Morality and Green Consumer Behaviour: A Psychological Perspective

Transcription

1 Seminar: Consumption Ethics and the Individual Royal Holloway, University of London, 5 February 2015 Morality and Green Consumer Behaviour: A Psychological Perspective Judith I. M. de Groot John Thøgersen University of Bath, UK Aarhus University, Denmark

2 Outline Introduction Green consumer behaviour in expectancy-value models Green consumer behaviour in moral norm models Risks of focusing on non-moral consequences When and how to use moral and non-moral arguments for promoting green consumer behaviour 5 February

3 Introduction Climate change 5 February Credit: Guardian graphics

4 Introduction Do we fit on the planet? It now takes the Earth one year and six months to regenerate what we use in a year. Moderate UN scenarios suggest that if current population and consumption trends continue, by the 2030s, we will need the equivalent of two Earths to support us. 5 February

5 Introduction Green consumer behaviour (GCB) Consumption patterns are not sustainable (UNEP, 2013) Changing individual consumption patterns regarded as a necessary condition for reaching a more sustainable society (IPCC WG3, 2014) Focus on psychology Unravelling the motivations of human behaviour, such as GCB, enables the development of behaviour change interventions 5 February

6 Expectancy-valence models Behaviour is based on deliberate reasoning Consider costs and benefits of green behaviour (expectancy) and weigh them by personal values Show those behaviours with greatest net benefit or utility When each individual maximises own utility, societal utility will be maximised Utilitarian approach to ethics 5 February

7 Expectancy-valence models Theory of Planned Behaviour Ajzen, February

8 Moral norm models Expectancy-value model assumptions unrealistic Consumers do not understand everything relevant about available alternatives Individually optimising behaviour does not always results in optimal outcomes on aggregate level Behaviour is based on moral decision making Show those behaviours that are considered the right thing to do Deontological approach to ethics (Alexander & Moore, 2012) 8

9 Moral norm models Value theory Green consumer behaviour as a social dilemma Cooperation depends on the person s values Desirable trans-situational and overarching guiding principles in life, varying in importance (Schwartz, 1992) Abstractness implies predictions of broad patterns of behaviour rather than specific actions only 5 February

10 Moral norm models Value theory Two types of values of particular relevance Egoistic and altruistic (and biospheric) (Stern, 2000; De Groot & Steg, 2008, 2010) Endorsing altruistic and biospheric values results in more green consumer behaviour, egoistic in less (Thøgersen, 2011) Activated values direct attention to value-congruent information which will affect behaviour accordingly Green product attributes were more influential on purchasing intentions for someone with strong rather than weak biospheric values (Schuitema & De Groot, 2015) 5 February

11 Moral norm models Value Belief Norm Theory Stern, February

12 Expectancy-valence vs moral norm models Two meta-analysis suggest that green consumer behaviour is a mixture of rational and moral decision making (Bamberg & Moser, 2007; Klockner, 2013) Attitudes, PBC, Personal Norms Moral considerations important when explaining green consumer behaviour Personal norms as internalised social norms (Thøgersen, 2009, 2014) 5 February

13 Morality and encouraging GCB Social marketing campaigns largely base persuading strategies on expectancy-valence models (Bolderdijk et al., 2013) People can only be persuaded if they benefit from the behaviour themselves? Opportunities and risks for promoting GCB 5 February

14 Awakening moral values and norms No activation, no influence Values and norms will only guide behaviour if activated in specific social context (Cialdini et al., 1990) If not activated, other egoistic motivations get in the way of acting upon moral values and norms Use of personal pronouns and questions marks Caring for the environment, please re-use bags Do YOU care for the environment, please re-use your bags (De Groot, Abrahamse, & Jones, 2013) 5 February

15 Risks of focusing on nonmoral consequences (1) Focusing on self-interest motivations changes one s mind-set and self-concept Makes people act rational rather than moral (Heymans & Ariely, 2004) Focusing on moral reasons helps us to keep a positive self-concept (Bolderdijk et al., 2013) Want to protect the environment? Check your car s pressure versus Want to save money? Check your car s tire pressure 5 February

16 Risks of focusing on nonmoral consequences (1) Focusing on self-interest motivations changes one s mind-set and self-concept Makes people act rational rather than moral (Heymans & Ariely, 2004) Focusing on moral reasons helps us to keep a positive self-concept (Bolderdijk et al, 2013) Do you care about the environment? Get a free tire check. versus Do you care about your finances? Get a free tire 16 check.

17 Risks of focusing on nonmoral consequences (2) Focusing on self-interest reduces chances of positive spill-over effects 5 February

18 Behavioural spill-over A large number of studies report positive correlations between pro-environmental behaviours Behaviours within the same taxonomic categories tend to be more strongly correlated than behaviours within different taxonomic categories (Thøgersen & Ölander, 2001) Correlations between pairs of pro-environmental behaviour increase with the similarity (Bratt, 1999) or with the perceived similarity (Thøgersen, 2004) of the two behaviours 5 February

19 People who think about environmental reasons for car-pooling recycle more 5 February 2015 Evans et al

20 Discussion GCB partially explained by morality (e.g. environmental values and norms) Motivations based on moral considerations need to be made salient Not focusing on self-interest motivations at all? Positive egoistic consequences as support rather than as an ultimate goal for desired behaviour (Heymans & Ariely, 2004) 5 February

21 Discussion 5 February

22 Discussion 5 February

23 Thank you for your attention! Questions??? Judith De Groot John Thøgersen 5 February

24 References Alexander, L. and Moore, M., Deontological ethics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2012 edition). Ajzen, I., The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50 (2), Bamberg, S. and Möser, G., Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psychosocial determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (1), Bolderdijk, J., Steg, L., Geller, E., Lehman, P. and Postmes, T., Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning. Nature Climate Change, 3 (4), Bratt, C., The impact of norms and assumed consequences on recycling behavior. Environment and Behavior, 31, Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., and Kallgren, C. A., A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, De Groot, J. I. M., Abrahamse, W., and Jones, K., Injunctive and personal normative messages to decrease the use of plastic bags. Sustainability, 5(5), De Groot, J. I. M. and Steg, L., Value Orientations to Explain Beliefs Related to Environmental Significant Behavior How to Measure Egoistic, Altruistic, and Biospheric Value Orientations. Environment and Behavior, 40 (3), February

25 References De Groot, J. I. M. and Steg, L., Relationships between value orientations, self-determined motivational types and pro-environmental behavioural intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30 (4), Evans, L., Maio, G. R., Corner, A. J., Hodgetts, C. J., Ahmed, S. and Hahn, U. (2013). Self-Interest and proenvironmental behaviour [Letter]. Nature Climate Change, 3(2), Heyman, J. and Ariely, D., Effort for payment. A tale of two markets. Psychological Science, 15, Klöckner, C. A., A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), Schuitema, G. and De Groot, J. I. M. (2015). When proself and prosocial interests are at odds: Product characteristics, values and purchase intentions of personal care products. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, preview Schwartz, S. H., Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 1 65). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Stern, P. C., Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 3, Thøgersen, J., Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: An extended taxonomy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26, February

26 References Thøgersen, J., The motivational roots of norms for environmentally responsible behavior. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31, Thøgersen, J., Green Shopping: For Selfish Reasons or the Common Good? American Behavioral Scientist, 55 (8). Thøgersen, J., Unsustainable consumption: Basic causes and implications for policy. European Psychologist, 19, Thøgersen, J. and Crompton, T., Simple and painless? The limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32, Thøgersen, J. and Ölander, F., Human values and the emergence of a sustainable consumption pattern: A panel study. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23 (5), February