Consumer Attitudes and Behavior
The E-SCOPE survey asked householders about their attitudes to product life spans. This revealed that the U.K. population is divides, almost evenly, on whether or not appliances last long enough: 45% responded that they do not, whereas 50% stated that they do (the remaining 5% expressed no opinion). People’s opinions appeared to be reflected by their behavior. Those who were satisfied with product life spans were significantly more likely to purchase premium range appliances and attempt to get products repaired.
Asked how long appliances should last, householders revealed expectations that appeared realistic but not quite fulfilled. The average age of discarded appliances was just below the age considered “reasonable”. One focus group participant hinted at an apparently innate desire for improvement. “I don’t think they ever last as long as you’d like” (Cooper and Mayers 2000 p. 13). A small proportion of householders had markedly higher expectation: for example, more than 10% thought that cookers (i.e., ranges), refrigerators and freezers, hi-fis and stereos, telephones, and home and garden tools should last at least 20 years. Nor does any market research in the public domain include such data, although the importance of durability is sometimes implied in questions about quality and reliability.
Concerning acquisition, the E-SCOPE questionnaire asked householders to identify the disadvantages of purchasing longer-lasting appliances. The results revealed that more respondents were deterred by a fear that more respondents were deterred by a fear that such items would become “out of date” (30%) than by price (23%). Men were significantly more concerned about advancing technology than women, who were more price-conscious. The focus groups explored different interpretations of “out of date”. One participant said that a reconditioned case would be acceptable but working parts should be new, whereas another considered reconditioned inner parts acceptable as long as the case was new!
Many consumers evidently want better information at the point of sale about the intended life spans of products. Some 73% considered information on the expected life spans of appliances to be “very important,” whereas 54% were dissatisfied with those currently available. New research suggests that few consumer durables are labeled with their intended life spans, although eco-labels and other quality labels provide signals, as may the length of guarantees, advertising claims, price, brand reputation, and industry standards (Christer and Cooper 2004).
Recent research concluded that repair work has declined in the U>K>, in part because labor cost are high, while manufacturing has increasingly relocated to countries with low costs (Cooper 2005). The E-SCOPE survey found that one-third of discarded appliances were still functional and of those that were broken, a third were classified as “in need of repair” as distinct from “broken beyond repair.” The responses are based on subjective judgments, but suggest that trading up is common and people often replace broken appliances that they consider reparable. This conclusion is reinforced by another research study, which assessed the condition of bulky items discarded at civic amenity sites (local authority facilities for bulky household waste) and concluded that 77% of upholstered furniture and 60% of domestic appliances could theoretically be refurbished and reduced (Anderson 1999).
The increasing cost of repair relative to replacement exerts an important influence upon user behavior. In the E-SCOPE survey almost four in ten respondents (38%) reported that they rarely or never had appliances repaired, and over two-thirds (68%) cited cost as a factor that discouraged them. A study in Finland showed that from 1981 to 1994 the price of new televisions increased by 20%, whereas the cost of repair work rose by over 150%; the figures for washing machines were 40% and 165%, respectively (Consumers International 1998, p. 20). Recent research concluded that repair work has declined in the United Kingdom because labor costs are high, whereas manufacturing is increasingly relocated to countries with low costs (Cooper 2004). This relocation also leads to the loss of workers skilled enough to be employed in repair workshops. The regulatory climate is a further factor that may have dissuaded consumers from undertaking repair work. The ECLG (1988) criticized a lack of information on the durability of goods accessible to consumers and a lack of transparency in the after-sales service market, which led to inadequate price competition. Its report also argued that consumers were often victims of legal uncertainty concerning unsuccessful repair work.
Finally, the E-SCOPE survey found that most householders, when replacing functional appliances, want to see them utilized rather than disposed of as waste. Consequently many appliances have more than one owner during their life spans. Almost one-quarter of all discarded appliances (24%) were donated or sold and the reuse of computers (67%), hi-fi and stereo (44%), and video equipment, microwave ovens, and toys (around 35% in each case) was particularly high. Focus group participants were asked about their view of second-hand appliances, which account for approximately 5% of the total stock. Attitudes were generally negative, although some people expressed a willingness to purchase them if they offered good value and were sold with adequate guarantees.
The E-SCOPE project was followed by a study of consumers’ attitudes and behavior relating to product life spans for other types of consumer durables, footwear, and upholstered chairs as well as kitchen appliances (Evans and Cooper 2003). This research, based on survey of 711 householders in Sheffield, United Kingdom in 2000 and a series of in-depth interviews in 2002, explored consumers’ intentions and behavior during successive phases in the consumption cycle (acquisition, use, discard) for each of the three types of products.
The study concluded that most people do not adopt a consistent approach toward product life spans. In each of the three phases some behaved in such a way as to encourage a long life span, such as making durability a priority at acquisition, taking good care of the product during use, or ensuring reuse if it still functioned when discarded. Only a very few people, however, exhibited such behavior in all three phases. Moreover, the research found that most people did not have the intention of behaving in such a way that products have long life spans. Even among those that did, their actual behavior during the use phase was often not consistent with their intentions. Footwear, for example, was infrequently cleaned.
