Shaping social norms – can ‘community’ act as an instrument of change to encourage environmental citizenship?

It's Friday afternoon and I'm having an internal debate with myself (note to self: get out more) about what it is exactly that I'm trying to achieve with my research, and whilst it might not seem like much of an output at the moment, here are a few bullet points briefly summarising my thoughts:

Shaping social norms – can ‘community’ act as an instrument of change to encourage environmental citizenship?

• Individuals exist within multiple instances and elements of ‘community’ across multiple social networks - e.g. work, family, clubs, neighbourhood associations etc...
• bonding and bridging social capital within those communities can act as a means of encouraging change
• power within the community can be utilised (consciously or sub-consciously) as a means of top-down distilling/encouraging of adoption of new social norms (think of Scandinavian countries…)
• can combine to encourage pro-environmental behavioural change across all sectors of society including Defra's ‘honestly disengaged’ through internalising of new social norms as individuals strive to conform...

Will I still think this next week? Will I still be sat at my desk talking to myself?

Cold comfort: the psychology of climate denial

An interesting, small piece on some of the many reasons why climate change denial is apparently on the increase. It boils down to it being easier to have your head in the sand (even if that sand is getting hotter...) rather than face up to the reality of climate change.

In light of the CRU email hacking incident that has been seized upon by sceptics as 'proof' of a climate change conspiracy, combined with the almost inevitable disappointment that COP15 in Copenhagen is likely to be I wonder if 'community' really tackle can climate change, whether it is some localised form of it or the global 'community of nations'? The more I read at present the more I think that stronger Government regulation to encourage/enforce low carbon lifestyles is where we're heading unless there is some dramatic change in how people respond to climate change as an issue; but whether that will happen as a reactive rather than proactive response to climate change remains to be seen.

Perhaps what is needed instead is a complete change in how the issue is framed, and move away almost entirely from focussing on the apocalyptic imagery and scenarios of climate change of the 'we must avoid 2C rise in temperatures or we're doomed' and instead start presenting more positive imaging of how peoples local communities / counties / regions /countries / hemispheres / whatever may look in a low-carbon future...I know I'm getting a bit tired of so much negative imagery...

Cold comfort: the psychology of climate denial

Plane Stupid's shock ads linking flights with polar bear deaths could fall flat | Ed Gillespie | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Futerra's Ed Gillespie commenting on more shock tactic ads - this time from Plane Stupid...quite a good article, pointing out some of the problems with shock ads, namely that they're not very effective. But the question that needs to be asked is that if they're not effective why does everyone from the Government to Plane Stupid persist in using them???

Plane Stupid's shock ads linking flights with polar bear deaths could fall flat | Ed Gillespie | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Rethinking Laundry in the 21st Century - Room for Debate Blog - NYTimes.com

An interesting blog from the New York Times that touches on some of the issues around conventions of comfort, cleanliness etc that have been covered during the course...

Rethinking Laundry in the 21st Century - Room for Debate Blog - NYTimes.com

There's an interesting post regarding re-using hotel towels - you know those little cards that get left in the bathroom asking you to re-use them for the sake of the environment? Apparently re-use rates went up 34% in one particular hotel when they added to the card the fact that most other guests DID re-use their towels. Individuals really do want to conform to prevailing norms it seems...

Community-based social marketing...a sociological or psychological approach to sustainable consumption?

I had an interesting conversation with Gill and Tom yesterday following the lecture I gave on 'Behaviour change and Ipswich Town Football Club'.

Gill made the comment that the Save your Energy for the Blues campaign was essentially an example of community-based social marketing (CBSM) - a comment to which I would have to largely agree. But then I got thinking about the three strands of promoting sustainable consumption that the course has covered - Economics, Psychology and Sociology. Social marketing, when considered in that context, is deemed a 'psychological' approach - yet as I argued at some length yesterday, community-based approaches are, to my mind, inherently sociological in nature. So is CBSM a psychological or sociological approach to promoting sustainable consumption?

'Community', whether as an idea, locale, or symbolic construct, is a sociological construct. Traditional social marketing of the 'Act on CO2' and 'Are you doing your bit' kind adheres to the psychological approach, so if you combine the two what sort of hybrid have you created? Do we even need to classify it within such a framework? My own thoughts are that if its got 'community' in its title, it's sociological as you are creating a CBSM campaign with a clear target community in mind. Therefore, as community is a social construct, CBSM must at least in part be following the sociological pattern in that it is dealing with people not as individuals but as members of a group bound by certain lifestyle choices and routine practices - but I'd be interested to know the views of anyone else out there...

BBC NEWS | World | Free market flawed, says survey

Is it news that the free market is flawed? Surely the newsworthy element of this is that someone bothered to ask people other than economists their opinion on free-marketeering in the first place...or is that a tad cynical for a Monday morning?

BBC NEWS | World | Free market flawed, says survey

BBC NEWS | Politics | 'Scary' UK climate ad faces probe

Not only is it not necessarily going to be very effective, it turns out it also appears to be breaking some Advertising Standards Authority rules...oops...

BBC NEWS | Politics | 'Scary' UK climate ad faces probe

Bridging the Apathy Gap | ClimateBiz.com

An interesting snippet of extra information to add to our discussions as to why appealing to the consumer as a rational decision maker doesn't always work, even with a proven economic incentive of saving money in place...the answer according to this is that they can't really be bothered...although whether that is actually news or not is an altogether different point...

Bridging the Apathy Gap | ClimateBiz.com

Shared via AddThis

Is technology the answer?

In response to Ben's comment on my post below:

I guess the whole point about an issue such as climate change is that there is no single solution to the problem, and that a range of different approaches are needed.

Technology will no doubt play it's part, but relying on it to do so as the only or the major agent of change is too risky, encourages a 'business as usual' mindset, and creates the false impression that it is ok for us to continue living such a resource intensive lifestyle.

Social changes are also necessary to tackle climate change, and this is where the idea of engaging 'community' groups as another tool in the box of behavioural change methodologies comes in - appealing to an individuals conscience doesn't work beyond a committed minority, so before we go down the path of forcing people via taxation or carbon allowances - or indeed waiting for a technological fix such as CCS or a new generation of nuclear reactors to be built (neither of which I think are the answer either, by the way...) encouraging voluntary change seems a worthwhile pursuit.

UK Government's latest 'Act on CO2' campaign...

Is this the way to encourage behavioural change?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w62gsctP2gc

Personally, I don't think so. Whilst the comments posted on YouTube are of the familiar sceptic variety - such as my personal favourite shown below, the real danger here is that the intended audience - individuals who may be concerned about the future impacts of climate change for both themselves and their children - are likely to be put off by the negativity inherent in the message. Dystopian visions of the future do not encourage most people to act, but instead encourages them to bury their heads in the sand and hope the problem goes away or that someone else will deal with it.

Defra's own research (amongst a list of other academic work on the subject) has shown the limited value of appealing to individuals via such information campaigns, whilst other work has also shown the limited effectiveness of using such overtly negative messaging as it does not resonate with a wide enough section of society.

My favourite YouTube sceptic quote (so far) attached to this video:

I like to think of myself as a conscious user of energy and yet I still find this advert infuriating. What a load of rubbish. Is this advert on the television? If it is then it should be pulled immediately. CO2 is NOT A POLLUTANT!!! Come on! Think about it! Humans exhale this stuff day in, day out to keep us alive!! There is literally NO (yes, that's right, ZERO, scientific proof that CO2 causes adverse affects to our atmosphere and global climates.

----------------------

Zero, sorry, ZERO scientific proof? That's a relief. We can all carry on as normal then...

But seriously, if, as the Government keeps telling us, we need to face up to the challenges of climate change, how do you engage with people such as the author of the above quote? This is where I believe the idea of 'community' can be used as an instrument of change to encourage pro-environmental behavioural change - even amongst those more reluctant members of society who remain disengaged from the issue.

'Community' as both an idea and as a place can have a powerful influence over people. The ties that bind people to community as either a physical location such as a village or suburb or as a shared sense of identity such as a company, sports club or church can be utilised to encourage people to change their behaviour without them necessarily having to engage with them on an intellectual/informational level as to why they are.

There is currently a limited (but growing) body of academic research around community engagement with sustainable development, consumption and climate change issues, however the potential to utilise 'community' as a focal point for future behavioural change campaigns has been recognised - and is in fact the focus of my own interest.

Correctly framed and presented climate change messaging aimed at individuals has its place, but to me the content of the latest Act on CO2 campaign is certainly not it...