Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy conservation – The role of Foundations by Stéphanie A. Jacometti
Introduction While the production and use of energy is integral to daily life, it inevitably impacts the environment and draws on scarce resources. In the last thirty years, energy efficiency and energy conservation have been seen as an increasingly important way to reduce energy use. Campaigns that have sought to address demand have so far concentrated on raising awareness and providing information, but this has not changed behaviour significantly. For example, the UK Government has tried to change behaviour by taking a generalised, massmarketing approach which appears to have had little significant impact. Foundations and NGOs may, however, be better placed to change behaviour, as they have longer time horizons, are better positioned to take certain kinds of risks and are sometimes better resourced to start or finance a programme. Aim of the research The overall aim of this thesis was to analyse what elements of a programme could change energy-using behaviour in the long term, and to explore whether and how a Foundation might develop and evaluate such a programme. Specific objectives included: To understand the behavioural change process. To understand why people change their behaviour. To analyse where past programmes, be they education or behavioural change ones, have gone wrong and what can be learned from them. To analyse whether and how Foundations might be particularly well placed to sponsor a behavioural change programme, compared to government initiatives.
Research methods A critical literature review of journal articles and reports, including a focus on the psychology of behavioural change, revealed relatively little information about behavioural change programmes specifically sponsored by Foundations. Consequently, the information needed had to be gathered through interviews. Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted, both with people and organisations that had experience with behavioural change programmes and that worked on the funding side. The behavioural change process and campaigns The research reviewed shows that knowledge does not always lead to attitudinal change nor does a change in attitude always lead to behavioural change. Therefore, providing information and changing attitudes will most likely not lead to a change in behaviour. The main focus of most of the campaigns carried out by the UK Government has been to raise awareness and inform the audience, which has been largely unsuccessful in changing behaviour.
1
Behaviour change campaigns are more resource intensive than awareness-raising campaigns, but are more effective. With limited resources, two approaches can be taken: personalised and time intensive or time “extensive� and generalised. Unfortunately, the latter is used most often, although it tends to be less effective. Several factors have been shown to be effective in encouraging people to change their behaviour. These include feedback, prompts, personalised advice and collective action. Collective action, or community support, is especially important when people learn that others are doing their bit and, as a result, may want to emulate those in their direct environment. The EcoTeams programme run by a charity, Global Action Plan, integrates a number of these factors, such as a group setting, material and feedback, in the form of measuring and monitoring. Rather than discussing radical measures to save energy, the EcoTeams programme focuses on no- or low-cost practices, which can become habits and - eventually - routines. Research by the University of East Anglia found that after participating in the EcoTeams programme, participants were more likely to install high cost measures.
Results The primary data collected showed that Foundations focused more on policy and lobbying than behavioural change programmes when asked how high changing behaviour was on their agenda. According to those working for Foundations, cost effectiveness, quality of its content and timeframe are important criteria when selecting a programme. Those who carried out programmes encountered a number of overlapping obstacles. These included time-constrained participants, gaining trust from people, difficult to reach target audiences and the expectations of funders. When asked what key lessons interviewees learned during the design, implementation and evaluation of the programmes, answers differed considerably as did the programmes. However, interviewees felt that it was important, during the implementation stage, to engage with partners and have a very specific aim. For the evaluation stage, the following methods to gauge the outcomes were mentioned: CO2 as a measurement, qualitative data, external evaluators and feedback in the form of surveys filled out by participants. In order to complement behavioural change programmes, a number of interviewees suggested rewarding good behaviour by investing in something that would benefit the whole community, such as a park. It was also felt that energy advice services should be personalised so that individuals would not be burdened with excess and unwanted information. Both groups were asked what they felt was the most successful behavioural change/education programme. Policy actions such as the Carbon Emissions Reduction Targets and boiler legislation were mentioned, as well as behavioural change programmes such as the EcoTeams programme. The energy advice network run by the Energy Saving Trust and school programmes were also highlighted. It was felt that education and information are necessary but not sufficient to change behaviour. Interviewees believed that while the government is responsible for changing behaviour, the community also plays a crucial role. Both published reports and the primary research concluded that the government needs to take the lead with regard to changing behaviour in energy conservation. Conclusions The following conclusions can be drawn from the primary and secondary data. Advice and information are often used interchangeably but there is a distinct difference. 2
Advice is personalised, whereas information is of a more general nature. Both the message and the messenger are important; the message should be clear and consistent, and ideally should come from a trusted source such as friends or family. Important success factors include providing feedback and focusing on communities. Furthermore, many of the interviewees felt that a forum is needed to bring all the stakeholders together so that there is an opportunity to collaborate. This would also increase the likelihood that the message sent to individuals is consistent. School education was also seen as important so that young people can grow up with energy conservation, while becoming more environmentally aware. Although it may take time before the results of a change in behaviour are felt, it is important to work simultaneously on policy and behaviour, i.e. top-down as well as bottomup, so a reduction in energy use is likely to materialize significantly faster. Foundations are well positioned to achieve changes in the way in which we use energy since they can take more risks over longer timescales than government initiatives. However, Foundations find it difficult to select the most effective programmes. This manifests itself in the small amount of funding by Foundations in the UK going towards environmental charities. Recommendations The following recommendations can be made from the research. National campaigns usually last a short period of time and are often ineffective in changing behaviour. The community-focused EcoTeams programme only lasts six months and is carried out on a smaller scale, but has been proven to be effective. A far-reaching campaign should probably last a number of years using multiple communication channels, including media and one-toone approaches. Government organisations, Foundations and NGOs have different strengths and weaknesses. A strategy that builds upon the particular strengths of these organisations, focused on effective behavioural change, could be made up of three stages. The first stage of such a strategy would involve the government raising awareness and providing individuals with information about a programme. The second stage would be carried out by Foundations providing the funding for charities that could change behaviour. The third stage would involve charities changing the behaviour of individuals, with the government backing up their efforts with policy if necessary. Evaluating a programme in order to gauge its effectiveness is very important but is often not carried out thoroughly. The EcoTeams programme is an exception, with numerous studies focussing on its outcomes. Funds are often available for quantitative analysis but not qualitative, as the latter is more resource intensive. Foundations could support NGOs in such evaluation activities, through both financial resources and expertise. Such evidence and evaluation would make it easier to determine which programmes are demonstrably successful in changing behaviour.
3