Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON
Faculty of Natural Sciences
Centre for Environmental Policy
Creating and sustaining a behavioural ...
DECLARATION OF OWN WORK
I declare that this thesis
Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy conservation –
T...
AUTHORISATION TO HOLD ELECTRONIC COPY OF MSc THESIS
Thesis title: Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy c...
Abstract
Energy use is essential for daily life, but it always has an impact on the environment. As
a consequence of rapid...
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my supervisors, Peter Pearson and Paul Rutter, for their advice and
encouragement, ...
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ...........................................................................................
5.6 Foundations in the USA...................................................................................................
List of tables
Table 1: Impact results and attitude changes after participating in EcoTeams .36
Table 2: Details of interv...
Acronyms
BBC British Broadcasting Corporation
CEN Creative Environmental Network
CFL compact fluorescent light bulb
CO2 ca...
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Aims
This thesis seeks to address the following questions:
 What are the elements of a programme th...
2
what impact it has had on the environment. Analysis of the statistics produced by the
United States of America (USA) Env...
3
1.3.2 Potential solutions
1.3.2.1 Energy efficiency
Energy efficiency became increasingly important in the early 1970s, ...
4
that render energy flows invisible to energy users” (Costanzo et al. 1986: p. 525), but
research has shown that many peo...
5
1.3.3.2 Government
The majority of the high profile campaigns that have been created and implemented by
the UK Governmen...
6
people with personalised and localised energy saving advice is the best way of engaging
the public to take action to red...
7
in time is likely to be one that energy efficient behaviour is what is approved of
socially.”
1.3.4 Foundations
Although...
8
interviewees, two sets of questions were developed, although there was some overlap.
Set questions were used for the int...
9
sources included government reports and theses written by Imperial College students.
Secondary literature sources took t...
10
5. Results and discussion
This chapter presents the results of the 16 interviews and analyses them. The opinions
of Non...
11
2. Knowledge, attitude and behaviour
2.1 Overview
This chapter describes the behavioural change process and the differe...
12
2.2.2 Studies
A conclusion from Frick et al. (2004) was that reinforcing effectiveness knowledge
might be a good way of...
13
collective action was necessary. Collective action in this case refers to community
action, which suggests that people ...
14
the sample would “be willing to change their lifestyle to conserve more energy” (Curtis
et al. 1984: p. 455).
2.3.3 Mea...
15
applied for low-cost and high-cost changes in behaviour. Black et al. (1985), Heberlein
& Warriner (1983) and Stern (19...
16
illustrate that “there is rarely a strong, direct, or consistent relationship between attitudes
and subsequent action.”...
17
2.5.1 Studies
A study carried out by Crossley (1983) in Melbourne, Australia found the following
relationships between ...
18
elements under information was feedback, which “provides highly credible information,
compared with supposedly expert a...
19
2.5.3 Prompts
Whereas feedback is usually provided after energy has been used, prompts are often
placed near the point ...
20
observe new activities, experience new expectations, and be influenced by others to
organise collective conservation ef...
21
(1986: p. 526) found that “once someone has made a small commitment in a given area,
that person will subsequently be m...
22
Coltrane et al. (1986) reviewed some of the literature associated with social diffusion
and issues of influence. Kier e...
23
2.7 Conclusions
The research brought together in the above sections points towards an approach with a
personalised mess...
24
3. Past campaigns
3.1 Overview
Past campaigns carried out in the UK, both by the Government and NGOs are analysed
in th...
25
3.1.2 Government campaigns
The campaigns run by the UK Government have been education programmes and have
mostly focuse...
26
basis of the campaign. As the campaign progressed, results from questionnaires pointed
to more specific segments and th...
27
problems was regarded with some scepticism.” Furthermore, the sample did not trust
the Government and felt that the Gov...
28
There were at least three stages of the campaign, which started in 1998, with a gradually
increasing budget. The first ...
29
the promoted actions and only 20% said they were motivated by the campaign to do
their bit, and therefore change their ...
30
and these data were then crossed with TGI data, which looked at attitudes towards the
environment. Next, media consumpt...
31
being run to publicise the work that EST does, but without a slogan. EST is reviewing
what campaign to do next and look...
32
an engaging way. It was launched on the 20th
of June 2007 and, as of the 26th
of August
2008, has had over 1,223,837 vi...
33
3.3.1 EcoTeams
An EcoTeam is made up of 6 to 8 people who meet once a month for five months “at a
time and place of the...
34
Staats et al. (2004) noted that the EcoTeams approach was different from other
programmes because it targeted a number ...
35
3.3.1.3 Outcomes
It has emerged from primary and secondary data that the evaluation of programmes is
not always carried...
36
Impact Attitude
Households: Having completed EcoTeams:
 reduction in waste to landfill 20%
 increase in recycling as ...
37
cited was gathered during an interview with Nick Martin, the project manager of
EverGreen. EverGreen is a partnership b...
38
4. Results and discussion
4.1 Overview
This chapter analyses the qualitative data gathered from the 16 interviews condu...
39
Interviewee Organisation Type of
organisation
Programme Date Length (in
minutes)
Iona Joy New Philanthropy
Capital (NPC...
40
4.2 Foundations and Trusts
4.2.1. Key objectives of Foundations
As the Foundations interviewed were selected on the bas...
41
Lee & Cracknell (2005) again highlighted the lack of funding dedicated towards
activities which change policy.
4.2.3 Cr...
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis

587 views

Published on

  • Celebrated pianist Scott Henderson says: "I am thoroughly impressed by the system's ability to multiply your investment! ■■■ http://t.cn/A6zP24pL
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • The "Magical" Transformation That Happens When You Combine Two Of The Best Brain Reprogramming Technologies  https://tinyurl.com/y6pnne55
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • A Free Gift From Your Guardian Angel: Musical soundscape composed using sacred "Angel Tone" brings healing, abundance, and magic into your life. Go here to experience this majestic sound gifted to us from a "higher plane." ▲▲▲ http://ishbv.com/manifmagic/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • How to improve brain memory power naturally? Boost your brainpower with brain pill now... ◆◆◆ https://tinyurl.com/brainpill101
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

Stéphanie Jacometti's thesis

  1. 1. IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON Faculty of Natural Sciences Centre for Environmental Policy Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy conservation – The role of Foundations By Stéphanie A. Jacometti A report submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the MSc and/or the DIC. September 2008
  2. 2. DECLARATION OF OWN WORK I declare that this thesis Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy conservation – The role of Foundations is entirely my own work and that where any material could be construed as the work of others, it is fully cited and referenced, and/or with appropriate acknowledgement given. Signature:..................................................................................................... Name of student: STÉPHANIE A. JACOMETTI Name of supervisors: PETER PEARSON and PAUL RUTTER
  3. 3. AUTHORISATION TO HOLD ELECTRONIC COPY OF MSc THESIS Thesis title: Creating and sustaining a behavioural change in energy conservation – The role of Foundations Author: Stéphanie A. Jacometti I hereby assign to Imperial College London, Centre of Environmental Policy the right to hold an electronic copy of the thesis identified above and any supplemental tables, illustrations, appendices or other information submitted therewith (the “thesis”) in all forms and media, effective when and if the thesis is accepted by the College. This authorisation includes the right to adapt the presentation of the thesis abstract for use in conjunction with computer systems and programs, including reproduction or publication in machine-readable form and incorporation in electronic retrieval systems. Access to the thesis will be limited to ET MSc teaching staff and students and this can be extended to other College staff and students by permission of the ET MSc Course Directors/Examiners Board. Signed: _____________________ Name printed: STÉPHANIE A. JACOMETTI Date: 10th of September 2008
  4. 4. Abstract Energy use is essential for daily life, but it always has an impact on the environment. As a consequence of rapidly expanding economies in developing countries, the world faces major energy security and environmental challenges, including climate change. Energy efficiency and energy conservation have become more important in the last thirty years, but campaigns that have tried to change behaviour in this area have been largely ineffective. The main aims of these campaigns were to raise awareness and provide information. This thesis analyses the elements that could be brought together to change behaviour and what the role of Foundations is in this process. Furthermore, a literature review and interviews with those involved in successful programmes and working for Foundations was carried out. In order to understand the process that individuals go through to change behaviour, research on knowledge, attitude and behaviour was examined. It was found that knowledge does not always change attitude, nor does attitude lead to a change in behaviour. Therefore, the act of raising awareness and providing information by itself is unlikely to be effective in changing behaviour. An analysis of past campaigns carried out by the UK Government concluded that while these sought to raise awareness, they did not translate this awareness into action. A programme that is able to change behaviour, and has been evaluated thoroughly, is EcoTeams run by the charity Global Action Plan. This is based on three concepts: group activity, weighing and measuring, and feedback, which have been shown to change behaviour effectively. After analysing both the literature and data gathered from the interviews, it can be concluded that the following elements should be integrated into a behavioural change programme: advice, a consistent message, a trusted messenger, feedback, communities, and collaboration. A three-part strategy was suggested in which the Government raises awareness, Foundations fund and support charities, and charities carry out programmes that change behaviour. Such a strategy should take place over a number of years, with a thorough evaluation of the outcomes.
  5. 5. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisors, Peter Pearson and Paul Rutter, for their advice and encouragement, and Joanne Wade for her guidance during the early stages of the thesis process. I would also like to thank my parents and my friends for their support. I am extremely grateful to all those that kindly agreed to be interviewed: Merrilee Harrigan of Alliance to Save Energy, Mark Hopkins of United Nations Foundation, Meroë Jackson of Creative Environmental Networks, Iona Joy of New Philanthropy Capital, Sheila Keating of Energy Saving Trust, Nick Martin of Global Action Plan, Laura McGadie of Changeworks, Jon McGowan of Energy Saving Trust, Janine Michael of Centre for Sustainable Energy, Roger Mitchell of Arcadia Trust, Ann Morris of Global Action Plan, Jos van Renswoude of European Climate Foundation, Danyal Sattar of Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, Anna Shamoon of Carbon Descent, Desmond Simpson of Oak Foundation, and the DEFRA official.
  6. 6. Table of Contents 1. Introduction .....................................................................................................1 1.1 Aims..................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Objectives............................................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Background ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Research methodology ....................................................................................................... 7 1.5 Data..................................................................................................................................... 8 1.6 Outputs ............................................................................................................................... 9 1.7 Chapter structure................................................................................................................ 9 2. Knowledge, attitude and behaviour...............................................................11 2.1 Overview........................................................................................................................... 11 2.2 Knowledge......................................................................................................................... 11 2.3 Attitude............................................................................................................................. 13 2.4 The gap between attitude and behaviour ........................................................................ 15 2.5 Behaviour.......................................................................................................................... 16 2.6 Sources of influence.......................................................................................................... 21 2.7 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 23 3. Past campaigns ............................................................................................24 3.1 Overview........................................................................................................................... 24 3.2 Past government campaigns............................................................................................. 25 3.3 Non-government campaigns............................................................................................. 32 3.4 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 37 4. Results and discussion .................................................................................38 4.1 Overview........................................................................................................................... 38 4.2 Foundations and Trusts..................................................................................................... 40 4.3 Charities and government agencies.................................................................................. 42 4.4 Overlapping questions ...................................................................................................... 49 4.5 Comparing research to Green Philanthropy conclusions ................................................. 56 4.6 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 58 5. Foundations and trusts .................................................................................59 5.1 Overview........................................................................................................................... 59 5.2 Definition of a Foundation................................................................................................ 59 5.3 Strengths and weaknesses................................................................................................ 60 5.4 Trust .................................................................................................................................. 61 5.5 Current funding situation in the UK.................................................................................. 61
  7. 7. 5.6 Foundations in the USA..................................................................................................... 64 5.7 Government...................................................................................................................... 64 5.8 Charities and their role in changing behaviour................................................................. 66 5.9 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 66 6. Conclusions and recommendations..............................................................67 6.1 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 67 6.2 Recommendations for further research ........................................................................... 70 6.3 Recommendations............................................................................................................ 70 7. Reference list................................................................................................72 8. Appendices ...................................................................................................77 8.1 Appendix I – Brief description of organisations................................................................ 77 8.2 Appendix II – Templates of interview questions............................................................... 81 8.3 Appendix III – Results from interviews ............................................................................. 83
  8. 8. List of tables Table 1: Impact results and attitude changes after participating in EcoTeams .36 Table 2: Details of interviews ............................................................................39 Table 3: Obstacles faced while carrying out programmes ................................42 Table 4: Criteria and processes used by programmes and organisations ........43 Table 5: Key lessons learned in the designing stage........................................44 Table 6: Key lessons learned in the implementation stage...............................45 Table 7: Key lessons in the evaluation stage....................................................46 Table 8: Policy actions to complement behavioural change programmes ........48 Table 9: Most successful behavioural change/education programmes.............50
  9. 9. Acronyms BBC British Broadcasting Corporation CEN Creative Environmental Network CFL compact fluorescent light bulb CO2 carbon dioxide DEFRA Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DETR Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions EAF Environmental Action Fund EST Energy Saving Trust GAP Global Action Plan Mt CO2/yr millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide per year NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NPC New Philanthropy Capital TV television UK United Kingdom UN United Nations USA United States of America
  10. 10. 1 1. Introduction 1.1 Aims This thesis seeks to address the following questions:  What are the elements of a programme that could change energy-using behaviour fundamentally?  Who should be responsible for, and would be most effective in, bringing about this change, and what role do Foundations have in this context? The overall aim is to analyse what elements of a programme could change behaviour in the long term, and whether and how a Foundation might develop and evaluate such a programme. 1.2 Objectives Specific objectives include:  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. 1.3 Background 1.3.1 The context of the challenges humanity is facing 1.3.1.1 Energy use Energy is an integral part of daily life, but most people are only interested in the services it delivers (Wilhite 2007). They do not consider where the energy came from or
  11. 11. 2 what impact it has had on the environment. Analysis of the statistics produced by the United States of America (USA) Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy shows that “energy use is the leading cause of global warming, pollution, smog, acid rain, nuclear waste, and air toxics” (The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 2007: p. 2). 1.3.1.2 One planet living The population is growing at an alarming rate and “humans are consuming more (and creating more waste) than the planet can sustain” (Mercer 2007: p. 1). Research by WWF & Bioregional shows that if everyone in the world consumed as much as people in the United Kingdom (UK), two additional planets would be needed (Sustainable Development Commission & National Consumer Council 2006a). Some would argue that it is necessary to use more resources and energy to be prosperous, but as Coltrane et al. (1986: p. 133) noted “the declining ratio of energy consumption to economic output suggests that economic growth is not dependent on increased energy usage, as is often assumed.” 1.3.1.3 Problems we are facing Depleting resources at an alarming rate, and creating more waste than the Earth’s ecosystem can process, has resulted in a myriad of problems, and the only solution, in terms of energy, is to reinvent the world’s energy system (The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 2007). If this is not done, the human race will “face catastrophic global consequences – from more extreme storms and droughts, to sea level rise, to changes in weather that impact crop production, to destruction of the world’s coral reefs and acceleration of species extinction” (The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 2007: p. 2). 1.3.1.4 The environment Using energy impacts the environment. Different energy sources will have different impacts, but there is no denying that all energy use alters the environment. Wind is a renewable energy but resources are still extracted from the ground to manufacture the turbines, just as equipment is needed to drill for oil. In recent years, the environment has been given significant attention in the media and 2007 seems to be a highpoint due to the film An Inconvenient Truth and the Live Earth concerts (Foundation Center 2008b). Although raising awareness of the environment has been positive, Global Action Plan (2006: p. 14) remarked that “there is a danger that coverage of these issues will make people feel that they are too large for them to personally address.”
  12. 12. 3 1.3.2 Potential solutions 1.3.2.1 Energy efficiency Energy efficiency became increasingly important in the early 1970s, because of the Arab oil embargo in 1973 (Coltrane et al. 1986) and the increase in oil prices in 1972/1973 and 1978/9 (Carter 1985). It is sometimes said that the “only by-product of energy efficiency is wealth” (Anon. 2008: p. 93), in terms of using less energy and therefore consumers spending a smaller proportion of their income on heating their home, etc. Another important ‘by-product’ would be reduced emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2). A study by the IPCC revealed that energy efficiency investments could reduce the UK’s emissions by a fifth (Anon. 2008). It seems that energy efficiency is the solution to many problems, but it does have its issues. For example, consumers are more likely to use more energy if it costs less (Greenhalgh 1990). This is known as the rebound effect and highlights the importance of changing behaviour at the same time as installing energy efficiency measures. 1.3.2.2 Energy conservation Weber (1997: p. 834) stated that “energy conservation (…) results from the omission of an action (e.g. not buying a certain machine) or doing something in a different way (e.g. integrated instead of isolated planning).” The latter change results from an adjustment in behaviour and, as Doyle & Pearce (1979: p.346) noted, “conservation strategies have inherent problems of securing changes in behaviour.” Energy conservation is often lauded as being “the largest, fastest, cheapest way to abate climate change” (The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation 2007: p.4) and remains “an important and viable strategy for economic as well as environmental wellbeing” (Coltrane et al. 1986: p. 134). It is different from energy efficiency because it cuts down on energy that is wasted, whereas energy efficiency urges people to use the energy they need to use as efficiently as possible. 1.3.2.3 Technology definitely does not have all the answers Technology is often seen as the answer to a myriad of problems, but the issue here is that a large amount of energy will only be saved if everyone has installed that measure (Costanzo et al. 1986). Another issue is that “most energy technologies work in ways
  13. 13. 4 that render energy flows invisible to energy users” (Costanzo et al. 1986: p. 525), but research has shown that many people find energy an abstract concept and that measuring daily energy use changes behaviour (see section 3.3.1 on EcoTeams). A third issue is that “the mere availability of energy conserving technology does not mean that energy will be conserved” (Winett & Ester 1983: p. 205), although rebates and incentives can both contribute to increasing turnover (Sioshansi 1994). 13.2.4 Demand side management There are two fundamental approaches to tackle the energy shortage problem; through supply or through demand. Policies mostly concentrate on supply because this is seen to create the biggest change, but demand must also be considered. As Crossley (1983: p. 545) states, “energy demand curves are not only determined through major decisions by captains of industry; they are also the result of millions of small decisions taken by individual people in the privacy of their own home.” 1.3.3 Change in behaviour 1.3.3.1 Energy efficiency and savings Researchers have recognised the importance of changing behaviour in terms of how people use energy. Crossley (1983: p. 533) noted that “changes in human behaviour are an essential prerequisite to increases in the efficiency with which energy is used.” However, changing behaviour is not simply a case of giving people information. As Gardner & Stern (2002: p. 74) found “environmental attitudes are not always correlated with behaviour, and attitude change does not always lead to behavioural change.” In terms of how much CO2 could be saved each year, EST (2008) has calculated that 6 MtCO2 could be saved each year if no-cost measures were taken such as switching off lights and turning down the thermostat. Global Action Plan (2006: p. 1) also found that programmes that change behaviour “can achieve significant environmental savings and social benefits providing that they are carefully structured, professionally run and properly resourced.” Although behavioural change programmes are often more expensive than ones that aim to raise awareness, Strategy Unit (2004: p. 10) noted that “detailed cost-benefit analyses in health, crime and education have shown that behaviour-based interventions can be very much more cost-effective than traditional service delivery.”
  14. 14. 5 1.3.3.2 Government The majority of the high profile campaigns that have been created and implemented by the UK Government have sought to raise awareness “for which little or no evidence of effectiveness is sought” (Global Action Plan 2006: p. 1). Government has realised that “behaviour change will be needed to deliver sustainable development” (Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 2005: p. 25), but there is a fine line between doing too much (a ‘nanny state’) and doing too little (no leadership) (Global Action Plan 2006). The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) is partially responsible for raising awareness and changing behaviour. It is currently doing so through the Act on CO2 campaign and the Environmental Action Fund (EAF). EAF funds “voluntary and community sector groups to further the government’s sustainable development objectives within the UK” (Mercer 2007: p. 98) and has a budget of approximately £2.2 million per year. Other government agencies, which are not-for- profit organisations, include the Carbon Trust, the Energy Saving Trust (EST), and the Waste and Resources Action Programme. The Carbon Trust and EST support businesses and householders respectively. 1.3.3.3 Energy Saving Trust EST was formed in the early 1990s (Löfstedt 1996) and is funded by DEFRA, Department of Transport and Industry, and Department for Transport amongst others (Mercer 2007). EST provides advice to consumers and local authorities and does so by “promoting the need for action, providing information and advice on what they should do, [and] offering practical support to help them do so through our advice centres and website, through the media and through communities” (EST 2008: p. 18). Its mission is to help “60 million people to act on climate change” (EST 2008: p. 18) and it has published a report called “Emission Impossible?” that looks at certain areas where, and how much, savings can be made. EST has a national network of advice centres which is currently being restructured into a more regionalised set-up, according to Janine Michael of EST. These advice centres are not drop-in centres but can be contacted over the phone for advice. Most of EST’s interaction with the general public is not face-to-face, instead the Internet and advice centres are used to help people. This is in conflict with the EST’s belief that “providing
  15. 15. 6 people with personalised and localised energy saving advice is the best way of engaging the public to take action to reduce their carbon footprint” (EST 2007b: p. 11). 1.3.3.4 Programmes/campaigns The campaigns mounted by the UK Government have concentrated on raising awareness and providing information (see section 3.2 for a detailed analysis of past campaigns). A study by Crossley (1979) found that the UK had the biggest budget for their campaign Save It, which highlights the importance given to the 1973/4 energy crisis. The rationale behind these campaigns is “to fill a supposed ‘information deficit’ that exists within the public’s understanding of environmental change (see Burgess et al., 1998; Owens, 2000). The logic of this approach rests on the assumption that information will prompt individuals to adopt sustainable lifestyles (Burgess et al., 1998)” (Hobson 2003: p. 96). As Global Action Plan (2006: p. 13) noted, the UK Government seems to invest considerable amounts of money in awareness-raising campaigns, but not in behavioural change programmes, even though there is a large body of research which shows that “increased awareness does not translate into changes in behaviour.” Furthermore, Ipsos MORI (2007: p. 10) concluded that these campaigns “have a lower impact on developing understanding of complex issues or eliciting behaviour change, apart from amongst consumer groups who are already energy literate.”. This touches upon the idea of segmentation, which is something that both DEFRA and EST are using. 1.3.3.5 Community In 1996, a notion was coined that urged people to “think global, but act local”, which implied that environmental problems could be solved by making changes to the everyday lives of consumers (Barr 2007). However, research has shown that “60% of Britons think that global warming could be best tackled at a global level. Just under 1 in 10 people (9%) think it would be best tackled by individual households” (Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 2005: p. 24). It often seems to people that, even if they are behaving in an environmentally friendly way, others are not. Sustainable Development Commission & National Consumer Council (2006b: p. 3) found that “people are willing to change, but they need to see others acting around them to feel their efforts are worthwhile.” Ipsos MORI (2007: p. 14) also remarked on the importance of community and that “the optimal energy efficiency message at this point
  16. 16. 7 in time is likely to be one that energy efficient behaviour is what is approved of socially.” 1.3.4 Foundations Although Government is probably ultimately responsible for helping people change their behaviour towards energy, it needs support from other stakeholders. A Foundation could be better placed to sponsor a campaign, as it will be able to commit resources for a number of years. Change does not happen overnight and therefore a well-structured, sustained long-term campaign could be most effective. It has become apparent that donors are more and more interested in funding environmental programmes (Mercer 2007). 1.4 Research methodology In the early stages of research, it became clear that a wide range of materials on the subject of behavioural change in relation to energy conservation exists. However, it also became clear that there was little research on behavioural change programmes funded by Foundations. There has been some research on government-sponsored programmes, but most of these programmes concentrated on energy education rather than behavioural change. It was concluded that interviews were needed to obtain more information. Furthermore, academic literature was critically reviewed to determine whether programmes have been successful, as well as what conclusions can be made from past programmes. 1.4.1 Interviews To achieve the aims and objectives, semi-structured interviews, both face-to-face and over the telephone, were carried out with those who work for Foundations and those who were involved in successful programmes. In total, 16 interviews were carried out; ten people were involved in successful programmes, five people worked for Foundations and one interviewee worked for an organisation that advises donors which charities to invest in. The interviews were semi-structured so that the order and wording of the questions could be changed because of the different backgrounds of the interviewees (Robson 2002). As there were two distinctly different groups of
  17. 17. 8 interviewees, two sets of questions were developed, although there was some overlap. Set questions were used for the interviews, with additional questions asked when clarification was needed. 1.4.2 Critical review of materials The purposes of the critical literature review were to identify and learn from what research had already been done and what gaps needed to be filled. Four searches were done to find the relevant literature. First, a search was carried out on ScienceDirect using the following criteria: Search term(s) “Energy conservation”, “energy education”, “energy conservation programmes” Study date Post 1970 Language English Study quality Qualitative Once an article was found, more articles were accessed through the “Related Articles in ScienceDirect” window on the website. Further articles of interest were found by looking through the reference lists and bibliographies of certain articles. The second search was carried out at the British Library, but yielded no results because the search was narrowed down; it focused primarily on Foundations in relation to energy conservation programmes. The third search was done using the Google search engine and resulted in a number of government reports. Keywords used included “changing behaviour” and “energy conservation programmes.” The fourth search was carried out using the catalogue at Imperial College library and some relevant theses were found. 1.5 Data Primary data were gathered from interviews with those working for Foundations, as well as with those who worked on successful behaviour change programmes. Secondary data were divided into primary and secondary literature sources. Primary literature
  18. 18. 9 sources included government reports and theses written by Imperial College students. Secondary literature sources took the form of journal articles and books. 1.6 Outputs The output of this thesis will be an analysis of past programmes and what elements were successful in changing behaviour in the long-term. It also provides suggestions for Foundations on how they could approach changing energy conservation behaviour with a view to developing potentially effective programmes. 1.7 Chapter structure 2. Knowledge, attitude and behaviour This chapter examines the behavioural change process. In the past, programmes have concentrated on educating the general public on energy and climate change. Research has shown that often information does not translate into attitude and attitude does not always lead to a change in behaviour. The chapter also looks at sources of influence. 3. Past programmes This chapter analyses past programmes, both by the UK Government and by charities. Save It, Helping the Earth Begins at Home, and Are You Doing Your Bit? were carried out by the UK Government and sought to educate the general public, but were not successful in changing behaviour. The EcoTeams and EverGreen programmes stand out as effective programmes, but take place on a local rather than a national level, and are carried out by a charity. 4. Foundations and trusts This chapter focuses on whether and why philanthropic Foundations might be best placed to sponsor a behavioural change campaign. It refers back to the section of sources of influence in Chapter 2. It also looks at the current funding situation in the UK and some of the obstacles both donors and charities encounter.
  19. 19. 10 5. Results and discussion This chapter presents the results of the 16 interviews and analyses them. The opinions of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and Foundations were compared and contrasted. Furthermore, within each of the groups, the answers were analysed. 6. Conclusions and recommendations This chapter presents the conclusions of the research as well as key recommendations, including suggestions for further research. It also proposes different elements which could work together to design a successful behavioural change programme.
  20. 20. 11 2. Knowledge, attitude and behaviour 2.1 Overview This chapter describes the behavioural change process and the different elements of knowledge, attitude and behaviour, as well as the sources that influence behaviour. The psychology behind energy conservation was looked at, as it was felt that understanding what drives behaviour is important. The research analysed often did not look at knowledge, attitude and behaviour separately, but touched upon all three areas. The conclusions of these studies are therefore spread out over the different sections. Most of the studies were from the 1980s and others were written as reports for the UK Government. As mentioned in section 1.3.3.1, knowledge does not necessarily change attitude nor does a change in attitude lead to a change in behaviour. Strategy Unit (2004: p. 38) also found that “several decades of research have conclusively shown that knowledge alone often fails to change behaviour.” Ipsos MORI (2007: p. 4) cited an IPPR publication which presented the challenge of designing an effective behavioural change programme as being twofold: “firstly, people do not necessarily recognise the detrimental impact of their actions, and secondly, even when they do it may not be enough to lead to a change in behaviour.” 2.2 Knowledge 2.2.1 Definition of knowledge Frick et al. (2004) identified three types of knowledge with regard to promoting energy conservation behaviour; system, action-related and effectiveness. System knowledge is defined as knowledge about environmental problems. Action-related knowledge is the “knowing how” of dealing with environmental problems. Finally, effectiveness knowledge is the “relative gain or benefit (…) that is associated with a particular behaviour” (Frick et al. 2004: p. 1599).
  21. 21. 12 2.2.2 Studies A conclusion from Frick et al. (2004) was that reinforcing effectiveness knowledge might be a good way of promoting energy conservation, which means underscoring the benefits - whether social, financial or otherwise - gained from changing behaviour. Another conclusion was that “the final decision to choose a behavioural alternative may additionally be based on effectiveness knowledge” (Frick et al. 2004: p. 1610). From these findings, Frick et al. (2004: p. 1610) found that “knowledge-based education should focus on all three knowledge forms” and that past campaigns had not included effective knowledge in their design. Löfstedt (1996) interviewed a sample of people living in Edinburgh and Bournemouth about the greenhouse effect and the ozone layer. He found that most of the respondents had heard of the greenhouse effect, but that a large proportion did not know what caused it or what its consequences were. Furthermore, the sample did not link their energy use to the greenhouse effect. Löfstedt (1996) cited a study carried out by Löfstedt (1995), which found that 23% of respondents saved energy for environmental reasons compared to 65% for economic reasons. Costanzo et al. (1986) looked at how people process knowledge or information and reviewed some of the literature related to this topic. With regards to knowledge and memory, Norman (1976) cited by Costanzo et al. (1986: p. 525) found that information, that is in line with pre-existing values and attitudes, is best remembered and elaborated on this topic to conclude that “clear, specific, concrete information is remembered best.” With regards to knowledge and personalisation, Borgida & Nisbett (1977) cited by Costanzo et al. (1986: p. 523) found that “people tend to assign disproportionate weight to “vivid” information that is highly concrete and personalised”, which further strengthens the case for personalised advice. Related to this, Kempton, Gladhart & Keefe (1983) cited by Costanzo et al. (1986) found that when people buy energy- conserving devices, there is some form of cost-benefit analysis, but that they do not integrate all the information related to the decision. This obstacle might be overcome by providing personalised advice. 2.2.3 The gap between knowledge and behaviour Several studies have explored the gap between knowledge and behaviour. Vyas (2007) found that a change in behaviour was not realised solely through knowledge and that
  22. 22. 13 collective action was necessary. Collective action in this case refers to community action, which suggests that people need to feel that they are not alone in changing their behaviour. Gatersleben et al. (2002) cited studies by Baird & Brier (1981) and Gatersleben (2000) to underscore that knowledge can be the cause of the low correlation between attitudes and behaviour. Winett & Ester (1983) touched upon the concept of frequent feedback, and that it is effective because it fills the gap in people’s knowledge. 2.3 Attitude 2.3.1 Definition of attitude Two definitions of attitude were found. Eagley & Chaiken (1993) cited by Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 712) defined attitude as a “psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favour or disfavour.” Although this definition does not directly mention the effect attitude has on behaviour, O’Riordan (1971) cited by Curtis et al. (1984: p. 452) does: “organised sets of feelings and beliefs about an object or group of objects, which will influence an individual’s behaviour.” 2.3.2 Studies A study carried out by Curtis et al. (1984) stated that attitudes influence actions, which has implications for public education programmes. They noted that attitudes develop because of exposure to an environmental stimulus and that “the more frequent the stimulus, the more constant the attitudes become” (Curtis et al. 1984: p. 452). An important conclusion was that “stating an intention does not imply a behavioural change” (Curtis et al. 1984: p. 453). The study looked at households in Regina, Canada and how attitudinal and socio-economic factor influenced energy conservation behaviour. Curtis et al. (1984) distinguished between energy conservation practices and measures. Practices are no- or low-cost changes, such as turning the thermostat down and switching off lights, and “can be easily implemented and just as easily undone” (Curtis et al. 1984: p. 453-4). Measures, on the other hand, require significant investment and cannot be easily implemented. It was found that two attitudinal factors influenced conservation behaviour. The first was that there was a direct link “between energy conservation actions and the strength of belief that individual energy conservation actions are important” (Curtis et al. 1984: p. 455) and the second was that
  23. 23. 14 the sample would “be willing to change their lifestyle to conserve more energy” (Curtis et al. 1984: p. 455). 2.3.3 Measuring attitudes The Green Barometer is published by EST every quarter and measures people’s attitudes on environmental issues. Each time around 1,200 households are interviewed. The first Green Barometer, published in April 2007, found that “nearly three quarters of the population now feel a growing pressure to change the way they live to reduce the impact of climate change” (EST 2007a: p. 3) and that “over half of the UK population now recognises a real link between the energy they use at home and climate change” (EST 2007a: p. 3). It also found that on a scale of 0 being negative and 5 being positive, the UK population was at 3.56 with regards to attitudes towards doing something to help the environment. This number fell to 3.42 in July 2007 (EST 2007b) and 3.28 in November 2007 (EST 2007c). In terms of actions taken to help the environment, the index fell from 2.00 in April 2007 to 0.92 in July 2007 (EST 2007b). However, this number then increased in November 2007 to 1.96 (EST 2007c). 2.3.4 Attitude and education Pooley & O'Connor (2000) looked at environmental education and attitudes. A review of the literature in this study found that a model exists that looks at three elements of information. They are: cognitive – what people believe, affect – how they feel, and behaviour. Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 713) concluded that “social attitude may be informed by two or three different sources of information (cognitive, affective and behavioural) or they may be informed by only one source.” Ulrich (1983) cited by Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 728) made the observation that affect is “an important factor in our interaction with the environment”, and (Iozzi, 1989a, 1989b) cited by Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 718) expanded on this statement by suggesting that affect is “potentially a key entry point for environmental education.” The results from Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 719) show that “both cognition and affect are important to understanding environmental attitudes in environmental education.” 2.3.5 Low-cost behaviours Gatersleben et al. (2002) looked at the determinants of environmentally significant consumer behaviour and, in their literature review, found that different strategies can be
  24. 24. 15 applied for low-cost and high-cost changes in behaviour. Black et al. (1985), Heberlein & Warriner (1983) and Stern (1992) cited by Gatersleben et al. (2002) found that for low-cost interventions, changing personal norms and attitudes is more effective whereas for high-cost interventions, financial strategies are more effective. Furthermore, a conclusion of the study was that pro-environmental behaviours were related to attitudinal variables and “that general environmental attitudes are especially relevant when behaviours do not cost too much effort or change in comfort” (Gatersleben et al. 2002: p. 354). As mentioned previously, energy is an abstract concept for many people, as are CO2 emissions. In their review, Coltrane et al. (1986) found that an effective strategy taken by many programmes is to use energy-saving measures, which are both immediate and quantifiable. A good example of such a measure is a smart meter, which provides instant feedback to the householder. Making energy and emissions less abstract has also been recognised by EST (EST 2008), who feel that transparency will change attitude. 2.3.6 School education Both Vyas (2007) and Curtis et al. (1984) found that educating and informing people about energy and the environment should start during the early stages of development, i.e. when children are still at school. Curtis et al. (1984: p. 455) related this to “the relationship between the number of sources from which people gained information and the number of actions taken” and suggested that “a better informed public would undertake more energy conservation actions and thus consume less energy.” However, an analysis by Pomerantz (1990-1991) cited by Pooley & O'Connor (2000) showed, that out of 700 different environmental lesson programmes in the USA, only 42 addressed behaviour with 124 addressing attitudes and 543 addressing knowledge. 2.4 The gap between attitude and behaviour EST research has found that although “being seen to be green” is popular among 70% of the UK population, only 40% take action (EST 2008). This is known as the “attitude- behaviour gap”, which stipulates that information and a change in attitude does not change behaviour. This gap was found in studies by Crossley (1983), and Costanzo et al. (1986: p. 521) cited Azjen & Fishbein (1977), McGuire (1969) and Olsen (1981) to
  25. 25. 16 illustrate that “there is rarely a strong, direct, or consistent relationship between attitudes and subsequent action.” 2.4.1 Studies A report by Ipsos MORI (2007) highlighted that the attitude-behaviour gap is even more apparent when a person’s lifestyle needs to be altered to bring about a change, and that most large-scale campaigns rely on increasing the knowledge of the audience rather than overcoming this gap. Sustainable Development Commission & National Consumer Council (2006b) expands on this and notes that the gap exists between pro- environmental attitudes and everyday behaviour. Costanzo et al. (1986: p. 522) found evidence of this gap when they concluded that “people who cite conservation as the single most important strategy for improving our energy future are no more likely than others to engage in energy-conserving behaviours.” 2.5 Behaviour De Young (1993) identified three sets of techniques that can be used to change behaviour, which are often complimentary. Information techniques are there to provide people with an understanding of what the environmental problem is, the actions needed to overcome the problem, and the stages needed to carry out the actions. This technique relies on self-discovery and it is therefore less clear how to trigger it. Positive motivational techniques use both extrinsic and intrinsic motivations. Extrinsic motivation is used to make a behaviour more engaging through, for example, monetary or social reinforcement. Intrinsic motivation occurs when individuals discover that a behavioural change is important, which takes the form of altruism and intrinsic satisfaction. The last set of techniques is of a coercive nature. These techniques edit people’s choices either physically or perceptually and in doing so, change behaviour through, for example, social pressure. Another approach is using techniques that employ fear, something which has been used by past awareness campaigns in the UK.
  26. 26. 17 2.5.1 Studies A study carried out by Crossley (1983) in Melbourne, Australia found the following relationships between attitudes, intentions and behaviour; a very weak relationship between attitudes and intentions, virtually no relationship between attitudes and behaviour, and a strong relationship between intentions and behaviour. He therefore concluded that “respondents were experiencing barriers which prevented them from adopting energy-conserving practices” (Crossley 1983: p. 358). In linking these relationships with household energy use, it was concluded that there was not a strong relationship between energy use and attitudes, intentions and behaviour. Those respondents with attitudes in favour of energy conservation had a tendency to use more energy and had a slight tendency to come from households with higher incomes. De Young (1993), as mentioned previously, found that research has also concentrated on changing behaviour through external information and motivation. De Young (1993) derived five evaluation dimensions from the notion of behavioural effectiveness. These include reliability (can it change behaviour the first time it is used?), speed of change, particularism (can the technique be used universally?), generality (is there a spill-over effect from a target behaviour to untargeted behaviours?), and durability (is repeated intervention necessary?). Furthermore, techniques were described that are used to change behaviour, including prompts, material incentives, social pressure and material disincentives, and commitment. As mentioned previously, Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 711) examined environmental education and attitudes. One of their conclusions was that “what people feel and believe about the environment (…) determines their attitudes towards it.” In their literature review, Kraus (1995) was cited by Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 712) because he found that “one of the most important determinants of behaviour is attitude.” Eagly & Kulesa (1997) cited by Pooley & O'Connor (2000: p. 712) found that “giving environmental knowledge on environmental issues does not necessarily foster positive environmental attitudes”, which supports the finding that knowledge does not necessarily lead to a change in behaviour. Stern (1992) reviewed research done by psychologists in the area of energy conservation. He found that of the policy instruments used to change energy use, most research looked at information and financial incentives. One of the most important
  27. 27. 18 elements under information was feedback, which “provides highly credible information, compared with supposedly expert advice” (Stern 1992: p. 1227). Money “profoundly influences energy choices” (Stern 1992: p. 1228), but non-financial motives, such as consumer preferences and group membership, are also influential. One of the conclusions from the study was that, in order to make policies successful, “the target individuals or organisations must learn of them and comply without the need for major enforcement efforts” (Stern 1992: p. 1230). Nordlund & Garvill (2002) examined how pro-environmental behaviour is influenced by problem awareness, general and environmental value orientation, and personal norm. They found that “pro-environmental behaviour was seen as a behaviour that involves a conflict between acting in one’s own immediate interest or in the long-term interest of the collective or the environment” (Nordlund & Garvill 2002: p. 752). Furthermore, Stern (2000) cited by Nordlund & Garvill (2002) highlighted the four types of causal factors that might influence pro-environmental behaviour. These types include attitudinal factors (e.g. values, beliefs and norms), contextual factors (material costs and rewards), personal capabilities (e.g. financial resources), and habits. McDougall & Mank (1982) concentrated on consumer energy conservation policy in Canada and found that, although Canadians find it important to conserve energy and that individuals can make a difference, they are unlikely to change their behaviour or lifestyle. McDougall & Mank (1982: p. 223) concluded that the “consumer response in terms of engaging in meaningful, significant conservation behaviours to a voluntary non-financial policy such as an advertising programme will be low and consequently, the behavioural barrier is high.” 2.5.2 Feedback As mentioned previously in section 2.2.3, feedback can be very effective in changing behaviour. Costanzo et al. (1986: p. 526) found that “feedback is most effective when (a) energy users have voluntarily set themselves quantitative goals for reducing consumption, (b) the information is clearly understood, (c) feedback is frequent, and (d) energy costs are a large portion of the household budget.” Furthermore, Rothstein (1990) cited by Winett & Ester (1983) found feedback can be given to individuals and the community through the media and that this method is effective. This shows that even on a larger scale a change in behaviour through feedback can be achieved.
  28. 28. 19 2.5.3 Prompts Whereas feedback is usually provided after energy has been used, prompts are often placed near the point of use, such as a sticker urging people to switch off the lights when not in the room. Prompts are provided externally and, according to De Young (1993: p. 490), are “generally experienced as being tangible and concrete in nature.” A study by Winett & Ester (1983) reviewed a number of approaches to changing energy conservation behaviour and came up with a media-based approach, which would contain such interventions as feedback and prompts. One of the conclusions from the review was that booklets and brochures, which are often used in programmes and provide information, rarely influence behaviour (Winett & Ester 1983). The approach called for a longer campaign so that the frequency of prompts could be increased, as well as more specific information distributed about actions such as “turn down the thermostat” rather than “it is good to conserve energy.” Geller et al. (1982) cited by Winett & Ester (1983) identified a number of elements that create an effective environment for prompts to be successful, including specificity, proximity, convenience, non-demanding language, and high visibility. 2.5.4 Promoting energy conservation and interventions In looking at past campaigns carried out by the UK Government (see Chapter 3), it became clear that the main focus of these campaigns was to provide the general public with more information. Costanzo et al. (1986) noted that information campaigns were based on two “vague” theories of conservation behaviour. The rational-economic model “assumes that people will perform conservation behaviours that are economically advantageous” and the attitude-behaviour model “assumes that conservation behaviour will follow automatically from favourable attitudes toward conservation” (Costanzo et al. 1986: p. 521). In terms of energy conservation policy instruments which are communicative, Joerges & Müller (1983) identified three types; information, persuasion and participation. The UK Government has used information and persuasion in its efforts to change behaviour. However, participation can be very effective, as seen in the EcoTeams programme described in section 3.3.1, because it exposes “people to situations in which they will
  29. 29. 20 observe new activities, experience new expectations, and be influenced by others to organise collective conservation efforts” (Joerges & Müller 1983: p. 6). 2.5.5 Habits Aarts & Dijksterhuis (2000) cited by Staats et al. (2004: p. 347) defined habitual behaviour as “behaviour that occurs automatically upon the presence of a goal, a direct goal-action link, not preceded by consciously developed intentions.” Bargh (1996) cited by Staats et al. (2004: p. 347) found that breaking a habit calls for the intention to act differently, which means that “effects of participation, therefore, should operate on the intentional component of behaviour.” A study by Stern & Gardner (1981a) focused on how psychological research can be used to shape energy policy. They found that repeated behaviour, i.e. habits, can be changed by using behaviour modification, but that “one-shot” behaviours need a different strategy which takes into account “the multiple determinants of particular consumer choices” (Stern & Gardner 1981a: p. 334). Furthermore, Stern & Gardner (1981a: p. 334) concluded that “frequently repeated behaviours usually involve curtailment, while one-shot actions usually involve efficiency.” In the report “I Will If You Will”, Sustainable Development Commission & National Consumer Council (2006b) also touched upon the importance of habits. They found that people sometimes act in an unsustainable way out of habit or because others are doing the same thing, and that therefore new behaviours “need to become ‘social norms’ to be truly effective and successful” (Sustainable Development Commission & National Consumer Council 2006b: p. 11). Strategy Unit (2004: p. 14) also recognised that some behaviours “are so deeply rooted that they are more akin to ‘habits’ and unspoken assumptions.” 2.5.6 Snowball effect As mentioned previously in section 2.5.1, energy conservation behaviour can spill over from taking place in the household to other areas. A study by Daneshvary, Daneshvary & Schwer (1998) cited by Barr (2007) found that in terms of recycling, people who had taken part in textiles recycling were more likely to have been a part of curb side recycling schemes. Furthermore, Freedman & Fraser (1966) cited by Costanzo et al.
  30. 30. 21 (1986: p. 526) found that “once someone has made a small commitment in a given area, that person will subsequently be more likely to make a larger commitment in the same area.” 2.6 Sources of influence 2.6.1 Background Vyas (2007) carried out a study on the concert Live Earth and examined how this event might encourage people to change their behaviour. He found that the person or entity delivering the message is important and that “the validity and credibility of messenger is just as important as the message itself” (Vyas 2007: p. iii). Furthermore trusting the messenger is vital, from which can be concluded that friends and family will probably have the most influence on people’s behaviour. Vyas (2007: p. 52) also looked at the social context of behaviour and found that after attending Live Earth, “collective action was the most influencing factor for people that had changed their lifestyle.” This is supported by the finding of EST (2007a: p. 4) which states that “being seen to be green is popular among 70% of the UK population” and that conserving energy “is seen to be as virtuous as donating to charity.” 2.6.2 Studies Costanzo et al. (1986) found that if information is conveyed through social diffusion, it is more likely to influence behaviour. Furthermore if the information is received from a trusted source, it “is more likely to be perceived, favourably understood and remembered” (Costanzo et al. 1986: p. 527). The importance of social diffusion may be due to the difficulty in making decisions when it comes to energy conservation (Costanzo et al. 1986). He also noted that social diffusion is more influential than media appeals (Costanzo et al. 1986), and that “media sources are effective in creating awareness of new technology, but interpersonal sources exert far greater influence on the decision to adopt a new technology” (Costanzo et al. 1986: p. 528). From this finding it can be concluded that Government may be best placed to carry out an awareness campaign, but that adoption must be strengthened by other sources.
  31. 31. 22 Coltrane et al. (1986) reviewed some of the literature associated with social diffusion and issues of influence. Kier et al. (1983) cited by Coltrane et al. (1986) found that people often heard about energy conservation programmes from others rather than through media. Solari & Harper (1984) cited by Coltrane et al. (1986) found that middle- and upper-income households also learn about programmes from others, and (Davis et al, 1984) cited by Coltrane et al. (1986) found that low-income households are also more influenced by others, such as a credible community group, than by the media. Strategy Unit (2004) also focused on social diffusion but termed it an “ecological approach”; by changing the behaviour of friends and family, social norms are also changed. Furthermore it recognised that government might not be as influential in changing behaviour as an individual’s network. The Australian Government (2007) came to the same conclusion, while Ipsos MORI (2007) found that not trusting traditional sources of authority undermines the information that they are spreading. Ipsos MORI (2007) also mentioned the concept of social influencers, which are certain individuals with wide social networks. However, there are problems with targeting these social influencers, such as the reliance of the exchanged information being accurate. 2.6.3 Energy Saving Trust and social influencers EST has also recognised the concept of social influencers, so-called Green Ambassadors, and has strived to identify them and provide them with resources so that it is easier for them to communicate with their social network (EST 2007c). EST has found that “90% of people would save more energy if they knew their community had the capacity to save more”(EST 2007c: p. 3), which highlights the importance of both collective action and community support. Furthermore, EST has identified four elements that define a community; membership, influence, integration and fulfilment of needs, and shared emotional connection (EST 2007c). However, a community does not necessarily have to exist physically; it can also be virtual and exist online.
  32. 32. 23 2.7 Conclusions The research brought together in the above sections points towards an approach with a personalised message and a trusted messenger. It also concludes that knowledge does not always lead to a change in attitude and that this in turn does not always lead to a change in behaviour. Elements that may help to change behaviour include collective action, feedback and prompts. Although reports written for the UK Government have concluded that raising awareness is not enough to change behaviour, the next chapter will show that the UK Government departments continue to use a mass-media approach to reach people, usually ineffectively.
  33. 33. 24 3. Past campaigns 3.1 Overview Past campaigns carried out in the UK, both by the Government and NGOs are analysed in this chapter, in order to form an understanding of the history of these campaigns and to examine how effectiveness was evaluated. It was found that most energy conservation campaigns were actually information and awareness-raising campaigns, which has been found to not have a profound effect on changing behaviour. Costanzo et al. (1986) found that most programmes grew out of a marketing tradition, which meant that mass marketing was used. However, McDougall & Mank (1982) and Costanzo et al. (1986) noted that both the impact and the success rate of advertising are low. Evaluation of a campaign is a vital component of the process and the only way to measure how effective the programme has been, according to Crossley (1979), is to monitor people’s energy use before and after. Joerges & Müller (1983: p. 28) found in their study that these “evaluating procedures (…) are in the overwhelming majority of cases non-existent.” Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2005) carried out some research into evaluation of past campaigns and found that although they have raised awareness, behaviour has not been changed. 3.1.1 Models As mentioned previously in section 2.5.4, there are a number of models that are used to explain behaviour. McKenzie-Mohr et al. (1995) found that campaigns based on the rational-economic model were largely ineffective. Owens & Driffill (2006) noted that most government campaigns on energy conservation have been based on this model. Campaigns based on the attitude-behaviour model have also been ineffective (McKenzie-Mohr et al. 1995).
  34. 34. 25 3.1.2 Government campaigns The campaigns run by the UK Government have been education programmes and have mostly focused on raising awareness. The premise is that raising awareness and therefore increasing knowledge will change behaviour. As was discussed in Chapter 2, this premise is incorrect. A reason why the Government may concentrate on trying to change behaviour in this way is because of a limited budget. Both Ipsos MORI (2007) and Benders et al. (2006) noted that programmes are either personalised and time intensive and can therefore only include a limited number of people, or they are generalised and time “extensive” and can therefore reach the majority of the general public. An early study by Crossley (1979) looked at campaigns carried out by governments around the world and found that the strategy used in these campaigns was one of persuasion. It emerged that “the most relevant government department would get the responsibility for organising and coordinating the campaign” (Crossley 1979: p. 59), which seems to be the case in the UK at the moment. EST gives consumers energy advice, but the main information campaign, Act on CO2, is currently carried out by DEFRA. 3.2 Past government campaigns As mentioned previously, government campaigns with the objective of changing behaviour have mostly sought to raise awareness. A number of campaigns are analysed in detail here, but the amount of information and analysis available on the past campaigns varied and it was often difficult to find evidence and evaluation. When the topic of past campaigns came up during an interview with the DEFRA official, she explained that a digital hub will be created with information about the present campaign, Act on CO2, as well as previous campaigns. 3.2.1 Save It One of the first campaigns carried out by the UK Government was the Save It campaign. Only one reference, Crossley (1979), could be found. The campaign was carried out by the Department of Energy with collaboration from energy utility companies. The Save It campaign used segmentation, although this was not the sole
  35. 35. 26 basis of the campaign. As the campaign progressed, results from questionnaires pointed to more specific segments and the messages in the material and advertising were developed to reach them. Save It used editorial materials and supplements were included in newspapers and magazines. 3.2.2 Helping the Earth Begins at Home Another public awareness campaign, Helping the Earth Begins at Home, was launched after Save It in 1991 (Löfstedt 1996). The budget totalled £6.2 million and was provided by the Department of the Environment. Helping the Earth Begins at Home relied on scare tactics. The main premise of the campaign was that if people were informed about the greenhouse effect as well as energy use, their energy consumption would change. After Helping the Earth Begins at Home had come to an end, it was decided that another public information campaign should be launched. This time the slogan was “Wasting Energy Costs the Earth” and the budget was £4 million. According to Löfstedt (1996), cartoon dinosaurs were used to promote energy conservation, but no further information was given to dispel the notion that there was a link between the ozone hole and the greenhouse effect. Löfstedt (1996) found that during Helping the Earth Begins at Home, individuals were confused about the greenhouse effect (see section 3.2.2.1). 3.2.2.1 Analysis Two reports were found which provided analysis of Helping the Earth Begins at Home. Taylor (1994) cited by Löfstedt (1996) found that the campaign was relatively ineffective, but according to the Government, 94% of adults are now aware of global warming and 76% understand that it is linked to personal energy use. A major weakness of the campaign, according to Löfstedt (1996), was that the general public did not link the greenhouse effect with energy conservation, but with the ozone hole. Hinchliffe (1996: p. 53) focused on the framing of Helping the Earth Begins at Home and how its aim was to “foster a global consciousness and a collective will.” He found that energy conservation was promoted as being worthwhile from both a financial standpoint and a less personal, environmental standpoint in the campaign. Furthermore, the message sent out was that the government’s “role was to encourage people to behave rationally at the micro scale and gain from incidental benefits at the macro scale” (Hinchliffe 1996: p. 57). Hinchliffe (1996: p. 59) interviewed a number of people and concluded that “the idea of saving energy in order to reduce socio-environmental
  36. 36. 27 problems was regarded with some scepticism.” Furthermore, the sample did not trust the Government and felt that the Government should also try to save energy. The campaign ran for over five years (Hinchliffe 1996), but Hinchliffe (1996: p. 62) found that it “did not reinvent itself quickly enough.” This need for reinvention has been taken into account in the Save Your 20% campaign (see section 3.2.4). 3.2.3 Are You Doing Your Bit? The Are You Doing Your Bit? campaign was created by the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott in 1997 (DETR 2000), because he felt that it was necessary for individuals and industry to take action, “irrespective of whatever climate change targets were agreed internationally” (DETR 2000: p. 2). Two reports were found on this campaign; one written by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) and one by Ipsos MORI, a research company. 3.2.3.1 Objectives For Are You Doing Your Bit?, a team analysed DETR’s “existing promotional activity; partner and other campaigning activity; and external research” (DETR 2000: p. 2). The campaign was very much a joint effort, with transport and environment both being highlighted. As EST was already promoting the financial benefits of conserving energy, it was decided that Are You Doing Your Bit? would focus on no cost measures as well as reinforcing partners’ messages. The objectives of the campaign were to:  Promote awareness of actions which individuals can take to protect the local/ global environment  Build/reinforce the link between individual action and climate change  Make the environment mainstream  Create a strong campaign identity/ reinforce partners’ activities (DETR 2000: p. 3) 3.2.3.2 Structure The research carried out by the team at DETR included a 1996 survey of Public Attitudes to the Environment and a Target Group Index (DETR 2000). They identified a number of barriers that stop people acting, which included confusion, helplessness and apathy.
  37. 37. 28 There were at least three stages of the campaign, which started in 1998, with a gradually increasing budget. The first stage had a budget of £3.4 million and sought to educate and inform the general public via press. It also had elements associated with transport (exhaust emissions checks and the “Greener Vehicles” campaign) and promoted World Environment Day in June. For the second stage, which took place in 1999, the budget doubled in size to £7 million and TV, radio, press, poster sites and bus sides were used to spread awareness. Water use and waste were also part of the messaging with more of a focus on industry. Although the first stage showed real people displaying energy conserving behaviour, celebrities were used in the second stage to provide memorable messages, inject the campaign with importance and add the energy component as well as “making the campaign relevant to everyday life” (DETR 2000: p. 7). In order for the campaign to be “talked about”, media was engaged both nationally and regionally in the form of a travelling exhibition. The third stage had a budget of £9 million a year and the overall aim was to “build on this increasing association and provide further motivations for people to increase their environmental actions” (DETR 2000: p. 8). Based on recent research, DETR developed an advertising approach, which included “a sharper message focus, stronger calls to action, clear explanation of personal benefits, explanation of wider cumulative impact of individual actions, and stronger branding/greater integration” (DETR 2000: p. 8). 3.2.3.3 Outcomes DETR carried out research in order to evaluate the campaign’s effectiveness in changing people’s behaviour. In 1998 research showed that the shifts in people’s awareness were statistically significant, although the difference was not large. The change was highest for not leaving the TV on standby (26% to 40%) and lowest for using public transport (59% to 61%). Monthly tracking research started in May 1999 which coincided with TV advertising. It was found that showing celebrities making everyday changes was successful, as it created a “memorable approach” (DETR 2000: p. 10). In terms of effectiveness, it was found that 90% of people recognised the campaign, 70% felt it was applicable to them and 60% recognised the logo/slogan. However, in terms of attitudes and behavioural change the campaign was not so successful; 90% of people said that they were already “doing their bit” by carrying out
  38. 38. 29 the promoted actions and only 20% said they were motivated by the campaign to do their bit, and therefore change their behaviour. In addition to tracking research, focus groups were also used to measure the outcomes of the campaign. The advertising was well-liked but some found that “the brand was not sufficiently strong and the campaign carried too many messages” (DETR 2000: p. 11). The most recent research shows that a new advertising approach was used and the reaction from the public was good. However, as Ipsos MORI (2007) noted, the primary objective of the campaign was to raise awareness, even though awareness was already high. The campaign should have translated this awareness into action. 3.2.4 Save Your 20% The Save Your 20% campaign started in 2005 and ran for three years, ending in April 2008. Research and evaluation is not yet available, so all data, unless otherwise cited, was gathered during an interview with Jon McGowan. The campaign was carried out because of “the need for the Energy Saving Trust to have one consistent message to consumers.” Initially there were sixteen different programmes that EST carried out, each with their own website. Save Your 20% was there to consolidate these programmes into one website, with “different channels for the different website and the different programmes.” As two thirds (67%) of website traffic was made up of consumers, it was important to EST that the website functioned as a homepage so that the audience could be channelled into activities the EST wanted them to follow or that they were searching for themselves. Furthermore, the campaign was there to give consumers “a call to action and a reason to visit EST.” Save Your 20% was created because the UK Government’s target was to achieve “a 20% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions below 1990 levels by 2012” (Department of Trade and Industry 2003: p. 25). It focused on saving 20% of energy use, which would cut emissions and help fight climate change. There were first of the three phases described the context for Save Your 20%. A series of adverts were run, which explained that the government and the general public have a commitment to save energy and mentioned the “20% by 2012” target. A postcode-driven segmentation model was used to identify the target audience. Out of the ten segments, it was concluded that four segments had the biggest savings to make
  39. 39. 30 and these data were then crossed with TGI data, which looked at attitudes towards the environment. Next, media consumption of the four segments was analysed, and at the outset of the campaign, television and press were used, supported by the Internet. In the second phase of the campaign, the Internet was used more as it was easier to get people to sign up and commit their 20%, and give feedback. This part of the campaign focused on showing that other people were committing, with real case studies taking centre stage. Concurrently, a TV programme on UKTV was sponsored, with idents (identification) shown at the start and end. This programme was selected because, according to media buyers, it resonated well with the target audience. The third, and last phase, of Save Your 20% contained a thank-you element aimed at everyone who had committed to saving energy. Although the campaign has now finished, people who committed and opted to receive information from EST, still receive emails. However, a hierarchy of actions has been created to underscore that some actions save more carbon than others. 3.2.4.1 Outcomes In terms of figures, the objectives of the campaign were to recruit 1.2 million unique visitors to the EST website and 700,000 recorded visits to the advice centres, which translated into a total of 1.9 million visitors to EST. These targets were exceeded by 25% online and 1 or 2% for the advice centres. For EST it was difficult to know what to expect because there had not been that many pledge campaigns up until that point. When the campaign ended in April 2008, 216,997 people had committed to saving their 20%, with profiles created online (Help prevent climate change - Commit to save your 20% - Energy Saving Trust.). Their combined number of commitments, such as only boiling as much water is needed and washing clothes at 30 degrees, totalled one million. In terms of evaluating the campaign, EST’s measure is carbon, but it also uses other methods of evaluation. EST will take a nationally representative sample and gather data from them on their awareness of EST as well as interviewing people who have used the service and if they are thinking of installing new measures, and comparing this to the benchmarks from the 90s. Save Your 20% will not continue as it was felt that it had “reached a natural finish and end”, after the planned three years. Currently another awareness raising campaign is
  40. 40. 31 being run to publicise the work that EST does, but without a slogan. EST is reviewing what campaign to do next and looking at how best to communicate locally and nationally, taking into account what Act on CO2 is trying to achieve. 3.2.4.2 Save Your 20% and Act on CO2 Save Your 20% was launched in 2005, which was before the Act on CO2 campaign started in March 2007 (DEFRA). The EST sees the role of Act on CO2 to be “to educate consumers about what CO2 is and what to do about it.” Neither commercial organisations nor charities have an interest in advertising CO2, which means that “government are best placed to educate people around CO2 and what it is and how to save and why to save.” Act on CO2 is very much a DEFRA initiative, with support from the EST. 3.2.5 Act on CO2 The Act on CO2 campaign is carried out by DEFRA but is supported by EST. As with Save Your 20%, research and evaluation are not available yet and therefore all data gathered was from an interview with the DEFRA official, unless otherwise cited. Unlike Are You Doing Your Bit?, which ran for three years, Act on CO2 is “a long-term campaign because it’s there to change attitudes.” There are at least three stages to the campaign. The first explains what climate change is, the second focuses on individual actions and how those actions contribute to a larger carbon footprint, and the third stage shows how changes in behaviour can lead to a smaller footprint, as well as save money. TV adverts were shown featuring a sticky footprint, which “were about making people aware that their actions had an impact on their footprint.” In September 2008, the third stage of the campaign will be launched with TV ads, press and online, which will concentrate on behavioural change. One campaign component is the carbon calculator. 3.2.5.1 Evaluation of Act on CO2 Tracking research will be carried out in order to evaluate if the general public registered the adverts and if they understood them. This research will be done periodically, with one mid-way and one at the end of this financial year, so that the results can be compared with previous tracking research. 3.2.5.2 Act on CO2 – Carbon calculator The carbon calculator is “a public engagement tool within the Climate Change Communications Initiative” and seeks to communicate the message of climate change in
  41. 41. 32 an engaging way. It was launched on the 20th of June 2007 and, as of the 26th of August 2008, has had over 1,223,837 visitors, who have created 462,342 footprint profiles. The calculator was based on Government methodology and others were encouraged to build calculators based on that methodology. This was done in order to spread the word, as it was felt that if more people had access to the information, more behavioural change would occur. Also, it is stipulated that if people know how large their carbon footprint is in the areas of home, appliances and travel, they will know which areas to target. When all the data have been entered into the carbon calculator, a report is produced. If an individual wants to learn more about insulation for example, they are redirected to EST’s website. Currently it is not possible to measure how many people go on to install such high-cost measures. Another issue is that the campaign focuses on behavioural changes and so outcomes will become apparent later on. 3.3 Non-government campaigns During the preliminary stages of research, an evaluation of the EcoTeams programme by Global Action Plan (GAP) was found. Although there are many different programmes in place, EcoTeams not only had an evidence base, but it was also possible to gain more data from an interview with the project manager, Ann Morris. Data was gathered from the interview with Ms. Morris unless otherwise cited. GAP was founded in the USA in 1989, and is established in 13 other countries in addition to the UK (Global Action Plan 2006). It is a charity focused on changing behaviour in order to protect the environment, and works with companies, schools and communities to do this (Mercer 2007). The EcoTeams programme was created in the 90s by the Dutch branch of GAP and EverGreen is a spin-off from this programme. It receives its funding from local authorities for the EcoTeams programme, but also from the companies it helps as well as donors. The City Bridge Trust Fund has funded GAP as an organisation for three years, while the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation has invested in GAP rather than giving them a grant, because according to Danyal Sattar “they are clearly very good.”
  42. 42. 33 3.3.1 EcoTeams An EcoTeam is made up of 6 to 8 people who meet once a month for five months “at a time and place of their convenience and choosing.” Every meeting has a different topic such as energy use, transport, water, or waste and shopping, and lasts about an hour. The final meeting celebrates the “collective achievements of the group and to discuss potential next steps or future actions that participants may wish to take in their communities” (Global Action Plan 2008a: p.1). Throughout the programme, waste, recycling, energy use (gas and electricity) and water use are measured. What sets the programme apart from others is that it works on a community level. The materials used during the programme include a web database, on-going advice and guidance, and education materials (Global Action Plan 2008a). The database is used to record the measurements members take and will adjust these figures depending on the weather, as more energy is used to heat the home when it is cold. It also automatically produces a report at the end of the programme. The members aim to reduce their waste, recycling, energy use and water use. Reducing the amount that is being recycled is needed because “the most important thing is that they realise not to produce the waste in the first place.” An EcoTeam is led by a volunteer team leader who is recruited through an existing community, such as a sports club (Global Action Plan 2008a). The team members have two motives for joining; social as well as environmental. Furthermore, because the EcoTeam is made up of people who live in the same area, information can be exchanged about the local area (Global Action Plan 2008a). 3.3.1.1 Studies Staats et al. (2004) carried out a study on the behaviours that are targeted during the EcoTeams programme. He noted that approximately 100 behaviours are targeted. As mentioned previously, there are three elements to the approach of EcoTeams; a group setting (community), materials such as the database, and feedback in the form of measurements. Another area of the study was to examine whether these three elements strengthened behaviour change. It was found that the behavioural change experienced by the participants was still evident two years after the programme had ended and that the “findings clearly suggest that ETP participation is mainly responsible for the changes observed among the participants” (Staats et al. (2004: p. 355).
  43. 43. 34 Staats et al. (2004) noted that the EcoTeams approach was different from other programmes because it targeted a number of behaviours, rather than a group of behaviours, as well as having the elements of information, feedback and social support. 38 behaviours were studied in greater detail and it was found that half of them “changed in a pro-environmental direction directly at the end of the ETP [EcoTeams programme]. Moreover, these changes were retained or increased further during the subsequent two years” (Staats et al. 2004: p. 361). Global Action Plan (2006) found through anecdotal evidence that EcoTeams continue to meet after the programme has ended. The study concluded that the EcoTeams Programme is demanding for both participants and the organisation that runs the programme. It suggested that another programme be developed which is less demanding and can be applied to “broader segments of the population” (Staats et al. 2004: p. 363). If this were done, Staats et al. (2004) stipulate that participation might increase and the cost might decrease, as well as the possibility of reaching people with low pro-environmental behaviour who could make large savings. In 2006, GAP and the University of East Anglia received funding to evaluate the EcoTeams programme (see section 3.1.1.3). The study lasted two years and its primary objective was “to address the question of how individuals and households can be encouraged to change their behaviour in order to reduce their level of waste and also to sustain this behaviour change” (Global Action Plan 2008b: p. 2). 3.3.1.2 Development of the programme During an interview with Ann Morris of GAP, the development of the EcoTeams programme was discussed. Advertising is often used to reach a larger number of people but Ms. Morris said that this is not something that GAP is considering because they do not have the budget for national advertisements. At the time of the interview no EcoTeams were running in London but in the autumn, two local authorities, one faith- based group and two voluntary organisations will be taking part. A website has been developed and will be further improved so that it can include blogs from different teams and allow the teams communicate with each other. In terms of outreach, GAP will do road shows and be able to reach more people, a suggestion that Staats et al. (2004) made previously. The materials used during the programme are also being updated when a new technique or technology becomes available.
  44. 44. 35 3.3.1.3 Outcomes It has emerged from primary and secondary data that the evaluation of programmes is not always carried out. However, Hobson (2003: p. 98) found that “GAP has continually sought to evaluate and develop its programmes.” Furthermore, when the topic of evaluation was brought up during an interview with Danyal Sattar of the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, it became apparent that evaluating a programme so thoroughly – and being able to define where savings are made – is very rare. The study carried out by UEA, in addition to examining how to encourage a change in behaviour, also looked at how to sustain this change (Global Action Plan 2008a). The UEA study looked at both quantitative data from the database and qualitative data in the form of interviews. During the interviews, a number of aspects were identified, including a team-based approach, measuring, monitoring and feedback, and the development of habits (Global Action Plan 2008a). Furthermore it was found that participants were installing higher cost measures after the programme was finished. As mentioned before, those who had participated in the EcoTeams programme continued to carry out actions for a number of years after it had ended. From the interviews, UEA found that this was due to the different topics discussed during the meetings, which resulted in a holistic approach, and the changes which fit into the pre- existing lifestyles of the participants. These changes are small but also significant, and these changes can become habits and eventually routines. A questionnaire was used to evaluate various areas of the programme and looked at both attitude and impact. These results were summarised in the following table:
  45. 45. 36 Impact Attitude Households: Having completed EcoTeams:  reduction in waste to landfill 20%  increase in recycling as a proportion of total waste 5.1%  reduction in electricity consumption 7.0%  reduction in heating energy consumption 20.8%  reduction on CO2 emissions 16.6%  reduction in water use 14.9%  average households make savings of £148 per year on energy and water bills  94% reported that they were doing more to reduce environmental impact than before  94% stated that they were ‘likely’ or ‘very likely’ to maintain the changes they implemented during EcoTeams  89% rated their understanding of their household’s impact on the environment as ‘high’ or ‘very high’  83% stated that they feel confident talking to other people about environmental issues and 84% would recommend EcoTeams to people they know  81% rated the EcoTeams meetings as ‘effective’ or ‘very effective’ in encouraging them to make small (but significant) changes in their lifestyle Table 1: Impact results and attitude changes after participating in EcoTeams Source: (Global Action Plan 2008a: p. 3) The research carried out was further “supported by an evaluation methodology created for EcoTeams by GAP in partnership with the New Economics Foundations” (Global Action Plan 2008d: p. 3). It was found that the two elements of influences, weighing and measuring as well as group activity, “operate in both distinct and complementary ways to facilitate behaviour change” (Global Action Plan 2008a: p. 3). Weighing and measuring helps to create transparency so that participants can link their routines to consumption. Group activity and support, when combined with this feedback, can “lead to a new ‘joined-up thinking’ regarding everyday behaviour and a personalisation of environmental impact” (Global Action Plan 2008a: p. 3). What sets the EcoTeams programme apart from other programmes is that attitudes and behaviours are changed within a short period of time, four to five months, rather than campaigns carried out by Governments that can last years (Global Action Plan 2006). GAP also discovered that “the longer a project runs in an area the easier it is to find people who are willing to volunteer for the programmes and even to train as facilitators” (Global Action Plan 2006: p. 13), which might be the result of social diffusion. 3.3.2 EverGreen Programme The EverGreen programme came out of the EcoTeams programme and is concerned with older people residing in supported living in Hackney. All data, unless otherwise
  46. 46. 37 cited was gathered during an interview with Nick Martin, the project manager of EverGreen. EverGreen is a partnership between housing associations and GAP, and has been running for two years. Through experience it was found that the EcoTeams programme sometimes lacked the practical application desired and therefore other ways to engage participants were developed. For example, the participants wanted to grow their own fruits and vegetables, so a solution was found to enable them to do this. Apart from benefitting the environment, EverGreen also has social and physical benefits, although these conclusions are based on anecdotal evidence. As the programme progressed new partnerships and ideas were created. Volunteers from local businesses were recruited to help participants and a local school visited the project. External groups were brought in for their expertise and were able to bring something new to the project. For example, some people were not able to garden but were interested in arts and crafts, often reusing material in the process. There are 850 people spread over 29 different housing blocks in Hackney, who have access to the project and over 350 participated. Mr. Martin involved the participants by arranging a meeting through their housing officer and tried to gain their trust, which turned out to be a lengthy process. Although energy has not been the main focus, it will be higher on the agenda, as the first stage was about getting people engaged. 3.4 Conclusions The research analysed in the previous sections concludes that only recently Government campaigns have tried to change behaviour and offered personalised advice. Previous campaigns, such as Are You Doing Your Bit?, concentrated on raising awareness. Although this is a welcome development, the campaigns are less well-rounded than those carried out by GAP. Both EcoTeams and EverGreen are personalised and involve face-to-face contact, as well as including support, collective action and feedback. All these elements were found to be effective in changing behaviour in the literature review in Chapter 2. The next chapter compares and contrasts the responses from the interviewees.
  47. 47. 38 4. Results and discussion 4.1 Overview This chapter analyses the qualitative data gathered from the 16 interviews conducted. It compares and contrasts the answers of the interviewees, and seeks to find common ground with other research. Over the course of two months, 16 interviews were carried out, six of which were done face-to-face. The interviews varied in length; lasting between 17 and 52 minutes. The discrepancy is due to the fact that the interviews that lasted longer often included descriptions of the projects that the interviewees were involved with. Of the 16 interviews, five were carried out with Foundations, ten with charities or government agencies and one with an organisation which advises donors on how to give most effectively. Of the five Foundations, two were based in the UK, two in Europe and one in the USA. Interviewees were identified by consulting someone who had worked in the energy and environment sector for a long period of time. The writer of this thesis also drew on contacts made while working for NGOs, as well as being referred to interviewees by others. The following table contains further details of the interviews. The column “type of organisation” is included because the name of the organisation is not always self- explanatory. For example, the Energy Saving Trust is a government agency and does not focus only on grant-making, whereas the Arcadia Trust focuses solely on grant- making. Brief descriptions of the organisations can be found in Appendix I. There were two sets of questions; one for Foundations and one for charities and government agencies. Some of the questions overlapped in order to compare and contrast the responses. Furthermore, additional questions were added or removed depending on the interview. Templates of these questions can be found in Appendix II. Full responses of the interviewees can be found in Appendix III.
  48. 48. 39 Interviewee Organisation Type of organisation Programme Date Length (in minutes) Iona Joy New Philanthropy Capital (NPC) Charity 1 Various 18 th of July 2008 30 Jos van Renswoude European Climate Foundation Foundation 2 Various 22 nd of July 2008 18 Roger Mitchell Arcadia Trust Foundation Various 23 rd of July 2008 17 Sheila Keating EST Government agency Various 24 th of July 2008 35 Meroë Jackson Creative Environmental Networks (CEN) “Not for profit” Various 24 th of July 2008 31 Janine Michael Centre for Sustainable Energy Charity Various 24 th of July 2008 26 Nick Martin Global Action Plan Charity EverGreen 25 th of July 2008 41 Merrilee Harrigan Alliance to Save Energy “Non-profit” Various 25 th of July 2008 30 Laura McGadie Changeworks Charity Various 28 th of July 2008 21 Anna Shamoon Carbon Descent “Not-for-profit” Various 29 th of July 2008 30 Danyal Sattar Esmée Fairbairn Foundation Foundation Various 30 th of July 2008 41 Ann Morris Global Action Plan Charity EcoTeams 30 th of July 2008 28 Mark Hopkins United Nations Foundation Foundation Various 31 st of July 2008 52 Official DEFRA Government department Carbon calculator 15 th of August 2008 39 Desmond Simpson Oak Foundation Foundation Various 19 th of August 2008 19 Jon McGowan EST Government agency Save Your 20% 19 th of August 2008 50 Table 2: Details of interviews 1 A charity is an organisation which carries out programmes and is often funded by Foundations. 2 A Foundation is independent and makes grants.
  49. 49. 40 4.2 Foundations and Trusts 4.2.1. Key objectives of Foundations As the Foundations interviewed were selected on the basis of the grants they made in the environmental field, the objectives were based around climate change and reducing CO2 emissions. Depending on the size of the Foundation, different programmes may have different objectives. For example, the UN Foundation has a number of programmes of which Energy & Climate is one. The objective of that programme is, according to Mark Hopkins, “changing policy”, but the overall objective of the UN Foundation is to “build partnerships to assist the United Nations in addressing global problems.” 4.2.2 Behavioural change programmes on agendas of Foundations Overall, funding of behavioural change programmes did not feature very high on the agenda of Foundations. Four of the five Foundations focused on changing policy through lobbying as this was believed to be most effective. This signalled a more top- down approach and focused on the supply side. Danyal Sattar admitted that “we’ve done very little on that kind of trying to convince people to change behaviour through action, thought and deed. Where we have come in are the other ends of the scale.” Behavioural change was mentioned with regards to changing the behaviour of key decision makers as part of lobbying. Through this approach only a few people’s behaviour is changed, but the Foundations felt that this was most effective, as Mark Hopkins said, “with the limited resources we have.” Behavioural change on a larger scale was not ruled out, but for Danyal Sattar they were “low-ish” on the agenda because the proposals were not sufficiently compelling. Desmond Simpson of the Oak Foundation said that the funding priority had changed. Due to “advancements with media”, behavioural change programmes were not as important as before. Although the overall conclusion is that Foundations sponsor lobbying more than other projects, and therefore make the most grants in this area. Cracknell & Lee (2004: p. 7) found that advocacy (or lobbying) received “just under 20% of the funds being disbursed.” In the second edition of Where The Green Grants Went (see section 5.5.2),
  50. 50. 41 Lee & Cracknell (2005) again highlighted the lack of funding dedicated towards activities which change policy. 4.2.3 Criteria and processes for selecting a programme It emerged that there is some overlap between the criteria and processes used by the five Foundations. For example, interviewees from the Arcadia Trust and the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation both used the expression “the most bangs for our buck.” This suggests that cost effectiveness is one of the criteria used when selecting a programme. Jos van Renswoude mentioned the quality of the programme whereas Danyal Sattar referred to this indirectly by saying that the three criteria were: good idea or project, good people and a good organisation. Mr. van Renswoude also felt that timeframe was important as well as “the potential to make a real change”, which again underscores the importance of effectiveness. In terms of processes, the approach taken by the Foundations differed substantially. The Oak Foundation and the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation both go through a selection process which starts with an application from an organisation. Further information is gathered about the project and a decision is then made whether or not to fund the project. The UN Foundation has a very different process because, as Mark Hopkins explained, “we’re a Foundation with a client of one. We, in essence, have one grantee.” The process is a collaborative one, which involves the United Nations (UN), and takes place each year “to determine what kinds of activities we’re going to fund at the UN.” 4.2.4 Processes to evaluate behavioural change programmes The Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and the Oak Foundation make use of the same evaluation practices. Both ask the funded organisations to report back against what they applied for, and both want details on what elements worked and did not work. Furthermore, both Foundations occasionally carry out a follow-up in order to evaluate and understand the outcomes more thoroughly. These evaluations take place in order to broaden Esmée Fairbairn Foundation’s knowledge base and, for the Oak Foundation, can depend on the size of the grant.

×