Research on Fair Trade Consumption—A Review
Journal of Business Ethics 106 (4):415-435 (2012)
Abstract
An overview and assessment of the current state of research on individual consumption of Fair Trade (FT) products is given on the basis of 51 journal publications. Arranging this field of ethical consumption research according to key research objectives, theoretical approaches, methods, and study population, the review suggests that most studies apply social psychological approaches focusing mainly on consumer attitudes. Fewer studies draw on economic approaches focusing on consumers’ willingness to pay ethical premia for FT products or sociological approaches relying on the concept of consumer identity. Experimental, qualitative and conventional survey methods are used approximately equally often. Almost all studies draw on convenience or purposive samples and most studies are conducted in the USA or the United Kingdom. Several problems in current research are identified: amongst others, studies’ rather narrow theoretical focus, potential hypothetical and social desirability bias of conventional survey data, and a lack of generalizability of empirical findings. In turn, we suggest that research would benefit from both a multiple-motives and a multiple-methods perspective. Considering competing theories can help to single out key behavioral determinants of individual FT consumption. The combination of different methods such as conventional surveys and field experiments contributes to uncovering respondents’ truthful answers and improves generalizability of results. Scholars in the field of ethical consumption research should use experiments to detect causal relations proposed by theories and conduct cross-country surveys to gather insights as to how differences in market structures, cultural traits, and other path dependencies affect patterns of individual FT consumptionDOI
10.1007/s10551-011-1008-5
My notes
Similar books and articles
Through Thick and Thin: How Fair Trade Consumers Have Reacted to the Global Economic Recession. [REVIEW]Tierney Bondy & Vishal Talwar - 2011 - Journal of Business Ethics 101 (3):365-383.
Ethical Consumption, Values Convergence/Divergence and Community Development.Michael A. Long & Douglas L. Murray - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 26 (2):351-375.
Empowering Coffee Traders? The Coffee Value Chain from Nicaraguan Fair Trade Farmers to Finnish Consumers.Joni Valkila, Pertti Haaparanta & Niina Niemi - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 97 (2):257 - 270.
How to Create the Ethical Consumer.Judith Schrempf & Guido Palazzo - 2011 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 22:532-543.
Articulating the Meanings of Collective Experiences of Ethical Consumption.Eleni Papaoikonomou, Mireia Valverde & Gerard Ryan - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 110 (1):15-32.
Ethical issues in empirical studies of software engineering.Janice A. Singer & Norman G. Vinson - forthcoming - Philosophical Explorations.
Why People Don’t Take their Concerns about Fair Trade to the Supermarket: The Role of Neutralisation. [REVIEW]Andreas Chatzidakis, Sally Hibbert & Andrew P. Smith - 2007 - Journal of Business Ethics 74 (1):89 - 100.
Do Consumers Care About Ethical-Luxury?Iain A. Davies, Zoe Lee & Ine Ahonkhai - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 106 (1):37-51.
The fair trade movement: Parameters, issues and future research. [REVIEW]Geoff Moore - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 53 (1-2):73-86.
A practical guide to ethical research involving humans.Norman G. Vinson & Janice A. Singer - 2008 - In Cogprints.
“Why Don’t Consumers Care About CSR?”: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Role of CSR in Consumption Decisions. [REVIEW]Magdalena Öberseder, Bodo B. Schlegelmilch & Verena Gruber - 2011 - Journal of Business Ethics 104 (4):449-460.
Analytics
Added to PP
2011-08-28
Downloads
100 (#125,586)
6 months
1 (#451,398)
2011-08-28
Downloads
100 (#125,586)
6 months
1 (#451,398)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Who Says There is an Intention–Behaviour Gap? Assessing the Empirical Evidence of an Intention–Behaviour Gap in Ethical Consumption.Louise M. Hassan, Edward Shiu & Deirdre Shaw - 2016 - Journal of Business Ethics 136 (2):219-236.
Feelings that Make a Difference: How Guilt and Pride Convince Consumers of the Effectiveness of Sustainable Consumption Choices.Paolo Antonetti & Stan Maklan - 2014 - Journal of Business Ethics 124 (1):117-134.
The Impact of Proximity on Consumer Fair Trade Engagement and Purchasing Behavior: The Moderating Role of Empathic Concern and Hypocrisy.Alvina Gillani, Smirti Kutaula, Leonidas C. Leonidou & Paul Christodoulides - 2021 - Journal of Business Ethics 169 (3):557-577.
Socio-Cognitive Determinants of Consumers’ Support for the Fair Trade Movement.Andreas Chatzidakis, Minas Kastanakis & Anastasia Stathopoulou - 2016 - Journal of Business Ethics 133 (1):95-109.
Faith and Fair Trade: The Moderating Role of Contextual Religious Salience.Rommel O. Salvador, Altaf Merchant & Elizabeth A. Alexander - 2014 - Journal of Business Ethics 121 (3):353-371.
References found in this work
A Review of The Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 1996–2003. [REVIEW]Michael J. O’Fallon & Kenneth D. Butterfield - 2005 - Journal of Business Ethics 59 (4):375 - 413.
A Review of The Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 1996–2003. [REVIEW]Michael J. O’Fallon & Kenneth D. Butterfield - 2005 - Journal of Business Ethics 59 (4):375-413.
Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. [REVIEW]Robert C. Ford & Woodrow D. Richardson - 1994 - Journal of Business Ethics 13 (3):205 - 221.
Why Ethical Consumers Don’t Walk Their Talk: Towards a Framework for Understanding the Gap Between the Ethical Purchase Intentions and Actual Buying Behaviour of Ethically Minded Consumers.Michal J. Carrington, Benjamin A. Neville & Gregory J. Whitwell - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 97 (1):139-158.
Do What Consumers Say Matter? The Misalignment of Preferences with Unconstrained Ethical Intentions.Pat Auger & Timothy M. Devinney - 2007 - Journal of Business Ethics 76 (4):361-383.