Capable or Just Aware? Sustainable Consumption Challenges—A Case of Indonesian Youth

Despite growing environmental awareness among youth, the road from intention to action remains uneven. While many young people voice firm commitments to sustainability, their daily behaviours frequently tell a different story. This paradox is not merely a matter of personal inconsistency, but rather reflects deeper systemic and structural dynamics. It is also necessary to acknowledge that the urgency of promoting responsible consumption has intensified in recent years, particularly among younger generations who are expected to play a key role in adopting sustainable lifestyles. While developed economies fundamentally support or even incentivise sustainable behaviours, youths in developing economies, such as Indonesia, face inconsistent access to affordable sustainable options (D​j​a​f​a​r​o​v​a​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​F​o​o​t​s​,​ ​2​0​2​2; Gunawan et al., 2023; T. N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4). Based on these standpoints, the challenge, therefore, lies in a persistent gap between what young individuals know and believe about sustainability and their actual practices. Practically, while many express strong normative values and pro-environmental beliefs (H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1; Johnson & Chattaraman, 2021; Ritch, 2020), their actions often fall short, constrained by a mix of internal and external factors (L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​,​ ​2​0​1​5; Longo et al., 2019). This value-behaviour gap raises essential questions about how intention is formed, and more importantly, what prevents it from translating into sustainable actions.

Upon revisiting the work of extant scholars, traditional behavioural models have primarily focused on internal cognitive or normative variables, such as awareness, beliefs, and perceived control. For instance, SCT has long been applied to explain how people’s behaviours are shaped by observational learning, self-efficacy, and the internalisation of social expectations (D​i​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​5; H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1; Lin & Hsu, 2015). SCT’s emphasis on personal agency, particularly through constructs such as self-efficacy and behavioural modelling, has been widely utilised to explain green consumption behaviour in various contexts, including tourism, housing, and e-commerce (A​y​a​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​G​ü​r​b​ü​z​,​ ​2​0​2​1; J​i​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2). Yet, such models generally overlook the structural conditions that facilitate or hinder an individual’s capacity to act sustainably.

In response to this limitation, CA offers a broader lens. By emphasising the importance of fundamental freedoms and opportunities—what people are effectively able to do and be—CA complements the psychosocial perspective with attention to contextual barriers such as affordability (N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4; R​a​u​s​c​h​m​a​y​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​L​e​s​s​m​a​n​n​,​ ​2​0​1​3), accessibility (D​j​a​f​a​r​o​v​a​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​F​o​o​t​s​,​ ​2​0​2​2; S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​,​ ​2​0​2​1), and social as well as institutional support (F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8; L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​,​ ​2​0​1​5; Longo et al., 2019). Especially in developing countries like Indonesia, where economic disparities and systemic constraints persist, capability-based frameworks provide essential insights that cognitive models alone cannot capture. For example, L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​ ​(​2​0​1​5​) argued that operationalising sustainable consumption requires not only attention to individual motivations but also the conversion factors, such as socio-economic background, infrastructure, and institutional quality, that are associated with personal values and can be realised. Moreover, as Longo et al. (2019) highlighted, more profound environmental knowledge may paradoxically lead to behavioural paralysis. When individuals are overwhelmed by the complexity of sustainability trade-offs or become highly aware of systemic barriers beyond their control, their knowledge may create internal dilemmas and tensions that inhibit action.

Also, other popular behavioural theories, such as the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), Value-Belief-Norm (VBN) theory, and Social Identity Theory (SIT), attempt to explain consumer behaviour through individual-level constructs like perceived behavioural control, normative beliefs, and group affiliation (J​i​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2; Y​o​u​n​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​0). Nevertheless, these frameworks still predominantly rely on psychological intention as the predictor of action, leaving structural and environmental conditions underexplored. Therefore, this study seeks to bridge the gap between SCT and CA, each rooted in distinct assumptions and constructs, yet both relevant to understanding human behaviour and decision-making in responsible consumption. By drawing upon the complementary strengths of SCT and CA, we aim to develop a more comprehensive understanding of youth intentions and capability beliefs toward responsible consumption. Additionally, we examine how internal awareness and structural enablers jointly shape the capacity and willingness of Indonesian youth to engage in sustainable lifestyles. To this end, we develop and test three models, namely cognitive-based, capability-based, and the SCT-CA specifications, using a structured survey instrument, including scenarios that simulate real-life dilemmas. This approach enables us to unpack the interplay between psychosocial drivers and structural constraints, offering novel insights into what truly motivates youth to act sustainably or refrain from acting.

This study critically contributes by clarifying the disconnection between internal awareness and actual behavioural commitment among Indonesian youth in the realm of responsible consumption. First, by empirically examining the complementary roles of SCT and the CA across three theoretical models, it reveals that high levels of environmental or legal awareness alone are insufficient to generate consistent sustainable behaviour. Furthermore, using a structured survey instrument enriched with scenarios that simulate real-life dilemmas, it examines how youth interpret and respond to complex consumption trade-offs. Also, behavioural intention is not merely a product of cognitive or normative influence, but is shaped by the structural conditions surrounding affordability, accessibility, and support systems (Longo et al., 2019; Nath & Agrawal, 2023). Thus, we argue that interventions targeting behavioural change must move beyond knowledge-centric campaigns and instead address the contextual limitations that inhibit youth from translating intention into sustainable action, especially those in a developing-economy environment.

Secondly, by synthesising SCT’s behavioural mechanisms with CA’s structural sensibility, this study contributes to a growing call for behavioural frameworks that are both psychologically and contextually grounded. Furthermore, by providing a multidimensional framework, it constructively contributes to assessing youth behavioural intention through a structured survey with embedded scenarios. By presenting real-life sustainability dilemmas in the measurement, our study captures both intention and constraint in a more contextually grounded manner (E​z​e​l​l​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3; Ishida & Furukawa, 2013). This approach echoes Longo et al’s (2019) notion of knowledge-induced tension, in which individuals experience conflict not only within themselves but also concerning their environment, when structural and social norms limit their sustainable action. As their study shows, knowledge may lead to internal paralysis or confusion when individuals are unable to reconcile ideal sustainability values with trade-offs in real-life situations. Such psychological saturation reinforces our argument that, without tangible enabling conditions, youth awareness alone cannot be assumed to influence behavioural change (Mehta et al., 2024; Robichaud & Yu, 2022). Moreover, the scenarios developed for this study to measure behavioural intention add a novel methodological layer, enabling us to assess not only declared preferences but also how youth would respond in simulated real-life trade-offs. In doing so, it interrogates the conditions under which intention is formed, shaped, or inhibited. This dual-theoretical perspective is particularly relevant for policy and education strategies targeting youth sustainability behaviours in developing contexts like Indonesia, where idealistic environmental values may clash with constrained capabilities. Hence, this study integrates SCT and the CA model into a complementary framework, offering a more grounded understanding of the realities that shape and constrain responsible consumption among youth.

Young people have increasingly become a focal point in sustainability research, recognised for their significant potential in fostering long-term shifts toward sustainable consumption and catalysing broader socio-environmental change (Gunawan et al., 2023; Johnson & Chattaraman, 2021; M​a​ł​e​c​k​a​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2; N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4). Their pro-environmental behaviour can be seen as a convergence of individual values, prevailing social norms, and shared aspirations for a sustainable planetary future. Numerous studies have shown that younger generations tend to express stronger environmental concerns and greater intention to engage in sustainable practices than their older counterparts (Á​g​o​s​t​o​n​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​4; F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8), positioning them as key agents of change in the pursuit of responsible consumption. However, it should be noted that such intentions do not always translate into concrete actions, especially when constrained by economic limitations, lack of social support, or other structural barriers.

Moreover, youth engagement in pro-environmental behaviour is strongly influenced by factors such as environmental literacy, social identity, and peer group dynamics (D​j​a​f​a​r​o​v​a​ ​&​ ​F​o​o​t​s​,​ ​2​0​2​2; J​i​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2). For instance, young people who perceive themselves as part of environmentally conscious communities are more likely to internalise sustainable norms in their daily routines. Also, emotional and symbolic dimensions play a significant role: some youth adopt ethical consumption or environmentally friendly products as a means of expressing their identity and moral commitments. Nevertheless, their engagement often remains symbolic or limited to low-cost behaviours, while more effortful practices, for example, reducing particular consumption and consistently separating household waste, are less frequently undertaken. This highlights the need to examine more deeply how behavioural intention is shaped and what factors facilitate or hinder the actualisation of pro-environmental behaviour among young people in developing countries such as Indonesia.

By revisiting prior literature on pro-environmental behaviour, various behavioural models have attempted to explain youth engagement in sustainable practices. As shown in Table 1, SCT encompasses dimensions such as cognitive awareness, self-efficacy, and observational learning (D​i​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​5; H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1; Lin & Hsu, 2015). These constructs help clarify how young individuals form behavioural intentions through social modelling and internal reflection. In particular, SCT has been instrumental in understanding how youths respond to environmental messages, shape their efficacy beliefs, and conform to community norms around sustainability (H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1). However, a key limitation lies in its assumption that psychosocial mechanisms alone are sufficient to influence behaviour. It does not adequately account for the external enablers or structural constraints that may facilitate or impede actual behavioural execution.

In contrast, CA offers a complementary framework that extends beyond psychological drivers by focusing on individuals’ fundamental freedoms and opportunities. This approach argues that even if people are environmentally aware and motivated, their ability to act sustainably is shaped by contextual conversion factors such as affordability, institutional infrastructure, or social inclusion (L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​,​ ​2​0​1​5; S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​,​ ​2​0​2​1). In the context of youth consumption behaviour, CA provides a lens to examine disparities in what different youth groups are effectively able to do, rather than simply what they intend to do. For example, while SCT may explain why youth want to reduce plastic use, CA can explain why not all of them can afford or access alternatives such as biodegradable packaging or bulk-purchase options. Thus, when juxtaposed with SCT in Table 1, CA uniquely contributes to understanding behavioural intention from a structural capability standpoint, even though it does not emphasise normative constructs like social learning or rule internalisation.

In addition to SCT and CA, several other behavioural theories have been widely used to explain pro-environmental consumer behaviour. Notably, TPB, VBN theory, and SIT offer explanatory value by focusing on diverse individual-level determinants. TPB posits that perceived behavioural control, along with attitudes and subjective norms, shapes intention and, eventually, behaviour (A​y​a​r​ ​&​ ​G​ü​r​b​ü​z​,​ ​2​0​2​1; D​j​a​f​a​r​o​v​a​ ​&​ ​F​o​o​t​s​,​ ​2​0​2​2; Nguyen et al., 2026). Similarly, VBN theory integrates personal values and normative beliefs to explain moral obligations and environmentally conscious action (H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1; N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4; Y​o​u​n​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​0), while SIT explores how group identification influences sustainable choices, particularly among youth seeking affiliation with environmentally responsible communities (Johnson & Chattaraman, 2021; M​a​ł​e​c​k​a​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2; Ritch, 2020). While these frameworks enrich our understanding of behavioural intention, they still foreground internal cognitive and normative processes, with less emphasis on the structural or material dimensions that enable or constrain action. Therefore, this study draws upon SCT and CA as complementary theoretical perspectives, offering a more holistic perspective to interrogate youth behaviour in developing countries.

These dual theoretical lenses help, in addition to the cognitive and normative formation of environmental intentions, to fundamentally explain whether such intentions are materially and socially actionable. In contexts like Indonesia, where structural disparities may limit youth participation in sustainable lifestyles, this complementary perspective enables a deeper exploration of how motivation interacts with constraint. SCT can uncover how peer norms, identity signalling, or environmental literacy spark interest in responsible consumption, while CA can reveal why such intentions may falter due to unequal access, financial pressure, or infrastructural inadequacy. Therefore, bringing together SCT and CA within the same analytical framework may shed more light on what truly influences the translation of sustainability intention into action among youth, particularly under unequal and dynamic structural conditions.

Legal and environmental awareness are increasingly recognised as central components in shaping young people’s internal moral compass and behavioural agency concerning sustainability. Legal awareness, in particular, provides the cognitive foundation for understanding institutional norms, rights, and obligations, thereby fostering a sense of personal responsibility and informed choice in daily consumption behaviour (M​a​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3; Mehta et al., 2024). For instance, when youth are aware of environmental regulations, like waste management laws and product labelling policies, they are more likely to internalise these external norms and reflect them in their attitudes and decisions. This form of internalisation extends beyond passive knowledge (F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8; Longo et al., 2019); it fosters critical reflection, enabling individuals to see themselves not merely as consumers, but as active citizens within a broader socio-environmental context.

On the other hand, environmental awareness complements this legal literacy by highlighting the ecological consequences of consumption. Existing studies have demonstrated that young people exposed to environmental education or public campaigns tend to develop stronger pro-environmental values and intentions (F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8; Mehta et al., 2024; N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4). However, awareness alone does not automatically lead to action. As Longo et al. (2019) argue, increased environmental knowledge may even provoke a state of tension or paralysis, especially when individuals recognise the depth of environmental problems but feel powerless to act due to structural constraints. Taking a real-world perspective, Longo et al. (2019)’s arguments inferentially underscore the importance of combining legal understanding with ecological awareness to build a form of ‘informed agency’, which means the ability to act meaningfully within the constraints of one’s social and economic environment (Ishida & Furukawa, 2013; Nath & Agrawal, 2023; Robichaud & Yu, 2022). Together, legal and environmental awareness serve as twin pillars in fostering youth behavioural agency, particularly when supported by capability-enhancing structures such as access to affordable sustainable options, social support, and institutional guidance. These forms of awareness, besides encouraging norm internalisation, also enable youth to navigate conflicting pressures between ideal values and real-world limitations. In this sense, internalisation is an active process of aligning external legal and environmental norms with personal values and moral commitments (Robichaud & Yu, 2022; T​o​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3; T​s​e​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​3). Accordingly, rule internalisation reflects the alignment of sustainability-related values with one's personal principles, whereas sustainable self-efficacy reflects individuals' confidence in their ability to act upon those internalised values. Hence, by embedding both legal and environmental dimensions within behavioural frameworks, this study provides a stronger basis for understanding how young individuals internalise sustainability-related values, which subsequently strengthen sustainable self-efficacy and responsible consumption practices.

While legal and environmental literacy offer the cognitive and normative foundations for action, they do not always translate into behavioural change unless individuals possess the actual freedoms and means to act. For youth in developing countries like Indonesia, capability is not merely about having knowledge or motivation—it is about the substantive opportunities to convert awareness into sustainable action. In this way, individual capability should be placed as a bridge between internalised awareness and the realisation of sustainable behavioural intentions. By referring to L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​ ​(​2​0​1​5​) and S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​ ​(​2​0​2​1​), CA’s dimensional strands provide a valuable conceptual bridge between what young individuals value and what they are realistically able to achieve within the sphere of responsible consumption. Factors such as access to eco-friendly goods (Ishida & Furukawa, 2013; T​o​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3), supportive infrastructure (F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8; Mehta et al., 2024), and enabling institutional environments (M​o​n​t​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2; Spaargaren, 2003) critically influence whether intentions become practices. Therefore, capability becomes the operative dimension that enables aspirational awareness to become executable decisions.

Moreover, this bridging role is particularly salient when considering the interplay between internal motivations and external conditions. Young people may internalise environmental and legal norms through education or media (Jati & Rahayu, 2020), yet still find themselves unable to act sustainably due to structural impediments such as affordability, geographical disparities, or institutional neglect (Ishida & Furukawa, 2013; Longo et al., 2019). Accordingly, this study argues that individuals can consider these conversion factors by thoughtfully assessing themselves not just in terms of the values they hold, but also in terms of their functional ability to achieve those values. For instance, a youth aware of plastic waste regulations may wish to consume sustainably but lack access to alternative packaging or waste management systems. In such cases, capability serves as the analytical lens that connects legal and environmental literacy with behavioural feasibility. By adopting capability as a conceptual bridge, this study situates responsible consumption not solely as a matter of intention or knowledge but as an outcome of both personal agency and enabling environments. Hence, by embedding capability factors within its SCT models, this study presents a more realistic and empowering account of youth-led sustainable consumption, wherein informed agency is supported by accessible and achievable pathways to act upon it, rather than by ideals.

This study posits that youths’ legal and environmental awareness are foundational to developing an internalised sense of responsibility and efficacy towards sustainable consumption. Legal awareness, encompassing knowledge of environmental regulations, rights, and institutional mandates, enables young individuals to interpret rules as legitimate norms worth adopting (A​b​d​r​a​s​u​l​o​v​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3; L​i​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​1). Furthermore, besides informing, this legal literacy instils a deeper moral alignment with sustainability, shaping internal rule acceptance (A​y​a​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​G​ü​r​b​ü​z​,​ ​2​0​2​1; D​j​a​f​a​r​o​v​a​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​F​o​o​t​s​,​ ​2​0​2​2; L​i​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​1). At the same time, environmental awareness, derived from education, media exposure, and ecological campaigns, cultivates an understanding of environmental risks and personal impact, encouraging youths to believe that their actions matter (F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8). Such awareness fosters sustainable self-efficacy, the belief that one can effectively contribute to ecological goals despite uncertainties. Together, legal and environmental awareness function as internal cognitive and normative anchors, forming the psychological readiness necessary for behavioural change.

The proposed hypotheses are organised into three theoretical pathways within the SCT-CA framework. H1-H2 represent the initial SCT pathway by explaining how legal and environmental awareness shape youths' rule internalisation and sustainable self-efficacy as the cognitive and motivational foundations of responsible consumption. H3-H6 represent the CA pathway by examining how structural conditions, namely affordability, accessibility, ease of responsible consumption, and social norms, shape youths’ capability for responsible consumption (CRC). The remaining hypotheses specify how these two theoretical pathways are connected. Specifically, H7, H9-H12 represent the subsequent SCT behavioural pathway by examining how rule internalisation and sustainable self-efficacy influence responsible consumption intentions. H8 represents the bridging pathway linking the SCT mechanism with the CA mechanism by proposing that sustainable self-efficacy strengthens youths’ CRC. Finally, H13-H14 represent the downstream CA pathway by examining how capability translates into responsible consumption intentions. Accordingly, H1 and H2 are proposed below.

H1: Youths’ legal awareness positively influences their internalisation of rules.

H2: Youths’ environmental awareness positively influences their sustainable self-efficacy.

From the CA standpoint, this study argues that while internalisation and self-efficacy are necessary, they are not sufficient unless supported by structural capability. Youths in developing economies, such as Indonesia, often face affordability (N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4; S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​,​ ​2​0​2​1) and accessibility constraints (Ishida & Furukawa, 2013) (i.e., the limited availability of sustainable alternatives outside urban areas). These barriers negatively affect their practical ability to realise responsible consumption in the long run. On the other hand, when responsible choices are perceived as easy, enabled by infrastructure, design, and clear product information, they strengthen youths’ capabilities to act (H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1; L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​,​ ​2​0​1​5). Additionally, social norms, such as peer expectations and community values, are part of external facilitators that legitimise and reinforce sustainable behaviour (T​o​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3). Thus, this study constructs these four hypotheses to highlight that capability, as enabled or hindered by systemic and normative conditions, must be treated as a bridging element between internal readiness and actionable sustainable behaviour. Hence, this study constructs hypotheses H3, H4, H5, and H6 below.

H3: Affordability constraints negatively affect youths’ CRC.

H4: Accessibility constraints negatively affect youths’ CRC.

H5: Perceived ease of responsible consumption positively affects youths’ CRC.

H6: Social norms positively influence youths’ CRC.

Furthermore, this study contends that the internalisation of rules functions as a foundational cognitive mechanism that strengthens youths’ belief in their sustainable agency. Importantly, rule internalisation concerns the acceptance of sustainability-related values as personal principles, whereas sustainable self-efficacy reflects youths’ confidence in their ability to act upon those internalised values. Although conceptually related, these constructs represent different psychological mechanisms, namely value alignment and efficacy belief (L​i​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​1; Lin & Hsu, 2015; M​a​l​e​k​i​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​5). When young individuals internalise sustainability-related regulations or ethical norms, they are more likely to perceive such standards as personally relevant. In other words, this psychological alignment fosters self-discipline, increases personal accountability, and enhances the belief that their actions are legitimate, morally appropriate, and socially reinforced. Therefore, internalisation nurtures the emergence of sustainable self-efficacy. In this context, internalised norms act as an anchor that consolidates personal identity with sustainability-oriented agency, which is necessary to build resilient behavioural intentions across time and situations.

Moreover, building upon such value alignment, this study argues that sustainable self-efficacy plays a vital mediating role in transforming values and beliefs into concrete, capability-based action. While pro-environmental intention may emerge from awareness or rule acceptance (Á​g​o​s​t​o​n​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​4; F​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​8; Gunawan et al., 2023), the confidence to act, especially in the face of obstacles, requires a strong belief in one’s competence to make a difference (Jati & Rahayu, 2020; L​i​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​1). Specifically, youths with high self-efficacy are more likely to experiment with sustainable choices, persist in their efforts despite barriers, and further adapt their strategies as circumstances change to align with responsible consumption goals (Ishida & Furukawa, 2013; Longo et al., 2019; T​o​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3). This confidence also buffers against discouragement when faced with affordability or accessibility constraints, making it a crucial pathway for converting abstract values into real-world practices. Therefore, this study hypothesises that sustainable self-efficacy is a key predictor of an individual’s perceived capability to perform responsible consumption behaviours, representing the behavioural backbone of intentional sustainability among youth as constructed below.

H7: Youths’ internalisation of rules positively influences their sustainable self-efficacy.

H8: Youths’ sustainable self-efficacy positively affects their CRC.

When internalisation is strengthened, this study considers internalisation of rules and sustainable self-efficacy as sequential psychological mechanisms that form the cognitive-behavioural foundation of youth participation in responsible consumption. When young people internalise legal and environmental norms, they recognise them both as external directives and as integral to their ethical standards. Furthermore, this repetitive internalisation strengthens their moral commitment, further manifested in a firm intention to advocate for responsible consumption and adopt sustainable lifestyles. Simply demonstrated, youths who internalise plastic waste regulations may voluntarily educate their peers or reduce their use of non-recyclables, not out of fear of sanctions, but out of personal conviction (H​a​n​,​ ​2​0​2​1; J​i​a​n​g​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2; M​a​ł​e​c​k​a​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​2). However, even internalised norms may not lead to sustained action unless accompanied by a belief in one’s capacity to act effectively, referred to as sustainable self-efficacy. This self-efficacy strengthens resilience and consistency in pro-environmental behaviours, especially in environments where challenges such as affordability or peer indifference (Lin & Hsu, 2015; Ritch, 2020) are prevalent. To illustrate, a young person who possesses strong self-efficacy, believing in their ability to advocate for policy change or maintain a low-impact lifestyle despite limited resources, is more likely to sustain such behaviours over time. When individuals are proactive in championing their legal rights and voicing concerns about responsible consumption, it strongly reflects a parallel commitment to integrating sustainable values into their everyday lifestyle (M​a​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​3). Therefore, sustainable self-efficacy complements rule internalisation by facilitating moral alignment into actionable confidence, which together enhances both advocacy and personal engagement in sustainable consumption practices. Hence, this study formulates Hypotheses H9, H10, H11, and H12 below.

H9: Youths’ internalisation of rules positively influences their intention to advocate for responsible consumption.

H10: Youths’ internalisation of rules positively influences their intention to engage in a sustainable lifestyle.

H11: Youths’ sustainable self-efficacy positively influences their intention to advocate for responsible consumption.

H12: Youths’ sustainable self-efficacy positively influences their intention to engage in a sustainable lifestyle.

Ultimately, as individuals’ capabilities adapt to their environmental concerns, their sense of empowerment to act sustainably becomes more evident. When youth have access to supported means, including financial, social, and infrastructural resources, they are more likely to develop confidence in embodying those values in their daily routines and advocating for responsible consumption. Furthermore, grounded in SCT-CA’s perspective, it argues that people require more than just awareness or motivation; they need actual freedoms to achieve the kinds of lives they have reason to value (L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​,​ ​2​0​1​5; R​a​u​s​c​h​m​a​y​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​L​e​s​s​m​a​n​n​,​ ​2​0​1​3; S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​,​ ​2​0​2​1). Thus, besides being a reflection of existing conditions, individuals’ capabilities reflect a dynamic pathway of intention and agency. For instance, a young person who has both access to affordable eco-friendly goods and the knowledge to make informed decisions is more likely to integrate these values into a consistent lifestyle and advocate for sustainability as their social environment supports. In short, as capabilities are enhanced through education, social networks, and infrastructure, the likelihood of sustainable behaviours being both expressed and maintained also increases. Therefore, this study formulates Hypotheses H13 and H14 below.

H13: Youths’ CRC positively influences their intention to advocate for responsible consumption.

H14: Youths’ CRC positively influences their intention to engage in a sustainable lifestyle.

More than operating in parallel, the two frameworks connect at a single point: SCT explains how youth form the motivation and confidence to consume responsibly, whereas CA explains whether that motivation can be realised given their real opportunities to act. Self-efficacy and capability are thus not separate predictors but linked stages of one process, in which psychological readiness is either enabled or constrained by structural conditions such as affordability and access. This complementary logic positions capability as the bridge between internalised awareness and responsible consumption, and it underpins the developed models. Drawing on this theoretical reasoning, this study develops three research models. Each model represents a distinct theoretical specification of the proposed SCT-CA framework. The three models are designed to examine different behavioural mechanisms underlying responsible consumption intentions. Specifically, Model-A captures the intrapersonal and socio-cognitive processes that are well-established predictors of behavioural intention. Model-B focuses on the capability-related mechanisms that determine individuals' opportunities to translate intentions into action. Model-C represents the theoretical specification in which the socio-cognitive and capability-related mechanisms are examined simultaneously. Collectively, the three models provide distinct theoretical explanations of responsible consumption intentions, with each specification highlighting different behavioural mechanisms within the proposed SCT-CA framework. Hence, the three research models are presented in Figure 1.

By utilising a web-based questionnaire, this study enabled geographically broad and flexible data collection. As most Indonesian youths use gadgets as their primary mode of digital interaction, the online survey format enabled a broader reach across regions and socio-economic groups (H​e​r​d​i​a​n​t​o​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​S​y​a​h​i​d​i​n​,​ ​2​0​2​0; Larson, 2024; White, 2024). Furthermore, the questionnaire was distributed through university networks and social media platforms over a two-month period in 2025.

Practically, respondents were recruited through convenience sampling of general university students across disciplines. The demographic profile captured gender, age, and education level. Convenience sampling was considered appropriate because university students aged 18-24 represent a relevant segment of Indonesian youth who are actively forming sustainability-related values and consumption behaviours, making them suitable for examining the theoretical relationships proposed in this study. By referring to F​a​r​r​i​n​g​t​o​n​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​ ​(​2​0​1​2​) and the Commonwealth Secretariat (2016), eligibility was restricted to respondents aged 18-24, which falls within the defined youth age range.

Moreover, grounded in ethical clearance number 153/KEPK/FK/KLE/2025, we confirmed their informed consent prior to participation and adhered to ethical research standards throughout all research processes. The questionnaire included structured items measuring constructs derived from SCT and CA, including two scenario-based questions to assess behavioural intentions concerning sustainable practices: advocating responsible consumption and engaging in a sustainable lifestyle. These scenarios were designed to capture respondents' context-dependent decision tendencies, thereby enhancing the ecological validity of the behavioural intention measures. Technically, to reduce order effects and social desirability bias, the response options in each scenario were randomised across respondents, and their scoring weights were not shown to participants. In short, the measurement better preserved the authenticity of participants' behavioural intentions. Therefore, besides capturing cognitive and capability-based predictors, the questionnaire was designed to reflect sustainability dilemmas commonly encountered by Indonesian youth.

This study employed variables that address the dimensional gap identified in the literature review section. Specifically, it critically reviewed prior studies by identifying key behavioural, normative, and structural factors that influence sustainable consumption. The measurement items in Table A1 reflected constructs that were operationalised through specific item statements adapted from this study’s theoretical stance, SCT and CA. While the SCT-derived constructs (e.g., environmental awareness, legal awareness, rule internalisation, sustainable self-efficacy, and social norms) closely follow their original theoretical definitions, the CA is contextualised as CRC. Drawing upon Sen’s (1993) CA and its operational interpretation by L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​ ​(​2​0​1​5​) and S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​ ​(​2​0​2​1​), this study operationalises CRC as youths' perceived capability to perform responsible consumption behaviours. Thus, this construct reflects youths’ perceived substantive freedom to translate sustainability values into action, recognising that such capability is shaped by both internal capacities and external opportunities operating as conversion factors. Moreover, we cross-checked that several prior scholars had statistically tested the face and content validity. Hence, this study made minor modifications to ensure that the questionnaire’s items aligned with the study’s aim.

After collecting the data from respondents, this study conducted preliminary analyses to examine the data’s validity and reliability. Firstly, it conducted a measurement-model assessment using PLS-SEM in SmartPLS to evaluate the measurement properties of each latent construct (Hair Jr et al., 2020; Hair Jr et al., 2021; Y​u​s​o​f​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​1​2). Specifically, internal consistency was tested using Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability values. Secondly, each model was further assessed for its goodness-of-fit based on multiple indices and cut-off standards for model parsimony (Hair Jr et al., 2020; S​a​h​o​o​,​ ​2​0​1​9). Finally, the PLS-SEM structural model was used to test all hypotheses and assess the hypothesised relationships among variables across three distinct models. The PLS algorithm was used for model estimation, while bootstrapping was applied to assess the significance of the hypothesised relationships (Hair Jr et al., 2020).

Based on the demographic profile of respondents (see Table 2), the majority were female, accounting for 68.73% of the total participants, while male respondents comprised 31.27%. In terms of age, the distribution was fairly even, representing insights from individuals at all stages of youth. Regarding education level, most respondents held a bachelor’s degree (87.62%), followed by senior high school graduates (12.38%). This relatively small proportion of respondents with high school-level education indicates that higher educational attainment may correlate with greater engagement in topics of responsible consumption. Accordingly, the sample composition aligns with the study’s concern to explore sustainable consumption challenges among educated Indonesian youth.

Table 3 summarises the distribution of all study variables for 323 respondents. Every construct was measured on a 1–5 scale, and the observed scores indeed spanned that full range. The total data showed that most variables had mean values of more than 3.00. Furthermore, the standard deviations are modest (all ≤ 0.95), indicating relatively consistent responses across participants and suggesting that the relations among constructs are likely to be well-supported. Additionally, skewness and kurtosis skewness values range from -0.782 to 0.328, while kurtosis values range from -1.046 to 0.411, indicating that the distributions do not show substantial departures from symmetry or excessive peakedness. Taken together, these descriptive results meet common statistical assumptions and provide a solid basis for further analysis.

Table 4 indicates that item loadings predominantly exceed conventional thresholds, with only minor deviations from the recommended level of 0.70, thereby supporting satisfactory indicator validity. All constructs exhibit AVEs greater than 0.50, evidencing adequate convergent validity. Collectively, the indicators account for more than half of their respective variances, reinforcing the adequacy of the measurement model. On the other hand, all reliability test results are likewise acceptable, as each variable’s Cronbach’s alpha value is generally high, and composite reliability is uniformly above recommended cut-offs, indicating strong internal consistency. Overall, all the measures meet the standard validity and reliability criteria, enabling subsequent modelling and hypothesis tests.

Table 5 presents the statistical results for the models’ overall goodness of fit. Notably, all three models satisfy the SRMR criterion, with values well below 0.08. The NFI indices also exceed the 0.70 cut-off, indicating an acceptable fit given model complexity. Regarding rms Theta, Models B and C fall below the 0.12 threshold, whereas Model-A records a value of 0.134, slightly exceeding the specified cut-off. This indicates that Model-A does not fully meet the rms Theta criterion, although the deviation is relatively small. The additional diagnostics, d_ULS and d_G, are comparatively small and do not signal substantive misfit. Taken together, these indices indicate that Models A, B, and C demonstrate generally adequate goodness of fit, although Model-A shows a marginal deviation from the rms Theta criterion. Hence, the structural relationships can be interpreted with confidence in the subsequent analysis.

Table 6 presents the statistical results for all hypothesised causal relations. Collectively, the evidence indicates broad support across the three models with a few notable exceptions. The statistical results of H1 are strongly upheld in Models A-C, yielding significant positive coefficients and high significance. Similarly, H2 is also supported in all models; the effect is positive but comparatively modest, consistent with the smaller coefficients in Models B and C. Meanwhile, the H3 results in each model are consistently negative and significant in every model, corroborating the affordability-constraint mechanism.

As a crucial intrapersonal bridge that further associates with strong or weak responsible consumption capability, H7 is robustly positive in Models A–C, while H8 remains strongly positive, confirming the central role of self-efficacy in this context. The estimated coefficients for H4–H6 were positive and statistically significant, indicating that accessibility, ease, and social norms all promote the CRC. In other words, structural enablers and perceived efficacy jointly underpin RC capability. Although H4 hypothesised a negative relationship between accessibility constraints and CRC, the estimated coefficient was positive and statistically significant. These statistical results indicate that higher perceived accessibility constraints were associated with higher levels of perceived capability among Indonesian youth. In contrast to affordability constraints (H3), accessibility constraints did not reduce perceived capability in the expected direction. In other words, accessibility may no longer constitute a major constraint for many Indonesian youth, whose capability can be supported through digital information (e.g., online marketplaces and social media) despite limitations in the local physical environment.

Notably, the downstream intentions show mixed patterns. H9 is negative and significant, suggesting that internalisation alone does not translate into advocacy intentions. A similar pattern was observed, where the H10 result is negative and significant in Model-A but becomes non-significant in Models B and C, indicating that the effect is not stable across specifications. In other words, these results suggest that shifting intentions requires investments in skills, perceived control, and enabling conditions; messaging that targets internalisation alone is insufficient once these levers are considered.

By contrast, H11 is consistently positive and significant across models, underscoring that confidence in one’s ability is a proximal predictor of advocacy. H12 is strong in Model-A and marginal in Model-C, suggesting that self-efficacy is related to lifestyle intention. Still, its direct link weakens somewhat when capability and other facilitators are taken into account. Finally, H13 and H14 show that capability robustly predicts intentions; under the stricter specification, its association with lifestyle remains significant while its link to advocacy fades, suggesting that concrete capability translates more readily into personal lifestyle adjustments than into outward-facing advocacy. Ultimately, these findings support most hypotheses, elevate the mediating roles of self-efficacy and capability, and flag a small subset of direct effects that warrant nuance. Taken together, the three proposed models suggest that the pathway from awareness and internalisation to behavioural intentions operates predominantly through efficacy- and capability-building mechanisms, rather than persuasion effects alone. These findings outline a coherent behavioural explanation in which structural enablers and the perceived competence of RC convert normative agreement into action. In contrast, internalisation alone is insufficient for advocacy and is only weakly tied to lifestyle change when competing mechanisms are controlled.

An additional observation emerges from the comparison across developed models. Two relationships that were statistically significant when estimated within their respective theoretical specifications (RI → IESL in Model A and CRC → IARC in Model B) became non-significant in Model-C. This transition does not suggest that the theoretical relationships disappear. Instead, it indicates that the explanatory role of these constructs is redistributed once the complementary behavioural mechanisms are considered simultaneously. In other words, relationships that appeared to exert independent effects within the isolated theoretical specifications operate through or alongside other theoretically related mechanisms when the SCT and CA perspectives are represented within the complementary framework. This finding suggests that responsible consumption intentions are better understood as emerging from interconnected behavioural mechanisms, not as isolated theoretical pathways.

Specifically, to further examine the direct effects observed for H9 and H10, we inspected the total and indirect effects in Model-C. Although the direct effect on advocacy intention was negative (β = −0.417, p = 0.000) and the direct effect on lifestyle intention became statistically non-significant (β = −0.071, p = 0.625), the total effects remained positive and statistically significant (RI → IARC: β = 0.632, p < 0.001; RI → IESL: β = 0.505, p < 0.001). Further examination of the indirect effects revealed substantial positive indirect effects through SSE and CRC, indicating that the overall influence of RI on both responsible consumption intention constructs (IARC and IESL) is primarily transmitted through these mediating mechanisms. This pattern is statistically coherent because the total effect represents the combined contribution of the direct and indirect effects. As recommended by Hair Jr et al. (2020) and Hair Jr et al. (2021), mediation should be interpreted by jointly examining the direct, indirect, and total effects. Applying this approach, the positive total effects indicate that the negative direct path does not reverse the overall relationship but instead reflects that the influence of RI is predominantly transmitted through the proposed mediating pathways.

Also, these results are theoretically consistent with the complementary SCT-CA framework, whereby internalised rules primarily strengthen sustainable self-efficacy, which subsequently enhances youths’ perceived CRC before translating into behavioural intentions (L​i​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​1; Lin & Hsu, 2015; S​e​c​k​l​e​r​ ​&​ ​V​o​l​k​e​r​t​,​ ​2​0​2​1). In other words, rule internalisation provides the moral foundation, sustainable self-efficacy transforms that foundation into confidence to act, and capability determines whether such confidence can be realised under existing structural opportunities and constraints. Consequently, the complementary SCT-CA framework suggests that responsible consumption intentions emerge through a sequential behavioural process in which internalised values first develop personal agency, and that agency is subsequently converted into actionable intentions only when supported by sufficient capability and enabling contextual conditions.

First, this study finds that youth intentions toward responsible consumption emerge where moral endorsement meets practical enablement. Awareness and the internalisation of rules create the cognitive and ethical ground upon which behaviour can stand. Intentions consolidate only when young people possess the confidence to act and the capability to implement concrete routines. The findings highlight the centrality of self-efficacy and capability in translating beliefs into practice across everyday contexts, such as study, travel, shopping, and disposal. Affordability remains a decisive friction that tempers otherwise favourable attitudes. From the CA perspective, these findings reflect youths’ perceived CRC, recognising that such capability is jointly shaped by both internal capacities and external opportunities operating as conversion factors. For example, students tend to postpone or scale back sustainable choices when prices are higher, options are scarce, or the effort required is apparent. Additionally, public advocacy is more fragile than lifestyle adjustment because it demands both competence and enabling settings in addition to moral conviction. In other words, norms and rules orient conduct, but efficacy and capability carry it into action. Programmes that elevate skills and reduce frictions are more consequential than messaging alone for moving youth from assent to performance.

Second, this study highlights that social influence operates as a capability amplifier. Peer approval and observational learning normalise responsible choices and lower perceived barriers, with visible exemplars making refills, repair, and reuse feel ordinary. From the behavioural perspective, these mechanisms convert costly, effortful behaviours into patterned routines by scripting how to act and where to start. Moreover, internalisation exerts its impact chiefly through the dual channels of efficacy and capability; once those mediating pathways are incorporated into the structural model, the direct effects of rule internalisation on responsible consumption intentions attenuate or become statistically unstable. Although rule internalisation and sustainable self-efficacy are conceptually related, they represent distinct psychological mechanisms. While rule internalisation reflects the alignment of sustainability-related values with personal principles, sustainable self-efficacy captures youths' confidence in acting upon those internalised values. From a behavioural perspective, this pattern may reflect the tension between recognising responsible consumption as a personally endorsed value and perceiving sufficient efficacy and capability to enact that value in everyday decisions. For instance, youths may strongly internalise sustainability principles yet remain reluctant to advocate or consistently practise responsible consumption when they perceive inadequate confidence or limited opportunities to act. Previous studies suggest that such misalignment between internalised values and actual behavioural opportunities may create normative conflict and cognitive dissonance, which can subsequently manifest as symbolic compliance, moral disengagement, or behavioural withdrawal (Preuss & Walker, 2011; Longo et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2022). Hence, internalised values become behaviourally consequential after they are translated into sustainable self-efficacy and supported by sufficient capability to perform responsible consumption.

In terms of their lifestyle, youths who know what to do, feel able to do it, and see others doing it are the ones who sustain responsible habits despite contextual noise. Interestingly, affordability and accessibility constraints played different roles in shaping youths' perceived capability. While budget limitations consistently discouraged responsible consumption, perceived accessibility constraints were positively associated with capability. This finding may reflect how Indonesian youth increasingly rely on digital information, social media, and online marketplaces to obtain sustainability-related knowledge and identify environmentally friendly alternatives. Consequently, limitations in local physical accessibility do not necessarily reduce their perceived capability to engage in responsible consumption, as digital channels may partially compensate for these structural constraints. Those findings imply that the pathway from values to behaviour is mediated less by what youth believe than by what they are empowered to do within their social and material environments. They also extend previous studies on the value-action gap by demonstrating that capability-related constraints, particularly affordability and accessibility, constitute important mechanisms through which sustainability intentions fail to materialise into responsible consumption practices (Longo et al., 2019; L​e​ß​m​a​n​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​M​a​s​s​o​n​,​ ​2​0​1​5; N​g​u​y​e​n​ ​&​a​m​p​;​ ​D​e​k​h​i​l​i​,​ ​2​0​2​4).

Ultimately, this study demonstrates that a capability- and efficacy-centred strategy integrates the primary strands of contemporary behavioural theory into a coherent pathway from values to behaviour. Empirically, the pattern implies that demand for responsible offerings is elastic to changes in perceived competence and feasibility. For industry, this translates into predictable shifts in uptake when offerings reduce effort costs, clarify usage scripts, and integrate seamlessly into daily routines. Firms observing stable moral endorsement but volatile adoption can attribute the gap to capability frictions, not preference instability, aligning product design and customer experience with the mechanisms that actually move intention. Concurrently, the same structure yields clear consequences for the government, especially those in developing economies. Indeed, public support for responsible consumption is already present; however, its materialisation depends on the ambient capability set and access conditions that lie outside any single firm’s control. Where constraints in affordability and availability persist, aggregate intention remains underexpressed even amid pro-sustainability attitudes. In short, for regulators and public agencies, observed behaviour is a joint function of motivation and enablement, and market responses become reliable indicators of where capability bottlenecks reside. Hence, monitoring patterns of partial uptake, drop-off points, and uneven adoption across locales can help identify capability constraints. These signals can then guide sectoral coordination and the targeted removal of frictions that suppress otherwise latent demand.

This study identifies three empirical leverage points associated with responsible consumption among Indonesian youth, namely accessibility, sustainable self-efficacy, and affordability. Accordingly, the following policy recommendations are derived directly from these empirical findings to strengthen youths’ CRC. Beyond these findings, broader policy considerations are presented as conceptual implications, not as direct empirical conclusions.

First, improving accessibility should become a primary policy priority. Governments and industries could expand sustainable infrastructure, such as refill stations, recycling facilities, and environmentally friendly public services. This recommendation is directly derived from the finding that accessibility strengthens youths' capability to perform responsible consumption behaviours. Second, strengthening sustainable self-efficacy should complement infrastructural improvements. Environmental education, practical sustainability programmes, and community-based initiatives can enhance young people's confidence to perform responsible consumption behaviours. This recommendation follows the empirical finding that self-efficacy constitutes an important behavioural pathway linking internalised values with responsible consumption capability.

Third, affordability should be addressed through policy mechanisms that reduce the economic barriers associated with sustainable consumption. Instruments such as differential pricing, subsidies, or Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) incentives may help narrow the cost gap between sustainable and conventional products. This recommendation reflects the empirical evidence that affordability remains an important structural constraint limiting youths' capability to translate sustainability intentions into practice. Beyond these findings, the broader objective of reducing structural barriers is conceptually consistent with Roscoe Pound's notion of social engineering, which views legal and institutional arrangements as mechanisms for promoting societal welfare through institutional reform (M​i​s​h​r​a​,​ ​2​0​2​0; Pound, 1961). In other words, reducing these structural barriers reflects a form of social engineering in which legal and institutional reform actively cultivates responsible consumption as a collective societal goal, instead of leaving it to individual choice. This perspective also aligns with recent discussions emphasising the importance of governance and institutional arrangements in advancing environmental sustainability (A​b​d​u​r​a​h​m​a​n​ ​e​t​ ​a​l​.​,​ ​2​0​2​5; A​l​k​h​a​w​a​l​d​e​h​,​ ​2​0​2​6).

This study concludes that youth intentions toward responsible consumption in Indonesia emerge where moral endorsement intersects with practical enablement. Most young people already possess a strong awareness and have internalised rules that provide the cognitive and ethical foundation for their actions. However, their intentions consolidate only when they also possess confidence and the capability to enact sustainable routines in daily life. Affordability remains a decisive friction, whereas accessibility appears to operate differently among Indonesian youth because digital channels may partially compensate for limitations in the physical environment. Furthermore, the evidence shows that public advocacy is more fragile than lifestyle adjustment, as it requires not only moral conviction but also competence and enabling conditions. In other words, while norms and rules orient conduct, self-efficacy and capability are the actual carriers that turn belief into practice. Hence, the findings demonstrate that youths’ responsible consumption is mediated more by what young people are empowered to do within their social and material environments than by what they believe alone.

This research recognises that its design does not capture the full spectrum of psychological mechanisms underlying sustainable consumption. In other words, it did not examine in depth the cognitive biases and emotional drivers that may alter how youth interpret affordability, access, or peer influence. Therefore, this study suggests future research focusing on the role of such biases in shaping the consistency between awareness and action. Secondly, further investigation could address how youth attitudes and behaviours evolve over time as infrastructural and cultural supports strengthen, including potential shifts from fragile advocacy to enduring lifestyle change. This exploration would enrich the understanding of long-term behavioural trajectories. Another limitation concerns the operationalisation of CRC. The construct captures youths' perceived capability to engage in responsible consumption under their existing personal and contextual conditions, providing an empirical approximation of capability within the CA conceptualisation. Nevertheless, it does not directly capture the broader concept of substantive freedoms or objectively observable opportunity conditions. Therefore, future studies could strengthen this operationalisation by incorporating objective indicators, such as the availability of sustainable products and services, neighbourhood infrastructure, public and recycling facilities, as well as institutional support, thereby providing a more comprehensive assessment of capability.

Finally, this study employed a cross-sectional survey design; therefore, the observed structural relationships should not be interpreted as definitive evidence of causal effects. Rather, the proposed pathways represent theoretically informed associations consistent with SCT and CA. Therefore, future research may consider expanding the methodological approach beyond quantitative structural models, for example, by applying qualitative or case-based designs grounded in interpretive or philosophical paradigms. Such approaches would help uncover the causal reasoning behind youths’ choices, their lived experiences of constraint, and the socio-cultural narratives that condition their pathways to responsible consumption. Also, the possibility of endogeneity arising from reverse causality or omitted variables cannot be fully ruled out, and the reported path estimates should therefore be interpreted with appropriate caution. Relatedly, the scenario-based items may carry some social desirability bias inherent to their response format, which future studies could reduce through more neutrally worded options or forced-choice designs.