‘Cracking the toughest nut:
How to turn behaviour change
theory into practice.’
IEA DSM TASK XXIV
Closing the Loop Behaviour Change in DSM: From Theory to Practice
Nick Potter: re-be.com
BEhavE conference, Helsinki Finland, September 20-21
Dr Sea Rotmann (Operating Agent, Task XXIV)
Who are we?
Ruth Mourik (Duneworks, NL)
[email protected]
Sea Rotmann (SEA, NZ)
[email protected]
THEORY
PRACTICE
PhD in Science & Technology Studies
8 years working experience Energy Research Center NL (ECN)
Lead EU behaviour change research projects CREATE ACCEPTANCE and CHANGING BEHAVIOUR
Now working with DSOs, retailers, municipalities
on smart grid/smart metering rollouts and pilots
PhD in Environmental Impact Assessments
3 years working experience in sustainability
implementation in major NZ Govt departments
(10,000+ staff members)
Strategic advice to NZ Ministry of Science and Innovation on
demand side energy matters and research prioritisation and evaluation
4 years working on sustainable energy research policy, with focus o
turning behaviour change theory into practice
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Background to IEA DSM Implementing
Agreement
One of more than 40 co-operative energy technology
programmes within the International Energy Agency
(IEA).
The DSM IA is an international collaboration of 15
countries.
DSM offers solutions to problems such as load
management, load shifting, energy efficiency, strategic
conservation and related activities.
The work is organised through a series of Tasks.
Work is reported in publications.
The IA is managed by an Executive Committee (ExCo).
Each Task is funded by participating countries who
contribute National Experts to support the Operating
Agents.
What is DSM?
•
•
•
Demand Side Management (DSM) generally refers to all changes that originate from the
demand (energy user) side.
Reduce the demand for energy (conservation) and shift demand from peak periods to
off-peak periods (load-management).
Goal is to achieve large scale energy efficiency improvements usually by deployment of
improved technologies.
4
Pics via: tatapower.com, jcwinnie.biz, Guardian.co.uk, Treehugger.com,
What is Behaviour Change?
•
•
It is estimated that up to 30% of energy demand is locked in the so-called ‘behavioural
wedge’.
This ‘wedge’ includes people’s energy-using habits (what they do), as well as their
purchasing decisions of energy (in)efficient technologies (what they do it with)
Demand shifting
Demand reduction
Demand shifting
Demand reduction
Intentional or efficiency behaviours
Routine or conservation behaviours
5
We believe that:
•
•
•
The ‘market failure’ of energy efficiency is often due to
the vagaries of human behaviour and choice, not a lack
of energy efficient or demand-managing technologies.
Social norms are some of the most important drivers of
human behaviour, and some of the most difficult to
change.
Better understanding of human behaviour in energy use
is key to achieving a successful transition to a
sustainable energy system.
An important caveat
• In this Task, a successful behaviour change
outcome results in improved energy use by
households and businesses. This does not
necessarily focus solely on reduction in total
energy use (although this is the medium to longterm goal), but on the most efficient and
environmentally friendly use of energy to derive
the services that underpin societal and
economic wellbeing (eg comfort, mobility,
entertainment, cleanliness, production etc).
Premise for Task XXIV
That the current energy efficiency gap (or ‘market failure’ of energy
efficiency) results from:
 Homo sapiens sapiens ≠ Homo economicus
 overly technocratic approaches
 the limited transfer of best practice and good research
to the policy domain
 the lack of meaningful monitoring and evaluation tools
 limited information tailored specifically to countries’ needs.
8
Pics via: apache.be, h2-economy.com, agu.org,, library.carlton
Objective of Task XXIV
1. Creating and enabling an international expert network interacting with countries’ expert
networks
2. Provide a helicopter overview of current behaviour change models, frameworks,
disciplines, contexts, monitoring and evaluation metrics
3. Provide detailed assessments of case study applications focusing on
participating/sponsoring countries’ needs (smart meters, SMEs, transport, building
retrofits)
4. Create internationally validated monitoring and evaluation tool based on stakeholder
needs for proving successful behaviour change outcomes
5. Break down silos, enable mutual learning on how to turn theory into practice
5Expert platform
1-
Helicopter
overview of
models,
frameworks,
contexts, case
studies and
evaluation
metrics
2-
3-
4-
In depth
analysis in
areas of
greatest need
Evaluation tool
for stakeholders
Country-specific
project ideas,
action plans and
pilot projects
Objectives of Task XXIV
10
Pics via: theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com, dreamstime.com, agu.org, lifesupplemented.org, rassutassu.com,
change.comminit.com
Some special features of Task XXIV
11
Pics via: sintef.no, jimsmarketingblog.com, techvert.com, storyfest.com, onegreenplanet.org, smh.com.au, core77.com
Subtask 5 - Expert platform
www.ieadsmtask24.ning.com
Want to join? http://ieadsmtask24.ning.com/?xgi=5LLXb1UhqKzXNK
12
Learnings - Expert platform
 Really good in terms of invitations and organic, ongoing increase of expert members
~
OK in terms of engagement with discussions, groups, events etc
X
Insufficient in terms of data management
There is still a widespread reluctance to use social media professionally, even in a ‘safe’,
closed expert group like this. The most common reasons are likely: the time required to
interact/engage; a ‘trust’ factor especially when not knowing the other members
personally/professionally; not seeing the ‘point’ of social media; etc (see also Rotmann et
al, 2011).
Subtask I - Helicopter Overview
 There are many different behaviour change disciplines, models and frameworks, which
often operate in silos.
 As a first step when moving towards an interdisciplinary model of better understanding
behaviour change, we will present an inventory the diverse (sub)disciplines and models.
 Case studies will be provided to help understanding the benefits and limitations of
applying different models to different contexts.
 Ultimately, we hope to provide participating countries with the ability to select relevant
models that inform DSM initiatives focusing on particular topics of interest (detailed
analysis in Subtask II).
Subtask I - Example: Energy Cultures
1. Key questions:
Name of this model
Energy Cultures framework
For which questions is this model of understanding suitable?
What is ‘energy behaviour’? How do norms, practices and technologies influence one another to create habitual
behaviour or behaviour change? What are the external factors influencing behaviour? What clusters of energy
cultures are evident in a given population (households, businesses etc)? Can a nation be said to have a distinctive
energy culture? What policy, market or other interventions might be most effective in achieving behaviour change?
For which questions is this model of understanding unsuitable?
The model is useful for considering systemic interactions, stasis and change, and particularly designed to support
interdisciplinary studies.
Systems thinking, lifestyles as symbolic communication, actor-network theory, habitus, socio-technical systems,
everyday life, Lutzenhiser’s cultural model of household energy consumption (see Stephenson et al 2010 Energy
Cultures: A framework for understanding energy behaviours, in Energy Policy for discussion)
Complementarity with other models of understanding?
2. What does this model say about:
Energy (DSM/consumption)
Key units of analysis
-
The (role of the) individual
The (role of) social context
Role of technology
Actors and institutions
What behaviour is
-
Behavioural change processes
Social change
Distinctive consumption clusters are identifiable in the population, relating to their material culture and energy
practices
Both qualitative and quantitative data are suitable. We have used mixed methods including choice modelling, indepth interviews, statistical analysis of national survey n=2500, policy analysis, case studies, focus groups and
social network analysis.
For the individual (or household or firm), the model depicts the interacting influences of norms, technologies and
practices in generating habit and/or change, as well as the influences of the social context within which the
individual is situated.
Technology is depicted as both a generator of norms and practices, but also a potential tool for significant shifts in
these.
Model aims to help identify what specific policy tools and/or market actions support change to norms, technologies
and/or practices
Behaviour is the interactions between norms, material culture and practices
Seeks to identify what specific factors will support behaviour change, both for given energy culture clusters and for
households generally. Also what drives change over time? E.g. How do energy behaviours develop in childhood?
How does change in one area have roll-on effects in other areas? How does behaviour alter following significant
shifts in material culture (e.g. moving home).
At a societal level, how do energy cultures alter over time? How and why do the energy cultures of different nations
differ?
Relevant conditions/factors affecting behaviour change
Drivers, attractors, choosing, enabling.
Preference for attributes of new technologies.
Energy culture clusters, stage of life
Power of social networks and personalised information.
Policy settings, social marketing, retailers and installers of energy technologies.
Potential of (policy) interventions to encourage behavioural change
Premise of model is to help identify what interventions will achieve change most effectively for what set of
circumstances.
Current intervention study is evaluating two different approaches to household behaviour change, using both qual
and quant methods to evaluate.
Monitoring and evaluation
Subtask I - Example: Energy Cultures
(cont’d)
3. What are the strengths of this model?
(e.g. in terms of providing explanation, insight, a novel perspective; in terms of
providing ideas for intervention; being action oriented or not; grounded in theory;
grounded in empirical work)
Model offers a novel perspective for thinking about energy behaviour in an integrated way. It is applicable at
different scales (one household to nation); applies in different contexts (households, businesses and even nonenergy contexts) and deals with heterogeneity of situations. Useful as basis for design of interdisciplinary research
and integrating findings from different sources. Gives insights into where effort is best placed for interventions to
achieve behaviour change. Draws from several theoretical perspectives.
4. What are the weaknesses of this model?
(e.g. in terms of providing explanation, insight, a novel perspective; in terms of
providing ideas for intervention; being action oriented or not; grounded in theory;
grounded in empirical work)
5. Additional comments
(e.g. on how this model can be made practicable for practitioners, policy makers; in
case this model addresses other topics than energy, how it still bears relevance to
energy DSM)
It is a theoretical framework rather than an explanatory theory of behaviour. Model has been used & tested in New
Zealand work since 2010 and we are aware of it being used elsewhere, but is still relatively new - to date (Aug
2012) it has 15 citations.
Model has also been applied (by others) to changing behaviour in relation to greenhouse gas emissions.
Subtask II - Case studies
Name of person who submitted this case study
-
year, researchers, references, main topic
-
(infrastructure, political, technological, cultural, social, economic, psychological,
geographical, historical etc; point out country-specific issues pertaining to context
influences)
Model of understanding used
-
key units of analysis; main question; method
Monitoring and evaluation metrics used
-
definitions of success; effectiveness, efficiency – criteria for evaluation
Indicators, qualitative? Quantitative? Limitations of this evaluation ?
Main outcomes: findings and conclusions
-
In terms of the case outcome (e.g. success or not of the DSM practice; effectiveness
& efficiency; other...)
Lessons learned (bullet point format)
-
with regard to the model of understanding used;
with regard to behavioural change processes;
with regard to measuring behavioural change; etc.
Success
-
according to whom? Based on what outcome?
Case study
Contact details of person in charge/in the know
Publications/ reports/ weblinks
Summary (max 1 page)
Key words, tags
Behavioural change investigated (routine/habit,
investment/purchasing)
What was the case (unit of analysis)
Geographical scope
Context particularities
Main focus/hypothesis
Relevance for the IEA task
Does it cover the broad areas of smart metering, transport, SMEs or building renovations?
Strengths of the study
Weaknesses of the study
Additional comments
- e.g. follow-ups?
4 overarching themes
SMART METERING
BUILDING RETROFITS
Pics via: greensavingsco.com, fxgj.net, smebank.com.my
SMEs
18
4 overarching themes: HOUSEHOLDS
EFFICIENCY BEHAVIOUR
$$$
once-off
large impacts
intended
routine
cheap/free
habitual
small, cumulative impacts
BUILDINGS
CONSERVATION BEHAVIOUR
19
TRANSPORT
4 overarching themes: SMEs
EFFICIENCY BEHAVIOUR
BUILDINGS
CONSERVATION BEHAVIOUR
$$$
once-off
large impacts
intended
routine
cheap/free
habitual
small, cumulative impacts
20
TRANSPORT
Subtask III- Evaluation
 WHAT IS A SUCCESSFUL LONG-TERM BEHAVIOUR
CHANGE OUTCOME TO YOU?
21
Subtask IV: Country-specific
recommendations
22
And remember:
‘The difference between theory and
practice is that in theory it’s much easier
than in practice!’
IEA DSM TASK XXIV
Closing the Loop Behaviour Change in DSM: From Theory to Practice
Nick Potter: re-be.com
BEhavE conference, Helsinki Finland, September 20-21