Ethical Consumption Or Consumption of Ethical Products?: An Exploratory Analysis of Motivations Behind the Purchase of Ethical Products
Ethical Consumption Or Consumption of Ethical Products?: An Exploratory Analysis of Motivations Behind the Purchase of Ethical Products
复制标题
道德消费还是道德产品的消费？：对道德产品购买动机的探索性分析
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Spiteri
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Spiteri
道德消费一直被认为是消费者积极的道德态度和意图的直接结果。道德消费者被归类为那些对环保主义、动物问题和侵犯人权等道德问题持有积极态度和意图，并购买相关道德产品的人（例如Vermeir和Verbeke 2008； Carrigan， Szmigin和Wright 2004； Auger和Devinney 2007）。在文献中，他们大多被描述为收入较高、受教育程度高于平均水平、对社会问题知情的中年人（Maignan and Ferrel, 2001; Roberts, 1996; Carrigan and Attalla, 2001）。道德消费被定义为基于决策的消费，这种决策受到消费者社会责任的强烈影响（Meulenberg 2003）。研究表明，从事道德消费的人的比例正在增加（合作银行道德消费报告2010；Berry和McEachern, 2005; Davis, 2006; Harrison, neholm, and Shaw 2005）。然而，现有文献表明，在道德消费中存在非常大的“态度-意图-行为差距”，即持有道德态度和意图的消费者很少购买道德产品（例如，Auger and Devinney 2007; Carrigan and Attalla 2001; Follows and Jobber 2000; Shaw et al 2007）。事实上，在这一领域的销售仍然代表不到6%的整体消费市场约£6000亿（马卡利斯特，2007年）。试图弥合“态度-意向”差距的作者经常调查消费者为什么不合乎道德地购买，而不是为什么他们这样做（例如Bray et al. 2010）。然而，我们认为，要增加道德产品的消费，重要的是了解这种消费背后的动机，而不是关注消费的障碍。现存文献谈到了利他行为如道德消费所产生的“温暖的光芒”或道德满足（Andreoni 1990; Kahneman and Knetsch 1992）。然而，道德产品具有多种属性，除了道德满足之外，人们可能会出于多种复杂的动机购买这些产品。随着越来越多的跨国公司购买道德营销和销售道德产品，如公平贸易、可持续或回收，弥合“态度-意向”差距的必要性变得越来越迫切（Haddock, 2005; Beattie, 2006; Willman, 2007）。然而，除非更好地理解这种消费背后的动机，否则这是不可能发生的。在道德消费领域，理论发展处于早期阶段，道德消费决策的公认框架尚未发展（例如Carrignton， Neveille和Whitwell 2010； Starr 2009； Nicholls和Lee 2006）。在本文中，我们的目标是通过调查道德产品消费背后的不同动机，进一步研究消费者行为这一未充分研究的方面（Newholme和Shaw 2007）。然后，我们就如何利用这种理解来鼓励更多的道德消费提出建议。概念框架有人认为，在更富裕的社会中，人们从基本需求中解脱出来，对自己的消费行为更负责任（Etzioni, 2004； Dickinson和Carsky， 2005）。消费者行为的道德模型表明，这些人的购买意愿是由价值观、规范和道德驱动的，往往更具有社会意识（例如Shaw and Shui 2002； Vermeir and Verbeke 2008）。在这些情况下，道德消费的动机是道德自我实现或自我实现的需要，并帮助消费者建立一个良性的身份（Kozinets和Handlman, 1998; Langeland,1998; Bamett et al., 2005）。研究人员经常借鉴计划行为理论来更好地理解道德消费，并断言对道德行为的态度是购买道德产品的先决条件（Ellen 1994； Shaw和Clarke 1999）。然而，值得注意的是，道德产品具有多重属性（例如，公平贸易巧克力通常以道德和更高质量的方式销售），消费者在决策过程中考虑多个属性（Auger 2010; D 'Astous et al 1997）。因此，为了更好地理解道德消费，有必要调查哪些产品属性在决策过程中最突出。在消费过程中，消费者既考虑有形属性（如产品的特征，如质量和价格），也考虑无形属性（如产品的社会方面，如农民得到多少报酬）（Auger 2010）。道德产品需求的一个方面是消费者必须在有形和无形的产品属性之间进行权衡。价格、质量、便利性和产品的整体价值是主要的购买标准，消费者只有在不需要在这些属性上妥协的情况下才会表现出购买道德产品的意愿（Roberts 1996; Berger 1993； D’astous et al 1997）。Dupuis（2000）认为，对于研究伦理消费的研究人员来说，食物尤其重要，因为它突出了消费者决策中固有的自私。事实上，研究表明，食品消费几乎完全是基于物有所值、健康问题、口味、外观和方便，而不是由动物福利和环境保护等道德动机驱动的（食品配送研究所，2002年；食品标准局，2000年）。将这些发现应用于一般的道德消费将转化为可忽略不计的道德消费，这当然不是情况。那么，消费者为什么要合乎道德地购买呢？在本文中，我们研究了许多道德产品的多属性性质是否通过在健康、质量、味道、外观或便利方面提供附加价值来有效抵消消费者的“自私”。我们还研究了这是否与有道德意识的消费者更相关，他们欣赏产品的无形方面。
Ethical consumption has long been considered a direct result of positive ethical attitudes and intentions of consumers. Ethical consumers have been classified as those who hold positive attitudes and intentions towards ethical concerns such as environmentalism, animal issues and human rights infringements, and purchase related ethical products (e.g. Vermeir and Verbeke 2008; Carrigan, Szmigin and Wright 2004; Auger and Devinney 2007). In the literature, they are described as mostly middle-aged with higher income, above-average education and well-informed about societal concerns (Maignan and Ferrel, 2001; Roberts, 1996; Carrigan and Attalla, 2001). Ethical consumption is defined as consumption that is based on decision making which is strongly influenced by the consumer’s societal responsibility (Meulenberg 2003). Research suggests that the percentage of people engaging in ethical consumption is on the increase (Co-operative Bank Ethical Consumerism Report 2010; Berry and McEachern, 2005; Davis, 2006; Harrison, Newholm, and Shaw 2005). Yet extant literature demonstrates that there is a very large “attitude-intention-behaviour gap” in ethical consumption whereby consumers who hold ethical attitudes and intentions rarely purchase ethical products (e.g. Auger and Devinney 2007; Carrigan and Attalla 2001; Follows and Jobber 2000; Shaw et al 2007). Indeed, sales in this area still represent less than 6% of the overall consumer market of some £600bn (Macalister, 2007). Authors attempting to bridge the “attitude-intention” gap have frequently investigated why consumers do not buy ethically instead of why they do (e.g. Bray et al. 2010). However, we believe that to increase the consumption of ethical products, it is essential to understand the motivations behind such consumption rather than focus on the barriers to consumption. Extant literature speaks about the “warm glow” or moral satisfaction that arises from altruistic behaviors such as ethical consumption (Andreoni 1990; Kahneman and Knetsch 1992). Yet, ethical products have multiple attributes and are likely to be purchased for a diverse and complex set of motivations in addition to moral satisfaction. The need to bridge “attitudeintention” gap is becoming more imperative as more multinationals buy into ethical marketing and sell ethical products such as fairtrade, sustainable or recycled (Haddock, 2005; Beattie, 2006; Willman, 2007). However, this cannot happen unless the motivations behind such consumption are better understood. In the area of ethical consumption, theory development is in its early stages and accepted frameworks for the decision making of ethical consumption are yet to be developed (e.g. Carrignton, Neveille and Whitwell 2010; Starr 2009; Nicholls and Lee 2006). In this paper, we aim to further theory in this under-examined aspect of consumer behaviour (Newholme and Shaw 2007) by investigating the different motivations behind the consumption of ethical products. We then offer recommendations as to how this understanding can be used to encourage more ethical consumption. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK It has been argued that in more affluent societies, people are freed from basic needs and become more responsible for their consumption behaviour (Etzioni, 2004; Dickinson and Carsky, 2005). Ethical models of consumer behaviour suggest that the purchase intentions of these people are driven by values, norms and ethics and tend to be more socially-aware (e.g. Shaw and Shui 2002; Vermeir and Verbeke 2008). In these scenarios, ethical consumption is motivated by the need for moral self-realisation or self-actualisation and to help consumers develop a virtuous identity (Kozinets and Handlman, 1998; Langeland,1998; Bamett et al., 2005). Researchers often draw from the Theory of Planned Behaviour to better understand ethical consumption and assert that attitudes to ethical behaviour are antecedent to the purchase of ethical products (Ellen 1994; Shaw and Clarke 1999). However, it is important to note that ethical products have multiple attributes (e.g. fair-trade chocolate is often marketed as both ethical and of higher quality) and consumers consider more than one attribute during the decision-making process (Auger 2010; D’Astous et al 1997). Thus, to better understand ethical consumption, it is essential to investigate which product attributes are most salient in the decision-making process. During a consumption episode, consumers consider both tangible attributes (e.g. characteristics of products such as quality and price) and intangible attributes (e.g. social aspect of the product such as how much farmers are paid) (Auger 2010). An aspect in the demand of ethical products is the trade-off between tangible and non-tangible product attributes that consumers have to make. Price, quality, convenience and the overall value of the product are main buying criteria and consumers display a willingness to buy ethical products only if they do not have to compromise on these attributes (Roberts 1996: Berger 1993; D’Astous et al 1997). Dupuis (2000) argues that food is particularly salient for researchers in ethical consumption because it highlights the inherent selfishness in consumer decision-making. Indeed, research demonstrates that food consumption is almost completely based on value for money, health concerns, taste, appearance and convenience, rather than being driven by ethical motivations such as animal welfare and care for the environment (Institute of Grocery Distribution, 2002; Foods Standards Agency, 2000). Applying these findings to ethical consumption in general would translate into negligible ethical consumption, which is certainly not the case. So why do consumers buy ethically? In this paper we investigate whether the multi-attribute nature of many ethical products effectively counteracts the “selfishness” of consumers by offering added value in terms of health, quality, taste, appearance or convenience. We also examine whether this is more relevant for ethically-minded consumers who appreciate the non-tangible aspects of products.