CONSUMER BEHAVIOR AND SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION

Consumer Behavior and Sustainable Consumption

1. Introduction to Consumer Behavior

Consumer behavior is a subject dealing with the way people and organizations make decisions

in the acquisition of products, it also covers psychological, social, cultural and personal factors

affecting consumers’ decision-making processes, this field covers the buying process starting

with the identification of a need all the way to the evaluation of the purchase decision, this paper

examines consumer behavior and analysis of the process of creating efficient marketing

strategies.

Psychological factors

Psychological aspects remain centered to understanding consumers and consumer behavior due

to the impact of the mental processes’ consumers go through when processing and using

information concerning goods and services. Pro environmental self-identity is another

psychological factor and indicates the extent of how a person perceives himself as an

environmentally friendly person. Dermody et al. (2018) studied this in the emerging markets of

China and Poland and they postulated that it has a strong effect on sustainable consumption

buying and curtailment behaviors. Another psychological factor is stakeholders’ attitude towards

trade-offs between sustainability and other attributes. Luchs & Kumar (2017) explored

perceptions of consumers when similar decisions on sustainability and other attractive attributes

are presented to them, the authors demonstrated the intricacy of green consumption decisions. In

the theory of planned behavior, Ajzen (2020) has explained that attitude, subjective norms, and

perceived behavioral control affect intentions and in turn behavior. This theory has been used in

a large number of studies to examine and forecast different aspects of consumer behavior,

including the aspects connected with sustainability, furthermore, in the meta-analysis study by

Gifford and Nilsson (2014), factors related to personal and social aspects that affected pro-

environmental concern and behavior were investigated, including how the psychological

characteristic of an individual interacts with social factors. These psychological factors usually

work in conjunction with each other and with environmental conditions, which makes marketing

and policy decisions for encouraging sustainable consumption a rather delicate endeavor.

Social influences

Another dimension of consumer behavior is social factors, relevant in the analysis of sustainable

consumers, the social norms factor is quite influential in individuals’ behaviors, as people tend to

mimic other people’s behaviors in given contexts. Gupta and Ogden (2009) looked at green

buying behavior from social dilemma perspective, to underscore the fact that people’s choices

are shaped by concerns of others as well as the overall, aggregate outcome. Critical implication

of this study is that social factors moderate the intention-behavior gap with regard to purchasing

behaviors that are environmentally friendly. In the paper Becker-Leifhold and Iran (2018)

identified factors influencing collaborative fashion consumption, a novel concept that relies on

social interactions as well as shared values, their research focuses on the networks and friends’

influence to encourage a change to more sustainable use of the world’s resources. Peattie and

Peattie (2009) suggest that there is a way to achieve this through consumption reduction via

social marketing strategy that relies on social persuasion to effect change in the consumers’

behavior. This approach appreciates the influence of social pressure and perceived social beliefs

among the consumers, in the Phipps et al. (2013) sustainable consumption was noted to be an

intricate process that entails an interaction between the individual, the behavior, and the

environment, and these were proposed in a social cognitive framework, this framework

showcases social learning and modeling role of on consumers as being one of the most

influential processes. The social aspect of consumption is best explained in the ethical

consumerism whereby the consumers feel they have the responsibility to consume or feel that

they are conforming to the societal ideals.

Cultural impacts

Cultural factors are however very influential in consumer behavior as they affect the thinking of

consumers in various societies. Gollnhofer and Schouten (2017) analyzed how sustainability can

be aligned with the prevailing social culture and claimed that culture change is required to

support sustainable consumption. The works of both artists bring to attention how culture might

need to be interpreted and even redesigned to encourage sustainable practices. Culture is most

evident in the consumption of food products as revealed by Grunert et al. (2014) in the

Consumer motivation, understanding and use of sustainability labels on food products, they

establish how and why cultural dimensions influence the nature and significance of sustainability

information in purchasing. Dermody et al. (2018) in their research on sustainable consumption in

emerging markets of China and Poland, described how cultural differences can affect the way

people develop the pro-environmental self-identity and, therefore, their behavior. Another

variable that is culture dependent is materialism, which also has an impact on the environmental

cognition and action patterns. In particular, Kilbourne & Pickett, 2008 analyzed how

materialistic values impact on the environmental concern and environmentally responsible

behavior, which indicates that one needs to change the cultural attitudes in order to change

people’s behavior for the better. Furthermore, Moisander (2007) analyzed the motivational aspect

of green consumerism pointing to the fact that cultural references might give rise to the

motivational tensions and obstacles. Knowledge of these cultural influences is vital in

formulating strategies that will be useful in enhancing the consumption of sustainable products

across the globe since what will work for one culture will not always work for another one.

Decision-making processes

Choice processes in the consumption decisions especially the sustainable ones are influenced by

multifaceted interactions. The attitude-behavior paradox which is widely discussed in the context

of consuming sustainable products and services identifies the difference between people’s

claimed intentions and their actual behaviors. Carrington et al. (2014) took up this gap noting

that it is possible to be ethical intentioned but the question is how this is put into practice. As

their work implies, people do not always make decision in a linear fashion, and there are

situational and personal factors affecting this process. Eberhart & Naderer (2017) developed the

motives & heuristic cues segmentation where they were able to get an understanding of how

different consumers segments make their sustainable purchase decision, this research highlights

the need of decision-making characteristics when designing marketing interventions. It is now

well understood how information processing plays a central role in the decision-making process,

as also Grunert et al. (2014) pointed out in their analysis about sustainability labels, with respect

to this, they discovered that the knowledge and utilization of such labels differ and influence

consumers’ decision-making. While studying purchase intention of green products Joshi and

Rahman (2015) found out that there are individual and situational factors that are responsible for

green purchase decision, they argued that to understand and shape sustainable consumer

behavior, it requires need to a systemic approach. White et al. (2019) have presented the SHIFT

framework which can be used to guide the process of changing consumers’ sustainable

behaviors; it covers social influence, habit, individual self, feelings and cognition, as well as

tangible aspects.

Consumer motivation and values

Consumer motive and consumer values are basic factors that cause the consumers’ behavior

especially in consuming green products. Haws et al. (2014) defined green consumption values,

and showed how these values affect reactions to green products, they stress the need to ensure

that product attributes fit consumers’ values encouraging their sustainable use. The idea of

having multiple and sometimes conflicting motives in sustainable consumption is also supported

by Moisander (2007) that is seen as an extension of the above discussion. This kind of approach

to understanding motivation alters the traditional ways of perceiving the consumer as a rather

rational being. Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker (2016) conducted a study on green and non-green

consumer motivations and differences were noted on the factors that influence purchasing

decisions towards eco-friendly products, their work highlight the necessity of reviewing the

marketing communication strategies according to the essential customer needs and values. This

idea, as explained by Cohen (2020) in relation to home size, shifts the idea of consumer’s values

and motivation to a new dimension which is sufficiency. Based on this study, a change in

attitudes about what is ‘good enough’ might be instrumental in bringing about the desired change

in consumption habits. In this context, Prothero et al. (2011) stress the role of consumer research

and policy in fostering sustainable consumption; thus, it is required to gain a deeper knowledge

of consumers and their motivations or, in some cases, to redefine them. They contend that the

problem of sustainability is ontological – the need to rethink consumption – and, thus, there is a

need for research that looks into the possibility of evoking the right values/motives regarding

sustainability.

2. Sustainable Consumption Principles

Sustainable consumption principles are frameworks that makes societies and people to adopt the

right and responsible manner in consuming products in the society. These principles are focused

on extending the Earth’s natural assets, minimizing waste production, and lowering the effect on

the environment, they include such concepts as conscious purchasing, product durability,

resource management, and circular economy measures. Sustainable consumption aims at the

optimization of the level of consumption in an attempt to meet the wants and needs of the

consumer while at the same time preserving the environment.

Definition and importance

It should be noted that psychological factors exert significant influence on sustainable

consumption, the theory of planned behavior, according to Ajzen (2020), sheds light on a

relationship between attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control on intention

and behavior in the sustainability context, this theory assists in understanding why customers

will affirm environmental conservation practices but seldom practice them. Pro-environmental

self-identity introduced by Dermody et al. (2018) is the fourth psychological factor that affects

sustainable consumption. Their emerging markets research defined how people with green-self-

identity are inclined to practice sustainable buying and curtailment behaviors, the issue of

intention and action still persists and becomes a problem. Several researchers have described this

as the ‘ethical consumer intention-behavior gap,’ Carrington et al. (2014) in particular expounded

on the numerous psychological processes that stand in between the consumers’ willingness to

make sustainable purchases and their actual behavior in this regard. Gifford and Nilsson (2014)

provided a meta-analysis for personal and social antecedents of pro-environmental concern and

behavior with focus on the role of psychological factors and the impact of social factors, their

work presents the fact that one needs to understand the endogenous and the exogenous forces

that exist in the process of pushing for sustainable consumption. It is in this context that the

psychological factors highlighted above can be effectively managed using the SHIFT framework

developed by White et al. (2019) which is based on social influence, habit, identity, feeling and

thoughts, and tangible aspects that need to be changed in order to modify behavior towards

sustainability.

Triple bottom line: people, planet, profit

The concept of triple bottom line that can be abbreviated by three Ps: people, planet and profit is

a basic model in explaining and practicing sustainability consumption. Although this approach is

not mentioned in the cited sources, it subsumes many of the publications devoted to sustainable

consumption. For example, Gollnhofer and Schouten (2017) argue that sustainability is an

addition to the prevailing socius discourse calling for a more equitable blend of profit

(economic), people (social), and planet (environmental). Specifically, the “people” component of

the TBL can be seen in studies, such as Becker-Leifhold & Iran (2018) on sustainable

consumption of fashion products as a way of fulfilling people’s wants and needs. The “planet”

dimension is the most common in most of the sustainable consumption studies like Kilbourne

and Pickett’s (2008) study on the impact of materialism on environmentalism. The authors

Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker (2016) focus the difference between green and non-green

consumer, which means that different segments of the market can have different priority towards

these three aspects. The problem with the integration of these three elements is exemplified in

the Johnstone and Tan (2015) study that examines consumers’ green attitudes and purchasing

decisions, finding that purely self-interest drives the latter.

Circular economy concepts

The circular economy ideas are becoming the focal point in the analysis of sustainable

consumption, although some of these ideas are not articulated in the cited sources, they all relate

to many of the principles highlighted in sustainable consumption studies. The circular economy

model has an objective of eliminating waste and emissions, prolonging the usefulness of

resources and products and revitalizing ecosystems, this concept is not separately identified but

is assumed in papers like Young et al. (2010) where they explore the green consumer within the

context of purchase decisions with an emphasis on the durability and the possibilities for

recycling of the product. Peattie and Peattie’s (2009) paper on social marketing as enabler of

consume less, reflects the circular economy concepts as they suggest the means to escape the

linear economy of consume take make. Becker-Leifhold and Iran’s (2018) examine aspects of

collaborative consumption of fashion that briefly discuss circular economy principles through the

mechanisms for increasing the use frequency of products detailed through sharing and reuse. The

Shift framework that is presented by White et al., (2019) consists of elements that might be

contributing to the understanding of circular economy behaviors, namely the formation of habits

regarding recycling and reuse. The classification of sustainable behaviors by Zralek and Burgiel

(2020) based on the consumers’ perspective probably also comprises activities enabling the

notion of circular economy, e.g., products with low packaging rates, or products’ take-back

systems.

Life cycle assessment

Life cycle assessment (LCA) is widely defined as a method of assessment of various products

and services with regard to environmental performances during the whole life cycle from pre-

production through use and eventually disposal or recycling. As already noted, the idea of the life

cycle thinking is not mentioned in the extracted citations, but it underpins many of the studies

that concern sustainable consumption. For example, some of the aspects discussed in Grunert et

al. ’s (2014) study on sustainability labelling of food products also include the elements of LCA

in as much as certifications entail aspects like the methods of production and transportation. The

article by Luchs and Kumar (2017) on consumer response to tradeoffs between sustainability and

other attributes also indirectly includes the consideration of life cycle, owing to the fact that

sustainability of a product depends on its effects throughout the life-cycle. Eberhart and

Naderer’s (2017) segmentation typology that relies on motives and heuristic cues probably also

comprises the consumer reactions to life cycle information, e. g. carbon footprint labels and

recycling instructions. The theoretical framework of life cycle assessment is most relevant to the

study of Tukker et al. (2008) on enabling change for sustainable consumption and production

because the actual data in the form of LCA deliver the information on hotspots requiring changes

to the product systems. Likewise, his or her Stern (2000) work on theories of environmentally

significant behavior would also use life cycle thinking, as a medium for appraising the

environmental consequences of consumers’ choices.

Sustainable development goals (SDGs)

As stipulated in the objectives of this work, the major focus will be the analysis of the principles

of sustainable consumption and why they are relevant for proper consumer behavior, Prothero et

al (2011) for instance defined sustainable consumption in a wider perspective as more than a

mere act of ‘greening’ of current process but more of radical modification of the process. This

broader definition makes the consumer and the business organizations to question not only the

type of the product they required, but also the amount they need. The applicability of these

principles rises as consumption is highlighted as among the endogenous forces influencing

environmental effects as highlighted by Tukker et al., in the literature review on the effectiveness

of the EB-SCP approach. According to their opinion, Reisch et al., (2016) identify the major

research streams in sustainable consumption research, noting that the discussed advancements

necessitate the application of a multi-disciplinary research approach based on the complexity of

the consumers’ change for sustainability. The case of sufficient housing described by Cohen

(2020) can be considered as added value to the sustainable consumption theories as the shift of

perception could be the core of the change. Thøgersen (2014) clearly goes this way and notes

that they propose that sustainable consumption is a fundamental problem that is caused by

fundamental psychological and social processes and hence, should be solved as such. Sustainable

consumption is not just about decisions of what to consume but also about systems

implementation for sustainability.

3. Green Marketing and Eco-labeling

Green marketing and eco-labeling are promotional activities used in marketing green products

and services, green marketing can be defined as the process of creating and communicating

products with low environmental effects. Eco-labeling is a way of informing the consumers on

the environmental impact of a particular product using labels or certifications, they are used to

persuade the consumers, categorize the goods and services in the market, and support the

principles of sustainable consumption.

Green marketing strategies

There have been changes in the green marketing strategies since organizations have noted the

increasing trend of the green consumerism, these strategies seek to ensure that the company’s

products capture the consumers’ environmentalism and retain the competitive edge. The second

of the green marketing elements is the identification and utilization of consumer incentives.

Evaluating the antecedent of purchasing eco-friendly products Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker,

(2016) pointed out that the potential buyers can be divided into green and non-green ones, and

the appropriate marketing strategies should be developed taking into account the features of

these groups. According to their studies, the previous green promotion strategy of stressing the

environmental advantage can better target consumers who are already environmentally sensitive,

but stressing the self-benefit aspect can make the approach widely appealing. The SHIFT

framework designed by White et al. (2019) gives systematic guidelines for green marketing;

Social Influence, Habit, Individual Self, Feelings and Cognition, and Tangibility, this framework

offers marketers instruments to help them create better strategies for changing the world for the

better. One of the final components of green marketing includes the attitude-behavior paradox

highlighted by scholars such as Carrington et al. Such strategies have to go beyond awareness

creation and perceptions modification in order to achieve the kind of change in consumer

behavior that is required. According to Peattie and Peattie (2009), the necessity of transition from

the academic and managerial discourse of conventional marketing to the concept of social

marketing is revealed, however, the authors consider reduction of consumption as one of the

major goals rather than merely offering consumers green products.

Eco-label types and certifications

The type of eco-labels and certifications are significant in presenting the environmental status to

the consumers, Grunert et al., (2014) examine the specific aspects of consumers’ motivation,

knowledge, and decision-making concerning sustainability labels on food products and conclude

that while consumers have a positive attitude toward these labels, they are not always used by

consumers, their findings affirm the need for easily comprehendible eco-labels, which gives

useful information to the consumers. There are different kinds of eco-labels, from first tier, which

is self-declarations of companies, to third tier, which are labels from independent organizations.

These labels may relate to the particular characteristic such as organic farming, fair trade

practices or general sustainability index. Therefore, expanded consumer knowledge and trust are

factors that define the impact of eco-labels. Eberhart and Naderer (2017) have put forward a

segmentation strategy of motives and heuristic hint, which showed consumers may have

dissimilar reaction to different types of eco-labels. Their work has a strong focus on the

specificity when it comes to actions that are related to eco-labeling, the general use of eco-labels

has been associated with challenges such as confusion among consumers and consequently, the

overuse of labels commonly known as the ‘label fatigue’. Taufique et al. (2012) though absent in

the document, have observed that a large number of eco-labels available makes them less

appealing to the consumers, this challenge shows how there is need to standardize eco-labelling

and ensure that their communication strategies are well understood.

Greenwashing and its consequences

Misleading or making unconfirmed statements on the environmental benefits of a given product

or service is the common vice in green marketing known as Greenwashing. Even though the

issue of greenwashing is not stated directly in the provided citations, it can be associated with the

problem of consumers’ trust and the attitude-behavior gap mentioned by some researchers.

Consumers’ skeptical attitude toward green claims is another factor that was discussed by

Johnstone and Tan (2015) in relation to the gap between green consumerism claims and

consumers’ actual tendencies. The negative effects of greenwashing are the following: the

continuous deceiving of customers and the consequential breakdown of their trust, as well as the

weakening of the overall cause of sustainability. Another issue that Carrington et al. (2014)

address but only in relation to the ethical consumer intention-behavior gap is why consumers do

not act in line with their declared environmental values. Greenwashing can widen this gap due to

the confusion and distrust it causes in the marketplace. As for the concept of greenwashing, it

connects to Luchs and Kumar (2017)’s paper about consumers’ perceptions of tradeoffs between

sustainability and other features. When firms indulge in greenwashing, they manipulate these

tradeoffs and hence consumers are likely to make less favorable decisions for the environment

than they otherwise would. Eradicating greenwashing calls for the use of laws and policies,

industry-led regulation, and the public’s awareness. The study on sustainability labels by Grunert

et al., (2014) also supports that fact that, environmental claims that are credible and easy to

verify are crucial in creating confidence among consumers and thereby encouraging sustainable

consumption.

Consumer trust and transparency

It is well understood that the effective implementation of green marketing strategies and

consuming practices highly depend on honesty and faith from consumers. In the study by

Johnstone & Tan, 2015 on the disconnect between consumers’ claimed environmentalism and

actual consumption, the concept of trust emerges as the link between environmentalism and

purchasing. This means that when the consumers have doubts regarding the environmental

claims or the efficiency of their decisions, they will not exercise sustainable

consumption. Transparency in the disclosure of the attributes of products and their impacts on

the environment is central to developing this trust. Similarly, to Grunert et al. (2014), the authors

stress the significance of the interpretative quality of sustainability labels in gaining consumers’

trust and supporting the process of their decision-making. Based on their study, they postulated

that consumers will use and trust eco-labels when they know what the labels stand for and able to

authenticate the claims. Another concept that is also connected with consumer trust is the one

bearing the name of pro-environmental self-identity, discussed by Dermody et al. (2018).

Consumers with high levels of environmental consciousness may be more sensitive to green

communication and may want accurate information concerning the environmental status of the

products. White et al. ’s (2019) SHIFT framework also comprises of strategies that can be

adopted to foster trust and increase the levels of transparency and these consist of using social

influence and humanizing sustainable choices. Eberhart & Naderer’s (2017) motives & heuristic

cues segmentation strategy also points out to the fact that there is need for organizations to have

specific strategies that would help in addressing the worries and demands of consumers seeking

information.

Case studies in successful green marketing

Unfortunately, the document does not have case-studies of successful implementations of green

marketing; however, by analyzing the research, one can assume what such strategies might look

like. For instance, Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker (2016)’s study based on green and non-green

customers indicate that effective green marketing communications would have to be targeted. An

example of a case might be a firm that is able to pursue different marketing strategies for the

green consumers as compared to selfish consumers. The study conducted by Grunert et al.,

(2014) on sustainability labels insinuates that ideal green marketing would entail the use of

understandable ecological labels. An example may be a regional company that has adopted and

described in detail the environmental characteristics of its products. The analysis of Becker-

Leifhold and Iran’s (2018) study on collaborative fashion consumption seems to indicate that

green marketing might entail a focus on new consumption paradigms. A case could be done on a

fashion firm that has effectively communicated a clothing rental or resale service as sustainable

consumption. White et al. (2019) put forward the SHIFT framework that comprises several

approaches to encourage sustainable action. An ideal example might look at a particular

company which has adopted some of these elements in the framework where it uses social

pressure, which may try to form new habits among the consumer, and make sustainable choices

more real. Finally, because most of the papers under review addressed the attitude-behavior gap,

a case study that stands out in this regard could show how a firm has effectively translated

consumers’ positive attitude towards the environment into purchase actions.

4. Consumer Attitudes Towards Sustainability

Consumer attitude to sustainability refers to the mental concept that people have about its intent

and behavior towards consumption that has little impact on the physical environment and social

setting, these attitudes are influenced by parameters such as personal beliefs and knowledge,

respondent’s perception of societal norms and perceived efficiency of sustainability decisions,

there has always been a recognized awareness of the environment among many consumers, but

the disparity between their concern and behavior still remains present, knowing these attitudes is

essential for changing people’s behavior and encouraging them to use resources responsibly.

Environmental consciousness

The way consumers think about the environment is determinant of how they act towards

contributing to the cause of environmental conservation, this concept refers to a person’s

knowledge of the environment, concern with the environment and the ability to afford

responsible conduct towards the environment. Similarly, using the theoretical framework from

Vining and Ebreo (1990), Dermody et al. (2018) studied the relationship of self-identity and pro-

environmental behaviors in consuming and curtailing behaviors of consumers in emerging

markets and it was concluded that consumers with strong self-identity towards environmental

conservation are more inclined towards purchasing sustainable products and also involved in

curtailment of consumption, this implies that the general adoption of sustainable thinking as the

basis for environmental understanding is a useful approach when encouraging sustainable

consumption, environmental consciousness and behavior are always correlated with each other.

The study by Carrington et al., (2014) focused on the intention behavior gap and pointed out that

the consumers willing to be ethical may not always follow up on that by acting so in their

purchase decisions. This has brought out the fact that environmental consciousness is not entirely

reflected on behavior, hence the gap between the two scores. Gifford and Nilsson (2014)

provided an extensive analysis of the personal and social antecedents of concern and

conservation behavior and revealed that environmental concern is a multi-faceted phenomenon,

depending, on workers’ characteristics (knowledge, values, personality traits), and social factors

(norms, status, exposure to environmental issues), this confirms their future work where they

imply that environmental awareness involves the accomplishment of individual and collective

change. There is another perspective that is green consumption values introduced by Haws et al.

(2014) which also reflect the level of environmental concern, they also show that the consumers

who hold stronger green consumption values are more likely to prefer and select the products

with environmental advantages, thus, the stronger relationship between consciousness and action

among this group.

Ethical consumerism

Ethical consumerism is a type of consumer activism entailing consumers’ decision making

involving ethical and moral issues like sustainability, this concept is therefore very closely linked

to the concept of sustainable consumption as identified by different researchers as explained in

the given document. Johnstone and Tan (2015) also examined the dichotomy between

consumer’s expressed attitudes towards green purchase and their actual consumer behavior,

noting the ethical consumer’s struggles to act out their beliefs. They described some of these

impacts as including skepticism which is an unwillingness to accept ethical claims and engage in

ethical consumption practices, green stigma which is a negative attitude towards ethical products

and perceived consumer ineffectiveness which is the inability of consumers to influence firms’

ethical behaviors. Ethical consumerism is also discussed in the work of Luchs & Kumar (2017)

who analyzed the consumers’ evaluation of the trade-offs between sustainable and other

important attributes. From these findings, Saygor et al., imply that perhaps ethical consumers are

more ready to compromise on specific attributes so that they can have products that are

sustainable but also concede that this preparedness depends on the type of products and the

consumers in question. Some authors noted that attitude-behavior inconsistency can be explained

by more factors including the individual, situational, and social factors as it was suggested by

Papaoikonomou et al. (2011). Their work gives an outlook into what could be considered a

multi-faceted issue that makes ethical consumerism what it is and what has to be included in a

bid to enhance ethical consumption. The article on Fashion consumption cooperation by Becker-

Leifhold and Iran (2018) briefly addresses the issues of ethical consumption, comparing methods

on which the consumers choose cooperation strategies that reflect their principles.

Barriers to sustainable consumption

It is stated that challenges and threats regarding sustainable consumption encompass substantial

obstacles to the transformation of favorable attitudes towards environmental issues into actual

consumption patterns, such barriers are complex and can be of psychological. Social, Economic

or Structural in nature. Carrington et al. (2014) have considered different aspects that hinder

consumers from behaving ethically based on their intentions. These are implementation

difficulties, situation contingencies and real/reported autonomy. Johnstone and Tan, 2015 also

explored other barriers to green purchasing behavior, some of which included green stigma by

which a consumer feels the perception that people will judge him negatively for going green is

stronger than the benefits of green products and skeptical consumption where consumers’ trust in

green marketing claims is progressively being eroded. The perceived trade-offs between

sustainability and other attribute are the other barrier that has been investigated by Luchs and

Kumar (2017). Consumers have to face the dilemma of choosing the sustainable products

bearing in mind other factors like price, quality and convenience of the product. Gupta and

Ogden (2009) adopted the attitude towards consumption from the perspective of social dilemma

implying how the decisions made are based on perceived behaviors by other people, this

showcases the challenge of social norms where the consumer will be slow to change their

behavior since they will be waiting for others to change in the same behavior. There is also the

aspect of economics which is evident in the literature as discussed by Barbarossa & De

Pelsmacker, 2016; regarding the perception of price sensitivity as a key reason that keeps many

non-green consumers away from green products.

Generational differences in attitudes

Since consumers are portioned in generations, there may be a division of beliefs about

sustainability, which is a critical aspect to consider while comprehending consumer behaviors,

Nevertheless, this subject is not pointed to in the given document. It is possible to derive some

conclusions based on the reported studies. Since the study of Dermody et al. (2018) does not

directly compare generation-specific data, it points to consumption for sustainability in emerging

markets, and, despite that, the authors state that younger consumers are more aware of global

environmental issues, it could be assumed that generation Y consumers are willing to consume

sustainably. The particular idea of pro-environmental self-identity, which they discuss seems to

be influenced by formative experiences and environmental education received during the time

when the students belong to the certain generation. Thøgersen 2014 debating about unsustainable

consumption described that generations may have a different perception of ‘normal’ consumption

level which can lead to different perception of sustainability. The force further highlighted in the

research on collaborative consumption by Becker-Leifhold & Iran (2018) could be more useful

in comprehending younger generations’ attitudes since the AL of consumption appear more

accommodative of young consumers tending to delve into sharing economy notions. In relation

to Black et al. ’s (2019) review of the SHIFT framework for sustainable behaviors, there is a

potential of applying this framework differently across the generational fulcrum, given that such

factors as social influences, habit formation processes and the individual self-concepts may differ

in line with the generations given their experiences and values systems.

Cultural variations in sustainability perceptions

Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are used as a framework to understand culture’s impact on

attitudes and actions regarding sustainability and its levels, in their cross-sectional survey study

that compares sustainable consumption behaviors of people in China and Poland, Dermody et al.

(2018) deliver the proof of cultural differences influencing the manifestations of PEA and its

effects directly, they argue that their respective countries’ findings show that pro-environmental

self-identity has a significant impact on sustainable consumption, but that the degree to which

this factor affects the consumption behavior varies depending on cultural factors. The role of

sustainability in reinforcing or opposing the primary way of perceiving the world further

encouraged by Gollnhofer and Schouten (2017) to pay attention to how cultural stories affect a

person’s commitment to sustainable consumption. As this work shows, people’s cultural

backgrounds should be taken into account when introduced to the ideas of sustainability. The

comparative analysis of attitudes toward sustainability labels by Grunert et al., (2014) that are

based on the results of the European countries’ surveys shows how cultural factors affect the

perception and valuation of sustainability info in shaping the attitudes and purchase intentions,

their findings indicate that there may be issues regarding the difference of the impact of eco-

labeling strategies depending on the different cross cultural awareness and sensitivity to the

environment and the knowledge of its impacts. Indeed, Kilbourne and Pickett’s study of

materialism and environmental beliefs and behaviors also has cultural dimension to it because

levels of materialism can be quite different in different societies. This implies that strategies in

marketing a sustainable consumption agenda could require a cultural specificity particularly to

do with materialism.

5. Behavioral Economics and Sustainable Choices

Behavioral economics is a concept that relies on psychology while trying to explain economic

choices including sustainable ones, it looks at how factors like cognitive interventions, social

influences and context explain consumers’ behavior towards green products and sustainability

practices, the discussion explores why people make negligible changes to their actions even if

they have environment-friendly views and referrals to what can be done to modify the

consumers’ choices using principles of behavioral economics and design of incentives.

Nudge theory in sustainability

The nudge theory in sustainability is proved to be highly effective in encouraging people to

make correct environmentally friendly decisions without forcing them to make the right decision.

As the concept of ‘nudging’ is not pointed out at the provided document, one can state that the

concept is closely related to several research findings concerning sustainable consumption. For

example, White et al (2019) SHIFT framework which has the basis of nudge theory and

recommends strategies that encourages the social norms, habits, identification, feelings and

thoughts and things within the tangible environment for sustainable behavior. These are all ways

in which they can be defined as types of nudges – steering the consumer towards a ‘greener’

decision. Carrington et al. (2014) study of the ethical consumer intention-behavior gap implies

that there is possibility of using the concept of nudges to design settings that allow consumers to

make the right sustainable actions, it explains that they might help overcome the implementation

challenges and situational factors that they state as inhibiting sustainable behavior. As Thøgersen

(2014) elaborated on the issues of unsustainable consumption, the author postulated that nudging

could be particularly useful in changing consumers’ perception of what is considered normal in

terms of consumption. Thus, nudging may align people’s decisions with environmentally

friendly options slowly changing the perception of those choices as more desirable. The studies

of sustainability labels by Grunert et al. (2014) are related to the present research since well-

defined and easily-read eco-labels can act as examples of nudges due to the focus they bring to

sustainability information at the time of purchase.

Choice architecture for eco-friendly decisions

Choice architecture for eco-friendly decisions is about putting in place a surround for decisions

in a way that people will be in a position to make the right decision that favors the environment.

This idea is directly connected with nudge theory and is incorporated or discussed in a posteriori

in several of the studies from the given document. Self’s (2017) practical choices approach

proposes that both motives and heuristic cues should be segmented because decision

environments for different consumer segment should be organized appropriately. For instance,

giving the P1, sustainability information could be easier to present if it is easily identified that

targeted consumers are concerned with the environment than doing so for P2; on the same note,

it might be easier to stress on personal gains when persuading consumers for P2 than when doing

it for P1. Luchs and Kumar’s (2017) study on how consumers react to trade-offs in sustainable

and other attributes stresses the need to balance these choices properly when communicating

within product choices and promotions. A kind of choice architecture might be to position

sustainable choices in such a way that other attributes that customers rarely trade off, have less

perceived costs. The research done by Anita G Tata and Sandy J Ogden on green buying

behavior from a social dilemma perspective also support the above rhetoric of Roman and Scott

that choice architecture also needs to underestimate social factors. One possible way to support

sustainable choices is by creating social contexts that make for sustainable behaviors to become

more salient to the individuals, according to Becker-Leifhold and Iran (2018) on collaborative

fashion consumption, the literature suggests choice architecture could be applied to make the

more sustainable forms of consumption easier and more appealing like placing an option to rent

or buy used clothing next to the option to buy new clothing.

Cognitive biases affecting sustainable choices

The following cognitive biases that influence the decision making in sustainable products

contribute great influence to the gap created between the consumers’ environmentally friendly

opinions and actions. It is important to note that although there is no direct reference to cognitive

biases in the provided document several of the described studies reference related notions.

Carrington et al. (2014) explain the duality of the ethical consumer intention-behavior gap partly

due to such cognitive biases as present bias as well as status quo bias – which equates current

consumption with new sustainable consumption. Through Johnstone and Tan (2015) study on the

disconnect between green talk and walk, we understand that there are various biases that include

the confirmation bias which entails consumers choosing to find and process information in a

certain way just to justify irrational decisions that they make with regards to non-sustainable

purchases and the optimism bias where the stock value of people’s assimilated environmental

actions is underestimated. Haws et al. ’s (2014) survey of green consumption values signifies the

fact that the consumers with the high level of green value might be less influenced by some

biases in relation to sustainability, but they are vulnerable for the halo effect to overestimate the

complete sustainability quotient of a product based on a single attribute. The social dilemma

perspective presented by Gupta and Ogden (2009) pertains to how people’s thinking in social

contexts can be faulty in terms of sustainability thinking and action, such as the pluralistic

ignorance where people lack the thought that other people also lack concern with sustainability,

as a result of other people also doing many sustainability-inappropriate things.

Incentives and disincentives for sustainable behavior

Rewards and penalties for people’s sustainable actions remain key focus areas in encouraging

consumers to buy environmentally friendly goods, the findings of the study outlined in the

document concern different issues related to it, following Barbarossa and De Pelsmacker’s

(2016) findings on green and non-green consumers, it may be safe to infer that different forms of

incentives may work well for different categories of consumers. To appeal to the equivalents of

the so-called green consumers one can enforce the preservation of the environment might work

best while to other people benefits to them or saving money might work best. Luchs and Kumar

(2017)’s study on trade-off between sustainable and other aspects with products suggests that

these perceived trade-offs should also be incorporated as topic of the incentives, which might

mean presenting ways through which one can avoid compromising on other aspects of

sustainable matters. It is here that Peattie and Peattie’s (2009) argument for social marketing in

the context of sustainability states that incentives should not be solely monetary, but should

include social reward as well as satisfaction arising from the choice of sustainable option. In a

way, disincentives are contemplated in such consequent studies as Kilbourne & Pickett’s (2008)

study on materialism impact on environmental behaviors – it is stated here, that to decrease

materialistic values might be used as disincentive to unsustainable consumption. The SHIFT

framework developed by White et al. (2019) includes both incentives and disincentives where

the use of social incentives and making sustainability behaviors more real (immediate incentives)

are elements of the framework.

Gamification in promoting sustainable consumption

Taking into consideration the purpose and aims of the present work, it is possible to relate the

topic of gamification in promoting sustainable consumption to several ideas discussed in the

document. Gamification therefore refers to the process where game design and frameworks are

incorporated in areas that are outside games in order to influence positive behaviors among the

people. Using and coupling the proposed SHIFT framework by White et al. (2019), it is possible

to identify elements that could be effectively gamified. For example, the “Social influence”

component can be made into game where challenges and/or leaders are exhibited in order to

support sustainable behavior. The “Habit formation” may be enhanced by the apps based on the

game and habits that can be created with incentives for daily sustainable decision-making. In

Dermody et al. ’s (2018) study on pro-Environmental self-identity, more specifically one could

posit that gamification was applied as a means of enhancing or re-enforcing this identity in the

context of sustainability-based games or features that may be attributed to the games, including

customization of the avatars or storylines. The study of Becker-Leifhold and Iran (2018) on

collective fashion consumption, suggests that gamification could help to make the systemic

changes more appealing; such as the introduction of a point/ reward system for participating in

clothing swaps or rental schemes. According to Eberhart and Naderer (2017) from the

segmentation based on motives and heuristic cues, there are requirements for gamification that

could divided into different consumer segments, while the strategies for gamification may render

some kinds of game elements more appealing to the motives for sustainable behavior. Although

not prohibitively stated in the document, gamification would also break some of the barriers to

sustainable consumption that Carrington et al. (2014) and Johnstone and Tan (2015) have

underscored by taking sustainable consumption choices as fun-filled, reward-gaining and

socially accepted activities.

6. Future Trends and Innovations

Dates and events that are yet to happen in the future define the direction of developments, in all

fields. Whether it is AI, renewable energy, biotech or space exploration, new technologies hold

immense potential for ways we are going to live and do business in the future, all these

advancements provide the solutions to the existing global problems and at the same time create

new opportunities and complexities in matters of ethics. Knowledge of these trends is usefully

for businesses, for policymakers and for people to get ready and even to influence the future.

Technology's role in sustainable consumption

Technology is localized as a key enabler of sustainable consumption since it provides solutions

and platforms that can enhance the sustainable consumption process. Digital technologies have

and have continued to open possibilities for sharing economy and collaborative consumption that

lean towards efficiency in the use of resources and are environmentally friendly. For example,

applications on the consumer’s devices such as mobile applications, online platforms allow the

consumers to share, rent or borrow the products instead of buying them full price, hence

minimizing production and wastage (Becker-Leifhold & Iran, 2018). Sophisticated technology

also aids in sharing knowledge about sustainable products and practices by narrowing the

planning beach, which is a difference between the consumers’ attitude toward environmental

issues and their behavior (Carrington et al., 2014). Furthermore, technology can also make the

process of measuring the use of the resources required and the effects on the environment much

accurate, thus making it possible for consumers to change their behaviors in relation to their

consumption.

Sharing economy and collaborative consumption

The phenomena of the sharing economy and collaborative consumption are the groundbreaking

changes in the consumer behavior in the direction of sustainability, these models revolve around

decreasing the control of ownership causing disparities compared to the conventional models that

support buying and owning (Prothero et al., 2011). Thus, by increasing the value of resources

already in circulation, sharing economy initiatives may slow down the need for new goods and

services, in turn, limiting the impact of consumption. Some of examples are ride-sharing

applications, home sharing services and P2P tool lending. Nonetheless, the implementation of

those behaviors presents challenges like hygiene, trust, and perceived inconvenience of shared

ownership (Becker-Leifhold & Iran, 2018), he pointed out that it is crucial to eliminate those

barriers with the help of technologies, social initiatives, and changes in people’s mindsets

concerning ownership and consumption.

Sustainable product design and innovation

It is therefore paramount on the designers to design sustainable products and come up with new

and innovative ideas, this is so as to contain the impacts of a consumption-oriented society, it

focuses on such aspects as acquisition use and disposal of the product with particular respect to

the parts and materials used in the making of the product. Technological advancements in

materials include the creation of blends like biodegradable plastics or recycled clothes that result

in better products that are friendly to the environment, other sustainable design strategies include

minimization of product obsolescence, design for longevity, for reparability and upgradability

also help minimize waste (Luchs & Kumar, 2017). Circular economy principles in product

design implies that waste should not enter the cycle and resources should be utilized to the

maximum extent. However, sustainable goods encounter some issues in the market since the

consumers differentiate between economic, social, or environmental gains and losses derived

from their purchases and from the appearance or functionality of the object they are buying

(Luchs & Kumar, 2017).

Policy and regulation impacts

Policy and regulation are the critical factors influencing sustainable consumption, there are

lessons that governments can learn from the study and practice the measures that can be taken in

order to promote or demotivate sustainable behaviors. This may include using of economic

measures that involve the use of environmental taxes on bad goods, provision of incentives

towards environmentally friendly goods and services, and use of extended producer

responsibility. Policies include energy efficiency standards, labeling rules that make demands on

environmentally friendly products and prohibit on the use of single-use products are other factors

may also influence production and consumption shift (Thøgersen, 2014). But these policies have

bare imposed themselves depending on certain factors such as consumer awareness, the available

mechanism of enforcing them, as well as the overall intensity of socio-economic factors. Policy

makers have to also take into account possible side effect and avoid situations where SET

[sustainable consumption policies] will shift the burden to the youngest, the least wealthy and the

disadvantaged groups (Reisch et al., 2016).

Measuring and reporting sustainability impacts

Sustainability metrics not only help delineate the extent of the problem at hand but also shed

light onto sustainable consumer behaviors both at personal and organizational level as well as the

policy level. Different tools and approaches have been introduced to evaluate other social,

environmental costs and benefits of consumption such as carbon footprint, water footprint and

life cycle assessment, nonetheless, the globalization of supply chain and the social, economic as

well as environmental facets of sustainability adds to the difficulties in a precise quantification

(Tukker et al., 2008). What is more, there is a trend toward the extend of reporting on

sustainability issues and the comparability of the related reports increases. For consumers, the

limiting factor is the availability of comprehensible information regarding the sustainability

footprint of the manufactured goods. Eco-labels and sustainability certification works towards

filling this information gap; however, their success depends on the consumers’ knowledge and

confidence in these different schemes (Grunert et al., 2014). Self-measurement methods and

reporting procedures while changing can reveal more sustainable consumption behavior by

means of enhanced responsibility and more effective intervention.

REFERENCES

Ajzen, I. (2020). The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Human Behavior and

Emerging Technologies, 2(4), 314-324.

Barbarossa, C., & De Pelsmacker, P. (2016). Positive and negative antecedents of purchasing eco-friendly

products: A comparison between green and non-green consumers. Journal of Business Ethics,

134(2), 229-247.

Becker-Leifhold, C., & Iran, S. (2018). Collaborative fashion consumption – drivers, barriers and future

pathways. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 22(2), 189-208.

Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2014). Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical

consumer intention–behavior gap. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2759-2767.

Cohen, M. J. (2020). New conceptions of sufficient home size in high-income countries: Are we

approaching a sustainable consumption transition? Housing, Theory and Society, 37(2), 127-144.

Dermody, J., Koenig-Lewis, N., Zhao, A. L., & Hanmer-Lloyd, S. (2018). Appraising the influence of pro-

environmental self-identity on sustainable consumption buying and curtailment in emerging

markets: Evidence from China and Poland. Journal of Business Research, 86, 333-343.

Dumitru, A., et al. (2016). Low carbon energy behaviors among the public: The role of psychological and

socio-demographic variables. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 48, 81-90.

Eberhart, A. K., & Naderer, G. (2017). Quantitative and qualitative insights into consumers' sustainable

purchasing behaviour: A segmentation approach based on motives and heuristic cues. Journal of

Marketing Management, 33(13-14), 1149-1169.

Gifford, R., & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern

and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology, 49(3), 141-157.

Gollnhofer, J. F., & Schouten, J. W. (2017). Complementing the dominant social paradigm with

sustainability. Journal of Macromarketing, 37(2), 143-152.

Grunert, K. G., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation,

understanding and use. Food Policy, 44, 177-189.

Gupta, S., & Ogden, D. T. (2009). To buy or not to buy? A social dilemma perspective on green buying.

Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26(6), 376-391.

Haws, K. L., Winterich, K. P., & Naylor, R. W. (2014). Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses:

Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. Journal of

Consumer Psychology, 24(3), 336-354.

Johnstone, M. L., & Tan, L. P. (2015). Exploring the gap between consumers' green rhetoric and

purchasing behaviour. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(2), 311-328.

Joshi, Y., & Rahman, Z. (2015). Factors affecting green purchase behaviour and future research directions.

International Strategic Management Review, 3(1-2), 128-143.

Kilbourne, W., & Pickett, G. (2008). How materialism affects environmental beliefs, concern, and

environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Business Research, 61(9), 885-893.

Luchs, M. G., & Kumar, M. (2017). "Yes, but this other one looks better/works better": How do

consumers respond to trade-offs between sustainability and other valued attributes? Journal of

Business Ethics, 140(3), 567-584.

Moisander, J. (2007). Motivational complexity of green consumerism. International Journal of Consumer

Studies, 31(4), 404-409.

Papaoikonomou, E., Ryan, G., & Ginieis, M. (2011). Towards a holistic approach of the attitude behaviour

gap in ethical consumer behaviours: Empirical study from Spain. International Advances in

Economic Research, 17(1), 77-88.

Peattie, K., & Peattie, S. (2009). Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction? Journal of

Business Research, 62(2), 260-268.

Phipps, M., et al. (2013). Understanding the inherent complexity of sustainable consumption: A social

cognitive framework. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1227-1234.

Prothero, A., et al. (2011). Sustainable consumption: Opportunities for consumer research and public

policy. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 30(1), 31-38.

Reisch, L. A., Cohen, M. J., Thøgersen, J. B., & Tukker, A. (2016). Frontiers in sustainable consumption

research. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 25(4), 234-240.

Stern, P. C. (2000). New environmental theories: Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant

behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407-424.

Thøgersen, J. (2014). Unsustainable consumption: Basic causes and implications for policy. European

Psychologist, 19(2), 84-95.

Tukker, A., et al. (2008). Fostering change to sustainable consumption and production: An evidence

based view. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(11), 1218-1225.

Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer "attitude–

behavioral intention" gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169-194.

White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A

literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22-49.

Young, W., Hwang, K., McDonald, S., & Oates, C. J. (2010). Sustainable consumption: Green consumer

behaviour when purchasing products. Sustainable Development, 18(1), 20-31.

Zralek, J., & Burgiel, A. (2020). Prospects for a sustainable future: Mapping sustainable behaviors

according to consumer perceptions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 268, 121947.

CONSUMER BEHAVIOR AND SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION

Students also viewed