How free are consumers to make sustainable choices?

But for accelerated action on net zero, we must recognise that individual consumption is actively driven and moulded by powerful producers of goods and services and their marketing. Regulatory and other systems currently in place in most economies actively enable highly consumptive approaches. For as long as sustainable choices are less visible, more costly, and less convenient, change toward more sustainable consumption will not emerge, particularly from the majority of the global population, who are struggling to pay bills, get to work, source affordable food, and fulfil other basic daily needs. Cutting emissions cannot depend on the average consumer selflessly and autonomously making ‘the right choice’ . 

The burden is on the consumer

At present, the limited availability and affordability of low-carbon products in most markets is a major restraint on the growth of ‘climate friendly’ consumption. Many businesses indirectly or directly place responsibility on consumers and downplay the emissions created as part of production, arguing that the biggest source of their emissions is associated with consumers’ use of their products. This practice has become so widespread that it has a coined term: ‘eco-shaming.’ Yet, research shows that the global fashion industry overproduces between 30 and 40% each season, making it clear that its production is not a consequence of demand from consumers. In 2017, researchers tracked food waste in over 1,200 commercial kitchens in more than 20 countries and uncovered 13 million pounds of food waste due to overproduction.  

Confusion over the right choice

Due to a lack of regulation, unclear guidelines, and a lack of common standards, the accepted definition of sustainability usually varies across products, companies, and individuals – ultimately leading to a lack of clarity for consumers and accountability for businesses. Over the past few decades, a large body of research has consistently shown that when people are given too much choice they react negatively, with expressions ranging from frustration and confusion to regret, dissatisfaction, and even choice paralysis. Even environmentally conscious consumers navigate the market in the context of increasing concern but little guidance and support from businesses to make genuinely good choices within the unavoidable constraints of time, cost, and functionality.

Distorted pricing

Where sustainable choices are better understood, they can often be more expensive, harder to find, or impractical.

Meeting sustainability standards can involve additional costs for suppliers, often not just a one-time investment. Current business models would not stack up, work, or be profitable if the full social and environmental cost of production, operation, and distribution were taken into account. Growing and manufacturing raw materials in a sustainable manner, putting in place the required infrastructure or technology to reduce carbon intensity of operations, acquiring reputable third-party certifications and labels, instituting fair wages, investing in innovation and more efficient, resilient, and fairer supply chains can increase end user costs.

Until regulation and government incentives reshape operating conditions for manufacturers and suppliers to ensure they identify and are incentivised to follow sustainable processes and source sustainable goods, the creation of genuinely sustainable products and business models will be difficult to scale. Simultaneously, the current omission of the impacts on the environment, human labour, or local communities from the final cost of mainstream goods and services further distorts market pricing. It results in lower prices for goods and services that cause environmental damage, entail harmful or unfair use of labour, or use toxic ingredients or inputs.

At the same time, in some contexts, sustainable choices can be more efficient, healthier, or better quality, generating savings for consumers over time. Yet, a lack of awareness and higher upfront costs can keep consumers from considering such longer-term benefits and dissuade them from choosing sustainable alternatives – whether it is for how they travel, the products they consume, or how they maintain their homes. Provisions from suppliers and retailers, regulation from government, clearer communication of benefits, and greater, targeted support to help consumers would help shift mainstream perception of the higher upfront cost of sustainable choices. 

Changing consumer behaviour at scale

History shows that consumer choice, culture, and behaviour can be transformed at scale – when there is alignment across policy, businesses, media, and legislation. The fight against the tobacco industry in the USA to protect public health required major change from the general public to reconsider the culture of smoking and overcome a highly addictive product. Mass-media campaigns, bans on smoking in public places, school-based prevention programmes, counselling services, and subsidised nicotine replacement therapy services in the 1990s led to a 57% drop in tobacco consumption in California within a decade.

The more recent comeback of the bicycle in major cities across Europe and North America shows that when the conditions and information to highlight the benefits of an alternative are made clear, change can occur (even when it demands more physical exertion from the public). Over the last decade, US bike commuting reportedly grew by 73% in the country's largest cities and by 47% on average nationwide, albeit from a very low base. The number of people cycling in central London in 2016 was seven times what it was in 1977. Bike sharing market penetration in China has seen a 50% increase between 2017 and 2022. The growing popularity of the bicycle has been the result of rigorous and largely grassroots advocacy, thoughtful planning and incremental, but persistent policy efforts spanning many years and decades in cities globally. This has been a response to common problems of congestion, pollution, and declining public health stemming from car-oriented physical environments. 

What does sustainable consumer choice look like?

In our research, we considered typical scenarios an individual might face when they think about buying an everyday product or managing their energy bills – scenarios that connect back to the manufacturing and retail industries and the building and energy sectors. The intention of these studies is to provide an understanding of how systemic parameters still require significant repositioning to make the ‘right’ environmental choice more obvious and realistic for the average person seeking to meet a daily need.

Only when we’ve made an honest reckoning of current constraints to change, can we hope for everyday consumers to choose the more sustainable option, every time.