INTERVIEW - Behavioural Science in Environmental Policies
Behaven — Hello Anaïs, it’s great to have you here today! First, can you please introduce yourself in a few words?
Anaïs Rocci — Sure! I’m Anaïs Rocci and I have been a sociologist at ADEME, the French Agency for the Ecological Transition, for the past three years. I work in the Department of Prospective Research. I am particularly interested in understanding the behaviours and practices of different actors in the context of the ecological transition, and in different fields of action: food, consumption, etc. And I have more in-depth expertise on mobility practices, a subject on which I wrote my thesis a few years ago.
I am also in charge of barometers [national polls] and opinion surveys, and I lead an internal network that aims to better integrate social sciences into the agency's actions and public policies. The use of human and social sciences is becoming more and more important at the agency and it is increasingly present in the work we do.
In your opinion, how can the behavioural sciences help with sustainability and environmental protection?
Human and social sciences seek to analyse behaviours, practices, barriers and levers to the transition, whether they are individual, socio-organisational, or technical.
This is fundamental because changes in behaviour and lifestyles are essential to the deployment of the ecological transition. The transition cannot be solely based on technical progress. It is very systemic and relies on interdependent mechanisms that are very complex to understand, analyse and anticipate. Research in the human and social sciences helps us to understand the conditions under which social practices can evolve. They allow us to better understand the barriers and levers of evolution, and the emergence of collective initiatives in society. Thanks to them, we can also identify the institutional and regulatory changes necessary to the evolution of economic and governance models, which can then lead to changes in individual practices.
At ADEME, we are interested in studying the conditions under which technological and political innovations - which cannot be conceived independently of the user - can be integrated into society. It is important to be able to integrate users from the beginning and to analyse the opinions and expectations of the population in order to identify the best ways to implement public policies or technologies. Our barometers also allow us to observe trends in the evolution of individual practices and opinions in society.
What do the barometers say about the ecological behaviours of the French population?
The barometers show us that there is a real awareness of environmental issues and of the urgency of climate change. And even if there is a gap between what they say, think, and do, the French seem much more ready to change and to accept binding measures than their political representatives - whom we also interviewed - think. They are aware that strong measures will be needed and there is even very clear support for the implementation of fiscal measures. However, they are ready to accept these measures under the condition that the efforts are shared between everyone, and that vulnerable populations are protected. For example, according to our barometers, a small majority of French people are in favour of the carbon tax. And this support increases significantly as soon as conditions - such as conditions of redistribution - are added. These conditions are that this tax does not penalise the most modest categories and that the use of the revenue is put to the benefit of the ecological transition, with a clear and transparent purpose.
Have you identified levers to help change behaviour?
It is important to remember that everything does not depend solely on individuals. The individual leeway is directly linked to the offer, the infrastructure, and the services proposed. For example, mobility practices are the most complicated ones to change because the necessary infrastructure is not in place and because there is a lack of relevant alternative solutions. Therefore, adapted facilities and options are needed, in addition to binding and incentive measures. It is in areas where the most alternatives are available and where car use is most constrained that driving is reduced.
There is also a challenge in being able to accompany changes in less favourable contexts, where fewer options are available. In these cases, information and experimentation can lead people to change their approach. Because even if economic and regulatory incentives are necessary and effective at least for a while, the decision to change should come from an individual will to have a lasting impact. The more intrinsic and profound the motivation, the stronger the commitment. People need support to recognise what is in it for them, to realise that changing would align with their values. Only then can they close the gap between intentions and actions.
We are often asked to rank practices in terms of priority and impact, but that’s not the point. The point is that everyone has the opportunity at their level, with their own means and constraints, to do something. And there is a number of practices that are ultimately less expensive than we think. We can also leave it up to people to change what they want to change and start little by little. First with their energy practices, for example, then with their diet and mobility habits. They can then be led to do more. But by asking too much too soon, we slow people down.
The challenge is also to start from the users’ needs, practices, expectations, and daily constraints in order to imagine a service that is relevant and efficient and responds to real demand. Some initiatives in rural and urban areas do not work because they have not been designed with the users in mind. Human and social sciences make it possible to better involve them in the implementation of solutions. We have to make them actors of their own change and give them all the tools necessary to be in charge of the decision and of the conditions under which they will make the change.
Are there any demographic differences in terms of environmental awareness?
Overall, we see that older people tend to be more sceptical about the causes of climate change than the rest of the population while younger generations seem more preoccupied with environmental matters. There are also gender differences. For example, meat consumption is clearly a male practice. Women more often report having reduced their meat consumption.
Should we then have a more segmented approach and focus on certain actions and certain populations?
Information that puts forward environmental arguments does not speak to everyone. So yes, we must segment and above all multiply the levers, arguments, tools, and actions to reach a maximum number of people.
Some initiatives that support change, called programs of voluntary behaviour change, focus on reaching audiences that are willing to change instead of trying to convince the sceptical. The idea is to work with people who already have a willingness, interest, or desire to change, but who may not know how, or take the time to do so. Accompanying this already willing audience to move from intention to action can have a snowball effect, help accelerate the transition and massify changes across society.
Are certain tools more effective for certain groups of people?
Not everyone is at the same stage of change. For people who are more reluctant to change, those in the pre-contemplation phase, we use tools to make them aware of the impact of their practices and choices. For those who are open to the idea of change, those in the contemplation phase, we encourage them to take action. And for those who want to take action, we show them how to do it, and give them the tools they need to implement the change.
In general, our approaches rely on different tools:
Incentive tools provide information that helps generate individual awareness, and trigger a process of reflection, and potentially change.
Personalised feedback on costs, emissions, and time help people become aware of the impact of their behaviour, and, in the longer term, helps them see the fruits of their efforts.
Targeted training and advice provide people with solutions adapted to their constraints and personality. These tools help users move through the process of change by providing information about alternative solutions or by offering them the opportunity to experiment with new ways of doing things. The goal is to remove negative preconceptions and to encourage individuals to question their own practices and change by themselves.
As for gamification, it allows for more playful learning and can foster competition or cooperation. It can attract people who are not necessarily sensitive to environmental issues to start with and can create or maintain a collective dynamic.
Social norms and peer comparison are tools that can also be included in the provision of feedback to position people in relation to others (neighbours, colleagues, etc.). Group dynamics play a major role in the commitment and consolidation of ecological practices over time.
Finally, experimentation tools can propose trial offers, demonstration events, practical workshops, etc, to encourage people to experiment with different practices.
The more tools and levers we use, the more likely we are to reach different targets and put in place effective interventions. The reach of these tools can be massively increased through the use of persuasive and interactive technologies that rely on complex algorithms, capable of providing hyper-personalised information, feedback, and advice. These tools will be able to relay human advice and thus reach many more people. However, these devices are still being experimented with and developed - and their effect still hasn’t been fully evaluated - so we don't have much insight into their use at the moment.
What do you think of techniques like nudges that influence behaviour without changing intentions?
Nudges are techniques that are effective, fun, and that can lead people to change. It works for a while, but once people are used to it, I'm not sure it lasts. It's one tool among others that we can mobilise to trigger something, but we can't limit ourselves to that.
We can directly trigger action and get people to act differently, without necessarily using nudges. For example, we can reach people who are not sensitive to environmental issues through sports or art, and by mobilising local actors to help them change their practices. We can also help vulnerable people who want to better control their budget through workshops and make them aware of the financial benefits that come with ecological practices. I think that it is sometimes more effective for certain people to just 'do' without necessarily having ecological intentions to start with.
Thank you very much, Anaïs! Finally, do you have any books or articles to suggest to our readers?
The ADEME report ‘Changing Behaviour, Moving Social Practices Towards More Sustainability’ gives a good perspective of human and social sciences in the context of the ecological transition and on the levers to use. It is a good overview of the strategies that currently exist. On mobility issues, I did a literature review in 2009 on some of the approaches that I mentioned. And ADEME recently did a study on digital versus human management approaches for change, and therefore on everything that revolves around persuasive technologies. It's an in-depth report that presents the opportunity of digital versus human techniques, based on different examples and tools from the mobility, energy, waste, food, and health sectors.
Changing Behaviour, Moving Social Practices Towards More Sustainability, ADEME (in French): https://librairie.ademe.fr/changement-climatique-et-energie/2289-changer-les-comportements-faire-evoluer-les-pratiques-sociales-vers-plus-de-durabilite-9791029703638.html
Analysis of the Opportunities of Automated Behaviour Change Support in Relation to Humanised Support, ADEME (in French): https://librairie.ademe.fr/recherche-et-innovation/308-analyse-des-opportunites-de-l-accompagnement-au-changement-de-comportement-automatise-au-regard-de-l-accompagnement-humanise.html