Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap ☆ Michal J. Carrington a, ⁎, Benjamin A. Neville b , Gregory J. Whitwell c a La Trobe University, Australia b University of Melbourne, Australia c University of New South Wales, Australia abstract article info Article history: Received 1 January 2012 Received in revised form 1 August 2012 Accepted 1 September 2012 Available online xxxx Keywords: Ethical consumerism Intention–behavior gap Ethnography Prioritization Habits Implementation intentions Ethical consumerism is a burgeoning movement, yet ethically-minded consumers rarely purchase ethically. Understanding obstacles to ethical consumption is limited. This study explores the underlying mechanics of the ethical purchase intention–behavior gap in the context of consumers' daily lives. The study employs multiple qualitative methods across multiple sites, explores the intention–behavior gap in observed modes of shopping behavior, and uses an interpretive approach. The analysis reveals four interrelated factors affect- ing the ethical intention–behavior gap: (1) prioritization of ethical concerns; (2) formation of plans/habits; (3) willingness to commit and sacrifice; and (4) modes of shopping behavior. Awareness of these four factors provides both strategic and tactical implications for marketing managers seeking to reach the elusive ethical consumer. Understanding and enhancing ethical consumption – closing the gap – has positive outcomes for the future sustainability of economies, societies and environments. © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Ethical consumerism is a burgeoning social movement. Main- stream consumers increasingly express concerns about the ethicality and impact of their consumption choices upon the environment, ani- mals and/or society (De Pelsmacker, Driesen, & Rayp, 2005; Shaw & Shui, 2002). For example, recent UK market data, suggests the ethical food and drink market represents 8% of the total food and drink market (Cooperative Bank, 2009). Despite embracing the values of ethical con- sumerism, most consumers rarely support their beliefs at the check-out counter (Auger & Devinney, 2007; Belk, Devinney, & Eckhardt, 2005; Szmigin, Carrigan, & McEachern, 2009). For example, 89% of UK con- sumers report they have ethical issues of concern (Lazzarini & de Mello, 2001), however, a 2005 study reports that only 30% of UK consumers con- vert these concerns into ethical purchase intentions, and only 3% actually purchase ethical products (Futerra Sustainability Communications Ltd, 2005). Researchers refer to the misalignment of ethical intentions into ac- tual behavior alternately as the attitude–behavior, intention–behavior or words–deeds gap (Carrigan & Attalla, 2001; Elliot & Jankel-Elliot, 2003). The ethical consumerism, psychology, social psychology and con- sumer behavior domains variously document, but they do not explain the intention–behavior gap (Bagozzi, 2000; Sheeran, Trafimow, & Armitage, 2003; Szmigin et al., 2009). A growing body of research attempts to understand ethical purchase decision-making (e.g., De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Shaw & Clarke, 1999; Shaw & Shui, 2002; Shaw, Hogg, Wilson, Shui, & Hassan, 2006, Shaw, Shiu, Hassan, Bekin, & Hogg, 2007; Vermeir & Verbeke, 2008), but these studies primarily focus on the formation of ethical purchase intentions. The translation from intentions to actual buying behavior remains poorly understood (Auger, Burke, Devinney, & Louviere, 2003; Belk et al., 2005; De Pelsmacker et al., 2005; Szmigin et al., 2009). This study sheds light on the intention–behavior (I–B) gap in an ethical consumption (EC) context. The study addresses Fisk's (1998, p.661) reflection that: “a sustainable society is a great idea, but how can the world's 5.7 billion people be redirected to adopt sustainable society practices? No one knows”. Marketers express similar frustra- tions and acknowledge that marketing strategies to reduce the EC I–B gap provide marginal impact at best (Crane & Matten, 2004; Polonsky, 1995). Understanding and bridging the inconsistencies between what ethically-minded consumers intend to purchase and actually consume hold significant benefits for academia, industry, and society at large. To provide insights into the mechanics of why ethically-minded con- sumers often fail to enact their ethical purchasing/consuming inten- tions, the study draws upon the methodological framework presented by Edmondson and McManus (2007). The study combines a qualitative research methodology with grounded analysis (Glasser & Strauss, 1967) to explore the EC I–B gap. Journal of Business Research xxx (2012) xxx–xxx ☆ The authors thank Liliana Bove, University of Melbourne, and Graham Sewell, University of Melbourne, for reading and commenting on an early version of this article. The authors also thank Journal of Business Research Associate Editor Drew Martin and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions. ⁎ Corresponding author at: La Trobe Business School, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Tel.: +61 3 94792178, +61 3 9479 5971. E-mail address: M.Carrington@latrobe.edu.au (M.J. Carrington). JBR-07642; No of Pages 9 0148-2963/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.09.022 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Business Research Please cite this article as: Carrington, M.J., et al., Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap, Journal of Business Research (2012), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.09.022