Antecedents of energy behavior. Overview Method Reliability scales Values Goal frames Social representations Institutional factors Urban/ rural.

Antecedents of energy behavior

Overview

• Method• Reliability scales• Values• Goal frames• Social representations• Institutional factors• Urban/ rural

Method

• Response rate

• Response rate in urban area bit higher• Same introduction for experimental and control

group (HU: student helped)• Time range: February - May

HU CZ DE NL SCO

% 58 10 +/- 12 55 7

Reliability scales (NL)

Values:• Altruistic (0,766)• Egoistic (0,718) • Biospheric (0,867) • Hedonic (0,832)

Reliability scales

Social representations:• Perception of causes (0,831)• Social efficacy (0,550)• Outcome efficacy (0,749)• Perception of climate change (0,775).

Low reliability

• Social efficacy: NL α = 0,550; CZ α = 0,004; HU α = 0,297; DE α = 0,414; SCO α = 0,442

• 2 items:– Climate change will be effectively tackled if Europe

reduces CO2 emissions drastically– Climate change is an unstoppable process; humans

cannot do anything about it

• Hungary: outcome efficacy α = 0,298

Values

• General antecedents of behavior: guiding principles in your life– Altruistic– Egoistic– Biospheric– Hedonic

Values

• People with strong altruistic and biospheric values:– Eat less meat– Shower less– No significant effect for driving style (p = 0,09)

Social representations

• More specific; focus on climate change

– Perception of climate change– Perception of causes– Outcome efficacy– Social efficacy– Consequences of climate change

Values – social representations

Social representations

Altruistic values

Egoistic values

Biospheric values

+

-

+

Social representations - behavior

Perception of climate change weak but

negative relationship with:–Meat consumption–Showering

Only in the Netherlands and Germany no

relations in Czech Republic and Hungary

(Scotland?)

Goal frames

• Goals influence what people attend to; which knowledge and attitudes become accessible

• 3 goals:– Hedonic– Gain– Normative

• Goal strength depends on the situation and on the behavior

Goal frames - behavior

The Netherlands:

21% of the variance explained

Meat consumption

Normative goal

(greenhouse gas emissions)

Hedonic goal

(taste)

β = -0,17

β = 0,29

Health β = -0,15

Goal frames - behavior

Czech Republic:

Meat consumption

Normative goal

(greenhouse gas emissions)

Hedonic goal

(taste)

β = 0,14

β = 0,33

14% of the variance explained

Goal frames - behavior

Germany:

Showering

Normative goal

(greenhouse gas emissions)

Hedonic goal

(enjoyable)

β = -0,09

β = 0,11

3% of the variance explained

Goal frames - behavior

The Netherlands:

Showering

Normative goal

(greenhouse gas emissions)

Hedonic goal

(enjoyable)

β = -0,12

β = 0,17

11% of the variance explained

Personal careβ = 0,16

Institutional factors

• Effort of institutions

• Importance of actors

• Policy preferences

Institutional factors - behavior

• People who find environmental NGOs important for energy consumption eat less meat and shower less(in Germany, Hungary and the Netherlands, not in Czech Republic)

• Positive relationship between altruistic/ biospheric values and preference for a carbon label

Institutional factors

Effort:

Altruistic and biospheric values environmental NGOs ( r = 0,14)

Egoistic and hedonic values energy producers ( r = 0,15)

Institutional factors

• Preference for strategies is in line with cultural theory/ myths of nature (Schwartz & Thompson, 1990)

– Individualistic people think environmental problems should be solved via the free market

– Egalitarian people believe problems can be controlled by radical behavioral changes

Urban / rural

• People in rural areas use less energy

Urban / rural

• Czech Republic: drive more frugal than urban dwellers

• Hungary: – eat less meat when they grew up in a rural

area. – shower less in rural area

• The Netherlands: shower less

• Germany: eat more meat

Data analyses and publications

• Relationship between values, goal frames and behavior

Leading party: University of Groningen• How do lifestyles influence social

representations, beliefs and behavior?

Leading party: PIK• Social representations

Leading party: MLURI, PIK, Czech Republic,

Hungary

Data analyses and publications

• Institutional factors and behavior

Leading party: Hungary• Urban/ rural and behavior

Leading party: Czech team

Leading party Other parties

Values, goal frames

RuG

Lifestyles, soc repr, beliefs

PIK

Social representations

MLURI, PIK, Czech team, Hungary ?

Institutional factors

IPS-HAS

Urban/ rural Czech team