The problematization of consumers in Swedish financial literacy education

Abstract

Using the concept of problematization, this paper reveals the rationale for governing consumers in the practice of Swedish financial literacy education. Before the 1980s, the problematization of consumers was characterized by teaching economic thrift to 'at-risk groups'. Through observations of and interviews with teachers and organizers, as well as analyzes of policy texts, this study shows that contemporary financial education instead describes a whole population of consumers lacking 'financial self-confidence'. This study also shows how social, political, and economic developments prompted the problematization of the previously unnoticed issue of Swedish citizens' 'financial literacy'. Neo-liberal ideas and reforms, financialization, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's promotion of financial literacy are all strong factors in the current problematization of Swedish consumers and the ongoing practice of financial education. Financial education attempts to foster economically rational, responsible, self-reliant financial citizens; in other words, it seeks to make people more like the 'virtual consumer' of neo-classic economic theory. The ideal consumer of contemporary financial education is expected to turn to financial markets to ensure his or her economic welfare. Doing so is assumed to lead consumers to contribute to efficient and stable global and national financial markets. However, consistent with the local problematization of Swedish consumers as having diverse problems and needs in relation to finance, such education is adjusted to fit different categories of consumers. While some are said to require financial 'inspiration' to become active and engaged financial consumers, the traditional morality of thrift still characterizes financial education tailored for consumers deemed to be at risk of over-indebtedness.

Market Impact Analysis of Financial Literacy among A-Share Market Investors: An Agent-Based Model

“…Compen et al (2019) [9] examined the impact of financial literacy education on subsequent financial behavior and found that financial literacy education had a positive impact on stock market participation and investment behavior. Pettersson (2022) [10] found that financial literacy education had a positive impact on investment knowledge and behavior in the stock market. However, not all studies have found a positive relationship between financial literacy and stock market outcomes.…”

Transforming Subjectivities:

“…In short, financialization research has shown how finance has developed way beyond its function as a capital provider for the productive economy, reaching even into everyday life via products such as mortgages and savings f unds -and, in particular, via the pension system ( Belfrage 2008;Belfrage & Kallifatides 2017;Davis & Kim 2015;Erturk et al 2007;Krippner 2005;Lapavitsas 2011;Mader et al 2020;Montgomerie 2020; van der Zwan 2014). While critical and often F oucault-i nspired analyses of financialization ( e.g., Ahnland 2017;Langley 2006Langley , 2007 and of financial education ( Marron 2014;Pettersson 2021;Pettersson & Wettergren 2020;Santos 2017) have successfully analysed and revealed the ideological and normative premises taken for granted in discourse, they have tended to neglect the likewise important issue of whether such governance attempts actually create the subjects they seek ( however, for a critical discussion of the performativity of financialization, see Gonzalez 2015;Pellandini-Simányi et al 2015). Therefore, the purpose of this chapter is to reduce the present knowledge gap concerning the issue of how the governance attempts of financial education are received by citizen attendees.…”