Consumer Understanding Archives

A bold move into familiar territory – will it pay off?

Chipotle’s announcement to open its first restaurant in the country, which inspired its menu, raises eyebrows and expectations. Partnering with Latin American restaurant operator Alsea, the US-based chain is entering a market where culinary authenticity isn’t a differentiator; it’s the starting point. For Chipotle, this market entry isn’t just about expansion. It’s a litmus test: Can a brand that interprets Mexican cuisine resonate with consumers who live and breathe it?

The answer will depend not just on flavor but also on strategy and whether modern tools like hyper-local research and cultural intelligence can bridge the gap between inspiration and expectation.

Lessons From the First Movers

Chipotle isn’t the first American brand to try its luck in Mexico. In 1992, Taco Bell debuted in the country with ambitions just as bold. It launched with localised menu tweaks and a confident footprint, but the venture didn’t last. The brand ultimately withdrew, not because of a lack of visibility or investment, but because the offering didn’t quite land with local palates.

That chapter is often cited in business schools, but rarely for what it truly was: an early experiment in exporting food culture into a market that didn’t ask for it. The reaction underscored a gap between adaptation and resonance that modern market research now works to close.

Starbucks’ early entry into Australia offers a parallel lesson. Despite its global brand power, the company struggled to gain traction in a country with a deeply rooted, independent coffee culture. The issue wasn’t coffee quality; it was a misread of consumer behavior, expectations, and local identity. Like Taco Bell in Mexico, Starbucks in Australia became a case study in how even the most successful brands can stumble without cultural alignment.

It’s not a failure; it’s a framework, a snapshot of how global ambition once outran local alignment.

The Evolution of Market Entry Strategy

When Taco Bell opened in Mexico City in the early ’90s, global expansion followed a different playbook. Brands leaned on instinct, broad profiling, and the belief that what worked in the US would translate with minimal adjustment.

But exporting a concept doesn’t guarantee acceptance. Back then, cultural nuance often took a back seat to operational scale. Research was high-level. Brands made decisions based on economic opportunity, not emotional alignment.

That’s changed. Today, market entry starts with precision—predictive analytics to map taste profiles, behavioral segmentation to decode subcultures, and AI-powered simulations to test concepts before rollout. Tools like geo-targeted taste testing, cultural immersion labs, and brand mapping techniques that track real-time perception shifts are helping brands decode how products will land before they ever hit shelves.

In Chipotle’s case, these tools offer a sharper perspective on what Mexican consumers want and will not tolerate.

What Chipotle Brings to the Table

Chipotle isn’t entering Mexico as a fast-food chain. It is arriving as a brand that’s always walked a fine line: Mexican-inspired, never quite Mexican. Its menu leans into simplicity—burritos, bowls, and tacos built around a few core ingredients. This model resonated with US consumers seeking customisable, ingredient-forward meals. But in Mexico, where flavor, preparation, and regional identity are sacred, that same simplicity may land very differently.

Chipotle is partnering with Alsea to bridge that gap, a strategic move offering far more than logistics. Alsea operates Starbucks, Domino’s, and Burger King in Mexico. Its distribution networks, real estate expertise, and consumer insight pipelines offer Chipotle a turnkey path to localisation.

This isn’t Chipotle’s first time using a partnership-first approach. In 2023, the brand entered the Middle East through an agreement with Alshaya Group, opening restaurants in Kuwait and the UAE. There, too, Chipotle leaned on a local partner to navigate cultural preferences and consumer habits. The result? A thoughtful, localised rollout that aligned Chipotle’s “real food, responsibly sourced” ethos with regional values.

But even with the right partner, Chipotle must tread carefully. Mexican consumers know their cuisine – and they know when they’re being sold a version of it. For Chipotle, the win won’t come from mimicry. It’s not competing with Mexico’s beloved taquerias; it’s introducing a distinctly Americanised take on Mexican food. The challenge? Making that distinction matter.

It’s still unclear whether Chipotle will localise its menu for the Mexican market or keep its US offerings intact, which is an early test of how much flexibility the brand is willing to show. Will the Mexican consumer see Chipotle as a fresh alternative, or a foreign remix of something they already do better?

Chipotle’s international journey hasn’t been without its challenges. The brand has maintained a limited footprint in the UK, with around 20 locations, primarily in London, serving a niche but loyal customer base. While not a breakout success, its measured expansion offers lessons in pacing, positioning, and the importance of location strategy. That experience appears to have informed a more deliberate and partnership-driven approach in newer markets like the Middle East and now, Mexico.

Chipotle will also enter a market with an established and competitive fast-casual ecosystem. Local players like El Fogoncito and international chains like Carl’s Jr. and Subway already cater to urban consumers with varied prices and menu formats. However, the real competition may come from independent taquerias and fondas, neighborhood staples that offer affordable, regional fare with generational credibility. Chipotle must offer not just quality, but a reason to belong in Mexico’s culinary hierarchy.

Cultural Intelligence as a Competitive Edge

Culture isn’t a box to check—it’s the playing field.

The brands that succeed today don’t just bring a product; they bring a point of view. They understand how they’re seen, how authenticity is defined, and which signals matter. Cultural intelligence is the edge that separates a foreign brand from a familiar one.

For Chipotle, entering Mexico means navigating a minefield of expectations, where a single design choice or flavor decision could spark either loyalty or backlash. What looks neutral on paper can carry deep meaning on the plate.

Urban consumers in Mexico are increasingly drawn to brands that balance tradition with health-consciousness, speed, and sustainability – expectations that Chipotle must meet beyond just flavor.

This is where research evolves from insight to assurance. Ethnographic studies, in-market panels, and social listening help brands anticipate friction points before they go live. Cultural intelligence doesn’t guarantee success, but it’s often the only way to earn a second look in heritage markets.

Chipotle executives remain optimistic. The company points to the country’s familiarity with Chipotle’s ingredients and affinity for fresh food as key reasons for expansion. But that framing may miss the heart of the matter. Mexican consumers don’t reject American chains outright – Starbucks and Domino’s enjoy massive success. What they’re wary of is reinterpretation. When it comes to their culinary heritage, familiarity isn’t enough. It is identity. And that’s sacred ground.

All eyes will be on how Mexican consumers respond, because in markets where food is identity, perception can make or break the plan. Early commentary across Mexican business and food media has ranged from curiosity to skepticism, with some questioning whether Chipotle’s version of “authentic” will resonate or fall flat. That tension may be the most accurate test of the brand’s cultural fluency.

The New Rules of Global Brand Expansion

Chipotle’s Mexico debut isn’t just another store opening; it’s a bellwether moment. In markets steeped in cultural pride, success no longer hinges on menu tweaks or marketing spend. It hinges on mindset. Brands must listen, learn, and adapt before launch and long after the doors open.

Around the world, consumers are demanding transparency, local relevance, and cultural respect. They expect brands to reflect their values, not just satisfy their appetites.

The one-size-fits-all era is over. Whether entering heritage markets like Mexico, culturally complex ones like India, or hyper-digitised ones like South Korea, the strategy must start with ground-level intelligence. Brands need to know who their customers are, what they value, and when they feel seen.

In food-driven markets, that also means understanding how flavors, textures, and even aromas trigger emotional and cultural responses. Sensory research – testing taste profiles, mouthfeel, and multisensory experiences with local audiences – is emerging as a critical tool for brands looking to translate offerings across borders. It’s not just about what’s on the menu, but how it feels, smells, and satisfies in context.

The companies that thrive treat research not as a formality but as their competitive edge. Chipotle’s move into Mexico may be a test, but it could also be the new blueprint for global brand growth.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

In cafés from Stockholm to Singapore, something curious is happening to the humble latte. The milk has changed – but the meaning of what’s being poured has changed even more. Oat milk, once a fringe choice in vegan corners of Brooklyn and East London, now commands entire refrigerator shelves in mainstream supermarkets. In London alone, sales of oat milk have more than doubled in recent years, outpacing almond and soy. But its rise has sparked a question with global implications: is this just a Western infatuation – or the beginning of a broader, localised reinvention?

As plant-based milks grow in popularity, they are revealing more than just a shift in taste. They have become markers of identity, class, health politics, and cultural resistance. For younger generations in Western cities, oat milk is as much a badge of sustainability as it is a coffee additive. But in Asia, where soy and coconut milk have been kitchen staples for generations, Western brands often appear as tone-deaf outsiders. In India, almond milk is aspirational, signifying affluence and global awareness. In Japan, flavoured soy milk is sold in vending machines next to corn soup and iced matcha. Each tells a story – not just of diet, but of what progress tastes like in different corners of the world.

The Western Story: When Climate Guilt Meets Café Culture

In the West, plant-based milk has surged from niche to mainstream at breakneck speed. In the UK, oat milk has overtaken almond as the best-selling non-dairy option, with the market valued at over £146 million in 2023 and projected to reach more than £430 million by 2030—a growth trajectory that reflects not just a change in taste, but in values. In the United States, the plant-based milk market has experienced significant growth, with revenue increasing from $2.71 billion in 2024, more than doubling since 2019. This surge reflects a broader trend, as supermarkets now allocate entire aisles to milk alternatives, accommodating the rising consumer demand.

For Gen Z and Millennials, this shift is as much about values as it is about flavour. The rise of “climatarian” diets—eating based on environmental footprint—has positioned oat milk as the virtuous option. It requires far less water than almond milk (48 litres per litre vs. 1,600) and carries a lower carbon footprint than cow’s milk. Among baristas, oat milk’s texture and foam-ability have cemented its status as the café go-to.

But these motivations are not universal. Among Gen X and Boomers, plant-based milk adoption often stems from health concerns—lactose intolerance, cholesterol, weight management—rather than climate ethics. Many still view oat and almond milk as a wellness product, not a moral choice. And the taste? It’s tolerated more than it is loved.

Despite its early momentum, the plant-based milk category in the U.S. is starting to show signs of fatigue. In 2024, sales declined by 5.2%, driven more by inflation-driven price sensitivity than by waning interest. What we’re seeing at Kadence International is that consumers are making sharper trade-offs at the shelf. While oat milk is still seen as on-trend, its pricing—often double that of dairy—has started to generate real resistance.

Image credit: Minor Figures

Minor Figures, a UK-based oat milk brand, has carved out a niche among creative professionals. Its hand-drawn packaging, minimalist design, and carbon-neutral commitment resonate with urban Gen Z. The brand installed oat milk refill stations in eco-minded cafés in East London, turning sustainability into something tangible. Co-founder Stuart Forsyth emphasises their approach: “We want to grow sustainably, we want to grow ethically and just see where this sort of journey takes us.”

Still, even Minor Figures must contend with growing scepticism about “performative sustainability.” A growing share of younger consumers now want traceability—where was it grown? What happens to the packaging? As oat milk begins to look like the new default, the question becomes: what comes after default?

Southeast Asia: Taste First, Sustainability Later

If oat milk is the sustainability symbol of the West, in much of Southeast Asia, it’s still a curiosity—often priced high, unfamiliar in flavor, and positioned more as a lifestyle accessory than a kitchen staple. Here, taste and tradition are still the gatekeepers, and consumer priorities follow a different rhythm.

Soy and coconut milks remain the dominant non-dairy choices across the region. Long before Western plant-based trends took hold, these ingredients were already foundational in Southeast Asian cuisine. From Indonesia’s tempeh to Thailand’s tom kha, from soy puddings in Vietnam to rich coconut-based curries in Malaysia, non-dairy milk isn’t an “alternative”—it’s the original.

Yet, the surge of interest in plant-based eating is not being ignored. The market for dairy alternatives in Southeast Asia hit USD 3 billion in 2024 and is forecast to reach USD 4.1 billion by 2030. But the motivations driving that growth are not always what Western marketers expect.

For urban Gen Z consumers, the shift is being fueled by café culture and aesthetic appeal. In Singapore, Bangkok, and Ho Chi Minh City, oat milk is showing up in third-wave coffee shops, where latte art meets lifestyle branding. The creamy mouthfeel and mild taste of oat milk plays well with espresso, and baristas often frame it as the more “sophisticated” or “global” option. But the price—often two or three times higher than soy or coconut milk—makes it more of a treat than a household switch.

Health and digestion are also central to plant-based appeal. For Millennials balancing fast-paced urban lives with rising wellness awareness, soy milk retains a stronghold due to its protein content and familiarity. It’s not uncommon to see fortified soy drinks marketed for beauty benefits, gut health, or as part of fitness routines.

Among Gen X and Boomers, however, there’s little appetite for novelty. Traditional dairy is still prized, especially in countries like Vietnam, where sweetened condensed milk remains the heart of the national coffee. Coconut milk is not just nostalgic—it’s seen as natural, trusted, and tied to home cooking.

For Western brands attempting to gain traction here, the learning curve is steep. Oatly’s entrance into the region began with Malaysia and Singapore, distributed via speciality grocers and upscale cafés. The company announced in 2022 that Southeast Asia would form a “growth corridor” as part of its Asia expansion. But by 2024, it had shuttered its Singapore production facility to consolidate manufacturing back to Europe—a sign that demand in the region had not yet scaled fast enough to justify local production.

Oatly continues to maintain shelf presence in Singapore, but its growth in the region faces challenges. In December 2024, the company announced the closure of its production facility in Singapore as part of an asset-light supply chain strategy aimed at improving cost structures and reducing capital expenditures. This move reflects broader operational adjustments in response to evolving market dynamics in Asia.

The plant-based milk market in Singapore is becoming increasingly competitive, with local brands like Oatside gaining traction. In June 2023, Flash Coffee announced it would serve Oatside as the default in all milk-based beverages across its 24 outlets in Singapore. This highlights the growing consumer interest in plant-based options and the competitive landscape Oatly faces.

It’s evident that for plant-based products to succeed in Singapore, they must appeal to consumers in both taste and affordability. The sustainability pitch alone often isn’t sufficient; products need to meet consumer expectations in flavour and be competitively priced to gain widespread acceptance.

Local innovation may hold the key. In Thailand, companies are experimenting with rice milk made from surplus grains. In Indonesia, startups are blending coconut and cashew milk to cater to local palates while improving texture. Unlike oat, which has to be imported and processed, these ingredients are homegrown—offering not just flavor familiarity but economic resonance.

The tension in Southeast Asia isn’t whether consumers will adopt plant-based milk—it’s which ones, and why. Taste leads. Price follows. Sustainability, for now, lags behind. But for a younger class raised on Instagram, global branding, and iced matcha oat lattes, the next shift may arrive faster than expected.

Japan: Tradition Meets Innovation

In Japan, plant-based milk isn’t a trend—it’s tradition. Long before Western oat and almond milks arrived on convenience store shelves, soy was already woven into daily life. From tofu to miso to soy-based desserts, the legume’s liquid form has been consumed for centuries—not as a replacement, but as a cultural staple.

This historical baseline gives Japan a unique position in the global plant-based milk story. While much of the West is shifting away from cow’s milk, in Japan, dairy was never dominant to begin with. Lactose intolerance affects approximately 45% of the population to some degree, and the country’s culinary heritage has long favoured plant-based ingredients.

Yet even here, the landscape is shifting—quietly, and with the precision Japan is known for. In 2024, the soy milk segment still made up the overwhelming majority of plant-based milk sales, but oat and almond are inching upward. Projections estimate Japan’s oat milk market will expand from approximately $51.7 million in 2024 to over $163 million by 2033, reflecting a compound annual growth rate of 12.6%.

But growth in Japan doesn’t mirror that of its Western counterparts. Oat milk here is not a lifestyle statement. It’s more likely to be encountered in a café serving Nordic-style pastries than in a supermarket fridge. In Tokyo’s upscale coffee districts—Daikanyama, Aoyama, and parts of Shibuya—young professionals are experimenting with oat lattes, but the movement is still niche.

Soy milk is still the default. People are curious about oat milk, but it’s expensive and unfamiliar. Soy is part of the Japanese identity.

Image credit: Marusan

The soy milk aisle in Japan looks nothing like its Western equivalents. There are over 30 flavours of soy milk in most convenience stores—banana, sweet potato, black sesame, and even matcha. Sold in small, colourful cartons, these drinks are as much a snack as a supplement. They appeal across generations and demographics, from school children to business executives.

Almond milk, introduced in earnest in the early 2010s, is viewed as a beauty product as much as a drink—touted for its vitamin E content and its role in “clean eating” routines. It’s marketed in lifestyle magazines and television ads featuring pop stars and Olympic athletes.

So where does that leave oat? Still finding its place. Japanese consumers value texture and subtlety in flavor—qualities that oat milk sometimes struggles to deliver in traditional dishes or teas. But its creamy body is finding fans in the coffee world, and as more cafés experiment with it, familiarity may breed demand.

What’s clear is that plant-based milk in Japan isn’t driven by environmental activism or dietary rebellion. It’s driven by harmony—with the body, with the palate, with the past. While the West frames oat milk as progress, in Japan, progress tastes familiar—it just might be flavoured with yuzu or kinako.

India: Plant-Based Milk as Urban Status and Spiritual Alignment

In India, dairy isn’t just nutrition—it’s ritual. From temple offerings of milk to the everyday comfort of chai with malai, dairy products are woven into the country’s emotional and religious fabric. The white splash in a steel tumbler holds centuries of symbolic weight. So any conversation about plant-based milk here starts not with a health trend, but with the question: what could possibly replace something sacred?

The answer, for now, is: not much—but something is beginning to stir.

India’s plant-based milk market is still young, valued at around USD 50 million in 2024, but it is projected to grow at nearly 15% CAGR over the next six years. That growth, however, is uneven and tells a story less about dietary shifts and more about social signalling.

For Gen Z in India’s metros, plant-based milk is about cruelty-free living, fitness influencers, and Instagrammed morning routines. It’s not uncommon to see “dairy-free” smoothies and almond milk lattes showcased in the digital lives of young professionals in Bengaluru, Delhi, or Mumbai. These consumers often cite animal welfare, clean eating, and compatibility with lactose intolerance—affecting an estimated 60% of the population—as reasons for switching. But the shift is as much aesthetic as it is ethical. Almond milk isn’t just good for you; it looks good in a glass.

Millennials, especially those navigating careers abroad or within cosmopolitan India, are caught between reverence for traditional staples like paneer and ghee, and a rising curiosity about global wellness norms. Many are not rejecting dairy outright, but are experimenting with substitutes during certain meals, fasts, or fitness cycles. The language of Ayurveda also looms large—“easy on digestion,” “balance for pitta”—guiding product marketing and consumer trust.

For Gen X and Boomers, though, the idea of dairy-free milk is still foreign. Cow’s milk is considered pure in Hindu tradition. To deviate from it can feel like cultural heresy, particularly in religious households. Even within vegan circles, spiritual negotiations are common—almond milk in the smoothie, but cow’s milk in the temple.

And yet, there is movement at the margins.

Image credit: Good Mylk Co.

One company pioneering this shift is Goodmylk, a Bengaluru-based startup founded by Abhay Rangan in his teens. The company produces cashew and oat-based milk, peanut curd, and vegan butter. What sets it apart is its insistence on affordability and accessibility. “If we make it premium, we limit who gets to choose it,” Rangan said in an interview. Goodmylk raised $400,000 in seed funding and has focused on scaling without pricing itself out of the Indian middle class.

The brand also localises its innovation. Mung bean and millet-based milks are in development—grains familiar to Indian households, now reimagined for lattes and cereal bowls. This strategy isn’t just functional—it’s cultural. “People trust what they’ve grown up with,” Rangan notes. “If we can use those same ingredients in new ways, we don’t have to change people. We just meet them where they are.”

What India reveals, perhaps more than any other market, is that the future of plant-based milk may not be about substitution—but about addition. The almond milk doesn’t replace the dairy in the chai. It sits next to it in the fridge, as an option, a symbol, a signal of modernity. Milk, in this context, is not just nourishment. It’s narrative.

Cross-Cultural Observations: What Tastes Like Progress?

From Bangkok cafés to Berlin grocery aisles, plant-based milk carries different meanings depending on where you are—and who you ask. To understand the global arc of milk alternatives, it’s not enough to look at adoption rates. You have to ask what each product represents in a cultural context. Because in the world of milk, progress has many flavours.

In the UK, oat milk has become shorthand for ethical living. It’s the fuel of the “climatarian”—those who select food based on its carbon footprint. It helps that oats grow abundantly in Europe and require far less water than almonds. But this is also about optics. Oat milk in a flat white signals something specific: sustainability without sacrifice. It says, “I’m paying attention.”

In Japan, soy milk is the opposite of a trend—it’s a staple. You’ll find banana soy milk in vending machines, black sesame soy in school lunch trays, and unflavored soy behind the counter of every ramen bar. Oat milk, by contrast, is a foreigner: imported, expensive, and still largely a café novelty. Where Western markets romanticise innovation, Japan reveres the familiar.

In India, almond milk is climbing—but it’s doing so as a marker of status. Its presence in a smoothie bowl or a vegan café menu connotes wellness, modernity, and a kind of cosmopolitan sophistication. It’s aspirational, not essential. Meanwhile, mung bean and millet milks are emerging quietly from startups like Goodmylk, using ingredients that feel both futuristic and deeply local.

In Southeast Asia, coconut milk is tradition in liquid form. It’s thick, aromatic, and the base of comfort food across generations. Oat milk, by comparison, is still figuring out how to earn trust—or at least a spot in the fridge. Soy milk, sold sweet and chilled at street stalls and in grocery chains, continues to dominate the category for its price, protein, and familiarity.

And then there’s the matter of price. Across nearly every market, oat milk carries a premium—often double or triple the price of cow’s milk, and far more than local alternatives. In the UK, it retails for £1.90 per litre compared to £1.20 for dairy. In Southeast Asia, import costs push oat milk into the realm of aspirational indulgence.

This price disparity cuts to the heart of a growing identity tension: who gets to eat for the planet? In many regions, sustainability remains a luxury. And with that, a subtle backlash is brewing against the Westernisation of food. Consumers in Asia, Latin America, and Africa are increasingly questioning why “plant-based” must mean foreign, expensive, and out of touch with local ecosystems.As these questions simmer, the most forward-thinking brands aren’t scaling Western models—they’re turning inward. Instead of exporting oat milk to Jakarta or Mumbai, they’re asking: what’s already growing here? And how do we make that the new norm?

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

Global demand for chocolate is rising, even as consumer concern over sugar, processed foods and wellness reaches new heights. Across the UK, the US, and key Asian markets, confectionery companies are reporting growth not just in premium segments, but also in functional and “better-for-you” formulations once considered niche.

The shift reflects a broader recalibration of what indulgence means in the modern marketplace. Shoppers are eating less in volume but paying more for chocolate that aligns with evolving personal values-whether that means fewer ingredients, higher cocoa content, or the addition of protein and adaptogens.

Multinational players and local upstarts alike are moving quickly to capture this redefined sweet spot. In the US, dark and portion-controlled chocolates are gaining share despite higher prices. In the UK, new regulations on high-sugar foods have prompted a wave of reformulation and repositioning. And in Asia, where per capita consumption remains relatively low, demand is accelerating as chocolate becomes both an aspirational treat and a vessel for functional benefits.

For an industry once synonymous with excess, chocolate is proving remarkably adaptive. What was once a discretionary snack is now being repackaged as self-care-and that subtle shift in perception is proving to be a powerful driver of growth.

A Global Market Defying Expectations

Chocolate’s commercial momentum is not just anecdotal – it’s backed by hard numbers that defy nutritional orthodoxy. While public health messaging around sugar reduction has grown louder, global retail sales of chocolate continue to expand, particularly in markets where health consciousness and affluence are rising in tandem.

Recent industry estimates place global chocolate confectionery sales at around US$130 billion, with steady value growth driven by pricing power, premiumisation, and consumer appetite for smaller, higher-quality products. In contrast to other processed snack categories, chocolate has retained pricing resilience and cultural relevance – often viewed not as a vice, but as an acceptable reward.

In mature markets like the United States and the United Kingdom, manufacturers are offsetting flat or declining volumes with premium offerings, clean-label positioning, and targeted innovation. In the US, even as unit sales dipped last year, dollar sales rose. UK consumers, faced with inflation and regulatory pressure on high-fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) products, are adjusting by buying smaller formats or turning to private-label options – but they haven’t walked away from the category.

In Asia, the story is different. Markets like China and Singapore are seeing growing interest in chocolate, particularly among urban, middle-class consumers. Premium brands, often imported, are benefiting from rising disposable income and a gifting culture that values quality and presentation. Even in Japan, where the market has been contracting, companies are finding ways to win back consumers through functional formulations and high cocoa content offerings.

Whether as comfort, status symbol, or perceived health supplement, chocolate’s role is being redefined. And with that reframing comes an expansion in both who is buying – and why.

Changing Consumer Drivers

The growth in chocolate sales isn’t coming from nostalgia alone. It reflects a more nuanced shift in consumer mindset – one that doesn’t reject indulgence, but instead reclassifies it. Chocolate is increasingly seen as compatible with modern lifestyles, not in spite of its decadence but because of how consumers are redefining what balance looks like.

Across markets, there is growing tolerance – even encouragement – for what industry analysts term “permissible indulgence.” Rather than eliminating treats, consumers are looking for control: smaller portions, higher cocoa content, and labels that read more like pantry ingredients than chemistry sets. In the UK, more than a third of chocolate consumers say they are consciously limiting sugar – but not abstaining entirely. In the US, 91% say they’re willing to pay more for chocolate that feels like a personal reward.

What has changed is the framing. Where chocolate once sat squarely in the category of “guilty pleasures,” it’s now more likely to be marketed as self-care. Brands have responded with messaging that leans on mood, mindfulness, and mental health – themes that resonate particularly well with millennial and Gen Z consumers. In Asia, products with added collagen or calming botanicals are performing strongly, positioned as part of a broader wellness routine.

Functionality is part of the equation. But just as important is the emotional rationale. In a volatile global climate, consumers are granting themselves small indulgences, so long as they carry a justification – be it clean ingredients, health benefits, or sustainability claims. Chocolate, perhaps more than any other treat, has adapted to meet that need without losing its core appeal.

Market	Primary Positioning	Trending Segments	Notable Retail Behavior
US	Indulgence-first	Dark, functional, protein-added	Portion control, DTC growth
UK	Sustainability/Moderation	Plant-based, lower sugar, private label	HFSS-regulated placement, ethical labels
Japan	Functional-first	Stress-relief, GABA, polyphenols	Mini packs, convenience store dominance
China	Premium & Aspirational	Imported brands, gift sets	Gifting culture, boutique speciality retail
Singapore	Luxury meets wellness	Vegan, single-origin, no added sugar	Gifting culture, boutique specialty retail

Innovation in Product Development

Much of chocolate’s resilience can be traced to how aggressively manufacturers have innovated in recent years. The category has undergone a quiet but significant transformation, with R&D efforts focused on meeting modern expectations around health, quality, and purpose.

Product reformulation is now a baseline strategy. Across the UK and parts of Europe, pressure from HFSS regulations and consumer advocacy groups has accelerated the development of lower-sugar alternatives. Major brands, including Mondelēz and Nestlé, have introduced chocolate lines with 30% less sugar, while also cutting artificial additives and using alternative sweeteners like stevia and monk fruit. In the US, Hershey has expanded its zero-sugar range and invested in cleaner labels across its mainstream portfolio.

The fastest-growing segment, however, isn’t necessarily lower in sugar – it’s higher in cocoa. Dark chocolate continues to outperform traditional milk variants, buoyed by its association with antioxidants, reduced sugar, and a more “sophisticated” profile. Lindt & Sprüngli, Ferrero, and other global players have reported strong growth in dark chocolate sales across both Western and Asian markets, supported by expanding ranges with cocoa content of 70% and above.

In Asia, innovation has taken a more functional route. Japanese confectioners, long known for their product precision, have introduced chocolate fortified with stress-reducing botanicals, dietary fibre, and even blood pressure–supporting polyphenols. In China, new launches incorporate traditional ingredients like ginseng or goji berries, often positioned as “balance-enhancing” or “body-friendly.”

At the premium end, smaller brands are leading with single-origin sourcing, artisanal techniques, and clean-label credentials. Their appeal lies not just in purity of ingredients but in transparency – with packaging that highlights cocoa origin, ethical certification, and handcrafted quality. These innovations are helping redefine chocolate as not just permissible, but aspirational – a snack that delivers on taste, health alignment, and brand values simultaneously.

Some of the most telling examples of how chocolate makers are evolving come from established players experimenting beyond their traditional formulas.

In the UK, Mondelēz launched the Cadbury Plant Bar, a vegan version of its flagship Dairy Milk, using almond paste in place of dairy. The move marked the brand’s first foray into plant-based chocolate in nearly two centuries of operation, reflecting not just a shift in ingredients, but a broader strategy to reach flexitarian consumers. While still a small part of total sales, the Plant Bar represents a growing segment within confectionery where plant-based credentials are seen as a proxy for health, ethics, and modernity.

In the United States, Hu Kitchen has carved out a loyal following by doing less. Its clean-label chocolate bars – free from dairy, refined sugar, palm oil, lecithins, and emulsifiers – have thrived in premium health retailers and online marketplaces. The brand’s minimalist packaging and “Get Back to Human” tagline struck a chord with consumers seeking indulgence without compromise. Hu’s rapid success led to its acquisition by Mondelēz in 2021, underscoring how legacy players are using startup acquisitions to absorb innovation.

In Japan, functionality is a competitive advantage. Meiji’s “The Chocolate” line and Lotte’s “GABA-infused” chocolates target adult consumers seeking both pleasure and health benefits. GABA (gamma-aminobutyric acid), a naturally occurring neurotransmitter linked to stress reduction, is featured prominently in Lotte’s marketing, tapping into Japan’s growing demand for mood-supportive snacks. These products are often sold in convenience stores – not as candy, but as part of the functional food aisle.

Taken together, these cases illustrate how manufacturers are navigating a more complex chocolate landscape – where taste is non-negotiable, but health cues, ingredient ethics, and wellness positioning are becoming essential to growth.

Packaging and Positioning as Strategy

As much as product formulation has shifted, so too has the way chocolate is presented – and that evolution is proving just as important in driving consumer uptake. Packaging and messaging have become strategic tools in redefining how chocolate fits into a health-conscious lifestyle. In many cases, what’s on the outside of the bar is doing just as much work as what’s inside it.

One of the most noticeable changes across global markets is the move away from traditional share-size formats toward portion-controlled, individually wrapped offerings. Whether driven by calorie-conscious consumers or regulatory nudges, this shift aligns with broader health narratives. Smaller sizes are marketed not as a cutback, but as a mindful choice. In the UK, major supermarkets have reorganised confectionery aisles to prioritise “treatwise” options, while in Japan and Singapore, individually wrapped squares dominate shelves, reinforcing the idea of moderation and intentionality.

At the premium end of the market, design language has also evolved. Brands are increasingly leaning on matte finishes, minimalist typography, and earthy colour palettes to signal quality and modernity. Sustainable packaging has become a competitive differentiator: compostable wrappers, recyclable boxes, and carbon-neutral claims are now common among premium and artisanal brands. According to NielsenIQ, 72% of global consumers say they’re willing to pay more for products that offer sustainable packaging, and confectionery is no exception. In the UK, where eco-consciousness is deeply embedded in consumer decision-making, this has helped smaller brands gain traction.

Equally important is the messaging printed on the front of pack. Chocolate makers are experimenting with a vocabulary that reshapes indulgence into alignment with health, ethics, or personal care. Terms like “source of antioxidants,” “plant-based,” “no added sugar,” and “ethically sourced cacao” are increasingly used to build trust and justify premium pricing. In Asia, functional benefits take centre stage, with Japanese and South Korean brands promoting relaxation, cognitive support, and gut health directly on packaging. In the US, mood-related cues – “energy,” “calm,” or “focus” – are finding their way onto wrappers once reserved for novelty slogans.

What’s striking is how positioning diverges across markets, reflecting local consumer priorities. In the United States, chocolate is still framed primarily around indulgence, but with an upgraded narrative: it’s an “earned” treat, often marketed with language around self-reward and quality ingredients. In Japan, functionality leads, with packaging that emphasises health outcomes and precision. In the UK, sustainability and transparency are front and centre, with brands competing on cocoa sourcing, packaging recyclability, and sugar reduction metrics.

For multinationals, adapting packaging and messaging to these local nuances has become essential. What resonates in a Los Angeles health food store may not land in a Tokyo pharmacy or a London high street supermarket. But across all regions, the direction is clear: chocolate is no longer sold simply as a sweet. It is being positioned as a curated experience – one that reflects the consumer’s lifestyle, values, and desired level of indulgence.

Regulatory and Retail Landscape

As health concerns reshape consumer expectations, regulatory bodies and retailers are playing a growing role in influencing how, where, and what kind of chocolate is sold. Far from slowing the category, these shifts are prompting structural changes in how brands operate – from formulation to shelf placement.

In the United Kingdom, one of the most ambitious regulatory efforts has been the government’s restriction on the promotion of high-fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS) products. Since October 2022, chocolate and other confectionery brands have faced limitations on prominent in-store placements such as aisle ends and checkouts, along with bans on advertising HFSS products during primetime TV and online slots aimed at children. While critics initially forecast a sharp decline in impulse sales, early results from Kantar suggest a more nuanced picture: some volume loss has occurred, but consumers are increasingly switching to HFSS-compliant versions or smaller-format treats that are still allowed in high-traffic zones. Brands that anticipated these changes – either by reformulating or launching reduced-sugar SKUs – have retained shelf visibility and sales stability.

Retail strategy is also evolving in response to both regulation and pandemic-era behavioural shifts. The rise of direct-to-consumer (DTC) models and online artisanal chocolate brands has created a new layer of competition. In the United States, premium players like Dandelion Chocolate and Raaka have built thriving businesses selling craft bars online, complete with subscription models and seasonal releases. In Asia, particularly Singapore and South Korea, social commerce and messaging platforms are enabling local chocolatiers to bypass traditional retail entirely.

At the same time, speciality health retailers such as Whole Foods, Planet Organic, and iHerb have expanded their chocolate assortments, focusing on functional, low-sugar, and vegan options. Their merchandising strategies give these products front-facing visibility – a stark contrast to conventional supermarkets, where legacy brands still dominate shelf space.

Traditional grocers are responding. IGD data shows that major supermarket chains in Europe and Asia are reallocating shelf space toward “better-for-you” indulgences, particularly as demand grows for low-sugar and plant-based chocolate. Some are trialling “wellness treat” zones, while others are integrating chocolate into broader health-and-lifestyle aisles – a sign that chocolate’s category boundaries are shifting.

Taken together, these developments point to a category in flux – not shrinking, but reshaping. Chocolate remains a high-frequency purchase, but how it’s discovered, promoted, and purchased is changing rapidly, driven by policy, platform, and purpose.

Market Outlook and Investment Trends

Chocolate’s continued growth in a health-conscious world is not an anomaly. It is a lesson in the malleability of consumer perception – and a case study in how legacy categories can evolve when indulgence is repackaged as alignment with personal values.

From an investment standpoint, this has not gone unnoticed. The past five years have seen a wave of M&A activity as global FMCG players seek to future-proof their portfolios. Mondelēz’s acquisitions of Hu Kitchen and Lily’s, Mars’ purchase of KIND and Trü Frü, and Nestlé’s investments in functional and plant-based startups reflect a strategic shift: legacy companies are buying their way into health-aligned chocolate because they understand that future growth lies at the intersection of taste, wellness, and ethics.

At the same time, private label competition is intensifying, particularly in markets like the UK and Asia. As inflation pressures persist, consumers are increasingly opting for supermarket-owned brands that deliver on price without abandoning claims like “ethical sourcing” or “no artificial ingredients.” Retailers are capitalising on this, not only by expanding their own lines but also by positioning them as premium, narrowing the gap between store brand and artisanal in both packaging and provenance. In the UK, Tesco’s and Sainsbury’s premium private label chocolates now include single-origin and vegan lines. In Asia, Don Quijote has become a bellwether for how convenience and quality can coexist, with curated chocolate assortments from both domestic and imported brands.

The bigger question is whether the category can continue to bridge the tension between health and indulgence. All signs point to yes – but not without nuance. The hybridisation of chocolate is likely to continue: functional ingredients will gain ground, especially those linked to mental wellness, gut health, and energy support. Meanwhile, classic indulgence will persist, albeit in cleaner formats and more restrained sizes. Consumers are not abandoning pleasure; they are recalibrating it.

The success of chocolate in this new era lies in its emotional elasticity. It can be a gift, a ritual, a moment of calm, or a functional snack – sometimes all at once. Unlike many processed food categories that struggle to justify their place in a health-first world, chocolate has managed to make itself feel essential. That is not just clever marketing; it’s a deep understanding of how modern consumers make trade-offs. They don’t want to eliminate joy – they want to justify it.

For investors, that makes chocolate a rare thing in today’s food landscape: a category with legacy scale, emotional equity, and evolving relevance. For brands, the challenge now is not to follow fads, but to build trust, deliver on new expectations, and never forget that taste is still the gatekeeper. The future of chocolate will belong to those who understand that indulgence and intention are no longer opposites – they are partners in modern consumerism.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

I live in Tornado Alley, which means a roof isn’t just a roof – it’s armour. So when I found out mine needed replacing, I didn’t hesitate. I reviewed quotes, selected a company, signed the contract. All the hard stuff, I thought, was behind me.

Then came the question: what colour?

It felt like it should’ve been easy. But standing in my driveway, staring up at the expanse of shingles-to-be, I froze. It’s a massive, permanent decision – visible from every angle, exposed to the sky, the neighbours, and every passing storm chaser. Would black make the house too hot? Would brown make it look dated? Would grey clash with the brick?

Naturally, I turned to ChatGPT. I uploaded a photo of my home, asked for help, and was met with an avalanche of color-coded logic – slate complements red brick, brown warms the palette, weathered wood is a “classic choice.” The suggestions were smart, thoughtful… and somehow made things worse. I now had more choices, just better argued.

So I went to the manufacturer’s website and used their simulation tool, dropping different shingle colours onto a photo of my house. It helped, in theory. But once I narrowed it down to three, they all started to blur. On screen, they looked practically the same. That’s when my roofing company stepped in. They brought physical samples, laid them out in the sunlight, and – most importantly – showed me actual homes nearby with each of the colours installed. Only then, after all the tech, the swatches, and the analysis, could I make a choice I felt confident in.

This wasn’t indecision. It was decision friction. And it’s the kind of friction that brands, in their pursuit of offering more, often overlook.

The Psychology of Too Much Choice

We tend to think more choice equals more freedom. But in reality, more choice often creates more anxiety. Psychologist Barry Schwartz coined this dynamic the Paradox of Choice – the idea that while some choice is good, too much can lead to decision paralysis, increased regret, and less satisfaction overall.

This is especially true when the decision feels high-stakes. Choosing a roof colour isn’t just cosmetic – it’s a long-term investment, highly visible, and not easily reversed. When the pressure is on, our brain doesn’t appreciate abundance. It defaults to avoidance.

In one of the most cited studies in consumer psychology, Sheena Iyengar and Mark Lepper set up a jam sampling table in a grocery store. Shoppers were either offered six flavours or twenty-four. The larger display drew more interest – but those offered just six choices were ten times more likely to make a purchase. The takeaway? More options may attract attention, but fewer options drive action.

What’s happening under the surface is cognitive overload. Our working memory – responsible for weighing pros and cons – gets saturated quickly. With each new variable, our mental model has to recalculate. At a certain point, the decision becomes so mentally taxing that it feels easier to defer it, abandon it, or outsource it entirely. That’s not a lack of willpower. That’s the brain protecting itself from burnout.

When brands ignore this psychological friction, they unknowingly increase the likelihood of customer hesitation, second-guessing, or worse – inaction. Because when everything looks like a good option, nothing feels like the right one.

Why Some Decisions Deserve More Support

Marketers often treat decisions like they exist on a flat playing field. But in reality, choice sits on a hierarchy, and the higher up you go, the more psychological support people need.

Low-stakes decisions, such as choosing a gum flavour or a side dish, rarely cause friction. They’re inexpensive, reversible, and carry minimal consequences. High-stakes choices, on the other hand, are more complex, costly, and deeply personal. Whether it’s selecting a mortgage provider, a wedding dress, or a new roof, the risk of regret weighs heavier.

That’s when the brain switches gears. We move from intuition to analysis, and if overloaded, to avoidance. Behavioural economists refer to this as the decision fatigue curve. As the number of variables and the stakes increase, so does cognitive load. That’s why people delay home renovations or abandon full carts at checkout. It isn’t laziness – it’s self-preservation.

This is where tiered choice architecture can help. Instead of dumping every possibility on the table, brands can scaffold decisions. For example, a meal kit service might start by asking about dietary needs, then cooking skill, then taste preferences – delivering a filtered set of meals instead of all 200 at once. The consumer still feels in control, but the decision feels digestible.

Think of it like an elevator. Not every customer is heading to the top floor. Some want a shortcut to level two, others want to explore every stop. But without floors, stairs, or signage, everyone just stands around in the lobby – unsure of where to go next.

Smart brands design choice structures based on where decisions fall in the hierarchy and how much friction they carry. It’s not a nice-to-have – it’s essential.

Why Smart Tools Sometimes Backfire

Even when tools are meant to help, they can still make it worse. AI-generated recommendations, product filters, simulations – these were designed to ease decision-making. But when they simply layer on new variables without eliminating others, they amplify the problem.

In my case, ChatGPT gave me additional, well-reasoned colour suggestions. The roofing brand’s simulator let me “see” each option on my house. But with every added perspective, I became more uncertain – not less. What I needed wasn’t more input. I needed a system that filtered, narrowed, and helped me move forward confidently.

That’s the trap brands fall into. They assume the answer to choice anxiety is better information. But the real solution is constraint.

People don’t want endless options. They want a sense that they’re on the right path. And while visual tools are helpful, they rarely match the nuance of real-world conditions – light changes, neighborhood aesthetics, material textures. That’s why physical samples and in-person examples were what ultimately helped me decide. Not because they offered more data, but because they reduced ambiguity.

Even the smartest tools can fail if they don’t acknowledge the emotional weight of uncertainty. Help should feel like progress, not pressure.

The Business Case for Simplifying Choice

It’s one thing to talk about the theory of too much choice. It’s another to see what happens when companies actually do something about it.

Procter & Gamble once sold 26 different versions of Head & Shoulders shampoo. From dandruff control to citrus burst, there was something for every scalp scenario. But instead of boosting sales, the abundance of options led to customer hesitation – and stagnant shelves. When P&G reduced the number of variants from 26 to 15, something surprising happened: sales went up.

Why? Because fewer choices didn’t mean less relevance. It meant less confusion.

This pattern repeats across industries. GAP, for example, simplified its denim wall – once packed with indistinguishable fits – and saw shoppers choose faster and with more certainty. In tech, Apple’s limited product lines stand in stark contrast to Android’s sprawling menus. Apple doesn’t overwhelm with options. It offers what’s needed – and nothing more.

Even in the world of digital entertainment, Netflix has tested ways to surface fewer titles on screen to reduce decision paralysis and increase view time. Endless scroll may seem like engagement, but often it’s just a user trapped in the loop of not knowing what to pick.

These companies realised that offering fewer, better-differentiated choices creates momentum. It respects the consumer’s time, reduces cognitive strain, and makes the path to “yes” feel like a confident step – not a leap of faith.

In a world that equates abundance with value, restraint has become a competitive advantage.

What Brands Should Learn

When consumers are overwhelmed, they don’t want more options – they want clarity. The role of the brand is no longer just to offer a catalogue of possibilities, but to actively guide people through a decision journey that feels considered, contextual, and reassuring.

Start with curated collections. Rather than overwhelming customers with endless variants, group products into purposeful sets: “best for small spaces,” “most popular among professionals,” “ideal for warm climates.” Curation is not restriction – it’s a form of empathy.

Next, invest in personalised guidance. This could be as simple as a quiz that identifies key needs and filters options, or as advanced as AI-driven suggestions based on behavioural patterns. But the goal is the same: to remove irrelevant options, not add to the noise.

Then there’s context. Il Makiage, for example, doesn’t just match foundation shades – they show how those shades look on real people, under real conditions. They reinforce your selection with testimonials and visual proof, not just swatches on a screen.

Brands should also think about post-purchase validation. The moment after a decision is made is just as critical as the moment before. Thoughtful follow-up emails, affirming language, tips for first-time use – these reassure the customer they made a smart call.

Ultimately, this is about choice architecture. The brands that win don’t just give people more to choose from. They design the experience around how people actually make choices – emotionally, socially, and cognitively.

The Role of Research in Reducing Friction

Understanding decision friction isn’t guesswork – it’s measurable. According to a Baymard Institute study, nearly 70% of online shopping carts are abandoned – and one of the top reasons is a complicated decision process. This is where market research proves invaluable.

At its core, decision friction stems from uncertainty. But the source of that uncertainty – whether it’s lack of clarity, hesitation, or unspoken objections – differs by category, audience, and context. Research identifies these hidden blocks.

Qualitative studies reveal how consumers feel in the moment of indecision. Quantitative methods like conjoint analysis or maxdiff help identify which features drive real value. Segmentation shows how different customer types make decisions – some need freedom, others need a path.

Research also plays a critical role in post-choice validation – what gives people confidence after they say yes. The right message, email, or proof point can turn relief into brand trust.

If friction is the obstacle, research is the flashlight.

UX Doesn’t Stand for Unlimited Experience

In digital environments, more space doesn’t automatically mean more freedom. It often means more friction. In user experience (UX) design, subtraction – not expansion – is often the most powerful conversion tool.

Booking.com once overloaded its interface with filters, price badges, and urgency cues. But A/B testing revealed that simplifying the layout led to higher engagement. Shopify restructured its onboarding to guide users through sequential tasks rather than overwhelming dashboards. Completion rates rose.

Even streaming platforms like Disney+ and Netflix have learned to surface fewer but more relevant titles. Endless choice wasn’t delight – it was paralysis.

This is called cognitive offloading – helping users conserve mental energy by removing unnecessary decisions.

UX design, at its best, doesn’t just look good. It helps people move forward.

Final Thought

Decision-making is rarely logical alone. It’s emotional, contextual, and deeply personal – particularly when the stakes are high. Smart brands don’t just sell products. They design experiences that acknowledge the mental load customers carry.

The best marketing today isn’t louder. It’s sharper. It removes friction not by simplifying what you offer, but by anticipating how people choose. If you’re not thinking about how your customer feels at the point of decision, you’re not really in the business of persuasion.

You’re in the business of hoping.

And hope is not a strategy.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

Veterinary care is undergoing a transformation that few outside the pet industry have fully registered. Quietly, and with surprising speed, it is becoming one of the most innovative frontiers in healthcare delivery – spurred not by institutions or regulators, but by consumer behaviour.

The catalyst was COVID-19. As lockdowns confined millions to their homes, pet adoption surged worldwide. Between 2020 and 2022, more than 23 million American households acquired a new pet, according to the ASPCA. The UK saw a 20% increase in pet ownership during the same period, while markets like Singapore, Indonesia, and Thailand reported double-digit growth in first-time pet ownership, particularly among urban millennials and Gen Z. Today, nearly 60% of households in Southeast Asia’s major cities own at least one pet.

But what followed the adoption boom was something more profound: a redefinition of what pet care should look like. In a world of same-day grocery delivery, wearable glucose monitors, and always-on digital banking, pet owners began demanding the same immediacy, visibility, and personalisation from veterinary services. Convenience became table stakes; transparency became non-negotiable. And traditional clinics – often booked weeks out, with variable pricing and limited hours – found themselves out of sync with rising expectations.

Into this gap stepped a new breed of service: subscription-based, digital-first veterinary platforms. These companies don’t just offer reactive care – they promise continuous access, proactive advice, and predictable costs. Enabled by mobile technology and fueled by a consumer base fluent in subscriptions – from fitness to food to finance – these platforms are not only meeting demand, but redefining it.

This isn’t a Western phenomenon alone. Across Southeast Asia, mobile-native consumers are bypassing legacy systems entirely, engaging with vet care the way they engage with mobility, entertainment, and finance – via app, on demand, and often as part of a bundled service.

What’s emerging is not an add-on to the veterinary industry – it’s a parallel infrastructure. Subscription-based pet care is changing not just how services are delivered, but how they’re valued, experienced, and expected. The shift is quiet, but its implications are structural, global, and irreversible.

The Perfect Storm Behind the Shift

The rise of subscription-based, digital-first veterinary care didn’t happen in a vacuum. It was the product of mounting structural strain in the veterinary industry, colliding with a generational realignment in how consumers engage with health and wellness. What’s happening now is less a trend than a correction – one shaped by workforce shortages, behavioural shifts, and evolving definitions of convenience.

At the heart of this transformation is a growing imbalance between supply and demand. In the United States, the American Veterinary Medical Association projects a shortfall of nearly 15,000 veterinarians by 2030. In the UK, the British Veterinary Association has sounded the alarm over staffing shortages exacerbated by Brexit and post-pandemic burnout. Across Southeast Asia, where veterinary infrastructure has long lagged behind growing pet ownership, access to licensed professionals remains patchy – especially outside major cities.

The result is a system under pressure: overbooked clinics, rising costs, and long wait times for even routine care. These inefficiencies are increasingly incompatible with a consumer base accustomed to real-time digital access in nearly every other domain of life.

That base is also changing. Millennials and Gen Z now account for the majority of pet owners in many countries. In the US, 76% of Gen Z and 71% of millennials own pets, according to a 2023 report by Packaged Facts. These generations have grown up with mobile-first services, expect subscription-based billing, and value transparency over tradition. They’re less loyal to institutions, more loyal to user experience.

But the shift isn’t purely generational – it’s behavioural. Consumers are no longer looking to engage with veterinary services only when something goes wrong. They want ongoing access, reassurance, and preventative care for pets as part of a broader wellness lifestyle. In this model, a once-episodic service – one that was reactive by design – is being reimagined as a continuous relationship.

The demand for immediacy is also driving pricing innovation. Traditional clinics often operate on a fee-for-service basis with little predictability for clients. Subscription models offer a clear alternative: fixed monthly pricing, bundled services, and easy cancellation. It’s a format consumers understand intuitively – one that reduces friction and increases perceived value, even when the actual services may overlap with those offered by brick-and-mortar practices.

These forces – professional shortages, digital behaviour, rising expectations – have created a perfect storm. But it is consumers, not companies, who are setting the pace of change. Their demand for continuity, control, and convenience is rewriting the rules of engagement in pet care. Traditional models are being redefined not by what they lack, but by what they can no longer offer at scale.

The Rise of Subscription-Based Vet Care

If the traditional veterinary model is under strain, subscription-based platforms are capitalising on the gap, not just by digitising care, but by reframing what care means altogether.

At the centre of this shift is a new breed of veterinary service providers offering care plans that emphasise access, continuity, and convenience. Unlike conventional clinics, which are often bound by geographic reach, hours of operation, and one-off appointment models, these platforms offer a digital front door to veterinary support – always open, always responsive.

In the United States, startups like Fuzzy and Pawp have led the charge. Fuzzy offers members 24/7 live vet chat, medication delivery, and access to care plans for chronic conditions – all through a monthly subscription that ranges from $20 to $40. Pawp, which launched in 2020, delivers flat-fee emergency fund access and unlimited telehealth consults for under $25 per month. These companies are less interested in replacing brick-and-mortar clinics and more focused on becoming the first – and frequent – point of contact. Their services are designed around reassurance, convenience, and wellness, rather than surgical procedures or complex diagnostics.

In the UK, Joii Pet Care has gained traction by offering video consults and symptom checkers targeted at affordability and access. Developed by a team of experienced vets and tech entrepreneurs, the app aims to fill care gaps, particularly for lower-income households or those living in rural areas where local clinics are sparse. With prices starting under £25 per consultation or bundled into wellness plans, Joii represents a different approach: one rooted in cost democratisation without sacrificing clinical oversight.

Across Southeast Asia, where veterinary infrastructure varies widely, digital-first models are leapfrogging outdated systems. In cities like Jakarta, Bangkok, and Manila, startups are building integrated ecosystems that combine e-commerce, on-demand consults, vaccination reminders, and home diagnostics – all accessible via mobile app. In these markets, where smartphone penetration is high and traditional vet coverage is limited, the subscription model isn’t just disruptive – it’s foundational.

What all these models share is a fundamental redefinition of veterinary care as a service layer, not a physical location. This service is anchored in several common features:

Always-on access: 24/7 chat and video support, eliminating the need to wait for clinic hours.
Tiered pricing: Monthly plans that bundle consults, medications, supplements, or diagnostic tests.
Proactive care: Wellness tracking, behaviour coaching, and early intervention, rather than reactive treatment.
Integrated delivery: Some platforms even include food, flea treatments, or insurance coverage – shifting from care to full-lifecycle pet management.

From a business standpoint, the subscription model offers strong appeal: predictable recurring revenue, high engagement, and greater lifetime value per customer. For consumers, the model reduces decision fatigue. Instead of weighing every vet call against cost or necessity, pet owners can access care fluidly, often leading to earlier interventions and stronger long-term outcomes.

Crucially, the value isn’t just in the care provided – it’s in the perception of partnership. These platforms don’t operate like service providers; they position themselves as guides, helping owners navigate an increasingly complex pet wellness landscape. This relationship-first framing plays especially well with younger consumers, who prioritise trust and transparency in brand interaction.

Subscription-based vet care isn’t about replacing traditional clinics. It’s about meeting the unmet needs those clinics were never designed to solve – ongoing reassurance, flexible support, and access untethered from geography or schedule. And in doing so, these platforms are setting new benchmarks for what modern pet healthcare looks like, not just in the West, but in digital-first economies around the world.

Regional Perspectives in Transformation

While the shift to digital-first, subscription-based veterinary care is global in momentum, its expression varies significantly by region. Regulation, consumer behaviour, infrastructure, and healthcare norms all influence how the transformation unfolds – and where it gains traction fastest.

United States: Infrastructure Meets Expectation

The US remains the most mature market for pet telehealth, fueled by high rates of pet ownership, established digital payment infrastructure, and a consumer base accustomed to subscriptions across lifestyle categories. Companies like Fuzzy, Pawp, and Dutch have rapidly scaled, supported by favourable funding environments and growing regulatory flexibility.

The American Veterinary Medical Association has gradually updated telemedicine guidelines to reflect new realities, allowing licensed vets to establish a veterinary-client-patient relationship (VCPR) remotely in some states. This flexibility has given startups room to innovate while enabling hybrid models that bridge virtual triage and in-person escalation.

Consumer readiness has also played a role. With 97% of US households owning a smartphone and nearly 80% of millennials identifying as pet parents, mobile-based care isn’t a leap – it’s a natural extension of how health, finance, and lifestyle are already managed.

United Kingdom: Bridging Gaps with Affordability

In the UK, the rise of digital veterinary services has followed a different path – less about convenience, more about access and affordability. NHS-like expectations of care spill into pet ownership culture, where cost sensitivity often leads to delayed treatment or skipped appointments.

Joii and FirstVet have gained traction by offering consults at fixed, low prices, targeting underserved households and rural regions. These services are often paired with employer benefits or pet insurance providers, forming integrated care bundles that mirror human healthcare delivery.

Regulation is catching up, but remains a barrier in some respects. The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) still requires an in-person relationship to prescribe most medications, limiting the scope of pure-play digital models. Still, the appetite for innovation is evident, especially among younger consumers facing cost-of-living pressures and limited clinic access.

Southeast Asia: Mobile-First and Rapidly Scaling

In Southeast Asia, subscription-based pet care is not just a convenience – it’s becoming foundational. In high-density cities like Jakarta, Bangkok, and Ho Chi Minh City, veterinary infrastructure hasn’t kept pace with urban pet ownership. Clinics are often understaffed or geographically uneven, while demand for care is growing sharply among younger, mobile-first consumers.

Here, digital platforms are leapfrogging legacy systems, integrating consults, treatment reminders, product delivery, and even vaccination records into a single app. The model resembles fintech and telemedicine rollouts in the region: rapid, mobile-led, and often driven by startups with regional or pan-Asian ambitions.

Unlike in the West, where subscription models compete with entrenched systems, Southeast Asia’s innovators are building the baseline infrastructure from the ground up. For many new pet owners in the region, a subscription-based vet app isn’t a supplement – it’s the only vet they’ve ever known.

Brand Spotlight: Pawp

Image credit: Pawp

Few companies have captured the shift in pet care delivery as clearly as Pawp. Launched in 2019, the US-based startup built its model around a simple idea: pet owners want immediate access to expert care without unpredictable costs. For a monthly fee of around $24, subscribers receive unlimited 24/7 access to licensed veterinarians via chat or video, along with an annual $3,000 emergency fund that covers life-threatening situations.

It’s not insurance, and it’s not a replacement for in-person care. Instead, Pawp positions itself as the first point of contact – triaging concerns, offering advice, and filling the gap between full-service clinics and reactive emergency visits. The service is especially appealing to urban renters, multi-pet households, and younger owners accustomed to managing health, banking, and food delivery through their phones.

Adoption accelerated during the pandemic, as pet ownership hit record highs and consumers became more comfortable with telehealth. By 2022, Pawp had expanded nationwide. But its biggest leap came in 2023 when Walmart integrated the service into its Walmart+ membership. For millions of members, a vet became one tap away, included in their monthly subscription. That partnership wasn’t just a distribution win – it marked a cultural shift, signalling that veterinary access, like streaming or grocery delivery, could be bundled into everyday life.

Pawp’s model reflects a broader recalibration of how pet owners think about care. The unlimited access reduces the threshold for engagement – owners no longer hesitate over whether a question is “worth” asking. Instead, they ask more, earlier, and often. This changes the rhythm of care, encouraging prevention over reaction and making the pet-health relationship feel continuous rather than episodic.

While competitors have emerged, few match Pawp’s combination of on-demand triage and financial safety net. The company has also moved into employer benefits and financial services, appearing in bundled perks from credit cards and HR platforms. For traditional clinics, this model doesn’t displace in-person care – but it does rewire when, how, and why pet owners seek help.

What Pawp proves is that subscription care isn’t just a pricing structure – it’s a behaviour model. And for millions of pet owners, it’s quickly becoming the default.

Traditional Clinics at a Crossroads

The rise of subscription-based, digital-first platforms presents traditional veterinary practices with a pivotal question: resist, retreat, or reconfigure?

For decades, veterinary care has been defined by brick-and-mortar clinics. The model was straightforward – appointments, procedures, prescriptions. But this model was never designed for today’s expectations: 24/7 access, real-time answers, preventative guidance, and fixed-cost transparency. As new entrants deliver on these demands digitally, traditional clinics are being forced to confront their own structural limitations.

Some view the trend as a threat to their clinical authority and client relationships. But framing this evolution as competition misses the larger opportunity. In truth, these models don’t replace what clinics do – they fill the spaces in between. And for practices that embrace this reality, digital platforms offer not a threat but a strategic partner.

Hybrid care is emerging as a viable solution. Clinics that incorporate virtual consults – either independently or through collaboration with subscription providers – can triage non-emergency cases more efficiently, free up in-clinic capacity, and reduce staff burnout. This is especially critical as workforce shortages continue to mount. By adding a digital layer, clinics can serve more patients without diluting the quality of care.

The integration opportunity extends further. Clinics that lean into wellness plans, recurring product bundles, or asynchronous follow-ups are finding new ways to generate revenue, build loyalty, and align with how modern pet owners think. The shift from transactional care to relational care – something digital-first platforms do exceptionally well – can be mirrored within physical practices through smarter use of CRM systems, automated reminders, and bundled service pricing.

However, cultural shifts may prove more challenging than technological ones. Pricing transparency, a cornerstone of the subscription model, forces clinics to re-evaluate the traditional ambiguity around fees. Similarly, expectations around always-on access mean that practices must reconsider staffing models, triage protocols, and customer service norms.

Still, the alternative is stagnation. Pet owners will increasingly gravitate toward models that give them more control, clarity, and connection. If clinics don’t evolve in parallel, they risk becoming not obsolete, but peripheral – consulted only in crisis, instead of trusted across the care journey.

The path forward for traditional veterinary care isn’t defensive – it’s adaptive. The future belongs not to those who replicate digital models, but to those who integrate them with the irreplaceable expertise of in-person care.

What Subscription Care Reveals About Consumer Psychology

The growth of subscription-based veterinary care cannot be explained by technology alone. At its core lies a deeper psychological shift: the redefinition of care from a transactional act to an ongoing relationship – one that is emotional, preventative, and embedded in daily life.

Pet owners are no longer engaging with veterinary services purely out of necessity. They are engaging out of responsibility and routine, adopting the behaviours they’ve internalised from human wellness – preventative check-ups, continuous monitoring, and personalised guidance – and projecting them onto their animals. This is not sentimentality; it’s behavioural logic. Pets are increasingly viewed not as dependents, but as extensions of the self. Caring for them is seen as a reflection of competence, compassion, and control.

Subscription models tap directly into this psychological orientation. The fixed monthly fee does more than spread out cost – it reduces decision friction. Owners no longer have to weigh whether a behaviour warrants a $90 consult. They can simply ask. This freedom from hesitation leads to greater engagement, earlier intervention, and – crucially – higher customer satisfaction.

The format itself matters. Subscriptions create a psychological contract: a sense that care is ongoing, not contingent. This fosters trust and encourages owners to interact with the service even when nothing seems urgent. As usage increases, so does perceived value – making cancellations less likely and loyalty more resilient, even in times of economic pressure.

This model also aligns with modern consumers’ preference for predictability over spontaneity, especially among Gen Z and millennials. These cohorts are more likely to use budgeting apps, mental health platforms, and fitness subscriptions than previous generations. In this landscape, paying monthly for a responsive, wellness-oriented vet service doesn’t feel like an expense. It feels like a responsible default.

The emotional context is equally significant. Pet health triggers the same anxiety as human health, often without the institutional support systems or insurance coverage. Subscription care offers not just medical advice, but peace of mind – a buffer against uncertainty that is worth paying for, even if it’s never used.

What we’re witnessing is not just a new way to deliver veterinary services. It’s a new way to frame value, build trust, and establish relevance in the lives of modern pet owners – anchored as much in psychology as in medicine.

From Reactive to Relationship-Based Care

The next frontier in pet healthcare will not be built solely on digital access – it will be defined by intelligence, personalisation, and integration. Subscription models have laid the foundation. What comes next is an ecosystem where care is continuous, contextual, and increasingly predictive.

Already, we’re seeing early signals. AI-enabled symptom checkers and triage bots are improving accuracy and efficiency in first-line responses, particularly in high-volume markets like the US and UK. Wearables are moving beyond step tracking, offering real-time insights into sleep quality, heart rate variability, and behavioural anomalies – data that can trigger interventions before a clinical symptom emerges. And at-home diagnostics, from microbiome testing to genetic screening, are making it possible to detect risk factors earlier than ever before.

As these tools mature, the role of the veterinarian will evolve. Less gatekeeper, more guide. Less episodic expert, more integrated partner. Pet care will mirror the best of modern human healthcare: digitally enabled, insight-driven, and co-managed by both professional and consumer. The brands and clinics that succeed will be those that understand not just what services to offer, but how to build lasting relevance in a world of empowered pet parents.

In this landscape, market research becomes more essential – not less. Understanding the emotional, cultural, and behavioural drivers behind pet care decisions is critical to navigating what’s next. Data alone can reveal what consumers are buying; insight reveals why – and what they’ll demand next. Whether it’s segmenting how Gen Z in Bangkok approaches preventative pet care, or tracking the adoption curve of tele-vet platforms among suburban households in Manchester, the businesses that win will be those that treat insight as strategy, not a sidebar.

The future of veterinary care is not about digitising the past. It’s about reshaping the relationship between pet, owner, and provider. What began as a convenience – subscriptions, on-demand chat, symptom checkers – is becoming an expectation. The logic of episodic care is giving way to a relationship economy, where value is measured not just in outcomes, but in consistency, confidence, and care continuity.

Veterinary practices, platforms, and brands alike face a choice. Compete on service, or compete on understanding. In an age of intelligent pet wellness, the latter will shape the next generation of care.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

Consumer sentiment shifts rapidly, shaped not only by your company’s directives and strategies but also by external forces, such as viral trends, cultural movements, and economic forces. The brands that endure and adapt to these changes in real-time. Brand tracking is more than a periodic check-in – it’s essential for survival. By continuously monitoring brand health, companies can identify strengths, spot weaknesses, understand competitive positioning and adjust strategy accordingly.

But perception isn’t static. A brand with strong awareness today can lose relevance tomorrow if it fails to track how consumers feel, engage, and respond over time. To remain competitive, brands must continuously track their position in the market and be agile enough to adapt.

What is Brand Tracking, and Why Does it Matter?

Brand tracking measures a brand’s performance over time, helping companies identify shifts in the market, consumer trends, competitive trends, strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities to refine brand strategy.

Brand perception is fluid and influenced by consumer experiences, media narratives, and competitive shifts. Brand tracking helps companies answer critical questions:

Is our brand positioning resonating with the right audience?
How does our reputation compare to competitors?
What messaging, campaigns, or brand attributes build consumer loyalty?
Are external factors – economic shifts, social trends, or market disruptions – impacting our brand perception?

Key Elements of Brand Tracking

Brand tracking goes beyond surface-level metrics to assess a brand’s health and market position. Key components include:

Brand Awareness: Measuring Recognition and Recall
- Unaided vs. Aided Awareness
- Top-of-Mind Awareness: The first brand a consumer thinks of in a category often signals market leadership and competitive strength.
Brand Perception & Sentiment Analysis
- Consumer Attitudes and Associations: Understanding how consumers feel about a brand—and the attributes they link to it—is key to shaping brand identity. These should include both functional benefits and emotional benefits. As well as brand personality.
Purchase Intent, Satisfaction & Customer Loyalty Metrics
- Likelihood of Purchase: Gauging how likely consumers are to choose a brand helps predict future sales.
- Satisfaction: Understanding brand satisfaction versus competitors.
- Net Promoter Score (NPS): Measuring customers’ willingness to recommend a brand indicates satisfaction and loyalty.
Competitive Benchmarking
- Market Position Analysis: Comparing brand performance against competitors to identify strengths, weaknesses, and market opportunities.
- Share of Voice: Measuring a brand’s visibility in the market through media coverage and advertising reach.
Media & Advertising Effectiveness
- Campaign Impact Assessment: Assessing how marketing efforts affect awareness, perception, and sales.

Turning Data into Strategy

Brand tracking only matters if insights lead to action. Using data strategically, companies can refine marketing, reposition products, and strengthen customer loyalty.

Identifying Strengths and Weaknesses Before They Become Market Issues

Tracking brand health helps brands pinpoint areas where they excel and where they are losing ground. Rather than relying on assumptions, brands that act on measurable shifts in consumer sentiment can adjust messaging and engagement tactics before losing relevance.

Optimising Marketing Campaigns

Effective marketing isn’t just about visibility; it’s about impact. Brand tracking measures how marketing efforts influence perception, loyalty, and purchase intent. If a campaign falls short, data allows brands to tweak real-time messaging rather than wait until the next cycle.

Benchmarking Against Competitors

Brand tracking is most powerful when measured against competitors. Comparing brand health metrics against competitors enables companies to identify gaps in positioning, capitalise on underserved markets, and anticipate industry shifts before rivals do.

Building Customer Loyalty

Brand tracking isn’t just for attracting new customers; it helps brands understand why existing customers stay or leave. Tracking loyalty metrics allows brands to implement better retention strategies, such as loyalty programs, improved customer service, or product innovation.

Brand Tracking Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

Even the best tracking methods fail if poorly executed. Avoid these common mistakes to ensure insights lead to action.

Measuring Awareness Without Sentiment
A high awareness score means little if there are negative perceptions. Brands must pair awareness tracking with perception analysis to get a complete picture of their market position.
Tracking Without Business Goals
Brand tracking is useless if not tied to clear objectives. Tracking must support strategy, whether expanding markets, improving retention, or refining advertising.
Ignoring Qualitative Data
Numbers alone don’t tell the full story. Open-ended customer feedback and sentiment analysis reveal why brand perception shifts.
Failing to Act on Insights
Insights are useless if brands don’t act. Whether trust is eroding or a competitor is gaining ground, companies must adjust accordingly.
Overlooking Market Trends
Brand perception doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Economic shifts, cultural trends, and competitors shape public opinion. Effective tracking accounts for these factors.

Brand Tracking Is Not an Option—It’s Survival

Brand perception is a moving target. What consumers think today may not hold true tomorrow, and brands that fail to monitor these shifts risk becoming irrelevant. The market does not wait for companies to catch up; brands that do not track, analyse, and act on data are at the mercy of competitors who do.

Tracking isn’t just about data—it’s about influence. It reveals when a brand resonates or repels, when trust strengthens or erodes. The best brands spot risks before they escalate and seize opportunities before they go mainstream.

Market leaders don’t wait for a crisis to understand their position. They track, measure, and adapt before perception shifts beyond their control. A brand that isn’t tracking its relevance isn’t just falling behind – it’s already lost control of the narrative.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

Late one evening in Lagos, 22-year-old Chika is scrolling through TikTok, eyes fixed on a local influencer demoing the latest face serum. She watches the 30-second video twice, screenshots the product, and toggles over to Jumia to compare prices, scanning reviews that look a little too polished to be real. Before checking out, she sends a message to her cousin in Ibadan: “Have you tried this one? Is it legit?” Only after a thumbs-up and a money-back assurance from the seller does she complete the purchase – on mobile, of course.

This isn’t an isolated case. It’s a snapshot of how the next billion consumers will shop, click, and connect.

While Western economies grapple with saturation, inflation, and shifting loyalty, the momentum is migrating – toward Southeast Asia, Africa, and parts of Latin America. These regions are no longer just “emerging markets.” They are where the most dynamic, mobile-first, and digitally sophisticated consumers are coming of age.

The numbers make the case undeniable. According to the United Nations, over 85% of global population growth through 2050 will come from Africa and Asia. The GSMA reports that mobile internet penetration in Sub-Saharan Africa is set to reach 50% by 2025, up from 28% in 2019. Meanwhile, the World Bank highlights how smartphone adoption is leapfrogging traditional infrastructure, giving rise to an entire generation that skipped the PC era entirely.

But these consumers are not easily won. They are bilingual and bicultural, equally fluent in local slang and global memes. They are digitally native but deeply mistrustful, having grown up in online ecosystems rife with scams, misinformation, and empty brand promises. And they are forcing brands – both global and local – to rethink what it means to earn attention, deliver relevance, and build trust in the age of hyper-connectivity.

This is not just a demographic shift. It’s a behavioural revolution. And it’s already underway.

Meet the Next Billion: Demographics, Access, and Expectations

This new wave of consumers is young, connected, and coming online fast. In markets like Nigeria, Indonesia, Vietnam, and the Philippines, the median age hovers around 25. These are societies where more than half the population wasn’t yet born when Facebook launched – and for them, digital engagement isn’t an evolution; it’s a native state.

Urbanisation is accelerating across these regions, but it’s not confined to megacities. Second- and third-tier cities are becoming powerful engines of growth, fueled by digital access and rising educational attainment. In Vietnam, for instance, over 94% of youth are literate, and the number of university graduates has doubled over the past decade. Similarly, Nigeria’s youth enrollment in tertiary education is climbing, despite infrastructure constraints. With education comes language dexterity: millions speak at least two languages – one local, one global – and they switch between them instinctively, depending on the context, platform, or audience.

If their predecessors logged onto the internet, this generation lives inside it – and does so almost exclusively via smartphone. In Indonesia, smartphone penetration has surpassed 75%, with apps like Tokopedia, Gojek, and Shopee becoming gateways to everything from groceries to financial services. In sub-Saharan Africa, handset affordability and prepaid data plans have made mobile the default medium for learning, shopping, and socialising. The desktop? Many have never touched one.

Browser-based experiences are increasingly irrelevant. Instead, this generation navigates a constellation of apps, each with its own cultural role. WhatsApp is for family, Instagram for aspiration, TikTok for entertainment, and Telegram or local forums for unfiltered information. Platform behaviour is deeply segmented and purpose-driven. Brands attempting to force a uniform message across channels are quickly tuned out.

And while their tech habits may look similar from a distance, the nuances run deep. In Nigeria, digital spaces are often leveraged as tools for activism and community solidarity. Mistrust in institutions has made peer recommendations and online reputation more powerful than formal brand campaigns. By contrast, in Indonesia, religious and cultural values shape how products are perceived and promoted – especially in sectors like fashion, beauty, and food. Vietnamese consumers, on the other hand, exhibit a high degree of tech optimism, embracing e-wallets and livestream commerce, but place enormous emphasis on product quality and after-sales service, driven by prior experiences with low-cost imports.

These differences matter. What unites the next billion is their digital fluency, but what distinguishes them is the lens through which they evaluate brands. A price drop may trigger interest in Nigeria, but in Vietnam, durability and performance often take precedence. In Indonesia, localised design or halal certification may be the tipping point. The common thread is that these consumers are not passive recipients of global marketing – they are active participants, savvy navigators, and, increasingly, vocal critics.

To engage them, brands must move past old assumptions about emerging markets being homogenous or easily won with scale. What’s unfolding is a more complex, more nuanced, and more demanding consumer environment – and it’s being shaped not just by demographics, but by deep-seated expectations forged in mobile-first, culturally hybrid, and rapidly evolving societies.

Mistrust Is the Default Setting

For many of the next billion consumers, scepticism isn’t a reaction – it’s a reflex. Decades of unreliable infrastructure, political instability, and inconsistent enforcement of consumer rights have conditioned buyers to approach brands and platforms with guarded caution. In these markets, trust is not assumed; it’s earned slowly and lost quickly.

The scale of the challenge is significant. According to Edelman’s 2024 Trust Barometer, trust in institutions – including businesses – remains markedly lower in developing regions than in developed ones. In Nigeria, only 42% of respondents said they trust brands “to do what is right,” compared to 62% in the UK. In Indonesia, that figure was closer to 50%, but even there, trust is often linked to familiarity rather than formal reputation – people tend to trust people, not corporations.

This backdrop has fueled the rise of peer-to-peer influence as a dominant decision-making force. In the Philippines, Facebook community groups like “Online Budol Finds” (slang for impulsive purchases) function as real-time marketplaces and review boards, where users share unfiltered opinions about products, pricing, and service. In Kenya, WhatsApp groups play a similar role, serving as both watchdog and validator in a system where traditional consumer protections are weak or absent. Even in Vietnam, where e-commerce infrastructure has rapidly improved, 54% of online shoppers say they rely on recommendations from friends or family over brand messaging, according to Statista.

This preference for informal verification mechanisms stems from bitter experience. Counterfeit goods remain a rampant issue across markets – from fake electronics in Ghana to diluted skincare products in Indonesia. In response, many consumers have developed an internal checklist: check the seller’s social proof, confirm the payment method, look for real customer images, and verify delivery policies. Brands that fail even one of these checks are likely to be discarded in seconds.

At the same time, digital mistrust is compounding the issue. Scams, phishing attacks, and fake reviews have tainted the e-commerce experience. The GSMA estimates that more than 40% of mobile internet users in Africa and Southeast Asia have experienced some form of online fraud or misleading advertising. In Indonesia alone, the National Cyber and Crypto Agency reported over 190 million cyberattacks and suspicious traffic incidents in 2023.

In this climate, even influencer marketing – a strategy once thought to fast-track trust – has grown less effective. In Vietnam, consumers increasingly question whether influencers are being paid to promote products they don’t actually use. The same holds true in Nigeria, where audiences are savvy enough to distinguish between genuine recommendations and sponsored scripts. The result is a gradual shift toward micro-influencers and community advocates, whose endorsements feel more relatable and less rehearsed.

The implications for global brands are profound. Standard top-down marketing no longer carries weight. Instead, trust must be layered in – through reliable service, consistent messaging, transparency in returns and refunds, and responsiveness on the platforms where consumers are active. Brands must also recognise the importance of publicly visible customer interactions. A fast, empathetic reply to a complaint in the comments section may matter more than a million-dollar ad campaign.

Trust, in this context, is not a brand asset; it’s a user experience outcome. And in a market where every interaction becomes a review, the next billion are watching, judging, and sharing – with or without you.

The Battle for the First Page (or First Screen)

For the next billion consumers, the path to purchase doesn’t begin with a browser search – it starts with a scroll. Discovery has shifted from keywords to content, from desktop search bars to full-screen video, and from global search engines to localised social ecosystems. As a result, the first screen – what shows up in a feed, on a homepage, or in a chat group – has become the most valuable real estate in the customer journey.

In Indonesia, 71% of internet users aged 16–24 say they use social media as their primary source for researching brands, according to DataReportal 2024. In Nigeria, that figure is nearly identical. TikTok, Instagram Reels, Facebook Marketplace, and YouTube Shorts aren’t just distractions – they’re digital storefronts where decisions are made in real time, often before a brand’s official website is ever visited. The lines between content, commerce, and community have all but vanished.

And while this trend is visible globally, its intensity in emerging markets is distinct. A key reason: data affordability drives platform choice and usage behaviour. Telecom bundles that include free access to Facebook or WhatsApp often influence which platforms dominate attention. In the Philippines, for example, “Free FB” packages have made Facebook one of the most deeply entrenched platforms in the country’s digital culture – so much so that some users mistakenly believe it is the internet.

The importance of platform-specific strategy can’t be overstated. In Vietnam, product discovery frequently occurs through livestream commerce on TikTok Shop, where real-time interactions foster a sense of authenticity. In Kenya, small businesses routinely post promotions through WhatsApp Status or Telegram channels, bypassing traditional ad formats altogether. In Nigeria, where Twitter (now X) has a strong political and cultural presence, product conversations often unfold in threads filled with memes, humour, and direct audience engagement.

But it’s not just about where brands show up – it’s about how they’re experienced in the moment. Load speed, image optimisation, and mobile UX have a direct impact on trust and retention. According to Google, 53% of mobile users in emerging markets will abandon a page that takes longer than three seconds to load. And that’s not just about tech – it’s about expectations. These consumers are used to fast, seamless, and low-friction digital experiences. Anything less suggests the brand doesn’t understand them.

Just as critically, language and localisation now serve as first impressions. A landing page that defaults to English – or worse, uses awkward machine translations – can signal cultural detachment. By contrast, content tailored in local languages, with region-specific slang and visual references, is seen as a mark of respect and investment. It says: we’re not just here to sell; we’re here to understand.

In a space where attention is both fleeting and fiercely fought over, success no longer goes to the loudest voice or biggest budget. It goes to the most culturally fluent, visually intuitive, and platform-native presence. Winning the first screen isn’t about visibility alone – it’s about resonance.

The Rise of Reverse Aspiration and Quiet Power

Western brands once assumed that success in emerging markets meant becoming aspirational – symbols of modernity and affluence. But for today’s mobile-first generation, the tables are turning. Increasingly, it is not global prestige that earns admiration, but local relevance. In place of overt aspiration, there’s a growing sense of pride in indigenous culture, self-made success, and digital independence. What’s emerging is a quiet power: consumers who no longer seek to imitate the West, but expect brands – foreign and domestic – to meet them on their terms.

Across Southeast Asia and Africa, there’s a perceptible shift from status to substance. In Nigeria, youth are driving a surge in support for homegrown fashion labels like Orange Culture and Ashluxe – brands that blend global aesthetics with distinctly African narratives. A 2023 Euromonitor report found that 64% of Nigerian Gen Z consumers said they prefer to buy local brands that reflect their identity, even when international options are available.

This isn’t limited to apparel. In Indonesia, the halal cosmetics market has seen explosive growth, not merely as a religious preference but as an expression of cultural values. Brands like Wardah and Emina now rival – or outperform – multinational competitors in brand recognition among young women. These brands don’t compete by mimicking Western tropes. They succeed by embedding themselves in the rhythms of local life, from religious observances to beauty standards shaped by regional influencers rather than global celebrities.

The same dynamic is playing out in Vietnam’s tech sector, where local e-wallets like MoMo are outpacing foreign fintech entrants – not because of superior technology but because they better understand the daily behaviours, payment rituals, and security concerns of the Vietnamese consumer. According to a 2023 study by Decision Lab, MoMo enjoys over 60% brand preference among young urbanites, in part due to its partnerships with local merchants and integration into everyday routines like topping up phone credit or paying utility bills.

Meanwhile, global culture is increasingly being shaped by these same markets. Afrobeats, once a niche genre, now tops international charts. Thai skincare routines are influencing global beauty trends. Filipino content creators are gaining global followers on TikTok not because they adapt to global norms, but because they confidently showcase their own. In this way, reverse aspiration is not just a rejection of old hierarchies – it’s an export of influence.

For brands, the lesson is clear: you are not the centre of the story. Consumers no longer measure themselves against your brand identity. Instead, they measure your brand against their values, communities, and cultural fluency. Products must be flexible, not fixed; branding must adapt, not dictate.

The rise of reverse aspiration doesn’t signal hostility toward global brands – it signals maturity. These consumers aren’t trying to join the global mainstream. They are the mainstream – digitally savvy, culturally proud, and shaping the conversation on their own terms. And they expect brands to understand that before making their pitch.

Strategies to Earn Attention and Trust

Capturing the attention of the next billion is not a matter of flashy creative or inflated ad budgets. These consumers are deliberate and discerning, quick to disengage from brands that don’t meet their standards or speak their language – both literally and figuratively. Trust is not a funnel; it’s a framework. And it requires consistent, intentional action across every touchpoint.

1. Hyper-localisation isn’t optional – it’s foundational.
For emerging market consumers, brand credibility is tightly linked to cultural fluency. It goes beyond simple translation to a full embrace of local values, references, and usage contexts. In Vietnam, the delivery app Baemin differentiated itself by infusing its platform with witty Vietnamese slang, inside jokes, and hyper-specific product categories – earning loyalty not through function, but through cultural intimacy. In Kenya, Safaricom’s M-Pesa succeeded not just as a mobile payments tool, but because it was built around the realities of an unbanked population, with offline integration and SMS functionality that anticipated connectivity challenges.

2. Trust is built in the micro-moments.
In high-trust economies, consumers might forgive a misstep. In low-trust markets, every interaction matters. A delayed delivery, a missing refund, or a slow response to a query can permanently damage perception. In Indonesia, beauty brand Sociolla won favour by offering guaranteed authentic products, tracked delivery, and a no-hassle return policy – features that directly addressed consumer anxieties in a market flooded with counterfeits. Transparency, speed, and customer service are not operational choices; they are brand positioning strategies.

3. Community voices trump corporate messaging.
The age of the polished brand ambassador is fading. Peer influence, especially from micro-influencers and everyday content creators, now holds more sway. These are people with modest followings but high engagement, often speaking in native dialects or regional slang. In the Philippines, Shopee’s partnership with grassroots creators in smaller cities – rather than national celebrities – helped drive adoption among new internet users. Brands that co-create with local voices, elevate real customer stories, and share behind-the-scenes content signal a level of openness that consumers find relatable and reassuring.

4. Simplification drives conversion.
The mobile-first mindset means consumers expect streamlined interfaces, fast-loading pages, and frictionless payment processes. The most successful brands eliminate barriers rather than adding features. In India, Meesho – a platform that allows users to resell products through WhatsApp and Facebook – gained explosive traction not by competing on price or product, but by simplifying commerce to match the rhythms of informal entrepreneurship. Especially in markets with lower digital literacy or inconsistent connectivity, simplicity is not just convenient – it’s empowering.

5. Offer real value, not just marketing.
Beyond product benefits, brands that offer utility, knowledge, or community are more likely to earn sustained engagement. During the pandemic, Vietnam’s Vinamilk launched a nutrition education series across Facebook Live, fronted by local pediatricians and nutritionists. The effort was not overtly commercial, but it positioned the brand as a trusted source in a time of uncertainty – building long-term brand equity. Similarly, in Africa, MTN’s “Y’ello Hope” campaign provided remote learning support and free data for health workers, deepening brand connection far beyond mobile service.

6. Show up where it matters – and stay.
Too often, international brands treat emerging markets as seasonal experiments, testing campaigns without long-term investment. But consistency is critical. Consumers notice who’s around during key holidays, national events, and crises – and who disappears when results don’t come quickly. Building trust means being present, listening actively, and responding quickly, even when it’s not convenient. It means moving from transactional to relational.

Attention and trust are hard-won in these markets – but not impossible. Brands that succeed will be those that listen before speaking, localise without diluting, and deliver value at every step. It’s not about cracking a code – it’s about showing up, with respect, relevance, and reliability.

What the Next Billion Means for Global Strategy

The next billion consumers will not just change where companies grow – they will fundamentally reshape how companies think. For too long, emerging markets have been treated as the final frontier for global brands – places to extend reach and scale after success was achieved elsewhere. That model is not only outdated; it’s strategically short-sighted.

In markets like Vietnam, Kenya, and the Philippines, consumer expectations are being forged under entirely different conditions: mobile-first access, economic volatility, rapid urbanisation, and a deep mistrust of centralised systems. The result is a set of behaviours that are more adaptive, more sceptical, and often more innovative than those seen in mature markets. Consumers here are not merely catching up – they are setting new standards.

Rather than viewing these markets as extensions of Western playbooks, companies should see them as innovation testbeds. Take mobile commerce: features like embedded payments, one-click checkout via messaging apps, or app-free transactions are not novelties – they are necessities driven by constraints around bandwidth, infrastructure, and financial inclusion. Yet these same constraints are producing solutions that may become best practices globally.

Similarly, platform design in these regions often centres on immediacy, low data consumption, and local integration. Global teams should be asking: What can we learn from the success of super apps in Southeast Asia? From the rise of voice notes and vernacular language content in India? From trust mechanics built into informal commerce networks across West Africa? These are not fringe behaviors – they are indicators of where global user expectations are headed.

The ability to operate in these ecosystems requires more than translation. It demands cultural intelligence, operational flexibility, and a long-term mindset. Localisation must move beyond interface tweaks to encompass everything from payment methods and logistics to influencer partnerships and community engagement. A product launch is no longer the finish line; it’s the beginning of a multi-year trust-building process.

This shift calls for investment – not just in marketing – but in on-the-ground research, in building local teams with decision-making power, and in systems that can adapt quickly to feedback loops. The brands that will thrive are those that listen early, prototype fast, and refine continuously. That’s not reactive – it’s resilient.

The next billion are not waiting to be discovered. They are already online, already informed, already choosing. But they are choosing carefully. Their loyalty isn’t earned by reputation – it’s earned by repetition: consistent delivery, relevance, and respect over time.

What we’re seeing isn’t a short-term trend – it’s a structural redefinition of what global success looks like. And in this new equation, the old formulas – centralised control, broad generalisations, and push marketing – no longer hold. The competitive edge will belong to those who approach these markets not as territories to conquer, but as partners in evolution.

Because when consumers are multilingual, mobile-first, and mistrustful by design, brand engagement becomes a privilege – not a right. The challenge is not whether companies can reach them. It’s whether they can rise to meet them.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

Wearables aren’t fringe anymore. Once seen as fitness accessories for gym-goers and early adopters, smartwatches and health trackers are becoming everyday essentials. In the first quarter of 2024 alone, global shipments of wearable devices hit 113 million units – an almost 9% jump compared to the year before. And that’s despite persistent inflation and consumer pullback across key markets.

What’s shifting? People are treating these devices less like gadgets and more like tools for managing stress, sleep, and overall health. Consumers are using them to take control – sometimes even before they know something’s wrong. And tech companies are keeping pace, building in more sophisticated health features, wrapping them in sleek design, and expanding their reach far beyond Silicon Valley.

China, for example, led the world in wrist-worn device shipments through most of 2024, with almost 46 million units sold in just the first three quarters. Japan’s older population is increasingly using wearables to monitor vitals and stay independent longer. In the US and UK, mainstream use is now less about steps and more about holistic wellness. Meanwhile, in Southeast Asia and India, lower-cost models are making wearables accessible to first-time buyers – especially younger users who want health data but don’t need an Apple logo to get it.

This rise isn’t just about health – it’s about habits. The adoption curve shows that consumers are steadily folding digital health tracking into their everyday routines, reshaping not only how we think about wellness but also how we’ll live and age in the years ahead.

From step counters to personal health assistants

The evolution of wearables mirrors a larger shift in how we define health. A decade ago, a fitness tracker was mostly just that – a tool for counting steps or logging runs. Now, it’s a wrist-worn health hub, checking heart rhythms, analyzing sleep, detecting stress, and even alerting users to abnormal vitals before symptoms appear.

This transformation hasn’t just changed the product – it’s reshaped the market. What started with athletes and early tech adopters has now spread across age groups and income levels. Smartwatches are on the wrists of office workers in Singapore, older adults in Tokyo, commuters in London, and Gen Z students in Delhi. And the demand isn’t slowing.

Global sales of wearables reached over $84 billion in 2024, with projections putting the market on track to more than double by 2030. That growth is being powered by consumers in Asia, where China continues to dominate volume thanks to homegrown brands, and where India and Southeast Asia are seeing rising uptake of budget-friendly devices. In Japan, demand is strongest among an ageing population who are using wearables for peace of mind – keeping tabs on heart rate, sleep, and medication reminders.

The US and UK still lead when it comes to higher-end models and paid health tracking subscriptions. But what’s consistent across regions is the shift from passive to active wellness. As one analyst at Canalys put it recently, “We’re watching wearables move from fitness to full-spectrum lifestyle tech.”

And while device makers keep layering in new features – temperature sensing, stress tracking, blood oxygen levels – it’s the behavior behind the screen that matters most. Consumers aren’t just buying wearables; they’re changing how they relate to their own health. What’s changing fastest isn’t the tech – it’s how people are folding it into their everyday decisions.

Consumer Adoption Across Generations and Borders

Younger consumers may be driving volume, but wearables are winning over every generation – for very different reasons.

Among Gen Z and millennials, wearables are lifestyle enhancers. Sleep tracking, stress insights, and gamified fitness goals are baked into daily routines, often synced to social media. According to a 2024 YouGov poll in the US and UK, nearly 60% of millennials who own a wearable use it at least five days a week, while Gen Z’s interest is climbing fastest, especially in India, Indonesia, and the Philippines where affordable models are surging.

For younger users, it’s not just fitness. Wearables help manage anxiety, track menstrual cycles, and even gauge productivity. In Southeast Asia, TikTok influencers regularly promote smartwatch brands with built-in wellness challenges, and the appeal is sticking.

By contrast, Gen X and boomers tend to use wearables with a more clinical lens. In Japan, uptake among older adults rose sharply in the past two years, driven by growing interest in managing hypertension, irregular heart rhythms, and fall risk. Apple’s expanded medical alerts and ECG functions are frequently cited by Japanese media as valuable features for ageing consumers. In the UK, NHS-backed pilot programs are offering wearables to older patients recovering from surgery or managing long-term conditions.

In the US, over 40% of Gen Xers who own a wearable say they’ve shared data with a healthcare provider, up from just 27% in 2021. But privacy concerns linger, especially among Gen Z. Despite their high usage, only 26% of Gen Z respondents to a 2024 eMarketer study said they would be comfortable sharing health data with doctors or insurers – suggesting a growing tension between usage and trust.

Here’s how adoption looks across some of the key markets:

Country/Region	Top Adopting Cohorts	Primary Use Cases	Notable Trends
US	Millennials, Gen X	Sleep, stress, fitness, medical alerts	High usage of subscription models like Fitbit Premium
UK	Millennials, Boomers	Heart monitoring, post-surgery recovery	NHS pilot programs integrating wearable tech
Japan	Boomers	Heart rate, fall detection, medication	Growing adoption in eldercare and wellness insurance schemes
India	Gen Z, Millennials	Step counting, calorie burn, wellness apps	High growth in low-cost smartwatch brands
Indonesia	Gen Z	Fitness tracking, daily health challenges	Influencer marketing fueling adoption
China	All age groups	Everything from fitness to medical alerts	Domestic brands dominate; strong public sector partnerships
Singapore	Millennials, Gen X	Health monitoring, workplace wellness	Wearables integrated into corporate wellness programs
Germany	Boomers, Gen X	Blood pressure, diabetes management	Insurance discounts tied to wearable usage

The generations aren’t divided – they’re stacked. What started with Gen Z is now reshaping how everyone manages health. And the industry knows it.

The Technology Arms Race

The more wearables become part of daily life, the harder tech companies are pushing to stay ahead. And they’re not just making devices faster or sleeker – they’re turning them into medical-grade tools, payment platforms, and personal wellbeing dashboards, all in one.

What started as a step-counting competition is now a full-blown innovation sprint. Apple’s latest Watch models detect arrhythmias and track ovulation patterns through temperature fluctuations. Samsung has layered in blood pressure monitoring and sleep scoring tied to cardiovascular insights. Google-backed Fitbit has pivoted from steps to stress, with its newer models using electrodermal activity sensors to gauge emotional strain in real time.

And it’s not just the big brands. In Japan, wearable developers are exploring integration with long-term care plans, while Singapore’s public health teams have trialled government-backed trackers to incentivise exercise and preventive check-ups. In India and Indonesia, homegrown brands like Noise and Realme are keeping up by offering entry-level smartwatches with features that mirror high-end models – heart rate variability, SpO₂ monitoring, and meditation modes – at a fraction of the cost.

The market is clearly rewarding innovation. Smart rings, once a fringe category, are now booming. Oura has become shorthand for wellness among executives and athletes, while Samsung’s anticipated launch of its Galaxy Ring is already stirring up the category. Analysts at Canalys expect the global smart ring segment to triple by 2026, with Asia leading the growth.

Sensors are getting better, but software is where the race is heating up. The shift toward AI-enabled personalisation means devices are starting to behave less like monitors and more like coaches – detecting patterns, learning user behaviour, and nudging people to take breaks, breathe deeply, or move more. Apple’s upcoming software update includes passive tracking of mental well-being, aiming to surface early indicators of depression and anxiety based on behavioural signals.

This arms race is no longer about having the best display or longest battery. It’s about owning the feedback loop: gathering data, interpreting it meaningfully, and turning that insight into habit-changing nudges. And with more users willing to share health data – whether for clinical support or lifestyle optimisation – tech brands are rapidly becoming key players in the future of healthcare.

The Economics of Adoption in a Soft Economy

The flood of innovation might be grabbing headlines, but it’s the economics of wearables that’s driving their expansion into the mainstream – especially as consumers grow more cost-conscious.

Subscription models are a major pivot point. Fitbit Premium, Whoop, and Apple’s Fitness+ aren’t just upsells – they’re positioning wearables as part of a recurring wellness lifestyle. Fitbit Premium alone now has over 10 million paid users globally, according to Alphabet’s 2024 earnings report. Whoop, which has no upfront device cost and instead charges a monthly fee, has doubled its subscriber base since 2022, banking on athletes and executives willing to pay for deeper recovery and strain insights.

Yet in many markets, recurring costs are a harder sell. That’s where public and private incentives are stepping in. Singapore’s government-led LumiHealth program – developed with Apple – offers financial rewards for completing activity challenges and tracking sleep. In Germany, health insurers like TK and Barmer provide partial reimbursements for certified fitness wearables when used as part of preventive care. These programs aren’t about gadgets – they’re about reducing long-term healthcare costs.

Affordability is also being tackled at the hardware level. In India, for example, wearable brands like Noise and boAt have carved out a dominant position by offering smartwatches with fitness and health tracking features for under ₹2,500 ($30). These devices may lack the polish of premium models, but they’ve dramatically widened access, especially among younger consumers in urban areas. The result? India is now one of the fastest-growing wearables markets in the world, with domestic brands accounting for nearly 75% of total shipments in 2024.

In the US and UK, cost still matters. Refurbished models, bundle deals, and corporate wellness perks are helping buyers justify their spending. Entry prices are falling, but expectations are climbing. People want value – not just on the sticker but in the insights, the ecosystem, and the staying power of the device.

Wearables as Part of the Health Ecosystem

As wearable technology becomes more sophisticated, its integration into the broader health ecosystem is deepening, transforming patient care and preventive health strategies. Today’s devices don’t just count steps – they stream health data to doctors, flag risks in real time, and plug directly into telehealth platforms.

Seamless Integration with Healthcare Systems

In the United Kingdom, the National Health Service (NHS) has initiated pilot programs to incorporate wearable devices into patient care. These programs focus on remote monitoring of patients with chronic conditions, allowing healthcare professionals to track vital signs and detect early signs of deterioration without requiring patients to visit healthcare facilities. This approach not only improves patient outcomes but also alleviates the burden on healthcare resources.

Similarly, in Japan, addressing the needs of an ageing population has led to innovative uses of wearable technology. Companies like Tellus You Care have developed non-contact remote monitoring systems that track the health and safety of elderly individuals. These wearables can detect falls and monitor daily activities, enabling caregivers and medical professionals to respond promptly to emergencies.

Enhancing Telehealth Services

In the United States, the synergy between wearable devices and telehealth applications is revolutionising patient care. Wearables can sync with telehealth platforms, providing clinicians with continuous health data streams. This integration allows for more accurate assessments during virtual consultations and facilitates proactive management of conditions such as hypertension and diabetes. For instance, patients using wearable blood pressure monitors can transmit their readings directly to their electronic health records, enabling healthcare providers to adjust treatments in real-time.

Addressing Data Privacy and Reliability Concerns

Still, the deeper wearables penetrate healthcare, the more they raise questions – especially around privacy. These devices collect a steady stream of highly personal health data, and not everyone knows where that information ends up. Breaches are rare, but when they happen, the fallout is big. Surveys show many users remain unclear about how their data is handled, which puts pressure on tech companies and healthcare providers to be far more transparent.

There’s also the question of how reliable the data really is. Wearables offer useful health snapshots, but they’re not always accurate enough to replace clinical tools. If users or doctors lean too heavily on that information, it can lead to wrong calls – or unnecessary stress. That’s why most healthcare providers treat wearable data as one piece of the puzzle, not the whole picture.

How Singapore Turned Wearables into a Public Health Tool

Image credit: LumiHealth

Singapore may be small in size, but it’s been outsized in ambition when it comes to health tech. In 2020, the government launched LumiHealth, a joint initiative with Apple that turns the Apple Watch into a national wellness tool. The idea was simple: incentivise citizens to stay healthy by gamifying fitness and preventive behaviours.

Participants download an app, pair it with an Apple Watch, and earn vouchers by completing health goals like walking, meditating, or getting flu shots. The rewards are modest – up to S$380 over two years – but the behavioral nudge is powerful. More than 200,000 residents signed up in the program’s first year, with high retention and engagement among older adults and those managing chronic conditions.

What makes LumiHealth notable isn’t just its use of wearable tech, but how it reframes wellness as a shared responsibility between citizen, government, and platform. It’s one of the first large-scale examples of a nation leveraging consumer-grade devices for population health – and a blueprint for how data, design, and nudges can shift real-world behaviour.

The program has also informed broader policy. Health officials now see wearables as part of Singapore’s preventive care strategy. In 2024, pilot extensions were announced to include nutrition tracking and mental wellbeing prompts – making the Watch not just a step counter, but a guide for daily living.

From Devices to Digital Selfhood

As wearables sync more deeply with our health, they’re also syncing with something else: identity.

Fitness trackers and smartwatches are no longer just tools – they’ve become quiet status symbols, wellness affirmations, and, in some cases, lifestyle declarations. Wearing a Whoop band or an Oura ring signals a commitment to optimisation. A Garmin on the wrist might suggest serious training. Even design choices – stainless steel finishes, leather straps, minimalist rings – convey intention. The wearable, in short, has become part of the personal brand.

This isn’t accidental. Tech companies are leaning into the rise of the quantified self: a movement that treats data as a mirror for self-improvement. Sleep scores are shared in group chats. Heart rate variability is discussed on Reddit threads. There’s even a social layer – Apple’s fitness rings can be closed collaboratively, while Fitbit allows real-time challenges with friends. What began as private tracking is now an interactive, sometimes performative, pursuit.

That said, cultural context shapes how wearables are used – and what they mean.

Region	Attitude Toward Wearables	Underlying Values
US & UK	Individualised health and performance tools	Self-optimisation, control, productivity
Japan	Monitors for long-term care and group wellbeing	Safety, longevity, family responsibility
India	Lifestyle enhancers for youth and urbanites	Aspirational health, affordability, digital status
Singapore	Incentivised national wellness participation	Community health, public-private collaboration
China	Everyday convenience tools across all ages	Functional utility, tech-forward lifestyle

In the West, wearable data is often framed in terms of productivity – how to sleep better, train harder, or manage stress. In much of Asia, especially in countries like Japan and Singapore, adoption has leaned more toward collective well-being: tracking to stay safe, support ageing populations, or meet national health goals. While the hardware might be the same, the intention behind it can be radically different.

That’s the shift: wearables aren’t just keeping score anymore. They’re helping shape identity – quiet signals of the kind of life we’re trying to live.

The Future Forecast: Smart Living 2030

If the last decade was about wearables gaining acceptance, the next will be about wearables becoming invisible – fully embedded in our surroundings, our health systems, and our daily decision-making. By 2030, the line between body and technology will blur further, not through flashy upgrades, but through quiet, continuous presence.

One of the most anticipated frontiers is continuous, noninvasive blood glucose monitoring, widely viewed as the “holy grail” of wearables. Major tech players, including Apple and Samsung, have been investing heavily in research to bring this functionality to market. Success here wouldn’t just serve diabetics – it would recalibrate how millions think about food, energy, and performance in real time.

Another inflection point will be emotional health. Devices are beginning to detect mood states based on physical cues – micro-fluctuations in skin temperature, heart rate variability, or voice tone. In the next few years, we may see wearables that can flag the early signs of anxiety, burnout, or depressive episodes before the user is even aware. The implications for preventative mental health are enormous – but so are the ethical questions.

Artificial intelligence will be the connective tissue that binds these advances together. Already, AI is being used to turn raw data into feedback loops, coaching users to adjust behaviours. But by 2030, it’s likely that wearables will be part of more coordinated, multi-device ecosystems – syncing not just with phones and watches but also with smart homes, personal health dashboards, and even city infrastructure.

It’s a shift adjacent industries are already watching closely. Insurers are piloting risk models based on real-time biometric data. Pharma firms are testing wearable-driven trial designs and adherence tools. And in some cities, planners are exploring responsive environments – public spaces that adjust to physiological signals, from light and sound to air quality.

What’s next for wearables won’t be defined by tech specs – but by what people do with the data, and who they’re willing to share it with. Smart living by 2030 may not look like sci-fi. It may just look… seamless.

A Tipping Point for Personal Health

We’ve passed the point where wearables are optional tech accessories. They’ve moved into the domain of lifestyle infrastructure – tools people rely on not just for information, but for insight, motivation, and increasingly, autonomy.

When Apple’s COO Jeff Williams stood on stage at CES and said, “We’re not just building a watch – we’re building a guardian for your wellbeing,” it wasn’t marketing hype. It was a quiet signal of where the industry sees its role going: less device, more guide.

And yet, as wearables grow smarter, more embedded, and more predictive, we’re entering a new kind of contract with our devices – one where personal health is constantly measured, interpreted, and nudged. The convenience is undeniable. The value is rising. But so is the question: who controls the loop?

Will the decade ahead empower us to become more informed, more proactive, and more in tune with our health? Or will we find ourselves outsourcing our instincts to a wristband?

It’s a future being shaped now, one wrist at a time.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

Even as consumers trim expenses in travel, fashion, and dining out, there’s one area where spending continues to climb: their pets.

The global pet care market is now worth over $324 billion, with projections putting it close to $600 billion by 2033. In the United States alone, Americans are expected to spend more than $150 billion on their pets this year – up from $136 billion just two years ago. That’s roughly $1,700 per pet-owning household.

What’s driving the boom isn’t just more pets – it’s more premium care. Owners are trading up to organic diets, breed-specific supplements, and wearable health trackers. Subscriptions for virtual vet services and home delivery of fresh pet meals are becoming routine. Industry analysts say the trend reflects the growing “humanisation” of pets, where wellness standards once reserved for people are now expected for animals, too.

Here at Kadence International, we’re seeing this shift play out across markets. Consumers might delay upgrading a phone or cut back on takeout, but they continue to invest in pet wellness – whether it’s probiotic chews, allergy relief supplements, or DNA testing kits. The behaviour is less about indulgence and more about prioritising the quality of life for their animals.

The premiumisation of pet care is quickly moving from niche to norm – redefining how pet owners allocate household budgets and how companies compete in one of the most resilient sectors of consumer spending.

Rising Demand in Emerging Markets Reshapes the Global Pet Economy

The pet care boom is no longer centred solely in the West. Markets once considered secondary – particularly across Asia and Latin America – are rapidly becoming the industry’s main growth engines, reshaping supply chains, product innovation, and competitive strategy.

China, long known for its production of pet goods, is now a consumption powerhouse. Urbanisation, rising incomes, and a generational shift in attitudes toward pet ownership have driven the country’s pet economy past 270 billion yuan ($37 billion USD) in 2024, according to data from iiMedia Research. Functional pet foods, insurance services, and AI-enabled pet tech are flourishing in cities like Shanghai and Beijing, where single-person households and delayed family planning are accelerating the “pet as child” dynamic.

In Southeast Asia, pet ownership is rising fastest among millennials and Gen Z, particularly in Vietnam, Indonesia, and Thailand. Here at Kadence International, our fieldwork suggests that first-time pet owners in these markets are skipping entry-level products entirely – jumping straight into grain-free diets, subscription-based care boxes, and app-based training services. This leapfrogging effect mirrors what happened in fintech across emerging markets: consumers are building their relationship with brands in the premium tier from day one.

Meanwhile, in Brazil – the second-largest pet care market globally after the U.S. – veterinary services and pet health plans are expanding beyond affluent neighbourhoods. Brazilian households spent an estimated $9 billion USD on pets in 2023, with wellness products now part of everyday grocery retail.

Even mature markets are shifting internally. In Japan and South Korea, birth rates are at historic lows, and a growing number of households treat pets not just as companions, but as emotional and psychological anchors. As a result, the types of products being purchased – from calming diffusers to mental stimulation toys – are changing the definition of core pet care categories.

This reshaping of the global pet economy isn’t just a redistribution of revenue; it’s altering the cultural context of pet ownership. The premium boom may have started in North America, but the future of pet wellness is being co-authored in Jakarta, São Paulo, Seoul, and beyond.

Premiumisation in Pet Food and Supplements Redefines the Bowl

A decade ago, premium pet food meant a slightly higher protein count or a label with fewer artificial additives. Today, it means bioavailable nutrients, functional botanicals, customised formulations, and health claims that would feel at home in a human wellness catalogue.

The line between nutrition and therapy is blurring – and the market is responding. In 2023, sales of premium pet food grew at nearly double the rate of standard pet food globally, according to Euromonitor International. Functional claims – supporting gut health, mobility, immune strength, or anxiety reduction – have moved from the margins to the centre of packaging in the U.S., UK, Japan, and South Korea. Shoppers are no longer choosing between brands; they’re choosing between outcomes.

Consumer behaviour is shifting accordingly. Mintel reports that more than half of U.S. dog owners now actively seek out food with added health benefits, while one in three expect brands to personalise recommendations based on age, breed, or health status. In the UK, pet owners are increasingly mirroring their own dietary ethics, gravitating toward organic and even plant-based options. In Japan, ageing pets are driving demand for easier-to-digest meals and portion-controlled packaging that reflects pharmaceutical precision.

Supplements have quietly become one of the fastest-growing segments in the category. Once the preserve of niche online retailers, they are now a fixture in big-box pet stores and veterinary clinics. Calming chews, joint support powders, and probiotic drops are increasingly purchased not in response to a diagnosis but as part of a preventive care routine. Subscription models are flourishing in this space – not for convenience alone, but because owners want continuity in their pets’ health regimen.

What’s emerging is a recalibration of value: not measured by bulk or brand familiarity, but by purpose. The pet food aisle is no longer just a product display – it’s a wellness portfolio, curated by consumers who increasingly expect the same standard of care for their pets that they do for themselves.

The App Will See You Now

Veterinary care is no longer confined to the clinic. A growing share of pet owners are now managing health check-ins, nutrition planning, and behavioural advice through digital platforms – often without ever leaving home. In many markets, this is less a futuristic leap and more a pragmatic pivot driven by convenience, cost concerns, and a shortage of veterinarians.

The surge in telehealth for pets began during the pandemic, but it has since evolved into a new tier of service. Platforms like Pawp, Fuzzy, and Joii offer 24/7 vet consultations, monthly wellness plans, and AI-supported symptom triage. These aren’t replacing traditional care entirely, but they are reshaping the front line – handling minor concerns, triaging emergencies, and maintaining continuity between physical visits.

In the United States, pet telemedicine visits increased more than 300% between 2020 and 2023, according to data from the American Veterinary Medical Association. In the UK, the British Veterinary Association reported that one in five pet owners had used digital vet services in the past year. And in Southeast Asia, where access to veterinary professionals remains limited in many regions, digital care is emerging not just as an option but as infrastructure.

Tied closely to this trend is the rise of subscription-based wellness. What began with monthly deliveries of flea and tick medication has grown into a service model that includes customised food plans, behavioural coaching, supplements, and diagnostics – often bundled through a single platform or mobile app. Some services even offer annual blood testing with doorstep collection, designed to catch early signs of illness before symptoms surface.

The value proposition is as much about predictability as it is about health. For time-poor, urban pet owners – especially millennials and Gen Z – these services streamline routines and reduce the anxiety of not knowing when or how to act. They also lock in brand loyalty in a category where switching costs are otherwise low.

What makes this shift notable isn’t just the tech adoption – it’s the reframing of pet care as a continuous service, rather than an episodic, event-based expense. As competition grows and platforms race to add value, the veterinary space may be next in line for the kind of disruption already seen in human primary care.

Brand Spotlight: Butternut Box

Image credit Butternut Box

Launched in the UK, Butternut Box has become one of Europe’s fastest-growing premium pet food brands by reimagining how pet meals are made, marketed, and delivered. What began as a small direct-to-consumer startup offering fresh, human-grade dog food has evolved into a major player in the pet wellness space, known for its personalised subscription model and health-first messaging.

Every meal is pre-portioned, vet-approved, and tailored to the pet’s dietary needs – whether age, breed, or health condition. As demand for functional nutrition surged, Butternut Box expanded its offering to include treats, supplements, and, most recently, fresh food for cats.

The company has seen rapid growth. Revenues jumped significantly in 2023, and subscriber numbers continue to climb as the brand expands into new markets across Europe. Recent acquisitions and infrastructure investments are helping it scale beyond the UK, with operations now live in Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Poland.

Much of the brand’s appeal lies in its ability to align with pet owner expectations – offering transparency, convenience, and clear health outcomes. Its packaging, product formulation, and tone of voice are all geared toward the modern, wellness-minded consumer who wants more than just “better kibble.” And with fresh food sales rising across the industry, Butternut Box is well-positioned to lead the charge.

As the definition of pet health evolves, Butternut Box exemplifies how brands can thrive by staying close to consumer values. Its growth underscores a larger shift: pet owners aren’t just buying food – they’re investing in long-term wellness. And they’re choosing brands that make that easy, measurable, and personalised.

The Psychology Behind the Spend

Rational budgeting has never fully explained pet ownership. But in a year where inflation has squeezed discretionary spending across sectors, the continued rise in pet wellness expenditure points to something deeper: emotional economics.

In the United States, 62% of pet owners say they are spending “the same or more” on their animals despite cutting back in other parts of their lives, according to a 2024 survey by Morgan Stanley. And it’s not just petting parents in affluent neighbourhoods. In Brazil, where real incomes have fluctuated over the past two years, pet care remains one of the most resilient retail categories, particularly among single-person households and retirees.

What’s driving this behavior isn’t just brand marketing or a surge in new product availability – it’s a cultural shift in the perceived role of pets. In many homes, animals are no longer companions; they’re emotional extensions of the self. Pet care spending is often framed not as an expense, but as an expression of identity, responsibility, and affection. That makes it far less vulnerable to economic headwinds.

There’s also the matter of control. In periods of uncertainty, consumers tend to focus on the things they can manage. For pet owners, that increasingly means doubling down on wellness – purchasing products and services that promise safety, health, and longevity. In this way, premium pet care has become part of a broader coping strategy: a way to nurture stability in an unstable world.

Consumer researchers are watching this closely. “What we’re seeing is a shift from reactive to anticipatory spending,” said one behavioural analyst in a recent study published by Mintel. “It’s no longer just about solving a problem – it’s about preemptively protecting what matters most.”

The implication for brands is significant. Emotional drivers are shaping not just what consumers buy, but how they engage – with higher expectations around transparency, ethics, and personalisation. It’s no longer sufficient to claim that a product is “good for pets.” Increasingly, it has to feel like the right decision for the person making it.

What Comes Next for Pet Wellness Brands

The shift in consumer behaviour is now being mirrored in boardrooms and investment portfolios. Private equity firms, legacy conglomerates, and health tech startups are all converging on a singular conclusion: pet care is no longer a recession-proof niche – it’s a lifestyle category with global, cross-demographic appeal.

In the past 24 months, more than a dozen pet wellness platforms have closed Series A or B funding rounds in excess of $20 million. Unilever acquired a majority stake in pet supplement brand Nutrafol Pets. Mars, already dominant in veterinary services through its ownership of Banfield and VCA, is doubling down on diagnostics and AI tools through its Kinship division. Even players outside the category – like Nestlé and L Catterton – have quietly expanded their holdings in high-growth pet food startups.

This capital infusion is reshaping not just how pet products are developed, but how they’re delivered. Subscription platforms are building vertically integrated ecosystems. Diagnostics companies are exploring partnerships with tele-vet apps. Consumer goods firms are rethinking packaging, sustainability, and supply chains to appeal to increasingly values-driven buyers.

To make sense of the momentum, here’s a snapshot of key growth areas attracting attention:

Emerging Investment Hotspots in Pet Wellness

Category	Why It’s Growing	Notable Moves (2023–2024)
Functional Pet Food	Rising demand for therapeutic and preventative nutrition	Nestlé invests in JustFoodForDogs
Tele-Veterinary Services	Expanding access, convenience, and lower cost barriers	Fuzzy and Pawp secure $25M+ in funding rounds
Pet Supplements	Proactive health management among Gen Z and millennials	Nutrafol Pets launches in North America
Diagnostics & Health Tech	Early detection, personalisation, and longevity trends	Mars launches pet DNA and microbiome services
Subscription-Based Models	Strong retention, DTC control, consumer preference	PetPlate, BarkBox expand internationally

The next wave of competition won’t be driven solely by who has the best product – but by who owns the end-to-end relationship with the pet owner. As wellness becomes the defining lens through which pet care is viewed, brands will need to operate more like healthcare providers than traditional retailers.

The opportunity is enormous, but so is the expectation. The bar has been raised – by consumers, by capital markets, and increasingly, by the animals themselves, whose needs are now tracked, monitored, and optimised in real time.

A Wellness Revolution Still in Its Infancy

If the past five years marked the emergence of premium pet care as a trend, the next five will define it as an expectation. The convergence of health, data, and digital delivery has already reshaped human wellness; now it’s doing the same for animals – at speed and scale.

What we’re seeing is a new phase of maturity in pet ownership globally. In emerging markets, where pet care was once utilitarian, consumers are leapfrogging into advanced wellness behaviours – driven by rising incomes, smaller households, and increased digital access. In mature markets, the shift is more psychological: pets are not just part of the family, they are central to it, prompting a level of intentionality in purchase decisions that echoes human healthcare.

This signals not just a market opportunity, but a transformation in mindset. We expect to see a rise in predictive care models powered by biometric monitoring, AI-driven nutrition plans, and services that adapt in real time to the pet’s lifecycle or environment. The role of the vet will likely evolve, too – becoming more consultative and tech-enabled, supported by home diagnostics and subscription wellness ecosystems.

And while consumer demand is shaping the future, it’s also setting new standards. Transparency, traceability, and ethical sourcing will become baseline requirements. Products that once stood out for being “premium” will be judged instead by how well they anticipate needs, reduce friction, and integrate into a seamless care experience.

This is no longer a pet product story – it’s a consumer behaviour story unfolding across borders, cultures, and categories. As the definition of wellness continues to evolve, so too will the expectations around how we care for the animals in our lives.

The brands that succeed won’t just sell to pet owners. They’ll understand them – intimately, culturally, and contextually. That’s where the future of the pet industry will be shaped.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.

In a bustling market in Lagos, 26-year-old Aisha scrolls through Instagram, weighing whether to buy a locally made dress promoted by an influencer. The brand has no website, just a WhatsApp number for orders. With a few taps, she messages the seller, confirms the price, and arranges for cash-on-delivery. In markets like Nigeria, social commerce is leapfrogging traditional e-commerce. Shoppers don’t browse sleek e-commerce websites; they buy through Instagram DMs, Facebook groups, and TikTok live streams. The brands that fail to adapt to this reality risk missing out on the next billion consumers.

The numbers reveal an undeniable shift in global commerce. E-commerce sales are projected to grow from $5.13 trillion in 2022 to $8.09 trillion by 2028, driven by an influx of new consumers from high-growth regions. China and the United States still lead in online retail, contributing over $2.32 trillion in sales in 2023, but the real transformation is happening in emerging economies like India, Indonesia, Nigeria, and the Philippines. Here, mobile and social commerce has become the foundation of digital retail.

For brands, the challenge is not just expansion; it’s reinvention. These new consumers don’t shop the way the first billion did. Over 80% research products online using search engines, social networks, and short-form videos, while 76% rely on social validation – likes, influencer recommendations, and customer reviews – before making a purchase. Yet, nearly half of the world’s largest consumer brands still lack a presence in these emerging markets, leaving a vast opportunity for those willing to rethink their approach.

But being present is not enough. The next billion shoppers favour social commerce over traditional e-commerce, engage with brands through messaging apps rather than websites, and expect seamless digital experiences across devices – even in regions where internet access is unreliable. They are also fiercely value-conscious, prioritising flexible payment methods like digital wallets and cash-on-delivery, options many global brands still fail to support.

Yet, many companies still operate with outdated digital commerce models built for Western markets. Global brands risk losing ground to more agile, regionally dominant competitors without rethinking payment systems, embedding social commerce, and optimising for mobile-first experiences.

The next billion shoppers aren’t waiting for brands to catch up. The only question is: Are brands ready for them?

Who Are the Next Billion Shoppers?

A 22-year-old university student buys skincare products in India through a WhatsApp group chat. In Nairobi, a young entrepreneur sells handmade jewellery on Facebook Marketplace, coordinating payments through mobile money. Across emerging markets, consumers bypass traditional e-commerce models, turning to social-first, mobile-driven shopping experiences that global brands have barely begun to tap into.

These next billion digital consumers – predominantly in India, Indonesia, Nigeria, the Philippines, Egypt, and Kenya – are young, mobile-first, and digitally fluent. Internet access is expanding at an unprecedented pace, fueling a seismic shift in global commerce. Yet, many brands still fail to understand how these shoppers think and behave.

What sets them apart is how they shop. Unlike their Western counterparts, they favour informal, platform-driven commerce over conventional e-commerce sites. Social media, messaging apps, and peer-to-peer networks aren’t just places to connect; they are marketplaces, customer service hubs, and payment portals. A single Instagram post can trigger thousands of transactions, with sellers coordinating payments and deliveries through direct messages.

But logistical and economic challenges shape their habits. Cash-on-delivery remains dominant in many of these markets, and mobile data costs influence browsing behaviour. Poor infrastructure in rural areas means last-mile delivery is unreliable, forcing consumers to adapt. In response, brands leverage micro-fulfillment centers, regional payment apps, and social commerce strategies to bridge these gaps.

By 2030, these emerging digital consumers will drive global e-commerce revenues past $8 trillion. But brands that attempt a one-size-fits-all approach will fail. To succeed, companies must embed themselves into local digital ecosystems, rethink payment and fulfilment strategies, and embrace how these consumers already shop or risk becoming irrelevant in these emerging markets.

Digital Access Is No Longer a Barrier—But Trust and Infrastructure Are

On paper, the e-commerce revolution in emerging markets looks unstoppable. Smartphone penetration is soaring, digital payment systems are growing, and mobile data is cheaper than ever. But inside a small shop in Jakarta, 28-year-old Rizky still hesitates before clicking ‘buy’ on an Instagram ad.

“The products look good, but I’ve been scammed before,” he says, scrolling through the comments. “What if it never arrives? Or worse, what if it’s fake?”

Rizky’s concerns reflect a broader reality: while digital adoption is rising, trust remains one of the biggest barriers to e-commerce growth. Counterfeit goods, poor customer service, and unreliable delivery services have made many consumers sceptical. Even in fast-growing online markets, many prefer cash transactions or in-person shopping rather than risk a bad purchase.

Payments are another obstacle. While fintech solutions are expanding, millions of consumers remain unbanked or underbanked. In Nigeria and India, cash-on-delivery still dominates, yet many global brands continue pushing credit card-based payment systems. In a region where platforms like GCash in the Philippines, Paytm in India, and M-Pesa in Kenya have become standard, brands that fail to offer these options risk losing sales entirely.

Then there’s last-mile delivery, or the lack of it. In rural Indonesia and sub-Saharan Africa, poor infrastructure means packages take weeks to arrive – if they make it at all. Some brands have adapted, partnering with hyper-local delivery networks or setting up pickup hubs in community centres and convenience stores. Others still operate with rigid, one-size-fits-all supply chains that don’t work in these markets.

The lesson is clear: digital access alone won’t drive e-commerce success. Winning over the next billion shoppers requires more than just an internet connection; it demands localised payment solutions, seamless returns, and a serious investment in trust-building. Without these, even the best-designed digital strategies will fall flat.

How Brands Can Win the Next Billion Shoppers

In Manila, a small fashion retailer went from selling 50 dresses a month to 500 without launching a website. Instead, its business runs through Facebook Live sales and TikTok videos, where customers comment “Mine” to claim an item and settle payments via digital wallets. Across emerging markets, this is the new normal.

For global brands, the lesson is clear: scaling into high-growth digital markets requires far more than a translated website or a localised ad campaign. The next billion shoppers aren’t waiting for brands to find them on corporate e-commerce platforms – they’re already buying where they spend their time: social media, messaging apps, and peer-to-peer networks.

Yet, many Western brands still treat these channels as secondary sales tools rather than primary retail ecosystems. In Indonesia, Nigeria, and the Philippines, more than half of digital shoppers prefer buying through social media rather than traditional e-commerce websites. Brands that expect customers to visit standalone online stores are missing the point, as these shoppers expect brands to meet them where they already are.

That shift is forcing a rethink of engagement strategies. Live shopping, influencer-driven commerce, and peer recommendations have overtaken static product listings and website browsing. In China, where social commerce surpasses $500 billion annually, global brands have had to completely restructure their sales channels to compete with domestic players that integrate commerce seamlessly into entertainment. The same transformation is sweeping Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

But selling in these markets requires more than just showing up. AI-driven personalisation is now a competitive necessity, not a luxury. Machine learning models are helping brands optimise pricing, tailor product recommendations, and automate language localisation – yet many companies still fail to adjust their messaging, relying on generic campaigns that don’t resonate.

Language and cultural nuance can make or break a sale. While English is widely used in business, most consumers prefer to shop in their native language, engage with familiar imagery, and trust local influencers over foreign celebrity endorsements. Brands that get this right, like Coca-Cola and Unilever, see stronger conversion rates and long-term loyalty. Those that don’t risk alienating their audience before they even make it to checkout.

Simply put, what worked in established e-commerce markets won’t work here. Successful brands embed themselves in local digital ecosystems, embrace social-first shopping, and design their experiences around how consumers already buy, not how brands want them to buy.

Who Controls the Future of E-Commerce? Local Platforms Are Winning

When Indonesian beauty brand Somethinc wanted to expand online, it didn’t launch its website. Instead, it built its entire e-commerce strategy around Shopee and TikTok Shop, running daily flash sales and live-streaming product tutorials. The result? A 10x sales increase within months, driven entirely by social commerce and regional marketplaces.

Somethinc’s story isn’t unique. Across emerging markets, the next billion shoppers aren’t discovering products through branded websites; they’re buying from super apps, social media platforms, and dominant regional marketplaces. For global brands, winning these markets means playing by new rules where local giants, not Western e-commerce behemoths, set the terms of engagement.

The Power Shift: Regional Marketplaces vs. Global E-Commerce Giants
For years, companies like Amazon and Alibaba have defined global e-commerce. But that dominance is fading in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Platforms like Shopee, Jumia, and MercadoLibre have become the default shopping destinations, offering localised logistics, digital wallet integrations, and cash-on-delivery options that global brands struggle to replicate.

The numbers tell the story. In China, social commerce sales surpassed $500 billion, with platforms like Douyin (China’s TikTok), Xiaohongshu, and WeChat driving transactions entirely within their ecosystems. The same model is now spreading across Indonesia, Nigeria, and Mexico, where more than half of online shoppers prefer purchasing directly through social media.

Yet, many Western brands still treat these marketplaces as secondary sales channels rather than core business platforms. In India, Flipkart and Myntra dominate e-commerce for fashion and electronics, while Tokopedia in Indonesia has built a hyper-localised supply chain that global competitors can’t match. Simply listing products on these platforms is not enough – brands must actively invest in platform-specific strategies, native advertising, and localised engagement.

Why Direct-to-Consumer Models Are Struggling
For decades, DTC strategies helped brands build direct relationships with consumers. But DTC isn’t the future in emerging markets; it’s a limitation. Brands that cling to standalone e-commerce sites are losing relevance as shoppers expect frictionless transactions within the platforms they already use.

Even in Western markets, the shift is happening. TikTok Shop’s expansion into the U.S. and U.K. signals a major shift in commerce dynamics – one that mirrors the e-commerce revolution already unfolding in Asia and Africa. The next billion shoppers won’t be navigating company websites – they’ll be purchasing inside their favourite apps.

The message is clear: The future of e-commerce belongs to platforms that seamlessly blend social engagement, localised logistics, and frictionless transactions. The brands that adapt to this reality – rather than trying to control it – will be the ones that capture the next wave of global consumers.

How Global Brands Can Win in the Next Billion Market

In India, fast-fashion brand Ajio doesn’t just sell online; it has redefined mobile-first commerce. Instead of relying on traditional e-commerce websites, it built its entire sales strategy around WhatsApp-based shopping, integrating local payment options and live-chat support for consumers who prefer conversational commerce. The approach has been so successful that WhatsApp shopping now drives a significant share of its sales in smaller cities and rural areas.

For global brands, this is the future of e-commerce, requiring a radical shift in strategy. Companies that treat these new markets like extensions of the West will struggle. Those that understand the unique behaviours, expectations, and challenges of the next billion consumers will dominate.

Here’s how brands can compete effectively in these emerging digital economies:

Market Research Can’t Be an Afterthought

Global strategies often fail because they assume all emerging markets behave similarly. Shopping habits, payment preferences, and brand trust vary drastically between Jakarta, Lagos, and Manila. Companies that skip deep, localised market research often launch with the wrong pricing models, payment options, and messaging that doesn’t resonate.

Many brands have learned this the hard way. Walmart’s struggles in India stemmed from misunderstanding local retail behaviours, forcing the company to pivot from a direct e-commerce approach to acquiring Flipkart. In contrast, brands like P&G and Coca-Cola invest heavily in country-specific consumer insights and have successfully built strong footholds in these markets.

Think Beyond Translation – Create Market-Specific Storytelling

Localisation isn’t just about translating a global campaign into another language; it’s about understanding cultural nuances. Consumers in India, Indonesia, and Nigeria engage with storytelling differently than shoppers in New York or London.

Nike’s Southeast Asian marketing campaigns, for instance, don’t just feature global athletes. They include local sports icons and culturally relevant narratives, tapping into national pride and regional sports culture. This approach has driven significantly higher engagement than generic Western-focused messaging.

Build for Mobile-First, Low-Bandwidth Markets

In many emerging economies, the mobile phone is the only device people use to access the internet. More than 90% of internet users in these markets are mobile-exclusive, and many are on low-bandwidth connections.

That’s why progressive web apps (PWAs) and lightweight mobile sites outperform heavy, Western-style e-commerce platforms. Companies like Jumia in Africa and Tokopedia in Indonesia have invested in fast-loading mobile interfaces, ensuring that even consumers in low-data regions can shop seamlessly.

Payment and Fulfillment Must Be Localised

Credit cards are not the default in these markets. In India and the Philippines, cash-on-delivery remains a dominant payment method. In Kenya, M-Pesa is the standard for digital transactions. In China, QR-code-based WeChat Pay and Alipay drive nearly all online purchases.

Western brands that only integrate credit card checkouts exclude millions of potential customers. Companies that tailor their payment options—as Apple did by adding UPI payments in India—win consumer trust and adoption faster.

Social Commerce Is Now the Default, Not an Add-On

Social media isn’t just a marketing tool in emerging economies; it is the storefront. More than half of digital shoppers in Indonesia and Nigeria buy directly through social platforms, often engaging with brands through WhatsApp, Instagram, or Facebook groups.

Live-stream shopping is also exploding in popularity. Approximately 50% of the country’s internet users in China utilised live commerce in 2023. This model is quickly expanding across Southeast Asia and Latin America. Brands that ignore this trend risk losing to local sellers who understand the nuances of peer-driven shopping.

Logistics and Trust Are the Make-or-Break Factors

Selling a product is one thing. Getting it to the customer reliably is another.

Brands like Shopee and Jumia have gained an edge because they built extensive last-mile delivery networks, partnering with local couriers, pickup hubs, and even motorcycle taxi fleets to ensure orders arrive on time. Amazon, by contrast, struggled in markets like India because it initially relied on its Western fulfilment model rather than adapting to local infrastructure.

Trust is also a challenge. Consumers rely heavily on peer reviews and seller reputations before purchasing in markets with high counterfeit product risks. That’s why platforms like Tokopedia and Shopee have built-in buyer protection policies, a feature that global brands must adopt to compete.

The Time to Adapt Is Now

The next billion shoppers are reshaping digital commerce faster than most global brands can keep up. But this shift isn’t just about adding new markets to existing playbooks. It requires a fundamental change in how brands operate, engage, and build trust.

The companies that embed themselves into local digital ecosystems rethink their approach to payments and fulfilment and leverage social commerce as a primary – not secondary – strategy that will lead the next era of global retail. The rest? They’ll be playing catch-up.

Stay ahead

Get regular insights

Keep up to date with the latest insights from our research as well as all our company news in our free monthly newsletter.