DO ETHICS MATTER IN CONSUMER PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR? · DO ETHICS MATTER IN CONSUMER PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR? Fig 1: IKEA’s reusable blue bag embraces the green imperative. JACQUELINE BEI

i

DO ETHICS MATTER IN CONSUMER

PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR

Fig 1 IKEArsquos reusable blue bag embraces the green imperative

JACQUELINE BEI WALKER

Lord Ashcroft International Business School (LAIBS)

Anglia Ruskin University Cambridge - 2009

ii

ABSTRACT

In recent years ethical trade and Corporate Social Responsibility have

gained a lot of attention in the UK yet limited attention has been given to

the role and impact of ethical concerns on consumer purchase behaviour

The overall purpose of this study is to contribute to a better understanding

of ethical consumerism A self-administered questionnaire was used as the

data collection technique in order to achieve the objectives of this study

The results of the findings revealed that despite consumersrsquo high level of

awareness of ethical issues there is little evidence that these issues greatly

affect consumersrsquo purchasing behaviour In fact price seems to be the

most important indicator of their purchasing behaviour The uneven

distribution of wealth also makes it impossible for all consumers to choose

ethically sound products The findings of this study are a useful source of

information for marketers who may want to attract this ldquogreenrdquo segment of

the market Furthermore whether or not marketers are pursuing the ethical

strategy they should also bear in mind that even if a good eco-performance

is unlikely to yield competitive advantages a poor eco-performance can still

lead to competitive disadvantages

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This dissertation could not have been written without the support from

Mr Tim Froggett who did not only serve as my supervisor but also

encouraged and challenged me through the dissertation process and never

accepting less than my best efforts Many thanks to my professors at the

Ashcroft International Business School for helping me to think through their

challenging course work Also sincere thanks to staff at the AIBS for

assisting me with administrative tasks related to my studies

I would also like to acknowledge and extend my heartfelt gratitude to my

mentor Mrs Lynn Morgan for her time knowledge and assistance during

my studies

Most especially I would like to thank my husband Clive Walker and our

children for their support love encouragement without which I could not

have survived the process

And especially to God who made all things possible

iv

CONTENTS Title Page i Abstract ii Acknowledgement iii Table of Contents iv List of tables v 1 Introduction 1 11 Background 1 12 What is ethical consumerism 2 13 CSR vs Profit 8 14 Aims amp Rationale 9 15 Objectives 9

2 Literature review 7 21 Ethical issues 7 211 Environmental issues 7 212 Child Labour 8 213 Fair-trade 9

214 Factory farming 10 22 The Ethical Consumer 10 23 Barriers to ethical consumption 12 24 Conclusion of literature review 15

3 Methodology 16 31 The Empirical study 16 32 Sampling 19 33 Questionnaire 22 34 Limitations 23

4 Results of findings 24

5 Discussion of findings 31

51 Consumerrsquos interest and knowledge of ethical products 31 511 Age and Ethical Awareness 31 512 Gender and Ethical Awareness 31 513 Awareness of Key ethical issues 32 514 Awareness of Ethical Products 33 52 Attitude-Behaviour gap 34 53 Barriers to Ethical Consumerism 36 531 Price 36 532 Source of information 38 533 Complexity of Ethical consumerism 39 54 Negative Ethical Purchasing Behaviour 41 6 Conclusions amp Recommendations 44 61 Conclusion 44 62 Managerial Implications amp Recommendations 46 7 Bibliography 48

8 Appendix 1 52

v

TABLE OF FIGURES

Fig 1 IKEArsquos reusable blue bag embraces the green imperative i

Figure 2 A sugar bowl with East India Sugar Not Made by Slaves on the side 1

Figure 3 The Ethical Consumerism Report 4

Figure 4 Environmental issues 7

Figure 5 A child carrying unbaked bricks 8

Figure 6 Fair-trade Logo 9

Figure 7 Broiler chicken 10

Graph 1 Age groups 24

Graph 2 Gender 25

Graph 3 Purchase decisions 25

Graph 4 Most Ethical Companies 26

Graph 5 Most important Ethical Issues 26

Graph 6 Years of Ethical concerns 27

Graph 7 Consumerrsquos willingness to pay for ethical products 27

Graph 8 Purchasing products made from exploitation of workers 28

Graph 9 Unethical product by association 28

Graph 10 Labels 29

Graph 11 Ethical Marketing 29

Graph 12 Do Consumers give unwanted belongings to charity 30

Graph 13 The Ethical Consumer 30

Graph 14 Age and Ethical Awareness 31

Graph 15 Gender and Ethical Awareness 32

Graph 16 Ethical Issues 33

Graph 17 Ethical premium pricing 37

Graph 18 Complexity of Ethical Consumerism 39

Graph 1 Reusable products 43

1

10 INTRODUCTION

ldquoThe act of buying is a vote for an economic and social model for a

particular way of producing goods We are concerned with the quality of

goods and the satisfactions we derive from them But we cannot ignore the

conditions under which products are made ndash the environmental impact and

working conditions We are linked to them and therefore have a

responsibility for themrdquo By Anwar Fazal former President of the International

Organization of Consumer Unions (Harrison 1997)

11 Background

Ethical consumption of some sort has existed over the centuries According

to an article on the BBC website related to the abolition of slave trade in

1791 thousand of pamphlets were printed encouraging people to boycott

sugar produced by slaves Estimates suggest that 300000 people

abandoned this product resulting to a drop in sales by a third to a half At

the same time sales of sugar from India where slavery was not used

increased tenfold over two years (BBCcouk 2008)

Fig 1 An earthenware sugar bowl with the words East India Sugar Not Made by Slaves inscribed on the side Source BBCcouk

While the notion of ethical consumption can be traced back at least to the

18th century as seen above there have been a growing debate and

criticism over the past decades about the impact or role of ethical

consumerism The concept of ethical consumerism has grown significantly

and the meaning of ethical consumerism has evolved from an

environmental issue (green consumerism) to incorporate issues such as

2

child labour Fair-trade factory farming food miles health related issues

CO2 emissions government regimes etc

12 What is Ethical consumerism

Defining ethical consumerism is not an easy task since the term means

different things to different people Some studies on ethical consumption

concentrate only on environmental issues and thus omit ethical issues that

have come to the force in the recent years such as child labour (Tallotire et

al 2001) Harrison et al (2006) refer to ethical consumerism as ldquoa set of

debates and strategies in which consumption is not so much the object of

moral evaluation but more a medium for moral and political actionrdquo

Green consumption is often thought of as the process of avoiding certain

types of products such as those causing pollution or cruelty to animals

(Schaefer and Crane 2001 Strong 1996) It can also represent positive

product choices such as the purchase of environmentally friendly products

or recycling behaviour (Carrigan et al 2004)

ldquoEthical consumerism refers to buyer behaviour that reflects concern with

the problems that arise from unethical and unjust global trades such as

child and low-paid labour infringement of human rights animal testing

labour union suppressions inequalities in trading relations with the Third

World and polution of the environment (Lee 2008)

Recent studies on ethical consumerism suggest that consumers are giving

increasing considerations to the ethical components of products and

business processes and that these concerns have financial implications for

the businesses involved (Auger et al 2007) According to Baker (2003) the

ethical investment Research Service estimated that the value investments

in the UK held in ethical investment funds passed the pound4 billion mark by

mid-2001 and although it is relatively small compared to the total funds the

impact on corporate reputations of being de-listed from a particular ethical

fund gives them a disproportionately large influence in public relations

terms

3

Interest in ethical and environmental investment is set to intensify with new

initiatives such as the FTSE4Good index of socially responsible companies

Also businesses in Europe are now affected by a series of EU

environmental legislations and governmental laws for example green taxes

such as landfill taxes are being introduced in many EU countries including

the UK According to BBC news the EU in 2007 announced plans to

introduce a mandatory emissions standard for vehicles Car companies will

be forced to achieve a fleet average of 130g of CO2 per kilometre for their

trucks and cars by 2012 The UK government has also set a goal of cutting

carbon dioxide emissions by 20 by 2010 The government has set targets

in some sectors aiming for example to reduce imports of organics and to

reach a target of 70 home grown organics by 2010 (Mintel)

According to the 2007 Ethical Consumerism Report household expenditure

of ethical goods and services has almost doubled in the past five years It

further states that on average every household in the UK spent pound664 in

line with their ethical values in 2006 compared to just pound366 in 2002 These

figures reflects total economic value attached to broad range of personal

choices such as food finance charitable donations that are related to

concerns for the environment animal welfare and human rights support for

local communities via local shopping or boycott of brands whose behaviour

conflicts with their ethical priorities The Co-operative Bank states that

eight in ten consumers would choose eco-friendly product given the

choice

Fig 3 The Ethical Consumerism Report 2006 Source The co-operative Bank

4

13 CSR vs profit

A growing number of scholars believe that companies can no longer be

seen purely as private institutions but as a social institution responsible not

only to its shareholders but also to its stakeholders which include

consumers employees creditors communities etc (Balabanis et al

1998) This arguement is similar to the stakeholder theory whereby a

company is responsible to all its stakeholders for its success The concept

of CSR implies that companies could be accountable for its actions that

affect communities and the environment

Some scholars such as Milton Friedman (1970) have however argued that

lsquothe social responsibility of companies is to maximize profit for its

shareholdersrsquo Companies exist to make profit and even ethical companies

must make profit and expand in order to survive According to such

scholars a company can contribute to society by remaining in business

thereby allowing its employees to keep their jobs its suppliers to keep a

customer its customers the products demanded and to its shareholders

profit This could explain the continuous dominance of companies such as

Tesco with its lsquoeveryday low pricingrsquo strategy obtained through ruthless

cost-cutting By dictating the terms in which it operates to employees

suppliers communities etc Tesco has managed to provide its key

stakeholders (customers) what they demand most low prices

Furthermore it can be argued that in a free market economy where there

are no government regulations the theory of supply and demand will help

adjust itself in response to customersrsquo needs In other words in a free

economy activities flow openly with no cost to entry or exit producers and

consumers can obtain ldquotruerdquo information about a product its prize its

characteristics and availability Consequently if customers are not satisfied

with a product they could use their buying power to impose their values to

companies through boycott It can also be argued that demand and supply

at equilibrium maximizes the efficient allocation of available resources

Consequently there is no waste of natural resources

It can further be argued that there is no such thing as an ethical company

since the production of any goods produces waste and increases the level

of CO2 emissions in the atmosphere Furthermore a journalist Jon Entinersquos

5

investigation of The Body Shop in 1994 found that only a very small fraction

of its ingredients came from the ldquoTrade not Aidrdquo program a program

claimed to help developing countries (Entine 1995)

Some companies hire PR firms to portray a false image of them which

could hinder or distort the flow of information required by consumers to

make informed choices (also known as ldquogreenwashingrdquo) John McMurtry in

his book lsquoUnequal fredoms The Global Markets as an Ethical systems

(1998) however argues that lsquothere is no purchasing or investment

decisions that does not in itself imply some moral choicersquo

14 Aims amp Rationale

I chose ethical consumerism because the market for ethical products is

growing fast and ethics could be a major factor in consumer purchasing

behaviour in the future My research will also seek to understand why

ethical consumption and the purchase of ethical productsservices has not

become common practice despite increase public awareness of ethical

issues

15 Objectives

Identify the scale of UK consumersrsquo interest and knowledge of

ethical productsservices

Determine if gender and age influence UK consumersrsquo ethical

purchase decision

Examine the barriers to ethical consumerism

Elaborate on the attitude behaviour gap

6

20 LITERATURE REVIEW

21 The ethical issues

There are many ethical issues that are of concern to consumers but for this

dissertation the following will be discussed environmental issues animal

welfare abuses child labour and Fair Trade

211 Environmental issues

Fig 4 Environmental issues Source stopgreenwashorg

ldquoEconomists tell us that natural resources are scarce but that human wants

are unlimited and as Gandhi once famously said

ldquoThere is enough on earth for everybodys need but not for

everyones greedrdquo (enoughorg 2008)

The social and environmental consequences of the unquestioning pursuit of

economic growth of the 21st century have become increasingly noticeable

eg increasing level of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere a hole in the

ozone layer caused by CFC releases widespread destruction of the rain

forest a growing list of endangered species and ecosystems etc (Baker

2003) Environmental issues gained a lot of momentum in recent years

because of a growing awareness that rather short-sighted lifestyles in all

parts of the world have led to the depletion of energy sources pollution

deterioration of soil fertility reduction of biodiversity and climate change

(Solomon et al 2002)

Despite this growing environmental concerns some anti-environmentalist

such as Bjoslashrn Lomborg (2001) the author of ldquoSkeptical Environmentalistrdquo

7

have criticized the claims of overpopulation scarcity of raw-material and

resource consumption as unsupported claiming that environmentalists are

diverting resources to environmental issues when those resources could be

used effectively elsewhere (eg in poor countries to eradicate poverty and

diseases) forcing the global community to adopt inappropriate policies

which may have adverse effects on humanity

Lomborg (2001) dismisses the idea that overpopulation will lead to

widespread hunger and argues that technological improvements in

agriculture should help eradicate hunger He claims that food products are

not threatened by human prosperity with the exception of fish which he

claimed could be improved through fish farming He also finds no indication

of widespread deforestation and notes that the Amazon forest still retains

more than 80 of its cover He however points out that deforestation is

linked to poor economic conditions in the countries concerned and that

higher economic growth should tackle the problem of deforestation He also

claimed that concerns regarding waste is exaggerated as the entire waste

produced by the USA in the 21st century could fit into a square of 28km (ie

0009 of US total surface)

212 Child Labour

8

Fig 5 A child carries unbaked bricks to a kiln at a brick factory in Raichak India in December 2000 Scenes like this remain a fact of life in India despite a ban on hard labour by children Source nationalgeographiccom (2008)

Hundreds of millions of girls and boys throughout the world are

engaged in work that deprives them of adequate education health

leisure and basic freedoms violating their rights Of these children

more than half are exposed to the worst forms of child labour such

as work in hazardous environments slavery or other forms of

forced labour illicit activities such as drug trafficking and

prostitution as well as involvement in armed conflicts

(International Labour Organization ILO 2008)

Although consumers in the UK are concerned about this issue child labour

is not regarded as unethical in all countries For example Pakistan has no

legislation against child labour In fact it is encouraged since it improves

familyrsquos income keeps children off the streets and away from worst danger

and boosts the national income

213 Fair Trade

Fig 6 Fair-trade logo Source fairtradeorg

Fair trade is also concerned with issues of ecological concern which

stretch beyond pollution affiliations to include concerns for the degradation

of natural resources sustainable use of raw materials communities and

cultures (Strong 1997)

Cafe Direct the UKrsquos first ldquoFair Traderdquo brand coffee is a collaboration

between organizations such as Oxfam Traidcraft Twin Trading and Equal

Exchange Initially sold through alternative channels Cafe direct is now

UKrsquos 6th largest coffee brand and commands around 7 of the UK coffee

market However critics say too many fair trade dollars wind up in the

pockets of retailers and middlemen including non-profit organizations

(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming

Fig 7 ldquobroiler chickenrdquo Source advocacybritannicacom

The increasing consumer awareness of animal exploitation and cruelty has

played a crucial role in persuading consumers to give due consideration to

animal welfare It has been argued that the trend of mass production

resulting in pain and suffering for animals poses ethical issues Animals on

factory farms have their genes manipulated pumped with hormones

antibiotics and other chemicals to encourage high productivity As

awareness of this issue grow in the UK the government and EU are

fighting to regulate the industry and remove inappropriate behaviour

towards these animals The Farm Animal Welfare Council was founded in

1979 to tackle these issues

However despite the growing concern for factory farming it can be argued

that not everyone can afford free range products especially lower income

consumers Also free range products are not sufficient to feed the growing

population in the UK (advocacybritannicacom)

22 The ethical consumer

It is also not very easy to define an ethical consumer since it is not easy to

determine the reasons behind a purchase Some consumers may buy a

product because it is healthy others because it is cheap or simply because

it is the only choice available According to Harrison et al (2006) an ethical

purchaser may have political religious spiritual environmental social or

11

other motives for choosing one product over another Consumers are rarely

consistent in their purchase behaviour (Strong 1997 p 36) For example the

consumer who buys product from Body Shop because of its fair trade

values may also buy products from Nestle or Gap

Some consumers might be misled in their choice of ethical products For

example lsquoQuorn products which many people consume as an ethical

alternative to meat is often made using eggs from battery-farmed chicken

(Doane D 2001) The Body Shop has always presented itself as an ethical

company yet the company is now owned by LrsquoOreal a company that not

only holds none of the values of Body shop such as its refusal to test

cosmetics on animals but is also partly owned by Nestleacute the target of the

worldrsquos largest international consumer boycott because of its aggressive

and unethical marketing of infant formula (Spurr B 2006)

Wagner (1997) as cited in Baker (2003) indicates that attempts to profile

the green consumer have not always yielded strongly indicative results due

to the fact that one study has been repeatedly contradicted in another Also

such results were frequently inconclusive and sometimes contradictory

Accordingly Baker (2003) suggests that the solution to this difficulty is to try

and understand the purchase rather than the purchaser Many green

purchases involve some form of comprise over conventional purchases

such as paying a premium in the case where improving eco-performance

could increase production costs accepting a lower level of technical

performance in exchange of improved eco-performance as in the case of

rechargeable batteries that provide less power but are ultimately cheaper

and greener or travelling to non-standard distribution outlets such as health

food shops

In this perspective Harrison et al (2006) argues that any important

economic action is going to help some groups and hurt others According to

Baker (2003) in the past customer satisfaction has been judged in terms of

the performance of the product at the moment of consumption A green

consumer may reject a product because they become aware of the

12

environmental harm that the product causes in production or disposal They

may also avoid a product because they disapprove of the activities of the

producerrsquos suppliers or investors

According to Tallontire (2001) regular fair-trade buyers are untypical of the

population as a whole they are better educated wealthier mostly female

over 30 years of age and tend to work in the public sector or lsquocaring

professionsrsquo Research into Oxfam fair-trade buyers reveals that they are

generally under 50 years of age a Guardian newspaper reader

whiteBritish married Labour supporting undertaken further education

(Oxfam Campaigns 1995)

23 Barriers to ethical consumption

As stated in Baker (2003) lsquoMany research have found out that the majority

of consumers profess concern for the environment a desire to buy greener

products and a willingness to pay more for them or accept technical

performance reductions However the number of consumers measurably

changing their purchasing behaviour to buy ethical products is much less

and this has generally been interpreted as a failure to back up intentions

with purchase and a tendency to over report social and environmental

concerns (eg Baker 2003 Lee 2008 Solomon et al 2002)

Furthermore a survey by corporate edge as cited in Carrigan and Attala

(2001) found that 57 of their sample said they would stop buying a brand

if they knew child labour has been employed and only 21 supported

actions against companies perceived as unethical This shows that there is

a notable difference between professing support for an action and actually

carrying it out They also found out that although consumers express

willingness to make ethical choices social responsibility was not a

dominant criterion In fact there seem to be a disparity between increase

awareness and ethical purchase behaviour Some of the reasons for this

behaviour also known as the ldquoattitude-behaviour gaprdquo are as follows

13

Environmental preferable products may not meet consumersrsquo criteria of

price performance quality and easy access (Hurtado 1998 as cited in

Tallontire et al 2001 Carrigan et al 2007) Following in the same

argument Tallotire et al (2001) points out that while income could be a

major factor in consumersrsquo willingness to pay premium prices other factors

such as the awareness of the ethical issues related to the product and

market characteristics also play a part In the case of market characteristic

Tallotire et al (2001) cites the example in the UK of consumersrsquo willingness

to pay premium for fair trade coffee particularly for roast and ground as

oppose to instant coffee Harrison et al (2006) presumes that ethical

consumption has to be open about the high price of ethical goods and

services so that if humanity wants a decent society it has to pay for it or

society and the biosphere will pay anyway

Insufficient information about ethical benefits of products could also be

seen as a barrier The National Consumer council (NCC) identified a core

of willing consumers who could find lsquoneither the products nor the accurate

information to guide their behaviourrsquo (Harrison et al 2006) They further

argue that unless the consumer is an avid reader of newspapers or uses

ethical consumer guides which rate companies accordingly companyrsquos

information does not filter down otherwise Uusitalo and Oksanen (2004)

support the above argument by pointing out that because consumers do not

devote time searching external information or evaluating the alternatives

the intentions and choice of product remain unchanged However even

when they search for information on-pack information may lack credibility

with consumers (Tallontire et al 2001 p18)

The Internet enables products and companies to search prior to purchase

For example wwwscorecardorg wwwethicalconsumerorg provides

products and company information Also new technologies coming out

soon in the UK will include Hand-held bar code scanners used to provide

point of sale information on companyrsquos practises (Harrison et al 2006)

Uusitalo and Oksanen (2004) presume that ethical products requires that a

large amount of effort be invested in information acquisition and decision

making

14

Citing further barriers to ethical consumption Harrison et al (2001) argue

that there is a general distrust of information from companies among ethical

consumers At the heart of this distrust is the persistent problem of

greenwashing whereby companies make deliberately misleading

statement Harrison et al quote the example of the little red tractor meat

label that proclaim lsquokind to Animalsrsquo when its underpinning welfare

standards are generally no higher than minimum legal requirements

Other barriers to ethical consumerism include the fact that many people

have little inclination to pay a premium especially with the global economic

crisis affecting most of the UK population Tallontire et al (2001) claim that

consumers need to be convinced that their purchase behaviour can make a

difference in ethical terms in order to be persuaded to buy Also the lack of

product in the market could be a barrier

Furthermore Carrigan et al (2007) argue that whilst consumers often

punish unethical companies through boycotts they do not necessarily

reward ethical companies According to Carrigan et al many people

believe that businesses have a responsibility not to do harm (eg use slave

labor or produce dangerous by-products during manufacturing) but that

they do not automatically have an obligation to help others (eg sponsor a

local community project) Also if a companyrsquos behaviour has no direct

impact on an individual they are unlikely to take action

Also broadcasting green ethical credentials could attract scrutiny and

criticism especially when some parts of the company have not been

ethically overhauled (Harrison et al 2006) That is the reason why

although companies like the co-operative bank are keen to publicise their

ethical initiative some companies such as BampQ prefer the low key

approach Uusitalo and Oksanen (2004) also argue that even though

information helps some consumers make ethical choices some consumers

may feel that the additional information is confusing and may increase their

sense of uncertainties

15

Uusitalo and Oksanen (2004) however presume that production

satisfaction could motivate consumers over time to take the trouble to

select an ethical product and pay the premium price for it Consumers also

need up-to-date and accurate information in order to make ethical choices

Information about firm should be conveyed to consumers in such a form

that it is easily reached and does not cause them unnecessary

inconveniences

24 Conclusion of literature review

Within the literature there is the debate as to the commitment of

consumers towards ethical purchasing (Carrigan et al 2004) Most

research has concluded that consumers are very interested in both

negative and positive ethical purchasing meanwhile others have found a

gap in the ethical attitude of consumers (eg Carrigan and Attala 2001

Carrigan et al 2004 Tallotire et al 2001)

There also appears to be a divergence between opinion polls on green and

ethical consumersrsquo values and the volume of sales of ethical product

(Tallotire et al 2001) However Tallotire et al (2001) point out that those

promoting the concept of consumption of ethical products recognize the

limitation of quantitative survey because of the relatively low awareness of

concepts such as fair trade One advantage of survey however is that they

manage to grab the press headline claim Tallotire et al (2001) Tallotire et

al (2001) further point out that the common methodological flaw of all

surveys ndash they do not allow for the difference between what people do and

what they say

The following findings will focus on ethics and how they relate to consumer

buying choices It will also try to understand why there is the attitude-

behaviour gap and what marketers could do to remove the barriers to

ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY

31 The Empirical Study

For my research I will adopt an inductive approach as it involves theory

generating as oppose to theory testing as in the case of the deductive

approach I will therefore collect data and develop a theory as a result of

my data analysis to find out whether ldquoethicsrdquo play an important role in

consumersrsquo purchase behaviour Saunders et al (2007) describe the

inductive theory as a lsquoresearch approach involving the development of a

theory as a result of the observation of empirical data Saunders et al

(2007) argues that followers of induction would criticise deduction because

of its tendency to construct a rigid methodology that does not permit

alternative explanation of what is going on

The inductive research approach is particularly important for my research

due to the fact that I am more interested in understanding the role ethics

play in consumerrsquos buying behaviour rather than the deductive approach

which will tend to describe what is happening Also the inductive approach

is more appropriate for my research because I lack prior knowledge on

ethical consumption to be able to frame a hypothesis In other words my

objectives are to understand what ethical consumption is and its importance

to consumers

From this research approach I will be using interpretivism philosophy since

it lsquorequires the researcher to seek to understand the subjective reality and

meaning of participantsrsquo (Saunders 2007) The challenge here is to enter

the social world of our research subjects and understand their world from

their own points of view claims Saunders et al (2007) This philosophy

focuses on the way in which individuals behave based on the way they

interpret situations as oppose to positivism in which individualsrsquo behaviour

is viewed in terms of the external forces that affect them Interpretivism is

very compatible with the inductive research approach because of the

complexity of consumerrsquos behaviour It could also be argued that positivism

would not be appropriate in my research as the social world of business

17

and management is far too complex to lend itself to theorising by definite

laws in the same way as the physical sciences Also rich insights into this

complex world will be lost if such complexity is reduced to lsquolaw-likersquo

generalisation (Saunders et al 2007 p 106) Bryman (2004) argues that

the study of the social world requires a different logic of research

procedure one that reflects the distinctiveness of humans as against the

natural order

Grounded theory will also be used during my research project since a

combination of inductive and deductive approaches is helpful to explain

consumersrsquo purchasing behaviour According to Saunders et al (2007) in

grounded theory data starts without the formation of an initial theory

framework Theory is developed from data generated by a series of

observation This type of theory will therefore be very relevant for my

research in this perspective Grounded theory is also known as an

inductivedeductive approach by Collis and Hussy (2003) as cited in

Saunders et al (2007)

An exploratory research will be adopted during the preliminary stage of

my research to help refine my research question into a researchable one

Exploratory research is very useful at the preliminary stage when the

researcher has limited amount of experience and knowledge about a

research issue According to Zidmund (2003) there are three interrelated

reasons for conducting an exploratory research (1) diagnosing a situation

(2) screening alternatives and (3) discovering new ideas Zikmund (2003)

also states that lsquothe purpose of the exploratory research is to progressively

narrow the scope of the research topic and to transform discovered

problems into defined ones incorporating specific research objectivesrsquo He

further adds that exploratory research is a useful preliminary step that helps

ensure that lsquoafter such exploration the researcher should know exactly what

data to collect during the formal project and how the project will be

conducted According to Saunders et al (2007) there are three ways of

conducting exploratory research as follows

o A search of the literature

o Interviewing lsquoexpertsrsquo in the subject

18

o Conducting focus group interviews

I chose to search the literature using primary secondary and tertiary

sources to gather information needed for my study My primary sources of

information included questionnaires reports theses and reading pass

dissertations and thesis copies My Secondary sources of information

include books journals newspaper ethical magazines etc While my

tertiary sources of information come from googlecouk yahoocom

abstracts dictionaries indexes and encyclopaedias I will also visit

healthorganicfair-trade shops to find out information about ethical

consumers The above sources of information can also be defined as

Secondary data since they are all previously collected data

In order to successfully investigate the role of ethics in buying behaviour I

will use mixed method research This method uses both quantitative and

qualitative data collection techniques and analyses either at the same time

or one after the other (Saunders et al 2007) Qualitative methods could be

defined as

ldquoan array of interpretative technique which seek to describe

decode translate and otherwise come to terms with the meaning

not the frequency of certain more or less naturally occurring

phenomena in the social worldrdquo (van Maanen 1983) tba to

reference list

While quantitative methods are predominantly used for any data collection

techniques or data analyses that generates numerical data such as

questionnaires statistics or graphs (Saunders et al 2007)

The advantages of using this technique in my research are the fact that the

more techniques you use the richer the information you get since different

methods can be used for different reasons For example I will use the

questionnaire to collect quantitative data which would allow me for

example to verifier if age or gender effect consumersrsquo ethical purchase

behaviour I will also use questionnaires to collect descriptive or

explanatory data related to consumerrsquos perception of what is an ethical

company

19

Another advantage of using mixed methods is the fact that it enables

research triangulation to take place The idea behind research triangulation

is that by combining different methods empirical materials and theories

researchers can hope to overcome the weakness and biases that often

come with single methods single observer and single theory studies

Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003) as cited in Saunders et al (2007) argue that

mixed methods are useful if they provide better opportunities for you to

answer you research questions and where they allow you to better evaluate

the extent to which your research findings can be trusted and interferences

made from them

For this research I will collect quantitative data by using the statistical

technique called SPSS to analyse interpret present and explain the data

collected through the questionnaire I will also use the questionnaire to

collect descriptive or explanatory data related to respondentsrsquo definition of

an ethical consumer I may also choose to use individual in-depth

interviews at a latter state of my research to address any discrepancies or

pending issues related to my research

Quantitatively-based marketing research enquiries are particularly

important in research as it adds depth and understanding into the role of

ethics in the buying habits of consumers While qualitatively based

marketing research was particularly very important in the early stages of

market studies when concepts were being explored insights into behaviour

gained and research ideas generated Chisnall (2005) argue that

quantitative methods bring rigour and disciplined enquiry to the overall

research activities and is likely to benefit significantly from the more flexible

and spontaneous approach of qualitative techniques for example in the

design of effective questionnaires and the development of creative

promotional ideas

32 Sampling

The first sampling question to be asked is ldquowho is to be sampledrdquo There

are two types of sampling techniques Probability sampling in which every

20

member of the population has a known nonzero probability of selection

(eg simple random sample) and the non-probability sampling in which the

probability of any particular member of the population being chosen is

unknown and members of the population are selected on the basis of

personal judgement (eg Quota sampling)

Taking into consideration the impossibility to survey the entire population I

will be using a non-probability sampling called lsquocluster samplingrsquo for my

research This method of sampling is very useful where the populations

under survey are widely dispersed This form of probability sampling occurs

when interviews are concentrated in a relatively small number of groups or

clusters which are selected at random (Chisnall 2005 p 110) The purpose

of cluster sampling is to sample economically while retaining the

characteristics of a probability sample (Zikmund 2003 p 389) For

example if a Fair-trade coffee marketer can assume that the product will

work as well in London as in Manchester cluster sampling may be used In

my research I assume that consumersrsquo attitude towards ethical products to

be the same in the Cambridge population as anywhere in the UK Zihmund

(2003) stresses that ideally the sample should be a mirror image of the

population

Although cluster sampling is attractive in terms of cost and time the

drawbacks include the fact the sampling error is higher given the small

scale of my sample size Consequently the resultant sample might be

biased or non-representative of the population However taking into

consideration that respondents come from all works of life are of different

ages from privileged and unprivileged backgrounds it could be argued that

the sample portray an even representative of the UK population I decided

not to chose the other types of probability sampling such as the systematic

stratified multistage or simple random sampling because of the high cost

and time entail in carrying out the research

21

Target group

The target group for this study will be based on people around Cambridge

because of (a) the relatively accessible data from this segment (b) limitation

of time (c) limitation of financial resources Furthermore in order to ensure

objective evaluation of my findings the segment will be evenly distributed

between two age groups (ie 16 ndash 14 and 25+) in order to determine if age

matter in ethical purchasing behaviour Other segments of the UK

population such especially children and young adults below 15 were not

included (this segment also affect the purchasing behaviour of their

parents) because of the possibility that they might not grasp the meaning of

ethical purchasing Fifty respondents will be randomly chosen for this

research The questionnaires will be handed to respondents at different

venues on different days of the week and also through the internet to avoid

any bias

Finally my choice of methodology will be governed by ethical

considerations especially when collecting data from people through the

use of the questionnaire I will ensure that my research is both

methodologically acceptable and morally defensible to those involve in my

research

According to Saunders et al (2007) lsquoresearch ethics related to questions

about how we formulate and clarify our research topic design our research

and gain access collect data process and store our data analyse data and

write up our research finding in a moral and responsible way There are two

types of philosophical standpoints related to ethics Deontological view

argues that the end served by the research can never justify the use of

research which is unethical while teleological view argues that the end

justify the means I will adopt the deontological view by not deceiving

anybody to obtain research data and making sure respondents get

feedback from me once my research is completed

My questionnaire will be designed to ensure that none of the questions are

biased or would cause discomfort stress or any discomfort whatsoever I

22

will abide to any confidentiality or anonymity promises made at all times I

will also avoid applying any pressure on participant to give me information

they do not want to and will be sensitive to the impact my work could have

on those related to my research

33 Questionnaire

A lot of time was spent designing the questionnaire This was important as

questionnaires are the best way of collecting data I also took into

consideration my aims and objectives in order to create an effective

questionnaire The aim of the questionnaire was to seek to identify the role

of ethics in my respondents buying choices Chisnall (2003) define

questionnaire as lsquoa method of obtaining specific information about a defined

problem so that the data after analysis and interpretation result in a better

appreciation of the problemrsquo

There are many types of questionnaires and various methods of

interviewing the respondents A structure style questionnaire consists of a

series of formal questions designed to attract answers of limited response

and the unstructured style questionnaire where consists of a freer style of

investigation whereby the interviewer encourages conversation to develop

The design of the questionnaire also differs depending on how it is

administered Self-administered questionnaires are completed by the

respondent while interviewer-administered is completed by the interviewer

based on answers of the respondent

For my dissertation I will design a well structured self-administered

questionnaire which will be delivered mostly by hand and collected

immediately thus ensuring the reliability of responses and data since no

one else but the respondent will be answering the questions Respondent

will be selected randomly from students who are not related to me in order

to avoid bias Also collecting the questionnaire immediately will not only be

time efficient but will also mean that the questions are not discussed with

others thereby contaminating their response

23

Virtually all data collected by questionnaires will be analysed by computer

using SPSS Therefore I will establish a coding scheme and incorporate it

on the question before collecting data

After the completion of the questionnaire procedure data collected will be

recorded analyzed interpreted and presented in a way to help answer the

research questions and to meet my objectives Once data has been

entered and checked for accuracy and errors data analysis can now begin

34 Limitations

The results of the survey are limited to the Cambridge region which may

not be adequate for drawing a general conclusion about the ethical

consumerism of the entire UK population Future research should look at a

broader-based sample drawn from many cities around the UK

24

40 RESULTS OF FINDINGS

This chapter encompasses the summary of the data collected through the

questionnaire in appendix 1 and findings from its analysis

1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender

3) Some products are considered ethically acceptable eg Fair-trade products Is it

Some products are considered ethically acceptable

eg Fair-trade products Is it

54

12

28

6

A consideration

I buy ethical products

Never a consideration

Missing

Graph 3 Purchase decisions

26

4) How do you rate the following companies as ethical companies Number the most important 1 the next 2 and so on If a factor has no importance at all please leave blank

Most Ethical Company

44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph 4 Most Ethical companies

5) Please number each of the ethical issues below in order of importance Number the most important 1 the next 2 and so on If a factor has no importance at all please leave blank

Most important ethical issues

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02

EmissionsRecycling Food Miles

Plastic Bags

overuse

Graph 5 Most important Ethical issues

27

6) How long have you been concerned about these issues

years of ethical concern

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing

Graph 6 years of ethical concern

7) How much are you willing to pay for a product that is ethically sound

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

How much are you willing to pay for ethical

product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price

Graph 7 consumerrsquos willingness to pay for ethical product

28

8) Would you buy a product knowing that it has been produced by people working for low wages in poor condition

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know

Would you buy a product knowing that it has been produced by

people working for low wages in poor condition

Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know

Graph 8 purchasing product made from exploitation of workers

9) If you had purchased ethically sound products from a company that was taken over by a less ethically sound company would you continue to purchase the product Eg LrsquoOreal took over The Body Shop McDonald took over Precirct agrave- Manger

YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know

Graph 9 unethical products by association

29

10) When shopping for non-food items do you look at the label to see where the product is made

When shopping for non-food items do you look at

the label to see where the product is made

Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels

11) Some people argue that advertising products as ethical is just a ploy to

charge higher prices Do you agree or disagree

2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing

Graph 11 Ethical Marketing

30

12) Do you give unwanted clothes books etc to charity shops door to door

collections

Always Frequently Never Missing

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Graph 12 Do consumers give unwanted belongings to charity

13) Would you class yourself as an ethical consumer

Are you an ethical Consumer

Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42

Graph 13 Ethical consumer

31

50 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

This chapter encompasses the ways in which the empirical findings provide

answers to the research question and objectives It should be noted

however that not all the numerical and statistical details of each question

from the findings will be presented in order to avoid excess and irrelevant

information which could create confusion

51 Consumer interest and knowledge of ethical products

511 Age and Ethical Awareness

Ethical awareness was high among the age group of 25+ (see graph

below) Cross-tabulations between age-groups and ethical buying decisions

show that the majority of older respondents of the 25+ age group

considered ethical consumerism when buying a products as oppose to a

small amount of respondents aged 16 ndash 24

0

5

10

15

20

25

A consideration I buy ethical products Never a consideration

Does ethics matter in buying decision

16-24

25+

Graph 14 Age and Ethical awareness

512 Gender and Ethical Awareness

32

Crossndashtabulation between gender and consumers buying decisions indicate

that ethical awareness was higher among women and less for the male

gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female

Graph 15 Gender and Ethical awareness

From the findings on the role of age and gender in ethical awareness we

could define the demographic profile of an ethical consumer as female

aged 25+ This is not surprising as research show that females form a

higher proportion of shoppers in the UK Many researches have concluded

that ethical consumers are more likely to be female married well educated

with a relatively high income or generally in a better position to afford

premium priced products (Carrigan and Attalla 2001 Strong C 1996

Mintel reports) Also a research carried out by mintel (2008) revealed that

womenrsquos press regularly features article on environmental and human

interest issues which helps them to be more informed on ethical issues It

further states that even with the changing structure of the population (eg

smaller households more single people) women are still the main shoppers

for the household

513 Awareness of key Ethical issues

Respondents were asked to grade on a scale of one to five the most

important ethical issues to them Ethical sourcing was high on respondent

list with 26 per cent of respondent followed by recycling (28) C02

emission and food miles both came third with (18 respectively) and the

overuse of plastic bags came last with only (10) of the score The above

33

findings not only indicated that respondents were aware of ethical issues

but it also showed the selective nature of consumers Carrigan and Attala

(2001) study also arrived at the same conclusion that consumers are

ldquoselectively ethicalrdquo in their attitudes as not all ethical issues provoked the

same reaction from them This could explain why the overuse of plastic

bags was very low on repondentsrsquo list of ethical priorities


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Frequency 13 9 14 9 5

Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse

Graph16 Ethical issues

514 Awareness of Ethical Productscompanies

When asked to identify socially responsible firms among 5 selected

companies The Body Shop was select as the most ethical company (44

per cent see graph 4) The body shop an ethical pioneer is well known for

its anti-animal testing Second most ethical company was The Cooperative

Bank in second position (30 per cent) well known for its ethical banking

policies and its ldquoEthical consumerismrdquo reports

34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph

4 Most ethical companies

Not surprisingly Primark fell at the bottom of the list as the least ethical

company These results come five months after Primark was publicly

exposed through a very damaging hour long BBC Panorama investigation

watched by 42 million viewers in Great Britain which found out that

Primark suppliers in India were using child labour (timesonlinecouk 2008)

Timesonlinecouk website also has an exclusive survey that show that out

of all clothing retailers on high street Primark is the worst offender when it

comes to failing to address social and environmental issues

52 Attitude Behaviour Gap

The above findings clearly prove that although UK consumers are aware of

ethical issues and products this does not necessarily translate into sales

nor does it lead them to boycott unethical companies and reward the good

ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know


In the graph above about 48 percent of respondents claim that they would

not buy a product knowing that it has been produced by people working for

low wages in poor conditions

For example although Primark is rated as the least ethical company

surprisingly it is one of the few companies doing very well in recent months

despite the tough economic climate In fact Associate British Foods (ABF)

revealed this month that Primarkrsquos profit rose 165 per cent to 233 million

pounds with revenue up 21 per cent to 193 billion pounds in the year to

September 13th with like-for-like sales up 4 per cent (Marketwatchcom

2008 timesonlinecouk 2008) It is also set to open 4 new stores in the UK

including one in Cambridge by Christmas

The success of Primark is in stark contrast with ethical companies such as

Marks and Spencer which for the first half ended Sept 17 saw its profit

drop by 44 to 221 million pounds (MarketWatchcom2008) Many other

ethical retailers including John Lewis whose sales fell 14 percent in

November are discounting their stock for up to 20 to attract customers

despite their ethical credentials

36

Some products are considered ethically acceptable eg Fair-trade products Is it

54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing

Graph 3 Purchase decision

The attitude behaviour gap is also clearly evident in the finding on graph 3

below which reveal that although for a vast majority of respondents (54 per

cent) ethical sound product was a consideration during purchase decision

only as little as 12 actually buy a product because of its ethical

credentials It was however never a consideration for 28 per cent of

respondents The most notable example of this attitude behaviour gap are

high-end eco-friendly restaurants that may source sustainable fish but also

offer foie gras on the menu (mintel 2008)

53 Barriers to ethical consumerism

Some of the main reasons why there is an attitude behaviour gap with

respondents of this study could be due to some barriers to ethical

consumerism Some of the reasons are outline below as follows

531 Price

Although income could be a major draw back for ethical consumers willing

to pay ethical premium however the graph below from this study show that

even among self-identified ethical consumers price could be a barrier to

ethical consumerism This is in line with the ideas of rational choice theory

(RCT) whereby people will choose the object that provides the greatest

reward at the lowest cost

37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct

Are you an Ethical Consumer Yes

Are you an Ethical Consumer No

Are you an Ethical Consumer Dont know

Graph17 Ethical premium pricing

Also according to retail analyst TNS (2008) disposable income is at its

lowest level for a decade due to high taxes housing costs food and fuel

prices etc In other words consumers have less money to spend each

month after they have paid their bills

This could explain why in recent months bargain supermarkets chains such

as Lidl and Aldi are doing extremely well and attracting middle class

shoppers while at the same time profit at organic supermarkets such as

Whole Foods Market is declining TNS worldpanel grocery market share

figures published for the 12 weeks ending 7th September 2008 also

confirmed the trend of shoppers responding to strong low price messages

38

532 Source of information

Some people argue that advertising products as ethical is just a

ploy to charge higher prices Do you agree or disagree

2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System

Graph11 Ethical Marketing

From the results of my study above it is clearly evident that respondents do

not believe in green marketing Consumers are finding it very difficult to

differentiate between those companies which are genuinely ethical and

those taking advantage of the benefits of being ldquogreenrdquo Using ethical

credentials to sell a product could be a barrier to ethical consumerism

because of consumerrsquos perception that they are being manipulated or

misled by companies regarding their ethical practices Harrison et al (2001)

argue that there is a general distrust of information from companies among

ethical consumers because of greenwashing In 2008 the environmental

group GreenPeace launched a website called ldquostopgreenwashorgrdquo aim at

informing the public on these unethical practices confront deceptive

greenwashing campaigns give consumersactivists and lawmakers the

information and tools they need to hold companies accountable for their

actions

In 2007 Terrachoice an environmental marketing company released a study

called ldquoThe six Sins of Greenwashing (terrachoicecom 2008) which found

that 99 of 1018 the consumer products randomly surveyed for the study

was guilty of making false and misleading green marketing claims A total of

1753 ethical claims were made by these companies and only 1 out of the

1018 was found not guilty of greenwashing According to this study the 6

sins are as follows

39

Sin of the Hidden Trade-Off is suggesting that a product is ldquogreenrdquo based

on a single or minor environmental attribute without considering the major

environmental issues such as global warming energy etc (2) Sin of No

Proof is an environmental claim with no evidence or supporting information

(3) Sin of Vagueness is any claim that is poorly defined or its real meaning

is likely to be misunderstood by the intended consumer (4) Sin of

Irrelevance may be claims which are irrelevant and therefore distracts the

consumer from finding a truly greener option (5) Sin of Lesser of Two Evils

are claims that may be true withing the product category but that risk

distracting the consumer from the greater environmental impacts of the

category as a whole for example organic cigarettes (6) Sin of Fibbing is

committed by making claims that are simply false

533 Complexity of Ethical consumerism

Another barrier to ethical consumerism related to information could stem

from the fact that marketing effort could become so complex for consumers

to accurately compare company product value (Talontire et al 2001) The

graph below from my study show such complexity whereby respondents

were ask if they will continuously purchase a product which has been taken

over by an unethical company and the majority (44) were not so sure

If you had purchased ethically sound products from a company

that was taken over by a less ethically sound company would you

continue to purchase the product Eg LrsquoOreal took over The Body

Shop McDonald took over Precirct agrave- Manger

34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know

Graph18 Complexity of Ethical Consumerism

40

It could be argued that people would prefer ethical consumerism to be more

straightforward Although in this case low level of information related to

what the take over implies could be blame for the 44 respondentsrsquo

skepticism The complexity could also involve the fact that not all stages of

a productrsquos production are ethical For example raw materials could be

obtained through very poor working conditions and then manufactured in an

ethical manner Not surprisingly when questioned about ethical purchasing

some consumers will state that they cannot perceive any difference

between the ethics of one company vs another (Carrigan and Attala 2001)

There is a widespread of consumer skepticism about ethical marketing

which is being fuelled by initiatives from campaign groups such as Friends

of the Earthrsquos ldquoGreen Con of the Year Awards (Baker 2003) However

although ethical marketing have had bad press not all information is

greeted with skepticism 25 years after the publication of ldquoOur Common

Futurerdquo also known as the Brundtland report (1987) related to the growing

concern of the deterioration of the human environment and natural

resources many companies such as The Body Shop and BampQ have

deliberately avoided the ldquobrand sellrdquo style of marketing preferring to

concentrate on editorial coverage and in-store promotions than the

conventional advertising (Tallontire 2001 Bake 2003)

Some consumers seem to appreciate information on labels of products than

other forms of marketing even though information on labels could be

difficult to understand The results of my findings below show that a vast

majority (68 per cent) of respondents sometimes check the labels of non-

food items for information on country of origin

41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels

A Gallup poll for the CWS also indicated that 67 of consumers want more

information and clearer labeling (Tallontire 2001) The rise of easily

accessible information increase media engagement on ethical issues and

the use of internet to publish information on the ethics of company still

accounts for the increasingly informed ethical consumers Labeling has

been a particularly important issue in green marketing as it provides

customers with a simple and trustworthy signal of a products social and

ethical credentials (Baker 2003)

54 Negative Ethical Purchasing Behaviour

In graph 8 below when respondents were asked if there will buy a product

knowing that it was made from the exploitation of workers in very poor

working conditions 48 per cent said no In other words 48 per cent of

respondents would boycott a product because of unethical conducts

42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know


With exception of certain fair-trade products for many years the main form

of ethical consumerism was ldquonegative ethical purchase behaviourrdquo

according to Tallontire (2001) Although such boycotts are organized by

campaign groups for example Baby Milk Actionrsquos boycott of Nestle many

consumers may chose to boycott a product or services associated with a

particular ethical issues as is the case of my findings

The Co-operative Bankrsquos 2007 Ethical Consumer report found out that the

value of consumer boycotts of clothing retailers did grow by 20 per cent in

2006 reflecting concerns amongst some consumers that low prices of

clothing for example could mean poor labour conditions The values in this

reports reflects the money that consumers switch from one product to

another due to concerns over a companyrsquos record on ethical issues

43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing

Do you give unwanted clothes books etc to charity

shops door to door collections

Percent 30 64 4 2


Graph 19 Reusable products

It is however be important to note that there could be other reasons why

consumers switch from using a particular product For example it could be

for health reasons price availability of products etc In the graph above

respondents were asked if they give unwanted clothes books etc to charity

shops and a vast majority (64 per cent) frequently give products to charity

shops Other reasons for giving unwanted items to charity could include

peer pressure lack of recycling bins etc

44

60 CONCLUSION amp RECOMMENDATIONS

61 Conclusion

The aim of this research was to find out if ethics matter in consumer buying

behaviour The findings from this research demonstrate that even though

UK consumers seem to be more aware and knowledgeable about ethical

issues as a result of more media coverage of companies such as Primark

it does not necessarily translate into sales of more ethical products

Price seems to be the most important indicator of consumers purchasing

behaviour especially due to the present economic downturn The effects of

ethics of consumers buying behaviour is very limited due to barriers to

ethical consumerism discussed above

The study also reveals that consumers are rarely ethically consistent For

example those who buy fairly trade products might not care for animal

tested products As stated in Baker (2003) perhaps the solution to

understanding green purchasing behaviour is to try and understand the

purchase rather than the purchaser Many ethical purchases involve some

form of compromise such as paying an ethical premium or accepting lower

level of performance or travelling to non-standard distribution outlets such

as a health shop for ethical products

Consumers also need to be aware that the ethical issues are real problems

and that purchasing these products will make a difference (ie Fair-trade

product) According to Baker (2003) recent years have witnessed an

increasing range of conservation-orientated behaviour among consumers

from the recycling of cans and bottles to the boom of returning consumer

durables to the supply chain through small ads or car boot sales

The findings also revealed that there is no such thing as an ldquoethical

consumerrdquo As stated in Baker (2003) all consumers are ethical consumers

in some way or the other in that when faced with two products that are

identical in all respect except that one is superior in term of its eco-

performance they would choose the one with high eco-performance And

to reiterate John McMurtryrsquos statement ldquothere is no purchasing or

investment decision that does not in itself imply some form of moral choicerdquo

45

Also some significant contribution to ethical consumerism seems to be

generally overlooked such as product maintenance and avoiding or

delaying purchase through a make-do and mend mentality (Baker 2003)

The increasingly well informed consumers are not only demanding ethically

and fairly traded products but are also challenging manufacturers and

retailers about their ethical claims Furthermore although consumers are

skeptical regarding companyrsquos ethical marketing strategies information

from non-governmental organization (NGOs) are trusted by consumers As

stated in Baker (2003) an international social attitude survey by Edelman

showed that 60 per cent respondents trusted these organizations compared

to 15 per cent who trusted the government and 10 per cent who trusted the

major corporations

It could also be argued that ethically consumerism is becoming very

important in todayrsquos business and an organization which ignores this trend

of ethical consumption and its potential growth could be at risk of loosing

customers or potential market shares Increasing media interest on issues

such as climate change are dominating headlines each of which are

creating market opportunities and threats to many companies Within the

society concern about the environment and social impact of businesses

are also growing in many ways The Co-operative Bankrsquos Ethical Consumer

Reports are encouraging UK consumers to make ethical choices

Environmental performances is very important for companies wishing to

attract investors Eco-performance of companies could act as a key to gain

entry into new markets as in the case of mercury free battery ranges Also

competitive advantage could be gained through good ethical performance

as in the case of The Co-operative Bank which gained as many as 200000

customers because of its ethical policies (Baker 2003) Ethical concerns

are also creating demand for new products in market segments such as

cars cleaning products etc

According to Baker (2003) green marketing successes also involves the 4

Prsquos (ie Product Price Place and Promotion) of the marketing mix meeting

the 4 Ss criteria namely

Satisfaction of customerrsquos needs

46

Safety of products and production for consumers workers society

and the environment

Social acceptability of the products their production and the other

activities of the company

Sustainability of the products their production and the other


Ethical issues are also changing production economics of products such as

cars chemical and power generation Rising landfill costs and tougher

regulations on emissions means that production costs are increasingly

influenced by what is discarded after production

Ethical products need to be supported by marketing communications that

allow the individual consumer to feel a sense of lsquomaking a differencersquo in

order to secure a commitment to regular ethical purchase behaviour and

develop brand loyalty The emphasis on individual producer stories in many

fair trade adverts and labeling clearly attempts to fulfill this role

62 Managerial implications amp Recommendations

The findings of this study have important implications for business

especially for marketing managers who may want to attract this segment of

the market

Since consumers need to be convinced that their purchase behaviour do

make a difference in order to be persuaded to buy marketers need to

convey future ethical marketing information in a manner that does not

confuse or alienate consumers

As stated in Baker (2003) a number of prescriptive and regulatory

guidelines have been developed to guide marketers in formulating and

making claims about the environmental performances Davis (1993) as

stated in Baker (2003) suggests the following

Ensure that the promoted product benefits has a real impact Eg

reduced harmful emissions

Identify the productrsquos specific benefits in terms of the product

attribute that contributes to improved environmental performance

47

Provide specific data about the benefits eg specifying the

proportion and nature of recycled content

Provide a context to allow consumers to make meaningful

comparisons

Define any technical terms used

Explain the benefit since consumers often have limited

understanding of environmental issues

Coddington (1993) as stated in Baker (2003) recommend that firms

engaged in a greening process should set up an environmental task force

in which marketers play a leading role He identifies marketing managers as

being lsquosuperbly qualifiedrsquo for the task because marketers are able to identify

and analyze the marketing implications of corporate environmental

exposures and initiatives Marketers can help identify new business

products and service opportunities that arise out of those exposures

Marketers can work to ensure that when corporate environmental policies

are developed the marketing implications are given due considerations He

further states marketers must co-ordinate their activities across

departments such as RampD manufacturing packaging sales and public

relations

Finally marketers have to be aware of the fact that whether or not they are

pursuing an ethical strategy and even if a good eco performance is unlikely

to yield competitive advantages a poor eco-performance can still lead to

competitive disadvantages

48

70 REFERENCE LIST

Adams R (2007) Green consumerism and the food industry early signs of

big changes to come [Online]

httpwwwemeraldinsightcomInsightviewPDFjspFilename=htmlOutput

PublishedEmeraldFullTextArticlePdf0700920903pdf [Cited on 7 Oct 08]

A2govorg (2008) Recycle logo [Online] wwwa2govorgrecycle_logogif

[Cited on 1 Oct 08]

Academicmintelcom (2008) Is Fair Trade Fair [Online]

httpacademicmintelcomlogonampstart=displayampid=386354 [Cited on 01

Oct 08]

Advocacybritanniacom (2008) The Difficult Lives and Deaths of Factory-

Farmed Chickens [Online] httpenwikipediaorgwikiFactory_farming [25

Nov 08]

Allen D T (2008) What is a ldquoGreenrdquo Product Department of Chemical

Engineering University of Texas

Baker J M (2003) The Marketing Book 5th Edition By MPG Books Ltd

Bodmin Cornwall

BBCcom (2008) the abolition of slave trade 1907 [Online]

httpwwwbbccoukhistorybritishabolitionabolition_tools_gallery_07sht

ml [cited 6 Oct 2008]

BBC News (2006) How fair is fair trade [Online]

httpnewsbbccouk1hibusiness4788662stm [Cited on 25 Nov 2005]

Bryman A (2004) Social Research Methods 2nd Edition By Oxford

University Press

Brundtland report (1987) [online] httpwwwworldinbalancenetpdf1987-

brundtlandpdf [cited on 20 Nov 08]

Chisnall P (2005) Marketing Research 7th Edition By McGraw Hill

Education

Datamonitor (2005) UK Ethical Consumerism Mass Appeal CorpWatch

[Online] httpwwwcorpwatchorgarticlephpid=11926 [13 Sept 08]

Doane D (2001) Taking Flight the rapid growth of Ethical Consumerism

New Economic Foundation report for the Cooperative Bank [Online]

httpwwwneweconomicsorggenuploadstaking20flight20-

20epi202001pdf [Cited on 12 Sept 08]

49

Carrigan M amp Attalla A The myth of ethical in purchase behaviour [Online]


PublishedEmeraldFullTextArticlePdf0770180701pdf [Cited 8 Oct 2008]

Carrigan M Szmigin amp Wright J (2004) Shopping for a better world

[Online]


PublishedEmeraldFullTextArticlePdf0770210604pdf

Engel J F Blackwell R D amp Miniard P W (1995) Consumer Behaviour 8th

Edition By The Dryden Press

Entine j (1995) Exploiting Idealism Jon Entine on howThe Body Shop

betray its customeers [Online]

httpwwwjonentinecomarticlesutne_exploiting_idealism_02htm [Cited

25 Nov 08]

Eastwood P J (1995) Farm animal welfare Europe and the Meat

Manufacturer British Food Journal [Online] www

httpwwwemeraldinsightcomInsightviewContentItemdojsessionid=664A

AD1357F0E958E9E59035FAE9F03CcontentType=ArticleampcontentId=870

303 [Cited on 2 Oct 08]

Fair Trade Foundation (2008) What is Fair Trade [Online]

httpwwwfairtradeorgukwhat_is_fairtradefaqsaspx [Cited 30 Sep 08]

Goliath (2008) Ethical Marketing A question of ethics [Online]

httpgoliathecnextcomcoms2gi_0199-4371250ETHICAL-MARKETING-

A-question-ofhtml [Cited on 6 Oct 08]

Gosden R (1995) Greening all the way to the Bank [Online]

httphomepagemaccomherinstrgosdenarenahtml [Cited 7 Oct 08]

Harrison R (1997) Bare-faced Cheek The NewInternationalists [Online]

httpwwwnewintorgissue289barehtm 19 Sept 08] amp

httpwwwnewintorgissue289barehtm

Harrison R Newholm T amp Shaw Deirdre (2006) The Ethical Consumer By

SAGE Publication Ltd

Hawkins D I Best R J amp Coney K A (1998) Consumer Behaviour

Building Marketing Strategy 7th Edition By the McGraw-Hill Company

IDAUSAorg (2008) Facts Factory farming [Online]

httpwwwidausaorgfactsfactoryfarmfactshtml [Cited on 14 Oct 08]

International Labour Organization (2008) World Day Against Child Labou

12 June [Online]

httpwwwiloorgipecCampaignandadvocacyWDACLlang--enindexhtm

[Cited on 30 Sept 2008]

50

Lomborg B (2001) The Skeptical Environmentalist By Cambridge

University Press

MarketWatchcom (2008) Marks amp Spencer suffers while Primark thrives [Online] httpwwwmarketwatchcomnewsstoryms-primark-results-show-ukstoryaspxguid=5A306A1F-E447-4FBE-A089-85B8F22711EDampdist=msr_1 [Cited Nov 20 2008]

Meenakshi H (2007) The physical environment as the foundation of

Marketing environment [Online] httpbcognizanceiiitaacinoct-

dec06b1html [Cited 20 Sep 08]

McCormack B amp Hill E (1997) Conducting a Survey The SPSS Workbook

By International Business Press

Mowen J C 1995) Consumer Behaviour 4th Edition By Prentice-Hall Inc

Mintel (2008) Attitude toward ethical foods [Online]

httpacademicmintelcomsinatraoxygen_academicsearch_resultsshow

ampdisplayid=173791displayid=230842hit1 [Cited 27 Nov 08]

Nationalgeographiccom (2008) Child Labour Banned in India [Online]

httpnewsnationalgeographiccomnews200610photogallerieschild-

laborphoto2html [Cited on 30 Sept 08]

Fig 3 NewInternationalist (2006) Consumption The fact Issue 395 [Online]

httpwwwnewintorgfeatures20061101facts [Cited 11 Oct 08]

OrganicConsumerorg (2008) A Short History of the Ethical ConsumerAnti-Sweatshop Movement in the USA [Online] httpwwworganicconsumersorgarticlesarticle_4515cfm [Cited 30 Sept 08]

Pettie K amp Crane (2005) Green Marketing Legend myth face or prophesy

[Online]

httpwwwemeraldinsightcomInsightsearchQuickOptionsdosearchTerm

=Green+marketing3A+legend2C+myth2C+farce+or+prophesyampdum

my=amphdAction=button_searchamphdPreviousBrowserId=-

1110423636amplpSearchHistoryID=ampshTab=ARTICLESampsearchIncludeRTC=

searchIncludeRTCampsearchIncludeRTC=searchNotIncludeRTCampsearchInclu

deEBF=searchIncludeEBFampsearchIncludeEBF=searchNotIncludeEBFampsea

rchWithin=RD_ALLampsearchWithin= [cited 7 oct 08]

Raghavan L amp Gazala V (2008) Going Green in India [Online]

httpwwwlandorcompdfsk9LRaghavan_25Jul08pdf [Cited 29 Sept 08]

Uusitalo O amp Oksanen (2004) Ethical Consumerism a view from Finland

[Online] httpwww3intersciencewileycomcgi-

binfulltext118813782PDFSTART [Cited 8 Oct 08]

51

Sainsburycouk (2008) Freedom Food [Online]

httpwwwsainsburyscoukfoodfoodandfeaturessafety_qualityarticleseg

gshtm [cited 2 Oct 08]j

Saunders M Lewis P amp Thornhill A (2007) Research Methods for

Business Students 4th Edition By Pearson Education

Shaw D Newholm T amp Dickinson R (2006) Consumption as voting an

exploration of consumer empowerment [Online]


PublishedEmeraldFullTextArticlePdf0070400908pdf [Cited on 29 Sept 08]

Sheth J N Mittal B amp Newman B I (1999) Consumer Behaviour and

Beyond By the Dryden Press

Solomon M Bamossy G amp Askegaard (2002) Consumer Behaviour A

European Perspective 2nd Edition By Pearson Education Ltd

Statt D (1997) A Understanding the Consumer A Psychological Approach

By MacMillan Press Ltd

Strong C (1997) The problems of translating fair trade principles into

consumer purchase behaviour [Online] httpwwwemeraldinsightcomInsightviewPDFjspFilename=htmlOutputPublishedEmeraldFullTextArticlePdf0200150105pdf [cited 29 sept 08]

Strong C (1996) Features contributing to the growth of ethical consumerism ndash a preliminary investigation [online] httpwwwemeraldinsightcomInsightviewPDFjspFilename=htmlOutputPublishedEmeraldFullTextArticlePdf0200140501pdf [cited 19 Nov 08] Spurr B (2006) Body Shop to be added to Nestleacute Boycott list INFACT Canada [Online] httpwwwinfactcanadacanestle_boycott_updates_Apr3_2006htm [Cited 12 sept 08] Terrachoice(2008) The 6 sins of green washing [Online] httpwwwterrachoicecomfiles6_sinspdf [cited 20 November] Tallontire A Rentsendorj E amp Blowfield M (2001) Ethical consumers and ethical trade A review of current literature University of Greenwich [Online] httpwwwnriorgpublicationspolicyseriesPolicySeriesNo12pdf [Cited 6 oct 08] The Cooperative Bank (2007) The Ethical Consumerism Report 2007 The

Cooperative Bank

The Economist (2007) Food Politics Voting with your trolley [Online]

httpwwweconomistcombusinessdisplaystorycfmstory_id=8380592

[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52

The Guardian (2008) Has the credit crunch killed ethical consumerism

[Online] httpweblogshitwisecomrobin-

goad200809has_the_credit_crunch_killed_ethical_consumerismhtml

[Cited 12 Oct 08]

Timesonlinecouk (2008) Shoppers vote Primark the least ethical clothing

retailer [Online]

httpbusinesstimesonlinecouktolbusinessindustry_sectorsretailingartic

le5034065ece [Cited 18 Nov 2008]

Timesonlinecouk (2008) Primark defies gloom with 17 profits jump [Online]


le5079250ece [cited 20 Nov 2008]

TNS Global (2008) DISCOUNTERS MARCH ON (PLUS AN UPDATE ON

GROCERY PRICE INFLATION) httpwwwtnsglobalcomnewsnews-

18C52E650AB942DFAA5959DA8284BDB4aspx

UNICEF (2008) Child Labour [Online]

httpwwwuniceforgprotectionindex_childlabourhtml [Cited on 30

September]

Wright R (2006) Consumer Behaviour By Thomson Learning

The Journal of Consumer Behaviour (2007) Editorial studying the ethical

consumer A review of research [Online]

Zikmund W G (2003) Business Research Methods 7th Edition By South-

Western a division of Thomson Learning

Saunders M Lewis P amp Thornhill A (2007) Research Methods for Business

Students 4th Edition By Pearson Education Ltd

Mowen J C Consumer Behaviour 4th Edition By Prentice-Hall Inc

ii

ABSTRACT

In recent years ethical trade and Corporate Social Responsibility have

gained a lot of attention in the UK yet limited attention has been given to

the role and impact of ethical concerns on consumer purchase behaviour

The overall purpose of this study is to contribute to a better understanding

of ethical consumerism A self-administered questionnaire was used as the

data collection technique in order to achieve the objectives of this study

The results of the findings revealed that despite consumersrsquo high level of

awareness of ethical issues there is little evidence that these issues greatly

affect consumersrsquo purchasing behaviour In fact price seems to be the

most important indicator of their purchasing behaviour The uneven

distribution of wealth also makes it impossible for all consumers to choose

ethically sound products The findings of this study are a useful source of

information for marketers who may want to attract this ldquogreenrdquo segment of

the market Furthermore whether or not marketers are pursuing the ethical

strategy they should also bear in mind that even if a good eco-performance

is unlikely to yield competitive advantages a poor eco-performance can still

lead to competitive disadvantages

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT










my studies





iv








8 Appendix 1 52

v

TABLE OF FIGURES









Graph 2 Gender 25








Graph 10 Labels 29










1

10 INTRODUCTION








11 Background















2






























terms

3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT










my studies





iv








8 Appendix 1 52

v

TABLE OF FIGURES









Graph 2 Gender 25








Graph 10 Labels 29










1

10 INTRODUCTION








11 Background















2






























terms

3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









iv








8 Appendix 1 52

v

TABLE OF FIGURES









Graph 2 Gender 25








Graph 10 Labels 29










1

10 INTRODUCTION








11 Background















2






























terms

3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









v

TABLE OF FIGURES









Graph 2 Gender 25








Graph 10 Labels 29










1

10 INTRODUCTION








11 Background















2






























terms

3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









1

10 INTRODUCTION








11 Background















2






























terms

3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









2






























terms

3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









3























choice


4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









4

13 CSR vs profit


































5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









5
















issues

15 Objectives




purchase decision



6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









6
























7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









7



















212 Child Labour

8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









8















213 Fair Trade












(BBCcouk)

9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









9

10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









10

214 Factory farming






















11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









11


























food shops






12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









12






























13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









13

































making

14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









14































15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









15







inconveniences

















what they say




ethical consumption

16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









16

30 METHODOLOGY



















to consumers












17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









17







natural order



























18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









18
















defined as





reference list











company

19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









19










made from them


















promotional ideas

32 Sampling



20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









20



















population











21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









21

Target group













any bias





research













22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









22





33 Questionnaire


























23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









23








34 Limitations





24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









24




1) Age groups

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Age groups

Percent 34 66

16-24 25+

Graph 1 Age groups

25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









25

2) Gender

Gender

Male

34

Female

66

Male

Female

Graph 2 Gender




54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing


26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









26



44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing




0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Percent 26 18 28 18 10

Ethical

Sourcing

C02


Plastic Bags

overuse


27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









27



0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

1 year

2 years

3 years

4 years +

Missing



0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


product

Percent 34 28 8 30

Up to 10Up to 20

more

More than

30Normal price


28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









28


0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



YesNo

Dont know

Percent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent 34 22 44

Yes No Dont know


29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









29




Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph 10 labels



2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Missing


30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









30


collections


0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70




Yes

42

No

16

Dont know

42


31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









31














0

5

10

15

20

25



16-24

25+



32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









32



gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18



Male

Female














for the household







33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









33








0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percent

Frequency

Percent 26 18 28 18 10


Ethical

Sourcing

C02

Emission

s

RecyclingFood

Miles

Plastic

Bags

Overuse









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









34


44

28

30

10

6

The Body Shop

Primark

Nestle

TheCo-opBank

Microsoft

Missing

Graph














ones

35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









35

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know



















36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









36


54

12

28

6

A consideration



Missing














531 Price







37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









37

78

1

5

31

1

3

7

5

2

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Up to 10

Up to 20

more

More than

30

Normal

priceH

ow

mu

ch

are

yo

u w

illi

ng

to

pay f

or

eth

ical

pro

du

ct















38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









38




2

54

38

4 2

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

System















actions







sins are as follows

39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









39
























34

22

44

Yes

No

Dont know


40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









40


























41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









41



Always

16

Sometimes

68

Never

16

Always

Sometimes

Never

Graph10 labels














42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









42

0 10 20 30 40 50

Yes

No

Dont Know



Percent

Percent 30 48 22

Yes No Dont Know














43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









43

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Always

Frequently

Never

Missing



Percent 30 64 4 2










44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









44


61 Conclusion































45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









45












major corporations






















46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









46


and the environment

















the market













47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









47




comparisons















relations





48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









48

70 REFERENCE LIST






[Cited on 1 Oct 08]



Oct 08]



Nov 08]




Bodmin Cornwall







University Press




Education







49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









49





[Online]








25 Nov 08]























12 June [Online]



50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









50


University Press


















[Online]













51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









51



















Cooperative Bank



[As cited 7 Oct 08]

52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









52




[Cited 12 Oct 08]


retailer [Online]











September]









Documents

DO ETHICS MATTER IN CONSUMER PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR? · DO ETHICS MATTER IN CONSUMER PURCHASE BEHAVIOUR? Fig 1: IKEA’s reusable blue bag embraces the green imperative. JACQUELINE BEI