Multilevel implications for anti-consumption social marketing within the public policy framework for SDG realization: a systematic literature review

“

TL;DR

This systematic literature review examines how anti-consumption (rejecting, reducing, or reclaiming goods/services) can be leveraged through upstream social marketing and public policy to achieve UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). The authors analyzed 42 peer-reviewed articles and found that while anti-consumption research has focused primarily on individual consumer behavior, there is a growing but still underdeveloped connection to policymaking, with only 12 of 29 articles addressing policy implications directly. The paper proposes a multilevel framework connecting anti-consumption, social marketing, and public policy to address sustainability challenges, emphasizing that upstream social marketing—targeting structural and systemic change rather than just individual behavior—is essential for effective policy implementation.

Full summary

4,640 CHARS

**Background:** Anti-consumption—defined as behaviors or intentions to 'reject, reduce or reclaim certain goods, services, or brands' (Lee & Ahn, 2016, p. 18)—has been studied primarily at the micro level of individual consumer behavior, focusing on brand relationships, avoidance, and cessation. However, the literature calls for expanding this analysis toward broader societal and stakeholder contexts, particularly regarding global sustainability challenges. Social marketing, especially upstream social marketing, offers a framework for connecting anti-consumption to public policy and structural change. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 8 (Sustainable Tourism), and SDGs 14 and 15 (Life Below Water and Life on Land), provide a policy context for anti-consumption mechanisms. This study aims to bridge the gap between anti-consumption research, social marketing, and public policy by systematically reviewing existing literature to identify opportunities for addressing sustainable and environmental challenges.

**Methods:** The authors conducted a systematic literature review using Scopus and Web of Science databases. The search string used was 'anti-consumption' OR 'anticonsumption' OR 'anti consumption' AND 'policy' OR 'policies' AND 'regulatory' OR 'regulation'. Inclusion criteria were: English-language peer-reviewed articles and early-access peer-reviewed articles in the categories of Business, Economics, Management, and Psychology. Book chapters, books, and conference proceedings were excluded. No date restrictions were applied. The search yielded 42 articles, all of which met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. A multi-step analysis was performed involving reading titles, keywords, abstracts, and full texts to categorize topics, contexts, methodologies, and concepts. The top three journals by number of publications were the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing (8 articles), Journal of Business Research (5 articles), and British Food Journal (3 articles). The most frequently used methodology was surveys (22 articles), followed by ethnography (8 articles) and interviews (7 articles).

**Key Results:** The thematic analysis revealed four main topic categories: Environmental Sustainability (13 articles), Lifestyle (12 articles), Health (11 articles), and Consumer Behavior (6 articles). Of the 42 articles, 29 addressed public policy implications, but only 12 explicitly included policymaking in their research analyses. The most studied products/activities were general anti-consumption (18 articles), alcohol (4 articles), food (4 articles), and boycott (3 articles). The most cited article was Hartl et al. (2016) 'Do we need rules for what's mine is yours? Governance in collaborative consumption communities' with 108 citations, followed by Piacentini and Banister (2009) 'Managing anti-consumption in an excessive drinking culture' with 94 citations, and Isenhour (2010) 'On conflicted Swedish consumers, the effort to stop shopping and neoliberal environmental governance' with 71 citations. The distribution of publications showed increasing attention over the last decade, with a notable rise in citations from 2009 to 2021.

**Clinical Implications:** While this is not a clinical study, the findings have implications for public health policy. The review identifies that anti-consumption mechanisms can be applied to health-related behaviors, particularly alcohol consumption (studied in 4 articles), food choices (4 articles), and vaccination (1 article). Examples include Fry (2010) and Piacentini and Banister (2009) on excessive drinking culture, and Yarimoglu et al. (2019) on parents' intentions toward anti-consumption of junk food. The paper argues that upstream social marketing—targeting structural and systemic factors rather than just individual behavior change—is essential for effective public health policy. Policy mechanisms discussed include regulation, taxation (e.g., plastic bag levy studied by Zen et al., 2013), education programs, and dissemination activities. The authors emphasize that public policy can achieve more effective and structural change than downstream interventions alone, particularly for addressing root causes of health and environmental issues. The connection between anti-consumption and well-being is noted, with individual well-being merging individual good and common good in a complex interrelationship of practices and public policies focused on efficient resource use.