Misused and Confused: Why Information on Large Appliances Falls Short PDF Free Download
1 / 60/60
100%
CLEAN
ENERGY
ALWAYS
GREEN
GREEN
ENERGY
MISUSED
CONFUSED
WHY INFORMATION ON LARGE
APPLIANCES FALLS SHORT
CPRC
The Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC) is an independent, not-for-profit, Australian think tank.
CPRC aims to create fairer, safer and inclusive markets by undertaking research and working with
leading regulators, policymakers, academics and community advocates.
Acknowledgements
Report author: Marianne Campbell
This project was funded by Energy Consumers Australia as part of its Grants Program to support
consumer advocacy and research projects that benefit household and small business consumers.
The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Energy Consumers Australia
CPRC would like to acknowledge the following people for their expert advice and involvement in the
project’s Reference Group: Chris Barnes, Thea Bray, Kerry Connors, Kat George, Douglas McCloskey,
Dr Nicola Pitt, Jennifer Rayner, Nailah Rokic and Alana West.
Statement of Recognition
CPRC acknowledges the Traditional Custodians of the lands and waters throughout Australia. We pay
our respect to Elders, past, present and emerging, acknowledging their continuing relationship to land
and the ongoing living cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples across Australia.
Published by Consumer Policy Research Centre
Suggested citation:
Consumer Policy Research Centre,
Misused and confused. Why information on large appliances falls
short,
August 2025
cprc.org.au
MISUSED
CONFUSED
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 2
Introduction 4
Key findings 5
Where to from here? 6
Methodology 9
Keeping up with the cost of living in Australia 10
What does the large appliance point of sale look like? 15
A deep dive into green claims and vague information 23
at the point of sale
Do Australians have the information they want and need 33
when buying a large home appliance?
What do Australians do when a large appliance breaks? 42
What policy and industry improvements are needed? 47
Appendix - Detailed methodology 53
Endnotes 59
Table of Contents
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 3
As household expenses continue to rise,
Australians are looking for reliable, affordable
products with clear information on repair
options, efficiency, and environmental impact.
Energy efficiency is a key factor in purchasing decisions,
particularly for major household appliances that
contribute significantly to a household’s overall energy
consumption. Appliances account for approximately
30% of household energy use, and choosing energy-
efficient models can lead to substantial cost savings.1
However, many Australians struggle to navigate vague,
misleading, or incomplete information at the point of
sale, making it difficult to make informed choices.
This research explores how Australians make decisions
when purchasing large home appliances, focusing on the
importance they place on durability, repairability, and
sustainability. We examined how Australians interpret
and respond to energy efficiency claims, the point-of-
sale experience, and the role of sales staff in selling large
home appliances in Australia.
Australians are meant to have protections to help them
make products perform well and last for a reasonable
period, including protections for reasonable repairs. In
practice, we found that many Australians are unaware
of their rights and struggle to use them. Company
policies steer people to replace broken products with
a new item and product warranty periods confuse
consumers about their additional rights under the law.
The impacts of financial pressures on purchase
decisions, confusion using environmental “green” claims,
and the desire for more clarity of product durability and
repairability all point to the need for better standards
requiring greater transparency and more in-depth
information on product labelling.
Australians need certainty of product durability, as well
as reassurance that the green claims they defer to are
credible and help them understand what they’re buying,
the investment they’re making, and what they can do if
something breaks.
Introduction
S
U
S
T
A
I
N
A
B
L
E
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 4
Key findings
Australians want stricter regulation of green claims to stamp out greenwashing
CPRC conducted a three-stage research project comprising 120 mystery shops, eight qualitative
discussion groups, and a quantitative survey of 1,500 Australians. Results confirmed that
Australians want to know how long their appliances will last, and that people are often misled by
vague green claims.
84% of Australians are misled
by green claims – and are
willing to pay 10% more for a
fridge or washing machine
with a green claim
Australia risks $1.2 billion
wastage from vague green
claims if all misled Australian
households bought a new
fridge or washing machine
82% of Australians
want strict regulation of
vague terms like “eco-
friendly” or “green”
want manufacturers to submit
proof of environmental claims
want an independent regulatory body
to oversee the accuracy of claims
of appliance stores displayed
green claims at the point of
sale of large home appliances
of sales assistants relied
on vague green claims when
selling large appliances
39% 32%
of Australians believe that
at least one type of vague
green claim is regulated:
“efficient” (24%)
“sustainable” (18%)
“eco” (16%)
“green” (12%)
“clean” (11%)
48%
of Australians want labels to
state if an appliance can be repaired
with readily available parts
want a
repairability
score
79% 74%
How Australians purchase large home appliances
Australians want durability and repairability information on appliances
of Australians want
manufacturers to disclose the
expected lifespan of an appliance
want a
standardised
durability rating
85% 83%
80% 79%
$1.2B
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 5
Improve energy efficiency labelling at the point of sale
Where to from here?
Establish strict regulation and standards
for commonly used “green” terms
Green marketing claims on large energy-
intensive appliances lack standardisation, and
have the potential to cost Australians millions
of dollars a year.
Australia should follow the European Union’s
example by extending its planned prohibitions
for unfair trading to address greenwashing.
Review the Energy Rating Label format
on appliance
The Energy Rating on appliances, while trusted,
is often a source of confusion. Australians want
clearer information, including running costs.
Require energy efficiency training for
sales assistants
Retail staff often lack training on energy
efficiency, leading to poor advice for
Australians.
Elevate national awareness of energy
rebate programs to maximise consumer
uptake and impact
Multiple Australian state governments offer
rebates on energy-efficient appliances but
public awareness of these schemes remains
low, limiting uptake.
Establish a standardised durability
and repairability rating
France’s repairability index provides a useful
model which could be adopted to help
Australians make informed, sustainable
purchases.
Require that environmental trustmarks
are reviewed and approved by a regulator
1 4
5
6
3
2
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 6
Incentivise industry to design durable and repairable appliances
Broaden the objectives of the
Recycling
and Waste Reduction (Consequential and
Transitional Provisions) Act 2020
The
Recycling and Waste Reduction
(Consequential and Transitional Provisions)
Act 2020
primarily focuses on end-of-life
waste management. It should be expanded
to cover the entire product lifecycle,
promoting durability, repairability, resource
efficiency, clear labelling, repair accessibility,
manufacturer responsibility for recycling, and
transparent reporting.
Create a Government-backed
accreditation for voluntary industry-
led product stewardship schemes
with oversight from an independent
clearinghouse
The Government should establish an
independent, not-for-profit clearinghouse
to strengthen governance, coordination, and
accountability across voluntary, industry-led
product stewardship schemes.
The clearinghouse would accredit producers
and schemes, standardise data collection, and
report on participation, compliance, product
performance, and recycling outcomes. It would
refer non-compliance to regulators and publish
national performance insights.
It should be operated independently of
government and industry, with initial funding
provided by government and ongoing costs
recovered through industry levies and
registration fees.
Introduce legal obligations to sell
large appliances that meet minimum
environmental standards
Few Australian products are required to meet
environmental standards. Expanding Australian
Consumer Law (ACL) to include sustainability
performance would encourage the design
of durable and repairable appliances, while
holding industry accountable for environmental
impact.
Introduce a legal obligation to sell large
appliances with a software update
guarantee
Many modern large appliances require software
updates for security and functionality, yet the
ACL lacks explicit protections.
7
8
9
10
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 7
Make it easier for Australians
to get products fixed
Incentivise Australians to choose repair
over replacement
Australia should adopt measures similar to
Europe, including mandatory repair services,
and options for borrowing or purchasing
refurbished units. These rights should be
embedded in the ACL.
Ban extended warranties that offer
no additional value
Businesses should be prohibited from selling
warranties that do not provide meaningful
additional benefits, preventing unnecessary
costs for Australians.
Strengthen regulator powers to enforce
Australian guarantees
The ACCC and state regulators should have the
ability to impose penalties on businesses that
repeatedly fail to meet their repair, refund and
replacement obligations.
11
12
13
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 8
Methodology
Mystery shop
From August-September 2024, a mystery shopping
exercise was conducted at the point of purchase of
large appliances. The objective was to assess and
audit the retail landscape, examining what information
was on display and available to Australians, including
interactions with sales assistants.
In total, 120 appliances were mystery shopped: 100
across five states and 20 online. To account for areas
of highest financial difficulty, we targeted lower socio-
economic status suburbs of greater metropolitan
Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and Perth.
Shoppers focussed on large, energy-intensive
appliances such as electric ovens, reverse cycle air
conditioners, electric space heaters, fridges, washing
machines and clothes dryers.
Qualitative discussion groups
The qualitative research stage involved eight in-
person focus groups with 49 lower-income Australians
conducted in Adelaide, Melbourne, Newcastle and
Cairns between 10–17 October 2024.
Each location included a group of renters and a group
of homeowners to examine how differences shape
engagement with point-of-sale information and green
claims when purchasing major appliances. Participants
had either bought or intended to buy appliances like
fridges, dryers or air conditioners within a year.
Discussions explored participants’ decision-making
processes, experiences with energy information, and
reactions to real-world materials gathered in the
mystery shop
Quantitative survey and
choice experiment
From 6-17 March 2025, a 15 minute online quantitative
survey was conducted with a national sample of
n=1,500 Australians not opposed to purchasing a new
fridge and a new washing machine (‘non-rejectors’).
The survey incorporated a MaxDiff choice experiment,
to measure the utility (relative importance) of various
purchase factors on large appliance purchase decisions.
Quantitative outcomes included derived importance
of different purchase factors when purchasing a large
appliance, willingness to pay for various types of
green claims, sentiment towards green information
and marketing, attitudes towards durability and
repairability of large appliances, and perspectives of
regulation of the labelling of large home appliances at
the point of purchase.
Reference Group
The Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC)
established and coordinated a Reference Group
to ensure rigorous research design and policy
relevance. The group provided guidance on the
research instruments, research outcomes, and policy
recommendations.
Study limitations
• The mystery shop was based on a set selection
of appliance types and retail stores. This could be
replicated and expanded in any follow-up research.
• The methodology, while robust and comprehensive,
may not capture all the complexities of real-life
in-situ purchasing decisions. Future research could
consider building in shopper intercept interviewing,
eye-tracking and ethnographic observations to
provide deeper insights and verify findings.
This study employed a three-stage mixed-methodology approach to investigate Australian
interactions with information at the point of sale when purchasing large appliances. The
methodology incorporated both qualitative and quantitative elements to provide a comprehensive
understanding of Australian perceptions and expectations of appliance labelling, purchase
decision-making processes, as well as an audit of the retail environment.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 9
Keeping up with
the cost of living
in Australia
1
Recent years of increasing cost-of-living has been
challenging for Australians.
The research showed many people faced personal and
financial hardships and are looking to save money where
they can. As a result, Australians want more control over
how much energy they use.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 10
In discussion groups, Australians talked about
increasing unemployment levels and reduced job
security in recent years, contributing to a sense
of instability. This was raised by many different
demographic groups and made Australians less certain
of sustained income over the longer term.
Some Australians, mainly renters, had observed or
experienced mental health struggles, or having felt
a general sense of bleakness often linked to financial
difficulty.
Coming out of a shopping centre, and you’ve
done $100 and you have one bag! I buy five
things, and you’ve done $100...
MALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Businesses charging more for less, basically.
MALE HOMEOWNER, NEWCASTLE, 45-54 YEARS
I have had to change providers a couple of
times in the past couple of years. They are
just not understanding. And you struggle,
and they cut you off, so I’ve had to change.
They won’t come to an agreement.
FEMALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Generally, a lot of negativity in the last
12 months. Sadness, homelessness and
the general atmosphere.
FEMALE RENTER, CAIRNS, 55-64 YEARS
It’s getting worse and worse, with no hope
in the future.
MALE RENTER, NEWCASTLE, 45-54 YEARS
Australians did not attribute rising household
costs to a singular cause; instead noting a variety
of factors such as the cost of housing (rent and
mortgage interest rates), energy bills, the cost
of groceries and insurances. In the context of
increased cost-of-living pressure, Australians seem
to have lost some trust in companies “doing the
right thing” in terms of pricing, assuming most
– even essential services – are primarily profit-
driven. Price changes and increases, accompanied
by decreased product and service quality and
size (including “shrinkflation” of groceries) were
mentioned in all discussion groups.
Cost-of-living pressures have prompted Australians
to look more closely at their household income
and budget and have driven many to cut down on
expenses wherever possible. Renters were likely to
have made sacrifices such as reducing purchases
of pre-made food or drinks and shopping around
to get better deals. Some renters talked about bill
payment struggles and changing insurance and
utility providers due to disconnections.
The rising cost of living is putting pressure
on Australians
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 11
Australians have noticed their electricity bills going up
over the past 12 months, more so than in other years.
Some shared that their bills have nearly doubled, while
others mentioned increases of 30% year on year.
Energy bill stress was high, with focus group self-
complete activity findings showing 76% of renters and
54% of homeowners had experienced moderate to high
bill stress over the past 12 months (63% overall), with
higher bill stress felt in Newcastle (82%) and Adelaide
(77%). The self-complete activity also revealed that the
average energy bill for the last quarter was $548, and
higher on average among those who had experienced
moderate to high bill stress in the last 12 months ($579).
Many participants mentioned receiving a rebate from
the Australian Government of $300 in 2024-25
which was felt to have little to no impact. Queensland
participants noted some relief through a $1,000
government rebate. However, despite the rebate relief,
some raised concerns of monopolistic energy supply,
limiting choice and competition.
Interestingly, despite some states offering rebates, and
incentives for purchasing new appliances (e.g. Retailer
Energy Productivity Scheme in South Australia, Energy
Savings Scheme in New South Wales), this was not
mentioned by anyone in either the quantitative nor the
qualitative research.2
I live on my own, and only I have gas
hotplates and gas hot water. It seems like
it has gone up a lot. To the degree where I
decrease my usage now.
FEMALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 45-54 YEARS
I normally don’t ever have to ring and get
an extension. It happened to me only once
this year. I manage it but I have to keep
finding ways.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, MELBOURNE, 65-74 YEARS
“You always have to keep that rainy day
money aside just in case.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
We’ve been super lucky in Queensland
because we got the $1,000 rebate, so I have
got the air conditioning on already, which
normally I am very careful about – not leaving
it on, cause electricity is normally just so
expensive here.
MALE RENTER, CAIRNS, 35-44 YEARS
There is no competition here as well.
Whereas in Brisbane there are multiple
suppliers. When I was in Brisbane, my rates
were way cheaper than it is here.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, CAIRNS, 25-34 YEARS
Energy bill-shock is widespread
MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 12Consumer Policy Research Centre
Many participants reported implementing energy-saving
measures to curb their energy costs, such as limiting
heating and cooling, running appliances during off-
peak hours, and relying on insulation to retain heat and
reduce energy costs.
We never run air conditioning at night,
because the insulation allows us not to
worry about it.”
FEMALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 45-54 YEARS
Renters are less in control of the energy efficiency of
their home, and generally unable to take steps such as
installing insulation, and improving large devices such as
pre-installed air conditioning units, ovens or stovetops.
As a result, many renters reported taking drastic steps
and enduring tough conditions to minimise energy
usage, including:
• using lamps rather than overhead lighting or only
sparingly using lights
• showering in off peak times only
• using only the cold wash function on their washing
machine
• using tape to block draft from doors, windows, holes
in walls or ceilings
• not using heating and cooling when it is needed most
• using a fan as an alternative to air conditioning
• sleeping in the living room on very hot days because it
is cooler than the bedroom
• sleeping under a wet towel
• turning off appliances such as internet modems
• air drying rather than using a clothes dryer
• watching tv from bed under an electric blanket rather
than watching tv in the living room and using a heater
• wearing additional layers of clothing instead of using
a heater, and
• closing the blinds when the heater is on.
During the summer we use just the fan as
much as we can. When the house is like 45
degrees, we don’t have any air conditioning in
the bedrooms, we can’t sleep in the nighttime
because it’s too hot. We end up camping in
the living room and use the air conditioning
only for that night.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 35-44 YEARS
I think twice before I put the heater on.
I turn the lights off in the evening rather than
having them on. I never used to be like that,
but I feel like I am quite frugal now – if I can –
in my energy usage.
FEMALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 45-54 YEARS
Renters take drastic steps to reduce
their energy usage
MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 13Consumer Policy Research Centre
Australians were unlikely to feel that they fully
understand what contributes to their household energy
consumption. Many generally lack the ability to measure
the impact of their actions on their energy consumption
or bill size. Some just look at the size of their bills in
monetary value, and do not focus on consumption.
Others find that factors including quarterly billing,
changes in seasons, and changes in energy tariffs and
pricing make it difficult to identify and understand the
impact, if any, that their actions have on their bills.
I will do little things, but it seems like it goes
up regardless. In addition to using LED lamps,
in summer using roller shades, instead of
cooling. But the bills keep going up.
MALE HOMEOWNER, MELBOURNE, 45-54 YEARS
The increase in bills outweighs what we’re
trying to do.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Many participants admitted to a lack of understanding
of which appliances use the most energy in their
household. They admitted finding it difficult to monitor
and understand the information provided (e.g. via the
Energy Rating or other sources). Some try to use their
bill to monitor energy use; however, quarterly billing
gives too infrequent information to effectively monitor
changes in energy use. Some Victorian participants
reported using an app connected to their smart meter
that enables them to analyse their electricity usage,
seemingly benefiting some by revealing what appliances
are the most energy-intensive.
Few Australians have experienced bill stability after
taking action to reduce their energy consumption in
light of increasing energy prices. Australians discussed
that this can be demotivating to miss out on monetary
savings that they were hoping and planning for through
sacrificing energy usage and comfort.
Australians need clearer, more immediate ways to track
their energy use, including simpler energy consumption
information on appliances, to feel confident their actions
can make a difference. When energy-saving efforts are
visible and understandable, people are more likely to
stay engaged and motivated.
I find the star rating stuff on appliances, it’s
sometimes hard to know. Because you can’t
compare two appliances. You just buy it and
hope. You don’t really know.
MALE HOMEOWNER, MELBOURNE, 45-55 YEARS
The price is going up so fast. I had an
argument with the energy company, and they
said: yeah, we can see you have cut down. And
I said: but your prices have gone up so much.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, MELBOURNE, 65-74 YEARS
Trying to save energy does not always
result in a lower energy bill
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 14
What does the large
appliance point of sale
look like?
There is an overwhelming amount of information and
marketing at the point of sale, but very little of it is regulated.
Green claims were present on two in five appliance displays
and close to a third of sales assistants relied on green claims
present on appliances to determine energy efficiency.
2
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 15
How prevalent are green claims at the
point of sale?
Vague “energy efficient”,
“environmental”, “eco” claims
were found on large appliances
at two in five stores
Overall, 39% of stores had green claims on display at
the point of appliance sale. Of note, large national
stores (Harvey Norman, JB Hi-Fi and The Good Guys)
showed large concentrations of green claims, as
did online marketplaces (including Kogan, MyDeal,
and Catch of the Day). Small independent electrical
stores showed lower proportions of green claims on
appliances, and were less likely to rely on marketing
materials in general.
Figure 1. Proportion of appliances displaying green claims
(mystery shop of n=120 stores in total
Mystery shoppers recorded a greater saturation of
green claims on air conditioners and clothes dryers.
This a notable finding given research showing air
conditioners and clothes dryers are among the most
energy-intensive appliances in an average home. It’s
not a coincidence these are the appliances most likely
to display a green claim.3
When mystery shoppers asked “Is there an entry-
level version that would suit my circumstances?” the
consensus among sales assistants was that entry-level
appliances are not energy efficient, and more than a
quarter of sales assistants aimed to upsell to mystery
shoppers (27%).
Figure 2. Green claims on
display, by appliance type
(mystery shop of n=120 stores in total)
*Caution interpreting findings, sample size lower than 30
*Caution interpreting findings, sample size lower than 30
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 16
When mystery shoppers asked sales assistants for an
appliance that is “eco-friendly, good for the environment
and my energy bills”, 41% of sales assistants relied on the
Energy Rating.
The team member said to look at the energy
rating sticker on the fridge and said many
brands had 4 stars.
MYSTERY SHOPPER, FRIDGE, SYDNEY
However, 32% relied on vague green terms, such as
“eco-friendly”, “saves energy”, “efficient” and "green”
certifications (see Figure 3). Larger national store sales
assistants were more likely to draw upon the marketing
materials and least likely to use the regulated Energy
Rating Label.
The sales assistant was strong in
recommending the Westinghouse 503L as
being the most eco-friendly.
MYSTERY SHOPPER, FRIDGE, BRISBANE
Team member showed me and suggested
the Westinghouse quad door fridge. The
Westinghouse has a 4 star energy rating,
good for the environment.
MYSTERY SHOPPER, FRIDGE, ADELAIDE
Sales assistants tended to point shoppers towards
LG, Hisense, Haier, and Westinghouse when asked
for appliances that are “eco-friendly, good for the
environment and energy bills”. However, some sales
assistants also recommended gas, and appliances with
4-5 star Energy Ratings.
Gas recommended for eco-friendly, ASKO
brand $2,399 Gas cooktop.”
MYSTERY SHOPPER, OVEN, ADELAIDE
The team member said they had a good one
and showed the Whirlpool 10kg and showed it
had a 4-star energy rating.
MYSTERY SHOPPER, WASHING MACHINE, SYDNEY
The salesperson response to eco friendly
was washing machines necessary don't have
eco friendly in terms of machine but it is eco
friendly for the clothes. Salesperson told it’s
good for clothes and it’s energy efficient and
good for environment.
MYSTERY SHOPPER, WASHING MACHINE, MELBOURNE
What information do sales assistants use
to sell appliances?
Figure 3. Green claims on
display, by appliance type
(mystery shop of n=120 stores in total)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 17
Durability information is missing
at the point of sale
When mystery shoppers asked sales assistants about
the durability of appliances, sales assistants expressed
much longer durability expectations (7.8 years on
average) compared to the manufacturer’s warranties
(3.9 years on average).
Almost all sales assistants were certain that the
appliances could be repaired in Australia (94%), and
86% were certain that spare parts are also available
domestically.
More than half of the sales assistants mentioned an
extended warranty, unprompted (57%).
They said the fridge should last much more
than the warranty. They said Hisense was a
reputable brand from China and they made
good quality fridges.
MYSTERY SHOPPER, FRIDGE, SYDNEY
Figure 4. Sales assistants
mentioning extended
warranty (mystery shop of
n=120 stores in total)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 18
What regulation do Australians want
and expect?
Australians support mandatory
regulations for appliance labelling
Overall, 85% agreed that Australians would make
better purchasing decisions if products had clear and
trustworthy labelling on durability, repairability, and
energy efficiency.
Eighty-two percent agreed that the government should
introduce mandatory regulations for appliance labelling
at the point of sale.
Older age groups (Gen X and Boomers / Pre-boomers)
tended to show higher levels of agreement with
regulation of information at the point of sale.
They all sound wonderful but are they
backed by any government backed tick?
FEMALE RENTER, CAIRNS, 25-34 YEARS
Figure 5. Support for regulation of
appliance labelling
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 19
Australians want a durability rating
Overall, 85% agreed that manufacturers should be
required to disclose the expected lifespan of an
appliance, and 83% believe that appliance labels should
include standardised durability ratings.
Support for repairability labelling was also strong, with
close to eight in 10 agreeing that labels should clearly
state whether an appliance can be repaired with readily
available parts, and close to three quarters agreed with
the need of a repairability score.
Again, older age groups (Gen X and Boomers /
Pre-boomers) were more supportive of manufacturer’s
disclosing this information and government regulation,
reinforcing the recent departure of a repair culture in
newer generations.
Figure 6. Support for durability and
repairability information
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 20
Regulation of green claims
is needed
The qualitative research found that participants
tended to think that some wording is regulated, but
they couldn’t agree on which words were or were not
underpinned by regulation. Many participants assumed
that if a certain word was used then it is true and
certified.
They would have to have some sort of
environmental plan to be able to say that.
MALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
'Eco' is more trustworthy. For example, if
there is an Eco Mode, I can see that.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
Seven in 10 Australians are aware the Energy Rating is
regulated (71%); however, Gen Z and Gen Y respondents
were least likely to believe this is regulated.
More than half believe the manufacturer’s warranty is
regulated (56%), of note Boomers / Pre-boomers, Gen
X and Gen Y respondents. Interestingly, close to half
believe that at least one form of vague green claim is
regulated (48%). The most common misconception is
that the word “efficient” is regulated (24%), followed by
the word “sustainable” (18%).
This aligns with CPRC’s 2022 research into green
claims, that many people believe information has been
vetted before a product goes on sale.4
The word ‘efficient’ is more trusted and
regulated than ‘eco’ and ‘environmental’.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
Figure 7. Misconceptions of labelling regulation
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 21
There is strong support for stricter regulation of green
claims, with 82% in agreement that companies should
be banned from using vague terms like “eco-friendly” or
“green” unless they meet strict, regulated criteria.
Australians also showed support for ex-ante
obligations, with 80% wanting manufacturers to
submit proof of environmental claims, and 79%
wanting an independent regulatory body to oversee
the accuracy of claims.
Figure 8. Perspectives of greenwashing regulation
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 22
3
A deep dive into
green claims and
vague information
at the point of sale
Research participants were shown different images from
real world points of sale collected in the mystery shop.
In focus groups, we asked participants to rate each purchase
factor in terms of its importance when buying an appliance.
The survey derived relative importance of each purchase
factor to determine a hierarchy of most to least important.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 23
How important is energy efficiency
information on large appliances?
The role and perceptions of the
Energy Rating
The quantitative findings revealed that the Energy
Rating was considered most important by 36% in the
purchase of a fridge (36% importance), and by 40% in
the purchase of a washing machine (40% importance).
The qualitative self-complete also found that the
Energy Rating was ranked the most important
purchase consideration (96% of all participants rated
the Energy Rating as very important).
While the Energy Rating serves as a primary reference
for energy efficiency, the method of using it differs.
Australians reported using either the stars or the
consumption number (kWh). In general, the stars are
used for a quick and easy comparison or check by
people who do less research, whereas consumption is
used by more detail-oriented researchers and price-
sensitive buyers.
I wait for the stars to tell me that.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Few participants expressed scepticism about the
rating’s accuracy and its relevance in assessing actual
cost savings. There were some participants who raised
the possibility of “running costs” as beneficial, which
the current system does not readily provide.
While most assumed the Energy Rating was
independent and regulated, there were some
questions around what the standard is for the
Energy Rating and who signs off on it – e.g. questions
included “Is it a Government mandate?”
Interestingly, Gen Z Australians were significantly less
likely to use the Energy Rating for any large appliance
purchase.
Are these backed by any government
standard or tick?
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Figure 9. Importance
of Energy Rating
(qualitative research with
n=49 Australians)
Figure 10. Utility of Energy
Rating - most important factor
(quantitative research with
n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 24
How are green claims received by
Australians?
There is a growing concern among Australian
consumers that certain types of vague green
information and claims may lack substantiation,
potentially misleading the increasing numbers of
Australians who are interested in making sustainable
choices for themselves and/or the environment.
80% of all participants in our focus groups responded
positively to at least one type of vague green claim
if buying a fridge. The survey showed that green
claims had an overall importance (utility) of 13% (i.e.
considered most important by 13%) in the purchase of
a fridge, and 11% utility in the purchase of a washing
machine. Overall, younger Gen Z Australians were more
likely to give green claims more importance in purchase
decisions compared to their older counterparts.
Energy savings and comparison
claims
Many responded positively to the use of specific
energy saving information, as they use statistics, and
reference data, having the appearance of being backed
by scientific evidence. In general, more technically-
savvy or analytically-minded Australians were most
likely to be attracted to these green claims. Even
though most Australians did not read the fine print,
this type of green claim was regarded as more credible
due to its specificity.
While energy comparison claims were perceived
as most important, in both the qualitative and
quantitative stages, some were still sceptical due to the
feeling of important information being obfuscated.
59.9[%], the eco mode, yeah I am looking
at those first.
FEMALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 25-34 YEARS
From the small print I know they are only
comparing to themselves. Because of the
small print I basically ignore it.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
The survey showed that energy savings / comparison
claims had 8-9% importance overall.
Figure 11. Importance of
energy comparison claims
(qualitative research with n=49
Australians)
Figure 12. Utility of Energy comparison
claims - most important factor
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 25
Buzz words
While 33% of participants in the qualitative stage
rated “eco” claims as important, there is some
scepticism regarding terms like "eco mode" or “eco
wash“. Australians questioned if these words mean the
appliance is genuinely efficient or if this is marketing.
Overall, the choice experiment identified that words
such as “eco” or “sustainable” had a lower importance
compared to other green claims. They were deemed
the most important purchase factor for 1-3% of
Australians, which shows that when used, this is
mostly in conjunction with other information deemed
more important. While the utility metrics appear
small, at the population level, the number of Australian
households potentially misled by these vague green
claims each time they buy a new appliance equates to
between 105,000 and 315,700.5
Figure 13. Examples of “eco” claims
Figure 16. Examples of “sustainable” /
environmental claims
Figure 14. Importance
of “eco” claims
(qualitative research with
n=49 Australians)
Figure 15. Utility of “eco” claims- most important
factor (quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
Figure 17. Importance
of “sustainable” /
environmental claims
(qualitative research with
n=49 Australians)
Figure 18. Utility of sustainablity claims
- most important factor
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 26
“Smart” claims
While “smart” / “savvy” / “intelligence” claims are
not necessarily considered green claims, Australians
perceive them to be closely related, in that they
nearly always reference energy consumption. The
survey revealed that features and smart technology
in appliances is most important to 14% of fridge
buyers, and 6% of washing machine buyers. However,
Australians were divided in how to interpret claims
about intelligence and smart features.
“Smart technology” is something that is especially
remembered by Australians who enjoy using technology
such as apps to control their appliances. They believe it
shows that a brand is using good or modern technology,
and that it might be used to help make devices energy
efficient.
I would buy something with better tech over
something else.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 35-44 YEARS
However, there is some scepticism, with some
Australians feeling that labels featuring words such as
“smart”, “intelligent”, “savvy” linked to energy claims
provides insufficient information, and has the potential
to mislead Australians.
They are buzz words. Another marketing
ploy. But if they explain it, what technology is
used, then that can be useful.
MALE RENTER, NEWCASTLE, 25-34 YEARS
Smart… to me that wouldn’t be something
that is less energy consuming…more
technology.
FEMALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 35-44 YEARS
Green symbolism
The use of colours, imagery and symbols to convey
environmental impacts and energy efficiency was found
to be widespread in the mystery shop. Commonly
observed colours include greens and blues, with
imagery commonly depicting leaves, trees and grass.
Common symbols used included leaves, trees, light
bulbs, water drops, and combinations of these (see
Figure 21). This is consistent with previous CPRC
research findings.6
Australians in the qualitative stage responded
positively to green colours and environmental
imagery, interpreting these symbols as indicators of
environmental responsibility.
While some homeowners were sceptical of any
marketing materials and used brand loyalty as a driver
of purchase, many of the homeowners expressed trust
in symbols including leaves.
Renters also echoed these sentiments that green is a
useful colour, and leaves and trees are useful imagery
to signal environmentally friendly appliances.
I pick up on green all the time, I’m so drawn
to the green.
MALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Figure 19. Importance of
"smart" claims (qualitative
research with n=49 Australians)
Figure 20. Utility of "smart" technology and
features in general - most important factor
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 27
Environmental ventures and
investment by companies
In the qualitative stage, many Australians showed
positivity towards environmental and sustainability
ventures disclosed by manufacturers and did not
seem to question them, taking them at face value,
e.g. planting trees. Often used by consumers in
conjunction with other considerations, these are
signals that reinforce the green halo attributed
to companies, as we know consumers take these
statements and claims at face value.
I look for something tangible, for example,
planting trees.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 35-44 YEARS
That’s why I changed phone network. They
plant a tree every time you recharge.
FEMALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Figure 21. Examples of colours and symbols photographed in the mystery
shop at the point of appliance display (mystery shop of n=120 stores in total)
Figure 22. Importance of environmental venture claims
(qualitative research with n=49 Australians)
Figure 23. Utility of environmental venture
claims - most important factor
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 28
Would Australians pay for an appliance
with a green claim?
Overall, 75% of Australians would be willing to pay more
for a fridge displaying a green claim, and 77% would be
willing to pay more for a washing machine displaying a
green claim (compared to the same model without this
information).
The claims generating the highest willingness to pay
were vague claims featuring the words “efficiency”
or “eco”.
Figure 24. Willingness
to pay more for different
types of green claims
(quantitative research with
n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 29
84% of Australians would be willing to
pay more for a fridge and/or washing
machine displaying a green claim
Looking across appliance purchases in
aggregate, more than four in five Australians
would be willing to pay more for a fridge and/or
washing machine displaying a green claim.
When extrapolated to the Australian population, based
on household projections for 2025, this amounts to a
total of 8.8 million households that would be willing to
pay more money for a fridge and/or washing machine
displaying a green claim.7
Given these findings it is even more important to
ensure these terms are comparable, reliable and
verifiable so that the consumer’s choice is not made
in vain.
Figure 25. Willingness
to pay more for a green
claim on either appliance
(quantitative research with
n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 30
How much would Australians pay for an
appliance with a green claim?
Overall, the proportion of additional money (on top of
the unique custom selected base price) that the 84% of
Australians willing to pay extra would pay, was found to
be 10.3% extra.8
The additional amount Australians are willing to pay
ranges from $1-$3,000 (after excluding outliers),
averaging an additional $138 per appliance
(median: $80). The claims generating the highest
proportion of additional funds were again the “eco”
and “efficiency” claims.
Figure 26. Proportion additional willing to pay
for different types of green claims across a
fridge or a washing machine
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
Figure 27. Amount of
additional money Australians
are willing to pay
S
U
S
T
A
I
N
A
B
L
E
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 31
How much do green claims cost
Australians per year?
Overall, 84% of Australians indicated they would be
willing to pay more for a fridge and/or washing machine
if it displayed a green claim (based on an aggregation
of the ten green claim examples they were shown). On
average they told us they’d be willing to pay $138 more
for a fridge or washing machine with a green claim,
compared to the same appliance with no green claim.
Based on 2025 household projections from the
ABS 2021 census figures, combined with the 84% of
Australians willing to pay more and the amount of
money they indicated they’d be willing to pay ($138 on
average per green claim), if these households bought a
new fridge or washing machine within the same year,
Australians overall would be out of pocket $1.2 billion
in total.9
If a scenario is applied that every Australian household
experiences one appliance breakage every 10 years
(without repair), the money wasted on buying
appliances with green claims amounts to $122 million
per year.
If we apply a scenario that every Australian household
experiences one appliance breakage every 5 years, this
amounts to wastage of $244 million per year on buying
appliances with green claims.
Purchasing a long-lasting appliance is both a cost-
saving and waste-reducing choice for individual
Australians and the broader community. Durable
products reduce the need for frequent replacements,
saving consumers money over time while also cutting
down on environmental waste and resource use.
Encouraging a mindset that values longevity over
short-term convenience can help shift Australia
away from a ‘use and throw’ culture toward more
sustainable, considered consumption.
Figure 28. Formula for calculating cost to
Australians of green claims displayed on fridges
and washing machines
84% Misled
Figure 29. $ (000,000) wasted per year modelled
on different breakage schedules
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
Scenario applied: Time (in years) for a fridge / washing machine
to break in Australia
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 32
Do Australians have
the information they
want and need when
buying a large home
appliance?
Australians report using a mix of online and in-store
research before purchasing a large home appliance.
Energy efficiency is valued, but it competes with
other priorities such as reliability and price.
4
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 33
In discussions, homeowners appeared more likely to seek
advice from store staff and consider brand reputation,
durability and long-term value. In contrast, renters
appeared to be more heavily influenced by budget,
often prioritising affordability over brand or additional
features, looking to customer reviews in combination
with store discounts and sales promotions.
[I trust retail assistants because] Retail
assistants are being paid and they’re trained
to have so much information.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 55-64 YEARS
We have low brand loyalty these days as we
have to be smart with our money.
FEMALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
Participants in qualitative discussion groups were
asked to rate the importance of several purchase
criteria when thinking back to when they last
purchased a fridge (in the past 12 months), or what
they’re looking for in a fridge in the next 12 months.
The Energy Rating (96%), price (89%), and size of the
appliance were the top considerations (81%), followed
by a type of green claim (80%; collected in the mystery
shop), customer reviews (77%) and brand (68%). The
full list of items and associated responses are shown
overleaf.
What purchase criteria are most
important to Australians?
Figure 30. Top 10 pieces
of information valued
by Australians when
purchasing a new fridge
(qualitative research with n=49
Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 34
Figure 31. Stated importance of information when purchasing a new fridge
(qualitative research with n=49 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 35
What is the relative importance of
each purchase factor when buying
different large appliances?
In a MaxDiff choice experiment involving a series of
randomised scenarios and tasks, participants were
asked to trade off 15 different purchase factors when
buying a fridge, and a washing machine (excluding
price, style and capacity). Findings provide the relative
importance (utility) of each purchase factor compared
to all other purchase factors, when price, style and
capacity are held constant (and controlled for).
The top three most important purchase factors
were consistent across fridge and washing machine
purchases. Overall, the Energy Rating had the highest
utility in the purchase of a fridge or a washing machine
(36% and 40%, respectively). This was followed by the
appliance’s lifespan (warranty, durability rating, ease of
repairability rating), and green information and claims.
Factors receiving the lowest utility included product
award, and extended warranty (each 1-2%).
Figure 32. Importance of each purchase criterion when buying a fridge
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
Figure 32. Importance of each purchase criterion when buying a washing machine
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 36
For most Australians, a household appliance is a
significant purchase, making them want certainty about
the appliance’s lifespan. There is a general feeling that
appliances have become less reliable over the last few
decades (especially from older age groups), prompting
Australian concern in relation to replacement, wastage
and impacts on the environment. Despite the level
of interest, Australians feel they have limited useful
information to understand this important aspect.
I don’t have a good measure to be honest.
I am just a bit naïve, I think. You can read
reviews, you can look at star ratings,
whatever. At the end of the day there is just
a bit of faith. You just put a bit of trust in it
and hope you pick the right one.
MALE HOMEOWNER, MELBOURNE, 35-44 YEARS
When estimating an appliance’s lifespan, many people
rely on trusted brands or past experience (66%, mainly
older Australians), the warranty (57%), customer
reviews (50%, mainly younger Australians), and expert
reviews (33%, mainly Boomers and older). Close to
one in five would take out an extended warranty as
assurance of warranty period (19%), while others
consider brand or product awards (11%; predominantly
Gen Z and Gen Y). Few consider word of mouth,
country of manufacture, and what salespeople tell
them to determine expected lifetime (1%).
I buy brand names I guess, Miele, and Bosch,
they all have good names.
MALE HOMEOWNER, NEWCASTLE, 35-44 YEARS
Word of mouth, reviews, past experience
as well.
MALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 25-34 YEARS
Australians have limited information to
help them gauge appliance longevity
Figure 34. Current sources of durability information
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 37
Figure 35. Interest in durability and repairability information on appliances
(qualitative research with n=49 Australians)
To most Australians a household appliance is a
significant purchase in terms of budget, for which they
want certainty of appliance lifespan to avoid having to
prematurely replace such a significant and important
household item.
Wastage, in the context of household appliances,
is also top of mind for many. Having to replace an
appliance after an unreasonably short amount of time
is considered a waste of materials, having substantial
environmental detriment.
Overall, the durability and repairability of an appliance
are important factors that Australians use to determine
the longevity of their purchase, with 84% of Australians
moderately or very interested to see durability
information and 66% moderately or very interested in
repairability information when purchasing large home
appliances. This information is of particular interest to
Gen X and Boomers / Pre-boomers, and people living in
regional and remote locations.
Some believe that making this information transparent
might help to create a positive and competitive standard
for manufacturers. Others believe it would help them
determine the value for money or return on investment
of more (vs less) expensive appliances at the point
of sale. Many were very engaged with this type of
information, showing interest in how such a rating would
be calculated, and what input data could be used.
I want to know how they are cooking that
number up.
MALE HOMEOWNER, NEWCASTLE, 25-34 YEARS
Previous sales, and number of times things
have had to be repaired, maybe they could
look at the past five years and incidences
of repair.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, NEWCASTLE, 55-64 YEARS
Australians want certainty of appliance
durability and repairability
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 38
Duration of appliance life is very
important to Australians when
buying an appliance
Length of warranty, known to be the proxy for the life
of the appliance had 19% importance (utility) when
purchasing a washing machine, or 12% when buying
a fridge.
However, when included with other indicators of
appliance lifespan (i.e. warranty, durability rating, and
ease of repairability rating), the overall importance
increased to 24% for washing machine purchases,
and 18% for fridge purchases, demonstrating the
importance of durability to Australians. Looking by
the projected number of households for 2025 of
10,524,034, we can estimate that between 1.9 and 2.5
million households would find information on appliance
durability the most important when buying a large
appliance.10
Other proxies for quality, and therefore durability,
include brand and country of manufacture. When
combining these two factors alone, this gives the
importance of 10% for both appliances. However, when
aggregating the five factors known to impact product
durability expectations, these factors constitute 34%
importance in a washing machine purchase, and 28%
in a fridge purchase; rivalling the importance of the
Energy Rating (see Figure 36).
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 39
Green claims are deemed important
in purchase decisions despite being
vague
Overall, green claims were found to have 13%
importance (2nd most important factor) when buying
a fridge, and 11% importance when purchasing a
washing machine (3rd most important factor).
Based on household projections, we can estimate that
between 1.2 and 1.4 million households would be likely to
be misled by vague green claims, finding these the most
important in a purchase decision for a large appliance.
The most important type of green claim was found to
be an energy saving or comparative claim, e.g. “Save
44.8% energy” (9% importance in a fridge purchase);
“59% less energy consumption” (8% importance in a
washing machine purchase). The other types of green
claim have between 1% and 3% importance; however,
this still equates to between 105,000 and 315,700
households in Australia being misled by these vague
green claims.11
Gen Z respondents appear to be least interested in
the Energy Rating. Overall, compared to their older
counterparts, Gen Z and Gen Y respondents found
more importance in green claims, appliance features
and technology, customer reviews, extended warranty
and brand/product awards. In contrast, Gen X and
Boomers / pre-boomers found more importance in
indicators of the length of the appliance’s life, and the
brand / country of manufacture (see Table 1).
Findings suggest a generational shift in appliance
purchasing drivers, where Gen Z’s low interest in the
Energy Rating may reflect a lack of exposure, unlike
Gen X and Boomers who recall its introduction and
integration into household decision-making since the
late 1980s and early 1990s. For younger generations,
green claims, features, and social proof (e.g. reviews,
awards) may be more influential than the Energy Rating
which is not as prominent at the point of purchase
as other marketing. Further, older generations may
prioritise longevity, brand and origin due to higher
brand loyalty, life stage, and greater financial capacity.
Figure 36. Aggregated importance / utility of purchase factors
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 40
Figure 37. Usefulness of durability information display
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
Participants were asked to rate a series of three different types of durability label displays, based on
the existing French Durability Index.12 Participants were shown three different concepts for a durability
label, including a star rating, a rating out of ten, and the number of years. In general, all displays scored
closely in terms of perceived usefulness (84-86% moderately – very useful). This demonstrates that that
style and format don’t necessarily matter as long as information is clear and comparable.
What could a durability label look like?
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 41
5
What do Australians
do when a large
appliance breaks?
There is widespread uncertainty and confusion about
consumer rights under Australian Consumer Law (ACL),
particularly regarding consumer protections beyond the
manufacturer’s warranty period.
Most Australians are sceptical of the manufacturer’s
warranty covering repairs or remedies beyond the
standard period, prompting them to consider extended
warranties or insurance, or appliance replacement.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 42
Most Australians do not know their
consumer rights
When an appliance fails within the warranty period
(or just after), some Australians contact the retailer
and others contact the manufacturer for assistance;
however, many are unsure of their rights, or how to get
a satisfactory remedy.
Consumer law dictates a standard amount
of time.
MALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE 45-54 YEARS
Some parts are government mandated
that they have to have certain amount of
warranty.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
Australians often buy an extended
warranty for peace of mind
Some Australians purchase extended warranties
for peace of mind or when the costs are seen to be
reasonable, others are dismissive of them and would
never or very rarely purchase them.
Australians tend to balance the price of the extended
warranty with the price of the product, basing their
decision on perceived value, the cost and perceived
benefit.
That’s what a lot of the extended warranties
are, wearing the costs of the repairs.
MALE HOMEOWNER, NEWCASTLE, 35-44 YEARS
If it’s (the appliance) $500 I might not
consider… if I’m paying $4,000, I would want
extra cover.
FEMALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS OLD
Frustration and scepticism in relation to warranty
periods and processes (e.g. retailers or manufacturers
reneging on covering many product failure situations,
working the fine print) are common reasons why some
Australians are compelled to buy extended warranties
to bridge gaps in uncertainty and standard Australian
protections.
In essence, Australians are often feeling pushed to
buy their way into certainty instead of relying on the
consumer rights they have available for free because
of lack of clarity on what is covered and for how long.
With consumer guarantees also not enforceable by a
regulator, purchasing an extended warranty, in effect,
is a consumer buying the company’s commitment to
take action when things go wrong.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 43
Australians are pushed to choose appliance
replacement over repair
Despite the cost-of-living crisis, Australia suffers from
a limited repair culture, especially in recent decades
in response to vast improvements in technology and
increased manufacturing and supply of lower cost
materials. When an appliance fails after the warranty
period, many Australians will seek a replacement in
preference to getting the appliance repaired. Group
discussions revealed a general belief that appliances are
not made to be repairable.
Some Australians believe manufacturers intentionally
shorten appliance lifespans by using cheaper materials
and technologies, as well as embedding technological
obsolescence to align with the warranty running out.
This uncertainty leaves many Australians feeling
unsupported and reinforces the trend of replacing
appliances rather than repairing them.
I feel like for some things you just can’t repair
it. They just make it unrepairable, so you buy
a new one.
FEMALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 25-34 YEARS
Everybody seems to think nowadays that
everything is dispensable and replaceable. As
soon as something as it is faulty, get rid of it,
get something new. It’s not like the old TVs,
the old TVs, they went forever.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Repair feels expensive and
uncertain
The uncertainty of how long an appliance will last or be
supported reinforces the trend of replacing appliances
rather than repairing them.
Replacement, whether new or second hand, is
especially common in regional areas like Newcastle and
Cairns, where repair services are limited. Australians
in these areas report that product parts are harder
to source, repairs are more expensive, and repair
businesses are scarce. While some attempt ‘do-it-
yourself’ repairs, most lack the necessary skills or
resources, making new or second hand purchases
the default option. Renters, in particular, struggle
to find affordable repair services and often opt for
replacement instead.
It’s cheaper to buy a new fridge than to
buy a part.
MALE RENTER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
Finding a spare part of an appliance that is
5 years old is impossible.
MALE RENTER, CAIRNS, 25-34 YEARS
I will find out how much it is going to cost to
repair, and then I’ll determine if I think it is
worth repairing or not, versus just scrapping
it and getting a new one.
MALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 35-44 YEARS
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 44
Australians want more clarity for how
warranty periods are determined
An appliance’s warranty is generally seen as either
the time that a manufacturer expects the appliance
to last without faults or issues, and during which the
manufacturer will provide repairs or replacement in the
case any faults or issues occur. Some Australians think
the warranty represents the expected lifespan of an
appliance.
There is substantial uncertainty for how warranty
periods are determined; some assume these are based
on historical usage data, material quality, or legal
minimums. Discussion groups found that Australians
expect most entry-level household appliances to last
around 8-10 years; expectations generally higher for
ovens and split-system air conditioners (just more than
11 years on average). The average lifetime for portable
electric heaters was expected to be just under 5 years
(see Table 2).
Renters were more likely to be sceptical, have lower
expectations of the lifespan of their household
appliances, especially for appliances that they have
to bring to the rental property, e.g. fridge, washing
machine, clothes dryer and portable heater.
I assume it’s going to last until the last day of
its warranty.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, ADELAIDE, 45-54 YEARS
If it’s got a five-year warranty you can bet
your bottom dollar that it won’t last much
longer than five years.
FEMALE RENTER, MELBOURNE, 55-64 YEARS
Perspectives of the impact of more advanced
technology on an appliance’s durability were divided.
Many participants reported wariness of higher tech
appliances, feeling that increasingly complex newer
technology may provide more points for failure and
breakdown.
The more complex they get, the more things
could go wrong.
FEMALE HOMEOWNER, 35-44 YEARS
Stuff with more technology in it I would
ind it more of a risk of it not lasting as long...
or needing a repair sooner...
FEMALE RENTER, 25-34 YEARS
Table 2. Durability expectations of entry-level appliances (years)
(qualitative research with n=49 Australians)
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 45
In terms of developing a durability rating, Australians
expressed perceived usefulness of basing the rating
on information regarding the ease of maintenance and
upkeep (77%), support for diagnosis and repair (72%),
the affordability of spare parts (71%), the frequency of
failures (71%), and the availability of spare parts (71%).
Australians reported that trust in appliance durability
information should be limited to one independent,
authoritative source (e.g. a regulator such as the
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
(ACCC) or an Australian organisation such as CHOICE),
which would make product comparison not only easy,
but credible.
Figure 38. Usefulness of information to calculate durability rating
(quantitative research with n=1,500 Australians)
I'd be also interested to know who is making that number up. Is it some company that
you can pay to get a better rating?
MALE HOMEOWNER, 35-44 YEARS
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 46
What policy
and industry
improvements
are needed?
This research highlights the need for clearer product
information, improved access to affordable repair options
for Australians, and more robust Australian protections.
6
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 47
Improve energy efficiency information
and labelling at the point of sale
Establish strict regulation and
standards for commonly used
“green” terms
Marketers and businesses are tapping into this
growing desire of many Australians to actively make
energy-efficient and environmentally-conscious
choices. As a result, we are bombarded with claims
about the environmental and sustainable features
of products and services, including eco-friendly, and
energy-efficiency claims, especially prominent on large
appliances. The nature of many of these green claims
means that Australians cannot verify them. People are
left hoping that businesses are doing the right thing
and following through on their sustainable promises,
leaving them open to being misled.13
There is a lack of mandatory standardisation in green
and environmental marketing claims. Beyond the
Energy Rating Label, energy efficiency claims are often
unregulated, allowing for vague or exaggerated terms
such as “efficient”, “eco-friendly”, “sustainable”. Australia
needs to define and restrict the use of terms that are
commonly made at the point of sale but can mean very
different things across products.
We recommend that Australia follow in the footsteps
of the European Union (EU), which has taken decisive
action to stop businesses using unclear and vague
environmental terms. The EU has strengthened their
unfair trading prohibition specifically to stop businesses
from using vague claims without evidence such as
‘sustainable’, ‘eco’ or ‘green’. The Federal Government
in Australia recently committed to introducing a
ban on unfair trading and could extend this to stop
greenwashing.14
Establishing clear guidelines and minimum thresholds
(e.g. based on a regulated standard such as the Energy
Rating) for these claims would improve Australian
confidence in green claims.
Require that environmental
trustmarks are reviewed and
approved by a regulator
Environmental trustmarks or certification schemes
should be subject to a mandatory authorisation
or approval by a regulator (such as the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission) which has
demonstrated expertise in considering Australian and
public benefit outcomes. We believe it would make
the most sense and have greatest clarity if only one
scheme is allowed for each sector or product type.
Recommendation 1.
Recommendation 2.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 48
Establish a standardised durability
and repairability rating
Many Australians want to purchase sustainable
products, yet factors like spare part availability,
durability, and repairability are often not disclosed to
Australians at the point of sale. This leaves consumers in
the dark about the product’s lifespan and maintenance.
Governments in some countries, like France, are
addressing information gaps by mandating repairability
labels and developing a durability rating to inform
consumers (pictured below).15,16
The French model assesses products on five factors:
• Documentation (e.g. are repair manuals available).
• Disassembly, tools and fasteners
(e.g. if the product can be opened to self-repair,
if proprietary tools are needed, and if product
components can be separated or are glued together).
• Availability of spare parts.
• Price of spare parts.
• Product-specific aspects (e.g. software update
availability for smart TVs and phones).
Introducing a durability and repairability rating system
in Australia would help Australians make informed
choices about long-term product performance and
potential repair costs. This would provide a clearer
distinction between high-quality, long-lasting
appliances and those with shorter lifespans.
Recommendation 3.
Review the Energy Rating label
format on appliances
Australians can be confused by the Energy Rating,
especially as it doesn’t help them compare based on
the costs they will face when running an appliance.
The label should be reviewed and researched. Nearly all
Australians in our research indicated they want to know
running cost information, and the Energy Rating could
be a good vehicle for including guidance on lifetime
operating costs.
Establish a regulatory requirement
for sales assistants to undertake
energy efficiency training
Retail staff in major stores often lack adequate training
on energy efficiency standards and may prioritise
upselling over independent information provision. There
should be a regulatory requirement for energy efficiency
training, incentivising retailers to ensure staff provide
accurate information. This will be particularly crucial
for products where Governments have subsidised or
offered other incentives to purchase certain kinds of
products (e.g. Victorian Government rebates to buy
electric ovens). Governments need to arm salespeople
with knowledge to help people navigate decisions they
are being incentivised to make.
Elevate national awareness
of energy rebate programs to
maximise consumer uptake and
impact
Various Australian state governments offer rebate
schemes for new energy-efficient appliances, for
instance the New South Wales government offers
low-income, concession card holders and energy
hardship customers a 40-50% discount when replacing
their old fridge or TV with a newer, energy efficient
model, as well as discounts when installing a new
energy-efficient air conditioner. Similar schemes exist
in Victoria (Victorian Energy Upgrades), the Australian
Capital Territory (the Access to Electric Program, and
the Home Energy Support Program), Western Australia
(air conditioning rebate) and South Australia (the
Retailer Energy Productivity Scheme).17
Despite many states offering appliance rebate schemes,
few consumers are aware of them, limiting their
impact. A coordinated national awareness campaign is
needed, with clear and consistent messages on energy
bills, in stores, and through government paperwork like
vehicle registration and tenancy documents.
Retailers, comparison sites, and energy providers could
also help share this information at key decision points.
Recommendation 4.
Recommendation 5.
Recommendation 6.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 49
Incentivise industry to design durable
and repairable products
Broaden the objectives of the
Recycling and Waste Reduction
(Consequential and Transitional
Provisions) Act 2020
Designing products for longer life, reusability, or
recyclability reduces the demand for raw materials,
helping conserve finite resources like metals, minerals,
and fossil fuels.
The
Recycling and Waste Reduction (Consequential
and Transitional Provisions) Act 2020
(that repeals
the
Product Stewardship Act 2011
) was enacted to
reduce waste and prevent harmful materials from
entering landfills by promoting recycling and the
recovery of valuable materials. It provides a voluntary,
co-regulatory framework for product stewardship
schemes. In 2020 the Act was reviewed on the basis
of increasing concerns that its predominant focus is
on the end-of-life of products, whereas it should be
amended to consider the whole lifecycle.18
Manufacturers should be required to design, produce,
and manage products in a way that promotes
environmental sustainability and minimises waste, and
those that embrace whole of lifecycle thinking will not
only help protect the environment but may also gain
economic, regulatory, and reputational advantages
that position them strongly in a sustainability-focussed
market. Ultimately, manufacturers should be required
to adhere to certain standards and be transparent
about their tracking against these standards. We
believe that reasonable standards should include the
following core principles:
1. Design for durability and repairability, ensuring that
essential components are accessible and replaceable.
2. Resource efficiency, including minimising the use
of raw materials, prioritising recycled content, and
reducing energy and water consumption throughout
the product lifecycle.
3. Clear and standardised labelling of products.
4. Ensuring repair instructions are available to
Australians or third-party repairers.
Create a Government-backed
accreditation for voluntary
industry-led product stewardship
schemes, with oversight from an
independent clearinghouse
The Government should establish an independent, not-
for-profit central clearinghouse to support governance,
coordination, and accountability across voluntary,
industry-led product stewardship schemes.
The clearinghouse would be responsible for registering
and accrediting producers and stewardship
organisations, providing formal recognition of
businesses participating in product stewardship. It
would set consistent standards for data collection
and reporting, covering key metrics such as business
participation and compliance rates, product sales,
failures, recalls, repair success rates, product lifespan,
customer complaints, and recycling rates. It would
monitor this data and publish national performance
insights. All non-compliance issues would be referred
to relevant regulators. The clearinghouse should be
operated by a not-for-profit body, accredited by the
Australian Government and functioning independently
of both government and industry. Initial funding should
be provided by government to support establishment,
with ongoing operational costs covered by industry
through stewardship levies and annual registration or
compliance fees.
5. End-of-life responsibility of manufacturers to take
proactive steps to ensure products can be recycled,
reused, or safely disposed of at the end of their
lifecycle, e.g. take-back schemes or partnerships
with certified recycling facilities.
6. Good governance, with transparent reporting on the
finance, activities and outcomes of any scheme.
Recommendation 7.
Recommendation 8.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 50
Introduce legal obligations to
sell goods that meet minimum
environmental standards
Very few goods in Australia have to meet minimum
environmental standards. Under the
Greenhouse and
Energy Minimum Standards (GEMS) Act 2012
, certain
products in Australia must comply with Minimum
Energy Performance Standards (MEPS). Products
displaying an Energy Rating (as regulated by the
Australian Energy Regulator) must meet the stated
energy efficiency level as part of their description and
performance claims.19
To support this, the ACL could be enhanced to require
products to meet ‘sustainability by design’ criteria
by extending the definition of “acceptable quality” to
include a standard of environmental performance. This
would protect Australians from being misled by false
or misleading claims and also encourage businesses to
improve their environmental performance.
Introduce a legal obligation to sell
goods with a software update
guarantee
Many products now rely on software for which regular
updates are crucial for functionality, security, and
performance. However, the ACL currently lacks
explicit provisions for software updates on products
with embedded software, raising two main concerns.
The first concern is ambiguity on if faulty software
is covered under Australian guarantees, and the
second concern is that manufacturers aren't legally
obligated to provide software updates as they are with
spare parts. The ACL should be amended to require
manufacturers to provide essential software updates
for a reasonable duration, including product labelling
to inform Australians about the duration of security
updates at the point of sale. This would align with
broader government efforts to enhance cybersecurity
standards.
Recommendation 9.
Recommendation 10.
Make it easier for
Australians to get
products fixed
Incentivise Australians to choose
repair over replacement
Australians should have the right to repair their
lawfully purchased products directly, or by selecting
a repair service of their choice, as opposed to only
returning to the manufacturer or manufacturer-
approved providers for a repair.
Under a new right to repair directive active in Europe,
consumers are incentivised to choose repair instead of
replacement via a number of means:
• Manufacturers are required to provide timely and
cost-effective repair services and inform consumers
about their rights to repair.
• Goods repaired under the warranty will benefit
from an additional one-year extension of the legal
guarantee.
• After the legal guarantee has expired, the
manufacturer is still required to repair common
household products.
• Consumers may also borrow a device whilst theirs
is being repaired or, if it cannot be fixed, opt for a
refurbished unit as an alternative.20
Similar to the European directive, Australian
consumers should be incentivised to choose repair
instead of replacement through stronger repair rights.
This needs to include measures to make repairs
timely and effective and allow Australians to borrow a
common device during the repair period. These rights
should be explicitly articulated in the ACL.
Recommendation 11.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 51
Ban extended warranties that
offer no additional value to
Australians beyond the ACL
The core of the Australian guarantees is that
products must be of acceptable quality, including
“reasonable durability”, meaning a product should
last long enough to serve its intended function.
While this flexibility is helpful, it leads to uncertainty
about what “reasonable durability” means, especially
for high-cost items that fail after several years or
second-hand purchases.
Companies can easily mislead customers in the
purchase process when they sell an extended warranty
that offers little or no additional protections that
someone already has access to under the ACL. As a
result, Australians can often incur unnecessary costs
by purchasing extended warranties, believing this
will ensure easier claim acceptance and a smoother
process than relying on their Australian guarantee
rights. In effect, extended warranties are often offered
as a way of selling certainty to Australians for the
rights they already have.
Extended warranties that offer no additional value
to Australians beyond rights already granted under
the ACL should be explicitly banned under an unfair
trading practices prohibition.
Recommendation 12.
Enhance regulator powers to
enforce Australian guarantees
and seek pecuniary penalties
Australia faces significant challenges in ensuring
Australians have access to clear, reliable, and
actionable information when purchasing major
household appliances. Gaps in energy labelling
enforcement, Australian protection, and retailer
accountability contribute to ongoing confusion and
suboptimal purchasing decisions.
In addition to enhancing the powers of state regulators
to resolve individual disputes relating to Australian
guarantees, there have also been calls to strengthen
the enforcement powers of the ACCC for systemic
complaints relating to these guarantees. In late 2024,
the government undertook a consultation process
regarding reforms to penalties if businesses breach
the ACL under the Australian guarantees.21 However,
currently, the ACCC or state and territory fair trading
regulators are still unable to seek penalties or court
orders that would provide a specific or broader
deterrent effect to industry to improve product
performance against Australian guarantees. With no
recourse for businesses to comply with Australian
guarantees, there is little to no incentive to follow
through with this Australian protection.
Recommendation 13.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 52
Appendix -
Detailed methodology
7
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 53
Methodology
This study employed a three-stage mixed-
methodology approach to investigate Australian
interactions with information at the point of
sale when purchasing large appliances. The
methodology incorporated both qualitative
and quantitative elements to provide a
comprehensive understanding of Australian
perceptions and expectations of appliance
labelling, purchase decision-making processes,
as well as an audit of the retail environment.
The Consumer Policy Research Centre (CPRC)
established and coordinated a Reference Group to
ensure rigorous research design and policy relevance.
The Reference Group comprised experts in Australian
policy, energy, financial counselling, social research,
and product research, representing the following
organisations (in alphabetical order): Care Financial
Counselling, CHOICE, the Climate Council, Energy
Consumers Australia, Justice and Equity Centre, and
the Australian Energy Regulator.
The group provided guidance on the research
instruments, research outcomes, and policy
recommendations.
The study and all research instruments were designed
by CPRC, including mystery shop protocols and scripts,
qualitative discussion guide and self-complete activity,
and the quantitative questionnaire. The MaxDiff
choice experiment and willingness to pay activity
integrated into the quantitative survey were designed
in partnership with an external statistician and
quantitative expert.
Stage A. Mystery shop
Conducted in August-September 2024, the first stage
involved conducting a mystery shopping exercise and an
audit of Australian information available at the point of
purchase in large appliance retail environments, both in
physical stores and online.
The objective was to assess and audit the retail
landscape, examining how appliances were displayed
and what information was on display and available to
Australians, as well as recording interactions and advice
from sales assistants.
Sample details
To achieve a broad picture of large appliance retail
environments in lower socio-economic status areas
nationally, 120 appliances were mystery shopped; 100
across five states and 20 online.
Shoppers visited a broad range of store types in lower
socio-economic suburbs of greater metropolitan areas
in Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and Perth, and
shopped for higher energy intensive appliances such
as ovens, air conditioners / space heaters, fridges and
washing machines.
Stores visited were of the following profiles: n=73 large
national stores (n=65 in person, n=8 online), n=31 mid-
tier, state-specific stores (n=25 in person, n=6 online),
n=10 smaller, independent stores (all in person), n=6
online marketplaces
Design and process
Each mystery shopper followed a set procedure and
script to maintain comparability:
1. The shopper interacted with a sales assistant,
verbalising the script for their selected appliance.
2. The shopper then asked the sales assistant for
guidance on an appliance that “was eco-friendly, and
good for the environment and my energy bills”.
3. The shopper then observed and photographed the
point of sale, noting the presence of any “green”
information and the specifics of this information
(including but not limited to the Energy Rating,
references to “energy efficient”, the environment,
“sustainability”, “eco”).
Mystery shop analysis detail
Shoppers recorded all encounters in a questionnaire,
clearly showcasing the information observed at the
point of sale and the conversations had with sales
assistants. These conversations were then coded by a
CPRC researcher to determine frequencies of mentioning
(unprompted and prompted) certain factors.
Key metrics analysed included presence of green
information on the appliance display, coded mentions
by sales assistants of the Energy Rating, vague green
information, expected durability, ease of repair, and
extended warranties.
Each metric was quantified, and frequencies of
information encounters were analysed and reported.
In the analysis, we categorised different types of green
information into a series of common categories shown
throughout the report.
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 54
Stage B. Qualitative focus groups
with Australians
The second stage of qualitative research explored
Australian perspectives of the information they valued,
needed, and were influenced by when purchasing a
large home appliance.
This stage comprised a series of eight face-to-face 90
minute focus group discussions conducted between 10-
17 October 2024 with 49 Australians living in Adelaide,
Melbourne, Newcastle and Cairns. One group in each
state was conducted with homeowners and the other
with renters, to unpack differences in experiences,
impacts and implications of point of sale information
and green claims by home ownership status.
Participants were diverse in age, gender and financial
situation. Each participant was remunerated $100 for
their time and participation.
Target audience and sampling
The target audience for this research stage comprised
people who had purchased a new major home appliance
in the past 12 months or intended to purchase in the
next 12 months. Appliance types included electric oven,
reverse cycle air conditioner, electric space heater,
washing machine, clothes dryer and/or refrigerator.
The sample comprised lower income Australians to
highlight the experiences and attitudes of the most
financially vulnerable Australian segments (i.e. the
first two income quartiles as defined by the Australian
Bureau of Statistics (ABS).)
Instrument design and objectives
An in-depth discussion guide and private, unprompted
self-complete activity was designed to capture
participants’:
• purchase experiences, including decision-making
criteria
• recall of energy-related Australian information
• views on information Australians want and need in
purchasing a large home appliance
• reactions to the energy efficiency information and
photographs collected in Part A: Mystery Shop,
including interpretations, perceptions, expectations,
trust, confusion, questions
• information Australians need to understand energy
impact of appliances, and
• awareness and expectations of regulation in relation
to different information.
CAIRNS
POP 172K
1700km from
Brisbane
NEWCASTLE
POP 175K
170km from
Sydney
MELBOURNE
POP 5.2M
ADELAIDE
POP 1.5M
Figure 39.
Focus group locations
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 55
Qualitative analysis detail
A rigorous approach to qualitative analysis was
undertaken, to capture the depth and complexity of
different participant experiences.
The self-complete activity was analysed in a
quantitative manner, while the focus group discussions
were analysed using thematic analysis.
Thematic analysis was undertaken in both an inductive
and deductive manner – examining themes that
emerged directly from the data without predefined
hypotheses, as well as referring to research questions
and hypotheses to guide the analysis. While the
frequency and prominence of themes were considered,
emphasis was also placed on depth and significance of
themes rather than occurrence of mentions alone.
Relationships between themes were examined
to identify overarching commonalities and/or
contradictions, and differences between subgroups
(renters vs homeowners, capital city vs regional) were
explored to understand diverse viewpoints.
In this report, participants’ quotes have been used to
support key themes for each narrative, ensuring that
participants' voices were accurately represented.
Notes taken during the sessions were consolidated
to capture contextual nuances, and video recordings
of the focus group sessions were reviewed to ensure
accuracy. All videos, notes and quotes were anonymised
to protect participant confidentiality.
Stage C. Quantitative survey and
choice model
The third and last stage of the study comprised a 15
minute online quantitative survey conducted from 6-17
March 2025. The survey incorporated a MaxDiff choice
experiment, to measure the utility (relative importance)
of various purchase factors on large appliance purchase
decisions.
This stage established a hierarchy of decision-making
factors, analysing how Australians prioritised different
factors, including energy efficiency ratings, brand
preferences, durability information, and environmental
claims, when selecting appliances.
Quantitative outcomes included derived importance
of different purchase factors when purchasing a large
appliance, willingness to pay for various types of
green claims, sentiment towards green information
and marketing, attitudes towards durability and
repairability of large appliances, and perspectives of
regulation of the labelling of large home appliances at
the point of purchase.
Sample details
The target audience for the quantitative stage was
defined as non-rejectors of buying a new fridge or
washing machine, either in person at a store, or online.
This was kept purposefully broad to factor in different
reasons for purchase, e.g. sudden breakages, end of
life of appliances, upgrading appliances, need for new
technology, and so on.
The sample size was n=1,500; the resulting sample was
close to nationally representative.
For a sample of this size, the confidence interval is
5.1%, meaning that for a finding of 50%, we can be 95%
confident that the result in the broader population
would fall between 47.5% and 52.5%.
Willingness to pay activity detail
A willingness to pay (WTP) activity was included at
the start of the quantitative survey to get an initial,
unbiased measurement of the influence of green claims
on price point and willingness to pay for a fridge and a
washing machine.
Figure 40. Claims shown to participants in the willingness to pay activity
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 56
MaxDiff activity detail
In order to determine the relative importance of various
purchase factors when buying a large appliance, a
MaxDiff Discrete Choice Experiment was embedded
into the survey, after the willingness to pay activity.
The rationale behind employing a MaxDiff design is to
make respondents trade off attributes against each
other, forcing respondents to make a distinction of
the “most important” (and “least important”) purchase
factor. This model overcomes the common finding from
self-reported importance ratings where many / most
purchase factors are rated as similarly important and
the ability to differentiate is limited.
The 15 purchase factors included manufacturer’s
warranty, brand, Energy Rating, four different
types of common green claims, product features (in
general), country of manufacture, extended warranty,
award, customer reviews, smart technology, ease of
repairability rating, and durability rating. Appliance
price, style and capacity were purposefully excluded
from the MaxDiff design due to style and capacity being
controlled for, and price being tested, in the willingness
to pay activity. Participants engaged in a series of nine
modelled scenarios (tasks) per appliance, trading off
the importance of five purchase factors per scenario.
In each task, respondents were asked
“When buying a
[fridge / washing machine], what factor is most useful?
What factor is least useful?”
This was then repeated for the other appliance
type, ensuring the order of appliance exposure was
randomised across the sample.
Figure 41. Real world imagery of 15 purchase factors utilised in the MaxDiff design | Fridge stimuli
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 57
Quantitative analysis detail
Upon receipt of the survey data, the dataset was
cleaned and checked prior to analysis using Q research
software. All quantitative survey data was analysed
using descriptive techniques including cross-tabulation,
calculation of proportions and frequencies, and open-
ended questions were coded.
Analysis at the total sample level was undertaken,
followed by subgroup analysis, focussing on statistically
significant differences by:
• Age group: Gen Z (18-24 years), Gen Y (25-44 years),
Gen X (45-64 years) and Boomer / Pre-boomers (65
years or more)
• Location (metro vs regional/remote)
• Home ownership status (homeowners with or
without a mortgage vs renters)
• Equivalised household income (lower two quartiles vs
higher two quartiles), and
• Disability status (mental and/or physical impairment
/ challenge vs no impairment / challenge).
Statistically significant differences between subgroups
have been called out where they exist. If no subgroup
differences are stated in the commentary of this report,
this means any differences did not reach statistical
significance.
The sample achieved was very close to being nationally
representative. Data was RIM weighted for location
only (state and metro/regional/rural status), and
weights ranged from 0.8 to 1.9.
Washing machine stimuli
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 58
Endnotes
1. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water website: Appliances page:
https://www.energy.gov.au/households/appliances
2. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water website: Rebates and assistance page.
https://www.energy.gov.au/rebates
3. My Green Montgomery,
What uses the most energy in your home
, 2020.
https://mygreenmontgomery.org/2020/what-uses-the-most-energy-in-your-home/
4. Consumer Policy Research Centre,
The Consumer Experience of Green Claims in Australia
, December 2022.
https://cprc.org.au/report/green-claims
5. Australian Bureau of Statistics,
Household and family projections
, Australia, 2024.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/household-and-family-projections-australia/latest-release
6. Gupta, C., Bagnara, J., Parker, C., Obeid, A.K. Seeing green -
Prevalence of green environmental claims on social media
, November 2023.
https://cprc.org.au/report/seeing-green/
7. Australian Bureau of Statistics,
Household and family projections
, Australia, 2024.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/household-and-family-projections-australia/latest-release
8. Across washing machine and fridge purchases (averaging findings across green claims, price points and sizes of appliances selected),
on average Australians told us they'd pay an additional 10.3% (median: 6.25%) if the appliance displayed a green claim.
9. Australian Bureau of Statistics,
Household and family projections
, Australia, 2024.
https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/population/household-and-family-projections-australia/latest-release
10. Ibid
11. Ibid
12. Longtime Label,
Everything you need to know about the durability index
, 2024.
https://longtimelabel.com/en/news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-durability-index/
13. Gupta, C., Bagnara, J., Parker, C., Obeid, A.K. Seeing green -
Prevalence of green environmental claims on social media
, November 2023.
https://cprc.org.au/report/seeing-green/
14. Media release from the Prime Minister of Australia, 16 October 2024.
https://www.pm.gov.au/media/albanese-government-stop-rip-offs-unfair-trading-practices
15. Ifixit Europe,
The French repair index: challenges and opportunities
, 2021.
https://repair.eu/news/the-french-repair-index-challenges-and-opportunities/
16. Longtime Label,
Everything you need to know about the durability index
, 2024.
https://longtimelabel.com/en/news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-durability-index/
17. Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water website: Rebates and assistance page.
https://www.energy.gov.au/rebates
18. DCCEEW,
Review of the Product Stewardship Act 2011
, 2025.
https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/waste/publications/product-stewardship-act-review-report
19. Products can be seen here: https://www.energyrating.gov.au/industry-information/products
20. Council of the European Union, Press release (30 April 2024).
Circular economy: Council gives final approval to right-to-repair directive
.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/05/30/circular-economy-council-gives-final-approval-to-right-to-
repair-directive/
21. The Treasury,
Consumer Guarantees and Supplier Indemnification under Consumer Law
, Consultation November 2024.
https://treasury.gov.au/consultation/c2024-583535
CONSUMER POLICY RESEARCH CENTRE MISUSED AND CONFUSED | 59
CONTACT US
PO Box 621,
Collins Street West,
VIC, 8007
+61 3 9607 7101
office@cprc.org.au
www.cprc.org.au
