Mashitoh Yaacob, Zubaidah Mohd Nasir, W. Syairah Hazwani W. Petra



This paper is based primarily on quantitative data from an actual study in discussing: (a) the consumption ethics of Muslims in Bandar Baru Bangi (BBB) Malaysia township, i.e., a recently crowned as ‘knowledge city’ and (b) the contextual aspects that encourage or discourage the Muslims to consume ethically. The ethical consumption behavior measured is categorized into two categories: (a) pre-cycling and (b) recycling & reusing, while the contextual aspect measured is categorized into four categories: (a) social; (b) religion; (c) economy and (d) politic. A quantitative methodology, i.e., survey questionnaire, was employed to tap information on the consumption ethics of Muslims in BBB as well as on the influence of the contextual aspects. Hence, the questionnaire was distributed to 563 Muslims in BBB, and 178 of them responded. Reliability and validity tests of 21 items, 5 scales each, were conducted using SPSS Version 19. Cronbach’s Alpha value obtained shows the reliability of the items are high (0.907) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy is 0.825. The test of validity shows rotated component matrix in two components which all items loaded above 0.30 and each item loaded with its proposed constructs. Frequency analysis was conducted to identify the frequency of ethical consumption behavior performed by respondents and the influence level of contextual aspects on the respondents’ ethical consumption behavior. For pre-cycling behavior the majority of respondents (50.6%) performed ‘sometimes’ and ‘rarely’ while for the reusing and recycling behavior 46.3% of the respondents performed ‘always’ and ‘most of the time’. Almost 60.0% of the respondents stated that contextual aspects have a ‘very strong’ and ‘strong’ influence on their ethical consumption behavior’s decision making. Pearson correlation demonstrates that the two categories of ethical consumption behavior have a positive correlation and statistically significant with all four categories of contextual aspects (either p<0.01 or p<0.05).


Kertas kerja ini adalah berdasarkan kepada data kuantitatif daripada kajian sebenar dalam membincangkan: (a) etika penggunaan umat Islam di Bandar Baru Bangi (BBB) Malaysia yang baru-baru ini dinobatkan sebagai 'bandar ilmu' dan (b) aspek kontekstual yang menggalakkan atau tidak menggalakkan umat Islam untuk menggunakan secara beretika. Tingkah laku etika penggunaan yang diukur, dikategorikan kepada dua kategori: (a) pra-kitar dan (b) kitar semula & guna semula, manakala aspek kontekstual yang diukur dikategorikan kepada empat kategori: (a) sosial; (B) agama; (C) ekonomi dan (d) politik. Kaedah metodologi kuantitatif, iaitu, soal selidik digunakan untuk mendapat maklumat berkaitan etika penggunaan umat Islam di BBB dan juga pengaruh kepada aspek kontekstual. Oleh itu, borang soal selidik diedarkan kepada 563 umat Islam di BBB, dan 178 daripada mereka memberi maklum balas. Ujian kebolehpercayaan dan kesahan daripada 21 item yang setiap satunya mempunyai 5 skala, telah dijalankan menggunakan perisian SPSS versi 19.0. Nilai Alpha Cronbach yang diperoleh menunjukkan kebolehpercayaan item adalah tinggi (0.907) dan Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) yang mengukur kemampuan persampelan adalah 0.825. Ujian kesahan menunjukkan rotated component matriks dalam dua komponen di mana semua item yang dimuatkan melebihi 0.30 dan setiap item berada dalam konstruk yang dicadangkan. Analisis frekuensi dijalankan untuk mengenal pasti kekerapan tingkah laku penggunaan beretika yang dilakukan oleh responden dan tahap pengaruh aspek kontekstual kepada tingkah laku penggunaan beretika responden. Majoriti responden (50.6%) menunjukkan 'kadang-kadang' dan 'jarang' untuk tingkah laku pra-kitar manakala 46.3% daripada responden menunjukkan 'selalu' dan 'kebanyakan masa bagi tingkah laku guna semula dan kitar semula. Hampir 60.0% daripada responden menyatakan bahawa aspek kontekstual mempunyai pengaruh yang 'sangat kuat' dan 'kuat' dalam membuat keputusan tingkah laku penggunaan beretika mereka. Korelasi Pearson menunjukkan bahawa kedua-dua kategori tingkah laku penggunaan beretika mempunyai hubungan yang positif dan signifikan secara statistik dengan keempat-empat kategori aspek kontekstual (sama ada p <0.01 atau p <0.05).

Full Text:



Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. 1980. Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour. Englewood Cliffs. N.J: Prentice-Hall.

Baharuddin, A. 1992. Ethics and Environment – an Islamic perspective. Paper presented at the National Seminar on Ethics and Environment. Universiti of Malaya, 4-5 August.

Bakar, O. 2007. Environmental Wisdom for Planet Earth: The Islamic Heritage. Kuala Lumpur: Center for Civilizational Dialogue, University of Malaya.

De Chatel, F. 2003. Prophet Muhammad: A pioneer of the environment. [15 April 2004]

Dunlap, R.E. 1991. Public opinion in the 1980’s: Clear consensus, ambiguous commitment. Environment 33(8): 9-15 & 32-37.

Ebreo, A., Hershey, J., & Vining, J. 1999. Reducing solid waste: Linking recycling to environmentally responsible consumerism. Environment and Behaviour 31(1): 107-135.

Fowler, C.T. 2003. The ecological implications of ancestral religion and reciprocal exchange in a sacred forest in Karendi (Sumba, Indonesia). Worldviews 7(3): 303-329.

Hand, C.M., & Van Liere, K.D. 1984. Religion, mastery-over-nature and environmental concern. Social Forces 63(2): 555-570.

Hess, S. 1998. Individual behaviour and collective action towards the environment: An economic framework based on the social customs approach. Rationality and Society 10(2): 203-221.

Huebner, R.B & M.W Lipsey. 1981. The relationship of three measures of locus of control to environmental activism. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 2(1): 45-58.

Hulme, M. 2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change. Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Letcher, A. 2003. Gaia told me to do it: Resistance and the idea of nature within contemporary British eco-Paganism. Ecotheology 8(1): 61-84.

Mawil, Y.I.D. 1990. Islamic environmental ethics, law and society. In J.R. Engel, & J.G. Engel (Eds.), Ethics of environment and development, pp. 189-198. London: Belhaven Press.

Mainieri, T., Barnett, E. G., Valdero, T.R., Unipan, J.B., & Oskamp, S. 1997. Green buying: The influence of environmental concern on consumer behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology 137(2): 189-204.

Milbrath, L.W. 1984. A proposed value structure for a sustainable society. Environmentalist 4: 113-124.

Moncrief, L.W. 1973. The cultural basis of our environmental crisis. In I.G. Barbour (Ed.). Western man and environmental ethics, pp. 31-42. Sydney: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Nasr, S.H. 1990. Religion and environmental crisis: An oriental overview. India International Centre Quarterly: 113-128.

Oom Do Valle, P., Rebelo, E., Reis, E., & Menezes, J. 2005. Combining behavioral theories to predict recycling involvement. Environment and Behaviour 37(3): 364-396.

Oskamp, S., Harrington, M., Edwards, T., Sherwood, D., Okuda, S., & Swanson, D. 1991. Factors influencing household recycling behaviour? Environment and Behaviour 23(4): 494-519.

Rokeach, M. 1973. The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.

Schwartz, S.H. 1992. Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In MP Zanna (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 1-65. San Diego: CA, Academic Press.

Schwepker, C.H, Jr., & Cornwell, T.B. 1991. An examination of ecologically concerned consumers and their intention to purchase ecologically packaged products. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 10(2): 77- 101.

Shrum, L.J, Lowrey, T. M, & McCarty, J. A. 1994. Recycling as a marketing problem: A framework for strategy development. Psychology and Marketing 11(4): 393-416.

Shrum, L.J, McCarty, J. A., & Lowrey, T. M. 1995. Buyer characteristics of the green consumer and their implications for advertising strategy. Journal of Advertising 24(2): 71-82.

Shworm, R., Bidwell, D., Dan, A., and Dietz, T. 2010. Understanding US Public Support for Domestic Climate Change Policies. Global Environmental Change 20: 472-482.

Thogersen, J. 2000. The ethical consumer: Moral norms and packaging choice. Journal of Consumer Policy 22: 439-460.

Ujang, Z (Ed.). 1993. Islam dan alam sekitar. Kuala Lumpur: Institut Kajian Dasar.

Van Liere, K.D. & Dunlap, R. E. 1980. The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly 44(2): 181-197.

Wall, G. 1995. Barriers to individual environmental action: The influence of attitudes and social experiences. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 32(4): 465-493.

Wersal, L. 1995. Islam and environmental ethics: Tradition responds to contemporary Challenges. Zygon 30(3): 451-459.

White, L. Jr. 1973. The historical roots of our ecological crisis. In. I.G. Barbour (Eds.). Man and Environmental Ethics, pp. 18-30, Sydney: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Wilber, C.K. 1998. Consumption-John Paul II, catholic social thought and the ethics of consumption. International Journal of Social Economics 25(11/12): 1595-1607.

Yaacob, M. 2009. Environmentally Ethical Behaviour. Germany: VDM Verlag.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

  ISSN: 1985-6830

eISSN: 2550-2271

Institut Islam Hadhari
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
43600 UKM Bangi
Selangor, MALAYSIA.

Phone: +603-8921 6988/6994
Fax: +603-8921 6990