Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do as You Would Be Done by: The Importance of Animal Welfare in the Global Beauty Care Industry

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Green Fashion

Abstract

Nowadays, the concept of sustainability is discussed in almost every product category. In this context, companies commit themselves to advancing good social, environmental, and animal-welfare practices in their business operations, including sustainable sourcing practices. Nevertheless, even if many companies in the global beauty care industry have embraced such claims, common practices such as water pollution, the use of pesticides in the production of fibers, poor labor conditions, and animal testing are omnipresent. According to the European Commission, 11.5 million animals were used in the European Union for experimental or scientific purposes in 2011. Worldwide this figure rises to 115 million animals annually (Four Paws International2013). In the rising tension between “greenwashing” and the use of ethical/environmental commitments that are nothing more than “sheer lip service,” the question arises of the role of the consumers with regard to sustainable practices in the cosmetics industry. Are consumers increasingly conscious of the adverse effects of ethical and environmental imbalances? And what effect does this knowledge have on their buying behavior? On the divergent poles of hypocrisy and true commitment, to advance current understanding of sustainability and related links to consumer perception and actual buying behavior related to ethical issues, the aim of this chapter is to provide a comprehensive framework of animal welfare in the personal care industry. Based on existing theoretical and empirical insights it becomes evident that psychological determinants, such as personality traits, empathy, ethical obligation, and self-identity, as well as context-related determinants in terms of one’s ethical value perception of products, the trade-off between ethical and conventional products, and an individual’s involvement, represent antecedents of ethical consumer behavior, which can be expressed through the avoidance of specific products and brands and/or consumer boycott and buycott towards cosmetics using animal-tested ingredients. Our concept provides a useful instrument for both academics and managers as a basis to create and market successfully cosmetics that represent ethical and environmental excellence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaker JL (1999) The malleable self: the role of self-expression in persuasion. Mark Res 36:45–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahtola OT (1984) Price as a ‘give’ component in an exchange theoretic multicomponent model. Adv Consum Res 11(1):623–636

    Google Scholar 

  • Apostol L, Rebega OL, Miclea M (2013) Psychological and socio-demographic predictors of attitudes toward animals. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 78:521–525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auger P, Devinney TM, Louviere JJ et al (2008) Do social product features have value to consumers? Int J Res Mark 25(3):183–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Auger P, Devinney TM, Louviere JJ et al (2010) The importance of social product attributes in consumer purchasing decisions: a multi-country comparative study. Int Bus Rev 19(2):140–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banister EN, Hogg MK (2004) Negative symbolic consumption and consumers’ drive for self-esteem. Eur J Mark 38(7):850–868

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batson CD (1998) Altruism and prosocial behavior. In: Lindzey, G, Gilbert, D, Fiske, ST (eds) The handbook of social psychology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 282–301

    Google Scholar 

  • Bezençon V, Blili S (2010) Ethical products and consumer involvement: what’s new? Eur J Mark 44(9/10):1305–1321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya CB, Sen S (2004) Doing better at doing good: when, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. Calif Manage Rev 47(1):9–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broida J, Tingley L, Kimball R et al (1993) Personality differences between pro-and antivivisectionists. Soc Anim 1(2):129–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne A, Harris P, Hofney-Collins A et al (2000) Organic production and ethical trade: definition, practice and links. Food Policy 25(1):69–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckels EE, Trapnell PD, Paulhus DL (2014) Trolls just want to have fun. Pers Indiv Differ 67:97–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell J, Schermer JA, Villani VC et al (2009) A behavioral genetic study of the Dark Triad of personality and moral development. Twin Res Hum Genet 12(02):132–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrigan M, Attalla A (2001) The myth of the ethical consumer—do ethics matter in purchase behavior? J Consum Mark 18(7):560–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrigan M, Szmigin I, Wright J (2004) Shopping for a better world? An interpretive study of the potential for ethical consumption within the older market. J Consum Mark 21(6):401–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Celsi RL, Olson JC (1988) The role of involvement in attention and comprehension processes. J Consum Res 15(2):210–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cervellon MC, Hjerth H, Richard S et al (2010) Green in fashion? An exploratory study of national differences in consumers concern for eco-fashion. In: Proceedings of 9th international marketing trends conference, Venice, 20–21 Jan 2010

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowe R, Williams S (2000) Who are the ethical consumers. Co-operative Bank, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane A (2001) Unpacking the ethical product. J Bus Ethics 30(4):361–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane A, Matten D (2004) Business ethics: a European perspective: managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis MH (1980) A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalogue Sel Doc Psychol 10:85

    Google Scholar 

  • De Pelsmacker P, Janssens W (2007) A model for fair trade buying behaviour: the role of perceived quantity and quality of information and of product-specific attitudes. J Bus Ethics 75(4):361–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delacote P (2006) Are consumer boycotts effective? Paper presented at the 6th IDEI-LERNA conference on environmental resource economics—environment, finance and corporate behavior, Toulouse, May 2007

    Google Scholar 

  • Dholakia UM (2001) A motivational process model of product involvement and consumer risk perception. Eur J Mark 35(11/12):1340–1362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos A, Schlegelmilchh BB, Sinkovics RR et al (2003) Can sociodemographics still play a role in profiling green consumers? A review of the evidence and an empiricalinvestigation. J Bus Rev 56(6):465–480

    Google Scholar 

  • Diermeier D, Van Mieghem J (2005) A stochastic model of consumer boycotts. Department of Managerial Economics and Decision Sciences (MEDS), Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University, Evanston

    Google Scholar 

  • Doane D (2001) Taking flight: the rapid growth of ethical consumerism, the ethical purchasing index 2001. New Economics Foundation, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrich KR, Irwin JR (2005) Willful ignorance in the request for product attribute information. J Mark Res 42(3):266–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg N, Strayer J (1987) Critical issues in the study of empathy. In: Eisenberg N, Strayer J (eds) Empathy and its development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 3–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Englis BG, Soloman MR (1997) Special session summary: I am not therefore, I am: the role of avoidance products in shaping consumer behavior. Adv Consum Res 24:61–63

    Google Scholar 

  • FDA (2000) Animal testing, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Office of Cosmetics and Colors Factsheet. Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 14 Mar 1995, Revised 24 Feb 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell OG, Gresham L (1985) A contingency frame work for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. J Mark 49(3):87–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folkes VS (1984) Consumer reactions to product failure: an attributional approach. J Consum Res 10(4):398–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Four Paws International (2013) World day for laboratory animals, 24 Apr 2013.http://www.four-paws.org.uk/news-press/news/world-day-for-laboratory-animals-24thapril-2013-/. Accessed 11 June 2015

  • Freitas A, Kaiser S, Chandler J et al (1997) Appearance management as border construction: least favourite clothing, group, distancing, and identity…Not! Sociol Inq 67(3):323–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1985) Consumer boycotts in the United States, 1970–1980: contemporary events in historical perspective. J Consum Aff 19(1):96–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M (1996) A positive approach to organized consumer action: the “buycott” as an alternative to the boycott. J Consum Psychol 19(4):439–451

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnham A, McManus C, Scott D (2003) Personality, empathy and attitudes to animal welfare. Anthrozoos 16(2):135–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham A, Richards SC, Paulhus DL (2013) The Dark Triad of personality: a 10 year review. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 7(3):199–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia D, Sikström S (2014) The dark side of Facebook: semantic representations of status updates predict the Dark Triad of personality. Pers Indiv Differ 67(September):92–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenn AL, Iyer R, Graham J et al (2009) Are all types of morality compromised in psychopathy? J Pers Disord 23(4):384–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith RE, Clark RA, Lafferty B (2006) Intention to oppose animal research: the role of individual differences in nonconformity. Soc Behav Personal 34(8):955–964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald AG, Leavitt C (1984) Audience involvement in advertising: four levels. J Consum Res 11(1):581–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grubb EL, Grathwohl HL (1967) Consumer self-concept, symbolism and market behavior: a theoretical approach. J Mark 31(4):22–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins RA (2010) Boycotts, buycotts and consumer activism in a global context: an overview. MOH 5(2):123–143

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschmann AO (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty: response to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Harvard University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann S, Hutter K (2012) Carrotmob as a new form of ethical consumption. The nature of the concept and avenues for future research. J Consum Policy 35(2):215–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg MK, Cox AJ, Keeling K (2000) The impact of self monitoring on image congruence and product/brand evaluation. Eur J Mark 34(5/6):641–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogg MK, Banister EN (2001) Dislikes, distastes and the undesired self: conceptualising and exploring the role of the undesired end state in consumer experience. J Mark Manage 17(1–2):73–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HIS (2012) Animal use statistics. Humane Society International.http://www.hsi.org/campaigns/end_animal_testing/facts/statistics.html. Accessed 19 July 2015

  • Hunt Shelby D, Vitell Scott M (1992) The general theory of marketing ethics: A retrospective and revision. Ethics in marketing. Irwin, Homewood, pp 775–784

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt SD, Vitell S (1986) A general theory of marketing ethics. J Macromark 6(1):5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hustvedt G, Dickson MA (2009) Consumer likelihood of purchasing organic cotton apparel: influence of attitudes and self-identity. J Fashion Mark Manage: Int J 13(1):49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson T (2006) Challenges for Sustainable Consumption Policy. In: Jackson T (ed) The earthscan reader on sustainable consumption. Earthscan, London, pp 109–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonason PK, Baughman HM, Carter GL et al (2015) Dorian without his portrait: The psychological, social, and physical health costs of the Dark Triad traits. Pers Indiv Differ 78:5–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karanika K, Hogg MK (2010) The interrelationship between desired and undesired selves and consumption: the case of Greek female consumers’ experiences. J Mark Manage 26(11–12):1091–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassarjian HH (1971) Personality and consumer behavior: a review. J Mark Res 8(4):409–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavanagh PS, Signal TD, Taylor N (2013) The Dark Triad and animal cruelty: Dark personalities. Pers Indiv Differ 55(6):666–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee MS, Motion J, Conroy D (2009) Anti-consumption and brand avoidance. J Bus Rev 62(2):169–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Littrell MA, Dickson MA (1999) Social responsibility in the global market: fair trade of cultural products. Sage Publications, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Low W, Davenport E (2007) To boldly go. Exploring ethical spaces to re-politicise ethical consumption and fair trade. JCB 6(5):336–348

    Google Scholar 

  • Luchs M, Naylor RW, Irwin JR et al (2007) Is there an expected trade-off between a product’s ethical value and its effectiveness? Exposing latent intuitions about ethical products. J Int Mark 11(2):101–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucintel (2012) Global Beauty Care Products Industry 2012-2017: trend, profit, and forecast analysis, Sep 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Manaktola K, Jauhari V (2007) Exploring consumer attitude and behaviour towards greenpractices in the lodging industry in India. Int J Contemp Hosp M 19(5):364–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markus H, Nurius P (1986) Possible selves. Am Psychol 41(9):954–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeal KR (2005) Death: the price of beauty: Animal Testing and the Cosmetics Industry, American Bar Association Section of Environment, Energy and Resources, Law Student Division, Spring 2005.http://www.abanet.org/environ/committees/lawstudents/pdf/mcneal.pdf. Accesses 22 June 2015

  • McPhedran S (2009) A review of the evidence for associations between empathy, violence, and animal cruelty. Aggress Violent Beh 14(1):1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintel (1994) The green consumer. Mintel Research, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittal B (1989) Measuring purchase-decision involvement. Psychol Market 6(2):147–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monroe KB, Krishnan R (1985) The effect of price on subjective product evaluations. In: Jacoby J, Olson J (eds) The perception of merchandise and store quality. Lexington Books, Lexington, pp 209–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Munch JM, Albanese PJ, Mayo MA et al (1991) The role of personality and moral development in consumers ‘Ethical Decision Making’. In: Proceedings of American marketing summer educator’s conference, pp 299–308

    Google Scholar 

  • Newholm T, Shaw D (2007) Studying the ethical consumer: a review of research. J Consum Behav 6(5):253–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls AJ (2002) Strategic options in fair trade retailing. Int J Retail Distrib Manage 30(1):6–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Öberseder M, Schlegelmilch B, Gruber V (2011) Why don’t consumers care about CSR?: a qualitative study exploring the role of CSR in consumption decisions. J Bus Ethics 104(4):449–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogilvie DM (1987) The undesired self: a neglected variable in personality research. J Pers Soc Psychol 52(2):379–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver RL (1980) A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. J Mark Res 17(4):460–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organic Monitor (2010) CSR & Sustainability: How the Beauty Industry is Cleaning up, 18 May 2010.http://www.organicmonitor.com/r1805.htm. Accessed 11 June 2015

  • Paladino A (2006) Understanding the green consumerism: an empirical analysis. J Consum Behav 4(1):69–102

    Google Scholar 

  • Papadopoulos I, Karagouni G, Trigkas M et al (2009) Green marketing: the case of timber certification, coming from sustainable forests management, promotion. In: Annual international Euro med conference proceedings, vol 2. The Research Business Institute, Salemo

    Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus DL, Williams KM (2002) The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. J Res Pers 36(6):556–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck D, Whitlow D (1975) Approaches to personality theory. Methuen, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pervin LA (1990) A brief history of modern personality theory. In: Pervin LA (ed) Handbook of personality theory and research. The Guilford Press, New York, pp 3–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Peter JP, Olson JC (2009) Consumer behaviour and marketing strategy. McGraw Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Prothero A, McDonagh P (1992) Producing environmentally acceptable cosmetics? The impact of environmentalism on the United Kingdom cosmetics and toiletries industry. J Mark Manage 8(2):147–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum M (1993) Trading Standards: Will customers now shop for fair play?: Group plans to flag products that are Third World-friendly. The Independent.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/trading-standards-will-customer-now-shop-for-fair-play-group-plans-to-flag-products-that-are-third-worldfriendly-1489932.html. Accessed 13 July 2015

  • Rothschild ML (1984) Perspectives on involvement: current problems and future directions. Adv Consum Res 11(1):216–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen S, Gürhan-Canli Z, Morwitz V (2001) Withholding consumption: a social dilemma perspective on consumer boycotts. J Cons Res 28(3):399–417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pudaruth S, Juwaheer TD, Seewoo YD (2015) Gender-based differences in understanding the purchasing patterns of eco-friendly cosmetics and beauty care products in Mauritius: a study of female customers. Soc Responsib J 11(1):179–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw D, Shiu E (2002) An assessment of ethical obligation and self-identity in ethical consumer decision-making: a structural equation modelling approach. Int J Consum Stud 26(4):286–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw D, Shiu E, Clarke I (2000) The contribution of ethical obligation and self-identity to the theory of planned behaviour: an exploration of ethical consumers. J Mark Manage 16(8):879–894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheth JN, Newman BI, Gross BL (1991) Why we buy what we buy: a theory of consumption values. J Bus Rev 22(2):159–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Signal T, Taylor N (2007) Attitude to animals and empathy: comparing animal protection and general community samples. Anthrozoos 20(2):125–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sirgy JM (1982) Self-concept in consumer behavior: a critical review. J Consum Res 9(3):287–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith JB, Colgate M (2007) Customer value creation: a practical framework. J Mark Theory Pract 15(1):7–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon MR (1983) The role of products as social stimuli: a symbolic interactionism perspective. J Consum Res 10(3):319–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks P, Guthrie CA (1998) Self-identity and the theory of planned behavior: a useful addition or an unhelpful artifice? J Appl Soc Psychol 28(15):1393–1410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starr MA (2009) The social economics of ethical consumption: theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. J Socio-Econ 38(6):916–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney JC, Soutar GN (2001) Consumer-perceived value: the development of a multiple item scale. J Retail 77(2):203–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Transparency Market Research (2015) Organic Personal Care Products Market—Global Industry Analysis, Size, Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast, 2014–2020.http://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/organic-personal-care-products.html. Accessed 11 Aug 2015

  • Triandis HC (2001) Individualism-collectivism and personality. J Pers 69(6):907–924

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tsakiridou E, Boutsouki C, Zotos Y et al (2008) Attitudes and behaviour towards organic products: an exploratory study. Int J Retail Distrib Manag 36(2):158–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA (2015). Annual report animal usage by fiscal year. United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.http://www.aphis.usdAgov/animal_welfare/downloads/7023/Animals%20Used%20In%20Research%202014.pdf. Accessed 19 Aug 2015

  • Varman R, Belk RW (2009) Nationalism and ideology in an anticonsumption movement. J Consum Res 36(4):686–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitell SJ, Muncy J (1992) Consumer ethics: an empirical investigation of factors influencing ethical judgments of the final consumer. J Bus Ethics 11(8):585-597

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright ND, Claiborne CB, Sirgy MJ (1992) The effects of product symbolism on consumer self-concept. Adv Consum Res 19(1):311–318

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahn-Waxler C, Radke-Yarrow M (1990) The origins of empathic concern. Motiv Emot 14(2):107–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaichkowsky JL (1985) Measuring the involvement construct. J Consum Res 13(3):341–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanoli R, Naspetti S (2002) Consumer motivations in the purchase of organic food: a means-end approach. Br Food J 104(8):643–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeithaml VA (1988) Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: a means-end model and synthesis of evidence. J Mark 52(3):2–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Marketing and Management, Leibniz University of Hannover, Koenigsworther Platz 1, 30167, Hannover, Germany

    Nadine Hennigs, Evmorfia Karampournioti & Klaus-Peter Wiedmann

Authors
  1. Nadine Hennigs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Evmorfia Karampournioti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadine Hennigs .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Services Manager-Asia, SGS Hong Kong Limited, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Subramanian Senthilkannan Muthu

  2. Center for Studies on Sustainable Luxury, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Miguel Angel Gardetti

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hennigs, N., Karampournioti, E., Wiedmann, KP. (2016). Do as You Would Be Done by: The Importance of Animal Welfare in the Global Beauty Care Industry. In: Muthu, S., Gardetti, M. (eds) Green Fashion. Environmental Footprints and Eco-design of Products and Processes. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0111-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation