Sustainability is a central theme of this work and must be contextualized within consumption and outdoor equipment. It is important to emphasize that although this concept is widely accepted, it remains a controversial topic with various interpretations (24–27). It is most commonly defined as the effort to meet the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This definition emphasizes the balance between economic, social (28), and environmental aspects (3, 29–31).

In the context of consumption, it is necessary to distinguish between two perspectives on sustainability (8, 24, 32). The objectivist approach focuses on determining the maximum sustainable levels of consumption. This approach seeks to objectively determine the maximum sustainable levels of consumption and the measures that need to be taken to ensure these levels are not exceeded (24). The alternative approach emphasizes the limited nature of resources and the unevenness of their consumption, leading to the promotion of sustainable consumption that minimizes environmental impacts. This approach focuses on equitable consumption, where consumption would be socially fair and minimize environmental impacts (10).

Given the current unsustainable models of production and consumption, attention must be paid to the concept of the circular economy (CE). CE focuses on minimizing waste and transforming it into a resource, thereby reducing dependence on primary raw materials and minimizing negative environmental impacts (7).

The life cycle of a sustainable outdoor product emphasizes ethics and long-term use (33). Key aspects include (34):

Production Materials (34–36): Prioritizing environmentally friendly materials that minimize environmental impact. A significant step is the ban on PFC substances in the European Union since 2020. Both natural and synthetic materials have their advantages and disadvantages. Synthetic fibers are accessible and wrinkle-resistant but release microplastics (33). Natural fibers are antibacterial and thermally insulating.

To understand the factors influencing consumer behavior in the realm of sustainable outdoor apparel, the theory of planned behavior (TPB) is crucial. This theory, extending the theory of reasoned action, considers attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (18, 43, 44). Attitudes represent individual evaluations of behavior, encompassing positive or negative assessments of the given behavior (45). Subjective norms represent perceived social pressure (45). Perceived behavioral control is defined as the perception of the ease or difficulty of performing the behavior (18, 45, 46).

TPB is utilized to examine sustainable behavior in various domains, including consumption (47, 48). Despite the growing ethical consumption, the attitude-behavior gap persists (11, 13, 15, 16, 49). Studies aim to identify barriers to sustainable purchasing, such as price, convenience, and perceived quality. The priority is to find factors related to this discrepancy. The theoretical framework for this study is illustrated in Figure 1.

In the customer decision-making process, the attributes of sustainable outdoor products play a crucial role. These attributes include (9, 27, 50) the use of environmentally friendly production materials, the country (region) of production, aspects of social sustainability, the possibility of manufacturer repairs, durability, and longevity.

Key factors influencing the attitude-behavior gap include price (4, 5, 7), community attitudes towards sustainability, awareness of sustainability aspects (5, 7, 14), saturation with the topic of sustainability (5, 51, 52) and the feeling of insignificance of individual efforts (48). The high price of sustainable products is often cited as a key reason for this discrepancy. Based on the synthesis of prior studies and empirical evidence, the following research hypothesis is proposed for the present investigation:

This hypothesis is grounded in the theoretical and empirical framework established by previous research, which highlights the complex interplay between consumer attitudes, purchasing intentions, and willingness to pay in the context of sustainable consumption.

Awareness of sustainability aspects is a fundamental prerequisite for the intention to purchase sustainable products (52–54). Saturation with the topic of sustainability and the feeling of insignificance of individual efforts can lead to the rejection of purchasing such products (52). People may refuse to buy sustainably because they are tired of the constant pressure and information about the importance of sustainable behavior (48).

The research sample consists of 311 respondents who engage in outdoor sports and activities. The inclusion criteria specified participation in outdoor activities and age ≥18 years. The exclusion criterion was incomplete questionnaire submissions. In total, six respondents were excluded during data cleaning. The resulting structure of the respondents is presented in Table 1.

In the questionnaire, most questions utilized scaling, specifically using star ratings to capture the importance of individual attributes and factors. Additionally, closed-ended questions with a single possible answer were used to record demographic characteristics, attitudes, and purchasing behavior (likelihood of purchasing sustainable outdoor apparel and willingness to pay a premium for sustainability attributes). The questionnaire also included four open-ended questions, one of which served as a filter question to potentially exclude respondents who do not engage in any outdoor sports or activities. The questionnaire employed several response scales: a 10-point star-rating scale (1 = “least important”, 10 = “most important”), an 11-point scale (−5 to +5), a 0%–100% probability scale for purchase likelihood, and willingness-to-pay items presented in percentage-based categories. The variables measuring purchase probability and willingness to pay a premium were recoded into a numeric 1–10 scale based on their respective percentage categories.

The questionnaire comprised both closed- and open-ended items. Key constructs were operationalized as follows:

Awareness of sustainable attributes: Assessed through an open-ended item (“Please describe what sustainability means to you in the context of outdoor apparel”). Responses were subsequently coded according to product life-cycle phases.

Prior to the main data collection, the questionnaire was pilot-tested on a sample of 20 respondents from the target group to ensure the clarity of the items and the appropriateness of the scales used. The distinction between single-item and multi-item constructs is clearly presented in the operationalization overview in Figure 2 and further detailed in Appendix A. Based on the feedback received, several questions — particularly those related to attitudes toward sustainability — were revised for improved wording. The attitude items were revised following the pilot study, resulting in improved clarity and the removal of ambiguous wording. Content validity of the instrument was ensured through expert evaluation by three specialists in the fields of sports management and environmental marketing, who assessed the relevance of individual items in relation to the theoretical framework of the study.

The data analysis was conducted using statistical descriptive methods, including the calculation of absolute and relative frequencies, means, standard deviations, and skewness. In the analysis, the open-ended responses were coded using a deductive coding approach based on established product life-cycle phases. Two independent coders categorized all responses, and percent agreement was used to assess inter-coder reliability. The percent agreement reached 93.14%, indicating a high level of consistency between coders.

To empirically test the hypothesis, an analysis of variance (ANOVA) will be employed. This statistical approach enables the assessment of whether the observed differences in purchase probability and willingness to pay a premium for sustainable attributes are statistically significant within the research sample. For the purposes of conducting the ANOVA, the 0%–100% probability scales for “Purchase probability” and “Willingness to pay a premium” were recoded into a 10-point scale (1 = 0%–9%, 2 = 10%–19%, 3 = 20%–29%, 4 = 30%–39%, 5 = 40%–49%, 6 = 50%–59%, 7 = 60%–69%, 8 = 70%–79%, 9 = 80%–89%, 10 = 90%–100%).

This study was conducted in full compliance with the ethical standards required for academic research involving human participants. The research employed a quantitative methodology through an anonymous online survey, ensuring that no personally identifiable information was collected or stored. The study adhered strictly to the guidelines set forth by the Faculty Ethics Committee for anonymous online quantitative research. All necessary ethical principles — including voluntary participation, data protection, and confidentiality — were rigorously observed throughout the research process.

Respondents’ awareness of sustainable attributes of outdoor apparel in the context of the product life cycle was assessed using an open-ended question. The responses (e.g., “environmentally friendly production”, “ecological packaging”, “no use of plastic”, “guaranteed repair by the manufacturer”, “production from recycled materials”, “fair treatment of animals”) were subsequently categorized into six groups according to the product life cycle phase: production, distribution, usage, damage, end of life, and overall lifespan. Table 2 summarizes the frequency and proportion of responses and respondents in each category.

The results indicate that a relative majority of responses (37.3%) pertained to the production phase of the product. A total of 228 respondents (73.3%) associate the term sustainability in the context of outdoor apparel with aspects related to production, such as the use of recycled or organic materials and the reduction of water and energy consumption. The second most frequently mentioned category was the overall lifespan of the product, cited by 157 respondents (50.5%). Sustainability aspects related to distribution, usage, damage (e.g., repairability), and end of life (e.g., recycling) were mentioned significantly less frequently.

While the open-ended question suggests that awareness of sustainable attributes is primarily focused on production, a subsequent closed-ended question asked whether some of the information about sustainable aspects across the product life cycle was new to the respondents (this information was provided to respondents in the text between questions). Nearly half of the respondents (44.7%) indicated that this information was not new to them. This slight discrepancy between the responses to the mentioned questions can be explained by the fact that respondents may be aware of various sustainable initiatives (e.g., repair guarantees), but do not explicitly associate these with the general term “sustainability” during spontaneous recall.

Using 5 questions in the questionnaire, respondents rated the importance of five defined sustainability attributes when purchasing outdoor apparel on a ten-point scale (1—least important, 10—most important): durability and longevity, the possibility of manufacturer repairs, aspects of social sustainability, the country (region) of production, and the use of environmentally friendly production materials. Table 3 presents the statistical data (mean, standard deviation, skewness coefficient) for each of these attributes.

The results indicate that respondents attribute the highest level of importance to the attribute of product durability and longevity (mean 8.49). Following with a slightly lower but still significant mean of 6.67 is the possibility of manufacturer repairs. The other three attributes—social sustainability aspects (mean 3.90), country (region) of production (mean 4.46), and the use of environmentally friendly production materials (mean 4.86)—achieved statistically similar and significantly lower mean values. The positive skewness coefficient for these three attributes suggests that while many respondents rated them as having low importance, there is a smaller group that assigns them great significance.

The influence of personal attitudes vs. subjective norms was examined using an 11-point scale (−5—I evaluate the sustainable attributes of the product solely based on my own attitude, 0—influenced equally by both factors, +5—I evaluate the sustainable attributes of the product solely based on the attitude of close persons/outdoor community). Respondents rated what influences their opinion on the importance of sustainable attributes of outdoor apparel more. Table 4 presents the distribution of responses for the entire research sample and for respondents who indicated that they are part of a community that considers sustainable attributes important.

The average value of −1.56 for the entire research sample indicates a preference for personal attitudes over subjective norms when evaluating the importance of sustainable attributes. However, the high standard deviation (2.38) points to considerable variability in the responses. For the group of respondents who are part of a community that emphasizes sustainability, the average value is −0.48, indicating a more balanced influence between personal attitudes and subjective norms, with a slight, almost negligible preference for personal attitudes.

The importance of aspects influencing the attitude-behavior gap was assessed using 5 questions, where respondents rated on a ten-point scale (1—least influential, 10—most influential) the impact of high price, concerns about greenwashing, the feeling of insignificance of individual efforts, saturation with the topic of sustainability, and situational factors in the store (staff, store atmosphere, product presentation, etc.). Table 5 summarizes the statistical characteristics for each of these aspects.

The most significant factor that respondents perceive as a barrier to purchasing sustainable outdoor apparel, despite positive attitudes, is clearly the higher price of these products (mean 7.11). Situational factors in the store emerged as the second most significant factor (mean 6.28), highlighting the importance of the sales environment and customer interaction. Concerns about greenwashing (mean 4.05) and saturation with the topic of sustainability (mean 3.52) play a less significant role in the attitude-behavior gap, although they may be relevant for certain customer segments. The feeling of insignificance of individual efforts (mean 2.89) was found to be the least significant factor examined.

These results imply that to reduce the gap between positive attitudes and purchasing behavior in the realm of sustainable outdoor apparel, it is crucial to address customers’ price sensitivity and optimize situational factors in the sales environment. Measures aimed at increasing transparency and credibility of environmental claims and sensitively communicating about sustainability can also have a positive impact, although they do not appear to be primary barriers to purchase. The feeling of insignificance of individual efforts does not seem to be a significant psychological barrier in this specific context of outdoor apparel.

The probability of purchasing sustainable outdoor clothing was assessed on a scale from 0 to 100%, where respondents indicated the likelihood of purchasing such clothing. The 0%–100% probability scales for “Purchase probability” and “Willingness to pay a premium” were recoded into a 10-point scale (1 = 0%–9%, 2 = 10%–19%, 3 = 20%–29%, 4 = 30%–39%, 5 = 40%–49%, 6 = 50%–59%, 7 = 60%–69%, 8 = 70%–79%, 9 = 80%–89%, 10 = 90%–100%). The descriptive statistics of the results are presented in Table 6. The average reported probability of purchasing sustainable outdoor clothing was 7.45 (60%–69% interval). The negative skewness coefficient (−1.48) suggests that most respondents reported a higher probability of purchase.

Respondents’ willingness to pay extra for sustainable attributes was assessed through a question where they indicated the percentage price increase they would be willing to accept for the same type of outdoor clothing but with sustainable attributes. The average willingness to pay extra for sustainable attributes was 2.59 (10%–19% interval) of the price of a comparable product without these attributes. The standard deviation (1.51) indicates significant variability in the willingness to invest in sustainability. The positive skewness coefficient (1.57) shows that most responses were concentrated at lower premium values, although there is a smaller group of respondents willing to pay significantly more. It appears that respondents are primarily willing to pay extra for attributes related to the product's longevity, such as durability and repairability.

The difference between the probability of purchasing sustainable outdoor apparel and the willingness to pay a premium for such apparel was analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) at a significance level of p = 0.05. A repeated-measures ANOVA was conducted to compare respondents’ purchase probability for sustainable apparel and their willingness to pay a price premium for such products, both assessed within subjects. The independent variable was the attribute type (purchase probability vs. willingness to pay), and the dependent variables were the corresponding rating scores. The resulting p = 2.59E−139 (Table 7) provides evidence of a statistically significant difference between the variables under investigation, thereby confirming the research hypothesis. The analysis yielded the following statistical results: F = 1,097.65, df = 620, p = 2.59E−139. Figure 3 presents the means comparison plot with 95% confidence intervals, and Figure 4 provides the means accompanied by standard deviations.

The findings of this study have practical implications for outdoor companies aiming to promote and sell sustainable products. Educational campaigns focused on increasing awareness of sustainable attributes across the entire product life cycle—while emphasizing not only environmental aspects but also functional benefits such as longer lifespan and repairability—appear to be crucial. Raising such awareness may enhance customers’ appreciation of sustainable attributes and help reduce perceived price barriers. In addition, the results reinforce the importance of situational factors in the retail environment, suggesting that well-informed staff, transparent communication, and an attractive presentation of sustainable products can positively shape purchasing intentions. Because concerns about greenwashing still play a secondary yet notable role, building trust and credibility through evidence-based claims and third-party certifications can further support consumer confidence.

At the managerial level, the insights show that consumers prioritize durability and repairability more than other sustainability characteristics, indicating that firms should highlight these functional benefits in marketing communication, product labelling, and point-of-sale materials. Given that the higher price of sustainable apparel emerged as the primary barrier, companies may benefit from clearly articulating the value proposition of longer-lasting products and offering price-anchoring strategies, repair services, or loyalty programs that reward sustainable choices. Retailers should also consider adjusting store environments to support decision-making—for example, by integrating sustainability information into product displays or training sales staff to address questions about materials, production, or repair options.

For scholars, the findings offer empirical indications of how TPB-related factors—attitudes, awareness, norms, and perceived behavioral control—manifest in descriptive consumer evaluations. The study contributes exploratory insights into the attitude–behavior gap in a CEE outdoor apparel context, which remains under-researched. Future research should build on these findings by employing longitudinal, experimental, or model-based statistical approaches (e.g., SEM) to test causal mechanisms and validate construct structures.

Several limitations should be acknowledged. Because the study employs TPB as a theoretical frame rather than a formally tested model, the findings should be interpreted as exploratory insights into how TPB-related constructs appear in the data. The observed patterns in attitudes, awareness, and perceived barriers are therefore indicative rather than confirmatory, and they highlight areas where future TPB-based modeling (e.g., structural equation modeling or hierarchical regression) could provide stronger causal explanations.

The study relied on a non-probability convenience sample recruited through social-media groups, which may introduce self-selection bias. Participants who are more engaged in outdoor activities, more sustainability-aware, or more digitally active may have been more likely to participate. Second, the design is cross-sectional and based entirely on self-reported data, which limits causal inference and may be subject to social-desirability effects. Furthermore, the study focused specifically on sustainable outdoor apparel and did not examine other categories of outdoor equipment or general sportswear. Consequently, the findings may not fully capture consumer behavior across the broader outdoor or sports market.

This study focused on quantitative data collection using an electronic questionnaire. Future research could employ qualitative methods (e.g., in-depth interviews) to gain deeper insights into consumer decision-making processes and better understand the nuances of sustainability perceptions and factors influencing behavior. Further research could focus on specific market segments with different levels of awareness and attitudes towards sustainability, or on the impact of various types of marketing communication on bridging the gap between attitude and behavior.