2.2. Alternatives to Utility Maximization Explanations
Social scientists outside of economics, as well as some heterodox economists, have tended to take it as given that straightforward utilitarian considerations, anchored to the functional characteristics of products, fail to account fully for modern consumption practices, and have suggested alternative explanations. These may be loosely categorized into behavioral-psychological explanations, social status explanations, cultural accounts, and various forms of Marxism.43 In what follows I briefly consider whether these approaches (taking one or two theoretical accounts as exemplars for each) do a better job at explaining the pattern of productivity, work time, and consumption under capitalism.
2.2.1. Behavioral Economics
Recent work in psychology and behavioral economics has sought to jettison, or at least relax, some of the more unrealistic assumptions of neoclassical economics, especially those underlying the homo economicus model of the economic agent. The aim has been to develop an approach to economic behavior based on a more plausible, evidence-led theory of the human subject.44 Behavioral theories of economic action present a very diferent picture of the consumer, and by extension of consumer society, than standard economic theory, one grounded in actual empirical studies of how people behave. Perhaps, therefore, behavioral economics can explain the apparent materialistic bias suggested by the pattern of work and consumption characteristic of advanced industrial capitalism.
An early, influential example of an economic approach to consumption that is informed by psychology is found in the work of Tibor Scitovsky. Working within a behavioral psychological framework, Scitovsky (1992) suggests a theory to account for the irrationalities of consumerism. For Scitovsky, commodities produce utility along two dimensions. They can be endowed with a potential to produce functional utility—for example, the capacity of a chair to yield a certain amount of sitting utility before becoming worn out. But they can also be endowed with a potential to provide various forms of stimulation for the consumer. According to Scitovsky, in afluent industrial societies the capacity of things to stimulate people typically gets exhausted before their functional capabilities wear out. Put simply, people become bored with their still functional possessions and so seek out new and more stimulating ones. The psychologist Barry Schwartz makes a similar point in his work on the discontents associated with consumer sovereignty. He comments: “When the brief period of real enthusiasm and pleasure wanes, people still have these things [consumer durables] around them—as a constant reminder that consumption isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, that expectations aren’t met by reality” (Schwartz 2004, p. 172).
32
Time for Things