Changing human behaviour and lifestyle: a challenge for sustainable consumption?
Changing human behaviour and lifestyle: a challenge for sustainable consumption?
复制标题
改变人类行为和生活方式：可持续消费的挑战？
DOI：
10.4337/9781845423568.00014
复制
发表时间：
2005
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
E. Shove
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
E. Shove
在过去十年左右的时间里，关于当代消费对环境的影响，社会和自然科学界进行了大量的辩论，到目前为止，已经达成了某种共识。很明显，生活方式，特别是西方的生活方式，必须改变，如果有任何机会避免资源枯竭，全球变暖，生物多样性丧失，废物生产或污染和破坏宝贵的“自然”环境的长期后果。把布伦特兰著名的定义反过来说，如果目前的趋势继续下去，后代将遇到一个严重退化的世界。在这一点上的明显一致掩盖了关于行为、生活方式和消费概念化的重要理论分歧。“生活方式”在某种意义上是“被选择的”，还是更好地被视为“生活方式”，即作为社会结构的一部分（哈里森和戴维斯1998）。人们所做的“行为”和他们所想的之间有什么关系？消费是一种品味的表达，还是社会、文化和物质再生产的复杂系统中的一个时刻？筛选这些差异的任务不仅仅是学术上的兴趣。正如我在下文中指出的那样，旨在促进可持续消费的政策一般是建立在对人类行为极其狭隘的理解之上的。解释为什么会这样并不太困难，毕竟，一些理论立场比其他立场更适合政策制定（如目前的配置）。然而，危险在于，这种可以理解的理论和实践的融合掩盖了，有时甚至否认了社会和环境变化的重要形式。在本章中，我想对这些局限性以及如果环境政策要对建立更可持续的生活方式并使之制度化的挑战做出有效和持久的贡献，仍然需要的社会理论发展的类型做出一种感觉。
Over the last decade or so, there has been a wealth of social and natural scientific debate about the environmental consequences of contemporary consumption and there is, by now, something of a consensus. It is clear that lifestyles, especially in the West, will have to change if there is to be any chance of averting the long-term consequences of resource depletion, global warming, the loss of biodiversity, the production of waste or the pollution and destruction of valued 'natural' environments. To put Brundtland's famous definition another way round, future generations will encounter a much degraded world if present trends continue. Apparent agreement on this point disguises important theoretical divisions regarding the conceptualisation of behaviour, lifestyle and consumption. Are 'lifestyles' in some sense 'chosen' or are they better seen as 'ways of life', that is, as part of the social fabric (Harrison and Davies 1998). What is the relation between 'behaviour' what people do and what they think? Is consumption an expression of taste, or a moment in a complex system of social, cultural and material reproduction? The task of sifting through these differences is of more than academic interest. As I suggest below, policies designed to promote sustainable consumption are generally founded upon an extraordinarily narrow understanding of human behaviour. It is not too difficult to explain why this might be so, after all, some theoretical positions are much more amenable to policy-making (as it is presently configured) than others. The danger, however, is that this understandable confluence of theory and practice obscures, sometimes even denies, important forms of social and environmental change. In this chapter I want to give a sense of these limitations and of the kinds of social-theoretical development still required if environmental policy is to make an effective and durable contribution to the challenge of establishing and institutionalising more sustainable ways of life.