Green Consumer Behavior & Green Lifestyle Development
John Berggren
CMC 200: Researching Media & Culture
December 7, 2012
On my honor, I have read the assigned material in its entirety, and I have not given, received, or
witnessed any unauthorized collaboration on this work.
Abstract
This paper addresses the scholarly views of consumer behavior regarding green products
and lifestyle development. The market for almost any major type of product now has a green
option that is typically more expensive than non-green options, and highlights specific skewed
information. Through many examples of green consumer behavior and analysis of the
consumers’ behaviors, scholars’ explore reasons for buying a “green” product and the real
impact that purchase has on the environment. Whether the “environmentally conscious”
consumer chooses to drive a hybrid vehicle, shop locally, or wears eco-fashions, scholars argue
that when the financial aspects are taken into account, the reason for consumer behavior is
largely caused by a need to fulfill self-identity, an issue exacerbated by marketed exaggerations
and misleading information.
The environmental problems that our earth faces continue to grow as we consume gas,
non-recyclables, and mass produced artificial foods. Historically, we have made drastic
improvements to change our environment and better the earth as a whole. As industry
progressively develops, we have seen many fallbacks over the past few centuries. From Henry
David Thoreau addressing wilderness conservation in the mid 1800’s to the Kyoto Protocol in
2005 setting standards for industrialized countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we have
taken steps to make our world greener. On the other hand, keeping up with the needs of industry
has slowed the green movement and other green initiatives. Unfortunate natural disasters like
hurricane Katrina and economic failures in communities like Detroit can negatively impact the
environment. Rebuilding suffering communities poses opportunity for environmental
approaches when developing. Mass political restrictions like the Kyoto Protocol are vital in
order to monitor industry. Conversely, powerful countries that heavily rely on industry can
break agreements in order to remain successful. Taking action to improve the environment
needs to happen on political, social, and economical levels. However, the original and leading
change will occur at the lowest level with people who properly consume. “Buying green” is an
attempt to shift these consumption habits. As this occurs, “green purchase behavior has become
one of the most popular research topics among academics” (Albayrak 2011, 189). The different
motives for “going green” or ways of “consuming green” differ depending on the goal of the
consumer. However, whether the consumer desires a specific lifestyle brand, environmental
consciousness, or is trying to save money, the act of “buying green” might not actually be as
“green” as it is advertised. Chang (2011) concludes that green product claims “are often
exaggerated or misleading, and skepticism toward green claims in marketing communications is
a global phenomenon (e.g., Chan 2001; Mohr, Eroglu, and Ellen 1998) 21”. Marketed green
products tend to highlight specific skewed information in order to persuade the consumer.
Scholars argue that the reason for green consumer behavior is largely caused by a need to fulfill
self-identity, an issue exacerbated by marketed exaggerations and misleading information.
Consumer Behavior Regarding Green Products
Scholars argue that the consumer behavior connected to products with new green
alternatives has changed our buying process, eco-consciousness, and willingness to pay
premiums. Different behavioral changes have helped grow the green market, but also make it
seem more beneficial and more “green” than it actually is. Okada & Mais (2010), for instance,
focus on green product pricing for eco-conscious consumers. They “examine the effects of
framing the relative benefits of green alternative either positively or negatively and the level of
the consumer’s environmental consciousness, on the green premium” (226). They interpret the
ways consumers respond to purchasing green alternatives when the cost is greater, and different
ways the market can promote green products in order to maintain a premium. Through
behavioral experiments using students who were either very environmentally conscious or not
environmentally conscious, they asked them which type Honda civic (hybrid or regular) they
would purchase given the higher car price and gas saved. Okada & Mais found that when the
advantages of the green product were highlighted, the willingness to pay more was seen in
'green' consumers. The product example they give that embodies this concept most is for the
Toyota Prius because it “attests to the willingness of consumers to buy green, even at a
premium” (222). For 'non-green' consumers, avoiding the disadvantages of the conventional
product caused a willingness to pay more. Chang (2011) adds to Okada & Mais saying “price
perceptions should account for some variance in consumers’ ambivalence toward buying green
products” (20). Framing the green alternative price for this type of biased consumer causes them
to want the product more, even if they are less conscious of the environment or do not have
environmentally friendly lifestyles.
Contrary to price premiums, Mahenc (2007) believes that clean producers should actually
have lower costs than the dirty producers, and that clean producers use the price increase to
symbolize a “better” and more “clean” product. There are some green products that are created
by dirty producers, but overall Mahenc focuses on the clean producers. When the consumer has
low expectations about the cleanliness of a product, the producer of the dirty product has trouble
raising the consumers’ “willingness to pay for the product by raising price in an attempt to act
the same way as the clean producer” (470). In such a case, the clean producer can fully “reveal
information about environmental performance by distorting price above the full information
level” (470). Mahenc argues that the reason why the green products have a higher price is to
distort the prejudgment of the consumer in order to fully reinforce the idea that the product is
green. Mahenc explains that the cleaner companies have lower levels of pollution than their
competitors and signify it with higher prices. He says “It is possible for producers to signal their
environmental friendliness with prices that rise with the environmental performance of products”
(466), rather than an increased cost of production. Higher environmental friendliness signals are
socially costly because the cleaner producer “distorts his price upward relative to” the actual
environmental performance of the product (466). The cleaner producer benefits doubly from the
price increase because it not only earns more profit per product sold, but it also “loses a lower
profit margin per consumer from an increase in price than does the dirty producer” (466). The
high price of a product can thus convey messages about its environmental impact without
proving the fact or actively improving it more than conventional method.
Chang (2011) argues that “if consumers have conflicting attitudes toward buying green
products, they also may respond differently to advertisements that feature different green claims,
including those that involve different levels of efforts and resources expended by advertisers”
(19). The other was "direct peer-to-peer interaction and indirect observation of peers'
environmentally friendly behavior" (29). Yan & Xu concluded that "Participants' green purchase
behavior would be positively related to the influence of socialization agents (i.e., family, peers,
media, and school)" (29). These lifestyle choices are becoming more prevalent among college
students as the trends become more popular with peers and family.
Yan & Xu address consumer auto purchases as "almost 20% of respondents who reported
that they had bought a new car or truck in the previous 6 months indicated that they had
considered a green vehicle or had actually bought a vehicle they believed to be more green"
(Connelly 2008. as sited in Yan & Xu 2010, 27). Connolly & Prothero (2008) investigate how
consumers are given information about the environmental problem, and then told to adapt
consumption habits to help the environment. Using in-depth interviews with green consumers,
this article explores the ways they participate in environmental activism each day. Connolly &
Prothero specifically examine green consumption in regards to the consumer's self-identity.
When the authors interviewed the consumers and examined previous data, they found that there
were two main areas where the participants appeared to exercise a considerable level of
regulation: recycling and food consumption. The participants practiced recycling at different
levels, but “several of them who had gardens, used composting heaps for food waste” (124).
Recycling materials and composting are simple ways to cut down on waste and pollution,
although it is difficult to get people to participate because they do not see an immediate impact
by recycling.
Socially we see changes in self-identity of green consumers to be different, get attention,
help the environment, or feel better about trying something new. Connelly & Prothero explain
that our social relations have changed in order to improve “individualization and the concept of a
reflexive self” (121) or the construction of the rewarding needs of the self-identity. Therefore,
our “self-identity has to be shaped, altered and reflexively sustained in relation to rapidly
changing circumstances of social life” (121). Unfortunately, the political standpoint of
environmental issues greatly impacts the need to buy, act, and advocate toward developing a
green identity. The political benefits from buying into the green movement have not caught up
to our desperate need for change.
When the self-identity simply is altering itself to become more reflexive, it uses positive
factors involved to alter the rational reasoning for buying a green product. One of the factors
that outweigh a reflexive intuition is tax incentives. There is new research on the demand for
hybrid vehicles as well as the tax credit program that the US offers for purchasing a hybrid
vehicle. With recent government deadlines for environmental action, “hybrid technology has
been considered as a promising tool in the United States to reduce CO2 emissions and air
pollution and to achieve energy security” (Beresteanu 2011, 161). US hybrid vehicle sales
increased from 9,367 in 2000 to 345,920 in 2007 (163). These dramatic improvements in hybrid
consumer behavior have helped reduce CO2 emissions and air pollution. Rates of almost
350,000 sales are minuscule when compared to the sales of regular vehicles as the percentage of
hybrid vehicles in 2007 was a mere 2.15% (163). Before 2005, the government provided tax
deductions for purchasing hybrid vehicles, but now they offer an income tax credit of greater
value, although the credit is limited to the number of people involved, and thus targets early
adopters; most car purchases no longer qualify for the credit, as it is based on manufacturer and
brands such as Toyota that have reached capacity.
Developing a Green Lifestyle
Scholars argue that when consumers have chosen a green product over a regular product
they also make a choice about their lifestyles. There are many ways to demonstrate that lifestyle,
but our culture suggests that green products are an exception. Therefore, buying green products
makes the consumer stand out. Gilg, Barr & Ford (2005) look at lifestyles using green
consumption habits as a sustainable lifestyle instead of a way to be different. It addresses the
correlation between green consumption habits and environmental action through the lifestyles of
1,600 households in Devon, UK (481). The article examines all of the alternative forms of green
consumption and focuses on the reality of having a truly sustainable lifestyle. The main
concentration of the research is based on food consumption choices which were learned from the
households in focus groups. The authors’ definition of “green consumption encompasses even
more behaviors than even those mentioned by policy makers” (486). The study had three
findings: Buying local did not mean they were buying green products, the difference between
being a committed environmentalist and a mainstream environmentalist, and that committed
environmentalists often had more community involvement as well as greater environmental
values. An interesting difference between the committed, mainstream, and nonenvironmentalists was that “there were significantly more males in the non-environmentalist
cluster”. Gilg, Barr & Ford noticed “the gender balance remained relatively stable in the three
remaining clusters” (491). There were many different visible lifestyle variables within
consuming sustainably and maintaining a “green” lifestyle.
Kahn (2007) addresses a different lifestyle notion by asking if environmentally conscious
people (“greens”) act on the ways one can be eco-friendly. Kahn focuses on lifestyles of
environmentalists and their individual green actions towards being environmentally conscious in
regards to consumption habits. The example he gives is that an individual’s “own consumption
patterns only have a negligible effect on the environment” (130). He finds two ideological
indicators of the environmentalists' behavior: the consumer behavior of an individual not making
a difference in the global environmental problem, or the consumerism of a green product
resulting in an enhanced identity as well as a different and noticeable consumption pattern.
Using California Green Party members, the article highlights hybrid vehicle owners and the
social images associated with owning a greener vehicle. When the “Prius Effect” is wanted, the
act of purchasing a hybrid is meaningless to the owner's environmental concern. This explains
the actual thought process and craved image behind the purchasing decisions of a hybrid vehicle.
Wang explains the lifecycle of a product which includes manufacturing, selling, utilizing,
and disposing, and that not all of those aspects are green. In some cases, if one is green another
will be extremely damaging to the environment. When one of these stages of the lifecycle is
green, however, then the entire brand can be marketed as being environmentally conscious (Dahl
2010, 250). The consumer is then participating in a falsely advertised purchasing decision that
still causes environmental problems. Chang (2011) says that consumer “skepticism is a
consistent predictor of ambivalent attitudes, whether the attitude target is green products or
buying green products” (28).
Another reason for buying “green” is that there are behavioral and attitudinal factors that
influence green consumerism. Gupta & Ogden (2009) argue that there is a gap between the
consumer's environmental concerns and their green purchasing habits. For this study, the
researchers discriminated between green and non-green participants in order to create a
framework for their subjects’ attitudes prior to choosing a product. Gupta & Ogden found that
“the likelihood of purchasing green products depended on certain individual characteristics: trust
in others, reference group influence (in-group identity, expectation of others’ cooperation,
perceived efficacy) and factors that influence the costs of cooperation to the individual (product
substitutability and product preference)” (388). When the more green option was chosen, the
decision was made by a participant who felt confident in regards to the three characteristics.
Gupta & Ogden found that there are many important attitude characteristics that the green
consumer factors into a purchasing decision in order for the 'green change' to be made.
Other lifecycles that environmentally conscious consumers follow are through the fashion
industry. In Green Is the New Black, Winge (2008) focuses on fashion subcultures dealing with
ecofashion. This booming trend is being led by eco-conscious designers who create ecofashions. The designers clearly differentiate themselves and their work from hippie clothing
stereotypes. The current ecofashion trend “challenges these understood stereotypical images and
identities” (512). Due to high prices and innovative materials used, only the elite can afford this
new and expensive subculture. Many 'eco-conscious' celebrities are the first to express
themselves through ecofashions because they can communicate their lifestyle choices nonverbally. Celebrities use their social status and “eco-consciousness by promoting sustainable
fashions on red carpets and in the pages of magazines” (513). Ecofashion wearing celebrities
lifestyles include support of human, environmental, and animal rights. Winge addresses many
ecofashion fetishes and how those choices affect lifestyles. The difference between eco-dress
and ecofashion is vital because eco-fashion is what is seen on the boutique hanger whereas ecodress is created by the consumer. The “value for ecofashion is significantly higher in price than
stereotypical eco-dress” because the ecofashion has a designer label on it” (519). The price
disparity is only existent because previously successful brands take advantage of the concept and
use the green label to market themselves.
Method 1
My first research method was a content analysis of different car advertisements in a
variety of magazines. The market for almost any major type of product now has a green option
that is typically more expensive and highlights specific skewed information. Through many
examples of green consumer behavior and analysis of the consumers’ behaviors seen in popular
magazines like Time, Esquire, and Consumer Report, I find the true reasons for buying a “green”
product and the real impact that purchase has on the environment. Using car advertisements in
these magazines, I have analyzed their key descriptions, highlights and features as well as the
small print and some vital standard data that wasn’t present, especially if it conflicted with the
“green” concept. Some of my coding included, make and model, style, presence of gas mileage,
and green images or logos used to label it green.
In the regular vehicle advertisements, I focused on the ways the brand marketed other
features in order to mask the fact that they have lower gas mileages. In eco-friendly vehicle
advertisements, I focused on the marketing methods used to promote the green aspects of the
product. In addition, I analyzed the parts of the cars with green labels that included particular
green aspects of the products lifecycle. The broad magazine selection addressed all types of
vehicles including standard gas, hybrid, and electric engines. The demographics of readership
for these magazines reached multiple categorized groups. In particular it reached new car buyers
and car buyers looking to make a change. Overall, the analysis included specific factors seen in
the advertisements that were used for promotion.
My findings were not surprising in terms of the presence of green promotion, yet the
absence of certain product details was repetitive and consistent across brands. In all cases, the
full lifecycle of the product was never explained primarily due to the fact that the most “green”
vehicles have batteries that are terrible for the environment. These “environmentally conscious
consumers” choose to drive a hybrid vehicle because they have a need to fulfill self-identity
along with marketed exaggerations and misleading information. If the full lifecycle of the
product was explained, the current vehicle that is best for the environment would probably be a
compact car like a Fiat that runs on gas because they are light weight, get relatively good gas
mileage, and do not have harmful batteries. This vehicle still uses gas and has more emissions
during use than a hybrid or electric car, but their overall effect is much healthier.
The leading brand icon of the hybrid car market is the Toyota Prius. It is associated with
green driving, low gas mileage and is for very environmentally conscious people as it is very
expensive. However, the original models of the vehicle were terrible for the environment
because of their huge batteries. Just like a phone or car battery, the Prius battery would only
have a certain lifespan before it needed to be replaced. The original models were using multiple
batteries in the lifespan of one car. This causes more damage to the environment than simply
driving a regular vehicle. Hybrids’ still use gasoline so the batteries hurt the environment, but
they also feed off of the general eco-problem we face today. The latest hybrid models are better
for the environment because the batteries are smaller and can last longer, but the same problem is
seen at a smaller extent.
In order to discontinue the use of gasoline completely, electric cars seem like the obvious
solution. However, they use the same batteries as the hybrids. Electric cars cannot travel long
distances without recharging and they use a lot of power to accelerate. The power to charge
these vehicles come from coal, nuclear, natural gas, and maybe a wind turbine or two. The
power generated for these underperforming vehicles is not eco-friendly, and they are still using
huge batteries. One of the factors that the consumer uses to outweigh a reflexive intuition is tax
incentives. With recent government deadlines for environmental action, “hybrid technology has
been considered as a promising tool in the United States to reduce CO2 emissions and air
pollution and to achieve energy security” (Beresteanu 2011, 161). US hybrid vehicle sales
increased from 9,367 in 2000 to 345,920 in 2007 (163). These dramatic improvements in hybrid
consumer behavior have helped reduce CO2 emissions and air pollution. Rates of almost
350,000 sales are minuscule when compared to the sales of regular vehicles as the percentage of
hybrid vehicles in 2007 was a mere 2.15% (163).
The ways that the car companies portrayed the same vehicle different demographics was
obvious. Interestingly, Time Magazine (November 2012) and Rolling Stone Magazine
(November 2012), both had advertisements for the Toyota Camry. In the Rollins Stone
Magazine the non-hybrid Camry was shown as a cool car to drive for a young person. It ignored
its great gas mileage and instead focused on different features. Rolling Stone Magazine’s
demographics are mostly male and primarily ranged 18-35 in age. Most 18-35 year old men care
more about a cool car with fancy gadgets than a sensible car with good gas mileage. On the
other hand, Time magazine’s demographics are 54% male and have a median age of 48 years.
Given that the readers might be older and not be as interested in fancy features. Toyota decided
to place a different advertisement focusing on its fuel economy being 44 mpg. This cars fuel
efficiency is outstanding for not being a hybrid yet it doesn’t even mention it to the younger
audience.
When advertising a hybrid vehicle, Toyota knows that its’ market for the Prius already
knows it is a “green” vehicle, but they try to give over the top examples for how it is so green.
An advertisement seen in the Torque Report shows a picture of a sheep and a Prius. They both
have a Co2 emissions level next to them and the sheep’s level is higher. They suggest that the
Prius is better for the environment than a sheep. This is quite humorous but isn’t actually
accurate because the sheep is natural and biodegradable whereas the Prius has harmful batteries.
A lot of advertisements today are humorous or indirectly unrelated to the product, only 4% of the
advertisements found were humorous; the majority were simply about the vehicle (See Appendix
1). It is difficult to compare these two emitters, but even if the Prius is better in its usage
lifecycle, it is still worse in the overall lifecycle.
The vehicles with better gas mileage list their mileage in the advertisements where those
that don’t use images and car placement to make it seem better for the environment. 55.5% of
the advertisements for were made to look environmentally friendly even if they got low gas
mileage. This is the same technique as not listing ones GPA on a resume if they have lower than
a 3.0. It was visible in all of the advertisements and it obviously worked. When looking at the
ad I first thought it looked pretty “green”, then after going to the company’s website, the actual
mileage was very different. Hiding these statistics is effective and can cause false claims by the
consumer. Over 57% of the advertisements did not present gas mileage in the ad but had other
green symbols. This was misleading as the vehicles were not green at all. Once they are hooked
on the product, the worse mileage can be overlooked. Interestingly the gas guzzlers featured
lower sale prices and did not show mileage. For consumers who are looking for a cheap car, this
was an obvious choice. Although for the cheaper vehicles, the cost of gas would be a lot more
per month. A great example of this was seen in Esquire (November 2012) and Consumer Report
(November 2012) with the Ford Escape ad featuring low prices but not mentioning the 22 mpg it
has on average.
Luxury cars were completely overlooked mileage because consumers interested in a
Porsche could also afford higher gas prices and wanted performance instead of eco-friendliness.
In Consumer Report (November 2012), the Porsche Panamera boasted the 20mpg efficiency and
later explained it through great acceleration abilities. On the other hand, advertisements for the
Chevy Volt in the Advocate (November 2012) didn’t have any mention to being electric, ecofriendly, or “green”. It looked like Chevy was either missing out on key concepts about their
product, or they purposely were avoiding the obvious to highlight other aspects of the vehicle.
No matter what the advertisements highlighted, not one ad includes the full lifecycle of the
product. “Environmentally conscious consumers” choose to drive hybrid, electric or low gas
mileage vehicles because they have a need to fulfill self-identity along with marketed
exaggerations and misleading information. If the full lifecycle of the “eco-friendly” products
were explained, the current vehicles that are “best” for the environment nobody would buy a
hybrid. Compact cars are the best option today because they their overall eco-effect is much
healthier and they get above average mileage. Until we have a better option, there will not be a
truly green and affordable car to buy.
In 100% of the advertisements analyzed, the price was never shown. In the past,
economy cars that are less expensive often use their price as a motivator. Even these vehicles
used other aspects of the product to motivate buyers. When the fuel economy of a car was given,
even if it was in the fine print, I expected fuel savings to be an attractive factor. Instead, the
hybrids overwhelmingly addressed other features. Finally, the green labeled vehicles all used
fuel economy as the reason for being green. Ignoring the rest of the product’s lifecycle resulted
in false claims about its actual greenness.
Method 2
I conducted in-depth interviews for my second research method. I interviewed two
Rollins College students, Chad and Sophie, in person. I also interviewed a Toyota sales
associate (David) over the phone. I was interested in getting different perspectives on the
concept of being “green”. I conducted interviews in a classroom in my residential building for
the students. Since the Toyota sales associate was unable to meet with me, I interviewed him
questions over the phone. In general, I decided to ask the interviewees questions about being
“green” and then ask follow up questions to understand their opinions and personal involvement
in having a “green” lifestyle. My goal was to make sure the person being interviewed was
honest about their perceptions, involvement, and opinions. Once the participants shared their
perceptions of green consumerism, I explained many misconceptions and exaggerations about
green marketing and green products. I wanted to see if the subject perceptions changed after
learning more. In order to get their responses, I had them answer questions about a Toyota Prius
and a Honda advertisement. My final goal was to better understand what people think about
being “green” and if their views of green consumerism changed. The interviewees were not
given time constraints as the purpose was to get their opinions and responses. If the subject had
more to say, I was willing to lengthen the interview because I was interested in their hearing their
responses. I also made sure the subjects understood that they could stop answering questions and
end the interview process at any time. I explained that their personal information and response
are anonymous and completely confidential. At the beginning of the interview I had each
participant sign an informed consent form. The sales associate agreed to the consent form over
the phone.
To begin the interviews, I addressed general environmental issues by asking them
questions about their understanding of the topic. First, I asked them to provide an example of a
product that is part of the “green” economy. All three participants responded with hybrid
vehicles or the Toyota Prius in particular. Following that, I asked them about their own vehicle
and its green impact on the environment. David drives a Toyota Highlander non-hybrid SUV.
He likes the vehicle “because it is has lots of space and it is very comfortable”. David said “I
wish I had the hybrid version because it gets better gas mileage. I sell more of the regular
Highlanders so it helps that I know exactly how the regular one looks, feels, and drives”. Sophia
and Chad both own midsize sedans but did not get hybrid vehicles “because they cost too much”.
I asked the participants about their views on the green car movement and types of green cars.
They all thought it was very new, progressive, and that the cost difference would eventually be
more reasonable. Later, to transition the conversation away from heavily marketed green brands,
I addressed more personal environmental issues with eco-fashions. The interviewees’ explained
their eco-fashion purchasing habits and their opinions on the future of green produced clothing. I
was curious to better understand an uninformed person’s opinion on the green quality of
production for a green product. They hadn’t even heard of eco-fashions but were intrigued by
the idea of it. The first response the one student had been that “eco-fashions would be too
expensive” (Chad). The other student said she “would buy a more green dress if it looked new
and pretty” (Sophie). David said “eco-fashions seem cool, but would probably be taken
advantage of by designers and large retailers as a way to generate interest and profits”. After
that, I guided the conversation to address recycling, shopping locally, and buying organic. The
interviewees were not as interested in talking about those issues, so we progressed back to hybrid
vehicles because they are the most heavily marketed.
In the second section of the interview, I showed the subjects a Toyota Prius print
advertisement, along with a Honda ‘econ’ car advertisement. The ‘econ’ button on the Honda
vehicles limits it’s acceleration in order to save gas. It also changes some electrical cooling
systems in the vehicle too. Before I asked the subjects questions about the two advertisements, I
explained some of the misconceptions about Prius’ lifecycle. At this point, David decided to opt
out of the rest of the interview. He said that he wanted “to continue but that he could not
because of company policies”. The two other participants said that because of the
misconceptions learned, “the Honda was probably a greener vehicle” (Sophia & Chad). The
Prius had less green imaging, but the label is very well known as a green product. The Honda
used many more green images and logos in order promote its green features. I asked them which
car they thought was worse for the environment throughout the vehicles complete lifecycle.
With a prior knowledge of the negative impact the Prius hybrid battery has on the environment I
expected different answers from earlier. I was interested in learning if they thought the
advertisements were persuasive and if they could identify any techniques used to make it more
attractive. Sophia thought the advertisements were persuasive “but with more knowledge about
the product, they lost all persuasive abilities” (Sophia). Chad said “not explaining the full
lifecycle of the product is false advertising. The claims that Toyota uses to promote their
products only cover up the products real impact”. Both students’ perceptions of the product
completely changed after explaining the scholarly works about product lifecycle.
I argue that hybrid vehicles turn away prospective car buyers due to higher list prices and
less features. Currently, hybrid producing companies are advertising the other features about the
vehicle in order to put in on a level playing field with less expensive options. Even though the
features may be equal in the two types of cars, the price is going to be higher on the hybrid
model. Therefore, the increased fuel economy while utilizing the product is the deciding factor
for spending the extra money. Continuing to produce dirty products and market them as green
ones is dangerous to the environment and consumerism. Since companies use the green label to
persuade customers to buy their products, being green is simply a strategy used to increase
profits, awareness, and popularity.
Scholars who research green consumer behavior highlight specific skewed information
but fail to link it to individual products. I argue that green regulations need to be placed on all
products in order to use the green label. In addition, there need to be label regulations as well.
The term “eco-friendly” is used everywhere but could mean anything. Defining the meaning of
“green” and regulating it across all type all products are necessary. Without regulation, any
product can claim to be green and effectively persuade consumers using misleading data. Green
products should be able to prove why they are green. If they are not completely green,
companies should be required to provide the amount of greenness behind the product. If there is
not action, then consumers will continue to be tricked. There are also many truly green products
on the market. It is important that consumers learn about those products and are not discouraged
by buying “green” because of misleading information provided by dirty producers.
Green consumer behavior is largely caused by a need to fulfill self-identity. The green
lifestyle often originates from successfully marketed green products. The lifestyle is sustained
and driven by followers’ egos. In terms of marketing, green promotion can immediately cause a
need to purchase the product. In terms of adopting good green consumption habits, I argue the
need to fulfill an ego by consuming green products is great. If green products were actually
completely green, the lifestyle would immediately carry and change everyone’s environmental
consumption habits. Once a large group of people crave greenness, products will need to change
in order to be successful.
The willingness to go green has multiple consumer factors including attitude, behavior,
peer behavior, family behavior, price disparity, and reflexive self identity as influences of
socialization agents. The decision to make a lifestyle change that completely supports
environmentally friendly actions is challenging. There are many influences of factors that
prohibit these agents to be successful. The most common influence is price premiums that are
only affordable and available to the wealthy. Scholars argue that these prices are distorted, but
they are still methods for having a successful business and profit. Without government support
for providing greater tax incentives to those that transition, the green product will still be an
exception to modern consumerism in American culture. The fact that an immediate impact isn’t
seen hinders the willingness to change immediately by increasing efforts to change our products
lifecycles.
However, the self identity of certain “environmentally conscious” consumers might not
have a huge impact individually, but the trends created from their reflexive fetishes could be a
catalyst for change. An increase of eco-fashions dominating the market and the “Prius Effect” at
work puts a physical symbol with the lifestyle choice. The behaviors seen by these ecoconscious trend setters should cause the consuming process of manufacturing, selling, utilizing,
and disposing to completely change for the betterment of the environment. Then, the likelihood
of purchasing green products would depend on new cultural and societal norms instead of the
exceptions that they are today. When more green products are created to compete with each
other, the “truly green” products and companies will monopolize the market.
As individuals learn more about eco-consciousness, misconceptions, and the complete
lifecycle of products, there will be more environmental progress. Dirty producers will no longer
be able to use the green label as a motivational factor for marketing their product. Due to
behavioral and attitudinal actions that are consistently seen by green consumers, they will begin
to demand details about the true greenness of their purchases. Pressuring corporations to change
their messages and actions in order to be successful will also benefit green consumers
economically. When truly green products are being mass produced, the cost difference between
dirty and green products will become closer. The basis for this change is rooted in consumers
learning about the implications of consuming green and becoming more educated on what
producers are actually green. Once consumers become more educated on the reality of green
marketing and consumerism, many will adapt their lifestyles by committing to be greener.
Scholars argue that a common effect and drive from living a greener lifestyle comes from a need
to fulfill self-identity. When consumers’ purchasing habits are heavily influenced by egos,
greener products will be consumed. Self-identity is stronger than any image, label, or brand.
The ego is a positive and influential factor for the progressive future of green consumerism and
eco-consciousness. After individuals adapt their consumption habits to being greener, political
change will follow. Green labels are placed on too many dirty products in the market. Political
restrictions and qualifications for using these labels will not only make the green economy more
environmentally friendly, but it will make consumers’ options more reliable. New and growing
practices like eco-fashions, buying locally, buying organic, urban farming, and recycling are the
future of the green movement. The green economy will boom and become more regulated once
these practices are actually practiced by more of the population.
References
Albayrak, Tahir, Meltem Caber, Luiz Moutinho, and Ram Herstein. "The Influence of
Skepticism on Green Purchase Behavior." International Journal of Business and Social
Science 2, no. 13 (2011): 189-187.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/904511204?accountid=13584.
Beresteanu A, Li S. "Gasoline Prices, Government Support, And The High Demand For Hybrid
Vehicles In The United States." International Economic Review 52, no. 5 (2011): 161182. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2354.2010.00623.x.
Chen, Sophia. (Student at Rollins College) in discussion over the phone with the author,
November 2012. Name changed for confidentiality.
Chang, Chingching. “Feeling Ambivalent About Going Green.” Journal of Advertising 40, no. 4
(2011): 19-31. http://search.proquest.com/docview/912510656?accountid=13584
Connolly, John, Andrea Prothero. "Green Consumption: Life-politics, Risk and Contradictions."
Journal of Consumer Culture 8, no. 1 (2008): 117-145. doi:10.1177/1469540507086422.
Consumer Report Magazine, November 2012.
Dahl, Richard. “Green Washing: Do You Know What You’re Buying?” Environmental Health
Perspectives 118, no. 6 (2010): 246-252.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898878/
Esquire Magazine, November 2012.
Gilg, Andrew, Stewart Barr, Nicholas Ford. “Green Consumption Or Sustainable Lifestyles?
Identifying The Sustainable Consumer.” Futures 37, no. 6 (2005): 481-504.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328704001569.
Gregory, Chad. (Student at Rollins College) in discussion over the phone with the author,
November 2012. Name changed for confidentiality.
Gupta, Shruti, and Denise T. Ogden. “To Buy Or Not To Buy? A Social Dilemma Perspective
On Green Buying.” Journal of Consumer Marketing 26, no. 6 (2009): 376-391. doi:
10.1108/07363760910988201.
Kahn, Matthew E. “Do Greens Drive Hummers Or Hybrids? Environmental Ideology as a
Determinant of Consumer Choice.” Journal of Environmental Economics and
Management 54, no. 2 (2007): 129-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2007.05.001.
Mahenc, Philippe. "Are Green Products Over-Priced?" Environmental and Resource Economics
38, no. 4 (2007): 461-473. doi:10.1007/s10640-007-9084-9.
Motive Magazine, November 2012.
Okada, Erica Mina, Eric L. Mais. "Framing the "Green" Alternative for Environmentally
Conscious Consumers." Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal 1,
no. 2 (2010): 222-234. doi:10.1108/20408021011089257.
"Rolling Stone: Reader Profile” SRDS.com. Last modified Spring 2012.
http://www.srds.com/mediakits/rollingstone/demographics.html.
Rolling Stone Magazine, November 2012.
Smith, David. (Toyota Sales Associate) in discussion over the phone with the author, November
2012. Name changed for confidentiality.
The Advocate Magazine, November 2012.
The Torque Report Magazine, November 2012.
"Time: Media Kit / US” timemediakit.com. Last modified Spring 2012.
http://www.timemediakit.com/us/index.html.
Time Magazine, November 2012.
Wang, Wen-Lan. "A Study on Consumer Behavior for Green Products from a Lifestyle
Perspective." Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge 18, no. 1 (2012):
164-170. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1019442748?accountid=13584.
Winge, Theresa M. "Green Is the New Black": Celebrity Chic and the "Green" Commodity
Fetish." Fashion Theory: The Journal Of Dress, Body & Culture 12, no. (2008): 511-523.
doi: 10.2752/175174108X346968.
Yahoo Livestand Magazine, November 2012.
Yan, Ruoh-Nan, Huimin Xu. "Understanding Green Purchase Behavior: College Students and
Socialization Agents." Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences 102, no. 2 (2010): 2732. http://search.proquest.com/docview/821709430/fulltextPDF?accountid=13584.