Sustainable	Consumption,	Consumer	Culture	and the	Politics	of	a	Megatrend William	Kilbourne Pierre	McDonagh Andrea	Prothero Introduction Three	things	must	be	clarified	before	we	can	proceed	with	the	examination.	These	are	the terms	sustainability,	politics	and	megatrend.	Unfortunately,	all	three	are	ambiguous	and	few disciplines	have	arrived	at	a	consistent	definition	for	any	of	them.	While	we	will	not	resolve the	ambiguity	to	everyone's	satisfaction,	we	will	attempt	to	achieve	an	extensional	bargain (Rappaport,	1953)	through	which	we	develop	an	understanding	of	how	we	are	using	the	terms. First,	sustainable	development	became	a	construct	in	1987	through	the	Brundtland	Report (Brundtland,	1987)	and	has	remained	ambiguous	ever	since.	This	is	where	we	begin	our examination	of	sustainable	consumption.	Megatrend,	as	a	phenomenon,	has	been	defined	in	a multitude	of	ways	over	the	past	thirty-five	years.	In	this	chapter,	we	adopt	the	criteria	set	forth by	Mittelstaedt	et	al.	(2014)	for	categorising	megatrends,	but	will	use	a	broader	interpretation of	what	constitutes	megatrends.	Finally,	our	use	of	the	term	political	will	be	broader	than	the more	common	use	of	the	term	relating	to	legal	structures,	laws	or	agencies,	and	include	the underlying	institutions	that	frame	the	more	micro	aspects	of	politics.	This	approach	is necessary	because	of	the	scale	of	sustainability	and	megatrends	in	both	time	and	space. Using	this	broad,	institutional-based	approach,	the	authors	consider	the	swing	in	popularity	of sustainability	and	the	various	solutions	provided	to	the	extent	that	there	is	discussion	of sustainability	as	megatrend.	We	ask	what	changes	have	occurred	in	the	past	and	how	they	affect the	politics	surrounding	sustainable	consumption	that	might	enable	humanity	to	feel	confident and	competent	to	now	offer	up	solutions	to	the	challenge	of	sustainability.	But	before	this	can be	accomplished,	it	is	critical	to	have	a	better	understanding	of	the	institutional	underpinnings of	the	politics	and	economics	of	sustainability:	how	we	got	where	we	are	now	and	what	the prospects	for	the	future	are.	There	is	no	apparent	consensus	on	whether	sustainability	is	a megatrend	or	even	what	that	means.	Mittelstaedt	et	al.	(2014)	argue	from	the	perspective	of paradigms	that	sustainability	is	the	new	megatrend,	while	Scott,	Martin	and	Schouten	(2014), arguing	from	the	perspective	of	growing	materialism,	are	not	as	convinced.	This	is	an anomalous	result	if	one	considers	that	materialism	is	contained	within	the	Western	paradigm (Kilbourne,	Dorsch	et	al.,	2009).	Varey	(2012)	offers	a	third,	and	more	prescient	point	in	terms of	the	relationship	between	sustainability	and	megatrends.	He	argues	that	sustainability	is larger	than	a	megatrend	in	its	impact	and	evolution. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . To	better	understand	the	varying	conclusions	about	sustainability	and	its	prospects,	we	develop an	historical	perspective	of	the	changing	patterns	of	economic	and	political	structures	(these are	considered	inseparable)	and	the	evolution	of	the	underlying	institutional	structures	that	are firmly	in	place.	This	constitutes	the	Dominant	Social	Paradigm	(DSP)	of	Western	societies (Kilbourne,	McDonagh	and	Prothero,	1997)	that	includes	the	political,	economic	and technological	perspectives	that	constitute	its	worldview.	It	is	against	this	backdrop	that sustainability	as	a	megatrend	will	be	examined. The	approach	to	be	taken	here	falls	in	the	general	area	of	the	New	Political	Economy	(NPE) that	treats	economic	institutions	as	the	relevant	phenomena	to	be	explained	by	political economy.	NPE	is	said	to	examine	economic	doctrines	to	better	understand	their	political content.	It	examines	economic	ideas	and	behaviour	as	beliefs	and	actions	that	must	themselves be	explained	and	that	are	not	taken-for-granted	behaviours	that	are	self-evidently	rational	and, as	a	result,	do	not	need	further	analysis	(Bauman,	1998).	This	we	hold	to	be	the	essence	of being	immersed	in	a	prevailing	structure,	or	in	the	DSP	of	society.	In	Western	industrial societies	it	is	the	institutions	of	the	DSP,	whatever	those	may	be,	that	initiate,	direct	and reward	economic	beliefs	and	behaviours.	These	come	to	be	so	prevalent	that	they	become	so self-evidently	true	to	the	extent	that	behaving	in	any	other	way	becomes	irrational.	Or	as Marcuse	(1963)	states	it,	beliefs	become	'irrational	in	their	rationality'.	Our	approach	in constructing	this	framework	is	a	synthesis	of	Kilbourne,	McDonagh	and	Prothero's	(1997)	use of	the	DSP	and	the	NPE	emphasising	the	theory	of	Antonio	Gramsci	(1971).	Thus,	the	focus will	be	on	the	sustainability	of	consumption	as	it	is	currently	practised	relating	to	both	its quality	and	quantity,	and,	in	doing	this,	we	will	attend	both	to	the	genesis	of	what	may	be called	cultures	of	consumption	(Featherstone,	2007)	and	the	role	that	consumption	can	play	in ameliorating	its	own	condition	through	market	actions	such	as,	for	example,	the	political consumer	(Connolly	and	Prothero,	2008;	Trentmann,	2007). Here	we	examine	sustainability	to	determine	its	position	within	the	prevailing	historical context	that	might	be	called	late	modern	capitalism.	We	provide	a	brief	historical	assessment of	the	development	of	the	relevant	institutions,	and	then	we	provide	some	likely	scenarios	that might	develop	in	the	future	depending	on	whether	sustainability	is	a	new	megatrend,	or	if	its internal	logic	is	insufficient	to	change	the	direction	of	globalisation,	consumption	and	the future.	What	this	suggests	is	that,	if	current	modes	of	consumption	are	not	globally	sustainable, as	has	been	frequently	pointed	out	in	recent	years	(O'Connor,	1994),	then	there	is	an	inevitable conflict	between	the	culture	of	consumption	and	nature,	or	a	conflict	between	sustainably minded	consumers	who	want	to	consume	less	and	producers	who	must	produce	more. Megatrends Since	Naisbitt's	(1982)	first	book	on	megatrends,	many	others	have	embarked	on	the	search	for megatrends.	Foremost	among	them	are	the	major	global	consulting	firms	including	Price Waterhouse	Coopers,	Ernst	and	Young,	KPMG,	Frost	and	Sullivan,	and	Arthur	D.	Little.	Other public	policy	organisations	such	as	the	Mowat	Centre,	Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung	and	the The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Council	of	State	Governments	have	entered	the	field	as	well.	However,	there	has	not	arisen	as yet	a	formal	definition	of	megatrends	that	is	used	by	everyone.	There	is	a	consensus	on	the general	idea	of	a	megatrend	that	we	will	adopt	for	this	chapter,	and	it	is	that	provided	by	Frost and	Sullivan	(2017)	as,	'Megatrends	are	global,	sustained,	macroeconomic	forces	of development	that	affect	business,	economies,	societies,	cultures,	and	personal	lives.	In essence,	these	trends-such	as	urbanization,	connectivity	and	convergence-will	define	our future	world'. While	the	definition	is	sufficiently	broad	to	take	in	most	of	what	are	considered	megatrends today,	it	is	not	sufficiently	precise	as	not	to	be	ambiguous.	We	could	not,	for	example	apply	this definition	to	a	particular	trend	and	determine	whether	or	not	it	is	a	'mega'	trend.	This	reduces us	to	making	a	subjective	judgement	and	suggests	that	there	might	be	different	opinions	on	a particular	trend	regarding	the	precise	meaning	of	macro,	sustained	or	global.	But	this	is	an inherent	difficulty	of	all	definitions:	they	are	ambiguous	at	the	margins,	and	this	is acknowledged	by	the	authors.	The	ambiguity	is	reflected	in	the	identification	of	megatrends	by the	organisations	that	study	them	on	a	regular	basis	(those	mentioned	above).	We	now	provide a	synthesis	of	megatrends	that	have	been	developed	by	the	above	organisations.	We	also categorise	the	trends	in	a	general	classification	scheme	presented	in	Table	27.1. Each	of	the	megatrends	in	Table	27.1	was	mentioned	by	one	or	more	of	the	organisations studying	them.	While	the	list	is	not	exhaustive,	it	provides	exemplars	of	what	the	organisations consider	global	megatrends.	It	can	also	be	seen	that	some	megatrends	can	fall	in	different categories,	and	some	may	question	whether	a	particular	trend	is	a	megatrend. Of	particular	note	in	Table	27.1	is	that	while	resource	shortages	and	climate	change	are mentioned,	sustainability	is	not.	Why	this	is	the	case	is	uncertain,	but	we	can	speculate	on	the possibilities.	The	first	is	simply	that	the	term	sustainability	is	not	yet	sufficiently	widespread	to be	in	the	vocabulary	of	those	doing	the	judging.	Sustainability	is,	as	will	be	shown	in	the	next section,	still	not	clearly	understood.	It	also	has	meanings	beyond	those	concerned	with	nature; being	a	sustainable	entity	for	example	could	refer	to	an	organisation's	green	credentials	or	its economic	viability.	Within	marketing,	sustainability	was	frequently	used	interchangeably	with environmentalism,	although	in	recent	years	there	has	been	a	focus	on	sustainable	marketing.	All of	the	megatrends	mentioned	by	the	organisations	above	are	mentioned	in	the	context	of business	opportunities	rather	than	problems.	As	we	will	argue	later,	sustainability	is	probably The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . not	an	opportunity	for	achieving	long-term	competitive	advantage	but	is,	instead,	an	imperative that	will	impose	itself	on	all	business	activity	in	the	not	too	distant	future.	This	is	where	the ambiguity	of	time	enters	the	megatrend	discussion. There	is	no	definite	time	frame	included	in	any	of	the	megatrend	studies.	They	simply	refer	to 'long	run'	changes	in	strategies	and	objectives.	From	the	megatrends	in	Table	27.1,	it	can	be inferred	that	some	will	last	longer	than	others,	and	that	during	the	period,	product	offerings	and consumer	demands	will	change.	What	is	important	in	this	is	the	nature	of	the	changes	wrought by	the	megatrend,	and	the	changes	will	certainly	vary	according	to	context.	Most	will	involve changing	cost	structures	for	firms	and	prices	for	consumers.	In	addition,	methods	of distribution	and	marketing	communications	will	likely	change	to	reorient	consumption practices.	While	the	Internet	of	Things	has	only	recently	been	discussed	in	any	depth,	Rifkin's (2015)	book	is	about	an	emerging	megatrend	that	might	have	tremendous	consequences	for	the business	model.	The	title,	The	Zero	Marginal	Cost	Society,	is	self-explanatory.	When	the marginal	cost	of	production	approaches	zero,	the	ramifications	for	marketing	and	consumption will	be	large	indeed.	But	these	are	strategic	changes	within	the	normal	course	of	business activities.	The	major	question	with	which	we	are	concerned	is	the	ramifications	for	sustainable consumption.	If	the	price	of	consumer	goods	reflects	the	marginal	cost,	then	prices	will necessarily	decline	and	consumption	of	those	goods	will	increase,	further	exacerbating	the problem	of	sustainable	consumption	unless	the	ecological	cost	of	goods	diminishes commensurably.	This	question	can	be	inferred	from	Varey's	(2013)	term,	mega-megatrend.	Is sustainability	a	megatrend	requiring	adaptation	(McDonagh	and	Prothero	2014a)	or	is	it something	greater	that	will	require	a	fundamental	shift	in	the	institutional	structure	of	the consumer	society?	To	address	this	question,	we	must	first	establish	an	extensional	bargain	on what	constitutes	sustainability. Sustainability Because	sustainability	has	been	a	substantive	issue	in	consumer	research	for	almost	thirty years	now,	it	would	seem	that	its	meaning	would	have	been	established	with	some	consistency by	this	time.	Such	is	not	the	case	however,	and	it	appears	that	the	term	has	become	more confused	than	at	its	original	conception	in	'Our	Common	Future'	(Brundtland,	1987)	(also known	as	the	Brundtland	Report).	The	most	often	quoted	definition	of	sustainable	development is	'development	that	meets	the	needs	of	the	present	without	compromising	the	ability	of	future generations	to	meet	their	own	needs'	(p.	43).	While	it	has	been	acknowledged	over	the	years that	this	definition	is	somewhat	ambiguous	and,	therefore,	can't	be	used	as	a	tool	or	measure, its	implications	can	be	used	as	a	conceptual	guideline.	O'Connor	(1994),	for	example,	suggests a	triple	meaning	from	the	definition	of	'sustain'	itself.	He	argues	that	it	implies	a	system	that stays	on	course,	provides	the	necessities	of	life	for	people	around	the	globe,	and	endures	over time	in	the	face	of	challenges. It	can	be	inferred	from	this	description	of	sustainability	generally,	that	it	would	impose significant	restraints	(challenges)	on	firms,	consumers	and	governments.	But	the	magnitude	of The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . these	restraints	can	only	be	discussed	if	we	clarify	the	different	degrees	of	sustainability	being referred	to.	Unfortunately,	within	the	past	twenty	years	or	so,	the	term	sustainable	has	remained opaque.	To	help	alleviate	this	ambiguity,	we	propose	a	continuum	of	sustainability	rather	than different	terms.	We	see	sustainability	activities	as	a	continuum	flowing	between	strong	and weak	sustainability.	Buying	greener	products	for	environmental	reasons	would	be	weak sustainability	while	incorporating	eco-rationality	into	one's	daily	behaviour	would	be	stronger sustainability.	Deep	ecology	as	proposed	by	Naess	(1973)	would	be	strong	sustainability.	Such an	environmental	continuum	was	originally	proposed	by	Kilbourne	(1995). Making	the	production	and/or	distribution	process	more	eco-efficient	is	characteristic	of	weak sustainability	because	it	implies	doing	what	we	have	always	done,	but	doing	it	better	and	more eco-efficiently.	It	means	reducing	the	throughput	in	the	system	while	maintaining	or	increasing the	output	(getting	more	for	less).	But	it	does	not	require	fundamental	changes	in	consumption practices.	The	question	then	becomes,	if	we	use	this	approach	exclusively,	will	it	eventually achieve	strong	sustainability?	The	answer	is	a	resounding	'probably	not'.	But	if	such	activities as	voluntary	simplicity	(Rudmin	and	Kilbourne,	1995),	adopting	the	anti-consumption perspective	(Black	and	Cherrier,	2010),	or	political	consumption	(Connolly	and	Prothero, 2008)	spread	significantly,	then	the	probability	is	greater	because	it	adds	the	consumption perspective	to	the	problem.	Sustainability	generally	and	sustainable	consumption	specifically are	multidimensional	problems	and	will	require	multidimensional	solutions. There	is	no	shortage	of	uncertainty	in	the	eventual	outcome,	however,	because	it	relates	to	a complex	interaction	of	production	and	consumption.	We	are	referring	here	to	the	underlying assumptions	under	which	the	complete	consumption	process	is	carried	out	from	beginning	to end	as	an	integrated	system.	Production	and	consumption	in	this	view	are	an	inseparable duality	that	underlies	cultures	of	consumption.	While	a	thorough	discussion	of	each	assumption is	beyond	the	scope	of	this	chapter,	it	is	important	that	significant	ones	be	addressed. The	first,	and	probably	most	controversial,	is	the	limits	to	growth	thesis.	This	dimension	of	the economic	process,	including	production	and	consumption,	was	addressed	most	formally	in Meadows	and	Randers	(1972),	in	which	they	concluded	that	there	were	definite	limits	to consumption	and	that	Western	industrial	societies	were	rapidly	approaching	them.	This	was supported	by	Daly	(1991),	who	postulated	the	impossibility	theorem	stating	that	infinite	growth in	a	finite	system	is	prima	facie	impossible.	While	there	was,	and	still	is,	contentious	debate (Cole,	Freeman	and	Jahoda,	1973;	Simon,	1981)	on	the	limits	to	growth	thesis,	its	basic premise	is	still	worthy	of	consideration.	In	support	of	the	limits	to	growth	thesis,	more	recent and	independent	research	on	the	ecological	footprint	(Wackernagle	and	Rees,	1998)	indicates that	many	nations	in	the	industrial	West	are	already	exceeding	their	bio-capacity	limits.	That	is, resources	(sources)	are	being	used	at	a	rate	that	exceeds	their	regenerative	capacity	and	waste deposits	(sinks)	are	exceeding	the	earth's	assimilative	capacity.	This	suggests	that	the	current approach	to	marketing,	economics,	etc.	will	not	be	sustainable	in	the	long	term	unless	some currently	unknown	and	unpredictable	change	in	the	basic	structure	of	our	world	occurs. Conversely,	Porritt	(1988)	suggests	that	the	situation	in	which	we	find	ourselves	has	resulted The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . from	our	unwillingness	to	address	the	underlying	causes	of	environmental	destruction, choosing	to	focus	instead	on	symptoms	such	as	pollution	and	ozone	depletion.	These	symptoms manifest	themselves	as	a	consequence	of	over-consumption	of	the	wrong	types	of	products	that tax	both	resource	availability	and	the	assimilation	capacity	of	the	planet.	This	assessment, which	is	not	universally	accepted	yet,	does	have	significant	implications	for	the	culture	of consumption	because	it	ties	it	directly	to	the	sustainability	of	current	consumption	patterns. Smith	(1998)	argues	that	the	current	situation	is	related	to	the	underlying	rationality	of	Western industrial	societies,	particularly	the	USA,	that	have	been	captured	by	a	productivist	discourse. This	discourse	operates	as	a	suture	through	which	the	flaws	of	its	role	in	the	sustainability discourse	are	hidden.	The	flaws	are	also	hidden	by	the	counter-entropic	logic	of	perpetual economic	growth	through	which	inequality	in	the	distribution	of	goods	and	ecological	'bads'	is perpetuated	in	a	process	of	economic	reductionism	that	transforms	political	choice	(who	we want	to	be)	into	economic	preferences	(what	we	want	to	have).	In	this	process,	the	productivist narrative	is	conflated	with	matching	consumer	and	environmental	narratives	to	create	the	metanarrative	of	capitalism.	The	fundamental	problem	in	this	hegemonic	process	(Gramsci,	1971) is	that	strong	sustainability	is	incompatible	with	the	prevailing	meta-narrative	that	demands unlimited	economic	growth	in	a	finite	system.	The	end	result	of	the	hegemonic	process	is	that	a new	myth	about	sustainability	in	the	culture	of	consumption	is	created	that	factualises	fictions (growth	in	consumption	is	the	ultimate	good)	and	fictionalises	facts	(current	consumption practices	are	unsustainable).	As	both	Marcuse	(1963)	and	Gramsci	(1971)	argue,	facts contrary	to	the	major	societal	narrative	are	absorbed	into	the	narrative	rendering	them	impotent by	transforming	critique	into	naive	acquiescence. When	this	hegemonic	process	is	successful,	the	narrative	of	capitalism	is	reinforced	and reproduced	in	its	original	form	with	only	minor	changes.	While	the	narrative	is	challenged somewhat	by	the	sustainability	discourse,	its	logic	is	also	reinforced.	This	is,	for	example,	the case	for	sustainable	consumption	generally.	Sustainable	consumption	as	a	term	was	first introduced	at	the	1992	Rio	Earth	Summit	and	was	an	important	element	of	the	Agenda	21 programme.	It	was	discussed	by	the	United	Nations	Environment	Programme	in	1999	and included	such	factors	as	consuming	less,	consuming	differently,	consuming	more	efficiently, and	quality	of	life. There	are	disagreements	within	the	various	definitions	of	the	term,	particularly	in	relation	to consuming	less	(Jackson,	2014).	Meanwhile,	recognising	the	importance	of	the	full	life-cycle of	a	product,	the	United	Nations	Environment	Programme	(2009),	building	on	the	earlier	work of	the	Oslo	Symposium	held	in	1994,	defines	sustainable	consumption	and	production	(SC&P) as	follows: the	use	of	services	and	related	products,	which	respond	to	basic	needs	and	bring	a	better quality	of	life	while	minimizing	the	use	of	natural	resources	and	toxic	materials	as	well	as the	emissions	of	waste	and	pollutants	over	the	life-cycle	of	the	service	or	product	so	as not	to	jeopardize	the	needs	of	further	generations.	(UNEP,	2009,	p.	8) The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Switching	the	emphasis	from	consumption	to	production	allows	a	shift	of	focus	from consumption	to	'resource	productivity	issues'	(Jackson,	2014),	and,	while	it	is	clear	that	to achieve	sustainability	requires	both	consumption	and	production	changes,	it	is	important	that the	emphasis	on	production	should	not	be	at	the	expense	of	questioning	the	role	of consumption.	As	Jackson	(2014,	p.	282)	reminds	us:	'Questioning	consumption	and	consumer behaviour	quickly	becomes	reflexive,	demanding	often	uncomfortable	attention	to	both personal	and	social	change.	To	make	matters	worse,	arguments	to	reduce	consumption	appear to	undermine	legitimate	efforts	by	poorer	countries	to	improve	their	quality	of	life'.	While	there appears	to	be	no	clear	acceptance	of	a	definition,	and	indeed	some	arguments	amongst academics	and	policy	makers	surrounding	the	term,	particularly	in	relation	to	the	thorny	issue of	questioning	consumer	ideology	and	consuming	less,	there	is	acceptance	that	both consumption	and	production	must	play	a	part	in	engendering	changes	to	consumption	practices. There	have	been	many	global	initiatives	to	achieve	such	changes,	and	some	of	these	can	be summarised	by	focusing	on	the	initiatives	developed	following	Rio+20,	the	most	recent	United Nations	Conference	on	Sustainable	Development. Sustainable	Consumption	and	Production	Initiatives Rio+20,	built	on	the	success	of	the	2003	Marrakech	process,	identified	various	SC&P	needs and	priorities	that	led	to	numerous	initiatives.	The	UNEP	then	produced	a	report	(UNEP,	2012) focusing	on	global	and	regional	SC&P	activities	and	providing	56	case	studies	from	across	the globe	that	address	SC&P	priorities.	Examples	are	taken	from	government,	business	and	civil society.	At	the	government	level,	for	instance,	is	the	example	of	The	Montreal	Protocol,	a global	initiative	which	focuses	on	substances	that	deplete	the	ozone	layer.	By	2009,	over	98% of	the	chemicals	being	controlled	were	totally	eliminated.	At	the	business	level,	various initiatives	are	considered,	ranging	from	those	undertaken	by	individual	companies	like Unilever's	successful	Sustainable	Sourcing	Initiative,	to	examples	of	businesses	coming together,	both	within	and	across	industry	sectors	to	tackle	SC&P	issues.	For	example,	the Global	Reporting	Initiative	(GRI)	produces	reports	in	which	businesses	document	their sustainability	performance	following	the	guidelines	laid	down	by	the	GRI.	At	the	civil	society level,	organisations,	including	NGOs,	community	and	indigenous	groups,	have	also	played	a significant	role	in	affecting	change	at	the	SC&P	level.	Two	examples	include	the	FLO,	a	fair trade	labelling	scheme	now	available	for	15	product	groups,	and	the	success	of	the	Forest Stewardship	Council	(FSC)	in	certifying	sustainable	forest	products.	While	there	is	criticism of	all	three	bodies,	there	is	also	a	general	acceptance	that	since	the	first	UN	Rio	Conference	in 1992	much	has	been	accomplished	in	relation	to	SC&P	and	this	has	been	as	a	result	of	a	global recognition	of	the	need	to	tackle	the	depletion	of	the	earth's	resources	and	the	role	consumption plays	therein. While	it	is	clear	that	many	initiatives	have	been	proposed	with	success	on	the	production	side, much	remains	to	be	done	regarding	the	future	of	the	productivist	discourse	as	it	relates	directly to	consumption.	Unfortunately,	the	essence	of	the	relationship	between	production	and consumption	will	be	deferred	until	a	later	time	as	space	does	not	permit	a	thorough The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . examination.	For	more	recent	assessments	of	production	approaches,	many	can	be	found	in studies	of	the	ecological	footprint,	such	as	those	by	Waggoner	and	Ausubel	(2002)	and	York, Rosa	and	Dietz	(2003).	Instead,	we	focus	the	remainder	of	the	chapter	on	the	consumer	aspects of	the	sustainability	problem. The	ideology	of	consumption	is	maintained	within	the	DSP,	in	that,	while	it	may	advocate	weak sustainability,	the	necessity	for	continuous	growth	in	production	and	consumption	is	maintained intact	if	not	increased	through	a	sustainability	backlash	effect,	suggesting	that	if	people consume	better,	they	can	then	consume	more.	Because	the	current	phase	of	the	DSP	is	so	well engrained	and	its	separate	narratives	so	well	integrated,	especially	in	the	USA,	it	is	opaque	to both	critics	and	adherents.	Its	logic	is	self-evident,	requiring	no	justification	(Kilbourne, McDonagh	and	Prothero,	1997),	and	that	logic	repairs	the	fracture	created	by	the	contradiction between	sustainable	consumption	and	expansionary	economics.	The	political	nature	of sustainability	is	subverted	as	it	is	incorporated	into	the	dominant	discourse	of	economics	and markets,	as	will	be	discussed	later	in	the	chapter. The	second	factor	that	the	dominant	discourse	on	sustainability	relates	to	is	the	time	frame, which	is	admittedly	imprecise.	But	this	is	not	too	difficult	to	deal	with	if	we	avoid	the	standard treatment	in	neoclassical	economics	that	uses	discounting	methods	to	value	the	future.	The rationale	here	is	that	the	farther	into	the	future	we	try	to	imagine,	the	more	likely	we	are	to	be wrong,	so	there	are	time	frames	beyond	which	it	is	not	fruitful	to	venture.	We	cannot	know what	future	consumers	will	value,	what	technological	changes	will	have	occurred,	or	what	the state	of	the	environment	will	actually	be.	This	is	the	domain	for	predicting	megatrends	and their	consequences.	But,	while	it	is	certainly	true	that	we	cannot	predict	these	characteristics with	great	accuracy,	that	should	not	disqualify	the	endeavour	altogether.	One	of	the	favoured pastimes	within	econometrics	is	making	those	types	of	predictions.	While	Galbraith	may	have disparaged	the	discipline	in	his	characteristically	witty	style	with	his	quip	that	economic forecasting	makes	astrology	respectable,	we	must	continue	to	improve	our	skills.	And	while	it is	true	that	long-term	forecasting	of	social	trends	is	difficult,	we	can	do	some	'what-if' assessments	that	help	us	frame	the	possible	scenarios. One	approach	that	has	been	used	in	the	past,	albeit	not	in	studies	of	consumer	culture,	is	the Ehrlich	equation,	I	=	PAT	(Ehrlich	and	Holdren,	1971).	The	equation,	which	is	really	an identity,	cannot	be	used	for	predicting,	but	it	can	be	used	to	gain	insight	into	how	a	system operates.	The	actual	identity	says	that	environmental	impact,	I;	is	a	function	of	the	product	of population,	P;	affluence,	A;	and	technology,	T.	Affluence	is	defined	as	per	capita	consumption (GDP/Population)	and	technology	is	defined	as	the	environmental	impact	per	unit	of	GDP (Impact/GDP).	Speth	(2008)	provides	an	example	of	how	the	equation	can	be	used	to	enhance one's	perspective	about	change	over	time.	He	shows	that	if	the	current	population	growth	rate remains	at	about	3%	and	the	current	growth	rate	in	affluence	remains	at	about	3%,	how	must technological	impact	change	over	the	next	50	years	to	maintain	the	current	ecological	impact	of consumption	behaviour?	When	the	problem	is	solved	it	shows	that	for	constant	impact,	the	T factor	must	be	reduced	by	approximately	95%.	This	becomes	reduced	to	a	probability	estimate The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . of	the	likelihood	that	this	dramatic	improvement	in	technology	will	occur. This	approach	to	studying	sustainability	has	been	improved	in	the	last	decade	by	converting	it to	an	actual	predictive	equation	referred	to	as	STIPAT	(York,	Rosa	and	Dietz,	2003).	In	this formulation,	many	different	factors	(for	examples	see	Wei,	2011)	such	as	production	of	CO2	or consumer	spending,	can	be	included	to	determine	their	contribution	to	the	ecological	footprint generally.	This	allows	for	an	assessment	of	the	impact	of	consumer	culture	and	its	ecological impact	on	sustainability. In	this	brief	examination	of	sustainability,	the	intent	was	to	provide	a	characterisation	of sustainability.	It	is	considered	here	as	a	continuum	from	weak	sustainability	(making	limited sustainability	choices	–	e.g.	buying	recycled	toilet	paper)	to	strong	sustainability (incorporating	eco-rationality	into	both	consumption	and	production	decisions).	We	argue	that sustainability	embedded	in	the	productivist	logic	rooted	in	neoclassical	economics	is	an incomplete	and	flawed	construct	as	it	is	the	product	of	economic	reductionism	in	which	the essential	political	content	has	been	removed.	The	missing	political	content	is	at	two	levels:	(1) the	political	consumer	embedded	in	consumer	culture;	and	(2)	production	embedded	in	the DSP	of	Western	industrial	societies.	Our	task	is	now	to	reintroduce	the	political	in	the	form	of the	New	Political	Economy.	From	this	we	will	then	frame	sustainability	in	a	more	appropriate and	comprehensive	way	than	it	is	currently	considered. Political/Economy	Approach	(from	the	New	Political Economy) Traditionally,	within	marketing	generally	and	consumption	specifically,	consumer	choices	have been	taken	as	an	economic	phenomenon.	It	has	been	viewed	through	the	lens	of	neoclassical economic	theory	(NCE),	and	reduced	to	an	act	of	choice	guided	by	a	singular,	all-inclusive consumer	(economic)	preference	function	(see	Schwarzkopf	in	this	volume).	Fundamental	to this	is	that	consumers	do	not	make	interpersonal	comparisons	of	their	respective	preferences and	that	preferences	are	exogenous	and	do	not	change	as	a	result	of	the	market	activity	in	which the	consumer	is	embedded.	In	short,	economic	preference	functions	answer	the	question,	'What do	I	want	to	have?'	The	difficulty	in	this	is	that	it	is	becoming	more	frequently	argued	that	this is	not	the	end	of	the	question.	NCE	argues	that	it	is	because	market	actors	are	perfectly	rational and	capable	of	reducing	all	their	disparate	roles	into	the	one	all-encompassing	economic preference	function.	As	a	result	the	confluence	of	all	types	of	preferences	other	than	economic is	realised.	The	question	to	which	we	turn	is	whether	this	represents	actual	reality	or	is	simply a	necessary	condition	for	simplicity	in	the	theory	underlying	it. Depoliticisation Kassiola	(1990)	argues	that	this	position	reflects	a	depoliticisation	of	society	in	which	all values	(including	consumption	choices)	can	be	reduced	to	a	set	of	economic	choices.	As	a The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . product	of	economic	imperialism,	this	effectively	removes	political	choices	regarding	many aspects	of	the	life	one	chooses	to	live.	This	condition	has	been	examined	for	several	decades going	back	at	least	to	Hirschman	(1970)	who	argued	that	such	depoliticisation	reflects	a transition	from	voice	(expressing	one's	views	through	discourse)	to	exit	(expressing	one's	view by	exiting	the	situation).	The	latter	is	the	market	(economic)	approach	in	which	consumers express	their	views	through	(non)purchase	behaviour:	If	I	like	your	offering	I	will	purchase	it, and	if	not,	I	will	not.	The	former	is	concerned	with	the	reasons	behind	one's	choices	which	are reflected	through	unadulterated	discourse	(political). The	primary	difficulty	with	the	economic	approach	is	that	it	is	likely	that	individual	tastes	and preferences	are	conditioned	by	cultural	institutions	such	as	advertising	to	the	extent	that	they	do not	truly	intercede	between	the	consumer	and	his/her	preferences.	Samuelson	(1947)	describes Western	man	as	a	'hodgepodge	of	beliefs	stemming	from	diverse	and	inconsistent	sources'	(p. 226).	Deferring	to	the	market	as	the	sole	arbiter	of	all	values	then	becomes	highly	problematic. This	has	not	gone	unnoticed	throughout	modern	history. In	the	philosophy	of	Rousseau	(1975)	we	find	a	similar	distinction	that	he	refers	to	as	the	will of	all	versus	the	general	will.	This	suggests	that	there	are	two	types	of	will	residing	in	the same	person,	and	they	reflect	different	beliefs	and	preferences.	Specifically,	the	will	of	all	is the	sum	of	individual	wills,	which	includes	their	individual	self-interest	in	personal	choices. The	general	will	is	that	part	of	the	will	of	all	with	self-interest	removed.	This	reveals	what	the individual	would	choose	as	the	best	for	everyone	collectively.	The	first	reflects	what	each individual	wants	for	themselves,	and	the	second	reflects	their	choice	for	the	common	good. More	recently,	this	distinction	has	emerged	in	O'Neill	(1993)	who	expresses	it	as	want regarding	principles	versus	ideal	regarding	principles,	where	the	former	express	that	which	I want	to	have	and	the	latter	expresses	who	I	want	to	be.	The	first	is	economic	and	the	second political.	This	same	distinction	is	brought	to	the	fore	by	Sagoff	(2007),	who	argues	that	the	two types	of	preference	function	are	generally	in	conflict	with	each	other,	particularly	in	public finance.	Thus,	he	argues	that	there	are	clear	distinctions	between	consumer	and	citizen	where the	choices	of	the	former	are	reflected	in	the	economic	preference	function,	and	the	choices	of the	latter	are	reflected	in	the	political	preference	function.	He	further	argues: Analysts	who	attempt	to	shuffle	citizen	judgements	and	personal	preferences	into	the	same ordering	commit	a	logical	mistake.	They	confuse	judgment	with	preference,	that	is	to	say, beliefs	about	what	we	should	do	with	expressions	of	what	I	want	or	prefer	(p.	55,	italics	in	the original). Finally,	as	clear	and	distinct	an	expression	as	we	have	found	for	the	difference	between consumer	and	citizen	is	that	provided	by	Musgrave	(1959).	He	also	sets	the	stage	for	the approach	we	will	be	adopting	for	the	remainder	of	the	chapter.	Speaking	of	the	roles	of	citizen and	consumer,	he	states:	'In	the	latter	situation	the	voter	acts	as	a	private	individual	determined by	self-interest	and	deals	with	his	personal	wants;	in	the	former,	he	acts	as	a	political	being guided	by	his	image	of	a	good	society'	(pp.	87–88).	In	this	passage,	Musgrave	ascribes	the roles	of	citizen	and	consumer	to	the	same	person,	who	reflects	one	set	of	values	as	citizen	and The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . a	different	set	as	consumer.	However,	he	describes	the	consumer	as	a	voter,	but	one	who	votes in	a	different	way	than	as	a	citizen.	As	a	consumer,	the	individual	expresses	his/her	beliefs with	money	in	the	market	rather	than	in	political	discourse.	But	Musgrave	also	suggests	that,	in some	sense,	the	consumer	is	voting	using	exit	rather	than	voice	as	a	strategy.	As	indicated earlier,	the	concept	of	the	consumer/voter	re-emerged	in	the	marketing	literature	through Dickinson	and	Hollander	(1991)	and	has	been	reiterated	by	Trentmann	(2007).	We	propose	to combine	both	strategies	by	reuniting	the	political	and	the	economic	through	the	mechanism	of the	New	Political	Economy	proposed	earlier. New	Political	Economy Galbraith	(1997)	argues	that	within	the	more	affluent	countries	of	the	world,	consumer	goods are	produced	in	such	abundance	that	large	sums	of	money	must	be	allocated	to	the	cultural apparatus	to	cultivate	the	wants	that	the	system	provides.	But	he	further	argues	that	the preoccupation	with	consumer	satisfaction	will	someday	lead	to	undesirable	consequences	that will	become	more	critical	in	the	future.	But	there	is	a	powerful	political	agenda	carried	out through	market	activities	that	is	managed	by	those	who	are	engaged	in	the	productive	process. The	problem	we	deal	with	in	this	chapter	is	that,	while	we	now	begin	to	see	the	consequences as	they	are	manifested	through	the	natural	environment,	we	also	assent	to	the	system	because there	are	no	plausible	alternatives	to	be	found	within	the	DSP.	Galbraith	further	argues	that dissenting	political	organisations	no	longer	offer	the	dissent	they	did	in	the	past.	This	suggests the	prevalence	of	the	NCE	philosophy	in	advanced	market	societies,	that	is,	cultures	of consumption. Our	use	of	the	New	Political	Economy	(NPE)	in	assessing	the	political	aspects	of	sustainable consumption	is	predicated	on	Galbraith's	conclusion	about	the	tacit	assent	to	the	NCE framework	in	high	consumption	cultures.	To	better	understand	this	condition,	it	is	necessary	to examine	some	of	the	institutions	that	underlie	the	NCE	system	and	its	encroachment	on	and absorption	of	the	political	element	of	the	original	classical	economic	model,	or	what	Kassiola (1990)	referred	to	as	depoliticisation.	Maier	(1987)	describes	the	distinctive	element	of	NPE as	disclosing	the	sociological	and	political	premises	contained	in	NCE	and	takes	them,	not	as an	established	framework,	but	as	'beliefs	that	must	themselves	be	explained'.	This	exposes	the normative	assumptions	that	underlie	the	NCE	framework,	not	as	self-evident	conditions,	but	as conditions	that	themselves	require	political	debate.	Besley	(2004)	states	that,	'...	the	new political	economy	is	re-engaging	with	the	art	of	political	economy	as	envisaged	by	the classical	economists'	(p.	5).	It	further	considers	seriously	the	Aristotelian	position	that	one may	set	aside	their	individual	interest	in	favour	of	the	common	good.	This	is	echoed	by Rousseau	(1975)	who	states,	'There	is	often	a	great	difference	between	the	will	of	all	and	the general	will.	The	latter	looks	only	to	the	common	interest,	while	the	former	looks	to	private interest	and	is	only	the	sum	of	individual	wills'	(p.	27).	This	becomes	reduced	to	the conclusion	of	Hirschman	(1977)	that,	from	Adam	Smith	on,	the	self-interested,	individual	will has	been	separated	from	the	political,	general	will.	One	of	the	goals	of	the	NPE	is	to	reunite the	two	to	achieve	a	comprehensive	understanding	of	the	political	element	in	economic	theory. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Myrdal	(1954)	criticises	the	confluence	of	politics	and	economics	in	liberalism	as	well	when he	observes: Presumably	'economic	interest'	means	the	desire	for	higher	incomes	and	lower	prices and,	in	addition,	perhaps	stability	of	earnings	and	employment,	reasonable	time	for leisure	and	an	environment	conducive	to	its	satisfactory	use,	good	working	conditions, etc.	But	even	with	these	qualifications,	political	aspirations	cannot	be	identified	with those	interests.	People	are	also	interested	in	social	objectives.	They	believe	in	ideals	to which	they	want	their	society	to	conform.	(p.	199) All	of	the	foregoing	suggests	that	economics	alone	cannot	provide	an	adequate	description	of human	behaviour	generally	or	consumption	behaviour	specifically.	As	the	emerging	field	of Socio-Economics	suggests,	economics	is	embedded	in	the	larger	social	and	political	field	and, while	it	provides	essential	information	in	consumer	choices,	it	must	be	united	with	other	fields to	achieve	more	complete	understanding	of	the	multi-faceted	cultures	of	consumption.	Simply stated,	there	are	economic	preferences	(what	we	want	to	have)	and	there	are	political preferences	(who	we	want	to	be).	These	represent	different	but	interactive	modes	of	choice and	the	most	prescient	recognition	of	this	is	provided	by	Fromm	(1976)	whose	book,	To	Have or	To	Be?	is	aptly	titled.	This	is	the	essence	of	consumer	culture	theory.	The	question	to	which we	now	turn	relates	to	the	particular	model	of	NPE	that	lends	itself	best	to	an	analysis	of sustainability	within	cultures	of	consumption. Relationship	to	Gramsci Kilbourne,	McDonagh,	and	Prothero	(1997)	were	the	first	to	examine	the	idea	of	sustainable consumption,	as	the	term	is	used	here,	within	the	marketing	literature.	They	did	so	within	the context	of	the	DSP	of	Western	industrial	societies.	One	of	the	difficulties	within	this	approach has	been	incorporating	paradigm	change	into	the	model	as	it	was	originally	developed	by	Kuhn (1970).	He	argued	that	scientific	paradigms	(the	context	of	his	work)	do	not	change	smoothly, but	rather	they	transform	dramatically	when	conditions	are	right	for	the	transformation.	That	is, they	do	not	change	gradually	by	incorporating	changes	at	the	margins	of	the	paradigm	into	the mainstream,	or	core,	of	the	paradigm.	While	this	may	be	true,	or	at	least	arguable,	within scientific	paradigms,	it	is	problematic	within	social	paradigms	as	described	by	Dunlap	and Van	Liere	(1978),	Cotgrove	(1982),	Milbrath	(1984),	and	Pirages	and	Ehrlich	(1974).	Because they	are	much	more	complex	than	scientific	paradigms,	social	paradigms	consist	of	multiple institutional	structures	interrelated	in	a	complex	and	dynamic	system	that	is	continuously	in flux.	Because	the	idea	of	the	DSP	is	still	in	its	developmental	stages,	its	improvement	as	a conceptual	model	of	social	development	and	transition	is	necessary.	Among	the	changes	that would	be	useful	is	a	better	explanation	of	its	dynamic	character.	Gramsci	(1971)	provides	a good	starting	point	for	this	explanation. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Gramscian	Perspective While	the	primary	constructs	articulated	by	Gramsci	are	very	diverse,	covering	a	wide	range of	political/economic	activity,	two	are	particularly	relevant	for	this	chapter.	These	are hegemony	and	passive	revolution	that	can	lead	to	the	evolution	of	the	static	concept	of	the	DSP, making	it	more	consistent	with	social,	political	and	economic	change.	The	critical	aspect	of Gramsci's	framework	is	that	it	serves	to	explain	the	absence	of	dramatic	transitions	in	the socialist	trajectory	of	Marx.	In	doing	so,	it	also	serves	to	explain	how	social	paradigms	change without	the	revolutionary	component	suggested	in	Kuhn's	(1970)	The	Structure	of	Scientific Revolutions.	In	this	sense,	Gramsci's	theory	argues	that	changes	in	paradigms	can	be evolutionary	as	well	as	revolutionary,	and	our	focus	is	on	this	aspect	of	social	change.	This raises	the	fundamental	question	to	which	this	chapter	is	directed.	What	are	the	politics	of sustainable	consumption	and	how	do	we	get	there	from	here? To	begin	this	process,	we	have	adopted	Gramsci's	(1971)	interpretation	of	hegemony.	This approach	is	useful	because,	unlike	the	more	static	view	of	the	scientific	paradigm,	hegemony	is a	dynamic	process	rather	than	an	end	state	(Smith,	1998).	As	such,	hegemony	adds	to	rather than	replaces	the	concept	of	the	DSP.	The	concept	of	hegemony	is	an	interpretation	of	political power	that	explains	how	the	political,	cultural	and	moral	values	of	a	dominant	class	become dominant.	How	is	it	that	the	belief	system	of	the	dominant	class	becomes	self-evidently	true	for the	rest	of	society	without	the	coercion	usually	associated	with	elite	control?	Hegemony	is	a process	through	which	consent	by	subaltern	classes	is	achieved	more	by	acquiescence	than	by coercion.	While	dominant	groups	in	more	advanced	societies	do	have	access	to	coercive power,	its	exercise	is	seldom	necessary.	This	is	because,	when	successful,	hegemony	results	in the	subordinated	classes	accepting	the	extant	power	relations	as	the	natural	order	of	things. They	accept	the	status	quo	because	they	believe	that	prevalent	social	relations	are	as	they should	be.	This	is	what	Gramsci	(1971)	refers	to	as	'...	hegemony	protected	by	the	armour	of coercion'	(p.	263),	but	he	also	reasons	that,	in	more	advanced	societies,	the	coercive	function of	the	political	could	wither	and	become	unnecessary	in	maintaining	dominance.	This trajectory	from	coercion	to	consent	was	alluded	to	by	Thomas	Paine	1776	in	his	assertion (2017,	Introduction,	p.	6),	'a	long	habit	of	not	thinking	a	thing	WRONG,	gives	it	a	superficial appearance	that	it	is	RIGHT,	and	raises	at	first	a	formidable	outcry	in	defence	of	custom.	But the	tumult	soon	subsides'.	It	is	interesting	that	the	Paine	statement	is	found	in	the	pamphlet entitled	Common	Sense	because	'common	sense'	is	taken	by	Gramsci	(1971)	to	mean	'...	the uncritical	and	largely	unconscious	way	of	perceiving	and	understanding	the	world	that	has become	"common"	in	any	given	epoch'	(p.	322). We	conclude	from	this	that	hegemony	differs	from	mere	domination	in	that	while	coercion	is	an alternative,	the	preferred	approach	to	social	control	is	through	the	assent	of	the	subaltern classes.	Next	we	briefly	examine	how,	within	Gramsci's	perspective,	assent	is	achieved.	This is	similar	to	asking	how	it	is	that	the	DSP	of	a	society	can	change	from	within	rather	than through	coercive	political	activity	and	become	dominant.	This	entails	an	examination	of	the evolution	and	structure	of	macro	institutions	within	civil	(as	opposed	to	state)	society.	In	this The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . case	we	view	'the'	DSP,	not	as	a	static	arrangement	of	institutions	but	a	phase	through	which	it is	passing	in	the	process	of	dynamic	equilibrium. How	this	process	unfolds	is	described	by	Gramsci	(1971)	as	passive	revolution.	While	a complete	analysis	of	the	concept	of	passive	revolution	is	beyond	the	scope	of	this	chapter,	the basic	process	will	be	addressed	as	it	relates	to	consumer	culture	and	sustainability.	Callinicos (2010)	describes	passive	revolution	as	the	process	through	which	domination	by	a	particular class	is	achieved	or	maintained	gradually	through	compromise	and	concession	rather	than	the punctuated	equilibrium	and	destruction	found	in	the	American	and	French	revolutions.	Gramsci (2007)	argues	that	the	outcome	results	from	a	process	through	which: 'progress'	occurs	as	the	reaction	of	the	dominant	classes	to	the	sporadic	and	incoherent rebelliousness	of	the	popular	masses	–	a	reaction	consisting	of	'restorations'	that	agree	to some	part	of	the	popular	demands	and	are	therefore	'progressive	restorations'	or 'revolutions-restorations',	or	even	'passive	revolutions'.	(p.	252) This	does	not	suggest	that	passive	revolutions	are	the	product	of	irrational	demands	from	the subaltern	classes,	but	they	can	result	from	contradictions	in	social	relations	and	crises	that occur	within	the	DSP.	These	crises	may	first	have	the	character	of	structural	contradictions (described	by	Kuhn	[1970]	as	anomalies)	which	are	'sticky'	problems	to	which	the	dominant class	seeks	resolution	from	within	hegemonic	relations.	These	are	referred	to	as	restorations because,	once	implemented,	the	status	quo	ante	is	resumed.	Gramsci	(1971)	argues,	however, that	anomalies	of	exceptional	duration	reveal	intransigent	crises,	the	solutions	of	which	the dominant	class	will	not	accede	to,	and	it	is	on	this	ground	that	the	oppositional	forces	will organise	to	push	their	positions.	Callinicos	(2010)	argues	that	at	the	conclusion	of	this	'passive revolution',	the	elements	of	dissent	initiating	the	conflict	are	absorbed	by	the	dominant	class, but	demands	of	the	subaltern	classes	are	at	least	partially	fulfilled	while	the	dominant	class remains	dominant.	This	moves	the	hegemonic	relations	to	a	'new	and	improved'	phase	that	is then	maintained	by	the	same	processes	through	which	it	arrived.	The	DSP	after	the	restoration is	both	different	and	the	same.	The	counter-hegemonic	project	manages	the	structural contradiction	of	the	existing	paradigm	but	does	not	achieve	a	paradigm	shift	of	the	kind referred	to	by	Kuhn	(1970). The	Counter-Hegemonic	Element	in	Consumer	Culture 'Political	consumers	respond	to	corporate	policies	and	products	reflecting,	expressing, and	promoting	political,	social,	and	normative	values	beyond	those	of	consumer	price, taste	and	quality	of	goods',	and	political	consumerism	is	defined	as	'consumer	choice	of producers	and	products	with	the	goal	of	changing	objectionable	institutional	or	market practices'.	(Micheletti,	Follesdal	and	Stolle,	2004,	p	xiv) The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . These	authors	also	remind	us	that	political	consumers	have	existed	for	many	centuries	and	are not	a	recent	phenomenon.	The	National	Negro	Convention,	for	example,	called	for	a	boycott	of slave-produced	products	in	the	1800s.	For	the	purposes	of	this	chapter	we	will	focus	on consumers	who	make	political	consumption	choices	based	on	their	concern	for	the	environment –	sustainable	consumers	(in	the	past	also	called,	for	instance,	green	consumers, environmentally	friendly	consumers,	environmentally	conscious	consumers,	but	for	the purposes	of	this	chapter	we	stick	with	a	generic	label	of	sustainable	consumers,	recognising that	this	term	can	have	different	meanings).	There	have	been	a	number	of	reviews	of	the sustainability	marketing	literature	(Kilbourne	and	Beckmann,	1998;	Leonidou	and	Leonidou, 2011;	McDonagh	and	Prothero,	2014b),	and	literature	with	specific	reference	to	sustainable consumption	is	assessed	here. In	terms	of	political	sustainable	consumers,	the	literature	has	focused	on	a	wide	range	of	issues spanning	over	half	a	century.	Much	of	the	early	research	provided	profiles	of	sustainable consumers	and	the	reasons	behind	their	green	purchasing	behaviour	(Balderjahn,	1988; Granzin	and	Olsen,	1991;	Kinnear,	Taylor	and	Ahmed,	1974).	Later	research	though	moved away	from	an	emphasis	on	buying	greener	products	to	consider	consuming	differently	(Jackson and	Michaelis,	2003),	and	in	some	instances	non-consumption	(Dobscha	and	Ozanne,	2001). There	has	been	an	emphasis	on	both	individual	and	collective	forms	of	sustainable	actions (Connolly	and	Prothero,	2008);	while	there	is	also	a	recognition	that	making	sustainable choices	is	difficult.	In	Connolly	and	Prothero	(2008)	consumers	emphasise	'I	know	that	I should	and	could	do	something,	but	I	don't	know	which	is	the	right	thing	to	do'	(p.	133).	While there	have	been	disagreements	with	the	political	consumer	literature	as	to	whether	or	not political	consumerism	can	be	successful,	we	have	witnessed	similar	arguments,	specifically	in relation	to	sustainable	consumer	practices. What	has	become	clear	in	recent	years	is	a	recognition	that	much	of	the	early	sustainability research	which	focused	on	small	incremental	changes	to	consumption	(buying	recycled	toilet paper	for	example)	will	not	be	enough	to	tackle	the	environmental	crisis,	and	thus,	research which	reflects	this	is	warranted.	To	that	end	Kilbourne	and	Mittelstaedt	(2012)	highlighted	the need	for	two	strands	of	sustainable	consumption	research	–	the	first	would	pay	specific attention	to	the	environmental	impact	of	our	consumption	practices	and	the	second	would	focus on	the	more	systemic	and	fundamental	issue	of	lowering	total	consumption	–	both	strands tackle	the	institutional	and	market-based	practices	highlighted	by	Micheletti,	Follesdal	and Stolle	(2004)	above.	This	second	avenue	therefore	poses	important	questions	from	political, economic	and	cultural	perspectives	because	it	questions	growth	–	which,	of	course,	occurs against	the	backdrop	of	buying	more	stuff.	The	ideology	of	consumption	therefore	plays	an important	role	in	understanding	sustainable	consumption.	This	is	not	a	new	finding,	and something	that	Fisk	(1973)	acknowledged	many	years	ago.	In	focusing	on	the	ideology	of consumption	issue,	McDonagh	and	Prothero	(2014b)	ask	'how	do	we	get	everyone	to	consume less?' Consumer	Culture	and	Sustainability:	Megatrend	or	Passive The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Revolution While	we	posit	that	sustainability	is	yet	to	be	widely	confirmed	as	the	megatrend,	or	as	Varey (2013)	suggests,	a	mega	megatrend,	it	does	appear	logical	to	assume	that,	for	humanity's survival,	it	is	the	megatrend.	This	is	because,	if	left	unaddressed,	it	will	have	the	most	serious consequences,	such	as	species	extinction	and	resource	depletion.	The	rise	of	consumer	culture and	its	inculcation	into	development	and	civilisation	(market	societies)	permits	a	dynamic	DSP to	effect	both	change	and	restoration.	It	is	notable	that	many	of	the	very	same	companies	that initiated	unsustainable	consumption	are	now	presenting	themselves	as	newly	improved	and offer	their	products	and	services	to	consumers,	calling	themselves	'solution	providers'.	In	this way	consumption	levels	continue	to	grow	through	newly	marketed	'sustainable	brands'.	A	key issue	here	is	whether	or	not	this	offers	too	little,	too	late,	but	this	is	open	to	wide	debates. Furthermore,	the	logic	of	consumption	as	articulated	within	the	dynamic	of	the	DSP	after restoration	is	seductive	from	a	consumer	point	of	view.	To	know	that	trusted	companies	and brands	have	the	situation	in	hand	is	reassuring,	and	to	see	some	change	occurring	supports	the premise	of	a	passive	revolution	unfolding.	This	is,	however,	analogous	to	the	people	of	nations being	told	to	'Keep	calm	and	continue	shopping'	during	times	of	intense	aggression	between states	at	war. The	counter-hegemonic	element	then	has	to	once	again	return	to	the	question	'What	is	to	be done	to	get	from	here	to	there?'	And,	for	the	purposes	of	this	chapter	we	are	asking	if	a Gramscian	approach	focusing	on	hegemony	and	passive	revolution	might	be	a	part	of	the answer.	Can	a	move	towards	strong	sustainability,	focusing	on	sustainable	consumption,	be achieved	via	acquiescence,	compromise	and	concession?	If	so,	what	will	this	mean	for consumer	culture?	It	would	appear	that	the	general	will	is	pivotal	at	this	juncture.	The	need	to shift	measurements	of	output	for	the	productivist	discourse	(indicators	of	progress	such	as GDP)	towards	those	more	suited	to	conditions	of	strong	sustainability	within	consumer	culture is	apparent.	At	this	stage	we	now	know	that	these	may	include	the	capacity	to	feed	and	provide water	to	a	population,	provide	improved	air	quality,	minimise	toxicity	and	lower	risk	to personal	health,	provide	cleaner	energy	supplies	and	repair	polluted	resources	(the	seas, rivers,	fish	stocks,	etc.)	all	of	which	require	increased	capacity	for	scrutiny.	The	biggest	hurdle for	sustainability	is	its	own	ambiguity	in	a	conceptual	sense,	as	this	delimits	the	capacity	for the	counter-hegemonic	element	to	inform	political	consumers	of	the	best	alternatives	to	move towards	sustainable	consumption.	Passive	revolution	is	an	on-going	and	contradictory	project given	that	what	needs	to	change	has	taken	centuries	to	emerge	and	will	not	be	easily	altered. This	should	not,	however,	be	a	distraction	because	Green	(1993)	reminds	us	that	any	form	of emancipatory	politics	involves	'...	a	protracted	and	fundamental	process	of	counter-hegemonic cultural	contestation'	(p.	175). Conclusion Consumer	Culture	Theory	(CCT)	is	now	a	well-established	research	field	within	the	broader The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . consumer	research	field,	and,	as	illustrated	above,	sustainable	consumption	has	been	an important	(but	limited)	strand	of	research.	In	their	ten-year	review	of	CCT	research	Arnould and	Thompson	(2005)	emphasised	how	'the	politics	of	consumption'	has	become	a	key	pillar of	CCT	research	and	'politically	engaged	theory	and	practice'	will	grow	in	importance	in	the future.	Building	on	the	current	trend	of	assemblage	theory	in	CCT,	the	authors	argue	for	a	future focus	on	power	relations	(as	well	as	a	specific	focus	on	resistance);	this,	in	conjunction	with an	emphasis	on	the	politics	of	consumption,	is	centrally	important	if	one	begins	to	further theorise	sustainable	consumption	through	a	hegemonic,	passive	revolution	lens.	This	requires building	on	earlier	sustainability	research	which	has	an	institutional,	societal	and	systems perspective	(see,	for	example,	Kilbourne,	2004;	Prothero	et	al.,	2011)	and	studies	that	have questioned	the	ideology	of	consumption	(see,	for	example,	Dolan,	2002;	Kilbourne,	Beckmann and	Thelen,	2002;	Prothero	et	al.,	2011). There	is	also	further	scope	for	consumer	culture	research	to	examine	the	appropriation	of resistance	(see	Desmond,	McDonagh	and	O'Donohoe,	2000)	into	what	is	becoming	popularly communicated	as	corporate	sustainability,	and	a	need	to	unpack	this	by	those	seeking meaningful	ecological	change	(McDonagh	and	Prothero,	2015).	This	is	quite	problematic	given the	power	relations	at	play.	It	is	feasible	that	large	conglomerates	can	invest	heavily	in convincing	the	general	public	to	endorse	their	improved	market	offerings	under	the	banner	of 'corporate	sustainability'	as	this	legitimises	their	right	to	continue	in	business.	An	analogous situation	might	be	how	the	US	government	prior	to	the	first	Iraq	war	hired	a	public	relations firm,	Hill	and	Knowlton,	to	fabricate	'atrocity	stories'	about	what	was	happening	in	Iraq,	with the	desired	result	being	the	public	endorsement	of	an	invasion	of	that	country.	Therefore,	for some	people,	the	emergence	of	corporate	sustainability	might	be	seen	as	a	form	of appropriation	of	sustainability	issues	that	should	be	resisted.	In	this	respect	passive	revolution requires	even	closer	scrutiny	than	before	as	the	DSP	after	restoration	might	best	be	critiqued	as an	intelligent	system	which	is	self-serving.	As	a	result,	the	politics	of	resistance	on	grounds	of sustainability	may	fragment	first	across	a	number	of	issues	and	second,	depending	upon whether	or	not	there	is	weak	or	strong	sustainability	at	stake,	over	some	types	of	resistance perhaps	being	viewed	as	much	more	authentic	than	others. References Arnould,	E.	and	Thompson,	C.	(2005)	'Consumer	Culture	Theory	(CCT):	Twenty	Years	of Research',	Journal	of	Consumer	Research,	31(4),	868–882. Balderjahn,	I.	(1988)	'Personality	Variables	and	Environmental	Attitudes	as	Predictors	of Ecologically	Responsible	Consumption	Patterns',	Journal	of	Business	Research,	17(1), 51–56. Bauman,	Z.	(1998)	Globalization:	The	Human	Consequences.	New	York:	Columbia	University Press. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Besley,	T.	(2004)	The	New	Political	Economy.	Lecture.	London	and	Cambridge,	UK:	Keynes Lecturers. Black,	L.R.	and	Cherrier,	H.	(2010)	'Anti-Consumption	as	Part	of	Living	a	Sustainable Lifestyle:	Daily	Practices,	Contextual	Motivations	and	Subjective	Values',	Journal	of Consumer	Behaviour,	9(6),	437–453. Brundtland,	G.H.	(1987)	'Our	Common	Future'.	World	Commission	on	Environment	and Development. Callinicos,	A.	(2010)	'The	Limits	of	Passive	Revolution',	Capital	and	Class,	34(3),	491–507. Cole,	H.S.,	Freeman,	C.	and	Jahoda,	M.	(1973)	Models	of	Doom:	A	Critique	of	the	Limits	to Growth.	London:	Universe	Publishing. Connolly,	J.	and	Prothero,	A.	(2008)	'Green	Consumption:	Life-politics,	Risk	and Contradictions',	Journal	of	Consumer	Culture,	8(1),	117–145. Cotgrove,	S.	(1982)	Catastrophe	or	Cornucopia.	New	York:	Wiley. Daly,	H.E.	(1991)	Steady-State	Economics.	New	York:	Island	Press. Desmond,	J.,	McDonagh,	P.	and	O'Donohoe,	S.	(2000)	'Counter-Culture	and	Consumer Society',	Consumption	Markets	&	Culture,	4(3),	241–279. Dickinson,	R.	and	Hollander,	S.C.	(1991)	'Consumer	Votes',	Journal	of	Business	Research, 23(1),	9–20. Dobscha,	S.	and	Ozanne,	J.L.	(2001)	'An	Ecofeminist	Analysis	of	Environmentally	Sensitive Women	Using	Qualitative	Methodology:	The	Emancipatory	Potential	of	an	Ecological	Life', Journal	of	Public	Policy	and	Marketing,	20(2),	201–214. Dolan,	P.	(2002)	'The	Sustainability	of	"Sustainable	Consumption"'.	Journal	of Macromarketing,	22(2),	170–181. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Dunlap,	R.E.	and	Van	Liere,	K.D.	(1978)	'The	"New	Environmental	Paradigm"',	The	Journal of	Environmental	Education,	9(4),	10–19. Ehrlich,	P.R.	and	Holdren,	J.P.	(1971)	'Impact	of	Population	Growth',	Science,	171(3977), 1212–1217. Featherstone,	M.	(2007)	Consumer	Culture	and	Postmodernism.	Thousand	Oaks,	CA:	Sage. Fisk,	G.	(1973)	'Criteria	for	a	Theory	of	Responsible	Consumption',	Journal	of	Marketing, 37(2),	24–31. Fromm,	E.	(1976)	To	Have	or	To	Be?	London,	UK:	Bloomsbury	Publishing. Frost	&	Sullivan	(2017)	'Mega	Trends',	New	York:	Frost	&	Sullivan.	Retrieved	from https://ww2.frost.com/index.php/consulting/key-client-issues/mega-trends Galbraith,	J.K.	(1997)	'Preface',	New	Political	Economy,	2(1),	5–9. Gramsci,	A.	(1971)	Selections	from	the	Prison	Notebooks	of	Antonio	Gramsci	(Q.	Hoare	and G.N.	Smith,	Trans.).	New	York:	International	Publishers. Gramsci,	A.	(2007)	Prison	Notebooks,	Vol.	3.	(J.A.	Buttigieg,	Trans.).	New	York:	Columbia University	Press. Granzin,	K.L.	and	Olsen,	J.E.	(1991)	'Characterizing	Participants	in	Activities	Protecting	the Environment:	A	Focus	on	Donating,	Recycling,	and	Conservation	Behaviors',	Journal	of Public	Policy	and	Marketing,	10(2),	1–27. Green,	C.	(1993)	'Advanced	Capitalist	Hegemony	and	the	Significance	of	Gramsci's	Insights: A	Restatement',	Social	and	Economic	Studies,	42(2/3),	175–207. Hirschman,	A.O.	(1970)	Exit,	Voice,	and	Loyalty.	Cambridge,	MA:	Harvard	University	Press. Hirschman,	A.O.	(1977)	The	Passions	and	the	Interests.	Princeton,	NJ:	Princeton	University The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Press. Jackson,	T.	(2014)	'Sustainable	Consumption'.	In	Handbook	of	Sustainable	Development	by Giles	Atkinson,	Simon	Dietz,	Eric	Neumayer	and	Matthew	Agarwala.	Edward	Elgar Publishing:	279–290. Jackson,	T.	and	Michaelis,	L.	(2003)	Policies	for	Sustainable	Consumption.	London, Sustainable	Development	Commission. Kassiola,	J.J.	(1990)	The	Death	of	Industrial	Civilization.	Albany,	NY:	SUNY	Press. Kilbourne,	W.	(1995)	'Green	Advertising:	Salvation	or	Oxymoron',	Journal	of	Advertising, 24(2),	7–20. Kilbourne,	W.	(2004)	'Sustainable	Communication	and	the	Dominant	Social	Paradigm:	Can They	Be	Integrated?'	Marketing	Theory,	4(3),	187–208. Kilbourne,	W.E.	and	Beckmann,	S.C.	(1998)	'Review	and	Critical	Assessment	of	Research	on Marketing	and	the	Environment',	Journal	of	Marketing	Management,	14(6),	507–512. Kilbourne,	W.	and	Mittelstaedt,	J.	(2012)	'From	Profligacy	to	Sustainability:	Can	You	Get There	from	Here?'	In	D.	Mick,	J.	Ozanne,	and	C.	Pechmann	(eds)	Transformative	Consumer Research	for	Personal	and	Collective	Well-Being	(pp.	283–300).	New	York:	Routledge. Kilbourne,	W.E.,	Beckmann,	S.C.	and	Thelen,	E.	(2002)	'The	Role	of	the	Dominant	Social Paradigm	in	Environmental	Attitudes:	A	Multi-National	Examination',	Journal	of	Business Research,	55(3),	193–204. Kilbourne,	W.E.,	Dorsch,	M.J.,	McDonagh,	P.,	Urien,	B.,	Prothero,	A.,	Grünhagen,	M.	and Bradshaw,	A.	(2009)	'The	Institutional	Foundations	of	Materialism	in	Western	Societies:	A Conceptualization	and	Empirical	Test',	Journal	of	Macromarketing,	29(3),	259–278. Kilbourne,	W.,	McDonagh,	P.	and	Prothero,	A.	(1997)	'Sustainable	Consumption	and	the Quality	of	Life:	A	Macromarketing	Challenge	to	the	Dominant	Social	Paradigm',	Journal	of Macromarketing,	36(1),	54–67. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Kinnear,	T.C.,	Taylor,	J.R.	and	Ahmed,	S.A.	(1974)	'Ecologically	Concerned	Consumers: Who	Are	They?',	Journal	of	Marketing,	38(2),	20–24. Kuhn,	T.	(1970)	The	Structure	of	Scientific	Revolutions.	Chicago,	IL:	University	of	Chicago Press. Leonidou,	C.N.	and	Leonidou,	L.C.	(2011)	'Research	into	Environmental Marketing/Management:	A	Bibliographic	Analysis',	European	Journal	of	Marketing, 45(1/2),	68–103. Maier,	C.S.	(1987)	In	Search	of	Stability:	Explorations	in	Historical	Political	Economy. Cambridge,	UK:	Cambridge	University	Press. Marcuse,	H.	(1963)	One	Dimensional	Man.	London,	UK:	Routledge. McDonagh,	P.	and	Prothero,	A.	(2014a)	'Introduction	to	the	Special	Issue:	Sustainability	as Megatrend	I',	Journal	of	Macromarketing,	34(3),	248–252. McDonagh,	P.	and	Prothero,	A.	(2014b)	'Sustainability	Marketing	Research:	Past,	Present	and Future',	Journal	of	Marketing	Management,	30(11/12),	1186–1219. McDonagh,	P.	and	Prothero,	A.	(2015),	'Unpacking	corporate	sustainability:	sustainable communication,	waste	and	the	3Rs	in	network	society'.	In	K.	Ekstrom	(ed.)	Waste Management	and	Sustainable	Consumption:	Reflections	on	Consumer	Waste	(pp.	166–183). London	and	New	York:	Routledge. Meadows,	D.	and	Randers,	J.	(1972)	The	Limits	to	Growth.	New	York:	Universe	Books. Micheletti,	M.,	Follesdal,	A.	and	Stolle,	D.	(2004)	Politics,	Products,	and	Markets:	Exploring Political	Consumerism	Past	and	Present.	London,	UK:	Transaction	Publishers. Milbrath,	L.	(1984)	Environmentalists:	Vanguard	for	a	New	Society.	Albany,	NY:	SUNY Press. Mittelstaedt,	J.,	Kilbourne,	W.,	Shultz,	C.	and	Petersen,	M.	(2014)	'Sustainability	as The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Megatrend',	Journal	of	Macromarketing,	34(3),	253–264. Musgrave,	R.A.	(1959)	The	Theory	of	Public	Finance:	A	Study	in	Public	Economy.	New	York: McGraw-Hill. Myrdal,	G.	(1954)	The	Political	Element	in	the	Development	of	Economic	Theory.	Cambridge, MA:	Harvard	University	Press. Naess,	A.	(1973)	'The	Shallow	and	the	Deep,	Long-Range	Ecology	Movement:	A	Summary', Inquiry,	16(1–4),	95–100. Naisbitt.	(1982)	Megatrends:	Ten	New	Directions	Transforming	Our	Lives.	New	York: Warner. O'Connor,	M.	(1994)	Is	Capitalism	Sustainable?	Political	Economy	and	the	Politics	of Ecology.	New	York:	The	Guilford	Press. O'Neill,	J.	(1993)	Ecology,	Policy	and	Politics:	Human	Well-Being	and	the	Natural	World. London,	UK:	Routledge. Paine,	T.	[1776]	(2017)	Thomas	Paine:	Collected	Writings:	Common	Sense/The	Crisis/Rights of	Man/The	Age	of	Reason,	CreateSpace	Independent	Publishing	Platform	(22	Feb). Pirages,	D.C.	and	Ehrlich,	P.R.	(1974)	Ark	II:	Social	Response	to	Environmental	Imperatives. New	York:	Viking	Press. Porritt,	J.	(1988)	Seeing	Green:	The	Politics	of	Ecology	Explained.	London,	UK:	Basil Blackwell. Prothero,	A.,	Dobscha,	S.,	Freund,	J.,	Kilbourne,	W.E.,	Ozanne,	L.K.	and	Thøgersen,	J.	(2011) 'Sustainable	Consumption:	Opportunities	for	Consumer	Research	and	Public	Policy', Journal	of	Public	Policy	and	Marketing,	30(1),	31–38. Rappaport,	A.	(1953)	Operational	Philosophy.	New	York:	Harper	and	Brothers. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . Rifkin,	J.	(2015)	The	Zero	Marginal	Cost	Society.	New	York:	Macmillan. Rousseau,	J.J.	(1975)	The	Essential	Rousseau	(L.	Blair,	Trans.).	New	York:	Meridian	Books. Rudmin,	F.	and	Kilbourne,	W.	(1995)	'The	Meaning	and	Morality	of	Voluntary	Simplicity:	The History	and	Hypotheses	on	Deliberately	Denied	Materialism'.	In	R.	Belk,	N.	Dholakia	and A.	Venkatesh	(eds)	Consumption	and	Marketing:	The	Macro	Dimensions.	Cincinnati,	OH: South-Western	College	Publishing. Sagoff,	M.	(2007)	The	Economy	of	Earth.	New	York:	Cambridge	University	Press. Samuelson,	P.A.	(1947)	Foundations	of	Economic	Analysis.	Cambridge,	MA:	Harvard University	Press. Scott,	K.,	Martin,	D.	and	Schouten,	J.	(2014)	'Marketing	and	the	New	Materialism',	Journal	of Macromarketing,	34(3),	282–290. Simon,	J.L.	(1981)	Population:	The	Ultimate	Resource.	Princeton,	NJ:	Princeton	University Press. Smith,	T.M.	(1998)	The	Myth	of	Green	Marketing:	Tending	Our	Goats	at	the	Edge	of Apocalypse.	Toronto,	CA:	University	of	Toronto	Press. Speth,	J.G.	(2008)	The	Bridge	at	the	Edge	of	the	World.	New	Haven,	CT:	Yale	University Press. Trentmann,	F.	(2007)	'Citizenship	and	Consumption',	Journal	of	Consumer	Culture,	7(2), 147–158. UNEP/CDG	(2000)	Sustainable	Consumption	and	Production.	Creating	opportunities	in	a changing	world:	Report	of	the	4th	International	Business	Forum,	Berlin	1999,	in	UNEP	and Consumers	International	(2002),	Tracking	Progress:	Implementing	Sustainable	Consumption Policies,	http://webdocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/7865/Tracking%20Progress_20Implementing%20Sustainable%20Consumption%Policies%20%20%20%A%20Global%20Review%20of%20Implementation%20of%20the%20United%20%nations%20Guidelines%20for%20Consumer%20Protection2002156.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y	(accessed	August	24th,	2017) The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed . United	Nations	Environment	Programme	(2009)	'Frequently	asked	questions:	The	Marrakech process	–	towards	a	10	year	Framework	of	Programmes	on	Sustainable	Consumption	and Production.	http://www.unep.fr/scp/marrakecj/about.htm.	(retrieved	February	22nd	2016) United	Nations	Environment	Programme	(2012)	Global	Outlook	on	Sustainable	Consumption and	Production	Policies	–	Taking	action	together. http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTlx1498xPAGlobalOutlookonSCPPolicies.pdf	(accessed	online,	February	22nd,	2016) Varey,	R.	(2012)	'The	Marketing	Future	Beyond	the	Limits	of	Growth',	Journal	of Macromarketing,	32(4),	424–433. Varey,	R.	(2013)	'Marketing	in	the	Flourishing	Society	Megatrend',	Journal	of Macromarketing,	33(4),	354–368. Wackernagle,	M.	and	Rees,	W.	(1998)	Our	Ecological	Footprint:	Reducing	Human	Impact	on the	Earth.	New	York:	New	Society	Publishers. Waggoner,	P.E.	and	Ausubel,	J.H.	(2002)	'A	Framework	for	Sustainability	Science:	A Renovated	IPAT	Identity',	Proceedings	of	the	National	Academy	of	Sciences,	99(12), 7860–7865. Wei,	T.	(2011)	'What	STIRPAT	Tells	about	Effects	of	Population	and	Affluence	on	the Environment',	Ecological	Economics,	72,	70–74. York,	R.,	Rosa,	E.	and	Dietz,	T.	(2003)	'Footprints	on	the	Earth:	The	Environmental Consequences	of	Modernity',	American	Sociological	Review,	68(2),	279–300. The SAGE Handbook of Consumer Culture, edited by Olga Kravets, et al., SAGE Publications, 2017. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bath/detail.action?docID=5202388. Created from bath on 2018-08-01 02:38:30. C op yr ig ht © 2 01 7. S A G E P ub lic at io ns . A ll rig ht s re se rv ed .