Monday, February 13, 2006
Home and Garden, Part 2
In the comments to my post about lawns below, Jimmy makes some interesting points:
"When people buy property, they're also buying status. Owning your own home is a sign of financial stability and wealth (versus renting). When people are envisioning their first home, they probably envision cut grass (as is the convention for a nice home). Thus, if a homeowner were to let his or her grass grow out, the homeowner would be losing some of that status that he or she covets. Biologically, having a clean lawn is like the tail on a peacock. It serves no purpose, but to survive in spite of it is a symbol of strength. The high cost of maintaining a lawn is exactly what makes maintaining a lawn attractive. "
There are two nice insights here. First, individuals' preferences are shaped by observing those who act before them. I have a lawn because those who had houses before me had lawns. Later, when we discuss fads, norms, and convention formation formally, we will see that this instinct to follow along is an essential part of the models used to explain these phenomena.
Second, I like the recognition that lawns may serve an important signaling value (do you all still cover signaling and screening in 1010a and 1011a?). Here is an activity which is more costly for some (like me apparently) to undertake. As such, those for whom lawn care is relatively cheap can use their nice lawns to signal others something about their type. But what? What does having a nice lawn signal to others that makes engaging in this costly activity valuable? That is, what is the return to the investment in the costly signal? Can it really just be signaling that I have the resources (or in Jimmy's words the "strength") to maintain a lawn, or is there something else?
As an aside, I have similar questions about living rooms as I have about lawns. Why do many people still build houses with living rooms (and formal dining rooms)? I have spent substantial time in a variety of houses in my life, and in every house that has a separate living room that I've ever been in, the family uses it like once a year. I've been in many houses that didn't have them, and I certainly didn't miss them. Given how expensive each square foot of housing is, why not spend the money on space that is actually useful. Is there also signaling value in spending thousands of dollars on rooms that never get used?
(Needless to say when I build a house it is unlikely to have either a living room or a lawn.)
"When people buy property, they're also buying status. Owning your own home is a sign of financial stability and wealth (versus renting). When people are envisioning their first home, they probably envision cut grass (as is the convention for a nice home). Thus, if a homeowner were to let his or her grass grow out, the homeowner would be losing some of that status that he or she covets. Biologically, having a clean lawn is like the tail on a peacock. It serves no purpose, but to survive in spite of it is a symbol of strength. The high cost of maintaining a lawn is exactly what makes maintaining a lawn attractive. "
There are two nice insights here. First, individuals' preferences are shaped by observing those who act before them. I have a lawn because those who had houses before me had lawns. Later, when we discuss fads, norms, and convention formation formally, we will see that this instinct to follow along is an essential part of the models used to explain these phenomena.
Second, I like the recognition that lawns may serve an important signaling value (do you all still cover signaling and screening in 1010a and 1011a?). Here is an activity which is more costly for some (like me apparently) to undertake. As such, those for whom lawn care is relatively cheap can use their nice lawns to signal others something about their type. But what? What does having a nice lawn signal to others that makes engaging in this costly activity valuable? That is, what is the return to the investment in the costly signal? Can it really just be signaling that I have the resources (or in Jimmy's words the "strength") to maintain a lawn, or is there something else?
As an aside, I have similar questions about living rooms as I have about lawns. Why do many people still build houses with living rooms (and formal dining rooms)? I have spent substantial time in a variety of houses in my life, and in every house that has a separate living room that I've ever been in, the family uses it like once a year. I've been in many houses that didn't have them, and I certainly didn't miss them. Given how expensive each square foot of housing is, why not spend the money on space that is actually useful. Is there also signaling value in spending thousands of dollars on rooms that never get used?
(Needless to say when I build a house it is unlikely to have either a living room or a lawn.)
// posted by BW @ 12:27 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Jenny, I totally agree with your question about back yards. I wondered the same thing.
Huilin, I agree that they are signalling that they have the means (or whatever) to maintain the lawn, what I am curious about is what do they gain by doing this? That is, for me to expend time, money, and/or effort maintaining a lawn there's got to be something in it for me. That is, there has to be some benefit to distinguishing myself from others using this method. I am struggling to put my finger on what that benefit is.
Post a Comment
Huilin, I agree that they are signalling that they have the means (or whatever) to maintain the lawn, what I am curious about is what do they gain by doing this? That is, for me to expend time, money, and/or effort maintaining a lawn there's got to be something in it for me. That is, there has to be some benefit to distinguishing myself from others using this method. I am struggling to put my finger on what that benefit is.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]