1) Calculative determinism – Rational decision-making process
Credits : Dennie, J. O.
Based on Hardin’s work – “The Tragedy of the Commons” (1968), he argued that individuals are essentially egoistic beings when faced with a “commons dilemma”. This is a dilemma where individuals in a social group are faced with a decision-making situation of common pool resources. Decisions for the fulfillment of self-interest would be more rational and beneficial for members independently but would result in detrimental consequences to the social group collectively (Shultz & Holbrook, 1999). One of the underlying means to make decisions that is commonly used is cost-benefit analysis. Consumers will assess different purchase options based on their costs – the explicit and implicit value of the products, and benefits that can be derived from making the purchase (Reijonen, 2011). In accordance with Hardin’s argument, consumers are more inclined to make purchases that results in the greatest benefit for themselves at the extent of reasonable cost.
This pose as an obstacle to green consumer behavior as green products may not necessarily appeal to Singapore consumers due to the lack of perceived relative benefits when high cost is inflicted.
2) Consumers’ values
Values are inherent inclinations among individuals in the means for elicitation of actions (Clayton & Myers, 2009). They can be motivational which encourage people to express certain preferences and engage in goal-directed behaviors across different situations.
Credits : Igor
Values may be classified into different dimensions, one of which proposed by Schwartz (1992)– self-enhancement versus self-transcendence. In this dimension, values are arranged in a continuum ranging from the extent of importance of self-interest to the importance of collective-interest. According to Thogersen & Olander (2002), individuals differ in the way these values are prioritized and this extends its influence to general behavioral pattern. In agreement with Hardin’s argument, research has found that consumers who have high priority for self-enhancement values tend to have non-engagement of sustainable consumer behavior. It was also found that individuals who have high priority for values on the openness to change dimension such as hedonism also display limited engagement in green purchase behavior. The cost of purchasing green products incurred by the consumers comprises of the unpleasant adjustment to the green products as they are required to move away from previous habitual purchasing behavior. It also includes the degree of unpleasantness and lack of physical appeal of the green products. These factors adds up based on individual’s cost-benefit analysis and green products still fall short in comparison to non-green products that individuals have been purchasing in the past.
Therefore, consumers having higher priority for self-enhancement values will influence their green purchase intentions that affect actual green buying behavior. This is another psychological obstacle to green consumer behavior among Singaporeans if they fail to see the need to make decisions that are beneficial to the collective due to value priorities.
3) Consumers’ attitudes-behavior gap
Attitudes are evaluative acknowledgements to products or behaviors (Clayton & Myers, 2009). Although scholars have established that people act in ways that are consistent with their attitudes, studies have found that consumers with pro-environmental attitude do not express actual green buying behavior. This influence of consumers’ attitudes to actual purchase behavior can be understood from the Theory of Planned Behavior proposed by Ajzen (1991).
According to this theory, there are three sources that contribute to behavioral intentions. They are namely individual’s attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control. These influences can serve to translate behavioral intentions to actual occurrence of the behavior. With reference to TPB, recent studies have found the important contribution of perceived consumer effectiveness (PCE) to actual green purchase behavior (Shamdasani et al., 1993; Kim & Choi, 2005; Gupta & Ogden 2009). It was found that the lack of knowledge for consumers to be aware of the impact of their buying behavior have led to low perceived efficacy. This stands as an obstacle for consumers to adopt sustainable consumption pattern. In addition, research has found that non-green consumers are more skeptical towards engagement in sustainable consumption pattern. This is because of the lack of expectation and trust in the cooperation of other members in the social group to engage in this behavior. The result of this lack of recognition of subjective norms serves as an obstacle to behave sustainably as there is limited influence of social pressure to conform.
Therefore, with the lack of PCE and recognition of subjective norms, it prevents individuals from seeing the need to engage in green buying behavior, with or without pro-environmental attitudes. This contributes as another internal factor that hinders green purchase behavior among Singaporeans.
Images credit to the following respectively:-
Dennie, J. O. (2011). Op-Ed: 40 years later, ‘The Tragedy of the Commons’ as relevant as ever, Digital Journal. Retrieved 3 April 2012, from, http://digitaljournal.com/article/302211
Igor (2011). The difference in designing for the public or the individual. Retrieved 3 April 2012, from, http://blog.colorjive.com/2011/05/difference-between-designing-for-public.html