Cause-related marketing of luxury brands: does the global versus local scope matter?

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate how luxury brands’ cause-related marketing strategies − focused on global versus local causes − influence perceived luxuriousness and purchase intention. It examines the moderating roles of consumers’ global versus local identities and perceived psychological distance evoked by these cause-related initiatives. Design/methodology/approach Study 1 (N = 260) used an online experiment to assess the effect of proximity of cause on purchase intention toward luxury brands through sequential mediation of perceived psychological distance and perceived luxuriousness. Study 2 (N = 510) used a fictitious luxury brand to replicate the findings of Study 1 and further tested the moderating role of global–local identity. Findings When luxury brands issue a global-scoped versus local-scoped cause-related marketing campaign, consumers are more likely to perceive the brands as psychologically distant. This increased perceived psychological distance enhances the perceived luxuriousness of the brands which in turn increases purchase intention. In addition, consumers’ local (versus global) identity further strengthens the relationship between proximity of cause and purchase intention toward luxury brands. Originality/value This study makes three key contributions: it addresses the gap in luxury marketing literature by linking global and local cause-related marketing strategies to consumers’ identity orientations and perceived psychological distance, it provides insights into how cause-related marketing strategies can resolve the paradox between luxury’s exclusivity and social responsibility and it emphasizes the unique influence of perceived psychological distance on perceived luxuriousness and purchase intentions, offering luxury brand managers actionable insights into tailoring cause-related initiatives to distinct consumer segments.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.