Sustainability in Purpose-Driven Businesses Operating in Cultural and Creative Industries: Insights from Consumers’ Perspectives on Società Benefit

Abstract

This study intends to provide insights and challenges for the shape of the B movement, an emerging paradigm that fosters cross-sectoral partnerships and encourages ethical business practices through so-called purpose-driven businesses. Focusing on Italy, the first European country to adopt this managerial model, the research investigates Italian Benefit Corporations, known as Società Benefit (SB), and their most appealing sustainability claims from a consumer perspective. The analysis intends to inform theory development by assuming the cultural and creative industry (CCI) as a field of interest, utilizing a within-subjects experimental design to analyze data from a diverse consumer sample across various contexts. The results indicate that messaging centered on economic sustainability emerged as the most effective in generating positive consumer responses, highlighting a prevailing inclination toward pragmatic factors such as affordability, economic accessibility, and tangible benefits rather than social issues. While sustainable behaviors are not yet widespread, latent ethical sensitivity for authentic, value-driven businesses suggests that economic and ethical dimensions can be strategically synthesized to enhance consumer engagement. This insight highlights the role of BCs in catalyzing a shift in consumption patterns within ethical-based and creative-driven sectors.

1. Introduction: The Role of Hybrid Managerial Models in a Changing Era

Less than a decade ago, the Aspen Institute published the report “The Emerging Fourth Sector” [1], which underscored the imperative for “for-benefit” enterprises [2,3,4] to lead a transformative business revolution. The paradigm shift seeks to cultivate societal prosperity as a primary objective for developing community well-being, rather than merely accruing economic advantages for stakeholders and shareholders [5]. In this vein, the emergent domain identified as the “fourth sector” of the economy [6] encompasses profitable enterprises that operate independently of public administration and governmental entities (the first sector), for-profit businesses (the second sector), and non-profit organizations (the third sector), as shown in

Table 1. The emerging fourth sector.

	First Sector	Second Sector	Third Sector	Fourth Sector
Primary Revenue	Taxes	Profit	Donations and Earnings	Earnings
Primary Purpose	Public Welfare	Private Wealth	Public Welfare	Public Welfare

Source: own elaboration from Network, F. S. (2009) [1].

.

The academic literature characterizes this domain as a hybridization of public, private, and non-profit sector organizations [7]. Assuming Rask et al.’s (2018) perspectives, the fourth sector addresses a specific set of challenges and opportunities within the contemporary socioeconomic landscape by responding to “an emerging field composed of actors or actor groups whose foundational logic is not in the representation of established interests, but rather, in the idea of social cooperation through hybrid networking” [8]. The novelty of the theme, coupled with its significant social and economic implications, has garnered the attention of multiple sectors, prompting comprehensive engagement with the subject matter. Indeed, recent scholarly discourse surrounding the fourth sector has unfolded within policy science, the administrative sciences, sociology, and economics, offering diverse perspectives on this emerging phenomenon [9]. Considering this definition, the fourth sector is characterized by entities committed to social purpose and stakeholder responsibilities, which are inherently embedded within their organizational frameworks [4]. Examples of such organizations include the emerging managerial model represented by sustainable enterprises, social enterprises, and purpose-driven businesses. Consequently, new organizational and social entrepreneurship concepts have emerged, reflecting the increasingly indistinct boundaries between traditional business models and those motivated by broader social objectives [10,11]. Within this context, purpose-driven businesses represent a growing area of interest for theory and practice, given their contribution to community welfare rather than the traditional shareholder profit to be achieved [12,13,14].

These purpose-oriented businesses have cultivated strong associations with sustainability, establishing credibility that often surpasses that of larger, well-known brands [15,16]. Companies founded with a social mission are often perceived as more authentic when communicating sustainability messages, positioning them as significant competitors to traditional business-oriented organizations [17]. The rise of hybrid business models, which combine conventional commercial strategies with innovative sustainability initiatives, has given rise to value-driven companies [18]. Purpose-driven businesses integrate sustainability into every aspect of their operations, instilling a strong sense of identity and purpose while generating meaningful value [19]. Although corporate purpose and business sustainability appear to be inherently linked, there is a notable lack of research exploring the nature of this relationship [20]. Additionally, there is limited empirical research on how consumers perceive these brands [21]. Given these scenario assumptions, this study aims at investigating the following research objective:

RO: To evaluate consumer perceptions of sustainability dimensions within purpose-driven businesses operating in the cultural and creative industry (CCI).

Specifically, in response to calls for more research on how sustainable operations, when paired with circularity and business innovation, shape brand perceptions [22], this study is rooted in two main themes: (a) examining consumer behavior towards the B movement by focusing on SB and (b) investigating how sustainability dimensions impact management practices within the CCI and specifically dealing with tourism [23]. In this direction, the present study effectively addresses a more profound examination of the intersection between sustainability, the CCI, and tourism [24,25,26,27] through the use of a within-subjects experimental design [28].

This article is structured as follows: First, it examines the rise of the B movement and purpose-driven businesses. Next, it explores corporate social responsibility (CSR) and firms’ reputations from the consumers’ perspective. Following this, the within-subjects experimental design and the mixed-methods approach used in the research are described. The results are then presented, followed by a discussion on directions for further research.

2. Theoretical Framework of the Research

2.1. Unveiling the B Movement Through an International Lens

Over the past decade, significant scholarly attention has been directed toward the “fourth sector,” a nexus wherein the traditionally profit-oriented framework of corporate entities converges with endeavors aimed at fostering societal welfare, an obligation typically earmarked for public institutions. This emerging sector is distinguished by the formation of cross-sector partnerships aimed at addressing social challenges, thereby illuminating the discourse surrounding hybrid organizations [29]. In this context, the so-called “B movement” emerges as a paradigm shift by urging businesses to reconcile their financial objectives with enhanced environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance [30]. Specifically, its main feature is represented by a shift from the conventional focus on shareholder primacy, pivoting instead towards a holistic consideration of all the stakeholders involved in value proposition processes [31].

The starting point of the “B movement” was in the United States and Canada, in 2006, under the influence of B Lab, a non-profit organization whose aim is to harness the power of business to address social and environmental challenges [32,33]. It encompasses innovative managerial frameworks for hybrid-purpose businesses [34], such as Benefit Corporations (BCs) and Certified B Corporations (BCorps), which reconcile dominant and alternative frames of profit [35] by integrating social missions into their operationalization [36].

Certified B Corporations pursue B-Corp certification for institutional legitimacy, as posited by Occhipinti (2023, p. 28) [37] who contends that “becoming a BCorp should be regarded as a process of legitimation, through which firms attempt to satisfy their stakeholders’ expectations that they will develop a sustainable corporate model” [38]. The B Impact Assessment serves as the certifying body, evaluating corporate performance across a spectrum of responsible practices impacting the environment, communities, customers, suppliers, employees, and shareholders [39,40]. Notably, while many existing social certifications are often relegated to specific sectors or highly visible industries (such as green energy), the BCorp certification has emerged as a comprehensive mechanism to audit and certify businesses uniformly across various social and environmental metrics [41].

While BCs are distinguished by their adherence to specific legislative requirements, BCorps are notable for their achievement of certification, which signifies compliance with stringent standards of verified performance, accountability, and transparency. This certification necessitates that firms maintain substantial levels of social and environmental performance, engage in stakeholder governance, and uphold transparency regarding their operational performance vis-à-vis consumers, communities, and suppliers [42]. Moreover, BCs are defined by their commitment to generating positive social and environmental impacts that transcend mere profit maximization [43]. Their potential contributions to CSR practices and sustainable development have achieved increasing interest in the scientific community [44]. The academic literature surrounding BCs highlights pertinent legal considerations, particularly within the context of the United States, owing to the inception of B Lab in 2006 [45,46]. The legal recognition of BCs has expanded internationally, with notable developments in Europe [47]. In this direction, Italy was the pioneering country in Europe to introduce its legal framework, under the name of Società Benefit (SB) in 2016, following the global proliferation of the concept originally derived from the American model known as BCs [30,48]. The Italian legislator has conferred legal recognition upon companies with a social purpose, thereby facilitating the establishment of new SBs and the conversion of existing firms into this legal format [49]. The regulatory framework that governs this emerging managerial model of profit-oriented enterprise establishes a robust foundation for the preservation of corporate missions while fostering the creation of shared long-term value. Specifically, the classification of SBs implies that such enterprises (1) incorporate within their corporate objectives the pursuit of common benefit or the intention to generate value for all stakeholders, thereby formalizing their commitment to objectives aligned with the common good that extend beyond mere profit, and (2) appoint a designated individual responsible for assessing the company’s social and environmental impact, which must be transparently reported in an annual impact report. This report, along with the financial statements, is required to be filed with the Chamber of Commerce. Consequently, transparency and impact measurement emerge as foundational pillars of the SB paradigm, underpinning its commitment to social responsibility and accountability.

The Italian model, heavily influenced by paradigms established in the United States, has catalyzed the emergence of analogous initiatives across various European nations, including Belgium, Luxembourg, and France [50]. When extending the analytical framework from a European context to an intercontinental one, it becomes evident that purpose-driven managerial models have been implemented across 38 states in the U.S., paralleling developments in Italy since 2016, as well as in Colombia (2018), Puerto Rico (2018), British Columbia (2019), Ecuador (2019), Peru (2020), Rwanda (2021), Spain (2022), Panama (2022), and San Marino (2023). Moreover, legislative initiatives aimed at adopting specialized laws regulating these entities are currently underway in over ten additional jurisdictions, including Uruguay, Argentina, Australia, Chile, Taiwan, and South Korea. In a parallel vein, France introduced the Société à Mission in 2019, a construct that, while distinct from the international model of Benefit Corporations, aligns closely with its underlying values and foundational principles [51].

A thorough examination of the existing literature reveals a limited focus on the institutional and managerial dimensions of Italian Benefit Corporations, particularly in light of the rapid development and institutionalization of these hybrid management models [30]. Although some preliminary studies have investigated the performance metrics of these organizations [52] and analyzed pioneering case studies [53], a more comprehensive analysis is warranted to fully understand their implications and trajectories. Considering the significant potential that these businesses possess in advancing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and promoting sustainability among for-profit enterprises [54], there remains a notable scarcity of empirical research exploring the dynamics of purpose-driven businesses. Furthermore, the relationship between these entities and critical variables within corporate strategy has not been sufficiently elucidated in the existing literature [55,56]. This is even more evident concerning this emerging managerial model in the CCI [57,58].

2.2. Navigating Sustainability Orientation and CSR to Gain a Competitive Advantage

The World Commission on Environment and Development [59] articulated the notion of sustainable development as an advancement that addresses the needs of the present while safeguarding the capacity of future generations to fulfill their own needs [59]. This definition provokes critical inquiry into the sustainability of exploiting natural resources perpetually to ameliorate the conditions of those in need, without further compromising the integrity of ecosystems [60]. It emphasizes the imperative of addressing contemporary needs in a manner that does not undermine the prospects of future generations and advocates for global equity in resource distribution [61]. Historically, sustainability issues were predominantly managed by public authorities and institutions [62]. Recently, businesses have started to see the value of including sustainability in their operations by taking into account economic, social, and environmental factors [63]. Indeed, an increasing number of businesses are showing greater enthusiasm for sustainable development and corporate responsibility, operating under the belief that organizations should not only pursue profit but also fulfill their responsibilities towards enhancing environmental and social well-being [64,65]. Consequently, firms are increasingly endeavoring to cultivate a sustainability orientation, aiming for favorable organizational outcomes [66,67,68]. Despite the advancements, the integration of sustainability dimensions into business strategies and innovative practices remains a topic of vigorous scholarly discourse [69].

The interest of businesses in sustainability can be attributed to two primary factors: (a) the long-term benefits that mature from sustainability integration within corporate practices [70] and (b) the pressure exerted by various stakeholders, such as the United Nations, governmental bodies, consumers, and employees, for private entities to operate in socially and environmentally responsible manners [71,72]. As noted by Abukari et al. (2023) [73], companies that manifest a solid commitment to sustainability practices tend to outperform their less committed competitors. Achieving sustainable development necessitates that organizations prioritize green innovation and foster creative practices while underscoring the pivotal role of supplier engagement in catalyzing such innovation [74]. A comprehensive analysis of sustainability dimensions theorizes the concept as four distinct categories: environmental, social, economic [75,76,77], and cultural [78,79,80]. Each dimension contributes uniquely to the generation of value which is social, environmental, economic [81], and cultural.

Social sustainability refers to practices that stakeholders, including employees and consumers, view as fair and trustworthy [82]. This aspect has become increasingly important due to the existing tensions between environmental and economic issues [83], as it plays a critical role in supporting basic needs, alleviating poverty, promoting human development, and ensuring equity. Additionally, it helps to foster a sense of identity, place, and community stability and security [84]. To effectively tackle inequality, initiatives to improve access to markets, public services, and social support need to be aligned with efforts to enhance social cohesion [85]. As noted by Barron et al. (2023, p. 30) [86], social sustainability is a collective effort that seeks to overcome challenges by providing public goods and distributing limited resources in ways that are seen as fair and legitimate, ensuring the long-term well-being of all individuals involved in value creation processes. In the business sector, the wider implications of social responsibility highlight the connection between sustainable development and economic performance, suggesting that the quest for sustainability should not be seen as separate from achieving economic success [87].

Environmental sustainability is fundamentally defined as a state in which the demands exerted on the planet are met without compromising its capacity to support a high quality of life for all individuals, both presently and in future generations [88,89]. This concept represents the first pillar in the broader framework of sustainability, which is grounded in four fundamental principles: (1) social stability; (2) food supply, carrying capacity, and biodegradation; (3) reduction in reliance on non-renewable resources; and (4) human activities that minimally impact global climate systems [90]. A recent study demonstrates that certain business models tend to create a more significant positive impact on society or the environment, depending on the characteristics of their products or services, especially when considering the externalities associated with this aspect [91]. This perspective leads to the awareness according to which governments and policymakers are called upon to develop “green growth strategies” able to balance both economic expansion and environmental stewardship [92].

The economic dimension of sustainability is mainly defined by a business’s profitability. This conventional viewpoint emphasizes wealth creation, with assessment methods largely based on financial and accounting indicators [87]. Expanding on Lim’s (2022) insights, individual well-being becomes a key factor in conversations about economic sustainability, addressing both eudaimonic elements (related to happiness) and financial security [93]. This perspective, economic sustainability, illuminates the critical issue of obscured consumer benefits associated with sustainable consumption, whether through the adoption of greener alternatives or the outright rejection of consumption. This issue is particularly salient in the context of consumer complaints, which often highlight that green products tend to be perceived as more costly, lower in quality, and less effective compared to their non-green counterparts [94]. Moreover, the phenomenon of consumption rejection raises significant challenges, leading to compromises that render sustainable living increasingly arduous [95].

The cultural dimension of sustainability encompasses the beliefs, values, practices, and aspirations of a society, along with the processes and mediums through which these cultural elements are preserved and transmitted [96]. Soini and Birkeland (2016) [97] posit that the cultural dimension serves as an “overarching dimension of sustainability”, which integrates the other three pillars, economic, social, and environmental, thereby framing development as an inherently cultural process. Within the business sector, the notion of cultural sustainability is more closely tied to the social dimension than to the economic and environmental dimensions. Key elements facilitating cultural sustainability include the preservation of both tangible and intangible cultural assets, active societal participation in heritage management, the democratization of access, and the assurance of cultural appreciation and conservation for future generations [98]. This independence of culture within the broader sustainability discourse is accentuated by the necessity of preserving, conserving, and maintaining various forms of cultural capital, as highlighted by Janhonen-Abruquah and Posti-Ahokas (2018) [99]. Such preservation is crucial, as cultural heritage can only contribute to the social, ecological, and economic objectives of sustainable development once appropriate measures for its preservation are instituted [100].

2.3. Beyond Cause-Related Marketing: Key Drivers and Challenges of Purpose-Oriented Business from a Consumer Perspective

The far-sighted and long-run temporal horizon inherent to sustainability characterizes it as a particular type of CSR asset [101,102]. As of today, businesses are increasingly adopting CSR strategies to meet both social and environmental needs to balance the changes in the thriving consumer needs and demand, further observed and governed by policymakers [103]. Indeed, an increasing consumer inclination towards socially and environmentally responsible purchasing has taken the field, prompting businesses to articulate their sustainability initiatives, practices, and products [21,104,105]. As of today, the number of companies focused on creating a sustainable value proposition while meeting social and environmental performance is increasing significantly [106,107]. Indeed, as shown by recent studies, firms’ CSR reputation notably influences the sales of new sustainable products, thereby proving that alignment with sustainability goals enhances corporate CSR reputation [108]. In this vein, it should be noted that over 85% of individuals worldwide report a shift towards the purchase of more sustainable products [109,110]. Following these assumptions, sustainability can be considered as a key player in product branding and advertising, serving as a strategic asset for creating and maintaining a competitive advantage [111]. Therefore, labeling schemes focused on sustainable claims and products attract consumers by strategically pointing out their sensibilities with reliable information about a product’s performance across various environmental, ethical, and social dimensions [112].

Adopting a consumer perspective, the literature suggests that sustainability is firstly associated with environmental issues, while the social dimension is relatively under-considered [113]. At the same time, these two dimensions appear to be considered as binary variables, as distinct constructs [114] indicating that the social dimension of sustainability is perceived as short-term, localized, and personal considerations, while the environmental dimension is associated with long-term, global, and cognitive reflections. This dichotomy is further supported by Sander et al. (2021) [113], whose study found that environmental sustainability calls for a stronger consumer response, attributable to the perceived urgency of environmental issues. However, the scientific literature shows a gap concerning how various dimensions of sustainability, namely, economic, social, environmental, and cultural, are conceptualized within consumer cognition [114], especially by focusing attention on sector-specific analyses [115], such as in the cultural and creative industries [98,116], whereas purpose-driven businesses shape value propositions able to promote cohesion, social innovation, and community well-being [117].

In a globalized context where travel consumption is incentivized, cultural heritage often becomes a commodity, particularly through tourism, which transforms cultural elements into narratives and emotional experiences with economic value [118,119,120,121]. Nonetheless, while the interplay between tourism and culture is recognized as a relevant opportunity for cultural sustainability, it also presents significant challenges that necessitate further exploration [122].

3. Research Method

To address the research objective (RO), the authors employ an experimental framework to systematically examine behavior within a controlled abstract environment. As articulated by Charness et al. (2012) [123], participants’ exposure to varying treatments facilitates the identification of causal relationships. This study utilizes a within-subjects design, among the principal methodologies for constructing experimental environments [28,123]. In a typical within-subjects design, participants engage with multiple treatments, be it variations in in-game parameters or exposure to diverse external stimuli. By ensuring random group assignment, this design permits causal estimations through the comparative analysis of behaviors observed across distinct experimental conditions [124]. The rationale for choosing this method is based on its advantages, which include greater statistical power, requiring a smaller sample size [125,126].

3.1. Research Setting

Following Lazzeretti and Capone (2015) [127], the authors draw upon the conceptual framework of the CCI, which integrates the business economy with the cultural and creative sectors, encompassing not only core cultural and creative activities but also extending to sectors such as tourism and the experience economy. Importantly, this definition acknowledges a more peripheral dimension where various sectors that depend on content production exhibit interdependencies with CCIs. This includes, notably, cultural tourism and the influence of new technologies, thereby highlighting the multifaceted nature of the creative landscape. The rationale for the perimeter adopted arises from a demand for further scholarly investigations that examine the interplay between sustainability, the CCI, and tourism demand [128,129,130,131,132].

To effectively assess consumer perceptions regarding sustainability dimensions within purpose-driven enterprises operating in the CCI, with a particular emphasis on the tourism domain, this investigation employs a within-subjects experimental design. As previously mentioned, in a within-subjects design experiment, each individual is exposed to more than one of the treatments being tested. With such designs, as long as the multiple exposures are independent, causal estimates can be obtained by examining how individual behavior changes when the experiment’s circumstances change [123]. During the implementation of the within-subjects design, the authors followed several steps (Figure 1).

Initially, an exhaustive literature review was conducted (Step 1) to identify the most efficacious methodologies for validating experimental designs. Subsequently, the authors articulated the value proposition for a proposed SB operating within the CCI, which encompasses the provision of tourism experiences through the sale of tickets for visits to museums, art galleries, and archaeological parks. The decision to create a novel service, accompanied by an upscale brand, was informed by the objective of assessing the respondents’ familiarity and experience with the product. This elaboration serves as a presentation of the research project in the survey to be submitted to the subject involved in the survey process. Subsequently, drawing upon the established value proposition, the authors identified the core message for each sustainability dimension. Specifically, for the environmental dimension [88,92], the core message created is centered on highlighting the SB commitment to reducing environmental impact through the use of plastic-free materials in products and merchandise. The purpose is to position the SB as an eco-conscious actor that contributes to environmental protection, deeply oriented towards green values and environmental responsibility. With reference to the social dimension [82,84,86], the core message emphasizes the importance of inclusivity and equal access within cultural tourism experiences by promoting equity, accessibility, and social justice in tourism and culture. Concerning the economic dimension [87,93], the core message combines individual benefit (savings, value) with collective impact (supporting the local economy), by framing cultural tourism as both affordable and socially valuable. Finally, regarding the cultural dimension [96,97], the core message underlines the role of cultural tourism in preserving and promoting cultural diversity and heritage. Through educational activities, events, and intergenerational programming, the organization positions itself as a steward of cultural identity and intercultural dialogue. The messaging appeals to values of cultural representation, identity, and awareness, reinforcing the idea that cultural tourism is a vehicle for sustainable cultural transmission and mutual understanding in active citizenship.

Therefore, four distinct advertising claims were created (Step 2), each corresponding to a specific dimension of sustainability, as identified in the literature (

Table 2. Experimental stimuli description.

Sustainability dimension	Environmental Sustainability	At Cultural Tourism, we are deeply committed to protecting our planet. Our dedication shines through our selection of plastic-free products, including travel guides, creative toolkits, and engaging games. With our eco-friendly “Cultural Tourism For Planet” gadgets, every choice you make supports a cleaner, greener Earth!
	Social Sustainability	We believe that everyone deserves the chance to experience the joy of travel. Cultural Tourism emphasizes creating an accessible and welcoming environment for individuals with physical, sensory, and cognitive disabilities. Together, we can create an inclusive space where all can explore and enjoy the beauty of culture.
	Economic Sustainability	Discover unbeatable value with our “Open Tourism” card! Enjoy unlimited access to all Cultural Tourism attractions for an entire year, along with exclusive discounts on guided tours and multimedia experiences. This initiative not only enriches your journey but also bolsters the local economy, making travel both affordable and impactful.
	Cultural Sustainability	Experience the world through a cultural lens! Cultural Tourism takes pride in promoting cultural awareness and representation across all our educational offerings. From workshops to events and classes for children, we inspire a love for diverse cultures, ensuring a legacy of appreciation for generations to come. Choose Cultural Tourism for your travels, where every adventure contributes to a brighter, more sustainable future.

Source: authors’ elaboration.

).

The four advertising claims serve as foundational anchors for examining the research objective of evaluating the relative attractiveness of the four dimensions of sustainability among consumers regarding purpose-driven businesses operating within the CCI. Accordingly, this step involved the translation of these four claims into distinct experimental stimuli.

To test these drafts, we conducted an internal pilot (Step 3) with three opinion leaders in sustainable management studies. They rated each claim on a scale of 1 to 5 for clarity and emotional resonance and provided comments on any ambiguous or unusual phrasing. After choosing the ones rated ≥4, we refined the drafts by simplifying complex sentences, balancing emotional appeals, and standardizing readability.

We then chose the best-performing version for each dimension and integrated the stimuli directly into the questionnaire. This visual material was presented to a cohort of respondents (Step 4) through a semi-structured questionnaire, designed to capture their perceptions and opinions on the topic under investigation. Specifically, the four claims were designed using Figma (version 124.4.7, 2024), among the most advanced design tools to create engaging and captive graphs [133]. To facilitate the experimentation, a visual stimulus was utilized, comprising a screen image of a mobile phone that displayed the various claims (Table 2). Importantly, the four images differed solely in the advertising claim presented. The experimental stimuli are illustrated below (Figure 2).

The semi-structured online questionnaire utilized for the assessment of the experimental stimuli was disseminated across various social media platforms, as well as through word of mouth (WoM), over the period from January 2025 to May 2025.

The questionnaire covered three main areas of investigation. The first area focuses on sample profiling, specifically examining the consumers’ propensity to purchase sustainably and their willingness to pay a surcharge for sustainable products (

Table 3. Dataset overview.

	Option	Count	Percentage (%)
Gender	Female	96	55%
	Male	79	45%
			100%
Age	17–25	77	44%
	26–35	23	13%
	36–45	15	9%
	46–55	54	31%
	>65	6	3%
			100%
Education	Below a bachelor’s degree	127	73%
	Bachelor	23	13%
	Master	22	12%
	Doctorate	3	2%
			100%
Frequency of purchasing sustainable services/products	Rarely	46	26%
	Occasionally	68	39%
	Periodically	35	20%
	Quite often	26	15%
			100%
Willingness to pay a surcharge for sustainable services/products	Yes	99	57%
	No	76	43%
			100%

Source: own elaboration.

). The second part presents closed-ended Likert scale questions assessing the consumers’ perceptions of experimental stimuli. Finally, the third part presents open-ended questions regarding the reasons why the respondents found a claim more attractive than the others, as well as their impressions about the SB operating in the CCI.

Authors stopped the collection of responses after reaching a total of 170 participants in the survey, aligning the sample size with those utilized in previous studies pertaining to social sciences [134,135].

3.2. Research Design

This study employs mixed-methods research (MMR), as articulated by Creswell and Creswell (2017) [136]. By integrating both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, this approach is distinguished by its ability to provide a more nuanced understanding of research problems and complex phenomena than either methodological approach in isolation [137]. MMR is conceptualized as “an approach to inquiry involving the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data, the integration of these two forms of data, and the application of distinct designs that may encompass philosophical assumptions and theoretical frameworks. The foundational premise of this form of inquiry is that the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative approaches yields a more comprehensive understanding of a research problem than the application of a single approach alone” (p. 4) [136].

The adoption of MMR has seen a growing increase within the scientific literature [138] and has gained relevant traction within the realm of managerial science [139,140], particularly within the context of tourism research [141,142,143]. In alignment with the framework established by Molina-Azorín and López-Gamero (2016) [144] regarding the purposes of integrating quantitative and qualitative methodologies, specifically development, expansion, and complementarity, this study adopts MMR primarily for developmental objectives. Initially, a quantitative method was utilized in RStudio [145,146] to evaluate the effectiveness of the four proposed experimental stimuli related to sustainability claims. In this initial phase, the Shapiro–Wilk test was employed to assess the normality of the distribution of responses corresponding to each sustainability claim. Given the non-normal distribution of the data (as verified through the Shapiro–Wilk test), a Kruskal–Wallis H test was applied to assess whether there were statistically significant differences in the distribution of responses across the four sustainability claim conditions. The hypotheses for the test were defined as follows:

Null Hypothesis (H₀):

The distributions of scores across the four sustainability claim groups (environmental, social, economic, and cultural) are equal.

Alternative Hypothesis (H₁):

At least one group differs in its score distribution from the others.

Subsequently, Dunn’s pairwise comparisons, accompanied by Bonferroni correction, were utilized to further refine the analysis. The rationale underpinning these statistical methodologies, along with the evidence derived from them, is elucidated in the subsequent section. Secondly, upon identifying the most effective sustainability claim and its corresponding pairings, a qualitative analysis of open-ended responses was conducted to elucidate the rationales behind the respondents’ choices, thus contributing to theory development. Specifically, content analysis was executed on the responses to open-ended survey questions, allowing for the synthesis of themes and categories using NVivo software (v.14). The following section will detail the methodological steps undertaken in each phase of the study.

4. Results

This study is based on qualitative–quantitative data concerning several aspects of the sustainability perception of purpose-driven businesses operating in cultural and creative industries. The dataset underpinning this study comprises over 170 respondents, drawn from a diverse array of social and geographical contexts, with a notable concentration in southern Italy. This demographic distribution aligns with the authors’ expectations, as the questionnaire was disseminated through a variety of multichannel platforms and amplified via word of mouth among local residents, particularly those with established community ties in the southern regions. Intending to ensure a comprehensive representation of the phenomenon under investigation, the authors designed the data collection process to engage heterogeneous circles, groups, and communities across various age ranges. This approach aimed at encompassing a wide array of generational perspectives, thereby capturing the nuances of multiple-demographic audiences. A significant characteristic of the dataset is its marked female predominance, particularly among Generation Alpha respondents, most of whom exhibit educational attainment levels below a bachelor’s degree. The predominance of Generation Alpha among the respondents, specifically, was due to several reasons. Firstly, this generational cohort generally possesses a greater availability of leisure time to participate in such research activities. Secondly, their intrinsic familiarity with mobile devices facilitates the completion of the questionnaire, thus encouraging higher response rates (Table 3).

The core of the quantitative investigation focused on testing how consumers respond to four distinct advertising claims, each corresponding to a specific dimension of sustainability: environmental, social, economic, and cultural. Each claim was followed by a series of evaluation items, measured using 5-point Likert-type scales (1 = “Not at all” to 5 = “Very much”), capturing the participants’ affective, cognitive, and behavioral reactions to the message. Since Likert scale data are ordinal, and since parametric tests assume normality and equal variances across groups, preliminary statistical diagnostics were conducted to assess the distributional characteristics of the data.

4.1. Perceptions of Sustainability Claims: A Quantitative Exploration

Following established best practices, the authors initially employed the Shapiro–Wilk test [147,148] to evaluate the normality of the distribution of responses to each sustainability claim. As presented in

Table 4. Shapiro–Wilk test results.

Slogan	W	p-Value	Normality
Environmental	0.8907	6.22 × 10−10	No
Social	0.9150	1.88 × 10−8	No
Economic	0.9032	3.37 × 10−9	No
Cultural	0.9103	9.28 × 10−9	No

, the findings consistently demonstrate non-normal distributions across all four groups, with p-values substantially beneath the 0.05 threshold. Consequently, the null hypothesis of normality was rejected across the board.

These findings provide a robust justification for the application of the Kruskal–Wallis H test [149], a non-parametric statistical method utilized for the comparative analysis of independent groups, particularly when the assumptions of normality are not met and the data in question are ordinal. The results of the Kruskal–Wallis test were statistically significant, as indicated in

Table 5. Kruskal–Wallis test results.

Statistic	Value
Chi-squared (H)	14.793
Degrees of Freedom	3
p-value	0.0020

, with a chi-square statistic of 14.793, three degrees of freedom, and a p-value of 0.0020. This outcome suggests that there are significant differences in the ratings received across at least one of the groups being analyzed. To identify where the differences lay, the authors conducted Dunn’s pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction [150] (

Table 6. Dunn’s pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction results.

Comparison	p-adj	Significance
Environmental–Cultural	1.0000	No
Environmental–Economic	0.0020	Yes
Cultural–Economic	0.0164	Yes
Environmental–Social	0.9174	No
Cultural–Social	1.0000	No
Economic–Social	0.1863	No

). The results indicate that the economic claim was evaluated significantly differently from both the environmental and cultural claims (p = 0.0020 and p = 0.0164, respectively), whereas no significant differences were found among the remaining pairs.

The results of this study underscore the primacy of economic sustainability claims in shaping consumer perceptions, illustrating a marked divergence from the environmental and cultural dimensions. Notably, the social dimension, while characterized by its unique narrative, did not yield statistically significant distinctions when compared to the other three claims. This suggests that economic value propositions within sustainability communications hold greater relevance for consumers, particularly within the realm of cultural tourism offerings. Specifically, the analysis revealed statistically significant pairwise differences, with the economic claim receiving more favorable assessments compared to both the environmental and cultural claims. This outcome indicates that value-based arguments centered on cost, accessibility, and financial incentives resonate more profoundly with participants than more abstract ecological or cultural considerations do.

Interestingly, despite the prevalence of societal discourse surrounding environmental sustainability, the environmental claim did not generate responses that differed significantly from those elicited by the social or cultural claims. This finding implies that, in the context of this study, economic incentives emerge as the most influential motivators for engaging with sustainability-themed CCI offerings. Visual examination of the boxplot (Figure 3) distributions corroborates these statistical findings, revealing that the economic claim not only possesses a slightly higher median rating but also exhibits a notable outlier. The boxplot presented herein reflects an analysis conducted using RStudio software (version 2023.12.0+353 ‘Elsbeth’) on responses provided in the Italian language (the authors have opted to analyze the original language responses rather than translating them to mitigate the risk of distorting meaning and thereby compromising the overall interpretation of the results). This observation suggests individual variance in responses while indicating a stronger central tendency for the economic dimension relative to the others. Thus, the evidence points to the economic dimension as a crucial factor in consumer engagement with sustainability in the CCI.

4.2. Motivational Drivers Behind Ethical Consumption

For the qualitative analysis of the answers collected, the authors employed a content analysis utilizing NVivo software to delve into the intricate factors influencing the respondents’ preferences regarding the selection of the most compelling assertion among the four options provided, with a specific emphasis on economic sustainability. According to Hsieh and Shannon (2005), there are three main approaches to qualitative content analysis: conventional, directed, and summative content analysis [151]. In the conventional content analysis approach, themes and codes are derived from the raw data. Directed content analysis is an approach where the initial coding starts from a theory or previous findings, and then, during data analysis, researchers establish themes in support of previous findings or frameworks. In the summative approach, the process starts with a quantitative approach in counting words or phrases, and then, it moves in a more inductive manner in the exploration of the usage of such words or phrases [152]. This study uses the direct approach to orientate the cluster analysis and further clarify the reasons behind the high preference for the “economic dimension”. The initial phase of the analysis involved reviewing the most common vocabulary found in all responses collected pertaining to the identification of key terms within the preferred sustainability dimension. By utilizing the word frequency feature in NVivo, a list of frequently occurring words was compiled [153]. Therefore, 80 items coming from the four dimensions (20 for each one) were analyzed (

Table 7. The most widely used words for each sustainability stimulus.

Environmental Dimension	Weighted Percentage (%)	Social Dimension	Weighted Percentage (%)	Economic Dimension	Weighted Percentage (%)	Cultural Dimension	Weighted Percentage (%)
Plastic	2.26	Inclusive	3.09	Discounts	2.01	Sustainable	2.20
Products	2.26	Disability	1.93	Tourism	1.84	Enrich	1.10
Important	1.81	Accessibility	1.54	Offer	1.68	Engaging	1.10
Creative	1.36	Sustainability	1.54	Experiences	1.01	Communicate	1.10
Cultural	1.36	Theme	1.54	Local	1.01	Community	1.10
Free	1.36	Everyone	1.54	Impact	0.84	Awareness	1.10
World	1.36	Inclusion	1.16	Activity	0.67	Contribute	1.10
Planet	1.36	People	1.16	Cultural	0.67	Cultural	1.10
Plastic	1.36	Attention	0.77	Unlimited	0.67	Culture	1.10
Sustainability	1.36	Center	0.77	Access	0.67	Person	1.10
Tourism	1.36	Culture	0.77	People	0.67	Different	1.10
Travel	1.36	Important	0.77	Positive	0.67	Educative	1.10
Business	0.90	Inclusion	0.77	Found	0.67	Efficient	1.10
Damage	0.90	Inclusivity	0.77	Advantages	0.67	Experiences	1.10
Ecological	0.90	Message	0.77	Travel	0.67	Express	1.10
Evidence	0.90	Values	0.77	Access	0.50	Events	1.10
Encourages	0.90	Travel	0.77	Practical	0.50	Easy	1.10
Environment	0.90	Attractive	0.39	Cultural	0.50	Future	1.10
People	0.90	Suitable	0.39	Locals	0.50	Impact	1.10
Reduce	0.90	Face	0.39	Experience	0.50	Recorded	1.10

Source: authors’ elaboration.

) to establish a theme to group a set of them under a single group, the economic one.

This exercise led to the establishment of common stages to merge the categories sequentially and explain the results obtained. Initially, the authors expressed no surprise regarding the correlations that surfaced, particularly the evident connection between the environmental and economic dimensions [154]. This relationship underscores the necessity to safeguard the planet from ecological degradation, advocating for the adoption of plastic-free and environmentally sustainable products. Such measures are not only pivotal for preserving the integrity of the environment but also for ensuring that future generations inherit a rich historical, cultural, and artistic legacy, which is particularly significant for the tourism sector. Moreover, the dialogue between the economic and cultural dimensions indicates that respondents can actively influence the preservation of environmental ecosystems. The influence they can exert has several outcomes to be considered, such as enhanced access to resources or a potential decrease in economic constraints. The authors posit that the findings of the present study indicate a dual pathway: consumers, through their sensibility and eco-conscious choices, engage in proactive environmental stewardship while simultaneously reaping economic advantages. This interplay initiates a virtuous cycle grounded in a steadfast commitment to a value system that prioritizes the protection of environmental rights. As such, this research not only proves that these two dimensions are intertwined but also advocates for a transformative approach in which consumer behavior aligns with ecological sustainability. The results derived from the second level of the analysis warrant further exploration. The analysis demonstrates that when the economic aspects of sustainability are utilized effectively, they can initiate a ripple effect that improves even the less widely recognized dimensions, like cultural sustainability.

The lack of correlations between the economic and social dimensions can be explained by assuming a limited sensitivity of the respondents towards social challenges, such as gender equality, employment, and inclusiveness, particularly within marginalized groups known as “invisible,” “fragile,” and “vulnerable.” These populations often include individuals with disabilities, whose needs are frequently overlooked by institutions and businesses due to perceived unprofitability. The authors underscore a critical concern regarding the prevailing neglect of these groups, arguing that a fundamental shift in perspective is necessary. This change needs to originate from institutional leadership and educational systems, as it is crucial to reshape societal attitudes and cultural norms surrounding inclusiveness. Such a transformation in the collective vision needs to prioritize the well-being of all individuals within the community, fostering an environment characterized by full openness and support for the marginalized. From the analysis conducted, it is evident, therefore, that access to economic benefits serves as a strategic asset for fostering a diverse array of cultural experiences. These experiences, in turn, have the potential to enrich community welfare significantly.

4.3. Motivational Patterns and Value Convergence in Choosing an SB

To add more robustness to the analysis conducted so far, the authors performed a qualitative content analysis of the open responses collected. In detail, the NVivo software was used to investigate the motivational patterns underlying consumer preferences specifically targeted at SBs within the CCI. Respondents were asked, “Why would you buy a product or service from an SB?”. The analysis of open-ended responses employed a directed content analysis approach, as outlined by Hsieh and Shannon (2005) [151], which informed the coding process based on a theoretical framework centered around sustainability dimensions, with a particular emphasis on elucidating the pronounced preference for economic sustainability. The analysis yielded a tree map visualization that depicted the 50 most frequently cited lexical stems (see Figure 4 (The tree map presented herein reflects an analysis on responses provided in the Italian language. The authors have opted to analyze the original language responses rather than translating them to mitigate the risk of distorting meaning and thereby compromising the overall interpretation of the results. This decision underscores the commitment to preserving the integrity of the participants’ expressions and the nuances embedded within their original verbalizations)). This graphical representation, filtered by the frequency of stemmed words, illuminated predominant semantic fields associated with ethical commitment, social engagement, cultural relevance, and accessibility. Notably, economic terminology, such as “products,” “price,” “quality,” and “benefit”, emerged close to value-laden concepts such as “coherence,” “impact,” “sustainability,” and “future.” This proximity suggests a cognitive and affective convergence between pragmatic considerations and principled values.

Despite quantitative evidence indicating that habitual purchases of sustainable products remain relatively infrequent, with only 35% of respondents reporting such consistent behavior, many participants articulated motivations deeply rooted in ethical alignment and a desire to support enterprises that mirror their personal value systems. This phenomenon suggests the presence of a latent ethical sensitivity: while not always manifesting in consistent purchasing behavior, consumers express a preference for sustainability-oriented businesses that resonate with their beliefs. Specifically, these insights align with the value–belief–norm theory posited by Stern (2000) [155], according to which consumer behavior is designed by anticipated outcomes and, above all, by internalized values combined with perceived moral obligations.

It is evident, therefore, that trust, transparency, and coherence are pivotal factors in influencing consumer choices of SBs. In detail, the qualitative analysis of the open questions revealed that consumers expressed an urge for businesses to “practice what they preach” particularly within the cultural sector, where symbolic capital and authenticity are of paramount importance. This insight reinforces the awareness that purpose-driven positioning is not about a communication strategy but plays a reputational asset in contexts where identity, heritage, and social impact are profoundly intertwined.

Crucially, the majority of the data collected, over 57% of respondents, conveyed a willingness to pay a premium price for offerings from SBs (refer to Table 2), highlighting the presence of a value-based market segment. This evidence implies that economic incentives, such as discounts or pricing strategies, may function as a conduit to more intricate value systems, rather than opposing ethical or ecological motives. Several respondents framed economic arguments as facilitators of access to cultural goods, acknowledging that socioeconomic inclusion fosters cultural democratization, underscoring a virtuous cycle wherein financial mechanisms (e.g., discount cards, subsidies) augment participation in cultural activities. At the same time, the links between economic, environmental, and cultural aspects were especially evident. Many participants expressed a natural connection between using sustainable materials, such as plastic-free packaging, and the protection of cultural landscapes, as well as between cost-effectiveness and the accessibility of cultural heritage. This awareness highlights a holistic understanding of sustainability, viewing it not as separate components but as a complex web of interrelated values and practices.

5. Implications and Conclusions

The mixed approach adopted, based on both quantitative and qualitative analysis, frames consumer perceptions regarding sustainability within cultural and creative enterprises structured as SBs. This study indicates that messaging centered on economic sustainability emerged as the most effective in generating positive consumer responses, significantly surpassing communications focused on environmental and cultural considerations. This insight illuminates a prevailing inclination toward pragmatic value propositions, wherein factors such as affordability, economic accessibility, and tangible benefits resonate more profoundly with consumers than social issues. The qualitative data enrich this interpretation by revealing that many participants framed their preferences through constructs of ethical coherence, trust in the organization, and alignment with personal and societal values. Although sustainable purchasing habits have yet to become commonplace among the majority of respondents, there is indicative evidence of a latent ethical intentionality, a willingness to act responsibly when economic and structural conditions facilitate such choices. A particularly salient insight from the study is the readiness of consumers to pay a premium price for products and services from organizations perceived as trustworthy, transparent, and mission-driven. This willingness to support sustainable consumption, when authenticity is perceived, illustrates that economic and ethical dimensions are not mutually exclusive; rather, they can be strategically synthesized to enhance consumer engagement [156]. These findings have direct implications for cultural and creative SBs. First, communication strategies should refrain from framing sustainability as a moral imperative that is disconnected from real-world constraints. Instead, they should underscore value convergence, positioning sustainability as a shared economic, ethical, and cultural investment. Second, the design of products and services should be informed by inclusive pricing models that effectively balance economic accessibility with ethical branding. It is evident, therefore, that while the economic appeal remains a potent entry point for consumer engagement, it is the perceived integrity and social resonance of the enterprise that fosters deeper consumer loyalty. Cultural and Creative SBthus function as agents of change, capable of mobilizing values, meanings, and active participation in the transition towards a more sustainable society.

Theoretically, this study contributes to the literature on hybrid organizations, consumer behavior, value-based branding, and perceptions of sustainable features (PerSFs). It supports a dual-process framework that recognizes the coexistence of rational economic motivations and identity-based ethical commitments in sustainable choice, aligning with previous studies [157,158].

Practically, the evidence gathered can inform SBs and hybrid enterprises that are engaging with the CCI. By analyzing this evidence, these businesses can develop a more competitive value proposition that effectively integrates economic sustainability with cultural viability by involving a thorough examination of the ethical considerations and core values inherent in their operations.

Future research could further investigate how these motivations vary across different demographic and psychographic cohorts and how they evolve during post-consumption reflections.