explaining conspicuous consumption 9
prestige is more subtle: it affects patterns of deference, structures actors’
preferences, and directs rules and norms of social institutions (Barnett
and Duvall 2005 b). Prestige can also affect the levels of significant psy-
chological factors such as self- esteem (Maslow 1943 ). Through these pro-
cesses prestige can produce significant psychological, social, and material
benefits. However, because of the diffused nature of prestige, the imme-
diacy of the relation between cause and effect is absent: prestige paybacks
can occur years after the initial investment; they can come in small incre-
ments or in large installments; they can be paid by nearby observers or by
unintended audiences; they can be objective or subjective. The establish-
ment of causality in a diffused setting is challenging.
A somewhat circular reply to this conundrum comes from actors’ own
behavior. Prestige matters if actors believe that it matters. A systematic
recurrence of acts of conspicuous consumption tells us that actors indeed
believe that prestige matters. However, the circularity of this argument
is somewhat unsatisfactory. The fact that prestige- seeking actors believe
that their behavior is likely to result in increased levels of prestige does
not necessarily mean that they are correct. It might well be the case that
prestige- seeking policies are a collective form of “chasing ghosts.” Hence,
despite the challenges of diffused power, we need better elaboration of
the benefits of prestige. The literature offers a plethora of mechanisms
that identify prestige benefits. In mapping these arguments, it is useful
to differentiate between objective prestige benefits and subjective ones,
though both kinds matter.
From the objective side, prestige matters because prestigious actors
are privy to tangible advantages. Prestige affects patterns of deference
and responsiveness, regulates access to positions of influence, and shapes
the distribution of material benefits (Lake 2009 ).^21 A hierarchical system
tends to transfer values from bottom to top, allowing the actors at top posi-
tions to get more than their “fair” shares. Galtung ( 1964 , 97 – 98 ) notes that
where there is stratification, there will also be exploitation. Such benefits
make the top- dog position a very lucrative one. Accordingly, an investment
in prestige is an investment in social capital that can be converted into
material capital. Amassing such easily convertible capital, according to
Bourdieu, is “the most valuable form of accumulation in a society” ([ 1977 ]
2003 , 179 – 80 , italics added).
The second approach focuses instead on actors’ subjective worlds.
Prestige may be desired simply because it makes us feel good. Psycholo-
gists view esteem and recognition as an essential human need and even as
