Purchasing, it's like voting
A short reflection on the purchasing decision and responsibility.
The choice and especially the act of purchasing is surprisingly analogous to the act of voting. It is a clear expression of approval and endorsement, notwithstanding the influence of missing information. The same way one casts a vote for a political party, thus demonstrating approval and support for it, one selects a product among many others, compares, examines utility and benefits.
But, as the vote signals acceptance of a political party and its methods, a similar signal is sent to the producer of a product one purchases. For instance, buying a fur coat automatically flags your approval on the production process (skinning animals), especially considering the alternative of a synthetic coat. A similar approach can be applied to the preference of chemically-intensive detergents to softer, more human and environmental-friendly products, or the purchase of the product of a firm that is known for underpaying its employees.
Every act of purchasing gives economical power to the producing firm and broadcasts the message to "Go on!" the same way a vote gives political power and brings the party one step closer to be the governing player and exercise its agenda.
An analogy can be also found in the aspect of hidden information for the decision maker, be it a voter or a customer. Both firms and political parties withhold part of the information that might lead the decision makers to choose a competitor. Therefore, until the day firms and political parties are fully transparent and well-intentioned, voters and customers respectively bear a greater responsibility. This endorsement, if given by an adequately high number of consumers, ensures the further production and promotion of the given product, no matter its effects on social, economic or environmental viability. An increase in consumption clearly points toward an increase of production.
The societal and environmental challenges of today are shapping a new future that we might not entirely like. The once assumed granted resources are now - duly - considered scarce. In the simplified ecosystem of firms and consumers, the latter group has always been considered more passive, subject to intense research and marketing. The truth, however, lies beyond the price attractiveness and the promotional persuasion techniques. Purchasing carries the immense responsibility to shape better, fairer and more sustainable markets, bottom-up, and consumers will have to assume this responsibility while there is still time.
Founder and CPO
6yYes I agree, the analogy is great and achieving full transparency will empower consumers with more free thinking, resulting in an increase of sustainable purchase choices, however in my opinion transparency is not the only obstacle: unfortunately still an important percentage of people do not act rationally, not towards a political vote not towards a purchase. No matter how much evidence exists, people still harm themselves and others...see history as reference. Since people are lazy, the challange is to find a maietuic communication (see the Socratic method) that we shall call "sustainable communitation" that is effective accross everyone, so that the amunt of effort is spread across all, and the burden of information does not rely only on the company or the consumers but also on investors, governments and a wider spectrum of stakeholders where everyone is responsible and can be hold accountable.