Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

The Future of the Fair Trade Market in Japan: What motivates
consumers to purchase fair trade products?
Yoshiaki Takahashi

The Institute for International Policy Studies
Japan Academy of Consumer Education E-mail:ytaka2001@hotmail.co.jp
Ayuri Omoto

The Japan Research Institute, Limited
Abstract:
The purpose of this study is to identify factors that affect consumers’ decision making
regarding purchase of fair trade products in Japan. Fair trade is an approach that guarantees
that producers of goods from developing countries are not economically exploited. However,few models have been tested in Japan. Therefore, in this paper, referring to Shaw et al. (2000),
which analyzes factors to purchase fair trade products in the UK based on the Theory ofPlanned Behavior (TPB), we examine the effect of knowledge about fair trade and others onpurchase intention in Japan.
The data used here is from a survey in Ibaraki Prefecture (males and females aged between 20 and 79; n = 213). The results showed that knowledge alone did not directly affectpurchase intention. Rather, the more important factor influencing purchase of fair trade products was whether it was favorable or easy for consumers to do. Knowledge was related to theoutcome evaluation that purchasing fair trade products would be important for society. Suchpersons did not only obtain the knowledge, but also conduct altruistic behavior frequently.
They believed that altruism is socially important in daily life. Therefore, besides simply raising awareness about fair trade, education is important to understand the social significanceof altruistic behavior.
We tested only models based on TRA and TPB in this study. On the other hand, there
are many possible models to include factors that may explain consumers’ decision making forfair trade products. In addition, in order to generalize the results as a model of fair trade
products in Japan, it is necessary to carry out another survey targeting the whole of Japanese
population.
Keywords
Fair Trade, Consumer Education, Decision Making, Theory of Planned Behavior, Japan(1) Introduction

The purpose of this study is to identify

1. Fair Trade Market
1

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

factors that affect consumers’ decision mak-Global sales of products with this designa-

ing regarding purchase of fair trade products

tion reached 5.9 billion euros in total (JPYin Japan. The development of international

830 billion).

trade has raised various ethical issues. For

The Fair Trade logo was introduced ininstance, workers may be employed at low

Japan in 1993. However, awareness of thewages and be economically exploited in de-system in Japan was only 14.7% according toveloping countries. The most important is-a result from the Cabinet Office’s Nationalsue is that workers in developing countries

Life Preference Survey in 2007. There areoften lack bargaining power against import-

very few opportunities to find fair tradeers and producers of final products. Poverty

products in grocery stores. The market size

also leads to child labor issues. One of thein Japan is increasing and as of 2015 itways to solve these problems is the fair tradereached about JPY 10.0 billion (Figure 1).

system. Now, business pays greater atten-

This is equivalent to 0.53 euros per person.

tion to fair trade because consumers and in-

The market is still much smaller than thosevestors take more interest in corporate social

in other developed countries (Figure 2).

responsibility than they did previously.

What are important factors to promote

Awareness of fair trade products is now morefair trade products in Japan? A key is con-than 90% in the United Kingdom, Austria,

sumer behavior because consumer prefer-and Ireland (Fairtrade International &ence develops a market. If we understand

GlobeScan, 2015). It has become one deci-

the consumers’ decision-making process tosion-making criteria when consumers choose

buy fair trade products, tips to promote fair

a company’s product. As of 2014, 1.5 million

trade can be discovered.

producers and workers had joined the

In recent years, the relationship be-

Fairtrade International Certification system.

tween consumption and self-identity is one

Figure 1. Fair Trade Market in Japan (2010-2015)
Source: Fairtrade Label Japan (2015)2

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592(Euros)
60

50

49.54
46.98

40
32.17

30
20
10
0.53

Brazil

Kenya

India

Lithuania

South Korea

Hong Kong

South Africa

Japan

Spain/Portugal

LatviaSlovenia

Czech Republic

Italy

USA

Estonia

CanadaFranceAustralia/NZ

Germany

Belgium

Netherlands

NorwayDenmark

Luxembourg

Austria

SwedenFinlandUK

Ireland

Switzerland

0

Figure 2. Fair Trade Market in 2014
Note: The figures were calculated with information from Fairtrade International
Annual Report 2014-15 and United Nations World Population Prospects

ucts not only for economic value (prices) butof the drivers to promote consumption. Ac-

also relating to social values. Therefore, we

cording to Tamaki (2008), the formation of

can interpret such consumer behavior as ir-

identity through consumption is a process

rational behavior because consumers spend“to find themselves among others, explain

more money for “others,” i.e., workers in de-

their own as a consistent presence, and toveloping countries. In this paper, we focus

maintain a sense of self” (p. 52). Watanabe

more on the effect of the preference for oth-(2007) concludes that the awareness of fairers and education on purchase intention of

trade influenced the development of fair

fair trade products, using survey data fromtrade markets in Western countries. In fact,

Ibaraki, Japan.

since the mid-1990s, fair trade organizations
and other related associations in European

2. The definition of Fair Tradecountries have launched awareness raisingThree international fair trade organi-

campaigns and then increased sales of des-zations, the Fairtrade International (FLO),

ignated products. Therefore, raising aware-

the World Fair Trade Organization (WFTO),

ness through consumer education and in-and the European Fair Trade Association

creasing a sense of self-identity will be pil-

(EFTA), established the Fair Trade Network.

lars of promoting fair trade products in Ja-

The Network defined fair trade to be “a trad-

pan. Moreover, Watanabe (2007) also noted

ing partnership, based on dialogue, trans-

that the meaning of consumption has

parency and respect, that seeks greater eq-changed over time. Consumers choose prod-uity in international trade”. The Network3

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

states that “(i)t contributes to sustainable

in the international market. Even when thedevelopment by offering better trading con-price increases due to drought, small coffee

ditions to, and securing the rights of, mar-plant producers may not have any bargain-

ginalized producers and workers—especiallying power and get enough income to coverin the South. Fair Trade Organizations,

their production costs. On the other hand,backed by consumers, are engaged actively

the fair trade standard sets minimum prices,in supporting producers, awareness raisingregardless of the fluctuations of the interna-and in campaigning for changes in the rules

tional market prices (Figure 3). Importers

and practice of conventional internationalmust ensure that the minimum price is paid

trade”. According to the Fairtrade Label Ja-

to producers’ associations. The Japan Fairpan, fair trade was begun by Ten Thousand

Trade Labeling mentions that the price ofVillages of America for purchase of embroi-

approved coffee beans should be more thandery in Puerto Rico in 1946.

USD1.40 per pound (454 g). If it is organic,

In 2001, the Fair Trade Network de-

USD0.30 is added. Moreover, importers

cided its strategy as follows.

should pay USD0.20 per pound as a premium (incentive) to producers’ associations.

１．To work together so that marginalized

The Fair Trade system works to support sus-

producers and workers can break out ofvulnerable conditions and obtain economic independence and security;
2. To empower the producers and workers to organize themselves and become
significant stakeholders in a global market;
3. To actively play a wide variety of roles
in international trade and make it fair.
(Watanabe, 2007, p. 5)

tainable production and stability of the livesof the workers, and to facilitate trade on amore equal footing.
(2) Literature review
1. Behavioral model of fair trade products
The theory of reasoned action (TRA) isoften used as a model explaining consumer
behavior (Azjen & Fishbein, 1980). The theory of planned behavior (TPB) is anothermodel to be used (Azjen, 1985; Azjen, 1991).

Approved products with the fair trade

According to the TPB, when a consumer

marks follow the standards throughout thewants to buy something, the consumer has

process from raw material production, im-

an intention to buy before action. “Attitude

port, manufacture, through shipment. For

toward the behavior,” “subjective norm,” andexample, coffee prices fluctuated drasticallyFigure 3. The Framework of Fair Trade
4

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

Figure 4. Modified TPB Model (Shaw, et al., 2000)“perceived behavioral control” affect inten-

ical issues. The results showed that ethicaltion. Attitude means whether one’s evalua-obligation and self-identity affected the be-tion toward the purchase is favorable. Sub-havioral intention to buy fair trade products.

jective norm is measured by the question

Some research papers tested models towhether most people who are important to

explain decision-making of environmentallyme think I should purchase the product. Be-

friendly behavior and ethical consumption inhavioral control asks whether the purchase

Japan. For instance, Toyota (2008) examinedof fair trade grocery products is easy or diffi-

several kinds of models for five types of eth-cult.

ical consumer behavior: the purchase of soShaw, et al. (2000) tested several mod-lar panels, the subscription of a magazine

els including TRA and TPB to interpret eth-dealing with poverty issues, saving in a vol-ical consumer behavior to purchase fairuntary deposit, the boycott of disgraced cor-trade goods. The data was from 1,400 fairporate products, and socially-responsible de-trade magazine subscribers in the United

cision-making for consumption. However,Kingdom. It was more appropriate for thethis paper didn’t include fair trade products

fair trade market to use the TPB model be-

as one kind of ethical consumption. Because

cause it had more explanatory power than

GFI and AGFI in all five cases were greater

the TRA model. Shaw, et al. (2000) proposed

than 0.9 in the TPB model, it concluded thatto modify the TPB model (hereinafter “mod-the TPB explained the consumer behavior

ified TPB model”) to include ethical obliga-

more effectively than others. Among severaltion and self-identity (Figure 4). Ethical ob-

factors, the paper found that the subjective

ligation means that a respondent feels annorm had strong effects on consumers’ deci-

ethical obligation to purchase fair tradesion making.

products. Self-identity is a variable to meas-

As shown above, a variety of types ofure if a person feels any concern about eth-ethical consumption models was discussed
5

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

regarding the determinants of consumer be-nants of altruism are well known, the spe-

havior such as the TRA and the TPB. On thecific mechanism that fair trade uses is stillother hand, there is no study in Japan to test

an under researched issue” (p. 370). Kikuchi

the TPB model or others for fair trade. In(1988) define it as a behavior to try to en-this study, referring to the modified TPB

hance the relationship with others and de-model in Shaw et al. (2000), we would like tosire it to become more appropriate. It may

explore what kinds of factors make effects on

cause self-sacrifice and costs to the person

fair trade purchasing intention.

who takes such pro-social behavior. He distinguished between pro-social behavior and2. Personal factors

behavior that expects returns or financial re-

Consumption has various meanings towards from others. On the other hand, it in-consumers. One important factor is atten-

cludes behavior expected to get intrinsic re-tion to one’s identity. Sugawara (1984)

wards such as satisfaction and pride. Kiku-

stated that, “when others look at you or youchi (1988) developed a pro-social behavior

look at yourself in a mirror, you are con-scale based on the altruistic behavior scalescious of yourself.” He called this self-con-developed by Rushton (1981). In his paper,

sciousness. In his paper, he developed a Jap-

he examined the correlation between self-

anese version of a self-consciousness scaleconsciousness and pro-social behavior. The

based on those developed by Fenigstein et al.

results showed no statistical correlation be-(1975). The results of a survey on 438 stu-

tween them. He concluded that it happened

dents show that there were two main factors

because people behave socially when they dofor self-consciousness: public and private

not expect to receive rewards but does re-self-consciousness. Public self-consciousness

spect others’ situations.

means that a person paid attention to how

The other important factor relating toothers evaluate her. Private self-conscious-

fair trade can be education. The main aim ofness means that the individual asks her own

education is that people achieve the capacity

mind who she is. We decided to include theto improve their lives. The capacity includes

self-consciousness scale to test the relation-

how people communicate and collaborate

ship between self-consciousness and con-with each other to make society better.

sumers’ decision making for fair trade.

Knowledge is also important to understandOne of the main objectives of fair trade

why some issues would be a problem andis to help and protect producers and workers

how they can be solved. For instance, thein developing countries. Therefore, theCabinet Office of Japan (2008) found thatmindset of showing respect to others can be

the longer a person had attended consumer

an important driver for fair trade. Psycholo-

education classes, the higher the test scores

gists measure this mindset as altruism oron environmental issues.

pro-social behavior. However, Koppel andIn our research, we will include three

Schulze (2013) posit, “while the determi-

factors into our model: knowledge, self-con-

6

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

sciousness, and pro-social behavior (or altru-

knowledge about fair trade can enhance be-ism).

havior intention (H2).
Because fair trade is a framework to(3) Methodology

support workers in developing countries,

1. Hypothesis

consumers cannot obtain extrinsic rewards

In order to clarify what purchasing in-from them. As Koppel and Schulze (2013)

tention of fair trade products looks like in Ja-

noted the under-researched issue, we test

pan and what kinds of factors make effects

the relationship between self-consciousness,on decision-making to buy fair trade prod-

pro-social behavior and purchase intention

ucts, we follow the modified TPB model de-toward fair trade products. We expect that,veloped by Shaw, et al. (2000). Although thisif a person gets a higher score on the self-model was used to get the results in the

consciousness scale and the pro-social be-

United Kingdom, we selected it to determine

havioral scale, he or she is more likely to buy

whether the same results would be found infair trade products (H3).

Japan.

The hypothetical model is illustrated

Based on Shaw, et al. (2000), H1 is if

in Figure 5. To compare to this model, we

attitudes, subjective norms, behavior control,

would also test other models such as TRA

ethical obligation and self-identity affect be-

and TPB. We used the logit model and struc-havioral intention directly. Behavioral belief

tural equation modeling (SEM) to test theand outcome evaluation affect attitude. Nor-hypothesis.

mative belief and motivation to comply affectsubjective norm. Moreover, based on the

2. Data

findings about the role of education on con-

Data used in this paper is from the Sec-sumer behavior by the Cabinet Office (2008),

ond Life Condition Survey in Ibaraki Prefecture (hereinafter “second Ibaraki Survey”),

Figure 5. Hypothetical model
7

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

which was conducted by Yoshiaki Takahashi

When we check if the sample is a rep-

Laboratory Group, University of Tsukuba,

resentative sample of population in Ibaraki

from November to December 2015. A total ofPrefecture in 2015, we found that the elderly

2,000 people from 20 to 79 years old named

was overrepresented (see Table 1). For in-on voters’ lists in Ibaraki Prefecture (1,042

stance, males and females aged 60-69 should

males and 958 females) were randomly se-

be 7.58% and 7.71%, respectively, of the total

lected as the sample of the first Ibaraki Sur-

samples. The percentages of male and fe-

vey. The first survey was conducted in No-

male respondents in their 60s were 15.76%

vember and December 2014. The respond-and 13.30%, respectively. On the other hand,ents to the second Ibaraki Survey were per-males and females aged 20-29 comprisedsons who agreed in the first survey to coop-

only 1.97% and 2.46%, respectively, of the re-erate again in the next survey. Students vis-

spondents, though they should consist of

ited those 305 persons to ask questions in

5.07% and 4.40% of the sample, respectively.

the second Ibaraki Survey questionnaire. A

Therefore, we must conclude that the data

total of 213 persons accepted and sent thewas not representative of demographics ofcompleted questionnaire back by post (re-the general population in Ibaraki. However,sponse rate: 69.8%).

because there is not any research to examine

The respondents were asked the ques-consumer behavior for fair trade products intions about intention, attitudes, and otherJapan, and the size of sample was sufficient

subjects regarding fair trade products. Most

to conduct statistical analysis, we decided toof the measurements were applied fromuse it in this paper.

Shaw, et al. (2000). The knowledge wasmeasured by 11 questions as a quiz (see Ap-(4) Empirical Analysis

pendix. The correct answers are circled). For

1. Opinions and attitudes to fair trade

instance, we asked the respondents to

A few of the respondents recognizedchoose the correct definition of fair trade. We

what fair trade was. In Figure 6, two-thirds

also asked them to identify the logo markof the respondents in Ibaraki were not at all

shown on a package of fair trade products.

familiar with fair trade. Another 20% had

We used several questions from a quiz devel-

heard of the term, but didn’t know muchoped by the Fairtrade Foundation in theabout it. Further, 24% believed that mostUnited Kingdom. One question was if

people who are important to the respondents

Fairtrade beauty products have ever beenthought that they should purchase fair tradetested on animals. Self-consciousness wasproducts (“subjective norm”), and 33% saidmeasured by the Japanese version of self-that it was easy for them to buy fair trade

consciousness scale developed by Sugawara

products in Japan (“perceived behavioral(1984). When we measured altruism, we

control”). Moreover, 36% agreed that they

modified the pro-social behavior scale devel-

feel an obligation to purchase fair trade

oped by Kikuchi (1988).

products (“ethical obligation”), and 20% con-8

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

Know fairly well
9%
Have heard theterm, but don't
know meaning
20%

ISSN 2189-9592

Know very well
4%

Don't know at all
67%

Figure 6. Awareness about Fair Trade
Source: The second Ibaraki Survey

Table 1. Evaluation of representativeness (gender and age)Age group

20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70-79
Total

Expected sample
male
female109(5.07)(4.40)
13
12(6.27)(5.73)
15
14(7.30)(6.79)
1312(6.28)(6.14)
15
16(7.58)(7.71)
11
12(5.35)(5.78)
101
102(49.88)(50.12)

Ibaraki Survey
male
female45(1.97)(2.46)
710(3.45)(4.93)
11
21(5.42)(10.34)18
26(8.87)(12.81)32
27(15.76)(13.30)25
17(12.32)(8.37)
97
106(47.78)(52.22)

Note: Expected sample is calculated with the percentage of population by
age and gender in Ibaraki Population Survey in July 2015.

sidered themselves as a person who is con-purchase of fair trade goods is favorable andcerned about ethical consumer issues (“self-

only 10% considered that fair trade was not

identity”). In this situation, only 28% wasfavorable (“attitude”). Finally, 56% said that

more likely to purchase fair trade products

fair trade was important for our society

the next time they went to a grocery(“outcome evaluation”).

store(“intention”). On the other hand, morethan half (53%) of the respondents said that

2. Knowledge about fair trade9

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592(Number of persons)

35
30
25
20
15
10

5
0
0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

(points)

Figure 7. The distribution of test scores of fair trade
Source: The second Ibaraki Survey

Figure 8. Percentage of correct answers about fair trade
Source: The second Ibaraki survey

The mean score of the quiz about fairestion with the most correct answers is Q7,

trade in the second Ibaraki Survey was

asking about female ownership of land in Af-

4.627 out of 11 (Figure 7).

The highest

rica; 68.7% answered it correctly. The second

score was 9 and the lowest was 0. Standard

question most correctly answered was Q5,

error was 2.016.

which asked the effect of fair trade; 64.9%

The percentage of correct answers is

answered it correctly.

different for each of the 11 questions (Figure

On the other hand, the question with

8). The Appendix shows all questions in thethe lowest rate of correct answer was Q9quiz. Each correct answer is circled. The qu-about a product in which 100 million rural
10

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

households in developing countries are in-ethical obligation on intention was statisti-

volved. Only 17.7% chose the correct answer,

cally significant at 10% level. Therefore, thecotton. That may be because there are a very

results in this paper were slightly different

few fair trade certificated cotton products infrom those in Shaw, et al. (2000), showing

Japan.

that attitude, behavioral control and ethicalThe second lowest correctly-answered

obligation had effects on the purchase inten-

question was Q10 about the market share oftion.

fair trade cacao in the global cacao market:

We then tested the H1, H2 and H3 with27.3% answered 1% as the correct answer.

the structure equation modeling (SEM) of

The third lowest correctly-answered ques-

full information maximum likelihood. Thetion was the fair trade sales values per cap-

first results are shown in Figure 9. GFI and

ita in Japan (Q3). The correct answer was

CFI were not above 0.9. However, RMSEA

around JPY100 and 28.5% selected it cor-

was lower than 0.1 (0.075). Similar to the re-rectly. In contrast, 33.1% and 24.6% chose

sults of the logit model, only attitude andaround JPY500 and JPY1,500, respectively.

perceived behavioral control affected inten-

Respondents may not have imagined thattion to buy fair trade products. The behav-

Japanese spend such a small amount ofioral belief and outcome evaluation influ-

money on fair trade products.

enced attitude. Normative belief and motivation to comply affected subjective norm.

3. Regression analysis

However, knowledge about fair trade, self-

The results of the logit model for theconsciousness, and pro-social behavior didn’t

proposed models are detailed in Table 2. For

seem to matter for fair trade at the 5% sig-

the TRA, attitude and subjective norm had

nificant level.

significant effects on purchase intention for

In order to check indirect effects offair trade. However, when we added per-knowledge and pro-social behavior on pur-ceived behavioral control as the TPB model,chase intention, we developed an alternative

subjective norm was not statistically signifi-

model (model 2) shown in Figure 10. We as-cant. The pseudo R2 (.204) was also improved.

sumed that knowledge had effect on outcome

Moreover, when we added ethical obligation

evaluation and pro-social behavior had effectand self-identity as the modified TPB modelon attitude. In addition, we deleted subjec-

shown in Shaw et al. (2000), the AIC andtive norm because the results of logit model

pseudo R2 were improved more. As a result,and SEM for the Model 1 didn’t show any re-

we are able to conclude that attitude and be-lationship between subjective norm and pur-havioral control were important factors forchase intention. When we looked at the re-consumers in Japan when they decide to buy

sults, GFI was higher than 0.9. AIC was im-

fair trade products. What we must note here

proved from Figure 9. However, CFI was notis that, when we delete subjective norm andabove 0.9. RMSEA was not also lower thanself-identity among the explanatory varia-

0.1 (0.174). According to the indicators, thebles in the modified TPB model, the effect ofmodel is not perfect. However, we can look at
11

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

Table 2. The results of multivariable analysis (Logit model)

TRA
Coefficient S.E.
(Intercept)-5.487 (1.092) ***Attitude0.670 (0.192) ***Subjective norm
0.260 (0.182)
Behavioral control
Ethical obligation
Self identity
n
144
AIC
153.03
pseudo R2
0.152

TPB
Coefficient S.E.
-6.857 (1.278) ***0.504 (0.208) **0.230 (0.197)
0.526 (0.186) ***144
146.000.204

Revised TPB1
Coefficient S.E.
-7.718 (1.529) ***0.389 (0.214) *0.182 (0.213)
0.526 (0.196) ***0.208 (0.209)
0.314 (0.244)
140
143.62
0.241

Revised TPB2
Coefficient S.E.
-6.934 (1.272)
0.478 (0.205) **0.556 (0.190) ***0.325 (0.186) *140
143.830.217

Note: ( ) shows standard errors. *** p< 1%, ** p<5%, * p<10%

Figure 9. The results of Model 1 (SEM)

the relationship between know knowledge,

on purchase intention of fair trade products.

pro-social behavior, and attitude. Knowledge
affected outcome evaluation at 1% signifi-(5) Discussion and Conclusioncant level and then outcome evaluation af-

At first, H1 was partially supported.

fected attitude at 1% significant level. Pro-

The results of the logit model and the struc-social behavior also influenced attitude atture equation modeling showed that it was

5% significant level. Therefore, knowledge

important whether purchasing fair tradeand pro-social behavior had indirect effects

products would be desirable (attitude) or
12

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

Figure 10. The results of Model 2 (SEM)easy to purchase (behavioral control). There-

decision making for fair trade products. For

fore, the availability of fair trade products ininstance, referring to discussion by Basu &shops mattered in Japan.

Van (1998), we can also understand that theOn the other hand, knowledge of fairpromotion of fair trade is a form of subsidies

trade and altruism did not directly affectto wage. The economics of child labor sug-purchase intention. Rather, knowledge wasgests that subsidies to wage cannot stop sup-related to outcome evaluation which meas-

plying child labor in developing countries.

ured if purchasing fair trade products would

Rather the promotion may create a black

be important for our society. Moreover, per-market of child laborers if governments insons who want to buy fair trade did not only

developing countries are not able to regulate

obtain knowledge, but also conducted pro-so-such black markets effectively. However, wecial or altruistic behavior frequently. They

could not take into account the relationshipbelieved that altruism is socially significant

on consumers’ decision-making in this study

in daily life. Therefore, we concluded that H2

explicitly.

and H3 were supported. Besides simply rais-

Lastly, the data used here was not a na-

ing awareness about fair trade in promoting

tionwide sample. The number of the sample

the purchase, education is an important

was also limited. The percentage of elderly

measure to encourage understanding the so-people among the respondents was very high.

cial significance of altruistic behavior.

In order to generalize our results, it is neces-

We only tested several models based onsary to carry out surveys targeting the whole

TRA and TPB in this study. On the otherpopulation of Japan. We need further re-hand, there are many possible models to in-search to compare our models with other po-

clude factors that may explain consumers’

tential models in a nationwide survey.
13

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

Acknowledgement

ISSN 2189-9592_v5.ashx (Access on January 2, 2016)

We would like to express our great ap-

Fairtrade

International

andGlobeScan

important research. We would also like to ex-

Fairtrade
International
GlobeScan Consumer Study.
Fairtrade Label Japan (2016). Annual Report 2015 (2015 nendo Jigyo Hoko-

tend our thanks to support from staff in 41

kusho).http://www.fairtrade.jp.org/aboumunicipalities in Ibaraki Prefecture. We aret_us/data/2015_katsudo.pdf (Access on

also grateful to two anonymous reviewers for

November 30, 2016)

preciation to respondents in the second(2015).

Ibaraki Survey. Without their kind cooperation, we would not have been able to do thishelpful comments.

Fenigstein, Allan., Michael F. Sheier and Arnold H. Buss (1975). Public and Private

References

Self-Consciousness: Assessment andAjzen, Icek (1985). From intentions to ac-

Theory. Journal of Consulting and Clin-tions: A theory of planned behavior. In

ical Psychology, 43(4), pp. 522-527.

Ajzen, I., Action control. Berlin Heidel-

Koppel, Hannes and Gunther G. Shulze

berg: Springer, pp.11-39.

(2013). The Importance of the Indirect

Ajzen, Icek (1991). The Theory of Planned

Transfer Mechanism for Consumer

Behavior. Organizational Behavior andWillingness to Pay for Fair Trade Prod-

Human Decision Processes, 50, pp.179–

ucts: Evidence from a Natural Field Ex-

211.

periment. Journal of Consumer Policy,

Ajzen, Icek and Martin Fishbein (1980). Un-

36, pp.369-387.

derstanding attitudes and predicting
social behavior, Englewood Cliffs:

Kikuchi, Akio (1988). Omoiyari wo Kagaku

suru – Kou-Shokai-teki Kodo no Shinri
to Sukiru (The Science of Consideration

Prince Hall.
Basu, Kaushik and Pham Hoang Van (1998).

– Mentality and Skills of Prosocial Be-

The economics of child labor. American

havior). Tokyo: Kawashima Shoten.

economic review, 88(3), pp.412-427.
The Cabinet Office of Japan (2008). White
Paper of National Lifestyle: Prospects
for consumer citizenship Toward a comfortable and mature society (Kokumin

Rushton, J. P., R. D. Chrisjohn and G. C.

Seikatsu Hakusho: Shohisha Shimin

Shaw, Deirdre, Edward Shiu and Ian Clarke

Shakai heno Tenbo). Tokyo: Jijigaho(2000). The Contribution of Ethical Ob-

Sha.

ligation and Self-identity to the Theory

Fekken (1981). The altruistic personality and the Self Report Altruism Scale.

Personality and Individual Differences,2, pp.293-302.

Fairtrade Foundation, Fair Trade at 20.

of Planned Behaviour: An Exploration

http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/~/mdia/fairof Ethical Consumers. Journal of Mar-

tradeuk/get%20involved/docu-

keting Management, 16(8), pp.879–894.

ments/curent%20campaigns/

Sugawara, Kensuke (1984). Attempt to con-fairtrade%20at%2020/fairtrade20_quiz

struct the self-consciousness scale for14

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

Japanese. The Japanese Journal of Psy-

havior by Responsible Consumers: Datachology, 55(3), pp.184–188.

Analysis of Behavior Theory Model).

and Product Evaluation (Shohisha no

The Japan Society of Household Economics Annual Meeting 2009, pp.1–16.

Identity Keisei Ishiki to Seihin Hyoka).

Watanabe, Ryuya (2007). Trajectory of the

Journal of Business and Economics,

Fair Trade Movement: Challenging the54(3), pp.379–228.

International Trade System (Fair Trade

Tamaki, Satoru (2008). Identity Formation

Toyota, Shogo (2009). Sekinin Aru Sho-hishano Keisei to Tenkai: Kokusai Boeki Sys-

no Ishikettei to Shohi Kodo ni kansuru

tem heno Chousen). Tokyo Keizai Law

Kozo Bunseki (The Structural Analysis

Review, 14, pp.3–72.

of Decision Makings and Consumer BeAppendix: Fair trade quiz in the Ibaraki Survey
Q1: The definition of fair trade is .......
① a trading partnership, based on dialogue, transparency and respect, that seeks greater
equity in international trade;
2. a free trade by producers and vendors without government’s intervention like customs
duty;
3. financial aids that governments provide to assist economic development in developing
countries;
4. loans without interest to contribute to economic development and welfare in developing
countries.
Q2: The global sales values of fair trade in 2014 was JPY .....
1. 8 billion

2. 80 billion③ 800 billion

4. 8 trillion

Q3: Fair trade sales values in Japan per capita was around JPY ......
1. 16

② 114

3. 525

4. 1,621

Q4: The main product of fair trade in Japan was .......
① coffee

2. banana

3. cosmetics

4. chocolate

Q5: One of effects of fair trade is ........
1. cost-cutting to improve efficiency in business;
2. training technicians to convey technology in Japan to developing countries;
3. promoting competition in trade;④ improving working conditions in developing countries.
Q6: Which of these is the Fairtrade mark?
15

Journal of Japanese Management Vol.1, No.2, May 2017

ISSN 2189-9592

1. the logo of Consumer Agency of Japan
2. the logo of foods for specified health uses
③ the logo of Fairtrade International
4. the Woolmark logo
Q7: Women produce 60-80% of the food in most developing countries, but how much land in
Africa is owned by women?
① 1%

2. 9%

3. 16%

4. 21%

Q8: Smallholder farmers often receive low returns from their produce. According to a
Fairtrade Foundation report in 2013, what percentage of the retail value of a chocolate bar
are cocoa smallholders likely to receive?
1. 21-26%

2. 10-15%③ 3-6%

4. 1%

Q9: These statements are all true for which fair trade product?


Developing countries produce two thirds of this product

100 million rural households in developing countries are involved in its productionWest Africa produces about 4% of its total global production

1. rice

2. coffee③ cotton

4. cacao

Q10: Close to 50 million people depend on cocoa for their livelihoods. What percentage of cocoa
is sold on fair trade terms globally?
① 1%

2. 6%

3. 11%

4. 21%

Q11: Have fair trade beauty products ever been tested on animals?
1. Yes② No(Received: December 1, 2016)(Accepted: April 16, 2017)16