Abstract
This article aims at conceptually analyzing environmental concern and at understanding Tunisian citizens’ attitude toward this concept and at determining a typology of the different profiles of ecologically concerned consumers (ECCs). The results show a three-dimension structure of ECCs and identify four types of consumer profiles.
Keywords
Introduction
These days, it is acknowledged that the current means of production and consumption are no longer sustainable. Their negative social and environmental effects are constantly becoming more pronounced.
These impacts are in the form of global warming, loss of biodiversity, degradation of ecosystems, and in the form of social problems (child labor, labor rights violations, etc.). New social and environmental challenges have led to awareness and a veritable will to take action, expressed in concrete terms, as an evolution in purchasing behavior and the way in which people consume.
Researchers have started to take an interest in the role of the consumer, giving rise to an urgent need to develop consumption methods that would limit any negative social and environmental impact. Accordingly, the concept of socially responsible consumption (SRC) has emerged. This consumption tendency has appeared in developed countries where it is becoming increasingly widespread. However, several developing countries are progressively migrating toward a society based on consumption, generating behavior that is harmful for society and the environment.
Within this context, Tunisia adopted a set of measures, the aim of which is to develop citizens’ environmental awareness, as well as their interest in and action for the environment. Waste sorting is part of these measures.
Thus, we wanted to examine the waste sorting behavior of Tunisian consumers. As Arbuthnot (1977) demonstrates, people who recycle their household waste are convinced that their actions will be useful for the environment, and thus tend to take more of an interest in environmental problems. Our question is, in terms of their waste sorting behavior, are Tunisian consumers concerned about the environment?
In the “Review of Related Literature” section, we will develop a conceptual approach to SRC and environmental concern that will allow us to present our research questions. In the remainder of the article, the methodology used for the qualitative study to respond to these questions, the results obtained, and future recommendations will be presented.
Review of Related Literature
The negative repercussions of current consumption modes on the environment and society, in general, have raised collective awareness of SRC. This latter concept became the focus of governments and consumers alike. The concept of SRC has appeared in marketing literature for more than 30 years, and in particular, in the works of Anderson and Cunningham (1972) and Webster (1975). Webster (1975) defines SRC as when “the socially responsible consumer considers the public consequences of his/her own private consumption and who tries to use his/her purchasing power to induce changes in society” (p. 1).
According to Webb, Mohr, and Harris (2008), consumers’ social responsibility may be seen in their different consumption actions. Indeed, “The socially responsible consumer is a person who bases his/her supply, use and elimination of products on the desire to eliminate any negative effects and to maximise their long-term effects on society” (p. 92).
Roberts (1995) classifies SRC according to two dimensions: a social dimension according to which consumers should consider their impact on society and the environment.
In this article, we will focus on the environmental dimension or “environmental concern.” Kinnear, Taylor, and Ahmed (1974) broadly define an ecologically concerned consumer (ECC) as one who “adopts purchasing behaviour which is coherent with preserving ecosystems.” A more specific definition is given by Grunert and Juhl (1991) who distinguish between the different contexts in which ECCs manifest themselves. Accordingly, an ECC is the one who “attempts to minimise the negative impact of external costs of production, distribution, use and elimination of products on the environment” (p. 14).
Similarly, Dembrowski and Hanmer-Lloyd (1994) categorize ECCs into three dimensions. A cognitive dimension reflecting the individual’s knowledge of the consequences of his or her actions on the environment, an affective dimension concerned with the emotional reactions linked to the perceived environmental problems, and a connotative dimension reflected in the efforts a consumer makes to contribute to improving the environment.
Research on ECCs is abundant, but with different objectives. Many attempted to conceptualize, measure, and determine the factors explaining behavior concerned with protecting the environment and define types of ECCs. Our contribution to this array of research consists of the following question:
Giannelloni (1998), reviewing 30-year-old literature on ECC, points to two groups of factors explaining ECCs and environmentally friendly behavior: These are, on one hand, economic and socio-demographic factors and, on the other hand, psychological factors.
However, there are conflicting results on the influence of “age” on ECCs. According to some authors, like Baldassare and Katz (1992) and Van Liere and Dunlap (1981), the older people get, the less concerned they become about environmental problems. Other authors like Giannelloni (1995) believe that as people get older, the greater their concern for the environment is. Yet, Kristensen and Grunert (1990) find no correlation between the two variables.
As for income, education, and socially concerned consumption (SCC), most studies point out that ECCs dispose of higher incomes (Dolich, Tucker, & Wilson, 1981; Kinnear et al., 1974), higher educational levels (Samdahl & Robertson, 1989), and finally more SCC (Anderson, Henion, & Cox, 1974; Webster, 1975).
These results seem straightforward and can be explained by the fact that some environmentally friendly purchases are more expensive than other purchases. Likewise, a higher level of education may raise peoples’ awareness of the environment.
As for the gender variable, the results are once again equivocal. Some authors like Van Liere and Dunlap (1981) find no significant relationship. However, Giannelloni (1998) illustrates how males tend to show a concern for the cognitive dimension of ECCs, demonstrating more knowledge about environmental problems, while females tend to be sensitive to the environment, and this translates as environmentally friendly attitudes and behavior.
The impact of place of residence on environmental concern is another variable mainly studied by Balderjahn (1988) and Van Liere and Dunlap (1981). These authors indicate that urbanites are more sensitive to environmental problems than rural residents, particularly pollution. Urban residents are more exposed to, and live with, different levels of pollution.
In conclusion, the impact of socio-demographic and economic variables is ambiguous and fails to determine a typical profile of ECCs. Such a conclusion is confirmed by Marguerat and Cestre (2002), who casts doubt over the efficiency of these variables in explaining ECCs.
Regarding psychological variables, most studies on the impact of psychological variables on ECCs tend to agree with one another. These variables explain more about pro-environment attitudes and behavior than socioeconomic and demographic ones (Antil, 1984; Balderjahn, 1988; Giannelloni, 1998). Accordingly, two groups of variables were identified: social and personal variables and attitude/behavior variables. According to Kréziak and Valette-Florence (1997), some values (hedonism, self-fulfillment, universalism, etc.) may reinforce environmentally friendly attitudes and/or behavior.
The first group of variables is made up of personality variables. Giannelloni (1998), in his review of major studies on ECCs, insists on the impact of the three personality variables of perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE), control center or (perimeter), and alienation.
Internal control center or perimeter: When an individual faces any given personal event, they may consider that it comes from them, and take responsibility for it, or find an external cause, or consider that other people, or chance, hazards or fate are responsible for it (Lefcourt, 1976).
An internal control center reinforces pro-environmental initiatives. In a report reviewing studies conducted on the Programme d’appui scientifique à une politique de développement durable (PADD II1) on durable consumption, published by the Research Information Consumer Organisation Center (Belgique) (RICOC), it has been concluded, “Consumers wait to be guaranteed the involvement of everyone and they place responsibility for the existing situation on other actors.”
PCE: Ellen, Wiener, and Cobb-Walgren (1991) define PCE as “a belief, relating to a field, for which individuals’ efforts may create a difference in bringing about a solution to a problem” (p. 593). In this line of thinking, Antil (1984) finds a positive link between PCE and environmental concern.
Alienation: Within social sciences, alienation is a feeling expressed by a person who feels like a stranger in his or her own milieu, culture, community, job, or to himself or herself (Giannelloni, 1998; Marguerat & Cestre, 2002). Based on this assumption, Anderson and Cunningham (1972) and Cornwell and Schwepker (1995) find that less alienated people, and thus those who more integrated into their communities, are more concerned about environmental problems. However, other studies by Balderjahn (1988) and Webster (1975) point to different and contrasting conclusions.
The fact that psychological variables have more of a link to pro-environmental attitudes, in that they can provide more of an explanation for them than socioeconomic and demographic variables, can lead us to formulate our second research question:
The second group of variables relates to the relationship between attitude and behavior. The assumption held at this level is that a consumer with a pro-environment attitude adopts behavior that is consistent with this attitude (Marguerat & Cestre, 2003). Such a relationship has been developed by a number of authors like Roberts (1996), who found a significant relationship between an environmentally friendly attitude and recycling behavior. However, other authors found a contradictory trend indicating that pro-environment attitudes do not necessarily reinforce pro-environment behavior in terms of waste disposal, recycling, buying green products, and so on.
According to Giannelloni (1998), the green consumer considers other factors while purchasing, and the ecological attributes of products rarely determine their selection. Similarly, Kréziak and Valette-Florence (1997) bring in contextual factors, which may be reasons or constraints pushing consumers toward or preventing them from having a simple concerned attitude toward active behavior. Although environmental concern is a way to take action, the process remains very long.
As for the constraints and motivations related to adopting environmentally friendly behavior, as mentioned above, environmental factors rarely explain pro-environment behavior. In the case of recycling, “It is not systematically associated with environmental protection, and it is related to a variety of motivations and/or constraints, in terms of practicality, contextual and affective factors” (Kréziak, 1995, p. 60).
There may be several factors, which may act as motivations and/or constraints depending on the situation.
The first is of a financial nature, in that high prices are often cited as main obstacles to adopting pro-environmental behavior. Likewise, savings may be a serious motivation to that end. According to the RICOC’s report published in 2007, Belgium “In the field of energy consumption, investments resulting in saving energy (isolation, improvement of heating systems, etc.) tend to be related to finance and comfort, rather than the wish to contribute to preserving the environment.” Practicality or constraints are illustrated by Albertini and Bereni (2003) who assume that “concern for the environment translates as an obvious disposition to act, but limited willingness, since commitment decreases when actions entail constraints . . .” (p. 278). Polo (1995) cites acrylic paint as an example, which overwhelmed the French market not because of the fact that it pollutes less, but because of its practicality (odorless and easy to use).
Absence of regulations and repressive practices are a third constraint on pro-environment actions. Bartiaux (2007) finds that from the mid-1990s onward, a change in behavior toward significant positive attitudes to waste disposal in Belgium was mainly explained by the perception of intense political pressure. Giannelloni (1998) draws similar conclusions, attributing an inhibiting or an initiating role to the state, in terms of fostering ecological behavior and by means of an encouraging tax system.
Absence or lack of information plays a decisive role as well. The RICOC’s report published in 2007 points out that lack of information and the skills to process it, as well as lack of trust in their sources, are constraints involved in adopting pro-environmental consumption.
However, the fact that certain products are, or are not, available in some specialized outlets can prevent people from buying them. According to Soutar, McNeil, and Molster (1994), green products, for instance, are often less available than other products, thus hindering their consumption. Some products are only available in specialized outlets, and sometimes, consumers make a long journey to get them (François-Lecompte, 2003).
Some pro-environment actions can be made only in the presence of an appropriate infrastructure (nearby recycling facilities, waste pickup logistics . . .). Lack of such infrastructure is a real obstacle. Gray (1985) points to how it is often difficult to reach these recycling facilities.
Finally, altruism is another emotional motive influenced by a number of factors that are not easy to understand.
To answer our research questions, we opted for a constructivist research viewpoint. Our research methodology will allow us to understand and conceptualize the concept of ECC and to identify the profiles of environmentally concerned individuals within the Tunisian context.
The Sample
The target sample is Tunisian citizens. We opted for a convenience sampling method that allowed us to total a number of 17 participants with different socioeconomic attributes. These differences are in terms of gender (seven females and 10 males), education (two with primary school education, six with high school education, four with university education, and six with post-graduate education), and age (five aged between 20 and 30, seven between 30 and 40, four between 30 and 40, and one above 50). The interviewed subjects have not visited any developed country and do not reside near any recycling facilities.
Data Collection
We conducted seventeen 20- to 30-min semi-directed interviews. We used an interview guide made up of open questions. The first question targets general issues and are mainly related to how important a pro-environment attitude is for the respondents, followed by questions on waste collecting practices in general and in particular, plastic bottle collecting practices. The interview guide concluded with questions on respondents’ beliefs about ecology and the impact of their behavior on the environment (see interview guide in the appendix)
Interviewees are left free to express their beliefs and are encouraged to speak during pauses. Interviews are recorded and then transcribed. Their content is then processed using the Sphinx Lexica software for verbatim production for the first two probes and lexical analysis for the third probe. Analysis-wise, we opted for Bergadaà’s approach (Bergadaà, 2006) to identify the concept of the Olympic museum and the profiles of its visitors.
Data Analysis
The first analysis is an objective one. Garfinkel (1967, 1988) views individuals as having linguistic aptitude and common sense to conceptualize their actions. A descriptive lexical analysis helped us focus on the most significant themes. For each dimension, subjects’ output is then clustered. This stage involves reading the output and iteratively regrouping them into dimensions. Thus, any subjective perspective is eliminated, and the overall themes are retained.
The second analysis is a subjective analysis, as suggested by Schutz (1967, 1970). In this analysis, we opted for an interpretive paradigm to draw a conclusion about the particular reasons proposed by the subjects. According to Bergadaà (2006), this type of perspective is particularly adapted to study of a social action oriented toward others, and these other people can take on a variety of characteristics mirroring society itself, groups, or family, an abstract person or another concrete example.
As a starting point, we used the manner in which consumers tend to take action (whether they dispose of their waste or not) and the reasons behind their actions. Processing each interview, we were able to apprehend the rationale behind their personal actions. This analysis yielded four types of consumers, some of whom were concerned about the environment and some of whom were not.
Findings and Discussion
In what follows, we propose the results about the ECC concept, the different consumer profiles we identified, and the motivations and constraints behind waste disposal behavior.
For the environmental concern concept, the first analysis of the verbatim production helped:
Identify that the ECC concept relates to the individual’s closest environment and neither to the global environment nor the atmosphere.
Note that this concept relates to future actions rather than purchases (one subject mentioned purchasing organic products).
Regroup the different actions according to three dimensions, structuring the ECC concept: one dimension linked to earth space, one to air space, and another to green space.
The “earth surrounding oneself” dimension is the first most qualitatively (number of adjectives) and quantitatively (number of references) cited dimension to express the concept of ECC.
The environment is assimilated with the sphere around oneself, which should be protected.
Some even compare it with their life space and make it clear that they should behave out in the community in the same way they behave at home. As Subject 14 puts it, “In the same way that one behaves inside in terms of cleanliness, one should do the same outside. There are places for throwing away our waste.”
These verbatim outputs are consistent with the results of research on waste disposal, which indicates that the environment mentioned by subjects is the closest daily environment rather than the environment in its broader sense (Giannelloni, 1998). The “earth surrounding oneself” dimension of ECC is reflected in three components of the discourse of our subjects:
The first component is expressed through the “not throwing away” attitude, which is the most frequent attitude in the interviews. Being concerned about the environment means actively behaving in terms of cleanliness and pollution-aversive practices: “Not dropping litter on the ground,” “Not throwing away different kinds of waste, such as cigarette butts, paper or plastic bottles.”
The second component is expressed through the action of “picking up.” This includes picking up litter found on the ground and putting it in the bin. This means that the individual may adopt environmentally friendly behavior without being the cause of pollution. The most important attitude appears to be that what matters is not who did what, but how clean nature is.
The third component is expressed through “advice.” Individuals are not only responsible for their actions, but also they may raise others’ awareness about the impact of their behavior on the environment as Subject 11 reiterates: “Collecting waste on the ground and advising people not to drop litter on the ground . . .”
The air space dimension is often cited by our subjects, and it relates to pollution caused by car emissions. There are two aspects to this:
The first component is expressed through “maintenance.” It is about periodically checking cars to reduce air pollution. It is worth pointing out that this dimension was subject of intensive national TV campaigns. Such concern is mentioned by Subjects 9 and 12, respectively: “Being respectful of the environment means maintaining one’s car to avoid fuel emissions”; “It is about collecting waste . . . and regularly checking one’s car to avoid air pollution.”
The second component is about “restraining oneself.” It consists of using one’s car as little as possible to reduce fuel emissions, favoring other alternatives like walking or taking public transportation, as Subject 5 puts it: “For example, do not waste, use one’s car less.”
The green space dimension includes statements about plants and trees. Accordingly, environmental concern is seen in terms of green spaces that should be protected. Two components make up this dimension:
Regarding consumers and environmental protection, our second content analysis helped identify four environmentally concerned consumer profiles and found some of the personality traits mentioned in related literature.
The “Active Concerned Consumer” (ACC) expresses concern about environmental protection through their behavior toward disposal of plastic bottles and batteries. Subjects 4 and 8, respectively, voice this attitude in the following quotes: “I throw away batteries using special containers for them, because they are harmful to animals and to maintain soil fertility” and “I do it for the sake of those who are concerned about the environment.”
These subjects mentioned the presence of collection points for plastic bottles and batteries. These people took action for their personal satisfaction and to protect the environment. They are aware of the important role they may play in saving the environment they live in. They take action intentionally, thinking others will follow.
This profile reproduces the following personality traits:
An internal control center, that is, when an individual faces any event, he or she internally assumes responsibility (Lefcourt, 1976).
A perceived effectiveness, which means “a belief in a domain, in which the efforts of an individual may make a difference in solving a problem” (Ellen, Wiener, & Cobb-Walgren, 1991, p. 103).
This profile is consistent with research on the relationship between personality and environmental concern, illustrating a relationship between environmental concern, an internal control center, and perceived effectiveness.
The “Passive Concerned Consumer” (PCC) is environmentally concerned, yet passive. Subjects 1 and 6 evoke such a profile:
There are no regulations. If they ask me to do it, I will be the first to do it. I am aware of recycling initiatives, but I do not know how to take part in them. I cannot see plastic bottle recycling containers near my house.
And “because there are no plastic bottle recycling containers near my house, I cannot take the initiative to recycle.” Several constraints are mentioned to justify their stance. Either because of “the absence of regulations” calling for their involvement, or “the absence of special containers” available in their neighborhood, near their homes, or lack of information (“I don’t know”). Alternatively, the reason is “no one asked them to do it” formally or informally (council officials or others).
These people seem to be environmentally concerned, yet they need to be pushed, in contrast to the ACC type. This profile is consistent with the thesis according to which a pro-environment attitude does not necessarily mean that people take action (Giannelloni, 1998).
The main motivation for the “Active Unconcerned Consumer” (AUC) disposing of plastic bottles is his or her concern about helping others and protecting the environment. As Subject 2 aptly put it,
I saw people picking up plastic bottles, and so I started doing the same. Apparently, people sell these bottles because they can be recycled. I tend to place them outside my door and some people come and collect them to sell them.
Their behavior with batteries reveals this attitude in that no one seems to show similar concerns for batteries; they tend to throw them away. They seem to be environmentally concerned in terms of their attitude to disposing of plastic bottles, yet what motivates them is more the need to help others.
It is worth noting that a particular market has been developed by local recycling companies that purchase plastic bottles by the kilo. Low-income families pick up plastic bottles from the streets to sell them later by the kilo. This is about people who are economically fragile who “accidentally” contribute to protecting the environment in an indirect manner.
The “Passive Unconcerned Consumer” (PUC) is not environmentally concerned. Waste disposal is possible when all conditions are met: pro-environment school education, motivations and encouragement, and a pro-environment societal culture. Subjects 15 and 5 summarize these attitudes in the following quotes:
I put batteries in the bin; as I said in Tunisia we don’t have a waste disposal culture; sincerely it is a waste of time, I see it this way because I am one out of 10,000 doing this. This is stupid!
ECC components and dimensions.
And “we put plastic bottles in the bin mixed in with other waste. It is something spontaneous; we are not used to it. I know it’s good to do it [recycling], but I don’t do it.”
Subject 12 quoted below further elaborates on this profile, indicating that these people believe that they alone cannot do much and they need others to push them to act, “I saw on TV that we should dispose of plastic bottles and batteries, but I know no one in my entourage who does it. None of my neighbours or relatives do it. It is very rare, except on TV!” This profile is described in the literature as having no perceived effectiveness. They think that their personal efforts cannot make a difference in solving the problem (Giannelloni, 1998).
Analyzing the discourse of our subjects, we identified the constraints and motivations behind their waste disposal behavior (Table 1 below). We found the same reasons and constraints already discussed by the literature. The financial aspect and the non-availability of green products are relevant, in that they relate to purchasing and not to pro-environment gestures.
Reasons and Constraints Behind Waste Disposal Behavior.
Suggestions and Conclusions
The results of our study are consistent with previous research in which “environmental concern” refers to the closest environment and not to the environment at large. Its conceptualization in terms of the three dimensions of air space, earth space, and green space may be interesting for environmental protection organizations when scheduling their pro-environment campaigns.
These campaigns may refer to this three-dimensional construct to further anchor down a pro-environment culture among consumers. The aim of these campaigns is to reach as many environmentally concerned consumers as possible, to educate consumers about these dimensions, and make those reluctant consumers aware of the potential benefits. To make consumers more aware of these dimensions and induce them into action, they should involve themselves in regular pro-environment initiatives, as short-term and scheduled programs do not yield the desired outcomes.
The different profiles we identified are interesting as environment protection actors may concretely know what measures to be taken to make consumers active in environmental protection. Although we focused on waste disposal behavior, our belief is that these profiles can be generalized to other pro-environment actions.
ACCs do not need to be induced into action; they just need to be informed of relevant environment protection programs. Thus, appropriately informing them about the different measures issued by environmental protection agencies. The choice of a variety of media channels is needed for this.
PCCs, however, need to be encouraged. To induce these profiles into action, environmental protection agencies should change gear. They could reinforce their message, not just through simple media channels, but via more mass media-based channels.
In the context of waste disposal, city councils should promote action programs. To be efficient, sending officials to communicate and explain the different measures to be undertaken (making waste containers available and providing information about their location) are means to that end. Regulations could be passed with penalties in case of non-compliance with pro-environment measures.
AUCs who act out of altruism need to be informed about the impact of their actions on the environment. Campaigns should be scheduled to inform and explain how one’s daily actions can be harmful to living standards, health, and drinking water, or information campaigns about disposal of batteries, explaining how they may damage soil productivity, animals, and consequently health.
This consumer profile may as well be made aware of the fact that their actions are an indirect form of altruism.
Very PUCs require more effort than the other profiles to be pushed to create some change in their attitudes and encourage them to take action. Environmental protection actors should use a variety of stimuli. In addition to information campaigns and carefully thought out regulation, they also need to be shown how others are encouraged to take action and how they are not alone in this endeavor. The actively concerned consumers’ image may be used to further encourage them.
The variety of consumer profiles identified in this study leads us to give some recommendations to environmental protection agencies, pertaining essentially to diversifying communication themes in a way in which each profile can identify with. However, the altruistic theme frequently evoked as a motivating factor for pro-environment waste disposal behavior (plastic bottles) may be used in this communication process.
The set of waste disposal constraints and motivations identified in this study is a useful information source for relevant actors to make Tunisian consumers endorse pro-environment initiatives. These actors should further develop these motives and limit the effect of constraints on pro-environment behavior.
However, we can mention some limitations for this study, mainly the non-use of focus groups. Focus groups would allow for more in-depth understanding of a variety of motives and constraints and a validation of different consumer profiles, or an identification of new profiles. Other future research venues may extend this study into a quantitative investigation that focusses on a more representative sample of the Tunisian population and which aims to classify this population according to different profiles identified so far, to better guide the efforts of environmental protection agencies.
Footnotes
Appendix
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.