MKTG90049 · Marketing, Society and Sustainability
Consumers and Consumption
Week 4 analyses how consumers and consumption are shaped, using ultra-fast fashion as its case. It covers the consumer decision-making process, ethical consumerism and its challenges, and the central reading — Giesler & Veresiu's (2014) 'Creating the responsible consumer' with its P.A.C.T. routine and neoliberal governmentality — plus consumer resistance to responsibilisation.
In assessment this is the 'who is really responsible?' theme: an exam question asks you to explain a fast-fashion brand's appeal and then analyse how responsibility is shifted onto individuals, and the responsibilisation lens sharpens the individual SDG essay's reflection on your own consumption.
What this chapter covers
- 01Ultra-fast fashion business model and its three-pillar sustainability harms
- 02Consumer decision-making process (EKB): need recognition → search → evaluation → purchase → post-purchase
- 03Ethical consumerism (Zollo) and its challenges (Carrington): who defines 'ethical', responsibility-shifting, affluence bias
- 04Consumer responsibilisation (Giesler & Veresiu 2014): shifting responsibility for social problems onto individuals
- 05The P.A.C.T. routine: Personalization → Authorization → Capabilization → Transformation
- 06Enabling conditions: neoliberalism and Foucauldian (self-)governmentality; historical institutionalisation over time
- 07Consumer resistance (Gonzalez-Arcos et al. 2021): demanding 'more', the misled consumer, rejecting vilification, challenging truth claims
Short answer: explain a fast-beauty brand's appeal and the responsibilisation at work
- +5Explain the appeal via the decision process (about 5 marks). Walk the EKB stages: low price and trend-driven need recognition, algorithm-fed information search, evaluation dominated by cost and novelty, frictionless purchase, and post-purchase where the attitude-behaviour gap appears (concern but repeat buying). Name the green gap explicitly.
- +4Locate the harm and shift to responsibilisation (about 4 marks). Map harms across the three pillars and to SDGs (e.g. 12 responsible consumption). Then introduce Giesler & Veresiu's responsibilisation: responsibility for the harm is moved from firms and the state onto the individual consumer.
- +4Apply the P.A.C.T. routine (about 4 marks). Personalization (an idealised 'conscious consumer' vs a wasteful 'other'); Authorization (experts/influencers sanctify the responsible choice); Capabilization (a market of 'sustainable' products to buy); Transformation (adopting the responsible-consumer identity). Note neoliberal governmentality underneath.
- +2Close with resistance and a one-liner (about 2 marks). Note consumers can resist — demanding firms do 'more', rejecting vilification — implying responsibility should sit with producers too. Keep to ~300 words.
Key terms
- Consumer decision-making process (EKB)
- The five-stage model of a purchase: need recognition → information search → evaluation of alternatives → purchase → post-purchase evaluation. Used to explain how and why consumers buy, including where sustainability concerns are overridden.
- Attitude-behaviour gap (green gap)
- The disconnect between consumers' pro-sustainability attitudes or intentions and their actual purchasing behaviour — people say they care but keep buying the unsustainable option.
- Consumer responsibilisation (Giesler & Veresiu 2014)
- The process by which institutions shift responsibility for social problems onto individual consumers, producing a 'responsibilised consumer subject' and prioritising individual moral effort over binding rights to social protection or redistribution.
- P.A.C.T. routine
- The four stages by which consumers are responsibilised: Personalization (contrast an ideal responsible consumer with an irresponsible 'other'), Authorization (experts sanctify the responsible subject), Capabilization (build a market for responsible self-management), Transformation (foster adoption of the responsible identity).
- Neoliberal governmentality
- Under neoliberalism, top-down regulation is replaced by freedom-of-choice models supported by moral guidelines and non-binding rules (Foucault); individuals govern themselves through internalised norms — the enabling condition for responsibilisation.
- Consumer resistance to responsibilisation
- Counter-conduct tactics consumers use against burden-shifting interventions (Gonzalez-Arcos et al. 2021; Döbbe & Cederberg): demanding 'more' restraint from firms, constructing 'the misled consumer', rejecting vilification, and challenging truth claims.
Consumers and Consumption FAQ
What does 'responsibilisation' mean and why does it matter?
Responsibilisation (Giesler & Veresiu 2014) is the process by which firms and governments shift responsibility for social and environmental problems onto individual consumers — turning a structural issue into a matter of personal choice ('just recycle', 'shop consciously'). It matters because the subject argues this lets producers off the hook and can prioritise individual moral effort over binding protections. Recognising it is the key exam insight: telling consumers to be responsible is itself a marketing move, not a neutral solution.
What is the P.A.C.T. routine?
P.A.C.T. is Giesler & Veresiu's four-stage account of how a responsible-consumer subject is created: Personalization (contrast an idealised responsible consumer with an irresponsible 'other'); Authorization (experts and authorities sanctify that responsible identity); Capabilization (a market of products and services is built so people can 'manage' their responsibility by buying); and Transformation (people adopt the responsible-consumer identity). Underneath it sits neoliberal governmentality — self-governance through internalised norms.
Why do consumers keep buying unsustainably even when they say they care?
This is the attitude-behaviour or 'green' gap: pro-sustainability attitudes do not translate into behaviour because price, convenience, habit and the intangibility of the benefit dominate the decision at the point of purchase. The subject also stresses that ethical consumption is often only open to affluent consumers who can pay premiums, and that responsibility has been shifted onto individuals who are constrained by the choices available to them — so the gap is structural, not just personal weakness.
Can AI help me with Week 4 of MKTG90049?
Yes, as a study aid. Sia can walk you through the consumer decision process, drill the four P.A.C.T. stages, and check that you connect responsibilisation to the shift of responsibility away from firms. Bring a practice prompt and ask it to structure the answer step by step. It does not write your graded essay or exam answer, and University of Melbourne academic-integrity rules apply.
Exam move
The examinable payoff this week is the responsibilisation insight, so drill it. Memorise the EKB decision stages, the green gap, and — most importantly — the four P.A.C.T. stages in order, since a short answer will ask you to apply them. Practise the move: take any low-cost consumer brand, explain its appeal through the decision process, then analyse how responsibility for its harm is shifted onto individuals via P.A.C.T. under neoliberal governmentality, and close on resistance. Because the SDG essay reflects on your own consumption, use this lens to avoid a purely 'I should try harder' reflection and instead note where producers and structures share responsibility. Rotate examples so the frameworks transfer. When P.A.C.T. blurs, ask Sia to separate the stages with a fresh example; it teaches the method and never does your graded work. Confirm assessment details on Canvas.
Working through Consumers and Consumption in MKTG90049? Sia is AskSia’s AI Marketing tutor — ask any MKTG90049 Consumers and Consumption question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how MKTG90049 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
