Theor Soc (2008) 37:229–270 DOI 10.1007/s11186-007-9058-5 ARTICLE The citizen-consumer hybrid: ideological tensions and the case of Whole Foods Market Josée Johnston Published online: 30 December 2007 # Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2007 Abstract Ethical consumer discourse is organized around the idea that shopping, and particularly food shopping, is a way to create progressive social change. A key component of this discourse is the “citizen-consumer” hybrid, found in both activist and academic writing on ethical consumption. The hybrid concept implies a social practice –“voting with your dollar”–that can satisfy competing ideologies of consumerism (an idea rooted in individual self-interest) and citizenship (an ideal rooted in collective responsibility to a social and ecological commons). While a hopeful sign, this hybrid concept needs to be theoretically unpacked, and empirically explored. This article has two purposes. First, it is a theory-building project that unpacks the citizen-consumer concept, and investigates underlying ideological tensions and contradictions. The second purpose of the paper is to relate theory to an empirical case-study of the citizen-consumer in practice. Using the case-study of Whole Foods Market (WFM), a corporation frequently touted as an ethical market actor, I ask: (1) how does WFM frame the citizen-consumer hybrid, and (2) what ideological tensions between consumer and citizen ideals are present in the framing? Are both ideals coexisting and balanced in the citizen-consumer hybrid, or is this construct used to disguise underlying ideological inconsistencies? Rather than meeting the requirements of consumerism and citizenship equally, the case of WFM suggests that the citizen-consumer hybrid provides superficial attention to citizenship goals in order to serve three consumerist interests better: consumer choice, status distinction, and ecological cornucopianism. I argue that a true “citizen-consumer” hybrid is not only difficult to achieve, but may be internally inconsistent in a growth- oriented corporate setting. J. Johnston (*) Sociology Department, University of Toronto, 725 Spadina Ave., Toronto, ON M5S 2J4, Canada e-mail: [email protected] 230 Theor Soc (2008) 37:229–270 Whole Foods Market (WFM)1– the world’s largest ‘natural’ foods empire – is encouraging me to change the world by changing what I eat. Walking into a WFM store, I see a reassuring slogan, “Whole Foods, Whole People, Whole Planet,” advertised along with its “core values” on everything from paper napkins to the store walls. A large wall sign of a juicy, dripping steak is underscored with the text, “feel good about where you shop”–a promise and challenge reiterated on the brown- paper shopping bags and re-usable cloth bags. Another large sign floating from the ceiling depicts fish, and gives me the same “feel good” message along with the added information: “Seafood flown in from our very own wharf.” I go to pay for my groceries, which seem consistently to spill over from my prescribed list, and include items ranging from organic dupuis lentils to hand-made coconut dusted marsh- mallows. At the cashier, I notice pictures of local farmers depicted on the check-out screen, along with the assurance that I am supporting them with my shopping choices. As I walk past the check-out, I peruse a collection of pamphlets under the sign “Take-action!” and pick up some information on genetically engineered foods, and a “natural primer for the carb conscious.” I feel excited about the delicious food I have purchased, but confused about my role. Am I acting as a consumer looking out for my own interest in artisanal cheese and slow-rise bread, or am I a citizen supporting local agriculture and the “whole planet” through my shopping? Does Whole Foods offer a new opportunity for shoppers to become “citizen-consumers” who can have it all – pursue their interest in delicious food, while feeling good about their responsibilities to other people, other species, and the environment? Despite a broad consensus that consumers are key actors in global political systems (Beck 2000; Miller 1995), substantial debate remains about the extent to which these kinds of market opportunities represent new opportunities for consumers to exercise citizenship (Micheletti et al. 2004; Zukin and Smith 2004; Soper 2004; Slater 1997; Gabriel and Lang 2006; Scammell 2000).2 As shopping activities are more prominently linked to social and environmental causes, academic and activist accounts of consumer “activism” explicitly and implicitly collapse the distinction between “consumers” and “citizens,” suggesting that “voting with your dollar” is a 1 While WFM’s aspirations are oriented towards customer concerns of health and environmental sustainability, its growth strategies are unabashedly entrepreneurial, garnering massive growth, profits, and an impressive record of expansion and acquisitions. In 2006, WFM boasted revenues of $5,607 million − a 19% increase from 2005. Earnings per share in 2006 were $1.41, which was a 40% increase from the previous year. In 2007, the company reported that it employed 39,000 people, and had 195 stores in the USA, Canada, and the UK. Even though Whole Foods Market faces competition, particularly from the large-scale entry of WalMart into the organic sector, industry analysts consider Whole Foods Market the industry giant of natural foods (especially after the February 2007 $565 Million dollar buyout of its major competitor, Wild Oats) as well as a solid economic performer (e.g., WFM was named the best 2007 retail stock by The Motley Fool stock advisors; Lomax 2007). 2 Approaches emphasizing the manipulation of consumers are most often associated with the Frankfurt School and post-war critiques of the advertising industry (e.g., Marcuse 1964; Packard 1981, but today, such approaches are often viewed as overly pessimistic and old-fashioned because they underestimate consumer agency, and over-state the importance of selling (or manipulating) consumers (Micheletti 2003:70; Schudson 1991, 1984). Against Frankfurt pessimism, more optimistic accounts focus on consumers’ abilities to manipulate the commercial environment to construct meaningful lifestyles and identities (e.g., Fiske 1989; Abercrombie 1994; Nava 1991). Further, a voluminous business literature on the topic emphasizes how consumer demand fuels the growth of socially responsible corporations promoting social justice and environmental sustainability (Cairncross 1992; David 1991; Heald 1988). Theor Soc (2008) 37:229–270 231 highly significant, if not a preferred venue for political participation (Dickinson and Hollander 1991; Shaw et al. 2006; Stolle et al. 2005; Arnould 2007; Barnett et al. 2005; Schudson 2007; Stolle and Hooghe 2004; Hilton 2003:1). Even cautious accounts (Soper 2004; “’Gabriel and Lang 2005) suggest possibilities for a new era of hybrid citizen-consumers where shopping can serve as an entry point to larger political projects associated with citizenship. An investigation of the citizen-consumer is a timely subject of inquiry. The hybrid concept has gained considerable currency among consumers, and is increasingly prominent within academic work that addresses the hybrid concept’s sociological, economic, political, and philosophical implications (e.g., Jubas 2007;Slocum2004; Soper 2004, 2007). Although the academic literature depicts the citizen-consumer in relatively buoyant terms, there is a paucity of empirical work that examines its manifestation in “real-life” market settings and explores the ideological contradictions that play out on the ground level of ethical shopping. At the same time, there is also a need for social theoretic work on this topic (Gabriel and Lang 2005:39–40), that explores the contradictions that play out on the ground level of ethical shopping. As such, this article has two purposes: to explore theoretically and to study empirically a specific market context that frames ethical consumption and the hybrid citizen- consumer. First, this is a theory-building project that unpacks the citizen-consumer concept, asking how the citizen-consumer hybrid is assembled, what ideological tensions and contradictions does it appear to engender, and how it fits within a larger discourse of ethical consumption. The second purpose of the article is to relate theory to an empirical case-study of the citizen-consumer using a case-study of Whole Foods Market (WFM), a corporation frequently touted as an ethical market actor. To be clear, my goal is not to evaluate WFM and its transformative possibilities in their entirety, but to examine specifically the manifestation of the citizen-consumer concept in its shopping spaces, thus revealing some of its contradictions. Although it is important to understand how consumers engage with (and avoid) ethics while shopping, this article brackets the question of individual consumer motivations, which are often conflicted, complex, and multifaceted (Sassatelli 2006:224; Schudson 1991). The WFM case cannot be generalized to all other corporate retail environments,3 but it remains an important case given its market prominence, and the prominent way ethical consumer discourse is employed in its shopping spaces. Upon close inspection of the ideals that the citizen-consumer concept is purported to embody in this specific case study, I identify three ideological contradictions that privilege the goals of consumerism over the goals of citizenship. As a consequence, I argue that consumers generally and scholars