[Feature: Sustainable Consumption] Transformation of Values in Life Design and Consumption Styles: Toward Sustainable Consumption

2019/08/05

In this article, as we consider sustainable consumption, we will provide an overview of changes in consumer awareness and attitudes through the transformation of values in life design.

In an era when "possession" was a symbol of affluence, it was important to have what "everyone else has" and then further distinguish oneself by what else one owned. Importance was also placed on the quality of the items held within the category of "what everyone else has." Just 30 years ago, many people thought that a home with many expensive items that made life more convenient—such as televisions, washing machines, and refrigerators (known as the "Three Sacred Treasures" in the 1950s), as well as cars, dishwashers, and air purifiers—was "affluent." Furthermore, a home was considered "affluent" if it had even higher-priced products, such as large-screen, high-image-quality televisions, high-performance washing machines with fully automatic or drying functions, or luxury cars. Affluence was synonymous with "happiness," and a typical model of this was shared by society as a stereotype.

This "happiness" model based on possessing goods is currently losing its shape. Today, as lifestyles that involve owning as little as possible attract attention, an increasing number of consumers consider living with only what they need to be "affluent." Centered on the younger generation, a shift is being seen from conventional "standard consumption" (items considered essential to own) to "selective consumption." For example, a daily life where a newspaper is delivered every day, news and dramas are watched on television, and laundry is done in a washing machine is no longer the "standard." People do not take a newspaper (watching news online instead of in print), do not own a television (watching only what they want via video streaming services using smartphones or tablets), and do their laundry at a laundromat. Such lifestyles have become common, and a "standard lifestyle" no longer exists.

So, what kind of changes in life design values have influenced consumer awareness?

In the "Life Design 1.0" era (Figure), where lifestyles were highly homogeneous and uniform, a "typical family" model existed—consisting of a working father, a stay-at-home mother, and two children—under the value that getting married and having children was the norm, and under Japanese employment practices such as seniority-based pay and lifelong employment. An image of happiness within that model was shared by society.

Amidst upward economic growth, there were many consumers who felt joy in wanting one thing after another and acquiring them all. On the other hand, the lifestyle of mass production and mass consumption, predicated on "enjoying the benefits" of the global environment, began to impact the environment through "pollution" and "ecosystem changes," and problems gradually began to arise. These negative aspects attracted attention as social issues and were shared with children specifically in the form of "education." The children of that time belong to a generation that was made strongly aware that the earth's resources are limited, such as the fact that an oil-dependent society would reach its limits in the near future.

(1) Transformation of Values

The subsequent "Life Design 2.0" era was largely occupied by the "Lost 20 Years" following the collapse of the bubble economy. In particular, the Dankai Junior generation (currently in their late 40s) experienced a world of difference compared to their seniors just a few years older who found employment during the bubble era. According to our company's survey, a very high percentage of this generation feels that they "often lose out (or have lost out) on things" in terms of life design, and they view their parents' generation, the Dankai (baby boomer) generation, with a cold eye as the "generation that got away" (for details on the consumption awareness of the Dankai Junior generation, see "Life Design in the Age of 100-Year Life: Deciphering Japan's Future from the Dankai Junior Generation" (Miyaki et al., 2017)). Many people had no choice but to choose the path of non-regular employment or freelance work because they could not find jobs as regular employees. In addition to economic factors, changes in values regarding marriage and childbirth also played a role; despite the large population size, the percentage of people who married and had children was not high, leading to them being called the generation that "could not trigger the third baby boom."

The gap between the consumer society the Dankai Junior generation saw when they were in their teens and the reality they saw after entering society was too large, and there were many things they "could not do" as they wished. However, centered on this generation and those following it, "stinginess" (defense of livelihood = passive) was transformed into "eco-friendly" (environmental protection = active), and an "environment where one cannot buy" (passive) came to be seen as a "choice not to buy" (active).

Furthermore, a style emerged where people sought clear reasons for "buying," purchasing items not because "everyone else has them," but because "I need it." If they felt something was unnecessary for their own lifestyle, they stopped buying cars, televisions, and newspapers.

Against the backdrop of these changes, "rentals" and "sharing," which involve using only what is needed when it is needed, became widespread. Additionally, aided by the development of information and communication technology, a "C to C" (consumer-to-consumer) market where consumers buy and sell their own belongings was formed. Among the Dankai generation, many people seem to feel that rentals, sharing, and using second-hand goods are "shabby" or that they have a "resistance to things used by others," but among the younger generation, the concepts of "sharing things with others," "using things used by others," and "purchasing usage rights" are becoming established. "Subscriptions," where one pays a monthly or annual fee to use a service freely during the contract period, are one example of this.

(2) Reconsidering Connections

Furthermore, during this era, orientation initially shifted toward the "individual" and the "personal," with an emphasis on terms like "individual," "individuality," "individualized," "private room," and "eating alone." Behind this were factors such as the trend toward nuclear families, the increase in dual-income households, the individualization of behavior due to busy schedules, and the increase in private room ownership due to the declining birthrate; the personalization of music and communication media also encouraged these trends. In urban areas especially, neighborhood associations decreased, and a weakening of human relationships was pointed out, such as people not knowing the faces of their neighbors.

However, triggered by the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake in 1995, the importance of local connections and mutual aid was reaffirmed, and volunteer activities grew rapidly, leading to a re-evaluation of "connections with people" and "social connections." Furthermore, after the Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011, in addition to the further activation of volunteer activities, support activities through consumption in the form of "support consumption" and "cheering consumption" became established. The term "ethical consumption" also began to be used rapidly.

With each subsequent disaster, these activities formed further connections, and the movement to open up in search of "connections" became active, moving away from the tendency for people to close themselves off as "individuals." Personal media, which had encouraged individualization, began to demonstrate effectiveness as a tool for maintaining and forming networks centered on SNS, and came to play an important role in the formation of social capital.

(3) Sharing a Vision on a Global Scale

What supported these movements on a global scale and advanced the sharing of a global vision were the international goals described in the "2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development" adopted at the UN Summit in September 2015, the so-called SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals). The SDGs aim for 17 goals while being conscious of 169 targets toward solving global issues. In terms of consumption, the aim is for each individual to realize that the value chains supporting daily consumption are connected to the world, and that individual consumption behavior has the power to shape the quality of the world and the future. Although individual power is extremely small, it is expected that by individual consumers making global social issues "their own" and taking action or making improvements simultaneously, it will become a major movement.

While the Life Design 1.0 era was an era of "enjoying benefits," it was also an era when a sense of crisis regarding the environment and doubts about mass consumption were formed. The Life Design 2.0 era was an era that attempted to guarantee sustainability by efficiently circulating existing resources, driven by extrinsic motivations such as a restrictive economic environment and the amplification of social issues.

If that is the case, the Life Design 3.0 era is an era that requires proactive action based on intrinsic motivation—the desire to "draw this kind of future"—in line with the vision shared by the SDGs. It is expected to be an era of setting a mindset for spontaneous action and proactive involvement by envisioning the desired future and backcasting what must be done now to achieve it. In fact, such movements are becoming active in various parts of the world.

It is now a well-known fact that there are limits to a society where people compete for markets and resources—a so-called "winner-take-all competition." One could say that "value-combining co-creation," which aims for co-creation (Co-Creation) where people bring their values (Value) and combine (Connect) them, rather than a competition (Competition) where those who win (Win) form a group (Classify), will form the affluence of the Life Design 3.0 era. By combining individual resources to create new value and markets, we will create a sustainable society where growth can be expected, moving away from a social structure of competing for resources.

A safe and secure consumer society is something everyone desires. However, it does not fall from the sky; it is formed through one's own active involvement. By imagining the impacts and possibilities that can arise from one's own actions, and by sharing a vision of the desired future and "connecting," we will co-create a sustainable future. I believe that if as many consumers as possible become aware of this, a sustainable consumer society will move toward realization.

* "Life Design in the Age of 100-Year Life: Deciphering Japan's Future from the Dankai Junior Generation" (Yukiko Miyaki, Yasuko Matoba, Eiko Mizuno, Akiko Kitamura, 2017, Toyo Keizai Inc.)

* "Open Innovation Starting from Me: Report of the Task Force on the Implementation of Substantial Open Innovation Contributing to the Realization of a Value Design Society" (Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters, Cabinet Office, 2019)

* The figures were created based on figures scheduled to be published in "Happiness Strategy in the Age of 100-Year Life" (Yukiko Miyaki, Yasuko Matoba, Madoka Inagaki), scheduled for publication by Toyo Keizai Inc. in October 2019. For details on Life Design 3.0, please refer to this book.