Understanding the downshifting phenomenon: a case of South East Queensland, Australia.
Chhetri, Prem ; Stimson, Robert J. ; Western, John 等
1. Introduction
Many people are working harder and longer hours, often in a more
stressful and competitive work environment, than was the case in earlier
times. For example, Campbell (2002) estimated the average weekly working
time in Australia to be 41.9 hours in 2000, with about 26 percent of
people working more than 45 hours a week. Nevertheless, despite this
trend, others are reducing their work hours and their mode of work
together with the nature of their consumption behaviour in the
expectation that a simpler and more satisfying lifestyle will result. In
the recent literature, this phenomenon of life simplification is often
referred to as 'downshifting,' whereby people seek to
establish an alternative lifestyle that is simpler, less work-oriented,
and allows for greater time to be spent with family and friends.
Over the past few years, the simplification of life through
voluntary action has become the focus of a significant research effort
(see, for example, Leonard-Barton, 1981; Phehlke, 1989; Schor, 1991;
Iwata, 1997; and Etzioni, 1998). Since the 1990s in Australia,
downshifters have emerged as a group of relatively affluent, highly
successful, middle aged people choosing to live a less work-oriented
lifestyle (Craig-Lees and Hill, 2002). However, there are only a few
studies that explicitly address the issue of downshifting. In
particular, there is a lack of empirical studies with those by, Tan,
(2000); McKnight, (2001); Craig-Lees and Hill, (2002); Hamilton and
Mail, (2003), being the exceptions. Hamilton and Mail (2003) have called
for a better understanding of the phenomenon because its impact on
society is now greater than was the case some 20 or so years ago.
Research findings to date suggest that age (Hamilton and Mail,
2003), gender (The Harwood Group, 1995), lifecycle stage (The Harwood
Group, 1995; Hamilton and Mail, 2003), economic well-being (Etzioni,
1998), and attitudes towards the environment (Leonard-Barton, 1981;
Shama and Wisenblit, 1984; Iwata, 1997) may influence the decision to
downshift. But none of these studies has attempted to explicitly
categorise downshifters on the basis of their socio-economic and
demographic characteristics.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a better understanding of
downshifters through which four research questions will be answered.
These include: who are downshifters; what characterises downshifters;
why and how people downshift; and finally, are there different types of
downshifters? For the present research, a somewhat liberal definition of
'downshifter' is adopted. Simply put, a downshifter is one who
voluntarily makes a long-term change in lifestyle, other than planned
retirement, which reduces income. The data used to explore the
characteristics of downshifters in more detail were collected as part of
a quality of life survey conducted in the Brisbane South East Queensland
region, a large and rapidly growing region in South East Australia.
The structure of the paper is as follows. The paper first discusses
in more detail the concept of 'downshifting', describes and
characterises downshifters and then presents the results of modelling
downshifters into distinct clusters based on their motives, life
situation, socio-economic and demographic characteristics. It concludes
with a discussion of the implications drawn from the research.
2. Genesis of the downshifting phenomenon
The phenomenon of downshifting or the voluntary simplification of
one's life situation is not new. Its genesis can perhaps be seen in
the search for transcendental connections and meanings by earlier
spiritual movements such as those associated with the Amish or the
Quakers. Thinkers like Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry Thoreau also
proposed the idea of simple-living aesthetics. More recently, support
from people with eco-centric views gave further impetus to simplicity
movements. Schor (1998) sees downshifting as focussing on a voluntary
reduction in income and cutting down on consumption, whilst for Etzioni
(1998) downshifters are a subset of people practicing voluntary
simplicity.
To better understand the downshifting phenomenon, it is important
to distinguish concepts such as 'voluntary simplicity',
'sea change', and 'downshifting' as they are often
used interchangeably in the literature.
Supporting the doctrines of frugal consumption, ecological
awareness and personal growth, Elgin (1981) defines the term
'voluntary simplicity' as a way of living that is outwardly
simple but inwardly rich. The use of the phrase was first detected in a
paper titled 'Voluntary Simplicity' by Richard Gregg (1936)
for whom it means "singleness of purpose, sincerity and honesty
within, as well as avoidance of exterior clutter, of many possessions
irrelevant to the chief purpose of life" (Gregg 1936, quoted by
Elgin 1981, p. 31). Wachtel (1996) states that voluntary simplicity
should not be seen as a single phenomenon rather it should be viewed as
a complex set of attitudes, inclinations and changes in goals and
lifestyles. Iwata (1997) considers voluntary simplicity as a tendency to
consume less, while Juniu (2000) adds working less, spending less, and
enjoying things more.
Less centred on the philosophical doctrine of the simplicity
movement are the so-called 'sea changers,' who make a
fundamental change in their lifestyle by moving, from larger cities to
coastal and rural areas or smaller towns (Burnley and Murphy, 2003).
Salt (2001) refers to this movement in Australia as 'The Big
Shift', which he estimated to comprise approximately four million
people who are making coastal areas their home outside the capital
cities. Salt claims that these people are creating the 'Third
Australian Culture' with no particular allegiance to the city or
the bush.
The term 'downshifting' has been used to refer to the
ability of people to practice a lifestyle that empowers them to control
their life events and in doing so to be less oriented toward consumption
(Leonard-Barton, 1980). It emphasises personal development (Zavestoski,
2002); and also refers to the process of attaining a state of
satisfaction and fulfilment by changing work arrangements and lifestyle
(Tan, 2000). Hamilton and Mail (2003, p.7) define downshifters as
"those people who make a voluntary, long-term change in their
lifestyle that involves accepting significantly less income and
consuming less". Similarly, Drake (2001) refers downshifting to a
process of changing voluntarily to a less demanding work schedule in
order to enjoy life more.
Etzioni (1998) identifies three types of 'voluntary simplicity
practitioners,' namely: 'downshifters'; 'strong
simplifiers'; and 'simple living movement followers'. The
'downshifters' are well-off economically, but 'dress
down' to adopt a seemingly simpler lifestyle by giving up some
affordable privileges while still maintaining a degree of affluence.
'Strong simplifiers' abandon stressful and high income jobs
(for example, lawyers, investment bankers) for lower paying jobs and a
simpler lifestyle. While the category 'simple living movement'
comprises people who have a more holistic approach and are dedicated to
the ethos of voluntary simplicity, usually moving from affluent suburbs
or gentrified parts of larger cities to smaller towns or rural areas -
similar to those exhibited by sea-changers or tree-changers. Etzioni
(1998) has been criticised by Hamilton and Mail (2003) for his
assumption that all three types of simplifiers are economically
well-off, as the evidence shows the presence of downshifters across
income levels (Schor, 1998; Hamilton and Mail, 2003).
The Hamilton and Mail's (2003) study, as shown in Figure 1,
proposes a classification scheme in which 'sea-changers' are a
subset of 'downshifters,' while some voluntary simplifiers are
a kind of 'sea-changer'. From this perspective, downshifters,
VS and seachangers are not discrete groups; rather they are inclusive.
However, this raises the question whether a 'sea-changer', who
neither reduces income nor consumption, but just moves to the coast for
a lifestyle change, is a 'downshifter'. To the authors it
appears that not all 'sea-changers' are
'downshifters', nor for that matter are all
'downshifters' 'sea-changers.' Rather,
'downshifters' possibly overlap with some
'sea-changers' classified as 'downshifters',
although further study is required to examine the distinctive
characteristics of these overlapping groups.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
On the basis of these definitions, downshifters, sea changers and
those practising voluntary simplicity can be seen as displaying one or
more of the following characteristics: i) acceptance of a voluntary
lifestyle change for a substantial period of time; ii) adherence to the
philosophy of voluntary simplicity; iii) belief in a culture that is
less consumer oriented; iv) a conscious reduction of income by working
fewer hours; and finally v) a search for fulfilment and
self-actualisation. Despite subtle differences, the three terms,
voluntary simplicity, sea change and downshifting, all suggest a
voluntary simplification of lifestyle in order to achieve an improvement
in quality of life thus leading to the definition provided earlier: the
concept which we will call downshifting is to be understood as a long
term change in lifestyle other than planned retirement which has been
accompanied by the earning of less money.
3. Brisbane-South East Queensland Region
The Brisbane-South East Queensland (SEQ) region has been
experiencing rapid growth and socio-economic transformation over the
last two to three decades, with in-migration being a large factor
driving that growth The region is characterised by a multi-centric urban
structure, connecting the State capital Brisbane with two coastal growth
corridors, south to the Gold Coast and north to the Sunshine Coast, and
with a slower growing western corridor to Ipswich, a long-established
industrial and mining city. The region's population increased from
1.8 to 2.78 million between 1991 and 2006, and it is forecasted to reach
3.96 million by 2026. This rapid growth is characterised by urban
sprawl.
The movement to this 'sunbelt' growth region is
importantly driven by the ageing of baby boomers, the attractions of a
warmer climate, relaxed lifestyle, and ready access to amenities. The
important role of tourism in the regional economy has been a strong
factor in the growth that has occurred in the last decade. The region is
referred to as a post-modern urban consumption landscape (Mullins 1991)
but it has also been an epicentre of the sea-change movement for more
than a decade (Burnley and Murphy 2003). If downshifters comprise a
significant component of the population moving to the region, the
implications of downshifting on the economy of the region need to be
better understood, as some downshifting might be associated with
zero-growth and non-consumption oriented cultural attitudes. The
compatibility of two groups of people following different lifestyles,
one adhering to the culture of mass-consumption and the other seeking a
simpler lifestyle, needs to be proactively addressed in order to
encourage a harmonious relationship between the two. Understanding the
socio-economic and demographic characteristics of downshifters and their
more consumption oriented contemporaries is important to identifying the
needs and the potential implications for service provision and resource
use.
4. Data Collection
In 2003, a survey of quality of life (QOL) in the SEQ region was
conducted by the UQ Social Research Centre and the Centre for Research
into Sustainable Urban and Regional Futures at the University of
Queensland using a telephone interviewing mode. Data was collected from
1,612 respondents aged 18 years and older using a spatially stratified
sample survey design to generate a minimum of 100 respondents across
each of 10 sub-regional areas of the Brisbane-SEQ region. However, only
half the sample (N = 773) were asked about their recent downshifting
experience, if any. Other information on the socio-economic and
demographic characteristics of respondents, along with locational
information, was collected as a part of the broader survey. The
distribution of downshifters across the region shows that 33 percent of
the total downshifters in the sample live in the Brisbane metropolitan
area at the centre of the region, which comprises around 50 per cent of
the region's population. It is followed by the Gold Coast (15.3
percent), Ipswich (11.3 percent), Pine Rivers (6.9 percent) and
Caloundra (6.4 percent).
In order to compare the results from the previous study by Hamilton
and Mail (2003) the question they had used to identify downshifters was
asked. It said: "In the last ten years have you voluntarily made a
long term change in your life style other than planned retirement which
has resulted in you earning less money?" The participants who
answered "yes" were then asked a series of questions regarding
the way they had downshifted.
5. Results and Analysis
The results of the data analysis are presented in this section. It
has been structured to address the research questions that purport to
define, describe and characterise downshifters in South East Queensland.
5.1 Who are downshifters?
To be identified as a downshifter the individual had to meet the
criteria of voluntary participation, long-term change and a reduction in
income. Included in the group therefore were those who had downshifted
to pursue further study or start a new business. But excluded were
persons who had made a short-term lifestyle change to look after a baby,
for example, and had planned to return to work in the immediate future.
Using a broader definition, of the 773 participants who answered
the downshifting question 28.5 precent can be classified as
downshifters. The incidence of downshifting is close to both the
Hamilton and Mail (2003) study finding, which estimated a 23 percent
incidence of downshifting, and the US study by the Harwood Group (1995)
which reported 28 per cent. However, Hamilton and Mail's (2003)
study limits downshifters to a population group aged between 30 and 59
years, whereas in our dataset a substantial number of people are below
the age of 30 and above 59 years. That, in part at least, accounts for
the smaller proportion of downshifters found by Hamilton and Mail
(2003). To make the result comparable, a narrower definition of the
downshifting phenomenon is developed using more stringent criteria. For
example, when the respondents are restricted to the age bracket of 30 to
59 years the proportion of downshifters in our survey sample decreases
from 28 to 20 percent. Exclusion of people who had downshifted to look
after a baby further reduces the figure to 18 percent. This also
excludes downshifters who choose to retire. In our sample, a significant
number of respondents about twenty five per cent are retired; among them
only 8 percent describe themselves as downshifters. Therefore, the
magnitude of downshifting can vary depending upon the way the phenomenon
being conceptualised and measured.
5.2 What characterises downshifters?
Females are more likely to downshift than males, with 56 percent of
female respondents having downshifted during the last 10 years compared
to 44 percent of males (p< .05). The higher proportion of female
downshifters is perhaps due to family reasons, with respondents
nominating 'more time with the family' as an important reason
for downshifting. Downshifters are also likely to be younger with only 9
percent over 60 compared with 32 percent of the non-downshifters. Having
post secondary educational qualifications makes downshifting more
likely. Among downshifters, 56 percent have attended post secondary
institutions, while among non-downshifters it is a lesser 43 percent.
Relationships also make a difference. Downshifters are more likely
to comprise couples with children and those in extended family
relationships (56 percent) whereas non-downshifters are more likely to
be single (21 percent) or in a couple relationship (26 percent).
Involvement in the economy also distinguishes downshifters from their
counterparts. Downshifters are more likely to have part time or causal
work (44 percent compared to 25 percent) and less likely to have
permanent full time work (45 percent compared to 64 percent). They are
also more likely to have their partner employed (54 percent compared to
36 percent). Interestingly downshifters also report slightly higher
incomes with more above AUD$36,000 per annum (75 percent compared to 59
percent). The place of birth, a potential surrogate for ethnicity, seems
to have no bearing on downshifting, although the dichotomous
categorisation, of Australian born versus non Australian born was broad.
While these differences are not great they are statistically significant
and do suggest some patterned differences between those who downshift
and those who prefer to maintain an existing lifestyle.
Downshifters also tend to come from outside South East Queensland.
In response to a question asking about where they had lived before
downshifting, 28 percent of downshifters reported coming either from
overseas (especially New Zealand) or other states and territories
compared to only 19 per cent of non-downshifters (p <0.05). Further,
downshifters are more likely to be recent settlers with only forty
percent living in their current place of residence for more than five
years compared to sixty percent of non-downshifters. Average length of
residency at current address for downshifters is seven years; whilst for
non-downshifters it is eleven years, which is statistically significant
(p <0.05).
The phenomenon of downshifting has also been cross-tabulated
against occupation. Using the one-digit Australian Standard
Classification of Occupations (ASCO) code, respondents who had
downshifted are categorised into 9 designated categories as defined by
Australian Bureau of Statistics. Despite the insignificant difference
found between the two groups (p <0.213), downshifters are more likely
to be employed as Managers and Administrators or Professionals as
compared to non-downshifters (35 percent against 27.2 percent).
Downshifters are also less likely to be employed as Tradespersons or
Labourers.
5.3 Why and how people downshift?
In order to help understand why people downshift or simplify their
lifestyle, researchers have investigated the reasons they provide
(Etzoini, 1998, Leonard-Barton, 1981; Shama and Wisenblit, 1984; Itawa,
1997, 1998; and Tan, 2000). Chhetri et al., (2009) categorise the
reasons for downshifting into economic, social and personal and provide
a theoretical framework to conceptualise the downshifting phenomenon.
Some downshift because they have acquired anti-materialistic values,
while others aim to adjust to their changing personal or family needs. A
few come to reject the pursuit of wealth, and there are those who
downshift due to stress, fatigue and unhappiness. There are also those
reasons that are related to the increasing ascendancy of the market, the
consumerist society and the rejection of consumerism. Hamilton (2003)
argues that downshifting is a response "to the post industrial
society where manipulative marketing, obsessive consumerism,
commoditization, endemic alienation and loneliness are relinquished for
a value based social structure reflecting 'true' individual
identity and social responsibility".
To explore the reasons for and the impact of downshifting, we asked
two related questions. First we presented a list of reasons for
downshifting to respondents and asked them to select the most important;
then from a further list we sought information on how lifestyles had
changed as a consequence of downshifting. Subjects were allowed to
choose only a single answer from the list of reasons.
A number of studies (Andrews and Withney 1976, Lane, 1993; Diener
and Biswas 2002) have argued that life conditions, particularly family
and other close social relationships, are the drivers of quality of life
rather than increased financial well being. Family becomes of primary
importance for an individual's well being and happiness, followed
by the experience of friendship (Lane, 1993). Andrews and Withney (1976)
reported that economic status has little effect on the well-being of a
person and no significant effect on satisfaction with life-as-a-whole.
When personal and social well being is threatened by economic pressures
emanating from paid work individuals may escape by realigning their
priorities so that family and personal relationships come to the fore
and work recedes. In our study, results show that (See Figure 2) a
quarter of the downshifters nominated seeking more control of their
lives and personal fulfilment as the main drivers of lifestyle change,
followed closely by wanting more time with family (23 percent). A
healthier lifestyle was important to 16 per cent and to achieve more
balance in life to 14 per cent.
Some studies (Freedman, 1978; Lane, 1993) report that the value
associated with material wealth diminishes and becomes less meaningful
once the 'affluence threshold' is reached. When a level of
affluence is achieved, 'getting balanced', 'getting
free' and 'being authentic' become the drivers of
lifestyle change (Tan, 2000, p.158). Or in terms of Maslow's theory
of hierarchical needs (1968), once lower order material needs have been
met, higher order needs such as personal fulfilment, self-esteem and
self-actualisation or authenticity become more important. One strategy
for meeting these needs (Tan 2000) is by downshifting. However in our
findings, more broadly based reasons such as leading a more
environmentally friendly and less materialistic lifestyle were found to
be less important (important to no more than 3 per cent of
downshifters), which is somewhat surprising as these reasons are often
considered to be the core motives behind the simplicity movement.
When asked about what had produced lifestyle changes by far the
most common response had to do with economic factors. Figure 3 shows
that
"stopping work" was the most common response (23 percent);
this was followed by "reducing working hours" (16 percent),
"changing careers" (14 percent) and "taking up a lower
paying job" (13 percent).
In terms of gender differences, there is a higher percentage of
females among those downshifters who had either stopped work (70
percent) or reduced working hours (65 percent). As anticipated,
downshifting for family reasons was more common among females; 95 per
cent of those who downshifted to look after babies were women as were 67
per cent of those who planned to spend more time with their families. In
contrast, changing careers and starting a new business were the two
factors contributing most to lifestyle change among men. Seventy percent
of people who downshift by changing careers are males, while for those
who started a new business it is sixty percent. These findings indicate
the existence of gender-based differences in life situations and
available choices.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
Finally, when asked about their satisfaction with the change in
lifestyle, 83 percent of downshifters report they are happy with the
change, despite the fact that 53 percent reported that they are missing
the extra income that could have been generated had they not
downshifted.
5.4. Are there different types of downshifters?
Our purpose in this paper differs somewhat from previous studies in
that we are concerned to develop a typology of downshifters using a wide
range of variables--including reasons for and means of downshifting and
socio-economic, and demographic characteristics of downshifters. We have
seen already that, downshifters and non-downshifters differ on selected
socio-economic and demographic characteristics. In an attempt to develop
a typology of downshifters based on these differences a Two Step Cluster
Analysis was used to identify possible natural groupings of
downshifters. Using street level geocoding for the residential addresses
of survey respondents, the locational pattern of the cluster members was
also mapped (see figure 4).
A total of 17 variables relating to the survey respondent's
socio-economic and demographic characteristics, as well as their motives
for and means of downshifting, served as the basis for this cluster
analysis. The specific variables include: age; gender; marital status;
education; household income; household type; dwelling type; job tenure;
partner's employment status; type of place; working hours per week;
person per household; number of jobs; occupation; reasons for
downshifting; means of downshifting; and whether respondents miss extra
income. The importance of factors relating to the main reasons for
downshifting was rated on a five point Likert scale. The factors
included: 'more balance in life'; 'look after a
baby'; 'time with family'; 'control and personal
fulfilment'; 'healthier lifestyle'; 'less
materialistic lifestyle'; 'environmentally friendly
lifestyle'; and 'financial independence'. The ways in
which people have downshifted included: 'change to a lower paying
job'; 'reduce work hours'; 'refuse a
promotion'; 'stop paid work'; 'change careers';
'start a business'; and 'go back to study'.
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
[FIGURE 5 OMITTED]
The cluster analysis produced a three cluster solution which gave
good separation among the groups on the base variables and also
acceptable cluster sizes. As well it provided an understandable and
consistent interpretation. We have named the clusters as follows:
* Cluster 1: Non-Working, Mature Married Women Downshifters
* Cluster 2: Family-focussed, Change-seeking Mature Downshifters
* Cluster 3: Singles and Single Parents, Eco-centric, Disadvantaged
Downshifters.
Non-Working, Mature Married Women Downshifters is the second
smallest cluster (N = 63) and includes a high proportion of females who
are generally less educated and older and married couples who live on
relatively lower incomes, either superannuation or welfare benefits;
although this does not necessarily mean low assets. They live mainly in
separate dwellings and show a preference for coastal or rural areas.
They may be described as 'hobby workers', as half of them work
less than 10 hours a week, usually on a causal or contract basis. More
time for family and their own health are cited as the most important
reasons for downshifting. In order to achieve these goals, they decided
to quit work or at least reduce the hours worked. They do not miss the
extra income they once had. The needs and aspirations of this cluster of
downshifters are different from the others. They see downshifting as
strengthening family support networks to enable the creation of social
capital through social bonding at the family level.
Family-Focused, Change-Seeking, Mature Downshifters is the second
cluster (N= 82). It is a gender-balanced group, the members of which are
largely married couples with children. The employment status of a
partner, marital status, job tenure, employment status, household type,
number of jobs, weekly working hours, education and household incomes
are the main variables discriminating this cluster of downshifters from
the others. Gender, age and motives were not found to be significant
discriminators.
Downshifters in this cluster usually live in separate houses and
are high income earners, yet they miss the extra income they once had.
They work for wages or a salary or run their own business. They are
better educated than the members of other clusters and therefore are
more likely to be working on a permanent full-time basis as
professionals or knowledge workers. The presence of dependent children
for many of them has put pressure on both parents to work longer hours
in relative terms even after downshifting. Therefore, downshifting for
this cluster does not necessarily mean a substantial drop in income.
Household income, in general, is still reasonably high because of the
involvement of the downshifter in professional or managerial work and
also because of the contribution of both partners to total household
income.
Additional time with the family, improved control over their life
and greater fulfilment are the most important reasons for this group to
have downshifted, although time off after the birth of a child was
mentioned by some. Starting a new business is commonly reported by
professionals who were investment bankers, lawyers, or even retired
defence personnel, and this seems to be the most important adjustment
outcome from the downshifting process for this cluster. Also important
is the decision to opt for a lower-paid job or to refuse a promotion
when it had been offered.
Singles and Single Parents, Eco-Centric, Disadvantaged Downshifters
is the third cluster (N= 57) of downshifters, which is male-dominated
and single. Significant factors discriminating this cluster are marital
status, they are overwhelmingly single, non-traditional household type,
dwelling type, employment status, age and motives or reasons behind
downshifting. Education, job tenure, occupation household income, and
working hours per week were not found to be significant in
discriminating this cluster.
Downshifters in this cluster are most likely to be living in
non-traditional households, either alone or in a shared households or as
a single parent household. They typically live in apartments or units.
Many have either gone back to university or technical college for
further study or have reduced their working hours. The majority are
employed, around a third as professionals or managers. They hold
pro-environmental attitudes and express a desire to live a less
materialistic and a healthier lifestyle. Their preferred job is
permanent part-time, perhaps due to the availability of flexible work
arrangements, and they want more leisure time with children and family.
They are relatively happy with their decision to downshift, which they
entered by choice, not by chance.
This cluster is more heterogeneous with regard to income and social
characteristics than the first two. The relatively, high number of
single parent households--often female led--could make this segment of
the cluster more vulnerable. The downshifting decision for some members
of this cluster appears to be linked to a life cycle transition. Despite
their commitment for a long term lifestyle change, it could be
anticipated that some may rejoin the workforce after the completion of
study or as other goals are achieved.
6. Discussion and conclusions
Downshifting may be seen as offering an 'alternative' to
a consumer oriented lifestyle. Through the process of downshifting,
people attempt to adjust their lives to suit a new set of life
conditions. For some it is an adjustment strategy to accommodate
changing family conditions and a lifecycle transition. For others it is
a means of countering the culture of conspicuous consumption. However,
downshifting is only likely to be successfully achieved, if a certain
level of comfort or personal well-being is maintained. Downshifting does
not propagate the philosophy of sacrifice, though it purports to
"target consumerism, [but] not consumption" (Etzioni, 1998:
634). Downshifting does not argue for people to 'stop working'
or 'stop spending' (Juniu, 2000); rather it advocates for
balance in life--neither poverty reduction nor empowerment or
self-denial. Elgin (1981) states poverty is involuntary and
debilitating, whereas simplicity is voluntary and enabling.
There is still more to be explored regarding the decision to
downshift. Downshifting means different things to different people.
Using the criteria of voluntary long-term lifestyle change, 28 percent
of the participants answering the downshifting questions were classified
as downshifters. However, when a set of more stringent criteria are
applied (e.g. age group between 30 and 59 years and reasons such as the
people who downshift to look after a baby), the proportion of
downshifters to total sample reduced to 18 per cent.
The survey data analysed and discussed in this paper--along with
the findings of other studies on downshifting that we cite--reveals
that, in general, people downshift by stopping paid work or reducing
working hours. Changing careers or taking up a lower-paying job are also
other common ways to downshift. Generally men are more inclined toward
changing careers or starting a new business, whilst women exhibit a
greater propensity towards stopping paid work altogether or reducing
work hours, which indicates gender-based differences in life situations
and available choices. A little over four-fifths of our survey
respondents who had downshifted reported that they are happy with their
decision, despite slightly more than half of them missing the extra
income they used to have. In analysing the motives and socio-economic
and demographic characteristics of downshifters, the research reported
here has attempted to 'simplify the simplifiers' by developing
a typology of downshifters using a multivariate clustering technique to
reveal three clusters of downshifting differentiated by particular
socio-economic and demographic characteristics and reasons for
downshifting.
Findings from the research reported here do not indicate a
substantial decline in income among the downshifters and particularly
among the 'middle income earners'. Therefore, downshifting
seems to have emerged as a middle-income phenomenon. Despite their
moderate level of income, these downshifters can still afford to
maintain a comfortable and desirable lifestyle while being at the same
time less consumption oriented. Less consumption for downshifters does
not necessarily mean minimum consumption at the level of basic needs,
rather, the focus of life for downshifters appears to be on 'wise
consumption'. The downshifters do not propose a life of scarcity,
and it is important for certain, if unspecified, level of affluence to
have been reached before the decision of downshifting is made. People in
poor or near-poor conditions cannot give up the consumerist lifestyle
that they never had. As we approach the post industrial market driven
society a number of structural responses to increases in market power
can be observed. The emergence of boundaryless careers and non-standard
employment relations is one, the marked growth of self employment is a
second and the emergence of significant groups of downshifters is a
third. Whether downshifting is heralding a major structural change in
society still remains to be determined.
Acknowledgements
This paper is based on research funded through the Australian
Research Council Discovery program, project #DP0209146.
References
Andrew, F.M. and Withey, S.B. (1976) Developing measures of
perceived life quality: results from several national surveys, Social
Indicator Research, 1, pp. 1-26.
Bishop, B. and Drew, N. (1999) Multivariate Discriminant Analysis.
SPSS: Analysis Without Anguish. Version 7, Brisbane: John Wiley and
Sons.
Burnley, I and Murphy, P. (2003) Sea Change, Movement from
Metropolitan to Arcadian Australia. Sydney: UNSW Press.
Campbell, I. (2002) Witness Statement for Reasonable Hours Test
Case. Australian Industrial Relations Commission.
Chhetri, P., Khan A., Stimson R. and Western J (2009), Why bother
to downshift? The characteristics and satisfaction of downshifters in
the Brisbane-South East Queensland Region, Australia. Journal of
Population Research. 26, (1), pp.51- 72.
Craig-Lees, M. and Hill, C. (2002) Understanding voluntary
simplifiers. Psychology & Marketing, 19 (2), pp. 187-210.
Diener, E. and Biswas, R. (2002) Will money increase subjective
well-being? A literature review and guide to needed research, Social
Indicators Research 57 Feb, pp. 119-169.
Drake, J.D. (2001) Downshifting: How to Work Less and Enjoy Life
More. Berrett-Kohler Publishers.
Elgin, D. (1981) Voluntary Simplicity. New York: William Morrow and
Co.
Elgin, D. and Mitchell, A. (1977) Voluntary Simplicity, Summer,
Co-evolution Quarterly 3, Summer, pp. 5-18.
Etzioni, A. (1998) Voluntary simplicity: Characterisation, select
psychological implications, and societal consequences, Journal of
Economic Psychology, 19, pp. 619-643.
Freedman, J.L. (1978) Happy People: What Happiness it, Who Has It
and Why. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Gregg, R.B. (1936) The value of voluntary simplicity,
Vishva-Bharati Quarterly (Summer), Reprinted 1974 in Monas 4, Sept, pp.
1-3.
Hamilton, C. (2003) Growth Fetish. NSW: Allen & Unwin.
Hamilton, C. and Mail, E. (2003) Downshifting in Australia, A
Sea-change in the Pursuit of Happiness. Discussion paper No 50. ACT: The
Australia Institute.
Iwata, O. (1997) Attitudinal and behavioural correlates of
voluntary simplicity lifestyles, Social Behaviour and Personality, 25,
pp. 233-240.
Iwata, O. (1999) Perceptual and behavioural correlates of voluntary
simplicity lifestyles, Social Behaviour and Personality, 27, pp.
379-383.
Juniu, S. (2000) Downshifting: Regaining the essence of leisure,
Journal of Leisure Research, 32, pp. 69-73.
Lane, R.E. (1993) Does money buy happiness?, Public Interest, Fall,
p.58.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1981) Voluntary simplicity lifestyles and
energy conservation, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 8, pp. 243-240.
Maslow, A.H. (1968) Toward a Psychology of Being. Princeton: Von
Nostrand.
Mcknight, J. (2001) A Procrastinator's Guide to Simple Living,
Melbourne: University Press.
Mullins, P. (1991) Tourism urbanisation, International Journal of
Urban and Regional Change, 15, pp. 326-342.
Paelke, R. (1989) Environmentalism and the Future of Progressive
Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Salt, B. (2001) The Big Shift: Welcome to the Third Australian
Culture, Sydney: Hardie Grant.
Shama, A. and Wisenblit, J. (1984) Value of simplicity: Lifestyles
and motivation, Psychological Reports, 55, pp. 231-240.
Shama, A. (1996) A comment on 'the meaning and morality of
voluntary simplicity: History and hypotheses on deliberately denied
materialism, In: Belk, R.W., N. Dholakia and A. Venkatesh (eds.)
Consumption and Marketing, Macro Dimensions, Cincinnati, Ohio:
South-Western College
Schor, J. (1991) The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of
Leisure. New York: Basic Books.
Schor, J. (1998) The Overspent Americans: Why We Want What We
Don't Need. Oxford: Harper Perennial.
Sustainable Development Commission (2004) Redefining Prosperity:
Resource Productivity, Economic Growth and Sustainable Development,
Sustainable Development Report, London, June 2004.
Tan, P. (2000) Leaving the Rat Race to Get a Life: A Study of
Midlife Career Downshifting. Doctoral thesis, Swinburne University of
Technology, Melbourne.
The Harwood Group (1995), Yearning for balance: Views of Americans
on consumption, materialism and the environment. Prepared for the Merck
Family Fund.
Accessed on April 2005 (www.iisd.ca/linkages/consume/harwood.html)
Wachtel, P. L. (1989) The Poverty of affluence- a psychological
portrait of the American way of life, New Society Publishers.
Zavestoski, S. (2002) The social-psychological bases of
anticonsumption attitudes, Psychology & Marketing, 19 (2), pp.
149-165.
Table 1: Summary of base variables in percentage constituting
the three-cluster solution
Variables Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3
Overall Sample 63 82 57
(202)
Gender Male 17.5 48.2 61.7
[chi square] = Female 82.5 51.8 38.3
24.4, of = 2,
p<0.05,
Significant
Partner's No 54.4 9.4 93.3
employment Yes 45.6 90.6 6.7
[chi square] =
101.1, df = 2,
p<0.01,
Significant
Age 18-29 years 8.8 10.6 41.7
[chi square] = 30-59 years 66.7 87.1 53.3
47.6. df = 4, 60+ 24.6 2.4 5.0
p<0.01,
Significant
Education Less than 59.6 37.6 38.3
[chi square] = Year 12
10.6. of = 6, Year 12 22.8 22.4 28.3
p<0.05, Non degree post 10.5 20.0 16.7
Significant school (TAFE)
University 7.0 20.0 16.7
Household type Single person 15.8 0.0 23.3
[chi square] HH
N.A. Group HH 0.0 2.4 15.0
One parent HH 7.0 0.0 20.0
Couple with no 26.3 24.7 6.7
children
Couple with 43.9 70.6 11.7
children
Extended family 7.0 2.4 23.3
Marital status Single 3.5 1.2 78.3
[chi square] Married/de 71.9 98.8 1.7
N.A. facto
Divorced/ 12.3 0.0 16.7
Separated
Widowed 12.3 0.0 3.3
Income Less than 49.1 17.5 53.3
[chi square] = $36,000
31.02, df = 4, $36,000 to 40.0 41.2 23.3
p<0.05, $57,000
Significant $57,000 or more 10.5 41.2 23.3
Employment Wages/salaries 1.0 76.2 56.7
[chi square] Own business 1.2 16.0 18.3
N.A. Full time home 49.1 7.1 0.4
duties
Unemployed, 14.0 1.0 6.2
looking for
work
Unemployed, not 8.8 0 16.7
looking
for work
Retired 26.3 1.0 1.7
Occupations Professionals 25.0 43.5 31.7
(ASCO) and Managers
[chi square] = Associate 10.7 10.6 8.3
11.75. df = 8, professionals
p<0.05, Tradespersons & 8.9 16.5 15.0
Non-Significant clerical
workers
Intermediate 30.4 18.8 23.3
workers
Elementary 25.0 10.6 21.7
workers
(Source: The authors.)
Table 2: Classification results of predicted group
membership of cluster
Predicted Group membership
Cluster 1 2 3 Total
1 56 (98%) 0 1 57
2 0 80 (94%) 5 85
3 7 2 51 (85%) 60
(Source: The authors.)
Figure 2 The motives for downshifting in SEQ region
A more environmentally
friendly lifestyle 1%
More control and personal
fulfilment 24%
More time with family 23%
A healthier lifestyle 16%
More balance in life 14%
Time off to look
after a baby 10%
More financial
independence 10%
A less materialistics
lifestyle 2%
(Source: The authors; SEQ QOL Survey.)
Note: Table made from pie chart.
