Jakarta – A boycott of several global brands associated with Israel has impacted their sales in Indonesia, but that does not mean the boycott has "worked".

The franchisers operating Starbucks, Pizza Hut and KFC in the country, as well as fast-moving consumer goods giant Unilever, have all noticed an impact on their bottom lines from the consumer backlash in response to the Middle East crisis.

McDonald's and Danone, too, have reportedly felt the ire of local customers.

Some might say this shows that the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement has been a great success in Indonesia, particularly after the Mideast crisis escalated significantly in October of last year.

Others, however, point to Israel's continued occupation of Palestinian territories and its ongoing military campaign in Gaza, as well as its incursions into the West Bank and Lebanon, as evidence to the contrary.

If the intention of the boycotts is to punish companies for their perceived Israel ties, then they have worked, but if the plan is to affect change on the ground, then they have failed.

And further boycotts would do little to advance this latter cause, because the companies being hurt are Indonesian entities, and while their pain will be somewhat felt at the brands' global headquarters in the United States or the United Kingdom, it will barely register in Tel Aviv.

"We are an Indonesian company. We have no relation with Israel or the US," protested PT MAP Boga Adiperkasa, the company behind Starbucks in Indonesia, adding, "The boycott should not happen to us, as it is significantly impacting our [business]."

Has the boycott, then, done more harm than good by hitting companies' revenue and prompting store closures and job losses in Indonesia?

That is unlikely. Just because some people avoid Starbucks does not mean they suddenly drink less coffee. Rather, they simply take their business elsewhere. As some multinationals are shunned, local brands may stand to gain.

Be that as it may, and irrespective of whether the boycotts of Starbucks and other firms are fair or not, the case demonstrates the possibility of getting a critical mass of consumers in Indonesia to rally behind a cause, and the implications of that go well beyond this particular movement.

Consumer boycotts have occurred for more than a century, with a campaign against South African products over apartheid one of the most prominent cases in history, but they have been more associated with developed economies in the past.

Indonesian entities have found themselves on the receiving end of consumer activism abroad over deforestation concerns, when Mattel's Barbie dolls were shunned over paper sourced from Indonesia.

Now, Indonesians are among the most activist consumers.

A YouGov survey published earlier this year found that among the markets polled, Indonesia had the second-highest proportion of "potentially activistic consumers" at 86 percent, second only to the UAE at 88 percent. The country placed just ahead of Hong Kong and Australia at 85 percent, Canada at 84 percent, Denmark at 83 percent and the United Kingdom at 82 percent.

"These markets also have the smallest share of consumers who would never boycott a brand: at 10 percent or less," the report noted.

Those statistics show that a critical consumer mindset is a global phenomenon, and arguably more global than ever before, given how social media can massively amplify campaigns.

Conscious consumerism is a good thing, but there is also a risk of boycotts targeting the wrong companies or products, so a critical consumer mindset must involve a personal assessment of any alleged wrongdoing.

Going with the flow is the opposite of critical thinking, whether it comes to consumer activism or anything else.

Also, there is no reason to look critically only at large foreign companies, because there is plenty of wrongdoing to find among domestic firms too, including small and medium enterprises, whether in health and safety, environmental protection, good governance, labor practices or anything else.

Brand or product boycotts can be a powerful force for good, but with great power comes great responsibility.

Source: https://www.thejakartapost.com/opinion/2024/11/14/consumer-power-together-we-are-strong.htm