PRACTICES OF RISKY CONSUMER BEHAVIOR IN THE DYNAMICS OF LIFESTYLE STYLIZATION DURING WARTIME: RESEARCH OUTLINE
Abstract
In the context of a prolonged military conflict, consumer practices in frontline cities of Ukraine, such as Kharkiv, undergo significant transformations, becoming important indicators of social change. This article presents the exploratory stage of research aimed at studying "risky" consumption as a means of stylizing life under conditions of heightened threat and instability. We focus on such functions of consumption as anxiety management, maintaining collective and individual identity, and reconstructing everyday life through symbolic, including adaptive, mechanisms. Based on expert interviews, the main practices of "risky" consumption are systematized, including symbolic presentation, social adaptation, innovative approaches, and resilience-building. The theoretical framework of the article encompasses the sociology of risks and the sociology of consumption, including concepts by P. Bourdieu, A. Giddens, Z. Bauman, and E. Shove's theory of practices. We propose the formation of a compensatory consumption model, which manifests itself in the desire to reproduce pre-risk everyday life and symbolically (re)construct a deformed reality. Ultimately, we hypothesize the compensatory and hyper-adaptive nature of these practices and propose a methodological framework for their further study, including observations, in-depth interviews, and "walking" methods adapted to analyze urban and commercial spaces. This article lays the foundation for a multi-stage study aimed at identifying and analyzing changes in the stylization of life in urban communities under high-risk conditions, as well as their impact on the dynamics of social transformations.
References
2. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: SAGE Publications.
3. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Franklin, A. (2002). Nature and Social Theory. London: SAGE Publications.
5. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford University Press.
6. Luhmann, N. (1991). Der Begriff Risiko. In N. Luhmann, Soziologie des Risikos (pp. 9–40). Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter.
7. Lytovchenko A. (2011) Discourse as an instrument of the «reality-hacking». Methodology, theory and practice of sociological analysis of modern society. Vol. 17. pp. 208-211. URL:
http://www.irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/cgi-bin/irbis_nbuv/cgiirbis_64.exe?C21COM=2&I21DBN=UJRN&P21DBN=UJRN&IMAGE_FILE_DOWNLOAD=1&Image_file_name=PDF/Mtpsa_2011_17_41.pdf
8. Miller, D. (1998). A Theory of Shopping. Cambridge: Polity Press.
9. Perrow, C. (2007). The next catastrophe: Reducing our vulnerabilities to natural, industrial, and terrorist disasters. Princeton University Press.
10. Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). Connections between practices. In The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How it Changes (pp. 81-96). SAGE Publications Ltd. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250655
11. Yanitsky, O. (2000). Sustainability and risk: The case of Russia. In The Risk Society and Beyond: Critical Essays for Social Theory. London. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Sciences, 13(3). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/713670515
12. Zukin, S. (1998). Urban Lifestyles: Diversity and Standardisation in Spaces of Consumption. Urban Studies, 35(5-6), 825-839. URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43084034
Abstract views: 19 PDF Downloads: 12
