Percepciones de los residentes usuarios de predios de negocios o vivienda

Requiring as it does little to no structural upheaval, it is perhaps unsurprising that this mainstream approach is by far the most popular from a policy perspective (Seyfang 2009; Hopwood, Mellor and O'Brien 2005). In the context of sustainable food, for example, the market has responded through a plethora of new products identifiable by labelling initiatives that alert consumers attention towards the sustainability credentials of any given product (typically, these encompass three broad areas of concern - human rights (e.g. Fair Trade), animal welfare (e.g. Freedom Food) and the conservation of the natural environment (e.g. Marine Stewardship Councils, Soil Association) (Browne et al. 2000). Technological innovations (such as genetic modification) have also been developed to try and increase the availability of food supply and offer consumers greater choice. In their wake, academics have devoted much time and attention to questioning the effectiveness of labelling schemes, whether they measure the right things, and the extent to which consumers are willing to pay for labelled goods (Wessels, Johnston and Donath 1999; Schrader and Thøgersen 2011; Johnston et al. 2001). However, this mainstream approach to sustainable consumption has been criticised for its over-reliance on the individual consumer as opposed to institutional consumption behaviour and the relationships between the two; and for the concentration upon a narrow range of (usually environmental) issues, such as recycling and reducing carbon emissions, rather than encouraging a more holistic approach to behaviour, that would encompass changes in multiple aspects of peoples’ everyday lives (Peattie and Collins 2009; Wilk 2002) and the empowerment of “Consumer-Citizens” (Prothero et al. 2011). Lorek and Fuchs thus describe such policy initiatives as “weak sustainable consumption” (Lorek and Fuchs 2013).

In contrast, the alternative, or transformation approach, argues for a radical shifting of individual and institutional behaviours such that overall patterns of consumption are reduced and alternative measures of national prosperity are developed that place a greater emphasis upon well-being than upon growth (Chatzidakis, Maclaran and Bradshaw 2012; Seyfang 2005). The academic Literature here has tended to focus upon describing differential consumer responses to this agenda, through the practices of voluntary simplification, including downshifting and the embracing of alternative lifestyles (Hopwood, Mellor and O'Brien 2005; Lorek and Fuchs 2013; Shaw and Newholm 2002). Care needs to be given to understanding the exact motivations behind such actions, however. Shaw & Newholm, for example, argue for two groupings of voluntary simplifiers - those who are motivated to consume less and/or differently by their

78

ethical concerns and those who are motivated by a (more selfish) desire to disengage from the pressures of modern society (Shaw and Newholm 2002). Seyfang also cites the bottom-up emergence of new forms of food distribution (such as famers markets) as evidence of a desire from “ecological citizens” to consume differently (Seyfang 2004). Arguably, however, consumer motivations here could be said to be driven less by ecological concerns and more by hedonistic, pleasure-related goals and a desire to assert one’s Identity (Schaefer and Crane 2005).

Despite contentions that this approach represents strong sustainable consumption (and is therefore more likely to succeed (Lorek and Fuchs 2013)) the reform agenda remains dominant and, arguably, in the short term legislative and market measures have the power to enact the most change. Over time, however, it is generally accepted that the attention must shift towards attitudinal and institutional change which will, in turn, require some degree of investment. As Lang & Gabriel comment, “If humanity wants a decent society it has to be paid for. If it doesn’t,

or enough don’t, society and the biosphere will pay anyway” (Lang and Gabriel 2005, p. 53).

Michaelis and others (e.g. Seyfang) are confident that there are signs that this is already beginning to happen, with individualism being tempered by a growing interest in physical and virtual communities; market institutions changing their behaviour by involving and recognising stakeholder views and seeking to respond to their green concerns by providing more ethical choices; and globally-connected communities being encouraged to act locally to achieve global solutions (Michaelis 2003b). He argues that these early developments need to be encouraged through providing opportunities for community discourse, for the benefits that such group discussions can bring in terms of creativity, the sharing of practical skills and enabling changes in perceptions of others (versus individual reflection.) Others, additionally, point out the need to enable individuals to better enact their intentions, to enable them to break out from “locked- in” patterns of consumption that only serve to benefit the interests of big business and the sole pursuit of economic growth (Sanne 2002). Having alternative products and services (e.g. local food networks vs supermarket chains) available and giving consumers information so that they can make sense of their options and decide accordingly, are suggested as being key (Hertwich 2003), although others caution against the provision of too much information for fear that it can leave consumers feeling overwhelmed about the scale of the challenges and their personal ability to have any impact (Seyfang 2009).

Equally, however, there is a growing debate within the Literature (which is not fully reflected in most policy) that action at the level of the consumer, alone, is unlikely to yield the kinds of changes necessary in order to ensure sustainable levels of consumption (Sanne 2002). Instead, there is a call for “individualised collective action” or “virtuous globalisation” (Leitch 2003)

79

through consumer movements. Sebastiani, Montagnini and Dalli (2013) suggest four spheres of activity:- shareholder activism; political consumerism; social alliances and alternative business systems, and illustrate their argument with the case of the Slow Food movement, which began in Italy in 1989 with the aim of promoting “good, clean and fair food” and has subsequently grown to encompass over 100,000 members over 153 countries.

Political consumerism (PC), the concept of consuming (or not consuming) as a political act, has received considerable attention in the Literature (Berlin, 2011; Baek, 2010; Neilson, 2010a; Neilson 2010b). The advantage of PC as a form of democratic expression (as opposed to voting in an election or at an Annual General Meeting) is that it can be done every day, potentially many times a day, and can be applied to everyday activities, to the kinds of ordinary consumption (such as food stuffs) that are frequently overlooked in the Literature (Jackson 2005a; Lewis and Potter 2011). As an individual act of political action, PC implies that ethical, environmental and societal concerns can be brought to bear in consumer decision-making processes. Further, there are various forms that it can take – boycotting and buycotting (consciously choosing an alternative product) are perhaps the most direct approaches but switching to alternative lifestyles (such as deciding to become a vegetarian) can also be deemed a political act (depending upon the genuine motivations of the consumer – see above, regarding the motivations of voluntary simplifiers)(Berlin 2011).

Research into the prevalence of boy/buy-cotting reveals an interesting picture of a growing group of consumers who choose to express their opinions in this way, rather than through more traditional avenues of expression, such as donating to a political party. Interestingly, it also appears to be more popular amongst women than men, reversing the usual gender gap seen with traditional political engagement (Stolle, Hooghe and Micheletti 2005; Dalton 2008; Halkier 1999).

Baek (2010), for example, used two rounds of US consumer survey data to identify that up to 15% of consumers claimed to have boycotted products; 12% to have buycotted; and 23% of consumers had done both. The figures for European activism are higher. Using data collected as part of the European Social Survey, Neilson (2010) found that 35% of Europeans identified as “political consumers”, with 13% boycotting, 46% buycotting and 41% doing both. Stolle, Hooghe and Micheletti (2005) found even higher levels of activism amongst student populations in Canada, Sweden and Belgium, with 72% claiming to have buycotted and 63% boycotted. Importantly, however, both Neilson and Paxton (2010) and Stolle, Hooghe and Micheletti (2005) found a link between a person’s propensity to engage in political consumerism with their perceptions of their own effectiveness and measures of social capital. Consequently, because

80

social capital, like wealth, is unevenly distributed, regional differences in political consumerism also exist, suggesting that PC, as a tactic, is unfairly weighted in favour of those with the education and means to engage with (and benefit most from) it. Lockie (2002) articulates this in “The Invisible Mouth”. Here, he contends that the market has listened disproportionately to the views of a minority of concerned (and wealthy) consumers such that the supply of (less expensive) raw, organic fruit and vegetables, is being reduced in favour of providing (more expensive) added-value organic products, effectively reducing the chances for those on lower incomes to consume organic foods (Chapter 3 also demonstrated that similar differences in provision existed within Tesco stores with respect to organic seafood.) Nevertheless, political consumerism, through buycotting, boycotting and engaging in other forms of social movements, facilitated particularly now by the use of social media, is suggested as a genuine additional form of political engagement which has the potential to enable citizens to more directly shape policy and influence how it is enacted on the ground, reflecting a shift from citizen participation to citizen influence (Dalton 2008; Rokka and Moisander 2009).