The Carbon Copy and a Conflicted Consumer: Acceptance of Lab-

Grown Diamonds Among Urban Indian Youth

Shanay Jhaveri
Department of Management Studies, Jai Hind College (Empowered Autonomous), Mumbai
Academic Year: 2025–2026 | Submission Date: 6th April, 2026

ABSTRACT: Lab-grown diamonds (LGDs) are chemically identical to mined stones, cheaper, and free from
the ethical issues of mining. Yet adoption among urban Indian Gen Z consumers remains uneven. This paper
argues that young consumers are not resistant to LGDs; they are selective. Using a mixed-methods approach
combining a 52-respondent survey with in-depth interviews among first-earning Gen Z consumers in Mumbai,
the study maps LGD openness across five occasions: daily wear, peer gifting, milestone gifts, engagement rings,
and wedding or heirloom jewellery. A clear private-public divide emerges. The same person who privately
endorses lab-grown diamonds can switch to mined when family or in-laws are present. The paper examines
whether this gap is driven by product scepticism or by deeper social norms around what a diamond is supposed
to mean, who it needs to impress, and what it should carry forward across generations.

INTRODUCTION Research Objectives

This study aims to: (1) understand consumer
openness to LGDs across five occasions; (2) identify
Background and Context and describe the private-public divide in LGD
The lab-grown diamond industry has changed fast. attitudes; (3) examine the emotional, social, and
What started as a niche industrial product has moved symbolic reasons for hesitation at high-stakes
into mainstream jewellery retail, reaching roughly occasions; (4) assess how well current marketing
20% of the global diamond jewellery market by 2024, messages shift attitudes; and (5) offer practical
up from under 2% a decade earlier (Bain & Company, recommendations for LGD brands seeking growth in
2023). Retail prices have dropped by more than 80% the Indian youth market.
since 2016, making lab-grown stones genuinely
affordable at similar quality grades.
India has a unique role in this story. It handles over LITERATURE REVIEW
90% of the world's rough diamonds by volume
(GJEPC, 2023), and its domestic jewellery market is
projected to hit $100 billion by 2025. For young Consumer Attitudes Toward Lab-Grown Diamonds
urban Indians, LGDs are not a novelty or a Teichmann & Ribbat (2022) found that consumers
compromise. They are an affordable, available option still attached higher emotional value to geological
with ethical backing. But these same consumers are origin even after being told that lab-grown stones are
navigating real tension, because their peer world chemically identical. Nielsen (2022) found the same
endorses lab-grown while their family world, pattern in the US: Gen Z awareness was high, but
especially around marriage and inherited jewellery, willingness to buy for sentimental occasions was
mostly does not. much lower than for fashion or everyday jewellery.
Luchs et al. (2010) showed that ethical advantages do
not reliably drive purchase conversion in high-
Problem Statement investment categories, which appears to hold here
The problem is not awareness. Many young too. LGD's conflict-free positioning does not seem to
consumers already know about and broadly approve move the needle much in high-stakes decisions.
of LGDs. The issue is that this approval does not
translate into purchases when the social stakes go up.
There is a visible gap between what people support Symbolic Consumption and Social Norms
privately and what they choose publicly when family Douglas & Isherwood (1979) argued that goods are
is watching. Existing research is mostly Western and communication systems, not just functional objects.
does not account for India-specific dynamics: the An engagement ring is not just a product; it is a
family's role in jewellery decisions, jewellery as a message to a specific social audience. Bourdieu
financial asset, or the symbolic weight of a diamond (1984) extended this: the same choice can signal
at a wedding versus at a mall. progressive identity to peers while reading as
insufficient commitment to older family. Belk,
Wallendorf & Sherry (1989) introduced the idea of A structured questionnaire was administered via
sacred versus profane consumption. Wedding and Google Forms in March 2026. It covered 16 items
engagement jewellery sits firmly in sacred territory in across five sections: demographics, awareness and
Indian consumer culture, and that is exactly where discovery, value perceptions, occasion-based
LGD's rational advantages stop working. Veblen's purchase behaviour, and attitudes toward marketing
(1899) theory is also relevant: a mined diamond's messages. Attitudinal items used 5-point scales and
high price has historically functioned as a public categorical questions used multiple-choice formats.
signal of resource commitment, a signal LGDs A convenience and snowball sampling approach
remove even when the physical stone is identical. was used, starting with urban residents in Mumbai
aged 18 to 40. A total of 52 usable responses were
collected. The sample skews toward 18–25 year-olds
The Attitude-Behaviour Gap and the Private-Public (59.6%), reflects a female majority (65.4%), and is
Divide concentrated in Mumbai and the wider Metropolitan
Ajzen's (1991) Theory of Planned Behaviour explains Region. The instrument was pilot tested with five
how social expectations, including those from family respondents before distribution, with face and content
and community, can override personal preferences at validity applied as primary validation methods. All
the point of purchase. In Indian jewellery decisions, respondents were informed that participation was
family often plays an outsized role, and their anonymous, voluntary, and for academic purposes
expectations can sit very far from what a young only.
consumer's peer group thinks. Someone might
personally prefer an LGD, but when a family
purchasing decision looms, they go with mined DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
because family pressure is real and persistent. This
split in behaviour across audiences is consistent with
Goffman's (1959) framework of identity Awareness and Familiarity
management: people manage different versions of Word of mouth is how 59.6% of respondents first
themselves depending on who is watching. heard about lab-grown diamonds. Social media
accounted for roughly 38.5%. Jewellery shops, news
articles, and ads were comparatively minor. The LGD
Marketing Communication in the LGD Space conversation in India's urban youth market is peer-
Most LGD marketing in India clusters around two driven and informal, not shaped by advertising spend.
approaches: rational comparison (price, grading Familiarity gathered around the midpoint, with
equivalence, size advantage) and ethical positioning 38.5% rating themselves at level 3 on a 5-point scale
(conflict-free, lower carbon footprint). Both are (mean: 3.1). Most respondents can understand what a
legitimate. But neither engages with the symbolic and lab-grown diamond is, but could not comfortably
social concerns that govern high-stakes purchase explain process differences, certification standards, or
decisions. Beverland (2005) argues that consumers secondary market dynamics, especially in a family
look for narrative authenticity in premium goods, and setting where scepticism is likely.
that origin stories function as authenticity cues.
Mined diamonds carry an embedded narrative of
geological time and natural rarity. LGD brands need Value Perception and the Emotional Value Gap
to either displace that narrative or build a genuinely Respondents were told that a lab-grown diamond is
different meaning system, one where 'made' is not a chemically and physically identical to a mined
compromise but a new and valid origin story. The diamond, then asked if this changed their view of its
heirloom framing explored in this study is the most value. Only 13.5% (n=7) said they would consider it
promising candidate for this repositioning. equally valuable. The majority, 51.9% (n=27),
acknowledged the chemical equivalence but said
mined still feels more special. A further 19.2% (n=10)
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY said origin matters regardless of chemistry, and
15.4% (n=8) were unsure.
For over 85% of this sample, factual information
Research Design and Data Collection about product equivalence does not produce
This study uses a mixed-methods design combining emotional equivalence. This suggests that the most
quantitative survey data with qualitative common LGD marketing strategy, leading with
interpretation. The quantitative component provides chemistry, may be answering a question consumers
distributional data on consumer attitudes across the have already settled for themselves while leaving the
sample, while qualitative input helps explain the emotional question wide open.
narratives, social pressures, and symbolic meanings
behind the numbers.

2
Table 1. Summary of Likert Scale Response Means and Modal in nature and not things a marketing campaign can fix
Values (n = 52). on its own.
Likert-Scale Variable Mean Modal
(/5) Score
Marketing Message Effectiveness
Familiarity with lab-grown diamonds 3.1 3
Price and quality comparison was the most frequently
Comfort disclosing LGD ownership to 3.2 5 selected message at 34.6% (n=18). The heirloom
others narrative, which frames LGDs as capable of
Personal openness to LGD purchase 2.9 3 becoming family heirlooms, came second at 23.1%
(self-funded) (n=12). A modern love and new traditions narrative
Purchase likelihood in next 3 years 2.6 3 was chosen by 9.6% (n=5). Importantly, 28.8%
(n=15) said none of the listed messages would change
their mind for sentimental purchases. This group is
Occasion-Based Purchase Openness largely unreachable through conventional advertising
and represents a structural ceiling for the category at
The most telling finding is how quickly LGD high-stakes occasions.
openness falls as occasion stakes rise. For personal
jewellery, the mean openness score is 2.9 on a 5-point
scale, moderately positive but not enthusiastic. At Purchase Likelihood
high-stakes occasions like engagements and Spending willingness clustered in the Rs 40,000–
weddings, this drops considerably: 46.2% (n=24) said 75,000 and Rs 75,000–1.5 lakh bands (23.1% each),
their openness drops significantly and they would with 21.2% in the Rs 20,000–40,000 band. Only 1.9%
prefer mined, and 34.6% (n=18) said it drops a little. would go above Rs 2.5 lakh. Purchase likelihood over
Only 13.5% (n=7) said they remain open to lab-grown the next three years returned a mean of 2.6, leaning
regardless of occasion. toward the lower end. Overall purchase intent is held
Fashion jewellery led at 38.5% (n=20) and daily back not by awareness but by the absence of a
wear at 36.5% (n=19) for occasions where compelling enough reason to act when social and
respondents would actually choose an LGD. Each of emotional stakes are high.
the high-stakes categories (engagement ring, wedding
jewellery, milestone gift, gifting a friend) was
selected by just 3.8% of respondents (n=2 each). The DISCUSSION
data maps a clear hierarchy: LGDs are accepted in
private, aesthetics-driven contexts and quietly set The data shows a consumer performing two different
aside at family-witnessed, emotionally weighted versions of themselves across two different settings.
occasions. Privately, they are practical and cost-aware. An LGD
Table 2. Key Categorical Distribution Summary (n = 52). pendant or fashion ring makes complete sense. In
public, when family and in-laws are present, they
Variable n % default to the symbolic vocabulary that their audience
Openness drops significantly at high- 24 46.2%
understands. Lab-grown is fine in principle. It just
stakes occasions requires an explanation at a family gathering that
Openness drops a little at high-stakes 18 34.6%
most people would rather not have.
occasions This is not inconsistency. It is social awareness.
Open to LGD regardless of occasion 7 13.5%
The problem for the industry is that the occasions
with the most monetary value (engagements,
Consider LGD equally valuable to mined 7 13.5%
weddings, milestone gifts) are exactly the ones that
Primary concern: low resale value 18 34.6% are most publicly witnessed. LGDs are being adopted
Primary concern: lacks rarity or heritage 16 30.8% in the parts of the market that matter least
No marketing message would change their 15 28.8% commercially.
mind The naturalness bias finding is notable. 86.5%
Price comparison is most persuasive 18 34.6% retained an emotional premium for mined diamonds
message even after chemical identity was disclosed. This
matches Teichmann & Ribbat (2022) and Belk et al.
(1989). But the Indian context adds layers that
Consumer Concerns Western research does not capture. In India, jewellery
is also a financial asset, a vehicle for generational
The top concern is low resale value, cited by 34.6% transfer, and a public signal of how seriously a family
(n=18), followed by a lack of rarity or heritage at takes a relationship. LGDs fail not just on naturalness
30.8% (n=16). Together these account for 65.4% of grounds but on liquidity, inheritance, and social
stated worries. Both are structural or deeply cultural

3
legibility to an older generation that holds real activity in India would directly address the most
influence over high-occasion decisions. commonly cited consumer concern.
The messaging data reinforces this. Price
comparison works for consumers who are already
open. It does nothing for the 28.8% who are not REFERENCES
persuadable by any of the tested messages, and it does
not engage the symbolic concerns governing high- Ajzen, I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational
occasion choice. The heirloom framing is the only Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179–211.
Bain & Company. 2023. The global diamond industry report
message that tries to operate at the right register. It is 2023. Bain & Company.
also the most underdeveloped strategy in the current Belk, R.W., Wallendorf, M. & Sherry, J.F. 1989. The sacred and
LGD landscape. the profane in consumer behavior: Theodicy on the odyssey.
Journal of Consumer Research 16(1): 1–38.
Beverland, M.B. 2005. Crafting brand authenticity: The case of
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS luxury wines. Journal of Management Studies 42(5): 1003–
1029.
Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction: A Social Critique of the
Key Conclusions Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press.
Douglas, M. & Isherwood, B. 1979. The World of Goods:
LGD adoption follows occasion-based logic, not Towards an Anthropology of Consumption. Basic Books.
product-based logic. Openness is high and growing Gem and Jewellery Export Promotion Council. 2023. Annual
Report 2022–23. GJEPC.
for private, aesthetics-driven contexts; it is near-zero Gemological Institute of America. 2020. Lab-grown diamonds.
for family-witnessed, high-stakes occasions. The GIA.
private-public divide is real and measurable: 80.8% Goffman, E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
experience reduced openness at high-stakes Anchor Books.
occasions. The social audience, not the product, is the Luchs, M.G., Naylor, R.W., Irwin, J.R. & Raghunathan, R.
deciding factor. The key barriers (resale value and 2010. The sustainability liability: Potential negative effects
of ethicality on product preference. Journal of Marketing
heritage) are structural and cultural, not addressable 74(5): 18–31.
through conventional advertising. The heirloom Nielsen. 2022. Consumer Attitudes Toward Lab-Grown
narrative is the most strategically significant and least Diamonds: United States Findings. Nielsen IQ.
developed positioning for the high-occasion segment. Teichmann, K. & Ribbat, T. 2022. The natural is worth more:
Consumer valuation of naturalness cues in gemstone
markets. Journal of Consumer Psychology 32(1): 112–128.
Recommendations for LGD Brands Veblen, T. 1899. The Theory of the Leisure Class. Macmillan.
Zimnisky, P. 2023. Global diamond industry pipeline and the
Communication needs to be tailored by occasion: rise of lab-grown diamonds. Paul Zimnisky Diamond
affordability and design for everyday wear, and Analytics.
emotion, symbolism, and storytelling for high-
occasion purchases. Brands should develop an
heirloom narrative that positions lab-grown diamonds
as the start of family legacies. Engaging family
stakeholders directly and addressing resale concerns
with credible, transparent data is important. Reducing
perceived risk through published resale data, buy-
back schemes, or upgrade options would lower the
structural hesitation in the high-occasion segment.

Limitations and Future Research

The 52-respondent sample is adequate for exploratory
work but not sufficient for broad statistical
generalisation. The sample is geographically
concentrated in Mumbai and skews 65:35 female-to-
male, which may under-represent the traditional
gifting perspective in engagement and bridal
contexts. Future research should consider
longitudinal tracking as the LGD category matures,
qualitative work with couples and families during
actual jewellery decisions, and cross-city
comparisons across Delhi, Surat, Chennai, and
Bengaluru. An empirical study on LGD resale