Carl Dalhammar
Senior lecturer
Politik och styrning för hållbar konsumtion. : En forskningsöversikt
Author
Summary, in English
The ongoing environmental crisis and the growing socio-economic disparities between different population groups are among the most significant challenges facing humanity. These problems are rooted in unsustainable consumption patterns, particularly in the more affluent societies worldwide. We, therefore, need to change existing consumption patterns, which is a considerable challenge. A sustainable level of consumption must respect planetary limits and be in line with climate change targets. In contrast, the consumption levels of the poorest parts of the world’s population needs to increase to allow their population to live a dignified life.The climate impact of Swedish consumption consists partly of the climate impact of activities in Sweden and partly of the climate impact of Swedish consumption that take place outside Sweden,for instance related to import of products. We see some reduction in consumption-based emissions, but not at a rate that will enable us to reach our climate targets. Sweden has introduced several progressive climate policies, but Swedish consumption has a very high environmental impact in other countries. This can partly be explained by our high purchasing power, the individualization of responsibility for consumption-related impacts, and the social context influencing our consumption behaviour. Research on sustainable consumption has long discussed the two main courses of action for achieving sustainable development. The first is weak sustainable consumption, which can be achieved mainly by changing consumption patterns through more eco-efficient/greener consumption and some shift towards the consumption of less environmentally damaging consumption categories.The second is strong sustainable consumption which, in addition, stresses the need for a reduction in consumption levels through sufficiency measures (see below). Strong sustainable consumption emphasizes the need for real net reductions in global material consumption.This report aims to provide a critical overview of the state of research on weak and strong sustainable consumption, with an emphasis on research on three different strategies to achieve more sustainable consumption patterns:• Consuming more efficiently - better/greener consumption - means consuming better alternatives of the same goods and services, for example eco-labelled, organic, energy-efficient, ethical, or locally produced goods.
• Consuming differently - consumption shift - means a relative reduction in the impact of consumption due to switching to a less impactful category of goods and services, for example using public transport instead of driving or eating vegetables instead of meat.
• Consuming less - sufficient consumption - means an absolute reduction in consumption levels of goods and services leading to an absolute reduction in environmental and social impacts, for example living in a smaller area, flying less often, reducing consumption of meat and purchase of clothes and driving less.
The report also provides an overview of the research on environmental policy instruments for sustainable consumption. The methodology has mainly comprised of an integrative literature review. 9 (115) Politik och styrning för hållbar konsumtion Sustainable consumption policies have mainly aimed to make consumption greener/more efficient,for example correcting market failures through more information, enabling individuals to make more sustainable choices in the market, supporting eco-labeling schemes, and introducing consumption taxes. This is usually categorized as a weak sustainable consumption policy, as the policy does not question current consumption patterns but aims primarily to make them more sustainable. As a result, the policies have had a limited impact.Different consumption (“consumption shift”) strategies look at, among other things, changes insocio-economic systems, new business models, and new ways of consuming, such as sharing something instead of buying. Like ‘better consumption’, consumption shift fits within the existing economic system, but certain types of practices and business models can challenge the economy’s prevailing ‘linear’ flows. However, the shift towards different consumption/consumption systems is slow. These are often “niche” activities that find it challenging to impact the economy profoundly, at a larger scale. The overall conclusion is that current progress is too slow to prevent further deterioration of the global environment.Strategies related to greener and different consumption have limited capacity to achieve reductions in the environmental impacts of consumption. They can only provide some relative (not absolute)decoupling between economic growth and environmental impacts. There are several reasons for this. Crucial factors include rebound effects and other macroeconomic effects: a particular type of consumption may become less environmentally damaging, but efficiency gains free up consumption space, which is spent on new consumption activities. Furthermore, we can see how reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in some countries result from production shifting to other countries, with associated increases in greenhouse gas emissions there.This means that policies related to greener and different consumption may mitigate environmental impacts from consumption and environmental impacts, but they cannot deliver absolute decoupling. At best, they only buy us more time to find more effective policies. Current trends in greenhouse gas emissions, resource use and biodiversity loss mean that we urgently need new approaches.Consuming less (sufficiency/reduced consumption) is the strategy with the most significant potential to reduce the environmental impact of consumption. Reduction policies could include more radical measures such as emission quotas (for countries, regions, cities, households,individuals) that would require all economic activity to take place within the quotas. It could also involve banning certain types of consumption (for example short air travel), banning certain products (for example luxury goods like yachts), banning certain activities (for example oil exploration), banning activities that encourage more consumption (for example bonus points for air travel), or stopping certain production – with related effects on consumption (for example by creating marine reserves where fishing is not allowed). But policies aimed at reducing consumption question the current growth paradigm. This causes great concern among leading political elites. At the same time, several recent research reports have highlighted the need to reduce consumption levels and ban certain types of consumption. There are signs that the issue is also increasingly discussed in the political arena.The “reduce” approach has one essential difference compared to the “increase efficiency/change”approaches: it explicitly requires the consideration of equity perspectives. It is easier to ignore10 (115) Politik och styrning för hållbar konsumtion economic inequalities if one believes in economic growth that can “lift all boats”. On the other hand, if you say that the cake cannot grow, more attention will be paid to how it is distributed.That is why more and more research reports stress that the poorest people on the planet need to consume more, and that we need to reduce consumption levels among the wealthiest individuals.Regarding policy instruments for sustainable consumption, the report reviews existing and potential policy instruments in different consumption domains. Overall, existing instruments provide weak incentives for major consumption shifts, probably because habits, economic interests, etc., discourage the shift. More elaborate policy packages with stronger incentives are needed to accelerate the transition. Among potential - not yet implemented - policy instruments,we can conclude that those with a high potential to reduce the environmental impact of consumption, such as individual carbon quotas, are difficult to implement as they are complex in nature and likely to be unpopular among the public.The report also discusses the future research needs on governance for sustainable consumption.More research is needed in several research areas, such as how to design effective policy packages,how to increase the acceptability of policies that reduce consumption levels, behavioral research needs, policy experiments, and research on how to implement radical regulations for product supply systems and marketing, as well as research on rebound effects. We particularly need research that looks at sustainable consumption from a systems perspective, rather than research on individual practices or policies. We also need more research with critical elements, emphasizing the equity aspects of the necessary systemic transition. Finally, we need creative approaches to integrate different theories and methods to produce innovative research with policy relevance.
• Consuming differently - consumption shift - means a relative reduction in the impact of consumption due to switching to a less impactful category of goods and services, for example using public transport instead of driving or eating vegetables instead of meat.
• Consuming less - sufficient consumption - means an absolute reduction in consumption levels of goods and services leading to an absolute reduction in environmental and social impacts, for example living in a smaller area, flying less often, reducing consumption of meat and purchase of clothes and driving less.
The report also provides an overview of the research on environmental policy instruments for sustainable consumption. The methodology has mainly comprised of an integrative literature review. 9 (115) Politik och styrning för hållbar konsumtion Sustainable consumption policies have mainly aimed to make consumption greener/more efficient,for example correcting market failures through more information, enabling individuals to make more sustainable choices in the market, supporting eco-labeling schemes, and introducing consumption taxes. This is usually categorized as a weak sustainable consumption policy, as the policy does not question current consumption patterns but aims primarily to make them more sustainable. As a result, the policies have had a limited impact.Different consumption (“consumption shift”) strategies look at, among other things, changes insocio-economic systems, new business models, and new ways of consuming, such as sharing something instead of buying. Like ‘better consumption’, consumption shift fits within the existing economic system, but certain types of practices and business models can challenge the economy’s prevailing ‘linear’ flows. However, the shift towards different consumption/consumption systems is slow. These are often “niche” activities that find it challenging to impact the economy profoundly, at a larger scale. The overall conclusion is that current progress is too slow to prevent further deterioration of the global environment.Strategies related to greener and different consumption have limited capacity to achieve reductions in the environmental impacts of consumption. They can only provide some relative (not absolute)decoupling between economic growth and environmental impacts. There are several reasons for this. Crucial factors include rebound effects and other macroeconomic effects: a particular type of consumption may become less environmentally damaging, but efficiency gains free up consumption space, which is spent on new consumption activities. Furthermore, we can see how reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in some countries result from production shifting to other countries, with associated increases in greenhouse gas emissions there.This means that policies related to greener and different consumption may mitigate environmental impacts from consumption and environmental impacts, but they cannot deliver absolute decoupling. At best, they only buy us more time to find more effective policies. Current trends in greenhouse gas emissions, resource use and biodiversity loss mean that we urgently need new approaches.Consuming less (sufficiency/reduced consumption) is the strategy with the most significant potential to reduce the environmental impact of consumption. Reduction policies could include more radical measures such as emission quotas (for countries, regions, cities, households,individuals) that would require all economic activity to take place within the quotas. It could also involve banning certain types of consumption (for example short air travel), banning certain products (for example luxury goods like yachts), banning certain activities (for example oil exploration), banning activities that encourage more consumption (for example bonus points for air travel), or stopping certain production – with related effects on consumption (for example by creating marine reserves where fishing is not allowed). But policies aimed at reducing consumption question the current growth paradigm. This causes great concern among leading political elites. At the same time, several recent research reports have highlighted the need to reduce consumption levels and ban certain types of consumption. There are signs that the issue is also increasingly discussed in the political arena.The “reduce” approach has one essential difference compared to the “increase efficiency/change”approaches: it explicitly requires the consideration of equity perspectives. It is easier to ignore10 (115) Politik och styrning för hållbar konsumtion economic inequalities if one believes in economic growth that can “lift all boats”. On the other hand, if you say that the cake cannot grow, more attention will be paid to how it is distributed.That is why more and more research reports stress that the poorest people on the planet need to consume more, and that we need to reduce consumption levels among the wealthiest individuals.Regarding policy instruments for sustainable consumption, the report reviews existing and potential policy instruments in different consumption domains. Overall, existing instruments provide weak incentives for major consumption shifts, probably because habits, economic interests, etc., discourage the shift. More elaborate policy packages with stronger incentives are needed to accelerate the transition. Among potential - not yet implemented - policy instruments,we can conclude that those with a high potential to reduce the environmental impact of consumption, such as individual carbon quotas, are difficult to implement as they are complex in nature and likely to be unpopular among the public.The report also discusses the future research needs on governance for sustainable consumption.More research is needed in several research areas, such as how to design effective policy packages,how to increase the acceptability of policies that reduce consumption levels, behavioral research needs, policy experiments, and research on how to implement radical regulations for product supply systems and marketing, as well as research on rebound effects. We particularly need research that looks at sustainable consumption from a systems perspective, rather than research on individual practices or policies. We also need more research with critical elements, emphasizing the equity aspects of the necessary systemic transition. Finally, we need creative approaches to integrate different theories and methods to produce innovative research with policy relevance.
Department/s
- The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics
Publishing year
2022-05-10
Language
Swedish
Full text
Document type
Report
Publisher
Forskningsrådet Formas
Topic
- Earth and Related Environmental Sciences
- Economics and Business
Keywords
- hållbar konsumtion
- politik
- forskningöversikt
Status
Published
Project
- MISTRA Sustainable Consumption - from niche to mainstream (Phase II)
Report number
R4:2022
ISBN/ISSN/Other
- ISBN: 978-91-540-6155-6