Eco Hypocrites Or Key To A Sustainable Future An Exploratory Study

1

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

clairecarlilerees@googlemail.com
http://twitter.com/clairecarlile
http://www.linkedin.com/in/clairecarlile

Claire Carlile clairecarlilerees@googlemail.com

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.


Eco Hypocrites Or Key To A Sustainable Future An Exploratory Study

Eco Hypocrites Or Key To A Sustainable Future An Exploratory Study

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Eco Hypocrites Or Key To A Sustainable Future An Exploratory Study

Similar to Eco Hypocrites Or Key To A Sustainable Future An Exploratory Study (20)

More from Claire Carlile Marketing

More from Claire Carlile Marketing (10)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Eco Hypocrites Or Key To A Sustainable Future An Exploratory Study