Skip to main content

The Paradox of Privatization in Consumption

  • Chapter

Abstract

Most everyday goods can be more or less private in consumption. For example, a family may share one bathroom or may enjoy the luxury of one bathroom per person in which case the good has been completely privatized. Even such “personal” goods as haircuts may be shared in the sense that family members take turns getting a haircut rather than having their hair cut whenever they individually decide to do so. Thus, even haircuts may be privatized in consumption. There is a definite trend towards increasing privatization in consumption with increasing income. The paradox I would like to discuss in this paper can be summarized as follows: by increasing privacy in consumption, people seemingly also destroy something they cannot replace by their own efforts: certain forms of social approval. They seemingly act in such a way that they increase their own deprivation with regard to these forms of social approval.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Becker, G.S. (1976). “A theory of social interaction”. In G.S. Becker, The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. Chicago: 253–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, F. (1978). Social Limits to Growth. Cambridge, Mass. Kahn, A. (1966). “The tyranny of small decisions”. Kyklos: 23–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg, S. (1979). “Solidaritätsnormen und soziale Struktur”, paper presented at the annual meeting of the Section for Theoretical Sociology of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie, mimeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg, S. (1982), “Sharing groups: theory and suggested applications”. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 9: 33–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenberg, S. (1984). “Normen und die Allokation sozialer Wertschätzung”. In H. Todt (ed.), Normgeleitetes Verhalten in den Sozialwissenschaften. Berlin: 169–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opp, K.D., (1985). Die Entstehung sozialer Normen. Tübingen: Mohr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ouchi, W. (1980). “Markets, bureaucracies, and clans”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25: 129–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, Z. (1973). Liking and Loving. New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ullmann-Margalit, E (1977). The Emergence of Norms. Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1986 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lindenberg, S. (1986). The Paradox of Privatization in Consumption. In: Diekmann, A., Mitter, P. (eds) Paradoxical Effects of Social Behavior. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-95874-8_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-95874-8_21

  • Publisher Name: Physica-Verlag HD

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-0350-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-95874-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics