Sustainable Supply Chains and Green Marketing: A Qualitative Examination of Consumer Responses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explores consumer responses to sustainable supply chains and green marketing strategies, aiming to uncover insights into consumer behavior, perceptions, and attitudes towards sustainability in the marketplace. Through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with 30 participants, the study examines key factors influencing consumer trust in green marketing claims, barriers to adopting sustainable products, generational differences in attitudes towards sustainability, and the impact of social media on consumer perceptions. Findings reveal that consumers value transparency and credibility in green claims, preferring products certified by trusted third parties and companies that demonstrate transparent supply chain practices. Higher pricing, concerns about product effectiveness, and limited availability emerged as significant barriers to consumer adoption of sustainable products, highlighting the need for cost competitiveness and increased market accessibility. Generational cohorts, particularly Millennials and Generation Z, exhibit strong inclinations towards sustainability-driven behaviors, shaping market trends towards ethical consumption practices. Social media plays a pivotal role in influencing consumer perceptions, disseminating information about sustainability, and fostering engagement with environmental issues. The study underscores the importance of clear communication, consumer education, and supportive regulatory frameworks in promoting sustainable consumption behaviors. Practical implications include recommendations for businesses to enhance transparency, innovate sustainable products, align with consumer values, leverage social media platforms, and advocate for regulatory measures that uphold environmental standards. By addressing these insights, businesses and policymakers can effectively meet consumer expectations and contribute to sustainable development goals in the global marketplace.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".