Consumption as voting: an exploration of consumer empowerment

Abstract

PurposeIncreasing numbers of consumers are expressing concerns about reports of questionable corporate practices and are responding through boycotts and buycotts. This paper compares competing theories of consumer empowerment and details findings that examine the applicability of the theory to “ethical consumer” narratives. The nature and impact of consumer empowerment in consumer decision making is then discussed.Design/methodology/approachThe study takes an exploratory approach by conducting semi‐structured in‐depth interviews with a purposive sample of ten consumers. These were recruited from an “ethical product” fair in Scotland.FindingsResults indicate that the participating consumers embraced a voting metaphor, either explicitly or implicitly, to view consumption as an ethical/political domain. Setting their choices within perceived collective consumer behaviour, they characterised their consumption as empowering. This results in an ethical consumer project that can be seen as operating within the market. It, therefore, suggests some tensions between consumer power and sustainable living.Research limitations/implicationsThis small‐scale study relates to a single country and location. A particular group of accentuated consumers was recruited. Studies of the narratives of other consumer groupings would clearly be valuable.Practical implicationsTo the extent that political democracy is perceived as failing, it appears that the profile of the market as a site of consumer engagement is raised. Marketers would be wise, therefore, to take increasingly account of “empowered” consumers.Originality/valueLittle attention has been paid to the theory of consumption as voting. However, a continuing rise in the consideration of ethics among consumers and producers suggests its rehabilitation and further exploration would be worthwhile.

Purchase power: An examination of consumption as voting

“…However, as noted by Shaw, Newholm and Dickinson (2006) and also Fraser (1939), the perspective of the consumer is only one of the considerations of a firm, and ultimately firms will produce what is in their best interest. In evaluating the interests and concerns of various stakeholders, firms take into account complex interconnecting networks of exchanges among such groups.…”

“…Indeed, scholars increasingly see consumption as political (Micheletti and Follesdal 2007;Dickinson and Carsky 2005;Shaw 2007;Shaw, Newholm and Dickinson 2006;Soper 2007;Tormey 2007). Consumer voting, therefore, refers to actions taken by citizens in their role as consumers in response to particular aspects of the market system deemed inappropriate or unfair.…”

“…Consumer choices that seek to address issues of societal and individual concern in relation to consumption have been described as consumer votes (Dickinson & Carsky, 2005;Dickinson & Hollander, 1991;Shaw, Newholm, & Dickinson, 2006). Consumption-based voting can be witnessed in the established markets for products and services with clear pro-social agendas.…”

Exploring the animosity domain and the role of affect in a cross-national context

“…A boycott occurs "when a number of people abstain from purchase of a product, at the same time, as a result of the same egregious act or behavior, but not necessarily for the same reasons" (John & Klein, 2003, p. 1198. Consumers participate in boycotts to express severe dissatisfaction with a company or country's actions and/or policies (Shaw, Newholm, & Dickinson, 2006), and animosity plays an important role in attitudes toward participating in boycott activities (Smith and Qianpin 2010).Therefore, a boycott may be an outcome of animosity. One example of a boycott directed toward a country was experienced by the Danish dairy giant Arla Foods.…”

Voluntary simplicity: an exploration of market interactions

“…The benefits of personal satisfaction and taste highlighted in the above quote, combined with a discomfort with much conventional food production, resulted in home production being viewed as a pertinent aspect of a voluntarily simplified lifestyle. This may well represent a re-enabling of the consumer (Szmigin, Carrigan and Bekin, 2007) and indeed some level of consumer empowerment (Shaw, Newholm and Dickinson, 2006) in the face of such complex risks.…”