Bain Study Finds Consumers Acting More Sustainably While Talking About It Less

Bain's fourth annual global consumer sustainability study, surveying 7,500 consumers across five countries, finds 85 percent are concerned about environmental sustainability, up from 79 percent last year, while identifying what researchers describe as a consumer "do-say gap," where people increasingly act sustainably without describing their actions in those terms. The study finds 83 percent of respondents have adopted three or more sustainable lifestyle habits, up from 73 percent in 2023.

 

Why the "Do-Say Gap" Reveals a Different Consumer Psychology Than Declining Concern Would Suggest

 

The report specifically frames its central finding as "a consumer version of the 'do-say' gap we identified in companies last year: People act sustainably but often don't describe their actions as sustainable." That framing matters considerably for interpreting what might otherwise appear to be contradictory data, rising sustainable behavior adoption occurring alongside environmental sustainability declining as a stated top purchasing criterion relative to health, since it suggests consumers aren't becoming less environmentally motivated in absolute terms, but are instead pursuing environmentally beneficial actions through other stated motivations, primarily health, affordability and convenience, without necessarily framing or recognising those actions as sustainability-driven choices.

That distinction matters practically for how companies should interpret consumer research more broadly, since a company relying solely on stated purchasing criteria rankings, where sustainability trails health, price and brand, might incorrectly conclude environmental considerations carry declining practical influence over actual consumer behavior, when the report's own data on adopted sustainable habits suggests the opposite trend is actually occurring beneath that surface-level stated priority ranking.

 

Read more: Vanguard Renewables to Acquire Generate Upcycle, Creating Largest Food Waste-to-RNG Platform

 

Why the Carbon Literacy Gap Creates a Specific Opening for AI Intermediaries

 

The report finds "on average, 68% of consumers don't know or get it wrong when asked to choose the lower-carbon option between pairs of food products and packaging options." That substantial carbon literacy gap matters directly because it explains why the report identifies AI tools and product information apps as playing an increasingly central role in consumer decision-making specifically around sustainability, since a considerable majority of consumers genuinely cannot reliably assess a product's relative environmental impact through existing labelling or their own product knowledge alone.

That gap directly connects to the report's finding that "48% of consumers who use AI say they have used it in the past 12 months to help them live more sustainably," and that 41 percent of consumers now use dedicated product information apps such as Yuka, with 79 percent of those users reporting these apps have changed their purchases. Together, these figures suggest AI and app-based intermediaries aren't simply a convenient supplementary tool, but are addressing a genuine, previously unmet consumer need for reliable product comparison information that conventional labelling and marketing communication have evidently failed to adequately provide on their own.

 

Why the Walmart Reformulation Example Illustrates App-Driven Behavior Change Independent of Regulation

 

The report specifically cites that "after being flagged by app Yuka and in response to its own customer research, Walmart committed to 'one of the largest private brand reformulations in retail history': removing artificial dyes and 30 other additives by 2027." That example illustrates a genuinely significant dynamic distinct from regulatory-driven corporate behavior change examined throughout this batch's coverage of mandatory disclosure frameworks like CSRD and CBAM: a third-party consumer app's product assessment directly influencing a major retailer's product formulation decisions, occurring through market and reputational pressure rather than any specific regulatory mandate requiring that reformulation.

That dynamic suggests these consumer-facing verification apps are functioning as a distinct accountability mechanism operating in parallel to formal regulatory disclosure requirements, potentially exerting influence on corporate product decisions through direct consumer behavior change and reputational exposure, in ways that could move faster or reach product categories that formal regulatory frameworks haven't yet specifically addressed.

 

Explore OneStop ESG Marketplace: Corporate ESG consulting

 

Why the Resilience and Affordability Motivations Reveal a Distinct Driver From Environmental Concern

 

The report identifies "buying local" as among the top five lifestyle habits for the past two years, with respondents' top stated reasons being "supporting and developing the business infrastructure where they live and ensuring security of supply," rather than environmental considerations specifically. That motivation connects directly to the report's separate finding that "the price of gasoline and energy and the cost of living generally are global respondents' two greatest concerns," with this year's energy price increases specifically noted as having "sparked a surge in demand for solar panels in Europe."

That pattern illustrates how economic anxiety and supply chain resilience concerns, rather than environmental motivation specifically, can independently drive consumer behavior that happens to align with environmentally beneficial outcomes, similar to the broader energy security framing examined throughout this batch's coverage of hydrogen investment and various national energy policy shifts, where geopolitical and economic security considerations increasingly function as parallel or even primary drivers alongside, rather than purely secondary to, climate-specific motivations.

 

Why the Willingness-to-Pay Premium Difference Reveals How Combined Attributes Outperform Sustainability Alone

 

The report states consumers report willingness to pay 18 percent more for a product with sustainability benefits specifically, but "an even greater premium—24%—for something that offers both health and sustainability benefits." That six-percentage-point difference provides a concrete, quantified illustration of the report's broader strategic recommendation to "sell the AND, not sustainability alone," demonstrating that combining sustainability positioning with health benefits specifically commands a measurably higher price premium than either attribute could independently support, a finding directly relevant to how companies should structure their product positioning and communication strategies going forward based on demonstrated consumer willingness to pay rather than assumed consumer priorities alone.

 

Source: Bain & Company