Live Better by Consuming Less?: Is There a “Double Dividend” in Sustainable Consumption?

Abstract

Summary Industrial ecology has mainly been concerned with improving the efficiency of production systems. But addressing consumption is also vital in reducing the impact of society on its environment. The concept of sustainable consumption is a response to this. But the debates about sustainable consumption can only really be understood in the context of much wider and deeper debates about consumption and about consumer behavior itself. This article explores some of these wider debates. In particular, it draws attention to a fundamental disagreement that runs through the literature on consumption and haunts the debate on sustainable consumption: the question of whether, or to what extent, consumption can be taken as “good for us.” Some approaches assume that increasing consumption is more or less synonymous with improved well‐being: the more we consume the better off we are. Others argue, just as vehemently, that the scale of consumption in modern society is both environmentally and psychologically damaging, and that we could reduce consumption significantly without threatening the quality of our lives. This second viewpoint suggests that a kind of “double dividend” is inherent in sustainable consumption: the ability to live better by consuming less and reduce our impact on the environment in the process. In the final analysis, this article argues, such “win‐win” solutions may exist but will require a concerted societal effort to realize.

The Organic Food Philosophy: A Qualitative Exploration of the Practices, Values, and Beliefs of Dutch Organic Consumers Within a Cultural–Historical Frame

“…As Crompton (2011) argues, particular cultural values motivate people to express concern about a range of environmental and social problems, and such values are associated with action to tackle these problems. Our ultimate objective is therefore to derive insights that can facilitate the much needed transition towards more sustainable consumption patterns (Crompton 2011;Jackson 2005).…”

Fully integrated modelling for sustainability assessment of resource recovery from waste

“…It now forms the twelfth of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for 2030 and a crucial aspect is to drastically cut the generation of waste via prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse (UN, 2015). SCP aims to address sustainability in a comprehensive and holistic manner, going beyond engineering and technological solutions to also look at issues such as the dependence of consumption patterns on collective vs. individual psychology and their impacts upon wellbeing (Jackson, 2005).…”

Stewardship of things: The radical potential of product stewardship for re-framing responsibilities and relationships to products and materials

“…Product Stewardship and EPR schemes, while potentially addressing environmental impacts across the whole of a product's life cycle, have been critiqued for their focus on production and end-of-pipe recycling while largely ignoring the issue of consumption, a critique that has been levelled at EM more generally (Jackson, 2005;Spaargaren, 2003;Carolan, 2004). A further criticism, particularly of industry-driven voluntary schemes, is that they align with the broader shift towards neoliberal governance approaches where environmental responsibilities are devolved to the level of individual consumers making responsible consumption choices that offer market advantages to companies able to supply this demand (Hobson, 2004;Soper, 2007;Mol, 2009).…”