Figure 2: Positive feedback between CSR mainstreaming and sustainable consumption & consumer citizenship

Moreover, CSR mainstreaming has not only the potential to facilitate consumption of previous consumer citizens. It also stimulates the diffusion of consumer citizenship to new parts of the population. The target-group that can be well addressed through CSR mainstreaming is internationally known as cultural creatives (Ray/Anderson 2000) or LOHAS (“Lifestyle of Health and Sustainability”) (e.g. Ax/Wohlers 2008). Whereas consumers of products with social and ecological added value were hitherto a marginal group, the recent trend coming up with key words like LOHAS and CSR has created a broad publicity locating sustainable consumption in mainstream markets. Societal topics like climate change, the decline in resources or human rights which dominate the global agenda are increasingly connected to the mass market consumers’ daily life (Hira/Ferrie 2006). Thereby, taking responsibility is not seen as antipode to lust for life and quality of life. Hence, sustainable consumption gains a new image, an improved public attention and is thus generally strengthened.

Certainly, the effect of CSR mainstreaming on sustainable consumption is not a one-way street as sustainable consumption stimulates a sustainability pull towards a further strengthening of CSR mainstreaming. Consequently, this feedback loop of supply and demand, typical in market economies, can function as a self-energizing process towards sustainability. It becomes easier to act responsibly and use consumption as a new way of democracy (CCN 2005).

Next to the illustrated opportunities, mainstreaming of CSR holds risks for sustainable consumption and hence for the common goal of sustainable development (see figure 3).

The social and ecological added value of products and services is not necessarily visible on the good itself. To create trust in producers and their products consumers are bound to transparency meaning information about the production process and the activities of the company. In niche markets, transparency, trust and credibility are often created through a close relationship between producers, traders and consumers. In contrast, the mass market compensates its higher anonymity through increased mass communication. Although distribution of information is key element of CSR (Schrader et al. 2008), this looms to create a growing in-transparency. The flood of company-owned and independent organic- and social-labels and standards are leading to a ubiquity of so called “sustainable” products. The consumer`s valuation which standards suits one’s own needs and criteria often requires additional information or previous knowledge. The amount and quality of information addressed to the consumer is intractable leading to information-overload and consumer confusion (Langer et al. 2008). Finally, this can undermine the credibility of individual standards and labels as well as the trust in producers and their products. This might lead to a lost in trust and acceptance of sustainable products. In the end it might reinforce former consumption patterns.

If consumers are not able to differentiate between the various CSR activities and act accordingly it might lead to a dilution of sustainability standards. For example TransFair, Rainforest Alliance and the 4C Association all claim to bring sustainability into the coffee sector whereas the respective sustainability criteria they comply to vary enormously. If these differences are not describes transparently and clearly for example in the „Sustainable Shopping Basket”, the shopping guide published by the German Council for Sustainability (Rat für Nachhaltige Entwicklung 2008) or in educational material, awarded by the UN-decade “Education for Sustainable Development” (Kraft Foods Deutschland 2007), presumably mainstream consumers will not be aware of the differences in the sustainability engagement and will purchase accordingly. Consequently, the incentive for the mass market declines to hold up the usually cost intensive standards which are established in the niche markets. Looking at the example BP, it shows how instead CSR communication activities are promoted disproportionately in relation to the actual CSR activities respectively the remaining not-sustainable core business (Vogel 2006). Critics call these cases “greenwashing”.

A further risk lies in the moral relief that is created when consuming socially sound and environmentally friendly products and services. When consumers feel convinced that they contribute to saving the world through their consumer behavior with CSR mainstreaming their disposition to questions the own consumption quantity and reflect on the personal actual needs will decline drastically. If strawberries can be bought at Christmas time “organic” and “fair”, the transport costs and energy expenses of the needed greenhouses fall behind. If corporations like BP or RWE commit to climate protection energy consumption might only be a question of the thickness of the purse – especially when the domestic illumination is realized with renewables. And what is the moral problem of buying a cheap flight when a certificate of carbon compensation is sold simultaneously like selling of indulgences? In total there is the threat that CSR mainstreaming stimulates consumption- and lifestyle patterns that are unsustainable on a global scale reducing the willingness to question the necessity of consumption activities and undermining consumer citizenship.

In summary one can state that CSR is of growing importance in the mass market due to CSR mainstreaming which develops twofold: through growing companies leaving the niche market and the rising importance of CSR within corporations of the mass market.

Looking at sustainable consumption CSR mainstreaming leads to opportunities and risks. On the one hand side new target groups are made accessible and a self-accelerating sustainable development is possible. On the other side the fear of diluting the mission statement “sustainable consumption” is evident. The use or contra-productivity of CSR mainstreaming for sustainable consumption is bound to the respective framework conditions.

Those framework conditions are strongly guided by consumer policy. With different tools consumer policy can ensure that consumers are critical, enlightened and able to remunerate serious CSR activities and unmask “greenwashing” activities. That way, adequate consumer information creates transparency about real CSR activities of companies and assists to differentiate between credible and non-credible CSR communication. One step towards better CSR information is provided since 2004 with the – sporadically conducted – CSR tests of the German Stiftung Warentest²⁸ (Schoenheit/Hansen 2004).

A stronger focus on consumer education at schools and universities would stimulate the ability to reflect needs and help judging the credibility of standards and labels as well as on background information and the impact of the various CSR activities. The UN-decade “Education for Sustainable Development” could help to create awareness for sustainable consumption patterns within different stakeholder groups involved directly and indirectly into the production processes. That way the strongly linked activities of sustainable production and consumption are strengthened mutually and contribute to the spreading of consumer citizenship.

Furthermore, within their representative mandate consumer organizations can be involved closer into stakeholder dialogues for a more severe integration of CSR within companies´ core business. Partly those consumer policy tools are already implemented but are underrepresented with respect to the CSR-(communication)-activities led by companies.

CSR mainstreaming can only unfold its full potential to stimulate and strengthen sustainable consumption, a sustainable economy and contribute to consumer citizenship if CSR is not seen as a business topic only. CSR oriented awareness and activities of all stakeholder groups including consumer policy actors would contribute to sustainable development – and to the success of companies which take CSR seriously.

References

Ax, C., H. Wohlers, 2008. LOHAS: Yes we can. Forum Nachhaltig Wirtschaften 2008/3: 66 – 67.

Barth, R., F. Wolff, K. Schmitt, 2007. CSR between rhetoric and reality. Ökologisch Wirtschaften 2007/4: 30 - 34.

Berger, I., P. Cunningham, M. Drumswright, 2007. Mainstreaming corporate social reponsibility: Developing markets for virtue. California Management Review 49/4: 132 – 157.

Consumer Citizenship Network – CCN, 2005. Consumer Citizenship Education – Guidelines, Higher Education. Vol 1. Edited by V. W. Thoresen. Hamar: CCN.

Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative – CSRI, 2008. Defining of Corporate Social Responsibility. Cambridge: Harvard Kennedy School.

European Commission – EC, 2005. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee. Implementing the Partnership for Growth and Jobs: Making Europe a Pole of Excellence on Corporate Social Responsibility. Brussels: European Commission.

Hira, A., J. Ferrie, 2006. Fair trade: Three key challenges for reaching mainstream. Journal of Business Ethics 63/2: 107 - 118.

Krafts Foods Deutschland (ed), 2007. Auf Entdeckungsreise in die Welt des Kaffees. Eine fächerübergreifende Unterrichtsmappe mit variablen Lerneinheiten rund um das Thema Kaffee. Sekundarstufe I. Neuried: CARE-LINE.

Langer, A., M. Eisend, A. Kuß, 2008. Zu viel des Guten? Zum Einfluss der Anzahl von Ökolabels auf die Konsumentenverwirrtheit. Marketing – Zeitschrift für Forschung und Praxis 30/1: 19 - 28.

Rat für Nachhaltige Entwicklung (ed.), 2008. Der Nachhaltige Warenkorb. Ein Einkaufsführer zum Ausprobieren und Diskutieren. Berlin: Rat für Nachhaltige Entwicklung.

Schoenheit, I., U. Hansen. 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility. Eine neue Herausforderung für den vergleichenden Warentest. In: Management mit Vision und Verantwortung. Edited by K.-P. Wiedmann, W. Fritz, B. Abel. Wiesbaden: Gabler. 231-258.

Schrader, U, 2007: The moral responsibility of consumers as citizens. Int. J. Innovation and Sustainable Development, 2/1: 79–96.

Schrader, U., U. Hansen, S. Schoeneborn, 2008. Why do companies communicate with consumers about CSR? Conceptualization and empirical insights from Germany. Studies in Communication Sciences 8/2&3: 303 - 330.

Smith, N. C, 2008. Consumers as drivers of CSR. In: The Oxford Handbook of CSR. Edited by A. Crane et al. Oxford: University Press. 281 – 302.

Vogel, D, 2006. The market for virtue. The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

Wüstenhagen, R., A. Villiger, A. Meyer, 2001. Bio-Lebensmittel jenseits der Öko-Nische. In: Nachhaltiger Konsum. Forschung und Praxis im Dialog. Edited by U. Schrader, U. Hansen. Frankfurt: Campus. 177 – 188.

Ray, P. H., S. R. Anderson, 2000. The cultural creatives: How 50 million people are changing the world. New York. Harmony Books.