Two types of ‘enough’: sufficiency as minimum and maximum

Spengler, Laura

doi:10.1080/09644016.2016.1164355

Cited by 84 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Scholars of sustainable consumption have noted two broad and clearly divergent cultural narratives of social change for environmental aims. The naming of these dichotomies differs in the literature: strong and weak sustainability (Fuchs and Lorek 2005); reformist, reconfiguration, and revolutionary approaches (Geels et al 2015); a distinction between efficiency and sufficiency (Shove 2017; Spengler 2016); or “business as usual approaches,” as opposed to social innovations (Seyfang 2008). These manifold dichotomies all have a common thread, distinguishing between more radical, systemic approaches that critique the market economy and growth paradigm, and reformative approaches that advocate adjustments within the existing economic and political order.…”

Section: Conceptual Framework: Representations Of Social Changementioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the reliance on efficient technology or behavioral change has been criticized by scholars in sustainable consumption studies (Cohen and Murphy 2001; Fahy and Rau 2013; Maniates 2001; Shove 2010). An emerging alternative narrative around transformative change challenges the growth paradigm and calls for systemic solutions; these involve questioning our growth addiction (van Griethuysen 2010), proposing upper and lower limits to consumption (Di Giulio and Fuchs 2014), challenging the “bad habits” of capitalism (Wilhite 2016), aiming for sufficiency in its different interpretations (Shove 2017; Spengler 2016), or achieving sustainable wellbeing (Gough 2017), to name but a few approaches.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How Do Ordinary Swiss People Represent and Engage with Environmental Issues? Grappling with Cultural Repertoires

Balsiger

Lorenzini

Sahakian

2019

Sociological Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies how ordinary people in Switzerland represent and engage with environmental issues in daily practices. Bringing together conceptual developments in cultural sociology and social practice theory, the paper argues that cultural repertoires strongly shape how representations and forms of engagement play out. It identifies two main repertoires of social and environmental change: adaptation and transformation. The adaptation repertoire is reformist and aligned with individualism and the capitalist growth-paradigm; the transformation repertoire consists of a critique of the market society and calls for systemic change. Using qualitative in-depth interviews and a random survey of residents of Western Switzerland, the analyses show that most people’s representations and engagements with environmental issues relate to the dominant repertoire of adaptation, which appears to be very compatible with existing social practices. Although people hint at limits to the adaptation repertoire, only very few of our study participants relate to the transformative repertoire.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Framework: Representations Of Social Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Do Ordinary Swiss People Represent and Engage with Environmental Issues? Grappling with Cultural Repertoires

Balsiger

Lorenzini

Sahakian

2019

Sociological Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Global social policy has always had a clear focus on basic human needs, like avoiding poverty, adequate food, and drinking water provision. This is visible is the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and even the Brundtland report has made the centrality of needs explicit: "Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" [21].Philosophically, this approach is grounded in the concept of sufficientarianism [22][23][24][25][26], which states that we have particular duties to satisfy others' basic needs. Several scholars hold the position that, as a criterion of justice, the concept of human needs is superior to other concepts such as subjective preferences [27][28][29].…”

Section: Guarantee Of Need Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Money, Vouchers, Public Infrastructures? A Framework for Sustainable Welfare Benefits

Bohnenberger

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the social consequences of environmental policies are extensively evaluated in sustainability research, few studies exist on the ecological impact of social benefits and the welfare state. Sustainable welfare is a novel research field that seeks to close this knowledge gap and develop integrated eco-social policies. Within this, researchers are starting to ask how citizen’s needs can be guaranteed in an environmentally sustainable way and how their welfare benefits should be delivered. Should citizens receive a universal basic income, be given vouchers for ecologically beneficial or socially needed goods and services, or be provided with access to socio-ecological infrastructures and services? This article develops a framework for sustainable welfare benefits with six criteria of sustainable welfare and nine different types of welfare benefits that belong to the domains of universal basic income (UBI), universal basic services (UBS), and universal basic vouchers (UBV). Using this framework, existing policy proposals are categorized and evaluated. The advantages and disadvantages of the different types of welfare benefits are discussed and new application areas highlighted. The analysis shows that a successful policy will likely include all forms of welfare benefits, with certain types being more adequate for certain fields and societal circumstances. The framework for sustainable welfare benefits can serve as a starting point for further research on integrated policy design and inform policymakers on the selection of eco-social policies.

show abstract

“…Thus, policy framings around energy could also consider 'How much of what is enough?' (Spengler 2016), or offer a more explicit focus on sufficiency. Debates around sufficiency lead into more fundamental and societal questions, such as what services should be enabled, in what contexts, and towards what needs.…”

Section: Governing Framework and Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%