This document presents research on factors influencing students' opinions on environmental sustainability in business. The researcher conducted interviews with employees at a company called IPCS to understand their perspectives. He also administered questionnaires to university students to examine how emotional and empirical stimulators impact views on sustainability. The questionnaires included control, emotional, and empirical conditions. Statistical analysis found that both stimulators had a positive influence on opinions, with emotional stimulators having a greater effect on students. Females responded more strongly to the emotional stimulator while males responded more to the empirical. The research provides insights into effective strategies for businesses and universities to promote sustainability.

1. FACTORS INFLUENCING
STUDENTS’ OPINIONS ON
ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY IN BUSINESS
Nicholas Conte
MA (Hons)
Environmental Sustainability
April
2016

2. Declaration
I, Nicholas Conte, affirm that this dissertation has not been previously published,
constructed or written by anyone else other than me. This dissertation has not been
submitted for anything other than the attainment of the degree, Master of Arts (Hons.) in
Environmental Sustainability at the University of Dundee. All information not produced
by me has been appropriately and adequately acknowledged and cited.
April 8th
, 2016

3. 1
Acknowledgements
There are many people that I would like to thank. First, I would like to thank my supervisor,
Dr. Vincent Onyango, for his invaluable assistance, comments and constructive feedback
throughout the entire process. Dr. Onyango was always available with words of inspiration,
insightful contributions – and a smile. I would also like to thank Dr. Maj-Britt di Folco,
who guided me and provided invaluable assistance throughout the process. I also would
like to thank all those employees at IPCS and the University of Dundee students who took
the time to complete my questionnaires: I couldn’t have done it without you. Many thanks
go out to my friends and family who supported me during this journey. A special thanks
goes to my father, Michael Conte, who provided insight and unconditional encouragement.
Thank you all so much!

4. 2
Table of Contents
Declaration .................................................................................................................. 0
Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................... 1
List of Tables ............................................................................................................... 4
List of Figures .............................................................................................................. 5
Glossary ...................................................................................................................... 6
Abstract ...................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 10
1.2 Research aims, objectives and questions ...................................................................... 11
1.3 Research problem, assumption and hypothesis ............................................................ 12
1.4 Justification for research .............................................................................................. 12
1.5 Research approach ....................................................................................................... 12
1.6 Limitations to the research approach ............................................................................ 13
1.7 Expected contribution of research ................................................................................ 13
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................. 14
2.1 Importance of Environmental Sustainability ................................................................. 14
2.2 Behavioral changes to underpin sustainability .............................................................. 14
2.3 Empirical versus Emotional ........................................................................................... 16
2.4 Marketing Sustainability ............................................................................................... 17
2.5 Sustainability in Higher Education. ............................................................................... 18
2.6 How Businesses affect Sustainability ............................................................................ 19
2.7 Key Findings from Literature Review ............................................................................. 20
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 22
3.1 Choice for IPCS ............................................................................................................. 22
3.2 Choice for Dundee University ....................................................................................... 22
3.3 Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 23
3.3.1 Method 1: Interviews .............................................................................................. 23
3.3.2 Method 2: Surveys .................................................................................................. 24
3.3 Questionnaire design .................................................................................................... 27
3.3.1 Qualitative Interview ............................................................................................... 27
3.3.2 Survey Design .......................................................................................................... 28
3.3.3 The five questionnaires ........................................................................................... 29
3.4 Rationale ...................................................................................................................... 31
3.5 Validity and credibility of data ...................................................................................... 31
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS ...................................................................................... 33
4.1 Thematic Analysis ......................................................................................................... 33
4.1. 1 Results: ............................................................................................................. 34
4.2 Statistical Analysis ........................................................................................................ 34
4.3 Results ........................................................................................................................ 36
4.3.1 Shapiro test ............................................................................................................. 39
4.3.2 Summary of Questionnaire 1 – Control ................................................................... 39
4.3.3 Legend for the subsequent density charts (Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5) ................ 40

5. 3
4.3.4 Summary of Questionnaire 2 – Emotional .............................................................. 43
4.3.5 Summary of Questionnaire 3 - Empirical ................................................................. 47
4.3.5.1 Wilcox test of Significance .................................................................................... 48
4.3.6 Comparison between Control, Emotional and Empirical ........................................ 50
4.3.7 Female Analysis ....................................................................................................... 52
4.3.8 Male Analysis ........................................................................................................... 55
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..................................................................... 57
5.1 Interview ...................................................................................................................... 57
5.1.1 Results from Interview ........................................................................................ 57
5.1.2 Summary of Responses ....................................................................................... 60
5.2 Quantitative ................................................................................................................. 60
5.2 Question Analysis ....................................................................................................... 61
5.2.2 Analysis of Question 1 ............................................................................................. 61
5.2.3 Analysis of Question 2: ............................................................................................ 63
5.2.4 Analysis of Question 3: ............................................................................................ 64
5.2.5 Analysis of Question 4: ............................................................................................ 66
5.2.6 Analysis of question 5: ............................................................................................ 67
5.2.7 Analysis of question 6: ............................................................................................ 68
5.2.7 Analysis of question 7: ............................................................................................ 69
5.3 Summary of Findings .................................................................................................... 70
5.3.1 Both Stimulators had a positive influence ............................................................... 71
5.3.2 Emotional Stimulators appear to work better with students ................................. 72
5.3.3 Females respond better to emotional, and males better to empirical ................... 73
Question 1. ....................................................................................................................... 74
Question 2. ....................................................................................................................... 74
Question 3. ....................................................................................................................... 75
Question 4. ....................................................................................................................... 75
Question 5. ....................................................................................................................... 75
Question 6. ....................................................................................................................... 76
Question 7. ....................................................................................................................... 76
5.3.4 Measureable Topics ................................................................................................ 76
5.4 Justify approach ........................................................................................................... 77
5.5 Critical Evaluation: Limitations ..................................................................................... 78
5.5.1 Limitations to experiments ..................................................................................... 78
5.5.2 The nature of complexity. ....................................................................................... 79
5.5.3 Delivery method. ..................................................................................................... 79
5.5.4 Sample Size .............................................................................................................. 80
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 81
6.1 Constraints ................................................................................................................... 81
6.2 Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 82
6.3 Scope for future research ............................................................................................. 82
Appendix ................................................................................................................... 84
1.1 Interview Questions ..................................................................................................... 84
1.2 Interview Responses ..................................................................................................... 84
1.2.1 Adam Schmidt, Technical Deputy Director .............................................................. 84
1.2.2 Daniel Filchak, Operations Manager ....................................................................... 85

6. 4
1.2.3 Les D Toews, V.P. of Purchasing .............................................................................. 86
1.2.4 Brandon Jahner, Applications manager .................................................................. 87
1.2.5 Marc Fedou, International Logistics Manager ......................................................... 88
1.2.6 Murray Rose, Production Manager ......................................................................... 90
1.2.7 Kim Overstreet, Senior Account Manager ............................................................... 90
1.3 Ethical Approval Form .................................................................................................. 92
1.4 Survey Formatted questions ......................................................................................... 93
1.5 Emotional Stimulators .................................................................................................. 94
1.6 Empirical Stimulators .................................................................................................. 102
1.7 Likert Data: Questionnaire responses ......................................................................... 103
1.8 R Code ........................................................................................................................ 108
1.8.1 Shapiro-Wilk test for Control ................................................................................ 108
1.8.2 R Code for Wilcoxon-signed test: Emotional Compared to Control ...................... 109
1.8.3 R Code for Wilcoxon-signed test: Empirical Compared to Control ....................... 109
References .............................................................................................................. 111
List of Tables
Table 1. Control data breakdown: Control Data (n=59) .............................................................................. 37
Table 2. Emotional data breakdown Emotional Data (n=44) ...................................................................... 37
Table 3. Empirical data breakdown: Empirical Data (n=50) ........................................................................ 38
Table 4. Breakdown of gender identity for Control: Which of the following best describes you? (n=59) ... 40
Table 5. Breakdown of education level for Control: What year of study are you in? (n=59) ...................... 40
Table 6. Breakdown of gender identity for Emotional: Which of the following best described you? (n=44)
...................................................................................................................................................................... 43
Table 7. Breakdown of education level for Emotional: What year of study are you in? (n=44) .................. 43
Table 8. Wilcox test of significant difference: Emotional responses compared to Control ........................... 46
Table 9. Breakdown of gender identity for Empirical: Which of the following best describes you? (n=50) 47
Table 10. Breakdown of education level for Empirical: What year of study are you in? (n=50) ................. 47
Table 11. Wilcox test for significant difference: Empirical compared to Control ......................................... 49
Table 12. Total breakdown of gender identity ............................................................................................. 50
Table 13. Summary of gender identity: (n=153): .......................................................................................... 50
Table 14. Breakdown of education level (n=153) ......................................................................................... 50
Table 15. Summary of education level: ........................................................................................................ 51
Table 16. Breakdown of Likert responses ..................................................................................................... 51
Table 17. Female responses for Control: Average Female Response for Control (n=29): ........................... 52
Table 18. Female responses for emotional: Average Female Response for Emotional (n=25): .................. 53
Table 19. Female responses for Empirical: Average Female Response for Empirical (n=29): ..................... 53
Table 20. Male responses for Control: Average Male Response for Control (n=30) ..................................... 55
Table 21. Male responses for Emotional Average Male Response for Emotional (n=18): ............................ 55
Table 22. Male responses for Empirical: Average Male Response for Empirical (n=21): .............................. 55
Table 23. Breakdown of Likert responses for Control question 1: QA1: “Control” – (n=59) ........................ 61
Table 24. Breakdown of Likert responses for Emotional question 1: QA2: “Emotional” – (n=44) ............... 61
Table 25. Breakdown of Likert responses for Empirical question 1: QA3: “Empirical” – (n=50) .................. 62
Table 26. Breakdown of Likert data for Control question 2: QA1: “Control” - (n=59) .................................. 63
Table 27. Breakdown of Likert data for Emotional question 2: QA2: “Emotional” - (n=44) ........................ 63
Table 28. Breakdown of Likert data for Empirical question 2: QA3: “Empirical” - (n=50) ........................... 63
Table 29. Breakdown of Likert data for Control question 3: QA1: “Control” - (n=59) .................................. 64
Table 30. Breakdown of Likert data for Emotional question 3: QA2: “Emotional” - (n=44) ........................ 64
Table 31. Breakdown of Likert data for Empirical question 3: QA3: “Empirical” - (n=50) ........................... 65
Table 32. Breakdown of Likert data for Control question 4: QA1: “Control” - (n=59) .................................. 66

7. 5
Table 33. Breakdown of Likert data for Emotional question 4: QA2: “Emotional” - (n=44) ........................ 66
Table 34. Breakdown of Likert data for Empirical question 4: QA3: “Empirical” – (n=50) .......................... 66
Table 35. Breakdown of Likert data for Control question 5: Control: (n=59) ............................................... 67
Table 36. Breakdown of Likert data for Emotional question 5: QA2: Emotional: (n=44) ............................. 68
Table 37. Breakdown of Likert data for Empirical question 5: QA3 Empirical: (n=50) ................................. 68
Table 38. Breakdown of Likert data for Control question 6: Control: (n=59) ............................................... 69
Table 39. Breakdown of Likert data for Emotional question 6: Emotional: (n=44) ...................................... 69
Table 40.. Breakdown of Likert data for Empirical question 7: Empirical: (n=50) ........................................ 69
Table 41. Breakdown of Likert data for Control question 7: Control: (n=59) ............................................... 69
Table 42. Breakdown of Likert data for Emotional question 7: Emotional (n=44) ....................................... 70
Table 43. Breakdown of Likert data for Empirical question 7: Empirical (n=50) .......................................... 70
Table 44. Total female responses with Likert averages: Female Response (n=84) ...................................... 73
Table 45. Total male responses of Likert averages: Male Responses (n=69) ............................................... 74
List of Figures
Figure 1. Chart illustrating the breakdown of the five circulated questionnaires ........................................ 36
Figure 2. Average responses for the Control, Emotional and Empirical questionnaires ............................... 38
Figure 3. Density chart for Control (R Code, 2016) ....................................................................................... 42
Figure 4. Density chart for Emotional (R Code, 2016) .................................................................................. 44
Figure 5. Density chart for Empirical (R Code, 2016) .................................................................................... 48
Figure 6. Average female responses ............................................................................................................. 54
Figure 7. Average male responses ................................................................................................................ 56
Figure 8. 1993, a turtle wrapped in plastic and forced to grow disproportionately. .................................... 94
Figure 9. A bird caught in an oil spill at East Grand Terre Island along the Louisiana coast ........................ 95
Figure 10. An Albatross killed by too much plastic consumption ................................................................ 96
Figure 11. Seal's head nearly severed by commercial fishing wire ............................................................... 96
Figure 12. A child drinks water near a stream in Fuyuan county, Yunnan province ..................................... 97
Figure 13. Dead Fish at Lake in Wuhan, Central China’s Hubei Province ..................................................... 97
Figure 14. A dystopian landscape, Bangladesh ............................................................................................ 98
Figure 15. Industrial oil spill near Dalian port, Liaoning province ................................................................ 98
Figure 16. Tar sand sewage dumped in the Athabasca River, Alberta, Indigenous communities downstream
at risk of being poisoned by toxic seepage ................................................................................................... 99
Figure 17. This 'trail of fire' indicates where the front of the rapidly disappearing Lewis Glacier on Mount
Kenya used to be in 1987 ............................................................................................................................. 99
Figure 18. National Willamette forest, Oregon (USA), 99% deforested ..................................................... 100
Figure 19. Fire at oil platform in Gulf of Mexico, April 2010 ...................................................................... 100
Figure 20. Indonesian forest transformed into palm plantation ................................................................ 101
Figure 21. Mir mine, Russia. The world’s biggest diamond mine: Source: Google Maps ........................... 101
Figure 22. Svalbard, Norway. An area that normally freezes in winter. Last year it remained ice-free all
season. This polar bear headed north, in search for suitable sea ice to hunt on. Finding none, it died. .... 102

8. 6
Glossary
AMM: American Marketing Association
CEO: Chief Executive Officer
ES: Environmental Sustainability
HE: Higher Education
IEMA: Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment
IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IPCS: I.P. Callison & Sons
MA: Millennium Assessment
SD: Sustainable Development
TEEB: The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity
UN: United Nations
UNESCO: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNGCA: United Nations Global Compact-Accenture
UoD: University of Dundee
QA1: Control Questionnaire
QA2: Emotional Questionnaire
QA3: Empirical Questionnaire
QA4: Before After Control Intervention Emotional Questionnaire
QA5: Before After Control Intervention Empirical Questionnaire
VP: Vice President

9. 7
Abstract
Environmental Sustainability (ES): the capacity to endure. ES is a state in which the
demands placed on the environment and current resource needs can be met while allowing
future generations to meet their own needs (Brundtland, 1987). This study acknowledges
that the topic of sustainability is an open-ended discussion, subject to debate. This
investigation does not intend to ‘solve’ sustainability, but to shed light on new ways to shift
attitudes towards sustainability in a business setting, using the University of Dundee as a
case study.
The natural environment is essential to human well-being, and ES is jeopardized by
numerous external factors, one of the most significant being anthropogenic (Stern, 2000;
Mooney et al. 2013). As future leaders, university students have a responsibility to ensure
that business industry does not jeopardize the delicate balance between resource
consumption and the environment.
Methodology
The research investigates how different stimulators affect student opinion on the
importance of ES in business. The study tested emotional and empirical stimuli with
University of Dundee students. The research used a thematic qualitative analysis of face-
to-face interviews with senior business managers at IPCS, and data-driven quantitative
evaluation with statistical analysis of Likert data gathered online from University of
Dundee students.
Justification
Economic and ES have been considered together for several decades, yet corporations have
some of the largest adverse impacts on the environment (Baker, 2016). HE institutions
produce business leaders, and are therefore key to achieving SD, yet sustainability is not a
core focus in business academia (Pensen, 2003). Current literature reveals a gap in
empirical evidence demonstrating different factors in influencing students’ attitudes
towards positive sustainable integration and marketing sustainability towards students.
This research aims to fill that gap.

10. 8
Qualitative discoveries
There were three key findings in the qualitative analysis undertaken at IPCS. First, the
managers interviewed possessed neither the skills nor the knowledge adequate to employ
sustainability initiatives at a senior level. It was evident that there was a significant lack of
understanding, initiatives and sustainable structure within IPCS. Second, the interviewees
expressed an eagerness to learn about how they can help their industry achieve
sustainability through pragmatic and systematic plans. Third, it was clear that there was no
uniform definition of sustainability. Overall, it was identified that even in a business that
works directly with the environment, such as IPCS, managers may not understand
environmental consequences, and therefore it is important that employees be trained and
knowledgeable about sustainability.
Quantitative discoveries
There were four key findings in the quantitative data. First, both emotional and empirical
stimulators had an increase in pro-environmental behavioral responses, signifying that
exposure to adverse environmental impacts can influence a student into being more likely
to accept and agree that sustainability has a place in business. Second, the statistical tests
provided evidence to suggest that emotional stimuli produce higher pro-environmental
responses. Third, the data suggests that females recorded a higher pro-environmental
response when exposed to emotional stimuli. Males recorded a higher pro-environmental
response when exposed to empirical stimuli. Fourth, the statistical tests revealed that only
certain changes were significant. These questions that were significantly different related
to sustainability in academia and sustainable obligations of organizations. The questions
that did not produce statistically significantly different data were the level of which
students value working or studying at an institution that is environmentally responsible,
and the extent of which sustainability drives the market. However, the data trends were
analyzed, and the trends concur with the aforementioned discoveries.
Significance of the findings
The findings will allow educators to make more informed decisions when creating content
for seminars and lectures, and expand the knowledge of what factors influence student

11. 9
attitudes regarding sustainability. The results indicate students believe that ES should be a
mandatory course for business students. The data suggests that students at the University
of Dundee reacted more positively to emotional imagery rather than empirical statements.
The research has opened the door to further investigation on the subject matter. The
research has identified four key areas for further research:
1. If there is a significant difference between students’ level of environmental
responsiveness dependent on their age, years of HE or location of study.
2. If there is a significant difference between the delivery methods of
environmental information? For example, if the information is presented in an
interactive group, or isolated individually.
3. A survey could be circulated to recent business graduates with the intent of
discovering how sustainability fits into their occupations. Were business
graduates who had taken sustainability related classes more likely to get
employed? Or more likely to advocate and implement sustainability in their
occupation?
4. A study could explore if there is a significant difference between the
deliverance method of sustainability content within different universities. For
example, university A students fill in a survey that assess their perspective on
ES in business. Then the course lecture content is supplied in the form of
emotional stimulators. At the end of the course, the respondents would be
presented with the same survey. The statistical difference could then be
calculated and compared with University B, who instead of emotional lecture
content, the materials were provided in the forms of empirical statements.