Practices of thrift among high cultural capital consumers. When economic status gets in the way of ethics

Abstract

Practices and preferences of high cultural capital consumers are being reconfigured as a consequence of their incorporated ecological and social concerns. Yet, while their status and tastes are primarily influenced by their cultural position, their consumption logics also reflect their economic situation, which tends to be relatively secure and comfortable. As the limits of ethically-labeled substitution strategies are being exposed, high cultural capital consumers are forced to reconsider their living standards. In this context, the spread of online gifting communities in rather well-off and highly-educated neighborhoods suggests that thrift practices are popularizing, while being ethicized, among advantaged individuals. How does thrift fit into these consumers’ lifestyles? To what extent does it contribute to alleviate the tensions between their ethical principles and material standards? Through an analysis of thirty-five semi-structured interviews with participants in online gifting communities, this study finds that the adoption of thrift practices by high cultural capital consumers is indeed largely motivated by anti-consumerist concerns. Yet, the extent to which these consumers incorporate them in their everyday lives is conditioned by their position within the dominant consumption field, itself partially determined by their economic status. While trash-avoiding practices are highly consistent among respondents and align with their declared aversion to material waste, consumption reduction strategies vary by income level and are influenced by conventional logics of consumption. By adapting critically-motivated practices to their existing consumption patterns, these high cultural capital consumers redefine ethical consumption from within the broader field of consumption, not simply opposing it. At the same time, they legitimize its contesting dimension, revealing a dialectical relation between ethical and conventional consumption.

Divestment as investment: “Kondo-ing” selves in the context of overaccumulation

“…What comprises “alternative consumption” is wide and varied. Some forms include shopping differently, for example, rejecting certain brands or products (“boycotting”) or buying “green” or ethically produced products (“buycotting”), while others can include larger lifestyle shifts and the creation of alternative circular economies in which possessions are given away and reused, to be given away later, such as with “buy-nothing groups” (Bargain-Darrigues, 2022). Motivations can range from concerns for environmental sustainability (Black and Cherrier, 2010; Bryant and Goodman, 2004) and ethical considerations of fair payment and work conditions (Bryant and Goodman, 2004; Page, 2017) to anticonsumerism (Cherrier, 2009) and distinction (Bargain-Darrigues, 2022).…”