Can we shop ourselves to a clean sea? An experimental panel approach to assess the persuasiveness of private labels as a private governance approach to microplastic pollution

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.110927Get rights and content

Highlights

  • An experimental panel survey was conducted in Norway, Germany and Portugal

  • The majority of respondents selected products with microplastic free certification when the price was the same

  • The private governance mechanism (certification) did influence consumer behaviour

  • Portugal was more likely to purchase and pay for premiums for a label than Germany and Norway

Abstract

In this study, we conducted an experimental panel survey in Norway, Germany and Portugal to explore consumers' willingness to pay more for products that are certified microplastic free. This is placed within the context of private certification schemes and private governance as mechanisms to increase consumer conscientiousness, establish a higher environmental standard in terms of microplastic and reduce marine pollution. We find that consumers in general are very conscious about the issue, would generally prefer products that are microplastics free, but would seldom choose these when there is a price premium on the label. This had a geographical offset though, with the results aligning with that of political trust in the nation, with Norwegians being less likely to purchase items with price premiums for private governance labels, and Portugal being most likely to – even with a price premium.

Introduction

The environmental concern regarding marine plastic pollution has emerged as a pressing global issue, with much media attention and public outcries for global solutions (Tiller et al., 2019). The issue area has emerged as a global environmental issue affecting all of the world's oceans (Auta et al., 2017; Barboza et al., 2018; Ivar do Sul and Costa, 2014; Andrady, 2011), with estimations of plastic debris among this ranging from 60% in some areas and upwards of 95% in others (Auta et al., 2017; Xanthos and Walker, 2017; Derraik, 2002; Suhrhoff and Scholz-Böttcher, 2016). This is because, on a global scale, the production of plastic has increased drastically the past decades, and the use and production of plastic is increasing as a result of consumer-use patterns and demographics (Auta et al., 2017), and at the same time, proper waste management is still lacking in many countries. In addition to the large pieces of plastics that often dominate the imagery of plastic pollution, the prevalence of plastic debris in the form of microplastics or nanoplastics also affects marine habitats and biodiversity, and is currently assessed as a pressing concern towards the marine ecosystem (Gall and Thompson, 2015; Clark et al., 2016).

From a governance perspective, options to mitigate and prevent the dispersion and accumulation of plastic debris of any size in the marine ecosystem is perceived as a complex task (Chen, 2015). The transboundary marine pollution of microplastic brings further complexity to the issue due to its integral part in the social-ecological system, and its cumulative effect as a consequence of the practices of various actors – most of which is within state borders (Kerber, 2017). Private regulations in the form of certification schemes, initiated by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or firms with the intent to convey responsible production practices (Auld, 2014; Gulbrandsen, 2006), is considered for some as a possible solution to a variety of predicaments related to environmental governance issues that cross nation-state jurisdictions (Glasbergen, 2013; Vatn, 2018) such as that of marine plastics.

Such certification schemes may open up for market incentives, like customer loyalty, market access, or price premiums, for the firms that choose to participate, encouraging a more social and environmental shift in their production practices (Auld, 2014) through the construction of economic incentives that may allow them to make a given environmental friendly shift (Daugbjerg et al., 2014). Codes of conduct and voluntary standards are considered to be motivating factors for businesses and organizations in order to convey information about their environmental consciousness to consumers, thereby securing their reputation around contested environmental issues and in turn arguably obtain a competitive edge/advantage in the sale of products that are marked as such (Gulbrandsen, 2006). From a political consumer perspective, the market acts as an arena where consumers can express their political activism, and not only as an arena for economic transaction (Gulbrandsen, 2014). This also includes the consumer's ability to communicate political and ethical preferences through practices like “buycotting”, or choosing to buy, or not buy, a selection of products and brands based on their political or environmental preferences (Gulbrandsen, 2014).

When do consumers choose to purchase based on their conscience of socio-political and environmental issues, though, especially when there is a price premium associated with such a choice? In this context, the present study examines deliberate consumer behaviour through an experimental Internet panel survey, whereby we gain knowledge regarding consumer preferences related to private third-party certification schemes related to microplastic pollution and prevention thereof. We first discuss the environmental challenge itself, and its place in the spectrum of environmental issues that the consumer considers important to govern. We then discuss the theoretical framework, and the methods used to assess to what degree consumer behaviour is steered by such private governance schemes, followed by the results of a three-country experimental panel survey with respondents from Norway, Germany and Portugal where we explored this issue.

Section snippets

Background

A common definition of microplastics are fragments or particles of plastic material smaller than 5 mm in diameter (Rainieri and Barranco, 2018; Auta et al., 2017; Mendenhall, 2018; Barboza et al., 2018; Frias and Nash, 2019; Gall and Thompson, 2015; Clark et al., 2016) and originated from anthropogenic activities include several common consumer products (Andrady, 2011) such as cosmetics (Galloway et al., 2017), cleaning and personal hygiene products (Fendall and Sewell, 2009; Cole et al., 2011

Methodological approach: experimental online panel survey

In light of this, the following results were based on an experimental methodological approach to assess the impact of third-party certification labels on consumer purchasing behaviour under the assumption of consumer motivations around both price and product and label information around this objective.

Experimental methodologies have gained significant traction the last decades (Morton and Williams, 2008; Druckman et al., 2011), and are defined in comprehensible terms as two equivalent groups,

Results

As mentioned, Panel 1 (test group) was presented with a questionnaire where the price on certified products were significantly higher than for conventional products without certification, except for the last question where the price was only slightly higher between a certified and conventional product. Panel 2 (control group) on the other hand was presented with a questionnaire where the price between certified and conventional products had been the same. The main purpose behind implementing

Discussion and conclusion

In this study, we have explored stated willingness to pay for certified products while considering private governance mechanisms as tools for governing the increasing amounts of marine plastics, and microplastics specifically. We have discussed how dissatisfaction with established regulatory mechanisms have resulted in some cases in the perception of structural inadequacy to address issues around social and environmental issues such as plastics at the public level (Abbott and Snidal, 2009a;

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Andreas Misund: Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing - original draft. Rachel Tiller: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft, Project administration. João Canning-Clode: Writing - review & editing. Mafalda Freitas: Investigation. Jörn O. Schmidt: Investigation, Writing - review & editing. Jamileh Javidpour: Visualization, Writing - review & editing, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 - Research and Innovation Framework Programme (grant agreement No. 774499). J. Canning-Clode was supported by a starting grant in the framework of the 2014 FCT Investigator Programme (IF/01606/2014/CP1230/CT0001).

References (68)

  • E. Mendenhall

    Oceans of plastic: a research agenda to propel policy development

    Mar. Policy

    (2018)
  • R. Pirard

    Market-based instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services: a lexicon

    Environ. Sci. Pol.

    (2012)
  • T.J. Suhrhoff et al.

    Qualitative impact of salinity, UV radiation and turbulence on leaching of organic plastic additives from four common plastics — a lab experiment

    Mar. Pollut. Bull.

    (2016)
  • R. Tiller et al.

    Who cares about ocean acidification in the Plasticene?

    Ocean & Coastal Management

    (2019)
  • A. Vatn

    Environmental governance–from public to private?

    Ecol. Econ.

    (2018)
  • D. Xanthos et al.

    International policies to reduce plastic marine pollution from single-use plastics (plastic bags and microbeads): a review

    Mar. Pollut. Bull.

    (2017)
  • K.W. Abbott et al.

    The governance triangle: regulatory standards institutions and the shadow of the state

    The politics of global regulation

    (2009)
  • K.W. Abbott et al.

    Strengthening international regulation through transmittal new governance: overcoming the orchestration deficit

    Vand. J. Transnat’l L.

    (2009)
  • K.W. Abbott et al.

    Taking responsive regulation transnational: strategies for international organizations

    Regulation & Governance

    (2013)
  • K.W. Abbott et al.

    Two logics of indirect governance: delegation and orchestration

    Br. J. Polit. Sci.

    (2016)
  • K.W. Abbott et al.

    The governor’s dilemma: competence versus control in indirect governance

  • G. Auld

    Assessing certification as governance: effects and broader consequences for coffee

    J. Environ. Dev.

    (2010)
  • G. Auld

    Constructing Private Governance: The Rise and Evolution of Forest, Coffee, and Fisheries Certification

    (2014)
  • K. Bäckstrand et al.

    The democratic legitimacy of orchestration: the UNFCCC, non-state actors, and transnational climate governance

    Environmental Politics

    (2017)
  • T. Bartley

    Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: the rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental conditions

    Am. J. Sociol.

    (2007)
  • T. Bartley et al.

    15 communities of practice as cause and consequence of transnational governance: the evolution of social and environmental certification

    Transnational communities: Shaping global economic governance

    (2010)
  • T. Bartley et al.

    Looking Behind the Label: Global Industries and the Conscientious Consumer

    (2015)
  • S. Bass

    Certification’s Impacts on Forests, Stakeholders and Supply Chains

    (2001)
  • B.W. Cashore et al.

    Governing Through Markets: Forest Certification and the Emergence of Non-state Authority

    (2004)
  • F.S. Cesa et al.

    Synthetic fibers as microplastics in the marine environment: a review from textile perspective with a focus on domestic washings

    Sci. Total Environ.

    (2017)
  • C.-L. Chen

    Regulation and management of marine litter

  • J.R. Clark et al.

    Marine microplastic debris: a targeted plan for understanding and quantifying interactions with marine life

    Front. Ecol. Environ.

    (2016)
  • T.D. Cook et al.

    Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference

    (2002)
  • C. Daugbjerg et al.

    Improving eco-labelling as an environmental policy instrument: knowledge, trust and organic consumption

    Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning

    (2014)
  • Cited by (12)

    • Extending the theory of planned behaviour to investigate the issue of microplastics in the marine environment

      2022, Marine Pollution Bulletin
      Citation Excerpt :

      The ultimate objective of the TPB is to understand what drives behaviour. Whilst most studies related to consumer behaviour regarding MPs focus on behavioural intentions to reduce MPs via stated preference experiments (see for example, Abate et al., 2020; Deng et al., 2020; Misund et al., 2020), the investigation of actual behaviour is rare. To the best of the authors' knowledge, studies related to MPs behaviour have been limited to a qualitative study (Anderson et al., 2016), and a quasi-experimental study (Chang, 2015), both of which explored consumption of cosmetics containing MP, and studies designed to explore the publics' views on general (micro)plastic pollution (Soares et al., 2021) and reduction in microfiber pollution (Nam et al., 2017).

    • The issue of microplastic in the oceans: Preferences and willingness to pay to tackle the issue in Australia

      2022, Marine Policy
      Citation Excerpt :

      First, the paper explores the willingness to pay of New South Wales residents to reduce the impact of microplastics on the marine environment on the Australian coast. Recently, this topic has gained increasing attention within the literature, with similar studies being undertaken in locations such as the European Arctic [1], South Korea [8], Norway, Germany and Portugal [17]. Second, the paper seeks to support policy makers with information specific to different clusters within the population.

    • On the way to reduce marine microplastics pollution. Research landscape of psychosocial drivers

      2021, Science of the Total Environment
      Citation Excerpt :

      Consumers are perhaps the main direct responsible of microplastics pollution, but they are often unaware of the existence of microplastics in the products they buy. For the unnatural condition of microplastics and their adverse effects on flora, fauna and human health, perhaps consumers would avoid products of personal hygiene and cleaners with microplastics - if they were aware of them (Chang, 2015); although many consumers would not but microplastics-free product if they have to pay more for them (Misund et al., 2020). Secondary plastics are a different issue because they originate from larger plastics, but consumer awareness would be also essential.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text