“Who Is Responsible?”: Sustainability Responsibilization in U.S. Retailer Messaging

As retailers increasingly communicate sustainability initiatives through public-facing websites, these messages publicly frame who is expected to act. This qualitative content analysis examined a 50-retailer U.S. sampling frame, with 45 retailers providing usable coding records. Retailer-level codes covered dominant responsibility framing, persuasive appeals, consumer-protection references, and equity-related language. Corporate responsibility was the dominant frame for 36 retailers (80.0%), shared responsibility for eight (17.8%), and consumer responsibility for one (2.2%). Moral appeals appeared in 43 of 45 coded cases, although they did not necessarily request consumer action. Consumer-protection and equity references varied across the sample. The findings document how corporate commitments and invitations to participate are presented in retailer-controlled communications; they do not establish actual corporate performance, consumer interpretation, or a transfer of accountability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research
Published
2026-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer21110391
Primary Topic
Environmental Sustainability in Business
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

“Who Is Responsible?”: Sustainability Responsibilization in U.S. Retailer Messaging

Blake Mudd
Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research
Environmental Sustainability in Business
article

“Who Is Responsible?”: Sustainability Responsibilization in U.S. Retailer Messaging

Blake Mudd
article en

Abstract

As retailers increasingly communicate sustainability initiatives through public-facing websites, these messages publicly frame who is expected to act. This qualitative content analysis examined a 50-retailer U.S. sampling frame, with 45 retailers providing usable coding records. Retailer-level codes covered dominant responsibility framing, persuasive appeals, consumer-protection references, and equity-related language. Corporate responsibility was the dominant frame for 36 retailers (80.0%), shared responsibility for eight (17.8%), and consumer responsibility for one (2.2%). Moral appeals appeared in 43 of 45 coded cases, although they did not necessarily request consumer action. Consumer-protection and equity references varied across the sample. The findings document how corporate commitments and invitations to participate are presented in retailer-controlled communications; they do not establish actual corporate performance, consumer interpretation, or a transfer of accountability.

Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce researchVol. 21(11)
University of Houston (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Environmental Sustainability in Business
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon