There is a particular kind of economic anxiety that does not show up neatly in GDP figures. It is the quiet calculation before a purchase, the holiday that gets postponed, that corporate job with a better salary, or the electric car that seems like the right thing to buy, until the price appears on the screen.
While the global economy is still growing, the backdrop is becoming much harder to read. The IMF expects global growth of 3% in 2026, while warning that the war in the Middle East, energy prices and financial-market repricing remain significant risks. The OECD's June outlook was more cautious, projecting 2.8% growth this year and noting that higher energy prices are already weighing on household demand.
For households, the practical consequence is less dramatic than a recession headline but arguably more revealing. One recent survey from Mastercard found financial wellbeing is now defined primarily by immediate security, with half of respondents stating that it meant being able to pay bills on time without stress, while building wealth came considerably further down the list, only prioritised by just over a third.
That tells us something interesting about what happens when money gets tight. People do not necessarily stop caring about what their money means, but may simply become much more selective about what deserves it.
PwC's June 2026 Market Volatility Survey found that 51% had increased their focus on budgeting, 39% had reduced discretionary spending and 29% had increased savings. Three-quarters said the behavioural changes they had made reflected lasting shifts, while 84% said they were managing their finances with greater caution. A further 76% said market volatility had made them more focused on liquidity and emergency preparedness.
That looks, at first glance, like a retreat from consumption, but there is a difference between spending less and spending without thought. That distinction matters because consumer culture has spent years telling people that purpose can be expressed through purchasing. Buy the sustainable version from ethical brands, upgrade to the product that best reflects your values, and take the meaningful trip.
However, when disposable income shrinks, that proposition becomes harder to sustain. BCG's 2026 European Consumer Sentiment Survey asked respondents what they would do with 10-15% more income, and 53% said they would put it towards saving, with groceries coming next at 38%, followed by travel at 35%.
There is a fairly profound shift hidden in those numbers. The aspiration is not necessarily to consume more, but to create enough financial breathing room that they can make choices again. While this could easily be interpreted as purpose disappearing from consumption, it could also mean people are redefining what a worthwhile use of money looks like.
This is not a modern development, either. Research into supermarket loyalty card data following the 2008 global recession found that spending on organic products fell as a share of expenditure, while the share spent on fair-trade products increased despite both generally carrying a price premium. One explanation is that the benefit being purchased was different. Organic food can offer a relatively private benefit, whereas fair trade makes the social beneficiary more visible by helping someone else receive a fairer return for their work.
More recent consumer research points in a similar direction, although with an important qualification. NielsenIQ's 2026 analysis of sustainability found that environmental concern has softened from its 2021 peak, while issues such as over-consumption, health and the effects of chemicals in food have become more prominent, suggesting sustainability is increasingly being understood through personal wellbeing and practical behaviour, rather than only through abstract concern about climate change. Similarly, BearingPoint's 2026 Sustainable Retail Barometer found that 69% of UK consumers consider sustainability when purchasing new products and are willing to pay more. At the same time, 60% are focusing on buying second-hand and repairing items rather than replacing them.
Of course, there is also a more uncomfortable truth that financial pressure can absolutely force people to compromise. The electric-car market provides a good example, and according to the International Energy Agency's Global EV Outlook, affordability remains the most commonly cited barrier to wider electric-car adoption in Europe. A 2025 survey of 3,000 EU citizens found many consumers would not pay more for a battery-electric vehicle than for a comparable combustion-engine model, while fewer than 10% of available European BEVs were priced below €30,000.
The workplace isn't exempt
The same conflict is appearing at work, too. Deloitte's 2026 Global Gen Z and Millennial Survey, based on more than 22,500 respondents across 44 countries, found that more than half of Gen Z respondents and millennials had delayed major life decisions because of their financial situation. Housing affordability also influences career decisions for substantial majorities of both generations. At the same time, only 25% of Gen Z and 21% of millennials said they preferred rapid career progression, with stability, skills and wellbeing increasingly taking precedence.
There will always be people who choose a better-paid corporate job over work they consider more socially meaningful because financial security has become the more urgent need. That is not hypocrisy, but simply a reminder that values operate within circumstances.
Perhaps the question, then, is not whether people still want meaning when money gets tight, but whether businesses have understood where meaning actually lives. For years, purpose has often been presented as something consumers can buy into. However, the evidence increasingly suggests that people want purpose to fit around real life. They want the sustainable product at a price they can afford, durability rather than another premium attached to an ethical claim, and a company making responsible choices without requiring them to make an elaborate calculation at the checkout.
When money is plentiful, almost any purchase can be made to carry a story, but when money gets tight, the story has to earn its place. That is not necessarily bad news, though. It could force purpose to become less about persuading people that consumption itself is virtuous, and more about creating things that genuinely improve lives, last longer, waste less, treat people fairly or solve a problem worth solving.
The future of meaningful consumption may therefore belong to companies that stop asking, "How can we convince people to pay more because they care?" and instead ask, "How can we make caring compatible with how people actually live?"
