Global Brands, Cosmopolitan Socialization, and Consumption: the Case of ikea and the ‘Stuff’ of Ordinary Cosmopolitanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper we consider how the global brand ikea works as an agent of cosmopolitan socialization and shapes everyday practices of cosmopolitan consumption. Drawing on material from case study research, we consider ikea ’s support of cosmopolitan consumption through its emphasis on corporate social responsibility and framing of a cosmopolitan brandscape. We argue that ikea actively works to socialize individuals toward a moral cosmopolitan view, with the aim of enlisting consumers in the co-performance of global socio-environmental responsibility. Based on our interview data, we discuss how ikea does not so much cultivate cosmopolitan outlooks as affirm existing moral and aesthetic orientations, while easing ethical consumption concerns with a socially responsible image. Further, we show how ikea conducts a subtler, practical form of socialization: shaping ordinary cosmopolitan practices – ways of doing cosmopolitanism – with sustainable ‘stuff’ and in-store activity. In this way, ikea supports the co-production of a very ordinary, if not, convenient cosmopolitanism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".