Advertisement

Journal of International Business Studies

, Volume 46, Issue 6, pp 694–714 | Cite as

Citizens of the (green) world? Cosmopolitan orientation and sustainability

  • Amir Grinstein
  • Petra Riefler
Article

Abstract

Contemporary consumer markets are characterized by both a heightened need for sustainability and an increasingly cosmopolitan lifestyle. This article bridges these two trends and studies two untapped questions: (1) How do cosmopolitan consumers relate to sustainable behavior? and (2) How should environmental messages be framed to successfully target cosmopolitan consumers? Four studies in three countries show that high-cosmopolitan consumers demonstrate environmental concern and engage in sustainable behavior. To successfully target this promising segment with sustainable products or messages to promote sustainable behavior, marketers and public policymakers should highlight the benefit of these products/behaviors for the global (rather than the local) environment. However, the findings also show that high-cosmopolitan consumers can be successfully targeted to support local environmental initiatives when activating their local identification. The article offers implications for businesses, non-government organizations, and public policymakers in designing effective messages to promote sustainable behavior.

Keywords

cosmopolitan orientation sustainability global/local framing market segmentation experiments 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Oliver Buettner, Danit Ein-Gar, Ann Kronrod, and Yael Steinhart for their valuable input on this research. The authors thank Raz Shalev for designing the adverts used in Study 3 and Marco Meier for his methodological input.

References

  1. Alden, D., Steenkamp, E.M.J-B, & Batra, R. 1999. Brand positioning through advertising in Asia, North America, and Europe: The role of global consumer culture. The Journal of Marketing: 75–87.Google Scholar
  2. Baldassare, M., & Katz, C. 1992. The personal threat of environmental problems as predictors of environmental practices. Environment and Behavior, 24 (5): 602–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bamberg, S. 2003. How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23 (1): 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. 2007. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (1): 14–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behling, O., & Law, K. S. 2000. Translating questionnaires and other research instruments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonnes, M., & Bonaiuto, M. 2002. Environmental psychology: From spatial-physical environment to sustainable development. In R. B. Bechtel, & A. Churchman (Eds), Handbook of environmental psychology: 28–47. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, L., & Binney, W. 2010. Fear, guilt and shame appeals in social marketing. Journal of Business Research, 63 (2): 140–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brett, J., & Moran, A. 2011. Cosmopolitan nationalism: Ordinary people making sense of diversity. Nations and Nationalism, 17 (1): 188–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calhoun, C. J. 2002. The class consciousness of frequent travelers: Toward a critique of actually existing cosmopolitanism. The South Atlantic Quarterly, 101 (4): 869–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cannon, H., & Yaprak, A. 2002. Will the real-world citizen please stand up! The many faces of cosmopolitan consumer behavior. Journal of International Marketing, 10 (4): 30–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chess, C., & Johnson, B. B. 2007. Information is not enough. In S. C. Moser, & L. Dilling (Eds), Creating a climate for change: Communicating climate change and facilitating social change: 153–166. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cho, Y.-N., Thyroff, A., Rapert, M. I., Park, S.-Y., & Lee, H. J. 2013. To be or not to be green: Exploring individualism and collectivism as antecedents of environmental behavior. Journal of Business Research, 66 (8): 1052–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cleveland, M., Kalamas, M., & Laroche, M. 2005. Shades of green: Linking environmental locus of control and pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22 (4): 198–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cleveland, M., Laroche, M., & Papadopoulos, N. 2009. Cosmopolitanism, consumer ethnocentrism, and materialism: An eight-country study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of International Marketing, 17 (1): 116–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cleveland, M., Secil, E., Gülay, A., & Poyraz, T. 2011. Cosmopolitanism, individual-level values and cultural-level values: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Business Research, 64 (9): 934–943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clifford, S., & Martin, A. 2011. As consumers cut spending, “green” products lose allure. New York Times. 21 April, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/22/business/energy-environment/22green.html?_r=2&hp&, accessed 22 July 2013.
  17. Cronin, J. J., Smith, J. S., Gleim, M. R., Ramirez, E., & Martinez, J. D. 2011. Green marketing strategies: An examination of stakeholders and the opportunities that they present. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39 (1): 158–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diamantopoulos, A., Schlegelmilch, B. B., Sinkovics, R. R., & Bohlen, G. 2003. Can socio-demographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empirical investigation. Journal of Business Research, 56 (6): 465–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Earley, P. C., & Peterson, R. S. 2004. The elusive cultural chameleon: Cultural intelligence as a new approach to intercultural training for the global manager. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (1): 100–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Egan, P. J., & Mullin, M. 2010. Turning personal experience into political attitudes: The effect of local weather on Americans’ perceptions about global warming. The Journal of Politics, 74 (3): 796–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Förster, J., & Dannenberg, L. 2010. GLOMOsys: A systems account of global versus local processing. Psychological Inquiry: An International Journal for the Advancement of Psychological Theory, 21 (3): 175–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grinstein, A., & Nisan, U. 2009. Demarketing, minorities and marketing attachment. Journal of Marketing, 73 (2): 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grinstein, A., & Wathieu, L. 2012. Happily maladapted: Cosmopolitan identity and expatriate adjustment. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29 (4): 337–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grob, A. 1995. A structural model of environmental attitudes and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15 (3): 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. 2009. Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41 (3): 924–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Henderson, M. D., Fujita, K., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. 2006. Transcending the “here”: The effect of spatial distance on social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91 (5): 845–856.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Holt, D. B. 1997. Poststructuralist lifestyle analysis: Conceptualizing the social patterning of consumption in postmodernity. Journal of Consumer Research, 23 (4): 326–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Johnson, P. O., & Neyman, J. 1936. Tests of certain linear hypotheses and their application to some educational problems. Statistical Research Memoirs, 1: 57–93.Google Scholar
  29. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. 2002. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds), Heuristics and Biases: 49–81. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kalamas, M., Cleveland, M., & Laroche, M. 2014. Pro-environmental behaviors for thee but not for me: Green giants, green gods, and external environmental locus of control. Journal of Business Research, 67 (1): 12–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Karp, D. G. 1996. Values and their effects on pro-environmental behavior. Environment and Behavior, 28 (1): 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kates, R. W., & Wilbanks, T. J. 2003. Making the global local: Responding to climate change concerns from the ground. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 45 (3): 12–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kefalas, A. G. 1998. Think globally, act locally. Thunderbird International Business Review, 40 (6): 547–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kronrod, A., Grinstein, A., & Wathieu, L. 2012. Go green! Should environmental messages be so assertive? Journal of Marketing, 76 (1): 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leiserowitz, A. 2007. Communicating the risks of global warming: American risk perceptions, affective images, and interpretive communities. In S. C. Moser, & L. Dilling (Eds), Creating a climate for change: Communicating climate change and facilitating social change: 44–63. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Leonidou, L. C., Leonidou, C. N., Hadjimarcou, J. S., & Lytovchenko, I. 2014. Assessing the greenness of environmental advertising claims made by multinational industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 43 (3): 671–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lepkowska-White, E., Brashear, T. G., & Weinberger, M. G. 2003. A test of ad appeal effectiveness in Poland and the United States: The interplay of appeal, product and culture. Journal of Advertising, 32 (3): 57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Levy, O., Beechler, S., Taylor, S., & Boyacigiller, N. A. 2007. What we talk about when we talk about “global mindset”: Managerial cognition in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 38 (2): 231–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Li, Y., Johnson, E. J., & Zaval, L. 2011. Local warming: Daily temperature change influences belief in global warming. Psychological Science, 22 (4): 454–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. 1998. The role of feasibility and desirability considerations in near and distant future decisions: A test of temporal construal theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 (1): 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. 1990. A theory of goal setting and task performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  42. Luchs, G. M., Naylor, R. W., Irwin, J. R., & Raghunathan, R. 2010. The sustainability liability: Potential negative effects of ethicality on product preference. Journal of Marketing, 74 (5): 18–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. 1990. The influence of message framing and issue involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 27 (3): 361–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Milstein, T. J. 2005. Transformation abroad: Sojourning and the perceived enhancement of self-efficacy. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 29 (2): 217–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mischel, W. 1979. On the interface of cognition and personality: Beyond the person–situation debate. American Psychologist, 34 (9): 740–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mittal, B. 1995. A comparative analysis of four scales of consumer involvement. Psychology and Marketing, 12 (7): 663–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Olson, E. L. 2013. It’s not easy being green: The effects of attribute tradeoffs on green product preference and choice. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41 (2): 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Prince, M. 2012. Globalization and the cosmopolitan consumer. New York: Business Expert Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Raunio, T. 2005. Hesitant voters, committed elite: Explaining the lack of Eurosceptic parties in Finland. Journal of European Integration, 27 (4): 381–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rhinesmith, S. H. 1993. Globalization: Six keys to success in a changing world. Alexandria, VA: The American Society for Training and Development.Google Scholar
  51. Riefler, P. 2012. Segmentation strategies for cosmopolitan consumers. In M. Prince (Ed), Globalization and the cosmopolitan consumer: 143–162. New York: Business Expert Press.Google Scholar
  52. Riefler, P., & Diamantopoulos, A. 2009. Consumer cosmopolitanism: Review and replication of the CYMYC scale. Journal of Business Research, 62 (4): 407–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Riefler, P., Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. 2012. Cosmopolitan consumers as a target group for segmentation. Journal of International Business Studies, 43 (3): 285–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Risen, J. L., & Critcher, C. R. 2011. Visceral fit: While in a visceral state, associated states of the world seem more likely. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100 (5): 777–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. 2013. Personally relevant climate change: The role of place attachment and local versus global message framing in engagement. Environment and Behavior, 45 (1): 60–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schlegelmilch, B.B., Bohlen, G.M., & Diamantopoulos, A. 1996. The link between green purchasing decisions and measures of environmental consciousness. European Journal of Marketing, 30 (5): 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simpson, B., & Radford, S. 2013. Situational variables and sustainability in multi-attribute decision-making. European Journal of Marketing, 48 (5/6): 1046–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Smith, S. M., & Petty, R. E. 1996. Message framing and persuasion: A message processing analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 (3): 257–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Smith, T.W., & Kim, S. 2005. National pride in comparative perspective: 1995/96 and 2003/04. GSS Cross-National Report No. 26, Chicago, US, University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center.Google Scholar
  60. Spangenberg, J. H., & Lorek, S. 2002. Environmentally sustainable household consumption: From aggregate environmental pressures to priority fields of action. Ecological Economics, 43 (2-3): 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Spiller, S. A., Fitzsimons, G. J., Lynch Jr.., J. G., & McClelland, G. H. 2013. Spotlights, floodlights, and the magic number zero: Simple effects tests in moderated regression. Journal of Marketing Research, 50 (2): 277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M., & Ter Hofstede, F. 2002. International market segmentation: Issues and perspectives. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19 (3): 185–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stern, P. C. 2000. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56 (3): 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stewart, G. L., & Barrick, M. R. 2004. Four lessons learned from the person-situation debate: A review and research agenda. In B. Schneider, & D. B. Smith (Eds), Personality and organizations 61–85. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  65. Strizhakova, Y., & Coulter, R. A. 2013. The “green” side of materialism in emerging BRIC and developed markets: The moderating role of global cultural identity. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30 (1): 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Strizhakova, Y., Coulter, R. A., & Price, L. 2010. Responses of global citizens to cause-related green marketing. Journal of International Marketing, 16 (4): 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Szerszynski, B., & Urry, J. 2002. Visuality, mobility and the cosmopolitan: Inhabiting the world from afar. The British Journal of Sociology, 57 (1): 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Tajfel, H. Y., & Turner, J. C. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel, & W. G. Austin (Eds), Psychology of intergroup relations: 7–24. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
  69. Tanner, C. 1999. Constraints on environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19 (2): 145–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Thompson, C. J., & Tambyah, S. K. 1999. Trying to be cosmopolitan. Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (3): 214–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. 2000. Temporal construal and time-dependent changes in preference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (6): 876–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tu, L., Khare, A., & Zhang, Y. 2012. A short 8-item scale for measuring consumers’ local–global identity. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 29 (1): 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Turner, B. S. 2002. Cosmopolitan virtue, globalization and patriotism. Theory, Culture & Society, 19 (1–2): 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wakslak, C., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Alony, R. 2006. Seeing the forest when entry is unlikely: Probability and the mental representation of events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135 (4): 641–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Wertenbroch, K., & Skiera, B. 2002. Measuring consumers’ willingness to pay at the point of purchase. Journal of Marketing Research, 39 (2): 228–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Dahl, D. 2011. It’s the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (3): 472–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. White, K., & Simpson, B. 2013. When do (and don’t) normative appeals influence sustainable consumer behaviors? Journal of Marketing, 77 (2): 78–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zhang, Y., & Khare, A. 2009. The impact of accessible identities on the evaluation of global versus local products. Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (3): 524–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academy of International Business 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Guilford Glazer Faculty of Business and Management, Ben-Gurion University of the NegevBeer ShevaIsrael
  2. 2.Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, VU AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.D'Amore-McKim School of Business, Northeastern UniversityBostonUSA
  4. 4.Faculty of Business, Economics, and Statistics, University of Vienna, ViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations