Provide or prevent? Exploring sufficiency imaginaries within Danish systems of provision

Aagaard, L K and Christensen, T H (2024) Provide or prevent? Exploring sufficiency imaginaries within Danish systems of provision. Buildings & Cities, 5(1), pp. 434-450. ISSN 2632-6655

Abstract

The concept of sufficiency, recognised in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, denotes a reduction in production and consumption in the Global North, aiming to limit energy demand and resource use while promoting wellbeing for all within planetary boundaries. Although sufficiency-oriented policies and businesses exist, they are currently outliers, and the concept remains fluid among practitioners and researchers. This paper investigates the role of sufficiency and its potential in achieving sustainable production and consumption by studying professional stakeholders across different systems of provision in Denmark. Drawing on data from seven focus groups, including a backcasting exercise, stakeholders' sociotechnical imaginaries are explored, which reveal diverse engagement and visions across organisations. Participants (n = 52) are drawn from domains of food, mobility and housing. Unique insights are provided into the interactions between systems of provision, production and regulation that pose current challenges to sustainability. Varying forms of agency are at play among different types of organisations in envisioning sufficiency, and the paper discusses the implications for the realisation of a sufficiency-oriented future. The articulation of shared sufficiency imaginaries across systems of provision is highlighted as a potential guiding step towards sustainable ways of producing and consuming in the future. POLICY RELEVANCE Mitigating climate change necessitates comprehensive interventions, extending beyond technological solutions to encompass a restructuring of production and consumption patterns. The focus should shift from individual consumer behaviours to changes in systems of provision, particularly in resource-and emission-intense sectors, e.g. food, mobility and housing. Policy opportunities include promoting clear and shared sufficiency goals, i.e. drastic reductions in production and consumption and reorienting values towards community-oriented lifestyles. Relevant sufficiency goals for the Danish context are reducing animal production, preventing private car usage and reducing living space

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: built environment; Denmark; housing; overconsumption; socio-ecological transformation; sociotechnical imaginaries; spatial consumption; sufficiency; systems of provision
Index terms: consumption, regulation, mobility, practitioner, boundaries, exercise, lifestyle, built environment, focus group, drawing, agency, interaction, energy demand, Denmark, climate change, consumer behaviour, transformation, housing, well-being
Subjects: Geography, demography, technical documentation, climate science, practitioner, political science, business, consumer economics, infrastructure and transport systems, behavioral psychology, construction type, mental health and wellbeing, energy systems, property law, health behaviours and lifestyles, sociology, data collection methods
Topics: Urban Studies, Design Practice, Governance, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Business Strategy, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Health and Safety, Legal Issues
Descriptive scope: 4 PCTE

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