Understanding Consumers’ Motivations and Product Preferences for Deconsumption

The modern era features dramatic changes in consumer attitudes and behaviors related to consumption; this article investigates the motivations and product preferences of consumers who alter their consumption habits to obtain products that cause less damage or use fewer resources. The authors offer an empirical definition of such deconsumption and compare it with other terms used in prior literature to refer to resource-restricted purchases; they also propose consumer-oriented measures of deconsumption motivations and product preferences. The results reveal ten motivation factors that help explain why people choose to deconsume. Regression analysis further shows that product choice varies across these motives. Thus, businesses, public policy makers, and non-profit organizations can modify their communication and product strategies, for both green and conventional products and services, to appeal to different subgroups of consumers that deconsume for distinct reasons. 26 Anubha Mishra, Norm Borin, Joan Lindsey-Mullikin, Ram Krishnan functional aspect of products (Craig-Lees & Hill, 2002) or look for products with meaning (Black & Cherrier, 2010), and some studies indicate their overlap with green consumers and identify a specific segment of pro-social consumers (i.e., deconsumers) (Lee et al., 2009). Table 1 summarizes a variety of perspectives and some of the commonly used descriptive terms related to reduced consumption. However, prior literature provides descriptors of reduced consumption with unique motivations, as well as distinct behaviors that reflect these motivations. Most quantitative research leaves the definition of the behaviors related to reduced consumption up to the individual consumer, leaning heavily on behavioral measures associated with environmental concerns, such as recycling, biking, and buying organic foods. We seek to advance this research domain by proposing a precise definition of deconsumption, based on both prior research and consumer input. The current study relies on the term “deconsumers” to emphasize that the consumers being studied still consume but also avoid any adversarial connotations (e.g., as arise with terms like anticonsumption). In contrast with some prior research in table 1, we also focus on deconsumption motivations and purchases, as opposed to lifestyles and other tangential activities such as, decreasing the number of hours worked, changing job locations or helping disadvantaged groups. Our focus on consumption provides concrete examples of the types of product categories that can help consumers decrease their overall consumption. Further, to expand prior literature, we address the product preferences and consumptive behaviors related to different deconsumption motivations. This investigation of the link between consumers’ motivations and product and behavioral strategies helps us answer more niche questions such as, what types of products do people who deconsume for simplification reasons select? Do they differ from the products preferred by those who deconsume for Consumer Description Definition of Segment and Connection with the Current Research Voluntary Simplifier Some research focuses on the consumption aspect: “the choice out of free will rather than by being coerced by poverty, government austerity programs, or being imprisoned to limit expenditures on consumer goods and services, and to cultivate non-materialistic sources of satisfaction and meaning” (Etzioni, 1998, p. 620). Other research examines this group more broadly, investigating lifestyle aspects such as turning down promotions, working part time, reading more, or watching less television (Iwata, 1997). Anti-Consumption This label describes people who are against consumption, either selectively or across the board: “literally means against consumption” (Lee et al., 2009, p. 145) “A practice of rejection, reduction and reuse” (Black & Cherrier, 2010, p. 438) Related research focuses on what these consumers will not consume, rather than what they might consume. Mindful Consumption This recently introduced term implies a “Consumer Mindset of caring for self, for community, and for nature that translates behaviorally into tempering the self-defeating excesses associated with acquisitive, repetitive and aspirational consumption” (Sheth et al., 2011, p. 21). These authors introduce a framework and recommendations to companies to use the consumer’s mindset in developing their strategies. At this point, the framework has not been tested. Socially Responsible Consumption “A person basing his or her acquisition, usage, and disposition of products on a desire to minimize or eliminate any harmful effects and maximize the long-run beneficial impact on society” (Mohr et al., 2001, p. 47) Early studies focused primarily on the environmental impacts of consumption. More recently, social dimensions have been added (Webb, Mohr, and Harris 2008). Studies have not focused on connecting motivations to subsequent product choices that coincide with these motivations. Table 1 Commonly Used Descriptors Related to Reducing Consumption 27 Understanding Consumers’ Motivations and Product Preferences for Deconsumption environmental reasons? Etc. Overall, this study aims to address the lack of comprehensive exploration of research on reduced consumption. Three main contributions of the research are: 1. Introduce an empirically generated definition of deconsumption based on a survey designed to gather qualitative consumer input on its meaning. 2. Identify distinct reasons that people deconsume, on the basis of prior literature and consumers’ inputs, which guides the development of motivation statements that can evaluate why consumers choose to deconsume. 3. Connect the reasons people deconsume with different product/behavioral strategies that they use to satisfy their deconsumptive needs. We start with a review of relevant research that investigates consumers’ interests in reducing consumption. Deconsumers: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Segment Descriptions Traditionally, consumption offers a means to express individual identities, values, and beliefs (Grinstein & Nisan, 2009). Simplistic consumption is not just a coping behavior but has become a preference for many consumers; even affluent consumers note their dissatisfaction with excessive consumption and seek to lead a less wasteful life (Flatters & Willmott, 2009). Despite this notable appeal of deconsumption for consumers, the perceived costs and lack of immediate evidence of environmental benefits make it difficult for consumers to change their behaviors completely, especially if the changes go beyond using green products or avoiding some products altogether. Therefore, we seek to explore the various motivations that lead consumers to deconsume. Sustainable consumption research often attempts to explain people’s attitudes or behaviors with a variety of terms; a common description referred to voluntary simplifiers (VS). For example, Iwata’s (1997) VS scale suggests that these consumers only purchase necessary items, want to simplify their lives, focus on personal fulfillment rather than material purchases, and are environmentally concerned. As noted previously, other terms also have been used to describe deconsumers, such as socially responsible, ethical, or green, and some behaviors displayed by these groups are deconsumptive. However, they also might simply redirect their consumption from one product to another (e.g., electric car as an alternative to an internal combustion engine car; Sheth et al., 2011). In this sense, anti-consumption investigations may be more relevant for our study, because they pertain to people who fight against consumption (Lee et al., 2009). Iyer and Muncy (2009) classify four anticonsumer groups according to whether they avoid all types of products or only selected ones and whether they avoid consumption for personal or societal reasons. Their brief, eight-item survey offers some initial confirmation that anti-consumptive groups vary by their reasons for anticonsuming. Friends, family, and other external group associations also can influence individual deconsumptive motivations and behaviors. Social identity, which traditionally stems from intergroup relations, has a tremendous influence on attitudes and subsequent behaviors related to climate change and the environment. When people seek a particular social identity associated with a group whose norms are environmentally responsible, they are more likely to engage in pro-environmental decisions and behaviors too (Fieldling & Hornsey, 2016). Similarly, collective efficacy manipulations increase proenvironmental intentions at collective and individual levels, such that a greater sense of efficacy grants people more motivation to join in collective pro-environmental behaviors and display similar individuallevel behaviors (Jugert et al., 2016). Reflecting our understanding of extant research related to consumer interests in reducing consumption, we first conceptualize deconsumption, then present the methodology we used to extract the factor structure for deconsumption motives and strategies. The next section contains an analysis of the relationships of deconsumption motivations with strategies. Finally, we offer practical insights and conclude with a discussion of future research directions.