The End of Possession (The Story of Stuff)
 We Are Who We Are, Not the Stuff We Own
There was a time when products were solutions. New technologies were used to create new tools which made life easier. At the end of the nineteenth century, for example, smelly and polluting gas lamps were replaced by the newly invented incandescent light bulb. The first light bulbs would easily last for over 2,500 hours and soon the technology was available to make everlasting bulbs. Quickly, however, the producers of these bulbs realised that this wouldn’t be very good for business and so the decision was made to limit the lifespan of the bulbs to a 1,000 hours; planned obsolescence had been born. Nowadays every self-respecting company employs staff with the specific task to make sure products break down after a predetermined time of operation.
In the global rat race to maximize profits, it quickly became clear that planned obsolescence wasn’t quite doing the trick as there’s a limit on how quick something can break and still have costumers buy a new version of the same product. Following in the footsteps of marketing genius Edward Bernays, industry came up with the ultimate solution: perceived obsolescence. After a century of conditioning by advertisements, we now all happily throw away perfectly good functioning products just because we want — not because we need — a new one. At the same time we are creating a sustainable amount of unnecessary waste and pollution. What to do about this race to the bottom? Watch the 22-minute “Story of Stuff” video in the header of this article to find an answer.
Recently I came across the ideas of German architect Thomas Rau who proposes a truly revolutionary new economic system. To have us come off the consumerist treadmill fuelled by planned and perceived obsolescence, Rau suggests that products become services. His reasoning for this is that, by turning a product into a service, the responsibility for the consequences of the product will shift from the consumer back to the producer. Take lighting for example. If, instead of buying light bulbs, a consumer would buy hours of light provided by the producer, it would make economic sense for the producer to create bulbs which will last, are energy efficient and completely recyclable. Another example is refrigeration. Cheaper fridges tend to use a lot more electricity than the more expensive ones, but the average consumer doesn’t link the cost of usage to the initial investment of buying a new fridge. If a consumer was to buy cooling hours instead of a fridge, the service provider would make sure to use a more energy efficient fridge to maximise profits. Although his ideas need some fine-tuning, I think Rau is on to something. By making it profitable for producers to create energy efficient and fully recyclable products, we could be on the brink of a paradigm shift.
Rau’s ideas might spell the end for planned obsolescence, but they don’t quite take care of the scourge of perceived obsolescence. The solution to this lies within ourselves. For the past century we have been conditioned to identify who we are by what we own. The challenge is to reconnect with our ontological Selves and accept that what defines us is WHO we are and not what we own.
[T]here you are
Resources:
 Leonard, A. (2007). The Story of Stuff. (video) Retrieved 2 June 2017, from Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GorqroigqM&ab_channel=TheStoryofStuffProject