Key subtasks of IEA DSM Task 24 on behaviour change

Subtasks of Task XXIV
social media and
Task XXIV
Dr Sea Rotmann, Operating Agent
Dubai Energy Savers Conference, June 17, 2013
Closing the Loop -
Behaviour Change in DSM: From Theory to Practice
IEA DSM TASK 24

social media and
Task XXIV
Some context
!"#$%&'((')*($+,$-%.)-/$0'10$'*$#23#$
!0+*1%$'*$%*%-145-%6+,%/$!"#$%&'((')*(7$#23#$
!"#$%&'((')*($+,%-$./$0123$4)$,%567$8019$:4$'*$#;0#<$.=4$4,%*>($?5,/$./$6)=*4,/$
.-++"
.*++"
.,++"
+"
,++"
*++"
-++"
/++"
0++"
12345" %6789" :9;98" $<32;=98"
>8728"
>87?=5"
@?9?=A"
B?"%#*"
B7554="
$9A?"
(8579"

social media and
Task XXIV
Some context
!"#$%&'((')*($+,$-%.)-/$0'10$'*$#23#$
!0+*1%$'*$%*%-145-%6+,%/$!"#$%&'((')*(7$#23#$
!"#$%&'((')*($+,%-$./$0123$4)$,%567$8019$:4$'*$#;0#<$.=4$4,%*>($?5,/$./$6)=*4,/$
.-++"
.*++"
.,++"
+"
,++"
*++"
-++"
/++"
0++"
12345" %6789" :9;98" $<32;=98"
>8728"
>87?=5"
@?9?=A"
B?"%#*"
B7554="
$9A?"
(8579".++"
./+"
0++"
0/+"
1++"
*++-" *++2" *++1" *+,*"
3%#*"'"456"
!"#$%&
7++"
7/+"
/++"
//+"
2++"
*++-" *++2" *++1" *+,*"
3%#*"'"456"
'$#()*&+(%(),&
-")&(./&0%12),(&)3#(()1,&3%4)&)$5/61%2#$2&
&
!78&)3#,,#/$,&9)1&6$#(&/:&)0)5(1#5#(;&2)$)1%(#/$&
!"#$%&$'#()(*+#,-$#./0110)"1#0"#(2.#34#5.6.#7*89#*(#(2.#+.:.+#);#(2.#/0<=&>>%1'##
520+.#()(*+#,-$#./0110)"1#?6)5(2#0"#,20"*#5*1#)".#);#(2.#+)5.1(#0"#(2.#+*1(#<.8*<.#

social media and
Task XXIV
Some context
!"#$%&'((')*($+,$-%.)-/$0'10$'*$#23#$
!0+*1%$'*$%*%-145-%6+,%/$!"#$%&'((')*(7$#23#$
!"#$%&'((')*($+,%-$./$0123$4)$,%567$8019$:4$'*$#;0#<$.=4$4,%*>($?5,/$./$6)=*4,/$
.-++"
.*++"
.,++"
+"
,++"
*++"
-++"
/++"
0++"
12345" %6789" :9;98" $<32;=98"
>8728"
>87?=5"
@?9?=A"
B?"%#*"
B7554="
$9A?"
(8579".++"
./+"
0++"
0/+"
1++"
*++-" *++2" *++1" *+,*"
3%#*"'"456"
!"#$%&
7++"
7/+"
/++"
//+"
2++"
*++-" *++2" *++1" *+,*"
3%#*"'"456"
'$#()*&+(%(),&
-")&(./&0%12),(&)3#(()1,&3%4)&)$5/61%2#$2&
&
!78&)3#,,#/$,&9)1&6$#(&/:&)0)5(1#5#(;&2)$)1%(#/$&
!"#$%&$'#()(*+#,-$#./0110)"1#0"#(2.#34#5.6.#7*89#*(#(2.#+.:.+#);#(2.#/0<=&>>%1'##
520+.#()(*+#,-$#./0110)"1#?6)5(2#0"#,20"*#5*1#)".#);#(2.#+)5.1(#0"#(2.#+*1(#<.8*<.#
!
"#$!%&'()!*+&$,"+'(!
-.'/0.!$($&)12&$.0"$*!345!$6+77+'(7!
!"#$%&'((')*($+,%*-($.)'*+$+)$/$0)*12+%,&$+%&.%,/+3,%$'*4,%/(%$)5$3.$+)$678$ !$
,./+" ,/,+" ,/-+" ,/0+" ,/1+" ,//+" *+,*"
2"
."
,*"
,3"
*+"
*2"
*."
-*"45"
&67789:568;"8<"5=>"?8@6>5"A;68;"
$;B"8<"C8D9B"CED"(("
,75"869"FD6G>"7=8GH"
498IE9">G8;8J6G"B8K;5:D;"
*;B"869"FD6G>"7=8GH"
4D>E5"B>FD>7768;"

social media and
Task XXIV
Some context
!"#$%&'()#$')%*(+%),"-%%
'&.))."+)%/$"0,1%23%4545%
6&.))."+)%)(7.+/)%.+%,1'%89:"$94% ;%<*'+($."=%4545%
!"#$%&'()#$')%*(+%),"-%,.'%/$"0,.%1+%'&1))1"+)%23%4545%(,%+"%+',%'*"+"&1*%*"),6%
$'7#*1+/%'&1))1"+)%23%89:%;,6%<5=%">%,.'%)(?1+/)%$'@#1$'7%>"$%(%4% A%-(,.%
89:"$94 ;%<*'+($."%
>'?.7'$)%)(7.+/)%":%
@AB%C,%;D49'E%
8FG%
4BG%
BHG%
B4G%
(./01.123"41015316"
'+'$/3%'::.*.'+*3%%
/7085814"
"
98.83":41"7;""
.+'::.*.'+,%*"(?"/7<1="/0>234"
?16:51"&',1(+'%
$'?'()')";=7.":/43=1>."
780">26"@>4"
A>=38>0"=1.7B>0"7;""
:")).?9:#'?%)#2).>.')%

social media and
Task XXIV
Some context

Subtasks of Task XXIVTask 24: who are we ?
THEORY PRACTICE
Ruth: Science and Technology Studies, Cross-EU Behaviour Change research projects, DSM
consulting
Sea: Animal behaviour studies, research funding & evaluation, sustainable
energy policy, sustainability implementation

Committee for Energy Research & Technology
(CERT)
Oversees 40 intʼl implementing agreements
DSM Implementing
Agreement
(www.ieadsm.org)
15 Participating Countries
Each country has ExCo
member
24 Tasks - each task has
Operating Agent/s (OA)
Task 24:
Behaviour
Change in DSM
(OAs: Ruth and
Sea)
Countries participating
© OECD/IEA, October 2011
!"#$%&'#($()%(*&+%&%,(&-)(#./&!0#&122&30)4(#()5(&")&6$207&80#9+/&")&65%0:(#&;<==
!"#$%&'(#&)'*(#+$#)",(-.(,/#(0-)'1(23#)4*(56,'--7(89::
Netherlands
Switzerland
New Zealand
Belgium
Norway
Sweden
Italy
South Africa
UK
Austria
Australia
US
Portugal
Spain (in kind)
IEA DSM Task 24
participating countries

Task premise
The underlying proposition is that the energy efﬁciency
gap results from:

8
Target Audience of Task XXIV
Pics via: theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.com, dreamstime.com, agu.org, lifesupplemented.org, rassutassu.com, change.comminit.com
1. Intermediaries
2. Policymakers
3. (Research) funders/investors
4. Technology developers,
industry
target audience of Task 24

9
Some special features of Task XXIV
Text
Premise for Task XXIVspecial features of Task 24

WHY, OH WHY
BEHAVIOUR?
30% of energy demand is locked in behavioural wedge
Includes: technology uptake, use and maintenance
purchasing and investment behaviour
habits and routine behaviour
social acceptability

What is DSM and Behaviour
Change in Task 24? (in a tweet)

12
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 an immediate reduction in total energy use, but on
the most efﬁcient and environmentally friendly use of energy to
derive the services that underpin societal and economic wellbeing.
an important caveat

Subtasks of Task XXIVSubtasks
5- Expert platform
1- Helicopter
view of models,
frameworks,
contexts, case
studies and
evaluation
metrics
2-
In depth
analysis in
areas of
greatest need
(buildings,
transport,
SMEs, smart
metering)
3-
Evaluation tool
for
stakeholders
4-
Country-
speciﬁc project
ideas, action
plans and pilot
projects

subtask V - expert
platform

1
World Map of
Participating countries, contributing experts
Expert platform currently has over 170 experts from 21 countries and 7 main sectors.

Subtasks of Task XXIVsocial media in Task 24
@IEADSM
@DrSeaRotmann
IEA DSM facebook Group
IEA DSM LinkedIn Group
Expert platform:
www.ieadsmtask24.ning.com
Task 24 Wiki:
www.ieadsmtask24wiki.info
IEA DSM website:
www.ieadsm.org
Behaviour Change & Energy News
www.youtube.com/IEADSM
Pearltree: drsearotmann
Instagram: drsea77
Storify: DrSeaRotmann

Subtasks of Task XXIVsocial media in Task 24

Subtasks of Task XXIVD2: Task 24 Wiki

face to face is important too!
Task workshops

Subtasks of Task XXIVenergy expert stories

Subtasks of Task XXIVenergy stories: sectoral
!"#$%&"'()
!"#$%&'%$(
!"#$%&'($
!"#$%&'($%
)*"$+%,-$./0"1(%,++"2$.%
Energy Behaviour Challenge 1
Changing household energy cultures
A research perspective
Fuel efficient driving behaviour in
the light vehicle fleet
15 February 2013 | Jörn Scherzer | Transport Partnerships

Subtasks of Task XXIVenergy stories: national
IEA DSM – Task XXIV
Belgian Story
Brussels, September 7, 2012
The New Zealand energy
story
Sea Rotmann and Janet
Stephenson
demand-side
^
Norwegian Energy Story

23
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIV
subtask I -
Helicopter Overview
• Overview of models,
theories, frameworks
used in case studies
• Overview of definitions
• Inventory of experts
• Inventory of evaluation
metrics and contexts
• Navigation tool to
translate theory to be
useful by practitioners

24
subtask I - some
definitions
Models of behaviour help us to understand specific
behaviours, by identifying the underlying factors
which influence them.
There are individualistic models and social models.
By contrast, theories of change show how
behaviours change over time, and how they can be
changed.
Behavioural theory is diagnostic, and change
theory is more pragmatic.
Both are important to understand when designing
interventions.

feedback from
workshops
wrong, but some of
George E.P. Box
(1979)
owards a multiple models approach

26
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVmain models
INDIVIDUALISTIC (A-B-C Models)
Rational choice models based on cost-beneﬁt calculations
(classical economics)
Information deﬁcit models are based on linear assumptions:
information generates knowledge, which shapes attitudes, which
lead to behaviour (classical economics)
Bounded rationality models include psychological principles such
as cognitive biases and environmental constraints (behavioural
economics)
Value Action Gap shows the difference of what people say and
what they do (social psychology)
single specific rational decision every time it is done. In e
is always important to bear both perspectives in mind.
Individualist Model of B
This section sets out an individualist representation of beh
models that can be used from this social psychological pe
around “Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour”4
, a m
range of research as being well suited to use with regard
describing the basic structure of this model, this section th
concerning ‘Behavioural Economics (or MINDSPACE)’ an
currently being adopted to explain behaviour change and
the model.
Simple Models - ABC
Individualist models of behaviour focus on different compo
processes, and how these then lead to actions. They ran
complex ones. However, most follow a basic structure th
Attitude Behaviour Choice/Context/Constraint (different pe
the ‘C’ at different times but the general principle remains
very instrumental in their view of behaviour. They treat pe
independent individuals who decide what they want to do
intention give-or-take sets of identifiable constraints or ba
grounding in traditional economically rational views of beh
been extensively adopted by government.

27
INDIVIDUALISTIC
Theory of Planned Behaviour (social psychology)
Figure 2.5: Rogers’ Protection Motivation Theory (1975)
As EV models become more extended (and thus more ‘adjusted’) through the inclusion of
additional factors, so the relative influence of attitudes in predicting behavioural outcomes
declines. This pattern can be seen as Ajzen extended the TRA into the even more widely-
used Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB, first published in 1986, in Ajzen 1991 - Figure
2.6).
B e h a v io u rIn te n tio n
A ttitu d e
to w a rd s th e
b e h a v io u r
S u b je c tiv e
n o rm
B e lie fs a b o u t
o u tc o m e s
E v a lu a tio n o f
o u tc o m e s
B e lie fs a b o u t
w h a t o th e rs
th in k
R e la tiv e
im p o rta nc e o f
a ttitu d e a nd n o rm
P e rc e iv e d
B e h a v io u ra l C o n tro l
Figure 2.6: Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), (1986)
10
very instrumental in their view of behaviour. They treat
independent individuals who decide what they want to d
intention give-or-take sets of identifiable constraints or b
grounding in traditional economically rational views of b
Figure 1: Linear model of decision making and beh
Figure 1 shows a simplistic model of this rational, individ
individual has a range of attitudes and preferences. On
of relevant information, he/she forms an intention to act
enacted – resulting in “behaviour”.
!
"#$%&'(%)*"+,*"-.//,"0'12$32$)4'&5"627&8%49$,":4'12$2;*"<=>"?$44@()A<452

28
INDIVIDUALISTIC
Value Belief Norms Theory (social psychology)
Cialdini’s Focus Theory of Normative Conduct (social
psychology)
Schwartz’ Norm Activation Theory (social
psychology)
Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour includes
habit (social psychology)
single specific rational decision every time it is done. In encoura
is always important to bear both perspectives in mind.
Individualist Model of Beh
This section sets out an individualist representation of behaviour
models that can be used from this social psychological perspect
around “Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour”4
, a model t
range of research as being well suited to use with regard to ener
describing the basic structure of this model, this section then intr
concerning ‘Behavioural Economics (or MINDSPACE)’ and ‘Valu
currently being adopted to explain behaviour change and which
the model.
Simple Models - ABC
Individualist models of behaviour focus on different components
processes, and how these then lead to actions. They range from
complex ones. However, most follow a basic structure that is de
Attitude Behaviour Choice/Context/Constraint (different people h
the ‘C’ at different times but the general principle remains much
very instrumental in their view of behaviour. They treat people a
independent individuals who decide what they want to do, and th
intention give-or-take sets of identifiable constraints or barriers. B
grounding in traditional economically rational views of behaviour
Figure 1: Linear model of decision making and behaviour

29
MAIN MODELS:
psychology
DUAL PROCESS Models of Cognition
Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB)
(social psychology)

30
societal model: practice
theory
SOCIALLY ORIENTED MODELS
Needs Opportunities Abilities Theory (sociology)
Theory of Consumption as Social Practices (socio-
technical studies)
DECC running header

31
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVsociology
Practice Theory (worked example line drying)
54
Figure 6: 3 Elements Worked Example: Linedrying

32
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVtheories of change
 Central to many conceptions of change is the
merging of theory and practice.
 Applied approaches: Social Marketing, Shared
Learning, Defra’s 4 E Model etc
segment 5. Whilst they are more dependent on behaviours becoming the
norm before they will act and more embarrassed to be green, segment 5
are willing to do more. The emphasis here should be on interventions that
enable, encourage and, in particular, exemplify, for example providing
fiscal incentives or businesses and government leading by example.
Segments 6 and 7 are generally less willing to act and are less likely to be
open to voluntary engagement or exemplification by others; the emphasis
here is likely to have to be on interventions that enable and encourage,
for example choice editing in product availability or, where necessary,
regulation.
Success in encouraging segment 1 to do more may also help encourage 3 and 4,
given the higher numbers in group 1 that seek to influence others and that this is
a broader group than ‘deep greens’. It is likely that motivating segments 1, 3 and
4 to adopt more environmentally friendly behaviours will help interventions to
encourage segment 5.
Figure 9: diagrammatic representation of the 4E’s model

33
changing habits -
individuals
Methods:
 Unfreezing/Refreezing (emotional stir-up)
Vigilant Monitoring (avoid cues)
 Implementation Intentions (if-then plans)
==> But: individuals need to be pre-motivated,
they need to be done quickly and intensely and
they may not be easily scaleable
 Moments of Change

34
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVpros and cons
Individualistic modelsIndividualistic models Social modelsSocial models
Pros Cons Pros Cons
Some have
understanding of
dual process of
cognition
Easy to follow A+B
+C= behaviour
change
Can look at various
(mostly inﬂuencing)
contexts affecting
individuals
Known and tested
Very powerful with
segmentation and
bottom-up tailoring
Scaleability
Inclusivity
Breadth of Scope
Causal relationship
hard to determine
Not shown to be
that effective,
especially if based
on intentions
More complex
models hard to use
Takes systemic
approach thus easily
scaled up
If you change a
practice, it can be a
global change
Looped, re-inforcing
Inﬂuencing and
contextual factors
Fosters
collaboration among
all sectors
More realistic?
Too complex to
understand?
Dependent on many
elements to work
together
Frustrating if right
collaboration can’t
be fostered
Hard to put into
practice
May only speed up
change

35
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVworked examples in Task 24
Domain/Country
Cases and used
theories/models
Netherlands New Zealand Switzerland Italy Austria Norway Sweden Belgium UK Other countries
Smart Metering/
Feedback
Jouw Energie Moment
Theories/Models used:
Expectancy Value
Theory
Design with Intent
Interpretation for
sustainable behaviour
Responses to Time Varying
Prices for Electricity (Otago
Uni)
Theories/Model used: Classical
Economics and marketing
Smart Metering Zurich Pilot
EWZ and EKZ
Theories/Model used:
behavioural economics and
social norms/comparisons
Time of Use Tariff
Theories/Models:
Classical Economics
Die Energiejagd
Theories/Models:
Shared learning,
Social Norming,
freezing/
unfreezing
Demosteinkjer
Theories/Models:
Theory of Planned
Behaviour
Clockwise
Theories/Models:
Constructivist
Learning Theory
Shared learning
Rettie, Ruth CHARM
social norms approach
practice theory
Spain (Juan Pablo
Garçia): VERDIEM
Theories/Models:
Classical Economics
Smart Metering/
Feedback
Smart Metering EKT Dietikon
behavioural model of residential
energy use by Raaij & Verhallen
behavioural economics and
social norms/comparisons
!CO2
Management
Theories/Models:
Classical
Economics
Portugal (Joane
Abreu): Smart meter
feedback in North
Theories: Nudge,
classical economics,
moments of change
Smart Metering/
Feedback
Munx Repower website
behavioural economics, social
norming
US (Michela
Beltracchi):
Opower feedback
programme
Models: Cialdini’s
Social Norming
Retrofitting Blok voor Blok aanpak,
retrofitting programme
Theories/models used:
Behavioural economics
Warm Up New Zealand: Heat
Smart
Theories/Models used: social
marketing; social norms;
classical economic; TPB
Swiss Building Retrofit
Program
Models: Classical Economics
Retrofitting of
Myhrenenga
Housing
Theories: TPB
Building retrofits
Theories: Shared
Learning
Retrofitting
2000 Watts Society (housing)
Models: Ethics, long-term
visioning
SMEs De Groene Daad
Theory/model used:
Nudge
EECA SME Crown Loans
Scheme
Theory/model used: originally
based on TPB; changed to social
learning and social norm
theories
Energy-Model and SME-Model
from (EnAW)
Classical Economics
Social norm
Finnfjord
Theories:
Leadership
Build4Change
Model: Nudge
Energy Cultures SMEs pilot
Model used: Energy Cultures
Mobility Het Nieuwe Rijden (the
New Driving)
Theories and models
used: Psychology: Henry
A Murray (1938) and the
acceptability/availability
model of behaviour by
Rose (1990).
Active a2b
Theory/models used: Norm
Activation Theory
Elaboration Likelihood Model
Stern’s Principles for Intervening
Triandis TIB
Lewin’s Unfreezing/Refreezing
McKenzie-Mohr
2000 Watt on mobility
Models: Ethics, long-term
visioning
Electric vehicles
Nobil
Theories/Models
used: TPB
Stockholm
congestion tax
Models: activity
based models
Chatterton & Wilson
Framework
Combining
individualistic (eg
Triandis) and societal
(Practice theory)
approaches to help UK
policymakers
Kevin Luten
UrbanTrans (Australia)
Transport behaviour
change based on BJ
Fogg
Mobility
NZ Post Transport Driver
behaviour training
Theory/models used: Value
Action Gap Theory
Fuel consumption of newly
purchased cars
Theory of Planned Behaviour
(TPB) and Norm-Activation
Model (NAM)
Case studies collected for IEA DSM Task 24 in transport, building retroﬁts, SMEs and smart metering Note: Blue boxes denote government-led policies and programmes, green boxes
denote business, research or community-led programmes and pilots

36
Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVsome of the cases
TRANSPORT:The New Driving, Netherlands
Models used:Various psychological models
BUILDING RETROFITS: Retroﬁtting Myhrenenga Housing,
Norway
Models used:Theory of Planned Behaviour
SMART METERING: Smart metering pilots, Switzerland
Models used: Behavioural Economics, social norming
SMEs: Crown loans for SME energy savings, New Zealand
Models used: Classical economics then shared learning

37
• Identify the range of models/theories used in DSM
interventions in:
• smart metering
• SMEs
• (personal) mobility
• retrofitting
• Understand the benefits and drawbacks
• Impact on design, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation
• We collected more than 40 cases, often “learning”
stories
• Currently 3 main models or theories informing the
retrofitting interventions
Subtask I: Analysis by example of
retrofitting

38
Several of our Retroﬁtting cases informed
by neo classical economics: money and
information
http://www.contemporaryartdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2.jpg
http://pinterest.com/kyrpersa/homo-economicus/
Observations retroﬁtting

39
• Money makes the world go round
• You need to change your home’s energy use and we will help you by
paying (part of) its retrofitting
• By the way, you need to pay up first and then it’ll take a while before we
pay you back….
• The information we need from you will teach you all you need to know
• You only need to make a one-time decision to invest
• We have the technology you need, we will put it in and that’s it!
• If you do not understand the technology, just don’t touch the buttons…
• You will save money for a nice weekend to the Bahamas
• You only need to give us a bill from your installer, we probably won’t
check what actually happened in your home
• What counts for us is how many ( m2, $ spent, Number of homes)
• We will do the number crunching but we do not need to know what
you actually saved, we will use models to calculate all energy savings
• But if you want to know how much energy you saved, buy a metering
device.
Neo classical economics
and retrofitting

40
Observations retroﬁtting
enayetkabir.blogspot.com
greenbookblog.com
Several of our
Retroﬁtting cases
informed by
behavioural
economics

41
• Money makes the world go round
• Information helps us both
• You have many choices but we will make sure you will make
the right one to retroﬁt your home
• And to do so, we have the money & technology you need and
we will design rules, regulations, institutions, or infrastructure
that will nudge you in the right direction
• You only need, not only for yourself but for the sake of
everyone, to make a one-time decision to invest
• You will save money or the environment or whatever matters
to you
• You only need to give us a bill from your installer, we won’t
check what really happened in your home
• What counts for us is how many ( M2, $, homes)
• We will use models to calculate energy savings
• But if you want to know how much energy, CO2, trees or
polar bears you saved, buy a metering device
Behavioural economics
and retroﬁtting

42
They do well within what they intend to do
• The programmes are relatively easy to evaluate in quantitative terms and
often show really good results
• The retrofitting market can grow
• Subsidies are often used up to the max
• Many homes do get insulated
• Behavioural economics does manage to nudge a certain percentage
• Free riders upgrade their plans and retrofit more comprehensively
• Sometimes even a new norm seems to be emerging…
But if we want to tell a learning story:
• One-off programmes, no continuity after insulation
• Paradox: demand for information! And a lot of pre-financing required…
• Only financial and technological tailoring
• Hardly any flexibility or end user participation
• Only fostering self-interested, extrinsic motivations (money)
• Technocratic and policy-driven approach
• Not focused on changing energy use patterns (routine behaviour)
• Danger of rebound
• And: will this really change the building sector or market long term?
What can we learn?

43
blogs.scientiﬁcamerican.com
Systemic approaches and
retroﬁtting

44
• Together we will make the world go round
• You embody what we need to know and change: do, feel, learn
• We will help you understand and use the technology, and train
those that install and sell it to you
• We will create a supportive material, institutional and social
environment to ensure your needs are met
• Your needs are important so we need to do this together, as if this
were your kitchen or bathroom you are renovating
• Your life will change
• Its all about us now and our grandchildren - altruistic, intrinsic
• Quality matters and we will keep learning and sharing
• If we need to be flexible we will
• This is only the start of a long way and your home is the first step
• We will monitor, calculate and report on energy, money, health,
welfare, comfort, wellbeing
• And learnings based on qualitative and quantitative inputs will be
shared (with you)
• We will help you figure out what your impact is to be able to make
sure you get where we collectively want to!
Systemic approaches and
retrofitting

45
The storyline certainly appeals to many and acknowledges the social
and inter-related elements of practices
And these approaches are often experienced as successful by those
who are participating
Important additional elements to highlight:
1. Focus on creating trusted messengers and market parties (audits,
certification schemes, quality standards, energy labeling, provider
training etc)
2. More focus on institutional capacity building
3. Targeting needs central: also non-energy!
4. More pre-scoping to understand what and why of behaviour
But if we want to tell a learning story:
• These types of interventions are very complex with many partners
• They cannot be driven by policy alone, need all levels collaborating
• Not everyone wants to change everything or their lifestyle
• Not everyone wants to engage
• The flexibility of changing goals, aims and interrelatedness of issues etc makes
it difficult to evaluate
What can we learn?

46
1. Theories or models were mainly used explicitly…?
2. Storytelling very powerful way to avoid social dilemma
3. Peer-training is essential (learning to cycle, drive, save fuel)
4. Programmes hardly ever about energy or money!
5. Mostly all do pre-scoping! Evidence based…
6. Importance of urban design and accompanying
infrastructures appreciated
7. Capacity building and habit breaking central to many
programmes
8. Often mix of interventions
9. Getting people to use the car less proves difﬁcult (Sweden
exception?), it’s mostly about using it differently….
10. Direct social environment hardly tackled (work, family,
friends, colleagues)
General conclusions:
transport

47
subtask II -
case studies

48
subtask III -
evaluation
 WHAT IS A SUCCESSFUL LONG-TERM
BEHAVIOUR CHANGE OUTCOME TOYOU?

49
Subtask IV: Country-speciﬁc
recommendations
19
subtask IV -
country-speciﬁc recommendations

Subtasks of Task XXIVquestions or comments?
drsea@orcon.net.nz

Key subtasks of IEA DSM Task 24 on behaviour change

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Key subtasks of IEA DSM Task 24 on behaviour change

Ähnlich wie Key subtasks of IEA DSM Task 24 on behaviour change (20)

Mehr von SEA - Sustainable Energy Advice Ltd

Mehr von SEA - Sustainable Energy Advice Ltd (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Key subtasks of IEA DSM Task 24 on behaviour change