Underconsumption core
Recently, I learned about a new trend called underconsumption core. It's a social media trend, but there are practices that fellow humans implement in their everyday life such as using old items, repairing, buying less. In general, this trend celebrates frugal living. Frugal living is of course not new, but this trend is. I think it's being discussed a lot in sustainability communities and in the social movements that I am also part of, such as voluntary simplicity, minimalism, and zero-waste. This trend caught my attention as a sustainability researcher and a long-term practitioner of extreme minimalism (with various elements of simple, slow and zero-waste living). This entry will be just some initial thoughts about this trend.
When I first heard about underconsumption core, the first thing that came to mind is my own academic field (degrowth). Whenever some new trend appears, such as circular economy, regenerative business, sufficiency-orientated business, strongly sustainable business and so on, there also appears critique towards this new trend. Fellow humans assume, for example, that a new trend is greenwashing, apolitical etc. Personally, while (like anyone else) I can see various issues with different trends, I am also excited about them. I believe it's possible to criticise something with empathy and even gentleness. The goal of such critique can be finding common ground, working together, listening others' perspectives, and reconciling different theories. We should not automatically assume that someone knows less or that they do not want sustainability.
As frugal living is not new, so the practices that the underconsumption core trend shows have been around for ages. Many of these practices are something my grandmother was doing, and she would never refer to these practices as underconsumption core. And yet, I like this trend. In the end of the day, it doesn't matter so much to me what some trend is called. Underconsumption core, degrowth living, sustainable living, simple living, voluntary simplicity or something else. Personally I define my lifestyle as a constellation of various practices. There is no perfect label for my lifestyle. Even when it comes to my own field (degrowth), I am not attached to the label degrowth itself. It sounds somewhat better in Danish (modvækst, counter-growth), but generally degrowth is not a beautiful or inviting word. And it's still used mostly by academics. When a businessperson says to me that they want business to be operated more on feminine principles or that they want their business to be regenerative, I do not consider them apolitical, I listen with interest.
I can see why underconsumption core is criticised. For example, some would say that it (over)emphasises aesthetics (core). Others might not like a lack of defining what under-consumption actually means. That is to say, what is underconsumption for some is normal for others.
As for aesthetics, some do not like it when the question of aesthetics is brought into discussions about sustainability. They would say that sustainability is not an aesthetic, it is about urgent, actual change. I agree that genuinely sustainability requires real, individual and collective actions in all three domains of society (civil society, state, business). And that it is not about perfectly matching glass jars and beautiful cotton tote bags and metal straws. But it doesn't have to be an either/or situation. We do not have to choose between urgent actions and contemplating aesthetics of sustainable living and sustainable societies. For example, we can start seeing beauty in old and repaired items, in ageing, in overgrown gardens, in small spaces, in walks. For me, the aesthetic component of my extremely minimalist living is very important. When I live with less than 50 personal possessions, 10 items of clothing, and only a few pieces of furniture, it brings me joy that everything is beautiful (to me).
As for defining underconsumption more concretely, I think it is a humbling question to contemplate, but it is not necessarily something that discredits the trend. Oftentimes we say that in our society (I live in Denmark), we overconsume severely. And we do as a society, but there are many modes of living even within this society, and there are many different needs. In the academic field of degrowth, we do not have an answer to what normal or perfect/ideal consumption is. I don't think we will ever have it. I consume differently in different stages of my life. At some moments, when I was ill, I was consuming more medicine. I live an extremely minimalist life, and to some it appears as if I under-consume. But what I live with is lagom for me, and even more than I need. When I lived in Finland, I lived without furniture and electric appliances. So what I consume now is more than I used to consume.
I like the underconsumption core trend as something creating a space where people can share and celebrate their stories and their (and their grandmothers'!) sustainability practices. I hope that this trend grows and helps us start more conversations, networks and alternative organisations. One organisation that comes to mind is a byttestation (swap shop). I can envision many more of them in different spaces. They would allow people to consume less of new items and share objects with others.