Влияние социокультурных факторов на потребление этичных косметических средств в России

Research background and motivation
During the 20th century, a major shift to new economic and business models occurred, resulting in rapid economic growth that eventually fostered natural resource exploitation and over- consumption. The extensive consequences include global warming, environmental degradation (soil, air, and water), ozone layer depletion, and life-threatening health hazards (Biswas et al., 2015). Since these times the topic of sustainable responsibility became crucial for businesses and individuals, and the process of shifting towards new behavior has commenced.
This shift calls for a transformation of the markets, discarding such outdated notions as treating the environment as a limitless source of materials and sink for waste, seeing economic value as the only measure of nature’s worth, encouraging unbridled consumption, and considering perpetual economic growth as even possible (Hoffman A., 2018). In the past years, we observe how all over the world existing companies are integrating sustainable practices transformation into their processes and new businesses are proactively disrupting the market to make it even more sustainable.
Thus, previously mentioned environmental and social changes resulted in the inception of a new consumer mentality – ethical consumption. Nowadays, the range of ethical consumer practices is wide: boycotting the products of companies with an irresponsible attitude to the environment, participation in waste management, energy saving, gardening, eco-tourism, “buy less”, “walk more often” strategies, use public transport, and not own car.
Purchasing cruelty-free cosmetics (that are not tested on animals) is one of the forms of ethical consumer behavior. Despite existing alternative methods of testing products some companies are still using animals to run their tests. Most of the brands that are owned by a few giant corporations like L’Oreal, Estee Lauder, Procter & Gamble, Clorox, Johnson & Johnson, S.C. Johnson, Colgate-Palmolive, Reckitt Benckiser, Church & Dwight, Unilever, and Henkel are using animal testing for its products (PETA, 2021). In the meantime, the recently revised forecasts for the development of the beauty market, even with the recent drop in expenditure on skincare and make-up across consumers from all countries due to COVID-19, experts estimate global beauty market size valued at $463.5 billion by 2027 with a CAGR of 5.3% from 2021 to 2027 (Statista, 2021). While cruelty-free and vegan cosmetics are estimated to reach $21,4 billion by 2027 with an annual CAGR of 6,0 % (Market Research, 2021).
In the past years, we observe a growing demand for cruelty-free cosmetics, especially, among eco-active consumers (Market Research Future, 2020). However, the awareness of consumers about topics of cruelty-free products and animal testing, in general, is different across countries and social groups. The difference is especially visible between developed and emerging markets due to dissimilar law regulations on animal testing, as well as generally higher awareness about sustainable consumption among consumers from developed countries.
In addition to the gap between developed and emerging countries mentioned above, we still observe a consumers’ attitude-behavior gap between their environmental concern and actual buying behavior that hinders the market share for cruelty-free products. According to recent data, 49% of consumers in Russia find it important that cosmetics are not being tested on animals, however, only 22% of these consumers know cruelty-free brands and participate in cruelty-free consumption (Deloitte, 2019). In agreement with behavioral science, a key influencer of consumer behavior is the set of beliefs that a consumer holds about the world. This set of beliefs is determined by the society and culture where the individual is growing and living. For example, consumers can have different attitudes towards consumer concern for animal welfare (Cornish et al., 2016), willingness to pay for animal welfare (Clark et al., 2017), the role of consumer trust in animal- friendly labels (Harvey et al., 2013) and the trade-offs that consumers are willing to make between animal welfare and other product benefits, such as healthiness or safety (Krystallis et al., 2012). Moreover, such differences do not only stem from varying preferences and perceptions but may also stem from norms and values within specific cultures and subcultures.
In the meantime, the COVID-19 crisis has forced many consumers to change their behaviors. As it is stated in a recent global survey by Accenture, consumers “have dramatically evolved”, and that 60% were reporting making more environmentally friendly, sustainable, or ethical purchases since the start of the pandemic and it is estimated that nine out of 10 of that percentage said were likely to continue doing so (Accenture, 2020). According to recent studies, there was a significant change in the lifestyles of consumers: adoption of recycling practices, purchase of products in environmentally friendly packaging (Deloitte, 2020; McKinsey, 2020).
Because consumers ultimately decide to accept or reject animal-friendly products, consumer buying behavior presents a powerful drive or a barrier for the development of a market for such products. Thus it is essential to understand the internal and external barriers motives that lay underneath the consumer incentive to buy cruelty-free. Understanding deep sociocultural barriers and motives for cruelty-free consumption is beneficial to tackle existing challenges and opportunities in the Russian beauty market.
Research gaps in existing consumer behavior studies
As for today, existing literature provides us with a substantial amount of information on sociocultural factors that influence consumer behavior and green consumerism. Rather extensive
7

research has been conducted on the general topic of ethical consumption by both academic researchers (Chan and Lau, 2001; Chowdhury and Samuel, 2014; Biswas and Roy, 2015; Leonidou et al. 2010; Varshneya et al. 2017) and businesses (Deloitte, 2017; Deloitte, 2020; KPMG, 2018; McKinsey, 2020; McKinsey, 2021).
However, despite extensive research on consumers’ environmental actions, attitudes, and apprehension in the context of Europe and the USA, such studies are remarkably absent in the context of the developing economies of the East (Schlegelmilch et al., 1994; Minton and Rose, 1997; Arkesteijn and Oerlemans, 2005; Faiers et al., 2007; Saxena and Khandelwal, 2010; Boztepe, 2012). Besides, an extremely limited amount of information on cruelty-free consumption in Russia is presented over the available research. It is important to highlight the fact that, despite the certainty that there are general implications from studies on the emerging markets and some behavioral patterns are generally assumed to be common for developing economies, each society has its own cultural and historical background (Pizam et al., 1997; Hofstede, 2011) which does not allow us to see the consumers in different countries as people with same influence – while many common characteristics might be more or less universal, if we decide to dive into the peculiarities of consumer behavior we should perceive every single society as a unique one, especially if we are to discuss the societies which are different in their very core – for instance, Western Europe and Russia.
Furthermore, the literature shows the lack of studies that take into account the impact of COVID-19 both on consumer ethical behavior and cruelty-free consumption. Therefore, there is a necessity to review the past researches and update insights on the influence of sociocultural factors on consumer behavior.
It can be concluded that cruelty-free consumption of cosmetics is poorly investigated in the realities of Russia. Hence, the current study aims to fill this gap and provide both academia and businesses with data on the subject we are discussing.
Research problem, goal, and strategy of the study
Consequently, it is of high relevance and importance to study the influence of sociocultural factors on cruelty-free consumption in Russia, hence to understand the incentives and reasons for such behavior and the outcomes it presents for those who are concerned with marketing and especially consumer behavior studies.
The research goal, therefore, is to determine and explore sociocultural factors that influence cruelty-free consumption on the beauty market among Russian consumers. In this regard, the
8

practical focus of the work is due to the development of practical recommendations for companies selling cosmetic products in Russia.
The subject of the given research is: “Sociocultural factors influencing consumer behavior in cruelty-free beauty product market”.
The object of the given research is: “Russian consumers of the beauty products”.
This research paper might be of interest both for the companies that are trying to adjust their existing processes and products to the new mentality and for the companies that are looking for new insights on how to increase and support further evolvement of cruelty-free consumption. As Russian market currently is characterized both by low awareness among consumers and lack of government regulation on animal testing in the beauty industry, making it more challenging for companies to leverage cruelty-free as its competitive advantage and for multinational companies to maintain brand identity across the market organizations. However, with COVID-19 we are facing a unique moment in time during which companies can reinforce and shape behavioral shifts to position their products and brands better for the next normal. We, as the researchers are interested in exploring the phenomenon, assessing its importance, and developing recommendations both for future research in the area and for the specialists who are working with related subjects in a practical environment.
Proceeding with the methodology of the study, it is vital to mention that this research is explanatory since it aims to understand the causal relationships between variables and to identify the nature of these cause-and-effect relationships.
In the meantime, it is formal and aims to high structuration. Hence, the theoretical framework of the research is constructed upon the analysis of the theories explaining cruelty-free consumption.
Based on the specifics of the study area, two key methods were selected for this research: 1. Literature review
2. Experiments
These methods will help to obtain two types of information:
– Secondary data from the scientific articles and existing case studies,
– Primary data from the experiments
This study aims to gather empirical evidence of the phenomena so that the researchers
could be able to fill the research gap and present practically approbated information derived from several sources. Causal studies focus on the analysis of a situation or a specific problem to explain the patterns of relationships between variables. Experiments are the most popular primary data collection methods in studies with causal research design. This method aims to test different
9

assumptions (hypotheses) by trial and error under conditions established and managed by the investigator. One or more conditions (independent variables) are permitted to change during the experiment in an organized manner and the effects of these changes on associated conditions (dependent variables) are measured, recorded, validated, and analyzed for arrival (Gneezy, A., 2016). This method is beneficial in terms of the strict granting of data collected to the research problem’s objectives. Besides, the data-gathering technique is strictly regulated. This also has its drawbacks, though, as the method is very laborious and often costly, however, it covers a large number of users.
The current work is constructed in three parts. The first one reveals the theoretical background of the study and aims to analyze existing research on the subject as well as secondary data. The second chapter presents the structure of empirical research. The last chapter presents the findings obtained by an empirical study, provides recommendations, and observes the hypotheses. Practical recommendations, offerings for further investigation, and limitations of the research are also present within this work.