Consumer motivations for mainstream “ethical” consumption

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.

Everything Flows: A Pragmatist Perspective of Trade-Offs and Value in Ethical Consumption

“…However, when using soft laddering (a semi-structured interviewing technique used to explore links within the chain; Phillips and Reynolds 2009), it also invokes experience as a transitionary stage between the two, stressing also the role of values in shaping this experience (Davies and Gutsche 2016). Also, by emphasising both functional consequences (occurrences) and psycho-social consequences (feelings) the potential for being as well as doing in an ethical context is acknowledged (Shaw and Riach 2011).…”

“…Also, by emphasising both functional consequences (occurrences) and psycho-social consequences (feelings) the potential for being as well as doing in an ethical context is acknowledged (Shaw and Riach 2011). Studies of this kind have recently increased in number (see, for example, Davies and Gutsche 2016;Jägel et al 2012;Lin and Lin 2015;Lundblad and Davies 2016;Zagata 2014). Jägel et al (2012) are significant in identifying the integrated nature of trade-offs and values in consumption practice, whilst Lundblad and Davies (2016) describe ethical choice as a problem solving rather than cognitive rationalisation dilemma.…”

“…Similarly, that addressing these as either simple dichotomous preference balances, or as a mere backdrop to other more pressing imperatives, confuses rather than clarifies. Some recent studies (see, for example, Carrington et al 2014;Davies and Gutsche 2016;Longo et al 2017;and Schaefer and Crane 2005) have sought to combine some of the discrete perspectives outlined above (decision making, sociocultural and practice) and take a 'middle ground' approach in ethical consumption. We contend though that further work is required here to explore more fully how the weighing of tendencies are experienced and how, as a result, choices are formed.…”

“…Davies and Gutsche 2016;Schröder and McEachern 2004;Shaw et al 2005). We know little, however, about how consumers value.…”

Eco-Friendly Brands to Drive Sustainable Development: Replication and Extension of the Brand Experience Scale in a Cross-National Context

“…When referring to sustainable and ethical consumption, the assumption is that consumers' consumption experiences are influenced by their ethical and environmental concerns [61]. When selecting a suitable brand, consumers do not necessarily only consider functional and affective criteria but also the CSR of a company [62].…”