Next Article in Journal
Innovation of Startups, the Key to Unlocking Post-Crisis Sustainable Growth in Romanian Entrepreneurial Ecosystem
Next Article in Special Issue
Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change: The Case of a Community University Workshop in Taiwan
Previous Article in Journal
Research on the Evaluation and Influence Mechanism of Public Housing Service Quality: A Case Study of Shanghai
Previous Article in Special Issue
Water Quality Pollution Control and Watershed Management Based on Community Participation in Maros City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 13
Issue 2
10.3390/su13020673
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Guidelines for Designing Green Products Considering Customers’ Cultural Preferences

by
Ihwan Ghazali
1,*,
Salwa Hanim Abdul-Rashid
2,3,
Siti Zawiah Md Dawal
2,3,
Nurul Huda
4,*,
Amir Husni Mohd Shariff
4,
Safarudin Gazali Herawan
5,
Fu Haw Ho
6 and
Novita Sakundarini
7
1
Faculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering Technology, Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Hang Tuah Jaya, Durian Tunggal 76100, Malaysia
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
3
Center for Product Design and Manufacturing, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
4
Faculty of Food Science and Nutrition, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Kota Kinabalu 88400, Malaysia
5
Industrial Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta 11480, Indonesia
6
Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat 86400, Malaysia
7
Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Nottingham Malaysia, Jalan Broga, Semenyih 43500, Malaysia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2021, 13(2), 673; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su13020673
Submission received: 20 November 2020 / Revised: 27 December 2020 / Accepted: 30 December 2020 / Published: 12 January 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Environmental Behaviour and Collective Decision Making)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The increasing customer awareness of environmental sustainability during the last decade has had an influence on many manufacturers to produce green products. However, issues arise regarding the actual preferences of customers for green products, which often differ depending on cultural influences. Cultural values can affect the decisions of designers to determine detailed design specifications that relate to customer preferences. Currently, few guidelines consider cultural values as an aspect of green product design. Thus, the aim of this study is to develop a guideline that incorporates the influence of cultural values on green product design. Malaysia was selected as the location of this study. The sources of data to establish a guideline were obtained from customer perspectives on green products. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to identify cultural influences and preferences on green product characteristics as the input strategies for the proposed guideline. Professional designers from different profiles were asked to identify the applicability of the guideline. Based on the results, the designers agreed that the influence of cultural values is an important aspect that should be considered in the development of green products. The implication of the guideline is discussed in this paper to accelerate decisions of designers in developing green products.

1. Introduction

Increasing levels of environmental pollution have become a major concern of all countries around the world. To minimize environmental issues, manufacturers are now encouraged to ensure that their products have a desired environmentally friendly impact throughout their entire product life span. Products with inherent environmental characteristics are mostly known as green products, which are not expected to harm the living environment [1]. Less material usage or light-weight material [2], less energy consumption [3,4], easy reuse [3], made with recycled or recyclable materials [5] are some examples of green product characteristics that may appear in the market. However, the preferences of customers regarding green products can be differently expressed. During the development phase of a new product, designers have to account for customer preferences. Moreover, to understand customer preferences is not easy, and they can be influenced by many factors, such as level of education and knowledge, financial strength, and cultural preferences. It is found that cultural values, as a collective of the mind in the group or area, can influence customer preferences on specific products [6,7]. In product development, the designers need to determine which particular green characteristic of the product relates to a particular customer culture preference [8].
The consideration of cultural value influences can be used to evaluate collective preferences based on local character behaviors of targeted customers rather than individual evaluations [9]. It can assist designers in minimizing the misinterpretation of product specifications in the next phase of product design. Currently, there is a lack of guidelines for the consideration of cultural values in green product design. Thus, the aim of this study is to develop a guideline to incorporate the influence of cultural values into green product design. The guideline consists of strategies to evaluate suitable green product characteristics, with consideration of cultural value influences. The strategies were generated based on the data that were collected from customer perspectives. This study also applies evidence from the literature to confirm the relevance of the generated strategies used in the guideline with the existing theories. The designers considered as the experts in designing the product were asked to evaluate the applicability of the guideline.

2. Green Products

The world population is predicted to increase to more than 9.7 billion by 2050 and 11 billion by 2100 [10]. Increasing population may negatively impact the environment, such as the depletion of natural resources, an increase in waste generation, and pollution. Ljungberg [1] explained that environmental issues can be caused by three factors: (1) over-consumption of natural resources, (2) high levels of pollution, and (3) overpopulation. Steffen et al. [11] argued that environmental problems persist because the effort to participate in environmental protection is not balanced with the depletion of natural resources and the increase in waste generation. Therefore, to address this issue, there is a need to consider strategies on how to fulfill the needs of humans in the present to ensure the least impact as possible on the environment in the future. This approach is largely considered a suitable method to achieve sustainable development [12].
Beckerman [13] explained that the goal of sustainable development is to achieve social equity and responsibility, economic prosperity, and environmental protection. However, the question regarding the concept of sustainable development is what is to be developed and sustained, and for how long can it be sustained. Hence, to support the sustainable development goal, manufacturers are encouraged to increase the production and supply of environmentally friendly products in the market [14]. Environmentally friendly products, also known as green products, have minimal impact on the environment during their entire life cycle [1]. During the production process, manufacturers could incorporate green characteristics into their products such as reducing the use of virgin material, reducing energy consumption, and utilizing environmentally harmless materials [15]. However, when the products eventually reach the market, it is reported that not all customers show concern about environmental impact. This is because the preferences for green products often depend on the perception and knowledge of the customer about green characteristics [16]. A compilation of green product characteristics discussed in the literature is presented in Table 1.
It is suggested that designers should relate suitable green characteristics to customer preferences in order to develop successful green products in the market. Ulrich and Eppinger [60] explained that consideration of customer preferences is very important and should be evaluated at an early stage of product design before continuing to the next phase of product development. That is because incorrectly identifying the preferences of customers can lead to technical issues in the next phase of product design. However, determining the suitable characteristics of green products from customer preference remains a challenge to designers since customers have different viewpoints on the embedded green characteristics of a product they desire to buy. The characteristics may be perceived and valued either positively or negatively, depending on the individual preferences of consumers [14]. These preferences can be caused by cultural value influences as the natural setting of consumer characters.

3. Culture and Green Preferences

There are broad aspects of culture in the literature, such as norms, beliefs, values, attitudes, behaviors, goals, rituals, and traditions [6,61]. Culture can be defined as the natural setting of social relations, which is how a civilization may arrange their habits in the group [62]. Hofstede [63] pointed out that culture is a combination of mind programming, which distinguishes between one group of people and another. Birukou et al. [64] described culture as a collection of ordinary behaviors naturally formed for a particular concern. A number of previous studies described these aspects of culture from a different point of view since culture is revealed by the natural setting of human actions. Hofstede [63], one of the pioneers of cultural studies, categorized cultural aspects into five cultural dimensions: individualism-collectivism, masculinity-femininity, uncertainty avoidance, power distance, and long- and short-term orientation.

3.1. Collectivism–Individualism

Collectivism refers to the sense of belonging to a group that looks out for the subject’s interests in exchange for loyalty instead of being alone. The opposite of collectivism is individualism, which is described as the subjects’ intention to only look after themselves, independent of social interactions [65]. Malaysia is indexed with a high level of collectivism [66]. However, this finding is different from Huff and Kelley [67], who examined these dimensions in a specific segment. Huff and Kelley assessed the influence of collectivism-individualism on organizational trust and customer orientations in seven countries, including Malaysia. The results showed that Malaysian customers are more affected by individualism than collectivism in terms of organizational trust. Nowadays, the increase in environmental awareness has influenced the customer’s willingness to purchase green products [68]. This awareness can be affected by collectivistic or individualistic characteristics. Collectivist-oriented customers prefer green products because they want to participate in environmental protection or follow the current trend. Their preferences may also be due to the group’s influence to purchase green products. On the other hand, individualist-oriented customers purchase green products due to self-interest and are not affected by other people’s or groups’ intentions. In other words, they are drawn to protect the environment, motivated by their own self-preferences. To identify the influence of collectivism on customer preferences towards green products, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1.
Collectivism has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products.

3.2. Masculinity-Femininity

Masculinity and femininity are representations of gender role distinction. The masculine society is more concerned with assertiveness, acquisition of wealth, achievements, and success. In contrast, the feminine society is more concerned with care for others, lifestyle, and improving the quality of life [63]. This dimension has been used in several studies to evaluate the characters of the customers’ purchasing intention. Moon et al. [69] evaluated the influence of masculinity on the purchasing intentions of customers towards personalized products. Srite [70] tested a model to determine the influence of four Hofstede cultural dimensions on customer acceptance towards perceived ease of use and usefulness of a product. They found that only the masculinity-femininity dimension has a significant influence on the two product characteristics. Hence, this dimension can also be used to evaluate customer preferences for green products. For instance, in order to reduce the usage of materials, green products are designed with embedded environmental characteristics (e.g., reusable and recycled materials), which can influence the quality and durability of the products. This, in turn, can influence customer preferences. However, this depends on the personal character of the customers. Although companies can produce green products with high quality and good appearance, the customers may still perceive green products differently as they may have masculinity or femininity characters when selecting green products. Thus, in order to evaluate the influence of this dimension towards the customer preferences on the green products, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 2.
Masculinity has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products.

3.3. Uncertainty Avoidance

Uncertainty avoidance refers to the extent to which people feel threatened by uncertainty and ambiguity and try to avoid these situations [63]. Despite the numerous studies available that strongly advocate protecting the environment, uncertainty is still one of the common factors influencing customers’ willingness to pay for green products [71]. It should be highlighted that not all individuals who can be considered “green buyers” have a better understanding of green products than “non-green buyers” [72]. This may be due to the uncertainty towards green products, which influence customer preferences [73]. For example, green products can be made from recycled, harmless, or recyclable materials that can affect the performance of the product in terms of quality and texture. Uncertainty may influence customer preferences on these products due to their perceptions that green products may have lower quality than that of the conventional products that were made from virgin materials. Thus, this affects customer willingness to pay for green products [74]. In order to reduce this uncertainty, customers may ask questions of other customers who have experience using green products to get more information on the products [75]. Therefore, to identify whether uncertainty avoidance has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 3.
Uncertainty avoidance has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products.

3.4. Power Distance

Power distance is “the extent to which fewer powerful members of the organizations and institutions accept and expect that power has been delivered unequally” [76]. High power distance implies that the relationship among the powerless is difficult to manage since hierarchy means inequality and latent conflict may exist between the powerful and the powerless [65]. Since the authority is centralized and lacks autonomy, power and wealth will foster inequalities. In contrast, lower power distance implies harmony between the powerful and the powerless, and cooperation among the powerless can be based on solidarity and accessibility to the superiors [66]. Power distance may play a significant role in customer choices or decisions regarding green products. For example, it can cause a gap in customer understanding or knowledge of green products. Not all customers can understand which green product is in the market and what benefits they will get if they purchase it [77]. In addition, power distances can also be interpreted as a purchasing ability. A lower-level customer may have fewer preferences for green products due to unbearable prices than those at a higher level. Furrer et al. [78] suggested that customers with high power distance find reliability and responsiveness less important. This study proposes that the high power distance character in a society provides significant influence towards customer preferences on green products in Malaysia. Hence, the proposed hypothesis is as follows:
Hypothesis 4.
Power distance has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products.

3.5. Long- and Short-Term Orientation

Finally, long-term orientation stands for “fostering of virtues orientation towards future rewards, in particular, perseverance and thrift” [63]. One of the important aspects of purchasing a particular product is its performance and quality [79]. Green products minimize the usage of natural resources and energy consumption and thus may influence the long-term orientations of customers due to the performance and quality of green products [80]. Some studies on green products highlighted that there are several characteristics of green products related to the long-term orientation of customers. For example, some customers are willing to pay more for a product that consumes less energy since it can save them money from a long-term perspective [21]. Another characteristic is providing long-term product services. Product services, such as providing regular maintenance, may have a positive effect on the long-term orientation of the customers since the lifetime of the product can be extended [79]. Therefore, customers with a long-term orientation characteristic are more concerned about the long-term usage of the products. For green products, high product quality and durability, as well as their usefulness for environmental protection, may have a significant influence on customer preferences. Therefore, to identify whether long-term orientation has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hypothesis 5.
Long-term orientation has a significant influence on customer preferences for green products.

4. Methodology

The purpose of the guideline is to help designers create green products that are appealing to the customers’ culture. Three steps are performed to develop the proposed guideline. The first step identifies cultural value influences on green product preferences and identifies preferences for green product characteristics based on cultural influences. To achieve this, structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis is performed to obtain cultural preferences on green product characteristics from customers. This study adopts the established method from Ghazali et al. [81] to identify the relationship between cultural values and green product preferences. However, the focus of this study is not only to assess the relationship between cultural values and green preferences but also to extract the outer weight from the calculation of SEM as the input for the proposed guideline. In SEM, the outer weight is used to indicate the absolute contribution of an indicator to the assigned construct [82]. Some studies (e.g., Punniyamoorty et al. [83]; Jakhar and Barua [84]) used the outer weight from the SEM to identify a specific rank of characteristics that they wanted to evaluate. However, to ensure the accuracy of the provided outer weight, all validation criteria of the structural model evaluation must first fulfill the requirement of the critical threshold.
The second step identifies potential strategies and sub-strategies regarding cultural considerations when designing green products. Strategies were generated based on the identified findings in the first phase (identified cultural influences and green characteristic preferences), and sub-strategies were based on literature analysis. These strategies and sub-strategies are used to develop the proposed guideline. The last step conducts a validation of the proposed guideline to the practices. Designers from different profiles were selected to evaluate the applicability of the proposed guideline. The flow of guideline development for cultural consideration in green product design is illustrated in Figure 1.
Malaysia was selected as the location of the data collection. The sample used in this study consists of ordinary people who can be considered as potential green customers. However, to ensure data reliability, a preliminary screening process was conducted to ensure that the recruited respondents only consisted of those aware of the environmental issues. This means that the respondents who were found to have little knowledge of green products were removed for the analysis.
The minimum sample size required was calculated based on the following rule of thumb as suggested by Cohen [85]. The minimum sample size was determined (with 80% statistical power) based on the maximum number of arrowheads that point to the construct of the model developed. In this study, there were nine arrowheads that point to the construct, that is, five from the cultural dimensions and four from the green product preferences (appearance, functionality, price, and green characteristics). Appearance, functionality, and price were included in the construct since these three components are common factors that cannot be ignored when customers purchase a product. For these nine pointing arrowheads, the minimum sample size required was 247 samples with a minimum R2 of 0.10. A total of 615 samples was collected. There were 208 questionnaires that were not included as the answers were incomplete. Thus, the sample size number was satisfactory for the measurement as the amount exceeded the threshold requirement.
Questionnaires were used to collect the data on customer preferences in this study. Each questionnaire contains five sections. The first section consists of the items related to the demographic information of the respondents. A pre-test was performed to ensure that the respondents had no issue with answering the questions. The questionnaires were directly delivered to the respondents in order to identify whether the respondents had difficulties filling out the questionnaires. Once the pre-test was completed, the questionnaires were then distributed for a pilot test.

Measuring Cultural Influences and Preferences

In this study, the cultural value construct is tested in relation to the customer preferences for green products. The cultural value construct consists of five cultural dimensions (i.e., collectivism-individualism, masculinity-femininity, uncertainty avoidance, power distance, and long-term orientation. Customer preferences for the green product construct consist of 4 sub-constructs (i.e., appearance, functionality, price, and green product characteristics). A total of 24 indicators are involved in the construct. The framework for hypotheses testing is described in Figure 2.
In this study, the data analysis identifying the cultural value influences on green product preferences was classified into four steps. In the first step, an analysis of data adequacy and reliability is performed. This is important to ensure that the collected data and its reliability exceeds the critical threshold. Once this has been done, the second step extracts the items used by performing the Exploratory Factor Analaysis (EFA). The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) was used to evaluate all the calculations involved in the first step. In the third step, after all the critical threshold for the data reliability, sampling adequacy and factor analysis are evaluated, the next step confirms the validity items used by performing the Convergent Factor Analysis (CFA). Once the validity has been confirmed, the final step evaluates the developed hypotheses. The partial least square-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) approach was applied to assess the developed hypotheses. SmartPLS was used as a tool to evaluate all the validation of the items in the CFA and hypotheses development. The hypotheses result is presented in Table 2.
After the data validation procedures are performed and the relationships of the five cultural value influences are confirmed, the customer preferences for green products, considering cultural value influences, can be identified. In order to identify these preferences, the outer weight of the indicator should be used in the first stage of the calculation. This outer weight was considered to be more reliable than the mean value of the questionnaire. This is because the outer weight results have been statistically validated, and the measurement errors have been evaluated. The outer weight was used to indicate the absolute contributions of the indicators to the assigned constructs [82]. The results of the outer weight for the customer preferences for green products is presented in Table 3.

5. Guideline Development

The proposed guideline was developed based on the identified cultural values that influence customer preferences for green products and the identified green characteristics rank (based on the cultural influences). This finding will be generated as strategies in the proposed guideline. In addition, input from literature was needed to explore in more detail the generated strategies as sub-strategies. The generated strategies of cultural consideration for green product design is discussed in Section 5.1, Section 5.2 and Section 5.3.

5.1. Uncertainty Avoidance

It was found that customers in Malaysia are mostly influenced by the uncertainty avoidance dimension. Uncertainty avoidance characteristics have been described by Hofstede [63] as higher anxiety, stress, and concern for security. Rules and regulations should be written, and uncertainty situations must be fought. Higher anxiety and wanting to be safe when using green products are issues that affect customers. Green products may be produced from several materials. However, some substances in the product can contain harmful or toxic material to the living environment and may need specific treatment to minimize their impact [1]. To reduce the uncertainty of customers for green products, consideration for using fewer toxic materials can be applied to fit the preferences of customers for green products. To provide information concerning the benefit of green products to customers, eco-labels can also be used to reduce the uncertainty concerns of customers [86]. Considering cultural influences, the eco-label was identified as the most preferred characteristic in Malaysia. In order to minimize the usage of natural resources and reduce environmental impacts, manufacturers produce products using recycled, biodegradable, recyclable, and lightweight materials [87]. However, the perception of customers regarding products manufactured with these materials can affect or increase the uncertainty of customers, especially regarding the performance of the product. Therefore, to reduce the uncertainty of customers for green products, strategies to increase the quality of recycled, recyclable, biodegradable, and lightweight material in green products are very important. Another characteristic, which should be considered as an important strategy, is minimizing energy consumption. It has been logically approved that customers are concerned about how much money they expend for their consumed energy [88]. Thus, resource efficiency is also an important element in green products to reduce the uncertainty of customers.

5.2. Long-Term Orientation

The second cultural dimension that provides a significant influence on the preferences of customers in Malaysia is a long-term orientation. The characteristics of long-term orientation, emphasizing savings, persistence, and fostering pragmatic values towards rewards, should be given more attention in the future. Terms such as energy efficiency, providing product services, and easy to upgrade and maintain are considered characteristics of the long-term orientation of customers in Malaysia. In order to reduce the consumption of natural resources and minimize disposal-stage contamination, recycled, biodegradable, recyclable, and lightweight material can also be used as alternative characteristics [1,87]. However, these problems may influence customers in terms of product quality. Customers may perceive products made with these types of materials as having lower quality than products made using virgin material [74]. In this case, the preferences of customers are influenced by not only high uncertainty but also long-term orientation dimensions. Therefore, to increase customer preferences, strategies to improve the quality and durability of green products by recycled, recyclable, biodegradable, reused, and lightweight material is important. This strategy can be used to impact the long-term orientation of customers when choosing green products.

5.3. Power Distance

The last dimension that proved to have a significant influence on green product preferences in Malaysia is power distance. Malaysian consumers have a low score for power distance in terms of green product preferences. According to Hofstede [65], low power distance is indicative of harmony between the powerful and the powerless. Cooperation for achieving target orientation is based on solidarity. The whole society is considered equal and income is not an indicator of social status. This implies that green products can be accepted by customers from all levels of society in Malaysia, such as educated and less-educated customers as well as higher-income and lower-income customers. Providing eco-labels can also be used as a potential strategy to provide information on the benefits of green products to less-educated customers [89]. Providing product service also may be used to relate low power distance influences. This service can be offered in the purchasing phase, such as providing product advice or briefing to explain the details of green product specifications and answering all the questions from both levels of customers [90]. Resource efficiencies can also be applied to relate low power distance influences of customers. Lower-income customers may focus on the costs incurred by the usage of resources [91]. If the efficiency of energy during the consumption phase can be maximized, lower-income customers may have positive intention towards green products. This is due to the fact that the cost of consumed resources is still potentially reachable for lower-income customers. The compilation of identified design strategies consideraing the cultural influences is served in Table 4.

5.4. How to Use the Guideline

There are four steps that designers should follow when using the proposed guideline:
(a)
Step 1: the design concept and specification of the product should be prepared initially by the designers.
(b)
Step 2: based on that design concept, designers need to select possible green design strategies as presented in Table 5, which can be embedded in the design by giving a Yes or No answer. It should be noted that designers should consider the suggested priority of green product characteristics; the capability of companies to implement strategies such as time constraint and technology in the production line should also be considered.
(c)
Step 3: Based on selected green strategies in Step 2, select possible sub-strategies as outlined in Table 6.
(d)
Step 4: Extract the selected green design strategies and sub-strategies that can be embedded in the design concept. Write the selected green design strategies and sub-strategies in Table 7.
The guideline use procedure is illustrated in Figure 3:
Six professional designers were asked to use and evaluate the proposed guideline. The procedure and result of the case study is discussed in Section 6.

6. Guideline Validation and Discussion

The questionnaire that contained the proposed strategies and sub-strategies on designing green products based on cultural value influences was distributed through electronic mail (email) to the designers in Malaysia. A total of six professional designers with different backgrounds were asked to give their evaluation regarding the proposed guideline. The full profile of designers for guideline validation is presented in Table 8.
There were four questions used to evaluate the proposed guideline. The first question was, Based on your experiences, do you think cultural value should be considered in designing products?. For this question, all designers from Malaysia agreed that the consideration of cultural influences in designing products is important. It allows the designers to explore more details in the product’s specification in relation to the cultures of customers. The answers from all designers are compiled in Table 9.
The consideration of cultural influences provides more insight to designers to create products more relevant to customer preferences; thus, the specification of products can be determined based on cultural influences. The consideration of cultural values in designing products also enhances the acceptance of products since the designed product is more suitable with customers’ local characteristics. The answers from the designers in this study were in line with the theory explained by Bloch [61] as well as Salmi and Sharafuthdinova [6] where cultural values of customers is a prominent aspect and should be included in the designing process. This is because culture is naturally formed and can differentiate the behavior between groups of people in a certain area. In the next evaluation, the designers were asked to give their comments on the proposed guideline’s second question: Do you think the developed guideline provides some valuable information to support the development of green products?
All designers agreed that the proposed guideline provides some valuable information to support the development of green products. DS-1, for instance, stated that the provided guideline gives information how cultural influences can be involved in designing green products. DS-2–DS-6 explained that the provided guideline gives a deeper understanding of how to capture the preferences of customers for green products, which can assist their decisions for setting product specifications for green products based on cultural influences. The answers from all designers are presented in Table 10.
Although the designers agreed that the proposed guideline could be used as a potential tool to incorporate cultural considerations when designing green products, they also agreed that it should be known in which design process the proposed guideline can be applied. It can be used to identify customer needs, establish target specification, generate product concepts, select product concepts, test product concept, or set final specifications [128]. To achieve this purpose, question 3 was set up as follows: Based on your experiences, in which design process can the guideline help? The answers from all designers are compiled in Table 11.
For the six design process phases, the designers have different perspectives on which part should be applied to the guideline. However, most of the designers agreed that the guideline could be involved in the phase of identify customers’ needs. For example, DS-1 agreed that the guidelines can be used to identify customers’ needs and generate product concepts. DS-2 focused on identify customers’ needs, establish target specification, test product concept, and set final specification. DS-4 explained that the guidelines can be used to assist designers to identify customers’ needs, establish target specification, generate product concepts, test product concept, set final specifications. The other designers, such as DS-5 and DS-6, have the same belief that the proposed guideline is more suitable for identifying customers’ needs. Also, almost all the designers (i.e., DS-1, DS-3, DS-4, DS-5, DS-6) agreed that the proposed guidelines are suitable to generate product concepts. Although the designers mostly agreed that the proposed guidelines should be applied to identify customers’ needs and generate product concepts, the guidelines can also be applied, possibly, in other phases of product design. This can be seen from the different answers that were given by designers with respect to the application of the guidelines. It depends on how the designers perceive the strategies and sub-strategies in relation to the product they design. The proposed guidelines were confirmed to have a contribution in the design process.
To evaluate what should be improved in the guidelines, question 4 asked: Considering your experience as a designer, what are things that can be improved in the guidelines? Only one designer gave a comment for improving the guidelines. DS-1 explained that the guidelines could help guide designers to produce the best products and it can be more interesting if social and economic aspects can be involved in the guidelines. As the three pillars of sustainable development, the expectation from DS-1 to include social and economic aspects in the guidelines is greatly appreciated. It can be considered as further action to complete the guidelines not only for green products, but also for sustainable products.

7. Conclusions

A set of guidelines that incorporate cultural influences as an approach for deciding on suitable green characteristics in product design has been developed. Professional designers were asked to evaluate and confirm the applicability of the proposed guidelines. The result emphasized that cultural influences can be considered in the phase of identifying preferences of customers and generating concepts for designing green products. This study also identified related studies concerned with developing environmentally conscious guidelines for product design. Willskytt and Brambila [129], for instance, developed guidelines that focused on improving resource efficiency for the overall lifecycle when designing green products. Maccioni and Borgianni [130] developed guidelines to incorporate green attributes into product design, namely, eco-design guidelines (EDGs). The attributes of minimizing material consumption, minimizing energy consumption, extending material lifespan, and disassembling designs were used as inputs for the proposed guidelines. Schöggl et al. [131] developed a checklist for sustainable product development (CPSD) to assist designers in embedding social, economic, and environmental aspects into product designs in the automotive industry. However, the guidelines from previous studies are limited to incorporating environmental attributes into product designs. This study extends the previous studies on the development of guidelines where the attributes of “cultural value influences” are involved in designing green products.
The result also emphasized that consideration of customer cultures should be an important factor in designing green products. It allows designers to identify suitable characteristics of green products that should be embedded in products for their targeted market. Therefore, to support the achievement of sustainable development, designers are recommended to clearly identify the characteristics of green products related to customer characteristics. It is important to increase the preferences of customers for green products. The more market interest and purchase of green products, the more environmental depletion can be minimized. This study is limited to environmental strategies for designing green products by considering cultural influences. Further studies can extend more detailed strategies regarding socio-economic considerations as another aspect supporting sustainable development. The evaluation of the proposed guideline was conducted by designers from Malaysia. The inputs to the guidelines were generated based on results from Malaysia, therefore, the proposed guidelines apply only to Malaysia.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.G. and S.H.A.-R.; methodology, I.G.; software, I.G.; validation, I.G.; formal analysis, I.G.; investigation, I.G.; resources, F.H.H.; data curation, I.G.; writing—original draft preparation, I.G.; writing—review and editing, I.G.; visualization, I.G.; supervision, S.H.A.-R., S.Z.M.D., N.S.; project administration, F.H.H.; funding acquisition, N.H., A.H.M.S. and S.G.H.; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by University of Malaya grant number UMRG RP033B-15AET and The APC was funded by Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jalan UMS, 88400, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments

The Authors would like to thank Center for Technopreneurship Development (C-TeD), Universiti Teknikal Malaysia Melaka, Universiti Malaya, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, and Bina Nusantara University for this collaborative research paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ljungberg, L.Y. Materials Selection and Design for Development of Sustainable Products. Mater. Des. 2007, 28, 466–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kasulaitis, B.; Babbitt, C.W.; Tyler, A.C. The Role of Consumer Preferences in Reducing Material Intensity of Electronic Products. J. Ind. Ecol. 2020, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Matias, J.C.d.O.; Santos, R.; Abreu, A. A Decision Support Approach to Provide Sustainable Solutions to the Consumer, by Using Electrical Appliances. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  4. Olson, E.L. It’s Not Easy Being Green: The Effects of Attribute Tradeoffs on Green Product Preference and Choice. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2013, 41, 171–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Oyewole, M.O.; Komolafe, M.O. Users’ Preference for Green Features in Office Properties. Prop. Manag. 2018, 36, 374–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Salmi, A.; Sharafutdinova, E. Culture and Design in Emerging Markets: The Case of Mobile Phones in Russia. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2008, 23, 384–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Crilly, N.; Moultrie, J.; Clarkson, P.J. Seeing Things: Consumer Response to the Visual Domain in Product Design. Des. Stud. 2004, 25, 547–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Ogiemwonyi, O.; Harun, A.B.; Alam, M.N.; Karim, A.M.; Tabash, M.I.; Hossain, M.I.; Aziz, S.; Abbasi, B.A.; Ojuolape, M.A. Green Product as a Means of Expressing Green Behaviour: A Cross-Cultural Empirical Evidence from Malaysia and Nigeria. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2020, 20, 101055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Soron, D. Sustainability, Self-Identity and the Sociology of Consumption. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 18, 172–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Population. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/sections/issues-depth/population/index.html (accessed on 14 December 2020).
  11. Steffen, W.; Sanderson, R.A.; Tyson, P.D.; Jäger, J.; Matson, P.A.; Moore, B., III; Oldfield, F.; Richardson, K.; Schellnhuber, H.-J.; Turner, B.L.; et al. Global Change and the Earth System: A Planet Under Pressure; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2006; ISBN 978-3-540-26607-5. [Google Scholar]
  12. Hariem Brundtland, G. World Commission on Environment and Development. Environ. Policy Law 1985, 14, 26–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Beckerman, W. “Sustainable Development”: Is It a Useful Concept? Environ. Values 1994, 3, 191–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Luchs, M.G.; Naylor, R.W.; Irwin, J.R.; Raghunathan, R. The Sustainability Liability: Potential Negative Effects of Ethicality on Product Preference. J. Mark. 2010, 74, 18–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Ghazali, I.; Rashid, S.H.A.; Dawal, S.Z.M.; Aoyama, H.; Tontowi, A.E.; Ghazilla, R.A.R. Green Product Preferences with Respect to Cultural Influences: Empirical Study in Indonesia. Int. J. Autom. Technol. 2018, 12, 842–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. MacDonald, E.; Whitefoot, K.; Allison, J.T.; Papalambros, P.Y.; Gonzalez, R. An Investigation of Sustainability, Preference, and Profitability in Design Optimization. In Proceedings of the IDETC-CIE2010; Volume 1: 36th Design Automation Conference, Parts A and B, Montreal, QC, Canada, 15–18 August 2010; pp. 715–728. [Google Scholar]
  17. Dolšak, J.; Hrovatin, N.; Zorić, J. Analysing Consumer Preferences, Characteristics, and Behaviour to Identify Energy-Efficient Consumers. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Park, E.-S.; Hwang, B.; Ko, K.; Kim, D. Consumer Acceptance Analysis of the Home Energy Management System. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Lee, H.; Lee, M.; Lim, S. Do Consumers Care about the Energy Efficiency of Buildings? Understanding Residential Choice Based on Energy Performance Certificates. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Issock Issock, P.B.; Mpinganjira, M.; Roberts-Lombard, M. Drivers of Consumer Attention to Mandatory Energy-Efficiency Labels Affixed to Home Appliances: An Emerging Market Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 204, 672–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhang, Y.; Xiao, C.; Zhou, G. Willingness to Pay a Price Premium for Energy-Saving Appliances: Role of Perceived Value and Energy Efficiency Labeling. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chatterjee, P.; Mandal, N.; Dhar, S.; Chatterjee, S.; Chakraborty, S. A Novel Decision-Making Approach for Light Weight Environment Friendly Material Selection. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 22, 1460–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Steenis, N.D.; van der Lans, I.A.; van Herpen, E.; van Trijp, H.C.M. Effects of Sustainable Design Strategies on Consumer Preferences for Redesigned Packaging. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 205, 854–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Mayyas, A.T.; Omar, M. Eco-Material Selection for Lightweight Vehicle Design. In Energy Efficiency and Sustainable Lighting-a Bet for the Future; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Saputra, M.H.; Kristyassari, B.; Farida, N.; Ardyan, E. An Investigation of Green Product Innovation on Consumer Repurchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Green Customer Value. J. Environ. Manag. Tour. 2020, 11, 622–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Prasanth, V.S.; Jyothsna, M.; Kumari, N. Consumer Buying Preference Based On Green Marketing And Green Product Development. Int. J. Adv. Multidiscip. Sci. Res. 2018, 1, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Mohanty, V.; Nayak, S. Green marketing-its application, scope and future in india. Indian J. Sci. Res. 2017, 111–116. [Google Scholar]
  28. Rajendran, S.D.; Wahab, S.N.; Singh, M.K.P. Malaysian Consumers’ Preference for Green Packaging. Int. J. Soc. Syst. Sci. 2019, 11, 312–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lu, S.; Yang, L.; Liu, W.; Jia, L. User Preference for Electronic Commerce Overpackaging Solutions: Implications for Cleaner Production. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 258, 120936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Chen, T.B.; Chai, L.T. Attitude towards the Environment and Green Products:Consumers’ Perspective. Manag. Sci. Eng. 2010, 4, 27–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Boz, Z.; Korhonen, V.; Koelsch Sand, C. Consumer Considerations for the Implementation of Sustainable Packaging: A Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Yokoo, H.-F.; Kawai, K.; Higuchi, Y. Informal Recycling and Social Preferences: Evidence from Household Survey Data in Vietnam. Resour. Energy Econ. 2018, 54, 109–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ramayah, T.; Lee, J.W.C.; Mohamad, O. Green Product Purchase Intention: Some Insights from a Developing Country. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 1419–1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Khan, S.N.; Mohsin, M. The Power of Emotional Value: Exploring the Effects of Values on Green Product Consumer Choice Behavior. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 150, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tansakul, N.; Suanmali, S.; Shirahada, K. The Impact of Product Labels on Green Preferences and Perceptions of Customers: An Empirical Study of Milk Products in Japan. Int. J. Sustain. Soc. 2018, 10, 75–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Mauroner, F.L. An Analysis of the Customer Perception and Usage Preferences of Reusable Water Bottles in the German Market. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Lisboa, Portugal, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  37. Suhaily, L.; Darmoyo, S.; Boentoro, S.; Anasthashia, E. The Impact of Green Product Innovation, Green Perceived Quality to Purchase Intention Moderated by Lifestyle on Stainless Steel Straw. Int. J. Appl. Bus. Int. Manag. 2020, 5, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mahmoudi, M.; Parviziomran, I. Reusable Packaging in Supply Chains: A Review of Environmental and Economic Impacts, Logistics System Designs, and Operations Management. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2020, 228, 107730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. do Paço, A.; Shiel, C.; Alves, H. A New Model for Testing Green Consumer Behaviour. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 207, 998–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Klaiman, K.; Ortega, D.L.; Garnache, C. Consumer Preferences and Demand for Packaging Material and Recyclability. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2016, 115, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bovea, M.D.; Ibáñez-Forés, V.; Pérez-Belis, V.; Juan, P.; Braulio-Gonzalo, M.; Díaz-Ávalos, C. Incorporation of Circular Aspects into Product Design and Labelling: Consumer Preferences. Sustainability 2018, 10, 2311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Mestre, A.; Cooper, T. Circular Product Design. A Multiple Loops Life Cycle Design Approach for the Circular Economy. Des. J. 2017, 20, S1620–S1635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Ackermann, L. Design for Product Care: Enhancing Consumers’ Repair and Maintenance Activities. Des. J. 2018, 21, 543–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. De Medeiros, J.F.; Ribeiro, J.L.D. Environmentally Sustainable Innovation: Expected Attributes in the Purchase of Green Products. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 142, 240–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ajukumar, V.N.; Gandhi, O.P. Evaluation of Green Maintenance Initiatives in Design and Development of Mechanical Systems Using an Integrated Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 51, 34–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Tseng, M.-L.; Lin, S.; Chen, C.-C.; Calahorrano Sarmiento, L.S.; Tan, C.L. A Causal Sustainable Product-Service System Using Hierarchical Structure with Linguistic Preferences in the Ecuadorian Construction Industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 230, 477–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Chang, C.-H. How to Enhance Green Service and Green Product Innovation Performance? The Roles of Inward and Outward Capabilities. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2018, 25, 411–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zhu, X.; Yu, L. The Impact of Warranty Efficiency of Remanufactured Products on Production Decisions and Green Growth Performance in Closed-Loop Supply Chain: Perspective of Consumer Behavior. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Sharma, A.; Foropon, C. Green Product Attributes and Green Purchase Behavior: A Theory of Planned Behavior Perspective with Implications for Circular Economy. Manag. Decis. 2019, 57, 1018–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jaďuďová, J.; Badida, M.; Badidová, A.; Marková, I.; Ťahúňová, M.; Hroncová, E. Consumer Behavior towards Regional Eco-Labels in Slovakia. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Brécard, D. Consumer Confusion over the Profusion of Eco-Labels: Lessons from a Double Differentiation Model. Resour. Energy Econ. 2014, 37, 64–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Cai, Z.; Xie, Y.; Aguilar, F.X. Eco-Label Credibility and Retailer Effects on Green Product Purchasing Intentions. For. Policy Econ. 2017, 80, 200–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Song, Y.; Qin, Z.; Qin, Z. Green Marketing to Gen Z Consumers in China: Examining the Mediating Factors of an Eco-Label–Informed Purchase. Sage Open 2020, 10, 2158244020963573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Sohn, J.S.; Kim, H.K.; Kim, S.W.; Ryu, Y.; Cha, S.W. Biodegradable Foam Cushions as Ecofriendly Packaging Materials. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Scherer, C.; Emberger-Klein, A.; Menrad, K. Biogenic Product Alternatives for Children: Consumer Preferences for a Set of Sand Toys Made of Bio-Based Plastic. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2017, 10, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Khan, M.A.; Mittal, S.; West, S.; Wuest, T. Review on Upgradability—A Product Lifetime Extension Strategy in the Context of Product Service Systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 204, 1154–1168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Pialot, O.; Millet, D.; Bisiaux, J. “Upgradable PSS”: Clarifying a New Concept of Sustainable Consumption/Production Based on Upgradablility. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 141, 538–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sonego, M.; Echeveste, M.E.S.; Galvan Debarba, H. The Role of Modularity in Sustainable Design: A Systematic Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 176, 196–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Cohen, M.A.; Cui, S.; Gao, F. The Effect of Government Support on Green Product Design and Environmental Impact; Social Science Research Network: Rochester, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  60. Ulrich, K.T.; Eppinger, S.D. Product Design and Development, 5th ed.; McGraw-Hill/Irwin: New York, NY, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-0-07-340477-6. [Google Scholar]
  61. Bloch, P.H. Seeking the Ideal Form: Product Design and Consumer Response. J. Mark. 1995, 59, 16–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Hofstede, G.J.; Pedersen, P.B.; Hofstede, G.H. Exploring Culture: Exercises, Stories and Synthetic Cultures; Nicholas Brealey Publishing: London, UK, 2002; ISBN 978-1-877864-90-2. [Google Scholar]
  63. Hofstede, G. Cultural Constraints in Management Theories. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 1993, 7, 81–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Birukou, A.; Blanzieri, E.; Giorgini, P.; Giunchiglia, F. A Formal Definition of Culture. In Models for Intercultural Collaboration and Negotiation; Sycara, K., Gelfand, M., Abbe, A., Eds.; Advances in Group Decision and Negotiation; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 1–26. ISBN 978-94-007-5574-1. [Google Scholar]
  65. Hofstede, G. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values; SAGE Publications: London, UK, 1980; ISBN 978-0-8039-1444-5. [Google Scholar]
  66. Hofstede, G. Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations; SAGE Publications: London, UK, 2001; ISBN 978-1-4522-0793-3. [Google Scholar]
  67. Huff, L.; Kelley, L. Is Collectivism a Liability? The Impact of Culture on Organizational Trust and Customer Orientation: A Seven-Nation Study. J. Bus. Res. 2005, 58, 96–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Yu, Y.; Han, X.; Hu, G. Optimal Production for Manufacturers Considering Consumer Environmental Awareness and Green Subsidies. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2016, 182, 397–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Moon, J.; Chadee, D.; Tikoo, S. Culture, Product Type, and Price Influences on Consumer Purchase Intention to Buy Personalized Products Online. J. Bus. Res. 2008, 61, 31–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Srite, M. The Influence of National Culture on the Acceptance and Use of Information Technologies: An Empirical Study. AMCIS 1999 Proc. 1999, 355. Available online: http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis1999/355 (accessed on 16 December 2020).
  71. Berger, J. Signaling Can Increase Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Green Products. Theoretical Model and Experimental Evidence. J. Consum. Behav. 2019, 18, 233–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Gupta, S.; Ogden, D.T. To Buy or Not to Buy? A Social Dilemma Perspective on Green Buying. J. Consum. Mark. 2009, 26, 376–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Chen, Y.J.; Sheu, J.-B. Non-Differentiated Green Product Positioning: Roles of Uncertainty and Rationality. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2017, 103, 248–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Mainieri, T.; Barnett, E.G.; Valdero, T.R.; Unipan, J.B.; Oskamp, S. Green Buying: The Influence of Environmental Concern on Consumer Behavior. J. Soc. Psychol. 1997, 137, 189–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Pickett-Baker, J.; Ozaki, R. Pro-environmental Products: Marketing Influence on Consumer Purchase Decision. J. Consum. Mark. 2008, 25, 281–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Hofstede, G.; Bond, M.H. Hofstede’s Culture Dimensions: An Independent Validation Using Rokeach’s Value Survey. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 1984, 15, 417–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Mohd Suki, N. Green Product Purchase Intention: Impact of Green Brands, Attitude, and Knowledge. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2893–2910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Furrer, O.; Liu, B.S.-C.; Sudharshan, D. The Relationships between Culture and Service Quality Perceptions: Basis for Cross-Cultural Market Segmentation and Resource Allocation. J. Serv. Res. 2000, 2, 355–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Chang, N.-J.; Fong, C.-M. Green Product Quality, Green Corporate Image, Green Customer Satisfaction, and Green Customer Loyalty. AJBM 2010, 4, 2836–2844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Hong, Z.; Wang, H.; Gong, Y. Green Product Design Considering Functional-Product Reference. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 210, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Ghazali, I.; Abdul-Rashid, S.H.; Dawal, S.Z.M.; Aoyama, H.; Tontowi, A.E.; Sakundarini, N. Cultural Influences on Choosing Green Products: An Empirical Study in MALAYSIA. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 25, 655–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hair, J.F.; Hult, G.T.M.; Ringle, C.; Sarstedt, M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd ed.; Sage: Los Angeles, CA, USA, 2017; ISBN 978-1-4833-7744-5. [Google Scholar]
  83. Punniyamoorty, M.; Mathiyalagan, P.; Lakshmi, G. A Combined Application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Supplier Selection. Benchmarking Int. J. 2012, 19, 70–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Jakhar, S.K.; Barua, M.K. An Integrated Model of Supply Chain Performance Evaluation and Decision-Making Using Structural Equation Modelling and Fuzzy AHP. Prod. Plan. Control. 2014, 25, 938–957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Cohen, J. A Power Primer. Psychol. Bull. 1992, 112, 155–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Rashid, N.R.N.A. Awareness of Eco-Label in Malaysia’s Green Marketing Initiative. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2009, 4, 132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Gungor, A.; Gupta, S.M. Issues in Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing and Product Recovery: A Survey. Comput. Ind. Eng. 1999, 36, 811–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Mahlia, T.M.I.; Masjuki, H.H.; Saidur, R.; Amalina, M.A. Cost–Benefit Analysis of Implementing Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards for Household Refrigerator-Freezers in Malaysia. Energy Policy 2004, 32, 1819–1824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. D’Souza, C.; Taghian, M.; Lamb, P. An Empirical Study on the Influence of Environmental Labels on Consumers. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 2006, 11, 162–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Maxwell, D.; van der Vorst, R. Developing Sustainable Products and Services. J. Clean. Prod. 2003, 11, 883–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Darby, S. The Effectiveness of Feedback on Energy Consumption: A Review of the Literature on Metering, Billing and Direct Displays; Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford: Oxford, UK, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  92. D’Souza, C. Ecolabel Programmes: A Stakeholder (Consumer) Perspective. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 2004, 9, 179–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Taufique, K.M.R.; Siwar, C.; Chamhuri, N.; Sarah, F.H. Integrating General Environmental Knowledge and Eco-Label Knowledge in Understanding Ecologically Conscious Consumer Behavior. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2016, 37, 39–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Song, Y.; Qin, Z.; Yuan, Q. The Impact of Eco-Label on the Young Chinese Generation: The Mediation Role of Environmental Awareness and Product Attributes in Green Purchase. Sustainability 2019, 11, 973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Eco-Labelling Brand Strategy: Independent Certification versus Self-Declaration | Emerald Insight. Available online: https://0-www-emerald-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/insight/content/doi/10.1108/EBR-06-2013-0090/full/html (accessed on 16 December 2020).
  96. Bratt, C.; Hallstedt, S.; Robèrt, K.-H.; Broman, G.; Oldmark, J. Assessment of Eco-Labelling Criteria Development from a Strategic Sustainability Perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2011, 19, 1631–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  97. Gallastegui, I.G. The Use of Eco-Labels: A Review of the Literature. Eur. Environ. 2002, 12, 316–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Xie, X.; Huo, J.; Zou, H. Green Process Innovation, Green Product Innovation, and Corporate Financial Performance: A Content Analysis Method. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 101, 697–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Birch, A.; Hon, K.K.B.; Short, T. Structure and Output Mechanisms in Design for Environment (DfE) Tools. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 35, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Dangelico, R.M.; Pontrandolfo, P. From Green Product Definitions and Classifications to the Green Option Matrix. J. Clean. Prod. 2010, 18, 1608–1628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Zhang, L.; Zhan, Y.; Liu, Z.F.; Zhang, H.C.; Li, B.B. Development and Analysis of Design for Environment Oriented Design Parameters. J. Clean. Prod. 2011, 19, 1723–1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Vezzoli, C. Design for Environmental Sustainability: Life Cycle Design of Products, 2nd ed.; Springer: London, UK, 2018; ISBN 978-1-4471-7363-2. [Google Scholar]
  103. Bhatia, M.; Jain, A. Green Marketing: A Study of Consumer Perception and Preferences in India. Electron. Green J. 2013, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Pushkar, S. Modeling the Substitution of Natural Materials with Industrial Byproducts in Green Roofs Using Life Cycle Assessments. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 227, 652–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Zhu, Q.; Shah, P.; Sarkis, J. A Paler Shade of Green: Implications of Green Product Deletion on Supply Chains. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2020, 58, 4567–4588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Braungart, M.; McDonough, W.; Bollinger, A. Cradle-to-Cradle Design: Creating Healthy Emissions—A Strategy for Eco-Effective Product and System Design. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 1337–1348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Roy, R. Sustainable Product-Service Systems. Futures 2000, 32, 289–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Byggeth, S.; Broman, G.; Robèrt, K.-H. A Method for Sustainable Product Development Based on a Modular System of Guiding Questions. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Aurich, J.C.; Fuchs, C.; Wagenknecht, C. Life Cycle Oriented Design of Technical Product-Service Systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14, 1480–1494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Mont, O.K. Clarifying the Concept of Product–Service System. J. Clean. Prod. 2002, 10, 237–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Baines, T.S.; Lightfoot, H.W.; Evans, S.; Neely, A.; Greenough, R.; Peppard, J.; Roy, R.; Shehab, E.; Braganza, A.; Tiwari, A.; et al. State-of-the-Art in Product-Service Systems. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part B J. Eng. Manuf. 2007, 221, 1543–1552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  112. Armstrong, C.M.; Niinimäki, K.; Kujala, S.; Karell, E.; Lang, C. Sustainable Product-Service Systems for Clothing: Exploring Consumer Perceptions of Consumption Alternatives in Finland. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 97, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Rexfelt, O.; Hiort af Ornäs, V. Consumer Acceptance of Product-service Systems: Designing for Relative Advantages and Uncertainty Reductions. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2009, 20, 674–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Yang, X.; Moore, P.; Pu, J.-S.; Wong, C.-B. A Practical Methodology for Realizing Product Service Systems for Consumer Products. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2009, 56, 224–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Umeda, Y.; Kondoh, S.; Shimomura, Y.; Tomiyama, T. Development of Design Methodology for Upgradable Products Based on Function–Behavior–State Modeling. AI EDAM 2005, 19, 161–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Vinodh, S.; Rathod, G. Integration of ECQFD and LCA for Sustainable Product Design. J. Clean. Prod. 2010, 18, 833–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Shimomura, Y.; Umeda, Y.; Tomiyama, T. A Proposal of Upgradable Design. In Proceedings of the Proceedings First International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo, Japan, 1–3 February 1999; pp. 1000–1004. [Google Scholar]
  118. Umemori, Y.; Kondoh, S.; Umeda, Y.; Shimomura, Y.; Yoshioka, M. Design for Upgradable Products Considering Future Uncertainty. In Proceedings of the Proceedings Second International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo, Japan, 11–15 December 2001; pp. 87–92. [Google Scholar]
  119. Huiskonen, J. Maintenance Spare Parts Logistics: Special Characteristics and Strategic Choices. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2001, 71, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Markeset, T.; Kumar, U. Design and Development of Product Support and Maintenance Concepts for Industrial Systems. J. Qual. Maint. Eng. 2003, 9, 376–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Niggeschmidt, S.; Helu, M.; Diaz, N.; Behmann, B.; Lanza, G.; Dornfeld, D. Integrating Green and Sustainability Aspects into Life Cycle Performance Evaluation; Laboratory for Manufacturing and Sustainability: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2010; Available online: https://escholarship.org/uc/item/825308wk (accessed on 4 January 2021).
  122. Hauschild, M.Z.; Jeswiet, J.; Alting, L. Design for Environment—Do We Get the Focus Right? Cirp Ann. 2004, 53, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Fuller, D.A.; Ottman, J.A. Moderating Unintended Pollution: The Role of Sustainable Product Design. J. Bus. Res. 2004, 57, 1231–1238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Song, J.H.; Murphy, R.J.; Narayan, R.; Davies, G.B.H. Biodegradable and Compostable Alternatives to Conventional Plastics. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2009, 364, 2127–2139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Veleva, V.; Ellenbecker, M. Indicators of Sustainable Production: Framework and Methodology. J. Clean. Prod. 2001, 9, 519–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Hamzaoui Essoussi, L.; Linton, J.D. New or Recycled Products: How Much Are Consumers Willing to Pay? J. Consum. Mark. 2010, 27, 458–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Klausner, M.; Grimm, W.M.; Hendrickson, C. Reuse of Electric Motors in Consumer Products. J. Ind. Ecol. 1998, 2, 89–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Ulrich, K.T.; Eppinger, S.D. Product Design and Development, 4th ed.; McGraw-Hill/Irwin: Boston, MA, USA, 2008; ISBN 978-0-07-125947-7. [Google Scholar]
  129. Willskytt, S.; Brambila-Macias, S.A. Design Guidelines Developed from Environmental Assessments: A Design Tool for Resource-Efficient Products. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Maccioni, L.; Borgianni, Y. Bringing Success and Value in Sustainable Product Development: The Eco-Design Guidelines. In Sustainable Design and Manufacturing 2020; Scholz, S.G., Howlett, R.J., Setchi, R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  131. Schöggl, J.-P.; Baumgartner, R.J.; Hofer, D. Improving Sustainability Performance in Early Phases of Product Design: A Checklist for Sustainable Product Development Tested in the Automotive Industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 1602–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 13 00673 g001 550
Figure 1. Process of guideline development.
Figure 1. Process of guideline development.
Sustainability 13 00673 g001
Sustainability 13 00673 g002 550
Figure 2. Hypotheses testing to identify preferences based on cultural influences.
Figure 2. Hypotheses testing to identify preferences based on cultural influences.
Sustainability 13 00673 g002
Sustainability 13 00673 g003 550
Figure 3. Procedure to use proposed guideline.
Figure 3. Procedure to use proposed guideline.
Sustainability 13 00673 g003
Table
Table 1. Common green product characteristics found in the literature.
Table 1. Common green product characteristics found in the literature.
Green Product CharacteristicsReferences
Resources efficiency[3,17,18,19,20,21]
Size and weight reduction[2,22,23,24]
Using harmless material[25,26,27,28,29]
Using recyclable material[5,30,31,32,33,34]
Easy to reuse[35,36,37,38]
Using recycled material[39,40,41]
Easy to maintain[42,43,44,45]
Providing product service[46,47,48,49]
Eco-labelling[50,51,52,53]
Using biodegradable material[54,55,56]
Easy to upgrade[57,58,59]
Table
Table 2. Hypotheses testing calculation result.
Table 2. Hypotheses testing calculation result.
Hyp.DescriptionResultPath CoefficientStd. Errort-Value
H1Collectivism → Customer preferences for green productsNot Significant0.0250.0500.489
H2Masculinity → Customer preferences for green productsNot Significant0.0020.0570.036
H3Uncertainty avoidance → Customer preferences for green productsSignificant0.3510.0685.161 *
H4Power distance → Customer preferences for green productsSignificant−0.1010.0521.952 ***
H5Long-term orientation → Customer preferences for green productsSignificant0.2800.0713.946 *
* p < 0.01, *** p < 0.1.
Table
Table 3. Identified green product characteristics considering cultural influences.
Table 3. Identified green product characteristics considering cultural influences.
Preferences RankGreen Product CharacteristicsOuter Weight
1Eco-labelling0.261
2Energy efficiency0.225
3Reduce harmful materials0.211
4Provide product services0.189
5Easy to upgrade0.130
6Biodegradable materials0.127
7Recyclable materials0.106
8Weight reduction0.063
9Easy to maintain0.060
10Recycled materials−0.008
11Easy to reuse−0.083
Table
Table 4. The design strategies for the green product considering the cultural value influences.
Table 4. The design strategies for the green product considering the cultural value influences.
Influencing Cultural Value DimensionsDescribed CharactersApproach to Relate Cultural Value InfluencesPossible Strategies that Can Be Applied
Uncertainty avoidance
−
Higher anxiety and stress were experiencedÂThere is a great concern with security in life.
−
There is a need for written rules and regulations.
−
The uncertainty inherent in life was felt as a continuous threat that must be fought.
Reduce the uncertainty of customers for green products.
−
Embed an eco-label in the product design.
−
Use non-toxic material.
−
Provide product service.
−
Consider resource efficiency in the consumption phase.
−
Use high-quality recyclable material.
−
Apply size and weight reduction with high- quality material.
−
Use high-quality biodegradable material.
−
Use high-quality recycled material.
Long-term orientation
−
Attaching more importance to the future.
−
Foster pragmatic values oriented towards rewards.
−
Persistence.
−
Saving (thrift).
−
Capacity for adaptation.
Concern for the long-term expectation of customers regarding green products.
−
Provide product service.
−
Consider resource efficiency in the consumption phase.
−
Easily maintained.
−
Use high-quality recyclable material.
−
Can be upgraded easily by the user.
−
Easily reused.
Low power distances
−
Inequality in society should be minimized.
−
Everyone should have equal rights.
−
Latent harmony exists between the powerful and the powerless.
−
Cooperation among powerless can be based on solidarity.
−
All should have equal rights.
Concern for designing green products that do not indicate a social gap and should not negatively impact others.
−
Embed an eco-label in the product design.
−
Provide product service.
−
Consider resource efficiency, especially in the consumption phase.
Table
Table 5. Checklist of strategies for designing green products to reflect cultural value influences.
Table 5. Checklist of strategies for designing green products to reflect cultural value influences.
Cultural Value ConsiderationSuggested PriorityRecommended CharacteristicsChecklist
YesNo
Reduce your customer uncertainty1Embed eco-label on your product design.
2Use non-toxic material.
3Provide product service (e.g., rent the product, provide longer service support).
4Consider resources efficiency in the consumption phase (e.g., save energy, water, or material).
5Apply size or weight reduction with high-quality material.
6Use recyclable material.
7Use high-quality biodegradable material.
Concern for the customers’ long-term orientation1Provide product service.
2Consider resources efficiency, especially in the consumption phase.
3Use durable recyclable material.
4Can be upgraded easily by the user.
5Easily reused.
6Can be maintained easily by the user.
Reduce your customers’ power distance (gaps)1Embed eco-label in your product design.
2Provide product services.
3Consider resources efficiency in the consumption phase.
Selected strategies (Yes answers), please prioritize your selected strategies based on the rank of the green product characteristics
  • …….
  • …….
  • …….
    …….
Table
Table 6. Checklist of potential sub-strategies respect selected green design strategies in Table 5.
Table 6. Checklist of potential sub-strategies respect selected green design strategies in Table 5.
StrategiesPotential Sub-StrategiesChecklistSupported Literature
YesNo
Embed product with eco-label.
−
Provide relevant information and state main objective of eco-label to avoid misinterpretation.
 [92,93,94]
−
Use a certified eco-label from legislation (government) rather than self-declaration.
 [52,95,96]
−
The eco-label symbols used can be easily understood by consumers.
 [89,92,97]
Consider resources efficiency
−
Maximize efficiency of water consumption
 [98,99]
−
Minimize material used
 [1,99,100]
−
Maximize efficiency of energy used in consumption phase
 [1,101]
−
Reduce emission and waste produced during usage.
 [1,102]
−
Provide information to consumers such as prediction of how much energy they are using within a month, year, etc.
 [1,99]
Use non-toxic material
−
Eliminate toxic material to decrease environmental impact and customer health contamination.
 [25,29,103]
−
Consider material substitution to more superior materials in terms of sustainability.
 [104,105]
−
Assures that non-recyclable parts or materials can be disposed of in an ecological way.
 [1,102]
−
Although using non-toxic material, the quality and durability of the product should be ensured.
 [106,107]
−
If unavoidable, use of toxic material only when necessary.
 [107,108]
Provide product services
−
In the purchasing phase: provide product advice or briefing to explain the various details and functions of product.
[109,110]
−
Using phase: provide regular maintenance, upgrades, spare parts availability and responsiveness to customer complaints.
 [90,109]
−
In the disposal stage, retrieval and refurbishing should be practiced to reduce landfill waste.
 [109,111]
−
Offer rental of product rather than purchasing, so the producer can retrieve product at the end of its life
 [112,113,114]
Easily maintained
−
Easy to disassemble or replace for self-repairing or upgrading.
 [15,115,116]
−
Make the function independent (design by module).
 [115,117,118]
−
Support with spare part availability for reasonable duration of time.
 [119,120,121]
Applied size or weight reduction
−
Minimize material used and combination, the more material combination the more energy required in production line.
 [1,102]
−
Should not interfere with flexibility, impact strength or functional properties.
 [122]
−
Maintain produce performance by using high- quality and durable of material.
 [100,108,123]
Using recyclable material
−
Focus on maximum recyclability and a high content of recycled material in the product.
 [1,102]
Using biodegradable material
−
Use natural organic material; the product waste should be easy to decompose naturally.
 [1,100,124]
−
Products have high durability.
 [4,100]
−
Eliminate hazardous material; if unavoidable, use when necessary and minimize as possible.
 [125]
Using recycled material
−
Eliminate the hazardous materials contained in recycled material
 [102,126]
−
Provide quality products using recycled material.
 [126]
−
Increase reparability of product.
 [126]
Easily reused
−
Design proper quality assurance of used produce parts.
 [102,127]
−
Easy to disassemble or replace for problem parts
 [102,127]
Easily to upgrade
−
Easy-to-disassemble design.
 [15,115,116]
−
Consider modular design with minimal changing of product function by making structure independent.
 [115,117,118]
−
Consider modular design that allows additional functions to the product without changing the structure of product.
 [115,118]
Table
Table 7. Selected green strategies and sub-strategies.
Table 7. Selected green strategies and sub-strategies.
Selected Strategies.Selected Sub-Strategies
1……a…….
b…….
c…….
2……a…….
b…….
c…….
3...….a…….
b…….
c…….
Table
Table 8. Profile of designers.
Table 8. Profile of designers.
CodeExperience (Years)MarketProduct
DS-126Both Malaysia and others countriesProduct packaging, exhibition booths, etc.
DS-220Both Malaysia and others countriesSmart forest/digital forest product
DS-320Both Malaysia and others countriesToll highway management and maintenance product
DS-420Both Malaysia and others countriesSuspension system (absorber, coil spring, and stabilizer bar), brake system, engine parts for automotive industries.
DS-510Both Malaysia and others countriesMachine/equipment for semi-conductor industries
DS-610Both Malaysia and others countriesJuicer, food processor, blender, meat grinder product
Note: DS = Designers.
Table
Table 9. Designer comments on the importance of cultural considerations in design.
Table 9. Designer comments on the importance of cultural considerations in design.
DesignersYes/NoComment
DS-1YesPerhaps you should consider cultural values to be embedded if you were targeting a particular segment of users. You should have a look at the products that you are designing, too. Embedding such values may create a niche market for the product.
DS-2YesThe design of products should be relevant with the customers’ culture, since the product design cannot be easily generalized. By considering culture in the design, we can get more detailed information to set the product specification for our particular market.
DS-3YesIt is very important as part of building and enhancing a design identity and reputation, by being trendy, attractive, likable and also applicable with current times and needs, without sacrificing the heritage, culture, customs and values. In short, an integration of both worlds.
DS-4YesThe involvement of culture enables me to explore customer requirements in designing a product.
DS-5YesProduct design that matched to the local cultural values would have an easier acceptance by the end user.
DS-6YesYes. Design of a product should consider cultural values to suit specific target consumers. For example, Japan culture is more towards eco-friendly, ‘all-in-1′ type of products, which does not create any harm towards the consumers. They really are concerned with every detail of the product, such as the guide on how to use, how to maintain, which part should be carefully handled, and etc. All are stated and provide with a caution label.
Table
Table 10. Designer comment on the proposed guideline.
Table 10. Designer comment on the proposed guideline.
DesignersYes/NoComments
DS-1YesIt has opened my mind to consider other aspects, such as culture value influence in designing green products.
DS-2YesThis guideline provides me a new insight to understand how to set a product specification, especially for green products based on the cultural values of the customers.
DS-3YesIt has potential to support the development of a product; however, needs enforcement and audits.
DS-4YesMalaysian culture is intangible to be measured; the guideline provides me a deeper understanding regarding how the customers perceive environmental concerns through a product.
DS-5YesThe current manufacturers in Malaysia are encouraged to consider environmental aspects within the production line as well as for the end user of the product (consumers). The guideline provides a new perspective from the natural setting of consumer behavior, which leads me to be more careful to decide the design attributes with more concern about the environment.
DS-6YesYes. Relevant guideline can provide some information to support the development of a sustainable product in Malaysia. This can be a good guideline or reference for a company to initiate a business plan, so that they can produce the product that the market needs. However, this guideline should be more precise, in-depth, and easy to understand by all kinds of people for future use.
Table
Table 11. Designer comment on which phase the proposed guideline can be used.
Table 11. Designer comment on which phase the proposed guideline can be used.
DesignersDesign Process
DS-1
−
Identify customers’ needs.
−
Generate product concepts.
DS-2
−
Identify customers’ needs.
−
Establish target specification.
−
Test product concept.
−
Set final specifications.
DS-3
−
Establish target specification.
−
Generate product concepts.
DS-4
−
Identify customers’ needs.
−
Establish target specification.
−
Generate product concepts.
−
Test product concept.
−
Set final specifications.
DS-5
−
Identify customers’ needs.
−
Establish target specification.
−
Generate product concepts.
−
Select product concepts.
−
Test product concept.
−
Set final specifications.
DS-6
−
Identify customers’ needs.
−
Establish target specification.
−
Generate product concepts.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ghazali, I.; Abdul-Rashid, S.H.; Md Dawal, S.Z.; Huda, N.; Shariff, A.H.M.; Herawan, S.G.; Ho, F.H.; Sakundarini, N. Guidelines for Designing Green Products Considering Customers’ Cultural Preferences. Sustainability 2021, 13, 673. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su13020673

AMA Style

Ghazali I, Abdul-Rashid SH, Md Dawal SZ, Huda N, Shariff AHM, Herawan SG, Ho FH, Sakundarini N. Guidelines for Designing Green Products Considering Customers’ Cultural Preferences. Sustainability. 2021; 13(2):673. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su13020673

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ghazali, Ihwan, Salwa Hanim Abdul-Rashid, Siti Zawiah Md Dawal, Nurul Huda, Amir Husni Mohd Shariff, Safarudin Gazali Herawan, Fu Haw Ho, and Novita Sakundarini. 2021. "Guidelines for Designing Green Products Considering Customers’ Cultural Preferences" Sustainability 13, no. 2: 673. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/su13020673

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop