Abstract
The study evaluates the sustainability of consumption patterns among different socioeconomic deciles based on individual ecological footprints generated by four of the world’s most polluting industries: animal products/meat, textiles, transport, and residential energy. Online shopping is also considered due to its mounting popularity. A national survey, which ensured equal representation of socioeconomic deciles, involving 600 respondents in Israel was conducted, supplemented by follow-up semi-structured personal interviews with 25 participants. Conventional wisdom supports the notion that wealthier segments of society produce greater ecological footprints in all aspects of their consumption. In fact, our findings reveal that patterns are more nuanced and that there are areas in which poorer populations reveal less sustainable consumption patterns: poorer populations in the lower deciles report a greater per capita ecological footprint in their purchases of textiles and food consumption. By contrast, wealthier deciles have relatively larger ecological footprints in the areas of transport and residential patterns (which drive their energy consumption). Results suggest that some of the fundamental assumptions among environmental justice advocates regarding contrasting consumption patterns in affluent and poorer segments of society are not always supported by empirical evidence. Findings also indicate that there is room for greater government interventions to facilitate more sustainable consumption patterns among poorer populations.
Highlights
In June 2019, the United Nations released a stern warning about a growing “climate apartheid”
Environmental policy makers do not sufficiently understand consumption patterns that are largely informed by socioeconomic status
This study highlights the relationship between consumption patterns and socioeconomic status by examining the contribution of the various socioeconomic deciles to Israel’s ecological footprint
Summary
In June 2019, the United Nations released a stern warning about a growing “climate apartheid”. The report explains that “ the world’s poor are responsible for a fraction of greenhouse gas emissions, they are the main sufferers of these emissions, and at the same time have the least means to protect against climate change” [1] This is not the first time that environmental hazards have been linked to poverty and social injustice. In 1994, President Bill Clinton signed an executive order recognizing the challenge of environmental justice and in 2015 Barack Obama, -U.S president, linked disconcerting global phenomena such as the rise of Boko Haram and the Civil War in Syria, to climate change [2] This statement is backed by studies that show that a clear correlation exists between global warming in the Middle East and the conflict in Syria [3,4] a war which has far taken the lives of over 200,000 people [5]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
