A Day in a (Un)Sustainable Life is a 10-year research and policy project studying differences in individual perceptions of sustainable consumption around the globe. The project is a collaboration between Dr. David Alexander, Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of St. Thomas, and the Net Impact chapter at the University of St. Thomas’ Opus College of Business. Each year around Earth Day (April 22nd), we invite members of Net Impact chapters around the world to participate in the project by wandering around their communities with a digital camera and a journal. We are focused on Net Impact chapter members because they are a global group who have already developed individual perceptions of sustainable living practices. As they wander, participants take photographs of what they personally see as examples of the best and worst in sustainable living practices in their communities. As they compose their photos, participants capture their thoughts and feelings in their journal. They then share their photos and thoughts with the project.
2011 marked the second year of the project and saw contributions from Asia, Europe, and the U.S. Fifteen people contributed 38 photographs to the project with a wide range of subjects reflecting the diversity of perceptions of sustainable living. The bulk of the submissions can be viewed via Flickr.com at www.flickr.com/groups/adayinsustainability2011. To develop this summary of the 2011 project submissions, we looked at the photographs and their associated journal entries to identify the sustainable living practices being highlighted. Last year, as we reviewed the 2010 submissions, two broad themes emerged around consumption patterns. One set of sustainable living practices allowed people to maintain their current consumption patterns while seeking ways to increase pre- or post-consumption sustainability. A second set of sustainable living practices required people to change their current consumption patterns in order to achieve sustainability.
Many of this year’s submissions followed these same themes. People identified opportunities to increase sustainability with and without changing consumption patterns. More interesting, I think, are the emotional themes we find: hope, apathy, pride, guilt, frustration, encouragement, doubt, disappointment, enthusiasm, and others. Many of this year’s submissions also had a spiritual theme as people explored why we should be pursuing sustainable consumption.
Hope and Apathy
Thinking about moving towards sustainability elicits feelings of both hope and apathy. People found examples of sustainable consumption in their communities and in their lives that made them hopeful that sustainability could be achieved. Most of the submissions acknowledged the incremental progress being made on sustainability. This incrementalism is needed to maintain a hopeful feeling. For those contemplating the magnitude of the sustainability challenge, apathy seemed inevitable. In the face of the challenge, perhaps “ignorance really is bliss.” For individuals considering sustainable consumption it seems important for the individual to avoid thinking about the top-level task in an effort to avoid being overwhelmed by the enormity of the task. Apathy undermines the motivation needed to get people to practice sustainable consumption.
Pride and Guilt
As we read the submissions, we felt people’s pride in their efforts and the efforts of those in their community to “do their part” in efforts to live sustainably. The pride reflected a recognition of their effort and of the importance of the task. It also recognized their accomplishments given the number of impediments to sustainable consumption. At the same time, there were also significant feelings of guilt because people were unable to give up their wasteful vices—from motorcycles to hot tubs. It is important to recognize how difficult sustainable consumption is in cultures built on convenience. It’s hard (or impossible) to give up many conveniences for many people and the guilt one feels can be demotivating. I think people’s beliefs that their small vices are o.k. given their sustainable consumption efforts in other areas is appropriate. No one is perfect and so every effort should be applauded. Trying to guilt people into more sustainable actions is unlikely to be effective.
Encouragement and Frustration
It was interesting to read examples of people’s sense of both encouragement and frustration with the sustainable consumption efforts in their community. People were encouraged that those in their community were embracing recycling when the infrastructure was provided. And they were frustrated that people wouldn’t invest the slightest effort to use the recycling infrastructure provided. The degree of encouragement and frustration varies by nationality. Where incentives have been put in place, social norms have developed for participation, and people feel encouraged. Sustainable options become “normal” rather than “extraordinary” or “remarkable.” Where the infrastructure has been put in place, but incentives aren’t clear, participation lags and people feel frustrated. The old adage, “you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink” applies here.
Another interesting element of frustration is the frustration people feel when they see the wide-scale adoption of innovations that have unintended consequences. For example, we expect it’s unlikely that most people who look at aluminum as a preferred metal because it can be recycled understand the environmental damage done by bauxite mining along the with the energy required to produce and then recycle aluminum. It is frustrating to watch people pursue the latest “green” technologies without really considering the impact of adopting/pursuing that technology on the whole environmental/economic system.
Enthusiasm, Doubt and Disappointment
As people contemplate the increasing number of “green” products that have become available there is a mixture of enthusiasm, doubt, and disappointment. Enthusiasm accompanies innovative products that allow sustainable consumption. I like the observation that “it doesn’t have to be purchased to be nice.” I would extend it to “it doesn’t have to be manufactured to be nice.” There is a belief that sustainable products can provide greater benefits than traditional products. These benefits extend to aesthetics as well.
At the same time, there is rising doubt in the motivations of marketers to make sustainability claims about their products. Do marketers purposefully try to mislead consumers about the sustainability of their products/services and their operations? One participant wondered by McDonald’s would open a store for 23 hours, rather than 24 hours, per day? Doubt can easily turn to disappointment when marketers don’t deliver sustainable solution. Or when marketers make it harder for consumers to practice sustainable consumption. Beyond the economic incentives in markets that work against sustainable products/processes, the habits of market participants also work against sustainable consumption. One participant noted how vendors in an open air market frustrated her efforts to use her own bags rather than receiving new bags from the vendors.
Spiritual
Submissions to this year’s project included many more references to a spiritual aspect of sustainability. This spirituality showed itself in beliefs about the what and the why of sustainability. Sustainable living extends beyond the individual to society. It’s not enough for consumers to make sustainable decisions, changes need to happen at a societal level for sustainability to be achieved. To the extent that you have people who feel a sense of hopelessness in their lives, you can’t achieve sustainable living. You have to have a shared hope in what we can all do in order for society to foster and support sustainable decision-making. Society must teach individuals the importance of sustainability and the critical-thinking skills everyone needs to make intelligent decisions.
Another aspect of spirituality in this year’s submissions is the sense of the earth and its creatures being interconnected. Trees are living vital organism who play a vital role in the earth’s ecosystem. We all need to recognize the implications of our consumption beyond the benefits we enjoy and the immediate “harvesting” of resources that is done.
There was also a theme of parents leaving a livable world for their children. Part of this is making sustainable decisions. Part is teaching children the importance of sustainability. The effort transition to sustainable consumption is a long term cultural effort. Sustainability has to become an integrated aspect of society, from art to education to business.
Future Earth Days
In 2011, we had wider participation outside the US. This wider cultural participation is obvious in the broader emotional perspectives. The wider cultural participation also highlighted the dramatic country-by-country differences in perceptions of and participation in sustainable living. We expect that as participation in the project increases in coming years, we’ll continue to find both regional and country differences. These differences give us an opportunity to learn from each other and to increase our chances of living sustainable lives.
Participating in A Day in a (Un)Sustainable Life in 2012
If you’d like to add to our knowledge about how communities and individuals practice sustainable living, we invite you to participate in A Day in a (Un)Sustainable Life this year (2012). It’s easy, fun, and enlightening to participate. You just have to wander out in your community take photos of what you see as the best and worst in sustainable living practices in your community. As you snap photos, just write down your thoughts and feelings. When you’re done you can share your photos, thoughts, and feelings via Flickr or email (adayinsustainability@yahoo.com).
If you have questions, comments or want more information email the project at adayinsustainability@yahoo.com.
