Consumption, Sustainability, and Corporate Responsibility

Introduction

According to the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." There are many issues related to this important concept that have global implications. The purpose of this essay is to discuss the issue of consumption and how it affects the environment's ability to continue supporting sustainable living. This essay first describes the issue and illustrates key points connecting consumption with sustainability. It then discusses the role of businesses and corporations in relation to this issue, before concluding with commentary on current trends, future responses to consumption, and the potential implications for businesses.

The Issue of Consumption

Consumption is a unique term that relates to the sustainability of any system. It would appear that consumption must be counter-balanced with some energizing source capable of successfully negating its harmful effects. Shah (2011) described the problem simply: "Today's consumption is undermining the environmental resource base. It is exacerbating inequalities. And the dynamics of the consumption-poverty-inequality-environment nexus are accelerating. If the trends continue without change — not redistributing from high-income to low-income consumers, not shifting from polluting to cleaner goods and production technologies, not promoting goods that empower poor producers, not shifting priority from consumption for conspicuous display to meeting basic needs — today's problems of consumption and human development will worsen." Before accepting this conclusion, however, it is important to define and contextualize the idea of consumption and how it intersects with sustainability.

Sustainability is a vague term that needs additional context to carry clear meaning. Lammers (2011) portrayed the media's use of the word "sustainability" as trendy and imprecise. He argued that sustainability is "a good concept gone bad by mis- and overuse. It's come to be a squishy, feel-good catchall for doing the right thing. Used properly, it describes practices through which the global economy can grow without creating a fatal drain on resources." Contrary to this ambiguity, consumption itself is a straightforward term applicable at every level of analysis. Consumption is essentially the taking and using of a resource — whether natural or unnatural, material or immaterial, global or local. When dealing with complex global issues, simple and honest approaches are essential to eliminate the immense potential for confusion and misunderstanding. A focused approach requires solutions with an inherent flexibility that can respond to the needs of the many.

Consumption is both a local and a global issue. We must consume to live. The global market thrives only when consumption is at appropriate levels. In essence, consumption is at the heart of every action or inaction that nature or humans perceive or carry out. Tilford (2011) suggested that "by making conspicuous consumption our way of life, we have kept an 'enormously productive economy' running full tilt. Unprecedented levels of consumption have powered unparalleled economic growth, with predictable material benefits."

Consumption, like everything else, is multidimensional and carries negative components as well. As individuals, overconsumption of things like food, alcohol, or sleep produces immediate and recognizable after-effects. Subtle signals from the human body inform its user to slow down — taking the form of a hangover, heartburn, or lethargy. But what is obvious and easy to recognize at the individual level is very difficult to identify and manage collectively. For some reason, when society puts its collective mind together, results tend to stray from intentions.

Business, Consumption, and Sustainability

Capitalism has taken over the world, and this new order presents challenges that have not been adequately met in many cases. The trade and exchange of goods has brought much development to the world, but at a significant cost. Profits are often seen as justifying certain ends regardless of the means by which they were achieved. For many years, insatiable appetites for market share and profit margins have shaped how humans interact with one another on this planet. Businesses are now caught in a difficult situation that forces corporate leaders to balance sales targets with more conservative attitudes toward overconsumption. A new vision of environmental balance is essential for business leadership to navigate this problem. The old, outdated model is not a sustainable way to operate, and a new approach may be on the horizon.

This new trend of corporate interests operating under sustainable guidelines has largely been a failure and presents what appears to be an almost unwinnable situation — a case of letting the wolves guard the chicken coop. Kropp (2011) remarked on the balancing act international corporations must perform to appease regulators while surviving as viable entities. He found that "according to the nearly 3,000 executives from the commercial sector surveyed, sustainability is now part of the permanent management agenda at 70% of companies. Furthermore, two-thirds of respondents state that sustainability is necessary to be competitive in today's economy, and almost one-third says that sustainability contributes to increased profitability." However, the picture is less rosy than it appears: "sustainability may have become a permanent part of the management agenda at most companies by now, but it ranks only eighth in importance among management's agenda items."

Ihlen and Roper (2011) analyzed the world's largest corporations and how they communicate about sustainability and sustainable development, identifying a troubling pattern. They noted that "the most striking finding, however, is that so many of the corporations no longer argue that they are on a journey towards sustainability, but that they have already integrated sustainability principles and that they have worked like this for years. Such arguments arguably inhibit the change in business models that commentators call for" (p. 1). Trust and accountability are immediate concerns, but the question remains: is regulation even the answer? Can businesses and corporations be trusted to act in the best interests of the global community? It is up to all participants in this exchange to contribute to the process and make their voices heard. Consumers must not be relegated to the role of bystander; they should contribute by consuming for sustainable and reasonable reasons.

The problem of consumption and its effect on sustaining life on Earth ultimately comes down to the balance between quantity and quality. The emphasis on "the most," "the biggest," or "the most frequent" seems always to overshadow the idea of "the best." The design of disposable items, however convenient, places a heavy burden on the world's population collectively. Products are engineered to wear out and break down, reinforcing the cycle of consumption and production. In order for consumption to be scaled back, a new model must be developed — one that focuses on limiting production while prioritizing quality.

The over-reliance on and constant promotion of technology fuels this problem further, suggesting that older products cannot perform as well as newer ones. A new emphasis on durability and quality is needed to reestablish a balanced relationship with our technological processes. While technological obsolescence may be real, it is frequently engineered by design. Money is made through the exchange of goods and their consumption, which systematically diminishes the perceived value of quality and craftsmanship. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the accelerating pace of environmental risk makes addressing these patterns of production and consumption increasingly urgent.