Understanding Gen Z Consumers: A Typology of (Un)sustainable Purchases

Summary

This paper uses neutralisation theory to explain why Generation Z (born 1997–2012) often fails to convert pro-environmental attitudes into sustainable purchases. Based on 25 semi-structured interviews (ages 18–26) and thematic analysis, the authors identify four established neutralisation techniques in play (denial of responsibility, condemning the condemners, appeal to higher loyalties, metaphor of the ledger) and introduce two novel techniques particularly salient for Gen Z: denial of efficacy (feeling individual actions are futile) and denial of proximity (psychological, temporal and geographical distance from impacts).

The study develops a three-part consumer typology — Disengaged, Moderates and Advocates — which differ in the extent they use those techniques and in their real-world sustainable purchasing. Practical recommendations target marketers, governments and policy-makers: make green choices affordable and convenient, improve authenticity and transparency, leverage influencers and platform economies, and tailor interventions by segment.

Key Points

Gen Z shows pro-environmental predispositions but a consistent attitude–behaviour gap in purchases.
Neutralisation theory explains how young consumers rationalise unsustainable purchases through psychological techniques.
Four classic techniques were observed: denial of responsibility, condemning the condemners, appeal to higher loyalties, and metaphor of the ledger.
Two new techniques were identified: denial of efficacy (actions seen as ineffective) and denial of proximity (issues perceived as distant).
A three-segment typology (Disengaged, Moderates, Advocates) captures variation in how Gen Z applies these techniques and their purchase patterns.
Practical interventions: lower cost and increase convenience of green options, counter greenwashing with transparency, use influencers and community-driven solutions, and embed sustainability education early.

Why should I read this?

Short version: if you want to sell greener products to Gen Z or shape policy that actually works, this paper is a tidy shortcut. It digs beneath slogans to show the psychological excuses Gen Z uses — and gives a simple three-way split you can act on. Come away with concrete levers (price, convenience, authenticity, targeted messaging) instead of guessing why younger consumers say one thing and buy another.

Context and Relevance

With climate risks rising and Gen Z gaining spending power, understanding the attitude–behaviour gap is timely. The study links established sustainability research with neutralisation theory and adds two new mechanisms that clarify why even environmentally aware young people often choose less sustainable options. The typology is directly useful to marketers designing segment-specific offers and to policy-makers who need to design incentives and educational programmes that address psychological barriers (not just information deficits).

Broader trends reinforced by the paper: rising scrutiny of brand authenticity, the role of affordability and convenience in green adoption, and the growing influence of collective activism — all critical for designing effective interventions in the 2020s.

Source

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mar.70013?af=R