How to SHIFT Consumer Behaviors to be More Sustainable: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework
Abstract
Highlighting the important role of marketing in encouraging sustainable consumption, the current research presents a review of the academic literature from marketing and behavioral science that examines the most effective ways to shift consumer behaviors to be more sustainable. In the process of the review, the authors develop a comprehensive framework for conceptualizing and encouraging sustainable consumer behavior change. The framework is represented by the acronym SHIFT, and it proposes that consumers are more inclined to engage in pro-environmental behaviors when the message or context leverages the following psychological factors: Social influence, Habit formation, Individual self, Feelings and cognition, and Tangibility. The authors also identify five broad challenges to encouraging sustainable behaviors and use these to develop novel theoretical propositions and directions for future research. Finally, the authors outline how practitioners aiming to encourage sustainable consumer behaviors can use this framework.
“We are jeopardizing our future by not reining in our intense but geographically and demographically uneven material consumption…By failing to adequately limit population growth, reassess the role of an economy rooted in growth, reduce greenhouse gases, incentivize renewable energy, protect habitat, restore ecosystems, curb pollution, halt defaunation, and constrain invasive alien species, humanity is not taking the urgent steps needed to safeguard our imperilled biosphere.….—World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice (Ripple et al. 2017)I always make the business case for sustainability. It’s so compelling. Our costs are down, not up. Our products are the best they have ever been. Our people are motivated by a shared higher purpose—esprit de corps to die for. And the goodwill in the marketplace—it’s just been astonishing.—Ray Anderson (2009), Founder and CEO of Interface Carpet
Our behaviors as individual consumers are having unprecedented impacts on our natural environment (Stern 2000). Partly as a result of our consumption patterns, society and business are confronted with a confluence of factors—including environmental degradation, pollution, and climate change; increasing social inequity and poverty; and the growing need for renewable sources of energy—that point to a new way of doing business (Menon and Menon 1997). In response, many companies are recognizing the need for a sustainable way of doing business, and across industries we see firms such as Interface Carpet, Unilever, Nike, and Starbucks embedding sustainability into the DNA of their brands (Hardcastle 2013). The current research provides a review of the literature regarding sustainable consumer behavior change and outlines a comprehensive psychological framework to guide researchers and practitioners in fostering sustainable behavior.
Marketing and Sustainable Consumer Behavior
There are many reasons why understanding facilitators of sustainable consumer behavior should be of interest to marketers. One reason is reflected in the Ripple et al. (2017) quote: marketers should be cognizant that the consumption mindset that conventional marketing encourages is a key driver of negative environmental impacts (Csikszentmihalyi 2000; Peattie and Peattie 2009). Second, as the Ray Anderson quote suggests, businesses able to adapt to the demands of our changing world, including the urgent demand for sustainability, will be more likely to thrive in the long term and enjoy strategic benefits (Banerjee, Iyer, and Kashyap 2003). A sustainable business focus has advantages such as identifying new products and markets, leveraging emerging technologies, spurring innovation, driving organizational efficiency, and motivating and retaining employees (Hopkins et al. 2009). Moreover, research suggests that socially and environmentally responsible practices have the potential to garner more positive consumer perceptions of the firm, as well as increases in profitability (Brown and Dacin 1997; Luo and Bhattacharya 2006; Olsen, Slotegraaf, and Chandukala 2014; Sen and Bhattacharya 2001).
Firms that are able not only to operate more sustainably but also to consider new models of business that offer and encourage sustainable consumption can potentially earn greater long-term profits (Kotler, Kartajaya, and Setiawan 2010). In one example, the growth of the “sharing economy” demonstrates the substantial environmental and economic gains possible through shifting consumers sustainably—in this case, from owning products to accessing existing products and services. Although the question of how marketing relates to sustainable consumption has historically received attention in the form of identifying the “green consumer” segment (Anderson and Cunningham 1972; Kilbourne and Beckmann 1998), scholars now call for work on the predictors of sustainable consumption (Kotler 2011; Menon and Menon 1997; Mick 2006). Rather than merely targeting the green consumer segment, marketers can expand their market for the long-term mutual benefit of the firm and the planet. Thus, as firms operate and offer products and services in a more sustainable manner, they might simultaneously wish for consumers to recognize, embrace, and reward their sustainable values and actions in ways that spur sustainable consumption and maximize the firm’s sustainability and strategic business benefits.
The current work is motivated by the need for a comprehensive review and framework related to the key drivers of sustainable consumer behavior change. We build on existing work that has aptly outlined the steps marketers can take to identify, foster, and evaluate sustainable behavior (McKenzie-Mohr 2011; Peattie and Peattie 2009). Although this existing work details the social marketing concept and spotlights examples, it does not provide a comprehensive psychological framework for influencing consumer behavior change. Extant work often concentrates on a more focused set of factors that motivate sustainable behavior (Gifford 2014; Peattie 2010; Steg and Vlek 2009).1 The first intended contribution of the present work, then, is to outline a comprehensive framework to help both practitioners and researchers encourage sustainable consumer behavior. On the practitioner side, access to a broader framework (including all the major factors from the literature) will allow practitioners to develop the most effective interventions. Second, the unique, process-driven focus of our framework (as opposed to the intervention focus of previous work) ensures that as technologies and societies change, practitioners can easily apply our framework to new situations. Thus, a key contribution is that we offer a comprehensive set of tools firms can use as they pursue their sustainability and strategic business goals. Third, undertaking a more complete review allowed us to delineate a broader set of challenges to sustainable consumer behavior change that can inform both practitioners and researchers. We discuss these challenges—the self–other trade-off, the long time horizon, the requirement of collective action, the problem of abstractness, and the need to replace automatic processes with controlled processes—in the theoretical contribution section. Finally, we use these challenges to sustainable consumer behavior change to introduce a set of novel theoretical propositions to guide further conceptual development and future research.
Shifting Consumers to Behave Sustainably
At first glance, it might appear that the goals and assumptions of marketing are incompatible with the goals and assumptions of sustainability. Traditional marketing encourages growth, promotes an endless quest for satisfying needs and wants, and seems to view resources as ever abundant (Csikszentmihalyi 2000; Swim, Clayton, and Howard 2011). In contrast, a sustainability focus suggests that utilized resources can be renewed by mimicking the circular flows of resources in nature, and it respects the fact that capacity of both resources and the environment are limited (McDonough and Braungart 2002; Mont and Heiskanen 2015). We argue that, because of this apparent contradiction, marketing and sustainability are inextricably intertwined. Furthermore, we take the optimistic view that marketing and behavioral science have much to say about how we might influence consumption to be more sustainable. We review the literature and highlight ways in which consumers can be encouraged to behave more sustainably. Our review of the literature has led to the emergence of the acronym SHIFT, which reflects the importance of considering how Social influence, Habit formation, Individual self, Feelings and cognition, and Tangibility can be harnessed to encourage more sustainable consumer behaviors.
The SHIFT framework can help address the “attitude–behavior gap” that is commonly observed in sustainability contexts. Although consumers report favorable attitudes toward pro-environmental behaviors (Trudel and Cotte 2009), they often do not subsequently display sustainable actions (Auger and Devinney 2007; Gatersleben, Steg, and Vlek 2002; Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002; Young et al. 2010). This discrepancy between what consumers say and do is arguably the biggest challenge for marketers, companies, public policy makers, and nonprofit organizations aiming to promote sustainable consumption (Johnstone and Tan 2015; Prothero et al. 2011).
Thus, although consumer demand for sustainable options is certainly on the rise (Gershoff and Frels 2014)—for example, 66% of consumers (73% of millennials) worldwide report being willing to pay extra for sustainable offerings (Nielson 2015)—there is room to further encourage and support sustainable consumer behaviors. We define sustainable consumer behavior as actions that result in decreases in adverse environmental impacts as well as decreased utilization of natural resources across the lifecycle of the product, behavior, or service. Although we focus on environmental sustainability, we note that, consistent with a holistic approach to sustainability (Norman and MacDonald 2004), improving environmental sustainability can result in both social and economic advances (Chernev and Blair 2015; Savitz and Weber 2013). We examine the process of consumption including information search, decision making, product or behavior adoption, product usage, and disposal in ways that allow for more sustainable outcomes. Thus, sustainable consumer behaviors could include voluntarily reducing or simplifying one’s consumption in the first place (Leonard-Barton 1981; McDonald et al. 2006); choosing products with sustainable sourcing, production, and features (Luchs, Brower, and Chitturi 2012; Pickett-Baker and Ozaki 2008); conserving energy, water, and products during use (Lin and Chang 2012; White, Simpson, and Argo 2014); and utilizing more sustainable modes of product disposal (White and Simpson 2013).
Unlike typical consumer decision making, which classically focuses on maximizing immediate benefits for the self, sustainable choices involve longer-term benefits to other people and the natural world. Although broader marketing strategies can be useful in this domain, marketers also need a unique set of tools to promote sustainability. We endeavor to outline the key drivers of sustainable consumption with one comprehensive framework. Our review of existing literature on sustainable consumption began with an initial selection of top marketing journals: Journal of Marketing, Journal of Marketing Research, Journal of Consumer Psychology, and Journal of Consumer Research. These behavioral marketing and consumer behavior journals are the most highly regarded in the field, having high impact factors (above 3.0), and they are all featured on the Financial Times Top 50 list. Using this set of journals, we conducted a literature search using specific keywords on Web of Science. The keywords included: sustainab* or ecolog* or green or environment* or eco-friendly and consum* or behavi* or choice or usage or adopt* or disposal.
This set of papers was then read and grouped into themes, which formed the five factors in the SHIFT framework. We used these five categories because they emerged in our initial review as being the most frequently occurring concepts, and because they allowed us to summarize the literature on sustainable behavior change in an inclusive manner. To extend our review, we then searched the literature more broadly by using our first set of search terms and replacing the third search word with more specific labels that were relevant to our five themes. We refined our search to include behavioral sciences, business, psychology multidisciplinary, economics, and management journals. For example, for the first section on social influence, we searched “social influence” and “norms.” Our results allowed us to identify additional articles in peer-reviewed academic journals in marketing, psychology, and economics. We then read and reviewed these articles in terms of quality and relevance, which were determined through consensus among the authors before inclusion in our analysis. Our review identifies a set of 320 articles, some of which are used to frame the introduction (n = 40) and the rest represent the SHIFT factors (n = 280). Next, we discuss the five identified routes to sustainable consumer behavior change (refer to Web Appendix G for a summary of articles representing our SHIFT factors).
The SHIFT Framework
Social Influence
The first route to influencing sustainable consumer behaviors is social influence. Consumers are often impacted by the presence, behaviors, and expectations of others. Social factors are one of the most influential factors in terms of effecting sustainable consumer behavior change (Abrahamse and Steg 2013). We examine how three different facets of social influence—social norms, social identities, and social desirability—can shift consumers to be more sustainable.
Social norms
Social norms, or beliefs about what is socially appropriate and approved of in a given context, can have a powerful influence on sustainable consumer behaviors (Cialdini et al. 2006; Peattie 2010). Social norms predict behaviors such as avoiding littering (Cialdini, Reno, and Kallgren 1990), composting and recycling (Oskamp et al. 1991; White and Simpson 2013), conserving energy (Dwyer, Maki, and Rothman 2015; Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius 2008; Jachimowicz et al. 2018; Schultz et al. 2007), choosing sustainably sourced food (Dowd and Burke 2013), selecting eco-friendly transportation (Harland, Staats, and Wilke 1999), choosing green hotels (Teng, Wu, and Liu 2015), and opting for solar panels (Bollinger and Gillingham 2012). The Theory of Planned Behavior suggests that, along with subjective norms, attitudes and perceived behavioral control shape intentions, which predict behavior. This framework has been applied to sustainable behaviors (Han and Stoel 2017; Heath and Gifford 2002).
Cialdini and his colleagues use the term “descriptive norm” to refer to information about what other people are doing or commonly do (Cialdini, Reno, and Kallgren 1990; Reno, Cialdini, and Kallgren 1993). Descriptive norms can be stronger predictors of sustainable consumer behaviors than other factors such as self-interest, and people tend to underestimate how influential such norms can be (Nolan et al. 2008). Descriptive norms are most effective when combined with reference to similar contexts (Fornara et al. 2011). In one example, descriptive norms communicating that others were taking part in a hotel energy conservation program were more effective than a traditional environmental message, especially when the descriptive norms referred to the same hotel room as the guest’s (Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius 2008). Although descriptive norms are often very influential, if the majority of people are not engaging in the desired sustainable behavior, highlighting a descriptive norm might unintentionally lead to decreases in the desired action (Cialdini 2003; Schultz et al. 2007). One field study sheds light on an exception to this: when community organizers themselves installed (vs. did not install) solar panels on their homes (a behavior that reflects low norms), they were able to recruit 62.8% more residents to do the same (Kraft-Todd et al. 2018).
In contrast, “injunctive norms” convey what behaviors other people approve and disprove of. Such norms can thereby influence sustainable behaviors (Jachimowicz et al. 2018; Reno, Cialdini, and Kallgren 1993; Schultz et al. 2007), but they should be used carefully (Kronrod, Grinstein, and Wathieu 2012). Injunctive norms are most effective when combined with thoughts about the ingroup and when they do not threaten feelings of autonomy, which can lead to “reactance” responses (White and Simpson 2013). Thus, both descriptive and injunctive norms can affect sustainable behaviors, but they should be used with care.
Social identities
The impact of social influence depends on people’s “social identities” or sense of identity stemming from group memberships (Tajfel and Turner 1986). For example, consumers are more likely to engage in sustainable actions if ingroup members are doing so (Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius 2008; Han and Stoel 2017; Welsch and Kühling 2009). Moreover, viewing the self as a member of a pro-environmental ingroup is a key determinant of pro-environmental choices and actions (Fielding et al. 2008; Gupta and Ogden 2009; Van der Werff, Steg, and Keizer 2013). Seeing the self as similar to a “typical recycler” predicts recycling intentions, over and above other factors such as attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control (Mannetti, Pierro, and Livi 2004).
One additional implication of social identities is that individuals desire to view their ingroups positively (Rabinovich et al. 2012) and do not wish to see their ingroup outperformed by other groups (Ferguson, Branscombe, and Reynolds 2011). This is particularly true of outgroups that the consumer does not wish to be associated with, known as “dissociative groups.” In one example, researchers examined intentions to undertake sustainable actions such as water conservation, composting organics, and recycling (White, Simpson, and Argo 2014). When people learned that a dissociative reference group had performed better on a positive, sustainable behavior (thus casting the ingroup in a negative light), the focal group members increased their own positive behaviors. These effects were augmented in public settings, because this is a condition under which the collective self is most relevant. One practical implication of this work is that friendly challenges could be encouraged between competing groups (Vugt, Griskevicius, and Schultz 2014), such as cities, neighborhoods, organizations, or business units.
Another finding stemming from the social identity literature is that social identity effects are heightened for those high in “ingroup identification.” Identifying with being “an organic consumer” or “a green consumer,” for example, predicts organic purchases (Bartels and Hoogendam 2011; Bartels and Onwezen 2014). Moreover, majority group members, as well as minority group members who are high in ingroup attachment, receive messages encouraging sustainable consumption more positively (Grinstein and Nisan 2009). Highlighting a shared, superordinate ingroup identity can increase acceptance of information related to sustainable actions, especially for those who are high in ingroup identification (Schultz and Fielding 2014).
Social desirability
Another means by which social influence can impact sustainable behaviors is through “social desirability.” Consumers tend to select sustainable options to make a positive impression on others (Green and Peloza 2014), and they endorse high-involvement sustainable options (e.g., hybrid vehicles) to convey social status to others (Griskevicius, Tybur, and Bergh 2010). However, observers sometimes view sustainable behaviors negatively, leading some consumers to avoid pro-environmental actions (Brough et al. 2016; Minson and Monin 2012; Olson et al. 2016; Sadalla and Krull 1995; Shang and Peloza 2016). In one instance, males avoided appearing “eco-friendly” because it was associated with feminine traits (Brough et al. 2016). One implication, then, is to make sustainable products or behaviors socially desirable and to buffer against potential negative perceptions linked to sustainable consumption.
Moreover, consumers are more likely to act in a socially desirable manner in public contexts in which other people can observe and evaluate their actions (Green and Peloza 2014; Grolleau, Ibanez, and Mzoughi 2009; Peloza, White, and Shang 2013). In addition, encouraging public commitments to engage in sustainable consumer behavior can increase such actions (Burn and Oskamp 1986; Gonzales, Aronson, and Costanzo 1988). For example, those who committed to participate in a hotel energy conservation program and wore a pin as a public symbol of this commitment were the most likely to engage in the program (Baca-Motes et al. 2012).
Habit Formation
Whereas some sustainable behaviors (e.g., installing an efficient showerhead) require only a one-time action, many other sustainable behaviors (e.g., taking shorter showers) involve repeated actions that require new habit formation. Habits refer to behaviors that persist because they have become relatively automatic over time as a result of regularly encountered contextual cues (Kurz et al. 2014). Because many common habits are unsustainable, habit change is a critical component of sustainable behavior change (Verplanken 2011). Many behaviors with sustainability implications—such as food consumption, choice of transportation, energy and resource use, shopping, and disposal of products—are strongly habitual (Donald, Cooper, and Conchie 2014; Verplanken and Roy 2016). Interventions that break repetition, such as discontinuity and penalties, can disrupt bad habits. Actions that encourage repetition, such as making sustainable actions easy and utilizing prompts, incentives, and feedback, can strengthen positive habits.
Discontinuity to change bad habits
The habit discontinuity hypothesis suggests that if the context in which habits arise changes in some way, it becomes difficult to carry out the usual habits that would occur. In other words, a disruption in the stable context in which automatic behaviors arise can create ideal conditions for habit change. Life changes (e.g., a recent move) make people more likely to alter their eco-friendly behaviors (Bamberg 2006; Verplanken et al. 2008; Walker, Thomas, and Verplanken 2015). Thus, combining context changes with habit formation techniques can be one way to encourage sustainable behaviors.
Penalties
Penalties are essentially types of punishment that decrease the tendency to engage in an undesirable behavior. A penalty might take the form of a tax, a fine, or a tariff on an unsustainable behavior. Fines can encourage behavior change in domains that can be monitored, such as the disposal of waste (Fullerton and Kinnaman 1995), whereas taxes and tariffs can be effective in domains that involve strong habits (e.g., driving gasoline-powered vehicles; Krause 2009). Although penalties can certainly deter unsustainable behaviors in some instances, they can trigger backfire effects if the penalty seems unreasonable (Fullerton and Kinnaman 1995) and can lead to negative affect and defensive responses (Bolderdijk, Lehman, and Geller 2012; Geller, Bechtel, and Churchman 2002; Steg and Vlek 2009). Moreover, penalties can be difficult to enforce and monitor (Bolderdijk, Lehman, and Geller 2012). Thus, it is often desirable to turn to positive behavior change strategies instead, which we discuss next.
Implementation intentions
One means of transitioning people from an old habit to a new one is to have them consider implementation intentions, or thoughts about what steps they will take to engage in the action (Kurz et al. 2014). Such intentions can positively influence recycling (Holland, Aarts, and Langendam 2006) and sustainable food-purchasing habits (Fennis et al. 2011). Then the new behavior can be encouraged through repetition and by positive habit formation techniques such as making it easy, prompts, feedback, and incentives.
Making it easy
Many sustainable actions are viewed as effortful, time-consuming, or difficult to carry out, which can be a barrier to sustainable actions (McKenzie-Mohr 2000). Thus, one strategy to encourage sustainable habit formation is to make the action easier to do (Van Houten, Nau, and Merrigan 1981). Contextual changes that improve the ease of engaging in sustainable behaviors, such as placing recycling bins nearby, requiring less complex sorting of recyclables, and offering showerheads with “low-flow” settings, encourage such behaviors (Brothers, Krantz, and McClannahan 1994; Gamba and Oskamp 1994; Ludwig, Gray, and Rowell 1998). One means of making sustainable actions easier is to make them the default (Frederiks, Stenner, and Hobman 2015; Theotokis and Manganari 2015). In one example, when sustainable electricity was set as the default option, individuals were more likely to stick with it (Pichert and Katsikopoulos 2008). Because consumers are often low on cognitive resources, simplifying the decision-making process can allow them to more automatically form sustainable habits (Steg and Vlek 2009)
Prompts
Another means of encouraging sustainable habit formation is the use of prompts: messages that are given before the behavior occurs to remind the consumer what the desired sustainable behavior is (Lehman and Geller 2004). Prompts can positively affect many sustainable behaviors including waste disposal, energy usage, and recycling (Osbaldiston and Schott 2012). Prompts to engage in sustainable behaviors work best when they are large, clear, easy to follow, and placed in proximity to where the behavior will be performed (Austin et al. 1993; Werner, Rhodes, and Partain 1998). Because prompts are easy to employ and cost-effective, they can be a good initial behavior change strategy (Schultz, Oskamp, and Mainieri 1995), but they are best utilized in combination with other strategies (Delmas, Fischlein, and Asensio 2013).
Incentives
Rewards, discounts, gifts, and other extrinsic incentives can increase desired behaviors and positive habit formation. Monetary incentives such as rebates, tiered pricing, and cash can encourage people to adopt and maintain sustainable behaviors (Diamond and Loewy 1991; Slavin, Wodarski, and Blackburn 1981; Wilhite and Ling 1995). Incentives have been shown to influence sustainable behaviors such as waste disposal and cleanup (Baltes and Hayward 1976), energy usage (Abrahamse et al. 2005), and transportation choices (Everett, Hayward, and Meyers 1974). Although incentives can encourage the adoption and maintenance of sustainable behaviors, they do have potential drawbacks (Bolderdijk and Steg 2015). Smaller monetary rewards are often less motivating than other types of incentives such as a free gift, a lottery entry, or social praise (Handgraaf, de Jeude, and Appelt 2013; Hutton and McNeill 1981). Second, incentives to engage in sustainable behaviors can lead to actions that are short-lived (Katzev and Johnson 1984). Consumers initially respond positively to rewards, but the sustainable behavior often disappears once the incentive is removed (Cairns, Newson, and Davis 2010). Thus, one-time sustainable actions are easier to encourage with incentives than are longer-term changes (Geller, Bechtel, and Churchman 2002). Furthermore, incentives can have the unintended consequence of decreasing the desired behavior because the intrinsic motive to engage in the action is reduced (Bowles 2008).
Feedback
Another means of encouraging sustainable habit formation is to use feedback. This involves providing consumers with specific information about their own performance on a task or behavior. Feedback can be given for actions like water and energy usage, and it can be provided with reference to the consumer’s own past behaviors or in comparison to the performance of other individuals (Abrahamse et al. 2007; Fischer 2008; Tiefenbeck et al. 2016). Research suggests that feedback is more effective when it is presented over an extended period of time, in real-time, and in a clear manner (Chiang et al. 2014; Fischer 2008; Karjalainen 2011). Sharing group feedback with households and in work settings can also be an effective behavior change strategy (De Leon and Fuqua 1995; Schultz 1999; Schultz et al. 2007; Siero et al. 1996).
The Individual Self
Factors linked to the individual self can have a powerful influence on consumption behaviors. The concepts discussed in this section include positivity of the self-concept, self-interest, self-consistency, self-efficacy, and individual differences.
The self-concept
Individuals desire to maintain positive self-views and can reaffirm the positivity of the self-concept through consumption (Dunning 2007). As a result of the desire to view the self positively, people often exhibit self-defensive reactions to learning that their own behaviors have negative environmental impacts (Dickinson 2009; Feygina, Jost, and Goldsmith 2010) and derogate others displaying more sustainable actions (Minson and Monin 2012; Zane, Irwin, and Reczek 2015). Moreover, people display motivated biases including the tendency to seek out and reinforce information that confirms preexisting views (Weber 2016). Furthermore, people avoid some forms of sustainable behavior change (e.g., travel behaviors) because changing can threaten the self (Murtagh et al. 2015). In one example, threats to Republican self-identity led to backfire effects such that Republicans decreased support for climate change mitigation policies in response to climate change communications (Hart and Nisbet 2012) or were less likely to choose an eco-friendly option (Gromet, Kunreuther, and Larrick 2013). Thus, positively associating sustainable behaviors with the self-concept and buffering against self-threatening information can be critical for sustainable behavior change. For example, self-affirmation, or the endorsement of important self-values, mitigates self-protective responses and leads to greater endorsement of sustainable actions (Brough et al. 2016; Prooijen and Sparks 2014; Sparks et al. 2010).
The self-concept also relates to sustainable behaviors in that the possessions people own can become extensions of their identity (Belk 1988). One way this sense of extended self manifests is that people can be unwilling to part with possessions that are linked to the self because of a sense of identity loss (Winterich, Reczek, and Irwin 2017). Winterich and her colleagues showed that this identity loss was mitigated by having the consumer take a picture of a sentimental product before considering donating, which led to increased possession donation. Giving possessions to others not only has positive sustainability implications but it can also lead to greater well-being for the giver (Donnelly et al. 2017). Finally, consumers take better care of and are less likely to trash (vs. recycle) identity-linked products (Trudel, Argo, and Meng 2016).
Self-consistency
In addition to wanting to see the self in a positive light, people want to see the self as being consistent. Self-consistency research shows that a consumer reaffirming a component of the self-concept (e.g., being environmentally concerned) or engaging in a sustainable behavior at one time point often leads to consistent sustainable behaviors in the future (Van der Werff, Steg, and Keizer 2014). Similarly, initial personal commitments to act sustainably can increase the likelihood of subsequently behaving in a sustainable manner (Bodur, Duval, and Grohmann 2015; Katzev and Johnson 1984), especially when they are made in writing (Lokhorst et al. 2013). Along with individual consistency, a firm adhering to green values can lead to increased consumer conservation behaviors (Wang, Krishna, and McFerran 2016). Furthermore, evidence suggests that people who engage in a sustainable action in one domain are often more likely to perform sustainably in other domains as well (i.e., positive spillover; Juhl, Fenger, and Thøgersen 2017; Lanzini and Thøgersen 2014; Lokhorst et al. 2013; Ölander and Thøgersen 2014; Truelove et al. 2014). Self-assessments of the consumer’s behavior can also affect consistency. For example, those who felt that the end sustainability goal was unimportant were less motivated to pursue the end goal when they were unable to achieve subgoals (e.g., failing to recycle a newspaper; Devezer et al. 2014). Moreover, cuing people that a given behavior has positive sustainability outcomes leads them to see themselves as being more environmentally concerned and to be more likely to choose eco-friendly products (Cornelissen et al. 2008). Finally, simply reminding consumers of a time when their behavior was inconsistent with a personally held value related to sustainability can subsequently lead the consumer to behave in a manner consistent with those sustainable values (Dickerson et al. 1992; Peloza, White, and Shang 2013).
Although there are many examples of self-consistency effects, inconsistency effects can also arise. Licensing effects may occur wherein individuals who have engaged in a sustainable action at one time point will later be less likely to engage in another sustainable or positive behavior (Phipps et al. 2013; Sachdeva, Jordan, and Mazar 2015; Tiefenbeck et al. 2013). For example, researchers found that people who took part in a “green” (vs. conventional) virtual shopping task that asked them to select from sustainable products were subsequently more likely to behave in an antisocial manner (Mazar and Zhong 2010). The availability of pro-environmental technologies and resources also can lead to negative spillover effects (Small and Dender 2007; Sorrell, Dimitropoulos, and Sommerville 2009). For example, Catlin and Wang (2013) found that consumers used more resources when they knew that a recycling option was available.
Moreover, both inconsistency and consistency can emerge in the same context. People who brought a reusable shopping bag to the market subsequently spent more money on both sustainable and indulgent food options (Karmarkar and Bollinger 2015). Furthermore, making a sustainable choice decreases subsequent sustainable behaviors for those low in environmental consciousness but increases these behaviors for those highly conscious of environmental issues (Garvey and Bolton 2017). Consistency rather than inconsistency effects may be more likely to occur when connected to transcendent rather than self-interested values (Evans et al. 2013).
Self-interest
Economic and evolutionary theories both suggest that appeals to self-interest can be leveraged to influence pro-environmental behaviors (Griskevicius, Cantú, and Vugt 2012; Paavola 2001). One strategy is to highlight the self-benefits associated with a given sustainable product, service, or behavior (Green and Peloza 2014; Nolan et al. 2008). Research shows that sustainable attributes have a greater influence on consumers if self-relevant motives are fulfilled (vs. not fulfilled; Schuitema and Groot 2015). Another means of appealing to consumer self-interest is to highlight self-benefits that can counteract the barriers to sustainable action (Gleim et al. 2013; Lanzini and Thøgersen 2014). Such barriers include the belief that sustainable attributes can have negative implications for aesthetics (Luchs and Kumar 2017), functional performance (Luchs et al. 2010; Newman, Gorlin, and Dhar 2014; Truelove et al. 2014), effort (Johnstone and Tan 2015), or affordability (Chang 2011; Gleim et al. 2013; Hughner et al. 2007). Messages that appeal to self-interest are most effective in private (Green and Peloza 2014) and when the individual self is primed in some way (White and Simpson 2013). Research suggests that a focus on self-interest is not always effective alone (McKenzie-Mohr 2000). Moreover, self-interests can crowd out pro-environmental motivations (Schwartz et al. 2015), especially when appeals include self-focused and environmentally focused reasons for acting sustainably (Edinger-Schons et al. 2018).
Self-efficacy
According to Bandura (1977), self-efficacy involves beliefs that the individual can engage in the required action and that carrying out the behavior will have the intended impact. Consumers’ feelings of self-efficacy predict their sustainable attitudes as well as their tendencies to continue to enact sustainable behaviors over time (Armitage and Conner 2001; Cleveland, Kalamas, and Laroche 2005; Ellen, Wiener, and Cobb-Walgren 1991; Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974; White, MacDonnell, and Dahl 2011). According to Peattie (1999, 2001), consumers are most likely to choose sustainable options when consumer compromise is low and when there is high confidence that a particular behavior will make a difference (i.e., self-efficacy is high).
Individual differences
An important individual difference is “personal norms” or beliefs regarding a sense of personal obligation that are linked to one’s self-standards (Bamberg, Hunecke, and Blöbaum 2007; Jansson, Marell, and Nordlund 2010; Schwartz 1977; Stern and Dietz 1994). Individual differences in personal norms around sustainability predict sustainable behaviors, including recycling (Guagnano, Stern, and Dietz 1995), selecting sustainable food (Wiidegren 1998), and being willing to pay more for sustainable options (Guagnano, Dietz, and Stern 1994; Stern, Dietz, and Kalof 1993). Other research has focused on differences in environmental concern (Alwitt and Pitts 1996; Paul, Modi, and Patel 2016; Schwepker Jr., Charles, and Cornwell 1991). Marketers can find success targeting those with strong personal norms and values around sustainability or by strengthening existing personal norms through priming (Peloza, White, and Shang 2013; Steg 2015; Steg et al. 2014; Verplanken and Holland 2002). In addition, individual differences in mindfulness (Bahl et al. 2016; Barber and Deale 2014; Panno et al. 2018; Sheth, Sethia, and Srinivas 2011) as well as perceptions of feeling connected to nature (Nisbet, Zelenski, and Murphy 2009) have been shown to predict environmental concern and sustainable behaviors. Furthermore, traits such as extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and environmental concern predict green buying behaviors (Fraj and Martinez 2006; Mainieri et al. 1997).
Finally, demographics have been shown to relate to sustainable consumption behaviors (Diamantopoulos et al. 2003; Gifford and Nilsson 2014; Murphy, Kangun, and Locander 1978). Gender differences in which women exhibit more sustainable consumer behaviors are sometimes noted. This may occur partly because women tend to be higher in traits such as agreeableness, interdependence, and openness to experience (Dietz, Kalof, and Stern 2002; Eagly 2009; Luchs and Mooradian 2012). Other work finds that those who are younger, more liberal, and highly educated are likely to engage in pro-environmental behaviors (Gilg, Barr, and Ford 2005; Granzin and Olsen 1991; Roberts 1993; Semenza et al. 2008). It makes sense to target responsive segments with sustainability appeals (Anderson and Cunningham 1972; Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed 1974; Laroche, Bergeron, and Barbaro-Forleo 2001), and interventions should be tailored to reflect the specific needs and motivations, barriers, and benefits of the target consumer (Abrahamse et al. 2007; Balderjahn et al. 2018; Daamen et al. 2001).
Feelings and Cognition
We introduce the concepts of feelings and cognition together because, generally speaking, consumers take one of two different routes to action: one that is driven by affect or one that is more driven by cognition (Shiv and Fedorikhin 1999). This proposition is consistent with theories suggesting that either an intuitive, affective route or a more deliberative, cognitive route can dominate in decision making (Epstein 2003; Kahneman 2003, 2011). We note that this distinction is likely to be highly relevant in the domain of reacting to information about ecological issues (Marx et al. 2007). We first outline how negative and positive emotions can impact pro-environmental behaviors. Then we discuss the role of cognition in determining sustainable actions by considering information and learning, eco-labeling, and framing.
Negative emotions
Consumers often consider the negative emotional consequences of either engaging or not engaging in sustainable behaviors (Rees, Klug, and Bamberg 2015). Generally speaking, it is important to avoid creating negative emotional states that are too intense (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). Instead, more subtle activation of negative emotions can be effective (Meng and Trudel 2017; Peloza, White, and Shang 2013). We next address the impact of three specific negative emotions: fear, guilt, and sadness.
Communications regarding sustainable behavior often use “fear appeals” that highlight the negative consequences of a given action or inaction (Banerjee, Gulas, and Iyer 1995). On the one hand, communications that leave the individual feeling as though the consequences are uncertain and temporally distant can make the situation seem less dangerous and can lead to inaction (Lowe et al. 2006). On the other hand, using strong fear appeals can lead to a sense of being unable to overcome the threat and can result in denial (O’Neill and Nicholson-Cole 2009). Because of this, it is best to use moderate fear appeals and to combine these with information about efficacy and what actions to take (Li 2014; Osbaldiston and Sheldon 2002).
Guilt can influence sustainable intentions and behaviors (Carrus, Passafaro, and Bonnes 2008; Jiménez and Yang 2008; Luchs and Mooradian 2012; Mallett, Melchiori, and Strickroth 2013; Muralidharan and Sheehan 2018; Onwezen, Antonides, and Bartels 2013). This is largely due to the consumer assuming individual responsibility for the unsustainable outcomes (Lerner and Keltner 2000), leading people to feel morally responsible for the environment (Kaiser and Shimoda 1999). Research shows that “anticipated guilt” can also influence people to act in a pro-environmental manner (Grob 1995; Kaiser 2006; Mallett 2012; Steenhaut and Kenhove 2006). Anticipated guilt is more effective at encouraging sustainable behavior when consumers are subtly asked to consider their own self-standards of behavior rather than when they are exposed to explicit guilt appeals, which can backfire (Peloza, White, and Shang 2013). “Collective guilt” can also be a motivator of pro-environmental action (Ferguson, Branscombe, and Reynolds 2011). Information conveying that one’s country has a significant carbon footprint leads to a sense of collective guilt, and such feelings predict willingness to support sustainable causes and actions (Ferguson, Branscombe, and Reynolds 2011; Mallett, Melchiori, and Strickroth 2013).
In addition to fear and guilt, researchers have examined sadness as a driver of sustainable attitudes and behaviors (Sevillano, Aragonés, and Schultz 2007). Sadness was shown to lead to more pro-environmental behaviors such as using an energy footprint calculator and allocating higher donation amounts to a sustainable cause (Schwartz and Loewenstein 2017). However, once the emotion dissipated, differences in sustainable actions were eliminated between those who had received the sadness message versus a non-affective message. Thus, emotions such as sadness are more influential while consumers are experiencing them.
Positive emotions
Consumers are more inclined to engage in pro-environmental actions when they derive some hedonic pleasure or positive affect from the behavior (Corral-Verdugo et al. 2009). Sustainable behaviors can both decrease negative and increase positive emotions (Onwezen, Antonides, and Bartels 2013; Rezvani, Jansson, and Bengtsson 2017; Sun and Trudel 2017). On the one hand, engaging in sustainable actions has been shown to result in “warm glow” feelings that can spill over and lead to more favorable evaluations of the overall service experience (Giebelhausen et al. 2016). Positive emotions such as joy and pride have been shown to influence consumer intentions to decrease plastic water bottle usage, and optimism can motivate the maintenance of sustainable behaviors over time (Peter and Honea 2012). On the other hand, research suggests that positive emotions can work to negatively impact sustainable consumer behaviors. For example, unsustainable actions such as driving gas-powered automobiles are linked to positive affective benefits (Steg 2005).
Meanwhile, feelings of “affinity towards nature” predict sustainable attitudes and intentions (Kals, Schumacher, and Montada 1999). Studies demonstrated positive sustainable actions in response to “cute” appeals (e.g., communications featuring cute animals), particularly when the consumer exhibits “approach” motivational tendencies (Wang, Mukhopadhyay, and Patrick 2017). This is driven by increased feelings of tenderness in response to such appeals.
The role of specific positive emotions such as pride in determining sustainable consumer behaviors is also relevant (Bissing-Olson, Fielding, and Iyer 2016). Pride is a self-conscious and moral emotion stemming from a sense of responsibility for a positive outcome (Lerner and Keltner 2000). Those who feel a sense of pride have been shown to be more likely to subsequently engage in sustainable behaviors, in part because pride enhances feelings of effectiveness (Antonetti and Maklan 2014). Finally, positive environmental actions can lead to feelings of hope, which can increase climate activism and sustainable behaviors (Feldman and Hart 2018; Smith and Leiserowitz 2014). Feelings of hope can be augmented by framing climate change as a health issue as opposed to an environmental issue (Myers et al. 2012).
Information, learning, and knowledge
One basic means of persuading consumers to engage in eco-friendly actions is to present information that conveys information regarding desired (and undesired) behaviors and their consequences (McKenzie-Mohr 2000). Some have lamented that people’s dearth of understanding and knowledge—due to lack of exposure to information (Gifford 2011), information overload (Horne 2009; Neumann, Roberts, and Cauvin 2012), and confusion (Chen and Chang 2013)—can contribute to low uptake of sustainable behaviors. Moreover, intelligence (Aspara, Luo, and Dhar 2017), education (Gifford and Nilsson 2014), and knowledge (Levine and Strube 2012) are linked to greater responsiveness to environmental appeals and engagement in eco-friendly behaviors. In many ways, knowledge is relevant across all our SHIFT factors. The consumer must have knowledge of the social norm, must be aware of and understand the prompt or feedback, and must comprehend information related to self-values, self-benefits, self-efficacy, etc.
Providing information through appeals that highlight why the desired behavior or product is sustainable can be effective in giving consumers the initial knowledge they need regarding actions and consequences (Peattie and Peattie 2009; Sussman and O’Brien 2016). Indeed, one is unlikely to engage in more deliberate forms of sustainable behavior change if one is not informed about the problem, potential positive actions, and possible consequences (Gifford and Nilsson 2014). Meta-analytic reviews suggest that information has a significant albeit modest influence on pro-environmental actions (Delmas, Fischlein, and Asensio 2013; Osbaldiston and Schott 2012). However, research also reveals that interventions providing information only are often not enough to spur long-term sustainable changes (Abrahamse et al. 2005; Osbaldiston and Schott 2012). Because of this, combining information with other tactics can be more effective (Kahan et al. 2012; McKenzie-Mohr 2011; Peattie and Peattie 2009; Stern 1999). Some work even suggests that detailed knowledge can backfire. Those with the highest levels of science literacy displayed more ideology-reinforcing bias than their counterparts, which was attributed to their science knowledge making them better able to support their own pre-existing viewpoints (Kahan et al. 2012).
Eco-labeling
Eco-labeling is one means of conveying information about the sustainable attributes of a product (Parguel, Benoît-Moreau, and Larceneux 2011). Labels that are attention-grabbing, easily understandable, and consistent across categories can enable consumers to make better informed eco-friendly decisions (Borin, Cerf, and Krishnan 2011; Taufique, Vocino, and Polonsky 2017; Thøgersen 2000). It has been suggested that eco-labels would be more effective if they were contrasted against negative labels that highlight products with environmentally harmful attributes (Borin, Cerf, and Krishnan 2011). Eco-labeling can seem more transparent and unbiased if it is certified by a third party that validates the sustainability claims (Manget, Roche, and Münnich 2009). However, it is important to note that some work suggests eco-labels do not play a strong role in predicting consumer food selections (Grunert, Hieke, and Wills 2014).
Framing
Marketers can strategically choose message framing to encourage sustainable choices (Ungemach et al. 2018). Because consumers care more about future losses than about future gains (Hardisty and Weber 2009), labels on energy-efficient appliances should compare energy costs rather than savings (Bull 2012; Min et al. 2014). Furthermore, marketers can aggregate information to make a bigger impact, using lifetime (vs. annual) energy costs for appliances (Kallbekken, Sælen, and Hermansen 2013) and cost per 100,000 miles labeling to promote sales of efficient cars (Camilleri and Larrick 2014). Loss-framed information is especially effective when combined with concrete information on how to engage in the behavior. For example, loss-framed messages were most effective in improving the quantity and accuracy of residential recycling behaviors when they were combined with detailed information about how to recycle (vs. more general reasons regarding why we should recycle) (White, MacDonnell, and Dahl 2011). Also, framing can have differential effects on different segments of consumers. In the United States, framing a carbon price as a carbon offset (vs. a tax) has a strong effect on Republicans but has little impact on Democrats and a moderate impact on Independents (Hardisty, Johnson, and Weber 2010). In another example, framing an appeal in terms of “binding moral values” (e.g., duty, authority, consistency with ingroup norms) leads to more positive recycling intentions and behaviors among Republicans, whereas appealing to “individualizing moral values” (e.g., fairness, empathy, individuality) leads to more positive reactions among Democrats (Kidwell, Farmer, and Hardesty 2013). Notably, such matching effects in message framing are often driven by perceptions of fluency or the ease of processing and comprehending the meaning of stimuli (Kidwell, Farmer, and Hardesty 2013; White, MacDonnell, and Dahl 2011).
Tangibility
One unique facet of sustainable consumption is that eco-friendly actions and outcomes can seem abstract, vague, and distant from the self (Reczek, Trudel, and White 2018). Most sustainable consumer behaviors involve putting aside more immediate and proximal individual interests to prioritize behaviors with ill-defined consequences that are focused on others and are only realized in the future (Amel et al. 2017; Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon 2012). Moreover, consumers are not likely to act on issues that are impalpable in nature (Griskevicius, Cantú, and Vugt 2012). Pro-environmental outcomes are difficult to track and measure because changes emerge slowly over time and uncertainty surrounds problems and their solutions (Carrete et al. 2012; Gifford 2011; Weber 2010). Uncertainty can also emerge due to firm actions such as greenwashing (Chen and Chang 2013). Next, we outline some solutions to the tangibility problem.
Matching temporal focus
Whereas sustainability is naturally future-focused, consumers are often present-focused. Moreover, when consumers judge a future environmental payoff to be distant, it becomes less desirable in the present (Hardisty and Weber 2009; Vugt, Griskevicius, and Schultz 2014). One solution to this mismatch is to encourage the consumer to think more abstractly and/or to focus on future benefits of the sustainable action (Reczek, Trudel, and White 2018). Those who have a greater focus on the future engage in more pro-environmental behaviors (Arnocky, Milfont, and Nicol 2014; Joireman, Van Lange, and Van Vugt 2004). Asking individuals to focus on future generations can reduce present-focused biases (Wade-Benzoni, Tenbrunsel, and Bazerman 1997), and prompting the consideration of legacy increases sustainable choices (Zaval, Markowitz, and Weber 2015).
Communicate local and proximal impacts
Communications that relate the more immediate consequences of pro-environmental behaviors for a given city, region, or neighborhood can make environmental actions and outcomes seem more tangible and relevant (Leiserowitz 2006; Scannell and Gifford 2013). Drawing on people’s attachments to a specific place (Devine-Wright and Howes 2010; Gifford 2014), emphasizing personal experiences with climate change impacts (Weber 2010), and using current issues such as extreme weather events can lead to more sustainability-oriented beliefs and actions (Li, Johnson, and Zaval 2011).
Concrete communications
Another way to tackle intangibility is to make sustainability issues more relevant and concrete for the self (Akerlof et al. 2013; Arnocky et al. 2014; Li, Johnson, and Zaval 2011; Reczek, Trudel, and White 2018; Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon 2012). This can be done by communicating the immediate impacts of environmental problems such as climate change (Paswan, Guzmán, and Lewin 2017) and outlining clear steps to make a difference (White, MacDonnell, and Dahl 2011). Communications can make the consequences of inaction (or action) clear by using techniques such as vivid imagery, analogies, and narratives (Marx et al. 2007).
Encourage the desire for intangibles
A challenge for sustainable behaviors is that consumers often have a desire to own material goods. One means of moving toward more sustainable consumption is to promote dematerialization (Csikszentmihalyi 2000) in which consumers decrease emphasis on the possession of tangible goods. This could include consumption of experiences (Van Boven 2005), digital products (Atasoy and Morewedge 2018; Belk 2013), or services (Lovelock 1983). This is consistent with the notion that marketing is evolving to be more focused on the provision of services, intangible resources, and the cocreation of value (Vargo and Lusch 2004). Trends such as the “sharing economy,” with its ideal of collaborative consumption of idle resources (Donnelly et al. 2017), and “voluntary simplicity” in which consumers simplify their lifestyles rather than focus on possessions (Cherrier 2009) indicate that consumers can fulfill their needs without the possession of tangible products being a focal goal.
Theoretical Implications and Directions for Future Research
In our literature review, we identified five routes to sustainable behavior change while delineating specific behavior change strategies within each route. The focus of the review portion of this article has been to identify what the main drivers of sustainable consumer behavior are according to existing research. In the next section, we will go further to highlight a set of theoretical propositions regarding when and why each of the routes to sustainable behavior change (i.e., the SHIFT factors) will be most relevant. We do so by outlining a set of key challenges that make sustainable consumption distinct from typical consumer behaviors: the self–other trade-off, the long time horizon, the requirement of collective action, the problem of abstractness, and the need to replace automatic with controlled processes. We examine each of these challenges to sustainable consumer behavior change through the lens of our SHIFT framework and outline key theoretical propositions and directions for future research.
The Self–Other Trade-Off
Our first challenge to sustainable consumer behavior is that consumers often perceive such actions as having some cost to the self, such as increased effort, increased cost, inferior quality, or inferior aesthetics (Luchs and Kumar 2017). At the same time, sustainable consumer behaviors lead to positive environmental and social impacts that are external to the self (Campbell and Winterich 2018). Thus, although the traditional view of consumer behavior holds that consumers will choose and use products and services in ways that satisfy their own wants and needs (Solomon, White, and Dahl 2017), views of sustainable consumer behaviors often imply putting aside wants that are relevant to the self and prioritizing and valuing entities that are outside of the self (e.g., other people, the environment, future generations, etc.).
The self–other trade-off has implications for how social influence might operate in the context of encouraging sustainable consumer behaviors. Although sustainable consumption often comes at some cost to the self, we suggest that identity signaling can be a self-relevant positive repercussion that can outweigh the costs of sustainable action. This assertion is supported by work showing that consumers are more likely to select sustainable options when the setting is public or status motives are activated (Green and Peloza 2014; Griskevicius, Tybur, and Bergh 2010). A novel proposition building on this work is that product symbolism might have more impact on consumer attitudes and choices when a product is positioned on sustainable versus traditional attributes. By the term “symbolic,” we refer to the notion that some products are better able to convey important information about the self to others (Berger and Heath 2007; White and Argo 2011). The marketer could highlight either symbolic benefits (i.e., convey relevant information about the self to others) or functional aspects (i.e., information about satisfying practical needs) linked to a product (Bhat and Reddy 1998). Because there may be fewer direct self-benefits related to a sustainable action, linking a sustainable option with symbolic benefits could be a fruitful strategy.
P1: When a given behavior or product is positioned on the basis of its symbolic attributes (vs. functional attributes), consumers may exhibit more positive attitudes and behaviors if the option is framed in terms of being sustainable versus a traditional product.
Another way of overcoming the self–other trade-off is to consider the individual self (Gardner, Gabriel, and Lee 1999). In particular, how the individual views his or her own self-concept might predict sustainable consumer behaviors. Whereas some individuals tend to have a more independent view of the self (i.e., the self is separate and distinct from others), some have a more interdependent self-construal (i.e., the self is connected with others; Markus and Kitayama 1991). One possibility is that those who think of the self in terms of an interdependent self-construal (both as a measured individual difference and as a primed mindset; White, Argo, and Sengupta 2012) might be more inclined to engage in sustainable behaviors (Arnocky, Stroink, and DeCicco 2007), particularly when such actions assist ingroup members (Duclos and Barasch 2014). Moreover, research could examine how to activate even broader, more transcendent construals of the self that encompass not only the self and close others but also other species and the biosphere. Encouraging such transcendent self-views might effectively increase eco-friendly actions.
P2: Encouraging the self-concept to be seen as broader than the self (either interdependent or transcendent) will lead to increases in sustainable behaviors.
At the same time, a specific focus on the individual self might be linked to sustainable actions in a way that overcomes uncertainty and is motivating. Giving people a sense of agency (i.e., allowing individuals to perceive themselves as the causal agents of behavioral outcomes) offers them a perception of empowerment and the ability to actually effect change. This might be done through priming of agency to motivate individuals to achieve a given sustainable goal (van der Weiden, Aarts, and Ruys 2013). Because outcomes of sustainable actions are often abstract and uncertain, agency priming might be a relevant motivational tool in the domain of sustainable behavior change. Thus:
P3: Agency primes will lead to an increased tendency to engage in sustainable behaviors.
Research on the individual self in prosocial contexts also highlights the potential importance of moral identity in overcoming the self–other trade-off. Moral identity refers to a cognitive schema around moral traits, goals, and values (Aquino and Reed 2002). The strength of moral identity can vary as an individual difference (e.g., moral identity centrality), and it can be activated by situational priming (Aquino et al. 2009). Moral identity predicts altruistic and ethical behaviors (Aquino and Reed 2002), and those higher in moral identity appear to have an expansive “circle of moral regard” that includes entities further from the self such as outgroup members (Reed and Aquino 2003). Because of this, individuals who are high in moral identity or who have moral identity primed in some way might be more likely to endure some costs to the self to contribute to a greater good. Although research has looked at moral identity in the domain of prosocial behaviors (Reed, Aquino, and Levy 2007), to our knowledge no prior work has examined whether individuals view sustainable behaviors as moral obligations that are predicted by moral identity.
P4: Both individual differences in moral identity and moral identity primes will increase sustainable consumer behaviors.
The self–other trade-off is also linked to how consumers perceive the costs and benefits of sustainable consumption. The literature lacks sufficient work examining the positive consumer associations with sustainability. Although there are a number of studies on the negative associations of sustainable consumption, there are very few that explicitly examine the positive associations. For example, sustainability might be linked to positive feelings about design when it is in the context of innovative, out-of-the-box thinking. Tesla, for example, capitalizes on such associations. Furthermore, it seems likely that sustainability has positive associations with health, local and fresh food, and the outdoors and nature. Sustainable options that connect to growing trends such as healthy and vibrant living, being a “foodie,” and being an outdoor enthusiast might do well. Although some research shows that the concept of “organic” is linked to positive associations around health and even being lower in calories (Schuldt and Schwarz 2010), more work could certainly examine implicit positive associations of sustainability in other domains as well.
P5: Sustainable options and behaviors might have unique positive associations when compared to traditional options, including being healthier, more innovative, and being linked to the outdoors and nature.
The self–other trade-off highlights a heavier research emphasis on the role of “negative self-related” emotions such as guilt and fear. Future work might look further at the role of “positive feeling states that are related to entities outside of the self” in influencing sustainable consumption. For example, researchers have examined the impact of awe—a sense of wonder we feel in the presence of something vast that transcends the individual self—on prosocial behaviors more generally (Piff et al. 2015). However, to our knowledge no work looks at how awe impacts sustainable consumer behaviors. Extant work does show that empathy might be linked to prosocial behaviors (Verhaert and Van den Poel 2011). Although empathy is defined in different ways, it is often conceptualized as an affective state “that stems from the apprehension of another’s emotional state or condition, and that is congruent with it” (Eisenberg and Miller 1987, p. 91). Moreover, outwardly focused emotions such as moral elevation might also predict sustainable actions. Moral elevation refers to feelings of warmth and expansion that are linked to admiration and affection in response to seeing exemplary behavior on the part of another individual (Aquino, McFerran, and Laven 2011; Haidt 2003). Examining emotions like awe, empathy, and moral elevation are all directions for future research.
P6: Outwardly focused positive emotions such as awe, empathy, and moral elevation will predict positive sustainable consumer behaviors.
Another possibility, linked to focusing on the self versus others, is to examine the role of aspirational social influence in sustainable consumer behavior change. Is it possible to make the sustainable option or behavior socially desirable to the self by connecting it to aspirational role models such as celebrities and athletes? Although research covers the motivational roles of both ingroup members (Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius 2008) and dissociative outgroup others (White and Simpson 2013), there is a paucity of research on the impact of aspirational others on influencing sustainable consumer behaviors. One possibility is that aspirational branding could be harnessed to create positive, socially approved associations around the notion of sustainable lifestyles. Marketers could accomplish this by linking sustainable actions to aspirational others in a way that fosters a sense of desirability, luxury, and value linked to sustainable products and behaviors.
P7: Connecting sustainable products and behaviors to aspirational role models in a way that cultivates a sense of inspiration and luxury might increase sustainable behaviors.
Long Time Horizon
Our second challenge to sustainability involves the reality that sustainable behaviors require a long time horizon for outcomes to be realized. Invariably, asking individuals to engage in a pro-environmental behavior means that some of the consequences will be achieved only at a future point in time (Amel et al. 2017). As we have seen, consumers view payoffs to be less desirable the further off the payoffs are in the future (Hardisty and Weber 2009). Relative to sustainable behaviors, most traditional consumer behaviors have consequences that are more immediate. Many payoffs linked to sustainability are so far off in the future that they will not even be observed in the consumer’s own lifetime. We call this challenge the “long time horizon.”
The notion of the long time horizon is related to the individual self in that it is linked to self-control. Indeed, self-regulation research demonstrates that people have a difficult time regulating the self to forgo benefits in the present for longer-term payoffs in the future (Baumeister et al. 1998; Muraven and Baumeister 2000). Sustainable behaviors present a unique self-regulation dilemma. Whereas most self-regulatory acts involve holding off on some positive reward now in order to receive a later payoff that reflects a self-relevant goal (e.g., not eating ice cream in the present so one can fit into a favorite dress on an upcoming vacation), sustainable behaviors involve putting off something positive now for a future positive outcome that is not only temporally distant but broader than the self (e.g., not purchasing a sporty car to reduce carbon emissions, the effects of which will only be realized in the future and will benefit the environment and other people). Although one would think that the self-control literature has much to say about sustainable behavior change, little work has explicitly looked at the role of self-regulation in determining sustainable actions. Existing work shows that those who have their regulatory resources depleted are more susceptible to temptations and impulse buying (Baumeister 2002). Given that many sustainable behaviors require an effortful cost to the self in the short term for an uncertain future payoff, examining the dynamics of self-control in this domain could be productive. It is possible that sustainable behaviors require even more self-control than other self-control behaviors. For example, the same action (e.g., being vegan) could be positioned in terms of sustainability versus health goals, and it may be that self-regulation is more likely to fail for sustainability reasons given that such behaviors have fewer clear future implications for the self. Research might examine this and consider how to enhance self-regulation in the sustainability domain. One idea involves interventions to make the natural world part of the extended self, thereby transforming future environmental benefits into self-benefits, which could improve self-regulation.
P8: Those whose regulatory resources are somehow limited will be more likely to lapse in terms of engaging in sustainable behaviors (vs. other types self-control behaviors).
The long time horizon associated with sustainable behavior is related to feelings in that people often have to undergo hedonic costs to the self in the present to maximize some positive sustainable outcome in the future. Needless to say, this is often difficult, as people are usually hesitant to give up their own affective benefits. However, acting in a manner that helps others has been shown to provide positive affect, which is sometimes termed the “warm glow” effect (Giebelhausen et al. 2016). Focusing on how sustainable behaviors can create positive affect in the present might increase sustainable behaviors. We propose that:
P9: Sustainable behaviors that provide greater immediate (vs. long-term) warm glow feelings or positive affect will lead to decreased perceptions of the long time horizon and increase the likelihood of sustainable actions.
The long time horizon is linked to tangibility as well. Although people generally care less about future outcomes, the degree to which they care varies across individuals. People with higher “discount rates” care less about future outcomes (Hardisty and Weber 2009). Likewise, people with lower consideration of future consequences (Strathman et al. 1994) express weaker pro-environmental intentions (Joireman et al. 2001). Therefore, tangibility interventions (such as communicating local and proximal impacts) may be especially effective for these individuals. In contrast, those with low discount rates and high consideration of future consequences are already attuned to future outcomes and may be less influenced by tangibility interventions. Thus:
P10: Individuals with higher discount rates and low consideration of future consequences might be more sensitive to heightening the tangibility of environmental outcomes.
In addition, the long time horizon and self–other trade-off are both linked to how tangibility could play a role in determining sustainable consumer behaviors. Environmental impacts are not likely to be observed until the future, most likely by future generations. As such, interventions that increase the tangibility of the effects of acting (or not acting) sustainably on future generations might encourage more sustainable actions. One possibility involves perspective-taking interventions (Maner et al. 2002) that encourage the consumer to adopt the viewpoint of future generations. Thus, we propose that:
P11: Individuals will be more motivated to engage in sustainable consumer behaviors when they either dispositionally or situationally take the perspective of future generations.
A final implication of the long time horizon is linked to all of the SHIFT factors. One striking facet of the current review is that most of the existing research involves surveys or experiments that take place at a single point in time (Iyer and Reczek 2017). Future research could profitably examine the longitudinal effects of different interventions on sustainable behaviors. Moreover, a dichotomy that our framework highlights is the short-term versus long-term focus of the different behavior change strategies. Although some of the constructs are driven by the immediate context and lead to short-term behavior change, other constructs lead to more enduring behavior change over the long term. For example, although tools related to feelings and cognition and habit-formation tools that focus on in-the-moment behavior shaping can be effective in the current context, sustainable actions can disappear once they are removed. It may be optimal to ensure a balance of in-the-moment behavior-shaping tools (e.g., incentives, penalties, making it easy) with ways of making these behaviors last over time (e.g., relating the actions to the consumer’s morals, values, self-concept, self-consistency). Future research could test this possibility.
P12: Sustainable consumer behaviors may be best promoted over the long term by using a combination of in-the-moment tools and lasting-change tools.
The Challenge of Collective Action
Sustainable behaviors often require collective as opposed to individual action (Bamberg, Rees, and Seebauer 2015). A large group of people must undertake sustainable behaviors for the benefits to be fully realized. This differs from traditional consumer behaviors in which the outcome is realized if the individual engages in the action alone. This is also distinct from other behaviors with a long time horizon like health promotion behaviors (e.g., exercising and eating healthy) because these can be enacted at the individual level with observable results.
The “challenge of collective action” is relevant to how social influence might operate when considering sustainable (vs. conventional) actions. When people observe others engaging in an action, this may increase perceptions of collective efficacy or “a group’s shared belief in its conjoint capabilities to organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given levels of attainments” (Bandura 1997, p. 477). Although collective efficacy has received little attention in the sustainability domain, researchers have examined it in the contexts of organizational leadership (Chen and Bliese 2002) and political action (Velasquez and LaRose 2015). Drawing on this work, we suggest that collective efficacy can be a compelling motivator of sustainable consumer behavior. In fact, because sustainable outcomes require that actions be undertaken on a very large scale, it may be that collective action is more motivational in the domain of sustainability than other positive behavior domains. This is an open question for future research to examine. Thus:
P13: Messages communicating both the behaviors of others (collective action) and collective efficacy will increase the tendency to engage in sustainable actions.
The consideration of feelings has potential implications for how to overcome the challenge of collective action. Although some research has looked at the role of collective emotions (i.e., feelings that group members widely share as group-level goals are pursued or thwarted; Sullivan 2015), the types of emotions studied in this domain have been limited to past group actions resulting in guilt or pride (Antonetti and Maklan 2014; Bissing-Olson, Fielding, and Iyer 2016). Meanwhile, sustainable actions might be better fostered using other types of collective emotions. For example, collective feelings of anger and hope have been shown to predict collective action (Wlodarczyk et al. 2017). Thus, we propose:
P14: Collective, future-oriented emotions such as anger and hope might foster sustainable consumer behaviors.
In a similar vein, cognitions about collective actions might also facilitate sustainable behaviors. Because sustainable behaviors have the unique property of requiring collective action, one possibility is that communicating collective-level outcomes such as climate justice could be influential in encouraging such behaviors. Although thoughts about perceived ability to restore justice have been shown to lead to actions such as selecting fair-trade products (White, MacDonnell, and Ellard 2012), it might be the case that conveying collective notions of justice (e.g., communicating information about collective impacts and consequences of unjust, unsustainable actions) would be impactful in the domain of encouraging sustainable consumer behaviors. In particular, communication about inequitable distributions of negative environmental threats and how these are felt by communities that are the most vulnerable might be a compelling message (Lazarus 1994).
P15: Communicating information about climate justice might motivate sustainable consumer behavior change.
Collective action is also linked to tangibility. Anecdotally, a popular technique for motivating green behavior is to advertise the collective impact. For example, “If everyone in the United States washed their clothes with cold water instead of hot, we would save around 30 million tons of CO2 per year” (“Snappy Living” 2011). Despite the popularity of this type of messaging to promote green behavior in an applied context, to the best of our knowledge it has not been tested in the academic literature. We predict that this type of messaging has differential impacts for tangible versus intangible outcomes due to two opposing forces. On the one hand, collective impact framing highlights the collective action problem (e.g., “There’s no way everyone in the U.S. would do this!”), which might decrease sustainable action. On the other hand, it scales up the perceived size of the impact, which could increase sustainable behavior (Camilleri and Larrick 2014). Because people are often insensitive to large numeric changes in environmental outcomes (Schkade and Payne 1994), such that “3 million” tons of CO2 would be treated the same as “300 million,” it may be more effective to use tangible representations featuring visual images and analogies (e.g., “a garbage heap the size of the Empire State Building”).
P16: Tangible (vs. intangible) collective impact framing increases pro-environmental behavior.
The Need to Replace Automatic with Controlled Processes
We note that many unsustainable behaviors have become learned in ways that make them automatic rather than controlled in nature. Engaging in sustainable consumption thus often means (at least initially) replacing relatively automatic behavioral responses with more effortful new responses (e.g., carrying one’s own shopping bag). This challenge can be related to habit formation. Recall that one means of influencing habitual change is by leveraging discontinuity, or the notion that major life change events can allow for other forms of habit change to occur. It is also possible that a certain mindset (beyond rare major life changes) can lead to habit change (Price et al. 2017). Individuals who have a “fresh start” mindset exhibit more positive attitudes toward products that allow for a fresh start, and they hold more positive intentions to donate to charities focused on giving recipients a new beginning (Price et al. 2017). The authors define a fresh start mindset as “a belief that people can make a new start, get a new beginning, and chart a new course in life, regardless of their past or present circumstances” (p. 22), and they show that it can be both measured and manipulated. A fresh start mindset might be applicable in terms of habit formation. Taking a “fresh start” view of a new behavior might serve as a form of discontinuity that makes habit change more likely.
P17: Those who have a fresh start mindset (measured or manipulated) will be more inclined to change to sustainable consumer behavior habits.
Although the adoption of sustainable behavior often requires overriding an automatic habit with a controlled one, this process may be facilitated by tangibility. Because tangible outcomes are more vivid and immediate, they may provoke more experiential (rather than analytic) processing (Chaiken and Trope 1999), leading people to base their decisions more on emotions and heuristics. Therefore, tangibility may increase the effectiveness of heuristic-based interventions (such as defaults or framing) and decrease the effectiveness of calculation-based interventions (such as attribute scaling; Camilleri and Larrick 2014). For example, when buying a car online, representing the fuel efficiency as cost per 100,000 miles may be more effective, whereas when buying a car in person, a personal anecdote from the salesman about rarely needing to fill up the tank might be more effective. Thus, we propose:
P18: Tangibility interventions shift people from analytic to experiential processing and will therefore moderate the effectiveness of other interventions.
The Problem of Abstractness
Our last challenge to encouraging sustainable consumer behaviors is that such actions are often characterized as being abstract, uncertain, and difficult for the consumer to grasp (Reczek, Trudel, and White 2018). Furthermore, the consequences of sustainable actions can involve uncertain and fuzzy outcomes (Weber 2010). Although distant future outcomes are often abstract, immediate and local environmental outcomes are also frequently abstract (e.g., energy efficiency, air quality, biodiversity). Although traditional consumer behaviors can carry different elements of risk and uncertainty, the outcomes of choices in traditional consumer contexts are usually more clear and certain than they are in sustainable consumer contexts.
The problem of abstractness can be addressed by considering social influence. One reason why people are influenced by social factors is because we often look to the expectations and behaviors of others when the situation is uncertain (Cialdini 2007). There is evidence, for example, that unfamiliar behaviors are more likely to be influenced by norms than are more familiar behaviors (White and Simpson 2011). Thus, when the sustainable consumer behavior is in some way ambiguous (e.g., “Exactly what is the most sustainable option for baby diapers?”) or uncertain (e.g., “Will engaging in this behavior really have the desired impact?”), people may be more influenced by social factors. Those who are high in the individual differences of uncertainty avoidance (Hofstede 2001) might be more influenced by social factors when abstractness is high. Thus:
P19: When the sustainable action or the outcome is ambiguous, uncertain, or new in some way (vs. being clear, certain, and well-established), social factors such as the presence of, behaviors of, and/or expectations of others will be more influential in determining behavior. This might be pronounced among those high in uncertainty avoidance.
Habit formation can also be relevant in tackling the problem of abstractness. Climate change and other issues are serious, nebulous, and can have large-scale consequences, making the acts carried out by individuals seem small and inconsequential. This can lead to green fatigue, or demotivation that is the result of information overload and lack of hope for meaningful change (Strother and Fazal 2011), and such hopelessness can be demotivating to consumers (Guyader, Ottosson, and Witell 2017). One solution may be to celebrate small and concrete wins that can positively reinforce further sustainable actions and keep consumers engaged.
P20: Rewarding small milestones will encourage consumers to continue engaging in environmentally friendly behaviors and help avoid green fatigue.
The problem of abstractness also relates to the individual self. In fact, one way to combat the problem of abstract and uncertain outcomes might be to directly consider how they could impact the individual self. As we have seen, making sustainable impacts and outcomes seem local and relevant to the self can encourage sustainable consumer behaviors. However, future research might consider other means of connecting sustainable outcomes more clearly to the self. For example, Hershfield et al. (2011) manipulated a focus on the future self by showing people a digital image of what their future self might look like. These researchers found that increasing connectedness to the future self increases willingness to invest in retirement savings (Hershfield et al. 2011). It is possible that manipulations that create a connection between the current and future self will lead to increases in sustainable consumer behaviors.
P21: Those consumers who are encouraged to focus on the future self will be more likely to engage in sustainable consumer behaviors.
Sustainable behaviors can also be made to feel less abstract by making the current emotional benefits and costs more concrete. Future work might examine which different communication modes are most appropriate for making individuals feel emotions linked to sustainable behaviors. Images are known to activate emotions more readily in contexts such as communicating about intergroup conflicts (Brantner, Lobinger, and Wetzstein 2011). Visual information may best communicate how environmental issues will affect others in order to elicit concrete emotions, and these communications may potentially have an enhanced effect on those who are visualizers (Richardson 1977).
P22: Visual communications (vs. text) will be effective at eliciting other-focused emotions such as love and empathy and lead to greater participation in sustainable actions. This effect will be enhanced for individuals who are visualizers.
The problem of abstractness can be related to feelings. Allowing consumers to understand the impact of their actions might help facilitate relevant emotions and reduce perceived abstractness. In the domain of charitable giving, highlighting the impact has been shown to lead to greater emotional rewards attached to the behavior (Aknin et al. 2013). Previous work, however, has not looked at the specific emotions tied to impact in sustainable consumer behaviors. For example, making the potential impact clear and concrete may be more likely to lead to anticipatory pride (vs. other anticipatory states) linked to the sustainable action.
P23: Making the positive impact of sustainable behavior more certain in the present will result in greater pride and lead to greater likelihood of carrying out such behaviors in the future.
Feelings might also be linked to the problem of abstractness in another way. The ubiquity of social media and sharing exposes consumers to others who might communicate their actions linked to sustainability. For instance, people may share pictures of their commute by bike or by carpool, along with how they are feeling during the journey. Experiencing positive emotions leads to greater feelings of closeness (Van Boven et al. 2010; Waugh and Fredrickson 2006), and we tend to feel greater empathy for and thus more strongly experience the emotions of close others (Escalas and Stern 2003). Thus, close others sharing their emotions involved in carrying out sustainable behaviors should be more effective at reducing abstractness by increasing the strength of the emotions we expect to feel when we engage in the behavior.
P24: Social distance will lead to emotional contagion when emotional responses to sustainable behaviors are shared with others, such that close (vs. distant) others sharing how they experience positive emotions when carrying out sustainable behavior will make the benefits of the behavior seem more concrete.
Finally, the problem of abstractness is linked to tangibility. One possible way to increase tangibility of actions and outcomes (and to make information less abstract) is to employ analogies. Because sustainability is an abstract and intangible concept, comparing a sustainable action or outcome to a familiar experience or example unrelated to sustainability might facilitate greater connection between the consumer and the concept of sustainability. Thus, future work might examine the following:
P25: When the action or behavior is sustainable (vs. traditional), analogies will be more likely to encourage consumer behavior change.
How to Use the SHIFT Framework in Practice
Our SHIFT framework shows different tactics that can be used to influence sustainable consumer behaviors (see Web Appendix A). We note that no single route to behavior change identified by the framework works “best.” Rather, we suggest that practitioners should understand the specific behavior, the context in which the behavior will occur, the intended target of the intervention, and the barriers (and benefits) associated with the behavior (see Web Appendix B; for more detailed information on how to think about the relevant factors to encourage behavior change, see McKenzie-Mohr 2000; Peattie 2001; Schultz 2014; Schultz and Fielding 2014). We note that there are often multiple barriers to sustainable behavior change, and therefore combining strategies can be impactful (Osterhus 1997; Stern 2011).
Although our framework highlights the different drivers of sustainable behavior change, it can also be used to think about potential barriers to sustainable action. In particular, one way to use the framework is to consider the primary and secondary barriers to engaging in the desired behavior and then select relevant tactics to overcome them. A primary barrier is the barrier that elicits the strongest avoidance response in the target consumer, and a secondary barrier is the factor that elicits the next strongest avoidance response. Thinking about barriers in terms of the SHIFT factors (e.g., a barrier can be linked to social influence [the sustainable action is seen as socially undesirable] and habit [the existing unsustainable action is highly habitual]) can help the practitioner draw connections to the tools within the framework that might facilitate change. We provide examples of possible focal consumer behaviors in Web Appendix C, and Web Appendix D shows potential strategies that can be drawn from our framework based on the primary and secondary barriers to action.
In one example of identifying primary and secondary barriers that explicitly relied on the SHIFT framework, White and Simpson (2013) gathered data on the motives of residents who were hesitant to engage in grasscycling (i.e., composting grass clippings by allowing them to decompose naturally). The researchers discovered that residents’ hesitance was due to barriers related to social norms (primary barrier: the norm was that nobody was engaging in the behavior and that it did not seem approved of) and individual factors (secondary barrier: the behavior was perceived to be costly to the self). The authors developed and tested two different solutions that addressed the key barriers by using strategies related to social norms and the individual self. These researchers created messages that were delivered to residents on door hangers, and they tracked residential grasscycling practices over time (both before and after the intervention). First, when the individual was prompted to think of the collective self (“Think about how we as a community can make a difference”), descriptive norms (“Your neighbors are grasscycling—you can too”) and injunctive norms (“Your neighbors want you to grasscycle”) were most effective. Second, when the person was prompted to think about the individual self (“Think about how you as an individual can make a difference”), highlighting relevant self-benefits worked best (“Grasscycling improves your lawn quality”). By tackling the key barriers linked to social influence and the individual self, the authors increased sustainable behaviors in a large-scale field study.
Another example involves Our Horizon, which is a nonprofit with a mandate to discourage gasoline consumption caused by driving automobiles. Two focal barriers to decreasing gasoline usage are social factors (it is both socially normative and socially desirable to drive) and tangibility (consumers report uncertainty about the impacts of driving less). Our Horizon has responded by developing a strategy to target both social norms and tangibility. Our Horizon encourages local governments to implement warning labels on gas pumps similarly to the way many nations now place warning labels on tobacco packaging. The labels that the organization plans to implement serve to both (1) help communicate what is normatively approved of and (2) describe concrete and personally relevant local impacts (see Web Appendix F). Although we offer examples to illustrate the SHIFT principles in practice, it is important to recognize that different behaviors and segments will have unique barriers and benefits to behavior change. We include more examples of using barriers to identify tactics based on our Framework in Web Appendix E.
As we have seen, thinking about the primary and secondary barriers to pro-environmental behavior change is one means by which marketers, policy makers, and nonprofits can use the SHIFT framework. However, there is one important nuance: the practitioner should make sure that the tools employed are complementary rather than oppositional to each another. For example, in the grasscycling study described previously, messaging that reflected the individual self along with social norms was less effective than communicating about the individual self and self-benefits (or the collective self and social norms), because consistent messaging leads to goal-compatible outcomes (White and Simpson 2013). In another example, highlighting the extrinsic benefits of engaging in a sustainable action along with intrinsic benefits can be less impactful than communicating intrinsic benefits alone, because extrinsic motives are not compatible with intrinsic motives (Bolderdijk, Lehman, and Geller 2012; Edinger-Schons et al. 2018).
Concluding Thoughts
A question with practical and theoretical significance is whether our framework can be applied to other behaviors, such as prosocial actions or health behaviors, or if the factors are unique to sustainable behaviors. We conjecture that many of the facets of our framework may apply to the other positive behaviors as well. However, we note that there are some elements that may be unique to sustainable consumption. For example, health behaviors are not subject to the challenge of collective versus individual action to the same degree that sustainable behaviors are. Although health behavior changes can collectively have positive economic and societal benefits (WHO 2014), health behavior change also undeniably primarily has individual benefits (OECD and WHO 2015). Although health and prosocial behaviors (e.g., charitable giving) both carry problems of tangibility, sustainable behaviors and outcomes are likely perceived as being even less tangible than health and prosocial behaviors. This is an open question for future research to explore, and applying the framework in other domains certainly has theoretical and practical potential.
In summary, we have reviewed and categorized the behavioral science literature, uncovering five broad psychological routes to encouraging sustainable consumer behavior change: Social influence, Habit formation, the Individual self, Feelings and cognition, and Tangibility. We anticipate that this SHIFT framework will be helpful in guiding practitioners interested in fostering sustainable consumer behavior. Moreover, we expect that this framework will assist researchers in conceptualizing different means of influencing sustainable consumer behavior and will spur further research in this essential domain. At the end of the day, we hope that our framework will help stimulate sustainable consumer behavior change and allow firms wishing to operate in a sustainable manner to do so in ways that can maximize both their sustainability and strategic business goals.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors thank Sitra, the Finnish Innovation Fund, for financial support for the preliminary stages of this research. In addition, Professors White and Hardisty gratefully acknowledge grants from the Social Sciences and Humanties Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada.
ORCID iD
Katherine White https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3794-8247
Footnotes
Associate Editor Wayne Hoyer served as associate editor for this article.
1 Steg and Vlek (2009) focus on three key motivators of sustainable behavior change: weighing costs and benefits, moral and normative factors, and affective factors. Peattie (2010) provides a comprehensive review but does not give a detailed analysis of habit formation, emotional factors, or tangibility. Gifford (2014) gives a broad review of theories and techniques but does not delve as deeply into issues linked to habit, the self-concept, cognition, or tangibility.
References
Abrahamse Wokje, Steg Linda (2013), “Social Influence Approaches to Encourage Resource Conservation: A Meta-Analysis,” Global Environmental Change, 23 (6), 1773–85.
Abrahamse Wokje, Steg Linda, Vlek Charles, Rothengatter Talib (2005), “A Review of Intervention Studies Aimed at Household Energy Conservation,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25 (3), 273–91.
Abrahamse Wokje, Steg Linda, Vlek Charles, Rothengatter Talib (2007), “The Effect of Tailored Information, Goal Setting, and Feedback on Household Energy Use, Energy Related Behaviors, and Behavioral Determinants,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (4), 265–76.
Akerlof Karen, Maibach Edward W., Fitzgerald Dennis, Cedeno Andrew Y., Neuman Amanda (2013), “Do People ‘Personally Experience’ Global Warming, and If so How, and Does It Matter?” Global Environmental Change, 23 (1), 81–91.
Aknin Lara B., Dunn Elizabeth W., Whillans Ashley V., Grant Adam M., Norton Michael I. (2013), “Making a Difference Matters: Impact Unlocks the Emotional Benefits of Prosocial Spending,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 88, 90–95.
Alwitt Linda F., Pitts Robert E. (1996), “Predicting Purchase Intentions for an Environmentally Sensitive Product,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5 (1), 49–64.
Amel Elise, Manning Christie, Scott Britain, Koger Susan (2017), “Beyond the Roots of Human Inaction: Fostering Collective Effort Toward Ecosystem Conservation,” Science, 356 (6335), 275–79.
Anderson W. Thomas, Cunningham William H. (1972), “The Socially Conscious Consumer,” Journal of Marketing, 36 (3), 23–31.
Antonetti Paolo, Maklan Stan (2014), “Feelings That Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices,” Journal of Business Ethics, 124 (1), 117–34.
Aquino Karl, Freeman Dan, Reed Americus, Lim Vivien K. G., Felps Will (2009), “Testing a Social–Cognitive Model of Moral Behavior: The Interactive Influence of Situations and Moral Identity Centrality,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (1), 123–41.
Aquino Karl, McFerran Brent, Laven Marjorie (2011), “Moral Identity and the Experience of Moral Elevation in Response to Acts of Uncommon Goodness,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100 (4), 703–18.
Aquino Karl, Reed I. I. (2002), “The Self-Importance of Moral Identity,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83 (6), 1423–40.
Armitage Christopher J., Conner Mark (2001), “Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A Meta-Analytic Review,” British Journal of Social Psychology, 40 (4), 471–99.
Arnocky Steven, Milfont Taciano L., Nicol Jeffrey R. (2014), “Time Perspective and Sustainable Behaviour: Evidence for the Distinction Between Consideration of Immediate and Future Consequences,” Environment and Behaviour, 46 (5), 556–82.
Arnocky Steven, Stroink Mirella, DeCicco Teresa (2007), “Self-Construal Predicts Environmental Concern, Cooperation, and Conservation,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (4), 255–64.
Aspara Jaakko, Luo Xueming, Dhar Ravi (2017), “Effect of Intelligence on Consumers’ Responsiveness to a Pro-environmental Tax: Evidence from Large-Scale Data on Car Acquisitions of Male Consumers,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27 (4), 448–55.
Atasoy Ozgun, Morewedge Carey K. (2018), “Digital Goods Are Valued Less Than Physical Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (6), 1343–57.
Auger Pat, Devinney Timothy M. (2007), “Do What Consumers Say Matter? The Misalignment of Preferences with Unconstrained Ethical Intentions,” Journal of Business Ethics, 76 (4), 361–83.
Austin John, Hatfield David B., Grindle Angelica C., Bailey Jon S. (1993), “Increasing Recycling in Office Environments: The Effects of Specific, Informative Cues,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26 (2), 247–53.
Baca-Motes Katie, Brown Amber, Gneezy Ayelet, Keenan Elizabeth A., Nelson Leif D. (2012), “Commitment and Behavior Change: Evidence from the Field,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (5), 1070–84.
Bahl Shalini, Milne George R., Ross Spencer M., Mick David Glen, Grier Sonya A., Chugani Sunaina K., et al. (2016), “Mindfulness: Its Transformative Potential for Consumer, Societal, and Environmental Well-Being,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 35 (2), 198–210.
Balderjahn Ingo, Peyer Mathias, Seegebarth Barbara, Wiedmann Klaus-Peter, Weber Anja (2018), “The Many Faces of Sustainability-Conscious Consumers: A Category-Independent Typology,” Journal of Business Research, 91, 83–93.
Baltes Margret M., Hayward Scott C. (1976), “Application and Evaluation of Strategies to Reduce Pollution: Behavioral Control of Littering in a Football Stadium,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 61 (4), 501–06.
Bamberg Sebastian (2006), “Is a Residential Relocation a Good Opportunity to Change People’s Travel Behavior? Results from a Theory-Driven Intervention Study,” Environment and Behavior, 38 (6), 820–40.
Bamberg Sebastian, Hunecke Marcel, Blöbaum Anke (2007), “Social Context, Personal Norms, and the Use of Public Transportation: Two Field Studies,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (3), 190–203.
Bamberg Sebastian, Rees Jonas, Seebauer Sebastian (2015), “Collective Climate Action: Determinants of Participation Intention in Community-Based Pro-environmental Initiatives,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 43, 155–65.
Bandura Albert (1977), “Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change,” Psychological Review, 84 (2), 191–215.
Bandura Albert (1997), Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
Banerjee Subhabrata, Gulas Charles S., Iyer Easwar (1995), “Shades of Green: A Multidimensional Analysis of Environmental Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 24 (2), 21–31.
Banerjee Subhabrata Bobby, Iyer Easwar S., Kashyap Rajiv K. (2003), “Corporate Environmentalism: Antecedents and Influence of Industry Type,” Journal of Marketing, 67 (2), 106–22.
Barber Nelson A., Deale Cynthia (2014), “Tapping Mindfulness to Shape Hotel Guests’ Sustainable Behavior,” Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 55 (1), 100–14.
Bartels Jos, Hoogendam Karen (2011), “The Role of Social Identity and Attitudes Toward Sustainability Brands in Buying Behaviors for Organic Products,” Journal of Brand Management, 18 (9), 697–708.
Bartels Jos, Onwezen Marleen C. (2014), “Consumers’ Willingness to Buy Products with Environmental and Ethical Claims: The Roles of Social Representations and Social Identity,” International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38 (1), 82–89.
Baumeister Roy F. (2002), “Yielding to Temptation: Self-Control Failure, Impulsive Purchasing, and Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 28 (4), 670–76.
Baumeister Roy F., Bratslavsky Ellen, Muraven Mark, Tice Dianne M. (1998), “Ego Depletion: Is the Active Self a Limited Resource?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (5), 1252–65.
Belk Russell W. (1988), “Possessions and the Extended Self,” Journal of Consumer Research, 15 (2), 139–68.
Belk Russell W. (2013), “Extended Self in a Digital World,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (3), 477–500.
Berger Jonah, Heath Chip (2007), “Where Consumers Diverge from Others: Identity Signaling and Product Domains,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (2), 121–34.
Bhat Subodh, Reddy Srinivas K. (1998), “Symbolic and Functional Positioning of Brands,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 15 (1), 32–43.
Bissing-Olson Megan J., Fielding Kelly S., Iyer Aarti (2016), “Experiences of Pride, Not Guilt, Predict Pro-environmental Behavior When Pro-environmental Descriptive Norms Are More Positive,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45, 145–53.
Bodur H. Onur, Duval Kimberly M., Grohmann Bianca (2015), “Will You Purchase Environmentally Friendly Products? Using Prediction Requests to Increase Choice of Sustainable Products,” Journal of Business Ethics, 129 (1), 59–75.
Bolderdijk J. W., Lehman P. K., Geller E. S. (2012), “Encouraging Pro-environmental Behaviour with Rewards and Penalties,” in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction, Chap. 22. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 273–82.
Bolderdijk Jan Willem, Steg Linda (2015), “Promoting Sustainable Consumption: The Risks of Using Financial Incentives,” in Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, Chap. 21. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 328–42.
Bollinger Bryan, Gillingham Kenneth (2012), “Peer Effects in the Diffusion of Solar Photovoltaic Panels,” Marketing Science, 31 (6), 873–1025.
Borin Norm, Cerf Douglas C., Krishnan Ragi (2011), “Consumer Effects of Environmental Impact in Product Labeling,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28 (1), 76–86.
Bowles Samuel (2008), “Policies Designed for Self-Interested Citizens May Undermine ‘The Moral Sentiments:’ Evidence from Economic Experiments,” Science, 320 (5883), 1605–09.
Brantner Cornelia, Lobinger Katharina, Wetzstein Irmgard (2011), “Effects of Visual Framing on Emotional Responses and Evaluations of News Stories About the Gaza Conflict 2009,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 88 (3), 523–40.
Brothers Kevin J., Krantz Patricia J., McClannahan Lynn E. (1994), “Office Paper Recycling: A Function of Container Proximity,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27 (1), 153–60.
Brough Aaron R., Wilkie James E. B., Ma Jingjing, Isaac Mathew S., Gal David (2016), “Is Eco-Friendly Unmanly? The Green-Feminine Stereotype and Its Effect on Sustainable Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (4), 567–82.
Brown Tom J., Dacin Peter A. (1997), “The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses,” Journal of Marketing, 61 (1), 68–84.
Bull Joe (2012), “Loads of Green Washing—Can Behavioural Economics Increase Willingness-to-Pay for Efficient Washing Machines in the UK?” Energy Policy, 50, 242–52.
Burn Shawn M., Oskamp Stuart (1986), “Increasing Community Recycling with Persuasive Communication and Public Commitment,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16 (1), 29–41.
Cairns S., Newson C., Davis A. (2010), “Understanding Successful Workplace Travel Initiatives in the UK,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 44 (7), 473–94.
Camilleri Adrian R., Larrick Richard P. (2014), “Metric and Scale Design as Choice Architecture Tools,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 33 (1), 108–25.
Campbell Margaret C., Winterich Karen Page (2018), “A Framework for the Consumer Psychology of Morality in the Marketplace,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28 (2), 167–79.
Carrete Lorena, Raquel Castaño, Reto Felix, Edgar Centeno, Eva González (2012), “Green Consumer Behavior in an Emerging Economy: Confusion, Credibility, and Compatibility,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29 (7), 470–81.
Carrus Giuseppe, Passafaro Paola, Bonnes Mirilia (2008), “Emotions, Habits and Rational Choices in Ecological Behaviours: The Case of Recycling and Use of Public Transportation,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28 (1), 51–62.
Catlin Jesse R., Wang Yitong (2013), “Recycling Gone Bad: When the Option to Recycle Increases Resource Consumption,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (1), 122–27.
Chaiken Shelly, Trope Yaacov (1999), Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
Chang Chingching (2011), “Feeling Ambivalent About Going Green,” Journal of Advertising, 40 (4), 19–32.
Chen Gilad, Bliese Paul D. (2002), “The Role of Different Levels of Leadership in Predicting Self- and Collective Efficacy: Evidence for Discontinuity,” The Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (3), 549–56.
Chen Yu-Shan, Chang Ching-Hsun (2013), “Greenwash and Green Trust: The Mediation Effects of Green Consumer Confusion and Green Perceived Risk,” Journal of Business Ethics, 114 (3), 489–500.
Chernev Alexander, Blair Sean (2015), “Doing Well by Doing Good: The Benevolent Halo of Corporate Social Responsibility,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (6), 1412–25.
Cherrier Helene (2009), “Anti-consumption Discourses and Consumer-Resistant Identities,” Journal of Business Research, 62 (2), 181–90.
Chiang Teresa, Mevlevioglu Gokhan, Natarajan Sukumar, Padget Julian, Walker Ian (2014), “Inducing [Sub]conscious Energy Behaviour Through Visually Displayed Energy Information: A Case Study in University Accommodation,” Energy and Buildings, 70, 507–15.
Cialdini Robert B. (2003), “Crafting Normative Messages to Protect the Environment,” Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12 (4), 105–09.
Cialdini Robert B. (2007), Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. New York: Harper Collins.
Cialdini Robert B., Demaine Linda J., Sagarin Brad J., Barrett Daniel W., Rhoads Kelton, Winter Patricia L. (2006), “Managing Social Norms for Persuasive Impact,” Social Influence, 1 (1), 3–15.
Cialdini Robert B., Reno Raymond R., Kallgren Carl A. (1990), “A Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: Recycling the Concept of Norms to Reduce Littering in Public Places,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58 (6), 1015–26.
Cleveland Mark, Kalamas Maria, Laroche Michel (2005), “Shades of Green: Linking Environmental Locus of Control and Pro-environmental Behaviors,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22 (4), 198–212.
Cornelissen Gert, Pandelaere Mario, Warlop Luk, Dewitte Siegfried (2008), “Positive Cueing: Promoting Sustainable Consumer Behavior by Cueing Common Environmental Behaviors as Environmental,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25 (1), 46–55.
Corral-Verdugo Víctor, Bonnes Mirilia, Tapia-Fonllem César, Fraijo-Sing Blanca, Frías-Armenta Martha, Carrus Giuseppe (2009), “Correlates of Pro-Sustainability Orientation: The Affinity Towards Diversity,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29 (1), 34–43.
Csikszentmihalyi Mihaly (2000), “The Costs and Benefits of Consuming,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (2), 267–72.
Daamen Dancker D. L., Staats Henk, Wilke Henk A. M., Engelen Mirjam (2001), “Improving Environmental Behavior in Companies: The Effectiveness of Tailored Versus Nontailored Interventions,” Environment and Behavior, 33 (2), 229–48.
De Leon Iser G., Wayne Fuqua R. (1995), “The Effects of Public Commitment and Group Feedback on Curbside Recycling,” Environment and Behavior, 27 (2), 233–50.
Delmas Magali A., Fischlein Miriam, Asensio Omar I. (2013), “Information Strategies and Energy Conservation Behavior: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies from 1975 to 2012,” Energy Policy, 61, 729–39.
Devezer Berna, Sprott David E., Spangenberg Eric R., Czellar Sandor (2014), “Consumer Well-Being: Effects of Subgoal Failures and Goal Importance,” Journal of Marketing, 78 (2), 118–34.
Devine-Wright Patrick, Howes Yuko (2010), “Disruption to Place Attachment and the Protection of Restorative Environments: A Wind Energy Case Study,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30 (3), 271–80.
Diamantopoulos Adamantios, Schlegelmilch Bodo B., Sinkovics Rudolf R., Bohlen Greg M. (2003), “Can Socio-Demographics Still Play a Role in Profiling Green Consumers? A Review of the Evidence and an Empirical Investigation,” Journal of Business Research, 56 (6), 465–80.
Diamond William D., Loewy Ben Z. (1991), “Effects of Probabilistic Rewards on Recycling Attitudes and Behavior,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21 (19), 1590–607.
Dickerson Chris Ann, Thibodeau Ruth, Aronson Elliot, Miller Dayna (1992), “Using Cognitive Dissonance to Encourage Water Conservation,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22 (11), 841–54.
Dickinson Janis (2009), “The People Paradox: Self-Esteem Striving, Immortality Ideologies, and Human Response to Climate Change,” Ecology and Society, 14 (1), 34.
Dietz Thomas, Kalof Linda, Stern Paul C. (2002), “Gender, Values, and Environmentalism,” Social Science Quarterly, 83 (1), 353–64.
Donald I. J., Cooper S. R., Conchie S. M. (2014), “An Extended Theory of Planned Behavior Model of the Psychological Factors Affecting Commuters’ Transport Mode Use,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 39–48.
Donnelly Grant E., Lamberton Cait, Reczek Rebecca Walker, Norton Michael I. (2017), “Social Recycling Transforms Unwanted Goods into Happiness,” Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2 (1), 48–63.
Dowd Kylie, Burke Karena J. (2013), “The Influence of Ethical Values and Food Choice Motivations on Intentions to Purchase Sustainably Sourced Foods,” Appetite, 69, 137–44.
Duclos Rod, Barasch Alixandra (2014), “Prosocial Behavior in Intergroup Relations: How Donor Self-Construal and Recipient Group-Membership Shape Generosity,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (1), 93–108.
Dunning David (2007), “Self-Image Motives and Consumer Behavior: How Sacrosanct Self-Beliefs Sway Preferences in the Marketplace,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17 (4), 237–49.
Dwyer Patrick C., Maki Alexander, Rothman Alexander J. (2015), “Promoting Energy Conservation Behavior in Public Settings: The Influence of Social Norms and Personal Responsibility,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 41, 30–34.
Eagly Alice H. (2009), “The His and Hers of Prosocial Behavior: An Examination of the Social Psychology of Gender,” American Psychologist, 64 (8), 644–58.
Edinger-Schons Laura, Sipilä Jenni, Sen Sankar, Mende Gina, Wieseke Jan (2018), “Are Two Reasons Better Than One? The Role of Appeal Type in Consumer Responses to Sustainable Products,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28 (4), 644–64.
Eisenberg Nancy, Miller Paul A. (1987), “The Relation of Empathy to Prosocial and Related Behaviors,” Psychological Bulletin, 101 (1), 91–119.
Ellen Pam Scholder, Wiener Joshua Lyle, Cobb-Walgren Cathy (1991), “The Role of Perceived Consumer Effectiveness in Motivating Environmentally Conscious Behaviors,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10 (2), 102–17.
Epstein Seymour (2003), “Cognitive-Experiential Self-Theory of Personality,” in Handbook of Psychology, Chap 7. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 159–84.
Escalas Jennifer Edson, Stern Barbara B. (2003), “Sympathy and Empathy: Emotional Responses to Advertising Dramas,” Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (4), 566–78.
Evans Laurel, Maio Gregory R., Corner Adam, Hodgetts Carl J., Ahmed Sameera, Hahn Ulrike (2013), “Self-Interest and Pro-environmental Behaviour,” Nature Climate Change, 3, 122–25.
Everett Peter B., Hayward Scott C., Meyers Andrew W. (1974), “The Effects of a Token Reinforcement Procedure on Bus Ridership,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7 (1), 1–9.
Feldman Lauren, Sol Hart P. (2018), “Is There Any Hope? How Climate Change News Imagery and Text Influence Audience Emotions and Support for Climate Mitigation Policies,” Risk Analysis, 38 (3), 585–602.
Fennis Bob M., Adriaanse Marieke A., Stroebe Wolfgang, Pol Bert (2011), “Bridging the Intention–Behavior Gap: Inducing Implementation Intentions Through Persuasive Appeals,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21 (3), 302–11.
Ferguson Mark A., Branscombe Nyla R., Reynolds Katherine J. (2011), “The Effect of Intergroup Comparison on Willingness to Perform Sustainable Behavior,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31 (4), 275–81.
Feygina Irina, Jost John T., Goldsmith Rachel E. (2010), “System Justification, the Denial of Global Warming, and the Possibility of ‘System-Sanctioned Change,’” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36 (3), 326–38.
Fielding Kelly S., Terry Deborah J., Masser Barbara M., Hogg Michael A. (2008), “Integrating Social Identity Theory and the Theory of Planned Behaviour to Explain Decisions to Engage in Sustainable Agricultural Practices,” British Journal of Social Psychology, 47 (1), 23–48.
Fischer Corinna (2008), “Feedback on Household Electricity Consumption: A Tool for Saving Energy?” Energy Efficiency, 1 (1), 79–104.
Fornara Ferdinando, Carrus Giuseppe, Passafaro Paola, Bonnes Mirilia (2011), “Distinguishing the Sources of Normative Influence on Pro-environmental Behaviors: The Role of Local Norms in Household Waste Recycling,” Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14 (5), 623–35.
Fraj Elena, Martinez Eva (2006), “Influence of Personality on Ecological Consumer Behaviour,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 5 (3), 167–81.
Frederiks Elisha R., Stenner Karen, Hobman Elizabeth V. (2015), “Household Energy Use: Applying Behavioural Economics to Understand Consumer Decision Making and Behaviour,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 41, 1385–94.
Fullerton Don, Kinnaman Thomas C. (1995), “Garbage, Recycling, and Illicit Burning or Dumping,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 29 (1), 78–91.
Gamba Raymond J., Oskamp Stuart (1994), “Factors Influencing Community Residents’ Participation in Commingled Curbside Recycling Programs,” Environment and Behavior, 26 (5), 587–612.
Gardner Wendi L., Gabriel Shira, Lee Angela Y. (1999), “‘I’ Value Freedom, but ‘We’ Value Relationships: Self-Construal Priming Mirrors Cultural Differences in Judgment,” Psychological Science, 10 (4), 321–26.
Garvey Aaron M., Bolton Lisa E. (2017), “Eco-Product Choice Cuts Both Ways: How Pro-environmental Licensing Versus Reinforcement is Contingent upon Environmental Consciousness,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36 (2), 284–98.
Gatersleben Birgitta, Steg Linda, Vlek Charles (2002), “Measurement and Determinants of Environmentally Significant Consumer Behavior,” Environment and Behavior, 34 (3), 335–62.
Geller E. Scott, Bechtel R. B., Churchman A. (2002), “The Challenge of Increasing Pro-environmental Behavior,” in Handbook of Environmental Psychology, Bechtel R. B., Churchman A., eds. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 525–40.
Gershoff Andrew D., Frels Judy K. (2014), “What Makes It Green? The Role of Centrality of Green Attributes in Evaluations of the Greenness of Products,” Journal of Marketing, 79 (1), 97–110.
Giebelhausen Michael, Chun HaeEun Helen, Joseph Cronin J. Jr., Hult G. Tomas M. (2016), “Adjusting the Warm-Glow Thermostat: How Incentivizing Participation in Voluntary Green Programs Moderates Their Impact on Service Satisfaction,” Journal of Marketing, 80 (4), 56–71.
Gifford Robert (2011), “The Dragons of Inaction: Psychological Barriers That Limit Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation,” American Psychologist, 66 (4), 290–302.
Gifford Robert (2014), “Environmental Psychology Matters,” Annual Review of Psychology, 65 (1), 541–79.
Gifford Robert, Nilsson Andreas (2014), “Personal and Social Factors that Influence Pro-environmental Concern and Behaviour: A Review,” International Journal of Psychology, 49 (3), 141–57.
Gilg Andrew, Barr Stewart, Ford Nicholas (2005), “Green Consumption or Sustainable Lifestyles? Identifying the Sustainable Consumer,” Futures, 37 (6), 481–504.
Gleim Mark R., Smith Jeffery S., Andrews Demetra, Joseph Cronin J. Jr (2013), “Against the Green: A Multi-Method Examination of the Barriers to Green Consumption,” Journal of Retailing, 89 (1), 44–61.
Goldstein Noah J., Cialdini Robert B., Griskevicius Vladas (2008), “A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (3), 472–82.
Gonzales Marti Hope, Aronson Elliot, Costanzo Mark A. (1988), “Using Social Cognition and Persuasion to Promote Energy Conservation: A Quasi-Experiment,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18 (12), 1049–66.
Granzin Kent L., Olsen Janeen E. (1991), “Characterizing Participants in Activities Protecting the Environment: A Focus on Donating, Recycling, and Conservation Behaviors,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10 (2), 1–27.
Green Todd, Peloza John (2014), “Finding the Right Shade of Green: The Effect of Advertising Appeal Type on Environmentally Friendly Consumption,” Journal of Advertising, 43 (2), 128–41.
Grinstein Amir, Nisan Udi (2009), “Demarketing, Minorities, and National Attachment,” Journal of Marketing, 73 (2), 105–22.
Griskevicius Vladas, Cantú Stephanie M., Vugt Mark van (2012), “The Evolutionary Bases for Sustainable Behavior: Implications for Marketing, Policy, and Social Entrepreneurship,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31 (1), 115–28.
Griskevicius Vladas, Tybur Joshua M., van den Bergh Bram (2010), “Going Green to Be Seen: Status, Reputation, and Conspicuous Conservation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (3), 392–404.
Grob Alexander (1995), “A Structural Model of Environmental Attitudes and Behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15 (3), 209–20.
Grolleau Gilles, Ibanez Lisette, Mzoughi Naoufel (2009), “Too Much of a Good Thing? Why Altruism Can Harm the Environment,” Ecological Economics, 68 (7), 2145–49.
Gromet Dena M., Kunreuther Howard, Larrick Richard P. (2013), “Political Ideology Affects Energy-Efficiency Attitudes and Choices,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 (23), 9314–19.
Grunert Klaus G., Hieke Sophie, Wills Josephine (2014), “Sustainability Labels on Food Products: Consumer Motivation, Understanding, and Use,” Food Policy, 44, 177–89.
Guagnano Gregory A., Dietz Thomas, Stern Paul C. (1994), “Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Test of the Contribution Model,” Psychological Science, 5 (6), 411–15.
Guagnano Gregory A., Stern Paul C., Dietz Thomas (1995), “Influences on Attitude–Behavior Relationships: A Natural Experiment with Curbside Recycling,” Environment and Behavior, 27 (5), 699–718.
Gupta Shruti, Ogden Denise T. (2009), “To Buy or Not to Buy? A Social Dilemma Perspective on Green Buying,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 26 (6), 376–91.
Guyader Hugo, Ottosson Mikael, Witell Lars (2017), “You Can’t Buy What You Can’t See: Retailer Practices to Increase the Green Premium,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 319–25.
Haidt Jonathan (2003), “The Moral Emotions,” Handbook of Affective Sciences, 11 (2003), 852–70.
Han Tae-Im, Stoel Leslie (2017), “Explaining Socially Responsible Consumer Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of Theory of Planned Behavior,” Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 29 (2), 91–103.
Handgraaf Michel J. J., van Lidth de Jeude Margriet A., Appelt Kirstin C. (2013), “Public Praise vs. Private Pay: Effects of Rewards on Energy Conservation in the Workplace,” Ecological Economics, 86, 86–92.
Hardcastle Jessica Lyons (2013), “Nike, Starbucks: Climate Change Policy Is ‘Economic Opportunity,’” Environmental Leader (April 11), https://www.environmentalleader.com/2013/04/nike-starbucks-climate-change-policy-is-economic-opportunity/
Hardisty David J., Johnson Eric J., Weber Elke U. (2010), “A Dirty Word or a Dirty World? Attribute Framing, Political Affiliation, and Query Theory,” Psychological Science, 21 (1), 86–92.
Hardisty David J., Weber Elke U. (2009), “Discounting Future Green: Money Versus the Environment,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138 (3), 329–40.
Harland Paul, Staats Henk, Wilke Henk A.M. (1999), “Explaining Pro-environmental Intention and Behavior by Personal Norms and the Theory of Planned Behavior,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29 (12), 2505–28.
Hart P. Sol, Nisbet Erik C. (2012), “Boomerang Effects in Science Communication: How Motivated Reasoning and Identity Cues Amplify Opinion Polarization About Climate Mitigation Policies,” Communication Research, 39 (6), 701–23.
Heath Yuko, Gifford Robert (2002), “Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior: Predicting the Use of Public Transportation,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32 (10), 2154–89.
Hershfield Hal E., Goldstein Daniel G., Sharpe William F., Fox Jesse, Yeykelis Leo, Carstensen Laura L., et al. (2011), “Increasing Saving Behavior Through Age-Progressed Renderings of the Future Self,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (Special Issue), S23–S37.
Hofstede Geert (2001), Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Holland Rob W., Aarts Henk, Langendam Daan (2006), “Breaking and Creating Habits on the Working Floor: A Field-Experiment on the Power of Implementation Intentions,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42 (6), 776–83.
Hopkins Michael S., Townend Andrew, Khayat Zayna, Balagopal Balu, Reeves Martin, Berns Maurice (2009), “The Business of Sustainability: What It Means to Managers Now,” MIT Sloan Management Review, 51 (1), 20.
Horne Ralph E. (2009), “Limits to Labels: The Role of Eco-Labels in the Assessment of Product Sustainability and Routes to Sustainable Consumption,” International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33 (2), 175–82.
Hughner Renée Shaw, McDonagh Pierre, Prothero Andrea, Shultz Clifford J., Stanton Julie (2007), “Who Are Organic Food Consumers? A Compilation and Review of Why People Purchase Organic Food,” Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6 (2), 94–110.
Hutton R. Bruce, McNeill Dennis L. (1981), “The Value of Incentives in Stimulating Energy Conservation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (3), 291–98.
Iyer Easwar S., Reczek Rebecca Walker (2017), “The Intersection of Sustainability, Marketing, and Public Policy: Introduction to the Special Section on Sustainability,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36 (2), 246–54.
Jachimowicz Jon M., Hauser Oliver P., O’Brien Julia D., Sherman Erin, Galinsky Adam D. (2018), “The Critical Role of Second-Order Normative Beliefs in Predicting Energy Conservation,” Nature Human Behaviour, 2 (10), 757–64.
Jansson Johan, Marell Agneta, Nordlund Annika (2010), “Green Consumer Behaviour: Determinants of Curtailment and Eco-Innovation Adoption,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 27 (4), 358–70.
Jiménez Marissa, Yang Kenneth C. C. (2008), “How Guilt Level Affects Green Advertising Effectiveness,” Journal of Creative Communications, 3 (3), 231–54.
Johnstone Micael-Lee, Tan Lay (2015), “Exploring the Gap Between Consumers’ Green Rhetoric and Purchasing Behaviour,” Journal of Business Ethics, 132 (2), 311–28.
Joireman Jeffrey A., Lasane Terell P., Bennett Jennifer, Richards Diana, Solaimani Salma (2001), “Integrating Social Value Orientation and the Consideration of Future Consequences Within the Extended Norm Activation Model of Pro-environmental Behaviour,” British Journal of Social Psychology, 40 (1), 133–55.
Joireman Jeffrey A., van Lange Paul A. M., van Vugt Mark (2004), “Who Cares About the Environmental Impact of Cars? Those with an Eye Toward the Future,” Environment and Behavior, 36 (2), 187–206.
Juhl Hans Jørn, Fenger Morten H. J, Thøgersen John (2017), “Will the Consistent Organic Food Consumer Step Forward? An Empirical Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (3), 519–35.
Kahan Dan M., Peters Ellen, Wittlin Maggie, Slovic Paul, Ouellette Lisa Larrimore, Braman Donald, et al. (2012), “The Polarizing Impact of Science Literacy and Numeracy on Perceived Climate Change Risks,” Nature Climate Change, 2 (10), 732–35.
Kahneman Daniel (2003), “A Psychological Perspective on Economics,” American Economic Review, 93 (2), 162–68.
Kahneman Daniel (2011), Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
Kaiser Florian G. (2006), “A Moral Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior: Norms and Anticipated Feelings of Regret in Conservationism,” Personality and Individual Differences, 41 (1), 71–81.
Kaiser Florian G., Shimoda Todd A. (1999), “Responsibility as a Predictor of Ecological Behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19 (3), 243–53.
Kallbekken Steffen, Sælen Hæakon, Hermansen Erlend A. T. (2013), “Bridging the Energy Efficiency Gap: A Field Experiment on Lifetime Energy Costs and Household Appliances,” Journal of Consumer Policy, 36 (1), 1–16.
Kals Elisabeth, Schumacher Daniel, Montada Leo (1999), “Emotional Affinity Toward Nature as a Motivational Basis to Protect Nature,” Environment and Behavior, 31 (2), 178–202.
Karjalainen Sami (2011), “Consumer Preferences for Feedback on Household Electricity Consumption,” Energy and Buildings, 43 (2), 458–67.
Karmarkar Uma R., Bollinger Bryan (2015), “BYOB: How Bringing Your Own Shopping Bags Leads to Treating Yourself and the Environment,” Journal of Marketing, 79 (4), 1–15.
Katzev Richard D., Johnson Theodore R. (1984), “Comparing the Effects of Monetary Incentives and Foot-in-the-Door Strategies in Promoting Residential Electricity Conservation,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 14 (1), 12–27.
Kidwell Blair, Farmer Adam, Hardesty David M. (2013), “Getting Liberals and Conservatives to Go Green: Political Ideology and Congruent Appeals,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (2), 350–67.
Kilbourne William E., Beckmann Suzanne C. (1998), “Review and Critical Assessment of Research on Marketing and the Environment,” Journal of Marketing Management, 14 (6), 513–32.
Kinnear Thomas C., Taylor James R., Ahmed Sadrudin A. (1974), “Ecologically Concerned Consumers: Who Are They?” Journal of Marketing, 38 (2), 20–24.
Kollmuss Anja, Agyeman Julian (2002), “Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to Pro-environmental Behavior?” Environmental Education Research, 8 (3), 239–60.
Kotler Philip (2011), “Reinventing Marketing to Manage the Environmental Imperative,” Journal of Marketing, 75 (4), 132–35.
Kotler Philip, Kartajaya Hermawan, Setiawan Iwan (2010), Marketing 3.0: From Products to Customers to the Human Spirit. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Kraft-Todd Gordon T., Bollinger Bryan, Gillingham Kenneth, Lamp Stefan, Rand David G. (2018), “Credibility-Enhancing Displays Promote the Provision of Non-normative Public Goods,” Nature, 563, 245–48.
Krause Rachel M. (2009), “Developing Conditions for Environmentally Sustainable Consumption: Drawing Insight from Anti-smoking Policy,” International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33 (3), 285–92.
Kronrod Ann, Grinstein Amir, Wathieu Luc (2012), “Go Green! Should Environmental Messages Be So Assertive?” Journal of Marketing, 76 (1), 95–102.
Kurz Tim, Gardner Benjamin, Verplanken Bas, Abraham Charles (2014), “Habitual Behaviors or Patterns of Practice? Explaining and Changing Repetitive Climate-Relevant Actions,” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 6 (1), 113–28.
Lanzini Pietro, Thøgersen John (2014), “Behavioural Spillover in the Environmental Domain: An Intervention Study,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 381–90.
Laroche Michel, Bergeron Jasmin, Barbaro-Forleo Guido (2001), “Targeting Consumers Who Are Willing to Pay More for Environmentally Friendly Products,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18 (6), 503–20.
Lazarus Richard J. (1994), “The Meaning and Promotion of Environmental Justice,” Maryland Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 5 (1), 1–12.
Lehman Philip K., Scott Geller E. (2004), “Behavior Analysis and Environmental Protection: Accomplishments and Potential for More,” Behavior and Social Issues, 13 (1), 13–32.
Leiserowitz Anthony (2006), “Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect, Imagery, and Values,” Climatic Change, 77 (1), 45–72.
Leonard-Barton Dorothy (1981), “Voluntary Simplicity Lifestyles and Energy Conservation,” Journal of Consumer Research, 8 (3), 243–52.
Lerner Jennifer S., Keltner Dacher (2000), “Beyond Valence: Toward a Model of Emotion-Specific Influences on Judgement and Choice,” Cognition & Emotion, 14 (4), 473–93.
Levine Debra Siegel, Strube Michael J. (2012), “Environmental Attitudes, Knowledge, Intentions and Behaviors Among College Students,” The Journal of Social Psychology, 152 (3), 308–26.
Li Shu-Chu Sarrina (2014), “Fear Appeals and College Students’ Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions Toward Global Warming,” The Journal of Environmental Education, 45 (4), 243–57.
Li Ye, Johnson Eric J., Zaval Lisa (2011), “Local Warming: Daily Temperature Change Influences Belief in Global Warming,” Psychological Science, 22 (4), 454–59.
Lin Ying-Ching, Chang Chiu-chi Angela (2012), “Double Standard: The Role of Environmental Consciousness in Green Product Usage,” Journal of Marketing, 76 (5), 125–34.
Lokhorst Anne Marike, Werner Carol, Staats Henk, Dijk Eric van, Gale Jeff L. (2013), “Commitment and Behaviour Change: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Review of Commitment-Making Strategies in Environmental Research,” Environment and Behaviour, 45 (1), 3–34.
Lovelock Christopher H. (1983), “Classifying Services to Gain Strategic Marketing Insights,” Journal of Marketing, 47 (3), 9–20.
Lowe Thomas, Brown Katrina, Dessai Suraje, de França Doria Miguel, Haynes Kat, Vincent Katharine (2006), “Does Tomorrow Ever Come? Disaster Narrative and Public Perceptions of Climate Change,” Public Understanding of Science, 15 (4), 435–57.
Luchs Michael G., Brower Jacob, Chitturi Ravindra (2012), “Product Choice and the Importance of Aesthetic Design Given the Emotion-Laden Trade-Off Between Sustainability and Functional Performance,” Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29 (6), 903–16.
Luchs Michael G., Kumar Minu (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), 567–84.
Luchs Michael G., Mooradian Todd A. (2012), “Sex, Personality, and Sustainable Consumer Behaviour: Elucidating the Gender Effect,” Journal of Consumer Policy, 35 (1), 127–44.
Luchs Michael G., Naylor Rebecca Walker, Irwin Julie R., Raghunathan Rajagopal (2010), “The Sustainability Liability: Potential Negative Effects of Ethicality on Product Preference,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (5), 18–31.
Ludwig Timothy D., Gray Timothy W., Rowell Allison (1998), “Increasing Recycling in Academic Buildings: A Systematic Replication,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31 (4), 683–86.
Luo Xueming, Bhattacharya Chitra Bhanu (2006), “Corporate Social Responsibility, Customer Satisfaction, and Market Value,” Journal of Marketing, 70 (4), 1–18.
Mainieri Tina, Barnett Elaine G., Valdero Trisha R., Unipan John B., Oskamp Stuart (1997), “Green Buying: The Influence of Environmental Concern on Consumer Behavior,” The Journal of Social Psychology, 137 (2), 189–204.
Mallett Robyn K. (2012), “Eco-Guilt Motivates Eco-Friendly Behavior,” Ecopsychology, 4 (3), 223–31.
Mallett Robyn K., Melchiori Kala J., Strickroth Theresa (2013), “Self-Confrontation via a Carbon Footprint Calculator Increases Guilt and Support for a Pro-environmental Group,” Ecopsychology, 5 (1), 9–16.
Maner Jon K., Luce Carol L., Neuberg Steven L., Cialdini Robert B., Brown Stephanie, Sagarin Brad J. (2002), “The Effects of Perspective Taking on Motivations for Helping: Still No Evidence for Altruism,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28 (11), 1601–10.
Manget Joe, Roche Catherine, Münnich Felix (2009), “Capturing the Green Advantage for Consumer Companies,” research report, The Boston Consulting Group (January).
Mannetti Lucia, Pierro Antonio, Livi Stefano (2004), “Recycling: Planned and Self-Expressive Behavior,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24 (2), 227–36.
Markus Hazel R., Kitayama Shinobu (1991), “Cultural Variation in the Self-Concept,” in The Self: Interdisciplinary Approaches, Strauss Jaine, Goethals George R., eds. New York: Springer, 18–48.
Marx Sabine M., Weber Elke U., Orlove Benjamin S., Leiserowitz Anthony, Krantz David H., Roncoli Carla, et al. (2007), “Communication and Mental Processes: Experiential and Analytic Processing of Uncertain Climate Information,” Global Environmental Change, 17 (1), 47–58.
Mazar Nina, Zhong Chen-Bo (2010), “Do Green Products Make Us Better People?” Psychological Science, 21 (4), 494–98.
McDonald Seonaidh, Oates Caroline J., William Young C., Hwang Kumju (2006), “Toward Sustainable Consumption: Researching Voluntary Simplifiers,” Psychology & Marketing, 23 (6), 515–34.
McDonough William, Braungart Michael (2002), “Design for the Triple Top Line: New Tools for Sustainable Commerce,” Corporate Environmental Strategy, 9 (3), 251–58.
McKenzie-Mohr Doug (2000), “New Ways to Promote Pro-environmental Behavior: Promoting Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing,” Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3), 543–54.
McKenzie-Mohr Doug (2011), Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing. Gabriola Island: New Society.
Meng Matthew D., Trudel Remi (2017), “Using Emoticons to Encourage Students to Recycle,” The Journal of Environmental Education, 48 (3), 196–204.
Menon Ajay, Menon Anil (1997), “Enviropreneurial Marketing Strategy: The Emergence of Corporate Environmentalism as Market Strategy,” The Journal of Marketing, 61 (1), 51–67.
Mick David G. (2006), “Meaning and Mattering Through Transformative Consumer Research,” Advances in Consumer Research, 33 (1), 1–4.
Min Jihoon, Azevedo Inês L., Michalek Jeremy, de Bruin Wändi Bruine (2014), “Labeling Energy Cost on Light Bulbs Lowers Implicit Discount Rates,” Ecological Economics, 97 (C), 42–50.
Minson Julia A., Monin Benoît (2012), “Do-Gooder Derogation: Disparaging Morally Motivated Minorities to Defuse Anticipated Reproach,” Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3 (2), 200–207.
Mont Oksana, Heiskanen Eva (2015), “Breaking the Stalemate of Sustainable Consumption with Industrial Ecology and a Circular Economy,” in Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, Reisch L., Thøgersen J., eds. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 33–47.
Muralidharan Sidharth, Sheehan Kim (2018), “The Role of Guilt in Influencing Sustainable Pro-environmental Behaviors Among Shoppers: Differences in Response by Gender to Messaging About England’s Plastic Bag Levy,” Journal of Advertising Research, 58 (3), 349–62.
Muraven Mark, Baumeister Roy F. (2000), “Self-Regulation and Depletion of Limited Resources: Does Self-Control Resemble a Muscle?” Psychological Bulletin, 126 (2), 247–59.
Murphy Patrick E., Kangun Norman, Locander William B. (1978), “Environmentally Concerned Consumers-Racial Variations: Are Middle and Upper-Class Black Females as Ecologically Conscious as Their White Counterparts?” Journal of Marketing, 42 (4), 61–66.
Murtagh Niamh, Gatersleben Birgitta, Cowen Laura, Uzzell David (2015), “Does Perception of Automation Undermine Pro-environmental Behaviour? Findings from Three Everyday Settings,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 42 (Suppl C), 139–48.
Myers Teresa A., Nisbet Matthew C., Maibach Edward W., Leiserowitz Anthony A. (2012), “A Public Health Frame Arouses Hopeful Emotions About Climate Change,” Climatic Change, 113 (3/4), 1105–12.
Neumann Bruce R., Roberts Michael L., Cauvin Eric (2012), “Management Control Systems Dilemma: Reconciling Sustainability with Information Overload,” in Advances in Management Accounting, Epstein Marc J., Lee John Y., eds. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group, 1–28.
Newman George E., Gorlin Margarita, Dhar Ravi (2014), “When Going Green Backfires: How Firm Intentions Shape the Evaluation of Socially Beneficial Product Enhancements,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (3), 823–39.
Nielsen (2015), “Consumer Goods’ Brands That Demonstrate Commitment to Sustainability Outperform Those That Don’t” (accessed January 7, 2018), http://www.nielsen.com/ca/en/press-room/2015/consumer-goods-brands-that-demonstrate-commitment-to-sustainability-outperform.html.
Nisbet Elizabeth K., Zelenski John M., Murphy Steven A. (2009), “The Nature Relatedness Scale: Linking Individuals’ Connection with Nature to Environmental Concern and Behavior,” Environment and Behavior, 41 (5), 715–40.
Nolan Jessica M., Schultz P. Wesley, Cialdini Robert B., Goldstein Noah J., Griskevicius Vladas (2008), “Normative Social Influence Is Underdetected,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34 (7), 913–23.
Norman Wayne, MacDonald Chris (2004), “Getting to the Bottom of ‘Triple Bottom Line,’” Business Ethics Quarterly, 14 (2), 243–62.
OECD and WHO (2015), Promoting Health, Preventing Disease: The Economic Case. Paris: OECD.
Ölander Folke, Thøgersen John (2014), “Informing Versus Nudging in Environmental Policy,” Journal of Consumer Policy, 37 (3), 341–56.
Olsen Mitchell C., Slotegraaf Rebecca J., Chandukala Sandeep R. (2014), “Green Claims and Message Frames: How Green New Products Change Brand Attitude,” Journal of Marketing, 78 (5), 119–37.
Olson Jenny G., McFerran Brent, Morales Andrea C., Dahl Darren W. (2016), “Wealth and Welfare: Divergent Moral Reactions to Ethical Consumer Choices,” Journal of Consumer Research, 42 (6), 879–96.
O’Neill Saffron, Nicholson-Cole Sophie (2009), “‘Fear Won’t Do It’: Promoting Positive Engagement with Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations,” Science Communication, 30 (3), 355–79.
Onwezen Marleen C., Antonides Gerrit, Bartels Jos (2013), “The Norm Activation Model: An Exploration of the Functions of Anticipated Pride and Guilt in Pro-environmental Behaviour,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 39, 141–53.
Ormans Laurent (2016), “50 Journals Used in FT Research Rank,” Financial Times (September 12), https://www.ft.com/content/3405a512-5cbb-11e1-8f1f-00144feabdc0.
Osbaldiston Richard, Schott John Paul (2012), “Environmental Sustainability and Behavioral Science: Meta-Analysis of Pro-environmental Behavior Experiments,” Environment and Behavior, 44 (2), 257–99.
Osbaldiston Richard, Sheldon Kennon M. (2002), “Social Dilemmas and Sustainability: Promoting Peoples’ Motivation to ‘Cooperate with the Future,’” in Psychology of Sustainable Development, Schmuck Peter, Schultz Wesley P., eds. New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 37–58.
Oskamp Stuart, Harrington Maura J., Edwards Todd C., Sherwood Deborah L., Okuda Shawn M., Swanson Deborah C. (1991), “Factors Influencing Household Recycling Behavior,” Environment and Behavior, 23 (4), 494–519.
Osterhus Thomas L. (1997), “Pro-social Consumer Influence Strategies: When and How Do They Work?” Journal of Marketing, 61 (4), 16–29.
Paavola Jouni (2001), “Towards Sustainable Consumption: Economics and Ethical Concerns for the Environment in Consumer Choices,” Review of Social Economy, 59 (2), 227–48.
Panno Angelo, Giacomantonio Mauro, Carrus Giuseppe, Maricchiolo Fridanna, Pirchio Sabine, Mannetti Lucia (2018), “Mindfulness, Pro-environmental Behavior, and Belief in Climate Change: The Mediating Role of Social Dominance,” Environment and Behavior, 50 (8), 864–88.
Parguel Béatrice, Benoît-Moreau Florence, Larceneux Fabrice (2011), “How Sustainability Ratings Might Deter ‘Greenwashing:’ A Closer Look at Ethical Corporate Communication,” Journal of Business Ethics, 102 (1), 15.
Paswan Audhesh, Guzmán Francisco, Lewin Jeffrey (2017), “Attitudinal Determinants of Environmentally Sustainable Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 34 (5), 414–26.
Paul Justin, Modi Ashwin, Patel Jayesh (2016), “Predicting Green Product Consumption Using Theory of Planned Behavior and Reasoned Action,” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 29, 123–34.
Peattie Ken (1999), “Trappings Versus Substance in the Greening of Marketing Planning,” Journal of Strategic Marketing, 7 (2), 131–48.
Peattie Ken (2001), “Golden Goose or Wild Goose? The Hunt for the Green Consumer,” Business Strategy and the Environment, 10 (4), 187–99.
Peattie Ken (2010), “Green Consumption: Behavior and Norms,” Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35 (1), 195–28.
Peattie Ken, Peattie Sue (2009), “Social Marketing: A Pathway to Consumption Reduction?” Journal of Business Research, 62 (2), 260–68.
Peloza John, White Katherine, Shang Jingzhi (2013), “Good and Guilt-Free: The Role of Self-Accountability in Influencing Preferences for Products with Ethical Attributes,” Journal of Marketing, 77 (1), 104–19.
Peter Paula C., Honea Heather (2012), “Targeting Social Messages with Emotions of Change: The Call for Optimism,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 31 (2), 269–83.
Phipps Marcus, Ozanne Lucie K., Luchs Michael G., Subrahmanyan Saroja, Kapitan Sommer, Catlin Jesse R., et al. (2013), “Understanding the Inherent Complexity of Sustainable Consumption: A Social Cognitive Framework,” Journal of Business Research, 66 (8), 1227–34.
Pichert Daniel, Katsikopoulos Konstantinos V. (2008), “Green Defaults: Information Presentation and Pro-environmental Behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28 (1), 63–73.
Pickett-Baker Josephine, Ozaki Ritsuko (2008), “Pro-environmental Products: Marketing Influence on Consumer Purchase Decision,” Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25 (5), 281–93.
Piff Paul K., Feinberg Matthew, Dietze Pia, Stancato Daniel M., Keltner Dacher (2015), “Awe, the Small Self, and Prosocial Behavior,” Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 108 (6), 883–99.
Price Linda L., Coulter Robin A., Strizhakova Yuliya, Schultz Ainslie (2017), “The Fresh Start Mindset: Transforming Consumers’ Lives,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (1), 21–48.
Prooijen Anne-Marie, Sparks Paul (2014), “Attenuating Initial Beliefs: Increasing the Acceptance of Anthropogenic Climate Change Information by Reflecting on Values,” Risk Analysis, 34 (5), 929–36.
Prothero Andrea, Dobscha Susan, Freund Jim, Kilbourne William E., Luchs Michael G., Ozanne Lucie K., et al. (2011), “Sustainable Consumption: Opportunities for Consumer Research and Public Policy,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 30 (1), 31–38.
Rabinovich Anna, Morton Thomas A., Postmes Tom, Verplanken Bas (2012), “Collective Self and Individual Choice: The Effects of Inter-group Comparative Context on Environmental Values and Behaviour,” British Journal of Social Psychology, 51 (4), 551–69.
Reczek Rebecca, Trudel Remi, White Katherine (2018), “Focusing on the Forest or the Trees: How Abstract Versus Concrete Construal Level Predicts Responses to Eco-Friendly Products,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 57, 87–98.
Reed Americus, Aquino Karl F. (2003), “Moral Identity and the Expanding Circle of Moral Regard Toward Out-Groups,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84 (6), 1270–86.
Reed Americus, Aquino Karl, Levy Eric (2007), “Moral Identity and Judgments of Charitable Behaviors,” Journal of Marketing, 71 (1), 178–93.
Rees Jonas H., Klug Sabine, Bamberg Sebastian (2014), “Guilty Conscience: Motivating Pro-environmental Behavior by Inducing Negative Moral Emotions,” Climatic Change, 130 (3), 439–52.
Reno Raymond R., Cialdini Robert B., Kallgren Carl A. (1993), “The Transsituational Influence of Social Norms,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (1), 104–12.
Rezvani Zeinab, Jansson Johan, Bengtsson Maria (2017), “Cause I’ll Feel Good! An Investigation into the Effects of Anticipated Emotions and Personal Moral Norms on Consumer Pro-environmental Behavior,” Journal of Promotion Management, 23 (1), 163–83.
Richardson Alan (1977), “Verbalizer–Visualizer: A Cognitive Style Dimension,” Journal of Mental Imagery, 1 (1), 109–25.
Ripple William J., Wolf Christopher, Newsome Thomas M., Galetti Mauro, Alamgir Mohammed, Crist Eileen, et al. (2017), “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice,” BioScience, 67 (12), 1026–28.
Roberts James A. (1993), “Sex Differences in Socially Responsible Consumers’ Behavior,” Psychological Reports, 73 (1), 139–48.
Sachdeva Sonya, Jordan Jennifer, Mazar Nina (2015), “Green Consumerism: Moral Motivations to a Sustainable Future,” Current Opinion in Psychology, 6, 60–65.
Sadalla Edward K., Krull Jennifer L. (1995), “Self-Presentational Barriers to Resource Conservation,” Environment and Behavior, 27 (3), 328–53.
Savitz Andrew, Weber Karl (2013), The Triple Bottom Line: How Today’s Best-Run Companies Are Achieving Economic, Social, and Environmental Success-and How You Can Too. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Scannell Leila, Gifford Robert (2013), “Personally Relevant Climate Change: The Role of Place Attachment and Local Versus Global Message Framing in Engagement,” Environment and Behavior, 45 (1), 60–85.
Schkade David A., Payne John W. (1994), “How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions: A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Willingness to Pay for an Environmental Regulation,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 26 (1), 88–109.
Schuitema Geertje, de Groot Judith I.M. (2015), “Green Consumerism: The Influence of Product Attributes and Values on Purchasing Intentions,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 14 (1), 57–69.
Schuldt Jonathon P., Schwarz Norbert (2010), “The ‘Organic’ Path to Obesity? Organic Claims Influence Calorie Judgments and Exercise Recommendations,” Judgment and Decision Making, 5 (3), 144–50.
Schultz P. Wesley (1999), “Changing Behavior with Normative Feedback Interventions: A Field Experiment on Curbside Recycling,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21 (1), 25–36.
Schultz P. Wesley (2014), “Strategies for Promoting Pro-environmental Behavior,” European Psychologist, 19 (2), 107–17.
Schultz P. Wesley, Nolan Jessica M., Cialdini Robert B., Goldstein Noah J., Griskevicius Vladas (2007), “The Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms,” Psychological Science, 18 (5), 429–34.
Schultz P. Wesley, Oskamp Stuart, Mainieri Tina (1995), “Who Recycles and When? A Review of Personal and Situational Factors,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15 (2), 105–21.
Schultz Tracy, Fielding Kelly (2014), “The Common In-Group Identity Model Enhances Communication About Recycled Water,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 296–305.
Schwartz Daniel, de Bruin Wändi Bruine, Fischhoff Baruch, Lave Lester (2015), “Advertising Energy Saving Programs: The Potential Environmental Cost of Emphasizing Monetary Savings,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21 (2), 158–66.
Schwartz Daniel, Loewenstein George (2017), “The Chill of the Moment: Emotions and Pro-environmental Behavior,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36 (2), 255–68.
Schwartz Shalom H. (1977), “Normative Influences on Altruism,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 221–79.
Schwepker Charles H., Bettina Cornwell T. (1991), “An Examination of Ecologically Concerned Consumers and Their Intention to Purchase Ecologically Packaged Products,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10 (2), 77–101.
Semenza Jan C., Hall David E., Wilson Daniel J., Bontempo Brian D., Sailor David J., George Linda A. (2008), “Public Perception of Climate Change: Voluntary Mitigation and Barriers to Behavior Change,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35 (5), 479–87.
Sen Sankar, Bhattacharya Chitra Bhanu (2001), “Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility,” Journal of Marketing Research, 38 (2), 225–43.
Sevillano Verónica, Aragonés Juan I., Wesley Schultz P. (2007), “Perspective Taking, Environmental Concern, and the Moderating Role of Dispositional Empathy,” Environment and Behavior, 39 (5), 685–705.
Shang Jingzhi, Peloza John (2016), “Can ‘Real’ Men Consume Ethically? How Ethical Consumption Leads to Unintended Observer Inference,” Journal of Business Ethics, 139 (1), 129–45.
Sheth Jagdish N., Sethia Nirmal K., Srinivas Shanthi (2011), “Mindful Consumption: A Customer-Centric Approach to Sustainability,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39 (1), 21–39.
Shiv Baba, Fedorikhin Alexander (1999), “Heart and Mind in Conflict: The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making,” Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (3), 278–92.
Siero Frans W., Bakker Arnold B., Dekker Gerda B., van den Burg Marcel T.C. (1996), “Changing Organizational Energy Consumption Behaviour Through Comparative Feedback,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16 (3), 235–46.
Slavin Robert E., Wodarski John S., Blackburn Bernard L. (1981), “A Group Contingency for Electricity Conservation in Master-Metered Apartments,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14 (3), 357–63.
Small Kenneth A., Van Dender Kurt (2007), “Fuel Efficiency and Motor Vehicle Travel: The Declining Rebound Effect,” The Energy Journal, 28 (1), 25–51.
Smith Nicholas, Leiserowitz Anthony (2014), “The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition,” Risk Analysis, 34 (5), 937–48.
Snappy Living (2011), “Use Cold Water for Laundry,” (accessed June 18, 2018), https://snappyliving.com/cold-water-for-laundry/.
Solomon Michael R., White Katherine, Dahl Dahren William (2017), Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Sorrell Steve, Dimitropoulos John, Sommerville Matt (2009), “Empirical Estimates of the Direct Rebound Effect: A Review,” Energy Policy, 37 (4), 1356–71.
Sparks Paul, Jessop Donna C., Chapman James, Holmes Katherine (2010), “Pro-environmental Actions, Climate Change, and Defensiveness: Do Self-Affirmations Make a Difference to People’s Motives and Beliefs About Making a Difference?” British Journal of Social Psychology, 49 (3), 553–68.
Spence Alexa, Poortinga Wouter, Pidgeon Nick (2012), “The Psychological Distance of Climate Change,” Risk Analysis, 32 (6), 957–72.
Steenhaut Sarah, van Kenhove Patrick (2006), “The Mediating Role of Anticipated Guilt in Consumers’ Ethical Decision Making,” Journal of Business Ethics, 69 (3), 269–88.
Steg Linda (2005), “Car Use: Lust and Must. Instrumental, Symbolic and Affective Motives for Car Use,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39 (2), 147–62.
Steg Linda (2015), “Environmental Psychology and Sustainable Consumption,” in Handbook of Research in Sustainable Consumption, Reisch L., Thogersen J., eds. Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar, 70–83.
Steg Linda, Bolderdijk Jan Willem, Keizer Kees, Perlaviciute Goda (2014), “An Integrated Framework for Encouraging Pro-environmental Behaviour: The Role of Values, Situational Factors and Goals,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 104–15.
Steg Linda, Vlek Charles (2009), “Encouraging Pro-environmental Behaviour: An Integrative Review and Research Agenda,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29 (3), 309–17.
Stern Paul C. (1999), “Information, Incentives, and Pro-environmental Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Policy, 22 (4), 461–78.
Stern Paul C. (2000), “New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior,” Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3), 407–24.
Stern Paul C. (2011), “Contributions of Psychology to Limiting Climate Change,” American Psychologist, 66 (4), 303–14.
Stern Paul C., Dietz Thomas (1994), “The Value Basis of Environmental Concern,” Journal of Social Issues, 50 (3), 65–84.
Stern Paul C., Dietz Thomas, Kalof Linda (1993), “Value Orientations, Gender, and Environmental Concern,” Environment and Behavior, 25 (5), 322–48.
Strathman Alan, Gleicher Faith, Boninger David S., Scott Edwards C. (1994), “The Consideration of Future Consequences: Weighing Immediate and Distant Outcomes of Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (4), 742–52.
Strother J. B., Fazal Z. (2011), “Can Green Fatigue Hamper Sustainability Communication Efforts?” in 2011 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference, Cincinnati, OH (October 17–19, 2011), 1–6.
Sullivan Gavin Brent (2015), “Collective Emotions,” Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9 (8), 383–93.
Sun Monic, Trudel Remi (2017), “The Effect of Recycling Versus Trashing on Consumption: Theory and Experimental Evidence,” Journal of Marketing Research, 54 (2), 293–305.
Sussman Abigail B., O’Brien Rourke L. (2016), Knowing When to Spend: Unintended Financial Consequences of Earmarking to Encourage Savings. Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.
Swim Janet K., Clayton Susan, Howard George S. (2011), “Human Behavioral Contributions to Climate Change: Psychological and Contextual Drivers,” American Psychologist, 66 (4), 251–64.
Tajfel Henri, Turner John C. (1986), The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behaviour. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
Taufique Khan Md Raziuddin, Vocino Andrea, Polonsky Michael Jay (2017), “The Influence of Eco-Label Knowledge and Trust on Pro-environmental Consumer Behaviour in an Emerging Market,” Journal of Strategic Marketing, 25 (7), 511–29.
Teng Yi-Man, Wu Kun-Shan, Liu Hsiao-Hui (2015), “Integrating Altruism and the Theory of Planned Behavior to Predict Patronage Intention of a Green Hotel,” Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 39 (3), 299–315.
Theotokis Aristeidis, Manganari Emmanouela (2015), “The Impact of Choice Architecture on Sustainable Consumer Behavior: The Role of Guilt,” Journal of Business Ethics, 131 (2), 423–37.
Thøgersen John (2000), “Psychological Determinants of Paying Attention to Eco-Labels in Purchase Decisions: Model Development and Multinational Validation,” Journal of Consumer Policy, 23 (3), 285–313.
Tiefenbeck Verena, Goette Lorenz, Degen Kathrin, Tasic Vojkan, Fleisch Elgar, Lalive Rafael, et al. (2016), “Overcoming Salience Bias: How Real-Time Feedback Fosters Resource Conservation,” Management Science, 64 (3), 1458–76.
Tiefenbeck Verena, Staake Thorsten, Roth Kurt, Sachs Olga (2013), “For Better or for Worse? Empirical Evidence of Moral Licensing in a Behavioral Energy Conservation Campaign,” Energy Policy, 57, 160–71.
Trudel Remi, Argo Jennifer J., Meng Matthew D. (2016), “The Recycled Self: Consumers’ Disposal Decisions of Identity-Linked Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (2), 246–64.
Trudel Remi, Cotte June (2009), “Does It Pay to Be Good?” MIT Sloan Management Review, 50 (2), 61.
Truelove Heather Barnes, Carrico Amanda R., Weber Elke U., Raimi Kaitlin Toner, Vandenbergh Michael P. (2014), “Positive and Negative Spillover of Pro-environmental Behavior: An Integrative Review and Theoretical Framework,” Global Environmental Change, 29, 127–38.
Ungemach Christoph, Camilleri Adrian R., Johnson Eric J., Larrick Richard P., Weber Elke U. (2018), “Translated Attributes as Choice Architecture: Aligning Objectives and Choices Through Decision Signposts,” Management Science, 64 (5), 2445–59.
Van Boven Leaf (2005), “Experientialism, Materialism, and the Pursuit of Happiness,” Review of General Psychology, 9 (2), 132–42.
Van Boven Leaf, Kane Joanne, Peter McGraw A., Dale Jeannette (2010), “Feeling Close: Emotional Intensity Reduces Perceived Psychological Distance,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98 (6), 872–75.
Van der Weiden, Henk Aarts Anouk, Ruys Kirsten (2013), “On the Nature of Experiencing Self-Agency: The Role of Goals and Primes in Inferring Oneself as the Cause of Behavior,” Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 7 (12), 888–904.
Van der Werff, Linda Steg Ellen, Keizer Kees (2013), “The Value of Environmental Self-Identity: The Relationship Between Biospheric Values, Environmental Self-Identity, and Environmental Preferences, Intentions, and Behaviour,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 55–63.
Van der Werff, Linda Steg Ellen, Keizer Kees (2014), “I Am What I Am, by Looking Past the Present: The Influence of Biospheric Values and Past Behavior on Environmental Self-Identity,” Environment and Behavior, 46 (5), 626–57.
Van Houten Ron, Nau Paul A., Merrigan Michael (1981), “Reducing Elevator Energy Use: A Comparison of Posted Feedback and Reduced Elevator Convenience,” Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14 (4), 377–87.
Vargo Stephen L., Lusch Robert F. (2004), “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing,” Journal of Marketing, 68 (1), 1–17.
Velasquez Alcides, LaRose Robert (2015), “Youth Collective Activism Through Social Media: The Role of Collective Efficacy,” New Media & Society, 17 (6), 899–18.
Verhaert Griet A., van den Poel Dirk (2011), “Empathy as Added Value in Predicting Donation Behavior,” Journal of Business Research, 64 (12), 1288–95.
Verplanken Bas (2011), “Old Habits and New Routes to Sustainable Behaviour,” in Engaging the Public with Climate Change: Behaviour Change and Communication, Whitmarsh L., O’Neill S., Lorenzoni I., eds. Milton Park, England: Taylor and Francis, 17–30.
Verplanken Bas, Holland Rob W. (2002), “Motivated Decision Making: Effects of Activation and Self-Centrality of Values on Choices and Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82 (3), 434–47.
Verplanken Bas, Roy Deborah (2016), “Empowering Interventions to Promote Sustainable Lifestyles: Testing the Habit Discontinuity Hypothesis in a Field Experiment,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 45 (Suppl C), 127–34.
Verplanken Bas, Walker Ian, Davis Adrian, Jurasek Michaela (2008), “Context Change and Travel Mode Choice: Combining the Habit Discontinuity and Self-Activation Hypotheses,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28 (2), 121–27.
Vugt Mark, Griskevicius Vladas, Schultz P. (2014), “Naturally Green: Harnessing Stone Age Psychological Biases to Foster Environmental Behavior,” Social Issues and Policy Review, 8 (1), 1–32.
Wade-Benzoni Kimberly A., Tenbrunsel A.E., Bazerman M.H. (1997), “Egocentric Interpretations of Fairness as an Obstacle to the Resolution of Environmental Conflict,” in Research on Negotiation in Organizations: A Biannual Research Series, Vol. 6, Lewicki Roy J., Sheppard B. H., eds. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing, 189–208.
Walker Ian, Thomas Gregory O., Verplanken Bas (2015), “Old Habits Die Hard: Travel Habit Formation and Decay During an Office Relocation,” Environment and Behavior, 47 (10), 1089–106.
Wang Tingting, Mukhopadhyay Anirban, Patrick Vanessa M. (2017), “Getting Consumers to Recycle NOW! When and Why Cuteness Appeals Influence Prosocial and Sustainable Behavior,” Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36 (2), 269–83.
Wang Wenbo, Krishna Aradhna, McFerran Brent (2016), “Turning Off the Lights: Consumers’ Environmental Efforts Depend on Visible Efforts of Firms,” Journal of Marketing Research, 54 (3), 478–94.
Waugh Christian E., Fredrickson Barbara L. (2006), “Nice to Know You: Positive Emotions, Self–Other Overlap, and Complex Understanding in the Formation of a New Relationship,” The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1 (2), 93–106.
Weber Elke U. (2010), “What Shapes Perceptions of Climate Change?” Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1 (3), 332–42.
Weber Elke U. (2016), “What Shapes Perceptions of Climate Change? New Research Since 2010,” Wiley Interdisciplinary Review Climate Change, 7(1), 125–34.
Welsch Heinz, Kühling Jan (2009), “Determinants of Pro-environmental Consumption: The Role of Reference Groups and Routine Behavior,” Ecological Economics, 69 (1), 166–76.
Werner Carol M., Rhodes Mark U., Partain Kimberly K. (1998), “Designing Effective Instructional Signs with Schema Theory: Case Studies of Polystyrene Recycling,” Environment and Behavior, 30 (5), 709–35.
White Katherine, Argo Jennifer J. (2011), “When Imitation Doesn’t Flatter: The Role of Consumer Distinctiveness in Responses to Mimicry,” Journal of Consumer Research, 38 (4), 667–80.
White Katherine, Argo Jennifer J., Sengupta Jaideep (2012), “Dissociative Versus Associative Responses to Social Identity Threat: The Role of Consumer Self-Construal,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (4), 704–19.
White Katherine, MacDonnell Rhiannon, Dahl Darren W. (2011), “It’s the Mind-Set that Matters: The Role of Construal Level and Message Framing in Influencing Consumer Efficacy and Conservation Behaviors,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (3), 472–85.
White Katherine, MacDonnell Rhiannon, Ellard John H. (2012), “Belief in a Just World: Consumer Intentions and Behaviors Toward Ethical Products,” Journal of Marketing, 76 (1), 103–18.
White Katherine, Simpson Bonnie (2013), “When Do (and Don’t) Normative Appeals Influence Sustainable Consumer Behaviors?” Journal of Marketing, 77 (2), 78–95.
White Katherine, Simpson Bonnie, Argo Jennifer J. (2014), “The Motivating Role of Dissociative Out-Groups in Encouraging Positive Consumer Behaviors,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (4), 433–47.
WHO (2014), “The Case for Investing in Public Health” (accessed January 29, 2019), http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/278073/Case-Investing-Public-Health.pdf.
Wiidegren Örjan (1998), “The New Environmental Paradigm and Personal Norms,” Environment and Behavior, 30 (1), 75–100.
Wilhite Harold, Ling Rich (1995), “Measured Energy Savings from a More Informative Energy Bill,” Energy and Buildings, 22 (2), 145–55.
Winterich Karen P., Reczek Rebecca Walker, Irwin Julie R. (2017), “Keeping the Memory but Not the Possession: Memory Preservation Mitigates Identity Loss from Product Disposition,” Journal of Marketing, 81 (5), 104–20.
Wlodarczyk Anna, Basabe Nekane, Páez Darío, Zumeta Larraitz (2017), “Hope and Anger as Mediators between Collective Action Frames and Participation in Collective Mobilization: The Case of 15-M,” Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5 (1), 200–223.
Young William, Hwang Kumju, McDonald Seonaidh, Oates Caroline J. (2010), “Sustainable Consumption: Green Consumer Behaviour When Purchasing Products,” Sustainable Development, 18 (1), 20–31.
Zane Daniel M., Irwin Julie R., Reczek Rebecca Walker (2015), “Do Less Ethical Consumers Denigrate More Ethical Consumers? The Effect of Willful Ignorance on Judgments of Others,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 26 (3), 337–49.
Zaval Lisa, Markowitz Ezra M., Weber Elke U. (2015), “How Will I Be Remembered? Conserving the Environment for the Sake of One’s Legacy,” Psychological Science, 26 (2), 231–36.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
- ds_10.1177_0022242919825649.docx
- 984.50 KB
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: February 14, 2019
Issue published: May 2019
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Article usage*
Total views and downloads: 351290
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 821
-
Role of agricultural extension in learning for uptake and intensificat...
-
Effects of public policy interventions for environmentally sustainable...
-
How do consumers’ attitudes differ across their basic characteristics ...
-
It's a pleasure to stay sustainably: Leveraging hedonic appeals in tou...
-
A matter of identity: Promoting plant-based food among meat-eaters thr...
-
Descriptive or injunctive? The effect of sustainable normative appeals...
-
Beyond Sunsets and Souvenirs
-
Shifting Consumer Behaviors Towards Sustainability Through Eco-Packagi...
-
Why should innovators care about morality? Political ideology, moral f...
-
To see or not to see: The effect of observability of the recycled cont...
-
Enhancing Adoption of Sustainable Product Innovations: Addressing Redu...
-
Sustainable Purchasing Behaviors in Generation Z: The Role of Social I...
-
Factors for Consumers to Contemplate Regarding the Adoption of Eco-Fri...
-
Impacts of financial development and green trade on the shadow economy...
-
Societal perceptions of aquaculture: Combining scoping review and medi...
-
Self-Image and Green Buying Intentions among University Students: The ...
-
Investigating environmentally sustainable consumption: A diary study o...
-
Influence of government financial incentives on electric car adoption:...
-
Bridging the Green Gap in Homesharing: How Platforms Can Increase Host...
-
Greening the Path: The Three-Way Interactive Effects of Psychological ...
-
Status Consumption Effect on Moral Identity - Sustainable Consumption ...
-
Analysis of green deal communication on twitter: environmental and pol...
-
The Nexus of Knowledge, Action, and Values, and the Philosophical, Soc...
-
Luxury Consumption Tendency: A Comparative Study Between Chinese and P...
-
Sustainable Consumer Behaviours through Comparisons of Developed and D...
-
Whistleblowing and interpretation, addressing organizational challenge...
-
Breaking Climate Change Polarization
-
How temporal perspective affects the effectiveness of upcycled vs. rec...
-
The effect of matching promotion type with purchase type on green cons...
-
Shopping mall detachment: Why do some consumers avoid malls?
-
Nudging plant-based alternatives to meat and dairy in a real-life onli...
-
Affording Disposal Control: The Effect of Circular Take-Back Programs ...
-
Switching to sustainable products: The role of time, product, and cust...
-
Developing a Framework of Sustainable Consumption in Retailing Context...
-
Clean Technology and Food Waste Reduction in On-Site Foodservice Manag...
-
Exploration of public discussion around sustainable consumption on soc...
-
Does greenwashing affect Company's stock Price? Evidence from Europe
-
Sustainability Science Communication: Case Study of a True Cost Campai...
-
Profit before principle? An experimental assessment of incentive schem...
-
Immersive technology and cause‐related marketing: The role of personal...
-
Leisure-Time Physical Activity as a Pathway to Sustainable Living: Ins...
-
Understanding the desire for green consumption: Norms, emotions, and a...
-
Reduce or Refrain: Rethinking Resource Restriction Requests
-
Transformative advertising: well-being Instagram messaging
-
SÜRDÜRÜLEBİLİR TÜKETİM EKSENİNDE KOLEKTİF PSİKOLOJİK SAHİPLİK VE ÇEVR...
-
Firms’ green knowledge sharing and tourists’ green electronic word-of-...
-
Audience segmentation approach to conservation messaging for transform...
-
Strategies for Food Marketing in Achieving Sustainable Development Goa...
-
The impact of corporate social irresponsibility on prosocial consumer ...
-
Plastic-Free Brand Choices as a Holistic Approach to Self-Care: A Netn...
-
How does green consumers' self‐concept promote willingness to pay more...
-
Conceptualising and measuring consumer perceptions of brand wastefulne...
-
Framing effects on sustainable behavior
-
Revisiting consumer responses in situational animosity: a reference gr...
-
Using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Implement Diversity, Equity and ...
-
La reconnexion du consommateur : investigation à travers la pratique d...
-
Integration of sustainability marketing into business strategies: Chal...
-
Exploring Citizens’ Zero-Waste Journeys Through Practice Theory: Empir...
-
Detecting Routines: Applications to Ridesharing Customer Relationship ...
-
Ritual and environmental ineffectiveness: How psychological ownership ...
-
Nested Markets and the Transition of the Agro-Marketing System towards...
-
Purchasing Intention of Products with Sustainable Packaging
-
Sustainability-related product satisfaction – Development and applicat...
-
An Integrated Model of the Sustainable Consumer
-
Commentaire sur « Look up ! Cinq propositions de recherche pour repens...
-
Assessment on the Environmental Concern Level and Driving Mechanism of...
-
Assessing Consumer Behavior in Sustainable Product Markets: A Structur...
-
Slow Fashion: Between Environment Sustainability and Business Sustaina...
-
Careless product use in access-based services: A rebound effect and ho...
-
Consumer-driven climate mitigation: Exploring barriers and solutions i...
-
Electricity consumption optimization of power users driven by a dynami...
-
Factores que influyen en el comportamiento de consumo sostenible en la...
-
Unleashing the power of clustering: a qualitative study of cluster org...
-
Analyzing organic food purchase intentions: eco-literacy and innovatio...
-
Historizing the present: Research agenda and implications for consumer...
-
Exploring the Nexus
-
Up or down? The effect of vertical display on consumers’ attitude towa...
-
A practice theory perspective on apparel sharing consumption models ex...
-
Environmental Policies and the Promotion of Pro-Environmental Consumer...
-
Time for sustainable marketing to build a green conscience in consumer...
-
From green hype to green habits: Understanding the factors that influe...
-
Predicting the value‐based determinants of sustainable luxury consumpt...
-
Consumer collectives in the circular economy: A systematic review and ...
-
Healthy foods, healthy sales? Cross-category effects of a loyalty prog...
-
Can tweets be word of mouth that changes risky behaviors?
-
Hope for the environment: Influence of goal and temporal focus of emot...
-
Unlocking the potential of circular consumption: The influence of circ...
-
Spatial effects and influencing factors of urban sustainable developme...
-
Determinants of Consumer Intention to Purchase Fair Trade Products in ...
-
Not all information is informative: An exploration of educational cont...
-
Four decades of sustainable tourism research: Trends and future resear...
-
Sustainable luxury brands: the moderating effects of salient identity-...
-
Integrating the Triple Pillar: AI Marketing's Pathway to Enhancing Ind...
-
Sustainable Consumption Behaviour of Young Consumers
-
Cause-Related Marketing as Sales Promotion
-
Interlocking concrete paving blocks made with treated wastewater
-
Behavioral Labeling: Prompting Consumer Behavior Through Activity Tags
-
How social norms and dietary identity affect willingness to try cultur...
-
Greening the bottom line: a new scale to discern consumer perceptions ...
-
Exploring drivers of behavioral willingness to reduce plastic consumpt...
-
Fostering green customer citizenship behavioral intentions through gre...
-
Determinants of pro-environmental behaviour of urban youth in Ghana
-
The climate wins! – How a gamification approach can foster sustainable...
-
Does the Label Fit the Channel? How “Bricks” and “Clicks” Influence De...
-
The Uptrend Effect: Encouraging Healthy Behaviors Through Greater Infe...
-
The Impact of Public Policies and Civil Society on the Sustainable Beh...
-
Exploring the Generation Z Attitude towards Energy Efficiency Improvem...
-
The influence of cultural differences on consumers’ willingness to pay...
-
Implementing a campus food pantry in the US ...
-
Combating the exotic pet trade: Effects of conservation messaging on a...
-
Tourism and social marketing: an integrative review
-
What consumers want in a sustainability food label: Results from onlin...
-
Electrifying the future: analysing the determinants of electric vehicl...
-
Unveiling the role of gamification in shared mobility services
-
Value delivery in green consumption: the effect of advertisement value...
-
The effectiveness of social norms in promoting green consumption
-
SDG commentary: service ecosystems with the planet - weaving the envir...
-
SDG commentary: services that sustainably manage resources for all hum...
-
INTEGRATING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT INTO THEIR MARKETING STRATEGY: PRA...
-
Mapping the literature trends of consumer behavior and sustainability:...
-
Reimagining the sustainable consumer: Why social representations of su...
-
Designing the Post-Purchase Customer Journey:
-
Shifting focus in the fight against core environmental challenges
-
Turning the invisible into the visible: exploring consumers’ perceptio...
-
Engaging customers and suppliers for environmental sustainability: Inv...
-
Instilling label confidence in the minds of consumers: The role of sus...
-
Does intention translate into actual purchase? Analysis of inducers of...
-
Gen Z consumers’ sustainable consumption behaviors: influencers and mo...
-
“I Do What I Do to Drive Change”: The Social-Symbolic Work of Sustaina...
-
Gamification to Stimulate Green Behaviors in Cities
-
Practicing drum on VR to promote rhythm performance: Exploring the lea...
-
Prediction of Consumers’ Adoption Behavior of Products with Water Effi...
-
Uncovering Sustainability Insights from Amazon’s Eco-Friendly Product ...
-
Millennial Heterosexual Couples’ Sustainable Consumption Choices: An E...
-
Shifting Habits Toward Sustainability: An Exploratory Research
-
Reflective-Impulsive Green Buying: Psychological Mechanism and Role of...
-
Impact of a corporate social responsibility message on consumers' sust...
-
Doing more with less: An integrative literature review on responsible ...
-
Intention to purchase sustainable craft products: a moderated mediatio...
-
Adaptive Marketing Strategies for Post-Conflict Reconstruction, Region...
-
A behaviorist perspective on how to address negative consumer behavior...
-
Lay economic reasoning: An integrative review and call to action
-
Is it me or others who matter? The interplay between consumer values v...
-
The Gamification of Circular Practices Using the SDGs
-
Rethinking Consumer Acceptance of Circular Services and Product-Servic...
-
Design for Behavior Change in Design Education. A Case Study
-
The effect of message framing on young adult consumers’ sustainable fa...
-
Big business returns on B Corp? Growing with green & lean as any label...
-
The Effects of Norms on Environmental Behavior
-
Russian Attitude to Sustainable Development Strategy: System Factors o...
-
Deciphering the environmental values behind green purchasing: A mixed-...
-
Implications of consumer orientation towards environmental sustainabil...
-
Development of a New Conceptual Model: Consumers’ Purchase Intention t...
-
Negligible Levy Leads High Spending: How the Single-Use Bag Levy Polic...
-
Big Data for Behavioral Economics: Analyzing Sustainable Consumption T...
-
An Online Randomised Controlled Trial of Price and Non-Price Intervent...
-
Reasonably Green: The Effect of Giving Reasons on Green Consumption
-
Carbon footprint tracking apps. Does feedback help reduce carbon emiss...
-
Disentangling the Problem Space: A Validated Problem Statement for Sus...
-
Determinants of green consumer behavior: A case study from Vietnam
-
The differential effects of self-identity appeals on consumers’ intent...
-
Value creation in post-pandemic retailing: a conceptual framework and ...
-
Drivers of electric vehicle adoption: the moderating role of technolog...
-
Consumer Behaviour in a Circular System – How Values Promote and Hinde...
-
A bibliometric analysis on factors influencing green consumer behaviou...
-
Response Aggregation to Obtain Truthful Answers to Sensitive Questions...
-
Bulk food purchase: The effect of food package waste literacy, a deont...
-
How subsidiary and supplier misbehavior lead to corporate social respo...
-
A counterfactual thinking perspective of moral licensing effect in mac...
-
Should the milkman return? The effect of a reusable packaging on produ...
-
Eating out of paper versus plastic: The effect of packaging material o...
-
Review of Marketing Relevant Real Activity Manipulation
-
Sustainable Consumer Behavior: The Driving Force of Innovation in Reta...
-
Myths and Realities of Retail Shopper Behaviour towards ‘Sustainable’ ...
-
The nexus between circular economy innovation, market competitiveness,...
-
Towards more sustainable online consumption: The impact of default and...
-
A Matter of Framing: Analyzing Value Communication in Sustainable Busi...
-
What Is in the Context? Motivations and Implications of an Integrated ...
-
(Em)powering the underdog: How power states enhance referral intention...
-
The academic landscape of sustainability in management literature: Tow...
-
Understanding how ethical claims in advertising affect subjective ambi...
-
What? Why? When? How? Where? of Technology-Based Bibliometric Review
-
Strategies for Reducing the Environmental Impact of Impulse Buying
-
Local Roots and Global Responsibility: Terroir Brands and Their Respon...
-
Development of a New Conceptual Model: Consumers’ Purchase Intention t...
-
Effects of Sustainable Marketing on Fast Fashion Shoppers’ Perception ...
-
Unraveling the Nexus: A Bibliometric Analysis of Subjective Wellbeing,...
-
Cyclical Time Is Greener: The Impact of Temporal Perspective on Pro-En...
-
Advancing Sustainable Marketing through Empowering Recommendation: A D...
-
Sharing More, Owning Less: How Consumer Minimalism Drives the Sharing ...
-
Prosumers integration in aggregated demand response systems
-
Rescuing Unwanted Household Goods: Moving Towards a Circular Economy
-
How Do Tourists Use Metaheuristics for Decision-Making Mediated by Sma...
-
Advancing basic psychological needs theory in marketing research
-
Digitalization and energy: How could digital economy eliminate energy ...
-
The sustainable attitude-behavior gap dynamic when shopping at the sup...
-
Firms' multi-sided platform construction efforts and ESG performance: ...
-
Behavioral spillover in the circular economy: The importance of consum...
-
Do CSR efforts that focus on helping the environment influence brand p...
-
Does green brand anthropomorphism influence repurchase intention? Unde...
-
Green … but at what cost? A typology and scale development of perceive...
-
Effective Pro-environmental Communication: Message Framing and Context...
-
How lack of knowledge on emissions and psychological biases deter cons...
-
Towards a better understanding of sustainability gaps in retail organi...
-
Sustainability ambassadorship - the role of the store manager in devel...
-
The practice of sustainable fashion of luxury boutique fashion brands ...
-
Planet earth calling: unveiling the brain’s response to awe and drivin...
-
Sustainability and professional sales: a review and future research ag...
-
Personal values, consumer identities, and attitudes toward electric ca...
-
Consumers’ Perspectives on Circular Economy: Main Tendencies for Marke...
-
Artificial intelligence in marketing: friend or foe of sustainable con...
-
How to Regain Green Consumer Trust after Greenwashing: Experimental Ev...
-
The Negative Effect of Low Belonging on Consumer Responses to Sustaina...
-
What establishes citizens' household intention and behavior regarding ...
-
A segmentation of fish consumers based on quantity and type of fish: I...
-
Please keep ordering! A natural field experiment assessing a carbon la...
-
Mobile apps against food waste: Are consumers willing to use them? A s...
-
Unravelling the black box between coopetition and firms' sustainabilit...
-
Towards a unified definition of local food
-
How Do Consumers React to Production Waste?
-
How Does Social Media Impact Consumers’ Sustainable Purchase Intention...
-
Forget-Me-Not: The Persistent Effect of Information Provision for Adop...
-
Guest editorial: Sustainability marketing and sustainability managemen...
-
Consumer responses to sustainable product branding strategies: a liter...
-
Packaging-free practices in food retail: the impact on customer loyalt...
-
Stereotypes, same-sex struggles, and sustainable shopping: intrasexual...
-
Editorial: Discrete emotions in environmental decision-making
-
Ethical Consumption. What Makes People to Buy "Ethical" Products
-
Diner’s Sustainable Behavior: Differences between Sustainable Behavior...
-
Improving Society and the Planet: Sustainability and Fashion Post-Pand...
-
Modeling the Antecedents of Green Consumption Values to Promote the Gr...
-
What Is the Willingness to Pay for a Basket of Agricultural Goods? Mul...
-
Sustainable marketing: Let’s accelerate transformations!
-
Environmental, Social and Economic Attitudes and Sustainable Knowledge...
-
Employees' geographic social identity and group pro‐environmental beha...
-
The motivational dynamics of arousal and values in promoting sustainab...
-
Exploring the role of decision support systems in promoting healthier ...
-
Social norms and littering – The role of personal responsibility and p...
-
TikTok Videos and Sustainable Apparel Behavior: Social Consciousness, ...
-
The influence of internal and external factors on the purchase intenti...
-
Reviewing the impacts of smart energy applications on energy behaviour...
-
Advertising Eco-Friendly Behavior To Young Adults: “Sweat” or “Do Good...
-
Questioning the business model of sustainable wine production: The cas...
-
Do fast fashion sustainable business strategies influence attitude, aw...
-
Marketing Sustainable Events for Children
-
Relying on what different stakeholders express on social media to repu...
-
From Words to Deeds: How Do Knowledge, Effectiveness, and Personal Rel...
-
Sustainable consumption of services: willingness-to-pay for sustainabl...
-
Millennials’ Self-Identity and Intention to Purchase Sustainable Produ...
-
You are what you speak: Influence of future time reference (FTR) in he...
-
Young People Share, But Do So Differently: An Empirical Comparison of ...
-
The Dark Side of Green Marketing: How Greenwashing Affects Circular Co...
-
To Green or Not to Green: The E-Commerce-Delivery Question
-
Assessing the impact of energy labels on attitude and behavioral inten...
-
Shades of awe: The role of awe in consumers' pro‐environmental behavio...
-
Consumer minimalism for sustainability: Exploring the determinants of ...
-
Transforming consumption: The role of values, beliefs, and norms in pr...
-
Pro-environmental purchase intentions in a low-involvement context: th...
-
Resale as sustainable social innovation: understanding shifts in consu...
-
Organic line extensions: do they make sense for brands?
-
The importance of personal norms and situational expectancies to susta...
-
Reducing Emissions across the Consumption Cycle and an Agenda for Futu...
-
The Effects of Item Dirtiness on Disposal Decisions
-
Forgot Your Bottle or Bag Again? How Well-Placed Reminder Cues Can Hel...
-
Driving Sustainable Food Choices: How to Craft an Effective Sustainabi...
-
Marketing durable : accélérons les transformations !
-
Climate change and marketing: a bibliometric analysis of research from...
-
The Influence of Sustainability on Psychological Ownership in Services...
-
Questioning the business model of sustainable wine production: The cas...
-
How to arrange assortments available in green alternatives: Displaying...
-
Consumer Perceptions of Sustainable Development Goals: Conceptualizati...
-
Sustainable innovation: Additive manufacturing and the emergence of a ...
-
From warrior to guardian: An autoethnographic study of how consumers t...
-
Consumer willingness to pay for shelf life of high temperature, short ...
-
A Call for Research on Climate Adaptive Products
-
Effects of Instagram Influencers on the Adoption of Secondhand Fashion...
-
Towards Sustainable Fashion Consumption: An Exploratory Study of Consu...
-
Sustainable Technologies and Sustainable Products
-
Ecological Degradation Within the Context of Consumption
-
Redesigning loyalty marketing for a better world: the impact of green ...
-
Credibility of green advertising: six elements that drive credibility ...
-
Expanding consumer mindfulness for collective sustainable well‐being: ...
-
The Influence of Green Consumption Values on How Consumers Form Overal...
-
Vive la révolution animal! Using storytelling to explore...
-
Really That Sustainable? Exploring Costa Ricans’ Green Product Involve...
-
Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Agri-Food Products Delivered with El...
-
Food sufficiency, an approach rooted in the ethics of Epicurus: Analys...
-
Reasons and intuitions: extending behavioural reasoning theory to dete...
-
Predicting the Adoption of a Sustainable Diet in Adults: A Cross-Secti...
-
“I” get license but “we” keep consistent: The role of self-construal i...
-
Mapping the intellectual linkage of sustainability in marketing
-
The impact of financial scarcity on green consumption: Sequential medi...
-
Guidelines to Foster Consumer Acceptance of Products Made from Recycle...
-
Segmentation of consumers based on awareness, attitudes and use of sus...
-
Dynamics of social influence on consumption choices: A social network ...
-
The power of coworkers: the incidental effect of workplace green behav...
-
The Role of Anthropomorphism in Consumer Evaluations of Sustainable Pr...
-
Sustainable Marketing and People Behavior for Enhanced Governance
-
An Agent-Based Modeling Approach for Understanding Drivers of Consumer...
-
How has the effect of brand personality on customer-based brand equity...
-
Roles of Brand Benefits and Relationship Commitment in Consumers’ Soci...
-
Addressing the eco-gender gap in men through power and sustainability ...
-
Towards sustainable development: Coupling green marketing strategies a...
-
Curious about the circular economy? Internal and external influences o...
-
Sustainability motives, values and communication of slow fashion busin...
-
Antecedents of green purchase choices: Towards a value-oriented model
-
Improving societal benefit through transformative consumer research: A...
-
Mapping of the digital climate nudges in Nordic online grocery stores
-
Changing values of millennials and centennials towards responsible con...
-
SHIFTing to sustainable behavior: An ethical-persuasive approach for m...
-
Last mile delivery in logistics and supply chain management: a bibliom...
-
Enabling a service thinking mindset: practices for the global service ...
-
How Can Feelings of Nostalgia Facilitate Sustainable Consumer Choices?
-
Barriers to consumer adoption of sustainable products – an empirical a...
-
How to overcome the intention–behavior gap in sustainable tourism: Tou...
-
The impact of social vs environmental sustainability information discl...
-
La sobriété alimentaire, une démarche ancrée dans l’éthique d’Epicure ...
-
A greener way to stay: The role of perceived sustainability in generat...
-
A Longitudinal Study on Sustainability Perceptions in Portugal
-
Inside the black box of responsible consumers: Novel perspectives from...
-
How perceived life control shapes sustainable consumption: The role of...
-
How empowerment and materialism contribute to anti-consumers’ well-bei...
-
The Future of Sustainable Consumption after the Pandemic, Optimism or ...
-
Feeling the values: How pride and awe differentially enhance consumers...
-
Carbon labels as reminder of ethical consumption: an exploratory study...
-
Eco-Labeled Canned Tuna Consumption: What do Italians Know and How do ...
-
Embracing Human Complexity in Service Design for Inclusive and Sustain...
-
Investigating sustainable consumption behaviors: a bibliometric analys...
-
Does cognitive aspects of information and material presentation matter...
-
Social Media and Impact of Altruistic Motivation, Egoistic Motivation,...
-
Pro-environmental messages have more effect when they come from less f...
-
Making choices in addressing sustainability problems: A link to framin...
-
Social Class and Private-Sphere Green Behavior in China: The Mediating...
-
Tasting the ocean: How to increase ocean literacy using seafood herita...
-
Reaching for rigor and relevance: better marketing research for a bett...
-
Prepared food on the trail: Exploring sustainability in outdoor recrea...
-
Increasing sustainable behavior through conversation
-
Promoting new pro-environmental behaviors: The effect of combining enc...
-
From car use reduction to ride‐sharing: The relevance of moral and env...
-
Understanding food sustainability from a consumer perspective: A cross...
-
Store support for local producers as a driver of legitimacy and purcha...
-
Consumer self-regulation: Looking back to look forward. A systematic l...
-
Research trends of sustainability and marketing research, 2010–2020: T...
-
Green behavior among Gen Z consumers in an emerging market: eco-friend...
-
The sustainable transformation of business events: sociodemographic va...
-
Role of pro-environmental post-purchase behaviour in green consumer be...
-
I Will Be Green for Us: When Consumers Compensate for Their Partners’ ...
-
Big Data and Sustainable Consumption: A Review and Research Agenda
-
Towards Sustainable Food Systems: Exploring Household Food Waste by Ph...
-
Barriers to Enduring Pro-Environmental Habits among Urban Residents
-
The Electrical and Electronic Products Consumers Sustainable Behaviour...
-
Motivating relational organizing behavior for biodiversity conservatio...
-
Preferences for lemon consumption by Mexicans and its relationship wit...
-
To reduce waste, have it repaired! The quality signaling effect of pro...
-
Paper Meets Plastic: The Perceived Environmental Friendliness of Produ...
-
Intention versus behaviour: integration of theories to help curb food ...
-
Are Italian consumers of canned tuna fish sensitive to environmentally...
-
Verification of GPDS planning framework for social marketing: a Delphi...
-
Dense is not green: How visual density influences greenness evaluation...
-
Comparing Land Manager and Community Perceptions of a Colorado Prescri...
-
COMPORTAMENTO SUSTENTÁVEL DE BRASILEIROS RESIDENTES NO EXTERIOR: INVES...
-
Limited tourism: travel bubbles for a sustainable future
-
Hitting Net-Zero Without Stopping Flying: Increasing Air Travelers’ Li...
-
Measuring the “Clothing Mountain”: Action Research and Sustainability ...
-
How to enhance the sustainable disposal of harmful products
-
The Impact of Gamification Motivation on Green Consumption Behavior—An...
-
Reflections on Sustainable Urban Mobility, Mobility as a Service (MaaS...
-
Consumers’ Attitude towards Renewable Energy in the Context of the Ene...
-
Analysing the Influence of Green Marketing Communication in Consumers’...
-
Save near-expired food: Does a message to avoid food waste affect food...
-
Behavioral Perspectives on B Corps
-
Do behavioural interventions enhance waste recycling practices? Eviden...
-
A Systems Perspective on Social Indicators for Circular Supply Chains
-
Prospects and applications of nanotechnology for boosting the efficacy...
-
Tax Compliance in the Wild: Critical Review of Nudging and Proposition...
-
Please Do Not Buy Our Brand—How Consumers Respond to Green-Demarketing...
-
Urban residents' environmental citizenship behaviour: The roles of pla...
-
Is doing right all that matters in sustainability marketing? The role ...
-
Cosméticos Orgânicos e o Uso de Apelos Emocionais
-
(Non)Monetary Behaviors: How Morality and Status Shape Consumers’ Perc...
-
Organic Cosmetics and the Use of Emotional Appeals
-
Digital Grocery Retailing—The Influence of Product-Related and Persona...
-
In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, can the development of coasta...
-
Von der Ökoeffizienz zur Ökoeffektivität –Ansätze einer nachhaltigeren...
-
Is Gamification an Enabler of the Sustainable Urban Transition Process...
-
Do Consumers Vote With Their Feet in Response to Negative ESG News? Ev...
-
Internet Marketing Applications for Green Products: Based on Regulator...
-
Promoting Sustainability in Africa Through Entrepreneurial Branding
-
Plastic Pulse of the Public: A review of survey-based research on how ...
-
Communication of Fashion Sustainability in the USSR and Modern Russia:...
-
Plant power: SEEDing our future with plant...
-
The impact of loneliness on compliance with COVID ...
-
Encouraging green product purchase: Green value and environmental know...
-
Attitudes toward protecting endangered species: The impact of perceive...
-
Omnichannel as a Consumer-Based Marketing Strategy
-
How to maintain sustainable consumer behaviours: A systematic review a...
-
Emotions and consumer behaviour: A review and research agenda
-
Nachhaltiger Konsum
-
Measuring the effectiveness of value-framing and message valence on au...
-
Beyond Scarcity: A Social Value-Based Lens for NFT Pricing
-
Wie werden wir von sozialen Normen beeinflusst? Soziale Normen
-
Unveiling the Golden Thread: Unmasking the Power of Blockchain for Sus...
-
Marketing Campaigns and Consumer Behavior: The Long and Winding Road t...
-
Foreign Brand Admiration, Product Perceived Quality and Consumer Behav...
-
Gamification in the transport sector: Quasi-experimental evidence from...
-
Data Augmentation Strategies for High-Frequency NILM Datasets
-
Show me the impact: Communicating “behavioral impact message” to promo...
-
The importance of relative customer-based label equity when signaling ...
-
Born to be sustainable: How to combine strategic disruption, open inno...
-
Crisis behaviors as drivers of value co-creation transformation
-
What evidence exists on the effects of public policy interventions for...
-
The Price Entitlement Effect: When and Why High Price Entitles Consume...
-
Beyond a mediocre customer experience in the circular economy: The sat...
-
Interplay in Circular Economy Innovation, Business Model Innovation, S...
-
The Consumption Analysis of Economic Media at the Regional Level in a ...
-
Direct Expression or Indirect Transmission? An Empirical Research on t...
-
Act locally? Are female online shoppers willing to pay to reduce the c...
-
Expanding Formal School Curricula to Foster Action Competence in Susta...
-
The Process of Eco-Anxiety and Ecological Grief: A Narrative Review an...
-
A meta-analysis of antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intenti...
-
Climate gentrification in Miami: A real climate change-minded investme...
-
How gamified cooperation and competition motivate low-carbon actions: ...
-
Modeling the public attitude towards organic foods: a big data and tex...
-
Addressing the Cause-Related Marketing Paradox for Luxury Brands to In...
-
Sustainability Performance and Reporting – A Strategic Issue for Elect...
-
Mitigating Food Waste in the Retail Supply Chain: Marketing Solutions
-
Integrating an evolutionary perspective of “self-concept” in consumer ...
-
Using strengths to attack weaknesses – The effect of comparative adver...
-
The effect of fixed and growth mindsets on buying sustainable foods
-
Nutritional Composition and Environmental Impact of Meals Selected in ...
-
Politicised opinion leaders in the younger generation: to meat or not ...
-
Transcending Linearity in Understanding Green Consumer Behaviour: A So...
-
A toolkit for understanding and addressing climate scepticism
-
‘Sustainable’ marketing mixes and the paradoxical consequences of good...
-
Sweat it for sustainability: Impact of physical activity/exercise on s...
-
Does green brand positioning translate into green purchase intention?:...
-
Positive behavioral change during the COVID‐19 crisis: The role of opt...
-
Understanding technological, cultural, and environmental motivators ex...
-
Green advertising is more environmentally friendly? The influence of a...
-
A systematic review of empirical studies of pro-environmental behavior...
-
Exploring the role of AI algorithmic agents: The impact of algorithmic...
-
A value adoption approach to sustainable consumption in retail stores
-
The temperature dimension of emotions
-
The effects of message framing in CSR advertising on consumers’ emotio...
-
An analysis of social marketing practice: Factors associated with succ...
-
When Faster Online Delivery Backfires: Examining the Negative Conseque...
-
Engaging Consumers with Environmental Sustainability Initiatives: Cons...
-
Moderating Effect of Collectivism on Chinese Consumers’ Intention to A...
-
The Contribution of Local Agents and Citizens to Sustainable Developme...
-
Communications on Sustainability in the Apparel Industry: Readability ...
-
Environmental and Health Factors as Organic Fruit Purchase Drivers and...
-
Modeling Synchronization Risk among Sustainable Exchange Trade Funds: ...
-
The impact of environmental messages on consumer responses to plant-ba...
-
When sustainability backfires: A review on the unintended negative sid...
-
Intention and behavior towards bringing your own shopping bags when sh...
-
The PSICHE framework for sustainable consumption and future research d...
-
A framework for application of consumer neuroscience in pro-environmen...
-
Ex-ante reminders: The effect of messaging strategies on reducing non-...
-
Educating for change?: An investigation into consumers’ perception of ...
-
Proactive and reactive views in the transition towards circular busine...
-
Performance Evaluation of Green Furniture Brands in the Marketing 4.0 ...
-
Information source and content – Drivers for consumers’ valuation of f...
-
Adoption of Covid-19 contact tracing app by extending UTAUT theory: Pe...
-
How new sustainability typologies will reshape traditional approaches ...
-
How anticipated pride and guilt influence green consumption in the Mid...
-
Don't miss the boat when consumers are in-store! Exploring the use of ...
-
Reducing everyday consumption: Mapping the landscape of grassroots soc...
-
Elderly consumers in marketing research: A systematic literature revie...
-
SPICe—Determinants of consumer green innovation adoption across domain...
-
The same only different? How a pandemic shapes consumer organic food p...
-
Optimal strategies for product price, customer environmental volunteer...
-
Brand connection and entry in the shopping mall ecological chain: Evid...
-
A new lens to the understanding and reduction of household food waste:...
-
Climate anxiety: Conceptual considerations, and connections with clima...
-
A proposed checklist for climate-friendly sport and exercise programme...
-
Consumer responses to environmental corporate social responsibility an...
-
Warm glow and consumers’ valuation of ethically certified products
-
Past, present and future of research in relationship mar...
-
Making Sustainable Consumption Decisions: The Effects of Product Avail...
-
Moral-psychological mechanisms of rebound effects from a consumer-cent...
-
Motives underlying human agency: How self-efficacy versus self-enhance...
-
De-stigmatizing the “win–win:” making sustainable consumption sustaina...
-
Key factors underlying the willingness of patients with cancer to part...
-
Leveraging Artificial Intelligence in Marketing for Social Good—An Eth...
-
Will “Green” Parents Have “Green” Children? The Relationship Between P...
-
Leveraging technology to communicate sustainability-related product in...
-
Passive and active peer effects in the spatial diffusion of residentia...
-
Disengaging pro-environmental values in B2B green buying decisions: Ev...
-
Children sustainable behaviour: A review and research agenda
-
Disrupting marketing realities: A research agenda for investigating th...
-
Ethical consumption: Influencing factors of consumer´s intention to pu...
-
Examining ecotourism intention: The role of tourists' traits and envir...
-
Moderating reference group and message framing influences on sustainab...
-
Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) metrics do not serve servic...
-
Sustainability in retail services: a transformative service research (...
-
An examination of critical determinants of carbon offsetting attitudes...
-
Exploration of seaweed consumption in Norway using the norm activation...
-
Bringing Our Values to the Table: Political Ideology, Food Waste, and ...
-
Above and beyond meat: the role of consumers’ dietary behavior for the...
-
Exploring the Role of Sustainability-Oriented Marketing Education in P...
-
The role of sensors in the production of smart city spaces
-
Structural relationships of a firm's green strategies for environmenta...
-
Toward sustainable express deliveries for online shopping: Reusing pac...
-
Exploring green product attributes and their effect on consumer behavi...
-
Packaging design for the circular economy: A systematic review
-
Understanding the Attitude-Behavior Gap in the Context of Green Consum...
-
Innovation capabilities for sustainability: a comparison between Green...
-
Demoralization Effects of Sustainability: Development of a Theoretical...
-
Helping Mother Earth: young children's responses to sustainability lab...
-
USAGE INTENTIONS, ATTITUDES, AND BEHAVIORS TOWARDS ENERGY-EFFICIENT AP...
-
Cause for pause in retail service: a respond, reimagine, recover frame...
-
Factors Influencing Plastic Bag Avoidance Behaviour Among the Indian C...
-
Are companies using Twitter to greenwash and hide bad environmental pe...
-
Investigating the Drivers of Sustainable Consumption and Their Impact ...
-
Environmentally friendly cycling habit behaviour: could social influen...
-
The role of consumer trade-offs in limiting the transition towards cir...
-
Drivers of organic farming: Lab-in-the-field evidence of the role of s...
-
Green marketing capability: A configuration approach towards sustainab...
-
When Are Loss Frames More Effective in Climate Change Communication? A...
-
Rethinking individual relationships with entities of nature
-
A global perspective on the marketing mix across time and space
-
Understanding individual and diffusion behaviors related to native pla...
-
Unravelling the differential effects of pride and guilt along with val...
-
An integrated framework examining sustainable green behavior among you...
-
The Influence of Social Norms on Consumer Behavior: A Meta-Analysis
-
Exploring Consumers’ Attitudes towards Food Products Derived by New Pl...
-
Explaining the willingness of consumers to bring their own reusable co...
-
Carbon footprint tracking apps. What drives consumers' adoption intent...
-
The backfire effect of sustainable social cues. New evidence on social...
-
UNRAVEL-ing gnarly knots: A path for researching market-entangled wick...
-
When the green in green packaging backfires: Gender effects and percei...
-
Strategies to improve HIV care outcomes for people with HIV who are ou...
-
Slow fashion or self-signaling? Sustainability in the fashion industry
-
Information as an enabler of sustainable food choices: A behavioural a...
-
Changing Our Ways
-
What’s in it for you? Examining the roles of consumption values and Th...
-
Being innovative, fun, and green? Hedonic and environmental motivation...
-
Customers’ Attitude Towards Vegan Products Consumption and Its Impact ...
-
The Role of Perceived Environmental Responsibility and Environmental C...
-
Media Discourse on Sustainable Consumption in Europe
-
Unraveling the Relationship between Well-Being, Sustainable Consumptio...
-
Nature Ambience in a Lunch Restaurant Has the Potential to Evoke Posit...
-
Sustainable Consumption Research and the Role of Marketing: A Review o...
-
Strategic green marketing and cross-border merger and acquisition comp...
-
Success factors for environmentally sustainable product innovation: An...
-
Values, personality traits, and packaging‐free shopping: A mixed‐metho...
-
Contradictory or complementary? Stakeholders’ perceptions of a circula...
-
Investigating Trust to Bridge the Attitude–Behaviour Gap: A Study of S...
-
An experiential learning-integrated framework to improve problem-solvi...
-
One Size Does Not Fit All—Addressing the Complexity of Food System Sus...
-
Healthy and Sustainable Food Shopping: A Survey of Intentions and Moti...
-
The Intention-Behavior gap in Ethical Consumption: Mediators, Moderato...
-
Leveraging intrinsically rewarding symbolic attributes to promote cons...
-
Pro-environmental attitudes, pro-environmental behaviours and nature-r...
-
Drivers of and barriers to consumers’ plastic packaging waste avoidanc...
-
The COVID-19 pandemic as an impetus for pro-environmental behaviours: ...
-
Pro-environmental habits: An underexplored research agenda in sustaina...
-
Cakes in plastic: A study of implicit associations of compostable bio-...
-
Is bigger better? How the scale effect influences green purchase inten...
-
How do ethical consumers utilize sharing economy platforms as part of ...
-
Individualism/collectivism and perceived consumer effectiveness: The m...
-
Sustainable Marketing Strategies as an Essential Tool of Business
-
Impact of social influences and adoptive community on behaviours: An e...
-
Introductory Chapter: Sustainable Housing – Introduction to the Themat...
-
Constructing the food waste issue on social media: a discursive social...
-
The synergistic impact of motivations on sustained pro-environmental c...
-
The effect of message framing and language intensity on green consumpt...
-
People-watching and the environment: Looking for signs of hope while c...
-
Firstborns buy better for the greater good: Birth order differences in...
-
Influencing sustainable consumer behavior on electricity consumption -...
-
Major Shifts in Sustainable Consumer Behavior in Romania and Retailers...
-
Scientometric Analysis of Research on Corporate Social Responsibility
-
A meaningful reminder on sustainability: When explicit and implicit pa...
-
B2B marketing scholarship and the UN sustainable development goals (SD...
-
Increasing the effectiveness of ecological food signaling: Comparing s...
-
Recycling habits and environmental responses to fast-fashion consumpti...
-
The impact of COVID-19 related regulations and restrictions on mobilit...
-
Correlates of access to ICT and food security of the poor in South Afr...
-
Social capital and residents’ plastic recycling behaviors in China
-
Sociopolitical activist brands
-
An empirical study of consumer purchase intention for responsible ente...
-
Past, present, and future of pro-environmental behavior in tourism and...
-
JPP&M's Global Perspective and Impact: An Agenda for Research on Marke...
-
Behavioral Science Informed Governance for Urban and Regional Futures
-
Green Marketing Communication and Consumer Response in Emerging Market...
-
Social Dimensions
-
Transforming the Strategic Benchmarks of Russian Telecommunications Co...
-
Impact of CSR Communication on Brand Business and Social Values
-
Understanding and Raising Consumers’ Normative Motivation for Sustaina...
-
Moderation of Income and Age on Customer Purchase Intention of Green C...
-
Climate Change and Sustainability Behaviour Management
-
Behavioural Transformation for Sustainability and Pro-Climate Action
-
An integrative framework for transformative social change: a case in g...
-
The role emotions play in consumer intentions to make pro-social purch...
-
Motivating gender toward co-creation: a study on hedonic activities, s...
-
“Why Do We Buy Green Products?” An Extended Theory of the Planned Beha...
-
Impact of COVID-19 on Food Consumption and Marketing
-
Developing the Concept for Managing Digitalization of the Education Sy...
-
Is Ethical Consumption Intuitive? A Comparative Study on Food, Cosmeti...
-
Sustainable Luxury Fashion
-
The Rise of Virtual Representation of Fashion in Marketing Practices: ...
-
Digitale Lösungen mit Potenzial: Impulse und Beispiele zur Förderung v...
-
The Kaleidoscope of Changing Values: Are We Heading Towards Responsibl...
-
Moving Towards Less-Modeling Enablers of Responsible Consumption for S...
-
Is Doing Right All that Matters in Sustainability Marketing? The Role ...
-
Competition & Cooperation: How Gamified Interactions Promote Users’ Lo...
-
When is Frugality Optimal?
-
Research Trends of Sustainability and Marketing Research, 2010-2020: T...
-
Wykluczenie konsumenckie. Przyczyny, obszary i formy współczesnego wyk...
-
How going green builds trusting beliefs
-
Voluntary simplicity: An exploration through text analysis
-
Le gaspillage alimentaire dans la famille
-
On the habitual nature of environmentally relevant behavior: Evidence ...
-
Users’ behavioral intention and their behavior: before-and-after study...
-
The Fresh Start Mindset: A Cross-National Investigation and Implicatio...
-
Psychological distance as a working tool for managers
-
Shifting consumer behavior to address climate change
-
Gamification to prevent climate change: a review of games and apps for...
-
Comparative evaluation of commuters’ preferences and expectations for ...
-
Does sustainability sell? The impact of sustainability claims on the s...
-
Secure and sustainable but not as prominent among the ambivalent: Atta...
-
Paradoxes Datenschutzverhalten
-
A SEM-NCA Approach towards Social Networks Marketing: Evaluating Consu...
-
The Phantom of the ‘Responsible Consumer’: Unmasking the Intention–Act...
-
Exploring the Role of Norms and Habit in Explaining Pro-Environmental ...
-
Mercadotecnia sustentable: Un estudio bibliométrico
-
‘Go with the flow’ for gamification and sustainability marketing
-
Right information at the right time: Reevaluating the attitude–behavio...
-
Attentional and perceptual biases of climate change
-
Consumer expectation and responses to environmental sustainability ini...
-
Compulsion and reactance: Why do some green consumers fail to follow t...
-
Integrating Sustainability-Oriented Ecologies of Practice Across the L...
-
The impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) priming on consume...
-
Economía Circular: Una Revisión desde los Modelos de Negocios y la Res...
-
When drivers become inhibitors of organic consumption: the need for a ...
-
Valoriser le commerce responsable par les métaphores conceptuelles
-
Halo Effect and Source Credibility in the Evaluation of Food Products ...
-
Consumer Choice for Milk and Dairy in Romania: Does Income Really Have...
-
A Macroeconomic Review of the Factors Influencing Fruit Consumption in...
-
Visualizing recycling: Promoting recycling through mental simulation
-
Factors affecting adoption of electric vehicles in India: An explorato...
-
Can luxury attitudes impact sustainability? The role of desire for uni...
-
The role of consumer innovativeness and green perceptions on green inn...
-
Business Model Innovation for Circular Economy in Fashion Industry: A ...
-
In Pursuit of Happiness: Disentangling Sustainable Consumption, Consum...
-
Représentations sociales du consommateur responsable : les autres cons...
-
“Game on!” Pushing consumer buttons to change sustainable behavior: a ...
-
Sustainable by Design: Choice Architecture and the Carbon Footprint of...
-
La distance psychologique comme outil actionnable par les managers
-
Structural Equation Modelling of Properties That Trigger Purchaser’s C...
-
What Nudge Techniques Work for Food Waste Behaviour Change at the Cons...
-
Practical guidelines for designing recycling, collaborative, and scala...
-
Towards reduced meat consumption: A systematic literature review of in...
-
Making it Easier to Take Environmental Actions is not Enough: Policyma...
-
Confirming Antecedents of Green Consumption Intention: A Sustainable M...
-
They’re Just Not That into You: How to Leverage Existing Consumer–Bran...
-
Sustainable Consumption in Consumer Behavior in the Time of COVID-19: ...
-
Green Attributes in Young Consumers’ Purchase Intentions: A Cross-Coun...
-
Understanding Public Environmental Awareness and Attitudes toward Circ...
-
Consumer antecedents towards green product purchase intentions
-
Mapping the jungle: A bibliometric analysis of research into construal...
-
Cuteness or Coolness—How Does Different Anthropomorphic Brand Image Ac...
-
Social marketing: advancing a new planning framework to guide programm...
-
Potentials for reducing climate impact from tourism transport behavior
-
Price? Quality? Or Sustainability? Segmenting by Disposition Toward Se...
-
Changes in Consumers’ Purchase Patterns as a Consequence of the COVID-...
-
UK Consumers’ Preferences for Ethical Attributes of Floating Rice: Imp...
-
Guess What …?—How Guessed Norms Nudge Climate-Friendly Food Choices in...
-
Empathy from private or public self‐consciousness ...
-
How does public recognition affect price sensitivity to green products...
-
When normative framing saves Mr. Nature: Role of consumer efficacy in ...
-
Gratitude and sustainable consumer behavior: A moderated mediation mod...
-
Connecting consumers to producers to foster sustainable consumption in...
-
Intergenerational influence on sustainable consumer attitudes and beha...
-
Understanding the effectiveness of social influence appeals in charita...
-
Urban and Rural Sustainability: Divergent Concepts and Their Consequen...
-
Are Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes Effective? Reviewing the Evidence T...
-
Determinants of Smart Meter on Sustainable Energy Consumption Behavior...
-
A Note on Data-driven Actor-differentiation and SDGs 2 and 12: Insight...
-
Scientific procedures and rationales for systematic literature reviews...
-
Everybody Thinks We Should but Nobody Does: How Combined Injunctive an...
-
Trying to recycle domestic waste and feelings of guilt: a moderated me...
-
Can Sustainable Health Behaviour Contribute to Ensure Healthy Lives an...
-
References
-
Fashion and Lifestyle Brands: Storytelling within Purpose-Led Brands i...
-
Longer-Term Impact of the Flavored Tobacco Restriction in Two Massachu...
-
Green consumption: consumer behavior after an environmental tragedy
-
Antecedents of Environmentally and Socially Responsible Sustainable Co...
-
Developing a strong sustainability research program in marketing
-
Competition versus cooperation: How technology-facilitated social inte...
-
Changing diets - Testing the impact of knowledge and information nudge...
-
Proud to be sustainable: Upcycled versus recycled luxury products
-
The effect of ownership structure on social and environmental reportin...
-
The Individual Green-Washing Effect in E-Mobility: Emotional Evaluatio...
-
Better Marketing for a Better World
-
“How Do I Carry All This Now?” Understanding Consumer Resistance to Su...
-
Buy Less, Buy Luxury: Understanding and Overcoming Product Durability ...
-
Increasing Electric Vehicle Uptake by Updating Public Policies to Shif...
-
The Impact of Social Norms on Pro-Environmental Behavior: A Systematic...
-
Brain mechanisms underlying prospective thinking of sustainable behavi...
-
Digitalization as solution to environmental problems? When users rely ...
-
Age-related effects on environmentally sustainable purchases at the ti...
-
Packaging-free products: A lever of proximity and loyalty between cons...
-
Toward a personology of green consumers: An application of personal pr...
-
When does a social norm catch the worm? Disentangling social normative...
-
Antecedents of daily disposal routines in the Gaza Strip refugee camps
-
Antecedents and consequences of brand ownership: moderating roles of s...
-
Drivers to green consumption: a systematic review
-
Evaluating the Effect of Framing Energy Consumption in Terms of Losses...
-
Consumers care and firms should too: On the benefits of disclosing sup...
-
Sustainable product-service system hierarchical framework under uncert...
-
Sharing is caring: How non-financial incentives drive sustainable e-co...
-
Assimilating and Differentiating: The Curvilinear Effect of Social Cla...
-
Nudging Commuters to Increase Public Transport Use: A Field Experiment...
-
Sustainable advertising or ecolabels: Which is the best for your brand...
-
Impact of self-expressiveness and environmental commitment on sustaina...
-
Sustainable Marketing: Market-Driving, Not Market-Driven
-
Examining sustainability surcharges for outdoor apparel using Adaptive...
-
The role of food eating values and exploratory behaviour traits in pre...
-
Consumer responses to trade-offs in eco-friendly clothing: The moderat...
-
Determinants of customers’ intentions towards environmentally sustaina...
-
An empirical study on effective green marketing – Is ‘SHIFT Framework’...
-
Communicating Sustainable Responsible Investments as Financial Advisor...
-
Perceptions of Green User Entrepreneurs’ Performance—Is Sustainability...
-
Sustainable Retailing
-
Drivers of sustainable entrepreneurial intentions among university stu...
-
Individual antecedents to consumer intention to switch to food waste b...
-
Social Media Usage by Different Generations as a Tool for Sustainable ...
-
Tracing the Trends in Sustainability and Social Media Research Using T...
-
Factors Influencing Consumer Behavior in Sustainable Fruit and Vegetab...
-
Impact of raising awareness of Sustainable Development Goals: A survey...
-
How to Reap the CSR Fruits: The Crucial Role Played by Customers
-
Nachhaltiger Konsum
-
Zur Steuerung nachhaltigen Konsums: Die Entwicklung einer nachhaltigen...
-
Behavioural environmental economics
-
Social interaction and the formation of residents′ low-carbon consumpt...
-
Priority goals for the strategic development of industrial enterprises...
-
Main Dependences between Gender, Financial Status and Indicators Predi...
-
Design for Product Care—Development of Design Strategies and a Toolkit...
-
The Impact of Awe Induced by COVID-19 Pandemic on Green Consumption Be...
-
Towards a Taxonomy for Design Options of Social Networking Technologie...
-
Adoption of Energy-Efficient Home Appliances: Extending the Theory of ...
-
Consumption in the Circular Economy: Learning from Our Mistakes
-
Environmentally Motivated Travel Reduction: The Effects of Availabilit...
-
Research of how private label VkusVill has acquired sustainable brand ...
-
Determinants of Household Pro-Environmental Practices
-
Municipal Solid Waste Management Using an Inclusive Technological Plat...
-
Green Consumer Behaviour
-
Design Thinking to Engage Consumers in Achieving Zero Waste Food Exper...
-
The Environmentalist Movement in the World and Environmental Studies i...
-
How to Reap the CSR Fruits: The Crucial Role Played by Customers
-
Nachhaltiger Konsum im digitalen Zeitalter
-
The influence mechanism of environmental anxiety on pro‐environmental ...
-
Risky Business: The Risk-Reward Trade-off is Different for Nonprofit a...
-
The Challenges on the Path Toward Sustainability in the EU
-
Sustainable Market Exchange from the Consumer Perspective
-
Mobility as a service (MaaS): the importance of transportation psychol...
-
An investigation of unsustainable luxury: How guilt drives negative wo...
-
Data fusion strategies for energy efficiency in buildings: Overview, c...
-
Does experience sharing affect farmers’ pro-environmental behavior? A ...
-
Insights into German Consumers’ Perceptions of Virtual Fencing in Gras...
-
Relating the role of green self‐concepts and identity on green purchas...
-
Genetically Modified Crops’ Environmental Impact and Trust in Eco-labe...
-
Why do people buy organic food? The moderating role of environmental c...
-
Priming social media and framing cause-related marketing to promote su...
-
Heuristic Thinking and Credibility of Organic Advertising Claims: The ...
-
Envisaging Mitigation Action Can Induce Lower Discounting toward Futur...
-
Building power consumption datasets: Survey, taxonomy and future direc...
-
Consumer behaviour and environmental sustainability
-
Finding the Sweet Spot between Ethics and Aesthetics: A Social Entrepr...
-
Welfare Beyond Consumption: The Benefits of Having Less
-
Experimenting with sustainable business models in fast moving consumer...
-
Addressing the Sustainability Paradox: The Analysis of “Good Food” in ...
-
Seeking sustainable futures in marketing and consumer research
-
Marketing Research on Environmental Sustainability
-
When saving the planet is worth more than avoiding destruction: The im...
-
Social Media Goes Green—The Impact of Social Media on Green Cosmetics ...
-
Access Over Ownership: Case Studies of Libraries of Things
-
Different Perceptions of Belief: Predicting Household Solid Waste Sepa...
-
How to “Nudge” your consumers toward sustainable fashion consumption: ...
-
Tutumlu Bilgi Sistemleri Üzerine Bir İnceleme
-
Integrating Sustainability into Corporate Strategy: A Case Study of th...
-
Mobilising SDG 12: co-creating sustainability through brands
-
Environmentally Sustainable Food Consumption: A Review and Research Ag...
-
One app to trace them all? Examining app specifications for mass accep...
-
Customer Experience Journeys: Loyalty Loops Versus Involvement Spirals
-
A values–beliefs–attitude model of local food consumption: An empirica...
-
Tackling single-occupancy vehicles to reduce carbon emissions: Actiona...
-
Designing conceptual articles: four approaches
-
Is the Transition to Bioeconomy a Sustainable Solution in Fast-fashion...
-
The importance of customer trust for social marketing interventions: a...
-
Identifying the Promoters of Students Sustainable Behaviour: An Empiri...
-
Social Cues and the Online Purchase Intentions of Organic Wine
-
Social Feedback Loop in the Organic Food Purchase Decision-Making Proc...
-
“Be Careful What You Say”: The role of psychological reactance on the ...
-
Young energy savers: Exploring the role of parents, peers, media and s...
-
An investigation into the erroneous access and egress behaviours of bu...
-
Explaining Consumer Heterogeneity in Structural State-Dependence
-
The Drivers of Sustainable Apparel and Sportswear Consumption: A Segme...
-
“Throwaway” consumption in a consumerist society: Evidence from a deve...
-
Understanding household waste separation in South Africa
-
Pleasant Ambient Scents: A Meta-Analysis of Customer Responses and Sit...
-
Who Receives Credit or Blame? The Effects of Made-to-Order Production ...
-
A Review and Framework for Thinking about the Drivers of Prosocial Con...
-
Sustainable Purchasing Patterns and Consumer Responsiveness to Sustain...
-
Mobility as a Service (MaaS): The Importance of Transportation Psychol...
-
Sustainable Retailing
-
Changing Diets – Testing the Impact of Knowledge and Information Nudge...
-
The Impact of Pro-environmental Preference on Consumers’ Perceived Wel...
-
Framing Descriptive Norms as Self-Benefit Versus Environmental Benefit...
-
The Implication of Sustainability Innovation
-
Effectiveness of Actual and Anticipated Incentives for Reducing Mobile...
-
Public Discourse and Socially Responsible Market Behavior
-
Advancing Sustainable Consumption in Korea and Japan—From Re-Orientati...
-
Multiple Pathways to More Sustainable Diets: Shifts in Diet Compositio...
-
Effective design of domestic energy efficiency displays: A proposed ar...
-
Promoting reuse behaviour: Challenges and strategies for repeat purcha...
-
Evidence Is Key for Effective Biodiversity Communication
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
View options
PDF/ePub
View PDF/ePubGet access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
AMA members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
AMA members can access this journal content using society membership credentials.
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
