NYTimes: How Gen Z Is Shopping

[Philip Vergragt]

Hi SCORAI-ers,

Interesting article about the more sustainable shopping habits of Gen Z:

 

How Gen Z Is Shopping https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/28/briefing/how-gen-z-is-shopping.html?smid=nytcore-android-share

 

Get Outlook for Android

[Richard Rosen]

I doubt that this will have a measurable impact on greenhouse gas emissions.  ----  Rich Rosen

--
* Subscribe to this mailing list: scorai+s...@googlegroups.com
* SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
* Subscribe to the SCORAI newsletter: https://scorai.net/newsletter
* Submit an item to the next newsletter: newsl...@scorai.net
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/MN0PR20MB746449B698E524FAB0D531A5AADCA%40MN0PR20MB7464.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.

[Ashwani Vasishth]

Perhaps it is long past time we stopped looking for that one grand solution.  Many strokes for many folks and every little bit may be all we have.

Because "overshoot" is not a single problem, so to expect a single solution is to keep our engineering blinders on.  Firmly.

-- 

     Ashwani
        Vasishth         vasi...@ramapo.edu          (323) 206-1858 (cell)
                 https://www.linkedin.com/in/vasishth/
          --------------------------------------------------------
                  Professor of Sustainability (RETIRED)

                      http://ramapo.edu/ramapo-green
                  https://www.linkedin.com/groups/8272006/

              Co-founder and Advisor, Sustainable Jersey City
                       http://www.sustainablejc.org

You can ALWAYS set up an Appointment with me, without negotiation, seven days a week,
                 at: calendly.com/vasishth/google-meet-30

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAMZghTbcUYnnZcJ9DgOYjtbsqDMPMxfpbVSBG2LbbA%2BPYX85ww%40mail.gmail.com.

[Halina Brown]

The point is not the impacts on greenhouse gas emissions, but,  rather, can this ternd significantly contribute to a   cultural transition toward less consumerism. The question is open.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAMZghTbcUYnnZcJ9DgOYjtbsqDMPMxfpbVSBG2LbbA%2BPYX85ww%40mail.gmail.com.

[Richard Rosen]

Sorry, Halina, but in my view mitigating climate change is vastly more important than changing consumer culture. In fact, if climate change is not rapidly slowed, the damage to the world economy and mass human deaths, will quickly reduce consumerism, since most people will get even poorer than they are today. --- Rich

[Vasishth, Ashwani]

Halina, this is, I agree, a time for all viable and defensible interventions to be on our tables.

But.  Open question?…..good luck with that.  

strictly my US-centric, India-rooted personal view.  And I listen occasionally Bloomberg News and NPR’s Marketplace.  Consumers are 60% of all US spending.

Both countries, US and India at least, are trending elsewhere.  Seems to me unstoppable.  Of course, we must modulate.  I don’t see a way to get consumerism to trend differently. 

I’ve been a fan most of my life, of positive thinking.  I still am, in many ways.  But on this (and overshoot), I don’t see a path. 

The only block from apathy is the held certainty that the “status quo” conditions WILL reset.  We are merely sub-systems—full of ourselves and our power to destroy or to save—nested within our particular ecosphere.

-- 
    Ashwani
       Vasishth      
Professor of Sustainability (Retired) from Ramapo College of New Jersey
vasi...@ramapo.edu         
(323) 206-1858 (cell)
                  
http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~vasishth

You can ALWAYS set up an Appointment with me, without negotiation, seven days a week, at: 
calendly.com/vasishth/google-meet-30

On Fri, Nov 28, 2025 at 3:18 PM Halina Brown <HBr...@clarku.edu> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/SJ0PR03MB71271D481A16F3D3708940E7ACDCA%40SJ0PR03MB7127.namprd03.prod.outlook.com.

[JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF]

it's worse than that.  Consumer spending is 68-70 percent of the economy depending on the year.

John de Graaf

www.johndegraaf.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAOAXOUW-oiNi0h%3DYxz8GuRnOoGfAjUqsR2h3hMtY%2BszYz0Fefw%40mail.gmail.com.

[JOHN DE GRAAF,* JOHN DE GRAAF]

Richard, I suspect that Halina knows that upwards of 50% of carbon emssions are embedded in consumer products, an amount higher than transportation, heating etc.  One study in Portland, OR found that those activities accounted for only 44% of the city's carbon responsibility.  Consumer products accounted for the rest  But this sleight of hand, which you are inadvertantly contributing too, allows us to pretend that that the US is not the biggest cause of climate change.  All the greenhouse gases that China and others emit in making our products should be charged to us, as should the emissions connected with transport across the oceans.  It's not either or.  

 

Consumerism still matters big time as Halina pointed out.

 

best,

John

John de Graaf

www.johndegraaf.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAMZghTaJjR5QvS_p7skzzrTWjz8K5hQmwHZRjM6OwnaEcs4fAQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Joe Zammit-Lucia]

Dear John,

What do you mean by 'consumerism'

The current ratio of consumption between services and goods is approximately 65:35. Services now account for more than two-thirds of US economic activity.

In May 2025, services spending increased by $19.9 billion while goods spending decreased by $49.2 billion

Are Chinese goods, and their transport, really 'the problem'?

We could urge people also to decrease their consumption of services. In which case, what are we all supposed to do with our lives?

Best

Joe

Dr Joe Zammit-Lucia

+44 7398 353 404

jo...@me.com

Follow my regular 'Random Thoughts' newsletter here

newpoliticalcapitalism.com I get on Amazon

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/443244354.28021.1764371966830%40connect.xfinity.com.

[Richard Rosen]

My point was vague but different.  People, who are relatively poor, have always bought things second hand. Nothing new there. --- Rich

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/f0NMX2OACt5eWpbIOI11ATobx3njnuSFnM_0CC_-TC_7DTZghSeqzbL1WkBI_26l%40ip-10-0-8-242.cloze.com.

[Jean Boucher]

Hi Joe,

   Nice stat/ratio! That's monetary value, right?  Just checking as we know that manufacturing (goods) is far more energy and emissions intensive than services, and of course, there's some overlap in there.

Jean

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAMZghTa97DZdCyQGEba5WMT%2BTWjihe9b-Aq3SkEG8UjdJhRA-w%40mail.gmail.com.

[Joe Zammit-Lucia]

Dear Jean,

Yes it is. 

Of course it’s more complicated that my simple statistics suggest. Many manufactures now come with added services (maintenance contracts, insurance, etc) so it’s really hard to separate cleanly. 

In Europe we’ve more or less messed up our net zero strategies. We have destroyed our manufacturing industries (with consequent political and social issues and the inevitable backlash) and, while boasting about our own reduced emissions, we now import all those emissions in Chinese goods made using coal and oil powered energy. Great job! 

Best

Joe

Dr Joe Zammit-Lucia

+44 7398 353 404

jo...@me.com

Follow my regular 'Random Thoughts' newsletter here

newpoliticalcapitalism.com I get on Amazon

On 29 Nov 2025 at 15:21 Jean Boucher <jlb...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Joe,

   Nice stat/ratio! That's monetary value, right?  Just checking as we know that manufacturing (goods) is far more energy and emissions intensive than services, and of course, there's some overlap in there.

Jean

On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 10:16 AM Richard Rosen <richard...@gmail.com> wrote:

My point was vague but different.  People, who are relatively poor, have always bought things second hand. Nothing new there. --- Rich

On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 6:54 AM 'Joe Zammit-Lucia' via SCORAI <sco...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Dear John,

What do you mean by 'consumerism'

The current ratio of consumption between services and goods is approximately 65:35. Services now account for more than two-thirds of US economic activity.

In May 2025, services spending increased by $19.9 billion while goods spending decreased by $49.2 billion

Are Chinese goods, and their transport, really 'the problem'?

We could urge people also to decrease their consumption of services. In which case, what are we all supposed to do with our lives?

Best

Joe

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CA%2BsiMmi9SGqPy5Xb8GuqvjriH73LmPW1-e5RnceQ79nUjLsRpQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Robert Rattle]

Hi Joe,

In response to your question "are [foreign] goods and their transport really the problem"; Mokhtarian and many others have shown the close positive relationship between transport and internet use/communication. Given the roles of data, data centres, and AI in the global economy (communication services - the 'immaterial' internet), I would suggest that services have been supercharged as both a material and energy product. Services are material consumption.

The positive relationship between transport and communications is an example of what I term 'first order effects'. There are identified second, third and fourth order effects largely neglected in the consideration of the energy and material demands of digital technologies (services). For example, the data collected by these systems when a consumer makes a purchase (or even connects to the internet) are used not only to market further consumer goods, but used to design and apply systems that directly manipulate individual and group behaviour for profit (e.g. algorithmic manipulation that drives consumerism). Second order effect. From a service. (The surveillance economy/capitalism would be a third order effect of digitalisation - a communication service - that facilitates second and first order 'consumerism')

Most internet service users have little to no idea what they are revealing, giving away, when they connect.

We could use the simple example of e-commerce - and ironically the current date as of yesterday (black friday) as generating both first and second order consumer (material) effects simultaneously helping to propel third order effects.

Others probably have much more to say about 'services' as a delinking mirage.

As for your final question: localise, simplify and sufficiency supported by the policies and infrastructure that make these the default consumer choice - with the caveat that they challenge the doctrine of growthism.

[Ashwani Vasishth]

Dear Joe,

"....urge people also to decrease their consumption of services. In which case, what are we all supposed to do with our lives?"

Isn't that the root problem?  Consumption (in all it's forms) does define us and who we are.

As for "goods and services," Is there not a case to be made for using material stuff?  Many "services" require goods to bring to market?

There used to be a conversation about "dematerialization."  This is a great Idea, but, surely, but even in a “service economy,” most services depend on physical infrastructures, devices, buildings, and energy systems, so they are tightly coupled to material goods even if they are less material‑intensive per dollar of output than manufacturing.

-- 

     Ashwani
        Vasishth         vasi...@ramapo.edu          (323) 206-1858 (Cell Phone)
                   http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~vasishth

          --------------------------------------------------------
                   Professor of Sustainability (RETIRED)
                      http://ramapo.edu/ramapo-green

                     http://ramapo.edu/sustainability

You can ALWAYS set up an Appointment with me, without negotiation, seven days a week,
           at: https://calendly.com/vasishth/half-hour-webex-meeting

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/f0NMX2OACt5eWpbIOI11ATobx3njnuSFnM_0CC_-TC_7DTZghSeqzbL1WkBI_26l%40ip-10-0-8-242.cloze.com.

[Joe Zammit-Lucia]

Dear Robert,

Thank you for that helpful explanation. 

I agree re the localise and simplify - though now that’s easier said than done given where we’re starting from. 

Re challenging growthism, good luck with that. It’s many decades since the original Club of Rome report. It has had essentially zero practical impact. 

The reality is that we don’t know how to do no growth economies without the attendant political and social problems that would unleash. We have to find another way. 

Today there is no nation in the world (to my knowledge) that has embraced successfully and willingly the idea of no economic growth. I don’t see that changing I’m afraid. 

Practicable ideas welcome. 

Best

Joe

Dr Joe Zammit-Lucia

+44 7398 353 404

jo...@me.com

Follow my regular 'Random Thoughts' newsletter here

newpoliticalcapitalism.com I get on Amazon

--

* Subscribe to this mailing list: scorai+s...@googlegroups.com
* SCORAI website: https://scorai.net
* Subscribe to the SCORAI newsletter: https://scorai.net/newsletter
* Submit an item to the next newsletter: newsl...@scorai.net
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/1121973029.1185454.1764431835887%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Joe Zammit-Lucia]

Dear Ashwani,

I agree. Consumption does define us. As it has more or less forever. 

This is not a ‘problem’ that has glib solutions. It’s a conundrum - and conundrums don’t have easy solutions - if at all. 

Best

Joe

Dr Joe Zammit-Lucia

+44 7398 353 404

jo...@me.com

Follow my regular 'Random Thoughts' newsletter here

newpoliticalcapitalism.com I get on Amazon