From holistically to accidentally sustainable: a study of motivations and identity expression in sustainable living

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to examine the role of individual action in addressing challenges of sustainability, and to help marketing scholars and practitioners better understand what motivates sustainable living. Design/methodology/approach Semistructured interviews with 35 individuals self-identifying as sustainable shed light on motivations and identity expression in sustainable living. Four Drive Theory, and Personal and Social Identity Theory (operationalized through the Dynamic Model of Identity Development), provide this study’s guiding theoretical framework. Data analysis was informed by the Gioia methodology. Findings Individuals differently express their personal and social identities through sustainable living, and are differently motivated to live sustainably. Those expressing personal identity salience through sustainable living draw on a broader set of motivations than those expressing social identity salience. This results in varying levels of commitment to sustainable living, with differences also found in individuals’ personal satisfaction derived from their sustainable living efforts. Based on these findings, a novel typology of sustainable individuals is developed. Research limitations/implications This study is limited by its focus on one geographic area and relatively small sample size. A key implication is the need to consider both personal and social identity when studying behavior in other marketing contexts. Practical implications The research provides important insights for marketing practitioners, policymakers and others seeking to better categorize sustainable individuals and target marketing messages to encourage sustainable behaviors. Originality/value This paper contributes to marketing scholarship by providing new insights on the role of identity and motivations in sustainable living. It introduces a novel typology of sustainable individuals, founded on differences in identity expression and motivational drives, which are also associated with the range of sustainable behaviors people engage with and how individuals make sense of these behaviors.

Eco‐restrictive experiences forming extraordinary consumer experiences

“…Common‐sense is used to blame consumption for environmental challenges (e.g., Greenpeace Brasil, 2020; ONU, 2019; Pnuma, 2008; Wheeler, 2012), while calling consumers to an individual role to save the world (Garnelo‐Gomez et al, 2022; ONU, 2022). The unrealistic hope that believes that environmental problems will be solved through individual consumer choices (Bostrom & Klintman, 2017) usually underestimates the particularly broad, complex, and abstract problem sets that consumers have to face to deal with the theme (Soneryd & Uggla, 2015).…”

“…Different perspectives of practice theories (Bourdieu, 1979, 1997; Giddens, 1984; Reckwitz, 2002a, 2002b; Schatzki, 1996; Shove, 2003, 2010; Warde, 2005, 2014) also support the assumption that consumption patterns are “unsustainable” and that changes in consumption are necessary and pressing (Shove, 2010). Different from the rational and conscious decision‐making individual process perspective that believes it is possible to encourage sustainable choices through information (e.g., Chatzidakis, 2014; Garnelo‐Gomez et al, 2022; Longo et al, 2017), practice theories look at consumption as a complex process that involves habitual, mundane, and even unconscious practices that involve social, symbolic, and material characteristics (Hargreaves, 2011; Sahakian & Wilhite, 2013; Spaargaren, 2011).…”

Compensation mechanisms for fishermen quit fishing: A case of Jiangsu province, China

“…System, economy, culture, perception, motivation, and cognition often influence fishermen’ willingness to participate in fishing policies. This is transformed into concrete actions for participation [ 7 ]. Research on participation intention of the compensated object has always been a popular issue at home and abroad.…”

“…Implementing the fishing ban policy has damaged fishermen’ livelihood capital. Influencing factors of willingness to quit fishing [ 7 , 12 ] Economic compensation and individual characteristics are the main influencing factors 2. Fishermen’ individual characteristics and livelihood capital affect their willingness to quit fishing.…”