Can addressing over-consumption save our planet?

6 min readJun 25, 2019

The moment I bring up the topic of over-consumption of material goods in any conversation, I feel that I am being perceived as someone with an anti-development agenda. However, nothing could be further from the truth. For me, the issue of over-consumption needs attention at the highest levels in government and corporations as it has a significant hand in environmental destruction including climate change while making inconsequential impact on well-being and long term happiness.

Let me first define what I mean by ‘over-consumption’. We all find many products as superfluous without meeting any real need. Of course, marketeers are very effective in persuading that we will be miserable if we do not have them. I believe we are wasting precious human effort and creativity in producing different types of ineffective soap, toothpaste, cleaning agents and cosmetics that do not help but are potentially harmful for the environment; candy, breakfast cereals, packaged snacks, processed food and beverages with poor nutritional value; fast fashion clothing; avoidable cluttery furniture; frivolous household goods and appliances. The consumption is further exacerbated as products are made in such a way that they have a short lifespan by deliberately designing them to fail after some time (planned obsolescence) and creating a perception that they need to be replaced by influencing fashion trends (perceived obsolescence) causing over-consumption.

Overproduction and over-consumption of material goods has caused serious destruction across the planet. To make these products, it takes natural resources that are extracted through mining or grown resulting in exploitation of finite natural resources, deforestation, loss of biodiversity and local ecosystem collapse. The production process generally involves prodigious amount of freshwater depleting groundwater and exacerbating water stress. The energy used to make these things is largely produced from non-renewable fossil fuels adding to global warming and climate change. Furthermore, all of this consumption entails insane amounts of packaging waste.

Countless surveys and scientific studies have revealed that once the basic needs are met, buying material things does not result in any marked improvement in well-being. The excitement of a new thing wears off quickly. For instance, the pleasure one derives from a high end mobile phone or a designer suite wears off in a few days and leaves the consumer unsatiated and craving for more new things. Yet, a lot of us find ourselves trapped in this vicious cycle of working hard to be able to buy things that one does not need, that do not add to the quality of life and do not result in sustained enhancement in well-being.

In return for these serious losses, it is assumed that the local people in producer countries benefit from it through employment which improves quality of life and reduces poverty. Yet again, there is ample evidence that market economy mechanisms have failed miserably in uplifting incomes for the poorest.

Now that we have established that neither nature, nor producer or consumer benefit from mindless production and consumption of unnecessary goods, let’s ask — why does it happen? I would like to submit that all this evolved gradually as corporations wanted to grow, which is what the current economic system demands and rewards, they started making more and more consumer products while creating demand for them through aggressive and almost mind altering marketing leading people to believe that they need these products. Many of these purchases never get used and most of them are disposed off within a year. What a waste. Speaking of waste, these products come in copious amount of single use, highly resource intensive packaging. Moreover, in the name of convenience and access, companies have come up with small multi-layered non-recyclable sachets that have further polluted our soil, water and seas.

When we talk about reducing impact, companies and government are still not questioning what is produced and how useful some of these products are. It seems as though there is a sacred law of ‘market economy’ and ‘consumer choice’ that cannot be questioned. We forget that laws of market economy are broken all the time when it suits large corporations or governments’ interest. For instance, the major bailout of banks by the US government after 2008 financial meltdown instead of letting them fail as per the free market principles. And consumer demand is highly manipulable and hardly an accurate gauge of well-being of individual, society and the planet. Corporations’ command over consumer psychology has advanced tremendously. High-end stores like Gucci have figured out that customers are more inclined to buy expensive products if a salesperson acts snottily with them. And grocery stores are often laid out unintuitively as research indicates that losing focus makes people spend more on impulse purchases.

I ask of corporates to reflect on their business model and question what they are really producing. They should deeply reflect if their products help consumers to become truly happier and healthier; contribute to the society as a whole; perpetuate equality; and seriously consider their impact on natural resources and other life forms. One approach could be integrating the triple bottom-line of People, Planet and Profit in evaluating business performance.

I think corporates are deluding themselves and consumers if they do not question their present business model that is based on mindless consumption and growth backed by planned and perceived obsolescence.

We are told that this consumption and growth is necessary to protect the jobs of millions of people. This is based on the 20th century mindset which is not ‘fit for purpose’ in the current context of climate change, resource depletion, loss of biodiversity and water stress that threaten life itself on this planet.

Once we get out of this frame of thinking, I am convinced there is a potential for millions of new jobs to regenerate and revive the planet, to provide all kinds of services to each other and to create innovative low impact products.

The carpet company Interface turned around its business model where it now aspires for its products to be completely renewable, cyclical, and benign by 2020. Patagonia is another consumer product organisation that has been pushing the boundaries on sustainability and social impact. We need all businesses to move in this direction quickly if we are to avert the imminent climate and ecological crises. Time is running out.

The UK government has made a great start by recommending, among other things, 1% tax in order to end the era of throwaway clothes and poor working conditions in the fashion supply chain. This needs to be done for every wasteful sector in every country. Nothing less will suffice.

Going forward corporations, governments and consumers should consider the following:

Corporations should help consumers in buying less and not the other way round. They could use marketing and media to reverse mindless consumption.
Corporations should invest in technologies that incorporate closed loop and circular economy principles.
Corporations should consider innovative business models that are based on modular products (instead of throwaway) and service based solutions such as product-leasing so that it is in their interest to make it last longer.
Corporations should turn around their business model to make products that are truly useful for the consumer, society and the planet.
Corporations should stop marketing campaigns that promote perceived obsolescence such as items of fast fashion and furniture
Corporations should commit to not develop products with planned obsolescence, such as electronic and electrical products
Government should levy heavy taxes on mindless consumption like UK is considering on fast fashion.

Interesting reads

Can addressing over-consumption save our planet?

Written by Minhaj Ameen