The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Research on Fair Trade Consumption—A Review
Open accessAbstract
An overview and assessment of the current state of research on individual consumption of Fair Trade (FT) products is given on the basis of 51 journal publications. Arranging this field of ethical consumption research according to key research objectives, theoretical approaches, methods, and study population, the review suggests that most studies apply social psychological approaches focusing mainly on consumer attitudes. Fewer studies draw on economic approaches focusing on consumers’ willingness to pay ethical premia for FT products or sociological approaches relying on the concept of consumer identity. Experimental, qualitative and conventional survey methods are used approximately equally often. Almost all studies draw on convenience or purposive samples and most studies are conducted in the USA or the United Kingdom. Several problems in current research are identified: amongst others, studies’ rather narrow theoretical focus, potential hypothetical and social desirability bias of conventional survey data, and a lack of generalizability of empirical findings. In turn, we suggest that research would benefit from both a multiple-motives and a multiple-methods perspective. Considering competing theories can help to single out key behavioral determinants of individual FT consumption. The combination of different methods such as conventional surveys and field experiments contributes to uncovering respondents’ truthful answers and improves generalizability of results. Scholars in the field of ethical consumption research should use experiments to detect causal relations proposed by theories and conduct cross-country surveys to gather insights as to how differences in market structures, cultural traits, and other path dependencies affect patterns of individual FT consumption.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (2004) · Political Psychology · doi:10.4324/9780203505984-16 · Cited by 13,467
Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology
Portes, A. (1998) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 · Cited by 12,037 · cited 2×
“Complementary theories focusing on social capital (Putnam 1993; Portes 1998), justice principles (Deutsch 1975; Miller 1992), social identity (Tajfel and Turner 1986) and altruistic behavior (Andreoni 1990; Schwartz 1977) are rarely taken into account in empirical research on FT consumption.8…”
BackgroundEfficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour: A meta‐analytic review
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1348/014466601164939 · Cited by 9,970
A New Approach to Consumer Theory
Lancaster, K. J. (1966) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/259131 · Cited by 8,471
Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving
Andreoni, J. (1990) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2234133 · Cited by 5,825
What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?
Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.21.2.153 · Cited by 2,668
Gabriel, Y., & Lang, T. (2006) · doi:10.4135/9781446213049 · Cited by 695
Do What Consumers Say Matter? The Misalignment of Preferences with Unconstrained Ethical Intentions
Auger, P., & Devinney, T. M. (2007) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9287-y · Cited by 665
Voluntary simplicity and the ethics of consumption
Shaw, D., & Newholm, T. (2002) · Psychology & Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.10008 · Cited by 572
Cited by
Berki-Kiss, D., & Menrad, K. (2022) · Sustainable Production and Consumption · doi:10.1016/j.spc.2021.09.026 · Cited by 90
Eliciting willingness to pay for fairtrade products with information
Ruggeri, G., Corsi, S., & Nayga, R. M. (2021) · Food Quality and Preference · doi:10.1016/j.foodqual.2020.104066 · Cited by 49
Canova, L., Bobbio, A., & Manganelli, A. M. (2023) · Sustainable Development · doi:10.1002/sd.2441 · Cited by 45
Perceived Marketplace Influence and Consumer Ethical Action
Bret Leary, R., Vann, R. J., & Mittelstaedt, J. D. (2019) · Journal of Consumer Affairs · doi:10.1111/joca.12220 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Andorfer, V. A., & Liebe, U.
- Venue
- Journal of Business Ethics
- Published
- 2011-08-28
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 415-435
- ISSN
- 0167-4544 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-0697
- OpenAlex
- W1999861666
- Cited by
- 297
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 39.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Research on Fair Trade Consumption—A Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10551-011-1008-5
- The paper
- Andorfer, V. A., & Liebe, U. (2012). Research on Fair Trade Consumption—A Review. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1008-5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.