Although a large number of conceptual and empirical works on anti-consumption can be found in the marketing literature, the majority of these studies describe progressive reasons against consumption and pay little attention to rightist arguments. Building on multidisciplinary literatures, this article identifies three rightist ideological groups that are likely to engage in anti-consumption: moderate conservatives, the radical right and welfare chauvinists. We theorize rightist anti-consumption in relation to three tensions (global–national, novel–traditional, individual–communitarian), discuss the implications for marketing theory and identify possible avenues for further research. Consumer research should investigate political ideology as a dimension of anti-consumption, with particular attention paid to rightist reasons against consumption.

Purpose This paper aims to provide a typology of perceived risk in the context of consumer brand resistance and thus answers the following question: how do consumers perceive the risk they take when resisting brands? Design/methodology/approach Two qualitative methods were used. In-depth interviews were carried out with 15 consumers who resist brands. An ethnography was carried out for ten months in an international pro-environmental NGO. Findings This multiple qualitative method design led to the identification of four types of risks taken by consumers. The four categories of perceived risks identified are performance (lack of suitable alternatives for the brand), social issues (stigma and exclusion), legal reasons (legal proceedings) or physical considerations (violation of physical integrity). These risks are located along a continuum of resistance intensity. Resistance intensity levels are avoidance, offline word-of-mouth, online word-of-mouth, boycott, activism and finally extreme acts. Originality/value This study provides a framework that integrates perceived risks within the context of brand resistance. The paper highlights extreme acts of resistance and questions the limits of such behaviors.

No abstract

No abstract