In early April this year we released a report that consolidated 60 studies, from the time period 2005 to early 2013, on the behaviour, attitudes, shopping criteria of the ‘better consumer’.
The questions we tried to answer were: What insights can be considered consolidated, and what to they tell us? What is urban legend or one off results? What are early indicators of trends? The highlights of the report can be consulted in this previous blog post.
Over the summer, two of the source reports used for our evaluation have been updated, expanded and released in their 2013 edition with further relevant details.
What can be said in brief: while the insights as such do not come as a surprise – they correlate well with our daily experience both within our personal environment as well as in our work with brands and manufacturers.
The two updated reports are:
- Lebensqualität – Konsumethik zwischen persönlichem Vorteil und sozialer Verantwortung.
(Otto Group Trendstudie 2013, 4. Studie zum ethischen Konsum. Germany, September 2013, 61 pages).
The methodology behind this research is robust and multifaceted. In April 2013 1000 persons in the age range of 16 to 74 years across all of Germany were interview by phone. These results were then discussed in depth with 5 experts in the field of consumer behaviour / sociology / psychology in interviews that took lace in June 2013. - Consumers Who Care – And Say They’ll Reward Companies With Their Wallets.
(Nielsen. Sweden, August 2013, 14 pages).
This study is overall substantially less stringent, for 2 reasons. First, the survey was done online across 58 countries. This evidently does not allow for the same distribution control as in the first study – no guarantee hence can be taken that the age or income distribution is representative of the population. Taking into consideration that all respondents required internet access to take the survey, a bias is highly likely. Additionally, claimed behaviour was not double-checked in anyway, i.e. neither through e.g. experts as was the case for the first study.
Otto trend report: Insights
‘Better consumption’, whereby consumers consider both environmental as well as social credentials of a product, as arrived in ‘everyday life’: For the first time ever, 56% of all surveyed consumers – hence over half – declared to regularly buy products that were produced in an ‘ethically correct’ manner. This means that in only 4 years, namely since Otto published their first study in 2009, the percentage of consumers discriminating based on ethical product credentials has doubled.
The definition of ‘consumer ethics’ has also shifted among German consumers. Buying locally produced products has become more popular and important.
While in the 2011 study 77% of surveyees said to prefer locally produced products due to ethical (social) considerations, this percentage has risen 87% for the results of the last study.
In terms of environmental ethics, the response has only slightly increased relative to the 2011 results (from 89% to 92%), however, consumers are increasingly reluctant to spend more on organic produce.
The social (labour) aspects of consumption ethics are considered important. 92% of surveyees define ‘ethical consumption’ as buying products that can be guaranteed to have been produced under ‘humane’ labour and production conditions. This correlates with insights from experts as well as analysis of media reports confirming that the public at large is highly sensible to social topics such as labour considerations, slave or child labour.
The value of the social credentials and connotation attributed to the meaning of ‘consumption ethics’ becomes even clearer when seen in the context of quality of life: 97% of surveyees are of the opinion that business can, and should, contribute to higher quality of life through their labour policy and labour conditions. 60% buy ethically ‘correct’ products to enhance their own quality of life, 83% are doing so in order to impact the quality of life of others (positively).
This difference indicates a newly emerging trend whereby non-material trends are increasingly important for consumption choices and individual purchasing behaviour.
Finally, where as in 2011 only 12% of surveyees saw NGOs and and the media as a driving force to enhance the ethical consumption agenda, in the most recent study this percentage has increased to 21%.
The number of people trusting business to do actually be active and contribute their share, has remained stable at 21%.
Nielsen trend report: Insights
In Nielsen’s 2011 edition of their survey 45% of said they would be willing to reward companies that give back to society by paying more for their goods and services. This percentage has risen to 50% for the current 2013 edition.
However, it depends substantially on which market geography we’d be looking at.
Only 36% of surveyees in ‘old markets’ in European respondents say to be ready to pay more for goods and services from companies that “give back”. Apparently this is substantially lower then for ‘new’ European markets such as Estonia, or markets further east, such as India, the Philippines or Russia.
The study does though not mention a percentage number for the Eastern markets for example. However, knowing the way the ‘ethics’ and responsibility discussion is lead in China – heavily based on health and safety as well as consumer security issues – there is a chance that the underlying reason for consumers in these markets being willing to pay more for ‘better products’ has less to do with them ‘being better’ or ‘more responsible’ but rather their worry about their health and distrust in consumer goods.
Nevertheless, around 43% surveyees said that they have rewarded companies that give back, i.e. that they spent more on products and services from companies that have implemented programs to give back to society.
This is in as far relevant that as this is only 7% lower than the 50% that claim that they would spend money on ‘better’ products and companies. Overall, younger consumers are more willing to spend on ethically and environmentally sound products, where as with age that willingness diminishes.
Finally, on a global scale, 43 among the 58 countries surveyed are generally a positive attitude towards spending more for ‘better’ companies and products, and the respective percentages have increased throughout since the 2011 study. The same applies if comparing the willingness to spend more across all demographic groups, which has increased again throughout in comparison to the 2011 study.
Conclusion
The studies are very different in terms of quality of methodology, and also quantity and reliability of the data and subsequent research results.
However, it is the striking similarities that are interesting to observe. Both studies come, in essence, to the same results even though one of them has been conducted in a single country and under fairly controlled conditions, whereas the other was realised on much looser terms.
Both document a shift in perception of what ‘better consumption’ means, how important it is in global terms, but also that consumers are adjusting their individual behaviour accordingly.
They also show that old consumer markets have a different set of ‘triggers’ than new consumer markets. In one case clichés are still a major hurdle to take for better consumption to mainstream further, where as for Asian and new consumer markets health and safety concerns are a driving factor.
