TL;DR
Get kitchen gear delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
A qualitative study of 23 people aged 18 to 27 in Slovenia found that participants generally supported sustainable coffee practices, but said everyday purchases were more often shaped by convenience, price and routine. The author says the small sample was not designed to represent Gen Z consumers broadly.
A study of 23 people aged 18 to 27 in Slovenia found that young consumers generally approved of sustainable coffee, while convenience, price and routine more often shaped their reported purchasing decisions. Published July 27 in Frontiers in Sustainability, the research describes a gap between what participants said they valued and what guided everyday choices.
Polona Dakič of the Faculty of Management at the University of Primorska conducted three focus groups with participants divided into heavy coffee users, casual users and people who did not drink coffee. The discussions explored how they understood sustainability in coffee and how those views related to their routines and purchasing decisions.
Participants generally supported ideas such as ethical sourcing, recyclable packaging, fair-trade certification and environmental responsibility. But the study found that these values rarely drove reported purchases on their own. Speed, affordability, taste, comfort and familiarity often mattered more in daily situations.
The paper calls this gap the “sustainability-convenience paradox.” Some participants also questioned whether coffee companies’ sustainability messages reflected meaningful changes, describing some green marketing as performative labeling. The study reports these views from focus group discussions; it does not independently assess particular brands or verify their claims.
When Daily Routines Shape Coffee Choices
The findings offer coffee businesses and sustainability advocates a look at why positive attitudes may not lead to purchases. In this small group, sustainability appeared more likely to influence a choice after basic needs such as price, speed and taste were met. That suggests that making sustainable options fit ordinary shopping habits may matter alongside communicating their environmental or ethical benefits.
The result also speaks to the limits of treating consumer interest as evidence of changed behavior. People may express support for certified or responsibly sourced products while still choosing what is easiest or most affordable at the point of purchase. The focus groups help describe that tension, but they cannot show how common it is among Gen Z consumers in Slovenia or elsewhere.
How the Slovenian Study Fits Earlier Research
The report says the study is consistent with earlier research on the gap between sustainability preferences and buying behavior. One earlier study suggested shoppers may be more likely to follow through on ethical coffee purchases when the price stays the same, even if the package contains less coffee. That finding points to price as one condition that may affect whether stated preferences translate into a purchase.
A 2021 Mintel analysis found that the share of new coffee products carrying ethical or environmental claims had nearly doubled over roughly a decade. The analysis did not verify the claims or measure their outcomes. A more recent review of coffee sustainability research cited survey data indicating that more than 60% of consumers in North America and Europe preferred certified coffees, alongside willingness to pay more for traceable, single-origin products. Those broader populations are not directly comparable with Dakič’s small Slovenian sample.
“I care about sustainability in theory, but honestly, when I’m stressed or late for class, I just buy whatever is fastest.”
— A student participant quoted in the study
Limits of a Small Focus Group Sample
The study was qualitative and based on 23 participants in Slovenia; Dakič said it was not designed to be statistically generalizable. Its findings describe views expressed in the focus groups, not the prevalence of those views among all young people, coffee drinkers or consumers in other countries.
The research also does not measure participants’ purchases over time or test whether price, availability, product labeling or other factors caused a particular choice. It does not assess whether sustainability claims from brands are accurate. The author reported receiving no financial support for the work and declared no conflicts of interest.
Further Research on Purchase Behavior
The published report does not announce a follow-up study or give a timetable for additional research. Further work could test whether the patterns described in the focus groups appear in larger or more varied samples, and compare what consumers say with their recorded purchases. Until then, the findings are best read as a small-sample account of young participants’ views and routines, not a population-wide measure.
Key Questions
What did the study find?
In focus groups, participants generally approved of sustainability in coffee, while price, convenience and routine more often shaped their reported everyday choices.
Who took part in the research?
The study involved 23 people aged 18 to 27 in Slovenia, divided among three groups of heavy coffee users, casual users and non-drinkers.
Does the study represent all Gen Z coffee buyers?
No. The author said the small qualitative sample was not designed to be statistically generalizable, so it cannot establish how common these views are among Gen Z consumers broadly.
Did the study verify coffee companies’ sustainability claims?
No. Participants discussed skepticism toward some green marketing, but the research did not audit brands or verify their claims.
Source: rss
Evergreen bestsellers Picks
bestsellers
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
