健康樂活LOHAS!與每日生活的空間環境有著密集的關聯。但現今的物質文明發展背後，却忽略了更重要的與環境長期互生同榮的關係。居家為住宅之基本需求，若可以進一步在生活環境中增加健康環保的改良因素，如符合綠健材相關標準的材料延伸產品與規劃設計服務等，將可更增進居家健康價值，一起為美好大自然與長期發展增添未來，因此本研究聚焦於健康綠建材之購買傾向，希望藉由研究模型驗證影響消費者購買綠建材傾向的因素。本研究並驗證消費者至實體商家及網路商家購買綠建材傾向的因素。
本研究探討主要以品牌價值、品牌形象及價格等因素對消費者購買綠建材傾向、至實體商家及網路商家購買綠建材傾向的因果研究。本研究使用調查法以理性行為理論(TRA-Theory of Reasoning Action)為基礎並以國內使用健康綠建材環境空間產品知名業者的商品為樣本作為調查。研究結果經路徑分析後，發現綠建材產業的品牌知覺價值-品質及享樂性會正面影響消費者對品牌的認知並進而影響其購買傾向、至實體店面與網路店面消費傾向。品牌形象及企業歷史也會正面影響消費者對品牌的認知並進而影響其購買傾向及至實體店面與網路店面消費傾向。但關於價格因素無顯著影響消費者之購買傾向及至實體店面與網路店面消費傾向。

Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability is closely related to our daily living space. However, environmental benefits are often ignored as today's materialistic society continues to progress. A house is among the basic needs of a family. In the process of enhancing the living environment within a house, the improvement of environmental health factors through the purchase of environmental products such as green building materials and the support for green planning services and design will result in a healthy and sustainable living space. This study focuses on the intention of consumers to purchase green building materials from physical and online stores as well as identifies and verifies the factors that influence such intention using a research model.
By conducting a survey on the usage of green building material products from a well-known local industry based on the theory of reasoning action, this study investigates how brand value, brand image, and price affect the intention of consumers to purchase green building materials from physical and online stores. On the one hand, the perceived brand value, which comprises the quality and enjoyment of brand, positively affects the perception of consumers toward such brand, which in turn affects their intention to purchase green building products from physical and online stores. On the other hand, brand image and corporate history positively affect the perception of consumers toward a brand, which also affects their intention to purchase green building products from physical and online stores. However, the price of a brand does not significantly affect the intention of consumers to purchase green products from physical and online stores.

中文部份
1.財團法人塑膠工業技術發展中心，「綠色建材產業現況」，聚落與聯盟@塑膠製品產業聚落Mid-Taiwan Cluster，2011.2.1。
2.王世昌，「綠建材新契機以綠色科技邁向健康永續新環境」，台灣永續綠營建聯盟網站，2012.9.8。
3.工研院產業經濟與趨勢研究中心，「兩案建築市場趨勢與商機賣動研討」，2011年。
4.內政部建築研究所，「建築室內建材揮發有機化合物衰減總表之研究」，2000年。
5.內政部建築研究所，「綠建材認定要項之研究」，2002年。
6.內政部建築研究所，「綠建材解說與評估手冊」，2005年。
7.內政部營建署，「修正建築技術規則建築設計施工篇」，2012年。
8.台灣綠建材產業發展協會，「綠建材標章」，2013年。
9.財團法人台灣建築中心，「綠建材標章說明」，2013年。
英文部份
10.Aaker， D.A.， 1996， Building Strong Brands， The Free Press， New York.
11.Barwise， P.， 1993， Brand equity: snark or boojum， International Journal of Research in Marketing. 10(1)， 93-104.
12.Bernstein， David，2003 ，Corporate branding – back to basics， European Journal of Marketing，
13.Bhat, S & Reddy, S.K. (1998), “Symbolic and functional positioning of brands”, Journal of consumer marketing, 15(1), pp.32-43.
14.Bolton， R.N. and Drew， J.H.， 1991， A multistage model of customers’ assessments of service quality and value， Journal of Consumer Research， 17， 375-384.
15.Dodds， W.B. and Monroek K.B.， 1985， The effect of brand and price information on subjective product evaluations， Advances in Consumer Research， 12(1)， 85-90.
16.Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), “Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research,” Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Fried, C. “Privacy,” Yale Law Journal（77）1968, 477.
17.Keller， K.L.， 1993， Conceptualizing， measuring， managing customer-based brand equity， Journal of Marketing. 57(1). 1-22.
18.Knox， Simon & David， Bickerton.， The six conventions of corporate branding， European Journal of Marketing， vol. 37，no. 7， 2003， pp. 998-1016.
19.Kotler， P.， Marketing management (10th ed.)， 2000， Englewood Cliffs， NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20.Lehtinen， U. and Lehtinen J.R.， 1991， Two approaches to service quality dimensions. The Service Industries Journal， 11(3)， 287-303.
21.Parasuraman， A. and Grewal， D.， 2000， The impact of technology on the quality-value-loyalty chain: a research agenda. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 28(1)， 168-174.
22.Petrick， J.F.， 2002， Development of a multi-dimensional scale for measuring the perceived value of a service， Journal of Leisure Research， 34(2)， 119-134.
23.Sheth， J.N.， Newman， B. I. and Gross， B.L.， 1991， Consumption Values and Market Choices: Theory and Application， South-Western， Cincinnati.
24.Shih, Y., Fang K. (2004) “The use of a decomposed theory of planned behavior to study OLEL”, Internet Research 14(3), pp. 213-223.
25.Vigneron, F. & Johnson, L.W.(2004), “Measuring perceptions of brand luxury”, Journal of Brand Management, 11(6), pp.484-506.
26.Zeithaml， V.A. 1988， Consumer perceptions of price， quality and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence， Journal of Marketing， 52(3)， 2-22.