Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T21:07:07.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

13 - Conclusion

On Social Change, Status, and Sustainability Policy

from Part IV - Bending the Curve

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2021

Paul Roscoe
Affiliation:
University of Maine
Cindy Isenhour
Affiliation:
University of Maine
Get access

Summary

The collection of chapters included in this volume denaturalize dominant conceptualizations of status competition and consumption, drawing attention to alternative possibilities. The authors draw on a number of key themes recurring throughout the volume, including issues of governance and societal demographics to theorize diversity in status pursuits.  Roscoe and Isenhour observe that issues of in/equity loom large and point to a number of political and policy-based implications that might help to bend the curve toward more sustainable futures.

Type
Chapter
Information
Consumption, Status, and Sustainability
Ecological and Anthropological Perspectives
, pp. 324 - 341
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akenji, Lewis 2014 Consumer Scapegoatism and Limits to Green Consumerism. Journal of Cleaner Production 63:1323.Google Scholar
Alfredsson, Eva, Bengtsson, Magnus, Brown, Halina Szejnwald et al. 2018 Why Achieving the Paris Agreement Requires Reduced Overall Consumption and Production. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 14(1):15.Google Scholar
Amatulli, Cesare, Costabile, Michele, Guido, Gianluigi, and De Angelis, Matteo 2017 Sustainable Luxury Brands: Evidence from Research and Implications for Managers. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Athwal, Navdeep, Wells, Victoria K., Carrigan, Marilyn, and Henniger, Claudia E. 2019 Sustainable Luxury Marketing: A Synthesis and Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews 21:405426.Google Scholar
Ayers, Ian, Raseman, Sophie, and Shih, Alice 2009 Evidence from Two Large Field Experiments that Peer Comparison Feedback Can Reduce Residential Energy Usage. Working Paper 15386. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Bales, Kevin 2016 Blood and Earth: Modern Slavery, Ecocide, and the Secret to Saving the World. New York: Spiegel & Grau.Google Scholar
Benson, Melinda H. 2019 New Materialism: An Ontology for the Anthropocene. Natural Resources Journal 59(2):251280.Google Scholar
Binkley, Sam 2008 Liquid Consumption. Cultural Studies 22(5):599623.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre 1984 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Boyce, James K. 1994 Inequality as a Cause of Environmental Degradation. Ecological Economics 11(3):169178.Google Scholar
Carrier, James G., and Luetchford, Peter G., eds. 2012 Ethical Consumption: Social Value and Economic Practice. New York: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Chin, Elizabeth 2001 Purchasing Power: Black Kids and American Consumer Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Clark, A. E., and Oswald, A. J. 1996 Satisfaction and Comparison Income. Journal of Public Economics 61(1):19.Google Scholar
Crockett, David 2017 Paths to Respectability: Consumption and Stigma Management in the Contemporary Black Middle Class. Journal of Consumer Research 44(3):554581.Google Scholar
Daly, Herman 2019 Some Overlaps between the First and Second Thirty Years of Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics 164:106372.Google Scholar
Dauvergne, Peter 2010 The Problem of Consumption. Global Environmental Politics 10(2):110.Google Scholar
Dauvergne, Peter 2016 Environmentalism of the Rich. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Defila, R., and Di Giulio, Antonietta 2020 The Concept of “Consumption Corridors” Meets Society: How an Idea for Fundamental Changes in Consumption Is Received. Journal of Consumer Policy 43:315–344.Google Scholar
Di Giulio, Antonietta, and Fuchs, Doris 2014 Sustainable Consumption Corridors: Concept, Objections, and Responses. GAIA – Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society 23:184–129.Google Scholar
Diffenbaugh, Noah S., and Burke, Marshall 2019 Global Warming Has Increased Global Economic Inequality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116(20):98089813.Google Scholar
Downey, Liam 2015 Inequality, Democracy, and the Environment. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Easterlin, Richard A., Angelescu McVey, Laura, Switek, Malgorsata, Sawangfa, Onnicha, and Smith Zweig, Jacqueline 2010 The Happiness-Income Paradox Revisited. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(52):2246322468.Google Scholar
Eckhardt, Giana M., and Bardhi, Fleura 2019 New Dynamics of Social Status and Distinction. Marketing Theory 20(1):85102.Google Scholar
EEA 2012 Unsustainable Consumption – the Mother of All Environmental Issues? News. European Environment Agency. www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/unsustainable-consumption-2013-the-mother, accessed February 26, 2020.Google Scholar
EESC 2019 The Sustainable Economy We Need (Own-Initiative Opinion). NAT/765-EESC-2019. European Economic and Social Committee. www.eesc.europa.eu/en/our-work/opinions-information-reports/opinions/sustainable-economy-we-need-own-initiative-opinion, accessed February 28, 2020.Google Scholar
Ergas, Christina, and York, Richard 2012 Women’s Status and Carbon Dioxide Emissions: A Quantitative Cross-National Analysis. Social Science Research 41(4):965976.Google Scholar
Ferguson, James 2015 Give a Man a Fish: Reflections on the New Politics of Distribution. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Fremstad, Anders, and Paul, Mark 2019 The Impact of a Carbon Tax on Inequality. Ecological Economics 163:8897.Google Scholar
Gladwell, Malcolm 2000 The Coolhunt. In The Consumer Society Reader. Schor, Juliet B and Holt, Douglas B., eds. Pp. 360374. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Hammond, Jacobs, Huddart-Kennedy, Emily, and Wesselink, Anna 2019 Power and Politics in the (Work-Life) Balance: A Mixed Methods Evaluation of the Risks and Rewards of Downshifting. In Power and Politics in Sustainable Consumption Research. Isenhour, Cindy, Martiskanen, Mari, and Middlemiss, Lucie, eds. Pp. 159177. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hobson, Kersty 2002 Competing Discourses of Sustainable Consumption: Does the “Rationalization of Lifestyles” Make Sense? Environmental Politics 11(2):95120.Google Scholar
Hornborg, Alf 2013 Global Ecology and Unequal Exchange: Fetishism in a Zero-Sum World. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
IPBES 2019 Summary for Policymakers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Díaz, Sandra, Settele, Josef, Brondízio, Eduardo S., Ngo, Hien T., Guèze, Maximilen et al. eds. Bonn, Germany: IPBES Secretariat.Google Scholar
IPCC 2014 Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Core Writing Team, Pachauri, Rajendra K., and Meyer, Leo A., eds. Geneva: IPCC.Google Scholar
IPCC 2018 Global Warming of 1.5°C. Geneva: IPCC.Google Scholar
Isenhour, Cindy 2012 On the Challenges of Signaling Ethics without the Stuff: Tales of Conspicuous Green Anti-Consumption. In Ethical Consumption: Social Value and Economic Practice. Carrier, James G. and Luetchford, Peter, eds. Pp. 164180. New York: Berghahn.Google Scholar
Isenhour, Cindy, and Feng, Kuishuang 2016 Decoupling and Displaced Emissions: On Swedish Consumers, Chinese Producers and Policy to Address the Climate Impact of Consumption. Journal of Cleaner Production 134, Part A:320329.Google Scholar
Isenhour, Cindy, Middlemiss, Lucie, and Martiskainen, Mari, eds. 2019 Power and Politics in Sustainable Consumption Research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jackson, Tim 2005 Live Better by Consuming Less? Is There a “Double Dividend” in Sustainable Consumption? Journal of Industrial Ecology 9(1–2):1936.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, Andre K., Schor, Juliet B., Huang, Xiaorui, and Fitzgerald, Jared 2015 Income Inequality and Residential Carbon Emissions in the United States: A Preliminary Analysis. Human Ecology Review 22(1):93105.Google Scholar
Kasser, Tim 2002 The High Price of Materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kiatpongsan, Sorapop, and Norton, Michael 2014 How Much (More) Should CEOs Make? A Universal Desire for More Equal Pay. Perspectives on Psychological Science 9(6):587593.Google Scholar
Klein, Naomi 2014 This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Löfgren, Orvar 1987 Deconstructing Swedishness: Culture and Class in Modern Sweden. In Anthropology at Home. Jackson, Anthony, ed. Pp. 7493. London: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Lorek, Sylvia, and Spangenberg, Joachim H. 2014 Sustainable Consumption within a Sustainable Economy – beyond Green Growth and Green Economies. Journal of Cleaner Production 63:3344.Google Scholar
McElwee, Pamela D., and Sivaramakrishnan, K. 2016 Forests Are Gold: Trees, People, and Environmental Rule in Vietnam. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Middlemiss, Lucie, Wingate, David, and Wesselink, Anna 2019 The “Double Dividend” Discourse in Sustainable Consumption: A Critical Commentary. In Power and Politics in Sustainable Consumption Research. Isenhour, Cindy, Martiskanen, Mari, and Middlemiss, Lucie, eds. Pp. 124140. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, Roopali, and Banet-Weiser, Sarah 2012 Commodity Activism: Cultural Resistance in Neoliberal Times. New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
Mullins, Paul R. 1999 Race and the Genteel Consumer: Class and African American Consumption 1850–1930. Historical Archaeology 33(1):2238.Google Scholar
Norton, Michael I., and Ariely, Dan 2011 Building a Better America – One Wealth Quintile at a Time. Perspectives on Psychological Science 6(1):912.Google Scholar
OECD 2019 Global Material Resources Outlook to 2060: Economic Drivers and Environmental Consequences. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
OECD/IEA/IRENA 2017 Perspectives for the Energy Transition: Investment Needs for a Low-Carbon Energy System. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)/International Energy Agency (IEA)/International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).Google Scholar
Oishi, S., Kesebir, S., and Diener, E. 2011 Income Inequality and Happiness. Psychological Science 22:10951100.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, Dara, and Lollo, Niklas 2015 Transforming Consumption: From Decoupling, to Behavior Change, to System Changes for Sustainable Con-sumption. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 40(1):233259.Google Scholar
Oxfam 2015 Extreme Carbon Inequality: Why the Paris Climate Deal Must Put the Poorest, Lowest Emitting and Most Vulnerable People First. Leiden, Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill.Google Scholar
Payne, Keith 2017 The Broken Ladder: How Inequality Affects the Way We Think, Live, and Die. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Pew Charitable Trusts 2015 Should States Tell Welfare Recipients How to Spend Their Benefits? Stateline, April 4. www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2015/4/24/should-states-tell-welfare-recipients-how-to-spend-their-benefits, accessed September 30, 2020.Google Scholar
Princen, Thomas, Maniates, Michael, and Conca, Ken, eds. 2002 Confronting Consumption. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Raworth, Kate 2012 A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can We Live within the Doughnut? Oxfam. www-cdn.oxfam.org/s3fs-public/file_attachments/dp-a-safe-and-just-space-for-humanity-130212-en_5.pdf, accessed February 27, 2020.Google Scholar
Raworth, Kate 2018 Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think Like a 21st-Century Economist. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. Timmons, and Parks, Bradley C. 2009 Ecologically Unequal Exchange, Ecological Debt, and Climate Justice: The History and Implications of Three Related Ideas for a New Social Movement. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 50(3–4):385409.Google Scholar
Schor, Juliet 1999 The New Politics of Consumption: Why Americans Spend So Much More than They Need. Boston Review (Summer):n.p.Google Scholar
Soron, Dennis 2019 Practice Does Not Make Perfect: Sustainable Consumption, Practice Theory and the Question of Power. In Power and Politics in Sustainable Consumption Research. Isenhour, Cindy, Martiskanen, Mari, and Middlemiss, Lucie, eds. Pp. 4561. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Srinivasan, U. Thara, Carey, Susan P., Hallstein, Eric et al. 2008 The Debt of Nations and the Distribution of Ecological Impacts from Human Activities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(5):17681773.Google Scholar
Thøgersen, John, and Nielsen, Kristian S. 2016 A Better Carbon Footprint Label. Journal of Cleaner Production 125:8694.Google Scholar
Thomas, Kimberley, Hardy, R. Dean, Lazrus, Heather et al. 2019 Explaining Differential Vulnerability to Climate Change: A Social Science Review. WIREs Climate Change 10(2):e565.Google Scholar
Thompson, Craig J., and Üstüner, Tuba 2015 Women Skating on the Edge: Marketplace Performances as Ideological Edgework. Journal of Consumer Research 42(2):235265.Google Scholar
United Nations 2019 The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2019. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
Vandenbergh, Michael P., Dietz, Thomas, and Stern, Paul C. 2011 Time to Try Carbon Labelling. Nature Climate Change 1(1):46.Google Scholar
Vannini, Phillip, and Taggart, Jonathan 2013 Voluntary Simplicity, Involuntary Complexities, and the Pull of Remove: The Radical Ruralities of Off-Grid Lifestyles. Environment and Planning A 45:295311.Google Scholar
Veblen, Thorstein 1994 The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Wakefield, Juliet, Helen, Ruth, Sani, Fabio et al. 2017 The Relationship between Group Identification and Satisfaction with Life in a Cross-Cultural Community Sample. Journal of Happiness Studies 18(3):785807.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Richard, and Pickett, Kate 2010 The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×