TYPE Original Research
PUBLISHED 26 August 2022
DOI 10.3389/frsus.2022.958538
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
Aurianne Stroude,
Université de Fribourg, Switzerland
REVIEWED BY
Rachel Eike,
Iowa State University, United States
Tadhg O’Mahony,
University of Turku, Finland
*CORRESPONDENCE
Viola Muster
SPECIALTY SECTION
This article was submitted to
Sustainable Consumption,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Sustainability
RECEIVED 31 May 2022
ACCEPTED 08 August 2022
PUBLISHED 26 August 2022
CITATION
Muster V, Iran S and Münsch M (2022)
The cultural practice of decluttering as
household work and its potentials for
sustainable consumption.
Front. Sustain. 3:958538.
doi: 10.3389/frsus.2022.958538
COPYRIGHT
©2022 Muster, Iran and Münsch. This
is an open-access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License (CC BY).
The use, distribution or reproduction
in other forums is permitted, provided
the original author(s) and the copyright
owner(s) are credited and that the
original publication in this journal is
cited, in accordance with accepted
academic practice. No use, distribution
or reproduction is permitted which
does not comply with these terms.
The cultural practice of
decluttering as household work
and its potentials for sustainable
consumption
Viola Muster1*, Samira Iran2and Marlene Münsch3
1TU Berlin/Chair of Economic Education and Sustainable Consumption, ConPolicy and Technical
University Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2TU Berlin/Chair of Economic Education and Sustainable
Consumption, Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 3ConPolicy, Berlin, Germany
Popular literature and guidebooks on minimalism and decluttering have
brought the idea of “less is more” into the mainstream. Although decluttering
constitutes a central household chore in consumer societies, it is rarely
communicated as work within the current popular minimalism discourse,
but rather as an expression of self-care. Whether and to what extent this
“lifestyle minimalism” can contribute to sustainable consumption has –
with a few exceptions – not yet been studied in detail. In this article,
decluttering is first conceptualized in between housework and self-care.
Based on this work, potentials and limits for the promotion of sustainable
consumption are outlined. Finally, initial insights from an ongoing citizen
science project on decluttering in Germany are presented. The qualitative
results from two workshops and two reflection exercises show that the
main motivation for participants is the dissatisfaction with their multitude
of possessions and the desire for fewer material possessions in the future.
The decision to declutter can be understood as a window of opportunity
in which individuals are willing to reflect on and realign their possessions
and desires for goods. Thus, we argue that decluttering can be a relevant
starting point for changing consumption behavior toward (more) sustainable
consumption. At the same time, it remains unclear whether and to what
extent the participants’ willingness to change regarding possessions and
consumption actually leads to more sustainable consumption behavior after
decluttering. It is even conceivable that the newly gained space will stimulate
additional consumption. Decluttering would then rather function as a catalyst
for further consumption (and would have no or rather a negative contribution
to sustainability goals). Further research is needed to shed light on this.
KEYWORDS
decluttering, lifestyle minimalism, sustainable consumption, household work, care
Introduction
Modern consumer societies are characterized by households that are filled to the brim
with products and goods (Baudrillard, 2018). Consumers accumulate things–they collect,
store and stow them away (Belk, 1982). However, hardly anyone knows the total number
of goods or can remember every single thing in their possession. As Belk (1988, p. 160)
Frontiers in Sustainability 01 frontiersin.org
Muster et al. 10.3389/frsus.2022.958538
points out “we are what we have and [...] [this is the] most basic
and powerful fact of consumer behavior.” In most households,
however, the spatial capacities for storing goods and things
are limited. To address this issue, people either try to gain
additional storage space (e.g., through purchasing additional
wardrobes) or they start to declutter. Such practices enable them
to continue consuming regularly and to actively take part in
consumer society.
Sorting out and decluttering goods are central household
tasks in consumer societies. In recent years, decluttering
has increasingly received attention, especially through the
publications of Marie Kondo (Kondo, 2014) and numerous
follow-up self-help and guidebooks, blogs and magazine articles
on this topic. In popular literature however, decluttering is no
longer pictured as simple housework, but rather as an expression
of self-care (Lee H.-H., 2017;Ludwigsen, 2019;Chamberlin and
Callmer, 2021). Even though concepts and movements such
as voluntary simplicity or minimalism have been known for
decades (Etzioni, 1999), this so-called “lifestyle minimalism”
(Meissner, 2019) of Marie Kondo and Co has brought the
idea of “living with less” into the mainstream. The central
promise of “lifestyle minimalism” is that having less possessions
promotes well-being. In recent years, numerous researchers have
examined the link between minimalism and well-being (for an
overview see e.g., Hook et al., 2021). However, whether and to
what extent the practice of decluttering, as a specific method
to achieve a minimalist life, can contribute to more sustainable
consumption in the long term has not yet been sufficiently
explored. In a study on the KonMari method Chamberlin and
Callmer (2021) provide initial promising qualitative evidence
that decluttering can have positive effects on sustainable
consumption. They show, for instance, that practitioners of
the KonMari method reflect on their goods and the question
of what satisfaction they experience from their material
possessions. They also show that the practitioners express less
interest in new acquisitions. Building on these initial results, a
further consideration – both conceptually and empirically – of
possible potentials and limitations of decluttering for sustainable
consumption is considered important.
On the one hand, it can be argued that decluttering
guidebooks provide diverse impulses for reflection and learning
that might help consumers question their needs, existing
possessions, and the necessity of new acquisitions. Decluttering
guides often describe methods for decluttering very clearly and
give concrete suggestions for implementation. The resulting
positive effects of “liberation from excess” (Paech, 2012)
can be experienced directly after decluttering and might
motivate people to own fewer things in the long term.
Further, communicating decluttering as a form of self-care can
potentially help to promote a positive perception of living with
reduced possessions and thereby attract new target groups for
sustainable consumption (even if unintentionally). On the other
hand, decluttering is focused at getting rid of as many goods as
possible in the shortest feasible timeframe. Since sustainability-
oriented practices of passing on goods, reselling or repairing
them are rather slow and time-consuming, they can hardly be
implemented in the rather fast approach of decluttering. Also,
decluttering guides usually only address so-called “peanuts” of
sustainable consumption, but rarely the most environmentally
relevant areas of consumption [e.g., space and heating, mobility,
meat consumption (Bilharz and Schmitt, 2011;Geiger et al.,
2018)]. In addition, there is a certain risk of relapse into
old consumption patterns, as the newly created space might
stimulate new purchases.
Against this background, the article at hand takes a
close look at the phenomenon of decluttering, illustrates its
characteristics within general household work, discusses its
potentials and limits for sustainable consumption and presents
initial results of participatory research components from an
ongoing research project. Firstly, the article describes how the
cultural practice and meaning of decluttering has changed
in recent years. We thereby shed light on the emergence of
decluttering as a method within the framework of “lifestyle
minimalism” and locate decluttering in between the spectrum of
housework and (self-)care. Secondly, we develop our reflections
and conceptual considerations on potentials and limits of
decluttering for the promotion of sustainable consumption.
Thirdly, we present first qualitative results from our ongoing
citizen science research project. To be able to better classify
the results, we first explain our participatory research approach.
Then we present the results of two workshops and the evaluation
of two reflection exercises, which have been answered by the
citizen scientists. In doing so, we provide first qualitative
evidence from a selected group of citizens in Germany for
the discussion on potentials and limits of decluttering for
sustainable consumption.
Decluttering: A method for lifestyle
minimalism and household work
In a first step, we outline the development of minimalism
as a lifestyle concept and decluttering as a central method to
achieve a minimalist life. In a second step, we show that this
lifestyle-related, pop-cultural understanding of decluttering is
closely related to a reframing of housework as self-care.
The evolution of minimalism as lifestyle
concept and the role of decluttering
Looking at human history, various cultures and religious
communities (e.g., Hinduism and Buddhism) have associated
a “good life” with limiting possessions or avoiding excessive
consumption. However, these historical movements were not
concerned with a reduction of possessions in the context of
Frontiers in Sustainability 02 frontiersin.org
Muster et al. 10.3389/frsus.2022.958538
affluence, but rather with a forward-looking avoidance of “too
much” as well as an adequate use of resources that were perceived
as limited for each individual. During recent decades, terms
such as voluntary simplicity, simple life, minimalism, or anti-
consumption have been used to describe lifestyles that focus on
reduction of material possession (Rebouças and Soares, 2021).
Etzioni (1998, p. 620) for example, describes voluntary simplicity
as “the choice out of free will [...] to limit expenditure on
consumer goods and services, and to cultivate non-materialistic
sources of satisfaction and meaning.” Alexander and Ussher
(2012, p. 66) understand “the Voluntary Simplicity Movement
[...] as a diverse social movement made up of people who are
resisting high consumption lifestyles and who are seeking, in
various ways, a lower consumption but higher quality of life
alternative.” So-called voluntary simplifiers usually reflect on
the influence of overconsumption and/or overwork on their
personal wellbeing and “prefer to determine what is enough for
themselves and earn only what they need to get by” (Grigsby,
2012, p. 1). Besides, the process of downshifting can be seen
as an act toward voluntary simplicity (Aidar and Daniels,
2020), which aims at increasing one’s well-being by decreasing
work-load, income, and the total consumption level (Tan,
2000;Schor, 2008;Chhetri et al., 2009). All these downshifting
practices within the context of voluntary simplicity, simple life
or minimalism have the potential to contribute to sufficiency.
Sufficiency is considered a key sustainability strategy – which,
unlike consistency and efficiency – is behaviorally oriented and
focusses on the absolute reduction of resource consumption
(Schneidewind and Zahrnt, 2014).
Even though there was and is a lot of scientific interest
in downshifting concepts and their potential for reduced
consumption, they remain niche phenomena in Western
consumer societies. Much has been written about it, but the
actual implementation of a minimalist life is more imagination
than reality for the majority. However, it seems that this
has changed to some extent with the great popularity of
Marie Kondo in the public (Kondo, 2014). Her reception of
minimalism and especially the combination with “decluttering”
has brought the vision of “happiness through less” into the
mainstream. Vladimirova (2021, p. 112) argues that the success
of the method of decluttering was not accidental, but rather
timely: “The book appeared exactly at the moment when
the disorder caused by excessive consumption, including fast
fashion, reached a new peak”. Khamis (2019) describes Marie
Kondos KonMari method as part of a broader trend of
minimalism and alternative consumption that emerged after the
global financial crisis in 2008 and the growing awareness of the
negative effects of capitalism.
A closer look at Marie Kondos approach reveals that it is not
only a guide for clearing out and decluttering. Rather, it promises
nothing less than a life-changing impact (Kondo, 2014). As
Marie Kondo writes in the introduction of her work (Kondo,
2014, 2/3): “A dramatic reorganization of the home causes
corresponding dramatic changes in lifestyle and perspective. It
is life transforming.” Based on the “life-changing” perspective on
the benefits of decluttering and the holistic approach, numerous
guidebooks, blogs, video-blogs (vlogs) and magazine features
emerged in the following years. In contrast to earlier (scientific)
publications on the topic of minimalism, voluntary simplicity or
sufficiency, these guidebooks are characterized by being practical
and easy to understand. They contain concrete suggestions
that seem to fit well into everyday lives of consumers and
convey the feeling that anyone can use the method and start
immediately. Further, simple and minimalistic designs are used
to showcase content and exercises. The suggested techniques,
tips and exercises are comprehensive and versatile. They do
not only cover decluttering and tidying up the house, but also,
for example, the reorganization of communication and work
routines (Meissner, 2019).
Lifestyle minimalism and decluttering are characterized
by a central “promise of happiness”: In contrast to the
basic assumption of consumer society (more goods make
happy), the opposite assumption is propagated (fewer goods
make happy) (Biana, 2020). This promise corresponds with
a contemporary mindset in which exhaustion and overload
due to consumerism and over-consumption are widespread in
the mainstream of society. Studies also confirm the negative
effects of overconsumption and clutter on well-being (Roster
et al., 2016;Swanson and Ferrari, 2022) while showing clearly
positive effects of decluttering on well-being (Hook et al.,
2021). However, the political, economic, and cultural framework
conditions that cause or contribute to the accumulation of
clutter and the corresponding exhaustion are hardly even
considered within decluttering guides (which in turn comes
along with the positive observed effect of simplified content that
reaches a larger target group). The focus of lifestyle minimalism
and decluttering lies on the “aestheticization of individual
restrain” within the existing economic system (Khamis, 2019).
Since the focus is to achieve more joy, happiness, and well-
being through decluttering, the “work character” of decluttering
is concealed. Decluttering as a central household task, however,
is much older than the lifestyle trend of minimalism and
decluttering suggests. In the following, we will therefore
elaborate on decluttering in the context of household work.
Decluttering as housework and care
Even though the available living space has steadily increased
in Western countries over the past decades (e.g., in Germany
alone between 1995 and 2004 an increase by about 13% even
with a stagnating population, trend is still upwards, UBA
[German Federal Environment Agency], 2010), space for the
accumulation and storage of goods is finite. Similar to the
“scarcity of time” due to an increase in time-consuming activities
(Rosa, 2003), space in flats and houses is limited and can only
Frontiers in Sustainability 03 frontiersin.org
Muster et al. 10.3389/frsus.2022.958538
be expanded very slowly, if at all. Practices of sorting out,
decluttering, giving away and disposing of goods are accordingly
regular and necessary activities to continue to take active part
in consumer society. It is therefore almost surprising that
companies that make a big advertising effort to sell new products
do not offer much advice and support for consumers in getting
rid of things. Furthermore, it is remarkable that decluttering is a
rather “young phenomenon” (see The evolution of minimalism
as lifestyle concept and the role of decluttering) and not an
established issue in research on household work. One reason for
this might be the limited recognition of consumption work as
household work.
With the emergence of consumer societies in the mid-20th
century, consumer work became central tasks of households
(Glucksmann, 2016;Wheeler and Glucksmann, 2016). Contrary
to what the term suggests, consumption is always productive
and thus involves work. Consumption work can be defined as
“all work necessary for the purchase, use, re-use and disposal of
consumption goods and services” (Glucksmann, 2016, p. 881).
Consumption work is necessary because the mere acquisition
of consumer goods is rarely sufficient to completely satisfy
consumer needs. Goods must be adapted and further processed
to be individually valuable (e.g., a pleasant dinner requires
not only the purchase of food, but also, for example, cooking
and table setting). Many of these consumption-related activities
are usually understood as household work. However, they are
not sufficiently linked to the conditions and challenges of a
consumer society yet. Research on household work still has
a strong focus on the social recognition of unpaid household
work and its gender-specific distribution (Thébaud et al., 2021).
Moreover, there is an emphasis on the variety, quantity, and
duration of household work, but less on individual, selected
activities. The causes, functions, and conditions of individual
household activities in the context of a consumer society play
a subordinate role. This becomes particularly obvious with the
example of decluttering. To the best of our knowledge, sorting
out and decluttering activities, hardly play a role in the analysis
of household work (Sweet, 1988;Keith Bryant et al., 2004;
Eichler, 2008;Moreno-Colom, 2017).
In the following, we therefore aim to bring in an
alternative understanding of decluttering as household work.
According to Eichler (2008, p. 15) “[h]ousehold work consists
of the sum of all physical, mental, emotional and spiritual
tasks that are performed for one’s own or someone else’s
household and that maintain the daily life of those for
whom one has responsibility.” Household work thus always
has two dimensions: an activity- and thing-related dimension
(housework) and a more relationship-related dimension (care)
(Eichler, 2008). Both dimensions are directly linked to
each other.
Before decluttering becomes relevant and necessary, sorting,
organizing, and storing goods are the preceding central
household tasks. As Collins and Stanes (2021, p. 4) point out,
storage is a “central routine practice in the organization of
everyday life [...] [and] presents a range of practical solutions
to managing material accumulations.” Cwerner and Metcalfe
(2003, p. 229) illustrate, that storage is the “key to understanding
how people create order in the home” and even in their
life. The authors argue that storage is much more than the
simple physical-material arrangement of things but in fact
an expression of caring for people and goods (Cwerner and
Metcalfe, 2003;Collins and Stanes, 2021). There are various
forms and ways of storing and the “right degree of tidiness”
is a very subjective one. Nevertheless, it can be argued that
there are strong cultural notions and implicit norms about how
“filled with things” a home should be. The impact of these
implicit norms is particularly evident in the social exclusion and
devaluation of so-called hoarders (Newell, 2018). Hoarders are
characterized by owning more things than they can adequately
store and the inability to let things go. They overcrowd their
houses with things that–according to current norms-belong in
storage or in the garbage. This makes hoarders “reclassified as
belonging to the ‘outside’ of deviancy, as someone incapable
of maintaining themselves” (Newell, 2018, p. 4). Within the
tension of successful, almost invisible storage on the one side
and hoarding on the other side, the need to declutter arises.
The practice of decluttering thus serves the central function
of preservation and regeneration in households. Assuming the
continuous accumulation of goods, and at some point, a filled
storage space, practices of decluttering enable households to
repeatedly acquire and successfully store goods. Even if it seems
obvious and rather simple to get rid of things, when the quantity
of goods becomes too much, decluttering often poses a great
challenge. As Lee H.-H. (2017, p. 454) illustrates, “consumers
often attribute the cause of having ‘too much’ to the overall
volume rather than specific objects, which makes it hard to
choose what to discard.” In addition, many things are not
“neutral,” but people have multiple emotional ties with them.
Apart from the analysis of specific decluttering methods
such as KonMari (Lee H.-H., 2017;Chamberlin and Callmer,
2021), there is–to the best of our knowledge–still a lack of
research on the frequency, arrangement and gender-specific
distribution of decluttering as a task of household work. It
can be assumed that there is a wide range of decluttering
practices that people use. While some people might repeatedly
sort out single things at short time intervals, others might
take more time to dispose of a larger number of things and
do this at larger time intervals. Even if people declutter in
short intervals, decluttering is not a daily chore. With regard
to the different types and frequency of housework (daily
housework includes e.g., food preparation, dish washing or
laundry; occasional housework includes e.g., construction and
repairs, gardening or shopping) decluttering can be understood
as occasional housework (Moreno-Colom, 2017). From research
on housework it is well known that women are more involved in
daily housework, while men are more likely to do the occasional
Frontiers in Sustainability 04 frontiersin.org
Muster et al. 10.3389/frsus.2022.958538
chores (Moreno-Colom, 2017). Whether and to what extent this
is transferable to decluttering is not yet known.
Decluttering as housework involves a variety of mental
and physical activities. As Roster (2001) already shows for the
disposal of goods, the psychological “process of dispossession”
can be rather complex. Moreover, different notions of tidiness
and cleanliness might influence the decluttering process (Dion
et al., 2014). In a first step of the decluttering process, even if only
for a few seconds, goods are selected, examined, and reflected
upon in terms of their usefulness and (personal) value. In this
step, it is often necessary to consider the value of goods for
other members of the household. This can be accompanied by
negotiation processes about whether to keep things or not. In
a second step, some of the goods are removed from their usual
place of storage, while others are put back. Often, the returned
goods are then re-sorted and re-ordered. After this selection
process, the phase of disposal or transfer takes place as a third
step. While a large part of the goods will probably be disposed
of, it is also conceivable that goods are resold or given away.
It can be assumed that there are very different contexts and
situations in which decluttering takes place. However, unlike
other occasional household chores, decluttering seems to have
some frequent overriding occasions, such as the change of
seasons, moving house or redecorating the home. In this respect,
too, empirical data would be fruitful.
While decluttering is hardly considered as housework
work in both scientific research literature and the decluttering
guidebooks, the second dimension of household work, namely
(self-)care, is emphasized to a large extent (Ludwigsen, 2019;
Casey and Littler, 2021;Chamberlin and Callmer, 2021). This
raises the question of how consumption and care are generally
connected. As Godin and Langlois (2021) discuss, consumption
often implies multiple care-giving activities for oneself and
others within households. With reference to various studies, they
illustrate how consumption activities often involve anticipating
the needs and preferences of others. In addition to regular
care activities through consumption (e.g., cooking, laundry
etc.), there are numerous consumption practices that express
caring also on a symbolic level (such as cooking soup for
the sick, ironing a shirt for a spouse’s important appointment,
leaving lights on for family members coming home late) (Godin
and Langlois, 2021). In the context of care and sustainable
consumption, gender inequalities always become apparent.
As still more women carry out care-giving activities in the
household (as just mentioned, e.g., cooking), women are also
more likely to practice more sustainable forms of these activities
(e.g., buying organic food for cooking) (Bloodhart and Swim,
2020).
The analysis of consumption activities regarding their care
dimensions can also be applied to decluttering. From this
perspective, decluttering can be understood as a care-giving
activity as it ensures the (re)production of a well-organized and
pleasant home. Decluttering ensures that the household is not
filled to overflowing, that household members feel comfortable,
that household members save time looking for their goods, and
finally, that the routine consumption practices can continue.
Decluttering, however, is mostly not communicated or
marketed as care in general, but as self-care and self -help
(Lee H.-H., 2017;Ludwigsen, 2019;Meissner, 2019;Ouellette,
2019;Casey and Littler, 2021;Chamberlin and Callmer, 2021).
The WHO [World Health Organization] (2018) defines self-
care as “the ability of individuals, families and communities
to promote health, prevent disease, maintain health, and to
cope with illness and disability with or without the support
of a healthcare provider.” Self-care includes a comprehensive
set of different activities that can entail both therapeutic (e.g.,
medication administration) and personal care (e.g., daily living
activities such as bathing, eating, exercise) (Godfrey et al.,
2010). Decluttering as self-care assumes that clutter has certain
negative psychological and even physical implications (e.g.,
stress, discomfort, and overload). These negative effects–so the
assumption–can be reduced by liberating the home, and even
the whole life, from too much stuff and clutter. Decluttering as a
process of reducing (material) possessions might therefore help
to increase well-being, balance, and happiness (Kondo, 2014;
Lee H.-H., 2017;Chamberlin and Callmer, 2021). Accordingly,
decluttering techniques (and also other cleaning and tidying
“lifehacks”) are not only seen as “a quicker route to completing
mundane drudgery, but a means of achieving a better emotional
and affective state” (Casey and Littler, 2021, p. 10). Following this
understanding, decluttering is not only an externally directed,
thing-related activity, but also has a strong introspective
meaning. “Tidying [and also decluttering] is [presented as]
a dialogue with oneself. Through one’s possessions, one is
actually conversing with oneself. What one wants to own is how
one wants to live life” (Biana, 2020, p. 83). Regardless of the
question of how much decluttering can actually contribute to
successful self-care and well-being (Roster et al., 2016;Swanson
and Ferrari, 2022), there are numerous critical assessments
of the concept from a socio-economic perspective. Casey and
Littler (2021), for instance, see the interpretation of decluttering,
contributing to women continuing and willingly taking on the
greater share of housework. Ouellette (2019) argues similarly
and understands decluttering as a “neoliberal technique” that
depends in particular on work by women. She argues that the
“happiness-promise” of the KonMari-method is problematic as
it obscures structural problems of the consumer society and
the distribution of housework. Meissner (2019, p. 193) criticizes
that the understanding of decluttering as a form of self-help
highlights the current shift of societal responsibility to individual
self-responsibility and encourages “entrepreneurial practices of
self-development and ‘life-maximization”’.
Building on this understanding (and critique) of decluttering
as housework and self-care, the following section will outline
possible chances and risks decluttering entails for the promotion
of sustainable consumption.
Frontiers in Sustainability 05 frontiersin.org
Loading more pages...