The beauty industry has transformed in recent years driven by consumer demands for products that align with their cultural values and personal beliefs. While the top cosmetic brands continue to be L’Oreal and Estee Lauder, they are being challenged by younger, edgier brands like Selena Gomez’s Rare Beauty, Rihanna’s Fenty and e.l.f. Cosmetics. Consumer opinion, however, is not homogeneous. There are significant differences in preferences based on ethnicity, age, income and gender. ThinkNow uncovered some of those differences in our recent Inclusive Beauty Report based on a nationally representative online survey of 2,800 respondents.
Download the full results of the survey here.
The era of conscious consumerism has brought about a major shift in the beauty industry. Increasingly, consumers seek products that align with their values, whether minimizing harm to animals, supporting sustainable practices, or promoting inclusivity. This has led to a growing demand for cosmetics and beauty products that are cruelty-free, meaning they are not tested on animals and that are considered inclusive.
Interestingly, while nearly half of cosmetic consumers want cruelty-free brands, 88% of them are still not cruelty-free. However, the fastest growing brands like e.l.f. and Rare Beauty are both cruelty-free and vegan. Legacy companies that want to compete in today’s market are being pushed to adopt these practices in their formulations and testing processes.
While the market as-a-whole is trending towards conscious consumerism, there are significant multicultural differences. For example, the demand for all-vegan cosmetics appears to be driven by non-Hispanic White consumers.
Additionally, since non-Hispanic Whites are, on average, ten years older than multicultural Americans, 42% of them choose brands based on how they address age-related needs vs. 30% of Hispanics who value age-related needs. Asians value products that offer solutions for different skin tones (37%) vs products that are endorsed by celebrities (15%) while Black and non-Hispanic White consumers are more likely to value brands that have a variety of price points. Understanding and addressing these specific preferences, as supported by cultural consumer insights, is crucial for building a loyal customer base.
One might assume that younger consumers would be most interested in conscious consumerism. Gen Z however, is much less likely to seek out vegan cosmetic brands (19%) than Millennials (33%) or Gen X (31%). Gen X is more likely to seek out organic/natural ingredients (41%) than the 36% average for other age groups.
Income, however, is one of the factors that most affect cosmetic product preferences. For example, those earning more than $80K a year are significantly more likely to choose brands that are cruelty-free (53%) and vegan (42%) than those earning less than $40K annually (39%) and 21%), respectively. This insight-driven approach doesn't just enhance product offerings; it also builds trust and loyalty among diverse consumer groups.
The beauty industry's shift towards cruelty-free, vegan, and inclusive beauty products aligns with trends observed in multicultural consumer insights. Younger generations are the most statistically diverse in history and wield the power to affect change. They are communicating their expectations to brands or starting their own and challenging heteronormative stereotypes of “beauty.” Companies willing to adapt to these culture shifts will stay relevant as consumer tastes change and contribute to a more compassionate and diverse world.
The earth isn’t having a good 21st century. In terms of environmental health, the planet is deteriorating across all metrics, and most governments worldwide have failed to address this issue adequately. Politicians may be more willing to push for substantive policies on issues like climate change if they feel their constituents would support them, but they need the data. So, to commemorate Earth Day and Arbor Day, ThinkNow conducted a nationally representative quantitative consumer research study to identify sustainability policies that Americans support and to highlight their views on environmental concerns.
Download the study here.
Environmental concerns vary significantly by generation. For example, when asked about the importance of personally using renewable energy, 46% of Millennials said it was important, very important or extremely important (Top 3 Box response on a 10-point scale), whereas only 29% of Baby Boomers and 32% of Gen Z agreed. Millennial Americans were more likely to support and engage in every sustainability measure we asked about.
Millennials were also more likely to say they personally engaged in sustainability practices more than the general population and that those practices positively impacted the world.
However, sustainability can be expensive. Some policies increase the cost of goods and services, which is often cited as a reason politicians choose not to pursue them. But Millennials are willing to shoulder the expense more so than any other generation, with Gen Z a close second.
Some attitudes and behaviors surrounding sustainability appear to be influenced by ethnicity. Eighty-eight percent of Asian Americans, for example, say they take shorter showers to conserve water, whereas only 77% of non-Hispanic Whites say they do that. Non-Hispanic Whites were most likely to say they buy used/thrift items at 76%, while only 61% of Asian Americans were thrift shoppers.
Among the different ethnic groups, African Americans displayed the lowest level of concern regarding the planet's future, with only 68% expressing worry. On the other hand, Hispanics had the highest level of anxiety, with 76% expressing concern. This discrepancy could explain why Hispanics are also the group most willing to shoulder the financial costs associated with sustainable practices.
Income level is key in predicting an individual's likelihood to support or engage in sustainability practices. Opting to go green can get expensive, which explains why only 34% of individuals earning less than $40K per year believe that personally using renewable energy is important, in contrast to 50% of high earners who do. Additionally, certain practices, such as growing one's own food, are more feasible for individuals living in single-family homes than those residing in multi-unit buildings.
The infrastructure bill passed in 2021 aims to increase the number of electric vehicles (EVs) on the road. However, 52% of our representative sample said they would not buy an EV in the future. This presents a problem if the U.S. hopes to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels. At 64%, the main reason survey respondents gave for not planning to purchase an electric vehicle was cost. EVs are more expensive than their gas-powered counterparts. Range, on the other hand, was a barrier a few years ago, but only 15% of respondents cited that as a reason today. A lack of charging accessibility was the second most likely reason respondents would avoid EVs, with 34% stating they had nowhere to charge at work or home and an equal 34% stating there aren't enough charging stations.
Sustainability and environmental concerns are becoming increasingly important to Americans, particularly younger generations. Millennials and Gen Z are more likely to support and engage in these practices, even if they come at a cost. The passage of the infrastructure bill in 2021 represents progress in decreasing our reliance on fossil fuels. However, the cost of purchasing an electric vehicle remains a significant obstacle for many Americans. To effectively address environmental degradation, policymakers must consider their constituents' attitudes, behaviors, motivators, and barriers when formulating policies to tackle this crucial issue. Further action is necessary to ensure that sustainable solutions are accessible and feasible for all.
Gun violence in the U.S. is an intractable problem. A steady stream of mass shootings and increasing homicide rates do not appear to be motivating politicians to enact meaningful gun control laws. The recently passed bipartisan Safer Communities Act does little to solve the problem. Its provisions are so weak that few gun control advocates believe it will significantly impact U.S. gun-related deaths.
Democratic and Republican politicians have shied away from the problem because of the potential for electoral backlash. While more amenable to gun control, Democrats often attribute their loss of the U.S. House of Representatives in 1994 after four decades in power as a consequence of their passage of an assault weapons ban earlier that year. This led to years of anemic Democratic support for gun control while Republicans pushed to loosen gun laws under pressure from the NRA.
Weak Democratic support and Republican antipathy towards gun control has worked politically, but it appears the electorate is shifting its opinion on this issue. ThinkNow recently collaborated with Team Friday to field a nationally representative survey of 1,200 registered voters and found that 66% believe the U.S. needs stricter gun laws. Our survey results match those released by Gallup earlier this year which also found that 66% of respondents want more stringent gun laws, up from a low of 44% in 2010.
According to our data, party affiliation strongly indicates whether a respondent supports gun control. Eighty-six percent of Democratic voters, 41% of Republicans, and 69% of Independents stated that gun laws should be stricter. While 41% Republican support might seem low, it’s an improvement over the past couple of years which measured their support in the low 20s.
This shift in Republican support could have implications in Texas and Florida where a clear majority of the electorate support stricter gun laws while their legislators are actively loosening them.
More interestingly, we found that gun owners, themselves, support stricter gun laws.
While there are differences in opinion based on party affiliation, we found there are four reforms that Americans across the political spectrum can get behind. Universal background checks, red-flag laws, raising the gun buying age to 21 and permits for concealed carry all garner more than 50% support among Americans that want stricter gun laws.
Politicians in Red (leans toward Republicans) or Purple States (similar support for Democrats and Republicans) who are interested in addressing the gun problem can presumably support the four measures above without the risk of electoral backlash.
At 74%, the primary reason Americans state for buying guns is to protect their home. No other reason exceeds 50%. This would suggest that gun legislation that does not infringe on individuals’ right to protect their home has a lower chance of creating voter backlash.
Interestingly, a policy that does not have overwhelming support, even among Democrats is allowing individuals to sue gun manufacturers.
It’s possible that Americans don’t support suing manufacturers because they fear this will put them out of business and restrict their access to guns for home protection.
It’s often assumed that gun rights and gun regulations are mutually exclusive. That’s not true. Clear majorities of Americans that support gun rights want better regulation. Americans, in general, are tired of the carnage and want something done about it. In 2020, voters listed attitudes towards guns laws as one of the reasons they were voting for president. Unfortunately, the problem has only gotten worse since then. Politicians who respond to this crisis can lead the nation to a future where mass shootings and unprovoked gun deaths are a thing of the past. Those interested in maintaining the status quo may find themselves without a constituency.
Join ThinkNow and Team Friday for a webinar discussing insights from the study on Wednesday, November 2nd at 10 AM PST/ 1 PM EST.
Click here to register.
Consumption has changed since the pandemic, as consumers consider their lifestyles more deeply. Companies and brands are following suit, studying how their actions, systems, and beliefs impact the consumer dynamic and striving to be more inclusive in their marketing and advertising. However, not all consumers feel seen.
Latinx consumers in the U.S. are not a homogenous group. Marketers are accustomed to segmenting these groups by factors like country of origin but often overlook the biculturalism that exists among niche groups, like Latinx consumers of Asian descent who immigrated from Latin America to the States in the past few decades.
In this episode of The New Mainstream podcast, Silvia Li Sam, founder of Slam Media Lab (Slam), talks about her experience as a Peruvian Chinese American and how marketers must leverage research to understand the complexities of the Latinx consumer market.
About Silvia Li Sam:
Silvia Li Sam is a Peruvian Chinese American founder, published writer, and expert on content marketing, web design, and SEO.
Li Sam was one of the youngest CEOs to start a multi-million dollar agency during the Great Resignation of 2021. Her award-winning agency, Slam Media Lab (Slam), focuses on SEO, Webflow, content marketing, and brand strategy for founder-led and mission-driven companies.
Before starting Slam, Li Sam was the first hire for digital & SEO at the XQ, the nation’s leading organization rethinking America’s high schools started by Laurene Powell Jobs. She scaled XQ’s marketing efforts from 0 to over 650,000 members in 3 years, and skyrocketed their SEO from 0 to 2MM searches. Li Sam has led multi-million dollar advertising and branding campaigns, managed and executed partnerships with all social media platforms, and led two successful TV shows (Graduate Together & XQ Super School Live) on the four major networks. The shows have reached over 2B people.
Li Sam is known for starting one of the largest startup publications in the world in three months, growing it from 0 to 250,000 readers with no budget.
Her work has been nominated for Webby and Peabody awards. Li Sam’s marketing strategies have been featured on Forbes, The Huffington Post, NBC, and more.
She is a Board Member at Wild Awake, a nonprofit that provides immersive outdoor learning experiences for youth and adults that bring us closer to the earth. She also serves as a tech and marketing advisor to two tech-focused nonprofits: Peer Health Exchange and LTX Connect.
Li Sam holds a B.S. in Business & Marketing with a minor in design from the University of Southern California.
She lives in the East Bay with her partner and her labradoodle and frequently bounces between San Francisco, Lima, Honolulu, Los Angeles, and New York.
Food in America is multicultural. It’s a fusion of various tastes, ingredients, and cooking styles from around the world that culminate into a rich flavor profile of cultural diversity. But at its core, it’s American food, representing the swiftly changing demographics in the U.S. as it trends toward a majority-minority nation.
Brands in the food and CPG space are tasked with understanding the consumers driving these trends and showing up authentically, in-person and online. It's becoming increasingly important for brands to take intentional actions like staffing stores and restaurants to mirror the communities they’re serving. Birria lovers craving authenticity, for example, may give a restaurant a side-eye if no one in the kitchen serving up these tasty tacos is Latino. To them, insiders serve as translators, a bridge between the brand and the consumer communicating the needs and desires of the community.
But authenticity often gets misinterpreted in food. Dishes made generations before will naturally evolve based on what is available now and life experiences. Yet authenticity does drive purchases in CPG and food, from ingredients to labeling, especially among Hispanics and African Americans.
Luis Cachua, Director of Multicultural Strategy and Brand Partnerships at Food Beast, stops by The New Mainstream podcast to discuss the importance of authenticity in the food and CPG space and the love of birria tacos!
Listen to the The New Mainstream podcast.
Two years ago, the global shutdown sent the economy reeling, and many Americans, especially lower-income households, experienced a seismic shift in their financial security. Consumers reported worsening personal finances and a feeling that the economy was weakening. Their outlook for 2021 was equally as dim, with fewer Americans feeling optimistic about improvements in personal finances for the coming year. Uncertainty about the pandemic, unemployment, and higher prices threatened to thwart the comeback story of the American consumer. But with the mass distribution of COVID-19 vaccines, better protocols and treatments, and the distribution of trillions of dollars in federal stimulus, consumer sentiment has returned to pre-pandemic levels. (more…)
This time last year, America was fresh off the high of a change in executive leadership. Americans started rolling up their sleeves for COVID-19 vaccinations, and the nation was undergoing a racial awakening generations in the making. Then a week into the new year, democracy was breached, and the ensuing fallout would test the ideals of what it means to be American. In our 2021 ThinkNow year-end report we examine the economic highs and lows of the past twelve months, and how consumers, in their resilience, have weathered the storms by tapping into their power and wielding it to demand a fair and just society for all. (more…)