Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 133, Issue 1, pp 95–109 | Cite as

Socio-Cognitive Determinants of Consumers’ Support for the Fair Trade Movement

  • Andreas Chatzidakis
  • Minas Kastanakis
  • Anastasia Stathopoulou


Despite the reasonable explanatory power of existing models of consumers’ ethical decision making, a large part of the process remains unexplained. This article draws on previous research and proposes an integrated model that includes measures of the theory of planned behavior, personal norms, self-identity, neutralization, past experience, and attitudinal ambivalence. We postulate and test a variety of direct and moderating effects in the context of a large scale survey study in London, UK. Overall, the resulting model represents an empirically robust and holistic attempt to identify the most important determinants of consumers’ support for the fair-trade movement. Implications and avenues for further research are discussed.


Attitude–behavior gap Consumer ethical decision making Ethical consumerism Fair trade Theory of planned behavior 


  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ajzen, I. (2002a). Constructing a TPB questionnaire: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Retrieved May 29, 2014, from
  5. Ajzen, I. (2002b). Residual effects of past on later behavior: Habituation and reasoned action perspectives. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behavior: Reactions and reflections. Psychology & Health, 26(9), 1113–1127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  8. Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (2005). The influence of attitudes on behavior. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The Handbook of Attitudes (pp. 173–221). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Alexandrov, A. (2010). Characteristics of single-item measures in Likert scale format. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 8(1), 1–12.Google Scholar
  10. Anderson, W. T., & Cunningham, W. H. (1972). The socially conscious consumer. Journal of Marketing, 36(3), 23–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Andorfer, V. A., & Liebe, U. (2012). Research on fair trade consumption—A review. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(4), 415–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Armitage, C., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 471–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Arnold, H. J. (1982). Moderator variables: A clarification of conceptual, analytic and psychometric issues. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29, 143–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Basil, D. Z., Ridgway, N. M., & Basil, M. D. (2006). Guilt appeals: The mediating effect of responsibility. Psychology and Marketing, 23(12), 1035–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bray, J., Johns, N., & Kilburn, D. (2011). An exploratory study into the factors impeding ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 98, 597–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS, basic concepts, applications and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Camerer, C. F., Loewenstein, G., & Rabin, M. (Eds.). (2011). Advances in behavioral economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer—Do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behavior of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97, 139–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2014). Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap. Journal of Business Research, 67(1), 2759–2767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Castro, P., Garrido, M., Reis, E., & Menezes, J. (2009). Ambivalence and conservation behaviour: An exploratory study on the recycling of metal cans. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 24–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Chan, K. (1998). Mass communication and pro-environmental behaviour: Waste recycling in Hong Kong. Journal of Environmental Management, 52, 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Chang, M. K. (1998). Predicting unethical behavior: A comparison of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(16), 1825–1834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Charng, H.-W., Piliavin, J. A., & Callero, P. L. (1988). Role identity and reasoned action in the prediction of repeated behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Chatzidakis, A., Hibbert, S., & Smith, A. P. (2007). Why people don’t take their concerns about fair trade to the supermarket: The role of neutralization. Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Chatzidakis, A., Maclaran, P., & Bradshaw, A. (2012). Heterotopian space and the utopics of ethical and green consumption. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(3–4), 494–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cloake, F. (2014, May). Where are we to turn if we want to be ethical food shoppers these days? The Guardian, Retrieved May 29, 2014 from
  28. Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  29. Conner, M., & Armitage, C. J. (1998). Extending the theory of planned behavior: A review and avenues for further research. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1429–1464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Conner, M., Sparks, P., Povey, R., James, R., Shepherd, R., & Armitage, C. J. (2002). Moderator effects of attitudinal ambivalence on attitude–behaviour relationships. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(5), 705–718.Google Scholar
  31. Costarelli, S., & Colloca, P. (2004). The effects of attitudinal ambivalence on pro-environmental behavioural intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(3), 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Cremin, C. (2012). The social logic of late capitalism: Guilt fetishism and the culture of crisis industry. Cultural Sociology, 6(1), 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Darrow, A. L., & Kahl, D. R. (1982). A comparison of moderated regression techniques considering strength of effect. Journal of Management, 8, 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Davies, J., Foxall, G. R., & Pallister, J. (2002). Beyond the intention–behaviour mythology an integrated model of recycling. Marketing Theory, 2(1), 29–113.Google Scholar
  35. De Cannière, M. H., De Pelsmacker, P., & Geuens, M. (2009). Relationship quality and the theory of planned behavior models of behavioral intentions and purchase behavior. Journal of Business Research, 62, 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Devinney, T. M., Auger, P., & Eckhardt, G. (2010). The myth of the ethical consumer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Doherty, B., Davies, I. A., & Tranchell, S. (2013). Where now for fair trade? Business History, 55(2), 161–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  39. Evans, D., & Norman, P. (2003). Predicting adolescent pedestrians’ road-crossing intentions: An application and extension of the theory of planned behaviour. Health Education Research, 18, 267–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Fife-Schaw, C., Sheeran, P., & Norman, P. (2007). Simulating behaviour change interventions based on the theory of planned behaviour: Impacts on intention and action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 43–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  42. Francis, J. J., Eccles, M. P., Johnston, M., Walker, A., Grimshaw, J., Foy, R., et al. (2004a). Constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour: A manual for health services researchers. Newcastle: University of Newcastle.Google Scholar
  43. Francis, J. J., Johnston, M., Eccles, M. P., Grimshaw, J., & Kaner, E. F. S. (2004b). Measurement issues in the theory of planned behaviour: A supplement to the manual for constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour. Newcastle: University of Newcastle.Google Scholar
  44. Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counselling psychology research. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 51(1), 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Fridell, G. (2009). The co-operative and the corporation: Competing visions of the future of fair trade. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(1), 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Fukukawa, K. (2002). Developing a framework for ethically questionable behavior in consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Godin, G., Conner, M., & Sheeran, P. (2005). Bridging the intention–behaviour “gap”: The role of moral norm. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 497–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hagger, M. S., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2006). Self-identity and the theory of planned behaviour: Between- and within-participants analyses. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 731–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N., & Biddle, S. J. (2001). The influence of self-efficacy and past behaviour on the physical activity intentions of young people. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19(9), 711–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L., & Biddle, S. J. (2002). A meta-analytic review of the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior in physical activity: Predictive validity and the contribution of additional variables. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 24(1), 3–32.Google Scholar
  51. Haight, C., & Henderson, D. R. (2010). Fair trade is counterproductive and unfair: Rejoinder. Economic Affairs, 30(1), 88–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  53. Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (Eds.). (2005). The ethical consumer. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Hassan, L., Shaw, D., & Shiu, D. (2014). Who says there is an intention-behaviour gap? Assessing the empirical evidence of an intention-behaviour gap in ethical consumption. Journal of Business Ethics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  55. Henderson, D. R. (2008). Fair trade is counterproductive—and unfair. Economic Affairs, 28(3), 62–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Hunt, S. D., Sparkman, R. D, Jr, & Wilcox, J. B. (1982). The pretest in survey research: Issues and preliminary Findings. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(2), 269–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (1986). A general theory of marketing ethics. Journal of Macromarketing, 6, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (1992). The general theory of marketing ethics: A retrospective and revision. In C. Smith & J. Quelch (Eds.), Ethics in marketing (pp. 775–784). Homewood, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
  59. Hunt, S. D., & Vitell, S. J. (2006). The general theory of marketing ethics: A revision and three Questions. Journal of Macromarketing, 26(2), 143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Jackson, C., Smith, A., & Conner, M. (2003). Applying an extended version of the theory of planned behaviour to physical activity. Journal of Sports Sciences, 21(2), 119–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kaiser, F. G., Ranney, M., Hartig, T., & Bowler, P. A. (1999). Ecological behaviour, environmental attitude, and feelings of responsibility for the environment. European Psychologist, 4(2), 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kaiser, F. G., & Shimoda, T. A. (1999). Responsibility as a predictor of ecological behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Kalafatis, S. P., Pollard, M., East, R., & Tsogas, M. H. (1999). Green marketing and Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour: A cross-market examination. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(5), 441–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Keynote Report. (2012). Green and ethical consumer market assessment. Retrieved May 29, 2014 from
  65. Keynote Report. (2013). Green and ethical consumer market update. Retrieved May 29, 2014 from
  66. Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  67. Kraft, P., Rise, J., Sutton, S., & Røysamb, E. (2005). Perceived difficulty in the theory of planned behaviour: Perceived behavioural control or affective attitude? British Journal of Social Psychology, 44(3), 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Krier, J.-M. (2001). Fair trade in Europe 2001: Facts and figures on the fair trade sector in 18 European countries. Maastricht: EFTA Research Report.Google Scholar
  69. Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Lovelock, C. H., Stiff, R., Cullwick, D., & Kaufman, I. M. (1976). An evaluation of the effectiveness of the drop-off questionnaire delivery. Journal of Marketing Research, 13(4), 358–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Low, W., & Davenport, E. (2005). Has the medium (roast) become the message? The ethics of marketing fair trade in the mainstream. International Marketing Research, 22(5), 494–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Malhotra, N. K., Kim, S. S., & Patil, A. (2006). Common method variance in IS research: A comparison of alternative approaches and a reanalysis of past research. Management Science, 52(12), 1865–1883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Manstead, A. S. R., & Parker, D. (1995). Evaluating and extending the theory of planned behaviour. European Review of Social Psychology, 6(1), 69–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interaction and moderation effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 376–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mintel Report. (2007). Green and ethical consumers. Retrieved May 29, 2014 from
  76. Mohr, J. J., Fisher, R. J., & Nevin, J. R. (1996). Collaborative communication in interfirm relationships: moderating effects of integration and control. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 103–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Nicholls, A., & Lee, N. (2006). Purchase decision making in fair trade and the ethical purchase “gap”: “Is there a fair-trade Twix?”. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 14, 369–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Norman, P., & Conner, M. (2006). The theory of planned behaviour and binge drinking: Assessing the moderating role of past behaviour within the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11(1), 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Norman, P., Conner, M., & Bell, R. (2000). The theory of planned behaviour and exercise: Evidence for the moderating role of past behaviour. British Journal of Health Psychology, 5(3), 249–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Notani, A. S. (1998). Moderators of perceived behavioral control’s predictiveness in the theory of planned behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 7, 247–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Ogden, J. (2003). Some problems with social cognition models: A pragmatic and conceptual analysis. Health Psychology, 22, 424–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Ozcaglar-Toulouse, N., Shiu, E., & Shaw, D. (2006). In search of fair trade: Ethical consumer decision making in France. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(5), 502–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended biases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rindfleisch, A., Burroughs, J. A., & Wong, N. (2008). The safety of objects: Materialism, existential insecurity and brand connection. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19(4), 305–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Schoonhoven, C. B. (1981). Problems with contingency theory: Testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency “theory”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 349–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221–279). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  88. Schwartz, S. H., & Howard, J. A. (1980). Explanations of the moderating effect of responsibility denial on the personal norm-behavior relationship. Social Psychology Quarterly, 43(4), 441–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schwartz, S. H., & Howard, J. A. (1981). A normative decision-making model of altruism. In J. P. Rushton & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Altruism and helping behavior: Social, personality, and developmental perspectives (pp. 189–211). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  90. Shaw, D., & Clarke, I. (1999). Belief formation in ethical consumer groups: An exploratory study. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 17(2), 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Shaw, D., & Shiu, E. (2002a). An assessment of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer decision-making: A structural equation modeling approach. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(4), 286–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Shaw, D., & Shiu, E. (2002b). The role of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer choice. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26(2), 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Shaw, D., & Shiu, E. (2003). Ethics in consumer choice: A multivariate modelling approach. European Journal of Marketing, 37(10), 1485–1498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Shaw, D., Shiu, E., & Clarke, I. (2000). The contribution of ethical obligation and self-identity to the theory of planned behaviour: An exploration of ethical consumers. Journal of Marketing Management, 16, 879–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Smart, J. J. C., & Williams, B. (1973). Utilitarianism for & against. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Smith, A. (2009). Evaluating the criticisms of fair trade. Economic Affairs, 29(4), 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Sparks, P., & Guthrie, C. A. (1998). Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: A useful addition or an unhelpful artifice? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1393–1410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Sparks, P., & Shepherd, R. (2002). The role of moral judgments within expectancy-value-based attitude-behavior models. Ethics and Behavior, 12(4), 299–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Sparks, P., Shepherd, R., & Frewer, L. J. (1995). Assessing and structuring attitudes toward the use of gene technology in food production: The role of perceived ethical obligation. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 16(3), 267–285.Google Scholar
  100. Strong, C. (1996). Features contributing to the growth of ethical consumerism: A preliminary investigation. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 14(5), 5–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers. The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  102. Sykes, G. M., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 664–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Terry, D. J., Hogg, M. A., & White, K. M. (1999). The theory of planned behaviour: Self-identity, social identity and group norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Trafimow, D., Sheeran, P., Conner, M., & Finlay, K. A. (2002). Evidence that perceived behavioural control is a multidimensional construct: Perceived control and perceived difficulty. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 101–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Tyler, T. R., Orwin, R., & Schurer, L. (1982). Defensive denial and high cost prosocial behaviour. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 3(4), 267–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Verplanken, B., & Aarts, H. (1999). Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: Is habit an empty construct or an interesting case of goal-directed automaticity? European Review of Social Psychology, 10(1), 101–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Vitell, S. J., & Ho, F. N. (1997). Ethical decision making in marketing: A synthesis and evaluation of scales measuring the various components of decision making in ethical situations. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 699–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Webster, F. E. (1975). Developing the characteristics of the socially conscious consumer. Journal of Consumer Research, 2, 185–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Williams, B. A. (1972). Knowledge and reasons. Problems in the theory of knowledge/problèmes de la théorie de la connaissance (pp. 1–11). Hague, Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Yeow, P., Dean, A., & Tucker, D. (2013). Bags for life: The embedding of ethical consumerism. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi: 10.1007/s10551-013-1900-2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andreas Chatzidakis
    • 1
  • Minas Kastanakis
    • 2
  • Anastasia Stathopoulou
    • 3
  1. 1.Royal Holloway University of LondonEghamUK
  2. 2.ESCP EuropeLondonUK
  3. 3.Birkbeck University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations