Mehr Verantwortung für den Konsumenten

Heidbrink, Ludger; Schmidt, Imke

doi:10.14512/oew.v26i3.1144

Cited by 19 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…13 • ConSR-Domain 3: Demand-side responsibility (Nachfrageverantwortung) This domain can be further divided into the elements of (a) pre-purchase decisions, which include consumer involvement in the supply chain through (responsible) co-production 14 and cocreation of value, 15 (b) consumption as voting by means of selecting which products and suppliers remain in the market, 16 and (c) the critical reflection on the actual purchase decision (e.g., taking into account consequences, alternatives, quantity and type of goods or services, and eventually changing consumption patterns; see also Heidbrink and Schmidt 2011c;Schmidt 2016). • ConSR-Domain 4: Responsibility for usage (Nutzungsverantwortung) Here, we can directly refer to Neuner's spheres presented above.…”

Section: Conceptualizing and Contextualizing Consumer (Social) Responmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Bounded Morality to Consumer Social Responsibility: A Transdisciplinary Approach to Socially Responsible Consumption and Its Obstacles

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate social responsibility has been intensively discussed in business ethics literature, whereas the social responsibility of private consumers appears to be less researched. However, there is also a growing interest from business ethicists and other scholars in the field of consumer social responsibility (ConSR). Nevertheless, previous discussions of ConSR reveal the need for a viable conceptual basis for understanding the social responsibility of consumers in an increasingly globalized market economy. Moreover, evolutionary aspects of human morality seem to have been neglected despite the fact that private consumers are undoubtedly human beings. In addition to that, empirical studies suggest that many consumers believe themselves to be responsible but do not act according to their alleged values or attitudes. This raises the question of what deters them from doing so. Therefore, the contribution of this conceptual paper is threefold: we (i) (re-)conceptualize ConSR in terms of a combination of a Max Weber-inspired approach (social action and the ethic of responsibility) with the social connection approach to shared responsibility proposed by Iris Marion Young; (ii) shed light on the previously neglected implications of an evolutionarily induced bounded morality for ConSR, and (iii) identify potential obstacles to socially responsible consumption, particularly against the backdrop of shared social responsibility and bounded morality. In this latter respect, the paper focuses specifically on the obstacles of low moral intensity, moral stupefaction, informational complexity, and the lack of perceived consumer effectiveness. In sum, the paper advances knowledge in the field of ConSR by using a transdisciplinary, literature-based approach.

show abstract

Section: Conceptualizing and Contextualizing Consumer (Social) Responmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Bounded Morality to Consumer Social Responsibility: A Transdisciplinary Approach to Socially Responsible Consumption and Its Obstacles

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consumption as voting (b) could be regarded as another particular domain of political consumerism: Not too different from a ballot, consumers can exert influence by being a force of selection (e.g., Dickinson & Carsky, 2005;Moraes et al, 2011;Shaw et al, 2006). Finally, the critical reflection on the actual purchase decision (c) includes assessing potential consequences, alternatives (in terms of quantity and characteristics of purchased goods and services), critically reflecting on one's needs, and eventually changing one's purchasing behavior (e.g., Heidbrink & Schmidt, 2011;Schmidt, 2016). (4) "Responsibility for usage" and (5) "responsible disposal" are two rather selfexplanatory domains but nonetheless highly relevant as much research on consumer responsibility tends to revolve around the purchasing decision.…”

Section: The Consumer As a Co-creator Of A Sustainable Bioeconomy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Time to Say ‘Good Buy’ to the Passive Consumer? A Conceptual Review of the Consumer in the Bioeconomy

Wilke

Schlaile

Urmetzer

et al. 2021

J Agric Environ Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful transitions to a sustainable bioeconomy require novel technologies, processes, and practices as well as a general agreement about the overarching normative direction of innovation. Both requirements necessarily involve collective action by those individuals who purchase, use, and co-produce novelties: the consumers. Based on theoretical considerations borrowed from evolutionary innovation economics and consumer social responsibility, we explore to what extent consumers’ scope of action is addressed in the scientific bioeconomy literature. We do so by systematically reviewing bioeconomy-related publications according to (i) the extent to which consumers are regarded as passive vs. active, and (ii) different domains of consumer responsibility (depending on their power to influence economic processes). We find all aspects of active consumption considered to varying degrees but observe little interconnection between domains. In sum, our paper contributes to the bioeconomy literature by developing a novel coding scheme that allows us to pinpoint different aspects of consumer activity, which have been considered in a rather isolated and undifferentiated manner. Combined with our theoretical considerations, the results of our review reveal a central research gap which should be taken up in future empirical and conceptual bioeconomy research. The system-spanning nature of a sustainable bioeconomy demands an equally holistic exploration of the consumers’ prospective and shared responsibility for contributing to its coming of age, ranging from the procurement of information on bio-based products and services to their disposal.

show abstract

“…Hypokritisches Konsumentenverhalten lässt sich noch etwas präziser einordnen. Die Consumer Irresponsibility ist das Gegenstück zur Consumer Social Responsibility, doch ist erstere noch nicht gleichzusetzen mit Scheinheiligkeit (Devinney et al 2010;Heidbrink & Schmidt 2011;Hoffmann et al 2020). Die Hypokrisie entsteht erst, wenn der (meist öffentlich bekundete) Anspruch, verantwortungsvoll zu konsumieren, klammheimlich zugunsten von unverantwortlichem Konsumverhalten aufgegeben wird (vgl.…”

Section: Hypokritisches Konsumentenverhaltenunclassified

Der hypokritische Konsument – Einsichten der Verbraucherforschung

Hoffmann¹

2020

Die Dunklen Seiten Des Konsums

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dieser Beitrag behandelt das hypokritische Konsumentenverhalten, d.h. das Phänomen, dass KonsumentenInnen, die erklären, ihre Kaufentscheidungen an ethischen Richtlinien auszurichten, dies häufig nicht konsequent umsetzen. Der Beitrag soll eine Antwort auf die Frage geben, wie KonsumentInnen, die sich derartig "scheinheilig" verhalten, dennoch ein positives Selbstbild aufrechterhalten können. Hierzu gibt der Beitrag einen Überblick über einschlägige Modelle der Konsumentenpsychologie und führt in die Konzepte moralische Rationalisierung, moralische Entkopplung und moralische Lizenzierung ein.

show abstract

Mehr Verantwortung für den Konsumenten

Cited by 19 publications

References 1 publication

From Bounded Morality to Consumer Social Responsibility: A Transdisciplinary Approach to Socially Responsible Consumption and Its Obstacles

From Bounded Morality to Consumer Social Responsibility: A Transdisciplinary Approach to Socially Responsible Consumption and Its Obstacles

Time to Say ‘Good Buy’ to the Passive Consumer? A Conceptual Review of the Consumer in the Bioeconomy

Der hypokritische Konsument – Einsichten der Verbraucherforschung

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About