Title: Income Classes and Ethical Consumer Practices in Tondo, Manila,

Philippines

Summary:

In the field of economics, the ethical dimension is seldom considered. The

researcher asked himself, should this be so? Consumption as one of components of the

study of economics examines how and why people choose and decide. In consideration of

the importance of ethics in consumption, this research raised the question whether people

as consumers consider ethical dimensions in using goods and services, and how income

constraints consumers from practicing ethical consumption. Using 400 respondents from

Tondo, Manila, clustered into three income classes: poor, middle and rich income classes,

the researcher has found out that income directly relates to their ethical consumption. In a

sustainable economy, consumers should adhere to more ethical standards in consumption.

However, the issue of poverty impedes them from becoming.

Keyword list: ethical consumption, ethics, economics, sustainable economy, poverty

Body:

Problem Statement: This study aimed to determine the difference in the

ecologically and socially conscious ethical consumer practices among the three income

classes of selected respondents in Tondo, Manila, Philippines.

Specifically, this study sought answers to the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of:

 a. Age;

b. Gender;

c. Educational attainment;

d. Income;

e. Nature of Work;

f. Religion; and

g. Ethnicity?

2. What is their distribution in relation to three income classes: poor, middle

and rich?

3. What are the respective levels of their ecologically-conscious ethical

consumer practices?

4. What are the respective levels of their socially-conscious ethical consumer

practices?

5. Is there a significant difference in the levels of ecologically-conscious

ethical consumer practices among three income classes?

6. Is there a significant difference in the levels of socially-conscious ethical

consumer practices among three income classes?

7. What insights can be generated from this study relative to:

a. Sustainable economic development;

b. Human development; and

c. Science of economics?
Research Methodology: This study utilized descriptive-quantitative approach. This

research used random sampling of 400 respondents stratified into poor, middle and rich

income classes.

Findings:

A. Demographic Profile of Respondents

According to age, the greatest number of respondents (81% combined percentages)

are in the middle age ranging from 19-36 and 37-54. The age group 18 and below and 55

and above are not well-represented in this study (19%).

According to gender, there are more female (56.75%) than male (43.25%)

respondents.

According to educational attainment, majority (55.25%) of the respondents have

finished higher education (college, master’s, doctorate and post-doctorate levels). The

percentage of respondents who finished basic and technical education is 44.75%.

According to income class, the respondents are almost fairly distributed into poor,

middle and rich income classes.

According to nature of work, professional respondents ranked first (33.5%) and

self-employed ranked second (27.75%). Skilled workers ranked third (20.75%), and

unemployed and no-work ranked least (18% combined).

According to religion, the respondents are mostly Catholic (65%) and Christian

(32.25%). There are few Moslems and those with other beliefs.
 According to ethnicity, Tagalogs comprised the greatest of the respondents (70%).

Other ethnicities are Ilocano, Kapampangan, Pangasinense, Bicolano, Waray, Cebuano,

Ilonggo, and foreigners.

B. Distribution of Respondents in Relation to Income Classes

By age, the poor income class has more respondents who are younger (70.37%)

than the middle (55.63%) and the rich income class (43.18%).

By gender, majority of the respondents in all income classes are females (54% of

poor, 59.4% of middle and 56.82% of rich income class).

By educational attainment, when those with college, masters, doctorate and post-

doctorate degrees are combined, there are more highly educated in the rich (86%) than the

middle (62.4%) and the poor income class (38.51%).

By nature of work, significant proportion of poor income class have either no work

or unemployed (45.19%). Mostly, self-employed and professionals comprised the middle

(72.19%) and rich (84.09%) income classes.

By religion, all income classes have religious belief but great majority are Roman

Catholic (69.65% of poor, 75.94% of middle and 49.24 of rich income classes).

By ethnicity, majority (75.56% of poor, 78.95% of middle and 55.3% of rich

income classes) among three income classes belong to Tagalog ethnicity.

 C. Level of Ecologically-Conscious Ethical Consumer Practices

The highest level of ecologically-conscious ethical consumer practices is observed

by the rich income class (5.26), followed by the middle income class (4.07). The poor

income class ranked the least (3.67).

D. Level of Socially-Conscious Ethical Consumer Practices

The highest level of socially-conscious ethical consumer practices is observed by

the rich income class (5.22), followed by the middle income class (4.18). The poor income

class ranked the least (3.87).

E. Significant Difference in the Level of Ecologically-Conscious Ethical Consumer

Practices

The computed t-value of mean level of ecologically-conscious ethical consumer

practices is greater than the critical or table value at 0.05 significance level (1.96) when

comparing the poor and middle income (3.768), the middle and rich income (12.82) and

the poor and rich income class (14.08).

F. Significant Difference in the Level of Socially-Conscious Ethical Consumer

Practices

The computed t-value of mean level of socially-conscious ethical consumer

practices is greater than the critical or table value at 0.05 significance level (1.96) when
comparing the poor and middle income (2.949), the middle and rich income (11.03) and

the poor and rich income class (14.18).

G. Insights Generated from this Study Relative to:

Sustainable Economic Development

The framework of sustainable economic development is hampered by income

inequality. To realize a sustainable economy, everyone must perform to meet certain

ethical standards. However, these standards are not accessible to all due to income

constraints.

Human Development

There is income inequality favoring some to have freedom to self-determination

and to live lives according to what they value. Some are underprivileged to choose and

experience higher and more ethical living standards.

Science of Economics

Generally, consumers consider some ethical criteria of whats and hows of their

consumption. Nonetheless, their level of ethical consciousness indicated in their

consumption practices depends on the power of their income.

Conclusions:

A. Demographic Profile of Respondents

The respondents are capable of applying ethical standards in their consumer

practices, as revealed by their age, gender, educational attainment, income class, nature of

work, religion, and ethnicity.

B. Distribution of Respondents in Relation to Income Classes

While all respondents are expected to show ethical consciousness in their consumer

practices in general, higher income classes, nevertheless, have tendencies to become more

aware and concern due to their higher level of income, level of educational attainment and

the nature of work they occupy.

C. Level of Ecologically-Conscious Ethical Consumer Practices

The level of ecological consciousness reflected in respondents’ consumer practices

increases with income. This means that ecologically-conscious ethical consumption is most

often practiced at the rich income class, and most seldom at the poor income class.

D. Level of Socially-Conscious Ethical Consumer Practices

The level of social consciousness reflected in respondents’ consumer practices

increases with income. This means that socially-conscious ethical consumption is most

often practiced at the rich income class, and most seldom at the poor income class.
 E. Significant Difference in the Level of Ecologically-Conscious Ethical Consumer

Practices

There is a significant difference between the levels of ecologically-conscious

ethical consumer practices among the poor and middle, the middle and rich and the poor

and rich income classes. Therefore, all the null hypotheses are rejected, and all the

alternative hypotheses are accepted.

F. Significant Difference in the Level of Socially-Conscious Ethical Consumer

Practices

There is a significant difference between the levels of socially-conscious ethical

consumer practices among the poor and middle, the middle and rich and the poor and rich

income classes. Therefore, all the null hypotheses are rejected, and all the alternative

hypotheses are accepted.

G. Insights Generated from this Study Relative to:

Sustainable Economic Development

It is imperative that to sustain the economy, people specially the consumers,

must commit to having ethical consciousness that will guide their decision-making and life

choices. As this study reveals, this consciousness which reflects in consumer practices is

constraint by consumers’ income. Therefore, income distribution must be ensured equally

to holistically and systematically address issues of sustainability.

 Human Development

Poverty remains an issue even in the context of ethics and morality. For one to

become ethical consumer requires a price. Since poverty is hardly reduced, many are

deemed less ethical consumers because they are left choiceless and less capable of living

better lives. Therefore, when there is poverty, there impedes human development.

Science of Economics

This study enriches the analysis of consumption theory. This indicates that

ethics is also a determinant of patterns of consumption. However, the level of being

ethically conscious is proportional to consumer’s income.

Reference:

Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989). Educational research. an introduction (5th ed.). White
Plains, NY: Longman.

Crane, A. and Matten, D. 2007. Business ethics. Oxford : Oxford University Press.

Keynes, J. M. (1935). General theory of employment, interest and money. New York:
Polygraphic Company of America.

Krathwohl, D. (1993) Methods of Educational and Social Science Research: An Integrated

Approach. Longman/Addison Wesley Longman, New York.

Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd. 8th Edition.

Schumacher, E. (1973). Small is beautiful: economics as if people mattered. London:

Blond & Briggs. P.35.

Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. in the quality of life. edited by M. Nussbaum\
and A. Sen. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Dulja, X., Driouech, N., Kapaj-Mane A., & Nikolla, M. (2016). Albanian consumer’s
behavior towards ethical values of agro-food products: a socio-economic analyses.
AGROFOR International Journal, Volume 1. Issue No. 1. pp. 66-75.
DOI:10.7251/AGRENG1601066D

Fullerton, S., Kerch, K. B., & Dodge, H. R., (1996). Consumer ethics: an assessment of
individual behavior in the marketplace. Journal of Business Ethics.

Gregorio, R. (no date). Understanding the filipino green consumer: an exploratory study.
Ateneo de Manila University.

Hainmueller, J., Hiscox, M., & Sequeira, S. (2014). Consumer demand for the fair trade
label: evidence from a multi-store field experiment. MIT Press Journals.

Olson, J., McFerran, B., Morales, A., & Dahl, D. (no date). Wealth and welfare: divergent
moral reactions to ethical consumer choices. Journal of Consumer Research.

Roberts, James A. (1995). Profiling levels of socially responsible consumer behavior: A

cluster analytic approach and its implications for marketing. Journal of Marketing
Theory and Practice, 3 (4), 97-117.

Roberts, James A. (1996a). Green Consumers in the 1990s: Profile and Implications for
Advertising. Journal of Business Research, 36, 217-231.

Starr, M. (2015). The economics of ethical consumption. Working Papers 2015-01,

American University, Department of Economics.

Suplico, L. (2009). Impact of green marketing on the students’ purchase decision.

Journal of International Business Research.

Division for Sustainable Development, UNDESA. (2012). A guidebook to the green

economy issue 1: green economy, green growth, and low-carbon development –
history, definitions and a guide to recent publications. Retrieved from
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/GE%20Guidebook.pdf

Doyal, L. & Gough, I. (1991). A theory of human need. New York: Guilford.
http://www.espa.ac.uk/files/espa/bernard%20delhi%20final%20_0.pdf

Grisewood, N. (2009). Ethical consumerism: a guide for trade unions. Retrieved from
https://developmenteducation.ie/resource/ethical-consumerism-a-guide-for-trade-
unions/

Michaelis, L. (2000). Ethics of consumption. Oxford Centre for the Environment, Ethics
& Society. Retrieved from
http://env.chass.utoronto.ca/env200y/TEST_PREP/ESSAY_Q03/EthicsofConsump
tion.pdf
OECD. (2008). Promoting sustainable consumption: good practices in oecd countries, p2.
Retrieved from
https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/40317373.pdf?TSPD_101_R0=1f6648b8b3558
64e995ee7730e02920dz4u00000000000000008853c670ffff0000000000000000000
0000000005a8a89e400649ee4e5

Pearce, D. (1992). Green economics. Environmental Value 1, no. 1. : 3-13. Retrieved from
http://www.environmentandsociety.org/node/5454.

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: 2030 agenda for sustainable
development. Retrieved from
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication

World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future.

Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf

Albert, J., Gaspar, R., & Raymundo, M. (2015). Who are the middle class? Retrieved
from https://www.rappler.com/thought-leaders/98624-who-are-middle-class

Bautista, R. (2012). Ethical consumerism. Business World Online. Retrieved from

http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Opinion&title=ethical-
consumerism&id=50589

Carrigan, M. & Pelsmacker, P. (2009) Will ethical consumers sustain their values in
the global credit crunch?, International Marketing Review, Vol. 26 Issue: 6,
pp.674-687. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/02651330911001341

Dulock, H. (1993). Research design: descriptive research. Journal of Pediatric Oncology

Nursing, Vol. 10, No.4. p.154. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/104345429301000406

Lancaster, K. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. The Journal of Political

Economy, Vol. 74, No. 2, pp. 132-157. The University of Chicago Press
Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1828835


Manyukhina, Y. (2015). Ethical consumption: the wealthy and not so rich. Retrieved from
https://ediblematters.wordpress.com/2015/05/23/ethical-consumption-the-wealthy-
and-the-not-so-rich/

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review. 50 (4): 370–96.

Retrieved from
https://books.google.com.ph/books/about/A_Theory_of_Human_Motivation.htm
?id=CkonDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&redir_es
=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
McCaskill, A. (2015). Consumer-goods' brands that demonstrate commitment to
sustainability outperform those that d on’t. retrieved from
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/press -room/2015/consumer-goods-brands-
that-demonstrate-commitment-to-sustainability-outperform.html

Monbiot, G. (2007). Ethical shopping is just another way of showing how rich you are.
Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/jul/24/comment.businesscomme
nt

Morey, E. (2017). What are the ethics of welfare economics? and, are welfare economists
utilitarians?. Retrieved from
https://www.colorado.edu/economics/morey/papers/Morey_WhatAreWelfareEcono
mistsAndAreTheyUtilitarians_07122017.pdf

Nussbaum, M. (2011). Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: sen and social

justice, feminist economics, 9:2-3, 33-59, DOI: 10.1080/1354570022000077926

Pope Francis (2015). Encyclical letter ‘laudato si’ of the holy father
francis: on care for
our common home. Retrieved from
http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-
francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

Roberts, James A. (1996b). Will the socially responsible consumer please step forward?
Business Horizons. 39 (1), 79-84.

Shah, V. (2017). Singapore environment council launches tougher eco-label for paper.
Retrieved from http://www.eco-business.com/news/singapore-environment-council-
launches-tougher-eco-label-for-paper/

The Association for Educational Communications and Technology. (2001). What is

descriptive research? Retrieved from http://members.aect.org/edtech/ed1/41/41-
01.html

The Co-operative Bank. (2010). Ethical consumerism report 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/portals/0/downloads/ethical-consumerism-
report-2010.pdf

The Institute of Developing Economies Japan External Trade Organization(IDE-JETRO).

(2015). Ethical consumer movement in global era: seeking for constructive dialogues
between business entities and civil society. Retrieved from
http://www.ide.go.jp/library/English/Events/Seminar/pdf/150320_Ethical.pdf
University of Southern California. (2018). Organizing your social sciences research
paper: quantitative methods. Retrieved from
http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/quantitative

Wells, T. (2012). Sen’s capability approach. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/sen-cap/.


Barnett, Clive & Clarke, N & Cloke, Paul & Malpass, A. (2005). Articulating ethics and
consumption. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313027344_Articulating_ethics_and_con
sumption

Chaves, M. (2012). Purchasing decision making among filipino middle income household
heads: how green is it? Philippine E-Journals.

Enow-Ebot, G. (2011). An analysis of consumer purchasing attitudes and the challenges

of fair-trade products in the uk. Retrieved from http://www.diva
portal.se/smash/get/diva2:833013/FULLTEXT01.pdf

Friedrichsen, J. (2016). The effect of relative wealth on prosocial behavior in markets.

Retrieved from https://editorialexpress.com/cgi
bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=EEAESEM2016&paper_id=1785

Khan, U.,
Dhar, R., & Wertenbroch, K. (2004). A behavioral decision theoretic

perspective on hedonic and utilitarian choice. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255663016_A_Behavioral_Decision_The
oretic_Perspective_on_Hedonic_and_Utilitarian_Choice

Lanckneus, M. (2016). Psychological variables and the impact on ethical consumption in

the fashion industry. Retrieved from
https://lib.ugent.be/fulltxt/RUG01/002/273/855/RUG01002273855_2016_0001C

Maggioni, I., Montagnini, F., & Sebastiani, R. (2013). Young adults and ethical
consumption: an exploratory study in the cosmetics market. Retrieved from
http://www.marketing-trends-congress.com/archives/2013/pages/PDF/815.pdf

Neale, K. (2015). Children and ethical consumption. Retrieved from

https://epubs.scu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1501&context=theses

Salvador, L. (2013). Determinants of purchase decisions and consumers’ willingness to

pay for green products. Philippine E-Journals.

Ybañez, R. (2016). Attitude and barriers towards sustainable consumption. Philippine E

Journals.

Viriyavidhayavongs, V. & Yothmontree, S. (2002). The impact of ethical considerations

in purchase behavior: a propaedeutic to further research. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265494677_Impact_of_Ethical_Consid
rations_The_Impact_of_Ethical_Considerations_in_Purchase_Behavior_a_propa
deutic_to_further_research