European Journal of Marketing 36,5/6 548 European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 5/6, 2002, pp. 548-569. # MCB UP Limited, 0309-0566 DOI 10.1108/03090560210423014 Societal marketing and morality Andrew Crane Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK, and John Desmond University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK Keywords Marketing, Ethics, Social responsibility, Marketing concept, Decision making Abstract Societal marketing emerged inthe early 1970s,promising a more socially responsible and ethical model for marketing. While the societal marketing concept has attracted its adherents and critics, the literature on societal marketing has remained sketchy and underdeveloped, particularlywithrespecttoitsunderlyingandlargelyimplicit)moralagenda.Bymakingthemoral basisofsocietalmarketingmoreexplicit,thisarticleprimarilyseekstoofferamoralcritiqueofthe societal marketing concept. By situating discussion within notions of psychological and ethical egoism,arguesthat,inmoraltermsatleast,thesocietalmarketingconceptisclearlyanextensionof the marketing concept, rather than a fundamental reconstruction of marketing theory. While acknowledging the use of the societal marketing concept in practice, this use is problematized with respecttoanumberofcriticalmoralissues.Inparticular,thequestionofwhoshouldandcandecide whatisinthepublic'sbestinterests,andelucidatethemoraldeficienciesoftherational-instrumental processuponwhichmarketingdecisionsarefrequentlyrationalised.Suggeststhatattentionshould berefocusedawayfromprescribingwhat``moral''or``societal''marketingshouldbe,andtowards developing an understanding of the structures, meanings and discourses which shape and explain marketing and consumption decision making and sustain its positive and negative impacts on society. Introduction The dominant model of marketing, based on the notion of consumer sovereignty, assumes that the role of the marketing process is technical rather thanmoralinnature±itspurposeistotranslatedemandintoproduction,notto legislate on what demand or production might be ``good'' Dixon, 1992). This is largely the marketing ``science'', as derived from the Harvard University economic school of thought Jones and Monieson, 1990) and subsequently presented in major textbooks, and as traditionally taught in business schools Desmond, 1998). However, during the 1960s, constituencies critical of marketing emerged and grew in power and influence see Kotler, 1972; Levy and Zaltman, 1975; Gabriel and Lang, 1995, pp. 152-72; Arnold and Fisher, 1996). While many marketers became defensive about such developments, the upshot of this was a series of attempts both theoretical and practical) to address these criticisms see, for example, Dawson, 1969; Lazer, 1969; Spratlen, 1970; Bell and Emory, 1971; Feldman, 1971; Sweeney, 1972). Philip Kotler was central to these efforts to incorporate social and moral concerns into marketing ``science'',andhiscontributioncanbebracketedintwoways.First,heproposed an extension of the marketing technologies into non-business arenas Kotler and Levy, 1969). Thus, in prompting marketers to benefit society by The research register for this journal is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisters The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/0309-0566.htm