[1] Although the concept of demarketing lacks a precise theoretical definition, it refers to an attempt by the firm to discourage all or some of its customers from making purchases either temporarily or permanently.
Since the initial interests in the subject area of how to market strategically in times of shortages began, different viewpoints have been offered as to how the firm should pursue demarketing.
[1] In 2011, Dr. Kotler teamed up with R. Craig Lefebvre to write Design Thinking, Demarketing and Behavioral Economics: Fostering Interdisciplinary Growth in Social Marketing.
“As the growing number of governments, businesses and private funding sources focus on conditions of consumer excess, we see the social marketing paradigm expanding to accommodate this cultural shift to an Age of Demarketing.”[8] According to Lefebvre and Kotler (2011) “Demarketing can be viewed as blending all 4Ps of the marketing mix and also aiming for policy changes to nudge and sustain healthier and more socially responsible behavioral choices… (and) deeper understanding of the people we wish to serve, the environments in which they make choices, the market research we conduct and the programs we implement.”[8] Mikl ́os-Thal and Juanjuan (2011) proposed that sellers use demarketing to strategically manage buyers’ quality perceptions.
Amaldoss and Jain (2005) show that limited availability satisfies consumers’ need for uniqueness, and Stock and Balachander (2005) demonstrate that scarcity can signal high quality.
The logic then follows that demarketing would adapt this structure to serve the opposite purpose of reducing the consumer base and discouraging demand for a product and service.
Furthermore, demarketing would seek to increase availability of the alternatives and highlight the downside of the product or service, therefore making it less attractive to consumers.
Social marketing strategies have been widely implemented to demarket products or services that are perceived to be harmful or costly to society.
Adult communities demarket properties to families with children, and producers of goods with a snob appeal avoid low-image retailers.
[7] Although Kotler and Levy (1971) emphasized the need for careful research into these phenomena, little effort has been devoted to the formal study of demarketing by marketers.
Stock outages frustrate consumers, but stores often offer rain checks that guarantee delivery at a future date.
A low price usually attracts large numbers of shoppers, so customers must hunt for space in crowded parking lots and stand in long checkout lines.
The differentiation strategy means that a firm might use a “nuisance factor” that actually drives consumers away from them, and into the arms of their competitors in order to keep their prices elevated.
In order to combat these issues, Dr. Gurprit Kindra, from the University of Ottawa made strategic suggestions in an article he wrote in 1995.
He also proposed that a system geared toward more managed care would reduce the number of services being accessed if patients were required to get a referral from a primary point of contact before seeing other specialties.
[15] Due to the severe drought, the State of California has been restricting water usage, while providing tax rebates for installing synthetic turf.
In other words, a boomerang effect occurs where greater levels of exposure to anti-drug campaign results in potentially increased use of drugs.
Further, ABC News reported findings in 2008 that the federal government's effort to keep youngsters from using drugs "is unlikely to have had favorable effects on youths."