The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Live Better by Consuming Less?: Is There a “Double Dividend” in Sustainable Consumption?
Abstract
Summary: Industrial ecology has mainly been concerned with improving the efficiency of production systems. But addressing consumption is also vital in reducing the impact of society on its environment. The concept of sustainable consumption is a response to this. But the debates about sustainable consumption can only really be understood in the context of much wider and deeper debates about consumption and about consumer behavior itself. This article explores some of these wider debates. In particular, it draws attention to a fundamental disagreement that runs through the literature on consumption and haunts the debate on sustainable consumption: the question of whether, or to what extent, consumption can be taken as “good for us.” Some approaches assume that increasing consumption is more or less synonymous with improved well‐being: the more we consume the better off we are. Others argue, just as vehemently, that the scale of consumption in modern society is both environmentally and psychologically damaging, and that we could reduce consumption significantly without threatening the quality of our lives. This second viewpoint suggests that a kind of “double dividend” is inherent in sustainable consumption: the ability to live better by consuming less and reduce our impact on the environment in the process. In the final analysis, this article argues, such “win‐win” solutions may exist but will require a concerted societal effort to realize.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Becker, G. S. (1991) · doi:10.4159/9780674020665 · Cited by 10,565
Possessions and the Extended Self
Belk, R. W. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209154 · Cited by 9,064
A New Approach to Consumer Theory
Lancaster, K. J. (1966) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/259131 · Cited by 8,471
Culture and Consumption: New Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities
Mccracken, G. (1990) · doi:10.2979/1450.0 · Cited by 1,058
Supply Loops and Their Constraints: The Industrial Ecology of Recycling and Reuse
Geyer, R., & Jackson, T. (2004) · California Management Review · doi:10.2307/41166210 · Cited by 281
Self-citation
Cited by
Green Consumption: Behavior and Norms
Peattie, K. (2010) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-032609-094328 · Cited by 964
Material efficiency: A white paper
Allwood, J. M., Ashby, M. F., Gutowski, T. G., & Worrell, E. (2011) · Resources, Conservation and Recycling · doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.11.002 · Cited by 927
Assessing the intention-behavior gap in electronic waste recycling: the case of Brazil
Echegaray, F., & Hansstein, F. V. (2017) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.064 · Cited by 509
How psychology can help limit climate change.
Nielsen, K. S., Clayton, S., Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Capstick, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2021) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/amp0000624 · Cited by 373
de Boer, J., Schösler, H., & Aiking, H. (2014) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2014.02.002 · Cited by 355
Metadata
- Authors
- Jackson, T.
- Venue
- Journal of Industrial Ecology
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 19-36
- ISSN
- 1088-1980 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-9290
- OpenAlex
- W1978856606
- Cited by
- 538
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 73.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Live Better by Consuming Less?: Is There a “Double Dividend” in Sustainable Consumption? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/1088198054084734
- The paper
- Jackson, T. (2005). Live Better by Consuming Less?: Is There a “Double Dividend” in Sustainable Consumption? Journal of Industrial Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1162/1088198054084734
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.