14.10.2010
1
Environmental psychology and
environmental protection
Environmental values, attitudes
and behaviour
Philosophical perspectives on the
environment
• Biocentric - ecologic - economic (Petulla, 1980)
• Ecocentric - technocentric (O'Riordan (1980)
• Materialistic - quality of life (Inglehart (1977)
HEP versus NEP
(Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978; Dunlap et al.,
1992)
• "Human Exemptionalism Paradigm" (HEP):
– Human beings are exempt from the laws of nature
and rulers over the physical world.
• New Environmental (or Ecological)
Paradigm:
– Today, the HEP is assumed to be replaced by a
new world view more compatible with
environmental limits, hereafter NEP
14.10.2010
2
Environmental value-orientations as basis for
action
• Stern & Dietz (1994): a tripartite model
– Egoistic:perceived personal threat from
environmental problems is most important
– Altruistic:negative consequences for others is most
important
– Biospheric:perceived consequences for the
biosphere
The value-belief-norm thery of
environmentalism (Stern et al, 2000)
Biospheric
Altruistic
Egoistic
Ecological
Worldview
(NEP)
Adverse
conse-
quences
for
valued
objects
Perceiv-
ed
ability
to
reduce
threat
Sense of
moral
obligation
to take
pro-
environ-
mental
actions
Activism
Non-
activist
public
sphere
behaviors
so
Private
sphere
behaviors
Behaviors
in
organi-
sations
Values
Identity
Attitude Intention
Barriers/
opportunities
Actual
measure
taken
Factors assumed to influence choice of environment- friendly
measure (adapted after Biel & Grankvist, 2005)
14.10.2010
3
General environmental attitudes
and values as predictors of behaviour
• In general relatively weak relations between environmental
attitudes and behaviour
– Scott & Willits (1994): acceptance of parts of the NEP concept is
associated with the enactment of both consumer and political
behaviours focused on protecting the environment
– Widegren (1998): personal norm a better predictor of proenvironmental
behavior and willingness to pay than the NEP scale
– Bamberg (1996): General attitudes towards traffic-policy have no
direct impact on car-using behavior, but a strong direct impact on the
situation- and behavior-specific cognitions
General attitudes/motives:
Ecocentrism/Anthropocentrism scale
• Thompson & Barton (1994): Different reasons
or motives for acting environment-friendly.
• Anthropocentrism: protection of nature related
to maintaining or improving the quality of life for
people
– includes egoistic and social-altruistic values (cf.
Stern & Dietz, 1994)
• Ecocentrism: valuing nature for it’s own sake
– Nature should be protected because it has
intrinsic value
General attitudes/motives: New
Environmental Paradigm (NEP)
• Dunlap & Van Liere (1978):
– First version of the NEP-scale (twelve items)
• Three broad themes:
– Humanity's ability to upset the balance of nature
– Limits to growth for human societies
– Role of humans relative to the rest of nature
14.10.2010
4
NEP-R (Dunlap et al.,1992)
• 15 item scale
• Five facets
– Limits to growth
– Anti-anthropocentrism
– The fragility of nature's balance
– Rejection of exemptionalism
– The possibility of an ecological catastrophe
Specific environmental attitudes
• Schahn & Holzers (1990) 21 item scale:
– Theoretical concepts: Affective evaluation, attitudes (in
a narrower sense), and self-reported behaviors.
– Content areas: Reduced energy consumption, energy
used for transportation, environmentally responsible
purchases, societal involvement, recycling, water
consumption, protecting own health.
Specific environmental attitudes as
predictors of behaviour
• Diekman & Preisendörfer (1998):
– Considerable inconsistencies between specific
environmental attitudes and behavior
• Lober (1995):
– Attitudes towards the siting of a recycling center
differed significantly from behaviour in a study of
behavioural and attitudinal dimensions of public
opposition using inperson surveys and observed
measures of behaviour.
• Steel (1996):
– Attitude intensity was correlated with self-reported
environmental behaviour and political activism in
environmental issues.
14.10.2010
5
Responsibility as predictor of behaviour
• Kals, Schumacher & Montada (1998):
– Ecologically relevant decisions based on
responsibility related beliefs and emotions, and on
attributions of responsibility
Knowledge as predictor of behaviour
• Diekman & Preisendörfer (1998):
– Ecological knowledge affects environmental
behavior directly and indirectly
– Higher inconsistency in young people
Culture as a predictor of behaviour
• Laroche, Toffoli, Kim, & Muller (1996):
Determinants of environmental behaviours
may vary across cultures
14.10.2010
6
Methods strengthening the
relation between attitudes and
behaviour
16
Reminders
– Overcomes internal barriers for action such as
lazyness, forgetfulness etc
– Must be:
• Specific
• Close to the target behaviour in time and space
• Tailored to suit it’s audience
17
Influence internal barriers by a focus on
attitudes and norms
• Make people aware of the attitudes and norms they
already have, but do not relate to the present
situation
• When people’s attitudes already are in favour of
environmental protection, it is useful to remind them
about this in a subtle way
• Campaigns are well suited for this purpose
18
14.10.2010
7
Strategies strengthening the relation between attitudes,
information, attitudes and behaviour
Increasing participation in a recycling project: Four experimental
conditions
Control group (not contacted) 2% participation
Information (folder describing project) 10%
participation
Information + reminder before pick up 21%
participation
Information + reminder + personal
contact
28%
participation
19
Information has more effect when it attracts attention
through:
• a personal approach
• rumours
• making the invisible visible
• using a powerful medium
• careful design of the message
• message close to behaviour in time and space
• message designed to match the target group
• using the local groups
20
Credibility
• It must be possible to check the
information
• Use of social networks
• Use of opinion leaders to introduce desired
behaviour
21
14.10.2010
8
Create engagement
• Commitment increases engagement
• Norm activation increases engagement
• Crises can increase engagement
22
Behavioral knowledge from
intervention studies
Lehman & Geller (2004):review of the applied
behavior analysis approach to encouraging
proenvironment behavior
• Argues that behavior analysis can play a greater role in
solving environmental problems through
– (a) reexamination and expansion of intervention targets,
– (b) increased focus on long-term maintenance of proenvironment
behavior, and
– (c) more effective dissemination of intervention strategies
and research findings.
14.10.2010
9
INTERVENTION STRATEGIES.
• Antecedent Strategies
(a) information/education
(b) verbal or written prompts
(c) modeling and demonstrations
(d) commitment
(e) environmental alterations.
Consequence Strategies
• Rewards
– Notable behavior change, but behaviors drop to
baseline levels when the reward was removed
• Feedback: providing information to
participants about their environment-relevant
behaviors
– modest but consistent energy savings
Problem: Long-term behavior
maintenance
• Solution startegies
– focus on behaviors that do not need to be
maintained
– implement intervention evaluations of
appropriate length and design, so factors which
increase response maintenance can be discovered
– design interventions that can continue indefinitely
14.10.2010
10
Boyce and Geller (2001): three key factors related to
behavioral maintenance
• Reward schedules should be large enough to get a
behavior started, but not so large as to serve as
complete justification for performing a behavior
• Representations of the kind of behavior required to
earn a reward should be more general than specific
• When a behavioral commitment is requested, it
should be accompanied by information that provides
a sound rationale for the behavior.
Information campaigns: Can they increase
ecological behaviour?
• What can psychology tell us about the the effects of
information campaigns?
– Which type of campaign works best? When does
informationwork?
– What are the conditions for strong relations among
attitudes and behaviours?
– Are attitude campaigns sufficient for attitude change?
• Changing environmental attitudes: Effective
strategies
29
Information Campaigns: one of the basic interventions
proposed by The Norwegian Commission on Low
Emissions (NOU 2006:18: A climate-friendly Norway)
”Good and factual
information on the
problems and on
what can be done”
Reflects a conviction
that information
campaigns work.
But do they?
30
14.10.2010
11
Information- and attitude campaigns:
Possibilities and limitations
• + May increase people’s awareness and
change attitudes
• - Lead only occassionally to behavioural
change
–How can we increase the effectiveness of
campaigns?
31
Information alone has very limited
effect, because:
• Removes only information related barriers
• Does not remove external barriers (such as
economic ones)
– Increases at best only low cost/less demanding
behaviours
32
When is information effective?
• Feedback:
– Via the energy meter at home
– Via electronic devices (feedback every minute, hour, etc…)
• This works, because:
– The information is directly related to behaviour
– Straight-forward application of behavioural psychology (operant learning
theory): all behaviours leading to rewards will be repeated
• Feedback is at it’s most effective when available immediately before and
after the target behaviour (here: energy saving behaviour)
• Limitation: Participants must be highly motivated
33
14.10.2010
12
Modeling/observational learning
• Ex.: Video of a young couple demonstrating how they
can save energy in the home
– Combines behavioural psychology and communication
research
– Experiments have demonstrated energy savings of more
than 20%
– Cost-effective: video is a one-time cost that may be used in
an unlimited number of households
– Limitation: Participants must be motivated
34
The potential of information campaigns
• Works when the most important barriers are internal to the
individual
• May have important indirect effects over time
• Influences only attitudes and behaviours compatible with
people’s more fundamental values
• The effect increases if one builds upon psychological principles
of communication and focuses the campaign directly towards
relations between attitudes and behaviours
• Works best in combination with other strategies (such as
organisational change, economic incentives, etc)
35
Environmental attitudes and
behaviour
Some examples of empirical evidence
14.10.2010
13
Environmental concern and the prediction of
environmentally responsible behaviours: Results
from a pilot study and a national survey
Einar Strumse
Background
• Popular environmental concern is important in
itself
• Environmental problems are complex
• Environmental behaviour is determined by
many factors
Attitude – behaviour relations:
level of specificity
• Specific Environmental Attitudes (Schahn & Holzer
(1990) Umwelt-Gesamt-Kurzskala): Closer to equally
specific behaviours
• Environmental behavior items adapted from various
sources, ( cf. Smith-Sebasto’s (1994) ERBI
(Environmentally Responsible behavior Index) , De
Young (1993)
14.10.2010
14
Research questions
• Are some behavioural domains more
clearly determined be environmental
concern than others?
• Are specific attitudes always better
predictors of environmentally responsible
behaviours?
• Is general environmental concern a useful
predicor of specific environmental concern?
Method:Pilot study
• Participants: 243 voluntary male (n=140) and
female (n=103) social science (n=99) and
technology (n=143) students
• Questionnaires completed immediately on
hand-out and handed in to a research
assistant (spring 1996)
Method: National survey
• Representative national survey (autumn 1999)
in Norway
• Random sample +15 years. Questionnaires
mailed to a total of 3845 participants.
• Response rate:net 37%, n=1413
• 713 or 50,5%) women, 646 or 45,7%male
participants
14.10.2010
15
Predictors of responsible consumer
behaviours
• New Ecological Paradigm scale (NEP)
• Materialistic value orientation (MVO)
• Ecocentrism (ECO)
• Anthropocentrism (ANTHRO)
• Specific attitude scale (SEA)
Criterion variables
• Responsible consumer behaviour scale
• Transportation behaviour scale
• Environmental involvement scale
• Waste reduction behaviour scale
Hierarchical regressions of
environmental concern variables
on environmental behaviors
Results
14.10.2010
16
Design
• Block 1: NEP & MVO
• Block 2: Adding ECO & ANTHRO
• Block 3: Adding SEA
Predictors of responsible consumer
behaviour
• Variance explained:
– Pilot study: 25%
– National survey: 30%
• Stat. Significant predictors:
– Block 1: NEP (Pilot), NEP &MVO (Survey)
– Block 2: NEP & MVO (Pilot); NEP, MVO & ECO (Survey)
– Block 3: MVO & SEA (Pilot); ECO & SEA (Survey)
Predictors of transportation behaviour
• Variance explained:
– Pilot study: 6 %
– National survey: 9 %
• Stat. Significant predictors:
– Block 1: ---- (Pilot), NEP (Survey)
– Block 2: ANTHRO (Pilot); NEP, ECO & ANTHRO (Survey)
– Block 3: ANTHRO % SEA (Pilot); ECO, ANTHRO & SEA (Survey)
14.10.2010
17
Predictors of environmental involvement
• Variance explained:
– Pilot study: 25 %
– National survey: 26 %
• Stat. significant predictors:
– Block 1: NEP & MVO (Pilot), NEP (Survey)
– Block 2: NEP & MVO (Pilot); NEP & ECO (Survey)
– Block 3: SEA (Pilot); ECO & SEA (Survey)
Predictors of waste reduction behaviour
• Variance explained:
– Pilot study: 9 %
– National survey: 6 %
• Stat. significant predictors:
– Block 1: ---- (Pilot), NEP (Survey)
– Block 2: ECO (Pilot); ECO & ANTHRO (Survey)
– Block 3: SEA (Pilot); ANTHRO & SEA (Survey)
Tentative conclusions
• Different environmental behaviors ARE differently related to
environmental concern
• Consumer behaviour and involvement depend clearly more
on concern than transportation behaviour and waste
reduction behavior
• Specific attitudes are in most cases more strongly related to
behaviour
• For some environmental behaviors, concern is an important
determinant
14.10.2010
18
Diverging attitudes towards
predators: Do environmental
attitudes play a part?
Kaltenborn, B.P. & Bjerke, T &
Strumse, E.(1998)
Theme
• Environmental beliefs and attitudes towards
large carnivores among sheep farmers, wildlife
managers and research biologists in Norway
Human ecology
• Managing the interaction of population, social
organisation and technology in response to
the environment
• The ability of humans to cope and adapt to a
changing environment
14.10.2010
19
Resource management issues
• How various interest groups perceive the
environment
• Values and beliefs attached to the env.
• How environmental beliefs affect the position
different actors take in conflict situations
Wildlife as conflict issue
• Human dominion versus concern over
negative effect of human activity on ecological
processes
• Norway: Sheep farmers demanding
extermination of large carnivores versus
groups supporting protection
Kellert’s typology of attitudes toward
wildlife
• Positive attitudes
– Ecologistic: Interest in ecological value of species and
its rel to env
– Naturalistic: Interest in direct outdoor contact w.
species
– Moralistic: Opposition to harm toward spoecies
• Negative attitudes
– Dominionistic: Interest in mastery over animals
– Negativistic: Fear, dislike
– Utilitarian: Interest in use for the benefit of humans
14.10.2010
20
Earlier results (Norway)
• Wildlife managers and research biologists:
– High on Ecologistic and naturalistic attitudes
• Sheep farmers:
– High on dominionistic, negativistic and utilitarian
attitudes
Main research questions
• How strong is the support for an ecological
world view in sheep farmers, wildlife
managers and research biologists in Norway?
• Are differences in attitudes towards wildlife
related to more fundamental differences in
environmental values or beliefs?
Method
• Participants:
– 1129 sheep farmers, wildlife managers and
research biologists (response rate = 66.5%)
• Instruments:
– 35 statements measuring attitudes towards large
carnivores
– 15item NEP scale
•
14.10.2010
21
Results
• Eight items expressing the ”New Ecological
Paradigm”(NEP) received the highest mean
ratings
• Seven items expressing the ”Human
Exemptionalism Paradigm” (HEP) received
weakest support
Results
• NEP: Group differences
• Sheep farmers: higher than other groups on
HEP-items. Lower than other groups on NEP-
items
• Support/rejection of HEP and NEP
Results
• HEP
• Research biologists:
– Clearest rejection
• Wildlife managers
– Rejection, yes, …but less
strong
• Sheep farmers
– Close to a neutral pos.
• NEP:
• No distinction betw.
wildlif man. and res.
biol., who agree with
the NEP.
• Sheep farmers:
– Significantly lower
14.10.2010
22
Relations between NEP, HEP and the
six attitude scales
• Overall sample: NEP correlates pos. w. the
positive attitude domain, and neg. with neg.
attitudes
• HEP: opposite pattern: neg. corr. with pos.
attitudes, pos. corr. with neg. attitudes
• Relations between NEP, HEP and the six
attitude scales
Relations between NEP, HEP and the
six attitude scales
• Sheep farmers:
– Pos. corr. between NEP and ecologistic, moralistic and
naturalistic att.
– Pos. corr. between HEP and dominionistic, negativistic and
utilitarian att.
• Wildlife managers:
– NEP correlated pos. with positive att. and neg. with neg. att.
– HEPcorrelated neg. with positive att. and pos. with neg. att.
• Research biologists:
– Pos. corr. between NEP and ecologistic, moralistic and
naturalistic att.
– HEP correlated neg. with positive att. and pos. with neg. att.
Conclusions
• Respondents tended towards pro-ecological beliefs
• Negative attitudes towards carnivores are most
typically found in groups whose economic interests are
threatened by these animals
• The three groups express similar structure of
environmental beliefs, but there is a difference of
degrees: Sheep farmers’ ecological beliefs are weaker
• Sheep farmers: Carnivores are perceived as an
outgroup cognitively dissociated from other animals
and the ecosystem: Thus, pro-ecological beliefs go
together with neg. attitudes towards predators
•
14.10.2010
23
Psychological factors in energy
consumption behavior
• Lessons from meta-analyses and literature reviews
within environmental psych/environment and
behaviour research
• Conclusions from selected recent empirical studies
Intent-oriented versus impact-oriented research on
behaviroral responses to climate change (Stern, 2000)
• Impact-oriented research
– Focus on actual impacts of behaviour on the environment
• Intent-oriented research
– Focus on the motivation of the actor
• Overlap: When inteded actions are effective
• It is important to understand the divergence
between intent and action
• Relatively little is known about proenvironmental
intentions related to climate change
Meta-analyses on psycho-social
determinants of pro-environmental behaviour.
• Hines, Hungerford & Tomera’s (1987) meta – analysis
of 128 studies - Results from a subset of studies
focusing of psycho-social variables: mean
correlations with pro-environmental behaviour (PEB)
– Proenvironmental attitudes: r = .38
– Locus of control/self-efficacy: r = .37 (15 studies)
– Felt moral obligation to behave in a pro-environmental
way: r =.33 (6 studies)
– Pro-environmental behavioural intention: r =.49 (6 studies)
14.10.2010
24
Bamberg & Möser (2007): New meta-analysis of psycho-social
determinants of pro-environmental behaviour
• Based on 57 samples/studies
• Results:
• Mean correlations similar to those reported by Hines et al.
• Structural equation modelling (SEM): Meta-analytic SEM
(MASEM)
– Pro-environmental behavioural intention mediate the impact of all
other psycho-social variables on pro-environmental behaviour (27%
explained variance).
– Attitude, behavioural control and personal moral norm all predict proenvironmental
behavioural intention (52% explained variance)
– Problem awareness: important indirect determinant of proenvironmental
intention mediated by moral and social norms, guilt
and attribution processes.
Lutzenhiser, L. et al. (2009): Behavioral Assumptions
Underlying California Residential Sector Energy Efficiency
Programs
• Real-world energy use: extreme variability due to consumer
demographics, cultural backgrounds, and local social
influences.
• “Unconscious” use of energy: habitual action and habit-based
routines
• Energy use is collective – performed in and by groups living
together; and always social (oriented to socially-sanctioned
goals and often under the indirect scrutiny of social others.
• Routine action is cultural – i.e., behaviors, appliances, devices,
personal possessions, houses, and so on, have meaning to
persons and groups.
Stern (2008): Review of the social psychological literature on how
consumer choices are affected by various intervention approaches
1. The influences on environmentally significant behavior are
more varied than reflected in most psychological or economic
research.
2. The pattern of influences can vary greatly across behaviors
and places.
3. The strongest influences are often contextual. Psychologists
rarely examine more than a few of these
4. The more a behavior is shaped by technology, infrastructure,
regulation, financial cost, convenience, and other contextual
factors, the weaker the effect of personal variables
5. Choice models apply only in limited situations: the favored
variables of psychologists and economists have limited
importance
14.10.2010
25
Key conclusions by Stern (2008), and their
implications
6. Choices, when they are made, are not often carefully
considered
7. The effects of many psychological causal variables on specific
behaviors are highly indirect, but can potentially influence a
wide variety of behaviors
8. Practical applications of psychological interventions to
behavior in the home: niches between powerful contextual
variables, when behavior is not strongly constrained by
regulation, habit, matters of economic cost and convenience,
and the like. This may be very important, because some
choices determine the environmental impact of future
behaviors.
9. The most productive approach is interdisciplinary focusing on
full range of causes of behavior
Karpiak & Baril (2008): Moral reasoning and
concern for the environment
• Ecocentrism, previously found to
• correspond with environmentally friendly
behavior, was predicted by principled moral
reasoning, gender, and college major.
Homburg & Stolberg (2006): Explaining pro-environmental
behavior with a cognitive theory of stress
• Theoretical assumption:
– Environmental stressors (e.g. pollution in domestic and work
contexts), mediated via appraisal processes (demand appraisal, selfefficacy),
activate problem-focused coping. This in turn leads to proenvironmental
behavior in various behavioral domains (social
engagement, private sphere and workplace)
Results:
– Four studies lent support to the basic idea that appraisal
processes activate problem-focused coping, which in turn
leads to pro-environmental behavior, (however collective
efficacy replaced self efficacy)
14.10.2010
26
Fielding, McDonald & Louis (2008): incorporating identity
constructs into the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to
investigate intentions to engage in environmental activism
• Environmental group membership and self-identity
were positive predictors of intentions
• More positive attitudes toward and a greater sense
of normative support for environmental activism
were related to greater intentions to engage in the
behaviour.
Information: Energy efficiency and conservation
messages (Lutzenhiser, 2009)
• Should be intelligible to the consumer
• Should be concrete, vivid and impactful,
personalized, action-oriented, and offering advice
about choice and behaviour that is perceived to be
fair, just, and equitable.
• People process information in different ways
• The messenger affects the perceived legitimacy,
credibility, and trustworthiness of the information.
Pichert & Katsikopoulos (2008): Information
presentation and choice of elctricity (green or not)
• The format of information presentation assumed to
have a strong effect on choice of electricity
– People choose the electricity offered as the default
• Results:
– In a field study, people did choose green el. when it was
the default
– This was also the result in one experiment
14.10.2010
27
Addressing fields of rationality
– a policy for reducing household
energy consumption?
H. Westskog, CICERO, Oslo
T. Winther, SUM, University of Oslo
E. Strumse, Lillehammer University College
Factors influencing behaviour
on the individual level
Material conditionsSkills, knowledge
Attitudes,
personal norms
Beliefs, values,
identities
Energy behaviour
What conditions people’s
preferences
behaviour
14.10.2010
28
Preferences: A psychological
perspective
• Descriptive approach: preferences as the likes or
dislikes the individual may have in a certain
domain,
• Reasonable Person Model:
– People are satisficers, not maximizers
– People can be reasonable, depending upon the
circumstances
– People often possess extremely limited information.
– People’s needs are many and varied
Focusing selected cognitive, affective (and
material) factors
• Underlying factors for understanding
preferences in economic theory
• Factors partly accounting for the motivations
pushing or pulling the individual to perform
various measurable behaviours:
– Skills and knowledge
– Attitudes and personal norms
– Beliefs, values and identities
Important findings on predictors of
environmental behaviors
• A strong intention to act can be seen as resulting
from a large variety of environmentally relevant
thoughts and emotions, such as
– Attitudes
– Perceived behavioural control
– Personal norms
– Problem awareness
– Feelings of guilt
– Attributions: Beliefs about responsibilities and causes
14.10.2010
29
How strong are the influences of
psychological factors?
• The more a behaviour is shaped by contextual
factors, the weaker the effect of personal
variables (Stern 1999)
• Often highly indirect effect- can potentially
influence a wide variety of behaviours
• Some specific psychological factors(Stern 2009)
– Personal commitment
– Perceived personal costs and benefits of actions
– Behaviour-specific beliefs and norms
Psychological interventions
• Should target the ‘niches’ between powerful
structural variables: when the people –
environment configuration is particularly open
to change
– when behaviour is not strongly constrained by
regulation, habit, matters of economic cost,
convenience, and the like.
Structures
Energy
behaviour
Human resources Non-human resources
Social norms Culture
14.10.2010
30
Field of rationality:
configuration of factors
influencing behaviour
Material conditions
Energy
behaviour
Human resources Non-human resources
Social norms Culture
Group norms Group values
Capacity, competences
Skills, knowledge
Attitudes,
personal norms
Beliefs, values,
identities
Material conditions
Material conditions
Example: moving from Norway to France
Example of fields of rationality:
consumers versus citizens
• Sagoff (1988), Sen (1985) and Nyborg (2000)
• Rationalities exist in paralell
• Ex. Parents picking up children in the
kindergarten (Gneezy and Rustchini 2000)
• Policies may change the ”logic” for behaviour:
field of rationality
14.10.2010
31
Example: Appeal to ”the citizen”:
Renewable certificates, Barents Energi
• Treatment A Five sentences + link to NVE
Confusion, suspicions
• Treatment C Emissions = car use
”Bad consciousness, good”
• Treatment E The story of a role model
”I think she has a point”
Strategies for change
• Regulations: shifts in norms and relevant
values (incandescent light, smoking)
• Taxes: know how they co-work with other
factors
• Information: potential shift in field of
rationality, but requires clear ”translation”
Policies must take into account the logic with
which people act (made up of more factors
than material constraints)
Psychology!
Economics!
Interdisciplinarity
Socal anthropology!
14.10.2010
32
Research project (NFR 2009-2011):
Do customer information programs influence
energy consumption?
First article: Westskog, Winther and Strumse: ”Addressing fields of
rationality: A policy for reducing household energy consumption?”
In Markandya, A. et al. (forthcoming), Handbook of Sustainable Use of
Energy. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.