Ursula Bergmooser

ENGL 145

28 May 2007

Cal Poly Student Consumption Patterns

Student consumption patterns are in desperate need of a shift towards sustainability. From the clothes we wear to the way we furnish our homes, most college students are looking for the cheapest way to keep themselves and their apartments looking chic. With discount stores like Wal-Mart and convenient shopping malls offering almost everything, it is easy to see why we live in a materialistic world. Low-income college students are not looking to shell out extra money for environmentally friendly products when they can find cheaper products elsewhere. Cal Poly has embraced the idea of sustainability by starting a recycling plan, offering free public transportation, adding sustainability related courses to the curriculum, building an organic farm, constructing sustainable buildings and expanding campus awareness. But outside of campus, students are getting mixed signals—while their professors advocate sustainability, students are surrounded by the endless array of shopping stores online and downtown. By incorporating sustainable practices into their consumption patterns, college students can make an environmental impact.

College students shop at warehouse stores like Wal-Mart, Ikea and factory outlets because they offer customers the ability to “live in style” at “always low prices” (Wal-Mart). Low-income Cal Poly student Jeff Foster stated that their prices “appeal to people our ages”. Another reason for Wal-Mart’s popularity is their convenience. Jeff Foster says he shops at Wal-Mart because it has “everything in one store.” Wal-Mart fulfills grocery, electronic, hardware, clothing, athletic and pharmacy needs in one convenient location. Although Wal-Mart is not physically located in San Luis Obispo, their products are available online and the nearest store can be found within a half hour drive.

While Wal-Mart offers convenience and low prices, Wal-Mart factories in China have recently been under scrutiny after the National Labor Committee released a report stating that workers at Colorful Children’s Toys have been working 13-15 hour shifts with “few safety precautions” receiving payment “well below the legal minimum” (China Labor Watch). In 2004, Wal-Mart was fined $150,000 in Georgia for water contamination, $765,000 in Florida for “violating petroleum storage tank laws at its automobile service centers,” and $3.1 million for “violation the Clean Water Act in 9 states” (Wake Up Wal-Mart). Wal-Mart’s lack of concern for their employee’s well-being and their disregard for the environment causes speculation as to why Wal-Mart is ranked as Fortune 500’s most profitable and largest corporation in 2007 (CNN). The answer is that consumers would rather spend less money to buy from a store that extorts from their workers than spend more money to support a company grounded in sustainability. In response to recent demands for sustainable products, Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott introduced his Sustainability 360 plan—a shift towards more sustainable business practices. Scott’s goal is to “make environmentally friendly products more affordable and available to customers” and to “save people money so they can live better lives” (Wal-Mart). However, the affordable products that Scott promises are only made possible by outsourcing. Outsourcing translates to “more greenhouse-gas emitting transportation needs than if the products were made closer to home” as well as the shortchanging of outsourced workers like those at Colorful Children’s Toys in order to deliver cheaper products to Wal-Mart customers (MSNBC).

Vastly opposite from Wal-Mart is the outdoor clothing and gear company, Patagonia. Students should choose to shop at Patagonia and stores similar to Patagonia because their products are sustainable and a portion of the money spent by the consumer goes towards helping our environment. The goal of Patagonia is to “build the best product, do no unnecessary harm and use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis” (Patagonia Japan). The environment-friendly fabrics that Patagonia uses to produce their clothing line are made of “100 percent recycled or recyclable fabrics” (Patagonia). Unlike many companies who focus on appealing to customers, Patagonia focuses on the sustainability of the environment and then tailors their products to their customers. Kevin Hougen stated, “companies like Patagonia have got it right…they make great products that benefit the environment.” Patagonia provides environmental grants to nonprofit organizations and has given “more than $20 million to more than 1,000 organizations” (Patagonia). Since 1985 Patagonia has given over 25 million dollars through their One Percent For The Planet campaign. This campaign is “an alliance of companies that recognize the true cost of doing business and donate 1% of their sales to environmental organizations worldwide” (1% For The Planet). Additionally, in 1989 Patagonia co-founded the Conservation Alliance that has given a total of $3,808,750 to support environmental projects. Although Patagonia donates a large portion of their revenues, they still turn a substantial profit. This is because organic retail sales in the United States have “grown between 20% and 24% each year since 1990” (Organic Consumers). With such high revenues going towards sustainable industries and “39% of the U.S. population” purchasing organic products, companies who don’t make an effort to change will be left behind (Organic Consumers).

Unfortunately, stores like Patagonia are not as popular among college students as brands such as Nike, Abercrombie and GAP. When asked why, freshman students Kelsey Huffines and Danielle Perrot agreed that Patagonia clothing is not fashionable, mostly unheard of and expensive. Being fashionable is defined as “conforming to the current style” (American Heritage Dictionary). However the need to be in style is an idea established by the media and company advertisements. On average, college students watch an estimated “24.3 hours of television a week” during which they see countless advertisements and strategic product placements (New York Times). In comparison to the styles students see in magazines and on television, Patagonia is not “fashionable” and not as well known. Students have a preconceived notion that all environmentally friendly clothing is unfashionable.

Students claim they shop at Wal-Mart because they want to save money and that stores like Patagonia are too expensive; yet these same students would rather pay $80 for a fashionable pair of torn jeans at Abercrombie and Fitch than pay $50 for a multifunctional, waterproof and durable pair of environmentally friendly pants from Patagonia. This quandary is the root of consumerism. Why do students shell out hundreds of dollars for fashionable clothing when they barely have enough money to pay for necessities and many are facing student loan fees? When asked why they shop at Abercrombie, Huffines and Perrot agreed that “it’s important to look cute” even though Perrot admitted to taking out student loans to afford college tuition. Because their social identity is linked with their consumerism, students continue to shop at stores like Abercrombie. However if students were to shop at stores that sell organic, natural and recycled products or shop at thrift and vintage stores they could make an environmental impact. Salvaging used clothing is a great way to recycle and save money. It’s also important to “shop with a plan” in order to eliminate impulse buying (Treehugger). Otherwise, donating to consignment stores or the Salvation Army is an excellent way of reusing unwanted clothes.

While students insist on shopping at warehouse stores like Wal-Mart for their low prices, students ironically have no problem shelling out the money at pricey stores like Abercrombie. This cycle of splurging and saving is the reason student consumption patterns lack sustainability. Taking sustainable courses at Cal Poly is only the first step towards a sustainable future; the next step is practicing sustainability in the ways we act as consumers.

References

Chase, Geoffrey and Peggy Barlett. Sustainability on Campus: Stories and Strategies for Change. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 2004.

“Colorful Children’s Toys.” China Labor Watch. 21 December 2005. 22 May 2007. http://www.chinalaborwatch.org/en/web/article.php?article_id=50306

Dicamillo, Kara. “Sustainable Clothing.” Treehugger. 15 June 2006. 18 May 2007. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/06/blue_lotus_sust.php

“Fashionable.” American Heritage Dictionary. 5 June 2007. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fashionable

“Fortune 500.” CNN Money. 6 June 2007. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/index.html

Jana, Reena. “Organic Consumers.” Organic Consumers Association: Business Week Covers the Major Growth in Organic Clothing Sales. 27 September 2006. 20 May 2007. http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_2877.cfm

Linn, Allison. “Wal-Mart pushes suppliers to ‘go green’.” MSNBC. 18 April 2007. 5 June 2007. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18056716/

Low, Nicholas. The Green City: Sustainable Homes, Sustainable Suburbs. New York: Rutledge/Taylor & Francis. 2005.

“One Percent for the Planet.” 1% For The Planet. 22 May 2007. http://www.onepercentfortheplanet.org/za/en_us?PAGE=HOME

“Organic View.” Organic Consumers Association. 2006. 22 May 2007. http://www.organicconsumers.org/newsletter/OV06spring.htm

“Patagonia US.” Patagonia. 19 May 2007. http://www.patagonia.com/usa/contribution/enviro.jsp?OPTION=ENVIRO_ARTICLE_DISPLAY_HANDLER&assetid=1809

“Patagonia Japan.” Corporations at Work: Business Sector. 19 May 2007. http://www.japanfs.org/en/business/corporations52.html

“Real Facts About Wal-Mart.” Wake-Up Wal-Mart. 22 May 2007. http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/facts/

“Measuring TV Habits of College Students.” The New York Times. 20 February 2006. 5 June 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/20/business/media/20nielsen.html

“Unsustainable Patterns.” UN Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs: Division for Sustainable Development. 16 May 2007. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/WSSD_POI_PD/English/POIChapter3.htm

Waller-Hunter, Jake. “Sustainable Development.” OECD Observer. August 2002. 19 May 2007. http://www.oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/721/Sustainable_development.html

“Wal-Mart.” Sustainability 360 Unveiled. 19 May 2007. http://walmartstores.com/GlobalWMStoresWeb/navigate.do?catg=691

“Why People Buy Things They Don’t Need.” Fast Company. 19 May 2007. http://www.fastcompany.com/bookclub/excerpts/0793186021.html

Interviews

Foster, Jeff. Personal Interview. May 25 2007.

Hougen, Kevin. Personal Interview. May 25 2007.

Huffines, Kelsey. Danielle Perrot. Interview. June 5 2007.