Exploring Strategies toward Sustainable Consumption
A large number
of disciplines have studied consumer behavior. Some research investigates
individual choices, while other categories focus on broader lifestyle models (...). The field of
economics has been traditionally dominated by neo-classical
views based on the rationality of individuals squarely focused onfinalized
at achieving a utility maximization
measured in market prices and opportunity costs[MS1].
However, research in psychology, sociology, and marketing science has revealed
that “consumer behaviour is far more complicated than
just a rational response to price signals” (Mont, O. – Plepys,
A., 2008; p. 532). Consumer behavior and consumption practices,
are the are
influenced by result of a number of factors beyond
economics (Sanne, C., 2002; Buenstorf,
G. - Cordes, C., 2008), involving sociological,
psychological, technological, and environmental issues. Among these,
are
social and behavioral phenomena that
shape everyday life, including collective expectations; cultural norms, values,
and attitudes; the way choice options are made available and presented to
consumers by different markets; and the
existing infrastructure, organization, habits, and routines
(Jackson, T., 2005, Tukker, A. et al, 2006).
Therefore, methodologies for changing
behaviors – and in particular motivating more sustainable behaviors – areis
far from straightforward or ascertained, because we are often
locked into unsustainable patterns despite our own best intentions.
To modify
consumption levels and patterns in order towith
the purpose of decreassieng
environmental damage, we can identify two principal strategies: shifting demand
to low-impact consumption products, and lowering material demand (Michaelis[UD2] ,
L., 2003; Tukker, A. et al, 2008 alter
fonti). Both strategies must, systematically,
involve all the actors in the economic system, including
such as governments, business, and individuals (Tukker, A. et al, 2008b).
In the case of shifting
demand to low-impact consumption products, the goal is tofocus
is on modifying our consumer attitudes toward
environmentally friendly products and services and encouragefavoring
the proliferationdiffusion
of green shopping. Over the last decade, policy makers from
a policy perspective many efforts have worked hard been
devoted to advertise and
promote green shopping toinfluencing
consumersr attitudes and
values toward green purchase.
International agencies and national governments have paddressedromoted sustainable consumption through
administrative and economic instruments - such as product standards, taxes,
and ecolabels directly addressingaffecting
the
consumer choices (Mont, O. – Plepys, A.,
2008), and distributedcreated
information kits on responsible consumption to makeeducate
citizens aware ofn
the impact of their choices on the natural environment. In last
attempt to organize these many efforts to
realized in this area, complement othering
the
environmentalspecific
policies already in force.enforced over the
years. The goal, of course, is This
program has been designed to boost the demand
for more sustainable goods. Along with Like the
revision of both the Ecodesign and Energy Labelling Directives and Ecolabelling
(European Commission, 2009; Nash, H. A., 2009), the
Action Plan entails obligesing
retailers and producers to educate consumers on sustainable purchases, and
increasing their proactive role in this process (European Commission, 2008).
Also Business
has, moreover, strongly advocated
conversion to pushed for the shift
towards green products and categories. As noted above, it
has become increasingly dedicated towe mentioned before,
companies are getting more involved in developingthe
development of sustainable products and technologies consistent
withas the rise in
consumers s’are
gradually
being more concerned about
the environment and more aware about the effect
of their activities and decisions on itimpact of their
choices on nature (European Barometer; BCG; Bonini ... , WBCSD, 2008).
A sizeable amount of research over the
last five yearsSeveral researches carried out in the last five
years with panel data hasve
measured this positive trend (zzz). Several agentsaspects,
including increasing media attention tocoverage of
environmental news by media, increasing publicgrowing
education on sustainability issues, government pressure,s
from civil society and innovative business approaches have all
increasedcontributed to rise the consumers’
cooperation in preserving the environment from further damage.
willingness of acting on these concerns.
These surveys used to gather these
data,–conducted in carried out across several
countries, - reveal
growing consumer interest in
patronizing vendors of to
green products and a surprisingly good intention to buy.
In other words, barriers to
buying green are diminishingseem lowering,
thereby
providing businesses
with new marketing targets. opening
new markets opportunities for
companies. Green products are moving beyond the niche into the
mainstream publicshopping finally seems to have the potential to
move away from the niche where they have been hiding until now
arena.
At the same
time, it is true that the intention to buy
does not always translate into purchases, as marketing
studies have made clearit has already been
identified and addressed for several years in marketing studies (Peattie or Crane Young, W. et al,
2010). A large percentage of consumers in fact still have
not yet transittedcrossed
the threshold frombetween
intention toand
action (Eurobarometer and WBCSD … ), but
the context is rapidly evolving and consumers show signs of greater maturity:
higher awareness on the environmental impact of their actions and choices,
higher willingness to pay for green products, higher appreciation of the
benefits of environmentally and socially responsible products (WBCSD, 2008;
Manget, J. et al, 2009).[MS3]
However, further challenges await beforethere
are still some challenges to face if business canwants to
adequately
respond tofully exploit the potential of the increasing
public awareness of rising sustainability
issuesconsciousness.
More in-depth analyses have revealed that consumption of green
productsthe green purchase process varies
according to category and industryis influenced
by the type of products and industries considered (organic food,
textiles, detergents, with goods, energy, etc.), and that
price is much less a barrierseems
a much lower obstacle than consumer ignorancethe
awareness aboutof green
alternatives and where they can be purchased and,
the limitedation in
the number of options available.,
and the lack of information about where to find green
products (Manget, J. et al, 2009). Business
must take the initiative to reach this receptive publicThese
reasons very likely represent potential opportunities for business, which could
use communication tools and distribution
channels to efficiently target new potential consumers. Another still
critical obstacle is the lack of
information and consumer skepticism. The public must
learn which alternatives are best on environmental
performance. Consumers look confused and need support in choosing among alternatives.
Therefore, companies and industrial organizations have room to
improve the quality of messages on
green alternatives must improvethat
accompanies their green offer. At the same time, labels,
ranging from product descriptionsson-pack
claims to certifications provided by internationally recognized
bodies, can be useful tools to address allay
consumer skepticismdistrust,
reducing the gap between intentions and behavior (WBCSD, 2008; Bonini and Oppenheim, 2008).
NNevertheless,
the gradual entry of developing countries into global markets will soon
exacerbate the mounting problem—further proliferation of the western world’s
consumption model., biased
both environmentally and materially.
This destructive direction must be reversed towardpleads
forcalls for an implementation of stronger and
long-term actions aimed at lowering
material demand. On the one hand, For industrialized
countries, tthe
current societal model of of industrialized
countries fits with a literal definition
of consumption involves usingas the use
of up an item something up
to destroy it, where the utilization of goods is strictly
which
results in based on the depletion of
environmental resources (Peattie, K. - Collins, A.,
2009, p. 107). On the other hand, taking
the economic model ofperspective
consumption involves coincides with the act
of purchase, rather than usewith
the utilization of resource-intensive goods. In other words,
lowering material demand does not consequently mean
lowering expendituresconsumption levels in terms
of monetary expenditures, but switching to different, less
material - or less environmentally destructiveintensive
-–
lifestyles, which in turn requires.
A
different task, requiring stronger efforts by both
business and government tin comparison to shifting
o direct
consumers shopping towards greener,
and
more sustainable products within
the same product categories
they usually purchase.
The
drive toward reducLowering
material consumption is not a novel
to promote concept
when we address the topic of environmental sustainability is
nothing new. It appeared first in the mid-1970s The
debate rises in the mid of the ’70 with the report Club
of Rome “Limits to Growth” published by the Club
of Rome report and its legacies (Meadows et
al., XXX). Public
A turning point is probably the acceptance
of tan ideal he distinction
between reducing theconsumption levels of consumptions and
improving the quality reducing the
materiality of goods and services consumed was a significant step
in the right direction. within the same
quality of life. This distinction is well
defined assumption is well captured in this
definition made by UNEP in 1999: “Sustainable consumption is not about
consuming less, it is about consuming differently, consuming efficiently, and
having an improved quality of life” (Jackson, T. - Michaelis, L., 2003, p. 14). Forty
years later, improvements in In
practice, this process until now has shown limitations related both to consumer
behaviors and business attitudes are unremarkable.
As we mentioned
above, the existing infrastructures, social norms, and
habits continue to limit consumers are
largely imprisoned in infrastructures,
social norms, and habits that strongly limit
their choices (xxxx), which persist in
equatingere quality of life is
often mistakenly equated with material consumption. Within
the work-and-spend economic system that rules our
actions, the
amount of Economy has built a system
of work-and-spend where work
done
is a disutility directly rproportionalelated
to
the amount utility of
consumption it permits; in other words, unlocks,
with the consequences that the goal of work
is acquisitivemore people works,
Businesses brainwash
consumers into believing that their the
more people are able and keen to
spend. Marketing, instead, promotes a consumer culture
where every desire and need can be satiated by converted
in a commercial goods or
services (Sanne,
C., 2002). The result is Both systems
contribute to diffuse a culture of individualism and
possessiveness--, where an
individual can f single man is
sufficient enough to satisfyulfill
all his needs materiallywishes individually,
causing a redundant presence of goods that could and
can share the possessions acquired in this
processpotentially be shared with a large
number of people. Psychological studies suggest that consumer behavior is also
competitive—the quantity and apparent quality of additionally
fostered by individual competition,
where material goods have
acquired importance in definesing
social status; in other words, one’s cache
of material goods defines
one’s positioning, or by the symbolic role that goods
play in the construction of personal identity--, both and in
communicating affiliations and peer
groups identity (Jackson,
T. - Michaelis, L., 2003). An alternative model of
society could entail less acquisitiveness abe
rooted in less materialistic ambition nd superior
priorities - like freedom, security, a
good reputationsocial recognition, concern
with improving the environmental quality,
good
health, and a lifestyle consistent
with theseability to live in accordance
with one’s values and ideals (Tukker, A.
et al, 2006, p. 12) -– all
of which militate against the destructive preoccupation with that
challenges the principles of societal model led by material growth
(Mont, O. – Plepys, A., 2008).
To
alter the material consumption to which a population is dedicated and
accustomed is an extreme challenge, to vested interests
in particular. Accordingly, it is complex for firms to engage with
strategies aiming at lowering material consumption. Changing consumption
patterns appears to challenge vested interests. While
in the past industries conscientiously contributed to social welfare and well
beingWhile in the early days of
capitalism companies were highlighting their role in diffusing welfare and
well-being within society, more recently in
recent times, strategic and marketing logistics require
aggressive competition and robust growthare
such that the survival of companies in a market depends
in their abilities to either increase their market shares through competitiveness,
with
the ultimate goal of increasingor
to foster growth within the whole market, in order to reach
higher revenues for shareholders and other investors (Jackson, T.
- Michaelis, L., 2003).
A third
important cissueonsideration
is comes
from the necessity to take in consideration that,
beyond industrialized countries, economic
growth idoes not only concerns
sought by industrialized countries, but is a
basic goal for at least 80% of the world’s population (Chertow, M. R., 2001). The eradication of
poverty is inevitably tied in with this goal and is strongly
linked with poverty.
eradication issues. Today In recent times we are
observing the emersion of a new large
new
class of consumers, is
which
is rapidly accessinggaining access to the global markets in countries
such as increasing demands for material
goods burgeoning.material-based
consumption patterns. At the same time, many
populations in are
facing different kinds of challenges, at the level of
subsistence and survival such as meeting the
basic needs (Clark, G., 2007), an exigency caused
by global and. This arises social
inand
global equality issues.,
One
means of combatting this is
through policies that promote that are pillars of sustainable
development throughout the global community.,
and
that may require the adaptation of sustainable and green consumption policies
according to the geography of the world.
An
Integrative Framework ForToward Sustainable Production aAnd
Consumption in the Global Community
Our goal
in this paper is to provide purpose
here is to provide an integrative
framework for a deeper understanding of the challenges that face
governments, businesses, and
civil society have to tackle in the comingnext
decade as we forge ahead towardin
order to reach a
societal model in uniformity and
equality in the distribution of material and environmental benefits
the world over.equilibrium with the carrying
capacity of the natural environment and were human well-being
is distributed mere equally among countries and populations. On the
basis of the two dimensions addressed in the previous sections, production and
consumption, Iit is
possible to build a multidimensional 2 by 2 matrix that identifies 4 stylized
societal models distinguished by their vdifferentarious
impacts
on the natural environment (see Table 3).
_________________________
Insert Table 3 about here
___________________________
To measure consumerthe
behavior, of consumers
we studieduse
the intensity of consumption that indicates the amount of
consumption per person within a certain societal model. We identified 2 types
of consumption patterns that may be associated with various
behavior patternsto different kinds of behavior:
one based on a high level of consumption and the otherone based on a low level of consumption,
where consumer behavior is focused on fulfillment is
mainly driven by the satisfaction of basic needs andor
directed to the satisfaction of fewerless
material aspirations.
To measure
theaddress improvements achieved
by technology and businessesthe improvements
done within the business,
we useduse the
ecological efficiency as a criterion, that is, which
stands for the amount of environmental impact per unit of
production. In this case, the 2 production patterns identified refer to either
a high or low level of efficient
consumption of natural resources efficiency or a high
level of natural resources efficiency.
By combining the
2 variables, we derived 4
societal models – business as usual, low affluence, technology driven, and
sustainable - whichthat
reflects the positions of current
socio-economic systems and foresee allows us
to envisage angradual
progress toward universal evolutionary path to sustainability
practices that promote sustainability.
Business as
usual models are describes the societal
models that still seek wealth through material-intensive growth and
consumption. From the production perspective, Technologicaly improvements in productions
are economically motivated,
aiming to increase only
driven by economic factors such as higher
productivity and economies of scale, which in turnaimed
at fostering the economic growth and increaseing
production volumes, with little or no motivation to improveconsideration
for sustainability. issues.
Ecology remains at odds withand
economy are still in contrast, and protection
of natural resources is a considered a financial
burden cost for
business,that threatens
reducing firm competitiveness and social well-being. In other
words, the environment is regarded as an unlimited resource, and with
the consequence of environmental degradation as an acceptable
by-product of growth. In terms ofOn the
consumption, side,
the model is dominated by a culture of quantity that measures well-being with
consumerism, and socialsorts
class and lifestyles according to the quantity by
the ownership of material goods owned.
Technology- driven
models are characterized by a general awareness of the problems caused by the
issues of uncontrolled and unsustainable growth but,
at the same time, by a widespread
confidence in technological progress as the sole means of
achievingway to reach the objective of
sustainable development. In this societal model, business has taken
initiatives started
implementing measures at the process,
product, and system levels to eradicateabate
pollution and increase efficiency. The economic and managerial debate focuses
on the question, “does it pays
to be green?”, and
economic issues are no longer measured in terms of[MS4]t
anymore considered in contrast with profitability,
--but many
firms still struggles to discoverin
identifying business
opportunities within a sustainable
system. in
it. At the same time, governments focus
on implementing policies strive tothat
enhance the eco-efficiency of processes and
products, and regulate the emission of pollutants and waste at the industry
level. Citizens are aware of the importance ofssues
related to environmental sustainability, and green
shopping is a likely reactionto
be in the emergent phase, but they consumers
have not yet caught on in large enough
numbers to make a difference.extended this concern
to their consumer behaviors.,
hence,
increasing the risk of A “rebound effect” may therefore result,
offsetingting
the improvements in eco-efficiency achievedobtained
by technology applied to eco-efficiency. Here we
typically refer to western and industrialized countries, with their
high standards of livinglevel of well-being and,
high
levels of counsumption,
their
and growing attention to and
concern forwards sustainability issues
increasing, but not “there” yet.
Low affluence refers to
models are
societal models at the “bottom of the pyramid” (Prahalad
C.K., Hart S.L., xxxx) characterized by low – or very
low - consumption patterns and low technologicaly
development. In this context, the goal of technologicaly
improvements isare directed
to increase cost-efficiency. and largeSubstantial
effort iss are
devoted to building the first technological infrastructures,
few
of which have yet seen the light of daystill
limited or absent. The environmental efficiency of technologies is
in general low, and technologies are often obsolete, abutnd the overall impact is
still limited because due to the fact that markets are in
many cases at early stages of development, and consumption patterns are not
sustained by a strong demand. As a matter of fact, therefore, the level of
environmental impact relatively low. At the same time, in these
contexts many basic needs – such as health, security, and education
-–
remain
unfulfilled.still need to be fulfilled.
Environmental protection issues are peripheral compareding
to social and economic needsrequests
and in practice local governments often believeconsider
that
economic growth iin contrast with s
inhibited by the requirement toprotection of
protect ecosystems,,
like in the case of and
reduce climate change and global warming, which in turn problematizes the goal of rising
complex question about sustainable
development.
Finally, in sustainable
models growth and welfare are not motivated by
material gainfounded on non-material
ambitions; rather,, with
useconsumption of environmental resources
isn balanced
with the carrying capacity of ecosystems. Technologicaly
evolution complies with has
consistentstandards conducive toly
lowered its impacts in terms of eco-efficiency,
which entail thanks to the implementation of measures
and innovative solutions in the areas at of process,
product, and system level.
Companies have evolved to a higher level fully
entered in a new phase of commitment to responsibility
towards society and identify competitive opportunities in sustainability,
having
reached consumers and produced an deriving
both by the emersion of new concerned consumption segments and by innovative
business model structured to enter emerging markets
at the bottom of the pyramid. Governments are indeed strongly
dedicated
committed to enactto
policies
that aim at safeguarding the natural capital as an
indispensable not-substitutable source of social
well-being and economic welfare. In a sustainable societal model, consumers
play a key role through altering
their materialistic consumption patterns and lifestyles,
motivated and contribute with
less material ways of living, driven by a growinghigh
awareness ofn the
impact of their choices on the environment.
The
framework Wwe propose allows envisaging an evolutionary path
towards a sustainable societal model focuseding
on improving production and consumption
patterns in the direction of
enhanced sustainability. In the previous
sections we We have already discussedpointed
out how western and industrialized economies have advancedjust
passed from a business- as- usual
model to one oriented towarda
technology driven one. At the same time,
relevant constituencies of society – such as business, governments,
and civil society -– do
not prioritizeare hardly struggling to find a way to evolve
towards the sustainability.e
model, despite sustainable
consumption is still far away from being achieved. On a different
position of the matrix we find New industrialized and developing
countries hoverthat are still
in the middle of athe
development trajectory towards higher levels of
well-being. These countries prefer seems oriented to
follow western patterns of unsustainable consumption and are
quickly adopting our materialistic lifestyleapproach,
embedded
intaking possession of
the vices of consumerism. Finally, countries at the “bottom of the pyramid” have
yet to traversemust get trough several evolutionary
stages to eradicate poverty and consistently improve well-being. Even
in this case, Here they risks
seduction
into are related to the imitation of thea
destructive
societal model stubbornly maintained bylike
the one of affluent societiesy,
trending
toward passing through extremelythe
unsustainable path of like the
business- as- usual
model
or the technology- driven
modelsone.
The goal of a sustainable society can be reasonably
targeted in a practical way only if alternative
opportunities
of development opportunities are enhanced,
reaching out more effectively to the more recalcitrant
models.are made real and more attractive.
This requiresmeans more
innovative business approaches of doing business,
deeply rooted in native capabilities (XXX);,
improvedstronger relations between
the industrialized world and developing countries based on the
transfer of knowledge and technology transfer,
and advocation the proposal of less materialistic
lifestyles and consumption patterns (XXXX).
Conclusions
For decades the civil society in their race
towards sustainability. While difficulties in with
regards to controlling of population growth are evident,
much
progress has been achievedplenty of work has
been done inon the
production technologyside. For
years companies have been developing and implementing innovative strategies,
ranging
from operational solutions at
operational level to others encompassingsolutions
involving the entire business system in
which the company is embedded. In addition, the
consumers areis
becoming increasingly aware of the direct damage potential of effects
oftheir his
choices on the depletion of environmental
resources. In this context, efforts to change actual consumption patterns have championedbeen
mostly oriented towards fostering
green shopping, which implies a shift to more sustainable purchases within the
same product or service category.
However, a change in the basket of
products and services consumed is not enough to effectively address destructive
consumption trends, which continue to
increase, fostered by materialismconsumerism
and by the access of an increasing number of citizens from developing
countries to global markets and to the material-intensive attitudes inspired by
our model of economic development.
If we are to avoid environmental
crisis, we must there is the critical
need to lower material demand, move toward sparserwhich
requires a shift toward different and less
material-intensive lifestyles and new and innovative business
models. Business and governments mSuch
a task entails ust make a different and stronger
commitment by business and governments and
direct
contact and a
need to act on tdiscourse with the
pillars of a system controlled by destructive which
current social norms and infrastructures .have
constructed, allowing consumerism to be deeply rooted into our routine and
habits. A demanding challenge to
the twenty-first century is to Ccooperateion
with developing countries in constructing aimed
at guiding new economies to follow
a development vastly path
different from the one our
modeleconomies,
which is destroying not only the
environment but a value system far more sustainable
than this powerful western machine
that craves luxuries our future
cannot affordwent through would probably be the one of the main challenge
of this century.