Author(s)

ZiXin Fang¹, KaiQi Liang¹, ChongHua Zhu², Ting Zhou^1*

Affiliation(s)

¹School of Business, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, Guangdong, China.

²School of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Guangdong Ocean University, Yangjiang 529500, Guangdong, China.

Corresponding Author

Ting Zhou

ABSTRACT

Against the backdrop of China’s nationwide household appliance trade-in policy aimed at promoting green consumption and expanding domestic demand, this study examines how policy instruments influence consumers’ purchase intentions from a sustainability-oriented behavioral perspective. Drawing on the Howard–Sheth consumer behavior model, an integrated framework is constructed to analyze the effects of external policy stimuli—including subsidies, after-sales services, procedural arrangements, and recycling schemes—on purchase intention through perceived value, perceived risk, and social influence. Based on 965 valid questionnaires collected through online and offline surveys in Guangzhou, structural equation modeling is employed to test the proposed relationships. The results show that subsidy policies exert the strongest overall impact on purchase intention, mainly by enhancing perceived value and social influence, while procedural and recycling policies indirectly promote intention by improving value perception and social identification. Among cognitive factors, perceived value has the most significant positive effect, whereas perceived risk markedly suppresses purchase intention. These findings reveal the micro-level mechanisms of policy-driven sustainable consumption and provide practical implications for optimizing trade-in policy design beyond a subsidy-centered approach.

KEYWORDS

Policy instruments; Trade-in policy; Consumer purchase intention; Howard–Sheth model; Structural equation modeling

CITE THIS PAPER

ZiXin Fang, KaiQi Liang, ChongHua Zhu, Ting Zhou. The impact of “trade-in” policies on consumers’ purchase intentions for household appliances: empirical evidence from Guangzhou residents. Trends in Social Sciences and Humanities Research. 2026, 4(1): 17-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.61784/tsshr3206.

REFERENCES

[1] Allcott H, Greenstone M. Measuring the welfare effects of residential energy efficiency programs. Review of Economics and Statistics, 2017, 23386.

[2] Davis L W, Metcalf G E. Does better information lead to better choices? Evidence from energy efficiency labels. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 2016, 3(3): 589-625.

[3] Newell R G, Siikamaki J. Nudging energy efficiency behavior: The role of information labels. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 2014, 1(4): 555-598.

[4] Wang Jiaxing. Impact of incentives to purchase energy-efficient products: evidence from Chinese households based on a mixed logit model. Energy Efficiency, 2023, 16(7): 10159.

[5] Lin Chien-Chi, Dong Chih-Ming. Exploring consumers’ purchase intention on energy-efficient home appliances: Integrating the theory of planned behavior, perceived value theory, and environmental awareness. Energies, 2023, 16(6): 2669.

[6] Zhuang Wencan, Luo Xiaoguang, Riaz Muhammad Usman. On the factors influencing green purchase intention: a meta-analysis approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 2021, 12: 644020.

[7] Roh Taewoo, Seok Junhee, Kim Yaeri. Unveiling ways to reach organic purchase: green perceived value, perceived knowledge, attitude, subjective norm, and trust. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2022, 67: 102988.

[8] Andreica Mihut Ioana Sorina, Sterie Luigia-Gabriela, Mican Daniel. The green dilemma: what drives consumers to green purchase intention in an emerging EU economy? Environment and Natural Resource Economics, 2025, 28(1): 2536323.

[9] Gong Yanping, Chen Chunyan, Tan Yuxuan, et al. How active social network site use affects green consumption: a moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 2023, 14: 1124025.

[10] He Aizhong, Li Ayong. Intervention policies for promoting green consumption behavior: An interdisciplinary systematic review and future directions. Journal of Environmental Management, 2025, 373: 123917.

[11] Rosak-Szyrocka Joanna, Tiwari Sunil. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to test sustainable development in University 4.0 in the ultra-smart society era. Sustainability, 2023, 15(23): 16167.

[12] Joshi Y, Uniyal D P, Sangroya D, et al. Investigating consumers’ green purchase intention: examining the role of economic value, emotional value and perceived marketplace influence. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 328: 129638.

[13] Ma Dan, Dong Jialing, Lee Chien Chiang. Influence of perceived risk on consumers’ intention and behavior in cross-border e-commerce transactions: a case study of the Tmall Global platform. International Journal of Information Management, 2025, 81: 102854.

[14] Ahn Yunjeong, Lee Jieun. The Impact of Online Reviews on Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: Examining the Social Influence of Online Reviews, Group Similarity, and Self-Construal. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res., 2024, 19(2): 1060-1078.

[15] Lim X J, Radzol A R M, Cheah J H, et al. The impact of social media influencers on purchase intention and the mediating effect of customer attitude. Asian Journal of Business Research, 2020, 7(2): 19-36.