experiences and endorse these brands to others, enhancing brand credibility and reach. This study also reveals a positive effect of social media consumers’ engagement on food behavior, indicating that engaged consumers are more likely to make sustainable food choices. This supports Piligrimienė [61], who found that engagement mediates the link between attitudes and the purchase of eco-friendly goods. This study shows that social media consumers’ engagement positively influences other environmental behaviors, consistent with Săplăcan and Márton [59], who found that social media engagement fosters broader pro-environmental actions like recycling and reducing energy use. In summary, social media engagement significantly enhances e-word-of-mouth, sustainable food choices, and broader environmental behaviors.

Furthermore, our study investigated the mediating roles of receptivity to green communication and social media consumers’ engagement with environmentally friendly firms in the relationships between environmental attitudes, perceived environmental knowledge, and green consumption values with various consumer behaviors. Social media consumers’ engagement fully mediates the relationship between environmental attitude and e-word-of-mouth intention. This suggests that positive environmental attitudes lead to increased e-word-of-mouth intention primarily through heightened receptivity to green communication. This aligns with Corboș [42] and Cao [62], emphasizing that effective green communication can turn attitudes into proactive advocacy. RGC also fully mediates the link between environmental attitudes and food behavior, indicating that green communication bridges the gap between environmental attitudes and sustainable food choices. This supports findings by Do Paco [48], showing that effective messaging can translate positive attitudes into actual purchasing behavior. Social media consumers’ engagement fully mediates the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and e-word-of-mouth intention. This suggests that knowledgeable consumers are more likely to engage in e-word-of-mouth when they actively interact with green firms on social media. This finding is consistent with Săplăcan and Márton [59], highlighting social media’s role in transforming knowledge into advocacy. Social media consumers’ engagement also fully mediates the relationship between environmental knowledge and food behavior. This finding aligns with Piligrimienė [61], showing that social media engagement helps translate knowledge into sustainable food choices. Moreover, social media consumers’ engagement fully mediates the link between perceived environmental knowledge and broader environmental behaviors. This suggests that social media engagement can convert knowledge into actions like recycling or energy conservation, supporting the idea that social media fosters a community of informed, proactive consumers. On the other hand, receptivity to green communication partially mediates the relationship between green consumption values and food behavior. This indicates that while green values directly influence sustainable food choices, receptivity to green communication strengthens this relationship. This is consistent with Do Paco [48] and Corboș [42], showing that effective communication can amplify the impact of green values on behavior. In summary, both receptivity to green communication and social media consumers’ engagement are crucial mediators that enhance the impact of environmental attitudes, knowledge, and values on various consumer behaviors.

Finally, the role of information seeking in moderating the effects of environmental attitudes, perceived environmental knowledge, and green consumption values on consumer behaviors was explored. Information seeking negatively moderates the relationship between environmental attitude and receptivity to green communication. This suggests that consumers with strong environmental attitudes become less receptive to green communication as they seek more information, likely due to increased scrutiny and higher standards. This contrasts with Kim and Han [68] and Zhang [69], who expected information seeking to strengthen this relationship. Information seeking also weakens the indirect effect of environmental attitude on e-word-of-mouth intention through receptivity to green communication. This aligns with Testa [65], suggesting that increased scrutiny from information seekers can reduce their willingness to share green messages, especially if credibility is questioned. Similarly, information seeking negatively moderates the effect of environmental attitude on food behavior through receptivity to green communication. This indicates that information-seeking consumers need more convincing evidence to translate attitudes into sustainable food choices, highlighting the importance of comprehensive green messaging. Information seeking negatively moderates the relationship between green consumption values and receptivity to green communication. This suggests that information-seeking consumers with strong green values may be more critical and less receptive to green messaging, contradicting the expectation that information seeking would reinforce alignment with green values. On the other hand, information seeking positively moderates the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and e-word-of-mouth intention through social media engagement. This supports Săplăcan and Márton [59], showing that informed consumers who seek information are more likely to advocate for green brands on social media, leveraging their engagement to influence others.

Information seeking also strengthens the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and food behavior through social media engagement, aligning with Piligrimienė [61]. Similarly, information-seeking enhances the impact of perceived environmental knowledge on other environmental behaviors through social media engagement. This supports Kurisu [60], indicating that social media can amplify the effect of knowledge on a range of pro-environmental actions for information-seeking consumers. In summary, information seeking has a nuanced role, sometimes enhancing and sometimes weakening the impact of attitudes, knowledge, and values on behavior.

6. Conclusions

This study addresses critical gaps in the current research on sustainable consumer behavior by offering new insights into the mechanisms through which environmental attitudes, knowledge, and values influence pro-environmental outcomes. The key findings of this study—highlighting the necessity of receptivity to green communication for translating environmental attitudes into positive outcomes, the role of social media engagement in converting environmental knowledge into actionable behaviors, and the dual influence of values on outcomes both directly and through green communication—provide a nuanced understanding of how cognitive and behavioral processes interact in the context of sustainable food consumption.

This study advances a topic not previously covered in the literature by conceptualizing consumers’ receptivity to green communication and consumers’ environmental engagement in social media and their impact on consumer food behavior. Our study responds directly to the call for future research highlighted by Busalim [83], examining whether the social support offered by social media users encourages consumers to buy sustainable products. By exploring the role of social media engagement and its influence on sustainable consumer behaviors, our research offers new insights into the mechanisms through which social influence on digital platforms can drive sustainable consumption. This contribution is particularly significant given the increasing importance of social media in shaping consumer attitudes and behaviors, thus advancing the understanding of how social support in online communities impacts purchasing decisions related to sustainable food.

White [84] emphasizes the importance of future research exploring new ways to connect sustainable outcomes more clearly to the self. Our study addresses this call by investigating how environmental attitudes, knowledge, and values influence sustainable behaviors, specifically through the mechanisms of receptivity to green communication and social media engagement. By examining how these factors contribute to individuals’ self-concept and drive pro-environmental actions, our research provides insights into how sustainable food behaviors can be more deeply integrated into consumers’ identities, thus reinforcing the personal connection to sustainability that White [84] advocates for.

We also emphasize the importance of understanding the mechanisms through which sustainable food behaviors are fostered, as noted by Park and Lin [85]. Furthermore, it offers a practical application for the Theory of Planned Behavior, aligning with Calderon-Monge’s [86] call to analyze how personal consumer values influence socially responsible behavior.

Hosta and Zabkar [87] highlight the need for further research to explore the trade-offs consumers make between environmentally and socially responsible consumption and the role of social norms in these decisions. Our study directly addresses this call by examining how social media engagement mediates the relationship between perceived environmental knowledge and pro-environmental behaviors. Specifically, our findings suggest that social media platforms, through the influence of media and “influencers,” play a crucial role in shaping social norms and guiding consumer decisions toward sustainable practices. By understanding the impact of social media engagement, our research provides insights into how social norms are reinforced and how consumers navigate the trade-offs between self-centered and other-centered consumption, contributing to a more nuanced understanding of sustainable consumer behavior as outlined by Hosta and Zabkar [87].

Regarding the managerial implications, our results illustrate how crucial it is to understand consumers’ receptivity to green communication and consumers’ environmental engagement when assessing their behavior since it plays a critical role in determining how consumers’ characteristics variables influence these behaviors. The findings further highlight the need for companies to tailor their green marketing strategies to effectively engage different consumer segments. For consumers with strong environmental attitudes or green values, brands must ensure their communication is credible, transparent, and detailed, as information seekers are more critical and discerning.

Social media engagement is crucial for translating environmental knowledge into advocacy and sustainable behaviors, and brands can affect consumers using communication and social media engagement. Interactive and participatory techniques for encouraging e-word-of-mouth intention and other environmental food behavior can be more successful than conventional one-way communication strategies. By implementing attractive campaigns and interactive platforms, food brands can effectively promote sustainable practices and affect meaningful transformations by engaging consumers, suggesting that food brands should actively foster interactions on these platforms to build a community of informed and committed consumers.

Additionally, while green communication effectively promotes specific behaviors like sustainable food choices, it may not drive broader lifestyle changes; thus, integrating green messaging with educational campaigns and incentives could foster more comprehensive environmental actions. This highlights the need for businesses to invest in tactics that actively engage and inspire customers to behave environmentally. Consumers are more likely to interact on social media and react positively by supporting companies’ environmental actions when they have environmental attitudes, values, and information about environmental issues. Brands should offer environmental educational information, encourage community involvement, and promote green conversations on social media platforms. Overall, marketers should focus on delivering high-quality, trustworthy information and leveraging social media to enhance consumer engagement and advocacy for sustainable practices.

In this study, certain limitations to the findings present a chance for further investigation. We identified three variables (environmental attitude, perceived environmental knowledge, and green consumption value) that affect consumers’ behavior. Additional variables might also be significant in influencing customer involvement. Future studies may take into account additional characteristics and elements that were not included in this study. Furthermore, the majority of participants in the current study were female, so we recommend conducting the research again with a sample that is more gender-representative. Geographically, our study is restricted to Greece. Given the considerable influence that cultural elements have on consumer behavior and engagement, the results may differ in other cultural contexts.