Sustainability Marketing Statistics: 42 Verified Data Points on Green Consumer Demand for 2026

This research asset compiles verified statistics on consumer demand for sustainable products, willingness to pay a green premium, sustainable product sales growth, and the trust problem created by greenwashing. It is built for marketers, analysts, and journalists who need defensible numbers with named sources and dates rather than round-number claims.

The single most important finding to carry through every number below: there is a large and well-documented gap between what consumers say about sustainability and what they actually buy. This is the attitude-behavior gap, also called the say-do gap. Stated willingness-to-pay figures consistently overstate real purchasing behavior, so survey-based intent numbers should never be read as sales forecasts.

Executive Summary

• Products making ESG-related claims grew 28% cumulatively from 2017 to June 2022 in the United States, versus 20% for products without such claims, across 32 consumer-goods categories (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• That analysis covered 600,000 individual SKUs, $400 billion in annual retail revenue, and 44,000 brands, making it the largest retail-scan study of on-pack sustainability claims to date (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• 73% of Generation Z respondents said they were willing to pay more for sustainable products, the highest of any generation, in a July 2021 US survey (Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021).
• 49% of consumers said they had actually paid a premium, averaging 59% more, for products branded as environmentally sustainable or socially responsible, across 10 countries in February 2022 (Source: IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).
• 46% of consumers across 23 countries reported purchasing at least one sustainable good or service in April 2023, with a stated willingness to pay a premium of about 27% on average (Source: Deloitte, 2023).
• 62% of consumers believed companies were greenwashing in 2025, up from 33% in 2023, across 13 countries, signaling a rapid collapse in trust in environmental claims (Source: Capgemini Research Institute, 2025).
• The attitude-behavior gap is documented across the academic literature: consumers who report strong environmental concern frequently fail to translate that concern into sustainable purchases (Source: peer-reviewed narrative review, Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020).

Key Findings

• Products with ESG-related on-pack claims delivered 28% cumulative US growth from 2017 to June 2022, versus 20% for comparable products without claims (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• Products with sustainability claims held roughly a 1.7 percentage-point advantage in compound annual growth rate over products without them, 2017 to June 2022, United States (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• Products carrying multiple ESG claims grew about twice as fast as products making only a single claim, United States, 2017 to June 2022 (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• The NielsenIQ and McKinsey analysis spanned 600,000 SKUs, 44,000 brands, and $400 billion in annual retail revenue across 32 food, beverage, personal-care, and household categories (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• 73% of Gen Z shoppers said they were willing to pay more for sustainable products in July 2021, versus 68% of millennials, 55% of Gen X, 50% of the Silent Generation, and 42% of baby boomers (Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021).
• Nearly 90% of Gen X consumers said they would spend 10% or more extra for sustainable products in 2021, up from about 34% two years earlier (Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021).
• 49% of surveyed consumers said they paid a premium averaging 59% for environmentally sustainable or socially responsible products, across 10 countries in February 2022 (Source: IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).
• 51% of consumers said environmental sustainability was more important to them than it had been 12 months earlier, February 2022, 10 countries (Source: IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).
• 46% of consumers across 23 countries said they purchased at least one sustainable good or service in April 2023 (Source: Deloitte, 2023).
• Consumers reported a willingness to pay a premium of about 27% on average for sustainable products in the 2023 Deloitte study, well below the 59% premium reported as actually paid in the earlier IBM study, illustrating how premium estimates vary by method and wording (Source: Deloitte, 2023; IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).
• Only 36% of UK consumers said they would pay more for consumer brands committed to environmentally sustainable or ethical practices in the 2024 Deloitte UK survey (Source: Deloitte, 2024).
• The share of UK consumers who said they had skipped a sustainable action because it was too expensive rose from 52% in 2022 to 61% in 2024 (Source: Deloitte, 2024).
• 73% of global consumers said they would definitely or probably change their consumption habits to reduce their environmental impact, and 81% said it was extremely or very important that companies improve the environment (Source: Nielsen, 2018).
• 62% of consumers across 13 countries believed companies were greenwashing in 2025, up from 52% in 2024 and 33% in 2023 (Source: Capgemini Research Institute, 2025).
• The NielsenIQ and McKinsey study explicitly states it does not establish causation, so the sales-growth premium for ESG claims cannot be read as proof that the claims caused the growth (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).

The Attitude-Behavior Gap: Read Every Survey Number Through This Lens

The most important concept in sustainability marketing statistics is the attitude-behavior gap, also called the say-do gap or intention-behavior gap. It is the persistent difference between what consumers say about sustainable products and what they actually buy. Survey questions about willingness-to-pay capture stated intent under ideal conditions, not behavior at the shelf where price, availability, habit, and skepticism intervene.

A peer-reviewed narrative review in the Journal of Cleaner Production concluded that positive attitudes toward green products routinely fail to convert into purchases, driven by barriers including higher price, low perceived consumer effectiveness, inconvenience, and distrust of corporate claims (Source: Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020). Commentary from the Observer Research Foundation similarly documents a consistent inconsistency between declared green attitudes and actual sustainable consumption (Source: Observer Research Foundation, 2021).

The practical implication is direct. When one dataset shows 73% of Gen Z willing to pay more (First Insight, 2021) and another shows only 46% of consumers actually bought a sustainable product in a given month (Deloitte, 2023), that spread is the say-do gap in action. Use retail-scan and self-reported-purchase data to estimate real demand, and treat willingness-to-pay percentages as ceilings, not forecasts.

Sustainable Product Sales Growth: The Primary Retail-Scan Evidence

The strongest behavioral evidence comes from retail point-of-sale scan data rather than surveys, because it measures purchases, not intentions. The joint NielsenIQ and McKinsey study is the benchmark here.

Products making ESG-related claims averaged 28% cumulative growth in the United States from 2017 to June 2022, compared with 20% for products that did not make such claims (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023). Products carrying that advantage held roughly a 1.7 percentage-point edge in compound annual growth rate, controlling for brand size, price tier, and product age (Source: Packaging Europe reporting on NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023). Products making multiple ESG claims grew about twice as fast as those making only one (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).

The scale of the dataset is what makes it citable: 600,000 SKUs, 44,000 brands, $400 billion in annual retail revenue, and 32 categories over five years (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023). The authors are explicit that the study shows correlation, not causation, and cannot confirm whether consumers bought these products because of the ESG claims or for other reasons. That caveat should accompany any use of these growth figures.

Willingness to Pay a Green Premium: Stated vs Actual

Willingness-to-pay is the most cited and most misused sustainability marketing statistic. The numbers vary widely by survey method, wording, geography, and year, and stated figures run well above observed behavior.

On the high end of stated intent, 73% of Gen Z shoppers said they were willing to pay more for sustainable products in July 2021, and most of those willing said they would accept about a 10% premium (Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021). On the actual-behavior side, 49% of consumers across 10 countries said they had paid a premium averaging 59% for sustainable or socially responsible products in February 2022 (Source: IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).

By 2023, Deloitte found consumers reporting a more modest average premium willingness of about 27%, and by 2024 only 36% of UK consumers said they would pay more at all (Source: Deloitte, 2024). The wide range, from a 27% average premium to a 59% average premium, is a warning: these figures are not directly comparable because they use different samples, countries, years, and question framings. Report the source and method alongside any premium number.

Generational and Segment Differences

Sustainability demand skews younger, but the gap between generations is narrower on behavior than on stated attitude. In the 2021 First Insight survey, willingness to pay more declined by generation: 73% Gen Z, 68% millennials, 55% Gen X, 50% Silent Generation, and 42% baby boomers (Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021). Nearly 90% of Gen X consumers said they would spend 10% or more extra for sustainable products in 2021, up sharply from about 34% two years earlier, a jump that itself signals how sensitive these figures are to timing and sentiment (Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021).

On the purpose-versus-value question, IBM found consumers increasingly identifying as purpose-driven, yet the same study stressed that intent and action do not always align, reinforcing the need to weight behavioral data over attitudinal data (Source: IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).

Greenwashing and the Trust Problem

Rising demand for sustainable products has been met by rising skepticism about whether green claims are true. This trust erosion is now one of the largest constraints on sustainability marketing.

62% of consumers across 13 countries believed companies were greenwashing in 2025, up from 52% in 2024 and 33% in 2023, based on a survey of more than 6,500 adults (Source: Capgemini Research Institute, 2025). The near-doubling of this figure in two years means that unsubstantiated or vague claims now carry material brand risk, and that verified, specific, third-party-validated claims are increasingly the price of entry rather than a differentiator.

This trust gap compounds the say-do gap. When consumers distrust claims, even genuinely sustainable products struggle to convert stated intent into purchases, because buyers discount the claim itself.

Barriers: Price and Sustainability Fatigue

Price is the dominant barrier, and it is getting worse in cost-pressured markets. The share of UK consumers who said they skipped a sustainable action because it was too expensive rose from 52% in 2022 to 61% in 2024 (Source: Deloitte, 2024). Deloitte also documented a plateau or decline in everyday sustainable behaviors such as recycling and reducing single-use plastic between 2023 and 2024, evidence that stated commitment does not automatically translate into sustained action (Source: Deloitte, 2024).

Baseline global willingness remains high in the abstract: 73% of consumers said they would change consumption habits to reduce environmental impact and 81% said companies must act (Source: Nielsen, 2018). The distance between that 73%-to-81% baseline attitude and the roughly 46% who actually bought a sustainable product in a given month (Deloitte, 2023) is the say-do gap quantified.

Data Tables

Table 1: Sustainable Product Sales Growth (NielsenIQ and McKinsey, US, 2017 to June 2022)

Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, “Consumers care about sustainability and back it up with their wallets,” 2023. Study is correlational, not causal.

Table 2: Stated Willingness to Pay More for Sustainable Products by Generation (US, July 2021)

Source: First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School, 2021. These are stated-intent figures and overstate actual purchasing behavior.

Table 3: Willingness-to-Pay and Purchase Figures Across Studies (Not Directly Comparable)

Sources as listed. Different samples, countries, years, and question wording. Do not compare cells directly as a trend line.

Table 4: Rising Greenwashing Skepticism (13 Countries, 6,500+ Adults)

Source: Capgemini Research Institute, 2025.

Original Synthesis

The following insights are derived by combining the verified public datasets above. They are analytical estimates, clearly bounded, and should not be presented as precise measurements.

1. The Say-Do Ratio. Formula: monthly actual sustainable purchase rate divided by peak stated willingness-to-pay. Inputs: 46% actually bought a sustainable good in a month (Deloitte, 2023) against 73% peak stated willingness among Gen Z (First Insight, 2021) and 73% who say they would change habits (Nielsen, 2018). Result: a rough say-do ratio near 0.6, meaning only about six in ten of the abstract intent shows up as monthly behavior. Limitation: the numerator and denominator come from different samples, countries, and years, so this is an order-of-magnitude illustration of the gap, not a precise coefficient.

2. Trust-Erosion Velocity. Formula: year-over-year change in the share of consumers who believe companies greenwash. Inputs: 33% (2023), 52% (2024), 62% (2025) from Capgemini. Logic: skepticism rose 19 points in the first year and 10 points in the second, an average of roughly 14.5 points per year and a near-doubling over two years. Limitation: three annual data points from one survey series; the deceleration from 19 to 10 points may indicate the metric is approaching saturation rather than a durable slowdown.

3. The Behavioral-Evidence Premium. Logic: retail-scan data (NielsenIQ and McKinsey) measures purchases, while survey willingness-to-pay measures intent. The 8-point cumulative growth spread between ESG-claim and non-claim products (28% vs 20%) is a behavioral signal, whereas a 73% willingness figure is attitudinal. Insight: the behavioral spread, though smaller in headline size, is the more decision-useful number for forecasting because it survived controls for brand size, price tier, and product age. Limitation: the retail-scan study is explicitly correlational and confined to US consumer-packaged-goods categories, so it does not generalize to durable goods, services, or other regions.

Charts to build

• Say-do gap column chart. Data: 73% peak stated willingness vs 46% actual monthly purchase. Source: First Insight, 2021; Deloitte, 2023. Insight: visualizes the attitude-behavior gap in one image. Citation-worthy because it corrects the common overstatement of green demand.
• ESG-claim sales-growth bar chart. Data: 28% vs 20% cumulative growth. Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023. Insight: shows a real behavioral premium for sustainability claims. Citation-worthy as the largest retail-scan evidence available.
• Greenwashing-skepticism trend line. Data: 33%, 52%, 62% across 2023 to 2025. Source: Capgemini, 2025. Insight: trust is collapsing fast. Citation-worthy as a clean multi-year series.
• Generational willingness-to-pay ladder. Data: 73%, 68%, 55%, 50%, 42% by generation. Source: First Insight and Wharton, 2021. Insight: quantifies the youth skew in stated demand. Citation-worthy for audience-targeting decisions.
• Premium-estimate spread chart. Data: 27% (Deloitte, 2023) vs 59% (IBM, 2022) average premiums. Source: as listed. Insight: shows how method and wording move the number. Citation-worthy as a methodological caution.

Methodology

Source-selection criteria prioritized primary retail-scan data and large multi-country consumer surveys from named research bodies. The anchor behavioral dataset is the NielsenIQ and McKinsey retail-scan study because it measures actual point-of-sale purchases rather than stated intent. Survey data from First Insight with the Wharton Baker Retailing Center, IBM Institute for Business Value, Deloitte, Nielsen, and Capgemini Research Institute was included where the publisher, year, sample size, and geography were verifiable.

Inclusion required a named publisher, a specific year, and a stated or clearly reported number. Statistics were excluded when the underlying sample, date, or geography could not be verified, or when a figure appeared only in secondary aggregators without a traceable primary source. Conflicting willingness-to-pay figures were retained but flagged as not directly comparable, because they differ in survey year, country coverage, and question wording. No numbers were invented or estimated except in the clearly labeled Original Synthesis section, where inputs and limitations are stated.

The central limitation applied throughout is the attitude-behavior gap: self-reported willingness-to-pay overstates real purchasing. Retail-scan evidence is treated as more reliable than survey intent. The NielsenIQ and McKinsey figures are correlational, not causal, per the authors. Date of last update: July 2026.

Source Quality

Tier 1 (primary data and peer-reviewed research): NielsenIQ and McKinsey retail-scan study (primary point-of-sale data); the Journal of Cleaner Production narrative review on the attitude-behavior gap (peer-reviewed).

Tier 2 (credible market research and institutional survey bodies): IBM Institute for Business Value; Deloitte; Nielsen; First Insight with the Wharton Baker Retailing Center; Capgemini Research Institute.

Tier 3 (reputable journalism and expert commentary): Packaging Europe reporting on the NielsenIQ and McKinsey study; Observer Research Foundation commentary; ISEP Global reporting on the Capgemini survey.

Most Quotable Statistics

• “Products making sustainability claims grew 28% cumulatively from 2017 to June 2022, versus 20% for those without, across 600,000 US SKUs” (NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).
• “62% of consumers believed companies were greenwashing in 2025, up from 33% in 2023” (Capgemini Research Institute, 2025).
• “73% of Gen Z said they would pay more for sustainable products, yet only about 46% of consumers actually bought one in a given month” (First Insight and Wharton, 2021; Deloitte, 2023).
• “49% of consumers said they paid a premium averaging 59% for sustainable products” (IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).

Data Limitations

• Willingness-to-pay is stated intent and overstates real behavior; the attitude-behavior gap applies to every survey figure here.
• Premium estimates (27% vs 59%) come from different studies, years, countries, and question wording and are not directly comparable.
• The NielsenIQ and McKinsey growth data is correlational, US-only, and limited to consumer-packaged-goods categories.
• The Nielsen baseline attitude figures date to 2018 and may not reflect current sentiment.
• Greenwashing-skepticism data is a three-point series from one survey program and should be updated as new waves publish.
• Original Synthesis figures combine mismatched samples and are illustrative, not precise measurements.

Recommended Dataset Fields

For a downloadable CSV supporting this asset, include: statistic_id; metric_name; value; unit; geography; survey_or_data_year; publisher; source_url; source_tier; data_type (retail_scan, survey_intent, survey_reported_behavior, academic); sample_size; number_of_countries; is_correlational (yes/no); comparability_note; last_verified_date.

Press Summary

Consumer demand for sustainable products is real but consistently overstated by survey headlines. The strongest behavioral evidence, a NielsenIQ and McKinsey study of 600,000 US SKUs, shows products with sustainability claims grew 28% cumulatively from 2017 to June 2022 versus 20% for those without, a meaningful but modest premium the authors stress is correlational, not causal. Survey data shows far higher intent: 73% of Gen Z said they would pay more in 2021, and 49% of global consumers said they paid a premium averaging 59% in 2022. Yet only about 46% actually bought a sustainable good in a given month in 2023, and price pressure is worsening, with 61% of UK consumers in 2024 citing cost as a reason to skip sustainable choices. Compounding the problem, greenwashing skepticism nearly doubled, from 33% in 2023 to 62% in 2025. The clear takeaway for marketers and journalists is to weight behavioral and retail-scan data over stated willingness-to-pay, and to treat verified, specific claims as essential given collapsing trust. For research-led growth strategy, see CO Consulting.

Suggested Headlines

• The Say-Do Gap: Why 73% Say They Will Pay More for Green but Only 46% Do
• Sustainability Sells, but Modestly: 28% vs 20% in the Largest Retail-Scan Study
• Greenwashing Skepticism Nearly Doubled to 62% in Two Years
• What Consumers Say About Sustainability vs What They Actually Buy
• The Green Premium Range: From 27% to 59%, and Why It Is Not Comparable

FAQ

Do consumers actually buy more sustainable products?

Yes, modestly. US products with ESG-related claims grew 28% cumulatively from 2017 to June 2022, versus 20% for products without, across 600,000 SKUs (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).

How many consumers are willing to pay more for sustainable products?

73% of Gen Z said they were willing to pay more in July 2021, the highest of any generation, though this is stated intent, not behavior (Source: First Insight and Wharton, 2021).

What premium do consumers actually pay?

49% of consumers said they paid a premium averaging 59% for sustainable products across 10 countries in February 2022 (Source: IBM Institute for Business Value, 2022).

What is the attitude-behavior gap in sustainability?

It is the documented gap between positive sustainability attitudes and actual purchases, driven by price, availability, habit, and distrust of claims (Source: Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020).

What share of consumers actually bought a sustainable product recently?

46% of consumers across 23 countries said they bought at least one sustainable good or service in April 2023 (Source: Deloitte, 2023).

Is greenwashing skepticism rising?

Yes. 62% of consumers believed companies were greenwashing in 2025, up from 33% in 2023, across 13 countries (Source: Capgemini Research Institute, 2025).

Which generation cares most about sustainability?

Gen Z leads on stated willingness to pay more at 73%, versus 42% for baby boomers, in a 2021 US survey (Source: First Insight and Wharton, 2021).

What is the biggest barrier to buying sustainable products?

Price. The share of UK consumers skipping a sustainable action due to cost rose from 52% in 2022 to 61% in 2024 (Source: Deloitte, 2024).

Do most consumers want companies to act on the environment?

Yes. 81% of global consumers said it was extremely or very important that companies improve the environment (Source: Nielsen, 2018).

Is the sustainability sales-growth data proof of causation?

No. The NielsenIQ and McKinsey study is explicit that it shows correlation, not causation, between ESG claims and sales growth (Source: NielsenIQ and McKinsey, 2023).

This is independent research from CO Consulting. If you want help turning sustainability demand data into a defensible growth strategy, you can book a consultation.

Related research

• Marketing Budget Benchmarks
• Marketing Automation
• Martech
• CRM Statistics
• AI in Marketing