We Asked Users
This survey was presented to a prequalified TCD audience in contextually relevant web articles and newsletters.
Survey participants self-selected two times, first when deciding to consume the host content and then again when deciding to participate in the survey.
Does seeing a product labeled with its carbon footprint make you more likely to buy it?
Please select one.
Does seeing a product labeled with its carbon footprint make you more likely to buy it?Survey Results
2,159 Quality Focus:
497 Outrage Focus:
474
Aggregate Insights
The strong majority vote for "Not at all" suggests that brands need to move beyond conventional carbon footprint messaging to effectively engage mainstream consumers at scale.
The fact that 31% of respondents demonstrated some degree of openness to carbon footprint labeling suggests an opportunity for brands to win with footprint messaging targeted at niche audiences.
Further polling could explore sentiment among "Not at all" responders to determine (a) why carbon footprint labeling is unpersuasive (e.g., lack of understanding vs. lack of trust vs. pure indifference) and (b) whether other label language might be more effective in motivating purchases.
Contextual splits are determined by the topical focus and interests of the audience members participating in the survey, as described in more detail in the Insights and Methodolgy sections below.
2,159 Quality Focus:
497 Outrage Focus:
474
Split Insights
The dramatic overperformance of "Not at all" among the policy-focused audience suggests a potential backlash against eco-friendly mandates and regulations.
The much more balanced responses from the quality- and outrage-focused audiences suggests that both discernment and anger can motivate consumers to seek out carbon footprint labeling.
The overperformance of "Only if I understand the label" among the quality-focused audience suggests that discerning consumers are disproportionately focused on the nuances of carbon messaging.
Further polling could explore sentiment among the policy-focused audience to determine (a) why carbon footprint labeling is unpersuasive (e.g., resistance to mandates vs. lack of trust in authorities vs. mere indifference) and (b) whether resistance to carbon footprint messaging applies to other eco-friendly labels as well.
Methodology
This poll was conducted among a prequalified TCD audience of likely adopters via distribution in 5 syndicated web articles. It received a total of 3,340 responses and generated segmented data across 3 primary contextual splits.
TCD surveys are embedded inline in contextually relevant web articles and newsletters. Survey participants self-select two times, first when deciding to consume the host content and then again when deciding to participate in the survey.
Contextual splits are determined by the topical focus and interests of the audience members participating in the survey. Split analysis explores the degree to which different messages — and the self-selected participants who seek them out — can shape consumer sentiment.
