Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What to Buy? On the Complexity of Being a Critical Consumer

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article criticises the notion that critical/political/ethical consumerism can solve issues related to sustainability and food production. It does this by analysing the complexity of the concept of sustainability as related to food choices. The current trend of pursuing a sustainable food production through critical purchase decisions rather than through regulation is shown to be problematic, as shopping for a more sustainable food system might be much harder than initially believed due to the conflicting values and inherent trade-offs entailed in the different notions of sustainability. Thus, critical consumerism may give way to false expectations as the complexity of choices transpires. One obvious way out is to let decisions regarding food choices be made earlier in the food production chain as well as through new modes of governance engaging members of civil society in their capacity as citizens rather than consumers. This entails complementing society’s reliance on critical consumerism with a citizen-oriented and political process in support of making more sustainable food choices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As the terms ‘political’, ‘ethical, and ‘critical’ are all used frequently in the literature without any convincing definitions to distinguish them, we have chosen to use the words ‘critical consumer/consumerism’ in this article. To the extent that this needs justification we find the label ‘critical’ refers most broadly to the conscious choices implied in attempting to connect values and actions in the market-place. Political and ethical consumption may be subsumed to the notion of ‘critical consumption’ that may be seen as a form of political, or extra-parliamentary participation.

  2. The notion of tele-connection comes from atmospheric sciences and refers to climate phenomena which are related despite large distances. In its present use it denotes the virtual reduction of distances between places. The concept does not describe a new phenomenon, cf. socio-economic interactions. It is, however, noteworthy how frequent distant interactions are in the context of sustainability (Yu et al. 2013).

  3. The 16 impact categories include human carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic toxicity [chloroethene-equivalent (eq)], respiratory inorganics (particulate matter with a diameter of ≤2.5 µm), ionizing radiation (Bq, the SI-derived unit of radioactivity, C14-eq), ozone layer depletion (chlorofluorocarbon 11, CFC11), aquatic and terrestrial ecotoxicity (chloroethylene triethylene glycol-eq), nature occupation (agricultural land), global warming (CO2-eq), acidification (area unprotected cosystems), aquatic (NO3-eq) and terrestrial (area unprotected ecosystems) eutrophication, respiratory organics (person × ppm−10× h−1), photochemical ozone effects on vegetation (m2 × ppm−1 × h−1), non-renewable energy (MJ primary), and mineral extraction (MJ extra). Three impact categories were the most important in monetary terms: respiratory inorganics, nature occupation, and global warming.

References

  • Aiking, H. (2014). Protein production: Planet, profit, plus people? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 100(suppl), 483S–489S.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akenji, L. (2014). Consumer scapegoatism and limits to green consumerism. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63, 13–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Dietetic Association. (2009). Position of the American dietetic association: Vegetarian diets. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109, 1266–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audsley, E., Brander, M., Chatterton, J., Murphy-Bokern, D., Webster, C., & Williams, A. (2009). How low can we go? An assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from the UK food system and the scope to reduce them by 2050. UK: Cranfield University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balazs, B. (2013). Civil food networks—Stakeholders’ experiences on the community supported agriculture in Hungary. Civil Szemle, 10, 107–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baranski, M., Średnicka-Tober, D., Volakakis, N., Seal, C., Sanderson, R., Stewart, G. B., et al. (2014). Higher antioxidant and lower cadmium concentration and lower incidence of pesticide residues in organically grown crops: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Nutrition (open access),. doi:10.1017/S0007114514001366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B. R. (2007). Consumed. How markets corrupt children, infantilize adults and swallow citizens whole. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, W. (1989). The pleasures of eating. The Journal of Gastronomy, 5, 125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkfelt, S., Kondrup, S., Röcklinsberg, R., Bjørkdahl, K., & Gjerris, M. (2015). Closer to nature? A critical discussion of the marketing of “Ethical” animal products. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(6), 1053–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boström, M., & Klintman, M. (2008). Eco-standards, product labelling and green consumerism. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • British Tomato Growers’ Association (2012). The Greenhouse Effect—Environmental Issues. http://www.britishtomatoes.co.uk/environment.

  • Browne, A. W., Harris, P. J. C., Hofny-Colling, A. H., Pasiecznik, N., & Wallace, R. R. (2000). Organic production and ethical trade: Definition, practice and links. Food Policy, 25(1), 69–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cafaggi, F., & Iamiceli, P. (2014). Supply chains, contractual governance and certification regimes. European Journal of Law and Economics, 37, 131–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, J. (2010). Protecting the environment the natural way: Ethical consumption. Antipode, 42(3), 672–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don’t walk their talk: Towards a framework for understanding the gap between the ethical purchase intentions and actual buying behaviour of ethically minded consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A., & Whitwell, G. J. (2014). Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention-behavior gap. Journal of Business Research, 67, 2759–2767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, Y. N. (2014). Different shades of green consciousness: The interplay of sustainability labeling and environmental impact on product evaluations. Journal of Business Ethics,. doi:10.1007/s.10551-014-2080-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J., Newmann, J., Smith, N., Vidler, E., & Westmarland, L. (2007). Creating citizen consumers. Chaninging publics and changing public services. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dangour, A. D., Lock, K., Hayter, A., Aikenhead, A., Allen, E., & Uauy, R. (2010). Nutrition-related health effects of organic foods: A systematic review. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 92, 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. R. (2014). Co-creating sustainable eating futures: Technology, ICT and citizen-consumer ambivalence. Futures, 62, 181–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker, E., & Dagevos, H. (2012). Reducing meat consumption in today´s consumer society. Questioning the citizen-comsumer gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25, 877–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Savio, L., & Schmietow, B. (2013). Environmental footprint of foods: The duty to inform. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 26, 787–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ejrnæs, R. P., Wiberg-Larsen, T. E., Holm, A., Josefson, B., Strandberg, B., Nygaard, L. W., Andersen, A., Winding, M., Termansen, M. D. D., Hansen, M., Søndergaard, A. S., Hansen, S., Lundsteen, A., Baattrup-Pedersen, E., Kristensen, P. H., Krogh, V., Simonsen, B., Hasler, A., Levin, G. (2011). Danmarks biodiversitet 2010: Status, udvikling og trusler [biodiversity in Denmark 2010: Status, development and threaths]. DMU Report No. 815. University of Aarhus, Denmark.

  • FDB Analyse. (2010). http://forum.fdb.dk/fdb/presse/nyheder/Sider/Okologiskeforbrugerebelasterklimaetmindre.aspx.

  • Fogelberg, C. L. (2008). På väg mot miljøanpassade kostråd. Vetenskapligt underlag inför miljökonsekvensanalysen av Livsmedelverkets kostråd. Sweden: Livsmedelsverket, National Food Administration.

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations (FAO). (2010). Final document: International scientific symposium biodiversity and sustainable diets: United against Hunger. 3–5 November 2010. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (2011). World livestock 2011—Livestock in food security. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman, J., & Silverstein, J. (2012). Organic foods: Health and environmental advantages and disadvantages. Pediatrics, 130, 1408–1415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forssell, S., & Lanoksi, K. (2014). The sustainability promise of alternative food networks: An examination through “alternative” characteristics. Agriculture and Human Values,. doi:10.1007/s10460-014-9516-4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francione, G., & Garner, R. (2010). The animal rights debate: Abolition or regulation?. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, D., & Lorek, S. (2005). Sustainable consumption governance: A history of promises and failures. Journal of Consumer Policy, 28(3), 261–288.

  • Gamborg, C., & Larsen, J. B. (2005). Towards more sustainable forestry? The ethics of close-to-nature forestry. Silva Carelica, 49, 55–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamborg, C., & Sandøe, P. (2005a). Applying the notion of sustainability—Dilemmas and the need for dialogue. In S. Holm & J. Gunning (Eds.), Ethics, Law and Society (pp. 123–130). Hants: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamborg, C., & Sandøe, P. (2005b). Sustainability in farm animal breeding. A review. Animal Production Science, 92(3), 221–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnett, T. (2014). What is a sustainable diet? A discussion paper. Oxford: Food Climate Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genus, A. (2014). Governing sustainability: A discourse-institutional approach. Sustainability, 6, 283–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gjerris, M. (2015). Willed blindness: A discussion of our moral shortcomings in relation to animals. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 28(3), 517–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gjerris, M., & Gaiani, S. (2013). Household food waste in Nordic countries. Estimations and ethical implications. Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, 7(1), 6–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorgitano, M. T., & Sodano, V. (2014). Sustainable food consumption: Concept and policies. Quality—Access to Success, 15(Suppl. 1), 207–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, H. (2005). Human and environmental rights: The need for corporate accountability. In F. Dodds & T. Pippard (Eds.), Human and environmental security: An agenda for change (pp. 221–234). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunert, K., Hieke, S., & Wills, J. (2014). Sustainability labels on food products: Consumer motivation, understanding and use. Food Policy, 44, 177–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulyas, E. (2008). Interpretations of ethical consumption. Review of Sociology, 14(1), 25–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halberg, N., Dalgaard, R., Rasmussen, M. D. (2006). Miljøvurdering af konventionel og økologisk avl af grøntsager. Arbejdsrapport fra Miljøstyrelsen nr. 5. In Danish: Working Report from the Danish Environmental Agency—Environmental Assessment of Conventional and Organic Production of Vegetables. http://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/Publikationer/2006/87-7614-960-9/pdf/87-7614-961-7.pdf.

  • Halweil, B. (2006). Can organic farming feed us all? World Watch Magazine, 19(3). http://www.worldwatch.org/node/4060. Accessed 28 Nov 2015.

  • Harrison, R., Newholm, T., & Shaw, D. (2005). The ethical consumer. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassan, L., Shaw, D., Shiu, E., Walsh, G., & Parry, S. (2013). Uncertainty in ethical consumer choice: A conceptual model. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 12, 182–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepting, D. H., Jaffe, J., & Macaig, T. (2014). Operationalizing ethics in food choice decisions. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 27, 453–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertwich, E., van der Voet, E., Suh, S., Tukker, A., Huijbregts, M., Kazmierczyk, P., Lenzen, M., McNeely, J., & Moriguchi, Y. (2010). Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Consumption and Production: Priority Products and Materials. United Nations Environment Programme.

  • Holt, D. B. (2012). Constructing sustainable consumption. From ethical values to the cultural transformation of unsustainable markets. The Annals of the American Academy, 644, 236–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen, E., & Dalsrud, A. (2007). Will consumers save the world? The framing of political consumerism. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 20, 469–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jägerskog, A., & Clausen, T. J. (Eds.). (2012). Feeding a thirsty world—Challenges and opportunities for a water and food secure future. Report no. 31. Stockholm: SIWI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, J. D., Saxe, H., & Denver, S. (2015). Cost-effectiveness of a New Nordic Diet as a strategy for health promotion. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12, 7370–7391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, J. (2008). The citizen-consumer hybrid: Ideological tensions and the case of whole foods market. Theory and Society, 37(3), 229–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates, R. W., Parris, T. M., & Leiserowitz, A. A. (2005). What Is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 47(3), 8–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, W. (2011). ‘Be the change you wish to see in the world’—(Not) Gandhi. Elephantjournal.com. http://www.elephantjournal.com/2011/08/be-the-change-you-wish-to-see-in-the-world-not-gandhi/. Accessed 18 July 2014.

  • Lockie, S. (2009). Responsibility and agency within alternative food networks: Assembling the ‘citizen consumer’. Agriculture and Human Values, 26(3), 193–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorek, S., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2014). Sustainable consumption within a sustainable economy—Beyond green growth and green economies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63, 33–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markkula, A., & Moisander, J. (2012). Discursive confusion over sustainable consumption: A discursive perspective on the perplexity of marketplace knowledge. Journal of Consumer Policy, 35, 105–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maxey, L. (2007). From “alternative” to “sustainable” food. In D. Maye, L. Holloway, & M. Kneafsey (Eds.), Alternative food geographies: Concepts and debates (pp. 55–75). Oxford: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Micheletti, M., & Stolle, D. (2012). Sustainable citizenship and the new politics of consumption. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644, 88–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middlemiss, L. (2014). Individualised or participatory? Exploring late-modern identity and sustainable development. Environmental Politics, 23, 929–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minero, G., Codoni, A., Bonera, M., Corvi, E., & Bertoli, G. (2014). Being green: From attitude to actual consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies,. doi:10.1111/ijcs.12128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, K. (2010). Local and green, global and fair: The ethical foodscape and the politics of care. Environment and Planning A, 42, 1852–1867.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nordgren, A. (2012). Ethical issues in mitigation of climate change: The option of reduced meat production and consumption. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 25(4), 563–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ovaskainen, V., & Kniivilä, M. (2005). Consumer versus citizen preferences in contingent valuation: Evidence on the role of question framing. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 49, 379–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck, J., & Philips, R. (2008). Citizen Rennaisance. http://www.citizenrenaissance.com. Accessed 19 July 2014.

  • Röcklinsberg, H. (2014). Fish consumption: Choices in the intersection of public concern, fish welfare, food security, human health and climate change. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 05/2014,. doi:10.1007/s10806-014-9506-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society of Chemistry (2004). Don’t worry it’s organic. Chemistry World 2004. http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/Issues/2004/June/organic.asp.

  • Sabaté, J., & Soret, S. (2014). Sustainability of plant-based diets: Back to the future. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 100(suppl), 467S–482S.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, C., Barber, A., & Taylor, G. (2006). Food miles—Comparative energy/emissions performance of New Zealand’s agriculture Industry. Research Report No. 205.

  • Saxe, H. (2011). Diet as a healthy and cost-effective instrument in environmental protection. In J. O. Nriagu (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Environmental Health (Vol. 2, pp. 70–82). Burlington: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saxe, H. (2014). The New Nordic Diet is an effective tool in environmental protection: It reduces the associated socio-economic cost of diets. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 99, 1117–1125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxe, H., Larsen, T. M., & Mogensen, L. (2013). Two healthy Nordic diets reduce the impact on climatic change of eating and drinking. Climatic Change, 116, 249–262. doi:10.1007/s1054-012-0495-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schudson, M. (2007). Citizens, Consumers, and the Good Society. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 611, 236–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seufert, V., Ramankutty, N., & Foleey, J. A. (2012). Comparing the yields of organic and conventionsl agriculture. Nature, 485, 229–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, D., & Black, I. (2010). Market based political action: A path to sustainable development? Sustainable Development, 18, 385–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Söderbaum, P. (2014). The role of economics and democracy in institutional change for sustainability. Sustainability, 6, 2755–2765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sørensen, M. P. (2005). Liberal democratic society and political consumerism—A problematic combination. In: M. Boström, A. Føllesdal, M. Klintman, M. Micheletti & M. P. Sørensen (Eds.), Political consumerism: Its motivations, power, and conditions in the Nordic countries and elsewhere. Proceeding from the 2nd International Seminar on Political Consumerism, Oslo, 27–29 Aug 2004 (pp. 59–76).

  • Spangenberg, J. H. (2014). Institutional change for strong sustainable consumption: Sustainable consumption and the degrowth economy. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 10, 62–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Starik, M., & Kanashiro, P. (2013). Toward a theory of sustainability management: Uncovering and integrating the nearly obvious. Organization and Environment, 26, 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, H., Gerber, P., Wassenaar, T., Castel, V., Rosales, M., & de Haan, C. (2006). Livestock´s long shadow—Environmental issues and options. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations.

  • Stolle, D., & Micheletti, M. (2015). Political consumerism. Global responsibility in action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Sullivan, C. & Climatewire (2013). Can livestock grazing stop desertification? Scientific American, 3 March 2013. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-livestock-grazing-stop-desertification.

  • Thompson, P. B. (2007). Agricultural sustainability: What it is and what it is not. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 51, 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. B., Appleby, M., Busch, L., Kalof, L., Miele, M., Norwood, B. F., & Pajor, E. (2011). Values and public acceptability dimensions of sustainable egg production. Poultry Science, 90, 2097–2109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trentmann, F. (2010). Citizenship and consumption. Journal of Consumer Culture, 7(2), 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD (2013). Wake up before it is too late. Make agriculture truly sustainable now for food security in a changing climate. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Trade and Environmental Review 2013. http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/ditcted2012d3_en.pdf.

  • UNEP-UNCTAD. (2008). Organic Agriculture and Food Security in Africa. United Nations Environment Programme. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. UNEP-UNCTAD Capacity-building Task Force on Trade, Environment and Development. New York, Geneva. http://unctad.org/en/docs/ditcted200715_en.pdf.

  • Vermeir, I., & Verbeke, W. (2006). Sustainable food consumption: Exploring the consumer ‘attitude—Behavioral intention’ gap. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 169–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema, B. P. (2009). Using the budget constraint to monetarise impact assessment results. Ecological Economics, 68, 1591–1598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema, B. P., Wesnæs, M., Hermansen, J., Kristensen, T., Halberg, N. (2008). Environmental Improvement Potentials of Meat and Dairy Products. JRC Scientific and Technical Report. EUR 23491 EN.

  • Wilkins, J. F. (2005). Eating right here: Moving from consumer to food citizen. Agriculture and Human Values, 22, 269–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, L. S. (2011). Boycotting and boycotting in Europe. European Societies, 13, 191–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, Y., Kuishuang, F., & Hubacek, K. (2013). Tele-connecting local consumption to global land use. Global Environmental Change, 23, 1178–1186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Žižek, S. (2012). The Pervert´s Guide to Ideology. Zeitgeist Films.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge financial support from the OPUS project, Institute of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, and the division of Quantitative Sustainability Assessment and the Global Decision Support Initiative, both at DTU Management Engineering.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, 1958, Frederiksberg C, Denmark

    Mickey Gjerris & Christian Gamborg

  2. DTU Management Engineering, Division of Quantitative Sustainability Assessment and the Global Decision Support Initiative, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark

    Henrik Saxe

Authors
  1. Mickey Gjerris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Gamborg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Henrik Saxe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mickey Gjerris.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gjerris, M., Gamborg, C. & Saxe, H. What to Buy? On the Complexity of Being a Critical Consumer. J Agric Environ Ethics 29, 81–102 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-015-9591-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-015-9591-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation