Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Forschung für Nachhaltigkeit an deutschen Hochschulen pp 297–311Cite as

Nachhaltiger Konsum – Der Unterschied zwischen subjektiv und objektiv um-weltfreundlichem Kaufverhalten

  • Chapter

  • 9845 Accesses

Part of the book series: Theorie und Praxis der Nachhaltigkeit ((TPN))

Zusammenfassung

Der Umsetzung nachhaltigen Konsumverhaltens stehen subjektive und objektive Barrieren entgegen. Der Artikel geht auf die wesentlichen Einflussfaktoren ein. Auf Grundlage der Theory of Planned Behavior und Daten des GfK Consumer Panels kann zwar bestätigt werden, dass Konsument_innen nachhaltige Aspekte in ihr Kaufverhalten einfließen lassen und ihr Kaufverhalten als nachhaltig einstufen. Es besteht allerdings eine Diskrepanz zwischen selbstberichtetem und tatsächlich realisiertem Kaufverhalten. Weiterhin werden Methoden zur Umweltwirkungsbewertung von Produkten vorgestellt, um die subjektiv als nachhaltig empfundenen Verhaltensweisen mit objektiven Kriterien überprüfen zu können. An Beispielfällen wird gezeigt, dass das subjektiv nachhaltige Verhalten nicht in objektiv nachhaltigem Verhalten mündet. Eine entsprechende Abweichung kann kaum mit unterstellten Mehrkosten für nachhaltige Produkte erklärt werden.

Konsument_innen wollen umweltfreundlich konsumieren und gehen auch davon aus, dass sie dies tun. Das mangelnde Wissen über die Umweltwirkungen von Konsumgütern und die einfachen Heuristiken bei der Konsumentscheidung stehen aber letztlich einem nachhaltigen Konsumverhalten entgegen. Am Beispiel des Carbon Footprint lässt sich dieses Phänomen bei einigen Konsumgütern nachweisen. Schließlich werden die Eignung dieses monokriteriellen Indikators und mögliche Alternativen diskutiert.

Schließlich sollen Konsument_innen für mögliche Lücken zwischen subjektiv und objektiv nachhaltigem Konsumverhalten sensibilisiert werden, um zukünftig ein kongruentes Handeln zu ermöglichen. In diesem Sinn können die Ergebnisse als Ausgangspunkt für ein methodisch fundiertes Nachhaltigkeitsmarketing dienen.

Dieser Beitrag entstand im Rahmen des vom Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) geförderten Projekts „KosoK – Der Konsument zwischen subjektiver und objektiver Bewertung der Klimawirksamkeit von Konsumgütern und sein risiko-adversatives Konsumverhalten” im Rahmen des Förderprogramms „FHprofUnt” (Förderkennzeichen 17026X11).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, J.B. & Ferrand, J.L. (1999). Environmental Locus of Control, Sympathy, and Proenvironmental Behavior: A Test of Geller's Actively Caring Hypothesis. Environment and Behavior, 31(3), 338–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armitage, C.J. & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471–499.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Auger, P., Devinney, T.M., Louviere, J.J. & Burke, P.F. (2008). Do social product features have value to consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), 183–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg, S. (2003). How does environmental concern influence specific environmentally related behaviors? A new answer to an old question. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23(1), 21–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg, S. & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BSI (2011). PAS 2050:2011 – Specification for the measurement of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in products and services. London: BSI. Verfügbar unter: http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/forms/PASs/PAS-2050/ (aufgerufen am 23.04.2015).

  • Burney, J.A., Davis, S.J. & Lobell, D.B. (2010). Greenhouse gas mitigation by agricultural intensification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(26), 12052–12057.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carrete, L., Castaño, R., Felix, R., Centeno, E. & González, E. (2012). Green consumer behavior in an emerging economy: confusion, credibility, and compatibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(7), 470–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrigan, M. & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 560–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H.-L. & Burns, L.D. (2006). Environmental Analysis of Textile Products. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 24(3), 248–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coley, D., Howard, M. & Winter, M. (2009). Local food, food miles and carbon emissions: A comparison of farm shop and mass distribution approaches. Food Policy, 34(2), 150–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L. & Rayp, G. (2005). Do Consumers Care about Ethics? Willingness to Pay for Fair-Trade Coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), 363–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Ponti, T., Rijk, B. & van Ittersum, M.K. (2012). The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture. Agricultural Systems, 108, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekmann, A. & Preisendörfer, P. (1992). Persönliches Umweltverhalten: Diskrepanzen zwischen Anspruch und Wirklichkeit. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 44(2), 226–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • DIN EN ISO 14040 (2006a). Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework (EN ISO 14040:2006). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • DIN EN ISO 14044 (2006b). Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and guidelines (EN ISO 14044:2006). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • DIN EN ISO 14067 (2013). Greenhouse gases -- Carbon footprint of products -- Requirements and guidelines for quantification and communication (EN ISO 14067:2013). Geneva: International Organization for Standardization.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberle, U. (2001). Das Nachhaltigkeitslabel. Ein Instrument zur Umsetzung einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung. Spiegel der Forschung, 18(2), 70–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, K., James, K., Sheane, R., Nippress, J., Allen, S., Cherruault, J.-Y., Fishwick, M., Lillywhite, R. & Sarrouy, C. (2013): An initial assessment of the environmental impact of grocery products: Latest review of evidence on resource use and environmental impacts across grocery sector products in the United Kingdom. Final Report. Banbury Oxon: Product Sustainability Forum. Verfügbar unter: www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/An%20initial%20assessment%20of%20the%20environmental%20impact%20of%20grocery%20products%20final_0.pdf (aufgerufen am 23.04.2015).

  • Flysjö, A., Cederberg, C., Henriksson, M. & Ledgard, S. (2012). The interaction between milk and beef production and emissions from land use change – critical considerations in life cycle assessment and carbon footprint studies of milk. Journal of Cleaner Production, 28, 134–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraj, E. & Martinez, E. (2007). Ecological consumer behaviour: an empirical analysis. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(1), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadema, Z. & Oglethorpe, D. (2011). The use and usefulness of carbon labelling food: A policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers. Food Policy, 36(6), 815–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geller, E.S. (1995). Actively Caring for the Environment: An Integration of Behaviorism and Humanism. Environment and Behavior, 27(2), 184–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleim, M.R. & Lawson, S.J. (2014). Spanning the gap: an examination of the factors leading to the green gap. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 31(6/7), 503–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleim, M.R., Smith, J.S., Andrews, D. & Cronin Jr, J.J. (2013). Against the Green: A Multi-method Examination of the Barriers to Green Consumption. Journal of Retailing, 89(1), 44–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grankvist, G. & Biel, A. (2001). The Importance of Beliefs and Purchase criteria in the Choice of Eco-Labeled Food Products. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(4), 405–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, V., Schlegelmilch, B.B. & Houston, M.J. (2014). Inferential Evaluations of Sustainability Attributes: Exploring How Consumers Imply Product Information. Psychology & Marketing, 31(6), 440–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, G. (2007). Time to give due weight to the 'carbon footprint' issue. Nature, 445(7125), 256.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, U. & Schrader, U. (1997). A Modern Model of Consumption for a Sustainable Society. Journal of Consumer Policy, 20(4), 443–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanss, D. & Böhm, G. (2012). Sustainability seen from the perspective of consumers. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(6), 678–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haubach, C. & Held, B. (2015). Ist ökologischer Konsum teurer? Ein warenkorbbasierter Vergleich. Wirtschaft und Statistik, 65(1), 41–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haubach, C., Moser, A., Schmidt, M. & Wehner, C. (2013). Die Lücke schließen – Konsumenten zwischen ökologischer Einstellung und nicht-ökologischem Verhalten. Wirtschaftspsychologie, 15(2–3), 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoolohan, C., Berners-Lee, M., McKinstry-West, J. & Hewitt, C.N. (2013). Mitigating the greenhouse gas emissions embodied in food through realistic consumer choices. Energy Policy, 63, 1065–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hülsbergen, K.-J. & Rahmann, G. (Hg.). (2013). Klimawirkungen und Nachhaltigkeit ökologischer und konventioneller Betriebssysteme ‑ Untersuchungen in einem Netzwerk von Pilotbetrieben. Braunschweig: vTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isenhour, C. (2010). On conflicted Swedish consumers, the effort to stop shopping and neoliberal environmental governance. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 9(6), 454–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jungbluth, N., Flury, K. & Doublet, G. (2013). Environmental Impacts Of Food Consumption And Its Reduction Potentials. Paper presented at the The 6th International Conference on Life Cycle Management, Gothenburg. Verfügbar unter: www.esu-services.ch/fileadmin/download/jungbluth-2013-LCM-reduction-potentials-paper.pdf (aufgerufen am 23.04.2015).

  • Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruschwitz, A., Karle, A., Schmitz, A. & Stamminger, R. (2014). Consumer laundry practices in Germany. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 38(3), 265–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luchs, M.G., Naylor, R.W., Irwin, J.R. & Raghunathan, R. (2010). The Sustainability Liability: Potential Negative Effects of Ethicality on Product Preference. Journal of Marketing, 74(5), 18–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, D., MacRae, R. & Martin, R. (2011). The Carbon and Global Warming Potential Impacts of Organic Farming: Does It Have a Significant Role in an Energy Constrained World? Sustainability, 3(2), 322–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., Oates, C., Thyne, M., Alevizou, P. & McMorland, L.-A. (2009). Comparing sustainable consumption patterns across product sectors. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(2), 137–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meier, M.S., Stoessel, F., Jungbluth, N., Juraske, R., Schader, C. & Stolze, M. (2015). Environmental impacts of organic and conventional agricultural products – Are the differences captured by life cycle assessment? Journal of Environmental Management, 149, 193–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moser, A.K. (2015a). The Attitude-Behavior Hypothesis And Green Purchasing Behavior: Empirical Evidence From German Milk Consumers. AMA Winter Educators' Conference Proceedings, Vol. 26, C27–C28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moser, A.K. (2015b). Thinking Green, Buying Green? Drivers of pro-environmental purchasing behavior. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32(3), im Druck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, E.L. (2013). It's not easy being green: the effects of attribute tradeoffs on green product preference and choice. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(2), 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PCF Pilotprojekt Deutschland (2009): Product Carbon Footprinting – Ein geeigneter Weg zu klimaverträglichen Produkten und deren Konsum? Ergebnisbericht. Berlin. Verfügbar unter: http://www.pcf-projekt.de/files/1241099725/ergebnisbericht_2009.pdf (aufgerufen am 23.04.2015).

  • Peattie, K. (2010). Green Consumption: Behavior and Norms. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 35(1), 195–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Projektträger im DLR (2009). Statusheft – Vom Wissen zum Handeln – Neue Wege zum nachhaltigen Konsum. Erstellt aus Statusberichten 2009 anlässlich des Vernetzungsseminars „Nachhaltiger Konsum“ am 12. und 13.2.2009 im Hotel Dorint in Bad Brückenau. Bonn: PT-DLR. Verfügbar unter: www.ikaoe.unibe.ch/forschung/soefkonsum/data/vs2009/Statusheft_2009_NK_4.pdf (aufgerufen am 23.04.2015).

  • Prothero, A., Peattie, K. & McDonagh, P. (1997). Communicating greener strategies: a study of on-pack communication. Business Strategy and the Environment, 6(2), 74–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravn Heerwagen, L., Mørch Andersen, L., Christensen, T. & Sandøe, P. (2014). Can increased organic consumption mitigate climate changes? British Food Journal, 116(8), 1314–1329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J.A. (1995). Profiling Levels of Socially Responsible Consumer Behavior: A Cluster Analytic Approach and Its Implication For Marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, 3(4), 97–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röös, E., Ekelund, L. & Tjärnemo, H. (2014). Communicating the environmental impact of meat production: challenges in the development of a Swedish meat guide. Journal of Cleaner Production, 73, 154–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röös, E. & Karlsson, H. (2013). Effect of eating seasonal on the carbon footprint of Swedish vegetable consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 63–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, P., Nei, D., Orikasa, T., Xu, Q., Okadome, H., Nakamura, N. & Shiina, T. (2009). A review of life cycle assessment (LCA) on some food products. Journal of Food Engineering, 90(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rückert-John, J., Bormann, I. & John, R. (2013). Umweltbewusstsein in Deutschland 2012: Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Bevölkerungsumfrage. Berlin, Marburg: BMU/UBA. Verfügbar unter: www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/publikation/long/4396.pdf (aufgerufen am 23.04.2015).

  • Schmidt, M. (2009). Carbon accounting and carbon footprint – more than just diced results? International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management, 1(1), 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S.H. (1977). Normative Influences on Altruism. In B. Leonard (Hg.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Volume 10, S. 221–279). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seufert, V., Ramankutty, N. & Foley, J.A. (2012). Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature, 485(7397), 229–232.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sirieix, L., Kledal, P.R. & Sulitang, T. (2011). Organic food consumers' trade-offs between local or imported, conventional or organic products: a qualitative study in Shanghai. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35(6), 670–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren, G. & van Vliet, B. (2000). Lifestyles, consumption and the environment: The ecological modernization of domestic consumption. Environmental Politics, 9(1), 50–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P.C. (1999). Information, Incentives, and Proenvironmental Consumer Behavior. Journal of Consumer Policy, 22(4), 461–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P.C. (2000). New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, B. & Morwitz, V.G. (2010). Stated intentions and purchase behavior: A unified model. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(4), 356–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanner, C., Kaiser, F.G. & Wölfing Kast, S. (2004). Contextual Conditions of Ecological Consumerism: A Food-Purchasing Survey. Environment and Behavior, 36(1), 94–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanner, C. & Wölfing Kast, S. (2003). Promoting sustainable consumption: Determinants of green purchases by Swiss consumers. Psychology and Marketing, 20(10), 883–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarkiainen, A. & Sundqvist, S. (2009). Product involvement in organic food consumption: Does ideology meet practice? Psychology and Marketing, 26(9), 844–863.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thøgersen, J. (2005). How May Consumer Policy Empower Consumers for Sustainable Lifestyles? Journal of Consumer Policy, 28(2), 143–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thøgersen, J. & Ölander, F. (2002). Human values and the emergence of a sustainable consumption pattern: A panel study. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23(5), 605–630.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobler, C., Visschers, V.H.M. & Siegrist, M. (2011). Organic Tomatoes Versus Canned Beans. Environment and Behavior, 43(5), 591–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuomisto, H.L., Hodge, I.D., Riordan, P. & Macdonald, D.W. (2012). Does organic farming reduce environmental impacts? – A meta-analysis of European research. Journal of Environmental Management, 112, 309–320.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Doorn, J., Verhoef, P.C. & Bijmolt, T.H.A. (2007). The Importance of Non-linear Relationships between Attitude and Behaviour in Policy Research. Journal of Consumer Policy, 30(2), 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanclay, J., Shortiss, J., Aulsebrook, S., Gillespie, A., Howell, B., Johanni, R., Maher, M., Mitchell, K., Stewart, M. & Yates, J. (2011). Customer Response to Carbon Labelling of Groceries. Journal of Consumer Policy, 34(1), 153–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vega-Zamora, M., Torres-Ruiz, F.J., Murgado-Armenteros, E.M. & Parras-Rosa, M. (2014). Organic as a Heuristic Cue: What Spanish Consumers Mean by Organic Foods. Psychology & Marketing, 31(5), 349–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitmarsh, L. & O'Neill, S. (2010). Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(3), 305–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, A. (2012). Die Bedeutung von Gütesiegeln beim Kauf von Bio-Handelsmarken – empirische Untersuchungsergebnisse. Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit, 7(3), 211–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, V., Turner, W. & Stoneman, P. (1996). Marketing Strategies and Market Prospects for Environmentally-Friendly Consumer Products. British Journal of Management, 7(3), 263–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zehetmeier, M., Baudracco, J., Hoffmann, H. & Heißenhuber, A. (2012). Does increasing milk yield per cow reduce greenhouse gas emissions? A system approach. animal, 6(1), 154–166.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Industrial Ecology, Hochschule Pforzheim, Tiefenbronner Str. 65, Pforzheim, 75175, Deutschland

    Christian Haubach & Andrea K. Moser

Authors
  1. Christian Haubach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea K. Moser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Haubach .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Walter Leal Filho

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Haubach, C., Moser, A.K. (2016). Nachhaltiger Konsum – Der Unterschied zwischen subjektiv und objektiv um-weltfreundlichem Kaufverhalten. In: Leal Filho, W. (eds) Forschung für Nachhaltigkeit an deutschen Hochschulen. Theorie und Praxis der Nachhaltigkeit. Springer Spektrum, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10546-4_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation