eco hypocrites or key to a sustainable future an exploratory study

1

Claire Carlile [email protected]

Eco hypocrites or key to a

sustainable future? An exploratory study into influences on ethical consumer behaviour

with regard to air travel

Claire Carlile, MSc Marketing, September 2008

[email protected]

http://twitter.com/clairecarlile

http://www.linkedin.com/in/clairecarlile

2


ABSTRACT

The high profile of environmental issues, and the growing realisation of the need to mitigate climate

change, has resulted in a keen interest in the role of ethical consumers in building markets for more

sustainable products and for establishing new behaviours before they are taken up by the mainstream.

Despite government intervention aimed at reducing carbon emissions, and the role that reduction of air

travel behaviours could play in this, the amount that the public flies continues to rise. Ethical consumers,

who in other areas of their life choose greener products and take part in pro environmental behaviours,

appear to be heavily implicated in such air travel behaviours.

The literature indicates the importance of understanding ethical consumer behaviour, however, ethical

consumption remains a poorly understood phenomenon. The aim of this exploratory study is to gain an

insight into influences on ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel for travel and tourism

purposes. Data from in‐depth interviews are analysed and the findings related to the existing literature.

The findings indicate that ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel is influenced by a plethora

of factors; the most salient of which appear to be the type and strength of environmental concern, the

current role of travel and tourism in an individual’s life, social influences, situational constraints and

geographical location. Unlike previous research in the field, the findings of this primary research indicate

that this group of self selecting ethical consumers are indeed taking their ethical concerns into account

when making their air travel consumption decisions.

3


CONTENTS

Section Title Page Number

Introduction 5

Literature Review 8

Methodology and Method 22

Presentation and Analysis of Findings 30

Discussion 40

Conclusion 45

Bibliography 49

Appendices

Appendix A – Defra segmentation model: description of ‘Positive

Green’ population segment 58

Tables

Table 1 ‐ Respondent details, environmental concerns and

behaviours, and summary statement regarding flying 31

4


INTRODUCTION

“If consumerism is a force for good, then there are few issues that test the truth of that more than the

challenge of facing up to climate change. It is true that there are many environmental challenges…but

climate change stands out as an emergency because of its reach and the long time lags involved.”

Ed Mayo, Chief Executive of the National Consumer Council (Mayo, 2007b)

The seriousness of the global situation with regard to the environmental threat posed by climate change

is now widely accepted; climate change threatens the basic elements of life for people around the world,

including access to water, food production, health, use of land, and the environment. ‘The Stern Review

on Climate Change’ focuses attention on the responsibility of the UK’s government, businesses and

individuals to reduce carbon dioxide (C02) emissions and global action is believed to be required now if

devastating consequences for the planet and the people are to be avoided in the future (Stern, 2007).

This environmental crisis provides a stark backdrop to the research.

Although ethical purchase behaviour has been observed for centuries, the flowering of ethical consumer

behaviour around the world over the last twenty years has been unprecedented (Harrison, Newholm &

Shaw, 2005). Such consumers have long been viewed as a marketing opportunity (Newholm, 2000), and

more recently ethical consumers have been described as ‘high net worth’ customers who are happy to

pay a premium for products and services that are a good fit with their environmental and social beliefs

(Mintel, 2008), and ‘green’ is seen as having gone from the smallest of niches to a very desirable market

all set to grow (Futerra, 2008). The rise of ethical consumption is viewed as being likely to be a key trend

affecting all industries over the next few years (Mintel, 2007a), climate change is viewed as a business

opportunity as much as a commercial threat (Mayo, 2007a), and companies and organisations are assured

that financial returns can be made by marketing to the ethical consumer (Tinlin, 2007; Wheale & Hinton,

2007).

In addition to being urged to capitalise upon the commercial expediency presented by this market of

ethical consumers, organisations are also charged with playing a leading role in environmental efforts, not

only by taking steps to reduce their own carbon footprint but by helping their customers reduce the

impact they have on the environment (Stern, 2007). Businesses appear to be in a new and unique

position; not only to develop products and services to cater for the growing number of ethical consumers

but to encourage the take up of pro environmental behaviours1 as they guide consumers toward more

sustainable behaviour (Peattie & Crane, 2005), and green marketing is increasingly viewed as an agent for

1 A pro environmental behaviour is characterised as one that is carried out with the environment in mind; an environmentally responsible behaviour (Chan, 1998).

5


social and environmental change (Grant, 2007).

Individuals in our society are also expected to play an essential role in efforts to counter climate change

(Stern, 2007) and in this mission ethical consumers appear to fulfil two important functions. Aside from

their contribution to growing the markets for green and ethical goods, public policy views ethical

consumers as essential in establishing new behaviours before they are taken up by the mainstream

(Defra, 2008), and the behaviour of current ethical consumers is viewed as providing valuable lessons to

help move grey consumers2 towards more sustainable behaviours (Young, McDonald, & Oates, 2006b).

Despite the commitment to C02 reduction cemented in ‘The Climate Change Bill’ (HM Government, 2007)

the UK’s emissions are still on the rise (NESTA, 2008). Some pro environmental and pro social behaviours

are now practised en masse by the population; such as recycling, energy conservation, and the purchase

of free range eggs, organic, and fair trade foods, whereas other prevailing trends which are much more

carbon intensive, such as the amount the public fly and drive, continue to rise (Downing & Ballantyne,

2007). Aviation is thought to account for approximately 7% of the UK’s emissions, and research suggests

that Britain will not meet its climate targets without curbing the industry (Black, 2008). Despite their

perceived role as ‘early adopters’ (Darnton et al, 2006) in the sphere of green purchases and pro

environmental behaviour, ethical consumers are reported to be just as attached to air travel as

consumers in general (Defra 2008; BMRB, 2008; Miller, Rathouse, Scarles, Holmes & Tribe, 2006; Downing

& Ballantyne, 2007; Adam, 2008) and have thus been criticised by some as being ‘eco hypocrites’ (Barr,

2008).

Whether intending to take advantage of the revenue creation aspects of this group of consumers, or to

harness their actions to encourage sustainable behaviour in other population segments, it appears

undisputed that a more thorough understanding of such consumers is required (Jackson, 2003a; Peattie,

1999; Crane, 2000; Peattie & Crane, 2005). In view of the potential for carbon savings represented by the

reduction or cessation of flying an investigation into the influences on ethical consumer behaviour with

regard to air travel appears warranted and timely. Are ethical consumers influenced by their

environmental concerns with regard to their flying behaviours? If not, what are they influenced by?

These questions are at the core of this research, the answers to which are hoped to benefit any

organisation that has the aim of contributing in one way or another to the sustainability agenda.

The principal aim of this research is to gain an insight into influences on ethical consumer behaviour

with regard to air travel for travel and tourism purposes. The following section details the objectives of

this study, and offers a guide to the following chapters.

2 Grey consumers are defined by Peattie (2001b) as those with little or no interest in the environment.

6


With the research aim in mind, the first objective of the study is to investigate secondary research so as to

establish existing work in the field of ethical consumption relevant to the specific area of air travel, and

this objective is attended to in the ‘Literature Review’. In this section the concept of the ethical consumer

is clarified at a definitional level, and further background is provided to the research question. The

growth of ethical consumption is considered; the problems of identifying the ethical consumer are

examined; the justification for, and the intended relevance of, the research is detailed; and the field of

ethical consumer behaviour is introduced. Given that little previous research has been conducted in the

area of ethical consumption and air travel, it is necessary to consider a range of factors thought to

influence ethical consumer behaviour, all of which serve to provide a foundation and structure on which

to conduct the primary research.

The exploratory investigation is the second objective of the study, in which a qualitative methodology is

utilised with the aim of gaining an in‐depth insight into factors influencing the air travel behaviour of a

group of self selecting ethical consumers. The ‘Methodology and Method’ chapter establishes the

researcher’s position, considers the philosophical assumptions underpinning the research, presents a

rationale for the methodology employed, and the scope and limitations of the research design are

discussed. The method of analysis and ethical issues related to this study are then considered.

The third and final objective of the study is to compare the findings of the primary research with those of

the secondary research as detailed in the review of the literature. In the ‘Presentation and Analysis of

Findings’ chapter, and the ‘Discussion’ section, the boundaries and limitations of the investigation are

reflected upon, the findings and associated implications of the research are considered, and the research

results are compared and contrasted with the secondary research. Tentative suggestions are made to

explain the similarities and differences.

The concluding section establishes whether the aims and objectives of the study have been met. This

section adopts a reflexive stance and reflects on the process of the research, the limitations of the study

are again explored and suggestions are made as to how the research process could have been improved.

The contribution of the research to current knowledge is considered, and suggestions are made as to

possible avenues for future research.

7


LITERATURE REVIEW

This literature review aims to seek clarification on the concept of the ethical consumer at a definitional

level, and provides a background to the research question. The growth of ethical consumption is

considered, the problems of identifying the ethical consumer are examined, the justification for and the

intended relevance of the research is detailed. The field of ethical consumer behaviour is introduced, its

complexity is considered, and the existing body of research into influences on ethical consumer behaviour

is explored.

The ethical consumer – a working definition

The existence of consumers who are ethically concerned has been well documented over the past several

decades (Shaw, Grehan, Shiu, Hassan & Thompson, 2005). Throughout this period academic articles,

conference proceedings, surveys, and reports from a range of domains including the social sciences,

sustainable development, environmental policy and marketing have attempted to define behavioural

aspects of, and influences on, a group of consumers who are concerned about a broad spectrum of

environmental and social issues.

Understandings of the phenomenon are not particularly straightforward; ethical consumption is viewed

as a loose term (Low & Davenport, 2007) which typically encompasses the idea of personal consumption

where the choice of a product or service exists that supports a particular ethical issue, be it human rights,

the environment, or animal welfare (Cooperative Bank, 2003). The term ‘ethical consumer’ carries

various meanings and is open to misinterpretation (Cowe & Williams, 2001) and there is no one definitive

view or definition of the ethical consumer (Harrison et al, 2005). Early marketing literature on the

phenomenon predominantly utilises the term ‘green consumer’ and green consumerism is described by

Ottman (1998) as individuals looking to protect themselves and their world through the power of their

purchasing decisions. Harrison et al (2005) define ethical purchasers as those that have political,

religious, spiritual, environmental, social and other motives for choosing one product over another, but

that the one thing that they have in common is that they are concerned with the effects that a purchasing

choice has, not only on themselves, but also on the external world around them.

There is some difficulty in separating consumer’s social and environmental concerns. A variety of

purchases that are considered ‘green buying’ might pertain to a range of concerns (Gilg, Barr & Ford,

2005), animal welfare, human rights, and environmental sustainability combine and vie for consumer’s

attention (Newholm, 2005) and in many cases environmental and social concerns overlap (Yeoman, 2007)

and compete (Gilg et al, 2005).

8


In view of the array of definitions, drawn from a range of academic domains, for the purposes of this

research I adopt the term ‘ethical consumer’ utilised by Cowe & Williams (2001) as a consumer who is

influenced by environmental or social considerations when making purchase and non‐purchase

decisions.3

The rise of the ethical consumer

Many explanations have been proffered for the apparent rise in ethical consumption. The following

section attempts to place the phenomenon within the social, political, cultural and environmental

contexts of our time.

Green concerns in the late 1980’s were triggered by a string of natural and man made disasters across the

globe (Grant, 2008) and the rise of the ethical consumer continued to be a significant phenomenon

throughout the 1990’s, driven by market issues such as child labour and the controversy over genetically

modified organisms (Cowe & Williams, 2001). The rise of ethical consumerism is viewed as bringing

together several strands of societal change; the decline of fixed social forms and structures and increased

desire and opportunity for self expression (Mintel, 2007b), the spread of markets, the growth of affluence

and aspirations, and a greater opportunity to exercise choice (Cowe & Williams, 2001).

Harrison et al (2005) set the phenomenon of the ethical consumer in the context of ‘consumer culture’; a

culture where yesterday’s luxuries have become transformed into today’s necessities (Durning, 1992),

and where our involvement in consumption encompasses more than the acts of purchase and

consumption themselves (Ollman, 1998). In this consumer society we increasingly express our ethics

through consumption precisely because consumption, and the related construction of self‐image,

becomes our major time consuming activity (Newholm, 2000). It is in response to the increased levels of

consumption that have accompanied our consumer oriented culture that some consumers have started

to question their individual consumption choices (Shaw & Newholm, 2002).

The theories of eminent sociologists Beck (1999) and Giddens (1990), who argue that because

proportionately more of our risks are human derived, in consumer societies they are politicised, and that

all consumers are forced to consider the increasing consequences of their existence, are considered

pertinent in the consideration of the growth of ethical consumerism (Newholm, 2000; Harrison et al,

2005). Today’s consumer culture of environmental uncertainty, ecological crisis, and increasing social

inequality is contrasted with the context of earlier years, where the societal benefits of consumption were

3 In line with the research of Young et al (2006a) and McDonald, Oates, Thyne, Alezivou and McMorland (2008) the terms ‘green consumer’ and ‘ethical consumer’ are used interchangeably in this paper to reflect the terms used in the literature drawn upon. Although these discourses utilise different terms to signify individuals who consider the environmental implications of their consumption practises, the terms are taken to have the same broad meaning.

9


emphasized by a need for economic growth (Cherrier, 2005b), and on the subject of climate change the

public find themselves in a different world to that of only a few years ago (Downing & Ballantyne, 2007).

Today’s economic situation could well affect the propensity of ethical consumers to take into account

their social and environmental concerns when making their purchase decisions; it may well be the case

that in more difficult economic times ethical criteria are seen as less important by consumers relative to

factors such as price and value (Worcester & Dawkins, 2005). However, given the continuing high profile

of environmental issues some industry analysts ask that if consumers can’t afford to have a green

conscience, can society afford for them not to? (Smith, 2008). Rather than encouraging consumers to

consume differently, in the sense of choosing greener and more ethical alternatives, many believe that

the environmental crises before us can only be assuaged by encouraging people to consume less

(Buensdorf & Cordes, 2008; Grant, 2007; Peattie & Peattie, 2008; Porritt, 2007).

The oxymoronical qualities of the concept of a green or ethical consumer are noted (Peattie, 2001b;

Jamrozy, 2007). However, the notion of the ethical consumer is considered valid (Newholm, 2000) and it

is suggested that it might be better to think of our widening consumption as attracting our ethical

consideration, rather than of any increasing morality amongst consumers (Newholm, 2005).

Identifying the ethical consumer

The identification of ethical consumers, usually through the process of segmentation, is viewed as vital for

those aiming to capitalise on the commercial expediency of ethical consumers (Tinlin, 2007; Wheale &

Hinton, 2005) when adopting a green marketing approach (Ottman, 1993), and for those with a behaviour

change agenda, utilising a social marketing approach (Defra, 2006; Barr, Gilg & Shaw, 2006; Kotler & Lee,

2008; Dresner, McKeevor & Tomei, 2007).

The green marketing literature has attempted to utilise a variety of variables to identify green consumer

segments (Kilbourne & Beckmann, 1998). Many early attempts used socio‐demographic criteria,

however, most studies appear to indicate the limited or ambiguous value of socio demographics for

segmenting and targeting environmentally conscious consumers (Faiers, Cook & Neame, 2007), and

ethical consumers are believed to be best defined by their attitudes to, and behaviour on, ethical issues

(Cowe & Williams, 2001).

In much of the literature and according to dominant segmentation models, green consumers are

conceptualised as individuals who are either susceptible to environmentally friendly goods or services or

not, which raises the expectation of a definable and predictable market segment of green consumers

(Young et al, 2006a). Peattie (2001a) suggests that an alternative to conventional market segmentation

10


as a means of understanding green consumer behaviour is to focus on the purchase rather than the

purchaser (Peattie, 2001b). This concept heralds a move away from the question of who the green

consumer is, towards a consideration of why green purchases or behaviours are, and are not, made or

performed.

Research with a focus on the purchase, rather than the purchaser, has highlighted that ethical consumers

green or ethical criteria are not necessarily applied in the same way, if applied at all, to purchases in

different sectors (Young et al, 2006b). An individual’s willingness and ability to adopt a behavioural goal is

thought to differ within a segment according to the nature of the goal (Wheale & Hinton, 2007);

indicating that even the ‘greenest’ consumers might not be willing or able to adopt certain pro

environmental behaviours (NESTA, 2008).

Ethical Consumer Behaviour

Complexity of the consumer behaviour field

Consumer behaviour is an extraordinarily rich phenomenon (Jackson, 2003a), and is defined as the study

of the processes involved when individuals or groups select, purchase, use, or dispose, of products,

services, ideas or experiences to satisfy needs and desires (Solomon Bamossy, Askeggard & Hogg, 2006).

Consumption is thought to play a myriad of roles in modern society, including the functional role of

satisfying basic needs, but is also implicated in processes of identity formation, social distinction and

identification, meaning creation and hedonic dreaming (Jackson, 2004). The consumer behaviour field

thus covers extensive ground, which some assert borders on unmanageability (Gabriel & Lang, 1995).

Underlying much of the research into green or ethical consumption is the assumption that ethical

consumers are rational actors, who act systemically according to their values (Salmela & Varho, 2006).

Conventional responses to environmental or consumer policy tend to be based on a rational choice model

(Friedman & Hechter, 1990) or expectancy‐value model (Fishbein, 1973), which contend that consumers

make decisions by calculating the individual costs and benefits of different courses of action and then

choosing the option that maximises their expected net benefits.

However, far from being the outcome of rational deliberation, an enormous variety of factors influence

consumer behaviour. Behavioural choices are often subconscious, and inconsistencies between beliefs,

attitudes and behaviours are common (Jackson, 2004), as choices are made subject to a multiplicity of

often conflicting behavioural drivers (Brook Lyndhurst, 2006).

Despite the seemingly complex and intractable nature of the field of consumer behaviour the imperative

to understand, and to influence, consumer behaviour is apparent, and is considered below.

11


The importance of understanding the green consumer

Consumers are viewed as key players in policies to achieve the environmental goal of C02 reduction

(Defra, 2008; Stern, 2007; National Consumer Council, 2006) and an understanding of consumer

behaviour is thought to be the key to the impact that society has on the environment (Jackson, 2003a).

The need for a deeper and more thorough understanding of ethical consumers is undisputed; green

marketers call for more qualitative research in order to understand ethical consumer’s needs, attitudes,

and beliefs (Peattie, 1999; Crane, 2000; Peattie & Crane, 2005) and the social marketing literature urges

organisations to research their ‘customers’ (Gardner & Stern, 1996), and the importance of viewing a

behaviour from the actor’s perspective is stressed (Nesta, 2008; Lucas et al, 2008).

Specifically, qualitative research aimed at understanding the tensions pulling ethical consumers in

different directions, and the way that they elect to trade off, or simply ignore, competing demands, is

called for (Downing & Ballantyne, 2007; Dresner et al, 2007). Additionally, the literature calls for the

consideration of; the individuals point of view, current behaviours and environment (Kotler, Roberto &

Lee, 2002; Peattie & Peattie, 2008); barriers to action and how these might be overcome (Nesta, 2008;

Mackenzie‐Mohr, 2000); how social norms, beliefs and attitudes influence their decisions to adopt or fail

to adopt pro environmental behaviours (Shaw, 2008); and the barriers and motivators to pro

environmental behaviour (Defra, 2008).

Air travel and Climate change – the relevance of in the context of this research

There has been increased and emotive media coverage regarding the extent to which C02 emissions from

aviation contribute to climate change. The role of flying in contributing to climate change often makes

the headlines; flying on holiday is viewed as a ‘symptom of sin’ and of ignoring the consequences of one’s

actions (Bates, 2007), and air travel is believed to be a behaviour that results in the most destructive

environmental impact a single person can exert (Monbiot, 2007).

The imperative for the reduction of flights in order to mitigate the effects of climate change has been

urged by environmentalists (Monbiot, 2007) and has been considered by public and government agencies

(Mayo, 2007a; Defra, 2008). In their ‘Framework for Pro Environmental Behaviour’ the Department for

the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) outline the twelve headline behavioural goals that

concentrate primarily on public behaviours which will have an impact on carbon savings and therefore

link to climate change mitigation (Defra, 2008). Avoiding unnecessary flights is one of the headline goals

identified and hence ‘not flying’, or the reduction of flights, is a pro environmental behaviour to be

encouraged at public policy level.

12


It would appear that there exists a group of ethical consumers who already prefer not to fly for travel and

tourism purposes in accordance with their environmental beliefs4, and Ethical Consumer Magazine states

that in these climate aware times, the thorny issue of how people go on holiday has become the ultimate

test of greenness (Irving, 2008). Meanwhile, survey evidence indicates the existence of an attitude

behaviour gap (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001) in ethical consumers with regard to their air travel consumption;

the British Market Research Bureau found that ‘active environmentalists’5 were 55% more likely than the

average British adult to have taken three or more trips by air in the last year (BMRB, 2007). Research

based on surveys, focus groups and in depth interviews purports to have found existence of a group of

‘eco hypocrites’ or ‘bleeding heart jetsetters’; a group of committed environmentalists who operate green

households yet also choose to fly, and who justify their flying by suggesting that recycling, using energy

efficient light bulbs and buying ethically sourced groceries are sufficient to ‘trade off’ the environmental

implications of their flying (Barr, 2008). The same research concludes that these individuals exhibit an

addiction to cheap flights and holidays that will be difficult to break (Adam, 2008).

Influences on ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel

There appears to have been little empirical research specifically investigating the factors that influence

ethical consumer’s air travel consumption. Of relevance to the research objectives of this study are the

findings from several studies, the details of which are considered below.

McDonald et al (2008) investigated green consumer’s information search and decision making processes

for purchases in the tourism sector, and found that green or ethical criteria were discussed, but that these

were often compromised in favour of other more prosaic criteria such as journey time, economic cost6

and convenience. Although many respondents claimed it was against their principles to fly, particularly

for short journeys within the UK or Europe due to the high carbon emissions associated with this mode of

travel, most of them actually did make use of domestic flights. Although green criteria were discussed for

short haul air travel they were often absent from descriptions of long haul air flights (ibid, 2008).

Miller et al’s (2006) research for Defra focused primarily on the publics understanding of, and views

about, sustainable tourism and within this broad focus they also attempted to identify the issues and

4 As evidenced by a recent proliferation of travel websites dedicated to the needs of those who prefer not to fly for holidays according to their environmental beliefs, for example www.ecoescapes.org and www.seat61.com, and by www.noflyzone.org, a site listing and detailing the ‘pledges’ of those who have decided not to fly in view of their environmental concerns. 5 In this survey ‘active environmentalists’ were classed as those who buy ‘green’ and ‘ethical’ brands, and who buy environmentally friendly washing powder and use recycled toilet paper. This is perhaps an illustration of the questionable segmentation categories utilised in the green and ethical consumer market research. 6 The term ‘economic’ cost or price is used here to indicate that the fiscal, rather than the environmental, implications of the behaviour or purchase are the main consideration.

13


opportunities related to Defra’s ‘reduce flying’ behavioural goal (Defra, 2008), utilising a focus group

methodology to explore the issues. The report purported to have recruited a group of ‘green activists’,

however, Miller (telephone conversation) reported that the recruitment of this group proved to be

problematic and ultimately unsatisfactory, since recruitment was made on the street, and within a

restricted timeframe, thus calling into question the green credentials of the respondents. Recruitment of

truly ‘green consumers’ was limited by the fact that those who had chosen not to fly because of

environmental beliefs were excluded by the recruitment process, and ultimately most participants in the

sample had very little interest in the environment (Miller et al, 2006).

In view of the above Miller et al (2006) report their findings on a general basis, rather than according to

the levels of environmental concern or behaviours of their respondents. Participants had several

objections to changing their tourism behaviour for the sake of the environment; people felt a very strong

sense of entitlement to holidays and felt their lack of attention to environmental impacts was justified;

pro environmental tourism choices were generally seen as making a sacrifice although those that made

sustainable tourism choices with the environment in mind (e.g. holidays in the UK) did not feel they were

making a sacrifice; many participants believed that it was not normative for them to make tourism

choices with the environment in mind since other people were not doing the same thing; participants felt

that the experiences they could take part in abroad could not be found in the UK; they were found to

choose holidays abroad for the sunny weather; expense, time and convenience were all factors in air

travel choice; and having family and friends overseas played a large part in individual’s holiday destination

decisions (ibid, 2006).

Miller at al’s (2006) findings, along with other survey research, form the basis for Defra’s (2008)

statement regarding the motivations and barriers experienced by their segment of ‘positive greens’7

towards the pro environmental behaviour of reduction of air travel. Defra report that this group are

particularly attached to flying and are reticent to reduce air travel; that this group is reluctant to make

changes that fundamentally impact on present lifestyles and standards of living; and conclude that the

avoidance of unnecessary flights is a more challenging behavioural goal, where willingness to act is low,

although people acknowledge that they could (ibid, 2008).

In view of the paucity of research into influences on ethical consumers’ air travel consumption, this

review of the literature draws on secondary research into influences on ethical consumer behaviour

which explores ethical consumption in general, or with regard to ethical consumption in certain sectors or

domains, for example fair trade, organic foods, green electricity consumption, or in the context of pro

7 See Appendix 1 for details of the Defra segmentation model ‘positive green’ population segment

14


environmental behaviours such as recycling. It should be noted that much of the secondary research into

influences on ethical consumer behaviour as detailed below are located within the positivist paradigm,

and adopt a quantitative approach, and as such seeks to establish causal relationships among objectively

specified variables, or to test hypotheses derived from predictive theories (Shaw, 2005). These studies

predominantly seek to prove a causal relationship between the influencing factor in question, and the

existence of ‘ethical’ tendencies in an individual or the adoption of a pro environmental behaviour.

Although disparate in aim and approach, the findings of such studies are relevant to the current study in

that they provide a framework from which to approach the investigation of influences on ethical

consumer behaviour with regard to air travel.

Considering the complexity of the field, it is considered beyond the remit of this exploratory research into

ethical consumers and air travel to consider the countless factors that have the potential to influence

ethical consumer behaviour. Instead, drawing on the literature from a range of disciplines, the most

prominent factors thought to influence ethical consumer behaviour are considered.

These influences are deliberated within a framework suggested by Jackson (2004) who believes that there

are two identifiably different kinds of approaches to understanding pro environmental consumer

behaviour; internal approaches, that study and model behaviour mainly as a function of processes

conceived as being internal to the individual, and those that study consumer behaviour as a function of

processes and characteristics external to the individual.

These categories offer structure to this review. However, due to the complex nature of consumer

behaviour, this framework does not represent distinct categories that can be viewed independently and

separately; ethical consumers are at any one time influenced by both individual characteristics and social

obligations (Cherrier, 2005a) and also by other, more situational or contextual factors (Stern, 2000). The

following section explores the existing literature on ethical consumer behaviour in terms of individual,

social and situational influences, which in turn can be seen to reflect the contributions from the

psychological, sociological, and economic or political academic domains (Jackson, 2003a).

Internal influences

Motivation

The important role of motivation, defined as things that form the basis for someone’s actions or decisions

in the marketplace (Moisander, 1998) or a reason for behaviour (Moisander, 2007), in influencing ethical

consumer behaviour is widely accepted in the literature (Harrison et al, 2005; Devinney, Eckhart & Belk,

2007; NESTA, 2008; Crompton, 2008; Rose, 2008; Freestone & McGoldrick, 2008).

15


Barr et al’s (2006) empirical research for Defra provided insights into the motivating factors and barriers

to pro environmental behaviours, linked to the Defra segments. They found that motivators for the

‘positive greens’ were; an awareness, understanding and knowledge of environmental issues, that

environmentalism was already an interest or a hobby, that environmentally sound behaviour maintained

personal integrity and identity, that there already existed a desire to avoid waste, and that pro

environmental behaviours were already part of day to day lives and habits. Barriers for the ‘positive

green’ segment were that individuals felt that they deserved some gratification and indulgence (ibid,

2006). Motivations that are intrinsic, or which arise from an individuals sense of self are thought to be

more likely to lead to pro environmental behaviour, and this effect has been found to be particularly

strong for more challenging environmental behaviours where individuals might have to suffer

inconvenience and difficulties (Crompton, 2008).

Conventional marketing techniques often rely on motivating consumers by outlining the individual

benefits conferred; and this is believed to be less applicable to pro environmental behaviours, which are

often seen in terms of individual sacrifice by many consumers (Rangan, Karim & Sandberg, 1996). The

concept of pro environmental behaviour as an opportunity, rather than a sacrifice, is explored within the

literature. A less consumption intensive lifestyle is viewed not as a question of self sacrifice and

deprivation, but as a less frenetic, less stressful existence with more opportunities to do the things that

really matter (Jackson, 2004) and echoes the premises on which the practise of ‘voluntary simplification’

is based; as a way of living which means less of some material things but also more of non material others

(Shama, 1985). Soper (2007) identifies ‘alternative hedonism’8 or self interested motivations for less

environmentally destructive practises, as well as the altruistic motives commonly associated with green

and ethical consumption. Social marketing approaches to behaviour change increasingly suggest that pro

environmental behaviour might be motivated by linking a less consumption intensive lifestyle with

notions of downshifting and an increase in overall quality of life (Nesta, 2008; Peattie & Peattie, 2008).

Values

Values, defined as a belief about some desirable end state that transcends specific situations and guides

selection of behaviour (Shwartz & Bilsky, 1987) are viewed as playing an important role in ethical

consumption behaviour, since many goods and services are believed to be selected with value related

goals in mind (Freestone & McGoldrick, 2008).

Research suggests that altruistic values are strongly implicated in ethical behaviours (Stern, 2000), and

Shaw et al’s (2005) research into values influencing ethical consumer behaviour in the context of fair

8 Alternative hedonism is conceptualised as encompassing both the displeasures of a high speed, work dominated and air flight dependent mode of existence, and the pleasures that consumerism denies or pre empts (Soper, 2007).

16


trade found that universalism values, with their emphasis on pro social concerns, were considered most

important in ethical consumer decision making. Values are seen to serve both individual and collective

interests, and it has been asserted that all actions based on values can be traced back to self interest; in

the ethical context, feeling good (or avoiding guilt) by doing good (Freestone & McGoldrick, 2008).

A link between pro environmental behaviour and ecocentric and biospheric values9 is suggested (Steel,

1996; Gilg et al, 2005), and these values are viewed as distinct from altruistic values about other people

(Stern, 2002). Similarly, an individual’s sense of environmental identity, defined as the meanings that one

attributes to the self as they relate to the environment (Stets & Biga, 2003), is thought to have a direct

effect on the adoption of pro environmental behaviour (Hinds & Sparks, 2008).

Feather (1992) postulates that values emerge from both the society’s norms and from the individual’s

core psychological needs and sense of self. Values are thought by some to be stable, general and

different from attitudes in that they do not apply to specific situations only (Solomon et al, 2006; Feather,

1992). However, some warn that results of studies linking certain values with pro environmental

behaviour should be treated with caution (Jackson, 2004), as behaviours are believed to depend critically

on the strength of specific values in specific contexts (Stern, Dietz & Kalof, 1993).

Attitudes

In the literature, the influence of attitudes10 on pro environmental behaviours is often focused on an

individual’s attitude toward their own ability to exert a positive influence on environmental issues in their

role as a consumer; an individual’s self‐perception of his or her own efficacy in combating environmental

problems is thought to influence whether or not they will act on these environmental concerns in the

marketplace (Berger & Corbin,1992), and a high level of perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE) is

thought to result in greater levels of green consumerism (Roberts,1996).

However, a simple causal link between PCE and pro environmental behaviour is questioned. Berger &

Corbin (1992) go on to state that PCE is likely to be context specific and to vary between purchases.

Several significant caveats are thought to exist and highlight the existence of a PCE and action gap,

particularly with regard to car use and environmental consequences (Brook Lyndhurst, 2004). Newholm

(2000) found that ethical consumers are not necessarily driven in their behaviours by their belief in the

positive environmental consequences of their actions, instead, despite pessimism regarding

9 These values emphasise equality with nature and a need to work with the environment, rather than relying on technological solutions (Gilg et al, 2005). 10 In consumer behaviour attitudes are viewed as a lasting, general evaluation of people (including oneself), objects, or issues (Solomon et al, 2006)

17


environmental efficacy some ethical consumers were found to undertake considerable action without

much expectation of positive environmental effect.

While studies have shown that positive environmental attitudes tend to be positively correlated with a

range of specific pro environmental behaviours, the relationships are often weak and the results

contradictory (Bamberg & Moser, 2007; Oskamp & Schultz, 2005; Stets & Biga, 2003). Expectancy value

theories, like the Theory of Planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) suggest that behaviours flow from our

attitudes, however in reality there is often a gap between attitudes and our behaviour, for example our

concern for the environment and our willingness to take less flights for holidays (Jackson, 2004). This

phenomenon, often described as the ‘attitude behaviour gap’ (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001) is one of the key

challenges identified by researchers in the field of ethical consumption, and relates to the fact that

people’s ethical concerns are often not manifest in their behaviour (Chatzidakis, Hibbert & Smith, 2006).

The literature attempts to explain the attitude behaviour gap in a number of ways. Anable, Lane & Kelay

(2006) in their synthesis of research into public attitudes to climate change with regard to transport found

that there is a tendency for individuals not to regard climate change as an immediate threat to

themselves, seeing it rather as a threat to future generations and ‘far away’ places, and that as a result

they tend to place responsibility for action on national and global institutions rather than with

themselves. Evidence of the attitude behaviour gap arising from quantitative survey research is often

blamed on methodological flaws; including a lack of workable definitions of ethical products or ethical

consumers and that they do not allow for the difference between what people say and what they do

(Tallontire, Rentsendorj & Blowfield, 2001). Survey research is viewed as particularly susceptible to

people responding according to acceptable norms or aspirations rather than actual behaviour (Page &

Fearn, 2005).

In his case studies of ethical consumers Newholm (2005) seeks to reverse the concept of the attitude

behaviour gap; rather than research why ethical consumers behave inconsistently, given the difficulty of

meaningful action he considers how they manage to act at all. Lack of consistency between consumer

attitudes and their actual behaviour is also ascribed to a combination of internal and external factors that

limit the consumer’s ability to act consistently; internally, it may be difficult for the individual consumer to

choose a behaviour that is in accordance with his or her own values, attitudes and beliefs (Rahbek

Pedersen & Neergaard, 2006), and externally the actors affect and in turn are affected by social structure

and contextual or situational variables (Jackson, 2004) in an ongoing process.

18


Personal Norms

Social norms 11 that have been internalised and that gain strength from personal conscience rather than

from what others are doing or may expect (Von Borgstede & Biel, 2002) become individual or personal

norms experienced as a feeling of moral obligation (Schwartz, 1977), in which case sanctions (in the form

of guilt feelings or pride) are administered by the individual him or herself (Biel & Thogersen, 2007).

These ‘moral’ norms have been linked with green consumers self image as a ‘green’ person, and

behaviour in the market place is believed to be heavily determined by how purchases of different goods

will affect this self image (Ek & Soderholm, 2008). Moral obligation has been linked with self concept;

some research findings suggest that ethical consumers may make consumption choices because ethical

issues have become an important part of their self identity (Shaw & Clarke, 1999).

Personal norms are thought by many to influence the likelihood of take up of pro environmental

behaviour (Biel & Thogersen, 2007; Thogersen, 2008) although individuals do not necessarily abide by

their own personal norm, especially if they think that others will defect (Von Borgstede & Biel, 2002), or

when following the personal norm might be costly (Biel & Thogerson, 2007). In the latter case, there

might be a propensity for individuals to neutralize the personal norm, convincing themselves that they

wouldn’t have made a difference anyway, denying the need for action, or denying personal responsibility

for solving the problem (ibid, 2007).

Trade offs

The concept of ‘trading off’ one concern, influence, purchase or behaviour against another is viewed

variously in the literature; pro environmental behaviours are balanced against what is acceptable to an

individual in terms of time, effort, economic cost, and quality (Young et al, 2006a) and in terms of

restrictions on personal mobility and consumption (Downing & Ballantyne, 2006). The stronger the level

of individual environmental concern the higher the likelihood of the individual trading off one of these

factors in order to take part in the pro environmental behaviour (Peattie, 2001). An alternative

conceptualisation of ‘trade offs’ is advanced by Dresner et al (2007), who found that individuals justified

their unsustainable behaviours by trading these behaviours off against the pro environmental behaviours

in which they do take part. Similarly, Barr (2008) believes that some ethical consumers suggest that the

negative environmental implications of their air travel behaviour can be traded off against comparatively

trivial pro environmental behaviours, such as plastic recycling or fitting energy efficient lightbulbs.

External influences

Social norms

11 Social norms imply that people should manifest a prescribed behaviour or not manifest a prescribed behaviour (Biel & Thogersen, 2007).

19


Many social‐psychological models assume an individual approach to human behaviour, but it is

understood that there is an inescapably normative dimension to pro environmental behaviour (Jackson,

2004). Our everyday behaviour is believed to be guided by social norms (Schwartz, 1977), including

descriptive norms which are people’s perceptions of how other people are actually behaving in a given

situation (Aronson, Wilson, & Akert, 1999), and injunctive norms that alert us to what is sanctioned or

frowned upon in society (Downing & Ballantyne, 2007). Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen,

1991) suggests an additional norm influencing consumer behaviour; subjective norms, construed as an

individual’s belief about what other people who are important to them think of the specific behaviour

(Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980).

The role of others in influencing consumer behaviour was considered by Shaw & Clarke (1999) who found

that normative others in an individual’s social sphere were found to play a role in influencing and

informing behaviour; individuals who received little or no support for their ethical views from others

appeared to be generally frustrated when trying to discuss such issues for fear of ridicule, and the

difficulties inherent in ethical consumption meant that many ethical consumers desired support from

others. Experimental evidence indicates that descriptive norms influence peoples’ pro environmental

behaviour, particularly with regard to recycling (Nyborg, Howarth & Brekke, 2006) and less so in a study

investigating influences on participation in green electricity schemes, where subjective norms were found

to play a strong role (Ek & Soderholm, 2008).

An additional social factor thought to influence the take up of pro environmental behaviour is whether

people have a reason to expect that others are also prepared to act for the common good or not12

(Dawes, 1980); if there are reasons to believe that others will co operate one is more likely to do so

oneself (de Vries & Wilke, 1992; Bichierri, 2006). These findings are reflected by recent research

investigating factors influencing the public’s propensity to adopt pro environmental behaviours; collective

action was perceived to be paramount, respondents agreed that they would do more if others did too

(Downing & Ballantyne, 2007), and there were significant public concerns about fairness, in particular the

potential for ‘free riders’; those who take no action and simply benefit from others sacrifice (Miller et al,

2006).

Consumer ‘lock in’, where people find themselves locked in to unsustainable behaviours, is often thought

to flow from social and cultural norms (Jackson, 2004). Government led strategies for encouraging pro

environmental behaviours consider that mutual reinforcement and social learning related to sustainable

behaviour, and criticism of unsustainable behaviour, is strongest through close social relationships (WWF,

12 In this case, pro environmental behaviour is conceptualised as a social dilemma, where acting to the benefit of society conflicts with an individual’s narrow self interest (Thogerson, 2008; Von Borgstede & Biel, 2002).

20


2008) and peer group solidarity is viewed as a key factor in enabling us to change our behaviour (Jackson,

2003a). Social context is seen as playing a critically important role, even among ‘deep ecologists’, and is

thought to be of great consequence in validating and maintaining chosen lifestyles (Zavestocki, 2003).

Situational Factors

These factors are those that lie outside of the internal and social context of the individual. Stern (2000)

indicates that crucial structural barriers to pro environmental behaviour are often present, and

investigating these structural barriers is thought to be a pre requisite to instigating behaviour change

(McKenzie‐Mohr, 2000; Crompton, 2008; Lucas et al, 2008). Convenience is viewed as an important

precursor to individual action (Collins, Thomas, Willis & Wilsdon, 2003) and it is suggested that the easier

a behavioural change seems to be the more likely people are to take action for the common good (Von

Borgstede & Biel, 2002).

Empirical research into ethical consumer behaviour has uncovered the role of situational factors in

influencing an individual’s choice in various contexts. Shaw & Clarke (1999) found that problems of

availability, choice and information were obstacles to desired ethical consumer behaviour in the context

of fair trade, and ethical consumers’ choice of products in a range of product sectors has been found to be

affected by economic cost, availability, lack of choice and inconvenience (Young et al, 2006b). These

situational factors are believed by some to be the main barriers to the adoption of pro environmental

behaviours (Barr et al, 2006).

The role of situational ‘lock in’ is considered in the literature; whereby contextual limiting factors such as

lack of access to recycling facilities or public transport is found to limit the potential of even the greenest

consumer in engaging in pro environmental behaviour (Lucas et al, 2008). Sanne (2002) considers how

structural issues such as working life conditions can lock in unsustainable behaviours; he believes that

limited advances might be made by changing individual consumer habits, but further progress demands

that the political system that currently revolves around economic growth alters in line with environmental

goals and become more in tune with individual welfare of a less material kind, giving the example that

shorter working hours would allow people to live more lightly and enjoy more leisure.

In summary, this chapter indicates the complexity of ethical consumption practise and of the number of

factors which have the potential to influence ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel. Ethical

consumers do not necessarily share the same values, attitudes and behavioural patterns as each other

(Rahbek Pedersen & Neergaard, 2006) and on an individual level attitudes and behaviour also appear to

differ between purchase categories (Young et al, 2006b). Motivations, barriers, and attitudes can differ

between behaviours (NESTA, 2006; Stern et al, 2000), and different values can co exist in the same

21


individual and influence behaviour depending on the context (Jackson, 2004). Despite this complexity,

the understanding of ethical consumer behaviour is considered to be crucial if hoping to exploit the

marketing opportunities presented by this group of consumers (Peattie, 1999), or for the purposes of

encouraging pro environmental behaviours in pursuit of a sustainability agenda (Jackson, 2003b).

22


METHODOLOGY AND METHOD

In summary, and to clarify the researcher’s position, the following approach was taken by the researcher;

the research was located within a qualitative paradigm, the ontological assumption adopted was one of

subtle realism (Hammersley, 1992) and the epistemological position taken was that of empathetic

neutrality (Snape & Spencer, 2003). The methodology utilised was exploratory in nature in view of the

paucity of qualitative and in‐depth research in the area of ethical consumers and air travel. The research

methodology consisted of a number of semi structured, in‐depth, one to one interviews.

This following section considers the philosophical assumptions underpinning the research, presents a

rationale for the methodology employed, and the scope and limitation of the research design are

discussed. The method of analysis and ethical issues related to this study are then considered.

Philosophical underpinnings and methodological rationale

According to some, the worldview of the researcher is a key influence in both the selection of methods

and judgements about the quality and value of the outcomes (Easterby Smith, Thorpe & Lowe, 2004), and

the researchers basic beliefs about the world will be reflected in the way that the research is designed,

the collection and analysis of data, and the style of the final written report (Collis & Hussey, 2003).

These worldviews are commonly characterised by the adoption of specific research paradigms (Kuhn,

1970), which offer a framework comprising an accepted set of theories, methods and ways of defining

data. In the literature these paradigms are often represented as being at either one end or the other of a

positivist ‐ phenomenological continuum (Collis & Hussey, 2003), with proponents of either worldview

often being seen as being involved in paradigm wars (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Much of this debate centres around the ontological assumption; whether you consider the world as

objective and external to the researcher, or socially constructed and only understood by examining the

perceptions of the human actors, and the epistemological assumption; which is concerned with the study

of knowledge and what we accept as being valid knowledge, and involves an examination of the

relationship between the researcher and what is being researched (Collis & Hussey, 2003).

The assumptions and theoretical positions of the competing paradigms have been generalised thus; a

quantitative approach or those adhering to positivism have an ontological assumption that reality is

external and objective and set apart from the research (Easterby Smith et al, 2004), has an

epistemological position that the researcher is independent from that being researched, and has the

axiological assumption that the research process in value free and unbiased (Collis & Hussey, 2003). A

23


qualitative paradigm takes the ontological assumption that reality is subjective and multiple as seen by

participants in a study and the idea that meaning is in the mind, that is we construct our own distinctive

meanings based on our unique and shared cultural experiences (Solomon et al, 2006), has an

epistemological assumption that the researcher interacts with that being researched, and an axiological

assumption that is value laden and biased (Collis & Hussey, 2003). These stances are recognised as

extremes, to which few researchers would subscribe in their pure forms (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

The flaws in this purist view are outlined by Hammersley (1992), in that such a view only allows for two

methodologies, and thus pre supposes that there are only two possible ways of knowing, understanding

and learning about the world. Instead, the majority of researchers are more likely to fall somewhere

between the rigid certainties of a positivist epistemology and the seeming arbitrariness and shifting

grounds of a relativist point of view (ibid, 1992).

Collis & Hussey (2003) indicate the plethora of alternative terms utilised under the quantitative paradigm,

including intrepretivist, subjectivist, humanistic, and post positivist; and the quantitative paradigm,

including positivist, objectivist, scientific, experimentalist, and traditionalist. These terms are not

necessarily interchangeable, and in most cases reflect a difference in ontological and epistemological

positions, and the methodologies summarized under the label of qualitative research are still very

heterogeneous (Flick, 2007). The category ‘interpretive’ research is also used as a general label in

theoretically informed qualitative studies (Hackley, 2003), from hereon in the labels qualitative and

interpretive are used interchangeably to denote an approach to research characterised by the unifying

features detailed below.

Providing a precise definition of qualitative research is problematic, since the term is used as an

overarching category, covering a wide range of approaches and methods found within different research

disciplines (Snape & Spencer, 2003). However, despite this difficulty, qualitative research can be defined

as being about asking, in a flexible way, comparatively small samples of people questions about what they

do and think, and listening carefully to, and subsequently interpreting, what they have to say (Smith &

Fletcher, 2001), performed with an aim of understanding the nature and form of a phenomenon, to

unpack meanings, to develop explanations and to generate ideas, concepts and theories (Lewis, 2003).

Despite the variance of theoretical positions there are also agreements as to the common features of

qualitative research, regarding similarities in the qualities of the research, and also the methodologies

employed. Qualitative research aims to understand the phenomenon or event under study from the

interior (Flick, 2007), and is a naturalistic, interpretive approach (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000) concerned with

understanding the meaning that people attach to phenomena within their social worlds (Snape &

24


Spencer, 2003). The situations in which the research is conducted are typically ‘banal’ or normal (Miles &

Hubermann, 1994), and essentially qualitative research aims to provide an in depth understanding of the

social world of research participants by learning about their social and material circumstances, their

experiences, perspectives and histories (Ritchie, 2003).

Methodologically qualitative research is usually characterised by small samples, is reflective of everyday

life of individuals, the researchers role is to gain a ‘holistic’ overview of the context under study, many

interpretations of the material are possible, relatively little standardized instrumentation is used, the

researcher is essentially the main ‘measurement device’; and most analysis is done with words (Miles &

Huberman, 1994). Data collection methods usually involve close contact between the researcher and the

research participants, are interactive and developmental and allow for emergent issues to be explored,

and data is produced that is usually very detailed, information rich, and extensive (Ritchie, 2003).

More pragmatic approaches to methodology selection indicate the value of choosing the most

appropriate research method or methods to investigate the specific research questions and to fit with

what you are trying to find out (Silverman, 2005). Ensuring a suitable fit between the research methods

used and the research question posed is seen as taking priority over the degree of philosophical

coherence of the epistemological positions typically associated with research methods (Snape & Spencer,

2003; Dreher, 1994). According to this view, qualitative and quantitative research should not be seen as

competing and contradictory, but should instead be viewed as complementary strategies appropriate to

different types of research questions or issues (Seale, 1999; Easterby Smith et al, 2004).

Silverman (2005) also indicates the importance of the relevance of the ‘fit’ of the approach with the

purposes to which the research is to be put. My academic enquiry was also being written from the

viewpoint that the nature of such an enquiry might be relevant to those utilising a green or social

marketing approach to market to these consumers or to effect pro environmental behavioural change,

and the ontological and epistemological assumption made in the research would influence this relevance.

Insight and guidance were provided by the approach taken by the Qualitative Research Unit at the

National Centre for Social Research, which utilises elements of pragmatism and interpretivism;

ontologically they adopt the less extreme terms of Hammersley (1992) who argues for ‘subtle realism’ as

being a world in which social phenomena are believed to exist independently of peoples’ representations

of them but are only accessible through their representations (Snape & Spencer, 2003).

This appeared to me to be a sensible and fitting approach, and in keeping with this approach

epistemologically a position of ‘empathetic neutrality’ was embraced, whereby I recognised that research

cannot be value free but that reflexivity upon bias and an awareness of the importance of the role of the

25


researchers background and beliefs in both the data gathering and interpretation was essential (Snape &

Spencer, 2003).

My early surveys of research paradigms convinced me that my proposed study, with its focus on the

complexity of influences on ethical consumer behaviour with regards to air travel, was located

unquestionably within a qualitative paradigm, and that I needed to look deeper than the surface events or

appearances of concern in a positivistic approach (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Since the phenomenon at the

centre of my research question appeared to be poorly understood, and complex in the sense that

cognitive processes and decisions were the focus of the study, a qualitative research approach was

certainly necessitated (Ritchie, 2003). Furthermore, in line with the aims of much other qualitative

research I would not be seeking cause and effect; instead I aimed to capture the essence of the

phenomena by extracting data which is rich in explanation and analysis (Collis & Hussey, 2003). In

common with most interpretive studies, I wasn’t seeking findings that were generalizable across the

population, or that were true for all time and for all cases (Hackley, 2003).

As already indicated, my research as exploratory and inductive in nature became apparent, the fact that

little empirical and qualitative research had been conducted in the research area meant that the research

aim did not seek to confirm a hypothesis or to prove or disprove a theory but instead to gather a wide

range of data and impressions (Collis & Hussey, 2003) and simply to find out more so that what we do

know can be developed and elaborated upon and perhaps placed into initial categories (Hackley, 2003).

Indeed, my aim was to explore, and via an inductive interpretation of the data, begin to formulate

tentative understandings of what was revealed to me; I hoped to embark on a ‘journey of discovery’

rather than one of verification (Bryman, 1984).

On reading the discussion within the wider literature about the role of existing theory and research in

qualitative research I became aware that perhaps my existing knowledge and understanding of ethical

consumer behaviour might influence the interpretations I made of the data, and indeed my data

gathering methods. Miles & Huberman’s (1984) belief that a qualitative study can be informed by and

build on existing ideas, or use these ideas as a tentative framework, allayed these fears. Berg (2000) and

Maxwell (1996) stress the interactive, iterative and nonlinear linkages between theory and data, and my

early decisions about design were reviewed and revisited as the study progressed and new ideas

emerged. I took the stance that qualitative researchers have hunches and working ideas, but that they

need to remain open to emergent concepts and themes (Layder, 1992), and that qualitative researchers

should have open, but not empty, minds (Janesick, 2000).

26


Like Newholm (2005) in his case studies of ethical consumers I aimed to explore the ‘how’ and ‘why’

questions of ethical consumption, and I realized that in order to explore the attitudes, meanings and

practices of ethical consumers it was going to be necessary to use a method that revealed considerable

depth. My options of method for data gathering appeared to be a choice between focus groups and

individual in depth interviews. Although the strength of focus groups is often found to lie in their ability

to highlight a range of behaviours, attitudes and points of view in a relatively short period of time

(Morgan, 1997), and although potentially the utilisation of focus groups might have offered me the

opportunity to increase my sample size they were decided against for a number of factors.

Some researchers in the area of ethical consumption had chosen in‐depth interviews over focus groups;

Chatzidakis et al (2006) given the sensitive nature of the topic, and Newholm (2005) who felt that

individual interviews were preferable when exploring inconsistencies between attitude and behaviour.

Both of these decisions appeared relevant in the context of my own research. Further to this, I believed

that the phenomenon under study might represent complex motivations, processes and experiences that

would be best addressed through in‐depth interviews because of the depth of focus and the opportunity

for clarification and detailed understanding afforded by this method (Ritchie, 2003). A key feature of in‐

depth interviews is their ability to provide an opportunity for extensive investigation of peoples’ personal

perspectives, for an in‐depth understanding of the personal context within which the research

phenomena is located, and for very detailed subject coverage (Lewis, 2003). Topics in which social norms

play a part are also best studied one to one, so the researcher might go beyond what may be seen as

socially acceptable (ibid, 2003).

The interviews were in‐depth, and semi structured, and in all cases took place in the naturalistic setting of

the respondents own home. The interviews were conducted between June and September 2008, lasted

between forty minutes to an hour each, were audio recorded, and later transcribed for the purposes of

analysis. The question format was open ended and probes were used to explore answers in more depth.

In some cases the questions raised and the matters explored changed from one interview to the next, as

different aspect of the topic were revealed, and following up reasons behind reasons was considered

more important than covering exactly the same questions in each interview (Thomas, 1998). This process

of open discovery is viewed as a strength by some (Collis & Hussey, 2003) but I was aware that the

emphasis and balance of the emerging issues as the research progressed was influenced by the order in

which the respondents were interviewed.

Riley et al (2000) address the problems that subjectivity presents for the researcher in the course of the

interview, in the sense that shared understanding of the meanings of terms and concepts cannot always

be guaranteed. With this in mind careful attention was paid to the language used during the interviews,

27


meanings were established through attention to the use of suitable language and terminology and by

careful probing.

Sample size was a consideration, there appeared to be no hard and fast rules on what sample size should

be selected (Riley et al, 2000), so a sample size of 11 represented an optimum sample in terms of the

timescale of this project, given that qualitative research is highly intensive in terms of the research

resources that it requires (Ritchie et al, 2003) and also considering my own lack of research experience.

Purposive sampling was used, where the respondents were deliberately selected to reflect particular

features (Ritchie et al, 2003). In this case, and in line with similar research (Newholm, 1999; Young et al,

2006; McDonald et al, 2008) the respondents were self selecting ‘ethical consumers’. Respondents were

recruited through snowball sampling, which is viewed as a useful technique where small groups are the

focus and the population of interest is likely to be small and/or possess unusual characteristics (Riley et al,

2000). To supplement the pool of respondents identified through snowball sampling, again, in line with

other research (Newholm, 1999, Young et al, 2006; McDonald et al, 2008), an advert was placed in a local

wholefoods shop and in a local eco group e zine.

Such sampling methods are often criticised as presenting problems of sample bias (Collis & Hussey, 2004)

since a sampling frame cannot be unambiguously identified in advance (Ritchie et al, 2003), and the

sample will not be representative of the population as a whole. Unlike quantitative studies which are

judged on their ability to draw inferences about the wider population (Easterby Smith et al, 2004), and in

common with other qualitative studies, in this study representativeness was not necessarily a priority, I

wasn’t seeking to make generalized propositions about the world as a whole (Hackley, 2003; Riley et al,

2000).

Some thought was given to the inclusion and exclusion of respondents in this study. Respondents were

aged between 27 and 52 years of age, younger respondents were not included, some because of ethical

issues regarding age, and also to offer some homogeneity to the sample (Ritchie et al, 2003). My study

was confined to a small geographical location, partly so that the context in which the research was

conducted is known, and partly for reasons of efficiency (Lewis, 2003).

My own role in the research process was considered on a number of levels. The origin of the research

question was found in my own personal biography and social context given my personal ethical

consumption project and growing unease with flying, and this needed consideration within the process of

data collection and analysis (Flick, 2007). My realization that that the researcher is pre eminently the

research tool (Goulding, 2005) and that the success of the interview depends, to a large extent, on the

28


personal and professional qualities of the interviewer (Legard, Keegan & Ward, 2003) made it apparent

that one of the limitations of the research design would be my lack of experience and familiarity with this

role.

Different traditions in qualitative research have resulted in a diversity of perspectives on in depth

interviewing and in particular there are debates about how far knowledge is constructed in the interview

or is a pre existing phenomenon, and about how active or passive the role of the interviewer should be

(Legard et al, 2003). The research paradigm adopted viewed the role of the interviewer as an active

facilitator, enabling the respondent to talk about their thoughts, feelings, views and experiences (Ritchie

et al, 2003), and I did not view my role as simply a source of bias that should or could be entirely removed

(Hammersley & Atkinson, 1995). The position adopted was partway between the metaphors offered by

Kvale (1996) as being those of a ‘miner’, where knowledge is given and the researcher helps uncover this

knowledge, and a ‘traveller’; where the researcher is viewed as an active player in the development of

data and meaning.

Qualitative research interviews are often criticised for the potential propensity of respondents to say

what is expected of them, rather than the truth; a social desirability bias (Fisher, 1993). In the context of

my research this criticism was countered by attempting to build a context of solidarity in the interviews,

such that both researcher and respondent were engaged in a process of trying to understand important

aspects of their lives, and it is thought that in this way the respondent should feel less need to say what is

merely socially desirable (Polkinghorne, 1988).

Concern with the quality of the research informed my methodology at each stage. A bone of contention

with qualitative research is that all data are filtered through the eyes of the data collector and that the

findings are often considered to be subjective, intuitive and value laden (Goulding, 2006). Reflexivity as

an essential feature of qualitative research is well noted (Flick, 2007; Lewis & Ritchie, 2003; Goulding,

2006) and is described by Hackley (2003) as when the researcher is encouraged to try to be consciously

aware of the values, assumptions and perceptions that they bring to the research process. My reflexivity

as a researcher appeared to be key to the quality of my data gathering and subsequent data analysis.

Goulding (2005) believes that personal discipline assists qualitative researchers in avoiding excessive

subjectivity, and it is widely accepted that qualitative researchers should adopt a rigorous and self

conscious examination for bias at each stage of the research process. I attempted to employ reflexivity at

all stages of the research design and application to generate an awareness of limitation of method,

sample, and of ways in which the findings were influenced by my assumptions, beliefs and research style.

29


As a result of the relative freedom and lack of structure and rigour characteristic of most quantitative

research methods it is easy to question validity and reliability in their traditional sense (Ruyter & Scholl,

1998) and a qualitative study is often differentiated from a quantitative study according to the criteria by

which the quality and rigour of the study is judged. Judging qualitative data according to the concepts of

reliability, validity, and representativeness or generalisability is often considered inappropriate, since

these concepts are viewed as a reflection of the imperative of the positivist tradition (Riley et al, 2000).

Consequently, a set of standards applicable to naturalistic enquiry have been identified; these are

‘credibility’, ‘transferability’, ‘confirmability’ and ‘dependability’ (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

In line with practising qualitative researchers I made use of external referees such as other field workers

and academics in order to check the accuracy of my interpretation (Goulding, 2005). I also checked

indirectly through the use of similar or related literature which in some senses enabled me to provide a

comparative picture (Borman & Preissle‐Goez, 1986).

Ethics

Any research raises ethical considerations, but they have a particular resonance in qualitative research

studies because of their in‐depth nature and the fact that such research can often raise issues which are

not anticipated (Lewis, 2003). The research respondents’ informed consent was sought and given, and

the conditions for anonymity13 and confidentiality were made clear to the participants, as well as the non

judgemental context of the interview; there were no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers. I deliberately sought to

make the aims and mechanics of the interview as transparent as possible from the moment a potential

respondent was contacted by me, or vice versa.

When a respondent became emotional due to depth of feeling on the subjects being explored, in this case

my obligation was to the respondent, rather than to the research. Their previous consent was not

construed to be a taken, and was re confirmed after pausing the interview.

All interviews were conducted within the guidelines set out by the Market Research Society and personal

information storage was within the guidelines of the Data Protection Act 2001.

Analysis

Qualitative research has been accused of having no hard and fast rules of procedure, largely because

methods for data collection and samples are not always identified in advance (Goulding, 2005).

13 Pseudonyms, rather than the real names of the respondents, will be used in the presentation and analysis of results.

30


The concept of qualitative research and analysis as being a continuous and iterative process is noted

(Silverman, 2005), as is the belief that analysis is a pervasive activity throughout the life of a research

project (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). Interviews were transcribed immediately following the interview, and

the transcripts were regularly re read, leading to tentative identification of emergent themes and to

confirmation of the relevance of preset themes, and such analysis also fed in to the data gathering

process, as emergent themes could be explored in more detail in subsequent interviews.

The unit of analysis was that of the individual person. The analytical process of content analysis was

deemed to be the best method of analysis of the quantitative data, in view of the time frame of the

research project and also my own lack of experience as a researcher and data analyst. Content analysis is

often associated with a positivistic approach (Collis & Hussey, 2003); it presents a formal and systematic

approach to qualitative data analysis, but is commonly and acceptably used in interpretive research

(Hackley, 2003).

31


PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

This section of the research project presents and analyses the evidence collected through the primary

research within the remit of the research aims and the methodological approach adopted and described

below. Where appropriate, the analysis indicates where findings appear similar to the findings and

concepts detailed in the review of the literature.

At this point it appears pertinent to revisit both the primary aim of this investigation and the

methodological underpinnings of the study;

“The principal aim of this research is to gain an insight into the influences on ethical consumer

behaviour with regard to air travel for travel and tourism purposes”.

This research is located within a qualitative paradigm, and in line with such isn’t seeking to produce

findings generalizable across the population (Hackley, 2003) and does not seek to confirm or disprove a

theory, but instead seeks to gather a range of data and impressions (Collis & Hussey, 2003), and simply to

find out more so that what we do know can be developed and elaborated upon and perhaps placed into

initial categories (Hackley, 2003).

Transcripts of the interviews were analysed using content analysis, the unit of analysis was the individual,

the process was iterative, and utilised both preset and emergent themes [influences on behaviour] to

categorize the data.

Table 1, overleaf, presents details of the respondents and selected research findings. These are;

• The age and occupation of the respondents. The socio demographic particulars are

included to indicate group composition, rather than to suggest statistical or causal significance.

Pseudonyms for the respondents are used.

• Each respondent’s environmental concerns and the range of pro environmental

behaviours and ethical purchases that take into account those concerns14.

• A brief summary statement for each respondent regarding their flying behaviours and

intentions. These range from those whose environmental concerns have led them to cease flying,

through to those whose environmental concerns have minimal impact on their flying behaviours. It was

14 Since the respondents were self selecting ethical consumers it was necessary at the start of each interview to invite respondents to reflect on their ethical consumption; to establish their ethical concerns and to explore how they took these concerns into account through their purchase and non purchase behaviours.

32


found that many respondents had already acted to reduce or cease their flying behaviours, some had the

intention of doing so, and some had no intention of doing so.

Table 1 – Respondent details, environmental concerns and behaviours, and summary statement regarding

flying

Name. Age, Occupation

Issues of Concern Behaviours Summary statement regarding Flying

Respondent 1 Male, 52 Eco‐business owner

Climate Change

Built eco house, clay based paints, low energy and no energy appliances, organic cotton clothing, low impact and low carbon alternatives for everything in the house, cycles, lift share, limits car use, vegetarian, green electricity tariff

"I made the decision 4 years ago not to fly for recreation, and I haven't done so since."

Respondent 2 Female, 42 Social worker

Climate Change

Avoiding car use, doubling up on car journeys, recycling, buying with less packaging, solar panels, green electricity tariff, using public transport, cycling, using carbon calculator

"I can’t see us going on a holiday abroad…I can't square up doing all of those other bitty things on a day to day level, then whopping some great big airplane into your lifestyle."

Respondent 3 Male, 31 Environmental Officer

Climate Change, Bio diversity

Organic food, local food, solar panels, runs vehicle on bio diesel, green electricity tariff, cycle to work, work from home to reduce travel, eco friendly products, washing at low temperatures, turning thermostat down, trying to reduce carbon footprint, vegetarian

"Over the past few years I’ve tried to reduce my carbon footprint in a couple of fairly major ways, and one of those ways was to try and stop flying, which I’ve been relatively successful at, apart from one short flight to France – but I haven’t flown long haul for 2 years and that was a conscious decision."

Respondent 4 Male,35 Bio diversity Officer

Countryside management, Bio diversity, Consumption Reduction, Anti Globalization

Runs vehicle on biodiesel, grows own food, eco clothing, eco household products, sold house and lives in a caravan, trying to go 'off grid', runs van on chip oil, lives frugally

"I’ve used up my ration…I haven’t flown for 5 years now."

Respondent 5 Male, 44 Graphic DesigneCampsite Owner

Sustainability, Community Initiatives, Anti Globalization, Consumption Reduction

solar panels, micro generation – home totally off grid, buying local in season produce, avoiding excessive consumption, combining car journeys, recycling

"For me to justify it, I expect that my number of long haul flights… what we have just decided mentally, we’re probably going to make, maybe half a dozen more flights, and that’s it."

33


Respondent 6 Female, 33 Tourism Manager

Sustainability, Consumption Reduction,

Reduction of consumption of material goods, growing own veg, clothes swap, reusable sanitary towels, fair trade goods, organic food, recycling, composting, environment friendly household goods and cosmetics

“With air travel, I see that as increasingly problematic, for someone that does have environmental concerns, but the strength of my environmental concerns doesn’t stop me from flying altogether.”

Respondent 7 Female, 34 Marine Biologist

Marine Environment, Nature Conservation, Deforestation

Natural cleaning and household products, natural cosmetics, no chemicals in the garden, organic clothing, organic food, buy ethically and environmentally aware brands, bio diesel in vehicle, solar panels, eco surf wax for surf boards, vegetarian

“We have stopped flying so much, we still do fly abit, but it’s going to be once every few years, not every year.”

Respondent 8 Female, 27 Sustainable Communities Advisor

Marine Environment, Waste reduction

Avoids plastic, recycles, composts, eco friendly household products, bio diesel, vegetarian, green electricity tariff, local and organic food

“I do the things that I do because they are important to me, and I can do them. For me, not flying is too much of a big step, and I am not happy to make that sacrifice. I could fly less, but I don’t really want to.”

Respondent 9 Female, 33 Charity Worker and Housewife

Waste Reduction, Personal Health, Bio diversity

Organic, wholefoods and healthfoods, fair trade where possible, no chemicals in food or household products, anti industrialised farming, cutting down on waste, recycling

“Like most people I’m feeling increasingly negative about it… I’m not completely against it, but I think I would try not to, as much as I could.”

Respondent 10 Female, 38 Civil Servant

Nature Conservation, Bio diversity

Local produce, organic, buying local where possible, tries to limit car use, recycles, own veg, avoids packaging, fair trade where possible, vegetarian

“I feel I shouldn’t fly… I have consciously decided to cut down on flights. Flights will be something you do once every 5 years, like the trip of a lifetime.”

Respondent 11 Male, 42 Energy EfficiencyAdvisor

Consumption Reduction, Bio diversity, Personal Health

Eating organic and fair trade, avoiding chemicals in all household goods and food, utting down on fossil fuels, energy efficiency, second hand clothes for child, cloth nappies, bio diesel

“I have no great aversion to flying but I do it so infrequently, if I was doing lots of local and domestic flights I might feel more strongly. It’s not prevalent in our lifestyle, we’ve flown once in the last 6 or 7 years”

The research revealed a number of factors influencing the respondents in their consumption of air travel

for travel and tourism purposes. The research findings are presented below according to internal, social

34


and situational influences. This framework is adopted in order to provide structure, rather than to suggest

that these categories are essentially distinct or separate from each other. The influencing factors are

outlined in the following section and in some cases are supported with brief vignettes.

Internal influences

Motivations

From the analysis of the data three dominant motivating influences emerged; motivations for ethical

consumption in general, which in turn was sometimes found to influence motivations for flying, and

motivations for ‘not flying’.

Motivations for ethical consumption varied, although concerns for biodiversity, climate change,

consumption reduction, the marine environment, sustainability, and nature conservation were dominant.

Type and strength of concern appeared to be implicated in an individual’s intention to avoid air travel,

particularly with regard to climate change; some individuals who had a concern for climate change were

very aware of their personal carbon consumption and the carbon related consequences of flying, and so

were reticent to fly in view of this. Individuals with a concern for consumption reduction sometimes felt

the need to reduce their consumption

of flights, but not necessarily, and particularly when the respondent felt that they flew very infrequently

anyway. Individuals with other concerns did not necessarily link the environmental

impact of flying with their area of concern and so were often less motivated to reduce their flying in view

of this.

Motivations for flying were varied. In line with the findings of Miller et al (2006) some respondents were

motivated to travel by air to see friends and family who lived far away. In some cases it was felt that

once experienced these travel experiences would be hard to give up;

“I’ve been away to some lovely places and have surfed wearing a bikini in warm water, and snorkelled on coral reefs, I’ve tasted the riches and so I want to go and do it again.”

Respondents felt motivated to travel by a range of social and cultural expectations, travelling was

something that they felt was expected of them and that they felt was a normal thing for them to want to

do, and social approval could be gained from being well travelled and having

had plenty of interesting and varied travel experiences. Respondents felt motivated by what they

perceived to be social pressures to travel;

“So it’s like ‘I’ve done a gap year abroad, and I lived in Costa Rica for a year, or I worked my way around the world’… there’s this breadth of experience that comes from travelling, that you’ve seen this and you’ve done that, sometimes I feel like I’m under pressure to travel because that’s what all

35


the interesting people have done…I think that other people judge us by our travelling experiences, I think that’s part of how we are.”

Motivations for not flying were also varied. Societal expectations were also explored by those who had

chosen to cease or limit their flying, and framed in the context of how they believe that such expectations

might be changing;

"One of things that I was interested in on this last trip I did was how enjoyable it is to set out to shrink your horizons and not to grow them. For a whole generation or more, we’ve made it a big part of growing up and transition into adulthood to say expand your horizons, but actually there is something very smart about saying contract your horizons." “I think that a lot of people travel because they think it’s the normal thing to do, but I think that things are changing slightly in that if someone said to me I’ve travelled around the world on a bicycle or that I’ve gone around the world and I didn’t do any flying at all…I think that we are sort of starting to have a renewed respect for people that choose to travel in those ways because it just means that they have really thought about it.”

Besides the carbon reduction element of reducing flying some respondents were motivated to reduce or

cease flying in view of the other negative environmental attributes of air travel such as visual pollution,

airport expansion and the noise of planes overhead. Others noted non‐environmentally based negative

aspect of flying; the hassles of long queues at airports and baggage reclaim, some respondents

experienced flying as a ‘loss of control’, and preferred travel methods where they were ‘in charge’.

Similar to the concept of ‘alternative hedonism’ (Soper, 2007) motivations for not flying were often

framed within the context of the benefits offered by alternative forms of transport for tourism

experiences; whether by bike, yacht, boat, or horse and cart, and these were often viewed as exciting and

adventurous alternatives to air travel. These methods of travel were seen as offering something that

flying could not. Respondents reflected favourably on the slow pace of travel afforded by these methods;

“We got to know small areas by travelling 20 miles a day on holiday by bike, we still travelled through geographically and culturally different areas…there are a whole load of things that you can do when you travel in a different way that you cannot do when you travel by air, or by car.”

Some respondents were motivated to not fly by their belief that there was no need to fly, ‘not going’ was

viewed as an alternative to flying. Several respondents felt no need to travel over any real distance, they

felt it was much better to know one place in great detail rather than have fleeting experiences of many;

‘"I don’t feel that need to see all these places actually. I think that you can know a lot of places, or you can know some places in great detail. There’s a half mile stretch of coast near here and we know all of the rocky coves, and every rock you could jump off of, and every rock that you could fish from, and where the caves are and where the seals live…because you have to know it in great detail to have

36


that sort of intimacy with it. In a sense for me, that’s as rich an experience as going to lots of far flung places that you’ll only go to once.”

Travel experiences motivated by personal preferences, and the expectation of travel as a cultural norm

was fiercely resisted by one respondent;

“However much you try and justify travelling and doing tourism in an eco way there is no such thing. I don’t believe in that, I think that tourism is something of a virus really, it has fucked places up over the years. I suppose some people who travel can justify it in some sort of cultural exchange terms…but is that really true? Do indigenous people of jungle countries really need to learn from us and our ways, isn’t that like some sort of missionary throwback?”

Respondents who were motivated to travel often linked their travel experiences to their sense of self, and

thus felt that it was important for them to continue to travel;

‘Travelling is part of me, it’s part of who I am…I still need to visit my family and my life is built around working and then surfing in Morocco…or wherever…it’s not something that I’m going to stop doing…’

Those who had decided not to fly also indicated that that their travel experiences were linked to their

sense of self;

"Travelling made me grow up, it shook me up, I became more broad minded as a result, and it did all the things that travel is meant to do…” However, unlike those respondents who continued to be motivated to fly, the position they found

themselves in meant they didn’t feel the same imperative to travel;

"Travel initially was because I wasn’t content with my lot and where I was living, which was Gloucester. I’d been brought up in Canada, so I thought there was a bigger and better world out there, and I went out to find it, only to find that the best bit is Pembrokeshire." Respondents who had chosen not to fly also saw their previous travel experiences as contributing to their

current lifestyle and the way they were choosing to live their lives, and hence to their motivations to

reduce flying;

“It [travelling in Mexico] taught me about how people can live in a better way with their surroundings, and in harmony, in a much better way than we do here.”

Some respondents noted that this was perhaps due to their age and the travelling experiences that they

had already had, and that suggesting that a younger person should never travel by plane would be a

different matter;

“With our kids, who are in their late teens, if you say you can never travel by plane – it’s a very different emotional dialogue compared with me, I’ve travelled a lot, and I know that there’s nothing

37


that you cannot see, but it’s much easier to get that experience first hand than second hand at the moment.”

The geographical location15 of the respondents appeared to play an important role in shaping the

respondents’ motivations for not flying; and many respondents appear to have been drawn to the area in

view of their personal preferences for living rurally, by the sea, and with access to the opportunities for

leisure experiences afforded by such a location. This factor was often found to influence respondents’

motivations to not fly;

"I’ve got friends that want to do lots of travelling when they retire, but me; I’m really content where we’re living. When the sun comes out in Pembrokeshire, I really wouldn’t want to be anywhere else in the world to be honest.”

Some respondents felt that leisure experiences that people went on holiday for could be just as easily

found where they live, and so felt less drawn to travel for holidays.

Values

It wasn’t easy to identify the influence of respondent’s values in the analysis, but values were evident in

some responses, and were found to influence individuals both towards and away from air travel

consumption. Biospheric values were typical, and altruistic concerns were much less common.

Respondents were found to value nature, friendships and family, appeared to pursue non material

satisfactions, and weren’t driven by the need for acquisition of material possessions. However, many

respondents valued self growth and travel experiences, and for some these values were heavily

implicated in their perceived need for the continuation of their flying behaviours.

Some respondents who had decided not to fly felt they had a strong and important relationship with the

environment;

"I really love this planet…I just don’t think that I could feel at home with myself…at peace with myself…if I thought that I was living a lifestyle that was really hugely damaging. But to have a sense of integrity, and for me to keep that kind of relationship with the environment and being able to enjoy nature, I’d be really at a bit of a loss if I didn’t live in a way that contributed to the sustainability agenda." These respondents appeared to have assumed as ‘environmental identity’ (Stets & Biga, 2003), and their

sense of connection with the natural world and the landscape thus influenced their flying behaviour in the

sense that they were unhappy to compromise that relationship by causing harm.

15 Pembrokeshire, West Wales, in Britain’s only coastal National Park, hence a popular UK holiday destination

38


Attitudes

Attitudes to air travel were found to influence respondent’s air travel consumption behaviour;. Air travel

was invariably viewed as a functional method of transport to get from A to B over mostly long, but

sometimes shorter, distances and the air travel experience was generally framed in negative terms. Air

travel itself was viewed as decidedly unglamorous, in most cases uncomfortable, and in some cases

dangerous. Flying wasn’t imbued with the same ‘romantic’ connotations as long distance travel by train

or boat, or the Arcadian image of travel by horse and cart;

“My ideal mode of travel would involve hitching Rosie up to the cart and we go trotting off to Europe

like gypsies wandering the old Drovers lanes and byways…”

However, air travel was often seen as attractive because it was faster, economically cheaper and more

convenient than the alternatives.

All respondents believed that flying resulted in negative environmental consequences, and many

respondents, although not all, indicated that these beliefs had affected their propensity to fly.

Respondents manifested a very diverse range of attitudes towards the PCE (Berger & Corbin, 1992) of

their air travel behaviour, these attitudes were often contrary to their behaviour and in some cases a PCE

and action gap was observed (Brook Lyndhurst, 2004). By way of example; a respondent that had strong

environmental values, who believed that air travel was detrimental to the environment, and that also

believed that their own cessation or reduction of air travel would have a positive impact on the

environment, still chose to fly on holiday. In this example their choice was predominantly driven by their

appetite for far away travel experiences, and although they would have considered taking an alternative

travel option, they felt that the alternatives were not practical given the situational constraints of their

lifestyle.

Personal Norms

Respondents who had ceased flying, or had reduced their flying behaviours, often reported that they felt

under some sort of moral obligation to do so. For some respondents, considering the environmental

consequences of their behaviour had become pervasive in all aspects of their life;

"For me environmental thinking is second nature, it’s a second layer in my head; it’s very rare that I won’t think about the environmental consequences."

In these cases moral norms and a concern for the environment appeared to have merged with the

individual’s self identity, and this combination produced a very strong influence on pro environmental

39


behaviour; one respondent linked their feelings of moral obligation with their decision to forego flying

because of their environmental concerns;

"I’m a great believer in karma…and I have a conscience. I didn’t ask for one, but I do have one, and I can’t really live my life in the way that most people live their lives, because I would hate myself for it, and I don’t really want to hate myself....I don’t hate myself for having travelled in the past, but if I did fly now I don’t think I’d be able to justify it to myself."

Such strength of moral obligation when combined with an environmental concern that raised awareness

of the negative environmental attributes of flying appeared to be related to the strongest anti flying

sentiment.

An individual’s moral norm was sometimes found to be influenced by their attitude towards others in

sharing collective responsibility for the environment, particularly with regard to climate change, when

some felt that their not flying would not benefit the environment if other people were not doing the

same;

"I feel like I have a responsibility to do my bit, and I’m trying to [by not flying]…it’s frustrating because you look around you and you see that the majority aren’t doing much, they’re not doing as much as they could and so you just think ‘bugger it I’m off too, why should they have all the fun?’’" In some cases such respondents were thus influenced to neutralise their personal norm, in line with the

findings of Biel & Thogerson (2007). Such responses highlighted the existence of a concern for fairness

and this often emerged when an individual still very much felt the urge to fly, but this urge conflicted with

their environmental concerns and as such they sometimes experienced considerable internal dissonance.

In some of these cases despite strong environmental concern, and when ‘not flying’ had not been framed

in a positive sense and instead was predominantly viewed as a sacrifice, it was the behaviour of

respondents close friends and family that appeared to provide the strongest influence on their air travel

behaviour.

Trade offs

When a respondent reported an environmental awareness that led them to believe that flying was a

behaviour that should be reduced or ceased, but who still continued to fly, trade offs were apparent in

many cases; alternatives to flying were too expensive, time consuming, less convenient than flying, or

didn’t fit with their current lifestyles.

Some respondents suggested that they trade off their flying against their pro social behaviours, but the

most prevalent type of trade off was when respondents reported that their flying behaviours were

40


somehow ‘offset’ by the other pro environmental behaviours that they took part in, either whilst on

holiday or in their day to day lives;

"I’ve earned it from all of the things that I have done, whether it be recycling, composting, wood burning, solar panels, cycling to work when I can and just saving all that carbon and thinking that I have lived a relatively low carbon lifestyle for x amount of time, if I do the sums I work out that I can fly once every 3 years within my personal carbon allowance”.

In this sense the ability to trade off their ethical concerns influenced their air travel behaviour; such trade

offs were rationalised as a justification to take a flight despite their environmental concerns. Some trade

offs were in line with those indicated by Barr (2008) as comparatively trivial pro environmental

behaviours that were traded off against the rather large environmental impact of flying, although some

rationalizations appeared to be grounded in a logical understanding of, and enthusiasm for, carbon

rationing and personal carbon trading.

Social Norms

The influence of others was a readily identifiable factor in many of the responses, and social factors were

found to both encourage and curb flying behaviours. Most respondents reported some type of social

influence on their flying decisions, and descriptive, injunctive and subjective norms were all apparent.

Peer group influence was particularly noticeable for some of the respondents when friends influenced

their decisions to fly. The respondents in this study sometimes felt that it was difficult for them to take

their environmental concerns into account in their flying behaviours, as those around them were not

doing so, and thus it was not normative for them to do so, and this was often tied up with issues of

‘fairness’ – when respondents felt that they were doing much more than the rest of the population and

hence were reticent to give up flying, as this was an activity that in some cases they highly valued. On the

other hand, peer groups also set the social context for not flying and in some cases flying appeared to

have become stigmatised in the respondents’ social circles;

“I don’t think it’s [flying] the right thing to do anymore… I feel that within my social circle it would be frowned upon as well. It’s not socially acceptable to fly too much”.

Family were found to play a very strong role in influencing air travel behaviour. In some cases when close

family had negative attitudes towards flying in line with the respondent, choosing alternatives to flying on

holiday was easier and viewed as more acceptable. In other examples when family members put pressure

on the respondent to fly then often air travel was chosen as the transport option, despite the personal

intention and preference to utilise an alternative method of transport.

41


One respondent, despite his own strong environmental concerns and disposition to not fly in view of

those, struggled with the fact that he wanted to give his son access to the travel experiences that were

only accessible through air travel, because these experiences had been important to him in his life. He

worried that the opportunity to travel the world would be reduced once his son came of age;

“I have a young son who is growing up and I’m giving him opportunities that he is not going to get when he is older… I don’t think that he’ll be able to afford long haul flights when he has got a family and he is at that stage…I think that air travel is going to become too expensive and that the environmental costs will be realised…so it’s not right but it’s not a place that I am prepared to compromise at the moment.” Some respondents felt that it was important that they provide a positive environmental influence on

others; including friends, family, and also others beyond their social sphere;

"We went to the South of France, with bikes and trains and children. This is great because I can tell people that I have done it…that it is possible. I didn't go on holiday to prove a point, but at the same time having a fantastic, cheap, healthy, low carbon holiday is a very powerful story to tell…”

These respondents flying behaviours were strongly influenced by the effect that they felt that their

behaviours would have on others flying behaviours, they hoped that their behaviour might set a good

example for others, often their own children. These respondents were also keen not to be viewed as

hypocritical in their flying behaviour.

Situational Factors

As already indicated in the responses suggesting ‘trade offs’, respondents who had a desire to decrease

their flying consumption indicated that they felt that there were many situational barriers to them doing

so. Similar to the findings of McDonald et al (2008) the study found that the respondents sometimes

compromised their ethical criteria that led them to prefer alternative forms of transport in favour of air

travel, which was variously viewed as faster, economically cheaper, and more convenient.

For shorter journeys the high financial price of alternatives to short haul flights was the main barrier

mentioned, and flying was seen as more convenient and faster than alternative transport options such as

the train. Travel in the UK was viewed as being hampered by an inefficient and poorly served rail

infrastructure.

For long distance travel many respondents had considered the alternatives to long haul flights, but had

felt themselves constrained by their current lifestyles;

42


"When you work, and I have a full time job, I only have a limited amount of holiday, coming up now I have 2 weeks holiday and I could drive to Ireland, if I want to go further a field than flying is the way to go, you want to get to where you are going and then enjoy your holiday and then go home again. You don’t want to spend 3 days on horse back or on the train or whatever trying to get there. "

This finding is in line with those of Sanne (2002) and appears to be a good example of economic and

political structures being essentially incompatible with some pro environmental behaviours.

Summary of findings

To summarise, the findings of the primary research indicated that the respondents exhibited a range of air

travel behaviours, but that predominantly respondents had already acted or had the intention of acting to

decrease their flying behaviours in view of their environmental concerns. The respondents’ air travel

behaviours were subject to a plethora of interrelated influencing factors which appeared to influence

respondents to a range of degrees. The main influences were found to be the nature and strength of the

respondent’s environmental concern, the current role of travel and tourism in the individual’s life, the

social norms that the respondent finds them self subject to, the situational constraints on choosing

alternative transport options to flying, and the geographical location of the respondents themselves.

43


DISCUSSION

In this section the boundaries and limitations of this small scale empirical investigation are considered.

The primary research findings are evaluated in light of concepts from the review of the literature and

compared with those of the secondary research, and tentative suggestions are made to explain the

similarities and differences, and the implications of the findings are considered.

The nature of this empirical research as very small scale, exploratory, and conducted by a ‘beginner’

researcher require consideration when discussing the implications of the findings, contrasting the findings

with published academic research, and when suggesting that the results of such a study might contribute

to academic thinking or knowledge in any of the relevant domains. The limitations of this research are

thus acknowledged and accepted. The aim of the research was to gain an insight into influences on

ethical consumers’ air travel behaviour; and not to quantify these factors or to suggest the existence of

causal relationships between these factors, although tentative suggestions are made as to the existence

of possible links between these influences. The findings of this research are not intended to be

generalised across a population or to confirm or disprove a theory.

One of the principle findings of this research was that the respondents in question exhibited a variety of

air travel behaviours, ranging from those who had ceased flying, through to those who flew for travel and

tourism purposes as and when it suited them. Such a finding supports existing research into the efficacy

of approaching the study of ethical consumption with a focus on the behaviour or purchase, rather then

the purchaser (Peattie, 2001a; McDonald et al, 2008; Young et al, 2006). Although the group of

respondents exhibited environmental concerns and behaviours that might have led a market researcher

to classify them as ‘ethical’ or ‘green consumers’, their actual consumption behaviours in terms of air

travel were varied, indicating that traditional approaches to segmenting ethical consumers suggest a

homogeneity of attitudes, beliefs and behaviour that in some circumstances might not exist. The findings

of the research indicated that some respondents had adopted behaviours in their day to day lives that

could be considered as ‘less acceptable’ or ‘more challenging’,16 yet were still unable or unwilling to

reduce their air travel consumption, supporting the finding that even the ‘greenest’ consumers might not

be willing or able to adopt certain pro environmental behaviours (Nesta, 2008).

Much secondary research supports the proposition that the majority of consumers who consume with an

environmental awareness in their day to day lives will not transfer environmental criteria over into their

16Using the car less for short trips, installing micro generation, cycling or walking for trips under 3 miles, choosing a green energy tariff, and fuelling vehicles with an alternative to petroleum based products are all viewed as behaviours which are less acceptable or more challenging according to Defra’s (2008) research into the acceptability of these pro environmental behavioural goals.

44


air travel consumption choices (McDonald et al, 2008; Dresner et al, 2007; Defra, 2008; Miller et al, 2006;

BMRB, 2007; Barr, 2008; Downing & Ballantyne, 2007). However, in the current research, and despite the

range of behaviours apparent, it was predominantly found that the respondents were strongly influenced

by their environmental concerns in their air travel consumption. In most cases environmental criteria

were taken into account and utilised to judge the suitability of air travel, and respondents were found to

have already acted or to have the intention of acting to decrease their flying behaviours in view of their

environmental concerns.

The difference in findings between the pieces of research could be explained by a number of variables,

including the fact that the sample size of the current study is comparatively small; had more respondents

been interviewed perhaps other behaviours might have proved predominant. The utilisation of self

selecting ethical consumers as respondents in the research meant that there were no rigid selection

criteria for the sample and it could be the case that the respondents differed in their ‘greenness’; their

concerns, and the strength of those concerns when compared to respondents in the other studies. The

geographical location of the present study was found to be strongly implicated in the findings, and could

also have influenced the environmental fervour of the respondents. The life stage of the respondents

could also have affected their actions, and a younger sample of respondents might have yielded a very

different set of findings, as might a sample situated in a geographically dissimilar location. McDonald et

al’s (2008) study concentrated on actual purchases and the decision making processes associated with

such purchases. The current study included respondents who had already acted on their environmental

concerns regarding flying, but also included those who intended to act on those concerns when the

opportunity arose; and again this could affect the comparability of the findings.

The findings of this primary research are broadly consistent with existing research from various academic

domains which suggest that a range of influences will affect ethical consumer behaviour (Jackson, 2004;

Defra, 2008; Stern, 2000; Cherrier, 2005a; Anable et al, 2006; Snelgar, 2006; Brook Lyndhurst, 2004;

Nesta, 2008). In view of the paucity of research into influences on ethical consumers’ air travel

consumption, the review of the literature drew on the findings of secondary research which had been

undertaken to investigate the influences on ethical consumers in various consumption contexts (Shaw et

al, 2005; Steel, 1996; Stets & Biga, 2003; Hinds & Sparks, 2008; Berger & Corbin, 1992; Biel & Thogersen,

2007; Nyborg et al, 2006). In view of the differential of aim and approach between many of the reviewed

studies and the current study, it is not possible to make a direct comparison of results between the

investigations, but it is possible to confirm that the current study found evidence that factors found to

influence ethical consumers in these other contexts as detailed in the review of the literature were also

found to influence, to varying degrees, air travel consumption. The varying degrees of influence might be

45


explained by the proposal that each influence will vary in salience in any situation according to the

context, and / or to the individual.

With reference to the present study, the findings indicate that the respondents’ air travel behaviours

were subject to a plethora of individual, social and situational influences; many of which were found to be

interrelated on a number of levels. The findings of the current research would suggest that influences

merge, compete and affect each other in a web of intricate interplay, as per the complex nature of

consumer behaviour indicated in the review of the literature (Jackson, 2004; Solomon et al, 2006; Brook

Lyndhurst, 2006).

In view of the aim to seek an insight into the air travel consumption of the respondents’, and to

understand their behaviour more clearly, it is possible to identify several influences that did appear to be

more dominant, or more salient, in this context.

In line with the secondary research (Gilg et al, 2005; Newholm, 2005; Yeoman, 2007) this study

highlighted the diversity of the concerns that influence ethical consumers’ behaviour. The findings of this

primary research indicate that certain concerns might be more implicated than others in an individual’s

willingness to adopt a pro environmental behaviour. The strength of the concern was also found to be an

influencing factor; individuals who felt very strongly about their concern for climate change or

consumption reduction appeared to be more likely to choose the pro environmental behaviour of not

flying, and as Crompton (2008) suggests it was found that intrinsic motivations linked to the individuals

sense of self appeared to implicate the likelihood of adopting the ‘challenging’ pro environmental

behaviour of flying cessation or reduction.

Like the literature reviewed (Harrison et al, 2005; Devinney et al, 2007; NESTA, 2008; Crompton, 2008;

Rose, 2008; Freestone & McGoldrick, 2008) the current study found motivation to be a strong influence

on ethical consumer behaviour. The current role of travel and tourism in the individual’s life emerged as a

key influence in motivating the respondent’s air travel consumption; it did not appear to be air travel in

itself that some were reticent to relinquish, but instead what air travel had come to represent. Air travel

was often thought to be the most convenient, most economically viable and fastest mode of travel for

gaining access to travel and tourism experiences, and consequently air travel was often viewed in terms

of its symbolic value, the cultural and social meanings associated with it, and its role in constructing and

maintaining personal identity. These roles and meanings of consumption are often explored in the

context of material possessions in the consumer behaviour literature (Jackson, 2004) but appear to be

explored less so in the empirical research into influences on ethical consumption and pro environmental

behaviours.

46


This is perhaps because existing research into what might be considered to be the more mundane areas

of ethical consumption (recycling, energy provision, fast moving consumer goods) hasn’t necessitated an

investigation into the meaning and identity creation aspects of the contexts in question. Given the

important role ascribed to motivation in influencing consumer behaviour such findings could have

important implications for those with the objective of moving grey consumers towards the pro

environmental behaviour of air travel reduction (Defra, 2008; Young et al, 2006a), although as already

indicated the limitations of the findings as being very geographically specific should be kept in mind.

The findings of this research also revealed evidence of the more prosaic motivations to fly as indicated in

the findings of Miller et al (2006), such as the role of visiting friends and family, and the desire to visit

locations with sunnier climes. Previous in‐depth research into the motivations of ethical consumers to

‘not fly’ does not appear to exist, and the findings of this study uncovered multiple motivations

experienced by the respondents that influenced them to choose alternative methods of transport for

their tourism experiences, or in some cases led them to eschew travel and tourism experiences entirely.

In line with much previous research into social influences on consumer behaviour (Zavestocki, 2003;

Jackson, 2003a; Downing & Ballantyne, 2007) social pressures including subjective, descriptive and

injunctive norms were found to be of influence in the respondents’ air travel behaviour, even those who

appeared to be very internally driven and strongly motivated by their own personal norms. Some

respondents were driven by their desire not to appear hypocritical, both beyond and within their peer

groups, and also in their wish to provide a positive environmental role model for others.

Situational constraints, in the sense that respondents felt that there was no real alternative to air travel,

was also a salient factor in the research, as indicated by previous research in other sectors and contexts

(Lucas et al, 2008; Barr et al, 2006). Respondents felt restricted by the choices available, but also by the

economic and political structure which provided the backdrop to their lives (Sanne, 2002). However,

despite feeling constrained by their lifestyles in this sense, respondents accepted that they had chosen

these lifestyles and had made the decision to have a full time job, buy a house, and not exist outside of

the current economic system. They thus accepted that they could take more action to have less impact

on the environment if they chose to.

One key influence on the flying behaviour of the respondents was not suggested by the review of the

literature, and that was the geographical location of the research. The interrelated nature of the

influences on behaviour has already been noted, but this influence in particular appeared to hold sway in

many other areas; including respondents’ environmental concerns, the strength of those concerns,

47


motivations to not fly, and the existence and strength of an individual’s sense of environmental identity.

The high incidence of biospheric values in the respondents, as opposed to altruistic values, might have

also been related to the location of the respondents, and in turn could have had a strong influence on the

behaviour of the respondents. For example, a group of respondents who had much stronger altruistic

tendencies might have considered the impact that ceasing or reducing flying would have on the people in

the host countries, and as such their propensity to cease or reduce flying might have been effected.

In summary, the findings of the primary research appeared in most cases to support and reflect the

findings and concepts of the secondary research as outlined in the review of the literature; in the sense

that ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel was found to be a complex phenomenon,

subject to the influence of a wide range of often interrelated factors. The principle difference in the

findings between the primary and secondary research was found to be the level to which the respondents

took their ethical concerns into account when making air travel consumption decisions, and the possible

reasons for such a disparity in findings were considered. In all, this study has reinforced and supported

much of the research into influences on ethical consumer behaviour. Ultimately, this study adds to the

existing body of research not by challenging or by verifying existing theories, but by offering insight on the

largely unexplored area of influences on ethical consumer’s air travel consumption behaviour.

48


CONCLUSION

In this section the stated aims and objectives of the study are revisited in order to establish to what

extent they have been satisfied. This chapter adopts a reflexive stance and reflects upon the process of

the research and suggestions are made as to how the research process could have been improved. The

contribution of this study to theoretical knowledge is considered, and finally, further areas for research

are indicated.

The aim of this research was to gain an insight into influences on ethical consumer behaviour with regard

to air travel for travel and tourism purposes. Three objectives were set in order meet this aim, and are

considered below.

The first objective of this study was to establish the existing work in the field of ethical consumption

relevant to the specific area of air travel. This objective was met and secondary research was investigated

in order to set the context for the primary research. It was found that little empirical research had been

conducted with a view to investigate influences on ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel,

however, some existing research was located and the main findings of which were explored. In view of

the limited nature of secondary research in the specific research area it was deemed appropriate to

consider the findings of secondary research conducted with a view to establishing influences on ethical

consumer behaviour in general, or in specific contexts. It was established that the field of consumer

behaviour is both extensive and complex, and in view of this a framework for the study was adopted

which drew on two approaches to the study of consumer behaviour; internal approaches, and external

approaches (Jackson, 2004), which in turn was subdivided into social and situational influences on

behaviour.

The second objective of the study was to conduct the primary research with the aim of gaining an in‐

depth insight into factors influencing the air travel behaviour of a group of self selecting ethical

consumers. This objective was also met, in view of the successful completion of the primary research.

The research was located within a qualitative paradigm, and was exploratory in nature. The research

methodology consisted of eleven semi structured, in‐depth, one to one interviews, the findings of which

were analysed using content analysis to produce the findings that were presented and discussed in order

to meet the third and final objective of the study.

The third and final objective of the study was to compare the findings of the primary research with the

past investigations as detailed in the review of the literature. Again, this aim was met and it was found

that the findings of the current research were both similar and dissimilar to those of the secondary

49


research. As suggested in the review of the literature, it was found that ethical consumption is a complex

field, where individual consumers are subject to a plethora of interrelated and sometimes competing

influences, and that this is indeed the case in the area of ethical consumers and air travel. The influencing

factors identified in the review of the literature were all found to impact, with varying degrees, the air

travel consumer behaviour of the respondents. It was proposed that the variance in degrees of influence

might be explained by the fact that the secondary research had primarily been conducted with a view to

exploring influences on ethical consumers in general, or in specific contexts such as fair trade, and that

the salience of each influence might be variable according to the individual, and / or to the context in

question.

In line with some of the studies detailed in the review of the literature, this project approached the study

of ethical consumption with a focus on the behaviour or purchase, rather than the individual, and this was

found to be an effective method given that the respondents in the current study exhibited a range of

behaviours with regard to air travel. These findings suggest that approaches to ethical consumption that

conceptualise ethical consumers as a homogeneous mass might fail to meet their objectives in view of

such a disparity of consumer behaviour.

The main anomaly between the secondary research findings and those of the primary research was the

degree to which ethical consumers were found to take into account ethical criteria when making

consumption and non consumption decisions within the area of air travel. Previous research had

concluded that ethical consumers were as likely as grey consumers to choose air travel in order to meet

their travel and tourism needs. This study found that the majority of respondents were choosing to take

into account their environmental concerns in their air travel behaviour, and that predominantly the

respondents had ceased, reduced, or had the intention to reduce their flying behaviours. This is perhaps

an interesting finding, but further research would be required to establish whether or not such a finding

indicates that ethical consumers are becoming more ‘ethical’ in their air travel practises. The possible

reasons for such a variation in the findings were considered.

The constraints and limitations on the research process were found to be the restricted timeframe and

my own inexperience in the field of research and as a researcher. In retrospect, and in view of the

findings regarding the identity and meaning creation aspects of the travel and tourism experience and

their importance in motivating ethical consumers’ air travel behaviour, perhaps more attention in the

review of the literature could have been paid to research streams exploring such areas. Research

pertaining to the role of travel and tourism in identity creation might have been a more fruitful area to

explore in order to yield findings or concepts for comparison to my own research findings. Existing

research taking an interpretive approach to the exploration of influences on ethical consumption

50


appeared to be limited, which led perhaps to an over emphasis on the findings of positivistic research in

the review of the literature, which although offering a frame for the exploratory research didn’t comprise

of findings or concepts that were directly comparable to my own. If the research were to be conducted

again I might dispense with the use of preset themes suggested by secondary research, and instead have

increased confidence in my ability to allow the themes to emerge from the data collected.

Although the in‐depth interviews proved successful in providing a rich and deep insight into the air travel

consumption behaviours of these ethical consumers perhaps the inclusion of the findings from a focus

group might have been a welcome addition. As expected, ethical consumption was found to be a

sensitive topic, and some respondents appeared defensive of their air travel behaviours. The one to one

nature of the interview methodology afforded a chance to dissipate raised emotions in a gentle and non

confrontational manner. Focus groups might have been less likely to yield useful data regarding the

individual influences on the respondents’ air travel behaviour, but perhaps could have produced

interesting data for further exploring social influences and social norms on air travel consumption choices.

Further interviews might have affected the findings of the study, it wasn’t felt that saturation had been

reached, and each interview unearthed new influences, or new permutations of an influence, on the

respondents in question. As the research progressed, I gained confidence in my role as interviewer, and

latter interviews provided richer insights into the life‐worlds of the respondents. If the research were to

be repeated, my increased confidence as a researcher might produce a very different starting point, and

once again might contribute findings with a difference in emphasis.

The nature of this empirical research as small scale, exploratory, and conducted by a ‘beginner’

researcher require consideration when discussing the implications of the findings or when suggesting that

the results of such a study might contribute to academic thinking or knowledge in any of the relevant

domains. Although previous studies have presented important findings indicating the range of influences

on ethical consumption behaviour, either in general or in relation to a range of consumption and non

consumption contexts, no previous research has focused solely on the factors that influence ethical

consumer’s air travel consumption, and this exploratory study has provided potentially useful initial

insights into the neglected area of influences on ethical consumer behaviour with regard to air travel.

These findings, which indicate the range and complexity of influences on ethical consumer behaviour,

highlight the often simplistic approach adopted by existing models of consumer behaviour, which endorse

a deterministic view of decision making which neglects the complex relationships between a range of

influencing factors.

51


The findings of the current research could offer utility to those seeking to exploit the commercial

opportunities presented by the phenomenon of ethical consumption, or those with a behaviour change

agenda hoping to utilise insight from ethical consumer behaviour to move other consumers towards pro

environmental behaviours. In particular, the detailed findings regarding the motivating factors that

influence these consumers both towards and away from air travel consumption could be of import to

those hoping to encourage air travel reduction.

In the review of the literature academics and practitioners in various fields highlight the paucity of in‐

depth insight into ethical consumer behaviour, and thus indicate gaps in the literature. In particular they

call for qualitative research in order to understand ethical consumer’s actual needs, attitudes and beliefs;

barriers and motivators to action; and how social norms, beliefs and attitudes influence their decisions to

adopt or fail to adopt pro environmental behaviours. This study does not claim to provide findings that

can definitively answer the questions raised by these calls for further research. However, the findings of

this research would appear go part way towards plugging some of the gaps in knowledge indicated above,

as well as to suggest possibly fertile avenues for further research.

A future avenue for research might be to more fully investigate the nature of the relationships between

the influencing factors and how they relate to the respondents air travel consumption decisions; or to

attempt to identify the differences between individuals who choose to fly and those who do not. The life

stage of the respondents potentially had a significant effect on the findings; perhaps further research

might be to investigate the influences on a sample of respondents that were older or younger. The

geographical location of the study also appeared to be strongly implicated in the findings, perhaps the

findings from a study utilising a sample from a more urban area would produce results that might provide

an interesting contrast.

In particular, the findings of this small scale study appear to indicate that the social and cultural, identity

creation and identity maintenance roles allocated to travel and tourism experiences appear to sometimes

heavily implicate flying behaviours. These aspects of air travel prove so compulsive that even the most

environmentally conscious consumers are reticent to cease or reduce their air travel behaviours, whereas

other respondents manage to eschew air travel despite these intoxicating facets. These same ethical

consumers also appear to suggest that, at least in their lives, social and cultural expectations related to

travel and methods of travel appear to be changing. Perhaps these areas are worthy of further

exploration in view of the need to move more consumers towards the adoption of challenging pro

environmental behaviour, and would shed further light on the complex nature of the consumption

behaviour of the ethical consumer.

52


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M., (1980), ‘Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behaviour’, Prentice‐Hall Ajzen, I., (1991), ‘The theory of planned behaviour’, Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, No. 50, pp. 179‐211 Anable, J., Lane, B., & Kelay, T., (2006), ‘An Evidence Base Review of Attitudes to Climate Change and Transport’, Report for the UK Department for Transport Aronson, E., Wilson, T., Akert, R., (1999), ‘Social Psychology’, 3rd ed., Longman Atkinson, R., (2007), ‘Carrots and Sticks – Consuming our way to a Low Carbon Economy’, 2CV research agency Bamberg, S., & Moser, G., (2007), ‘Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta‐analysis of psycho‐social determinants of pro environmental behaviour’, Journal of Environmental Psychology, No. 27, Vol. 1, pp. 14‐25 Barnett, C., Cafaro, P., & Newholm, T., (2005a), ‘Philosophy and ethical consumption’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage Publications Barr, S., Gilg, A., & Shaw, G., (2006); ‘Promoting Sustainable Lifestyles: a Social Marketing Approach’, University of Exeter, Leeds, DEFRA Barr, S., (2008), ‘Bleeding‐heart Jetsetters Spell Bad News for Climate’, University of Exeter website, accessed 21.9.08 http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/newsjetsetters.shtml Bates, S., (2007), ‘Environmentally aware bishop pledges not to fly for a year’, The Guardian, February 8th Beck, U., (1998), ‘The World Risk Society’, Polity Press Berg, B., (2000), ‘Qualitative Research Methods for Social Sciences’, Allyn and Bacon Berger, I., & Corbin, R., (1992), ‘Perceived consumer effectiveness and faith in others as moderators of environmentally responsible behaviours’, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Fall, pp. 79‐100 Berry, M., and McEachern, M., (2005), ‘Informing ethical consumers’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage Publications Bicchieri, C., (2006), ‘The Grammar of Society. The Nature and Dynamics of Social Norms’, Cambridge University Press Biel, A., & Thogerson, J., (2007), ‘Activation of social norms in social dilemmas: a review of the evidence and reflections on the implications for environmental behaviour’, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 28, pp. 93‐112 Black, R., (2008), ‘Brits ‘Addicted’ to Cheap Flights’, BBC news website, accessed 19.9.08 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6970730.stm BMRB (2007), ‘Flying in the face of wisdom’, British Market Research Society website, accessed 10.5.08 http://www.bmrb.co.uk/news/article/flying‐in‐the‐face‐of‐wisdom/

53


Borman, K. & Preissle‐Goez, J., (1986), ‘Ethnographic and qualitative research design and why it doesn’t work’, American Behavioural Scientist, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 42‐57 BRASS, (2008), ‘BRASS policy briefing: Climate change, consumers, and the future of brands’, BRASS website, accessed 12.8.08 http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/uploads/CLIMATEPBD.pdf Brook Lyndhurst (2004), ‘Bad habits, hard choices: in search of sustainable lifestyles’, Brook Lyndhurst Brook Lyndhurst (2006), ‘Innovative Methods for Influencing Behaviours and Assessing Success – Triggering Widespread Adoption of Sustainable Behaviour; Final Report for Defra, March 2006’, DEFRA Brown, K.W., & Kasser, T., (2005), ‘Are psychological and ecological wellbeing compatible? The role of values, mindfulness, and lifestyle’, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 74, pp. 349‐368 Bryman, A., (1984), ‘The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: a question of method or epistemology?’, The British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 75‐92 Buensdorf, G., & Cordes, C., (2008), ‘Can sustainable consumption be learned? A model of cultural evolution’, Ecological Economics, article in press Burke, S., Miberg, S., & Smith, N., (1993), ‘The role of ethical concerns in consumer purchase behaviour: understanding alternative processes’, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 119‐122 Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A., (2001), ‘The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in purchase behaviour?’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 560‐577 Chan, K., (1998), ‘Mass communication and pro environmental behaviour: waste recycling in Hong Kong’, Journal of Environment Management, Vol. 52, pp. 317‐325 Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., Mittusis, D., & Smith, A., (2004), ‘Virtue in consumption?’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 20, pp. 527‐544 Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., & Smith, A., (2006), ‘“Ethically concerned, yet unethically behaved”: towards an updated understanding of consumer’s (un)ethical decision making’, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 33, pp. 693‐698 Cherrier, H., & Murray, J., (2004), ‘The sociology of consumption: the hidden facets of marketing’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 20, pp. 509‐525 Cherrier, H., (2005a), ‘Using existential phenomenological interviewing to explore meanings of consumption’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage, London Cherrier, H., (2005b), ‘Becoming sensitive to ethical consumption behaviour: narratives of survival in an uncertain and unpredictable world’, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 32, pp. 600‐604 Clark, C., Kotchen, M., & Moore, M., (2003), ‘Internal and external influences on pro environmental behaviour: participation in a green electricity programme’, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 23, pp. 237‐246 Clavin, B. & Lewis, A., (2005), ‘Focus groups on consumers’ ethical beliefs’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage, London

54


Collins, J., Thomas, G., Willis, R, & Wilsdon, J., (2003), ‘Carrots, sticks and sermons: influencing public behaviour for environmental goals’, Demos/Green Alliance report for Defra Coffey, S., & Atkinson, P., (1996), ‘Making sense of qualitative data’, Sage Publications Collis, J., & Hussey, R., (2003), ‘Business Research’, Second Edition, Palgrave Macmillan Co‐operative Bank (2003), ‘The Ethical Consumerism Report 2000’, The Co‐operative Bank Co‐operative Bank, (2007), ‘The Ethical Consumerism Report 2007’, The Co‐operative Bank Cowe, R., & Williams, S., (2001), ‘Who are the Ethical Consumers?’, The Co‐operative Bank Crane, A., (2000), ‘Facing the backlash: green marketing and strategic re orientation in the 1990’s’, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 8, pp. 277‐296 Crompton, T., (2008), ‘Weathercocks and Signposts: the Environment Movement at a Crossroads’, WWF, UK Darnton, A., Elster Jones, J., Lucas, K., & Brooks, M., (2006), ‘Promoting Pro Environmental Behaviour: Existing Evidence to Inform Better Policy Making – a Study for DEFRA’, Centre for Sustainable Development, University of Westminster, London Dawes, R., (1980), ‘Social dilemmas’, Annual Review of Psychology, No. 31, pp. 169‐193 Defra, (2006), ‘Behaviour Change: a Series of Practical Guides for Policy Makers and Practitioners. Number 2: Targeting Specific Lifestyle Groups’, University of Exeter and Defra Defra, (2008), ‘A Framework for Pro Environmental Behaviours’, DEFRA, January Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y., (1994), ‘Introduction’, in Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y., (eds), ‘Handbook of Qualitative Research’, Sage Publications Devinney, T., Eckhardt, G., & Belk, R., (2007), ‘Why don’t consumers behave ethically? The social construction of consumption’, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 34, pp 12‐21 De Vries, S., & Wilke, H., (1992), ‘Constrained egoism and resource management under uncertainty’, in Liebrand, W., Messick, D., & Wilke, H., (eds), ‘Social Dilemmas: Theoretical Issues and Research Findings’, pp. 81‐99, Pergamon Press Doane, D., (2001), ‘Taking Flight: the Rapid Growth of Ethical Consumerism: The Ethical Purchasing Index 2001’, New Economics Foundation Downing, P., & Ballantyne, J., (2007), ‘Tipping Point or Turning Point? Social Marketing and Climate Change’, Ipsos Mori Dreher, M., (1994), ‘Qualitative research methods from the reviewer’s perspective’ in Morse, J., (ed), ‘Critical issues in qualitative research methods’, Sage Publications Dresner, S., McKeevor, K., & Tomei, J., (2007), ‘Public Understanding Synthesis Report: a Report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’, Policy Studies Institute, Defra, London Easterby Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Lowe, A., (2004), ‘Management Research: an Introduction’, Sage Publications

55


Ek, K., & Soderholm, P., (2006), ‘Norms and economic motivation in the Swedish green electricity market’, Ecological Economics, article in press Elkington, J., & Hailes, J., (1989), ‘The Green Consumer’s Shopping Guide’, Gollancz, London Euromonitor (2006), ‘Airlines brace themselves for the climate change storm’, Euromonitor Website Archive, 9 November, accessed 10.5.08 http://www.euromonitor.com/airline_brace_themselves_for_the_climate_change_storm Faiers, A., Cook, M., & Neame, C., (2007), ‘Towards a contemporary approach for understanding consumer behaviour in the context of domestic energy use’, Energy Policy, No. 35, pp. 4381‐4390 Feather, N., (1992), ‘Values, valences, expectations, and actions’, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 48, No. 2, pp.109‐124 Fishbein, M., (1973), ‘The prediction of behaviour from attitudinal variables’, in Matrensen, C., & Sereno, K., (eds), ‘Advances in Communication Research’, Harper & Row Fisher, R., (1993), ‘Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, pp. 303‐315 Flick, U., (2007), ‘An Introduction to Qualitative Research’, Sage (third edition) Francis, J, (2008), ‘Can a Holiday be Responsible if you fly to get There?,’ Responsible Travel website, accessed 2.5.08 http://www.responsibletravel.com/preview.asp?Entity=Copy&ID=902435 Freestone, O., & McGoldrick, P, (2008), ‘Motivations of the ethical consumer’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 79, pp. 445‐467 Friedman, D., & Hechter, M., (1990), ‘The comparative advantages of rational choice theory’, in Ritzer, G., (ed), ‘Frontiers of Social Theory’, Columbia University Press. Futerra, (2008), ‘The Greenwash Guide’, Futerra Sustainability Commissions Gabriel, Y., & Lang, T., (1995), ‘The Unmanageable Consumer: Contemporary Consumption and its Fragmentations’; London, Sage Gardner, G., & Stern, P., (1996), ‘Environmental Problems and Human Behaviour’, Allyn and Bacon, Boston Giddens, A., (1990), ‘Consequences of Modernity’, Polity Press Gilg, A., Barr, S. & Ford, F., (2005), ‘Green consumption or sustainable lifestyles? Identifying the sustainable consumer’, Futures, No. 37, pp. 481‐504 Goulding, C., (1999), ‘Consumer research, interpretive paradigms and methodological ambiguities’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, No. 9/10, pp. 859‐873 Goulding, C., (2005), ‘Grounded theory, ethnography and phenomenology. A comparative analysis of three qualitative strategies for marketing research’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39, No. 3/4, pp. 294‐308

56


Goulding, C., (2006), ‘Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide for Management, Business and Market Researchers’, Sage publications Grant, J., (2007), ‘The Green Marketing Manifesto’, Wiley Grant, J., (2008), ‘Viewpoint: green marketing’, Strategic Direction, Vol. 24, No. 8, pp. 25‐27 Hackley, C., (2003), ‘Doing Research Projects in Marketing, Management and Consumer Research’, Routledge Hammersley, M., (1992), ‘What’s Wrong with Ethnography?’, Routledge, London Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P., (1995), ‘Ethnography’, Routledge, London Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (2005), ‘Introduction’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage, London Hinds, J., & Sparks, P., (2008), ‘Engaging with the natural environment: the role of affective connection and identity’, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 28, pp. 109‐120 HM Government, (2007), ‘Draft Climate Change Bill’, HM Government Irving, S., (2008), ‘Trains, planes and automobiles’, Ethical Consumer, ECRA Publishing, May/June, pp. 8‐13 Jackson, T., (2003a), ‘The Green Consumer – Myth or Miracle?’, Innovation Brief, www.sustainabletechnologies.ac.uk/projects/consumotion.htm Jackson, T., (2003b), ‘Sustainable Consumption and Production, Economic, Regeneration: Policies for Sustainable Consumption’, Sustainable Development Commission Jackson, T., (2004), ‘Motivating Sustainable Consumption: a Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour and Behaviour Change’, Sustainable Development Research Network and ESRC Sustainable Technologies Programme Jamrozy, U., (2007), ‘Marketing of tourism: a paradigm shift toward sustainability’, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 117‐130 Janesick, V., (2000), ‘The choreography of qualitative research design: minuets, improvisations and crystallization’ in Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y., (eds) ‘Handbook of Qualitative Research’, Sage Publications Kilbourne, W., & Beckmann, S., (1998), ‘Review and critical assessment of research on marketing and the environment’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 14, No. 6, pp. 513‐532 Kotler, P., Roberto, N., & Lee, N., (2002), ‘Social marketing: Improving the Quality of Life’, Thousand Oaks California, Sage Publications Kotler, P. & Lee, N., (2008); ‘Social Marketing: Influencing Behaviours for Good’, Sage Inc. Kvale, S., (1996), ‘InterViews: an Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing’, Sage Publications Layder, D., (1993), ‘New Strategies in Social Research’, Polity Press

57


Legard, R., Keegan, J., & Ward, K., (2003); ‘In depth interviews’ in Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J. (eds), ‘Qualitative Research Practice – a Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers’, Sage Publications Lewis, J, (2003), ‘Design Issues’, The applications of qualitative methods to social research’ in Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J, (eds), ‘Qualitative Research Practice – a Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers’, Sage Lincoln, Y, & Guba, E., (1995), ‘Naturalistic Enquiry’, Sage Publications Low, W., & Davenport, E., (2007), ‘To boldly go…exploring ethical spaces to re politicise ethical consumption and fair trade’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 6, pp. 336‐348 Lucas, K., Brooks, M., Darnton, A. & Elster Jones, J., (2008), ‘Promoting pro‐environmental behaviour: existing evidence and policy implications’, Environmental Science and Policy, No. 11, pp 456‐466 Mackenzie‐Mohr, D., (2000), ‘Fostering sustainable behaviour through community based social marketing’, American Psychologist, Vol. 55, No. 5, pp. 531‐537 Maxwell, J., (1996), ‘Qualitative Research Design: an Interactive Approach’, Sage Publications Mayo, E., (2007a), ‘The Environmental Contract: How to Harness Public Action on Climate Change’, The National Consumer Council Mayo, E., (2007b), ‘Foreword’, in Downing, P., & Ballantyne, J., ‘Tipping Point or Turning Point? Social Marketing and Climate Change’, Ipsos Mori

McCarty, J., & Shrum, L., (1994), ’The recycling of solid wastes: Personal values, value orientations, and attitudes about recycling as antecedents of recycling behaviour’, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 30, Issue 1, pp. 53‐62

McDonald, S., Oates, C., Thyne, M., Alezivou, P., & McMorland, L., (2008), ‘Comparing Sustainable Consumption Patterns Across Product Sectors’, unpublished article Menon, A. & Menon, A., (1997), ‘Enviropreneurial marketing strategy: the emergence of corporate environmentalism as a marketing strategy’, Journal of Marketing, No. 61, Vol. 1, pp. 189‐204 Miles, M., & Huberman, M., (1994), ‘Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook’, Sage Publications Miller. G., (2003), ‘Consumerism in sustainable tourism: a survey of UK consumers’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 17‐39 Miller, G., Rathouse, K., Scarles, C., Holmes, K., & Tribe, J., (2007), ‘Public Understanding of Sustainable Leisure and Tourism: a Report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’, University of Surrey, Defra, London Mintel, (2007a), ‘The Green and Ethical Consumer – UK’, Mintel International Group, London Mintel, (2007b), ‘The Impact of the Environment’, Mintel International Group, London Mintel, (2008), ‘Green and Ethical Finance – UK’, Mintel International Group, London

58


Moisander, J., (1998), ‘Motivation for ecologically oriented consumer behaviour’, working paper prepared for Second European Science Foundation Workshop on Consumption, Everyday Life and Sustainability, Lancaster University, England, accessed 12.7.08 http://www.lancs.ac.uk/users/scistud/esf/title.htm Moisander, J., (2007), ‘Motivational complexity of green consumerism’, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 31, pp. 404‐409 Monbiot, G., (2007), ‘Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning’, South End Press Morgan, D., (1997), ‘Focus Groups as Qualitative Research’, Sage Publications National Consumer Council, (2006), ‘I Will if You Will: Towards Sustainable Consumption’, NCC NESTA (2008), ‘Selling Sustainability: Seven Lessons from Advertising and Marketing to Sell Low Carbon Living’, NESTA, London Newholm, T., (2000), ‘Understanding the Ethical Consumer: Employing a Frame of Bounded Rationality’, PhD Thesis, Open University, Buckingham Newholm, T., (2005), ‘Case studying ethical consumers’ projects and strategies’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage Publications Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (2007), ‘Studying the ethical consumer: a review of research’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 6, pp. 253‐270 Nyberg, K., Howarth, R., & Brekke, K., (2006), ‘Green consumers and public policy: on socially contingent moral motivation’, Resource and Energy Economics, Vol. 28, pp. 351‐366 Ollman, B., (1998), ‘Market Socialism: the Debate Among Socialists’, Routledge Oskamp, S., & Schultz, P., (2005), ‘Attitudes and opinions’, Erlbaum. Ottman, J., (1993), ‘Green Marketing: challenges and opportunities’, NTC Business Books Ottman, J., (1998), ‘Green Marketing’, Ottman/Booksurge Page, G., & Fearn, H., (2005), ‘Corporate reputation: what do customers really care about?’, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 305‐313 Peattie, K., (1999), ‘Trappings versus substance in the greening of marketing planning’, Journal of Strategic Marketing, No. 7, pp131‐148 Peattie, K., (2001a), ‘Towards sustainability: the third ago of green marketing’, The Marketing Review, Vol. 2, pp. 129‐146 Peattie, K., (2001b), ‘Golden goose or wild goose? The hunt for the green consumer’, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 10, pp 187‐199 Peattie, K., & Crane, A., (2005), ‘Green marketing: legend, myth, farce, or prophesy?’, Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 8, No. 3., pp. 357‐370

59


Peattie, K., & Peattie, S., (2008), ‘Social marketing: a pathway to consumption reduction?’, Journal of Business Research, doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.033 Polkinghorne, D., (1988), ‘Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences’, New York Press Porritt, J., (2007), ‘Foreword’, in Grant, J., ‘The Green Marketing Manifesto’, Wiley, Prothero, A., (1990), ‘Green consumerism and the societal marketing concept: marketing strategies for the 1990’s’, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 87‐103 Rahbek Pedersen, E., & Neergaard, P., (2006), ‘Caveat Emptor – Let the buyer beware! Environmental labelling and the limitations of ‘green’ consumerism’, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 15, pp. 15‐29 Rangan, V., Karim, S., & Sandberg, S., (1996), ‘Do better at doing good’, Harvard Business Review, May‐June Riley, M., Wood, R., Clark, M., Wilkie, E., & Szivas, E., (2000) ‘Researching and Writing Dissertations in Business and Management’, Thomson Ritchie, J., (2003) ‘The applications of qualitative methods to social research’ in Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J. (eds), ‘Qualitative Research Practice – a Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers’, Sage Publications Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., & Elam, G., (2003), ‘Designing and selecting samples’ in Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J., (eds),‘Qualitative Research Practice – a Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers’, Sage Publications Roberts, J., (1996), ‘Green consumers in the 1990’s: profile and implications for advertising’, Journal of Business Research, No. 36, pp. 217‐231 Rose, C., (1994), ‘A tool for motivation based communication strategy’, Campaign Strategy Website, accessed 10.7.08 www.campaignstrategy.com Ruyter, K., & Scholl, N., (1998), ‘Positioning qualitative market research: reflections from theory and practice’, Qualitative Market Research, An International Journal, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.7‐14 Salmela, S., & Varho, V., (2006), ‘Consumers in the green electricity market in Finland’, Energy Policy, No 34, pp. 3669‐3683 Sanne, C., (2002), ‘Willing consumers – or locked in? Policies for a sustainable consumption’, Ecological Economics, No. 42, pp. 273‐287 Schlegelmilch, B., Bohlen, G., & Diamantopoulos, A., (1996), ‘The link between green purchasing decisions and measures of environmental consciousness’, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp. 35‐55 Schwartz, S., (1977), ‘Normative influences on altruism’, in Berkowitz, L., (ed), ‘Advances in Experimental Psychology’, pp. 222‐280, Academic Press Schwartz, S., & Bilsky, W., (1987), ‘Toward a universal psychological structure of human values’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, No. 53, pp. 550‐562 Seale, C., (1999), ‘The Quality of Qualitative Research’, Blackwell

60


Shama, A., (1985), ‘The voluntary simplicity consumer’, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 2, No. 4, Fall, pp. 57‐63 Shaw, B., (2008), ‘Using community based social marketing’, in ‘Environmental Communication and Social Marketing Newsletter’, Vol. 1, Issue 1, p2, Summer Shaw, D., & Clarke, I., (1999), ‘Belief formation in ethical consumer groups: an exploratory study’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 109‐119 Shaw, D., (2005), ‘Modelling consumer decision making in fair trade’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage, London Shaw, D., Grehan, E., Shiu, E., Hassan, L., & Thomson, J., (2005), ‘An exploration of values in ethical consumer decision making’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 185‐200 Shaw, D, & Newholm, T., (2002), ‘Voluntary simplicity and the ethics of consumption’, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 167‐185 Shaw, D., & Shiu, E., (2002), ‘The role of ethical obligation and self identity in ethical consumer choice’, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 109‐116 Shaw, S., & Thomas, C., (2006), ‘Social and cultural dimensions of air travel demand: hyper mobility in the UK?’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp 209‐215 Smith, L., (2008), ‘Is green the new beige?’, Brand Strategy, June, pp. 32‐33 Snelgar, R., (2006), ‘Egoistic, altruistic and biospheric environmental concerns: measurement and structure’, Journal of Environmental Psychology, No. 26, pp. 87‐99 Silverman, D., (2005), ‘Doing Qualitative Research’, Sage Publications Smith, D., & Fletcher, J., (2001), ‘Inside information: making sense of marketing data’, Wiley Snape, D., & Spencer, L., (2003), ‘The foundations of Qualitative research’, in Ritchie, J. & Lewis, J (eds.), ‘Qualitative Research Practice – a Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers’, Sage Publications Solomon, M., Bamossy, G., Askegaard, S., & Hogg, M., (2006), ‘Consumer Behaviour: a European Perpsective’; Prentice Hall Financial Times, Soper, K., (2007), ‘Re thinking the ‘good life’: the citizenship dimension of consumer disaffection with consumerism’, Journal of Consumer Culture, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 205‐229 Steel, B., (1996), ‘Thinking globally and acting locally? Environmental attitudes, behaviours and activism’, Journal of Environmental Management, No. 47, pp. 27‐36 Stern, N., (2007), ‘The Economics of Climate Change: the Stern Review’ Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Stern, P., (2000), ‘Towards a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour’, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 407‐424

61


Stern, P., Dietz, D., & Kalof, L., (1993), ‘Value orientations, gender and environmental concern’, Environment and Behaviour, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 322‐438 Stern, P., (2002), ‘New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behaviour’, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 56, Issue 3, pp. 407 ‐ 424

Stets, J., & Biga, C., (2003), ‘Bringing Identity Theory into Environmental Sociology’, Sociological Theory, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 398‐423 Tallontire, A., Rentsendorj, E., & Blowfield, M., (2001), ‘Ethical consumers and ethical trade: a review of the current literature’, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich Taylor Powell, E., & Renner, M., (2003), ‘Analysing qualitative data’, University of Wisconsin http://learningstore.uwex.edu/pdf/G3658‐12.pdf TGI, (2006), ‘Issue 25: flying, the environmental debate’, TGI website, accessed 1.5.08 www.tgisurveys.com/knowledgehub/barometer/TGI%barometerflying_Nov%2006.pdf Thogerson, J., (2006), ‘Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: an extended taxonomy’, Journal of Economic Psychology Vol. 26, pp. 247‐261 Thogersen, J., (2008), ‘Social norms and co operation in real‐life social dilemmas’, Journal of Economic Psychology, No. 29, pp. 458‐472 Thomas, A., (1998), ‘Challenging cases’, in Chataway, J., & Wuyts, M., (eds), ‘Finding out fast’, Sage Publications Tinlin, L., (2007), ‘Ethical consumers under the microscope’, Admap, No. 61, World Advertising Research Centre Von Borgstede, C., & Biel, A., (2002), ‘Pro‐environmental behavior: situational barriers and concern for the good at stake’, Göteborg Psychological Reports, 32, No. 1. Göteborg University, Department of Psychology 10pp. Wheale, P., & Hinton, D., (2007), ‘Ethical consumers in search of markets’, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 16, pp. 302‐315 Worcester, R., & Dawkins, J., (2005), ‘Surveying ethical and environmental attitudes’, in Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D., (eds), ‘The Ethical Consumer’, Sage, London WWF, (2008), ‘Community learning and action for sustainable living’, WWF, London Xin Xu, S., Walker, H., Nairn, A., & Johnsen, T, (2007), ‘A Network Approach to Understanding ‘Green Buying’: a Literature Review’, IMP website, accessed 23.5.08 www.impgroup.org/uploads/papers/5967.pdf Yeoman, I., (2007), ‘Tomorrow's Tourist: Scenarios & Trends, Volume 16’, Butterworth‐Heinemann Young, W, McDonald, S., & Oates, C., (2006a), ‘Trade offs in Decision Making for Sustainable Technologies’, ESRC research report Young, W, McDonald, S., & Oates, C., (2006b), ‘Choosing to be Sustainable: Tracing Complex Decisions’, ESRC Innovation Brief

62


Zavestoki, S., (2003), ‘Constructing and maintaining ecological identities: the strategies of deep ecologists’, in Clayton, S., & Optow, S., (eds), ‘Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature’, MIT press

63


APPENDIX A

Defra’s (2008) environmental segmentation model divides the public into seven clusters each sharing a

distinct set of attitudes and beliefs towards the environment, environmental issues and behaviours.

Segment 1: ‘Positive greens’ 18% of the population (7.6 million)

“I think we need to do some things differently to tackle climate change. I do what I can and feel bad about the rest” • This group assess themselves as acting in more environmentally friendly ways than any

other segment does.

• Members of this group consistently hold the most positive pro‐environmental attitudes

and beliefs; they believe that we are reaching the planets natural limits, and that the ecological crisis is

pressing. They believe that humans are largely responsible for the environmental damage and that it is

up to individuals to adapt their behaviour to address this.

• Whilst they are likely to be doing most to reduce their impact on the environment, there is

scope for them to do more, particularly with their travel behaviours. They are most likely to have

undertaken behaviours in the home including saving energy and water, and they are the heaviest

recyclers. They are also most likely to buy ethical and local products including local food and fair trade.

They have pro‐environmental attitudes to travel yet, for example, their dependency on cars is only just

below average.

• Members of this group are likely to be early adopters for environmental behaviours and

purchases.

• They are least motivated by saving money (and by far the most willing to pay more for

environmentally friendly products) keen to avoid waste, and most likely to feel guilty about harming the

environment.

• They are the least likely to cite generic barriers to being more environmentally friendly

(whether effort, the difficulty of changing habits, or the level of others’ action).

• They have the highest levels of self reported knowledge about environmental terms,

although still around a half know little or nothing about carbon footprints and offsetting. They are also

most likely to want information on what they can do.

• They are most likely to seek to influence friends, family and the workplace to be more

environmentally friendly. They are the most likely to be involved in environmental and community

organisations, although still at lower levels (i.e. fewer than 1 in 10 are members of Greenpeace of Friends

of the Earth).

64


• They are the most likely by far to be in AB socioeconomic groups (SEG’s) and have the

highest levels with household incomes of £40k and over per annum. They are the most likely to have a

degree, and to read The Guardian, The Independent or The Times. Their profile is biased towards middle

age (41‐64) and owner‐occupancy.

• They are the most likely group already to have reduced their air travel (and to intend to

keep that up), yet only a minority of those in this group why fly have actually reduced their air travel. A

similar minority say they feel guilty about taking short haul flights. Group 1 is the second most frequent

flying of all groups after group 3, though after control for socio economic factors (such as their higher

incomes) they are slightly less likely to fly than other groups.