This seems like a solution to a symptom, rather that addressing some ways to understand or influence behavior. One framework for human behavior suggests that for a person to plan to behave in a certain way, they need to believe there is a benefit, feel as though important people to them would approve, and have the opportunity to do so.
So maybe for a person to purchase a sustainable product, they need to believe there is a net benefit, cost vs. function (and by function I don’t mean utility alone!), they need to see important people to them also care about the issue of sustainability, and finally have the opportunity to purchase the product, so access, cost etc.
I think this is different than making the perception of a product seem “normal”. Additionally, the pricing and marketing that make the products seem elitist may be playing more against the approval of an important individual or group than the actual cost of access.
I agree that it is important to know what motivates, but normality is not necessarily the motivator. 914, I think you have hit on something really important in the pretentiousness, but I don’t think it is similar to that of the difference between Bud and Stella. Stella is successfully marketed towards a different set of people than Bud, the people who buy Stella may see a benefit to the prestige associated with the brand and a superior taste, and the people they associate would approve of their partaking in what Stella represents, as opposed to Bud. Stella is readily available to this group which converts intention to behavior.
Anyone know of any failed sustainable products? I would be happy to attempt to analyse one based on this theory.