Bouillet, J and Grandclément, C (2024) Sufficiency, consumption patterns and limits: A survey of French households. Buildings & Cities, 5(1), pp. 675-691. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
How can the concept of consumption corridors be operationalised? This research provides socio-demographic knowledge of the setting of the upper limit. Four distinct 'modes of consumption' are identified, based on material consumption levels and openness to consumption limits. A survey of French households (n = 2452) reveals people are generally reluctant to accept strict consumption caps, especially binding ones. Both high and low material consumption groups strongly oppose consumption limits, suggesting that wealth does not correlate with a sense of having 'enough'. Individuals with fewer possessions support the idea of limits to consumption, though not outright bans. Despite the cultural value placed on limitless consumption and political aversion to restrictions, actual consumption modes are inherently limited. Individuals operate within certain boundaries, whether or not acknowledged. Since perceptions of 'enough' are shaped by economic, social and technical contexts, urban settings and buildings could play a critical role in establishing these de facto limits. By facilitating frugal-yet-comfortable lifestyles, cities and buildings could help to restrain consumption without invoking a sense of deprivation. This approach suggests a pathway for fostering sustainable consumption corridors that feel normal rather than imposed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | consumption corridors; France; frugality; lifestyle; modes of consumption; overconsumption; socio-ecological transformation; sufficiency |
| Index terms: | lifestyle, transformation, household, survey, France, deprivation, consumption, boundaries |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, business, property law, consumer economics, demography, social justice, Geography |
| Topics: | Geographical Context, Legal Issues, Ethics, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here