Bachelor’s Thesis
Spring 2015
Consumers’ Perceptions of
Responsibility for Sustainability
& the Use of Messages
Economics and Business Administration - Sustainability
Student: Marc Sejr Eggen
ID: 20112401 / 510260
Supervisor: Jessica Aschemann-Witzel _________________________________________________________________________
Characters: 108,991 excl. blanks (1,600 in figures and tables)
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
2 of 61
Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4
2. Introduction and Research Focus ....................................................................................... 6
3. Context and Literature ...................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Assumptions ............................................................................................................... 12
4. Methodology .................................................................................................................... 13
4.1 Interviews ................................................................................................................... 14
4.2 Photo Elicitation ......................................................................................................... 15
4.3 Sampling ..................................................................................................................... 16
4.4 Selected Photos for Interview ..................................................................................... 19
4.5 Interview Guide .......................................................................................................... 21
4.6 Methods for Analysis .................................................................................................. 23
4.7 Changes to Methodology ............................................................................................ 24
5. Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 26
5.1 Separate Interviewees ................................................................................................. 26
5.1.1 Franck ................................................................................................................... 27
5.1.2 Christensen ........................................................................................................... 28
5.1.3 Genefke ................................................................................................................ 29
5.1.4 Jacobsen ............................................................................................................... 30
5.1.5 Pedersen ............................................................................................................... 32
5.1.6 Roed ..................................................................................................................... 33
5.1.7 Jessen ................................................................................................................... 35
5.1.8 Skou ..................................................................................................................... 37
5.1.9 Hansen .................................................................................................................. 38
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
3 of 61
5.1.10 Bach ................................................................................................................... 40
5.2 Cumulative Tendencies .............................................................................................. 41
5.2.1 Before and After Photos ....................................................................................... 43
5.2.2 Sorting Photos ...................................................................................................... 44
6. Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 46
6.1 Personal Characteristics .............................................................................................. 46
6.2 Perceptions .................................................................................................................. 48
6.3 Fear ............................................................................................................................. 49
6.4 Influence of Process and Interviewer ......................................................................... 51
7. Quality of Research .......................................................................................................... 53
7.1 Limitations .................................................................................................................. 53
8. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 55
8.1 Luchs & Miller Model ................................................................................................ 56
8.2 Use of Messages ......................................................................................................... 57
9. List of References ............................................................................................................. 59
9.1 Personal Interviews ..................................................................................................... 59
9.2 Theoretical Literature ................................................................................................. 59
10. List of Appendices .......................................................................................................... 61
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
4 of 61
1. Executive Summary
This Bachelor’s Thesis focused on consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for
sustainability, or PRS. It dealt with how consumers feel responsible for acting in a
sustainable manner. It also dealt with how consumers attributed responsibility for
sustainability and sustainable behaviour to companies and governments. This focus was
based on a model by Luchs & Miller dealing with the distribution of the responsibility for
sustainability between these three actors; consumers, companies, and governments. The
goal of the thesis and its research was twofold: One was to explore what happens to
consumers’ PRS when they are presented with photos carrying messages about
responsibility for sustainability. This represented the main research question. The other was
to explain why Luchs & Miller’s quantitative model looks the way it does; this was done by
answering how consumers talk about their responsibility for sustainability, as well as what
influences consumers’ PRS. These represented the two secondary research questions; the
answers to which would also help answer the main research question. Aside from the
theory by Luchs & Miller, the research was built up around two other theoretical papers on
consumers’ PRS, one on the use of fear appeals in messages, as well as a definition of the
term perception.
Because of the nature of its research questions, the thesis focused on qualitative research
and methods. The methodology chosen for this thesis and research was centred on the
method of photo elicitation; bringing pictures into the interview setting and discussing
them. The interview guide was structured so that it first posed introductory questions asking
for the consumer’s view on her or his responsibility, as well the responsibility of companies
and governments. Next step was to introduce 22 different “photos” - pictures, graphs,
tables, drawings - along with one video into the interview process. The interviewees were
asked to pick two photos that caught their attention the most, and were asked questions
about these photos in connection to responsibility for sustainability. The interviewer had
selected three other groups of photos as well as the video and introduced those into the
interview for similar questioning. The final step was re-asking the introductory questions to
see whether the interviewees changed the way they answered them. Ten interviewees were
gathered in eight interviews.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
5 of 61
The analysis of the interview data was done by looking at tendencies and themes within the
interviewee’s individual answers as well as adding the ten separate analyses to look for
cumulative tendencies.
When discussing the results and analysis and concluding on the research, many themes and
points stood out:
Consumers’ PRS did not change much by being subject to photo discussions. The
interviewees came into the interview with strong perceptions on the responsibility for
sustainability, which were hard to affect or change. But it did still show the importance of
educating consumers with new knowledge that can challenge and evolve their PRS.
The words used by the consumers to describe their responsibility for sustainability were
such as influence, power, consequences, and future generations. These words indicated a
focus on human beings; not nature or animals. Hence for messages to have a true impact on
consumers, they should focus on the human and social aspects of sustainability.
Many things influence the consumers’ PRS. The trends that emerged from the research
showed five personal characteristics that are important to how a consumer creates and
evolves her or his PRS. These characteristics are: The consumer’s optimism or scepticism.
Whether the consumer has a logical or sensitive mind-set. The information’s relatability to
the consumer’s everyday life. The consumer’s ability to put things into perspective. And
the degree of knowledge that the consumer has about sustainability.
These conclusions all helped explain the Luchs & Miller model. They also make up the
basis for a suggestion on how to design messages regarding responsibility for sustainability.
Finally, the author suggested how these trends and hypotheses could be tested by further,
quantitative research.
_________________________________________________________________________
Count: 3,573 characters excl. blanks
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
6 of 61
2. Introduction and Research Focus
This Bachelor’s Thesis deals with the sense of responsibility felt by consumers regarding
the broad term of sustainability. The most commonly used definition of sustainability
originates from the 1987 Brundtland Report - nicknamed after the chairman of the EU
Commission behind the report. Its definition sounds: “Sustainable development is
development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.” (World Commission on Environment and
Development, 1987, p. 41). In most instances it is further defined as sustainable
development in environmental, social, and economic terms.
This thesis consists of eight chapters, including the executive summary and this one. This
chapter of the thesis will clarify exactly what the thesis and its research will focus on as
well as argue why this research focus is important. This represents the first stage of the
research design and defines the basis which all subsequent research choices are made in
accordance with.
This thesis deals with the topic of consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for
sustainability, from now on mainly referred to as consumers’ PRS. This term is understood
as how consumers feel and think about who bears the responsibility for sustainable and
unsustainable behaviour, and in particular the responsibility they feel for their own
behaviour. Previous research has been done on consumers’ felt of responsibility, although
not in a large quantity - some of this research is mentioned in this chapter and the
subsequent one on Context and Literature. However, one particular research paper helps
form the basis of this thesis: Luchs & Miller’s 2012 paper entitled Sustainability,
Responsibility, and Consumption: A Scale of Consumers’ Felt Responsibility for
Sustainability. This paper included a model simplifying responsibility for sustainability and
through quantitative methods produced a version of the model showing how consumers
distributed responsibility for sustainability between three actors: Consumers, governments,
and companies (Luchs & Miller, 2012, p. 12). This model is shown on the next page.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
7 of 61
Figure 1: Average distribution of responsibility for sustainability
(Luchs & Miller, 2012, p. 12)
This particular model allows for a simplification of the discussions about responsibility for
sustainability due to its two axes of three aspects as well as the three actors splitting the
responsibility between them. This thesis and research seeks to both expand on the previous
research - by Luchs & Miller as well as others on same topic - and dig deeper into some of
the more exploratory and explanatory aspects not mentioned in the original research papers.
These aspects contain such aspects as consumers’ feelings, reactions, explanations, and
argumentations when talking about responsibility for sustainability. Most of these papers
mention the qualitative methods used to create a starting point for their subsequent research
on responsibility for sustainability, but do not expand on the findings and themes of this
exploratory research. The purpose of the focus and methods in this thesis is then to
understanding underlying structure of feelings and perceptions consumers have regarding
responsibility for sustainability; how interviewees speak about responsibility for
sustainability. This could thereby serve to validate previous research and add an important
explanation of why e.g. the distribution in Luchs & Miller’s model looks as it does.
ProductionPurchase &
usageDisposal
Environmental
Social
Economic
19%
29%
52% 52%
20%
28%
42%
30%
28%
36%
29%
35%
30%
35%
35%
26%
35%
39%
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
8 of 61
However, the main focus of this research will be to expand on the previous research by
focusing specifically on the impact negative or positive messages can have on consumers’
perceptions of responsibility. This thesis does not deal with finding a far-reaching
perspective but rather understanding the reasoning behind consumers’ PRS. The conclusion
of the thesis will then include suggestions for which words, messages, themes, and
arguments - that seem to affect consumers’ PRS - can be the focus of further, more
quantitative research.
For both focuses - building new theory and elaborating previous theory - this thesis will
focus on qualitative methods to explore these aspects. As part of both digging deeper into
and possibly expanding on previous research, this research will use the technique of photo
elicitation which “is based on the simple idea of inserting a photograph into a research
interview” (Harper, 2002, p. 13). Through use of photos carrying messages concerning
responsibility for sustainability, the research will try to affect consumers’ perceptions and
feelings of responsibility. Hence, this research will be based on an exploratory research
question:
What happens to consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for sustainability
when shown messages?
Secondary research questions will be such as: How do consumers talk about their
responsibility for sustainability? What influences consumers’ perceptions of responsibility
for sustainability? Aside from adding to the academic research within this field, this thesis
and research will create valuable knowledge for the worlds of business and governance.
Sustainability is a buzzword for companies and governments, so any further understanding
of consumers’ perceptions and feelings can be extremely valuable. Companies in particular
should know how consumers are affected by messages and their own perceptions of
responsibility. Social marketing and CSR are in this day and age a part of most companies’
communications and marketing strategy. As another research team puts it in their 2011
paper on consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for sustainability; “From a marketing
perspective, what is more significant is the consumer’s sense of responsibility, and how
they perceive and ascribe responsibilities for the environmental consequences of products,
production impacts, purchase behaviour, and consumption and disposal behaviours.”
(Wells et al., 2011, p. 8). So any implications that the consumers’ PRS would have for the
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
9 of 61
design and use of social and commercial marketing are important to understand. Such
marketing is often done proactively, but companies can also be subject to an attack from
organisations such as Greenpeace and would then benefit from knowing on which premises
to counter that attack. In frank terms, companies and governments can possibly learn how
to manipulate consumers’ PRS with messages or decrease the responsibility attributed to
them.
Ultimately, consumer behaviour is incredibly hard to predict even though large amounts of
research - academic and commercial - are done within this field. This research focuses on
the thoughts behind that behaviour - and will try to conclude on how to keep these thoughts
and emotions into consideration when acting as a consumer, company, or government.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
10 of 61
3. Context and Literature
As mentioned in the previous chapter, sustainability is a buzzword in our current society. It
influences national and international political discussions and agendas. It affects
companies’ choices of how to construct their supply chain, marketing plans, and many
more aspects of their value chain. It is the focus of extensive academic research trying to
explain and understand the many underlying aspects of this broad term. Consumers,
politicians, advocates, and many others try to stir up the debate and make other people take
a stand and act on this topic. But the question of who bears the responsibility for
sustainability is hard to answer. What can be concluded is that going towards a sustainable
future has to include consumers; so anything done to further understand how they feel, is
very important.
Aside from the sustainability definition in Chapter 2, another definition is important to
include in this thesis. It relates to discussions of consumers’ perceptions of responsibility
for sustainability - perception is the way we see and understand things. The way in which
we form our perceptions is based on 3 stages: exposure, attention, and interpretation
(Solomon, 2013, p. 46).
Felt responsibility for sustainability as well as the effect of messages is an under-researched
aspect of sustainability. However, important research has been done on this topic within the
past decade and a handful of research papers are worth mentioning in this regard. These
papers, and the theory it includes, will all be an important part of the subsequent analysis
and discussions in this thesis.
Already mentioned is the work done by Luchs & Miller in their 2012 research paper. The
paper produces a nine-aspect model with two axes or dimensions. On one axis are the
behaviours of Production, Purchase & usage, and disposal. On the other axis are the
outcomes of Environmental, Social, and Economic (Luchs & Miller, 2012, p. 4). The
division of responsibility between three actors - consumers, companies, and governments -
allows for a clear distribution of responsibility. Furthermore, their research created to
factors to predict product choices/behaviour: Consumers’ Felt Responsibility for
Sustainability (CFRS) and Sustainability Importance (SI). They conclude that a high sense
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
11 of 61
of responsibility and placing a high importance on sustainability means higher probability
of sustainable consumer purchases/choices (Ibid., p. 17).
Some of the earlier research on consumers’ PRS was Devinney, Auger, Eckhardt &
Birtchnell’s The Other CSR from 2006. They talk about consumer social responsibility, or
CnSR, being the counterpart of CSR done by companies - and that a gap exists between
consumers’ opinion and behaviour (Devinney et al., 2006, p. 31). They also argue that
demography does not matter when looking at behaviour and introduce five steps for
companies to be more proactive towards CnSR (Ibid., pp. 36-37).
In 2009, a very interesting research paper by O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole focused on the
impact of pictures and messages on people’s engagement with climate change. It focused
on finding appeals that would stimulate engagement and how fear images affect personal
priorities of importance and personal feeling of being able to do something. Numerous
things were concluded (O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole, 2009, pp. 375-377): Climate change
does not appeal to a personal and tangible level. Internal individual fear controls cause less
engagement and felt responsibility. It is important to include small-scale and everyday
impact in messages for them to have an effect. Images that made climate change feel most
important to people meant less personal feeling of being able to do something.
The final literature to be mentioned for now is the paper Behaviour and Climate Change:
Consumer Perceptions of Responsibility by Wells, Ponting, and Peattie in 2011. They
focused on trying to predict the behaviour of consumers, diving behaviours into categories.
What they found was that perceived responsibility was lower for leisure and travel
activities, things that are not part of everyday life. Also, they talk about understanding the
effect it has on consumers when responsibility is shared between multiple actors
responsible. They conclude that most consumers want governments to lead the way in
climate change solutions and that “Effectively communicating such developments to
consumers in such a way that encourages them to take responsibility for changing their
behaviours will be an important future challenge for commercial and social marketers
alike.” (Wells et al., 2011, pp. 30-31).
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
12 of 61
3.1 Assumptions
Based on the literature and context described above, some assumptions will be made and
thereby form the basis of and influence the work done in this thesis.
First of all, consumers are assumed to have generally positive attitudes towards
sustainability. But in spite of their positive attitudes, consumer behaviour is not assumed to
be equally sustainable - a positive attitude does not actual behaviour, only intent.
Demographic variables - sex, age, education, income level, etc. - are assumed to be able to
help explain some differences in opinion, but cannot be said to stand alone as an
explanation of sustainability attitude and behaviour (Wells et al., 2011, pp. 4-5). Hence it
will for the most part not influence the qualitative research done in this thesis. Finally, as
learned through O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole’s Fear Won’t Do It, one has to be careful to not
use too much fear; if fear is used it must be limited to avoid paralysis.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
13 of 61
4. Methodology
The research focus described in Chapter 2 gives the arguments and direction for the
methodology; focusing on consumers’ thoughts and feelings clearly imply the use of
qualitative methods. Essentially, this thesis and research will use personal interviews to try
to answer the stated research questions. This chapter will first provide an overview of the
thoughts behind the chosen methodology. Next up are explanations of the use of interviews
and photo elicitation, before describing the author’s choices made regarding sampling,
photos chosen for photo elicitation, the interview guide, and finally choices for analysis of
the data from the interviews.
The focus of this thesis and research is to see the world through the eyes of consumers - in
this case represented by the interviewees. Qualitative research is not meant to be
representative; but instead exploratory. Because of this, the number of interviews and
interviewees cannot be predetermined: When the data from new interviews becomes
redundant and too similar to the rest of the analysis, the research has hit a saturation point.
When hitting the saturation point, the researchers can then redesign the methodology and
interview guide if they feel more, but different data is needed. If the data gathered from
interviews has been substantial enough to answer the research questions, there is no need
for further interviews and data gathering. While the number of interviews cannot be
predetermined, researchers often set a goal of doing at least ten interviews, as the saturation
point is less likely to arrive before that number. This thesis and research was no different
and set the target at ten interviews.
When using an explanatory research focus and question, the research should take on a
cross-sectional design. This means the research will provide data and observations at only
one point in time - a snapshot so to speak - and not for a period or duration of time. Hence,
it is a retrospective study. This disadvantage of this snapshot and retrospective approach is
that the research does not include the feelings and thoughts of the consumers in the time
after the interviews. By doing another interview at a later point, it could become clearer if
and how the interview and talks within it had had an impact on the interviewee’s thoughts
and feelings, possibly even by help developing them. However, using the cross-sectional
design allows for better comparison of variables within the research.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
14 of 61
Because of its research focus and question, this thesis does not use method triangulation;
using both qualitative and quantitative methods to increase the strength of the data. Instead
the research done in this thesis will be used to make suggestions on avenues for future
quantitative research that would further explore the merit and importance of the themes in
this thesis.
4.1 Interviews
As mentioned, the purpose of interviews is to enter the world and perspective of
interviewees. Discussions during interviews provide “continually new insights into the
subjects’ lived world” (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009, p. 123) if done right. Another way of
putting it is as a previous researcher on anthropological interviewing, Spradley, does it - as
cited by Kvale & Brinkmann: “I want to understand the world from your point of view. I
want to know what you know in the way you know it. I want to understand the meaning of
your experience, to walk in your shoes, to feel things as you feel them, to explain things as
you explain them. Will you become my teacher and help me understand? (Spradley, 1979,
p. 34) (Ibid., p. 124). To achieve such an immersion of the interviewer into the world of the
interviewee, all steps of the interview have to be carefully planned and considered - both in
preparing the interview, the approach taken by the interviewer during the interview, as well
as the use of the interview data afterwards. The preparations - such as sampling
interviewees and constructing the interview guide - will be discussed in subsequent sections
of this chapter, as will the analysis of the interview data. This section will discuss the
structure and process within the interview.
To obtain valuable and unbiased data from the interviews, the role of the interviewer in the
interview itself is clearly defined. The interviewer must be flexible, objective, a good
listener, but still persuasive enough to get the answers needed to answer a research
question. The interaction between the interviewer and interviewee dictates the outcome and
value of the interview: “In the interview, knowledge is created ‘inter’ the points of view of
the interviewer and interviewee.” (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009, p. 123). Aside from
remaining objective and persuasive, it is important to make interviewees comfortable
during the interview: “The setting of the interview should encourage the interviewee to
describe their points of view on their lives and worlds.) (Ibid., p. 128). This can be done by
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
15 of 61
clearly stating the purpose of the interview, the interviewer’s expectations of the
interviewee, and generally creating a comfortable atmosphere where they feel free to speak
their mind.
Another part of the interviewer’s role is the non-participant observation where the
interviewer documents actions of interviewees, as well as interactions between interviewees
when having more than one. It requires the interviewer to keep a distance to the observed
interviewees, avoid reacting, and influencing actors’ behaviour. So preferably the interview
includes two researchers: One in the role of the interviewer and one as the observer. In this
case the research team consisted of only one person. Observation allows for selective notes
on e.g. body language and tone of voice during specific questions and activities. These
observations might add relevant context to the interviewee’s thoughts and feelings on a
specific topic. It allows the interviewer to look at the exact situation during the analysis and
interpret why the interviewee acted in a certain way, e.g. held back due to fear or
discomfort. However, observations are also a tricky thing to manage: It is hard to
understand the true meaning interviewee’s actions from their perspective and the risk of
misunderstanding exactly what caused a certain reaction or action is quite high. Also, it is
very hard and maybe even unlikely for interviewers to constantly stay in the role of the
observer and not have a minor influence or impact on the observed interviewees.
4.2 Photo Elicitation
Making photographs and pictures a part of the interviews is not a simple task. It should not
be just conceived as adding pictures to the interview process; rather it calls for the process
to be built around the pictures. Elicitation - meaning to bring forth - of pictures have
numerous benefits that can make the data from interviews even more valuable. In his paper
on photo elicitation Harper argues that “images evoke deeper elements of human
consciousness than do words; exchanges based on words alone utilize less of the brain’s
capacity than do exchanges in which the brain is processing images as well as words.”
(Harper, 2002, p. 13). Harper also cites much older research by Collier from 1957 in which
photo elicitation is argued to facilitate “longer and more comprehensive interviews but at
the same time helped subjects overcome the fatigue and repetition of conventional
interviews (Collier, 1957:858)” (Ibid., p. 14). There are two main ways of including photo
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
16 of 61
elicitation in one’s interviews: Letting either the interviewees or researchers decide on the
photos to use during the interviews. Interviewees can introduce photos to the interviews by
having them take the pictures, e.g. if the research focus and interviews deal with the
interviewees’ local environment. It would then allow for the interview to focus on why the
interviewees took these specific pictures and brought them into the interview. Letting the
researcher decide which photos to use simply means bringing carefully chosen pictures into
the interview process - and it is this latter method that has been used in this thesis and
research. Researcher-driven photo elicitation is of course no perfect method. As Van
Auken, Frisvoll & Stewart point out: “Since the researcher, planner or consultant controls
the stimuli, though, this version is relatively top-down and closed-ended. Consequently,
there are questions about its ability to address concerns about representation (Stewart and
Floyd 2004) and the validity of the data it produces (Crisman 2006).” (Van Auken et al.,
2010, p. 375). Steps were taken to avoid this closed-ended format, see the section 5.4 on
Selected Photos for Interview.
Another interesting part of using photo elicitation is the interaction between interviewee
and interviewer. As mentioned in the previous section, a good and positive interaction
between these two actors is critical to producing good data from an interview. In 1986,
Collier pointed out that using photo elicitation helps not only the interviewee, but also the
interaction and the analysis done by the interviewer afterwards: "We were asking questions
of the photographs and the informants became our assistants in discovering the answers to
these questions in the realities of the photographs. We were exploring the
photographs together" (Collier Jr. & Collier, 1986, p. 105). It is important to consider this
collaborative aspect of the interview and include it to get the most out of the use of photo
elicitation.
4.3 Sampling
The methods chosen for getting or sampling interviewees for the research are again
dependent on the research focus and question. It is critical to consider which and how many
interviewees are needed to answer the research question. It is equally important to consider
the goal of the study; is it to gain a broad scope of data or a deep scope of data? In this
thesis and research, the number of interviews needed to answer the research questions was
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
17 of 61
set at ten. This is due to the exploratory nature of the research questions as well as the
practical constraints of thesis such as this one. The goal and scope of the research was
determined to be a bit of both: The research should bring forth a broad range of
perspectives that also had a deep and exploratory nature.
Due to its qualitative nature, the research is not meant to be representative. Instead it needs
to get the relevant information to answer the research questions. This implies that the
sampling should be non-probability based and purposeful. Purposeful indicates that the
interviews should consist of people being able to give the most valuable answers to the
research question; not people representing any certain demography. This does not mean a
wide variety of consumers is not relevant or interesting to the research, but the main goal is
making sure the interviewees are sufficiently informed and knowledgeable to answer the
questions in the interview. Hence, the people desired for this research were chosen to be
mainly consumers who think about sustainability and have opinions on and attitudes
towards it - negative or positive - as this would best bring forth data with a deeper focus. To
get a wide range of perspectives on consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for
sustainability, interviewees who did not have a strong stand on sustainability and could e.g.
be more reactionary to the pictures in the interview, were also interesting to include, if
possible. As mentioned under the assumptions in chapter 3, no particular group of people
can be said to be “the sustainable consumer”. As put by Devinney, Auger, Eckhardt &
Birtchnell: “Contrary to what some might believe, CnSR is not just the purview of wealthy,
highly educated females in liberal Western democracies. Rather, it is something embedded
in the psyche of individuals.” (Devinney et al., 2006, p. 35). Since characteristics and
demography vary, no particular people were chosen as the desired interviewees.
Based on the discussion and choices above, convenience sampling was chosen as the
preferred method of getting interviewees. Convenience sampling simply implies that the
researcher recruits people who are easy to access, often in the author’s own network
(Patton, 2001, p. 309). Facebook was chosen as the method to reach prospective
interviewees. Through a post on this media platform - see Appendix K for the actual post -
several people volunteered to participate in the interviews. Of the volunteers, only people
who had a non-existent or limited relationship to the author were chosen. This was done to
remove any bias and increase the objectivity of the interaction between the two actors. A
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
18 of 61
few volunteers came from people within the author’s network who distributed the request
for interviewees to their own network - this is known as snowball sampling, (Ibid., p. 270).
Furthermore, the sampling happened continuously: After getting the first handful of
volunteers and executing the first couple of interviews, the author analysed the results and
followed that up by another round of sampling. This allowed for the choosing of particular -
different or the same - types of consumers for the subsequent interviews.
In the end, the recruiting of interviewees resulted in eight interviews with a total of 10
interviewees; two interviews consisted of two interviewees. This was slightly less than the
goal set before beginning - mainly due to practical difficulties - but was still enough for it
to feel substantial; that it would provide the data need to answer the research questions.
Each interviewee started by filling out a questionnaire that gave a basic profile of their
sustainability attitude and demography. The ten interviewees ended up being a broad group
of consumers: Three of them were volunteers with the political party, Alternativet - a party
very focused on sustainability. Six of them were students. Seven were male, three women.
Half were aged 21-30, the rest all the way up to 60+. The interviewees’ profiles can be
found in Appendix C.
A ninth interview was actually done but not used for the analysis due to multiple reasons.
One, the interview was a continuation of the themes talked about in the three interviews
done before this one and had therefore hit a saturation point of similar beliefs, thoughts, and
arguments. This is undoubtedly due to the fact that these first four interviews - including
the one not used - came from the same group of people: Volunteers with the political party,
Alternativet. Second, the interviewee misunderstood certain aspects of the interview - the
structure and process of the interview will be explained in section 5.5 on Interview Guide.
But to explain briefly, the misunderstandings included the focus on her role as a consumer
as well a task within the interview where she was asked to sort the photos used in the
interview. When sorting, she instead did it by how well she thought the messages within the
photos were delivered; not whether or not the core message was positive or negative.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
19 of 61
4.4 Selected Photos for Interview
When the researcher decides which photos to bring into the interview, it is important to
carefully consider the photos’ content as well as how the photos are presented. For this
research, a conscious choice was made to bring a wide variety of “photos” into the
interview; pictures, tables, and graphs - even one video. Common for them all was only that
they contained a message that related to the perceived responsibility for sustainability. The
messages were chosen in accordance with the Luchs & Miller model previously mentioned
- this meant messages that represented each actor: Consumers, companies, and
governments. The messages were also chosen to have either a positive or negative message
regarding responsibility for sustainability. In basic terms, this meant e.g. photos that both
tried to pin the responsibility for sustainability on companies as well as photos underlining
companies acting on their responsibility. A few photos were also chosen that seemed to pin
the responsibility on no actor in particular. Furthermore, some of the photos were easy to
understand while some required more time for the interviewee to read and understand the
message. These parameters - type of “photo”, negative and positive, easy and hard to
understand - were chosen deliberately as part of the interview process. It was done because
it would be interesting to see which ones would attract the interviewees - more on this in
the next section on Interview Guide. The “photos” chosen came from a wide variety of
sources, be it Greenpeace or other activist organisations, companies, artists, government
agencies, etc. All of the above choices regarding the photos were done in hopes of getting a
broad pallet of photos - ending up in a total of 22 “photos” and one video. But what the
author chose on the idea of it being e.g. a negative message was quickly challenged by the
interviewees, so the pallet ended up apparently having a different look than intended - for
more, see the end of Chapter 5.
An explanation of all the chosen photos follows below in Table 1 - see Appendix A for the
actual photos as well as the source of each one. Worth mentioning is that CP is short for
Company - i.e. these photos focus on companies’ responsibility for sustainability - while
CS is short for Consumer, GV for Government, and UK for Unknown. Unknown were the
photos pinning the on no actor in particular.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
20 of 61
Table 1: Selected Photos for Interview
Code Title Positive /
Negative
Content
CP01 Nestlé Palm Oil Negative Orang-utans posing outside
Nestlé’s buildings
CP02 John West Tuna Negative A bleeding can of tuna
CP03 Apple Green Wish Negative Slogan calling for sustainable
Apple products
CP04 Emission Responsible Negative Pie chart showing actors
responsible for CO2 emissions
since 1750
CP05 ROCKWOOL Energy
Consumption
Positive Chart showing ROCKWOLL’s
decreasing energy consumption
CP06 Who’s Doing Most? Positive Industries doing the most and least
for sustainability
CS01 Frying the Planet Negative Earth in a frying pan
CS02 Necessary Trip? Negative 1950’s-style poster with cars
CS03 Think.Eat.Save Negative Factory with text explaining
impact of food waste
CS04 Shopping Cart Affects Oceans Negative Slogan pointing out connection
between products in your
shopping cart and its effect on
oceans
CS05 Wear More, Wash Less Negative Washing guidelines with text
explaining impact of washing your
clothes
CS06 Willing to Pay Higher Price Positive Statistics on willingness to pay for
sustainable products in different
areas of the world
GV01 Leaders Keep Loafing Negative Picture with slogan stating world
leaders are not acting
GV02 Leaders Frying the Planet Negative Stop sign with Earth in a frying
pan
GV03 Solar Panels Needed Negative Areas in Sahara desert needed to
be filled with solar panels to get
electricity for areas of the world
GV04 Desired vs. Actual Priority Negative Graph showing political priority
of climate change in countries
GV05 Local Leaders Positive Text explaining local leaders are
acting on sustainability
GV06 Buildings in Risskov Positive Drawings of sustainable housing
project in Risskov, Aarhus
UK01 Severed Gorilla Negative Gorilla on branch with head cut
off and a baby gorilla on its back
UK02 Aarhus Creek Negative Floods by Aarhus Creek
UK03 Bangladesh Rising Sea Level Negative Map of Bangladesh before and
after rising sea level
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
21 of 61
UK04 Denmark Rising Sea Level Negative Map of Denmark before and after
rising sea level
Video FedEx: Enchanted Forest Positive Fairy-tale setting in forest while
narrator explains FedEx’s work
for sustainability
4.5 Interview Guide
The purpose of an interview guide is to give the process and course of the interview some
structure - the degree of structure is then dependent on the research focus. Exploratory
qualitative research like in this thesis is supposed to be based on an open-ended approach
where the interview and questions allow for the interviewee to control the outcome; not
where the interviewer leads them down a certain path. It is up to the researcher to evaluate
and decide beforehand to which degree the interview guide should be followed stringently,
“or whether it is the interviewer’s judgment and tact that decides how closely to stick to the
guide and how much to follow up on the interviewees’ answers and the new directions they
may open up” (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009, p. 130). Hence, the word “guide”. Having the
same structure and stringently following the same interview guide for multiple interviews
increases comparability. In this case, it was determined that the overall structure in the
interview guide - which will be described below - was pretty set. But the order of the
questions was allowed to shift around if it felt more natural, and questions asking for
elaboration such as “Why do you say that?” and “Why/why not?” could be posed at any
time. All interviews were conducted in Danish.
The questions that make up the interview guide were deliberately chosen to give the best
possible data to answer the research question. Questions are supposed to have a thematic fit
- meaning they focus on the topic of the research - as well as a dynamic fit where they
“promote a positive interaction, keep the flow of the conversation going, and stimulate the
subjects to talk about their experiences and feelings” (Kvale & Brinkmann, 2009, p. 131).
Both of these aspects were carefully considered when creating the interview guide as well
as during the interviews. The latter meant adapting the wording of a question during a few
interviews to make the interviewee sitting across the table comfortable - especially when
they were not as knowledgeable about sustainability as other interviewees or the author.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
22 of 61
When creating the interview guide - which can be seen in Appendix B in its entirety - its
structure was divided into four overall parts:
First up is a monologue by the interviewer explaining the focus and purpose of the research
and interview. This includes introducing the Luchs & Miller model and three actors;
consumers, companies, and governments. This introduction was done using a printout of
the model itself, as seen in Figure 1 from Chapter 2. Also, it includes explaining that the
interviewee is asked to answer from the point of view of a consumer.
Next are some introductory questions about sustainability and the interviewee’s attitude
towards responsibility for sustainability. This includes questions such as “Why do you, as a
consumer feel responsible for sustainable ways of living?” and “Is there a difference in the
responsibility of the three actors?”. Seven questions were asked during this part of the
interview.
In the third and biggest part of the interview the photos are introduced. The 22 photos are
laid out in front of the interviewee and they are asked to choose the two photos that catches
their attention the most; that talks to them the most. After letting the interviewee spend a
few minutes looking through the photos, they are asked seven questions about each of the
two photos they choose. These questions include “Why this photo?”, “What emotions do
you feel when seeing this photo and message?”, “Do you feel this photo pins responsibility
to any of the three actors?”, and “Does this photo change or underline how you feel the
responsibility is divided between the three actors?”. After discussing the two interviewee-
chosen photos, four other “rounds” of photos are chosen by the interviewer for discussion -
if they had not already been chosen by the interviewee before this. These four rounds of
photos are the same for all interviews: UK03-04 being the first, CP01-03 being the second,
CS03 being the third, and the video about FedEx as the final one. For each of these rounds,
six of the questions from the earlier discussions were asked again, only excluding “Why
this photo?”. But these four rounds were chosen deliberately as they were perceived to
focus on other interesting aspects that would be relevant to ask the interviewee about. For
UK03-04, additional questions were asked such as “Do these phots affect you differently?
Why/why not?” and “Does the time horizon and/or distance from Denmark impact the
power of the message to you?”. CP01-03 are all photos created by Greenpeace, blaming
companies for not acting sustainably and thereby not living up to their responsibility. These
photos are partially based on messages of fear and anger, so questions such as “Do you
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
23 of 61
approve of Greenpeace attacking certain companies like these? Why/why not?” and “Do
you approve of using fear as a tool to create change?” are asked. CS03 carries a message
that claims how much greenhouse gas is emitted due to food waste. This photo is chosen to
make sure the interviewee talks about pictures concerning all three actors; this one
representing a focus on consumers. Only the six standard questions are asked for this photo.
The final photo brought forth is the video about FedEx and their steps towards sustainable
behaviour. It has a duration of 61 seconds, and the six standard questions are asked for this
“photo”. As a final step in this photo-based part of the interview, the interviewee is asked to
sort the 22 photos in two piles - not including the video - depending on whether they found
the photo to have a positive or negative message.
In the fourth and final part of the interview, the introductory questions asked before the
photo elicitation, are now asked again. This is done to see whether the interviewee uses
different words to describe their opinion and whether they now make different points and
arguments. Of course, some of the outcome from such an exercise is random - the words
and explanations of the interviewees can change randomly, without any deeper
significance. But some changes can possibly be due to the impact of the interview process
on the interviewee, and it is up to the author to objectively and sceptically evaluate any
such connection.
An additional video created by Greenpeace - which was very focused on fear messages - as
well as another task - which asked interviewees to sort the photos depending on where they
felt it pinned responsibility - was originally considered but left out of the final interview
guide. It was clear during the first interviews that this choice was the correct one. One, fear
messages were already a big part of the conversations, so the additional video with such a
message seemed to be redundant and would not give new data. Second, the interviewees
rarely saw the pictures as pinning responsibility with only one of the three actors and would
possibly only have added confusion and irritation to the task.
4.6 Methods for Analysis
For qualitative research to have merit and value, the findings and data must be subject to
interpretation. The focus of the author was to subsequently go meticulously through the
data to look for any tendencies and reappearing themes in the feelings, wordings,
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
24 of 61
arguments, etc. of the interviewees. Also, the focus was put on the interviewees’ attitudes
and which aspects they focused on. By looking at these aspects throughout the interview,
the author would look for tendencies and changes possibly brought by the process of the
interview. The data was scanned meticulously from beginning to end. Furthermore, the
introductory questions posed in the second and fourth part of the interview process were
compared to each other side-by-side to look for any meaningful differences. This work was
done for each of the eight interviews individually. The interpretation of the interviews
continued until the author felt satisfied with the degree of detail - both regarding width and
depth. As put by Flick, ”The procedure of interpreting data, like the integration of
additional material, ends at the point where theoretical saturation has been reached (i.e.
further coding, enrichment of categories, and so on no longer provide or promise new
knowledge).” (Flick, 2009, p. 312). So when the knowledge gained from the interview data
seemed to saturate, the analysis was laid to rest.
Only the first four interviews were transcribed as it was deemed to not be crucial to the
analysis done by the author. Although audio interviews are often transcribed, it was not
deemed necessary and beneficial by the author to the work of analysing the words of the
interviewees. The author found it equally valuable to listen to the words spoken and the
manner in which the words were spoken, or tone of voice.
Furthermore, no coding - open, axial or selective - as well as discourse or narrative analysis
was done on the data from the interviews. Of course, these choices can all be feared to have
a negative impact on the analysis - decreasing the value and academic approach of this
research. This is something that will be discussed in Chapter 7 on Quality of Research.
4.7 Changes to Methodology
By analysing some of the interviews and data before executing the next interviews, it
allowed the author the possibility of considering any changes to the methodology.
However, the data seemed to be on point with the research focus and no major changes
were therefore done to the chosen methodology of the research. The only change was that
an additional question was posed in the final three interviews. When talking about these
three rounds of photos chosen by the interviewer - UK03-04, CP01-03, and CS03 - the
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
25 of 61
interviewee was asked “Why did you not choose this photo?”. This allowed these
interviewees to elaborate on the feelings - or lack thereof - that this photo had provoked.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
26 of 61
5. Analysis
Some important notes on how this chapter is built up: All interviews were done in Danish,
as were the four transcripts done. All references to the interviews are therefore based on the
author’s translation of the words spoken in Danish. Any direct quotes have been translated
and will be shown without quotation marks. References are shown by the interviewee’s
surname as well as a timecode. This will allow the reader to find the exact quote in the
audio file or transcripts which are all appendices to this thesis. For the four transcribed
interviews the timecode refers to the start of the time period in which the referenced words
were spoken - some of these time periods cover several minutes, but the words or meaning
quoted can be found somewhere within that time period. For the four non-transcribed
interviews the timecode refers to the sentences in the audio files where the referenced
words were spoken.
The analysis below is a mix of the two things: The interviewee’s opinions and feelings
described through quotes, shown by its reference. And the author’s observation and
analysis on the interviewee’s words, arguments, body language, tone of voice, etc. In
Appendix E, the reader can find additional notes by the interviewer taken during the
interviews. These notes have also been included in the analysis. First, this chapter will go
through the data from each interviewee to highlight tendencies and key words, feelings,
arguments, etc. showing the perception, attitude and worldview that person describes.
Afterwards, it will bring up a summation of these individual data to look for any cumulative
tendencies that will also help answer the research questions.
5.1 Separate Interviewees
For each of the interviewees, tendencies showed in their wording, arguments, feelings, etc.
Below are their thoughts along with the author’s analysis; this is limited to the data most
important to the research focus. It is also limited by the fact that not every interviewee’s
answer to a question brought forth important data - e.g. the talks about the interviewer-
chosen photos did not all bring valuable data for analysis, so the notes on this part will
differ quite a bit between the interviewees. The interviewees are listed here in a chronologic
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
27 of 61
order, depending on the date of their interview. For more information on who each
interviewee is - demography and sustainability attitude - go to Appendix C.
5.1.1 Franck
Frank, a male aged 51-60, believes that a consumer has duty to act sustainably (Franck,
2015, Interview 02:30). He also believes consumers do not have enough influence on
companies and governments (Ibid., 02:43), that governments have largest responsibility,
and incentives have a strong influence on sustainable behaviour (Ibid., 05:45). This is the
attitude and perception he showed during the introductory questions.
Franck chooses photo CS05 “Wear More, Wash Less” because he can see the tiny changes
he can do in his everyday life, so the message makes him feel like he has the power; not the
politicians (Ibid., 20:09). This makes it an extremely positive message to him, shown in the
positive and optimistic words he uses to describe it. However, it does not change the
division of responsibility at all in his eyes (Ibid., 24:53). His other choice is GV04 “Desired
vs. Actual Priority” as it confirms to him that others want governments to take
responsibility too (Ibid., 25:43). It seems that choosing this photo also allows him to
expand on his opinions on responsibility being mostly placed with the governments. Franck
also has some interesting thoughts when talking about UK03-04: He believes consumers
cannot act collectively, meaning their responsibility is low (Ibid., 39:32) - also he is not
emotionally affected by this photo (Ibid., 41:19). Franck finds the FedEx video cute (Ibid.,
58:43), but does not believe the message.
The way Franck talks about responsibility for sustainability before and after discussing the
photos does seem to change a bit. In the beginning, he talks about his own responsibility
and behaviour when talking about his responsibility as a consumer. After the photos, his
way of answering the same question centres on a sense of community and responsibility
towards people of future generations. When answering the question “Do you believe one of
the three actors has the most responsibility?” he first argues it to be governments and the
institutions created by governments. After the photos, he argues it to be all us people, as we
are within the institutions. But he also stays on point with his placement of responsibility
with governments and argues that they must put us into position to succeed and serve us.
In general, Franck chooses photos that confirm his beliefs and thoughts. He claims to not be
affected by negative messages because he has seen so many of them, and his reaction to
fear is mostly non-existent - he just rejects these photos as uninspiring. He seems
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
28 of 61
“prepared” for such messages - that he is either honestly unaffected, or that he has decided
upfront to not be affected by such messages. He talks about consumers needing to be very
knowledgeable to make sustainable decisions, but also underlines that it is very difficult
(Ibid., 50:53). He seems to be very knowledgeable and enlightened on sustainability topics.
Probably due to this knowledge, he is very sceptical of most messages and wants more
humbleness from e.g. FedEx when delivering a positive message (Ibid., 1:00:02). And he
clearly relates the most to messages that confirms his ideas and perceptions.
5.1.2 Christensen
Christensen, a male aged 31-40, feels his consumer responsibility because he is a parent.
He talks about individuals having limited power (Christensen, 2015, Interview 02:05). He
therefore believes that applied responsibility and change lies with companies and
governments, but that individuals are still morally responsible (Ibid., 04:23). He is sceptical
of how sustainably people really act and even laughs while talking about trusting
companies (Ibid., 02:50). He believes that the community must be respected and that
consumers lack knowledge to act sustainably (Ibid., 07:26).
Christensen ends up choosing four photos which are then talked about in pairs. He chooses
CP04 “Emission Responsible” and CS06 “Willing to Pay Higher Price” and believes them
at first; he talks about them being reasons and incentives for companies to change. He likes
the factual approach of these two photos. But then he starts to question their legitimacy and
remembers that these numbers do not equal to real behaviour, that they are relative facts,
and that people are dumb (Ibid., 19:24). He also chooses UK01 “Severed Gorilla” and
UK02 “Aarhus Creek”. He finds UK01 to be macabre (Ibid., 14:11) and it provokes strong
feelings from him: Anger, he calls it ridiculous (Ibid., 22:49), and that he is tired of these
types of messages (Ibid., 24:40). He talks about UK02 coming close to reality and feels
some powerlessness (Ibid., 21:53) - he seems a bit overwhelmed and stunned. When talking
about UK03-04, he seems to be figuratively shaking his head at the behaviour of Western
countries (Ibid., 27:15). He talks about it going to be slow steps towards change (Ibid.,
30:35) and wishes companies did more on their own so we would not have to force them
(Ibid., 33:20). When talking about CS03, he finds it positive when there is something for
him to change in everyday life (Ibid., 36:44).
The way Christensen talks about responsibility for sustainability before and after discussing
the photos is mostly consistent. When explaining why he feels responsible as a consumer,
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
29 of 61
both before and after the photo discussions he talks about consumers doing what we can to
controlling our own consumption because other things we cannot control. When talking
about who has the most responsibility, his attitude is again the same before and after - but
he seems to be clearer in his arguments afterwards. He talks about individuals having the
most responsibility as they make up the people within governments and companies as well.
He also argues that knowledge equals more responsibility and not having that knowledge
means having no responsibility.
In general, Christensen chooses photos that surprise him and provoke his feelings in a good
or bad way. Fear has an impact on him in the short term - as he points out while talking
about UK01. But he also believes fear pushes people with other opinions away, and argues
that to reach those people communication needs to be built on empathy and understanding
instead (Ibid., 34:10).
5.1.3 Genefke
Genefke, a female aged 41-50, talks about feeling responsibility as a consumer by wanting
a proper life for herself and future generations - she explains that she wants proper food and
being able to breather proper air (Genefke, 2015, Interview 01:27). She fears the
consequences that unsustainable living might have for her family and future generations,
and cannot fathom why people do not care more - using wordings as I simply cannot
understand and It puzzles me (Ibid., 02:06). She believes consumers have big part to play
(Ibid., 03:54).
Genefke chooses CS06 “Willing to Pay Higher Price” because its message fits her opinion
of consumer power and responsibility - she finds the message optimistic and positive (Ibid.,
16:22) and sees it as an incentive for companies to change their products. She also chooses
UK01 “Severed Gorilla”. She uses words like harsh, repulsion, awful, appalled to describe
her reaction and feelings towards the photo (Ibid., 21:56). She associates herself with the
gorilla and the baby gorilla as her son (Ibid., 23:35). This photo also enforces her opinion
of her own and other consumers’ responsibility. This is even though she sees it as blaming
companies - using words like fight, expose and pressure to describe how this message
makes her feel towards them (Ibid., 25:58). When talking about UK03-04, Genefke keeps
talking about the impact on her life and her impact on others (Ibid., 28:29). She anticipates
denial and dismissal towards a prognostic message like these ones (Ibid., 30:08). When the
discussion hits CS03, she gets riled up. She talks about feeling guilty about her impact on
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
30 of 61
others - I feel so bad about throwing any food out - and is annoyed at people’s indifference
- Food waste is absurd when thinking of people starving (Ibid., 40:32). She founds this
photo and message to be powerful as she did not realise it was this bad (Ibid., 57:58). The
FedEx video has a similar strong effect on her: She refuses the message totally and talks
about consumers’ having to be sceptical towards such messages.
The way Genefke talks about responsibility for sustainability, before and after discussing
the photos, is very consistent. When talking about her responsibility as a consumer, she
talks about it being a big-scale problem but her wanting to have a positive impact both
before and after photo discussions. When talking about who has the most responsibility she
starts of by arguing that responsibility is equally distributed between the three actors, but
that consumers have the biggest opportunity for changing the status-quo. Afterwards she
argues that consumers must change their mind-set to include responsibility. When
answering the question “Is it important who creates problems as to deciding who has to
deal with them?” the answer was the same before and after: She believes the answer is yes
and that governments thereby can send a message to companies as well as influence
consumers.
In general, Genefke sees everything as underlining her opinion of consumer responsibility -
she basically sees what she wants to. She clearly and enthusiastically believes that
consumers have the power to change things and should take the responsibility. Her
emotions can be affected temporarily but she soon returns to own opinions (Ibid., 39:52).
She was actually emotionally affected by all photos discussed - also the three Greenpeace
photos (Ibid., 31:38 & 33:45) - and also reacted strongly to fear-based messages. She
prefers fear to be used as little as possible but that it serves well as an eye-opener (Ibid.,
37:54).
5.1.4 Jacobsen
Jacobsen, a male aged 31-40, is quickly agitated when talking about his responsibility as a
consumer: He thinks it is a damn mess with all the waste and that his kids deserve good
future (Jacobsen, 2015, Interview 02:36). He blames people and companies for this mess
(Ibid., 04:21). He clearly believes that if you have enough money to help, you should (Ibid.,
07:56), and that consequences should be severe - show no mercy (Ibid., 11:53). He finds it
scary that we have destroyed so much in such short time (Ibid., 13:24).
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
31 of 61
Jacobsen chooses CS01 “Frying the planet” which includes the slogan “Because what can
one person do when 6.8 billion are frying the planet?” (Appendix A, p. 7). He relates to
this feeling and argues that if we all thought like this, nothing would happen - we have to
start somewhere as he says (Ibid., 22:15). He finds it frightening and worrying how things
are and project to be - and that we are not acting now (Ibid., 24:20). He seems almost
distraught and ponders how much could happen if only people took it seriously and acted
personally (Ibid., 26:59). He also chooses UK01 “Severed Gorilla”. He finds it to be a
powerful image and quickly states that people could not care less and it is totally bonkers
(Ibid., 30:55). He finds this situation frustrating and mega hard (Ibid., 32:11). He reiterates
these feelings at the end of the interview when thinking back to this photo - it is
overwhelming, frustrating and hard to do something about it (Ibid., 1:21:04) - so they seem
to have stuck with him throughout the interview. For UK03-04, he keeps talking about what
each consumer can do (Ibid., 37:40) even though this photo indicates a big-scale problem.
For CP01-03, he keeps talking about imposing big consequences for companies and seems
distraught - It cannot be true that companies can do this (Ibid., 43:34). He is clearly irritated
- So easy to get away with it (Ibid., 44:56) and gets increasingly annoyed and mad at
companies - If they weren’t so damn greedy (Ibid., 47:04). The trend continues with CS03
where he labels it a damn disgrace (Ibid., 54:29) that we waste so much food. He is still
irritated and dismayed (Ibid., 55:30).
The impact of the photo elicitation and discussions are very clear, as Jacobsen seems
overwhelmed and tired when having to answer the introductory questions the second time
around. This results in much shorter answers after - but his arguments still stay on point and
are consistent with his answers before. When talking about his responsibility as a
consumer, he goes from talking about consumers and companies being responsible to just
mentioning consumers. When talking about the difference in responsibility between the
three actors, he strongly believes companies should act both before and after the photo
discussions. When answering if any one actor has the most responsibility he goes from
saying everyone has equal responsibility to saying it is mostly companies. The interview
seems to have underlined for him the blame that he feels companies deserve. This fits with
his answer on the question of whether who is causing problems should also deal with them:
Both before and after he strongly thinks that greed and problems caused on purpose should
mean responsibility and punishment.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
32 of 61
In general, Jacobsen is clearly emotionally impacted by the discussions. He gets riled up
and increasingly irritated and angry. He almost cannot fathom the problems and solutions
and seems increasingly dismayed throughout the interview - it almost consumes him. Only
the FedEx video gets him excited again - he finds it very cool and describes it as happy
(Ibid., 1:04:33). Even though he is greatly impacted by it, he approves of the use of fear -
he thinks it is good to have some fear in you (Ibid., 48:37). He finds CP01-03 to be not
fearful enough and argues that we must put some fear into people - it is only way we stop
this (Ibid., 52:10). He keeps thinking about each consumer’s responsibility and actions
(Ibid., 1:01:48) even when the discussions focus on other things. And his lack of trust in
companies means he believes governments must act.
5.1.5 Pedersen
Pedersen, a male aged 21-30, was interviewed together with Roed - the next interviewee to
be analysed. When talking about his responsibility as a consumer, he says he felt it was
needed because of limited resources (Pedersen & Roed, 2015, Interview 02:45) and that
next generations should not be worse of (Ibid., 02:52). He believes governments must act
on the future while consumers have an easier time acting on what they experience now.
From the beginning his answers has a very practical nature; e.g. talking about companies
doing what is cost-effective (Ibid., 03:29) and using sustainability as a sales argument
(Ibid., 04:11). He believes everybody has a part to play and responsibility for sustainability.
Pedersen chooses CP05 “ROCKWOOL Energy Consumption” - Because it relates to my
education (Ibid., 15:31) and interests (Ibid., 19:10). He is impressed that we can continue to
lower energy consumption (Ibid., 16:30). Although he enjoys the factual nature of this
photo, he thinks people go crazy and react more when shown pictures, not numbers and
tables (Ibid., 20:55) - this is said with a bit of contempt. He also chooses CS03
“Think.Eat.Save” as it relates to everyday life. He did not know food waste was this severe
and is quite surprised (Ibid., 24:53). He says it underlines how bad we are (Ibid., 25:50), but
that it is something we can all do something about. When seeing UK03-04, the perspective
of the larger impact on Bangladesh causes him to say in contempt: Danes would cry more
(Ibid., 30:55). He is sceptical of Greenpeace and it shows in his reaction to the photos made
by them. He calls CP01 stupid (Ibid., 38:06) and not serious (Ibid., 45:49). He believes it is
hard to do something about the dilemma brought up in CP03 (Ibid., 39:13). Finally, he is
also critical of the FedEx video, described it as silliness (Ibid., 49:23). He is sceptical and
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
33 of 61
does not believe message. Also he could relate more to the message if it was a Danish
company like Rockwool (Ibid., 53:00).
The way in which Pedersen answers the introductory questions before and after the photo
discussions changes a bit. When talking about his responsibility as a consumer, he mentions
limited resources, a long-term outlook, and a regard for future generations as arguments at
first. After the photo discussions his answer revolves more around the consequences for
others. When talking about any differences in responsibility between the three actors, he
starts off by saying that all steps include individuals. Also he argues that responsibility is
equal and common in theory, but that it is probably different in reality. Afterwards he says
that everybody is still responsible just for different aspects and depending on focus. Also he
now says governments have the most responsibility. When answering whether causing a
problem should mean that actor had to solve the problem, he is consistent before and after:
All actors have a part in the act, so the responsible actor is never just one.
In general, Pedersen is very practical, sensible, reasonable, and factual. He wants simple
messages without too much emotion that relates to everyday life - only a message such as
CS03 caused him to be a bit affected and overwhelmed. He finds it OK to use fear if it is
done in a sober and thoughtful manner (Ibid., 43:30) - but he still thinks it has only a short-
term effect.
5.1.6 Roed
Roed, a male aged 21-30, believes the consumers have some power (Pedersen & Roed,
2015, Interview 02:22) but that government has the biggest opportunity to act (Ibid.,
04:59). He chooses CS06 “Willing to Pay Higher Price” because he finds it fun to see that
Europe is the least willing to pay higher prices (Ibid., 15:00). At first he is appalled by this
aspect (Ibid., 15:59), but the overall improvement that all areas of the world show end up
becoming the main point for him (Ibid., 16:14). He also chooses GV03 “Solar Panels
Needed” and is surprised by how little it actually takes (Ibid., 23:39). But he also finds it
frightening that more is not done (Ibid., 25:41). At first, he describes UK03-04 as focusing
on long-term consequences that you do not concern yourself with as much (Ibid., 29:55).
But he still gets himself involved in the message and soon describes it as awful (Ibid.,
30:01). He puts the situation into perspective by saying that in Bangladesh it concerns
human lives, whereas in Denmark it probably only concerns basements (Ibid., 30:35). He
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
34 of 61
says that we just know that this is going to cost human lives (Ibid., 32:30) and that
governments must act because it is critical (Ibid., 36:14). He ends up being somewhat
overwhelmed, asking how can we change this or stop this? (Ibid., 1:06:53). He cannot
relate to photo CP02: This because he does not know John West, but realises the message is
still awful (Ibid., 39:42).He also does not believe the message behind the FedEx video,
showing scepticism like many others.
Roed’s way on answering the questions changes quite a bit, and he even changes his
opinion on some of the topics after the photo discussions. He even states a few times that he
has changed his opinion. As he explains to the interviewer after the interview, he does not
often think about sustainability, so it is possible this expose to a discussion about it simply
made him more clear-minded. When he talks about having responsibility as a consumer, he
goes from saying that a consumer has power and influence to saying that consumers cannot
push responsibility away; but must accept it and try to have an impact by one’s small
choices. So the focus is still on the consumers, but the focus and arguments are different.
When answering whether the actors have different amounts of responsibility he goes from
saying that the responsibility is equal and common to saying that consumers choose
governments, that governments and companies can act more easily, and that governments
are the most responsible. When answering whether causing problems means that actor has
to solve them, he starts by saying that is it more important who tries to prevent (Ibid.,
06:27), and that those with the most money must do the most. After the photo discussions
he instead argues that everybody is involved. Finally, he also gives interesting answers to
the question of whether it affects his perceptions of responsibility when the conversation is
focused on either present consequences or future consequences. He starts of by saying that
although he thinks it is wrong, present issues are easier to feel responsible for and he argues
that consumers act on the now. After, he answers that he feels an equal sense of
responsibility for future consequences, saying: Bangladesh caused me to rethink.
In general, Roed talks less than Pedersen during their common interview, but his thoughts
and feelings are still effectively portrayed. He is objective but his thoughts are also based a
lot on emotion, with the exception of the Greenpeace photos. He is focused on the bigger
picture and sees the messages as highlighting different actors’ responsibility. He thinks that
using fear is a tough way to approach these discussions (Ibid., 42:56), and that fear has only
a short-term effect.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
35 of 61
5.1.7 Jessen
Jessen, a male age 21-30, talks about us having to make this world last as long as possible
(Jessen, 2015, Interview 01:55). He believes individuals have to act on government and
company changes for it to have an effect (Ibid., 02:40), but he also has some mistrust for
companies’ behaviour (Ibid., 03:53). He thinks an important question to ask ourselves is
why are we entitled to good life but not our remnants? (Ibid., 04:42). In general, he finds
long-term consequences too abstract (Ibid., 09:14).
Jessen chooses GV03 “Solar Panels Needed” because he finds it striking that it does not
take more (Ibid., 17:32), and therefore stupid that we do not do it (Ibid., 18:23). He
describes his contempt (Ibid., 18:34) for such inaction and calls it a pity that 150 people
make 6.5 billion and our remnants pay for their disagreements (Ibid., 19:32). He believes
there is not very much for consumers to do in this case. He also chooses GV04 “Desired vs.
Actual Priority” and calls it striking that the US do not do anything (Ibid., 22:42). He is
disappointed but not surprised with the US. He is also sceptical of China and India, who are
fairly highly ranked in the graphs (Appendix A, p. 16). He says they are ignoramuses (Ibid.,
23:58) and that people are gullible (Ibid., 25:20). This message confirms his prejudices
(Ibid., 25:58) and he calls for consumers to be more sceptical. He even chooses a third
photo, CS01 “Frying the Planet”. He finds this one relatable, saying what the hell should I
do when other people do not care? (Ibid., 27:16). He talks about this mantra being a part of
his upbringing, which makes it more relevant to him. When talking about UK03-04 he
describes being surprised at first but also a bit sceptical, saying it is hard to imagine these
scenarios. He argues that because Bangladesh is not part of my everyday life and identity
(Ibid., 33:05), he relates more to Denmark which seems more concrete to him. He blames
companies based on his preconceived notion of companies polluting the most (Ibid., 33:51),
and talks about 2050 being far into the future (Ibid., 36:50), decreasing its relatability.
When talking about CP01-03, he rejects critique of Apple in CP03, calling it too cliché. He
has pity for the orang-utans in CP01 because he finds them cute. He thinks the CP02 photo
is brutal, and says it scares him a bit but is not relatable because of the foreign brand. He
cannot relate to CS03 and rejects its basis by saying what the hell should we do without
food? (Ibid., 48:27). He does not believe vegetables can be compared to the two most
polluting countries in the world (Ibid., 51:44). He finds the FedEx video cute (Ibid., 54:54).
He is actually sceptical of the message in the video but still allows himself to be affected -
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
36 of 61
he points this out himself. He argues that the video targets people’s gullibility (Ibid., 56:53)
and moves the ignorance to FedEx’s competitors (Ibid., 59:19).
Jessen’s answers to the introductory questions are consistent before and after the photo
discussions - but he expands more in his explanations and answers after. When he talks
about having responsibility as a consumer, he starts by arguing it to be a common problem
but that we must act individually (Ibid., 02:04). Later, he says that demanding sustainable
products influences companies and that everybody should do a little bit. When talking
about whether the actors’ responsibilities differ, he starts by saying that he wants it to be
equal but that it is harder for individuals to cause change. Later, he uses the same saying of
wanting it to be equal but now elaborates that companies and governments should go
forward because it is harder for individuals to cause change. When answering whether one
actor has the most responsibility, he starts by saying that it should be companies but they do
acknowledge it because of their focus on profits (Ibid., 06:08). Later, he argues that
companies should accept they have to change. When answering whether causing problems
should also mean solving it, he starts by saying that everybody causes the problem because
there is an interaction between the actors. Later, he still points out that everybody causes
the problem, but adds that consumers could demand more sustainable products, drive less,
and that the Americans should change the most. Finally, he also gives interesting answers
to the question of whether it affects his perceptions of responsibility when the conversation
is focused on either present consequences or future consequences. He starts by stating that
he definitely feels more responsibility for the present as it is more concrete (Ibid., 09:02).
Later, he stills feels more responsibility for the present as it is tangible and the future is
hard to predict. So generally, he stays on message, but just puts it in other and more
elaborated ways.
In general, Jessen keeps a perspective when discussing but can still be affected and
overwhelmed by many of the photos and messages. He chooses messages that confirm his
opinion; only GV03 challenges it a bit. He finds it OK to use fear but thinks it has to show
the impact on humans; not on animals (Ibid., 44:35). He also thinks the photos have to be
relatable. To underline his opinions and attitude, he ended the interview with a monologue
arguing that the US, China, India, Russia, and similar large countries should go out in front.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
37 of 61
5.1.8 Skou
Skou, a male aged 61+, believes that consumers should feel responsible if they are not
indifferent about society and future (Skou, 2015, interview 02:02). He believes
governments should have most responsibility (Ibid., 06:55) and that governments are afraid
of challenging companies (Ibid., 10:22), causing a lot of inaction. He talks about consumers
having an incredibly small influence (Ibid., 11:44).
Skou chooses CS06 “Willing to Pay Higher Prices”. He points out that non-Western
countries want to do most and that we take things for granted (Ibid., 23:12). He is positively
surprised (Ibid., 23:52) by the non-Western countries, while feeling a mild head-shaking
over the Western countries (Ibid., 24:30), as he had not imagined it to be like this (30:48).
He argues that it is the responsibility of companies and governments to start change. He
also chooses GV04 “Desired vs. Actual Priority”, liking the data-based approach of both
this photo and CS06. He is not surprised about the low US ranking but positively surprised
about India and China (Ibid., 25:20). Again, he argues why the responsibility to do
something lies with companies and governments. He even chooses a third photo, GV03
“Solar Panels Needed”. After seeing it, he states that the solution is simple and already here
in principle (Ibid., 37:51) - which leads him to talk about impatience and that he does not
understand nobody has acted on this. He talks about simplicity and implies governments
and companies are somewhat negligent which is shameful (Ibid., 43:26). The simplicity to
him lies in the argument that such solar panels plants take up no space (Ibid., 45:48)
compared to their benefits. He even suggests Vestas can use this kind of message in their
marketing. When discussing UK03-04, he cannot imagine UK04 and therefore somewhat
rejects it (Ibid., 51:13). He then wants more background info - fitting well with the
impression of him as being a realist and factual. He argues that a consumer cannot relate to
this (Ibid., 54:24), that it is too overstated and vague which makes it ineffective (Ibid.,
58:20). When discussion CP01-03 he simply states that we know this already (Ibid.,
1:02:00) but will still buy the products. He argues that consumers cannot change this (Ibid.,
1:16:20). He believes the message in CS03 is true (Ibid., 01:19:13). But he does not
appreciate that it tries to make consumers feel responsible when governments have a part to
play (Ibid., 1:22:50). So he does not buy premise of consumer responsibility (Ibid., 1:23:47)
in this regard.
As was the case with interviewee Jessen, Skou gives longer explanations and answers to the
introductory questions when they are again posed after the photo discussions. Some of his
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
38 of 61
answers stay consistent while others focus on different aspects the second time around.
When he talks about having responsibility as a consumer, he starts by saying it comes down
to minimising waste and using as few resources as possible. Later he talks about
consumers’ limited impact but that they still have a principle and moral responsibility.
When answering whether the actors’ responsibilities differ, he starts by stating that he feels
it should be governments because consumers cannot change enough on their own. Later, he
answers by saying that it is hard to ask for change in companies and that government
decisions have bigger and faster effect (Ibid., 1:58:26). He believes governments have the
most responsibility both before and after the photo discussions. When answering whether
causing equals having to solve problems, his attitude is similarly consistent: He starts by
answering yes, in some way it should mean that. Later, he hesitates, again answers yes but
now underlines that everybody has played a part in the problem-creation. When considering
whether future or present consequences impact his perception of responsibility, he starts by
saying that is makes no difference, and underlines again that consumers cannot influence
much. Later, he still answers that it makes no difference, but now talks about it being sad to
see political disagreements and lack of action (Ibid., 02:01:34).
In general, Skou is clearly a realist and a bit cynical, while always focusing on real-life
implementation. He rejects UK03-04 because he finds them too speculative. However, a
photo like GV03 - which is also highly speculative - catches his attention and praise. He
can be argued to only see what he wants to see. Similarly, he keeps talking about
government and company responsibility. He does absolutely not approve of using fear
(Ibid., 1:13:42). Skou is asked fewer questions from the interviewer as he answers most of
them by himself during his long periods of explaining; basically short monologues.
5.1.9 Hansen
Hansen, a female aged 21-30, was interviewed together with Bach - the next and final
interviewee to be analysed. Hansen believes consumers have a societal responsibility
(Hansen & Bach, 2015, Interview 01:56) to act sustainably. She talks about community but
also deciding for yourself. She thinks it is important to educate people in third world
countries to act sustainably and not just do it the “Western way” - she argues that
governments can force and educate (Ibid., 09:25).
Hansen chooses CS01 “Frying the Planet” because it reinforces her feeling that it is hard to
work alone (Ibid., 24:13). The photo gives her a bad conscience (Ibid., 26:40), but also
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
39 of 61
encourages you to join the community (Ibid., 26:49) and not disregard it. She also chooses
CS04 “Shopping Cart Affects Oceans”, as it also is relatable for her. She says we are not
sufficiently enlightened (Ibid., 31:45). Again it hits her bad conscience, but it is more
rewarding for me (Ibid., 32:30), and she still finds message positive because you can
improve (Ibid., 33:49). She is clearly attracted to these relatable messages which she can
visualise into her everyday life. As she so simply puts it: Shopping I can relate to and the
ocean I can relate to (Ibid., 35:28). When talking about CS06 - a photo chosen by Bach -
she talks about Westerners being spoiled (Ibid., 23:04). She calls UK03-04 tangible (Ibid.,
38:49) and is irritated because she things we are spoiled here in Denmark (Ibid., 39:50);
people feel sorry for themselves (Ibid., 40:28). She even relates the time frame on UK03 to
own life pondering how it will affect her and her future children, and is uncomfortable with
the fact that the message does not tell her how she can help stop it (Ibid., 44:25). She finds
Greenpeace’s happenings somewhat silly, which causes annoyance with photo CP01. She
finds CP02 more relatable as it brings back negative memories of a documentary on tuna
she once saw. And she is too loyal an Apple customer to accept CP03. She enjoys that the
FedEx video has fairy-tale elements and that its cosiness makes it positive. But she fears
some lecturing and a negative message (Ibid., 1:03:23) halfway through the video as the
fairy-tale elements start disappearing.
Hansen’s answers to the introductory questions evolve somewhat from the first to second
time the questions are asked. She describes consumer responsibility as being focused on
community but also individual choice before the photo discussions. After, she talks about
consumers affecting supply and demand and how consumers must lead the way. When
answering whether the actors’ responsibilities differ, she starts by saying that individuals
are more responsible, but are restricted by acting in world decided by government and
companies. After, she talks about how government can set up framework but consumers
together can have a large impact. She believes individuals have the most responsibility both
before and after the discussions, but adds arguments about the influence of government and
their rules after, as well as stating that she would love if companies did more (Ibid.,
1:20:42). On the question of whether causing equals having to solve problems, her answer
is the same before and after: Everybody plays a part and should help, although companies
are easier to target. When considering whether future or present consequences impact his
perception of responsibility, she starts by saying a message should use emotions to show
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
40 of 61
personal consequences (Ibid., 11:07), and again using her own life - the day I have kids - to
feel responsible (Ibid., 11:30). After, she talks about how visualisations about now and the
future both help, but how they must relate to her own life (Ibid., 1:15:38).
In general, Hansen is very focused on how it will affect her life and which personal
consequences she can see. Relatability is the keyword in all messages; she is very visual
and makes associations to everyday life - e.g. shopping in stores - throughout the interview.
She does not have a clear opinion on the use of fear, instead only explaining that if she saw
the scenario in CP01 when coming to work she would be annoyed - again the relatability.
5.1.10 Bach
Bach, a female aged 21-30, believes you as a consumer should decide for yourself whether
you live sustainable (Hansen & Bach, 2015, Interview 02:11). She talks about how
individuals make up companies and governments (Ibid., 06:02). She also wants messages to
be relatable, saying: Consumer topics work because I cannot do anything about big-scale
problems (Ibid., 29:55). She prefers tangible messages with personal consequences even
though it has only a short-term effect (Ibid., 10:25) - she finds the future is too abstract.
Bach Chooses CS06 “Willing to Pay Higher Prices” because she finds it thought-provoking
those poor countries want to do most (Ibid., 14:43). She feels guilty on behalf of Western
countries (Ibid., 22:57), referring to the data as horribly low numbers for Western countries
(Ibid., 26:13). She chooses CS03 “Think.Eat.Save” because it is relatable. She talks about
the statement having two effects: It is not surprising but also insane (Ibid., 30:27), She uses
words as shock (Ibid., 30:39) and crazy (Ibid., 34:30) to describe her reaction to it. She
calls CS01 - photo chosen by Hansen - a bad excuse (Ibid., 19:24) and argues that
individuals cannot push responsibility away - she shows clear irritation. When talking about
UK03-04, she talks about looking for personal solutions (Ibid., 39:30), and it showing so
much impact for Bangladesh (Ibid., 43:08) in comparison with Denmark. For CP01-03, she
prefers more constructive messages (Ibid., 51:36). She finds the FedEx video cute by
underlines that it is still her responsibility to choose right solution (Ibid., 1:02:27).
Bach does not have a lot to say during the introductory questions, both before and after the
photo discussions - instead allowing Hansen to answer most of them. When talking about
consumer responsibility she goes from talking about the individual choice to arguing that
consumer must lead the way. She thinks individuals are the most responsibility both before
and after. When talking about whether causing equals having to solve problems, she starts
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
41 of 61
by saying everybody plays a part. After, she argues Western countries should be more
responsible but everybody should still help.
In general, Bach focuses on personal consequences and prefers concrete, not abstract
messages. She is somewhat sceptical of many messages. Although having no clear opinion
on the use of fear, when seeing UK01 “Severed Gorilla” the first time, her discomfort was
very clear as she said: OK, let us put that away now (Ibid., 16:10).
5.2 Cumulative Tendencies
By looking at all the individual interviewees’ wordings and arguments this section will
establish whether some similarities and themes show themselves in the data. When
describing the similarities, the distinctions some, many, and most will be used to highlight
how much of a common theme it was. Since this research is not quantitative, there is no
point in saying e.g. 6 of 10. The search for similarities and themes will go through the four-
part structure of the interview, starting with the introductory questions.
Generally, when the interviewees were talking about responsibility for sustainability,
certain words and phrases keep reappearing and mattering to most of the interviewees:
Influence, power, consequences, future generations, individuals making up governments
and companies. The interviewees often use these terms in a broad and vague sense such as
“we must look out for future generations”. But they are sometimes also used to explain a
real-life example such as “politicians and board members are consumers and individuals as
well”.
When choosing photos that catch their attention, most interviewees are interested in
relatable messages that deal with their everyday, personal life. Most also choose photos that
fit with their overall thoughts on who is most responsible - they seem to seek out
confirmation. Many interviewees allow themselves to choose emotionally, mostly photos
that provoke negative feelings - when the interviewees are negatively shocked by a photo
they seem to want to discuss the injustice and anger behind it. As a final trend, they actually
all choose a photo that has an element of surprise to them - giving them some new
information, be it negative or positive.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
42 of 61
Of the 22 photos, 11 different ones were chosen. A handful of them were only chosen once:
CP04, CP05, CS04, CS05, and UK02. CS03 was chosen by an interviewee in both of the
two-man interviews, thereby making the interview process a little shorter. CS01, GV03,
GV04, and UK01 were all chosen three times. These four are very different messages:
Whereas GV04 is a data-filled graph, the other three are visual and have a fairly simple
look and message. CS06 - which was chosen five times - seemed to be appealing because it
was so full of different information: Some chose it for the lower numbers on Western
countries and some for the higher numbers on non-Western countries. Some chose it for the
globally improving numbers, indicating a higher priority on sustainable products. There
seemed to be no real theme in whether visual or more information-heavy photos were
preferred - only that it depended on the personal preferences of the people choosing. When
explaining why they had found the different messages appealing, the arguments were
equally widespread: Colours, fonts, data with depth, simplicity, and much more.
When looking at the interviewer-chosen messages, other themes appear as well. UK03-04
triggered a few different reactions: Many find it hard to imagine these scenarios and try to
relate it to their own lives. The distance and time horizon seems to have a clear impact on
how the messages are perceived and accepted by the interviewees. Furthermore, something
the author found interesting and rather strange was that some interviewees kept talking
about their personal impact and responsibility, even during discussion of these two photos.
These interviewees were the ones who were already focused on their impact as a consumer,
such as Genefke and Jacobsen. To the author, personal consumer impact seems like an odd
thing to discuss when dealing with messages regarding big-scale floods of entire countries.
This could indicate interviewees getting fixated on their own perceptions, not allowing
them to be challenged. It could also indicate that some types of consumers will always
relate what they are seeing to their own personal life, no matter the scope of a message.
The three Greenpeace photos - CP01-03 - were interesting as well. Many reject them
because they find them to be not constructive enough, too fear-based, or even annoying.
Some interviewees are affected by them and get angry at the companies. Some talk about
consumers’ indifference to these, saying that we already know this but still do not act.
Photo CS03 surprises most in a bad way, causing such words and phrases as: Shock,
disgrace, shows how bad we are, crazy, insane, absurd, etc. Most interviewees enjoy the
relatability of this message; that it is something we can change ourselves. The interviewees
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
43 of 61
sound positive about that aspect but most sort it as negative image anyway. This indicates
that the emotions triggered by this photo are more powerful than the optimistic feeling it
also gives most of them. Some reject the message by saying this is not a consumer problem.
It is of course not only a consumer problem, but these interviewees might be slightly biased
when arguing that it is company and government responsibility instead.
Most find the FedEx video cute and well-done. Some believe the message totally, some
would like to believe it, but many are sceptical of its legitimacy.
The use of fear in the photos and messages also has a large scale of approval. Some do not
like at all, some find it OK if done in a sober manner, and some think it is very useful. Most
believe it has only a short-term effect and can serve only as an eye-opener. Some point out
it still has to relate to their life.
5.2.1 Before and After Photos
Asking the introductory questions both before and after the photo discussions had some
effects, although not as substantial as one could have imagined. In general, the interviewees
showed some different tendencies. When answering the questions for the second time, most
would either get more realistic and down-to-earth with their explanations, or they would
take on a more abstract and principled approach. Most used about the same amount of
words and time to answer as before the photo discussions. Only a few would speak a lot
more or a lot less - either because they were now “warmed up”, or overwhelmed and tired,
respectively. No one said exactly the same thing both before and after, but that is just a part
of the randomness. All interviewees did answer at least one question differently; not
necessarily changing their perception but instead choosing different words and arguments
to describe their perception and opinion.
When looking at the specific questions, a few tendencies show as well. Not all interviewees
gave fulfilling answers to these questions, but it is still relevant to discuss the answers that
were valuable. When talking about feeling responsibility as a consumer, it is different
whether people go from principled explanation to concrete action ideas, vice versa, or just
stay with a principled or action-based approach. But many actually go from a principled
explanation before the photo discussions to an action-based approach afterwards. They talk
about how consumers can specifically have an impact and accept their responsibility. It
indicates that they - through the photos and its messages - have been shown the ways and
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
44 of 61
areas to impact as a consumer; the messages help highlight the everyday impact of a
consumer.
When talking about whether the three actors’ responsibilities differ, some talk about a
principle and moral responsibility versus how responsibility looks in real life or actuality.
Most keep their same focus and elaborations, and some get clearer in their wording.
When talking about whether one of the actors has the most responsibility, most just stay on
point and explain the same opinion. Some expand on it and include more factors.
When answering the question of whether causing a problem should mean having to solve it
as well, most stay on message and give the same opinion. Many find it difficult to simplify
responsibility in such a way and instead believe all actors are involved. Some finds this
setup useful; being able to use consequences as weapon or message towards companies in
particular - but even then, they say that both before and after the photo discussions.
When talking about the impact of present or future consequences on the interviewees’
perception of responsibility, most do not change their opinion or explanations. In general,
they are based on the present and something relatable being better; while the future is often
too abstract to imagine and feel responsible for.
5.2.2 Sorting Photos
The task of sorting photos had several interesting outcomes. One, some photos had a clear
message of either positive or negative nature according to all interviewees and the
interviewer. This was CP01, CP02, CP05, GV01, and UK01-04. Second, some photos and
messages had interesting ambiguity and meant different things to the interviewees, almost
at a 50-50 split between negative and positive. Photos such as CP03, CP06, GV02, and
GV04 were in this category. When looking at the talks about these photos during the photo
discussions it is clear that most interviewees found these photos to have double meanings
and carry both positive and negative messages. So the sorting of these photos must be
considered more unreliable and to a higher degree at a risk of chance; that the interviewees
mentally flipped a coin on where to put these if they found them twofold. Maybe the
interviewees even categorised the photos with the positive ones as it made them feel less
unhappy and overwhelmed to look at the photo in a positive way. Third, the author had
mistakenly thought of some photos to have a negative message when the interviews showed
that all or almost all of the interviewees disagreed with the categorisation of the author.
These photos are GV03, CS04, and CS05. The interviewees likely disagreed because these
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
45 of 61
photos included an action-based message with simple steps that clearly show the positive
impact it could have. And in hindsight, the interviewees were almost entirely right.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
46 of 61
6. Discussion
In this chapter, the results and analysis performed will be linked to the context and
literature described in Chapter 3. Some clear tendencies showed in what impacted the
interviewees’ answers and perceptions of responsibility for sustainability, PRS. By putting
these tendencies into perspective with literature and discussion, it will later help answer the
research questions posed in the beginning of the thesis.
6.1 Personal Characteristics
Some specific personal characteristics turned out to be important for how the interviewees
talked and felt during the interviews, as well as perceived the photos. These are important
to understand and have in mind when trying to design messages intended to talk to
consumers’ PRS and facilitate discussions about sustainability topics. One was the
interviewees’ natural optimism or pessimism. An optimistic person would more often see
the positive and constructive aspects of a photo, and message. It also impacted how they
approached and talked about the sustainability challenges we are facing and discussed in
the interviews. It showed clearly during the discussions and also somewhat in the sorting
task. One interviewee - Franck - found only nine of the 22 photos to be negative, whereas
Hansen & Bach categorised 15 messages as negative. The sorting exercise has some
randomness and chance to it, but it can give an indication of how an optimistic or
pessimistic outlook impacts the perceptions of messages. Another important personal
characteristic is whether a person leans towards logical or sensitive thinking. This
influences the degree of appeal in the different types of photos. For instance, graphs and
tables generally do not attract people with a mind built for emotional and sensitive thinking.
It also showed in this research, as the interviewees clearly stated why they chose or did not
choose certain photos - and many mentioned it being either too technical or too emotional,
depending on their preferences.
One thing the analysis showed was that many of the effective photos allowed the
interviewees to relate the message to their personal and everyday lives, now or in the future.
The degree to which messages are relatable then also depend on the degree to which is
person is adept at visualisation. Most interviewees could describe themselves standing in
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
47 of 61
the store having to make a choice on e.g. a sustainable food product. But only a few were
able to visualise the impact of e.g. rising sea levels in Denmark and Bangladesh, and how
that might make their personal lives look differently. So the effect of a message or a
discussion on such topics depends on how well the person visualises such scenarios.
A fourth characteristic that showed to be important to the outcome of such discussions was
the interviewee’s ability to put the information into perspective or context. Many of the
interviewees showed great consideration and perspective by e.g. realising that the
consequences of rising sea levels in Bangladesh would most likely be a lot more severe
than in Denmark. This was shown by comments such as: In Bangladesh it concerns human
lives, whereas in Denmark it probably only concerns basements (Pedersen & Roed, 2015,
Interview 30:35), and how the maps are showing so much impact for Bangladesh (Hansen
& Bach, 2015, Interview 43:08) in comparison with Denmark. Perspective was also used a
lot when the discussion centred on food waste; how many of the interviewees felt sick
throwing away food or knowing that Western countries did it so excessively, when people
are starving all around the world. So to keep a discussion productive and reasonable, the
people involved must be able to put sustainability topics into perspective.
A final and very important thing, that impacted the course of the discussions as well as how
photos and messages were received, was the amount of knowledge about sustainability
topics that each interviewee had. The degree of enlightenment, unfamiliarity, or ignorance
within each person participating in such discussions, as well as being on the receiving end
of sustainability messages. The influence of level of knowledge was most obvious at two
ends of the spectre: Jacobsen was not very knowledgeable about sustainability. He was
explained the classic Brundtland definition before the interview started, but still had only a
very superficial idea of what it all was and meant. On the other end of the spectre were the
three interviewees from Alternativet; Franck, Christensen, and Genefke. These three could
be labelled as enlightened consumers, or at the upper end of such a scale. Many
interviewees talked about the extreme difficulty in being sufficiently informed to make
sustainable consumer choices. Franck put it well when referring to the palm oil dilemma
touched on in photo CP01: The consumer is subject to very, very difficult conditions when
wanting to act sustainably because if palm oil was the only thing you had to worry about
then it was damn easy, right. But you would have to read every label … and take a stand on
the principles of how they procure each and every raw material (Franck, 2015, Interview
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
48 of 61
50:53). So a fully enlightened consumer is surely and utopian idea. But sustainability
knowledge is not an exclusive thing, reserved for advocates of the cause. It also shows in
something like the interviewees’ reaction to photo CS06, which shows a global
improvement in consumers’ willingness to pay more for sustainable products (Appendix A,
p. 16). As mentioned in Chapter 3, most research shows that a positive attitude towards
sustainability does not correlate with sustainable behaviour. Hence its inclusion as an
assumption in this thesis. CS06 shows only an improved attitude towards sustainability.
Seven interviewees discussed this photo during the interviews, and only about half treated it
with general scepticism. Even the three Alternativet-interviewees were not all sufficiently
sceptical of its legitimacy, as Genefke seemed to believe it fully. So the level of knowledge
in a consumer regards many things. A final interesting aspect of a consumer’s knowledge
level is whether or not there is such a thing as too much knowledge. Knowledge increases
the scepticism of a consumer, as just mentioned above. Some of the interviewees talked
about having seen such messages too many times for it to have an effect anymore. Franck
and Skou in particular both seemed saturated and numb, saying multiple times that they
were not affected by it anymore. Knowledge can then be both a bad and a good thing:
When someone like Franck or Skou feels numb towards such negative discussions and
messages, they also seem to make a conscious choice to not be affected by it anymore. It is
not like their emotions can just shut off. On the other hand, knowledge can then help
decrease the negative effects of fear - e.g. paralysis or denial - and allow for a more
balanced discussion and reception of messages.
6.2 Perceptions
Another interesting part of analysis showed that many of the interviewees were quite set in
their opinions and perceptions about responsibility for sustainability. The interviewees had
strong and inflexible views and feelings on how responsibility was divided - and supposed
to be divided - between consumers, companies, and governments. Most of them chose
photos and messages that confirmed what they thought and clearly showed their
perceptions to the interviewer. They also talked about most of the other photos and
answered the introductory questions in a manner that showed their perceptions and
limitations thereof. The stringency of those perceptions seemed to depend on the amount of
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
49 of 61
knowledge and life experience that the interviewees had. The most senior interviewees
were - to put it harshly - set in their ways. Of course, it should not sound like having a clear
opinion and perception on responsibility for sustainability is only a bad thing - it is
obviously not. But when e.g. the interviewees get fixated on their personal impact as a
consumer when dealing with big-scale consequences such as rising sea levels, the
discussion gets off track and important messages get lost. A challenge like that requires
change and attention on all actors.
If following the teaching of Solomon, one of the difficult things with perceptions, attitudes
and opinions - how you see the world - is the matter of time. Nobody changes their opinion
in an instant. As mentioned in Chapter 3, a person must go through three stages when
forming her/his perception: Exposure, attention, and interpretation (Solomon, 2013, p. 46).
The interviewees have already been through this process before entering the interview
setting; processing their personal level of knowledge about sustainability - high or low -
into a perception and opinion on sustainability’s impact on our world and lives. When
entering the interview setting that perception will be exposed - stage 1 - to new knowledge
that challenges and adds to the knowledge and perception of each interviewee. But the next
two stages - attention and interpretation - are hard to do while simultaneously participating
in an interview where you have to answer many questions about sustainability. For the most
part, the new knowledge will not take effect until after the process where the mind has time
to give attention to the new knowledge - stage 2 - and then interpret this knowledge - stage
3. So interviewees exit with the same perceptions as they entered with, and changes to
one’s perceptions will for the most part not show until after the interview. Only two or
three of the interviewees in this research seemed to change their mind or evolve their
perceptions during the interviews. Two of them - Roed and Hansen - were part of two-
person interviews, so maybe the interaction with the other interviewee had an impact. It
could also just be their mental readiness to change perceptions. Changing perceptions is not
only a matter of time but also willingness.
6.3 Fear
In 2009, O’Neill and Nicholson-Cole called for research that tries to find other ways of
communication than through fear: “Future research attention in this field must concentrate
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
50 of 61
on how a much deeper personal concern and lifestyle engagement with climate change can
be encouraged through different methods and strategies of communication.” (O’Neill &
Nicholson-Cole, 2009, pp. 376-377). Fear can a very effective tool for some things, but
O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole along with previous research established that when using it fear
appeals to promote sustainability causes like climate change, the effect on engagement is
not long-term: “The “wicked” nature of climate change (Lorenzoni et al., 2006) makes it,
for many people, an impersonal and distant issue. This factor makes climate-related fear
appeals very difficult to sustain in the long term.” (Ibid., p. 361). Most of the interviewees,
included in the research of this thesis, talked about them believing negative and fear-based
messages would mostly have a short-term effect. Not only did they talk about it and convey
that belief, but it showed in their actions during the interviews as well. Many interviewees
were affected by their emotions for the first short period of time when looking at photos
with negative and fear-based messages. But almost all of them returned to their normal state
of mind and usual perceptions shortly thereafter. Then they could start talking about
responsibility for sustainability again. So the findings in this thesis are coherent with what
previous research has shown.
In this thesis’ research, several other points were brought up by the interviewees in regards
to the use of fear appeals, and in which form and manner they thought it should be used.
The first one comes from Christensen, who talks about a negative impact of fear appeals:
He also believes fear pushes people with other opinions away, and argues that to reach
those people communication needs to be built on empathy and understanding instead
(Christensen, 2015, Interview 34:10). To expand on his point, he argues that people who
are not necessarily sustainability advocates can be turned off by fear messages. Fear
appeals can be successful in mobilising the people who are already mobilised (Ibid., 34:10).
But people who do not believe the same as the advocates or the source of a fear message,
will possibly see this message as an attack on their beliefs, attitudes, opinions, and
perceptions. And if that happens, constructive dialogue is a longshot to happen. Instead,
Christensen suggests using appeals of empathy and understanding. This fits well with one
of the major themes in this research: Relatability. To build on a suggestion from Jessen: He
finds it OK to use fear but thinks it has to show the impact on humans; not on animals
(Jessen, 2015, Interview 44:35). Empathy and understanding for other humans must be said
to be easier to provoke than empathy and understanding for the impact on animals and
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
51 of 61
nature. Or put another way: More people probably feel empathy for other humans, than do
people feel empathy for animals and nature. So the target group is bigger. Some of the
photos and messages used in this research seemed to move towards a better balance of
negative messages which still includes relatability and provokes feelings of empathy and
understanding; e.g. a photo such as CS03. This focus on relatability fits well with another
quote from O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole which argues that “communications approaches that
take account of individuals’ personal points of reference (e.g., based on an understanding
and appreciation of their values, attitudes, beliefs, local environment, and experiences) are
more likely to meaningfully engage individuals with climate change.” (O’Neill &
Nicholson-Cole, 2009, p. 375). This quote supports a focus on relatability, empathy, and
understanding.
A final point worth making is one regarding a possible reaction to fear messages:
Discomfort leading to denial. The photo UK01 “Severed Gorilla” had a strong effect on
many of the interviewees - but none more than Bach. When seeing it, it did not take many
seconds before she said: OK, let us put that away now (Hansen & Bach, 2015, Interview
16:10). This shows a clear discomfort with the photo and message, and she simply decides
that it is better to move on from it, than to start discussing it. She ends up rejecting the
message and being unable to lead a constructive dialogue and discussion because the photo
and message has too strong an effect on her. Again this fits with aspects of the research
done by O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole: “These internal fear controls, such as issue denial and
apathy, can represent barriers to meaningful engagement.” (O’Neill & Nicholson-Cole,
2009, p. 363). So trying to avoid these barriers and avoid hitting people’s personal
discomfort and anxieties makes much to sense to include in the design of a message about
responsibility for sustainability.
6.4 Influence of Process and Interviewer
A final interesting aspect to discuss is whether the interview process itself and/or the
interviewer has had an impact on the thoughts, opinions, and perceptions of the
interviewee. First off, it became clear from the analysis that the question “Does this photo
change or underline how you feel the responsibility is divided between the three actors?”
did not have a significant impact. It helped underline the tendency that not much could help
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
52 of 61
change the interviewees’ perceptions. But only a few times did an interviewee say that a
photo changed the way she or he looked at the division of responsibility. This can of course
be the truthful and representative. But by so directly asking for a result that would be
interesting to the research, there is a risk of scaring that answer away.
Another interesting question to ponder is what effect it has to facilitate the topic of
responsibility for sustainability to a consumer. Does it give the consumer an epiphany,
make her or him overwhelmed, or something entirely else? Based on the interviewees’
reactions and feedback, it was probably a bit of both. Jacobsen said: This makes me think
more about it, want to do more (Jacobsen, 2015, Interview 1:20:22). However, Jacobsen
also seemed quite overwhelmed and disheartened at the end of the interview, so he
probably felt both feelings. Roed said this after conclusion of the interview: “This format
was good as it made me think a little extra about these topics and questions. Sustainability
is not normally something on my mind.” (Appendix E, p. 35). So for people with less
knowledge about sustainability, a discussion such as this can increase awareness and
involvement in the subject. But there is a balance to the length and depth of it. And how
long the involvement lasts is anybody’s guess.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
53 of 61
7. Quality of Research
Research ethics are critical to the academic work done in thesis like this one. The ethics
must not only be reviewed at the end of the thesis, but includes in the considerations of all
steps of research before it is actually performed.
No deception was intended or used at any time of the research. Confidentiality was not
asked for or suggested, as the interviewees’ participation was not defamatory in any way.
The transferability of the research is good as it matches well with previous research.
Dependability is high as the research is built on a very structured process with explicit
arguments for the choices of each step. Credibility is high as the data gathered supports the
research focus and enables the author to answer the research questions. The interviews
stretched over a period of 26 days, but due to the data’s qualitative and individual nature, it
is hard to say whether another round of interviews over time would give the same results.
This makes reliability only medium. If similar interviews were done again with the same
interviewees at a later time, the author would be allowed to see whether the interview
process itself had changed some of the interviewees’ perceptions. Validity is also only
medium, as the analysis was not based on a lot of academic tools. However, the research
should still be generalizable, and its value to business world adds to the validity.
One interesting aspect to consider is what the influence of interaction in the two interviews
has been. It makes sense to wonder how only small group interviews or focus groups would
have affected the research - analysis, discussion, and outcome in particular. In the two
group interviews in this research, the interviewees were more likely to shift their opinions
and perceptions a bit, and the other interviewee seemed to contribute to that. The influence
of interaction in these interviews especially showed during the sorting task where they
agreed on the categorisation of the photos.
7.1 Limitations
As mentioned, more academic analysis tools could have strengthened the results of the
research. Open coding would make the most sense to use due to the research’s exploratory
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
54 of 61
focus - it would allow for the author to create labels based on the meaning that appears
from the data.
Principally, the questions posed in the research “should be brief and simple.” (Kvale &
Brinkmann, 2009, p. 134). This was not always the case, which caused some confusion and
necessitated further elaborations from the interviewer. However, it is hard to make
questions completely simple with a sometimes abstract and principled discussion about
responsibility sustainability.
The final limitation is due to the mix of Danish and English in the thesis: Interviews were
conducted in Danish, but needed to be translated into English for the analysis. The author
has sufficient skills to do proper translations; but it is always difficult to hit the exact tone
and point of something spoken in another language. So this could have had a minor effect
on the results and decrease validity slightly. However, if conducted in English the
volunteers would have been ever harder to get, and the interview process could have given
far less valuable data due to the language barrier. In this regard, the interviewees’ English
skills did have a small effect on understanding the video and some of the photos which
were based on the English language.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
55 of 61
8. Conclusion
This final chapter will focus on answering the research questions posed in Chapter 2. It will
also evaluate the research’s impact on the Luchs & Miller model and describe the lessons
learned regarding the use of messages.
What happens to consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for sustainability
when shown messages?
Consumers do not seem to change their perceptions based on encountering just a few
photos and messages. The messages also need to facilitate a deeper discussion that will
challenge the consumers’ perceptions with new knowledge, allowing the perceptions to
evolve. As mentioned in Chapter 6, the steps to changing one’s perceptions are rarely
completed instantaneously. In this research, quick perception and opinion changes only
happened on a few occasions. The interviewees behind these changes seemed willing to
change their perceptions as they processed and interpreted the new knowledge during the
interview. The interviewees did actually all have at least one instance where their answer to
one of the introductory questions - posed before and after the photo discussions - changed.
This change was not necessarily a change in the underlying perception or opinion, but
rather describing their standpoint with new or elaborated aspects; meaning different words,
phrases, thoughts, and arguments. But for the most part, the interviewees were not
necessarily affected by the messages, but stayed on point with their perceptions. Many used
the messages as arguments for their own perception, whether the connection was obvious or
not. And many saw the different messages as highlighting the responsibility of one or more
of the three actors; but it rarely changed the consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for
sustainability, PRS.
How do consumers talk about their responsibility for sustainability?
In general, the words and phrases most used were such as: Influence, power, consequences,
future generations, individuals making up governments and companies. When looking at
those words, they have just one, important thing in common: At the core, they all focus to
other human beings. Humans are social creatures, so when talking about something like
sustainability - which sometimes turns into an abstract debate - we need to remember why
we seem to care: Because it affects other humans. Environmental sustainability deals with
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
56 of 61
our treatment of nature, but it also impacts the living standards of many, many people -
especially if the dire prognoses out there turn out to be true. Social sustainability deals with
how we treat our fellow humans; so here the connection is obvious. Economic
sustainability deals with our financial systems and setups, but also the impact that this has
on many people’s way of life. If using this human aspect when discussing sustainability, it
should seem most people would have the ability to feel engaged in its progress.
What influences consumers’ perceptions of responsibility for sustainability?
Many things seem to have an influence on how consumers’ PRS are created and preserved.
The flexibility of consumers’ perceptions - mentioned in the first section - seems to have an
impact. Fear appeals can shake the perceptions and attitudes in the short-run, but have not
yet been shown to have a lasting effect. More importantly, five personal characteristics
appeared through the research in this thesis. These characteristics seem to also have a large
influence on the perceptions from which interviewees felt, talked, and argued during the
interviews. The first is the consumer’s natural optimism or pessimism; determining the
degree of constructive attitude one sees the information with. The next is whether the
consumer has a logical or sensitive mind-set; what types of information appeals to her or
him. Very important is also relatability; being able to relate the discussions to one’s
everyday life - the way that a consumer normally experiences the world; their perceptions.
The ability to put the information into perspective or context is the fourth characteristic;
realising that others around the world are far worse off and need more help. The final and
very important characteristic is the amount of knowledge about sustainability topics that a
consumer has; the degree of enlightenment and insight one shows. Through influencing the
consumers’ PRS, these characteristics also influence how messages are received.
8.1 Luchs & Miller Model
As a stated goal in the research focus was to try to explain the underlying structure and
basis for the model created by Luchs & Miller. In this research it proved hard to affect to
consumers’ PRS. This insinuates that consumers show up with predetermined perceptions,
attitudes, and feelings on responsibility for sustainability. Not just their own but the other
actors’ responsibility as well. The research brought forth arguments about the influence of
five personal characteristic, the social and human aspect underlying discussion of PRS, and
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
57 of 61
more. It would seem essential to respect and understand these arguments and aspects when
working with the model. They could be important underlying explanations as to why it
looks as it does. So evaluating these aspects in connection to the model seems like an
interesting and valuable research focus.
Some interviewees in this research tried to distance themselves from responsibilities of
governments and companies. But most thought that sustainability was a common challenge
that could and should not be put on the shoulders of just one actor. And generally, most
interviewees agreed with the relatively equal division of responsibility between the three
actors. Finally, some trends also showed regarding the distinction between the three actors
as well. Most of the interviewees expressed that they saw themselves also as citizens in
society and electors of governments; not just consumers of products and services.
Furthermore, many talked about the companies and governments consisting of individuals -
basically consumers - as well. So the distinctions between the three actors were understood
somewhat more flexibly.
8.2 Use of Messages
First off, these thoughts for use of messages are not new or ground-breaking ideas. They
are based on what this research showed, and appear applicable to all types of
communication on sustainability between consumers, companies, and governments. The
key to more sustainable consumer behaviour is informing and educating the consumers.
Messages focusing on consumers’ PRS should be designed to appeal to the human aspect of
sustainability, while focusing on relatability, empathy, and understanding. This design
should be done while remembering the five personal characteristics that seem to influence
consumers’ PRS. If fear appeals are deemed valuable or necessary, they could be designed
to relatable; focus messages on consequences for humans; not nature and animals.
Companies should remember the sceptical mind-set of consumers when targeting them with
a message of PRS. This should help to satisfy Luchs & Miller’s request for more
communication focusing on consumers’ PRS: “A greater emphasis on felt responsibility for
sustainability could apply to a wide variety of media including product labeling, public
policy appeals and promotional messages. Though the gap between attitudes towards
sustainability and consumption behaviors remains wide, the current research suggests that
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
58 of 61
a greater focus on consumers’ felt responsibility for sustainability offers another lever
towards a more sustainable consumer marketplace.” (Luchs & Miller, 2012, p. 19).
Conclusively, the author will highlight parts of thesis that could be used for further
research, in particular of the quantitative kind. Such research could be done to test the
themes and hypotheses brought forth in this research. That would then either strengthen or
disprove those trends and ideas. Hopefully, the ideas could go from “Some say and express
X, which indicates that it influences consumers’ PRS” to e.g. “72 % say and express that X
influences consumers’ PRS”. The wide range of themes to focus on would be: How
perceptions change; the words focusing on the human aspect of sustainability; the five
personal characteristics; and the value of messages based on relatability, empathy, and
understanding. All of these themes could be evaluated against the Luchs & Miller model.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
59 of 61
9. List of References
Below are the sources used for this thesis; all listed alphabetically, but divided into
different categories.
9.1 Personal Interviews
Christensen, P.Ø. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (20th
March 2015)
Franck, P. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (20th
March 2015)
Genefke, V. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (26h March 2015)
Hansen, C.G. & Bach, S.K. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (14h April 2015)
Jacobsen, J. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (27h March 2015)
Jessen, T.H. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (12h April 2015)
Pedersen, J.L. & Roed, M. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (9h April 2015)
Skou, G. Interviewed by: Eggen, M.S. (13h April 2015)
9.2 Theoretical Literature
Devinney, Timothy; Auger, Patrice; Eckhardt, Giana & Birtchnell, Thomas (2006). The
Other CSR. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Fall 2006, pp. 30-37.
Luchs, Michael G. & Miller, Rebecca A. (2012). Sustainability, Responsibility, and
Consumption: A Scale of Consumers’ Felt Responsibility for Sustainability. Microcosm of
Economic Psychology. Proceedings of the IAREP Conference 2012, Wroclaw, Poland.
Collier Jr., John & Collier, Malcolm (1986). Visual Anthropology: Photography as a
Research Method (Revised Ed.). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
Flick, Uwe (2009). In Introduction to Qualitative Research (4th Ed.). SAGE Publications.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
60 of 61
Harper, Douglas (2002). Talking about pictures: a case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies,
Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 13-26. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Kvale, Steinar & Brinkmann, Svend (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative
research interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
O’Neill, Saffron & Nicholson-Cole, Sophie (2009). Fear Won’t Do It: Promoting Positive
Engagement With Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations. Science
Communications, Vol. 30, No. 3, March 2009, pp. 355-379.
Patton, Michael Q. (2001). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (2nd Ed.).
Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Solomon, Michael R. (2013). Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, and Being (10th ed.).
Pearson.
Van Auken, Paul M.; Frisvoll, Svein J. & Stewart, Susan I. (2010).Visualising community:
using participant-driven photo-elicitation for research and application. Local Environment,
Vol. 15, No. 4, April 2010, pp. 373-388. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Wells, V.K.; Ponting, C. & Peattie, K. (2011). Behaviour and climate change: consumer
perceptions of responsibility. Journal of marketing management, 27 (7-8), pp. 808-833.
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future.
Report, Oxford University Press.
Bachelor’s Thesis Marc Sejr Eggen, 20112401 Spring 2015
61 of 61
10. List of Appendices
Below is an overview of the appendices to this thesis which will follow on the ensuing
pages. They are ordered by their importance and relevance to the reading of the thesis.
Audio files of the interviews can be found on the enclosed USB.
Appendix A - Photos Used in Interviews Pages 1-23
Appendix B - Interview Guide Pages 24-27
Appendix C - Interviewee Profiles Pages 28-30
Appendix D - Sorting of Messages by Interviewees Pages 31-32
Appendix E - Interview Notes Pages 33-36
Appendix F - Transcript of Franck Interview Pages 37-56
Appendix G - Transcript of Christensen Interview Pages 57-73
Appendix H - Transcript of Genefke Interview Pages 74-91
Appendix I - Transcript of Jacobsen Interview Pages 92-110
Appendix J - Interviewee Profile Questionnaire Pages 111-113
Appendix K - Recruiting Post for Facebook Page 114
Top Related