Introduction

At present, the world economic model is based on the maximization of production and consumption, which generates enormous imbalances, both in the economic and social order as in the environmental one. The development and use of new technologies is generating limited environmental conditions, which have gained great relevance due to their relationship with the quality of life of people, a center of study of Sustainable Development. In addition to increasing awareness by consumers about the consequences of their purchasing decisions on the environment. With greater choice at the place of purchase, consumers are increasingly contributing to the production and consumption of environmentally friendly products (goods, services, ideas and experiences). In this context, concern about environmental problems, green consumption is a recent trend that has taken force due to consumers concerned about the environment and the impact that their actions have on it.

The objective of the research was to analyze sustainability and social development, in the search to determine the relationship between the constructs: Ecological Affect (EA), Ecological Concern (EC) and Ecological Knowledge (EK); And green purchasing behavior (GPB) in consumers (as a single field of application, not to be analyzed for companies, public persons, places or brands). That is, consumer behavior that is ecologically conscious from its green consumer profile (sociodemographic and psychographic variables), and the determinants of green purchasing behavior considering green buying intent and green buying consciousness.

Green purchasing behavior refers to the consumption of products (goods, services, ideas or experiences) that preserve the environment. Because of its sense of being recyclable, conserved, sensitive and receptive to the sustainability of non-renewable resources (Mostafa, 2007), it is a trend that is now known as "green consumption" (Chitra, 2007).

The green consumption differs from the mass consumption in the determinants of the behavior of green purchases and the process of decision making from the profile of the Consumers. Now consumption is based on the search for organic, ecological or sustainable options from food, clothing, appliances, beverages and even furniture, to take care of their consumption - health, environment or environment - through the acquisition and use of products that are friendly to the environment, Linking marketing with ecology and sustainability (Orozco Abundis, Cortes Lamas, González, & Gracia Villar, 2003).

According to Ottman (2012), in the 1960s the conscious lifestyle about the environment and the consumption of organic products in the consumer basket were almost impossible. A situation that has been changing thanks to advances in materials and technology, green products (known as alternative products) and more sustainable products (those that consider the social dimension) now work more efficiently than products and services Above. Hyper-consumption has found a more conscious and more concerned consumer at the time of purchase (Lipovetsky, 2007), the consumption of green products and the factors that play an important role in the decision-making process (Moser, 2015). Thus, the environment is a public good - of all - that is constantly threatened by human action. This is a challenge for the company, society, government and for the same consumer-citizen, which will imply the application of a philosophy of environmental management and different marketing for a new type of consumer, called ecological consumer and interested stakeholders In knowing what motivates your demand and how is your profile to be able to satisfy your needs.

Origin of Sustainable Marketing

The past decades have witnessed the emergence of the sustainability discourse as the dominant expression in the debate on environmental issues and social development in the broad sense. Its gradual expansion has influenced in diverse fields of the knowledge and in diverse activities, among them the field of the education. According to the Human Development Report of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP, 2014), human development depends on the choice of access to education and health and a reasonable standard of living A sense of security, which allow sufficient conditions for human development based on justice, health, quality of life and the interaction of our environment or the environment that surrounds us. Therefore, sustainable development refers to activities that do not deteriorate the elements that make it possible, allowing conservation of the environment and favoring the well-being of people (Cortéz, 2001). That is, the result of economic growth that promotes social equity and establishes a non-destructive relationship with nature.

In the Brundtland report in 1987 - originally called Our Common Future - it was the first time that sustainable development was discussed in the World Commission on the Environment, with the conviction that it was possible for humankind to build a future not only prosperous but also Fair and secure. Avoiding the destruction of the environment, increasing poverty and vulnerability of various social groups, to ensure the satisfaction of present needs without compromising the possibilities of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED, 1987).

The Brundtland report refers to the preservation of the environment through "sustainable development", conceived as a multidimensional process with three dimensions that constitute it (Artaraz, 2002): the Economic Dimension, the Ecological Dimension and the SocialDimension. In this context, Sachs (2000) and some authors have associated the idea ofsustainability with ecological aspects, as can be seen in the works of Hoffman (2000), Jenningsand Zandbergen (1995) and Calvelo Ríos (2001), Which add more dimensions: the CulturalDimension, the Energy Dimension, the Scientific Dimension, the Space Dimension and theEnvironmental Dimension (see Table 1). Sustainable Development is much more than anecological concept, since it raises the fundamental challenge of combining a dynamic (energy)economy with a (cultural) society that offers opportunities for all, while improving theproductivity of resources (spatiality) and the growth of (scientific) degradation of theenvironment is cut off (Rossi, 2012), see Figure 1.

In general terms, sustainable development is based on basic aspects such as the sustainable use of natural resources with the reuse of materials, in the healthiest ecosystems due to the lesser damages produced by the producing and consuming organizations in the most sensitized economic development That benefit the community as a whole (Whitford andRuhanen, 2010).

Sustainability, for Gladwin, Kennelly and Krause (1995), is configured as a possibility of comparative advantage, on the benefit of organizations (educational, industrial and social), governmental institutions (local and federal) and civil associations. Without losing their profitable orientation in the market and obtain social image front suppliers and consumers (social marketing). This explains why since the 1990s, organizations, in spite of their economic approach, have invested in socio-environmental actions in the market (Callenbach, et al., 1993).

With the gradual intervention of stakeholders in the process of consolidation and impact of sustainable development, in the different scientific, social and business areas. There are groups affected by the activities of a company and the environment: internal stakeholders such as employees, shareholders, investors and external stakeholders such as customers, suppliers, distributors, competitors and society itself. These groups or individuals have been considered as an essential element in strategic business planning and in incorporating the concept of sustainability into the company (Bur, 2013). Starting with various concepts and activities such as fair trade (marketing), organic trade, sustainable products, the green market, social consumers, alternative stores, organic products and corporate social responsibility to the market and consumers. And it is when the term environment begins to be defined in different ways. For the present research, environment is the set of natural (physical, chemical and biological), cultural and social conditions and their interactions that are permanently modified by human or natural action and that condition the existence and development of the Life in its manifold manifestations. In the long run, a healthy environment is fundamental to maintaining the prosperity and quality of life of a society (Bur, 2013). And together with sustainable development, it is in solidarity with future generations to preserve the environment so that they have the opportunity to live (with the participation of the people involved, everyone must be aware of the need to conserve the environment and do Each one's share) and preservation of natural resources (Mendes, 2009 and Hart, 1997).

The environment, from a marketing perspective, is characterized by two types of entities: the personal consumer and the organizational consumer, the first buys products for their own use or for their own family unit, and the consumer organization who includes companies with or without social objective (Orozco Abundis, Cortes Lamas, González, & Gracia Villar, 2003). In order to achieve this goal, it is necessary to establish a system for the development of new products and services. It is thus that the need for sustainable development, companies, government and society in general are focused on creating value creation models (companies, brands, products, people, consumers and places) from pollution prevention perspectives, Product management, clean technologies and a vision of sustainability (Hart & Milstein, 2003). And by the limitation of commercial marketing oriented to the operation to the economic interests of the company and to the emerging needs of the consumers, that leaves aside the preservation of the environment and the social welfare in the long term.

It is then that sustainable marketing arises - also known as ecological marketing (Kinnear & Taylor, 1973), green marketing (Ottman, 1993) and environmental marketing (Coddington, 1993) - as a process of integral management of the environment, to identify, anticipate and Meet the demands (in a mix of needs and desires) of customers and society in a cost-effective and sustainable way of natural resources, satisfying social needs as long as they do not compromise natural assets in the present and for the future. This can create value for a company, product, brand, character, consumer or place-stakeholders of marketing- in its fundamental role of transmitting innovations for the production, development, commercialization, distribution and supply of goods, services, ideas and experiences (products) to the consumer with its new environmental requirements, considering its value chain up to post-consumption.

Sustainable marketing: objective and fields of application

Although social marketing is the origin of sustainable marketing (ecological marketing, green marketing and environmental marketing), given from the perspectives of sustainable development and the concern to preserve the environment. It is also the mediator between the interests of the company (supplier) and the interest of consumers (demander). Throughout history and in the context of trade different approaches to doing business, but increasingly are oriented to the market and the customer, from the perspective where consumers procure those products that are widely available and have low cost in The market, when customers prefer those products that offer quality and durability, and even when protecting and increasing the welfare of the consumer and society, thereby achieving a balance between the two sides of mutual benefit.

From a social perspective, Sustainable Marketing is part of and emanates from social marketing and its activities are directed to the same objective of stimulating, facilitating and modifying social ideas or behaviors (beliefs, thoughts, customs and ideologies), so that they are beneficial for society. This change in behavior, ranging from political, religious, environmental, spiritual and even sexual. Sustainable marketing, reorienting consumer behavior, by actions that stimulate consumers' responsible buying and consents to ecological problems. As far as sustainable marketing is concerned, it is the way in which the terms of trade (society- environment) are perceived and carried out, in order to be satisfactory for the interested parties, for development, valuation, distribution and promotion of the goods, services, ideas or experiences that one of the counterpart needs for the preservation and improvement of the environment, they contribute to the sustainable development of the economy and society (Hartmann, et al., 2004), at a reasonable price and Whose environmental impact is minimal (Fraj et al., 2002).

In addition, it aims to increase social acceptance and is characterized by being an agent of voluntary social change. It is the type of marketing that is based on the use of market segmentation, consumer research, communication, among other factors. Finally, sustainable marketing (like social marketing), aims to increase social acceptance and does not pursue economic ends, only addresses behavior, values or lifestyles within society for a change in the medium or long term (never In the short term, by the cognitive process of learning of the individual), which causes that can not be measured objectively because it has intangible results.

Therefore, its objective of action is in two senses: from a social perspective and from a business perspective.

1. 1. 1. Sustainable Marketing from a social perspective, aims to:

   • Inform and / or educate about environmental issues: Awareness.

   • Stimulate actions in benefit to the environment: Tangibilization the conscience

   • Change behaviors harmful to the natural environment: Valorization of behavior.

   • Changing the values of society: Benefits for the environment and the future

2. 2. Sustainable Marketing from a business perspective:

   • Satisfaction of the needs, desires or demands of internal and external.

   • Compliance with the objectives of the organization (economic, positioning, growth and expansion).

   • Generate the least negative impact on the ecosystem (conservation of present and future natural assets).

If in general terms, one of several functions of social marketing is to increase or preserve the welfare of society, not to harm the health of consumers and not to harm the environment, from the perspective of sustainable marketing, the field of application Should be holistic and integral (Ramírez-Vázquez, Ochoa-Olivares, Martínez-Guel & Ríos-González, 2016). That is, it must involve all the agents involved in the commercial (social or business) process of the good, service, idea or sustainable experience in question (green product). All those involved in the value-production chain are co-responsible for sustainability: Stakeholders. From employees, managers, suppliers and commercial allies (Internal); Government, customers, consumers, competitors and society in general (External) and the same Sustainable Marketing (Strategy), must fulfill the promise, do not generate false expectations, from there begins the sustainability of marketing. Then, the application of sustainable marketing (as in the same commercial marketing) is given in and for Companies (Public, Social and Business), Products (Goods, services, ideas and experiences of Basic and Luxury consumption), Brands (Artists, Politicians, Altruists, Show and Sportsmen, Places (Countries, Cities, Regions and Localities) and Consumers (Potential Consumers and Final Consumers), in order to Promise of sustainable marketing. See Figure 2.

Environmental awareness and the ecological behavior of the consumer

2.5 Discussions generated around ecological awareness open up new business opportunities and new labor markets (new product development) and are contributing to the consolidation of socio-environmental responsibility practices at increasingly multidimensional and systemic scales, given the Interdependence between the various publics involved: customers, suppliers, shareholders, government, media and community. This action to reduce environmental impacts and contribute to the preservation of the environment is defined as environmentally responsible behavior (Lee, Jan and Yang, 2013), which is the fundamental basis of sustainable marketing. For example, the GEO5 (2014) data show that Europe and North America are consuming the planet's resources at unsustainable levels, just as in the Asia-Pacific region. As a result, more than 600 million people will be without access to safe drinking water by 2015 and more than billion people will not have access to basic sanitation. And with the help of marketing, society must adopt environmentally friendly attitudes towards its poor habits of ecological- sustainable consumption (Lee, Jan and Yang, 2013). It is within this approach that behavior based on the development of environmental awareness has become necessary and urgent.

Environmental awareness is a tendency to take a stand on issues related to the environment, which is for or against (Firat, Dholakia and Venkatesh, 1995). And at a higher level of environmental awareness, smart purchasing decisions are tended to consider environmental impact (Bedante & Slongo, 2004). Environmental consumers seek to consume products - perceived - with minimal impact on the environment, reflecting behavior Of ethical buying and ethical consumption (Harrison, Newholm and Shaw, 2005). In Mexico, this purchase is synonymous with green purchasing, which should be understood as the development of sustainable ways of life that incorporate other environmental actions into a more holistic conceptualization (Gilg, Barr and Ford, 2005), changing a brand X by a Brand Y or even leaving to buy certain product, so that the producers perceive the changes in the demand (Portilho, 2005). Where the consumer's perception and behavior in the purchase decision is given by the most efficient green-ecological marketing strategies (Schiffman & Kanulk, 2000). Because they are willing to change many of their behavior patterns for others more respectful of our environment.

The ecological consumer can be a fully informed "intellectual", who decides on the will to collaborate with or in search of a more socially and environmentally equitable planet, environment or space. And also, you can be a person concerned with your health, well-being and future-being. That from its attitude as a complex phenomenon of behavior, participate both variables internal to the individual as variables external to it, as the values, ideas and opinions. Going through information, advertising, social groups, family, education and their interaction with their environment. They influence their behavior to be more or less ecologically responsible (by consuming less polluting products, by recycling certain products and / or packaging and by buying or willing to buy organic products, they are even willing to pay a higher price).

Determinants of the ecological behavior of the consumer

The behavior of the ecological consumer has been measured in different ways and through different variables that are related to each other, because of the multidisciplinary nature of the concepts focused from their analysis to the study of greater or lesser environmental responsibility (Stone, Barles and Montgomery, 1995), to a greater or lesser ecological awareness (Sánchez, Gil and Gracia, 1998). Such relationships can occur between attitude and general ecological behavior (Hines, Hungerford and Tomera, 1986/87, Kaiser, Ranney, Hartig and Bowler, 1999; Kaiser, et al., 1999), between attitudes towards the environment and (Maloney, et al., 1975; Schahn and Holzer, 1990) on the balance of nature and the possibility of an ecological catastrophe outside consumer behavior (Dunlap and Van Liere 1978, Kotchen and Reiling, 2000).

The behavior of the sustainable-ecological-green consumer manifests itself through the Ecological Affect (EA), which is related to the emotions and feelings that an object awakens in someone. It is a factor that sums up the positive or negative feelings and the consequent emotions, which means that it is stimulated by the emotions used in advertising and marketing arguments in messages, product attributes and the marketing mix process. Since the affective component corresponds to the evaluation of the formed image (Karsaklian, 2008). The emotional factor, as understood by Schouten (1991), is one of the most interesting components of human behavior, and in particular of the consumer. Some studies indicate that, even with little knowledge about the environment, people have a strong emotional relationship with it (Maloney & Ward, 1973). Consumers with high levels of ecological concern and affection are more likely to have positive attitudes towards the environment than those with a low level of concern and affection (Laskova, 2007). Martin and Simintiras (1995) suggest that the influences of ecological knowledge and the ecological affection of the individuals are configured as independent variables and, therefore, both influence the behavioral responses of the consumers.

On the other hand, "ecological knowledge" (EK), as "factual knowledge", tends to affect the action of people even when the focus is not only on environmental issues (Schahn and Holzer, 1990). Tanner and Kast (2003) suggest that there is no conclusive uniformity that shows the direct relationship between environmental knowledge and environmental behavior.

The results of the studies of Dispoto (1977) showed that knowledge about ecology, environment and pollution is a predictor of environmental behavior, but with a low relation between the two variables. And sustainable marketing can be the guide to environmental education for changes related to the behavior of individuals (through social marketing). Well informed consumers about environmental problems tend to purchase green products (D'Souza, Taghian and Khosla, 2007). Conversely, a low level of knowledge about the uses and values of green products generates in consumers the commitment to the purchase decision (Chen and Chai, 2010).

Finally, the environmental concern, referred to as ecological (EC) or green (Ottiman, 1992) concerns the dimensions related to the concern for the environment within the market, where consumers are the first link for the development of green marketing strategies Chan & Lau, 2000; Chan, Wong & Leung, 2008; Zimmer, Stafford and Stafford, 1994).

Problem

In Mexico, the spectacular growth and ecological boom, has made 9 of 10 Mexicans think that it is very important that companies carry out environmental care policies, 8 out of 10 are very concerned about the environment and 60% Ensures that if it is an ecological product influences its purchase decision (Ramírez, 2013). Contrary to this, the desire is greater than reality, since the Green Study of Research International Mexico (2014) mentions that only 50% of Mexicans prefer to consume environmentally friendly products (with biodegradable packaging and Use less pollutants in their manufacture). The main obstacle to the development of this market lies in two aspects: low availability of organic products in conventional establishments and high sales prices, higher than the consumer's payment provision for the ecological attribute. According to another recent study, people are willing to make more responsible purchases, but 41% believe that green product prices are higher than traditional products (Trujillo León & Vera Martínez, 2011).

From a three-dimensional perspective, taking into account the three elements of the attitude (affective or emotional, cognitive and intentional), adding the element of behavior. With the determinants of ecological behavior such as ecological knowledge (EK), ecological concern (EC) and ecological affection (EA) (Kassarjian 1971, Maloney & Ward 1973, Kinnear & Taylor 1973, Kinnear, Taylor & Ahmed). A model for defining the ecological consumer in Mexico (Figure 3), which separates the model of the ecological consumer in Mexico, is used to describe the ecological consumer behavior in Mexico (Dunlop & Van, 1978; Elkington & Hailes, 1989. And the cognitive element (environmental knowledge) appears as a moderating variable of the relations established between the previous elements of the attitude (Fraj & Martínez, 2005).

So, is there a relationship between the buying behavior of Mexican consumers and ecological knowledge? Do Mexican consumers decide through ecological affection? Or Is it decided based on ecological concern? What is the relationship between knowledge, affection and ecological concern?

Methodology

The objective of the research was to analyze the relationships of green consumption in Mexicans, in the search to determine the correlation between the constructs: Ecological Affect (EA), Ecological Concern (EC) and Ecological Knowledge (EK); And green purchasing behavior (GPB) in consumers. It was a quantitative descriptive study in a sample of 1,550 (valid 96%, 1488 resposes) consumers chosen according to the criterion of convenience (men and women between 21 and 55 years), made in the first half of 2015 in Mexico (the States of Puebla, Tlaxcala, Guanajuato, San Luis Potosí, Tabasco and Querétaro). With the personal application of questionnaires using the Likert scale. Regarding the measurement of dependent (green purchasing behavior -GPB) and independent variables (Ecological Affect -EA, Ecological Concern –EC, and Ecological Knowledge –EK), he used the various subscales that make up the revised scale of attitudes and environmental knowledge (EAKS) by Maloney, et al. (1975). The survey instrument was administered in a self-completion format, which is a sampling error of +/- 4.75% (for Intermediate proportions p = q = 0.5) and Level of confidence was of 95%. TheSample design was Simple random sampling. See de technic description in Table 2.

With the personal application of questionnaires using the Likert scale. The scale was shortened to a 18 items in Likert scale, with responses ranging from 1, “strongly disagree,” to 5,” strongly agree.” Regarding the measurement of dependent and independent variables, he used the various subscales that make up the revised scale of attitudes and environmental knowledge (EAKS), see Table 2.

Research Hypotheses

For reference, all three (3) hypotheses have been formulated accordingly to Figure 4. With the previous study about Green Purchase Intention, done by Aman, A. L., Harun, A., & Hussein, Z. (2012:148-150), for this study, it was taked the definitions of follow concepts:

• Green purchasing behavior (GPB), as “the probability and willingness of an individual to give preference to Green product over conventional products in their purchase considerations”.

• Ecological knowledge (EK) as “a uni-dimension variable which includes the general aspects on what people know about the environmental issues”.

• Ecological Concern (EC) as “the level of emotional and commitment towards environmental issues”.

• Ecological Affect (EA), as “the personal affection that a person get for cause of environmental interaction”

Hypothesis 1

There is a significant relationship between Ecological Affect (EA) and Ecological Concern (EC), for prediction the green purchasing behavior (GPB) of Mexicans.

Hypothesis 2.

There is a significant relationship between Ecological Affect (EA) and Ecological Knowledge (EK), for prediction the green purchasing behavior (GPB) of Mexicans.

Hypothesis 3.

There is a significant relationship between Ecological Concern (EC) and Ecological Knowledge (EK), for prediction the green purchasing behavior (GPB) of Mexicans.

Results

With the objective of analyzing sustainability and social development under the perspective of the ecological behavior of the consumer, seeking to determine the relationship between ecological knowledge, ecological affection, ecological concern and green purchasing behavior, in a measurement of dependent variable (green purchasing behavior -GPB) and independent variable (Ecological Affect -EA, Ecological Concern –EC, and Ecological Knowledge –EK). The questionnaire consisted of four (4) sections.

• Section 1 of the questionnaire was on respondents demographic profile (such as gender, marital status, age, education and location).

• Section A of the questionnaire which contained seven (7) questions measured on the Ecological affection (EA) of respondents based on a five (5) point Likert scale (1= Strongly Disagree, 5= Strongly Agree).

• Section B of the questionnaire which contained seven (7) questions measured on the Ecological knowledge (EK) of respondents based on a five (5) point Likert scale (1= Strongly Disagree, 5= Strongly Agree).

• Section C of the questionnaire which contained six (6) questions measured on the Ecological Concern (EC) of respondents based on a five (5) point Likert scale (1= Strongly Disagree, 5= Strongly Agree).

Respondent Profile and reliability

Overall, frequency analysis revealed that the majority of the respondents were female (59.01%), single (70.90%). Mostly the sample were composed of about 71.98% aged between 21 to 27 years old and in term of education level, majority of the respondents have entered university with 73.99%. Geographically, were six (6) states of Mexico, who integrated of simple: Puebla and Tlaxcala with 270 (18%) respondents each one, Guanajuato, San Luis Potosí, Tabasco and Querétaro with 237 (16%) respondents each one, see the Table 3.

Using the SPSS software, these tests have been realised for each of the four measurement scales (see Table 4). The results confirm the reliability of the modified scales; the Chrombach’s alpha has the following values: A.-Affective Ecological Commitment, the Ecological affection (EA): 0.860; B. - Verbal Ecological Commitment, the Ecological knowledge (EK): 0.940 and C. - Royal Ecological Commitment, the Ecological Concern (EC): 0.810. Furthermore, in comparison with scales used in Straughan and Roberts’ (1999) study and Selvanathan, Selvanathan, Keller and Warrack (2004) stated that questions with Cronbach Alpha above 0.50 can be used and acceptable. Therefore, it can be concluded that all the items under studied were acceptable. Because, the adapted questionnaire has a higher reliability (Cronbach Alpha values ranged between 0.810 to 0.940), with 0.870 as general Chrombach’s alpha.

Correlation Analysis and Hypotheses Testing

According to Coakes, et. al (2009) Pearson product momento correlation –PPMC– gives information regarding the linear relationship between two continuous variables. In this investigation, a bivariate correlation analysis (PPMC) was performed on all the variables, the results from Table 5. In order to achieve the objective of this study, the Hypotheses Testing with the correlation. In this current study, the result for hypothesis 1, revealed that ecological concern have weak to medium positive correlations with ecological knowledge (r=0.359, p=0.001). The study found that there is significant direct influence between ecological knowledge and concern on for prediction the green purchasing behavior (GPB) of Mexicans. This means that Mexicans are aware of environmental problems, but do not express ecological behaviors or emotional affections regarding their degree of knowledge about it. Because green purchasing must be understood as the development of sustainable livelihoods, which incorporate other environmental actions into a more holistic conceptualization (Gilg, Barr & Ford, 2005). Similar results to the Brazilian market, in a research using the same model of analysis on consumer behavior (Rodrigues, Merlo, Larios-Gómez & Braga, 2016).

About hypothesis 2, this study revealed that ecological concern have weak to medium positive correlations with ecological affection (r=0.234, p=0.000). The study found that there is not significant direct influence between ecological concern and ecological affection on for prediction the green purchasing behavior (GPB) of Mexicans.Thus, the results indicate that the ecological consumer in Mexico is an individual interested and concerned about environmental issues and that shows a very important verbal and real ecological commitment. That it should be tangibilized in the relationship of a greater verbal ecological commitment implies a greater final ecological behavior.

Finally, about hypothesis 3, the ecological knowledge have moderate positive correlations with ecological affection (r=0.428, p=0.000). The study found that there is significant direct influence between ecological knowledge and ecological affection on for prediction the green purchasing behavior (GPB) of Mexicans. The important fact is that Mexicans present an intermediate level of environmental knowledge, which should conservatively intensify the relationship between affective ecological commitment and the verbal ecological commitment of individuals. Also in the investigation, it is identified that 79.86% perceive that organic products are little known, distributed and bought in the conventional market and in the commercial centers. And that advertising campaigns should demonstrate the benefits of consuming organic products, along with awareness of their consumption (95.3%). Advertising campaigns or the existence of more sustainable products (ecological or green) is not a solution to the problems of environmental pollution, the actions or programs of governments and companies, but also depends on the people, who have the power to Change their behavior towards the protection of the planet (Maloney & Ward, 1973; Elkington & Hailes, 1989). Situation that is presented in Mexico (and it can be said that in Latin America, since the same situation presents Brazil).

In a second analysis, it was decided to approach the information through factors that address the statistical technique of factor analysis, through which it is possible to obtain a general and broad view by reducing a large set of observable variables to hypothetical variables called factors; that is, this process allows us to represent a large number of variables in a space of small dimension called factorial space, which allows us to continue interpreting the relationships between them. When applying the technique of exploratory factor analysis (EFA), favorable indicators were observed, as shown in Table 6. To try to identify the underlying dimensions of the general ecological attitude, the main components were applied as extraction methods. First, according to the Bartlett sphericity test (218.563, p = 0.000) the hypothesis is accepted, so there are significant inter-correlations between the variables. Also with the Kaiser- Meyer-Olkin statistic presents an intermediate value (KMO = 0.798). According to this, a certain correlation structure is detected, so that a factor analysis can be performed. According to the criterion of own value greater than unity, five factors were found, with a explained variance percentage of 50.35%.

The resulting factorial matrix is shown in Table 6, the factors identified according to the observable variables associated with each one of them. In this way, factor 1 could be called educational responsibility, since it gathers the opinions that individuals have about the responsibility of being educated or trained to take care of the environment. In turn, factor 4 is related to the foregoing, so it can be considered as educational responsibility, when transferring the responsibility for the protection of the environment to the government, because it is not considered that each individual can influence their behavior in this way. Factor 2 could be called social responsibility, since it would gather the opinions that respondents have about the need to defend the environment against economic progress at any price and the role that society has to take responsibility and engage in that defense. For its part, the factor 3 could be considered as a concern for the contamination of the environment, as it relates to the impact that different forms of pollution have on the different environments of nature. In turn, the factor 5 could be considered as protection of the environment, by relating to the awareness that the individual has around the need to protect the natural environment in all its dimensions.

The results obtained indicate the existence of certain relationships between some of the socioeconomic variables of individuals and certain dimensions of their ecological consciousness. The relationships detected are as follows:

• Factor 1 (institutional responsibility) presents statistically significant relationships with the variables course (p = 0.037), age (p = 0.0173) and sex (p = 0.096), of Thus, individuals who consider that ecological problems are the responsibility of countriesand institutions are men, individuals of upper grades and older ones (which could alsobe interpreted as meaning that younger individuals and women do not they transfer thatresponsibility to the institutions, so they have a superior personal ecologicalconscience).

• Factor 3 (concern for pollution of the environment) presents a statistically significant relationship with the variable income4 (p = 0.090), so that the individuals who show a greater concern about this issue are those who have lower incomes, a concern that decreases as the rent level increases.

• Factor 4 (government responsibility) presents a statistically significant relationship with the sex variable (p = 0.017), so that, similar to factor 1, men consider that they can do little to protect the population. environment, responsibility that they transfer to the government (unlike women).

• The factor 5 (protection of the environment) presents statistically significant relationships with the variables worked (p = 0.007) and sex (p = 0.008), so that individuals who are more aware of the need to preserve var our natural environment are those of female sex and those who work.

• Likewise, the existence of a weak but statistically significant positive correlation 5 is detected between factor 3 (concern for environmental contamination) and the level of ecological knowledge of the individual (r = 0.12, p = 0.026).

Conclusions

This current study tested the relationships between sustainability and social development, in the search to determine the relationship between the constructs: Ecological Affection (EA), Ecological Concern (EC) and Ecological Knowledge (EK); for prediction the behavior of purchases of sustainable green-organic products (green purchasing behavior GPB). It has been identified that the intensity of the association between these scales of behavior, that the purchase or choice of a product of this type goes beyond the quality and price.

It should be based on social marketing strategies (idea-type products), which allow the consumer to become aware of a healthy lifestyle change, denoting the benefits to their health, their well-being and the final economic. The latter, in saving the investment in medical services and special interventions in his body. Since it is a "preventive maintenance of your health". In addition, environmental information and knowledge are used as a moderator of the relationship between attitudes and behavior (Arbuthnot and Lingg, 1975; Grunert and Kristensen, 1992), the psycho-demographic characteristics of grade school, NSE-social class and style Have no association with the buying behavior of these products (goods, services, ideas and experiences).

The consumer in Mexico presents a positive attitude toward the purchase of organic products and is even willing to stop buying those companies that pollute.

If the stakeholders (Society, Government, Company and universities) stimulate consumption in those individuals who are really committed to the environment, they would pay more for them, being aware of the economic change, for a change of health.. From this it follows that those individuals who have a higher level of concern for pollution are those who demonstrate to have a higher level of ecological knowledge. Given the low level of ecological knowledge detected, the increase in the ecological awareness of individuals (at least in some of its dimensions) should be based on the design of communication programs and campaigns that provide them with a correct education and training around the ecological or environmental problem.

The Mexican consumer is a Prosumer (Larios-Gómez & Fischer, 2016), who hopes to participate in the design and production of products that incorporate environmental factors, as an additional factor to those traditionally contemplated. Thinking that this, diminishes its environmental impacts through an increase of environmental efficiency in its life cycle, requires less inputs and generates less waste and gives use value to the nature. So: It reduces environmental impacts, generates economies of scale, facilitates the life of the user, must tend to become massive and stop being a product of niche or craft, which grants the "moral reward" to carry out actions for good Of the environment (eg paperless telephone receipt, ie electronic or reusable diaper) and less environmental impact in its manufacture, distribution and final disposal. It also creates an affective bond with the user. It allows you to "materialize" your environmental commitment. That does not imply higher costs in its elaboration and therefore a higher sale price, nor additional efforts on the part of the user when using it. Finally, a sustainable product with attributes "Utilitarian Attributes" that solve concrete and specific needs: mobility, food, clothing, hygiene, with "Sustainable Attributes" that generate the product to reduce its environmental impact in at least one stage of the cycle of Life and "Attributes of Sustainable Communication" that generate in the user (and most of the time in the person who observes it) the perception that is a sustainable product.

References

Alwitt, l. F.; & Pitts, R. E. (1996). Predicting Purchase Intentions for an Environmentally Sensitive Product. Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 5 (1), pp. 49-64.

Aman, A. L.; Harun, A.; & Hussein, Z. (2012). The influence of environmental knowledge and concern on green purchase intention the role of attitude as a mediating variable. British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 7(2), 145-167.

Arbuthnot, J.; & Lingg, S. (1975). A Comparison of French and American Environmental Behaviours, Knowledge and Attitudes. International Journal of Psychology, 10 (4), 275-281.

Artaraz, M. (2002). Teoría de las tres dimensiones de desarrollo sostenible. Ecosistemas2002/2, 133-142.

Barreiro, J. M., López, M. A., Losada, F. y Ruzo, E. (2002). Análisis de las dimensiones cognoscitiva, y afectiva del comportamiento ecológico del consumidor. Revista Galega de Economía, Vol. 11 (2), pp. 1-21.

Bedante, G. N.; Slongo, L. A. (2004). O Comportamento de Consumo e suas Relações com a Consciência Ambiental e a Intenção de Compra de Produtos Ecologicamente Embalados. Anais do EMA – Encontro de Marketing, Atibaia, SP: Anpad.

Bigné, E. (1997). El consumidor verde: bases de un modelo de comportamiento. ESIC Market, Nº 96, pp. 29-43.

Bur, A. (2013). Marketing sustentable. Utilización del marketing sustentable en la industria textil y de la indumentaria. Centro de Estudios en Diseño y Comunicación, 133-142.

Callenbach, E. et al. (1993). Gerenciamento Ecológico EcoManagement: Guia do Instituto Elmwood de auditoria ecológica e negócios sustentáveis. São Paulo: Editora Cultrix.

Calvelo Ríos, J. M. (2001). Desarrollo: comunicación, información y capacitación. Runa (Instituto de Investigación en Comunicación para el Desarrollo), 6. Obtenido de http://www.iicdruna.org/pag6.html

Chan R. Y. K. (2001). Determinants of Chinese’ Consumers’ Green Purchase Behavior. Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 18 (4), 389-413.

Chan R.Y.K. (1999). Environmental Attitudes and Behavior of Consumers in China: Survey Findings and Implications. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 11 (4), pp. 25-52.

Chan, R. Y. K.; Wong, H.; & Leung, T. K. (2008). Applying Ethical Concepts to the Study of ''Green'' Consumer Behavior: An Analysis of Chinese Consumers_ Intentions to Bring their Own Shopping Bags. Journal of Business Ethics, (79): 469-481.

Chan, R. Y. K.; & Lau, L. B. Y. (2000). Antecedents of green purchases: a survey in China. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 17(4): 338-357.

Chen, T. B., & Chai, L. T. (2010). Attitude towards the Environment and Green Products: Consumers' Perspective. Management Science and Engineering, 4(2): 27-39.

Chitra, K. (2007). In search of the green consumers: A perceptual study. Journal of Service Research, 7(1), 173-191.

Coakes, S.J.; Steed, L.; & Ong, C. (2009). SPSS Version 16.0 for Windows. Analysis Without Anguish, Australia: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Coddington, W. (1993). Environmental marketing: positive strategies for reaching the green consumer. New York: McGraw- Hill.

Cortéz, A. (2001). Desarrollo sustentable, pobreza y calidad de vida. Ambientico, 92, 18-21.

D 'Souza, C., Taghian, M., & Khosla, R. (2007). Examination of environmental beliefs and its impact on the influence of price, quality and demographic characteristics with respect to green purchase intention. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 15(2): 69-78.

Dispoto, R. G. (1977). Interrelationships Among Measures of Environmental Activity, Emotionality, and Knowledge. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 37(2): 451-459.

Dunlap, R. E., & Van L.K. D. (1978). The "new environmental paradigm": a proposed measuring instruments and preliminary results. The Journal of Environmental Education, (9): 10-19.

Elkington, J., & Hailes, J. (1989). The Green Consumer Guide: from shamppo to champagne – high-street shopping for a better environment. London: Victor Gollancz Ltda.

Ferguson, M. C., García, M. y Bornay, M. M. (2002). Modelos de implantación de los sistemas de gestión de la calidad, el medio ambiente y la seguridad. Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 8 (1), pp. 97-118.

Firat, F. A., Dholakia, N., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Marketing in a postmodern world. European Journal of Marketing, 2(1): 40-56.

Fraj, A., & Martínez, S. (2005). El nivel de conocimiento medioambiental como factor moderador de la relación entre la actitud y el comportamiento ecológico. Investigaciones Europeas de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa, Vol. 11, Nº 1, 2005, pp. 223-243.

Fraj, E. y Martínez, E. (2002). Comportamiento del Consumidor Ecológico. ESIC Editorial. Madrid.

Fraj, E. y Martínez, E. (2003a). Análisis psicográfico del segmento de consumidores que está dispuesto a pagar más por los productos ecológicos. ESIC MARKET, mayo-agosto, pp. 217-239.

Fraj, E. y Martínez, E. (2003b). Las actitudes como determinantes del comportamiento ecológico del consumidor: Análisis desde la perspectiva de la teoría de la acción razonada. Revista Española de Investigación en Marketing, Vol. 7, No.2, pp. 5

GEO5 – Global Environment Outlook (2014). Environment for the future we want. Disponible en: . Acceso en: 29 de junio de 2016.

Gilg, A., Barr, S., & Ford, N. (2005). Green consumption or sustainable lifestyles? Identifying the sustainable consumer. Futures, (37): 481–504.

Gladwin, T. N., Kennelly, J. J., & Krause, T. S. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable development: implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20 (4): 874-907.

Granzin, K. L. y Olsen, J. E. (1991). Characterizing Participants in Activities Protecting the Environment: A Focus on Donating, Recycling, and Conservation Behaviours. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 10 (2), pp. 1-27. Fraj Andrés, E., Martínez Salinas, E.ISSN: 1135-2523 Investigaciones 242 Europeas, Vol.11, Nº1, 2005, pp.223-243

Grunert, S. C. y Kristensen, K. (1992). The Green Consumer: Some Danish Evidence. XXI Annual Conference of The European Marketing Academy Proceedings, Aarhus, pp. 26- 29.

Harrison, R., Newholm, T. and Shaw, D. (2005). The Ethical Consumer. SAGE Publications, London.

Hart, S. L. Strategies for a sustainable world. (1997). Harvard Business Review, 75(1): Jan.- Feb.

Hart, S., & Milstein, M. (2003). Creating sustainable value. Academy of management executive, 17(2), 56-69.

Hartmann, P., Forcada S., F. Javier & Apaolaza I., V. (2004). Superando los límites medioambientales de la empresa: un estudio experimental del efecto del posicionamiento ecológico en la actitud hacia la marca. Cuadernos de Gestión. Vol. 4. Núm.1. España.

Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R. y Tomera, A. N. (1986/87). Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible Environmental Behaviour: A Meta-Analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 18 (2), pp. 1-8.

Hoffman, Andrew J. (2000). Environmental and Social Issues into Corporate Practice. Environment, 2(5): 22, June.

Jennings, P. D., & Zandbergen, P.A. (1995). Ecologically Sustainable Organizations: an Institutional Approach. Academy of Management Review, 20(4): 1015-1052.

Kaiser, F., Ranney, M., Hartig, T. y Bowler, P.A. (1999). Ecological Behavior, Environmental Attitude, and Feelings of Responsibility for the Environment. EuropeanPsychologist, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 59-74.

Kaiser, F., Wölfing, S. y Fuhrer, U. (1999). Environmental Attitude and Ecological Behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 19, pp. 1-19.

Karsaklian, E. (2008). Comportamento do consumidor. 2a. ed.; São Paulo: Atlas.

Kassarjian, H. H. (1971). Incorporating Ecology into Marketing Strategy: The Case of Air Pollution. Journal of Marketing, 35(3): 61-65, Jul.

Kinnear, T. C., & Taylor, J. R. (1973). The effect of ecological concern on brand perceptions. Journal of Marketing Research, 191-197, May.

Kinnear, T. C., & Taylor, J. R.; Ahmed, S. A. (1974). Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who are They?. Journal of Marketing, 38(2): 20-24.

Kotchen, m.j. y Reiling, S.D. (2000). Environmental Attitudes, Motivations and Contingent Valuation of Nonuse Values: a Case of Study Involving Endangered Species. Ecological Economics, Vol. 32, pp. 93-107.

Larios-Gómez, E. & Fischer, V. L. E. (2016). The New Mexican Consumer. IV International Congress of Research in Administrative Sciences. Pachuca, Hidalgo, Memories.

Laskova, A. (2007). Perceived Consumer Effectiveness and Environmental Concerns. Proceedings of the 13th Asia Pacific Management Conference, Melbourne, Australia, p. 206-209.

Lee, T. H., Jan, F. H., Yang, C. C. (2013). Conceptualizing and measuring environmentally responsible behaviors from the perspective of community-based tourists. Tourism Management, 36(1): 454-468.

Ling-Yee, L. (1997). Effects of Collectivist Orientation and Ecological Attitude on Actual Environmental Commitment: The Moderating Role of Consumer Demographics and Product Involvement. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 9 (4), pp. 31- 53.

Lipovetsky, G. (2007). A felicidade paradoxal: ensaio sobre a sociedade de hiperconsumo. São Paulo: Companhia das letras.

Maloney, M. P., & Ward, M.P. (1973). Ecology: let's hear from the people: an objective scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge. American Psychologist, July, p. 583-586.

Maloney, M.P.,Ward, M.P., & Braucht, G.N. (1975). Psychology in action: a revised scale for the measurement of ecological attitudes and knowledge. American Psychologist, July, p. 787-792.

Martin, B., & Simintiras, A.C. (1995). The impact of green product lines on the environment: does what they know affect how they feel? Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 13(4): 16-23.

Mendes.J. M. (2009). Dimensões da sustentabilidade. Revista das Faculdades Santa Cruz, v. 7, n. 2, p. 49-59.

Moser, A. K. (2015). Thinking green, buying green? Drivers of pro-environmental purchasing behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32(3): 1-23.

Mostafa, M.M. (2007). A hierarchical analysis of the green consciousness of the Egyptian consumer. Psychology & Marketing, 24(5), 445-473.

Orozco Abundis, M., Cortes Lamas, A., González, M., & Gracia Villar, S. (2003). Ecological marketing: consumer attitude towards organic products. (págs. 1041-1050). Pamplona: CIIP.

Ottman, J. (1992). Environmentalism Will Be the Trend of the '90s. Marketing News, 26(25): 13, Dec.

Ottman, J. (1993). Green marketing challenges and opportunities for the new marketing age. Chicago: NTC Business Books.

Ottman, J. A. (2012). As Novas Regras do Marketing Verde: estratégias, ferramentas e inspiração para o branding sustentável. São Paulo: M. Boos do Brasil Editora Ltda.

Portilho, F. (2005). Sustentabilidade Ambiental, Consumo e Cidadania. São Paulo: Cortez. PNUD -Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (2015). Relatório do Desenvolvimento Humano 2014 Sustentar o Progresso Humano: Reduzir as Vulnerabilidades e Reforçar a Resilência.. Disponible en: . Acceso en: 26 jun.

Ramírez, D. (02 de julio de 2013). The Green Pages: guide to sustainable consumption. Obtenido de Dinero en Imagen: http://www.dineroenimagen.com/2013-02-07/15819

Ramírez-Vázquez, I. A.; Ochoa-Olivares, M. J.; Martínez-Guel, A. M.& Ríos-González, J. E. (2016). Impact of social marketing on business and consumer in Mexico.Vinculategica Revistas/R2, Año 2 Número 1, 1024-1039 pag.

Rodrigues da Silva Tamashiro, H., Monforte Merlo, E., Larios-Gómez, E., & Silva Braga Junior, S. (2016). Sustainability and social development: A look from the perspective of consumer green consumer behavior. Revista Espacios, Vol. 37 (Nº 21), 23.

Rossi, J. P. (2012). Trends in Sustainability. Retrieved from Consultant's website J.P. Rossi & Asocs.: http://consultorajprossi.wordpress.com/concepto/

Sachs, I. (2000). Caminhos para o desenvolvimento sustentável. Rio de Janeiro: Garamond.

Sánchez, M., Gil, J. M. y Gracia, A. (1998). Brakes to the growth of the ecological market: the price or attitude towards the environment?. Revista Española de Investigación de Marketing ESIC, pp. 103-114.

Schahn, J., & Holzer, E. (1990). Studies of Individual Environmental Concern: The Role of Knowledge, Gender, and Background Variables. EnvironmentandBehavior, 22(6): 767- 786, nov.

Schiffman, L., & Kanuk, L. (2000). Comportamento do consumidor. Rio de Janeiro: LTC.

Schouten, J. W. (1991). Selves in transition: symbolic consumption in personal rites of passage and identity reconstruction. The Journal of Consumer Research, (17): 412-425.

Selvanathan, A., Selvanathan, S., Keller, G., and Warrack, B. (2004). Australian Business Statistics (3rd ed.). Australia: Thomson.

Stone, G., Barnes, J. H. y Montgomery, C. (1995). ECOSCALE: A Scale for the Measurement of Environmentally Responsible Consumers. Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 12 (7), October, pp. 595-612.

Straughan, R., & Roberts, J. (1999). Environmental segmentation alternatives: a look at green consumer behavior in the new millennium. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16 (6), 558- 575.

Synodinos, N. E. (1990). Environmental Attitudes and Knowledge: A Comparison of Marketing and Business Students with other Groups. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 20 (2), pp. 161-170.

Tanner, C., & Kast, S. W. (2003). Promoting Sustainable Consumption: Determinants of Green Purchases by Swiss Consumers. Psychology & Marketing, 20(10): 883-902, Oct.

Trujillo León, A., & Vera Martínez, J. (2011). El consumo verde en México: Conocimiento, actitud y comportamiento. México: ANFECA.

WCED - World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). World Commission on Environment and Development. Our common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Whitford, M.M., & Ruhanen, L. N. (2010). Australian indigenous tourism policy: practical and sustainable policies? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18 (4): 475-496.

Zimmer, M. R., Stafford, T. F., & Stafford, M. R. (1994). Green Issues: Dimensions of Environmental Concern. Journal of Business Research. (30): 63-74.

Additional information

How to cite the article:: Lários-Gómez, E. (2019). Relation among ecological effect, concern and knowledge and purchase behavior: a study regarding mexican consumers. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 18(3), 73-102.