Introduction
According to Harrison et al. (2005), consumers can act as agents of bettering society. They do this through ethical consumption, which relates to the intentional selection of alternative products offering or not offering the greatest utility or pay off. The motive for selective buying as described here would be to ensure that repercussions to the society remain positive. The essence of promoting ethical consumption is to make consumers powerful as economic voters who are able to shape the market preference and production choices in society.
People can use ethical consumption to increase the sense of participation and to integrate public and private life. The utopian goal of ethical consumer behaviour is to reach a position where markets reinforce altruism. The paper reviews theory and academic literature relating to attitudes and behaviour relationships in the context of ethical consumptions. It identifies the inadequacy of theory, dialogical relationships, and political cultivation related to space and place, cultural influences and cognitive biases as the main reasons for explaining why attitudes may not always help to predict behaviour and why the attitude-behaviour gap might be so prevalent throughout the ethical consumption literature in particular.
Theory of reasoned action
The theory of reasoned action (TRA) helps to predict consumer behaviour when making ethical consumption choices. TRA links attitudes, subjective norms, behavioural intentions, and behaviour in a fixed causal sequence (Shaw et al. 2000). Thus, it serves as a formula for use with different variables to determine resultant consumer behaviour or to analyse behaviour and determine its causal factors.
Unfortunately, the theory only uses a set of inputs to determine possible behaviour and the furthest it can go is to explain the most dominant intention of an individual. When the intentions turn out to correspond with actual behaviour, then its predictive capabilities are hailed. However, as various scholars would point out, that is not always the case as individual intentions sometimes are not enough to influence resultant behaviour. The TRA is an attitude-behaviour model that explains the formation of intentions by an individual.
The straightforward nature of the TRA is one of the reasons why most literature on ethical consumption relies on questionnaires as preferred data collection tools. People can easily identify their attitudes and underlying subjective norms when presented with relevant leading questions, especially when the respondents only have to think about a particular behaviour such as buying a certain product in a specific location (Armstrong et al. 2012).
With the TRA as the basis of marketing action, marketers can come up with ways of influencing intentions to ensure that consumers behave in a certain way. Present literature shows that the outcome is possible, but it depends on the exclusivity of conditions that lead to the formation of the intention, such that altering them as the marketer would do, would automatically create a change in intention (Auger & Devinney 2007).
Theory of planned behaviour models
The theory of planned behaviour (TPB) model is an extension of the TRA that has improved predictive capabilities (Shaw et al. 2000). However, the theory is also incomplete as research on ethical obligations demonstrated, leading to proposals to add the new concept as part of the theory. Evidence shows that ethical consumers hold obligatory feelings for others, which affects their choices. Therefore, in addition to the ethical obligation, the concept of self-identity has to be factored in the TRB model. As an improvement to the TRA model, the TPB states that only certain attitudes that relate to the behaviour being reviewed would be expected to predict that behaviour.
In addition, subjective norms must be measured to help make the prediction. In this case, the subjective norms would be the perception that a person has about the views concerning his or her behaviour as held by other people who are important to him or her. Beyond that, people also hold perceptions about their ability to influence their behaviours, which is another determinant factor in their intentions to behave in a certain way. In a typical setting, when the subjective norms are favourable, and the perceived control of behaviour is great, the propensity of the individual to behave according to his or her intentions would be high (Hayden 2009).
In light of changing literature on the subject of ethical consumption, suggestions on theory improvements should continue to arise. Issues in relation to self-identity and the consideration of certain social behaviour context would need inclusion when undertaking comprehensive analyses. People adjust their behaviour to correspond with issues that are central to their self-identity, which would explain why subjective norms were included in the initial model.
Here, the suggestion for improvement, which is supported by the following discussion of attitudes and behaviour gaps, is to ensure that no influences to intention are left out in analysis (Newholm & Shaw 2007). In the ethical consumption context, the decision-making process for the individual would still rely on their self-identity. It is expected that the heightened awareness of social, political, and environmental impacts of their purchasing decisions would be part of their self-identity (Auger & Devinney 2007).
Explanation as to why attitudes may not always help to predict behaviour 500
Most evidence from past and present research shows that ethical consumers exist. However, not all ethical consumers are the same, and the exact percentage of ethical consumers in society is relatively unknown. It is possible to group consumers into clusters representing their attitudes and then studying them. The problem with the approach is that it is quite difficult to identify consumers based on their attitudes to facilitate the grouping. In fact, as Belk et al. (2005) show, there is a weak relationship between social and environmental concern and consumer choice for products having social attributes.
Another reason for not fully relying on attitudes to predict ethical behaviour could be the effects of product nature and price being paid. The features elicit different responses among different people based on demographics and market conditions. Furthermore, consumer heterogeneity exists on price sensitivity caused by environmental and labour issues tied to the product (Garretson & Scot 2003). In addition, an individual will always react to the personal costs and rewards. Even though people could be exposed to normative influences, they would still strongly navigate towards perceptions and consequences related to personal costs and rewards as influencers of their behaviour (Solomon et al. 2010).
Attitude as the sole predictor of behaviour would be helpful when an individual was always rational, and the specific phenomena under study were fully understood. However, with consumer ethical progress, research work is on-going, and the consumer studies show a myriad of attitudes at any given time (Vittell 2003). Though the ethical consumer by definition would be seeking avenues to make a conscious choice, there are many social and economic forces, as outlined above, that impact the consumer’s behaviour. Research by Szmigin et al. (2009) confirms that consumers face competing priorities and contradicting outcomes.
There are gaps existing between ethical attitudes and actual ethical purchase behaviour due to the existing brand knowledge and actual brand image at the time of purchase. People are put off by inconsistencies in the presentation when they are supposed to behave according to their dominant attitudes. For example, a consumer concerned about Fair Trade and familiar with its principles would approach the opportunity to buy Fair Trade products. However, when the same person is at the store, he or she will evaluate the presentation of the Fair Trade product and use that as the basis of making a decision of whether to buy it or not. This behaviour change at the last minute would not necessarily correspond with or change the person’s predominant attitude towards Fair Trade.
Marketing information approach is also to blame for behavioural responses. Advocacy and lifestyle messaging approaches are different in how they yield of appropriate behaviour. At the same time, their delivery channels influence the existence of cognitive biases on the consumer, such as choice-supportive bias that favours previous non-ethical purchases (Arcidiacono 2011).
Explanation as to why the attitude-behaviour gap might be so prevalent throughout the sustainable/ethical consumption literature 800
The methodology used for most research on ethical consumer behaviour could be responsible for persistent misconnections between expected behaviour and actual actions by consumers. Auger and Devinney (2007) show that unconstrained surveys are too noisy to bring out exact information influencing ethical consumer. The surveys have too many variables and very little filters for incoming information. At the same time, they are prone to socially acceptable responses.
On the other hand, with a constrained environment, Auger and Devinney (2007) were able to show that traditional approaches are helpful in highlighting the existence of the relationship between ethical issues and consumer decision-making process. In addition, the authors showed that future researchers must recognize the complexities of human behaviour and use an appropriate methodology that is capable of filtering sources of bias. Surveys succumb to the problems of collecting data associated with differences in response styles when they should be checking differences in attitudes. Failure to recognize the error creates challenges in the interpretation of data.
As Szmigin et al. (2009) put it, media information and scientific reports are contradictory and end up confusing consumers such that individuals express very diverse opinions and expectations. As a result, what research expects to achieve as a reflection of theory ends up fuelling the search for new theories to explain the fact that there are no predictable links in what people do and what they would actually do in their ideal situations. Again, the concept of the ideal, in this case, becomes circumstantial, given that an individual’s information concerning consumption varies, as mentioned earlier.
Attitude-behaviour gaps persist because of the motivation behind various researches on ethical consumption. The marketing perspective often looks at the individual, rather than social aspects of consumption. Thus, they leave out many socially related factors such as family ties, household consumption behaviours, ethnic group influences, and religious beliefs that dictate, to a social degree, the values that an individual would rely on when embracing ethical consumption behaviour (Szmigin et al. 2009).
Still, some researchers focus on people’s behaviour and proceed to look at issues affecting a person’s action regarding ethical consumption (Darke & Chung 2005). Research reports of this category explain the way people reconcile many incommensurable forces and end behaving unpredictably. Therefore, in one research, outcomes would show that certain consumer behaviour theories are insufficient, while in another, outcomes would completely align with expected outcomes according to theoretical assumptions (Zanna et al..1980).
Disharmony exists among sustainable/ethical consumption literature because there are self-concept aspects of the individual and do not match behaviour. People are always rationalizing and self-justifying their choices and beliefs such that they would partly dismiss stimuli to action or on another part notice and use it. Gaps continue to exist in literature because research concentrates on an individual or social aspects of ethical consumption separately (Davies et al. 2012).
Most research only concerns adults as ethical consumers, but the evidence provided by Nicholls and Lee (2006) shows that children are increasingly becoming influencers in purchase decision-making, and they also act as consumers. This finding brings out another dimension to the attitude-behaviour literature on sustainable consumption. Beyond culture and economic factors, gender and age will now become additional factors influencing perceived and observed behaviour in research.
As that happens, more factors influencing attitude and its influence or failure to influence behaviour would then need additional review. As it stands, much of the information is still provisional, and major research reports are exploratory and call for further detailed research. There are still too many angles when making observations and analysis, such that highlighting a dominant position in all research becomes difficult as one moves deeper into the subject.
Perhaps, it is worth studying ethical consumption ideals as one of the many factors influencing consumer behaviour because it is dependent on place and space. Chatzidak et al. (2012) suggest that research on ethics should not just focus on identity projects on the given conception of ethics; instead, it should look at the spatial context of occurrence and political implications.
Considering space as part of reach focus is well covered on research as demonstrated by Szmigin et al. (2009) on the idea of consumption communities and social clusters. Lack of exploration on dialogical relationships and political cultivation related to space or place in most research could be another reason for attitude-behaviour gaps in the literature. Individuals may live in their ideal world and, thus, behave according to their attitudes on ethical consumption as demonstrated by Chatzidak et al. (2012) in their research on the Exarcheia neighbourhood.
At the same time, lack of societal cultivation of political ideals relating to ethical consumer behaviour could hinder appropriate behaviour, despite the existence of adequate knowledge, the motive to behave accordingly. Again, as the discussion above shows, the existence of different avenues for assessing spaces, as well individuals and societies all present research challenges for finding focus or reconciling reports with existing literature, leading to the gap (Harrison et al. 2005).
Conclusion
Just as the TRA was advanced into the TPB, additional modifications will be needed to explain the existing gaps in the literature and to cement a particular scope for explaining the ethical consumption concept. The additional factors for consideration in the new theory would relate to the highlighted reasons for the discordance in literature, as well as the reliance on attitudes to determine behaviour. The most important one is the realization that, at any time, consumers are always rationalizing and self-justifying their choices and beliefs.
Marketers and other stakeholders have to refocus their marketing strategies so that they build a consistent brand image of the products and communication campaigns that focus on ethical consumption. Without strong brand images and high levels of awareness, there would still be little impact on consumers. Linking campaigns to actual product offerings is a good approach that should be encouraged. Meanwhile, future researchers should use methodologies that adequately reduce the noise in responses and allow them to make accurate interpretations. They must consider the specialized nature of ethical consumption and possible political implications when choosing their study areas and research designs.
Reference List
Arcidiacono, D 2011, ‘Consumer rationality in a multidisciplinary perspective’, Journal of Socio-Economics, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 516-522.
Armstrong, G, Kotler, P, Harker, MJ, & Brennan, R 2012, Marketing: An introduction, Prentice Hall, New York, NY.
Auger, P, & Devinney, TM 2007, ‘Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment of preferences with unconstrained ethical intentions’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 361-383.
Belk, RW, Devinney, T, & Eckhardt, G 2005, ‘Consumer ethics across cultures’, Consumption, Markets and Culture, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 275-289.
Chatzidakis, A, Maclaran, P, & Bradshaw, A 2012, ‘Heterotopian space and the utopics of ethical and green consumption’, Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 28, pp. 494-515.
Darke, PR, & Chung, CMY 2005, ‘Effects of pricing and promotion on consumer perceptions: it depends on how you frame it’, Journal of Retailing, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 35-47.
Davies, IA, Lee, Z, & Ahonkhai, I 2012, ‘Do consumers care about ethical-luxury?’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 106, pp. 37–51.
Garretson, JA, & Scot, B 2003, ‘Highly coupon and sale prone consumers: Benefits beyond price savings’, Journal of advertising research, vol. 43, no. 2, pp.162-172.
Harrison, R, Newholm, T, & Shaw, D 2005, The ethical consumer, Sage Publications, London.
Hayden, N 2009, Basics marketing 01: Consumer behaviour, 2nd ed, AVA Publishing, Lausanne.
Newholm, T, & Shaw, D 2007, ‘Studying the ethical consumer: a review of research’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, vol. 6, pp. 253-270.
Nicholls, A, & Lee, N 2006, ‘Purchase decision-making in fair trade and the ethical purchase gap: is there a fair trade twix?’, Journal of Strategic Marketing, vol. 14, pp. 369-386.
Shaw, D, Edward, S, & Ian, C 2000, ‘The contribution of ethical obligation and self-identity to the theory of planned behaviour: an exploration of ethical consumers’, Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 879-894.
Solomon, M, Bamossy, G, Askegaard, S, & Margaret, KH 2010, Consumer behaviour: A european perspective, 4th ed, Prentice Hall, New York.
Szmigin, I, Carrigan, M, & McEachern, MG 2009, ‘The conscious consumer: Taking a flexible approach to ethical behaviour’, International Journal of Consumer Studies, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 224-231.
Vittell, SJ 2003, ‘Consumer ethics research: review, synthesis and suggestions for the future. Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 43, no. 1/2, pp. 33-47.
Zanna, MP, Olson, JM, & Fazio, RH 1980, ‘Attitude-behaviour consistency: an individual difference perspective’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 38, pp. 432-440.