Why Would I Bother? Young Consumers’ Knowledge, Attitudes and Behavior in Relation to Voluntary Carbon Offsetting

Virksomheder oplever et stigende pres på bæredygtighed fra myndigheder (lovgivning), forbrugere, samt presse og interesseorganisationer. Klimakompensation markedsføres som en strategi over for interessenter og forbrugere for at formidle virksomhedens bæredygtighed. Artikler og forskning har indtil nu primært fokuseret på tekniske løsninger for klimakompensation, herunder beregninger for CO2 neutralitet og hvilke projekter og aktiviteter, der kan kompensere for CO2 udslip.

Spørgsmålet om hvordan forbrugerne og kunderne opfatter og reagerer på markedsføringen af klimakompensation, har ikke fået meget opmærksomhed, men er afgørende for hvordan virksomheder kan tilrettelægge og markedsføre deres klima kompensation.

Forskningsprojektet skal gennem forbruge kvalitative interviews belyse næste generation forbrugeres syn på klimakompensation og give input til. hvordan virksomheder kan markedsføre klimakompensation.

Forskningsspørgsmål / Problem formulering

Projektet skal frembringe indsigt i næste generation forbrugerens opfattelse af klima kompensation, og på det grundlag give indikationer på hvordan virksomheder kan markedsføre klimakompensation over for målgruppen. 

• Hvilken viden har forbrugerne i målgruppen om klimakompensation?
• Hvilke forhold ved klimakompensation påvirker unge forbrugeres opfattelse af troværdighed?
• Hvilken betydning har klimakompensation for målgruppens valg af produkter og virksomheder?
• Hvilke ”trigger points” er relevante over for forbrugerne i markedsføring af klimakompensation

Bæredygtighed er defineret som et kerneområde på for IBA og integreres i stigende grad i fag og uddannelser. Bæredygtighed er også et begreb, som i stigende grad påvirker salg og markedsføring gennem nye forretningsmodeller, produkter, positionering og markedsføring. Ny viden om markedsføring af bæredygtighed og klimakompensation er derfor meget relevant for alle uddannelser, der omhandler salg og markedsføring / kommunikation.

Klimakompensation er forsat et nyt og relativt ukendt begreb for et stort antal virksomheder. Der mangler indsigt i forbrugernes opfattelser og præferencer. Projektet vil derfor give virksomheder et bedre grundlag for troværdigt at kommunikere og markedsføre klimakompensation.

Relevante aktiviteter og handlinger i projektet er:

• Kortlægning af teori og empiri relateret til klima kompensation
• Organisering af projektet, herunder inddragelse af studerende og undervisere på IBA
• Dataindsamling og bearbejdning
  • Virksomheder og ressource-personer for at kortlægge emnet
  • Unge forbrugeres opfattelse og holdning til bæredygtighed og klimakompensation
• Vidensformidling – rapport / publikation, presse, arrangementer

Forskningsprojektets metode bygger på 3 faser:

1. Analyse af eksisterende litteratur og sekundære data relateret til klima kompensation
2. Forundersøgelse i form af interviews med virksomheder og ressource personer
3. Hovedundersøgelse ved dybde interviews med personer i målgruppen 10-30 år

Eksisterende litteratur er primært søgt ved brug af Ebsco og Google Schoolar for at danne et overblik over relevant sekundær information om klimakompensation.

En to-trins proces blev anvendt for at opnå kvalitativ indsigt i danske forbrugeres opfattelse og holdning til klima kompensation. Det første trin i forskningsdesignet var en eksplorativ undersøgelse baseret på seks ekspertinterviews med virksomheder og ressourcepersoner relateret til bæredygtighed. Interviewene blev gennemført som onlineinterviews og gav relevant indsigt til andet trin i forskningsdesignet – forbrugerinterviews.

I alt 25 personlige interviews med danske personer i alderen 18 til 30 år blev gennemført som online videointerviews efter en semistruktureret interviewguide. Interviewpersonerne blev udvalgt baseret på en række demografiske variabler, herunder alder, køn, erhverv og geografisk placering. Data blev indsamlet i juni og juli 2021, video optaget og transskriberet. En gruppe på otte bachelorstuderende assisterede med forskningsstudiet og medvirkede efter træning og under supervision med at gennemføre interviewene.

For at sikre gennemsigtighed i den primære dataanalyse blev softwareprogrammet Nvivo brugt. Softwaren muliggør en struktureret og transparent analyse af datasættet. Alle interviewpersoner er anonyme i datasættet, kun identificeret efter alder, køn, geografi og erhverv.

Interviewguiden indeholdt en række dybdegående spørgsmål efter et intuitivt flow, startende med generelle spørgsmål relateret til bæredygtighed og derefter indsnævret til spørgsmål relateret til klima kompensation. Spørgsmål blev defineret for at kortlægge kernekonstruktionerne i TPB-modellen (Ajzen 1991,2013): holdning og adfærdsmæssige overbevisninger, subjektive normer og opfattet adfærdskontrol.

Ajzen, I. (2013) ‘CONSTRUCTING A THEORY OF PLANNED BEHAVIOR QUESTIONNAIRE’. Measurement Instrument Database for the Social Science 2013, 8

Ajzen, I. (1991) ‘The Theory of Planned Behavior’. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (2), 179–211

Projektets teoretiske ståsted

Det fundamentale tema for den valgte problemstilling i dette projekt er forbrugeradfærd relateret til bæredygtighed generelt og klima kompensation specifikt.

Forskningsprojektets teoretiske ståsted bygger på Theory of Planned Bahavior som grundlag for at analysere og forstå forbrugeradfærd generelt.

Teorien og modellen er udviklet af Martin Fishbein og Icek Ajzen i 1980. Teorien er siden blevet en ”klassikker” i marketing værktøjskassen selvom substansen i teorien hentes i psykologien. Teorien siger, at der er tre kernekomponenter, nemlig holdning, subjektiv norm og opfattet adfærdskontrol, som sammen former individets adfærdsmæssige intentioner.

TPB er anvendt som grundlæggende struktur for spørgeguide til kvalitative interviews, og ikke mindst analyse af empiriske resultater i artiklen. Fordelen med at anvende TPB er, at den giver en anerkendt struktur for analyse og forståelse af forbrugeradfærd.

Ajzen, Icek (1991). “The theory of planned behavior”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 50 (2): 179–211. 

Forskningsprojektets teoretiske ståsted bygger også på en artikel af Davidson, som beskriver de grundlæggende elementer i klimakompensation, herunder ”CO2 markets”, og hvilken rolle den frivillige klimakompensation har denne sammenhæng.

Davidson, S. (2008) ‘Voluntary Carbon Offsetting: An Overview’. Business Law Review 29 (11), 253–258

Projektets empiri

Companies, organisations and individuals around the globe are recognising the importance of reducing their carbon footprint to combat climate change. This trend has grown year by year since the late 1980s when the first mainstream agenda concerning holes in the ozone layer emerged (Davidson 2008). There is an increased availability of sustainable products, a move that has been motivated by consumers’ increasing demand for sustainable products and legislators’ continual imposition of lower caps on greenhouse gas (GHG) allowances.

Companies that do not strategically manage their carbon footprint may face negative attention. The trend towards companies working to reduce their carbon footprints has been further strengthened in the countries which implemented the UNFCCC Kyoto Protocol in 2005, in addition to their working towards the new ambitious objectives in the Paris Agreement in 2020.

Davidson (2008) suggests that investors and analysts must recognise that carbon emissions represent a real business cost and must look at carbon assets and liabilities as they would as any other element on a company’s balance sheet.

Companies aiming to reduce their emissions usually look to produce their goods and services with minimum emissions (Davidson 2008). Some companies choose to act beyond the legislative requirements and aim to offer carbon-neutral products and services (ibid). For emissions that cannot be reduced further, companies may find voluntary carbon offsetting (VCO) to be a method that allows them to achieve a lower environmental footprint (Warburg et al. 2021).

Voluntary carbon offsetting is increasing in popularity among companies as stakeholder pressure to take environmental action grows (Warburg et al. 2021).

The VCM operates independently of the regulated market and enables companies and individuals to purchase carbon offsets on a voluntary basis without the need to comply with legal obligations

The VCM enables businesses, governments, non-profit organisations, universities, municipalities, and individuals to offset their emissions outside a regulatory regime (Davidson 2008). Hence, the credits generated in the VCM do not go towards meeting any legally binding reduction targets. Contrary to the RCM, the VCM has developed independently of the UN, regional collaborations, and national governments and was formed with the aim of driving finance to activities that reduce GHG emissions. The VCM allows consumers to get directly involved, for example by personally offsetting an airplane flight by voluntarily paying an extra fee (Datt, Luo, and Tang 2020).

Voluntary carbon offset programmes increased in popularity in the years after 2005, as the CDM methods became more established, and the corporate social responsibility (CSR) agenda was gaining momentum (Warburg et al. 2021). Companies increasingly began to recognise that there was a demand for these voluntary instruments beyond the regulated schemes linked to the Kyoto Protocol (Davidson 2008). Today, the VCM enables companies to effectively tackle climate change by driving resources to projects which deliver verified emissions reductions (Datt, Luo, and Tang 2020).

In the early stages of the VCM, the quality and hence the validation of the carbon offset programmes varied significantly, and a lack of standardised quality criteria generated concern from the wider offset market. To some extent the reputation of the VCM is still tainted by the poor-quality schemes introduced in its early days (Datt, Luo, and Tang 2020).

A number of factors seem to affect the relationship between VCO and consumer behaviour. One factor is the complex nature of VCO and associated schemes. As the number of VCO initiatives  increases, so does the number of providers offering verified emission reduction (VER) schemes  to companies, which commonly comprise carbon offset exchanged in the voluntary market for carbon credits (Spash and Theine 2016). Verified emission reductions are usually certified through a voluntary certification process, such as the Voluntary Carbon Standard (Blaufelder and Mannion 2021).

The complexity of VCO schemes and the variation in the quality of VER schemes leads to critical environmental consumption and hence the method is perceived to be less trustworthy to some consumers and observers (Lange, Schwirplies, and Ziegler 2017). While companies may have anticipated that their VCO schemes would increase consumers’ goodwill towards the companies and consumer preference for their products, the critical and sceptical approach to VCO schemes in the media and among consumers has led to a lack of consumer trust in some companies and allegations of greenwashing – thus consumers continue their existing buying behaviour (Lange, Schwirplies, and Ziegler 2017).

Another complicating factor in the relationship between VCO and consumer behaviour is highlighted by Warburg et al. (2021), who found that individuals tend to trivialise the harmfulness of an environmentally harmful product and overestimate the effectiveness of VCO for environmental protection, which suggests a general lack of knowledge among consumers about VCO.

Traits in and motivations for consumers’ purchases of VCO are well covered in recent literature (e.g. Denton, Chi, and Gursoy 2021; (Chen 2020); (Schwirplies et al. 2019). Chen (2020) suggests that guilt avoidance plays an important role in consumers’ willingness to buy VCO and Schwirplies et al. (2019) find that mainly young, educated consumers with a strong environmental mindset engage in offsetting activities.

Voluntary carbon offsetting provides companies and consumers access to engage in voluntary trading in emission reductions they are responsible for themselves (MacKerron et al. 2009).

The VCO market has been subject to considerable uncertainty and controversy (MacKerron et al. 2009), (Lange, Schwirplies, and Ziegler 2017). The real effect of VCO programmes has been questioned, and VCO programmes have also been accused of contributing to consumers’ evasion of responsibility in that the programmes can be used as an excuse for not changing one’s emission-producing behaviour in a way that actually reduces one’s own GHG emissions.

Often, projects and activities in the VCO programmes, for example forest preservation, have been questioned in terms of their real ability to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere, and in terms of whether the projects would have been initiated regardless of the VCO programme (Lange, Schwirplies, and Ziegler 2017).

Still, well-managed and documented VCO projects may provide not only reduced CO2 in the atmosphere, but also advantages in relation to climate change (MacKerron et al. 2009). Voluntary carbon offsetting programmes create media coverage, public awareness of climate changes and causes, and allow consumers to take action on their concerns for the climate and sustainability.

The relationships between VCO and consumer behaviour are well documented (see e.g. Segerstedt and Grote 2016; Gössling et al. 2007; and Zhang et al. 2019a). Some studies have focused on demographic differences in the relationship between VCO and consumer behaviour  (Xiao and McCright 2014) and (Denton, Chi and Gursoy 2021).

Several studies have focused on consumer behaviour and VCO in the context of specific industries. They have been well documented in the aviation industry, which was one of the first industries to adopt VCO in their offerings to consumers, allowing consumers to voluntarily offset their journey by paying an extra fee (Burns and Cowlishaw 2014), (MacKerron et al. 2009), (Tyers 2018) and (Gössling et al. 2007).

Voluntary carbon offsetting allows airline passengers to pay the monetary equivalent of their CO2 emissions for a particular trip, where funds received are donated to third-party programmes that offset CO2 by the same amount emitted on the passenger’s trip (Kim et al. 2016). Programmes range from protection of forest areas to installation of solar panels in public buildings, with reputable programmes being certified for their effectiveness (Kim et al. 2016).

Studies indicate that the number of airline passengers that are willing to pay for VCO products is low, ranging from 1% to 10% of air travellers (Choi, Ritchie, and Fielding 2016); (Schwirplies et al. 2019).

Two key reasons are often mentioned in relation to consumers’ lack of willingness to participate in aviation industry VCO programmes: first, lack of knowledge and awareness among consumers in relation to carbon offset activities, and second, passengers in general perceive carbon offset programmes as confusing and hence see them as lacking transparency and credibility (Babakhani, Ritchie, and Dolnicar 2017).

Kim et al. (2016) investigated how consumers’ knowledge influenced their willingness to participate in aviation industry VCO. Their results revealed that less VCO knowledgeable consumers were driven primarily by their perceived behavioural control, while highly knowledgeable consumers exhibited a distinct influence from positive anticipated emotions. The study therefore indicates that extending consumers’ knowledge about VCO enables consumers to act on their positive attitude towards combatting climate change.

Research by Ritchie, Kemperman, and Dolnicar (2021) indicates that consumers prefer local programmes to international programmes, and that local programmes are effective in mitigating emissions.

The relationship between perceived credibility of VCO products and consumers’ purchase intention in relation to aviation industry VCO products has been outlined in a study by Zhang et al. (2019b). The study found that the information that passengers received about VCO programmes and the source of message through which they received the information impacted their willingness to participate in the VCO programmes. In general, passengers had little trust towards VCO programmes, but the source of the information they received influenced their intention to participate in VCO programmes (Zhang et al, 2019).

Babakhani, N., Ritchie, B.W., and Dolnicar, S. (2017) ‘Improving Carbon Offsetting Appeals in Online Airplane Ticket Purchasing: Testing New Messages, and Using New Test Methods’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 25 (7), 955–969

Blaufelder, C. and Mannion, P. (2021) A Blueprint for Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets | McKinsey [online] available from <https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability/our-insights/a-blueprint-for-scaling-voluntary-carbon-markets-to-meet-the-climate-challenge> [28 September 2021]

Burns, P.M. and Cowlishaw, C. (2014) ‘Climate Change Discourses: How UK Airlines Communicate Their Case to the Public’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 22 (5), 750–767

Chen, M. (2020) ‘The Impacts of Perceived Moral Obligation and Sustainability Self‐identity on Sustainability Development: A Theory of Planned Behavior Purchase Intention Model of Sustainability‐labeled Coffee and the Moderating Effect of Climate Change Skepticism’. Business Strategy & the Environment (John Wiley & Sons, Inc) 29 (6), 2404–2417

Choi, A.S., Ritchie, B.W., and Fielding, K.S. (2016) ‘A Mediation Model of Air Travelers’ Voluntary Climate Action’. Journal of Travel Research 55 (6), 709–723

Datt, R., Luo, L., and Tang, Q. (2020) ‘Corporate Choice of Providers of Voluntary Carbon Assurance’. International Journal of Auditing 24 (1), 145–162

Davidson, S. (2008) ‘Voluntary Carbon Offsetting: An Overview’. Business Law Review 29 (11), 253–258

Denton, G., Chi, H., and Gursoy, D. (2021) ‘An Examination of Critical Determinants of Carbon Offsetting Attitudes: The Role of Gender’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1–23

Gössling, S., Broderick, J., Upham, P., Ceron, J.-P., Dubois, G., Peeters, P., and Strasdas, W. (2007) ‘Voluntary Carbon Offsetting Schemes for Aviation: Efficiency, Credibility and Sustainable Tourism’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15 (3), 223–248

Kim, Y., Yun, S., Lee, J., and Ko, E. (2016) ‘How Consumer Knowledge Shapes Green Consumption: An Empirical Study on Voluntary Carbon Offsetting’. International Journal of Advertising 35 (1), 23–41

Lange, A., Schwirplies, C., and Ziegler, A. (2017) ‘On the Interrelation between the Consumption of Impure Public Goods and the Provision of Direct Donations: Theory and Empirical Evidence’. Resource & Energy Economics 47, 72–88

MacKerron, G.J., Egerton, C., Gaskell, C., Parpia, A., and Mourato, S. (2009) ‘Willingness to Pay for Carbon Offset Certification and Co-Benefits among (High-)Flying Young Adults in the UK’. Energy Policy 37 (4), 1372–1381

Ritchie, B.W., Kemperman, A., and Dolnicar, S. (2021) ‘Which Types of Product Attributes Lead to Aviation Voluntary Carbon Offsetting among Air Passengers?’ Tourism Management 85, 104276

Schwirplies, C., Dütschke, E., Schleich, J., and Ziegler, A. (2019) ‘The Willingness to Offset CO2 Emissions from Traveling: Findings from Discrete Choice Experiments with Different Framings’. Ecological Economics 165, N.PAG-N.PAG

Segerstedt, A. and Grote, U. (2016) ‘Increasing Adoption of Voluntary Carbon Offsets among Tourists’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 24 (11), 1541–1554

Spash, C.L. and Theine, H. (2016) Voluntary Individual Carbon Trading [online] available from <https://epub.wu.ac.at/5206/> [14 December 2021]

Tyers, R. (2018) ‘Nudging the Jetset to Offset: Voluntary Carbon Offsetting and the Limits to Nudging’. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 26 (10), 1668–1686

Warburg, J., Frommeyer, B., Koch, J., Gerdt, S.-O., and Schewe, G. (2021) ‘Voluntary Carbon Offsetting and Consumer Choices for Environmentally Critical Products—An Experimental Study’. Business Strategy and the Environment 30 (7), 3009–3024

Xiao, C. and McCright, A.M. (2014) ‘A Test of the Biographical Availability Argument for Gender Differences in Environmental Behaviors’. Environment and Behavior 46 (2), 241–263

Zhang, B., Ritchie, B., Mair, J., and Driml, S. (2019a) ‘Is the Airline Trustworthy? The Impact of Source Credibility on Voluntary Carbon Offsetting’. Journal of Travel Research 58 (5), 715–731

Zhang, B., Ritchie, B., Mair, J., and Driml, S. (2019b) ‘Can Message Framings Influence Air Passengers’ Perceived Credibility of Aviation Voluntary Carbon Offsetting Messages?’ Journal of Sustainable Tourism 27 (9), 1416–1437

• - Professionsbachelor International handel og markedsføring (1)