The Polarization of Lifestyles: Social Class and Consumption in the U.S.

Transcription

1 The Polarization of Lifestyles: Social Class and Consumption in the U.S. Ivaylo D. Petev Stanford University RC 28 Summer Meeting, Montreal August

2 Debunking the Consumption Society Myth: Hedonist Hypothesis Consumer Democratization: Post-Fordist/Death of Class Argument Industrial => Service Economy: rise of leisure consumption Mass consumption => Market segmentation: target all social groups Lower income barriers (e.g., rise in consumer credits; price differentiation) Lower education barriers (e.g., explosion of popular culture) Lower differences in employment experience (i.e., expansion of service sector) Decline in class identities (e.g., decline in unionizing; change in partisan politics) Generalization of the Hedonistic Consumption Lifestyle From Necessity-driven consumption to Leisure-driven consumption Decline in collective, Class Identities; Rise in Idiosyncratic Identities Consumer Lifestyles: Increasingly similar on the aggregate level (e.g., leisure vs. necessities) Increasingly idiosyncratic on the micro-level (e.g., positional goods [Hirsch 76; Frank 99])

3 Debunking the Consumption Society Myth: Restratification Hypothesis Consumer Democratization: Class Inequality Argument Rise of Commodification => strong interdependence between consumption inequality & inequality in the production sphere Rise in Class Inequality: Occupational polarization (e.g., deskilling, unionizing, job security) Rise in wage inequality and credit debt Rise in non-leisure spending (e.g., housing, transportation, health) Restratification of Consumption Lifestyles Polarization of lifestyles along the Leisure/Non-Leisure Divide and Across Social Class Differences

4 Hypotheses Hedonist Hypothesis Restratification Hypothesis Lifestyle Changes Inequality in Leisure Consumption Decrease Increase Strong Test Weak Test Strong Test Weak Test Stratification Effects Social Class No statistical significance Decline No decline Statistical significance

5 Methodological Note on Consumption Research: Correctives to Convention Revisit the measure of lifestyles: Convention: regression analysis one dependent variable at a time Corrective: Latent-Class regression analysis lifestyles as packages of unit practices Revisit the focus on consumption practices: Convention: exclusive focus on conspicuous consumption (e.g., music; fashion; art) Corrective: include inconspicuous consumption (e.g., food; furniture; electricity) Revisit the understanding of agency: Convention: individual consumption decisions, tastes Corrective: household consumption as the foundation to individual lifestyles Revisit the focus on consumption actions: Convention: focus on short-term, immediate consumption (e.g., dining, concerts) Corrective: include long-term consumption, investment (e.g., equipment, mortgage)

6 Sample Data Information U.S. Consumer Expenditure Survey (household level): Interview Survey Sample: annual rotating, cross-sectional samples Congressional Budget Office data files: aggregate-level standardization of original data Sample Population restricted to households in urban areas with employed heads of working age (btw. 25 and 65 yrs.) Sample years: Sample Years Sample Size Period I 1960, ,226 Period II 1982, 1983, ,154 Period III 2000, 2001, ,694

7 CES Consumption Variables Mnemonics Item Wording Food Food prepared and/or used at home Housing Rent Rent payments for primary home House Maintenance Nondurable supplies; services; electricity, water, gas, fuel, coal, communication, etc. Vehicle Maintenance Parts; gasoline and oil; tolls; insurance; related services Mass Transport Mass transit system; other mass transportation; travel expenses Health Drugs; medical professionals; hospitals; nursing homes; health insurance Clothing Clothing and shoes; clothing services; jewelry and watches Education Education; related services and equipment Old & New Vehicles Old and new vehicles Housing Durables Furniture and durable household equipment Own House Payments Total owned housing payments (e.g., mortgage payments) Dining Dining; alcohol; tobacco Personal Care Barbershops; beauty parlors; heath clubs Reading Books; magazines; newspapers Secondary Lodging Rent payments for secondary lodging Leisure & Recreation Recreation and sport equipment; recreation services

8 Methodology Fit Latent-Class Discrete-Factor Regression Model Evaluate the Change in Sample Distribution across Consumption Lifestyles Fit Multinomial Logistic Regression Models for Lifestyle types Look at Likelihood-ratio Chi-square tests for nested models Evaluate the change in statistical significance of social class Look at regression model results Evaluate the change in magnitude of effects of individual social classes

9 Latent-Class Discrete-Factor Regression Model

10 Descriptives for Consumption Variables by Period

11 Consumption Patterns: Slight Decrease in Leisure; Substantial Increase in Non-Leisure 100% Recreation 90% Reading 80% Personal care 70% Dining 60% Education 50% Health 40% 14 Transportation 30% Housing durables, services 20% 11 Housing 6 4 Clothing 10% Food 0% Figure 1. Structure of Household Consumption Expenditures by Aggregate Categories

12 Consumption Inequality: Decrease in Food; Increase in Leisure, and Others Food Clothing Housing Housing Durables, Services Transportation Dining Recreation Figure 2. Inequality Trends in Household Consumption Expenditures (Mean of logs)

13 Consumption Lifestyles: Generalized Consumerism, Moderate Hedonism, and a Minority of Others Lifestyles Latent Factor Consumeristic Hedonistic Utilitarian Abstemious Residual Necessities High Low High Low --- Investment High Low High Low --- Leisure High High Low Low --- Est. Relative Size (%) Logically possible number of lifestyles: 2 3 = 8 Residual (infrequent) lifestyles are amalgamated into a single category

14 Changing Lifestyles: Rise in Non-Leisure Consumption 100% 90% 80% Other Abstemious Utilitarian Hedonistic Consumeristic 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Figure 3. Sample Distribution across Consumer Lifestyles by Period

15 More Abstemious Youths, Less Hedonistic Others 100% 80% Other Abstemious Utilitarian Hedonistic Consumeristic conditional probability 60% 40% 20% 0% below 35 yrs. btw yrs. btw yrs. above 55 yrs. Figure 4. Consumer Lifestyle Conditional Probabilities by Age Groups (avrg. age of head and spouse)

16 Rising Leisure/Non-Leisure Divide: Greatly for Singles, Slightly for Couples 100% 80% Other Abstemious Utilitarian Hedonistic Consumeristic conditional probability 60% 40% 20% 0% Single Single Parent Married w/o children Married w children Other Figure 5. Consumer Lifestyle Conditional Probabilities by Household Structure

17 Persistent Class Differences as Leisure/Non-Leisure Divide Grows 100% 80% Other Abstemious Utilitarian Hedonistic Consumeristic conditional probability 60% 40% 20% 0% Manager/Professional Routine Non-Manual Skilled Craft Unskilled Craft Service Figure 6. Consumer Lifestyle Conditional Probabilities by Class and Period

18 Likelihood Ratio Chi-Square Tests: Statistically Significant Effects of Social Class (Dfs.) M: Base nested in M + Social Class *** *** *** (28) M: Base + Income nested in M + Social Class *** *** *** (28) M: Base + Income + Education nested in M + Social Class 88.06*** 97.74*** *** (28) Note: *** P < ; Base model = Avrg. Age of Spouses + Household Structure + Region

19 Multinomial Logistic Regression Models: Persistent Class Differences in Consumption Lifestyles He vs Co Ut vs Co Ab vs Co He vs Co Ut vs Co Ab vs Co He vs Co Ut vs Co Ab vs Co Region West (omitted) Northeast 0.40 ** -0.89** ** ** Midwest ** 0.41* ** ** ** -0.43** ** South ** 0.61** 0.86 ** ** 0.49 ** 0.44 ** * 0.71** 0.39 ** Average Age of Spouses ** 0.06 ** ** ** 0.04 ** ** ** 0.01 * ** Household Structure Other (omitted) Single 1.29 ** 1.43** 2.09 ** 1.21 ** 1.23 ** 1.81 ** 0.89 ** 1.06** 1.32 ** Single Parent 0.60 ** 0.91** 0.49 * 0.57 ** 0.53 * 1.08 ** 0.69 ** 0.35* 1.20 ** Married w/o children ** ** ** * ** ** -0.51** ** Married w children ** -2.27** ** ** ** ** ** -0.81** ** Social Class Manager/Professional (omitted) Routine non-manual ** ** ** ** * ** Skilled Craft ** ** ** Unskilled Craft 0.39 ** 0.46* 1.15 ** 0.28 ** 0.76 ** 0.78 ** ** 0.69 ** Service 0.54 ** 0.68** 1.73 ** 0.64 ** 1.04 ** 1.47 ** 0.60 ** 0.46** 1.03 ** Constant 2.82 ** -6.07** ** 3.30 ** ** ** -1.99** 1.38 ** Note: * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01; P < 0.10; Variables are effect coded. Co=Consumeristic; He=Hedonistic; Ut=Utilitarian; Ab=Abstemious

20 Regression Coefficients for Class: Irregular Decline and Polarization of Class Differences Service Unskilled Craft Skilled Craft Routine Non-Manual Manager/Professional Hedonist vs Hyperconsumer Utilitarian vs Hyperconsumer Austere vs Hyperconsumer Figure 7. Visual representation of multinomial logit regression model coefficients for social class

21 Is the Consumption Society Myth debunked? Supportive Evidence: Consumption trends mimic production trends low consumption inequality in periods of low income inequality, e.g. the 1960s high consumption inequality in periods of high income inequality, e.g. 1980s + Restratification of Lifestyles growth of classic leisure/non-leisure divide, regardless of consumer democratization persistent social class differences, although irregular Caveats for further research Restratification may be due to insufficient democratization in housing, transportation, or health Indeterminate impact of household consumption on individual consumption Unclear influence of changes in aggregate consumption on micro-level consumption