THE STUDY OF SUSTAINABLE AND PURPOSE-DRIVEN CONSUMER VALUES IN THAILAND: IN THE MARKETING CONTEXT OF 2026
Keywords:
sustainability, purpose-driven brand, consumer value, sustainable consumptionAbstract
This qualitative study aims to examine consumers’ perceptions, interpretations, and meaningmaking processes regarding sustainability value and brand purpose value that influence the purchasing decisions of Thai consumers in the context of 2026, a period in which consumers place greater importance on meaning-based value rather than purely functional value. The sample consists of 30 Thai consumers who have experience in making purchase decisions within this context. The research instrument employed was a semi-structured in-depth interview, and data were collected through in-depth interviews. The data were analyzed using interpretive thematic analysis to systematically synthesize patterns of consumer perceptions and meaning-making processes.
The findings indicate that Thai consumers perceive sustainability in a holistic manner encompassing environmental, social, and business ethics dimensions. Meanwhile, brand purpose value functions as a key criterion for evaluating brand sincerity, credibility, and trustworthiness. The purchasing decision-making process therefore represents an integration of economic value, emotional value, and moral value. This reflects that consumption in the current context is a meaning-based process rather than a purely rational decision-making process. The findings contribute to expanding knowledge in sustainable marketing and value-based consumption within the context of developing countries and provide strategic implications for organizations in developing brand strategies that align with the expectations of Thai consumers.
Downloads
References
โพสต์ทูเดย์. (2568ก, 15 มกราคม). วิเคราะห์เทรนด์ผู้บริโภคยุคใหม่กับการให้คุณค่าความยั่งยืน. Post Today. https://www.posttoday.com
โพสต์ทูเดย์. (2568ข, 20 กุมภาพันธ์). ธุรกิจไทยกับการปรับตัวสู่การเป็นตราสินค้าเชิงเป้าหมาย. Post Today. https://www.posttoday.com
Arnould, E. J., & Thompson, C. J. (2005). Consumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty years of research. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 868–882. https://doi.org/10.1086/426626
Belz, F. M., & Peattie, K. (2012). Sustainability marketing: A global perspective (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–24. https://doi.org/10.2307/41166284
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual behavior of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0501-6
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Delmas, M. A., & Burbano, V. C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1), 64–87. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? Experimenting with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Haws, K. L., Winterich, K. P., & Naylor, R. W. (2014). Seeing the world through GREEN-tinted glasses: Green consumption values and responses to environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(3), 336–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2013.11.002
Holbrook, M. B. (Ed.). (1999). Consumer value: A framework for analysis and research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203010679
Keller, K. L. (2013). Strategic brand management: Building, measuring, and managing brand equity (4th ed.). Pearson.
Kotler, P., Kartajaya, H., & Setiawan, I. (2021). Marketing 5.0: Technology for humanity. John Wiley & Sons.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Lyon, T. P., & Montgomery, A. W. (2015). The means and end of greenwash. Organization & Environment, 28(2), 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026615575332
McDonagh, P., & Prothero, A. (2014). Sustainability marketing as if the world mattered. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(11–12), 1186–1219. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2014.943263
Peattie, K., & Belz, F. M. (2010). Sustainability marketing-An innovative conception of marketing. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 27(5), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11621-010-0085-7
Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(91)90050-8
Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175
Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer "attitude – behavioral intention" gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-005-5485-3
White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A framework and overview. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649
Zeithaml, V. A. (1988). Consumer perceptions of price, quality, and value: A means-end model and synthesis of evidence. Journal of Marketing, 52(3), 2–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298805200302
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Kaonawat Academic Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Submission Guidelines: Kaonawat Journal
- Article Characteristics and Structure
Types of Works: Accepts Research Articles and Academic Articles in fields including Business Administration, General Management, Finance and Accounting, Marketing, Tourism and Hotel Management, Linguistics, Information Science, Business Computer, Education, Communication Arts, Social Sciences, Political Science, Public Administration, Economics, Arts, Culture, Agricultural Extension, Environment, Health and Healthcare, and related interdisciplinary fields.
Content Length: The main body (excluding abstracts) must be between 5,000 – 10,000 words (counted using Microsoft Word 2013 or higher).
Language: Articles can be submitted in either Thai or English.
Article Components: Must strictly follow the journal’s official Template.
- Manuscript Formatting
File Format: Submissions must be in .doc or .docx (Microsoft Word) format only.
Page Setup: Single-sided printing on A4 paper with margins set according to the provided Template.
References: Must use the APA style or the latest standards specified in the ThaiJO system. Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) or URLs for online sources must be included where available.
- Terms and Publication Ethics
Originality: The manuscript must not have been previously published or be under consideration by any other journal.
Review Process: Articles will undergo a Double-blind Peer Review by at least 2–3 experts.
Copyright: Content and illustrations must not infringe on any copyrights. The author(s) bear sole responsibility for any legal infringements.
- Submission Channel
Authors must register and submit their manuscripts through the Kaonawat Journal (ThaiJO) online system only. The latest Template can be downloaded from the journal’s homepage.
