Consumers' willingness to pay for corporate social responsibility: Theory and evidence

Abstract

In an era when consumers believe that businesses should engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR), it is vital to understand how it affects consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) for the goods and services offered by such businesses. There is a need for an in‐depth study into the relationship between CSR and WTP, and to identify the mediators and the moderators affecting this relationship. To investigate this, we conducted a systematic literature review based on a preliminary search result of 116 unique articles indexed on this topic in four bibliographic databases—Scopus, Google Scholar, Dimensions and Web of Science—published over the previous seven decades. The findings confirm the overall positive effect of CSR on WTP. This study also reveals the indirect effect between CSR and WTP, mediated by variables like Brand Trust, Brand Loyalty, Brand Love, Customer Satisfaction, Brand Attitude, Purchase Intention and Brand Equity. The relationship is impacted by moderators, including demographics, cause‐based aspects, company characteristics, personal aspects and types of products. The theory explaining the evidence of each of these aspects provides a deeper understanding of the relationship between CSR and WTP, and the intervening variables. Based on these, a conceptual framework of this relationship involving all the variables is developed. The Theory, Context and Method (TCM) framework is employed to identify gaps and systematically make recommendations for future research. The findings of this study will aid marketers in developing pricing strategies based on a thorough understanding of consumer behaviour in terms of CSR perceptions. Scholars can use this study's conceptual framework to examine previously unexplored relationships. As the literature on CSR and its influence on consumers' purchase behaviour grows, this comprehensive systematic literature review on the effects of CSR on WTP fills an important gap.

Support farmers: sustainability claims that influence moral satisfaction and purchase intention

“…Moral satisfaction positively affects taste expectations, willingness to pay, and willingness to purchase (Bratanova et al, 2015;Steenis et al, 2018). Consumers who strongly value altruistic behaviors and pro-social consumption exhibit a stronger relationship between CRS and willingness to pay (Narayanan and Singh, 2023). Consistently, the effect of moral satisfaction depends on the community's values and the individual's inclination to support social-related programs (Winterich et al, 2012).…”

“…Consumer responses to different sustainability claims It is widely recognized that social and environmental arguments influence consumer behavior (Iweala et al, 2019;Narayanan and Singh, 2023;Shao and € Unal, 2019); however, the research is not conclusive regarding what social or environmental claims move consumers the most. In the context of food, some studies find that social and environmental issues are equally important (Zander and Hamm, 2010;Janßen and Langen, 2017).…”

Consumer cynicism: Interdisciplinary hybrid review and research agenda

“…Though this strict selection criterion ensured quality and practicality, we do not deny the existence of other apposite articles and in turn, other unexplored model constructs (antecedents, mediators, moderators, and consequences). Future reviews may incorporate papers from other sources, like conference proceedings, books and/or book chapters, WOS or CABS AJG, across journal categories and citation figures for increased inclusivity and reduced positive outcome bias (Narayanan & Singh, 2023). Secondly, future reviews may utilize other multi‐faceted frameworks like 5WIH over ADO‐TCM framework (Luo et al, 2023; Paul et al, 2021), which may be more objective and may not require statistical validation (Wolf, 2023).…”

The dynamics of value co‐creation behavior: A systematic review and future research agenda

“…However, it alone does not explain the TCM that could guide future research. Similarly, the TCM framework is useful for replicating or making discoveries in any research domain (Luo et al, 2023; Mishra et al, 2021; Narayanan & Singh, 2023); it provides limited insights into any phenomenon as compared to the ADO framework (Lim et al, 2021); ergo, the integration of the two frameworks is logical. The ADO framework answers, “What do we know?” and “Where should we be heading?” and the TCM framework attempts to answer, “How do we know?” Thus, the integrated ADO‐TCM framework offers a comprehensive view of existing literature and suggests directions for future research.…”

“…However, it alone does not explain the TCM that could guide future research. Similarly, the TCM framework is useful for replicating or making discoveries in any research domain (Luo et al, 2023;Mishra et al, 2021;Narayanan & Singh, 2023); it provides limited insights into any phenomenon as compared to the ADO framework (Lim et al, 2021); ergo, the integration of the two frameworks is logical.…”