This document discusses approaches to influencing human behavior for sustainability. It notes that existing policies have had limited success due to piecemeal, individualistic interventions. Effective approaches recognize that decision-making is contextual and social. The document advocates designing policies and services based on actual human behaviors rather than assumptions. It suggests making behaviors the default and framing messages correctly. The document argues for focusing on collective behavior through community-level initiatives that build capacity, agency, participation and empowerment. An iterative process of discovery, learning and adaptation using multiple models of organization is recommended to spark innovation at individual and community levels.

1. HELLO

2. DR. SIMON O’RAFFERTY
RESEARCH FELLOW - EPA / UL
SIMONORAFFERTY@GMAIL.COM
@SORAFFERTY
Design Research & Practice Review

4. WHAT I WILL COVER
-WHAT WE (THINK WE) KNOW ABOUT BEHAVIOUR
CHANGE & SUSTAINABILITY
-POTENTIAL & LIMITATIONS OF APPROACHES
-INDIVIDUAL V.S. COLLECTIVE / COMMUNITY
BEHAVIOUR
-THOUGHTS ON WAYS FORWARD IN IRELAND

5. WHY FOCUS ON BEHAVIOUR?
DESIGN REGULATIONS AND SERVICES BASED ON
ACTUAL, NOT ASSUMED, BEHAVIOURS
LIMITED SUCCESS OF EXISTING POLICIES
PIECEMEAL, INDIVIDUALISTIC INTERVENTIONS

6. EVERY PIECE OF
DESIGN “ENCODES A
HYPOTHESIS ABOUT
HUMAN BEHAVIOUR”
adam greenfield

10. EVEN IF NOT EXPLICITLY
RECOGNISED, WE APPROACH
PROBLEMS WITH SOME MODEL OR
ASSUMPTION OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR

11. WHAT WE KNOW
DECISION MAKING IS RARELY RATIONAL
SUBJECT TO SEVERAL COGNITIVE BIASES (E.G.
OVERCONFIDENCE)
STRUGGLE WITH TOO MUCH INFORMATION OR TOO
MUCH CHOICE
DECISIONS ARE CONTEXTUAL & SOCIAL

12. WHAT WE KNOW
DISCOUNT FUTURE BENEFITS
PEOPLE ARE STRONGLY WEDDED TO CURRENT
SITUATIONS: ENDOWMENT EFFECT, LOSS AVERSION,
STATUS QUO BIAS - STRUCTURES
SHOCK / GUILT (SOCIAL MARKETING) DOESN’T
WORK

13. WHAT WE KNOW
LARGE GAPS BETWEEN MOTIVATIONS, ATTITUDES,
VALUES & BEHAVIOUR
- INFORMATION & KNOWLEDGE DOESN’T
NECESSARILY CHANGE BEHAVIOUR

16. WHAT WE KNOW
DIFFERENT TYPES OF BEHAVIOUR - ONE OFF,
HABITS
- CAN’T USE SAME APPROACH FOR ALL

17. adapted from Chatterton, 2014

18. adapted from Chatterton, 2014

19. DIFFUSE, DISTANT AND DELAYED

20. CHALLENGES
RISKS OF REBOUND EFFECTS, MORAL LICENSING
NO SPILLOVER OR LOW PERSISTENCE

21. BEHAVIOUR CHANGE
THE USE OF PRODUCTS, SERVICES,
POLICIES, INCENTIVES, REGULATIONS,
INTERFACES, BUILDINGS, ENVIRONMENTS
THAT ENABLE, MOTIVATE, CONSTRAIN OR
OTHERWISE INFLUENCE PEOPLE TO DO
THINGS IN DIFFERENT WAYS

22. BEHAVIOURAL ECONOMICS
≠
BEHAVIOURAL INSIGHTS
≠
NUDGING

24. MAKE IT SOCIAL

25. MAKE IT DEFAULT

26. FRAMING - GETTING THE MESSAGE RIGHT
14 x

27. INDIVIDUAL V.S.
COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOUR
V.S. TRANSITION

28. WHY COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOUR?
TENDENCY TO FOCUS ON SMALL PROBLEMS OR
INDIVIDUAL AS A CONSUMER
ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS OCCUR WHEN LOTS
OF PEOPLE BEHAVE IN CERTAIN WAYS
FOCUSSING ON INDIVIDUALS IS INEFFICIENT

30. LEARNING FROM EXISTING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY PROJECTS

31. SPEAKING TO COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS AROUND IRELAND

32. COMMUNITY LEVEL BARRIERS
LACK OF INTERNAL CAPACITY (SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE, FINANCE)
LACK OF A CRITICAL MASS OF COMMITTED INDIVIDUALS
LOW SOCIAL CAPITAL, CONNECTEDNESS AND INFLUENCE
CONFUSING RANGE OF SOURCES OF INFO/GUIDANCE
PLUS MANY MORE…..

33. WE HAVE COMMUNITY PLANNING / TRANSITION FRAMEWORKS

34. WE HAVE LOTS OF TOOLKITS AND STRATEGIES

35. IMPLEMENTATION IS PATCHY & UNEVENLY DISTRIBUTED

36. WHY DO SOME PLACES AND
COMMUNITIES PROVIDE MUCH
BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR
INNOVATION & TRANSITION THAN
OTHERS??

37. “HOW DO HUMAN BEINGS
MOST EFFECTIVELY WORK
TOGETHER?”

38. HOW HUMANS ORGANISE
HIERARCHICAL SOLIDARISTIC INDIVIDUALISTIC

39. HOW HUMANS ORGANISE
HIERARCHICAL SOLIDARISTIC INDIVIDUALISTIC
EQUALITY, MEMBERSHIP
SHARED VALUES, BELONGING
- INCLUSIVE, ALTRUISTIC, PASSIONATE
- SECTARIAN, DEFENSIVE, OPPOSITIONAL
AUTHORITY, RULES,
EXPERTISE
- STRATEGIC, VISION,
- SELF SERVING, BUREAUCRATIC
PURSUIT OF SELF INTEREST,
ENTERPRISE, COMPETITION
- CREATIVE, ENTERPRISING, INNOVATIVE
- SELFISH, IRRESPONSIBLE

40. HOW HUMANS ORGANISE?
HIERARCHICAL
SOLIDARISTIC
INDIVIDUALISTIC

41. CAUSE BASED
STRATEGICALLY FOCUSSED HIERARCHY
SOLIDARITY BASED ON COLLABORATION & A SHARED COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE
MODEL FOR ORGANISING THAT MAXIMISES SCOPE FOR CREATIVITY AND AUTONOMY
CREATIVE COMMUNITIES WITH A CAUSE
CHARLES LEADBEATER

42. SUMMARY
DESIGN REGULATIONS AND SERVICES BASED ON
ACTUAL, NOT ASSUMED, BEHAVIOURS
DESIGN POLICIES AND SERVICES THAT HELP
COMMUNITIES MAKE BETTER DECISIONS AND TAKE
ACTION FOR THEMSELVES
➡ REMOVE FRICTIONS, BUILD CAPACITY & AGENCY,
PARTICIPATION, EMPOWERMENT

43. SUMMARY
APPLY AN ITERATIVE PROCESS OF DISCOVERY,
LEARNING AND ADAPTATION.
A MULTI-MODEL APPROACH
SPARK THE CAPACITY OF INDIVIDUALS AND
COMMUNITIES TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, TO BE
INNOVATIVE, TO BE CREATIVE

44. RESEARCH CAPACITY?

45. thank
you