Recently, economists and environmental scientists have problematised households, showing that their reducing size in average number of inhabitants has implications for environmental sustainability due to losses in economies of scale. Findings suggest that resources are shared better when people live together. This article analyses this common domestic consumption, drawing on literature about households, sharing and sustainable consumption. It is argued that multiple-person households apportion the resources involved in supplying practices through three modes of sharing: successive sharing, simultaneous sharing and shared/divided work. These are underpinned and enabled by standard material arrangements of households, in which a minimum of certain goods and services are available to residents regardless of number. Exemplifying the perspective, I examine recent survey data relating to meals and domestic laundry, two sociologically significant and resource-intensive spheres of domestic activity, paying attention to differences across one-person and multiple-person households. Modes of sharing, it is argued, also surfeit the domestic sphere, with market, state and household infrastructures playing contextually variable roles in provisioning goods and services among populations.
BardhiFEckhardtGM (2012) Access-based consumption: The case of car sharing. Journal of Consumer Research39(4): 881–898.
2.
BelkR (2010) Sharing. Journal of Consumer Research36(5): 715–734.
3.
BelkR (2014) You are what you can access: Sharing and collaborative consumption online. Journal of Business Research67(8): 1595–1600.
4.
Bennett J and Dixon M (2006) Single person households and social policy: Looking forwards. Report, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.
5.
BotsmanRRogersR (2010) The Rise of Collaborative Consumption, New York: Harper Business.
6.
BowsAMcLachlanCManderSet al. (2012) What’s Cooking: Adaptation and Mitigation in the UK Food System, Manchester: Sustainable Consumption Institute, The University of Manchester.
7.
Bradbury M, Peterson MN and Liu J (2014) Long-term dynamics of household size and their environmental implications. Population and Environment 36(1): 73–84.
8.
CohenMJ (2016) The Future of Consumer Society. Prospects for Sustainability in the New Economy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9.
DeVaultM (1991) Feeding the Family: The Social Organization of Caring as Gendered Work, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
10.
DochertyDMorrisonDTraceyM (1987) The Last Picture Show? Britain’s Changing Film Audience, London: British Film Institute.
Euromonitor International (2015) Washing Machine Possession: Countries and Consumers Annual Data, London: Euromonitor International.
13.
GershunyJ (1978) After Industrial Society? The Emerging Self-Service Economy, London: Macmillan Publishers.
14.
GlucksmannM (2014) Bake or buy? Comparative and theoretical perspectives on divisions of labour in food preparation work. Anthropology of FoodS10: 1–14.
15.
Gudeman S (2001) The Anthropology of Economy: Community, Market, and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.
16.
HallROgdenPEHillC (1997) The pattern and structure of one-person households in England and Wales and France. International Journal of Population Geography3(2): 161–181.
17.
HeathSCleaverE (2004) Young, Free and Single? Twenty-Somethings and Household Change, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
18.
HeinonenJJalasMJuntunenJKet al. (2013) Situated lifestyles: II. The impacts of urban density, housing type and motorization on the greenhouse gas emissions of middle-income consumers in Finland. Environmental Research Letters8(3): 1–10.
19.
IsakssonCEllegårdK (2015) Dividing or sharing? A time-geographical examination of eating, labour, and energy consumption in Sweden. Energy Research & Social Science10: 180–191.
20.
Jamieson L and Simpson R (2013) Living Alone: Globalization, Identity and Belonging. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
21.
JarvisH (2015) Towards a deeper understanding of the social architecture of co-housing. Urban Research & Practice8(1): 93–105.
22.
KanMYSullivanOGershunyJ (2011) Gender convergence in domestic work: Discerning the effects of interactional and institutional barriers from large-scale data. Sociology45(2): 234–251.
23.
KaufmannJ-C (1998) Dirty Linen: Couples and Their Laundry, London: Middlesex University Press.
24.
KlinenbergE (2012) Going Solo: The Extraordinary Rise and Surprising Appeal of Living Alone, New York: Penguin Books.
25.
Levin I (2004) Living apart together: A new family form. Current Sociology 52(2): 223–240.
26.
LiuJDailyGCEhrlichPRet al. (2003) Effects of household dynamics on resource consumption and biodiversity. Nature421(6922): 530–533.
27.
MackellarFLLutzWPrinzCet al. (1995) Population, households, and CO2 emissions. Population and Development Review21(4): 849–865.
28.
MolgatMVézinaM (2008) Transitionless biographies? Youth and representations of solo living. Young16(4): 349–371.
29.
MollHCNoormanKJKokRet al. (2005) Pursuing more sustainable consumption by analyzing household metabolism in European countries and cities. Environmental Studies Series9(1): 259–275.
PahlJ (1990) Household spending, personal spending and the control of money in marriage. Sociology24(1): 119–138.
33.
Price JA (1975) Sharing: The Integration of Intimate Economies. Anthropologica 17(1): 3–27.
34.
SchorJBFitzmauriceCJ (2015) The emergence of the sharing economy. In: ReischLAThøgersenJ (eds) Handbook of Research on Sustainable Consumption, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 410–425.
WardeA (1992) Notes on the relationship between production and consumption. In: MarshC (eds) Consumption and Class: Divisions and Change, Basingstoke: Macmillan Publisher, pp. 15–31.
37.
WardeAMartensL (2000) Eating Out: Social Differentiation, Consumption and Pleasure, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38.
WatsonS (2014) Mundane objects in the city: Laundry practices and the making and remaking of public/private sociality and space in London and New York. Urban Studies52(5): 876–890.
39.
WilliamsJ (2007) Innovative solutions for averting a potential resource crisis – The case of one-person households in England and Wales. Environment, Development and Sustainability9(3): 325–354.
40.
YatesL (2015) Everyday politics, social practices and movement networks: Daily life in Barcelona’s social centres. British Journal of Sociology66(2): 236–258.
