Conspicuous, but not Consuming
- Posted by: Stephen Linaweaver , Brad Bate , Michael Keating
- on June 20, 2009 at 10:00 am
Why Facebook is more important to the environment than solar panels.
The growth of social networks indicates a fundamental shift in patterns of human behavior. The unsustainable practice of ever-increasing consumption of physical goods, and expressing oneself through what one purchases and displays, is being replaced by increasing consumption of virtual goods through virtual channels. This is good news for the sustainability of our economy.
Thorstein Veblen, in his groundbreaking work The Theory of the Leisure Class, published in 1899, posited that humans use displays of wealth to broadcast status to society. Veblen argued that, since the beginning of history, once basic needs were met, elites have “conspicuously consumed” to reinforce class. This has not been without consequence. As illustrated in Jared Diamond’s controversial book Collapse, this seemingly inevitable behavior of the ruling classes led to cultural demise.
Throughout the last century conspicuous consumption meant buying cars, boats, larger houses, jewelry, art, and meals in restaurants. Keeping up with the Joneses required a lot of energy—and produced a lot of carbon and waste. More and bigger became our mantras. The average size of the American home leapt from 983 square feet in 1950 to 2,080 in 1990, increasing roughly 20 percent per decade. The number of cars per U.S. family saw a similar 14 percent growth rate per decade over the same period.
Just over 100 years since Veblen introduced the idea of conspicuous consumption, however, the practice appears to be losing steam. The rates of growth in average home size and family car ownership in the United States have both roughly halved since 1990. The square footage of an average U.S. home peaked in the second quarter of 2008, and is now back down to pre-2004 levels. The average number of cars per household is following a similar trajectory.
Are people becoming less conspicuous? Hardly. Is this a response to the recession? Partially. A conscious effort to curb the environmental crisis? Unlikely. It may be, in fact, that houses, cars, clothes, and other traditional means of distinguishing oneself are no longer the best tools for the job.
Much has been said about how Facebook, Twitter, and blogging have revolutionized social networking and connectivity. But just as importantly, these channels for self-expression represent a new way to be conspicuous without the consumption. Take Twitter, for example, which expanded at a rate of almost 1400 percent in February 2009. Its sole purpose is to facilitate conspicuousness, allowing users to provide followers, many of whom are strangers, with minute-by-minute updates.
Professional thirtysomethings spend more time polishing their LinkedIn pages than pruning their front lawns. Prospective singles—men and women—focus more on tweaking their Match.com or eHarmony profiles than they do searching for that perfect convertible. An entrepreneur friend in Silicon Valley recently told me he sold his BMW because he was embarrassed to show up in it for meetings with younger software engineers in the coffee shops of Palo Alto. The car detracted from—instead of reinforced—his identity.
For many under the age of 25, a considerable portion of identity is shaped online—through friends listed, photos posted, causes supported, videos uploaded, and opinions shared. This may change with age, but the comparable activity of older people on other sites indicates it may not: the fastest growing demographic on Facebook is users over 35.
This shift from material goods to self-expression and social capital is heartening, but the real story is not in the coffee shops in California, but in villages in India and small towns in China that are just beginning to get online. Jared Diamond notes that Easter Island’s fatal fad for giant stone effigies—one well-known example of conspicuous materialism—didn’t travel well at all. But the newest form of conspicuousness is instantly transferable across geographies and cultures, and is spreading much faster than consumerism did.
Like cell phones in India, social networking will have a tremendous impact in the developing world. People in emerging economies already have real live social networks, of course, but social capital represents a much higher percentage of their net worth than for those who live in richer countries. A tool that can help them make the most of this asset will take on meaning and roles no one has anticipated.
One hundred years on, both here and in the developing world, the “conspicuous” portion of Veblen’s theory is as strong as ever. But “conspicuous consumption” is being replaced by “conspicuous expression” as the driver of identity. This new paradigm emphasizes the conspicuousness of ideas, interests, and opinions rather than accumulating more stuff than your neighbor. This is not insignificant. How billions choose to distinguish themselves from one another will be just as important to global sustainability as how they power their homes, what they eat, and how they commute to work, making online social networking a critical “leapfrog” technology in the developing world and a surprisingly powerful source of behavioral change in the developed world.
As with any transformation, this shift will not occur without costs. Some new sectors will emerge while others will disappear. People will still need food, clothing, and shelter, and will consume in quantities beyond necessity, but the record stores in our neighborhoods will continue closing in the face of downloadable competition, and economies that rely heavily on manufacturing consumer goods will be forced to retool. Not everyone wins in the short term. But the good news is that, in the long run, so much economic growth will be in the developing world, this new form of conspicuousness will be as much about meeting new demand in a new way as it will be about replacing existing patterns of consumption. What at first looked like a replacement for record stores has attracted thousands of entrepreneurs, from all over the world, to profit by developing additions to a single line of consumer products. iTunes’ App Store just added its 30,000th application, before it was even a year old. Welcome to conspicuous expression.
The environmental challenges we now face will not be solved by doom-and-gloom prognostications, the U.N., large national governments, or a heroic private sector. A mindset shift is needed, leaders say, but we speak as if that shift is ephemeral or distant, beyond the mist. That new mindset is just a few clicks away.
Guest bloggers Stephen Linaweaver, Michael Keating, and Brad Bate are consultants with GreenOrder, a sustainability strategy and management consulting firm that is a part of LRN.
Illustration by Will Etling.
DISCUSSION: 48 Comments
The greatest benefit of Facebook is that it has many groups on the site that you can join. So if you are interested in Chicago Cubs you can research Chicago Cubs in the groups section and you will be able to find friends on there that like the Cubs. This is just one example, I know that you can join groups of your favorite football team, television show, or whatever you want for the most part! If you can’t find a group for your interest, you can simply create one!James
Interesting point. Although I’m not a big fan of people replacing real life experience with virtual, I think that social-networking on a healthy level is a benefit. I like the idea that we are consuming non-expendable items, but it’s scary to think we are neglecting reality. I don’t want to see people end up like the humans in WALL-E.
Complete bullshit. Internet only reacts to the real world. The top of the pyramid will always continue to consume conspicuously. The human nature is something very difficult to change in that short terms. I come from (and live in) a so called country with ”emerging economy” and I don’t feel any basic change of the people’s behaviour and thinking.But in fact, yes, there is something. The group of people, who live only behind the computer screen is constantly growing.
So if people with the means to buy BMWs are eschewing them because luxury goods don’t reinforce their image, that frees up a lot of discretionary cash among the leisure class. Where does this money go?
Interesting thoughts.
However, the change in consumption preferences is at best an hypothesis, at this time. We shall have to look at data 3-5 years down the line to see what’s really going on.
Having said that, the other question is easier to address – whether social networks are fuelling consumers’ sense of well-being. And, it is likely that the authors’ hypothesis is largely right. But, will it substitute consumption of physical goods? I don’t know.. That’s a radical view to take, I feel. At best, it is the authors’ point of view, hardly fit to be a conclusion based on data.
Vacuous rubbish. Twitter et al are the worst forms of vox pop. What amazes me is that new channels like CNN think these lowest forms of VP enhance their offering. Its a good story though if you are a self absorbed journalist with nothing else to say…
Conspicuous, but not Consuming an Interesting topic, I would love to see the whole social networking play a big part in keeping the world at peace, interacting positively online and understanding each other continents apart would be a great endeavor!
Very right Mr. Linaweaver ”growth of social networks indicates a fundamental shift in patterns of human behavior.” The addition to archives of future Einsteins to be by viewing thoughts or tweets… is the beginning of Twitter or is the recent %1500 increase the climax?
An obvious reason for the decline in “average” size of home and cars is the decline of household sizes. Single heads of household are the fastest growing demographic. If one looks under the hood, there may actually be more duplication of certain goods and services consumption (lawn mowing, babysitters, small appliances, at the expense of the larger items. As a single HoH, my experience is that this status is very expensive, and many kinds of consumption have shifted from one category to another.
Good points. It’d be interesting to examine the consumption that is happening online (while on break from updating your Facebook profile), where online consumer spending continues to grow at a healthy clip. Check in with Amazon, ebay and Walmart.com – they may give us a good idea of how material consumption is actually waxing or waning. The potential downside of the ability to broadcast yourself online to so many people, is that it prompts citizens to focus their lens and energy on examining and reporting on themselves, rather than using that energy to focus on others. We’re a self-conscious and self-absorbed citizenry as is, the profile pages may be making that even more so.
Ethan’s comment says it best . We are indeed a self conscious and self absorbed people as evidenced by social networking . It is a huge time bandit and narrowly focuses on our own little ‘center of the universe’ , much as children do who see themselves in the same way. Helping others is living. Not tweeting.
A response:Interesting points and conclusion that we have moved from conspicuous consumption to conspicuous expression. Although I agree with the latter, I’m not convinced we have given up the former. Many people desire acquisition of the values of power and wealth which are traditionally equated with status and material possessions. Although young professionals may indeed spend hours preening their facebook profiles and updating the universe on their every feeling and thought via twitter, they certainly aren’t passing up designer clothing, fashionable apartments, stylish cars, elaborate dinner parties, nice jewelry, and drinks in the toney bar either. In fact, it seems that most young professionals in big cities eagerly strive to use their incomes to purchase the latest cosmopolitan fashions, the cutest IKEA furnishings, and the best exotic ingredients from the local Trader Joe’s for dazzling dinner parties to further reinforce to friends their rising social status. Then, they proceed to document said black and white cocktail parties on social networking sites so all friends are aware–across the globe-of rising fortunes and somewhat glamorous, if not consumptive, lifestyles.I’m not suggesting that online social networking sites don’t have their merits and don’t produce positive ramifications. Certainly, people are staying better connected and hearing news faster via these new technologies. (Though perhaps we are casually pleasing many rather than deeply pleasing a select few.) But is it correct to say that these tools are the key to sustainability? If we’re suggesting that getting everyone plugged in on a computer, blackberry, or iphone will induce a mindshift change for a sustainable economy, I think we’re being overly optimistic. Besides the obvious fact that such devices required to access online networking sites demand massive amounts of energy, magnified at a global scale, how does broadcasting your fabulous self via updated “status” reports and a litany of pictures actually incite the conservation of resources? Wouldn’t seeing pictures of your contemporaries living the lifestyle you desire make you more likely to seek more money, more possessions, and more stuff in order to live the way they do?Not to mention, cell phone and laptop production requires the use of Coltan, a mineral that is extracted from the deep forests of the Congo. The rampant cell phone and laptop craze has led to the demise of African Gorillas and their habitat–pushing yet another species closer to the brink of extinction.Furthermore, what does this say about our society if our interactions with one another predominantly take the form of one-sentence status updates and “tweets.” Have we crammed in so much information into our brains and reduced our attention spans to the point where we have too little time for meaningful phone conversations and heartfelt letters? Will email become the new “snail mail,” the relic of the past that is replaced by one-liners and sound bytes? Does it bother anyone that we spend more time indoors, logged into computers, butts on couches, than ever? That only 6 percent of children ages 9-13 play outside on their own? That childhood obesity is on the rise, in addition to a dwindling number of folks who feel a connection to the land? What does this say about the fabric of our communities, of real connection, of true meaningful relationships? Have we become so self-absorbed and so busy that we don’t have time for what really matters–spending QUALITY time with each other?Even with all of the social networking, people still feel disconnected from one another. Median incomes continue to climb, but happiness and quality of life measures have remained stable since the 1950’s. How does encouraging more time spent polishing profiles, showcasing pictures, and updating status’ get people active, outside, and genuinely connected to their communities, the place, and to each other?I am convinced that healthy whole communities and healthy whole ecosystems are linked. Our need to address economic sustainability must be met head on–by confronting the true crux of the issue which is our obsession with GDP as the measure of growth and progress. The bandwidth between the “haves” and the “have-nots” must indeed be shortened. But I’m not convinced it lies in writing a one-sentence tweet about what you ate for lunch.
Really you people are nuts who cares about facebook and twitter… please it is so overdone and why would i really care what you are tweeting about what you are having for lunch or what you have on your facebook page to either promote yourself or narcissim… please I could care less and in a year or so so will everyone else
Big Sky definitely said it best. These social networking sites place even more pressure (on the very impressionable teens) by giving them direct access to pictures, videos, and comments from their peers. They want to “out-do” their peers (i.e. throw a better party, take crazier pictures, have a nicer car). Social networking sites become a platform for all to “showboat,” it becomes a question of how many “friends” you have on Facebook, or how many “followers” you have on Twitter, as opposed to getting to know the few friends that you actually do know in real life. Users post pictures of their cars, their homes, their vacations not because they want to show their distant relatives what they are doing, but because they want everyone to look at their achievements and wail with envy.
what a stupid subtitle that’s not matched by the otherwise thoughtful text. the web may shift “conspicuous consumption” from the physical to the virtual, but it certainly scales the breathless attention-grabbing attitude of offline media to new and sad proportions.
Big Sky hits the nail on the head several time, and yes i completely agree. i believe that relationships and bonds are established through interaction and not just communication. Having a lot of friends on face book or twitter doesnt mean anything. It’s true it connects you to more people faster but it does not actually mean it’s better. How many can say that they have a friend in face book or twitter that would bleed for them, whom they knew only online? i doubt it. These social networking sites offer faster, broader, and accessible means of connecting, but quality of the connection greatly suffers. You can tell what ails you online, but you cannot share your pain. You can tell people that your happy but you cannot share your happiness, you can tell people your problems, but they wont be able to share your load. These method of connections will only create a barrier between real connections which will be harder to break in time, giving you a false sense of ‘connecting’. You think you know someone because you know what they are doing in twitter? but you wont know why they are doing it. You will only know the superficial things about the people and not what makes them tick.These social networking sites are not entirely to blame however. These only offer a means to express and connect, in the end should any misuse or abuse can only be blamed on the user.
All of this crap is for people that don’t have a real life, period. I have plenty of real friends, a job, my family, that How could I have time for this BULL SHHHHt!!
I think you may have missed a factor in the declining consumption statistics. In 2008 and throughout 2009,10 and 11, there will be a significant shift in the average age of the population. During this three to four year period there will be one of the highest number of Americans crossing the 60-70 year old age bracket.
Those Americans are downsizing in bigger ways due, in part, to the recession and the forecasted long slow improvement of our economy. Financial experts call this recession and the forthcoming economic improvement to be an “L” recession. An “L” recession as compared to a “V” recession means a very fast decline, as we’ve seen over the last 2-3 quarters, followed by a very long very slow return to some level of prosperity. A “V” recession is a fast decline followed by a fast recovery.
I think you may want to go back and review your facts as it pertains to the “real” factors involved in the statistics on which you’ve based your assumption.
Just one man’s opinions.
Dan
It seems to me that these social gatherings are actually detracting from individuality and focusing rather on a shallow collective-type thought stream. As for “conspicuous consumption”, I believe there will always be people who fill their lives with hollow fodder be it Facebook or BMWs as to alleviate the pressures of life in a socioeconomical system no one person has the power to change. If existence were merely enough…
Good debate
Keep in Mind there is a physical space relationship to the internet. It is not the completely non-consumer, non-physical medium this article implies. There are enormous server farms constructed to host such sites as facebook, and although I agree with the social consciousness and activism the article suggests, there could be at least an acknowledgement of the consumer resources used in simply powering the website. Many people spend idle time on the internet and save messages they will never read again. This is akin to leaving the light on in the bathroom when you’re not using it. Only drains a bit of energy, but it all adds up.
Truth be told the coming Hydrogen Super-Highway will eclipse any economic revolution this world has ever seen. Hydrogen is safer than natural gas and can be cheaply produced with Highly effecient and powerful solar modules. (3000 watt panel) Good Luck facebook I did always find you a little intrusive.
Why Second Life could be more important than solar panels would have made more sense. The flaw in your theory is consumer addiction with non ROHS compliant products is worse than if these consumers were to buy some other consumables. I have boxes of old boards, drives, CRTs sitting in my garage not knowing what to do with this junk. I have my first “tube” video camera and the chip cameras that followed. This is only the type of article that could be written by wannabes wearing green colored glasses.
The students in Highschools and colleges should should never be allowed to use this means of communacation because they spned much time on them rather than studies
Smaller homes — fewer cars –that’s because we are in a depression , and I guess that is a good thing in some peoples view .