The ‘supercenter’ effect can fuel overconsumption – Inquirer.com

Report on the Impact of Supercenters on Consumer Waste and Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction

A recent study investigated the correlation between the proliferation of large-format retailers, or “supercenters,” and consumer waste. The findings highlight a significant challenge to achieving key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production). This report summarizes the study’s methodology, key findings, and implications for sustainable development, proposing solutions aligned with global sustainability targets.

Research Findings: The “Supercenter Effect”

The study utilized a difference-in-differences analytical method to compare consumer waste trends in U.S. counties with and without new Walmart supercenter establishments over a decade. The analysis controlled for socioeconomic variables to isolate the impact of the retail format.

• The introduction of a supercenter leads to an increase in consumer waste of up to 7%.
• This increase is more significant when a new supercenter is opened compared to when an existing store is converted into a large-format one.

Causal Factors and Contradiction with SDG 12

The increase in waste, termed the “supercenter effect,” is driven by business models and consumer behaviors that directly oppose the principles of SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production. The goal of SDG 12 is to ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns, yet the supercenter model stimulates overconsumption.

1. Pricing and Sales Strategies: Business models centered on “everyday low prices” encourage bulk purchasing, often leading consumers to acquire more goods than necessary.
2. Store Location and Shopping Habits: Supercenters are typically located away from residential centers, prompting consumers to make fewer, larger shopping trips to maximize efficiency. This behavior frequently results in overpurchasing, leading to increased household waste as products expire or go unused.

This cycle of overconsumption and waste contributes to the nearly 300 million tons of consumer waste generated annually in the United States, undermining Target 12.5, which aims to substantially reduce waste generation through prevention and reduction.

Implications for Broader Sustainable Development Goals

The impact of the supercenter model extends beyond consumption patterns, affecting other critical SDGs.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The displacement of local neighborhood stores by large-format retailers alters the economic and social fabric of communities. Furthermore, the resulting increase in municipal waste places a significant financial and environmental burden on cities, challenging the objective of Target 11.6 to reduce the adverse environmental impact of cities, including waste management.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: Promoting local vendors and small businesses is a key driver for sustainable economic growth and job creation, as outlined in Target 8.3. The dominance of supercenters can stifle the growth of small enterprises, which have historically accounted for the majority of net new job creation.

Proposed Solutions for Sustainable Consumption

To mitigate the negative impacts of the supercenter effect and advance the SDGs, several solutions can be implemented.

1. Policy Implementation for Behavioral Change: Adopting policies such as “pay-as-you-throw,” which charges households based on waste volume, can incentivize consumers to reduce waste, directly supporting SDG 12.
2. Structural Support for a Circular Economy:
   • Revitalizing Neighborhood Stores: Promoting local vendors through city-led initiatives can facilitate smaller, more frequent shopping trips, reducing overpurchasing and waste. This approach simultaneously supports SDG 8 (local economic growth), SDG 11 (resilient communities), and SDG 12 (sustainable consumption).
   • Strengthening the Reuse Economy: Leveraging and expanding circular economy channels, such as thrift stores, food banks, and online marketplaces, provides an effective system for circulating surplus and used goods, preventing them from becoming waste.

Further research is required to determine the most effective combination of these solutions to foster consumption patterns that are both economically and environmentally sustainable.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on the “supercenter effect” and its impact on consumer waste and overconsumption directly addresses or connects to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: This is the most central SDG to the article. The entire piece revolves around unsustainable consumption patterns (overpurchasing) fueled by large retailers, leading to a significant increase in consumer waste. It also explores solutions like the “reuse economy” and promoting sustainable consumer behaviors.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The article connects the retail landscape of cities to waste management issues. It discusses how the location of supercenters away from residential areas contributes to overpurchasing and highlights the massive amount of waste that municipalities must manage (“close to 300 million tons of consumer waste every year”). The proposed solution of bringing back neighborhood stores is a direct comment on sustainable urban development.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The article proposes solutions that link sustainable consumption with local economic benefits. It suggests that promoting local vendors and neighborhood stores not only reduces waste but also supports small businesses, which are identified as major drivers of job creation (“accounted for 62% of net new job creation”).

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues and solutions discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 12.5: By 2030, substantially reduce waste generation through prevention, reduction, recycling and reuse.
   • The article’s core finding is that supercenters cause “an increase in consumer waste of up to 7%,” directly addressing the need to reduce waste generation. The discussion on overpurchasing leading to unused or expired goods is about waste prevention and reduction. Furthermore, the proposed solution of leveraging the “reuse economy” through thrift stores and food banks directly aligns with the “reuse” component of this target.
2. Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management.
   • The article quantifies the scale of the waste problem (“close to 300 million tons of consumer waste every year”) and notes the financial burden on society (“spends billions of dollars managing this waste”). This highlights the challenge cities face in municipal waste management, a key focus of this target. The proposed “pay-as-you-throw” policy is a direct strategy for managing municipal waste.
3. Target 8.3: Promote development-oriented policies that support productive activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises.
   • The article advocates for solutions that involve “bringing back neighborhood stores” and promoting “local vendors and stores.” It explicitly states that such solutions have “benefits for local economic growth by promoting small businesses that have historically accounted for 62% of net new job creation,” which directly supports the goal of fostering the growth of small enterprises to create jobs.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• For Target 12.5 (Reduce waste generation):
  • Indicator: Total national waste generation. The article provides a baseline figure: “the United States generates close to 300 million tons of consumer waste every year.” A reduction in this number would indicate progress.
  • Indicator: Percentage change in consumer waste linked to retail models. The study’s finding of a “7% increase in consumer waste” after a supercenter launch serves as a specific indicator of a negative impact that policies could aim to reverse.
  • Indicator (Implied): Volume of goods circulated through reuse channels. The article mentions thrift stores, food banks, and online marketplaces as underused channels. An increase in the volume of goods moving through these channels would be a positive indicator.
• For Target 11.6 (Reduce adverse environmental impact of cities):
  • Indicator: Cost of municipal waste management. The article states that “billions of dollars” are spent on managing waste. Tracking this expenditure could serve as an indicator of the economic burden of waste.
  • Indicator (Implied): Per capita or per household waste generation. The mention of “pay-as-you-throw” policies, which charge based on volume, implies that the volume of waste generated by households is a key metric to track and influence.
• For Target 8.3 (Promote small enterprises):
  • Indicator: Share of new jobs created by small businesses. The article cites the historical figure that small businesses “accounted for 62% of net new job creation.” This percentage is a direct indicator of the economic contribution of small enterprises.
  • Indicator (Implied): Density of local/neighborhood stores. A shift in the retail landscape from a few large supercenters to a greater number of small, local stores would be an indicator of progress towards the proposed solution.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: inquirer.com