Suchergebnisse

It has become almost of a commonplace both in academia and in the public to assume that political consumerism is a means to 'buy' a good conscience, while having only limited 'real-world' resonance. Studies from e.g. consumer psychology and behavioural economics fuel this image by pointing to evidence for how people who act sustainable in one moment engage in unsustainable activities afterwards. Likewise, the so-called 'rebound effect' that is being observed in economies worldwide, seems to support that image further. This contribution sets out to challenge the persisting criticism, dismantling the assumption that activities like political consumerism serve only to put responsibilities on the shoulders of individuals who are expected 'to save the planet at home', while in fact being trapped in a system in which they can (and want to) do little more than continuing with non-sustainable consumption patterns mantled in green. Relying on data from representative population surveys conducted in Germany (2014) and Sweden (2019), the paper shows that for most political consumers it is indeed about re-programming production and consumption – as well as the economic system and politics more in general – towards ecological sustainability. Specifically, the insights presented challenge three common critiques of political consumerism. First, looking at the activities that are associated with political consumerism, it stands out as a form of highly committed change making and major aspect of 'real-world' sustainable consumption. Second, whereas political consumerism is correlated with higher education and social class levels, citizens from all social backgrounds practice sustainability. They just do so through different forms of practices adjusted to their capabilities. Third, the discussion of political issues regarding consumption among individuals and their interpersonal encouragement to get involved in political and sustainable consumption are strikingly pervasive. Thus, political consumerism is not just something ...

1. Überarbeitung unseres Verständnisses von politischem Konsum -- 2. Perspektiven des politischen Konsums -- 3. Erklärung des politischen Konsums -- 4. Politischer Konsum auf Landesebene -- 5. Politischer Konsum auf der individuellen Ebene -- 6. Politisches Konsumverhalten als vielschichtiger Prozess.

This book provides an analysis of the politics of consumption and how the 'educated consumer' plays a vital role in advancing responsible market practices and consumption. Based on a comprehensive interdisciplinary perspective, it explores the extent, drives and links of boycotting, buycotting, labelling schemes and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in 20 European countries. A central question addressed is whether macro-societal patterns of orientation concerning the roles of the state, companies and citizens can explain individual and cross-national differences in boycotting and buycotting. As the book shows, there is not one type of 'political consumer', but several, and their occurrence is directly connected to national variations of labelling schemes and Corporate Social Responsibility. Consumers need reference points and information on the political backgrounds of purchases, and policy makers must address that need through political measures which fit to the national patterns in views about cooperation and market relationships. Carolin V. Zorell is Researcher at the University of Mannheim, Germany. Her research interest lies especially in the political and socio-psychological background of social interaction, and the inquiry of how context and personal characteristics form political participation and social cooperation.--

What people eat has become a highly political issue, closely intertwined with public health, environmental concerns, and climate change. Individuals' consumption decisions tend to be greatly influenced by the people that surround them, and this seems to be especially true when it comes to food. In recent years, alongside close contacts, such as family and friends, a myriad of social influencers have appeared on the screens, sharing opinions on what (not) to eat. Presenting results from a youth survey conducted in Sweden in 2019 (N = 443), this paper shows that social media have become the primary source of information about food and eating for youths, followed by schools and families. However, primary sources of influence continue to be parents and the family at large. Furthermore, the study shows that it is possible to identify 'central persons', i.e., relatively clear-cut groups of people whose food choices—measured as tendency to eat climate friendly—is mirrored by the youths, both in their everyday food preferences and in their broader political awareness as expressed through political consumerism. A conclusion from this is that certain people can be particularly successful at inspiring larger numbers of other people to engage with healthier and environmentally friendlier (food) consumption in a society.

The ecological impacts of consumption are well acknowledged, and most people worldwide are likely to have encountered proofs for or information about it. Likewise, online and offline media seem to be full of information on the issue. Even so, large numbers of people are 'non‐political' consumers, inconsiderate of the ethical and ecological implications of what they buy and consume. Using representative survey data from Sweden collected in 2019, this paper shows that a major reason for non‐political consumerism can be seen in the lack of interpersonal 'recruitment' efforts; that is, deliberate attempts by some to influence another's consumption. Moreover, the analyses show that for a person having faced such attempts by others to influence their consumption is distinct from them discussing political consumption issues. With this, the paper also provides one of the first large‐N studies confirming recent theoretical propositions of an extended definition of political consumerism: discussion, that is, discursive action, is a sub‐form of political consumerism next to boycotting, buycotting, and lifestyle change. Interpersonal influence, in turn, is a key predictor of political consumerism. Altogether, the results suggest that spreading information may feed discursive actions. Yet, to get more people change their consumption choices and engage in political consumerism, what is needed is that people influence each other to do so.

While the number of theoretical concepts surrounding sustainable citizenship, political consumerism and ethical lifestyles is rising continuously, this article is interested in how citizens themselves delineate sustainable citizenship through their practices. Asking which contours real-world sustainable citizenship has, we draw on the practice turn. From this perspective, sustainable citizenship might be an empirical nexus of material practices, like buying organic products or sharing goods. These practices rely on dispositions that include practical rules, attitudes and political values. With survey data from Germany (N = 1350) and using principle component analysis, we reconstruct sustainable citizenship through stable and widespread real-world patterns. The results suggest that sustainable citizenship is a relatively coherent, nonetheless hybrid bundle of performances and dispositions. Real-world sustainable citizenship most resembles political consumerism, but consists overall of three distinct practices: sustainable purchasing, reduced consumption, and green mobility. All three are shown to be connected to engaged citizenship norms and the intention to advance social-ecological change. However, social class seems to prevent some citizens particularly from applying sustainable purchasing, while age and infrastructures constrain green mobility. Altogether, our results show that citizens from all social backgrounds practice sustainable citizenship. Yet they do so through different forms of practices, adjusted to their capabilities.

AbstractExisting studies suggest that what people do and do not think of as being 'politics', varies a lot. Some citizens embrace narrow understandings, regarding only few issues as 'political'. While others hold broad conceptions. What remains unclear is to what extent citizens agree on the contents, i.e., which topics are 'political'. Using representative survey data from the U.S. (N = 1000), this article illustrates the overlaps and differences in conceptions of politics that different groups of citizens hold. Specifically, the results of a cluster analysis reveal five groups. The citizens within each group share similar conceptions of politics, while across groups conceptions differ. We find one group considering everything as political, one not regarding anything as such, and a third one identifying only tax-cuts as 'political'. In between these extremes, two groups identify politics in terms of rather demarcated spheres of issues: domestic, or cross-border/global issues. Further analyses point to important differences in the groups' socio-demographic profiles, political interest, and political behaviors. This shows, in their minds, people draw boundaries around politics in quite varied, yet principled, ways. This comes with a meaningful diversity in citizens' connection to the political world around them, and with important implications for their roles within it.

The understanding of what democracy means has never been the same for all people and nations. However, contemporary developments suggest a fundamental shift. Preferences for a- and anti-democratic political parties and authoritarian(-like) relationships between politics and civil society are gaining support. Remarkably, these developments originate and thrive in the midst of exactly those democratic structures rejected. We therefore ask if there is a new understanding of democracy, and we empirically identify a discernible category of people who support illiberal understandings of democracy. These citizens with disparaging views of democracy reject democratic processes and actors, and weakly support common norms of citizenship. Yet, they are active in politics. Because we find that it is actual participation which stimulates the understandings of democracy, our results suggest that instead of attempting to exclude citizens with illiberal understandings of democracy from political arenas, meeting them there can offer the opportunity to nurture more liberal democratic orientations.

There is not one type of political consumer but several, and citizens seem to make a distinction between them. But why are boycotter not automatically buycotter, and vice-versa? The dissertation investigates to what extent citizens' understanding of how cooperation between government, firms and civil society should look like influences their preferences for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) compared to labelling schemes, and how this together influences the decision to boycott and/or to buycott. Drawing on a cross-country study of 20 European countries and a survey conducted among 1.350 individual citizens living in Germany, the study shows that boycotting and buycotting represent two opposite and yet complementary modes of political consumerism, which together constitute a process that develops in parallel and interacting with the availability of political shopping guidelines. The comparative importance of labelling schemes and CSR for political consumerism in turn varies across countries depending on the prevailing understanding of cooperation.

Over the last two decades, scholars have investigated norms of citizenship by focussing primarily on 'dutiful' and 'engaged' norms. In the meantime, contemporary democracies have witnessed growing demands for more sustainable styles of living and increasing public support for authoritarian and populist ideas. These developments point to both a change and an expansion of conventional understandings and conceptions of what a 'good citizen' in a democratic polity ought to do. Specifically, they raise questions about whether demands for more sustainability and increasing support for populist ideas establish new facets of democratic citizenship, and if so, how they can be meaningfully incorporated into existing images of citizenship. This study provides a re-conceptualization of citizenship norms and empirically tests a new measurement instrument using original data collected in Germany in 2019. The empirical application of an expanded set of items demonstrates the existence of more variegated facets of norms of citizenship, including norms to safeguard a sustainable future and distinct populist facets emphasizing the relevance of trust in authorities and experts as well as reliance on feelings and emotions. Contemporary conceptions of citizenship thus go beyond conventional distinctions between dutiful and engaged norms of citizenship.