Decoding Sustainable Lifestyles: A Comprehensive Analysis of Life-‎Style Factors and Their Impact on Environmental Sustainability ‎Ratings

  • Authors

    • Ejder Guven Faculty of Business Administrative Sciences, Gebze Technical University, Kocaeli, Türkiye https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3662-7142
    • Yavuz Selim Balcioglu Management Information System, Dogus University, Istanbul, Türkiye https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7138-2972
    • Fatma Gulcin Demirci Darica District Directorate of National Education, Kocaeli, Türkiye https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7750-7393
    • Ayşe Bilgen Faculty of Business Administrative Sciences, Gebze Technical University, Kocaeli, Türkiye
    • Turhan Karakaya Faculty of Business Administrative Sciences, Dogus University, Istanbul, Türkiye
    https://doi.org/10.14419/anxcde52

    Received date: October 24, 2025

    Accepted date: November 28, 2025

    Published date: December 9, 2025

  • Environmental Behaviour; Lifestyle Factors; Pro-Environmental Behaviour; Sustainability Assessment; Sustainable Lifestyles; Resource Economics‎.

  • Abstract

    As global environmental crises escalate, understanding how individual lifestyle factors affect sustainability outcomes is essential for informing effective interventions with measurable economic and environmental benefits. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 499 participants across urban, suburban, and rural areas. Participants completed measures for 19 variables categorized under six domains: ‎demographics, diet and consumption, transportation and energy use, environmental behaviors, resource usage, and social/physical activities. ‎Transportation mode emerged as the strongest predictor of sustainability. Participants who primarily walked scored significantly higher, with ‎‎84.6% classified as high sustainability performers, compared to only 20% of car users. Diet type also significantly influenced ratings: plant-based diet adherents scored 4.37 on average, with 80.2% rated highly sustainable, versus 2.26 and 28.5% for those consuming animal-based diets. Environmental awareness exhibited a threshold effect; participants with awareness levels 4-5 showed 88% high sustainability, ‎whereas those at levels 1-3 averaged 28%. Six key behaviors, never using plastic, walking, a plant-based diet, limited clothing purchases, ‎renewable energy use, and composting, were associated with average sustainability ratings above 4.3. High-sustainability individuals used ‎‎39.2% less electricity and 36.0% less water than their lower-rated counterparts, representing substantial resource cost savings. Suburban ‎residents demonstrated the highest sustainability rates (67.9%), surpassing urban (47.4%) and rural (46.4%) populations. These findings ‎identify priority areas for promoting sustainable lifestyles and highlight the economic benefits of targeted behavioral interventions through ‎reduced resource consumption and associated cost savings‎.

  • References

    1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.
    2. Barrett, B., Walters, S., Checovich, M. M., Grabow, M. L., Middlecamp, C., Wortzel, B., Tetrault, K., Riordan, K. M., & Goldberg, S. (2024). Mindful eco-wellness: Steps toward personal and planetary health. Global Advances in Integrative Medicine and Health, 13, 27536130241235922. https://doi.org/10.1177/27536130241235922.
    3. Cohen, S. A. (2017). Understanding the Sustainable Lifestyle. Academic Commons. https://academiccommons.columbia.edu.
    4. Creutzig, F., Jochem, P., Edelenbosch, O. Y., Mattauch, L., van Vuuren, D. P., McCollum, D., ... & Minx, J. (2015). Transport: A roadblock to cli-mate change mitigation?. Science, 350(6263), 911-912. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac8033.
    5. Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Sinkovics, R. R., & Bohlen, G. M. (2003). Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers?. Journal of Business Research, 56(6), 465-480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(01)00241-7.
    6. Duong, C. D., Phan, T. T. H., Van Bui, T., Tran, T. D., & Tran, N. M. (2025). "Is ethical eating a matter of belief?": Activating organic food con-sumption with curvilinear impacts of religious beliefs. Acta Psychologica, 256, 105031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2025.105031.
    7. Foley, J. A., DeFries, R., Asner, G. P., Barford, C., Bonan, G., Carpenter, S. R., ... & Snyder, P. K. (2005). Global consequences of land use. Sci-ence, 309, 570-574. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111772.
    8. Garnett, T. (2011). Where are the best opportunities for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the food system (including the food chain)?. Food Policy, 36(1), 23-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.10.010.
    9. Geissdoerfer, M., Savaget, P., Bocken, N. M., & Hultink, E. J. (2017). The Circular Economy–A new sustainability paradigm? Journal of Cleaner Production, 143, 757-768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.
    10. Granda-Beltrán, D., López, M., Guamán, J., & Ponce, P. (2025). Determinants of pro-environmental practices: An analysis using discrete choice models. Environmental Management, 75(6), 1487-1503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-025-02149-7.
    11. Guan, Y., Shan, Y., Hang, Y., Nie, Q., Liu, Y., & Hubacek, K. (2025). Unlocking global carbon reduction potential by embracing low-carbon life-styles. Nature Communications, 16(1), 4599. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-59269-1.
    12. Jackson, T. (2005). Motivating sustainable consumption: A review of evidence on consumer behaviour and behavioural change. Sustainable Devel-opment Research Network.
    13. Kates, R. W., Parris, T. M., & Leiserowitz, A. A. (2005). What is sustainable development?. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable De-velopment, 47(3), 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00139157.2005.10524444.
    14. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally, and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior?. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401.
    15. Lorek, S., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Strong sustainable consumption governance–precondition for a degrowth path?. Journal of Cleaner Production, 38, 36–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.08.008.
    16. Makkonen, A., Gluschkoff, K., Airaksinen, J., Halonen, J. I., Salo, P., & Ervasti, J. (2024). Development of a multifactorial prediction model for commute mode choice in 10,983 Finnish public sector employees: A cross-sectional study. BMJ Open, 14(10), e080276. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-080276.
    17. Mambrini, S. P., Penzavecchia, C., Menichetti, F., Foppiani, A., Leone, A., Pellizzari, M., Sileo, F., Battezzati, A., Bertoli, S., & De Amicis, R. (2025). Plant-based and sustainable diet: A systematic review of its impact on obesity. Obesity Reviews, 26(6), e13901. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.13901.
    18. Meyer, E., Allès, B., Berlivet, J., Péneau, S., Bellicha, A., Touvier, M., Langevin, B., Pointereau, P., Lairon, D., Hercberg, S., Kesse-Guyot, E., & Baudry, J. (2025). Typology of out-of-home eaters: A description of sociodemographic, lifestyle, nutritional and environmental characteristics in the NutriNet-Santé cohort. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 22(1), 61. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-025-01752-5.
    19. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press.
    20. Nagy, S., & Molnarne, C. K. (2022). The Effects of Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions on Pro-Environmental Behaviour: How Culture Influences En-vironmentally Conscious Behaviour. arXiv. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.04609.
    21. Peattie, K., & Peattie, S. (2009). Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction?. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 260–268. Peattie, K., & Peattie, S. (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.033.
    22. Pretty, J., & Smith, D. (2004). Social capital in biodiversity conservation and management. Conservation Biology, 18(3), 631-638. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3589073. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00126.x.
    23. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin III, F. S., Lambin, E. F., ... & Foley, J. A. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472-475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a.
    24. Sallis, J. F., Cerin, E., Conway, T. L., Adams, M. A., Frank, L. D., Pratt, M., ... & Cain, K. L. (2016). Physical activity in relation to urban environ-ments in 14 cities worldwide: a cross-sectional study. The Lancet, 387(10034), 2207-2217. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01284-2.
    25. Sinclair, M., Combet, E., Davis, T., & Papies, E. K. (2025). Sustainability in food-based dietary guidelines: A review of recommendations around meat and dairy consumption and their visual representation. Annals of Medicine, 57(1), 2470252. https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2025.2470252.
    26. Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175.
    27. Tang, L., Yu, X., Qiu, C., Lu, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, F., & Zhu, X. (2025). Adherence to the planetary health diet is associated with slower cognitive decline: A prospective cohort analysis of Chinese older adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 22(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-025-01759-y.
    28. Tilman, D., & Clark, M. (2014). Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature, 515(7528), 518-522. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959.
    29. Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Herrero, S. T., Dubash, N. K., & Lecocq, F. (2015). Measuring the co-benefits of climate change mitigation. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 40, 179-208. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-031312-125456.
    30. Whitmarsh, L., & O’Neill, S. (2010). Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across di-verse pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 305–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.003.
    31. Wiedmann, T., & Barrett, J. (2010). A review of the ecological footprint indicator—Perceptions and methods. Sustainability, 2(6), 1645-1693. https://doi.org/10.3390/su2061645.
    32. Wolfson, J. A., Altema-Johnson, D., Yett, A., Ali, E., Kim, B., Carr, N., Santo, R., Cho, C., Browning, G., & Ramsing, R. (2025). Climate change menu labels in a university cafeteria: Effects on student's diets, perceptions, and attitudes. Appetite, 211, 108001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2025.108001.
    33. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press.
    34. Wu, W. K., Lo, Y. L., Chiu, J. Y., Hsu, C. L., Lo, I. H., Panyod, S., Liao, Y. C., Chiu, T. H. T., Yang, Y. T., Kuo, H. C., Zou, H. B., Chen, Y. H., Chuang, H. L., Yen, J. J. Y., Wang, J. T., Chiu, H. M., Hsu, C. C., Kuo, C. H., Sheen, L. Y., Kao, H. L., & Wu, M. S. (2025). Gut microbes with the gbu genes determine TMAO production from L-carnitine intake and serve as a biomarker for precision nutrition. Gut Microbes, 17(1), 2446374. https://doi.org/10.1080/19490976.2024.2446374.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Guven, E., Balcioglu, Y. S. ., Demirci, F. G., Bilgen , A. ., & Karakaya , T. . (2025). Decoding Sustainable Lifestyles: A Comprehensive Analysis of Life-‎Style Factors and Their Impact on Environmental Sustainability ‎Ratings. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(8), 269-277. https://doi.org/10.14419/anxcde52