Bachelor Thesis, 15 credits, for a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration: International Business and Marketing Spring 2016

What if ethical buying behavior leads to boycotts? The buying behavior of Generation Z Filip Helmersson and Amanda Svensson

School of Health and Society

Author Filip Helmersson and Amanda Svensson

Title What if ethical buying behavior leads to boycotts? The buying behavior of Generation Z

Supervisor Karin Alm

Examiner Jens Hultman Abstract The care for the environment has been a hot topic during the last fifteen years. Ecological and Fairtrade

products made from sustainable materials and methods can be found in almost every store. It seems

like awareness regarding our environmental impact has increased and therefore changed our purchase

behavior. The awareness has also created pressure on the companies to behave in an ethical manner,

if the consumers feel that their ethical needs are not acknowledged, they will tend to stop purchasing

products from that company. In this new aware society there is a new player that in a few years will

make up the new buying force. Generation Z is individuals born after 1995 and is expected to bring new

demands to the market. The purpose of this thesis is to study if ethical products and ethical

consumption have an effect on the buying behavior of Generation Z. To better understand if the ethical

awareness affect the purchase behavior of Generation Z and if they are willing to boycott companies

that misbehaves, theory within the fields of CSR, consumer behavior and ethical consumption has been

collected to form questions for a survey. The findings show that the ethical awareness do not affect the

purchase behavior of Generation Z, however there is discovered attributes such as ethical profile that

affect the frequency of purchases. The findings also show that Generation Z will actively boycott a

company if that company misbehaves.

Keywords CSR, Ethical consumption, Generation Z, Consumer behavior, Boycott, Ecologic and Fairtrade

AcknowledgementsFirstly,wewouldliketothankoursupervisorKarinAlmforpushingustobebetterand

forherdedicationandexpertise.

Secondly,wewouldliketothankPernillaBroberg,PierreCarbonnier,TimursUmansand

JaneMattisson-Ekstamfortheirexpertiseinstatistics,surveymethodandlinguistics.

Thirdly,wewould like to thank the teachers at Söderport andWendesHigh School for

lettingusconductoursurveyandtherespondentsforansweringthesurvey.

Lastly,Wewouldliketothankbothourfamiliesandfriendsfortheirsupportduringthis

hecticspring.Weareallinthistogether!

Kristianstad,26thMay2016

FilipHelmersson AmandaSvensson

4

Tableofcontent1.Introduction................................................................................................................................7

1.1Background.........................................................................................................................................71.2Problematization............................................................................................................................101.3Purpose...............................................................................................................................................111.4Researchquestion..........................................................................................................................111.5Outline................................................................................................................................................12

2.Theoreticalframework.........................................................................................................13

2.1Corporatesocialresponsibility..................................................................................................132.1.1.Stakeholderpressure..........................................................................................................................14

2.2Consumerbehavior........................................................................................................................142.2.1Ethicalconsumption.............................................................................................................................162.2.2Generationaldevelopment...............................................................................................................17

2.3Conceptualframework..................................................................................................................18

3.Theoreticalmethod................................................................................................................203.1Researchethics,approachanddesign.....................................................................................203.2Choiceofmethodology..................................................................................................................213.3Choiceoftheory...............................................................................................................................22

4.Empiricalmethod....................................................................................................................24

4.1.Researchstrategy...........................................................................................................................244.2Theliteraturesearch.....................................................................................................................244.3Choiceofrespondents...................................................................................................................254.4Datacollectionmethod.................................................................................................................264.4.1Pilottest.......................................................................................................................................................264.4.2FieldCollection........................................................................................................................................26

4.5.Operationalization.........................................................................................................................274.5.1Dependentvariables............................................................................................................................274.5.1.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases....................................................................................................................284.5.1.2Boycott....................................................................................................................................................................28

4.5.2Independentvariables........................................................................................................................284.5.2.1Ethicalawareness...............................................................................................................................................29

4.5.3Controlvariables....................................................................................................................................294.5.3.1Gender.....................................................................................................................................................................29

5

4.5.3.2Education...............................................................................................................................................................294.5.3.3KnowledgeofCSR...............................................................................................................................................294.5.3.4Higherawarenessthanparents...................................................................................................................304.5.3.5Importantfactorswhenpurchasing...........................................................................................................304.5.3.6Trustablesources...............................................................................................................................................304.5.3.7Ethicalprofile.......................................................................................................................................................30

4.6.Dataanalysis....................................................................................................................................314.7.Statisticalloss..................................................................................................................................314.8.Reliability&validity.....................................................................................................................324.9.Generalizability..............................................................................................................................334.10.Ethicalconsiderations...............................................................................................................33

5.Analysis.......................................................................................................................................34

5.1Descriptivestatistics......................................................................................................................345.2Cronbach’sAlpha.............................................................................................................................355.3Testofnormality.............................................................................................................................375.4Spearman’scorrelationmatrix..................................................................................................375.5Multipleregression........................................................................................................................385.5.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases......................................................................................................405.5.2Tendencytoboycott.............................................................................................................................41

5.6Concludingdiscussion...................................................................................................................42

6.Discussionandconclusion...................................................................................................43

6.1Discussion..........................................................................................................................................436.2Thestudy’scontributions.............................................................................................................456.2.1Theoreticalcontributions.................................................................................................................456.2.2Empiricalcontributions.....................................................................................................................46

6.3Limitations........................................................................................................................................466.4Futureresearch...............................................................................................................................466.5Concludingcomments...................................................................................................................47

References......................................................................................................................................48

Appendix1–SwedishQuestionnaire....................................................................................52

Appendix2–EnglishQuestionnaire.....................................................................................56

Appendix3–Regression:frequencyofethicalpurchases.............................................60

Appendix4–Regression:tendencytoboycott..................................................................60

6

Listoftables5.1Gender……………………………………………………………………………………………………..34

5.2Program…………………………………………………………………………………………………..34

5.3Descriptivestatistics……………………………………………………………………………….35

5.4Cronbach’salpha

5.4.1Ethicalawareness……………………………………………………………………………..36

5.4.2Tendencytoboycott1……………………………………………………………………….36

5.4.3Tendencytoboycott2……………………………………………………………………….36

5.4.4Ethicalprofile1…………………………………………………………………………………37

5.4.5Ethicalprofile2…………………………………………………………………………………37

5.5Testofnormality…………………………………………………………………………………….37

5.6Spearman’scorrelationmatrix………………………………………………………………..38

5.7Regressionfrequencyethicalpurchases…………………………………………………40

5.8Regressiontendencytoboycott………………………………………………………………42

7

1.IntroductionGlobalwarminghasbeenahot topic for the last fifteenyearsand todayFairtrade food

andproductsmadefromecologicalmaterialscanbefoundinalmosteverystore.Itseems

like the awareness is increased due to companies’ active work with corporate social

responsibility(CraneandMatten2010).Consumersalsohavearesponsibilityandneedsto

makechoiceswhilepurchasinganditisdebatedifdifferentgenerationsmakepurchases

differentfromanethicalperspective(Crane&Matten,2010;Carrigan,Szmigin&Wright,

2004).Inthischapterthebackground,problematization,researchquestionandresearch

purposeofthisstudyisdescribed.Thepurposeofthissectionistogiveaninsightintothe

problemandanoverviewofthisdissertation.

1.1BackgroundConsumersarebecomingmoreandmoreawareofwhattheyconsumeandwhatkindof

impact their consumptionhaveon theenvironmentand the societyat large (Crane&

Matten,2010).Inthe1970sFriedmandiscussedthebeginningofincreasingawareness

and consumers demand for companies to take larger responsibility. The corporate

climatewaschangedandcompaniesstartedtodevoteincreasinglymoreresourcesinto

a sustainable course of business and developed corporate social responsibility (CSR)

(Friedman, 1970). 40 years later Low and Davenport (2007) argue that consumers

knowmoreandareactivelymakingpurchasechoicesto“shopforabetterworld”.CSR

isnolongerjustcreatingvaluefortheshareholdersbutalsoforthestakeholders(Crane

&Matten,2010). Stakeholders today canputmorepressureon companieswhichhas

ledtothattheyhavetobemorecarefulanduseethicsintheirbusinessstrategy(Crane

& Matten, 2010). Reasons for the increased CSR work can be consumers increased

awarenessofconsumersimpact,theirecologicalfootprint(Low&Davenport,2007).To

motivateconsumerstomaketherightchoicesisaquestionofhowtheirbehaviorisand

how they act regarding ethical products. According to Auger and Devinney (2007)

consumers in2007werecharacterizedasconsumerswhosaidthatCSRaffectedtheir

purchase behavior but when they actuallymade a purchase CSRwas not noticeable.

Froma corporateperspective in thebeginningof the1970sFriedman (1970) argued

thattopleasetheshareholdersethichadtobecomeapartofthecorporateclimatesince

the company with the better CSR activity would gain an advantage against their

8

competitorswhencompeting for consumersandgainmoreprofit, but also to respect

thelegalaspects(Friedman,1970).CSRdevelopedandfortyyearslaterdiscussesCrane

and Matten (2010) that the consumers are important in this relatively new CSR

environment. Since consumers aremore aware ofwhat they buy, theywill do active

choices to avoid companies that offer products that do not live up to the ethical

standards that they expect (Crane&Matten, 2010). Tomake a better choice about a

purchase, informationhas to be collected,when consumers collect information about

products,theirattitudeandperceptionofthesocialcontextdevelopsandthebehavior

changes (Newholm & Shaw, 2007). According to Belk (1975) consumer behavior is

affectedofsituationalvariables,dependingonhowconsumersactindifferentsituations

their behavior changes. Hence the situation of globalwarming can have changed the

consumers’behaviorinpurchasesandbuyingdecisions(Belk,1975).

Thedefinitionofethicalconsumersisthattheyareknownforbuyingthegreenestand

mosthumanesolution,theyalsoconsiderotherlivingbeingswhenpurchasing(Crane&

Matten,2010).FreestoneandGoldrick(2008)definetheethicalconsumerasaperson

whosupportsgreatergoodsthatmotivateconsumers’purchases.Theethicalconsumer

avoidsproductsthat:

‘‘endanger the health of the consumer or others; cause significant damage to the environmentduring manufacture, use or disposal; consume a disproportionate amount of energy; causeunnecessary waste; use materials derived from threatened species or environments; involveunnecessary use or cruelty to animals [or] adversely affect other countries’’ . (Freestone &Goldrick,2008,P.446)

NewholmandShaw(2007)arguethatethicalconsumptionstartedinthelastquarterof

the20thcentury.Today,ethicalconsumptionhasdevelopedanditcanbedescribedasa

consumercultureofethicalconsumersthatobtainanidentitythroughtheirpurchases,

which also is a part of their moral self-realization (Crane & Matten, 2010). The

consumption of ethical products and services has increased dramatically during the

21stcentury.In1999astudyconductedbytheInstituteofGroceryDistribution(IGD)

in 2008 showed that 25 percent of adults in the UK hadmade a purchase primarily

becauseofethicalreasons.Thesamestudyshowedthatthisnumberhadincreasedto

50percentamongadults intheUK(InstituteofGrocerieDistribution,2008). Further

9

on, consumers need information tomake a ‘’green decision’’, only then can they put

pressureonmanufacturesandretailers(Crane&Matten,2010).

Thephenomenonof ethical consumptionmight takeanew form ina coupleof years.

Becker writes for Veckans Affärer the 24th February 2016 that the buy force is

estimated to shift to the younger generations as soon as 2018. The company KPMG

explains in their KPMG View (2016) that the new generation that will make up the

futurebuyingforceisGenerationZborn1995orlater,whichisthegenerationthatwill

takeoverfromtheMillenials.MillenialsisdescribesasthelategenerationYthatisborn

between1982-1994andisknownforbeingengagedinthesociety(KPMGView,2016).

Because of this upcoming shift in the buying force, Generation Z becomes the largest

stakeholderanditis,thereforehighlyrelevanttoidentifythedifferentgenerationsand

theircharacteristics(Schlossberg,2016).FurthermoreTwenge,FreemanandCampbell

(2012) claim that Generation Y unlikeGeneration Z is showing a declined interest in

saving the environment, showing less concern for others and possesses lower civic

engagement.

Changes regarding behavior have been noticed among teenagers born 1995 or later

compared to earlier generation (KPMGView, 2016). Generation Zwill do things in a

different way than Generation Y would have done. Generation Z is characterized by

ErnstandYoung(2015)asconsumersthathaveexperiencedalotintheirbrieflifetimes

andhaveencounteredpolitical,social,technologicalandeconomicalchanges.Theyare

more self-aware and are thereby putting larger emphasis on their role in the world

since they understand their responsibilities and want to improve in the larger

ecosystem (Ernst and Young, 2015). Schlossberg (2016) writes in the article “Teen

Generation Z is being called 'millennials on steroids,' and that could be terrifying for

retailers”forBusinessInsiderUKontheeleventhFebruary2016thattheGenerationZ

are individualsbornintheInternetage. TheInternetageenablesthemtoaccessand

spread information quicker than any generation before them and therefore making

them a new challenge for companies to handle. Generation Z is a challenge since it

appears that they have a changed behavior compared to earlier generations

(Schlossberg, 2016). The changed behavior can lead to changes in consumption

behavior of the teenagers that just reached age of majority. Regularly there is an

10

uncertaintyofhowthenewgenerationwillreactonethicalpurchasessincethepriceis

not an equally dominant factor, they have higher expectations, no brand loyalty and

caremoreabouttheexperience(Schlossberg,2016).

1.2ProblematizationPreviousresearchdiscussesthatCSRisanimportanttopicandthatitwillhaveaneven

greater impact in the future (Klein, Smith & John 2004; Crane & Matten, 2010;

Eisingerich,2011).CSRhasdevelopedfrombringingvaluetoshareholderstoacertain

action performed by companies that consumers value as an important factor when

decidingwhichproducts tobuy(Friedman,1970andCrane&Matten,2010). Giesler

and Veresiu (2014) state that CSR is the reason for the rise of popularity in ethical

productsandanincreasedawareness.Eisingerich,Rubera,SeiferandBhardwau(2011)

agreewithGieslerandVeresiu(2014)andcontinuebyarguingthatconsumersintheir

day-to-dayconsumptionaremoreawareandmakedecisionsfrommoreenvironmental

and social concerns. The awareness and knowledge of environmental causes make

consumersimportantsincetheymakethechoiceswhenpurchasing.CraneandMatten

(2010) state that the ‘’consumers are king’’, without supporting consumers the

companycansufferabadimageandnosoldproducts(p.68).

CraneandMatten(2010)explainsthatethicalconsumptioncanbeanumbrellatermfor

responsestocompanieswithpoorsocial,ethical,orenvironmentalrecords.Itisknown

that ethical consumers will buy products, which are the greenest or offers themost

humanesolutionandtheymostlyfocusonthelargerissuesconcerningtheirpurchase

(Godson, 2013). Crane andMatten (2010) argue that the personalmoral beliefs and

valuesareconsideredtobethechoicetomakeconsciousdecisionssuchaschoosinga

fairtrade labeled chocolate instead of a non fairtrade chocolate. Crane and Matten

(2010)continuesbydiscussingthatethicalconsumerscanbeextremeintheirbehavior

andactouttheirdisappointmentthroughboycottingtoopenlyshowtheircommitment

forenvironmentalawareness.Kleinet al. (2004)discussed theconsumers’ reason for

boycottingasacontributiontothesocietybuttofeelbetteronanindividuallevel.The

powerthatboycottinghavecanstrengthenCraneandMattens’(2010)argumentofthe

concept that consumers actions towards companies are important. They continue by

stating that theethicalconsumerconsidersother livingbeings in thedecision-making

11

and he or she values the companies’ impact highly (Crane & Matten, 2010). Due to

increasedethicalconsumptionitisinterestingtoseeiftheknowledgeincreasesdueto

time. The earlier generations X and Y is well researched in the fields of CSR and

consumer behavior, but how will the next generation namely Z act upon future

purchasesfromanethicalperspective.GenerationZ issaidtobemoreself-awareand

maintain understanding of their role in the world, therefore it is important for

companies to understand Generation Z before they control themarket (KPMG View,

2016).

Thediscussionabovedemonstratesthatcompaniesknowabouttheearliergenerations

butaretheyreadyforhowthenewGenerationZwillfunction.Existingresearchargues

that the awareness of ethical consumption is increased and develops due to time, in

alignment with the statement; awareness could be even bigger in the coming

generations(Eisengerichetal.,2011;Giesler&Veresiu,2014).Thereforethereisagap

intheresearchofhowthenextgenerationispredictedtoactuponethicalconsumption.

There are different traits that characterize Generation Y and Generation Z andmake

themmore or less interesting to investigate. The attributes of Generation Y arewell

researched and they are defined as a generation that does not care thatmuch about

saving theenvironment, even if theyare said tobemoresocialaware (Twengeetal.,

2012;Parment,2013).ThereforeitisinterestingtotrytounderstandhowGenerationZ

functionsandhowtheyarepredictedtofunction.Thediscussionabovehasresultedin

thefollowingpurposeandresearchquestion.

1.3PurposeThepurposeofthisthesisistostudyifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionhave

aneffectonthebuyingbehaviorofGenerationZ.

1.4ResearchquestionHow will ethical products such as Fairtrade and ecological products affect the early

GenerationZs’buyingbehavior?

12

1.5OutlineThis thesis consists of six sections. The first section presents the background and

problematization,whichresultsinapurposeandresearchquestion.Thissectionsends

withtheoutlineofthethesis.InthesecondsectionthehistoricdevelopmentofCSRis

presented followed by stakeholder pressure and consumer behavior. The section

continueswith a presentation of ethical consumption and generational development.

The second section endswith a brief summary and a presentation of the conceptual

framework, where the formulation of hypotheses is presented. The third section

presents the researchethics, approachanddesign,which is followedby the choiceof

methodology and choice of theory. In the fourth section the empirical method is

presented. The section contains the research strategy, literature search, choice of

respondents, data collection method and an operationalization of the concepts. It is

followedbydataanalysis,reliabilityandvalidity,generalizabilityandthesectionends

withethicalconsiderations.The fifthsectionpresents theresults fromthesurveyand

theempiricaldataisanalyzed.Thissectionalsopresentsthetestingofhypothesesand

itendswithasummaryoftheresults.Thesixthandfinalsectionofthisthesispresents

a discussion and conclusion, as well as the contributions. The section ends with

limitations,suggestionsforfutureresearchandconcludingcomments.

13

2.TheoreticalframeworkInthissectionthetheoreticalframeworkispresented.Thetheoreticalframeworkincludes

thehistoricaldevelopmentofCSRanditsdefinition,followedbythedevelopmentofethical

consumptionandconsumerbehavior.Theprogressofgenerationalchanges inconsumer

behaviorisalsopresented.

2.1CorporatesocialresponsibilityThehistoryofCSRisnotrelevantfortheanalysisitself,butitisimportanttoknowand

understand the changes in the development of the concept CSR. Corporate social

responsibilityasaconceptwasintroduced1970byMiltonFriedman,whoarguedthat

thesocialresponsibilitiesofbusinessesonlywereinusetoincreaseprofitandcoverthe

legalaspects.Theresponsibilitiesonlysupportedtheshareholderstogainmore,while

theenvironmentwasnotinfocus(Friedman,1970).NineyearslaterexplainedArchie

B.Caroll(1979)thethree-dimensionalmodelofsocialresponsibilitiesthatcompanies

hadtowardssociety.Themodelconsistedoffoursteps;thetwofirststepsofthefigure

are based onwhat society required as economic and legal responsibilities. The third

stepiswhatsocietyexpectsfromcompaniessuchasethicalresponsibilities.Thefourth

step is discretionary responsibilities, which at time was uncertain since it was

voluntary. In 1991, Caroll refined the model and the fourth step discretionary

developedandbecamephilanthropy,whichisdesiredbysociety.Themodelbecamethe

pyramid of corporate responsibility with steps of what is required, expected and

desiredby the society.Thepyramid showed that the stakeholdershavean important

role in CSR (Caroll, 1991). The development of the fourth stepmay suggest that the

interest and awareness for CSRhas increased over time, since it is something that is

desired by society. Another twenty years later Aksak, Ferguson and Duman (2014)

arguethatCSRischangedduetocontext,eraandculture,thereforeitisachallengeto

define.CSRimpliesseveralapproachesandisdifferentdependingonwherecompanies

work,whomtheywanttoreachouttoandwhichagegrouptheywanttoattain.Inthis

thesis CSRwill bedefined aswhat companiesdo tomake the society better, orwhat

they try to do (Crane & Matten, 2010. Due to increased awareness and consumer

shoppingforabetterworlditisdemonstratedthatCSRhashadanimpact(Eisingerich

etal.,2011).

14

2.1.1.Stakeholderpressure

Inthepasttheshareholderswerethedominantpartythatcompanieshadtoanswerto,

butwiththeincreasedethicalconsumption,consumershavebegantotakeupmoreand

more demanding space as stakeholders (Jamali, 2007). According to Spiller (2000),

therearesixmainstakeholdergroups,whicharecommunity,environment,employees,

customers, suppliers and shareholders. These six groups have then been assigned

severalkeybusinesspracticesthatareimportantforeachstakeholder.Theconsumers,

accordingtoSpiller(2000),haveseveraldemandingfactorssuchastruthfulpromotion,

consumer dialogue and most relevant to this thesis, environmentally and socially

responsible product composition. Other connected stakeholders such as environment

includewastemanagement,energyconservationandenvironmental requirements for

suppliers. The community is another stakeholder, which demand generous financial

donations, support for education and job training programs, support for the local

community and disclosure of environmental and social performance (Spiller, 2000).

Withseveralstakeholderstorelatetoitisdifficulttoevaluatewhichstakeholderisthe

most important one to please (Carrigan&Attalla, 2001). Carrigan andAttalla (2001)

continuebysayingitisdifficulttomakereliableethicaljudgmentsthatavoidharming

stakeholdersinterestortoachieveequalgoodforallstakeholders.CarriganandAttalla

(2001) continue with this statement by saying that all stakeholders matter but the

difficultyliesinbalancingtheimportanceofeachindividualstakeholder.Tobattlethis

problem, companies have begun to selectively prioritize their different stakeholders

according to instrumental and/or normative considerations. This is also due to

companies’limitationofresources,thusavoidingproducingeverytypeofethicalvalue

foreverystakeholder(Jamali,2007).Inthisthesistheconsumeristhemostimportant

stakeholder,thereforethefollowingwillexplainconsumerbehavior.

2.2ConsumerbehaviorFahy and Jobber (2012) state the importance for companies of understanding the

consumer and to understand the consumers’ behavior is beneficial to know how

consumers make purchases. Consumer behavior is studied from economical,

psychological,sociologicalandculturalperspectives(Fahy&Jobber,2012).Smith,Van

BaarenandWigboldus(2005)arguesthatconsumers’behaviorsismodifiedduetothe

situationstheyareactinginandthattheyareunconsciousofhowtheymakedecisions

15

ofwhattopurchase.Theycontinuebydiscussingthattheawarenessofwhatproductto

purchase depends on the price and what value it bring the consumer. To make a

decisiontheconsumerprocess informationfromearlierpurchasesandknowledge.To

makeapurchase isalsoasocialgameofseeingwhatothersdoandwhichbrandsare

accepted by society (Smith et al., 2005). In consumer behavior the act of mimicking

othersisanimportantfactor,itcanbewhatcelebritiesarebuyingorwhatsomeonein

the local store buys (Smith et al., 2005). According to Fahy and Jobber (2012)

consumerswillseekforinformationbeforeapurchasesinceitisimportanttomakethe

rightchoices.FahyandJobber(2012)agreeswithSmithetal.(2005)thatitdependson

whatkindofpurchaseit is, forexampleahabitualpurchaseisdeemedless important

regardingethicalconcerns. Thelevelofinvolvementisalsoasignificantfactorthatin

situations can be seen as an extreme behavior,which can result in boycotts (Fahy&

Jobber, 2012). Further, consumershave a responsibility since they candemandmore

and pressure companies to do better; therefore their behavior is important for

companies(Crane&Matten,2010).Kleinetal.(2004)discussthatanincreasedinvolvementincompanies’actionssuggest

that consumers can use more extreme methods to show their disagreement to

companies and their products, one way is through boycotting. The authors define

boycotting as a part of consumer behavior and it occurs when companies fails at

sustaining a sufficient consumer focus. There are four factors that make consumers

boycott; the first is the desire tomake a difference. This factor is tomake the firms

changetheirtargets,behaviorandbeliefthateachboycottercancontributetoachieve

the collective goal. The second factor is self-enhancement that focuses more on the

individual boycotter to boost the self-esteem and make themselves feel good about

them, also to be admired by other consumers. The third factor is counter arguments

that inhibit boycotting and highlights that the cost of helping others increases and

helping decreases. Embedded in the third step are the free riders that believe their

partition will not have an impact and change the company so they choose to not

participate. The last and fourth factor is the cost of boycotting, which is whether

individualslooseorwinwhentheyboycottcertainproductsthathavebeenincludedin

theirusualconsumption.Kleinetal.(2004)continuesbysayingthatconsumerswitha

stronger relation to the company with bad social responsibility are more likely to

16

boycott.CraneandMatten(2010)andKleinetal.(2004)areinanagreementthatthe

consumershavethepowertomakeachange.Kleinetal.(2004)alsoclaimsthatwomen

aremoreinclinedtoboycottproductsiftheyarenotsatisfiedwiththeirethicalneeds.

DuetogreaterpublicattentiontoCSR,consumersarefunctioningasamechanismfor

socialcontrolandthededicationhasledtoahigherrelevanceforboycotts.Femalesare

not onlymore willing to boycott products, they are alsomore concerned about CSR

issuesandethicscomparedtomales(DelMarAlonso-Almeida,Navarrete&Rodriguez-

Pomeda,2015;Arlow,1991).CraneandMatten (2010) states that theconsumersare

king and they can affect the companies to be more CSR oriented. Öberseder,

SchlegelmilchandGruber(2011)contradictsthatconsumersdonotcareifcompanies

haveCSRornot but that firms are increasingly engaging in theirworkwithCSR and

howtocommunicateittoconsumers.CSRonlyplaysaminorrolewhenconsumersare

decidingwhat topurchase,despite their interest inmaking theworldbetter.Leeand

Shin (2010)disagree and state that consumersunderstandingof CSRwill affect their

purchases.Öbersederetal.(2011)arguethatifconsumersareawareofwhatCSRis,it

can lead to a changed behavior in the decision making process and products from

sociallyresponsiblecompanieswillbepurchased.Ingeneral,consumersarenotaware

ofwhat CSR is and there is lack of understanding. According to Auger andDevinney

(2007)consumersareawareofethicalpurchasesandCSR,theyevensaythattheyare

willing topaymore for it,but it isnotshownin theirpurchasebehavior.Further, the

authors state that individual consumers have an important role through their daily

buying decisions (Auger & Devinney, 2007). The consumers’ way of affecting a

company’s responsibilities is to pressure the company and demand more ethical

productsthereforethenextchapterwilldescribeethicalconsumption.

2.2.1Ethicalconsumption

Ethicalconsumptionischoosingthemosthumanesolutionofproductsapproachandto

notharmotherlivingbeings(Crane&Matten,2010).Arecentstudyconductedin2015

by Shaw, McMaster and Newholm showed that the respondents cared about ethical

issues in their everyday life and shopping.Thismindset among consumers has been

presentduringseveralyears;astudyconducted in1996 foundout that50percentof

consumerswould stopdoingbusinesswith a company if the companybehaved in an

unethicalway(Carrigan,Szmigin,&Wright,2004).Thisshowsthatconsumershasbeen

17

actively aware that somecompaniesbehave in anunethicalwayand that theywould

makeanactivechoicewhenpurchasing.However,consumers’statethatethicsmatter

whenmakingapurchase, ithasbeenshownthatethicscouldbecompromised if they

desire to buy a particular product (Carrigan, Szmigin, &Wright, 2004). According to

Irwin (1999), this does not occur due to neglect for ethics, it is merely a conflict

between how much the consumer desires a certain product and how much the

consumeriswillingtobendtheethics.Thiscouldbeduetoadesireforlowerpricesor

brandedfashion,thustrumpingtheethicaldesire(Irwin,1999).PelligrinoandFarinelli

(2009) state that additional attributes such as ethical purchases aremade for safety,

taste and environmental protection. Even if the consumer cares about ethics when

makingpurchases, studieshave shown that the consumerneeds tohave adirect and

personal link to a specific ethical problembefore they indulge in an ethical purchase

behavior(Boulstridge&Carrigan,2000).Anotherstudyconductedin2001showedthat

respondents were tolerant of poor ethics if those particular ethics were viewed as

normal in the host country. With this mindset, consumers could accept that factory

workersabroadearnbelow the subsistence level, if that is considerednormal in that

particularcountry(Carrigan&Attalla,2001).Althoughsomecompaniesareeffectiveat

writing and communicating their ethical progression, a research has shown that

consumersdonot rely on a company’s own statements (Carrigan, Szmigin,&Wright,

2004). Carrigan et al. (2004) continues by saying that company literature, PR and

advertisingareseenas lesscrediblesources forethical consumers.CraneandMatten

(2010)addressthattheethicaldecision-makingcandependongeneraleducationand

upbringing, it isargued tobeunclearbutdifferencesexist. Ethical consumerscanbe

both old and young; therefore will the next chapter present the generational

development.

2.2.2Generationaldevelopment

InaccordancewithEisingerichetal.(2011)theawarenessofethicalconsumptionhas

increasedovertimeandtounderstandwhy,ithastobeknownhowearliergenerations

have acted. Parment (2013), researched the generation Baby boomers, which is

individuals born 1945- 1958. The author later compared the baby boomers with

generation Y, which contains individuals born 1977-1989. The segmentation of

generations can be different. Eastman and Liu (2012) define the Baby boomers as

18

individuals born between 1946-1964, Generation X born between 1966-1985 and

GenerationYbornbetween1986-2005.InthisthesistheyearsofgenerationYissetto

begin 1982 and end at 1994, where Generation Z then will take over (KPMG View,

2016).

The generation segments are distinguished by different characteristics, the Baby

boomerissaidtobeindependentandindividualistic(Eastman&Liu,2012).Generation

X is described as highly educated andwith knowledge of technology. GenerationY is

claimedtobethefirsthigh-techgenerationandasmoresociallyaware(Eastman&Liu,

2012).Twengeetal.(2012)disagreesthatGenerationYwouldbemoresociallyaware

and argues that the commitment of helping the society will decrease with the later

generations,thereforetheyarecallinggenerationYthe‘’GenerationMe’’.Twengeetal.

(2012)continuesbydiscussingifthenextgenerationwillbe‘’GenerationWe’’butitis

stillunknownhowGenerationZwillactandthereareonlypredictions.Freestoneand

Goldrick(2008)statesthatconsumersarereadytoputtheirmoneywherethemorals

aresincetheyarehighlyawareoftoday’sethicalissues.Parment(2013)claimsthatthe

purchase behavior of the individual is correlated to which generation they belong.

Twengeetal.(2012)writesthattheconcernforotherssuchashavingempathyforout-

groups,makecharitydonations, the importanceofhavinga jobworthwhile tosociety

have declined slightly. He concludes by stating that the future generation Z can have

threeoutcomes,thecontinuingofGenerationMe,nochangeoranewGenerationWe.

2.3ConceptualframeworkOur chosen theory has steered the formulation of the hypotheses below. The

hypotheses in their turnwilldeterminetheempiricalmaterialcollected.LeeandShin

(2010) state that consumers understanding will affect the consumers purchase

behavior. Shaw, McMaster and Newholm (2015) showed that the respondents cared

about ethical issues in their everyday life and shopping. The mindset that ethical

awarenessaffectstheconsumptionbehaviorofindividualshasbeenshowninprevious

studies,suchasastudyconductedin1996,whichshowedthat50percentwouldalter

their consumption pattern with respect to ethical issues. All these theoretical

standpointsmake it appropriate to ask if GenerationZ´s ethical awarenesswill affect

theirpurchasepatternofethicalproducts.Therefore,thefollowinghypothesishasbeen

19

constructed:

Hypothesis1: Increased ethicalawarenesswill notaffectGenerationZ´s consumptionof

ethicalproducts.

The level of involvement is a significant factor that in situations can be seen as an

extreme behavior, which can result in boycotts (Fahy & Jobber, 2012). Further,

consumershavearesponsibilitysincetheycandemandmoreandpressurecompanies

to do better; therefore their behavior is important for companies (Crane & Matten,

2010).Kleinetal.(2004)discussthatanincreasedinvolvementincompanies’actions

suggestthatconsumerscanusemoreextrememethodstoshowtheirdisagreementto

companiesandtheirproducts,onewayis throughboycotting.Asshowninthetheory

thereisatendencytoboycottifthecustomersdonotagreewithacompaniescourseof

actionortheirproducts.Therefore,itisrelevanttoinvestigateifGenerationZbehaves

inasimilarway if theydisagreewithacompany.Asaresult the followinghypothesis

hasbeenconstructed:

Hypothesis2:GenerationZconsumerswillnotboycottaproductifthecompanybehaves

inanunethicalway.

20

3.TheoreticalmethodThissectiondiscussesresearchethics,ourapproachandstudydesign.Thisisfollowedbyadiscussionofourchoiceofmethodologyandtheory.3.1Researchethics,approachanddesignThisstudywillbebasedonasurveythatwillbeconductedonindividualsbornin1997.

Theethicalreasonbehindthischoiceisthatindividualsbornin1997arethelatestage

groupthathasreachedtheageofmaturity.Whenindividualsreachtheageofmaturity

theycandecideiftheywishtoparticipateinasurvey.Ifthesurveyistobeconducted

onyoungerindividuals,thelegalguardiansmustmakethedecisionsastowhetherthe

children participate in the survey or not. As established by Denscombe (2014) it is

important that researchers respect the relevant laws and ethics while conducting a

study.

Thepurposeofthisthesisistostudyifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionhave

aneffectonthebuyingbehaviorofGenerationZ.Bymakinghypothesesandtestingif

thereisacorrelationbetweenethicalconsumptionandage,itisnecessarytoemploya

deductiveapproach.PatalandDavidsson(2011)supportthisviewarguingthatscience

is expected to explain the cause-effect relationship and theory is the basis of

establishingsuitablehypothesesthatcanbetestedusingscientificmethods.

Theresearchdesignisdesignedtoprovideananswertotheresearchquestionandto

fulfillthepurposeofthestudy(Bryman&Bell,2015).Theresearchdesignthatwillbe

usedinthisstudyisacross-sectionaldesign,alsocalledasocialsurveydesign.Sinceit

isasurveywherethecollectionofdatawillbeconductedformorethanonecase,thus

making the survey according to a Cross-sectional design (Bryman&Bell, 2015). This

Cross-sectional design is also appropriate for this thesis since the study researches

several classes of teenagers that were born in 1997, these students are studying

business,society,orvocationalprogrammes.Thesurveyisperformedondifferentdates

buttherespondentsanswerthequestionnaireononeoccasiononlyaccordingtowhen

the classes were available. In accordance with a cross-sectional design the samples

werethuscollectedatthesametimesincethequestionnairewasansweredoncebythe

teenagers born in 1997. The answerswere then compiled and possible relationships

21

between variables will be analyzed (Bryman & Bell, 2015). The research design is

based onwhether it is a qualitative or a quantitative research. The following section

introducesourmethodology.

3.2ChoiceofmethodologyAt the beginning of a research project all researchers must analyze which research

approachthatwillbebesttofulfill thepurposeandthereforechoosebetweenusinga

quantitative or qualitativemethod. Bryman and Bell (2015) distinguish between the

methodsbystatingthataquantitativemethodemploymeasurementsandaqualitative

methoddoesnot.Ethicalconsumptionhasearlierbeenresearchedwiththeaidofboth

aqualitativeandaquantitativemethod.

Bryman and Bell (2015) argue that a quantitative method allows the researcher to

categorizepeopleanddefinedifferences,alsomeasuretheirattitude.Sincethepurpose

of this thesis is tostudy ifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionhaveaneffecton

the buying behavior of Generation Z, it is appropriate to define and measure their

attitude and therefore, a quantitative research strategy is optimal for this study. The

surveywillbeconductedonteenagersborn1997.Allteenagerswillbeanonymousand

inaccordancewithaquantitativemethodthesamplewillbeanalyzedobjectively.Asa

counter argument the researcher still makes a selection of what will be analyzed

(Bryman & Bell, 2015). A quantitative method is useful for sampling and analyzes

greater data sets, which is appropriate for this study since a greater data set will

provideabroaderviewoftherespondent’sattitude(Bryman&Bell,2015).

One other argument for this study to use a quantitative research method is that

quantitativeresearchcanbeusedtogeneralizeandrepresentalargergroup(Bryman&

Bell,2015).SinceitisGenerationZthatistheselectedsampletheresultscanaimtobe

generalized with a quantitative method. Another reason for using a quantitative

approach is that the study can easily be replicatedwhere researchers wish to study

anotherorthesamegeneration(Bryman&Bell,2015).Thereisalsothepositiveeffect

ofgatheringmaterial inanobjectiveway;viewing thematerialobjectivelymaximizes

thechanceofdescribing thematerialas closely to realityaspossible (Bryman&Bell,

22

2015). To make the study credible the material needs to be based on theory. The

followingsectionpresentsourchosentheoryanditsrationale.

3.3ChoiceoftheoryBryman and Bell (2015) argue that concepts and theories are the start point of a

researchprojectandthattheresearchermaycollectdatatounderstandtheconnection

betweendifferentconcepts.Existingtheoriesareintroducedandexplainedinorderto

give the reader a clearer view of the concepts that is studied. CSR and consumer

behaviorwillbethemaintheoriesthatarebroughttogetherandconstitutetheconcept

ofethicalconsumption.CSRgivesmoreofafirm’sperspectiveonsocialresponsibilities

sinceitisastrategyforcompanies.TounderstandCSRfromaconsumer’sperspective

theconsumerbehaviorhavetobeequallyimportant.Thefirm’sperspectiveonCSRwill

not directly be discussed in this thesis. To understand CSR its history needs to be

discussed,thereforeFriedman’s(1970)theoryofCSRasastrategytomakeprofitand

Carroll’s (1979; 1991)model ofwhat the society demands and desires. An historical

perspective is not relevant here. However, the evolution of CSR is important as

awarenessisraisedovertime(Eisingerichetal.,2011).Stakeholdersaretheoneswho

canputpressureonthecompanyandthemostimportantstakeholderinthisthesis is

theconsumer.

Consumer behavior is discussed and defined in order to understand how consumers

makepurchasesandwhatinfluencesthemtobuyacertainproduct.Generalknowledge

ofconsumerbehaviorissignificantforunderstandingethicalconsumerismandhowthe

ethicalconsumersfunction.Itisalsoofinteresttounderstandconsumerbehaviorwhen

tryingtoimposetheirwill.ForthisreasonwedrawattentiontotheworkofKleinetal.

(2004),whosetheoryofwhyconsumersboycottcertainproductsishighlyrelevantto

thepresentstudy.Weapplytheirtheoryconcerningethicalconsumptionandconsumer

behaviortoGenerationZtoseehowtheyarethinking.

Theevolutionofhowgenerations’ethicalawarenesshasdevelopedisasubjectthatis

limitedresearched.Thenewergenerationsissaidtobemoreethicalawareaccordingto

someresearches(Eisingerichetal.,2011;FreestoneandGoldrick,2008;Twengeetal.,

2012). Further information about Generation Z has been gathered through popular

23

press as The Economist and Veckans Affärer. The categorization of the generation-

groups varies, whichmakes the categorization difficult. In this study Generation Z is

said to contain individualsborn1995and forwardbasedon thepopularpressKPMG

ViewbyKPMG(2016).Therearemostlypredictionsregardinghowthenextgeneration

will act compared to earlier generations. The collectionofdata to analyze the future

buyingforceispresentedinthenextsectionempiricalmethod.

24

4.EmpiricalmethodThis section presents the research strategy, choice of respondents and data collection

methodarepresentedtheyare followedbyademonstrationof theoperationalizationof

the concepts, data analysis, reliability and validity, generalizability and ethical

considerations.4.1.ResearchstrategyResearch strategies come in several forms.Denscombe (2014) claims that there isno

right orwrong research strategy: a strategy can only be evaluated in relation to the

purpose of the study. Bryman and Bell (2015) argue that the research strategy is

dependentonhowthestudyisdesigned;thechoicespresentedareexperimental,cross-

sectional, longitudinal, case study and comparative. How the design is performed

indicatesifthestudyisaquantitativeoraqualitativeone.Denscombe(2014)presents

an alternative to the research strategies,which are survey, case study, experimental,

ethnographic,phenomenological,groundedtheory,actionresearch,systematicresearch

summary and method combinations. After reading about the several options one

particularstrategywaschosen.Wehaveoptedforaquantitativesurveysinceitisbest

suitable strategy for answering our purpose. Bryman and Bell (2015) describe the

strategy as a social survey carried out at a single point in time. Denscombe (2014)

describes a survey differently, presenting it as a way to measure aspects of social

phenomenaortrendsfollowedbythecollectionofdatathatleadstotheselectionofa

theory. Further, the research strategydoesnotonly refer to the researchphilosophy,

approach, design and methodology described in section three above, but also a

presentationoftheresearchprocessasawhole.Thisisfollowedbyadescriptionofthe

researchprocess.

4.2TheliteraturesearchTo build a relevant and reliable theoretical framework the literature search has

primarilyconsistedofscientificarticles.Theresearchprocessstartedwithanextensive

searchofrelevantliteratureandscientificarticleswerefoundprimarilyinKristianstad

University’s search engine Summon@HKR. This uses several article databases. Our

focus has been on peer-reviewed articles. The key terms used were CSR, ethical

consumption, consumer behavior, stakeholder pressure and ethical consumer. These

25

were then used in combination with other search terms such as generational

differences, consumerpressure, ethical products, boycott andpower of consumers to

findresearchpossibletoexplainifethicalproductsandethicalconsumptionaffectthe

buyingbehavior ofGenerationZ. Thekey termshavebeenusedon their ownand in

combination to provide a wider context of CSR, consumer behavior and ethical

consumption.Amixtureof old andnewarticleshasbeen searched for to get awider

understandingoftheusedconcepts.Sinceethicalawarenessissuggestedtohavebeen

increasedovertimebotholdanewarticleshavebeenhelpful.Duringtheexplorationof

articlesallsources foundwerecritically judgedtothebestofourability,which ledto

the rejection of a number of sources on the grounds of the relevancy for our study,

numberofcitation,ifitispeerreviewedandwherethearticlehasbeenpublished.The

followingpresentsthechoiceofrespondents.

4.3ChoiceofrespondentsAccording toStatisticsSweden82855childrenwereborn in1997 inSweden, in this

study 108 individuals have responded (Statistics Sweden, 1998). The study is

conductedonSwedishteenagersborn1997,sincetheseareapartofgenerationZand

theyrecentlyreachageofmajority.Thereasonforchoosingteenagersborn1997isthat

theywererelativelyeasytoreachouttosincetheystillare inHighSchooland itwas

possibletovisittheHighSchoolsandmakethesurveyfacetoface.Denscombe(2014)

explains this procedure as a method, which enables the researcher to gather more

answers.Thesampleshouldbeabletorepresentthepopulation,butthereisnodefinite

answertohowbigthesamplemustbe(Bryman&Bell,2015).Thisstudy isbasedon

teenagersthatstudiesat twoofKristianstad’sHighSchoolsatSöderportandWendes.

Thesamplecoversbothvocationalanduniversitypreparatoryeducationstogetawider

understandinginattitudestowardsethics.SinceHighSchoolsinKristianstadhavebeen

usedthesamplingmethodcanbeidentifiedasconveniencesampling.Theconvenience

samplingimpliesthatthesampleiseasilyaccessedfortheresearcherbutitcancause

difficultiestogeneralize.Theprocessofreceivingresponsesfromthe108teenagershas

ledtothefollowingchapterwerethedatacollectionmethodwillbepresented.

26

4.4DatacollectionmethodThe firststep in thedatacollectionprocesswastocallandemailHighSchoolswithin

Kristianstad and Hässleholm County. The subject of the thesis was described, which

university and which program we as authors study at. The High Schools were then

asked ifa surveycouldbeconductedduringclass timeandonly inclassescontaining

3rdyearstudentswhichiscontainingstudentsbornin1997.Weacknowledgethatthe

respondentgroupmayconsistofteenagersbornin1996and1998,beyondthedesired

targetgroupofteenagersbornin1997.Thisisduetostudents’abilitytoskiporrepeat

a year in school. It proved difficult to obtain any real commitments from the High

Schools since the responsible partywas hard to locate. As a result, personal visits to

someschoolswereconductedinthehopeofgettingabetterresponse.Itproveddifficult

toconductsurveysonseveralHighSchoolssincethestudentshadnationaltestsduring

thattimeandalotofotherstudentshadaskediftheycouldconductasurveyduringthe

sameperiod.Twooutofthefiveschoolsagreedtocollaborate.Oneschoolallowedthe

surveytobepostedontheinternalnetworksothatthestudentscouldansweronline;

theothertwoschoolsweretoooccupiedtoallowasurveytobeconducted.Themain

goal was to conduct the survey in classrooms since it allows for better attention;

dedication and thereforemore answers could be collected (Denscombe, 2014). Since

the teaching language in SwedishHigh Schools is Swedish, the surveywaswritten in

Swedish(Appendix1)andthentranslatedintoEnglish(Appendix2).

4.4.1Pilottest

Before conducting the survey in the classrooms, a pilot test was completed with 3

individuals that match the research group of Generation Z. In this pilot test vague

questionsweredetectedandcouldbealteredsothattherespondentscouldunderstand

thembetter.Ameetingwas thenscheduledwitha lectureratKristianstadUniversity,

who has considerable experience from conducting surveys. This meeting revealed

severalpossible improvements suchas changingmostof thequestions to conform to

theLikertscale,whichfacilitatesanalysis.

4.4.2FieldCollection

AtameetingwiththeprincipalofC4HighSchool,anagreementwasreachedandthe

surveywouldbereleasedon theschools Internetplatform forstudents,however, the

27

surveywas never released on the platform even though itwas sent to the principal.

Therewasalsoadiscussionwitha teacherat thehairdresserprogramatMilnerhigh

school.Unfortunately,a time forconducting thesurveycouldnotbe founddue to the

student’shecticschedule.DiscussionswereconductedwithprincipalsfromHässleholm

technical High School and Österäng High School since those schools have science

programs.However,thestudentsattheseschoolsweretobusywithnationaltestsand

other surveys. The survey was constructed on the premise that every school would

attend,thereforethesurveycontainsprogramsthatisnotrepresented.

Onthe29thAprilthefirstsurveywasconductedinoneclassonSöderportHighSchool.

Before the surveywas answered, the students were informed about the topic of the

thesis, that the survey was voluntary and that every individual answering was

answeringthesurveyanonymously.Aftertheinformation,thesurveywashandedout

to the students and they could begin answering the questions. After the survey was

collected,abrief reminderof that the respondentscouldemail if theywished to read

the completed thesis.On3rdMay a classwas visited atWendesHigh School and the

sameprocedureofexplainingtothestudentsaboutthetopic,voluntaryandanonymous

participationwas followed.On4thMay, SöderportHighSchoolwasvisitedagainand

threedifferentclassesweresurveyed,thesameprocedureofexplainingtothestudents

aboutthetopic,voluntaryandanonymousparticipationwasfollowed.

4.5.OperationalizationTheprocessofoperationalizationimpliesconvertingconcepts intomeasures(Bryman

&Bell,2015).Thisstudyusesaself-completionquestionnairewherethequestionsare

constructed as indicators for being able tomeasure the chosen concepts.Most of the

questionsmeasures attitudewith the help of a Likert-scale. Bryman and Bell (2015)

describes the Likert-scale as a cluster of attitudes that can be investigated, in our

questionnaireaseven-pointscaleisused.Thefollowingwillpresenttheoperationalized

conceptsofthisstudyintheformofdependent,independentandcontrolvariables.

4.5.1Dependentvariables

The dependent variables in this study is how frequently the individual teenager and

theirfamiliespurchaseethicalproductsandthetendencytoboycott.

28

4.5.1.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases

The ethical consumer is said to consider each purchase, think about the impact they

haveandtoreducetheirecologicalfootprint(Low&Davenport,2007).Tobeanethical

consumer it is required that theconsumerchooses theproducts that ismosthumane

and have least impact on other living beings (Crane&Matten, 2010). The process of

identifying the consumption of the individual teenager and of their families was

measured by asking how often they made purchases of ecological or/and Fairtraide

products.Itwasestimatedbyaseven-pointLikert-scalewhereonerepresentedrarely

and seven represented often. The frequency has beenmeasure on both an individual

andafamilylevel.Thefamilylevelisusedsinceconsumerbehaviorisaffectedbywhat

othersdo,akindofmimicking(Smithetal.,2005).Howoftenthefamilymakesanethic

purchasewasalsoaddedsincemostof the teenagersstill livewith theirparents.The

teenagers and the parents can affect each other to make better choices. The

measurement will be positive towards ethics if the teenager and the family is

purchasingecologicalandFairtradeproductsfrequently,closertooften.

4.5.1.2Boycott

Theseconddependentvariableisthetendencytoboycott.Kleinetal.(2004)claimthat

this extreme method can convey the consumers’ disagreement to companies. The

consumershavethepowerandcanthereforechoosetonotbuyproductsfromacertain

companyiftheybehavebadly.Ifthepersonhasmoretendenciestoboycott,theperson

ismeant tobemorepositive toethics.Themeasurement isbasedon threequestions

thatmention scenarioswhere the individual have to estimate their attitude from the

seven-point Likert-scalewhereone represent disagree and seven represents agree. If

theteenageranswersagreeitismeasuredasmorepositivetendencytoboycott.

4.5.2Independentvariables

The dependent variable in this study is ethical awareness, which is divided in four

differentalternatives;poorworkingconditions,poormanufacturing,animaltestingand

environmentalhazardousspraying.

29

4.5.2.1Ethicalawareness

PelligrinoandFarinelli(2009)statethatattributessuchasethicalpurchasesaremade

for safety, taste and environmental protection. Therefore, four questions were

constructed which aimed to investigate how different safety and environmental

protectionattributesaffectedapurchasemadebytherespondents.Thesefourfactors

were; poor working relationship, poor manufacturing process, animal testing and

environmental hazardous spraying. The four factors were later constructed into one

variable, whichmeasure ethical awareness. A higher score indicates amore positive

attitudetowardsethics.

4.5.3Controlvariables

The control variables in this study are important factorswhenpurchasing both ethic

andnotethicproducts,howethicaltheteenagersare,gender,education,whichsources

theytrust,iftheteenagersknowwhatCSRisandiftheyaremoreawarecomparedto

theirparents.

4.5.3.1GenderThe first control variable that will be used is gender, since researches argues that

womenindulgemoreinboycottthanmen(Kleinetal.,2004).Itisalsosaidthatwomen

caremore of CSR and ethics compared tomen (DelMarAlonso-Almeida et al., 2015;

Arlow, 1991). This could affect the answers and should, therefore, to be taken into

account. Thequestionwasdichotomousand therespondentcouldchose fromgirlor

boy.

4.5.3.2EducationEducation will be used as the second control variable since it can influence the

individual on ethical decision-making.Morals can be changed due to upbringing and

general education, it is argued that it is unclear but differences can appear (Crane&

Matten,2010).Sinceeducationcanaffecttheanswers,thevariableisimportanttotake

intoconsideration.Thealternativegivencanbeseeninappendix2,question2.

4.5.3.3KnowledgeofCSRÖbersederetal.(2011)statesthatifconsumersareawareofwhatCSRisitcanleadtoa

changed behavior in the decision making process and products from socially

30

responsible companies will be purchased. Therefore, the question asking the

respondentsiftheyareawareofCSRwasadded.Therespondentscouldchosebetween

yesorno.

4.5.3.4Higherawarenessthanparents

FreestoneandGoldrick(2008)statesthatconsumersarehighlyawareoftoday’sethical

issues. Additionally, Eisingerich et al. (2011) states that the awareness of ethical

consumption has increased over time. Twenge et al. (2012) discusses if the next

generation will be ‘’Generation We” Therefore the question of how the respondents

viewedthemselvesrelativetopreviousgenerationswereaddedintothequestionnaire.

ThequestionwasaddedintheformofLikertscale,whichenablesabetterdepiction.

4.5.3.5ImportantfactorswhenpurchasingImportantfactorswhenpurchasingecologicalproductsaresupportedbytheoryinthe

sense that Irwin (1999) states that lowerprices andbranded fashionare two factors

thatcoulddetermineifaecologicalpurchasesaremadeornot.PelligrinoandFarinelli

(2009) state that additional attributes such as ethical purchases aremade for safety,

taste and environmental protection. These theoretical standpoints developed the

factors;price,quality, environmental impact, if it looksgood, taste,whichareused in

thequestionnaire.Onewasrepresentedoflessimportantandsevenimportant.

4.5.3.6TrustablesourcesCarrigan,Szmigin,&Wright(2004)states thatconsumersdonotrelyonacompany’s

own statements such as; company literature, PR and advertising. In reference to this

theory the trustworthinessofseveralsourceswere tested in thequestionnaire.These

sourcesaremedia,companymarketing,familyandcelebrities.Onewasrepresentedof

lessimportantandsevenimportant.

4.5.3.7Ethicalprofile

ThelastcontrolvariablethatisusedistheethicalprofilewhereTheEthicalPositioning

Questionnaire (The EPQ) by Donelsen R, Forsyth (1980) has been helpful. The EPQ

consistoftwentystatementswheretherespondentshavetoestimateiftheydisagreeor

agreeonaseven-pointscale.Inourquestionnaire5statementswereusedandtheyare

31

constituted inquestion16-20(Appendix2), thesestatementsmeasureshowethic the

teenagersare.ThehighernumberoftheLikert-scalepresentstherespondentsasmore

positivetowardsethicsofquestion16-18.Thelasttwoquestionsofthequestionnaire

wereconstructedtomisleadtherespondents.Forthesequestionsthelowernumberof

theLikertscalerepresentsamorepositiveattitudetowardsethics.Thecontrolvariable

ethicalprofileisimportantforthestudysincethereisanabsenceofhowGenerationZ

isasethicalprofiles.

4.6.DataanalysisTo analyze the data the statistical computer program SPSS was used. Firstly, a

Cronbach’salphatestwasdonetotesttheinternalreliabilityofthemeasures.Secondly,

a factor analysis was done to check if the questions are grouped in the right

components. Thirdly, a Spearman´s correlation matrix is used to find statistically

significant relationships between variables. The data is assumed to be non-normal

distributedduetothesamplesize.Finally,thehypothesesaretestedbymultiplelinear

regressions.Thehypotheseswillbeconsideredsupportedifthestatisticalsignificance

isp<0.10,whichoftenisusedinbusinessandadministrationresearch(Pallent,2013).

4.7.StatisticallossAtthestartof thisstudythreehypotheseswas formulated.Theanalyzedresults from

SPSS showed that hypothesis three could not be answered, itwas therefore, decided

thatthethirdhypothesiswouldberemoved.Theformulationwas:

• GenerationZwillnotdisregardethicsiftheydesiretobuyaparticularproduct.Theproblemwithansweringthishypothesiswasthatthemeasurementsdidnotfit in

the context, so it was counted as a statistical loss. None of the formulated questions

were able tomeasure the thirdhypothesis, since theywere formulated tomeasure if

ethicsisnotimportantwhenmakingpurchasesofaspecificproduct.

32

4.8.Reliability&validityReliability implies that thestudyshouldgivethesameresults if thesamesamplewas

administratedatsecondoccasion,whichwouldincreasethestabilityofthecompleted

survey(Bryman&Bell,2015).Italsoreferstothequestionstrustworthinessandhow

theanswersaremeasuredasifthechosenmeasurementsaresuitablefortheexamined

concepts (Djurfeldt, Larsson & Stjärnhagen, 2010; Bryman & Bell, 2015). Due to the

time limits during this study there is no possibility to conduct a replication. Validity

refers to the study of conceptual and theoretical relevancy, how well the questions

answerwhat is studied (Djurfeldt,Larsson&Stjärnhagen,2010). Inotherwordshow

wellameasureofaconceptreallymeasuresaconcept(Bryman&Bell,2015).

In accordancewithDenscombe (2014) the sampling should reflect thepopulation for

thebestresult,thereforethesamplingshouldberandomlyselected.Thisstudyisbased

on convenience sampling.Convenience samplingmakes itmoredifficult to generalize

andthereliabilitycanbeconsideredaslessreliable.Theselectionofrespondentswere

teenagersborn1997andweare aware that the classes thatwere surveyed canhave

consistedofteenagersborn1996and1998also.Therequirementforparticipatingthe

study was that the respondents had reached the age of majority. This can have

decreased the reliability since the examined sample is teenagers born 1997 selected

from Generation Z. Further, the respondents can have overestimated their attitude

towardsethicstoappearasamoreethical, if this is thecasetheresultcanhavebeen

affectedandthereliabilitywouldbedecreased.Ifaretestwouldhavebeenmadelike

Bryman and Bell (2015) suggest, the respondents would have knowledge of the

questioninadvanceandtheresultwouldbemisleading.

All 108 answers from the questionnaire have been collected and compiledmanually,

thushavetheexcelfilebeencontrolledatseveraloccasionstoavoiderrors.Outofthe

108answeredquestionnaires106havebeencompletedandtwowere incomplete.To

assure the reliability of themeasurements, theywill be testedwithCronbach’sAlpha

before the analysis and the combination. Bryman and Bell (2015) describes it as

internal reliability, to investigate if the questions from the surveymeasure the same

concept,theresultofCronbachsalphaispresentedinTable5.4.1-5.4.5.Anacceptable

33

value of Cronbachs alpha should be higher than 0.7, thus is values below this also

acceptediftheyarenottosignificantlydeviant.

4.9.GeneralizabilityThegeneralizationofthefindingsfromthisstudywillbelimitedduetogeneralizability

being restricted to the studied population (Bryman & Bell, 2015). Since the study is

conductedonindividualsbornin1997,thefindingscanonlybegeneralizedforthatage

groupandnotforGenerationZatlarge.Thesampleisalsoaconveniencesample,which

isproblematictogeneralize.Furthermore,sincethestudyisconductedinSwedenand

on Swedish individuals born in 1997, the findings can only be generalized to the

Swedishcontext.

4.10.EthicalconsiderationsThe ethical considerations in this thesis are based on four principles claimed by

Denscome(2014).The firstprinciple isprotectionof therespondents,which includes

that the individuals will not be physical, psychological or personally harmed by

participating. Further,therespondentsshouldbeabletobenefitfromparticipatingin

thesurveyandwasthusofferedtoreceivethecompletedthesis.Inaccordancewiththe

first principle the respondents remained anonymous through the study and treated

accordingly to research ethics. The second principle is voluntariness, all of the

respondentswere informed that to participatewas voluntarily. The third principle is

thattheresearchwouldworkinanhonestandopenmannergiventhestudy,therefore,

a small presentation of the purpose was presented before the questionnaire was

handedout. Thevariablesand findingshavebeenobjectivelyevaluated inanhonest

manner.The lastprinciplebyDenscombe(2014) is to followthenational laws,which

havebeentakenintoconsiderationwhenselectingthesample.Allrespondentshadto

have reached age of majority to participate without legal guardians permission. The

nextsectionwillpresenttheanalysisofthestudyandthetwohypotheses.

34

5.AnalysisIn this section the outcomes of the survey are presented. First, a presentation of the

descriptivestatisticsisgiven.Thenthedependent, independentandcontrolvariablesare

presented. It is followedby the resultsof the correlationand linear regression test.This

chapterendswithasummaryoftheresults.

5.1DescriptivestatisticsIn the following section descriptive statistics will be presented to enable a greater

understandingoftheconductedstudy.108respondentsansweredthesurveyfromthe

5 different classes that were visited. Out of 108 respondents, 106 surveys could be

collectedwithcompleteanswers.Twosurveyswereincomplete.Thetwosurveysthat

wereincompletearestillpartofthefinaldataanalysissincetheyonlyrepresent1.8%

oftheselectiongroupandwillthereforenothaveanegativeimpact,whichwouldjustify

aremovalofthosetwosurveys.Theyarestillincludedsincetheyhaveagreatimpacton

someimportantvariablessuchasEthicalprofileandthetendencytoboycott.Asseenin

table5.1,72oftherespondentswerefemaleand36oftherespondentsweremale.This

meansthattwothirdsoftheentirerespondentgroupisfemale.

Therespondentswerethencategorizedintogroupsdependingonwhichprogramthey

studyattheirschool.Therespondentscouldchoosefromfivedifferentprograms.Three

different programs were represented. The programs children & leisure and society

were combined into the section other, as seen below in table 5.2. This was done to

createamorequantitativevariable.

Table&5.1&GenderFrequency Percent

Girl 72 66,7Boy 36 33,3Total 108 100

Table&5.2&ProgramFrequency Percent

Other 44 40,7Economy 64 59,3Total 108 100

35

Intable5.3descriptivestatisticsfordependent,independentandcontrolvariablesare

presented. Theminimum ranges from 1 to themaximum of 7, with small variations

depending on if the question used a Likert scale or not. Theminimumof the control

variable ethical profile stands out with a minimum of 2.67, which indicate that the

ethicalprofileoftherespondentsishigh,evenatitslowestpoint.

Themeanofthevariablesrangefrom1to7,exceptfromthecontrolvariablesgender

and program, which do not use a Likert scale. The variable ethical profile has the

highest mean of 6.1204, which indicate that the average ethical profile of the

respondentsisveryhigh.

5.2Cronbach’sAlphaTheCronbach’sAlphameasurestheinternalreliabilityamongseveralquestions.When

computingseveralquestionsintoone,theCronbach’sAlphawillshowifthosequestions

measure the same thing and if it therefore canbe used as a single variable. The first

Cronbach’s Alpha test was tested on question 4, which had four different factors

affecting if the respondents made a purchase or not. The variables poor working

relationships, poor manufacturing process, animal testing and environmental

hazardoussprayingweretestedtoseeifthesevariablescouldbecomputedintoone.As

Table&5.3&Descriptive&StatisticsN Minimum Maximum Mean Std..Deviation

Individual.frequency 106 1 6 3,29 1,597

Tendency.to.boycott 108 1,67 7 4,9877 1,23208

Ethical.awareness 106 1 7 3,1958 1,52167

Price 107 1 7 4,7 1,844

Queality 107 1 7 5,79 1,499

Environmental.impact 106 1 7 4,53 1,774

Looks.good 106 1 7 3,12 1,829

Taste 107 1 7 5,74 1,65

Ethical.Profile 108 2,67 7 6,1204 1,0663

Gender 108 0 1 0,33 0,474

Program 108 0 1 0,59 0,494

Media 108 1 7 3,39 1,49

Company.Marketing 108 1 7 3,4 1,516

Family 108 2 7 5,4 1,353

Celebrity 108 1 7 2,97 1,513

36

shown in table 5.4.1, the Alpha value for these four variables were ⍺=0.899, which

indicate that the fourvariablescouldbecomputed intoonesinglevariablemeasuring

ethicalawarenessamongtherespondents.

The next set of questions that were tested with Cronbach’s Alpha was question 11

through 14. Question 11 measured the respondent’s perception of their ethical

awarenesscomparedtotheirparents.Questions12to14wereconnectedwithboycott.

The test was first done on the four questions together and as seen in table 5.4.2 it

resulted in the ⍺=0.553, which indicate that the four questions do not have internal

reliabilitytomeasurethetendencytoboycott.

The testwas thenmadeonquestion12 through14.Asseen in table5.4.3 the⍺=0.61

which indicate that the questions have a higher internal reliability. This enabled the

questions tobe computed intoone variablemeasuring the tendency toboycott. Thus

thetesthavealowervaluethanusuallyisaccepted,weasauthorsdecidedtouseitfor

measuringthetendencytoboycott.

The final setofquestions testedwithCronbach’sAlphawerequestion16 through20

whicharequestionsregardingethicalstandpoints.Thetestwasconductedwiththefive

questionsandasseenintable5.4.4theCronbach’sAlphawasatalowresult,⍺=0.472,

whichindicatethattheinternalreliabilityamongthefivequestionsislow.

5.4.1%Cronbach's%Alpha%Ethical%awarenessCronbach's+Alpha N+of+Items

0,899 4

5.4.2%Cronbach's%Alpha%Tendency%to%boycott%1%Cronbach's+Alpha N+of+Items

0,553 4

5.4.3%Cronbach's%Alpha%Tendency%to%boycott%2Cronbach's+Alpha N+of+Items

0,61 3

5.4.4$Cronbach's$Alpha$Ethical$profile$1Cronbach's+Alpha N+of+Items

0,472 5

5.4.5$Cronbach's$Alpha$Ethical$profile$2Cronbach's+Alpha N+of+Items

0,783 3

37

The test was conducted again on question 16 through 18 to see if those questions

measured the same thing. As seen in table 5.4.5 the⍺=0.783,which indicate that the

three questions are internally reliable and the questions could be computed into one

variable measuring the respondents ethical profile. Question 19 and 20 was

misunderstoodandarethereforeseenasastatisticalloss.

5.3TestofnormalityTo test if the data collected are normally distributed or not, a test of normality was

conducted.Asseenintable5.5thetestofnormalityshowedthatthevariableindividual

frequencyhasap-value=0.0<0.1=⍺,whichindicatethatthevariableisnotnormally

distributed.

Thetablealsodisplaysthetestthatshowsthatthevariabletendencytoboycotthasap-

value=0.072<0.1=⍺,which indicates that thevariable isnotnormallydistributed.

Both these variables have a high number of respondents, which normally gives an

abnormaldistribution.

5.4Spearman’scorrelationmatrixSpearmancorrelationmatrixspecifiescorrelationcoefficientsthatindicateifthereisa

relationship between two variables (Pallent, 2013). The indication explains if the

correlationcoefficientsrelationshipispositiveornegativeandthenumericvaluesshow

thestrengthoftherelationship.Thecorrelationcoefficientsinthisstudyarepresented

intable5.6.Thesignificantlevelusedinthisstudyis10percent,tofindindicationsof

relationships.

Table&5.5&Test&of&NormalityKolmogorov(Smirnova Shapiro(Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.Individual9frequency 0,152 106 0 0,918 106 0Tendency9to9boycott 0,083 106 0,072 0,973 106 0,029

38

The correlation matrix shows a significant positive relationship between the

frequenciesofhowoftentheindividualmakesanethicalpurchaseandthetendencyto

boycott.Itisalsoshownwhethertheindividualhaveanethicalprofile.Thefrequencyof

ethicalpurchasesisalsosignificantpositivecorrelatedwithenvironmentalimpact.The

tendencytoboycottshowsasignificantpositiverelationshiptowardsethicalprofileand

environmental impact. The price of ethical products is significant positive correlated

withqualityandtaste.

Negative relationships shown in the correlation matrix is that there is a significant

negativerelationshipbetweenpriceandonhowoftentheindividualmakepurchasesof

ethical products. The frequency of how often the individual make ethical purchases

show a significant negative relationship towards environmental impact. Further, the

correlation matrix shows significant positive and negative relationships between

controlvariables,thesecorrelationindicationsshownorelevancyforsupportingornot

supportingthehypotheses. Thecorrelationmatrixwillnotbethebasefortestingthe

hypotheses;insteaditwillbebasedonamultiplelinearregression,whichispresented

in the next section. The significant level for testing the hypotheses will be set at 10

percent.

5.5MultipleregressionMultiple regression is a collection of techniques to explore relationships between

dependent and independent variables (Pallent, 2013). The techniques are based on

correlationsandallowseveralsetsofvariablestobeinvestigatedatthesametime.The

5.6$Spearman's$correlation$matrix1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

1 Individual3Frequency

2 Tendency3to3boycott ,463**

3 Ethical3Awareness E0,058 E0,096

4 Price E,234* E0,154 0,056

5 Quality 0,115 0,06 E0,062 ,221*

6 Environmental3impact ,443** ,342** E0,046 E0,008 ,253**

7 Looks3good3 E0,074 E0,114 0,105 0,125 E0,044 0,067

8 Taste E0,009 E0,101 0,011 ,308** ,416** 0,038 0,149

9 Ethical3Profile ,243* ,338** E0,167 E0,109 E0,143 0,142 E0,042 E0,086

10 Gender E0,116 E0,09 0,047 0,054 ,207* E0,156 E0,044 0,006 E,277**

11 Program 0,029 E0,177 0,125 E0,161 0,133 E0,116 E0,147 E0,079 E,210* ,227*

12 Media 0,091 0,159 E0,072 E0,021 0,164 0,188 0,14 0,101 0,075 E0,145 E0,06

13 Company3Marketing E0,05 0,093 E0,082 0,02 0,188 0,087 0,06 0,057 0,074 E0,012 E0,165 ,431**

14 Family E0,036 0,12 0,015 0,135 0,122 E0,006 E0,07 0,044 ,267** E0,016 E0,036 ,301** ,335**

15 Celebrity E0,08 E0,17 0,065 0,052 E0,007 0,056 0,162 E0,013 E0,004 E,272** E0,046 ,311** ,266** 0,166

**3Correlation3is3significant3at3the30.013level3(2Etailed).

*3Correlation3is3significant3at3the30.053level3(2Etailed).

39

multipleregressionwillshowinformationofthemodelasawholeandeachvariable’s

contributiontothemodel(Pallent,2013).

Inthisstudyastandardmultipleregressionisappliedwhichallowsfortheindependent

and control variables to be entered simultaneously into the equation. This studywill

presenttworegressionssincethedependentvariablesof thetendencytoboycottand

howoften the individualpurchaseethicalproductsareexamined. It is suitablewitha

standardmultipleregressionsincethesampleisofsufficientsizeandthescoresisnot

skewed.Thedependentvariablehowfrequenttheindividualmakesanethicalpurchase

islessskewedthanthetendencytoboycott.Itisalsoimportantthatmulticollinearityis

checked for. Multicollinearity can occur between independent variables and control

variablesbutalsobetweenthecontrolvariablesthemselves.Allmodelspassedthetest

of multicollinearity, since the VIF for how frequent individuals purchase ethical

productsliesbetween1.057and1.792seeappendix3.Forthetendencytoboycottthe

VIF lies between 1.052 and 1.802 see appendix 4. VIF values over 2.5 indicate

multicollinearity(Djurfeldt,Larsson,&Stjärnhagen,2010).

Beforetestingthehypotheses,allvariableswerecontrolledtoevaluatetherelevanceof

including or excluding them from the analysis. The control variables that remain are

price, quality, environmental impact, looks good, taste, ethical profile, gender,

education, trust tomedia, company’smarketing, family and celebrities. Theexcluded

onesaretheknowledgeofCSRandiftheteenagersconsiderthemselvesasmoreethical

aware then their parents. The dependent variables that remain are frequency of the

individuals ecological and Fairtrade purchases, and the tendency to boycott. The

dependent variable frequency of the family’s purchases is excluded. The excluded

variableswillnotbepresentedinthecontinuingofthisthesis.

Thehypothesestestedare:

• Hypothesis 1: Increased ethical awareness will not affect Generation Z´s

consumptionofethicalproducts.

• Hypothesis 2:GenerationZ consumerswill not boycott a product if the company

behavesinanunethicalway.

40

5.5.1Frequencyofethicalpurchases

The result of the multiple regression on the dependent variable how frequent the

individuals make ethical purchases is presented in table 5.7. Standardize Beta is

preferredtouse insteadof theunstandardized.ThestandardizedBeta isconvertedto

thesamescalesothevaluescanbecompared(Pallent,2013).

Toevaluatethemodel theadjustedRsquare iscontrolled. AdjustedRsquare isused

insteadofthenormalRsquaresinceitgivesamoretruevalueofthepopulation.When

testing the dependent variable frequency of ethical purchases 25.4 percent of the

variance is explained by the independent and control variables. The Coefficients

indicatewhich variablesmake a contribution to thedependent variable and theBeta

value indicates which variable that has the strongest unique contribution on the

dependentvariable.

TheBeta value in this table indicates that the variable environmental impacthas the

strongestuniquecontributiontothedependentvariablewithastandardizedBetavalue

5.7Regressiontest.FrequencyofethicalpurchaseStandardizedCoefficients

Beta t Sig.Constant 0,389 0,698Ethicalawareness 0,033 0,373 0,71Price -0,261 -2,783 0,007Quality 0,155 1,355 0,179Environmentalimpact 0,361 3,637 0Looksgood -0,1 -1,094 0,277Taste 0,098 0,941 0,349EthicalProfile 0,188 1,949 0,054Gender -0,007 -0,078 0,938Program 0,048 0,508 0,613Media 0,035 0,332 0,741CompanyMarketing -0,126 -1,194 0,236Family -0,03 -0,301 0,764Celebrity -0,067 -0,67 0,505

AdjustedR²:0,254VIFHighest:1,792F-value:3,671*p<0,05**p<0,1***p<0,001

41

of0.361.Thesignificantvalueof thevariablescontributing to thedependentvariable

indicatesthattherearethreevariablesthathaveastatisticallysignificantcontribution

on the dependent variable. The first variable contributing is pricewith a significant

value of 0.007. The second variable contributing is environmental impact with a

significant value of 0.0. The third variable contributing is ethical profile with a

significant value of 0.054. The model including all of the independent and control

variables is significant at p < 0.05. Hypothesis one states that an increased ethical

awarenesswouldnotaffectGenerationZ’sconsumptionofethicalproducts.However,

theethicalprofilehasapositiveeffectonthe frequencyofethicalpurchases,whereas

the ethical awareness has no effect on consumption of ethical products. Therefore,

thereissupportforhypothesisoneanditisaccepted.

5.5.2Tendencytoboycott

Theresultfromthemultipleregressionofthetendencytoboycottispresentedintable

5.8.

5.8Regressiontest.TendencytoboycottStandardizedCoefficients

Beta t Sig.Constant 2,423 0,017Ethicalawareness 0,048 0,539 0,591Price -0,119 -1,239 0,218Quality 0,201 1,71 0,091Environmentalimpact 0,212 2,092 0,039Looksgood -0,131 -1,413 0,161Taste -0,082 -0,764 0,447EthicalProfile 0,285 2,879 0,005Gender 0,012 0,12 0,905Program -0,152 -1,575 0,119Media 0,111 1,033 0,304CompanyMarketing -0,062 -0,576 0,566Family 0,078 0,769 0,444Celebrity -0,161 -1,581 0,117

AdjustedR²:0,21VIFHighest:1,802F-value:3,102*p<0,05**p<0,1***p<0,001

42

ThevarianceinadjustedRsquareinthedependentsvariabletendencytoboycottis21

percent explained by the independent and control variables. When looking at the

variables separately it is shown that the highest Beta value is found at the variable

ethical profile,with a Beta value of 0.285. Also shown in table 5.12 is the significant

value that indicateswhichvariableshavea statistically significant contribution to the

dependent variable. For the dependent variable tendency to boycott, there are three

uniquevariablesthatcontributetothedependentvariable.Thefirstvariableisquality

witha significantvalueof0.091.The secondvariable is environmental impactwitha

significantvalueof0.039.Thethirdvariableisethicalprofilewithasignificantvalueof

0.005.Themodelincludingtheindependentvariableandallofthecontrolvariablesis

significant at p < 0.05. Hypothesis two claims that Generation Z consumers will not

boycottaproductifthecompanybehavesinanunethicalway.Sincetheonlyvariable

measuringbadbehaviorfromcompaniesisenvironmental impact,whichissignificant

inthemodel,thehypothesistwoisnotsupportedandshouldberejected.Thefollowing

willgiveaconcludingdiscussionofthissection.

5.6ConcludingdiscussionThissectionhasanalyzedtheresults fromthesurvey,whichhaveresultedinfindings

thatethicalprofilehavethehighestmeanandtwothirdsof therespondentsaregirls.

The regression test showed thathypothesisone is acceptedand it cannotbeproven

that ethical awareness have an affect on the purchase behavior of Generation Z. The

regression test conducted on hypothesis two showed that hypothesis two is rejected

since it canbe shown thatunethicalbehaviorperformedby companies canaffect the

tendency of boycott by Generation Z. Even if one hypothesis is accepted and one

hypothesisisrejected,therearemanyofthefindingsthatareofsignificanceandshould

be considered as findings of interest. Generation Z is considered to have high ethical

profiles,ethicalawarenesshadnosignificantimpactandtheyarereadytoboycottifa

company not behave in an ethical manner. These findings were then connected to

theorytherefore,willthenextsectiondiscussthefindingsandconcludethethesis.

43

6.DiscussionandconclusionIn this final section a summary of the thesis and its findings are presented. It is followed by

the contributions. The section ends with limitations, suggestions for future research and

concluding comments.

6.1DiscussionThethesisaimsatansweringtheresearchquestion:howwillethicalproductssuchas

FairtradeandecologicalproductsaffecttheearlyGenerationZs’buyingbehavior?Past

research has been used to conceptualize the consumption of Generation Z and their

behaviortowardsethicalproducts.TheresultsfromthesurveyshowsthatGenerationZ

isconsideredtohavehighethicalprofiles,whichindicatesthattheycarefortheimpact

the product they purchase have on the environment. The minimum value of ethical

profileis2.67outof7,whichgeneratesameanof6.1204outof7asshownintable5.3.

Thetendencytoboycottalsoindicatedvaluesabovemean.GenerationZ’smeanofthe

tendency to boycott is 4.9877 out of 7, which indicates that they aremore ready to

boycott.

Theresultsaboveledtoasupportforthefirsthypothesis,thustheyarenotanethical

awaregeneration,whichcontradictsthatGenerationZshouldbethemostethicalaware

generation so far (Eisingerich et al., 2011). They are not affected to have a changed

buyingbehaviorforconsumptionofethicalproducts.Twengeetal.(2012)arguedthat

thenextgenerationcouldhavethreeoutcomesGenerationMe,nochangeorGeneration

We. The findings indicated that Generation Z highly care for ethics. According to

Twengeetal.(2012)individualswithhighercareforotherswillconsumemoreethical

products. The results show the opposite, Generation Z has high ethical concerns but

they do not show it in their consumption. Le and Shin (2010) claimed that an

understanding for CSR and ethical issues would increase the ethical consumption.

Ethicalawarenessdidnotshowsignificanceinthemodel,whichcanbeanexplanation

forwhyGenerationZdoesnotconsumemoreecologicalandFairtradeproducts.Auger

andDevinney(2007)arguedthatconsumersexpressthemselvestobemoreethicalbut

theydonot show itwhen theymakepurchases.Further, the teenagersmaybend the

ethics tomaketheirpurchasesokaytonotbeethical,whichourstudydisagreeswith

44

sincetheirethicalprofileishighandtheydocareforethics(Irwin,1999).Öbersederet

al.(2012)statethatiftheindividualreallywantsaproduct,ethicalissueswillnotbethe

firstpriority.Inagreementwiththisstudyahigherpricehasanegativeimpactonthe

frequencyofethicalpurchases.ToanswerTwengeetal. (2012)ofwhichoutcomethe

futurewillhave,themodelindicatesaGenerationWe.Thehighresultofethicalprofile

implies that Generation Z care for other and will chose the most humane solution

possible,whichagreeswithourresults(Crane&Matten,2010;Twengeetal.,2012).

Thesurveyalsoresultedinthatthetendencytoboycottwasincreasediftheindividual

were considered to have a higher ethical profile. The second factor that contributed

positively to themodel was environmental impact. So Generation Zwould boycott a

productifthecompanybehavedinanunethicalmanner,whichistheoppositeofwhat

washypothesized.However,themodelwithindependentandallcontrolvariableswere

significant at p< 0.05. The data collected resulted in findings that indicate that the

tendencytoboycottwas increasing if the individualwereconsideredtohaveahigher

ethicalprofile.This is in linewithFahyand Jobber(2012),whostate that the levelof

involvement is a significant factor,which can result in boycotts byGeneration Z. The

second factor that contributed positively to the model was environmental impact. It

showedthat thegreater theenvironmental impact is, thegreater isalso the tendency

forboycott.Thisindicatesthatifacompanybehavesinanunethicalway,GenerationZ

will boycott. These findings contradict the hypothesis that stated that Generation Z

wouldnotboycott ifacompanybehavedinanunethicalway.However,weareinline

withKleinetal. (2004) findingssincetheystatethatconsumersaremore involved in

companies’actionandwillthemselvestakeactiontosuchextremelengthsasboycotting

iftheythinkthatacompanybehaveinanunethicalway.Theauthorsalsodescribethe

fourfactorsofboycotting.Thesefourfactorshavenotbeensupportedbyourstudy.Our

findingsalsoagreeswithCraneandMattens(2010)statementthatconsumersaremore

aware of what they buy, they will do active choices to avoid companies that offer

productsthatdonotliveuptotheethicalstandardsthattheyexpect.Thefindingsand

Crane and Mattens statement disagrees with Öberseder et al. (2011) who says that

consumers do not care if a company has CSR or not. Klein et al. (2004) claims that

dedicationhasledtohighertendencyforboycotting,whichourstudysupports.Further,

45

DelMarAlonso-Almeidaetal.,(2015)statesthatfemalesaremoreopentoboycottthan

males,however,thiscouldnotbeprovenwithourstudy.

Oneofthebiggest findingmadeinthisstudyisthehighvaluefromtheethicalprofile

variable.InthebeginningofthisstudyweasauthorsthoughtthatGenerationZwould

be careless of ethics. The results from the survey have shown howwrong we were.

Since themeanof theethicalprofile showed6.1204and is consideredveryhigh.The

ethical awareness however, had no significant impact on Generation Z’s purchases.

Researchesarguedthattheethicalawarenesswouldbeincreasedovertime,butstillthe

meanwas3.1958(Eisingerichetal.,2011;Giesler&Veresiu,2014;Twengeetal.,2012).

Further,GenerationZwillboycottproductsiftheirdemandisnotethicalsatisfied.That

theyarewillingtoboycottalsocontributestotheethicalprofileandmakeGenerationZ

tohaveastrongethicalprofile.Theyareincontrastnotwillingtopayhigherpricesfor

ethicalproducts,sinceahigherpriceaffectthefrequencyofethicalpurchasesnegative,

thusitisarguedthatconsumerswouldpaymore(Auger&Devinney,2007).Toanswer

theresearchquestion,GenerationZarenotwillingtopaymoreforethicalproductsbut

theywillboycottifacompanybehavesinanunethicalmanner.Inthefuturecompanies

will therefore have to offer more ethical products with a lower price if they want

GenerationZasconsumers.

6.2Thestudy’scontributionsThissubsectionispresentingthetheoreticalandempiricalcontributionsofthisstudy.

6.2.1Theoreticalcontributions

Thetheoreticalcontributionofthisthesis isanewviewonhowGenerationZ,namely

the future buying force will make ethical purchases. Several researches have been

madeonthepreviousgenerationsbutlessforthefuturebuyingforce(Parment,2013;

Eastman&Liu,2012).ThisstudyofGenerationZinSwedenthereforecontributeswith

a small insightofhowGenerationZ isasethical consumers. It is shown that theyare

engagedinthepurchasingprocess,sincetheywillboycottiftheynotaresatisfied.For

companies thiswillbean important factorsinceGenerationZwillbe thenextbuying

forceandtheconsumersareking(Crane&Matten,2010).Itisalsoshownthattheywill

notpaymoreforethicalproducts,eveniftheybelievethatmoreethicalpurchaseswill

46

giveagreaterrangeofecologicandFairtradeproducts.Twengeetal.,2012discussed

the future generation and to evaluate from the ethical profile variable that indicated

high values, the next generation seems like a Generation We. This contradicts what

Twengeetal.(2012)discussed,thatsocialawarenessandcareforothershaddeclined.

Further, since the hypotheses are only tested on teenagers born in year 1997 of

GenerationZ,thehypothesesmustbetestedfortheotheryearsofGenerationZaswell,

orforthegenerationaswholetomakeagreatercontribution.

6.2.2Empiricalcontributions

This study contributes to the research as a prediction for the future consumption of

ethical products through Generation Z, which has been less researched compared to

earlier generations like the Baby boomers, Generation X and Generation Y (Parment,

2013; Eastman & Liu, 2012). Due to the increased ethical awareness, the ethical

purchasesshouldhaveincreasedwithitandtheconsumerbehaviorshouldhavebeen

changed (Eisingerich et al., 2011). This study is a small step towards knowing if the

futurepurchaseswillcontainmoreethicalproductssincetheconsumersareconsidered

moreethicalaware.Thefollowingwillpresentlimitationsofthisstudy.

6.3LimitationsThis study contributes with a better understanding of the purchase behavior of

Generation Z, but it is not without limitations. The first limitation is the selection of

respondents used in the survey. Since it is a convenience sample it prohibits the

findingstobegeneralizedintoagreatergroup.Thesecondlimitationisthatthestudy

only contains two hypotheses, with a greater number of hypotheses, a greater

understanding of Generation Zwould be achievable. Since there are limitationswith

thisstudythenextsectionwillbringupadvicesthatmightenablefutureresearchtobe

conductedmoreefficient.Thefollowingwillpresentsuggestionsforfutureresearch.

6.4FutureresearchWerecommend that if theresearch is replicated, theresearcherscouldusea random

selectionofrespondents.Thiswouldenabletheresearcherstogeneralizetheirfindings

toagreatergroup. Future researchcanalsoconductaqualitativemethod,andmore

precisely, interviews, which would grant a deeper understanding of Generation Z´s

47

behavior. Researchers could also beginwith interviews to get deeper understanding

and then form hypotheses that can be tested using a quantitative survey. Also, that

futureresearchisconductedonalltheagegroupsthatconsistwithinGenerationZ,not

only those born in 1997. These two combined will give a greater view of how

GenerationZbehavesand indicatehow theywill behave regardingethicalpurchases.

Thirdly, future research could comparegenerations.To research if thebeginningof a

generation share similarities with other beginnings of other generations, also if that

shift between generations is similar or not. Lastly, future research can conduct

researchesthatexaminethesameselectioninafuturestagetoseeiftheirbehaviorare

accordingtotheirstatementsornot.Thisthesiswillbefinishedwithsomeconcluding

comments.

6.5ConcludingcommentsThisstudyshowsthatGenerationZisanethicalgenerationbuttheirpurchasebehavior

is not affected by their ethical awareness. Still they would choose a company that

behaves in a more ethical manner before an unethical, even in the extreme form of

boycotting.

48

ReferencesAksak, E., Ferguson, M. A., & Duman, S. A. (2015, December 10). Corporate social

responsibility and CSR fit as predictors ofcorporate reputation: A global perspective. Public

Relations Review , 42, pp. 79-81.

Arlow, P. (1991). Personl Characteristics in College Students' Evaluations of Business Ethics

and Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics , 10 , pp. 63-69.

Auger, P., & Devinney, T. (2007). Do what consumers say matter? The misalignment of

preferences with Uncontrained ethicalintentions. Journal of Business Ethics , 76, pp. 361-

383.

Becker, C. (2016, February 24). Tre miljarder blir medelklass - snart sprids köpfesten över

hela världen. Retrieved March 20, 2016, from Veckans Affärer:

http://www.va.se/nyheter/2016/02/24/medelklassen-exploderar-i-tillvaxtlanderna---snart-

sprids-kopfesten-over-hela-varlden/

Belk, R. W. (1975, December). Situational Variables and Consumer Behavior. Journal of

Consumer Research , 2, pp. 157-164.

Bhattachary, C. B., Korschun, D., & Sen, S. (2009). Strengthening Stakeholder–Company

Relationships Through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives.

Journal of Business Ethics , 85, pp. 257-272.

Boulstridge, E., & Carrigan, M. (2001). Do consumers really care about corporate social

responsibility? Highlighting the attitude- behaviour gap. Journal of Communcation

Management , 4 (4), pp. 355-368.

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2015). Business Research Methods (Vol. 4th). Oxford , UK: Oxford

University Press.

Caroll, A. B. (1991, July/August). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward

the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons , pp. 39-48.

Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of ethical consumer - do ethics matter in

purchase bahviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing , 18 (7), pp. 560-578.

Carrigan, M., Szmigin, I., & Wright, J. (2004). Shopping for a better world? An interpretive

study of the potential ethical consumption within the older market. Journal of Consmer

Marketing , 21 (6), p. 401.417.

49

Carroll, A. B. (1979). A Three-dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance.

Academy of Management Review , 4 (4), pp. 497-505.

Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2010). Business etichs (Vol. 3). Glasgow, Great Britain: Oxford

university press.

Del Mar Alonso- Almeida, M., Navarrete, C. F., & Rodriguez-Pomeda. (2015, January).

Corporate social responsibility perception in business studetns as future managers: a

multifactorial analysis. Business Ethics: A European Review , 24 (1), pp. 1-17.

Denscombe, M. (2014). The Good Research Guide- for small-scale social research projects

(Vol. 3:1). Maidenhead, UK: Open International Publishing .

Dijksterhuis, A., Smith, P. K., Van Baren, R. B., & Wigboldus, D. H. (2005). The

Unconscious Consumer: Effects of Environment on Consumers Behavior. Journal of

Consumer Psychology , 15 (3), pp. 193-202.

Djurfeldt, G., Larsson, R., & Stjärnhagen, O. (2010). Statistisk verktygslåda -

samhällsvetenskaplig orsaksanalys med kvantitativ metoder 1 (Vol. 2). Lund, Sverige:

Studentlitteratur.

Eastman, J. K., & Liu, J. (2012). The impact of generational cohorts on status consumption:

an explantory look at generational cohort and demographics on satus consumption. Journal of

Consumer Marketing , 29 (2), pp. 93-102.

Eisingerich, A. B., Rubera, G., Seifer, M., & Bhardwaj, G. (2011). Doing Good and Doing

Better despite Negative Information?: The Role of Corporate Social Responsibility in

Consumer Restistance to Negative Information. MIT Sloan Management Review , 14 (1), pp.

60-75.

Ernst & Young . (2015). What if the next big disruptor isn't a waht but a who? . Ernst &

Young LLP. Ernst & Young .

Forsyth, R. D. (1980). A Taxonomy of Ethical Ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology , 39 (1), pp. 175-184.

Freestone, O. M., & Goldrick, P. J. (2008). Motivations of the Ethical Consumer. Journal of

Business Ethics , 79, pp. 445-467.

Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its

Profits. The New York Times Magazine, .

50

Giesler, M., & Veresiu, E. (2014, October). Creating the Responsible Consumer: Moralistic

Governance Regimes and Consuer Subjectivity. Journal of Consumer Research , 41, pp. 840-

857.

Godson, M. (2013). Relationship marketing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Institute of Grocerie Distribution. (2008). Institute of Grocerie Distribution. Retrieved April

5, 2016, from http://www.igd.com/Research/Sustainability/Ethical-consumerism/

Irwin, J. (1999). Introduction to the special issue on ethical Trade-Offs in consumer decision

making. Journal of Consumer Psychology , 8 (3), pp. 211-213.

Jamali, D. (2007). A Stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: A fresh

perspective into theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics , 82 (1), pp. 213-231.

Klein, J. G., Smith, C. N., & John, A. (2004, July 3). Why we boycott: Consumer

Motivations for Boycott Participation. Journal of marketing , 68 (3), pp. 92-109.

KPMG View. (2016). KPMG View , 1, pp. 1-48.

Lee, K.-H., & Shin, D. (2010, October 26). Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The

linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention. Public Relations Review , 36,

pp. 193-195.

Low, W., & Davenport, E. (2007). To boldly go... exploring ethical spaces to re-politicise

ethical consumption and fair trade. Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 6, pp. 336-348.

Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (2007). Studying the ethical consumer: A review of research.

Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 6, pp. 253-270.

Pallent, J. (2013). SPSS survival manuala step by step guide data analysis using IBM SPSS

(Vol. 5). Boston: MA: Open University Press.

Parment, A. (2013). Generation Y vs. Baby Boomers: Shopping behavior, buyer involvment

and implications for retailing. Journal of Retailing adn Consumer Services , 20, pp. 189-199.

Patel, R., & Davidson, B. (2011). Forskningsmetodikens grunder. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Pellegrini, G., & Farinello, F. (2009). Organic consumers an new lifestyles . British Food

Journal , 111 (9), pp. 948-974.

51

Schlossberg, M. (2016, February 11). Teen Generation Z is being called 'millennials on

steroids,' and that could be terrifying for retailers. Retrieved March 9, 2016, from Business

Insider UK: http://uk.businessinsider.com/millennials-vs-gen-z-2016-2

Shaw, D., McMaster, R., & Newholm, T. (2015). Care and commitment in ethical

consumption: An exploration of the "Attitude-Behavior Gap". Journal of Business Ethics .

Spiller, R. (2000). Ethical Business and Investment: A Model for Business and Society.

Netherlands: Springer .

Statistics Sweden. (1998). Befolkningsstatistik 1997. scb.se.

Twenge, J. M., Freeman, E. C., & Campbell, K. W. (2012, March 5). Generational

Differences in Young Adults' Life Goals, Concern for others asn Civic Orientation, 1966-

2009 . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 102 (5), pp. 1045-1062.

Öberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Gruber, V. (2011, June 12). ‘‘Why Don’t Consumers

Care About CSR?’’: A Qualitative Study Exploring the Role of CSR in Consumption

Decisions. Journal of Business Ethics , 104, pp. 449-460.

52

Appendix1–SwedishQuestionnaire

Etisk konsumtion

1. Kön

Tjej

Kille

2. Vilket program läser du?

Samhälle

Ekonomi

Natur

Barn och fritid

Frisör

Annat (specificera)

3. Vet du vad Corporate social responsibility (CSR) är?

Ja

Nej

Starkt emot Starkt för

Dåliga arbetsförhållande

Dålig

tillverkningsprocess

Djurförsök

Miljöfarlig besprutning

Annat (Specificera)

4. Mina köp påverkas av ett företags.. (Ett svar per alternativ)

5. Handlar du ekologiskt/Fairtrade?

Ja

Nej

Vetej

53

Sällan Ofta

6. Hur ofta handlar du ekologiskt/Fairtrade

Inte alls

viktigt Väldigt viktigt

Pris

Kvalité

Miljöpåverkan

För det ser bra ut

Smaken

Annat (specificera)

7. Följande egenskaper är viktiga när jag handlar Ekologisk/Fairtrade (Ett svar per alternativ)

8. Handlar din familj ekologiskt?

Ja

Nej

Vetej

Sällan Ofta

9. Hur ofta handlar din familj ekologiskt/Fairtrade

Inte alls

viktigt Väldigt viktigt

Pris

Kvalité

Vad andra köper

Vad som är mode

Tillverkningsprocess

Smaken

Annat (specificera)

10. Följande egenskaper är viktiga när jag handlar (Ett svar per alternativ)

54

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

11. Jag tror att jag är mer medveten än vad mina föräldrar är när det gäller att handla ekologiskt och/

eller Fairtrade

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

12. Jag tror att om flera kunder hade valt att inte köpa produkter från oetiska företag så hade det funnits

mer ekologiskt och Fairtrade

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

13. Jag tror att det gör skillnad om jag väljer att handla varor som är ekologiska och/eller Fairtrade

märkta produkter

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

14. Jag kan tänka mig att undvika att köpa en produkt om den inte uppfyller mina etiska krav

Instämmer

inte

Instämmer

helt

Media

Företagets

marknadsföring

En närstående

(Familj,släkt,vänner)

Kändis (Bloggare,artist

etc.)

Annat (Specificera)

15. Följande källor litar jag på när det gäller företags produkter (Ett svar per alternativ)

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

16. Människor bör se till att deras handlingar aldrig avsiktligt skadar en annan människa

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

17. Om en handling kan skada en oskyldig, bör den inte genomföras

55

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

18. Det är aldrig nödvändigt att offra andras välmående

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

19. Vad som är etiskt varierar från en situation till en annan

Instämmer inte Instämmer helt

20. Vad som är etiskt varierar från land till land

Tack för din medverkan!

56

Appendix2–EnglishQuestionnaire

Ethical consumption english

1. Gender

Girl

Boy

2. Which program do you study?

Society

Business

Science

Children and Leisure

Hairdresser

Other (please specify)

3. Do you know what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is?

Yes

No

Strongly

against Strongly for

Poor working

relationships

Poor manufacturing

process

Animal testing

Environmental

hazardous spraying

Other (please specify)

4. My purchases are affected by a companies.. (One respons per option)

57

5. Do you purchase ecological/Fairtrade?

Yes

No

Do not know

Rarely Often

6. How often do you purchase ecological/Fairtrade?

Not at all

important

Very

important

Price

Quality

Environmental impact

Because it looks good

Taste

Other (please specify)

7. The following attributes are important when I purchase ecological/Fairtrade (One respons per option)

8. Does your family purchase ecological/Fairtrade?

Yes

No

Do not know

Rarely Often

9. How often does your family purchase ecological/Fairtrade?

58

Not at all

important

Very

Important

Price

Quality

What others purchase

What is fashion

Manufacturing process

Taste

Other (please specify)

10. The following attributes are important when I make a purchase

Disagree Agree

11. I think that I am more aware than my parents regarding purchasing ecological/Fairtrade

Disagree Agree

12. I think that if more people choose not to purchase products from unethical companies there would

be more ecological and Fairtrade

Disagree Agree

13. I think that it makes a difference if I choose to buy products that are ecological and/or Fairtrade

Disagree Agree

14. I would consider to avoid purchasing a product if that product does not meet my ethical demands

Disagree Agree

Media

Company marketing

A relative

(Family,friends)

Celebrity (Blogger,artist)

Other (please specify)

15. I trust the following sources regarding companies products (One respons per option)

59

Disagree Agree

16. People should make certain that their actions never intentionally harm another

Disagree Agree

17. If an action could harm an innocent other, then it should not be done

Disagree Agree

18. It is never necessary to sacrifice the welfare of others

Disagree Agree

19. What is ethical varies from one situation to another

Disagree Agree

20. What is ethical varies from one country to another

Thank you for your participation!

60

Appendix3–Regression:frequencyofethicalpurchases

Appendix4–Regression:tendencytoboycott

Regression)test:)Frequency)of)ethical)purchase)with)VIFStandardized*Coefficients Collinearity*Statistics

Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIFConstant 0,389 0,698Ethical*awareness 0,033 0,373 0,71 0,946 1,057Price G0,261 G2,783 0,007 0,831 1,203Quality 0,155 1,355 0,179 0,558 1,792Environmental*impact 0,361 3,637 0 0,742 1,348Looks*good G0,1 G1,094 0,277 0,877 1,141Taste 0,098 0,941 0,349 0,669 1,495Ethical*Profile 0,188 1,949 0,054 0,784 1,275Gender G0,007 G0,078 0,938 0,797 1,255Program 0,048 0,508 0,613 0,829 1,206Media 0,035 0,332 0,741 0,66 1,515Company*Marketing G0,126 G1,194 0,236 0,66 1,515Family G0,03 G0,301 0,764 0,745 1,342Celebrity G0,067 G0,67 0,505 0,74 1,351

Adjusted*R²*:*0,254VIF*Highest*:*1,792FGvalue*:*3,671*p<*0,05**p<*0,1***p<0,001

Regression)test:)Tendency)to)boycott)with)VIFStandardized*Coefficients Collinearity+Statistics

Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIFConstant 2,423 0,017Ethical*awareness 0,048 0,539 0,591 0,95 1,052Price B0,119 B1,239 0,218 0,832 1,203Quality 0,201 1,71 0,091 0,555 1,802Environmental*impact 0,212 2,092 0,039 0,746 1,34Looks*good B0,131 B1,413 0,161 0,889 1,124Taste B0,082 B0,764 0,447 0,668 1,497Ethical*Profile 0,285 2,879 0,005 0,78 1,282Gender 0,012 0,12 0,905 0,801 1,249Program B0,152 B1,575 0,119 0,825 1,212Media 0,111 1,033 0,304 0,662 1,509Company*Marketing B0,062 B0,576 0,566 0,656 1,525Family 0,078 0,769 0,444 0,744 1,344Celebrity B0,161 B1,581 0,117 0,738 1,354

Adjusted*R²*:*0,21VIF*Highest*:*1,802FBvalue*:*3,102*p<*0,05**p<*0,1***p<0,001