Sustainable Consumption

Sustainable consumption is only one facet of sustainable development, which seeks to challenge prolific patterns of consumption. This could relate to the sustainable consumption of natural resources, energy use, and consumer goods more broadly. Initiatives such as the Marrakech Process, a global multistakeholder process to promote sustainable consumption and production (SCP), are working toward a Global Framework for Action on SCP, a so-called 10-Year Framework of Programmes on SCP. This signifies that there is widespread acknowledgement that consumption has an effect on sustainability, which in turn has given rise to debates surrounding how to strive toward more sustainable and equitable patterns of consumption.

Tim Jackson, in his report for the Sustainable Development Commission, stated that the term sustainable consumption entered into being from Agenda 21 (a policy document that emanated from the 1992 Rio Summit), even though consumption had been an international policy issue since the 1970s. He noted that there are differing interpretations as to whether sustainable consumption means consuming differently, responsibly, or less. He also noted that to fully understand whether sustainable consumption is feasible, the rationale and history of consumption has to be considered, as well as thoroughly understanding patterns of consumer behavior, as many consumption actions are seemingly habitual.

The maxim “reduce, reuse, recycle” demonstrates the priorities of the waste hierarchy that should be observed in the quest for sustainable consumption. Where this is not feasible, research by the British Sustainable Consumption Roundtable suggests sustainable consumption techniques for businesses. For example, by ensuring that consumers are offered clear choices of environmentally responsible products or behaviors, positive incentives exist for consumers to choose more environmentally responsible products, social stimuli are needed to make environmentally responsible products more desirable, people engage in initiatives that encourage them to help each other, and governmental departments also set a good example.

The danger of encouraging people to consume less to save money may have unintended rebound effects—such as an increase in consumption in other areas. For example, consumers who are encouraged to buy new, more energy-efficient electrical goods may notice a drop in their energy bills. However, if the money saved is spent on going on holiday abroad, this may negate the environmental benefits that are created in the first place. In addition, the embedded energy inherent in products that may have been put together with components from all over the world, assembled in one country, and then shipped to another for retail has to be considered when making purportedly “sustainable” purchases. The embedded energy may also negate the energy savings of buying new products, [Page 423]although at this time this information is not readily available for consumer goods, nor is it factored into the price of the product.

Initiatives such as ecolabeling and reducing packaging are other techniques that can be adopted to encourage consumers to think about making more sustainable purchases. However, it is counterintuitive to the sustainable consumption debate if these initiatives provide third-party organizations with an opportunity to develop new labels that could potentially increase the scope for new product development. Recent debates in improving sustainable consumption behavior have also centered on retailers' efforts in choice editing, where set contracts and specifications exist that frame procurement choices before products get to the shelf, though retailers are reluctant to slim down their product lines, possibly out of fear of foregoing profits. Perhaps it could also be said that current consumers are not willing to accept responsibility for their own actions and their own consumption habits and may be reluctant to change unless other actors (retailers/producers) do more to encourage this.

...