A Look at Conspicuous Consumption

In an economic study of conspicuous consumption, Arrow and Dasgupta (2009) examined how happiness mediates present vs. future standing. Essentially, the paper examined if we have a desire to consume conspicuously (i.e., noticeable by others), this might bring happiness in the present, but the need to continue consuming would bring future conflict (e.g., need to purchase more and more, working harder to spend harder, spending larger amounts of money). I would like to focus on the idea of conspicuous consumption, in general, though.

The authors look at conspicuous consumption, first posited by Thorstein Veblen in late 1800s and early 1900s. The idea is that there is a "comparison of one's consumption with those of others" (p. 2). These consumption behaviors have to observable; therefore, conspicuous. According to the theory, "wealth confers status and esteem; and conspicuous consumption is a way of displaying wealth" (p. 3).

In examining leisure as a consumptive good, it tracks that leisure too could involve observable consumption that a person with the time and money would want to show others their wealth and status. Leisure can take the form of observable behaviors, such as tourism, specialized equipment (e.g., kayak, climbing gear, GPS device, ATV, etc.), or through our entertainment (e.g., 3-D TVs, 60" flat screens, blu-ray players, etc.). Does the same hold true for other forms of leisure that are not outwardly noticeable, such as the amount of books one owns, pairs of shoes, music owned, etc.

As the authors note, researchers studying this affect have differing results. For instance, they noted a study where researchers examined neighbors of a Dutch lottery winner... finding that the winner's spending did not affect his neighbors consumption behaviors (see Kapteyn et al., 2007). So is there something here? Do we consume conspicuously relative to our peers? Do we do this with everyday household goods? Do we consume conspicuously in our leisure?

Experiencing Experiences

Joe Pine and Jim Gilmore wrote a book called The Experience Economy (2005) that examined how the economic value of services was changing. The authors hypothesized that our economy (and consumers) were becoming more interested in experiences rather than services. They outlined a “Progression of Economic Value” (p. 1) that begins with commodities (raw materials), goods (physical objects), services (intangible activity), and experiences (memorable events).

This specifically relates to leisure opportunities as we are often in the business of providing services (coordinating / planning expeditions and other activities). Leisure practitioners also aim to provide experiences that our participants participate in often, we hope, to change a perspective or behavior or provide positive “free time” activity. A final level in Gilmore and Pine’s “Progression of Economic Value” is transformation, otherwise known as demonstrated change. This is a big piece of some leisure practitioner’s duty as challenge course facilitators, expedition guides, and wilderness therapists (to name ONLY a few), often are charged with building relationships and changing behaviors in their participants.

Wilderness therapists may focus on refocusing negative behaviors, like teen drug-use, and re-positioning the teen to have a humbling, eye-opening experience that shows a life without substance abuse. Challenge course facilitators often focus on frontloading or debriefing experiences that force (challenge by choice, of course) participants to work together and face their fears and obstacles. Then the facilitator attempts to relate the experience to “real-world” obstacles in hopes that the experience transfers and the participant goes home with changed.

With this focus, it falls on the practitioner to offer safe, but perceived risky experiences and then to have a plan to create demonstrable change whereby the participant goes home having vivid, memorable experiences while also successfully attempting to show change. A practitioner may not have to change much of what they already do, but to be aware and focus on the experience and transformation aspects of their experiences can only help provide better services.

Environmental Literacy and Proenvironmental Behaviors

With concern rising about the effect humans have on the environment (pollution, climate change, to name a few), researchers are increasingly becoming interested in what motivates (or predicts) a person to act environmentally. Within the research, environmentally responsible behaviors can also be called stewardship, conservation behavior, environmentally friendly behavior, and proenvironmental behavior.

Researchers have examined proenvironmental behavior by examining demographic variables such as education, gender, and political orientation. Interestingly, research has found contradicting results. For instance, some researchers have found positive correlations between females and being more environmental. Contradictorily, other researchers have found that no gender correlation exists. There does appear to be a relationship between higher educated individuals being engaged in proenvironmental behaviors as well as being aligned to a particular political orientation.

Mobley, Vagias, and DeWard (2010), though, examine the formation of environmentally responsible behavior through environmental education, specifically the readings of A Sand County Almanac, Silent Spring, and Walden. To examine environmental attitudes, the researchers utilized the New Ecological Paradigm developed by Dunlap that examines a person’s beliefs regarding the environment. Finally, to gauge environmental behaviors, researchers asked participants to respond to 17 consumer behaviors during the last 12 months (bought products made of recycled materials, reduced driving, tried to use less water, etc.).

The researchers found that regarding the environmental literature piece specifically, that reading environmental literature like Walden can increase proenvironmental behaviors. Essentially, those who responded higher levels of environmental reading reported higher levels of stewardship behaviors. Even when incorporating environmental attitudes into the model, environmental reading was a significant predictor.

What this literature should suggest is that environmental readings (through book clubs or environmental education) should be utilized early and often. Introducing teens through environmental education and readings can help provide context as well as meaning to the issues contained within these books and in the world. Creating an awareness of environmental problems and then providing in-nature opportunities for learning can strengthen nature ties that will hopefully create environmentally responsible adults.

The Cost of Going Green

Peter Morris, in the Pension Real Estate Association Quarterly (2007), asks the question “what does green really cost?” In his opinion, this is a faulty and loaded question. He believes for companies, the question should not be about the cost, but about the process. By having a good process, in his research, the premiums for going green are less costly than assumed. In fact, he states that there is “evidence in the marketplace that reasonable levels of sustainable design can be incorporated into most building types at little or no additional cost” (p. 55).

Another question a company should ask prior to adding green to their buildings is “what will green cost me?” Morris thinks that trying to examine other companies and/or look at add-on features is not a good strategy for planning because location, elevation, climate, building design, etc. can all affect what the cost of going green will be. Most buildings are not alike in every way.

So, the process for any company going green is to examine their green goals. Morris suggests looking at different green certifications that exist in the marketplace. A well-known certification is the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system sponsored by the US Green Building Council. This system examines the site, water efficiency, energy output, materials and resources, and indoor environmental quality. A building can be certified, silver, gold, or platinum-rated. Green Globes is also a certification that examines a building’s carbon footprint in examining the energy efficiency.

Overall, once goals are established, a strategic plan and team must be created that incorporates all members. Meaning, construction teams, design teams, contractors, etc. should all be part of the planning process to ensure the building functions as a whole, rather than its parts. A well-designed building with green materials that has poor day-lighting or has window leaks does not function as an efficient, green building.

Connecting You to Your Park; and Branding

In the December 2008 issue of Parks and Recreation magazine, Doug Knapp wrote an interesting article about how parks can better connect with their visitors and will likely lead to repeat visitations!

In this current article, Knapp specifically looks at the impact of interpretative programs, and their effectiveness, in promoting the history and resources of particular parks. Many parks provide multiple resources and landmarks that will attract visitors (Civilian Conservation Corps relics, a lake, hiking trails, museums, etc.). While offering many opportunities can diversify who travels to your park and why, it is also important to brand a park in a way that relates it to many of the park visitors. Creating a brand for a park markets specific resources, opportunities, or other attractions that are coveted by the majority of users. Once in the park, the visitors might discover other aspects that are enjoyable.

To find a park brand, it becomes very necessary to conduct a park evaluation and/or visitor needs assessment. What is this park doing well? What attracts you to come back? What can we work on? Finding the urban-reminders (Lewicka, 2008), those physical aspects that hold significance to the visitor (due to familiarity with, or similarity to) can increase repeat visitation and a sense of ownership in the visitor.

One way to promote this sense of attachment is to provide interpretative opportunities that allow the visitors to connect to the park. Knapp (2008) has multiple suggestions. One such suggestion is to connect better with children. In Knapp's research, adults connected better to a park through their children rather than directly connecting to the adult. Also, try a constructivist approach to interpretation. Try to connect individually with each visitor in some way and relate your content to something they know. And then again, as Knapp puts it, "find the hook;" or more to the point, find the brand that continually brings the visitor back!

Bubble-Wrapped!

Karen Malone in her 2007 article, “The bubble-wrap generation: children growing up in walled gardens,” asserts that over-protective parents are partially to blame for health issues and developmental issues in their children. By not allowing children to be outside alone (to play, to walk to school, etc.), these kids are growing up sheltered and indoors. According to Malone, “many parents are failing to allow children the opportunities to build resilience and skills critical to be competent and independent environmental users” (p. 513).

Malone makes many claims about the effect of this protective layer around children. One such claim is that parents are over-scheduling their children (e.g., music lessons, sports practice, tutoring) to avoid allowing children unsafe alone time. It is true that many studies have found that unstructured time and boredom in children can lead to juvenile delinquency (see “Rationale for Recreation by Witt and Caldwell (2010) and/or many other studies about juvenile delinquency and recreation), but there is also a connection to self-exploration, recreation and leisure, and identity development (Freysinger and Kelly, 2011) that can be neglected by over-scheduling children; not to mention the pressures of living an adult-life before being able to maturely capable of doing so.

Most startling, Malone notes that in a study conducted in 2005 regarding Australian children, one in ten was active in play as we understand it and one in twenty admitted that they rarely left the inside of their home to play. Richard Louv (author of Last Child in the Woods) and a slew of researchers have found time and again that this loss of connection to nature does relate to health and developmental issues in children. Taking it further, researchers have found that children who lacked a connection to nature, also lacked this connection as adults. More specifically, environmental value researchers have found that there appears to be significant environmental value formation in children which can lead to values and behaviors as an adult; or these values if not formed in children, may not form as an adult.

Conservation, A Good Idea

In a recent article entitled The Public Mandate for Conversation published in the January 2012 issue of Parks and Recreation Magazine, author Richard Dolesh noted that parks and recreation agencies, holders of much of our public lands, should re-focus their attention on sustainable practices that conserve our public lands, protects public water, and flora and fauna. This is absolutely true! The National Resources Council of Maine (http://www.nrcm.org/documents/publiclandownership.pdf) noted that the Federal Government as of 1995, held 654,885,389 acres of land in the United States.

With our state and federal governments holding so much of our public land, the land we recreate in, Dolesh argues that green practices create better quality of life and better communities. Research has shown that outdoor activity can decrease childhood obesity and attention deficit issues (see Richard Louv’s Last Child in the Woods) while surgical patients heal faster and office workers report more satisfaction when provided a window to the out-of-doors. Older adults and children (with parental supervision), meanwhile, are more likely to utilize outdoor spaces when the area feels safe (i.e., steady walking trails, good lighting, less traffic noise).

As practitioners and researchers in the field of Leisure and Recreation, it will be our responsibility to provide these well-designed, conservation-focused spaces. This will likely mean re-planning activities, changing materials utilized, and spending more money. Going green is definitely not cheap. In an off-hand example, smart-money.com noted In the Hidden Cost of Going Green that going green in the housing market was a $49 billion dollar industry in 2009.

Becoming concerned with conservation will force practitioners to involve themselves in the community (what resources can you keep within the local economy (e.g., farmer’s markets)), what is important to the natives (any historical landmarks or natural features, a community center), as well as getting political. Our politicians are supposed to listen to their constituents needs and wants. We can do this by deciding who we vote for, writing and calling in, and creating a voice for change.

If we, as a community, want to turn a dilapidated lot into a community garden, we’ll have to band together as a group and let local and state politicians know what is needed to make this change as well as spend our own time and money in renovations. We can do this by involving our local parks and recreation agencies and creating programs that revolve around cleaning this lot, planting the garden, etc. This will ensure that the outcomes of recreation are met, such as physical (doing physical movement), social (meeting others), and emotional benefits (knowing that you are helping your community and world).