作为塑料购物袋治理工具的零售商志愿服务:购物者对环境社会营销的思考与贡献

IF 2.3 Q3 BUSINESS
A. Muposhi, R. Shamhuyenhanzva
{"title":"作为塑料购物袋治理工具的零售商志愿服务:购物者对环境社会营销的思考与贡献","authors":"A. Muposhi, R. Shamhuyenhanzva","doi":"10.1177/15245004211055688","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction The pollution of landscapes and coastal environments with plastic shopping bag litter is an escalating global problem. The introduction of plastic bag tax aimed at addressing this challenge achieved limited success in South Africa. This study explores South African shoppers’ perceptions towards social marketing anchored retailer voluntary initiatives, which is an emerging plastic bag policy option. Literature Adverse environmental and social effects of plastic shopping bags are discussed. Retailer voluntary initiatives used to de-market plastic shopping bags, including jurisdictions where they were implemented, are also reviewed. The focus is on retailer anti-plastic bag initiatives such as ‘reusable shopping bags’ and ‘plastic bag-free’ shops. Methods This study is situated within a constructivist research paradigm and a qualitative methodology. Data were collected from a sample of 31 grocery shoppers recruited from retailer outlets in South Africa’s metropolitan cities, Johannesburg and Pretoria. In-depth interviews were conducted to explore shoppers’ perceptions towards retailer-driven anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse interview data. Findings The findings of this study highlight shoppers’ negative perceptions towards retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives. Shoppers perceived retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives as forms of green capitalism, green entrepreneurship, symbolic corporate social responsibility, strategic business posture, commandeered green consumerism, measured environmental morality, masked green washing and calculated pre-emptive behaviour. Future studies may seek to extend the generalisability of these findings by using a larger sample size. Conclusion The study’s findings highlight the trust deficit associated with retailer anti-plastic bags voluntary initiatives and the importance of enhancing market acceptance and legitimacy. Mistrust and cynicism directed towards retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives point to the importance of consumer education aimed at emphasising the negative effects of single-use plastic shopping bags. This study concludes that reliance on retailer self-regulation may not be the best approach to solve the escalating problem of plastic bag litter. We argue that national governments need to implement interventions that strike a balance between environmental sustainability and economic development.","PeriodicalId":46085,"journal":{"name":"Social Marketing Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retailer Volunteerism as a Plastic Shopping Bag Governance Tool: Shoppers’ Reflections and Contributions to Environmental Social Marketing\",\"authors\":\"A. Muposhi, R. Shamhuyenhanzva\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15245004211055688\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction The pollution of landscapes and coastal environments with plastic shopping bag litter is an escalating global problem. The introduction of plastic bag tax aimed at addressing this challenge achieved limited success in South Africa. This study explores South African shoppers’ perceptions towards social marketing anchored retailer voluntary initiatives, which is an emerging plastic bag policy option. Literature Adverse environmental and social effects of plastic shopping bags are discussed. Retailer voluntary initiatives used to de-market plastic shopping bags, including jurisdictions where they were implemented, are also reviewed. The focus is on retailer anti-plastic bag initiatives such as ‘reusable shopping bags’ and ‘plastic bag-free’ shops. Methods This study is situated within a constructivist research paradigm and a qualitative methodology. Data were collected from a sample of 31 grocery shoppers recruited from retailer outlets in South Africa’s metropolitan cities, Johannesburg and Pretoria. In-depth interviews were conducted to explore shoppers’ perceptions towards retailer-driven anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse interview data. Findings The findings of this study highlight shoppers’ negative perceptions towards retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives. Shoppers perceived retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives as forms of green capitalism, green entrepreneurship, symbolic corporate social responsibility, strategic business posture, commandeered green consumerism, measured environmental morality, masked green washing and calculated pre-emptive behaviour. Future studies may seek to extend the generalisability of these findings by using a larger sample size. Conclusion The study’s findings highlight the trust deficit associated with retailer anti-plastic bags voluntary initiatives and the importance of enhancing market acceptance and legitimacy. Mistrust and cynicism directed towards retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives point to the importance of consumer education aimed at emphasising the negative effects of single-use plastic shopping bags. This study concludes that reliance on retailer self-regulation may not be the best approach to solve the escalating problem of plastic bag litter. We argue that national governments need to implement interventions that strike a balance between environmental sustainability and economic development.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46085,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Marketing Quarterly\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Marketing Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15245004211055688\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Marketing Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15245004211055688","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

引言塑料购物袋垃圾对景观和沿海环境的污染是一个不断升级的全球问题。旨在应对这一挑战的塑料袋税在南非取得的成功有限。这项研究探讨了南非购物者对以社会营销为基础的零售商自愿倡议的看法,这是一种新兴的塑料袋政策选择。文献讨论了塑料购物袋对环境和社会的不利影响。还审查了用于淘汰塑料购物袋的零售商自愿举措,包括实施这些举措的司法管辖区。重点是零售商的反塑料袋倡议,如“可重复使用的购物袋”和“无塑料袋”商店。方法本研究采用建构主义研究范式和定性研究方法。数据是从南非大都市约翰内斯堡和比勒陀利亚的零售商招募的31名杂货店购物者中收集的。我们进行了深入访谈,探讨购物者对零售商推动的反塑料袋自愿倡议的看法。采用主题内容分析法对访谈数据进行分析。调查结果这项研究的结果突显了购物者对零售商反塑料袋自愿倡议的负面看法。购物者将零售商的反塑料袋自愿倡议视为绿色资本主义、绿色创业、象征性的企业社会责任、战略商业姿态、征用绿色消费主义、衡量环境道德、掩盖绿色洗涤和精心策划的先发制人行为。未来的研究可能会通过使用更大的样本量来扩大这些发现的普遍性。结论研究结果强调了与零售商反塑料袋自愿倡议相关的信任赤字,以及提高市场接受度和合法性的重要性。针对零售商反塑料袋自愿倡议的不信任和冷嘲热讽表明了旨在强调一次性塑料购物袋负面影响的消费者教育的重要性。这项研究得出结论,依赖零售商的自我监管可能不是解决日益严重的塑料袋垃圾问题的最佳方法。我们认为,各国政府需要实施干预措施,在环境可持续性和经济发展之间取得平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Retailer Volunteerism as a Plastic Shopping Bag Governance Tool: Shoppers’ Reflections and Contributions to Environmental Social Marketing
Introduction The pollution of landscapes and coastal environments with plastic shopping bag litter is an escalating global problem. The introduction of plastic bag tax aimed at addressing this challenge achieved limited success in South Africa. This study explores South African shoppers’ perceptions towards social marketing anchored retailer voluntary initiatives, which is an emerging plastic bag policy option. Literature Adverse environmental and social effects of plastic shopping bags are discussed. Retailer voluntary initiatives used to de-market plastic shopping bags, including jurisdictions where they were implemented, are also reviewed. The focus is on retailer anti-plastic bag initiatives such as ‘reusable shopping bags’ and ‘plastic bag-free’ shops. Methods This study is situated within a constructivist research paradigm and a qualitative methodology. Data were collected from a sample of 31 grocery shoppers recruited from retailer outlets in South Africa’s metropolitan cities, Johannesburg and Pretoria. In-depth interviews were conducted to explore shoppers’ perceptions towards retailer-driven anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse interview data. Findings The findings of this study highlight shoppers’ negative perceptions towards retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives. Shoppers perceived retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives as forms of green capitalism, green entrepreneurship, symbolic corporate social responsibility, strategic business posture, commandeered green consumerism, measured environmental morality, masked green washing and calculated pre-emptive behaviour. Future studies may seek to extend the generalisability of these findings by using a larger sample size. Conclusion The study’s findings highlight the trust deficit associated with retailer anti-plastic bags voluntary initiatives and the importance of enhancing market acceptance and legitimacy. Mistrust and cynicism directed towards retailer anti-plastic bag voluntary initiatives point to the importance of consumer education aimed at emphasising the negative effects of single-use plastic shopping bags. This study concludes that reliance on retailer self-regulation may not be the best approach to solve the escalating problem of plastic bag litter. We argue that national governments need to implement interventions that strike a balance between environmental sustainability and economic development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
21
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信