Public Engagement for Net-Zero: A Literature review
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Public Engagement for Net-Zero: A Literature review
About CPI Europe Contents
The Centre for Public Impact (CPI) This Review was co-authored by Martin Foreword 4
is a global not-for-profit, founded King, Chandrima Padmanabhan, and Katie
by Boston Consulting Group, with a Rose at CPI Europe. Thank you to Graham Executive Summary 6
mission to help government and public Smith, Lorraine Whitmarsh, Lucy Stone,
Introduction: aim and approach 8
sector organisations achieve better Clare Saunders, Brian Doherty and the
outcomes for everyone. In the UK, rest of the CPI team for their formative Structure of Review 10
we work with government and public contributions to this Review. Thank you to
sector organisations to tackle the the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation (UK
complex challenges they face, equipping Branch) for supporting the research and Section A:
changemakers with the confidence, tools production of this Review. Ways of Understanding Public Engagement Around Climate Change:
and mindsets to listen, learn and adapt
in these fast-changing and unpredictable
This Review is published alongside A Case A Challenge of Communication, of Intervention, or of Democratic
times.
Study Compendium, which shines a light Collaboration 11
on eight examples of public engagement
from across the world. Please visit the CPI I. Public engagement as a challenge of communication 12
project page to find out more.
II. Public engagement as a challenge of intervention 16
III. Public engagement as a challenge of collaboration 20
Conclusions from the Literature Review 24
Section B:
Further considerations affecting impact of Public Engagement
methods 25
Need to embrace complexity 26
Navigating uncertainty in science communication 27
Designing for inclusivity and justice 28
Final Remarks 29
Bibliography 30
Join the conversation
info@centreforpublicimpact.org
Follow us @CPI_foundation
Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 5
In 2019, on the 150th anniversary of the whose livelihoods are already insecure and investing in this area, it serves as a helpful
birth of our founder Calouste Gulbenkian, whose interests we seek to prioritise at the refresher on the vital principles on which
the Foundation’s trustees announced their Foundation. we should base our approach.
commitment to prioritise climate change.
This is why it matters and why we feel This year, Glasgow will play host to the 26th
This included launching the Gulbenkian
compelled to focus on climate change. Conference of the Parties of the United
Prize for Humanity, awarding €1 million
But what to do about it? We know that Nations Framework for the Convention on
annually to recognise contributions to the
scientific and regulatory solutions are a Climate Change. Those of us working on
mitigation of and adaptation to climate
critical part of the answer. Yet whatever climate change in the UK have a special
change. At the UK Branch, we have begun
responsibility as a result. We must gather
Foreword
technologies we invent or policies we
a complementary programme supporting
deploy, there is another critical ingredient: together to ensure that the negotiators
Citizen Engagement on Climate, seeking
without deep public engagement, we will are surrounded by the dual support and
to demonstrate what effective public
not be able to make real, sustainable challenge that a vibrant civil society
engagement looks like and create the
change. Our research shows a big gap can offer. We must create a platform
conditions for its scaling.
between what is necessary and the for people doing transformative work to
We have a history of supporting resources available for this work. Public tackle climate change all over the world.
environmental work at the UK Branch, understanding and engagement is the soil Most importantly, we must remind the
including through our Valuing the Ocean on which the seeds of government policy UN negotiating teams that although they
programme which has illuminated the or scientific advancement lands. We must are the ones around the table, the real
importance of effective communications nurture that soil to ensure that when the work of saving our planet from dangerous
in building ambition for environmental opportunity comes to act, the seeds land climate change will be done by billions of
action. Yet, for some years we were on fertile ground. us, scattered in towns, cities and villages
concerned that we would not be able to around the world, inland and on the
make a difference in a problem so big and This report – written by the Centre
coast. It is those voices – and the huge
so complex as climate change. However, for Public Impact – offers a powerful
opportunity for change they carry with
the growing visibility of climate impacts foundation for that work of bringing the them – that must anchor the conversation
has reinforced the urgency of the issue. In public with us in the fight to defend our in Glasgow. So as you read this report, we
2019, the Foundation’s trustees decided to climate. It provides a rich analysis of ask you to think about what the climate
divest from our oil and gas holdings which public engagement models on climate transition will mean for people and
were the original source of Calouste’s change, highlighting how communication, communities, and let us then ask ourselves
fortune. In the same year, I was shocked collaboration and public engagement how we can best support this.
by the terrible flooding at Woolley Bridge, around climate interventions can be made
with the risk that an entire village and its more effective. Each model has its own
residents would be subsumed under water, strengths and limitations, requiring
and the catastrophic fires in Australia. conscious design and facilitation to build
It seemed the impacts of our changing impactful, sustainable and inclusive
climate were everywhere: cyclones in people-led change. For those of us who Andrew Barnett OBE
Mozambique, the terrifying hurricanes in are relatively new to this area of work, the
Director, Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation
the Caribbean and grave water scarcity in report offers essential guidance about how
(UK Branch)
parts of India. The effects are both near to lay good parameters for new projects
and far. The most vulnerable are those getting started. For those who are already April 2021
Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 7
The aim of this Literature Review is to understand effective ways to engage the
public on meaningful behaviour change that can aid in achieving net-zero emissions
goals. The Review is a first step to unpacking how public engagement strategies in
practice can be built to be relevant, meaningful and inclusive to the public, while also
conveying urgency and driving large-scale adoption.
Through in-depth desk research and practitioner interviews, the Review draws out three
prominent ways of understanding public engagement around climate change:
Executive I. Public Engagement as a challenge of Communication
This explores how the framing of the message, the legitimacy of the messenger, and the
Summary
values and identities of the audience impact communication around climate change, and
thereby meaningful engagement.
II. Public Engagement as a challenge of Intervention
This draws out how public engagement can effectively incentivise sustainable consumption
and pro-environmental behaviour at an individual, social and systems level.
III. Public Engagement as a challenge of Collaboration
This focuses on understanding what makes effective public deliberation on climate policy
(for example through mini-publics, citizen assemblies etc.), and impactful citizen-led
grassroots movements around climate change.
Through the three lenses outlined above, this Review provides broad insight on the public
engagement methods that can enable meaningful behaviour change around climate change.
It also draws out the gaps in current research - particularly around a) how the complexity of
decision-making around climate change can be communicated without reductionism, b) how
public engagement can be made more adaptive to uncertainty and evolving local conditions
and c) how engagement processes can be made more inclusive in order to produce
legitimate and just outcomes. The importance of these themes are discussed in the final
section of this Review, drawing out the need for further research. It highlights the importance
of engaging with these tensions and value-laden decisions in order to ensure the transition to
a net-zero world is socially just, sustainable, and impactful.
8 Centre for Public Impact Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 9
Introduction: aim and approach
Our aim Our approach results, rather than pre-existing criteria or
Illustrating our methodology
priorities around public engagement. We
According to the IPCC SR 1.5°C For the purposes of this Review we have also conducted additional searches using
(2018), global carbon emissions adopted a broad definition of “public terms specific to the area to identify the
should reach net-zero by mid-century engagement”. Our definition includes any most cited, relevant and recent works for Step
Abstract
Step Grey
1 2 Literature
in order to limit warming to below intervention aimed at communicating further exploration.
1.5°C and avoid catastrophic climate with or mobilising the public, or changing
Second, we reviewed the grey
Review Review
impacts. In response to a growing their behaviours, choices or attitudes
body of scientific evidence and literature and reports from established
to positively contribute to reducing
mounting public pressure, a number organisations and research institutions
emissions. The synthesis report on the
of governments, including that of the in relevant fields. The organisations and
Action for Climate Empowerment by
UK, have translated these goals into research institutions targeted for analysis Step
3
the UNFCCC similarly adopts broad
national strategy, making tangible definitions of public engagement (FCCC
were Climate Outreach, the Centre for
Climate and Social Transformation
Interviews
policy commitments to move to a 2020).
net-zero carbon economy. (CAST), the Climate and Urban Systems
Our methodology followed a 3-step
In 2019, the UK made a legally process:
Partnership (CUSP), Futerra, Centre
Scope and Limitations
for Sustainable Energy, the Institute
binding target to achieve net-zero
for Public Policy Research (IPPR), New
by 2050. While the UK has reduced First, we conducted an initial abstract
Economics Foundation (NEF), Involve,
emissions by 40% since 1990, this review. We utilised the Web of Science By nature, literature reviews are prone with experts in the field. This was Convention (1992) and re-established
Grassroots Innovations the Global Action
has been predominantly achieved database and applied the following to degrees of imprecision, particularly necessary in order to develop a deeper through the Paris Agreement that these
Plan, the work of Rebecca Willis, the
through the decarbonisation of criteria: where the area is as wide as public understanding of the theory and practice countries need to lead the charge on
Sustainable Consumption Institute at
energy supply, requiring very little engagement in the context of climate of public engagement on climate emissions-reduction. In addition, or
• Abstract must include the terms: Manchester University, and the Research
effort on the part of the public. change. Different approaches to reviews change given the limited information perhaps due to this, the understanding
(“public engagement” OR “behaviour Group on Sustainable Lifestyles and
Reaching the net-zero target by 2050 will always be prone to exaggerating available in abstracts. However this of and responses to climate change
change”) AND (“climate change” OR Values (RESOLVE) at Surrey University.
will require significant behavioural aspects of a phenomenon and practice introduces a trade-off between mitigation objectives such as Net-Zero
“zero carbon”) These organisations were selected on
shifts (as will meeting the legally occluding others. Given these inevitable depth and balance as we are relying are better researched and documented
binding carbon budgets). This would
• Time-span: 2000-2020 the basis of various criteria, primarily
in highly industrialised economies of
constraints, we have sought to provide on a smaller number of sources to
through a form of snowball sampling
require significant investment in The search produced 246 results. The a review drawing on credible sources, gather richer information. Although Annex II countries. Given the geographic
which noted that they were frequently
public engagement, to build mutual papers were published in peer-reviewed providing a balanced account of the these sources were well-established scope, the sectors that were researched
referenced by research and practitioners.
acceptability on a way forward. journals providing some assurance available information and ensuring they and credible, we must recognise that are those seen as contributing highly
Further, these organisations represented
of sufficient quality, relevance and are relevant to the central issue. they only represent a sample of the to consumption emissions in those
This Review, commissioned by the diverse perspectives and viewpoints on
significance. We reviewed the abstracts potential research and perspectives. economies including transport, food and
Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation UK the subject, and met considerations of The papers used in the abstract review
and categorised the papers by descriptive In order to ensure transparency, we diet, and domestic energy (Carmichael
branch, is a first step in a quest to access and relevance in the context of the were published in peer reviewed
criteria; how the public are being have indicated sources, identified 2019). This review acknowledges this
understand effective ways to engage Review. journals and therefore provide
engaged, who is leading the engagement theoretical perspectives underpinning focus as a limitation, as the ensuing
the public on meaningful behaviour some assurance that independent
and who is being engaged, and on what Third, we interviewed practitioners and discussion misses out on considerations
change that can aid in achieving the approaches, and sought to offer
issues the public are being engaged. academics with established experience professionals in the relevant field and perspectives relevant to the context
net-zero emissions goals. The descriptions of research in their own
From this we were able to identify in the area of public engagement and regarded the research as sufficient in of developing economies, and the
research aims to underpin further terms as well as recording criticisms
thematic clusters of research that shared climate change. The purpose of these quality, relevance and significance. This systemic impacts of climate-related
study on ways by which effective featured in the wider literature.
an understanding of what the core aim steps was to ensure our account of the work was supplemented by deep dives decision-making on those geographies.
public engagement strategies can
of public engagement around climate literature was informed by a diverse range into key texts and reviews (frequently We have limited our scope to research As these considerations form an integral
be built to be relevant, meaningful
action was, and explore these in greater of sources, perspectives and viewpoints. cited papers pertinent to the review), from high-income developed countries part of meeting a global net-zero goal,
and inclusive to the public, while also
depth. This exploration was guided in Our interviewees included individuals an exploration of grey literature and (and more specifically countries referred further research on public engagement
conveying urgency and driving large-
an emergent sense, by the number of working at Involve, CAST and IPPR. the work of prominent organisations to as Annex II countries by the UNFCCC). practices in developing country contexts
scale adoption.
(as outlined above), and interviews It is enshrined in the UN Climate is imperative.
10 Centre for Public Impact
Structure of Review
Section A Section B
Section A illustrates the prominent ways of Section B attempts to draw together
understanding public engagement in the conclusions from the literature – as
climate space from the main themes that far as this is possible. This section also
emerge from the literature. These themes highlights further considerations key to
have been organised into three categories: understanding the climate challenge
Section A:
as one that engages with complexity,
• public engagement as a challenge of
uncertainty and deep-seated issues of
communication
justice and inclusion, drawing out what
• public engagement as a challenge of that might mean for public engagement,
intervention
Ways of Understanding Public
and new avenues of research.
• public engagement as a challenge of
collaboration
This section explores each of these three
categories, highlighting the prominent
Engagement Around Climate Change:
insights and debates on how each method
and/or process seeks to achieve behaviour
A Challenge of Communication,
change around climate change. It also
aims to provide some insight into the
of Intervention, or of Democratic
benefits and limitations of each of these
ways of framing and understanding public Collaboration
engagement.
12 Centre for Public Impact Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 13
I. Public engagement as a challenge of 2
The message such as anger, and self-related health professionals were found
communication In relation to engaging the public in
general on climate change, points of
such as guilt or shame). Research
explores the emotional impact of
to be more trusted sources for this
messaging). Furthermore the public
different messaging on climate must find the link credible and
consideration on ‘messaging’ include:
change and the relationship relatable (e.g. they feel vulnerable
• Framing and narrative: A between affective reaction and to the health risk). For example the
One understanding of public engagement from the literature is as a challenge of communication. primary focus of the research risk appraisal (see Bohm 2003). link between a low carbon diet and
Specifically, it explores how factors relating to the source of information, the message and the audience involves understanding the most Messaging on climate change a healthier diet varies in acceptance
impact the effectiveness of communication. The link here between public engagement and behaviour effective framing and narratives can also be linked to positive amongst different audiences
change is through the development of effective communication strategies that speak to peoples’ values for climate change messaging. emotional responses including (the young find it more credible
and identities, encouraging the public to care about climate change and generating a mandate for action This refers to the broad frames of hope, and efficacy. There is general than older generations). Similarly
thought through which the issue consensus around the need to research around air pollution
(Moser 2010, Whitmarsh 2013, Carvalho 2017, Schafer 2012, Corner et al 2014).
is understood and the values couple negative and positive found that appealing to the claim
appealed to (Corner et al 2014). For messages. For example, fear might that air pollution causes cancer
example we could frame climate grab people’s attention but can was met with scepticism (evoking
change as a war, as a race, or a lead to despair, therefore it can be associations with the thought that
Insights and debates climate change. There are a number of to encourage the audience to see climate problem. We could appeal to values helpfully paired with messages of “everything causes cancer”), while
areas of consensus in literature. There change as an important, tangible threat
around communication is acceptance that the deficit model is that they should take ownership of and
of avoiding waste, preservation constructive action (efficacy) and messages that emphasised links
with asthma were more effective.
(e.g biodiversity), or preparedness. more positive messaging around co-
as a way to understand not sufficient. This means that simply seek to address. The most effective framing and benefits. Crucial to these messages • Visual imagery: The research has
public engagement providing people with information
There are debates within the literature narrative will depend greatly on is ensuring the audience finds explored the significance of imagery
about climate change is not sufficient the values and identities of the the messaging around both risk
This research emerges from studies in about how best to do this, with different associated with messaging around
to encourage people to care about the and hope credible and relatable.
strands of research focusing on audience, and much of the research climate change. It has long been
communication and persuasion around climate or support action on climate
different avenues and possibilities for is focused on testing how different This will be different for different recognised that images overpower
climate change. It draws on psychological change (Maibach et al., 2008; Myers,
better engagement on climate change. language, framing and narratives audiences, and depends on factors words in persuasive messages
models, notably the elaboration likelihood 2003; Pitrelli, Manzoli, & Montolli, 2006 in
We can consider these in relation to resonates with different audiences such as the source of information (Griffin 2008, Messaris 1994 in
model (Lazard 2015, Myrick and Comfort Lazzard 2015). There is agreement that
three interrelated elements of the (Corner et al 2014, Moser 2010, and how successfully framing and Lazzard 2015). This area of research
2020) and the appraisal theory of emotions in order to communicate effectively you
communication process: Saltmarshe n.d). narrative matches the values and explores variables of different
(Lazard 2015, Myrick and Comfort 2020) need to reframe the debate and provide
1. the messenger • Drawing on Emotion: There identity of the audience. types of imagery in encouraging
to explore the role of values, emotions, narratives that resonate with the identities
and context in communication on 2. the message is a large body of literature • Connecting climate change to the audience to care about climate
and values of your audience. These need
3. the audience. on the emotional reactions to human-centred co-benefits: change and overcome distancing. For
messaging on climate change, Research in this area has explored example it finds that it is important
including emotional reactions to the potential of linking climate to show real people not staged photo
1 et al 2014, Corner n.d). Research has example, Corner (n.d) has called for
climate change risks and positive
messaging around hope, efficacy
change to more tangible issues
and highlighting co-benefits. For
ops, local but serious examples of
impact, and to be very careful with
The messenger focused on the impact of polarisation “heroes” and champions on the centre and potential co-benefits. Bohm example, linking action on climate imagery of protestors (which can
and the domination of particular right to lift climate change out of its left (2003) provides an influential change to better jobs, wellbeing, cause resistance amongst people
It is important for the source of
segments of society in taking ownership wing niche. Research also highlighted account of different emotional biodiversity and health. There has who don’t identify with these groups)
information to be trusted and credible.
of the issue which has resulted in the need for greater attention to be paid responses to environmental risks, been significant interest in drawing (Corner et al 2015). We should note
The extent to which an audience trusts
scepticism and disengagement for to the marginalisation of certain groups distinguishing consequence-based out the links between climate there are ethical considerations in
the source of information will depend
others. Specifically, climate change and communities in conversations on emotion (for example, prospective change and better health outcomes relation to telling stories or sharing
in part on perceptions of authority and images of particular groups, and
is commonly perceived as an issue climate change. Pearson et al (2017) emotions such as fear, despair, (e.g. in relation to diet, air pollution).
the messenger’s expertise. However, practitioners need to ensure that the
owned by left wing, progressive, draw attention to the need for greater worry, and retrospective emotions As highlighted above, crucial to
the research suggests these judgements images they show of people do not
middle-class liberals and activists. This diversity with respect to class, race and such as sadness, sympathy), the efficacy of this message is
are highly contingent upon wider perception is exacerbated by various gender in climate communications. The and ethical-based emotions (for that the source is trusted (e.g. negatively impact or result in any
social and political conditions and the trends in politics and marketing (e.g. research has also focused on the way example, other-related emotions in this case parental groups and harm to them.
extent to which the audience match ‘green marketing’ is targeted at this “elite” messengers are perceived (e.g
their own values and identity onto the audience). As such a conversation celebrities (Leas et al 2016), religious
messenger (Donner 2017). In this sense, has emerged around climate change authorities (Myrick and Comfort 2020))
the question audiences might ask of conducted by and for a small section with evidence suggesting it can be a
the source relates more to whether of the population. Research suggests double edged sword (Whitmarsh 2013).
this person is like them and shares the need for messengers to come from While it may positively impact the profile
their values and outlook, rather than groups currently marginalised by this of an issue (Whitmarsh 2013), it often
their qualifications, in determining messaging and marginalised more risks negative reactions and resistance
whether they are to be trusted (Corner generally by the political process. For (see Myrick and Comfort 2020).
14 Centre for Public Impact Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 15
Evaluation and limitations
This approach draws on an evidence term and short-term effects of different in its scope. This literature, and the
base derived primarily from focus groups messaging i.e. a message that draws an evidence it builds, focuses on changing
and surveys which test responsiveness initially negative response during testing people’s behaviour primarily by
to different types of messages. Although in focus groups may, if applied over the encouraging them to care about and relate
the Review did not find major schisms long-term, usefully shift perceptions and to calls for more action on climate change.
in the literature on how to understand become more acceptable. For example, It has less to say about the challenges of
communication, there was variation in how declaring a climate emergency may be changing people’s day-to-day behaviours,
studies operationalise different variables received poorly initially, but through or understanding what change is needed
and measure impact. Researchers highlight at the level of government policy or
repeated use over a sustained period of
that the majority of evidence is drawn from business practices to enable us to respond
time may usefully shift the tone of debate.
studies in the US and therefore grounded to climate change. The researchers in the
in a particular cultural context limiting The limitation of this approach to public field acknowledge this, recognising that
generalisability of findings. In addition, engagement is arguably less to do with the good communication can only be part of
3 there are challenges with measuring long- quality of evidence, but with the limitations the response to climate change.
The audience right evangelical groups as notably values such as responsibility, avoiding
resistant (this is arguably a reflection waste, protecting the land, rather than
We have observed, throughout the
of the dominance of US research in on issues of justice (e.g. supporting the
research, the significance of the
the cultural setting of this research). vulnerable, addressing inequalities).
audience in understanding how climate
Pearson et al (2017) describes how
change messaging is processed. The Finally, there is also the issue of
there has been relatively less attention
research considers a range of variables targeting. The research warns against
to those groups for whom the issue of
in exploring effective communication, exacerbating polarisation with
climate change is less politically charged
including general considerations of messaging that might engage some
such as racial and ethnic minorities
literacy and numeracy as well as the audiences while alienating others
and members of socioeconomically
timing of communication (Bostrom (Pearson and Schuldt 2015, Whitmarsh
disadvantaged groups. Pearson et al
et al 2013). A significant strand of and Corner 2017). Therefore the
(2017) argues there is a research gap
the research involves segmenting research in this area considers not
around these audiences, as these groups
the audience by demographic and are currently poorly served by climate only what messaging is most effective
attitudinal criteria to understand change messaging. Additional research with an audience, but also what
different responses and to develop has considered engaging faith groups messaging is least polarising. For
better strategies for communicating (Marshal et al 2016), different national example, a study by Whitmarsh and
with these groups (Bostrom et al 2013, identities (Marshal 2014), young people Corner (2017) found framing around
Hine et al 2014). There has been a (Dodson and Papoutsaki 2017), and low “avoiding waste” resonated well across
particular focus on political values, income groups (Pearson et al 2018). all groups in contrast to climate justice
ideological world-views and cultural Research develops evidence around how (e.g the view that climate impacts the
mindsets, but also increasing interest to frame information and what narrative most vulnerable first, therefore it is
in non-partisan social factors including or stories to tell to resonate with the the responsibility of those in greater
racial and ethnic identities, social class values and identity of different groups. positions of wealth and power to
and gender. The research suggests There is also a focus on developing address it),which works well with left
that these factors interact, and that profiles of different languages, framings audiences, or patriotism (e.g preserving
beliefs and risk perceptions around and narrative techniques for engaging the nations’ heritage/countryside)
climate change are more polarised specific groups. For example, talking which works better with the right. We
amongst advantaged groups than about “creation” when engaging faith should also note that while the research
disadvantaged groups (Pearson et groups on climate change was found focusing on different audiences aims to
al 2017). There has been particular to resonate well with Muslim, Jewish overcome the problem of polarisation,
research interest in addressing the and Christian faith groups, but less well it encounters an ethical and
scepticism prominent amongst centre- with Hindu and Buddhist faith groups epistemological challenge in ensuring
right audiences (Corner n.d), and the (Marshal et al 2016). The centre right it does not inadvertently contribute to
identification of conservative white are easier to engage on climate change reductive understandings of different
men (Ballew et al 2020) and centre by framing the conversation around groups leading to blame attributions.
16 Centre for Public Impact Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 17
II. Public engagement as a challenge of
intervention Whilst, interventions designed
around social practice include:
We can observe how social practice theory
directs us to consider interventions that
what needs to change at a system level
and the role of governments and business
target action at the level of group activities in creating appropriate conditions for
• Provision of training or education
and systems of provision. This directs us to behaviour change. Literature in this area
A second cluster of literature is centered around an understanding of public engagement as a challenge programmes (e.g. sustainable
developments in the literature that focus connects sustainable consumption with
of intervention. The thought is that the transition to net-zero requires urgent and fundamental audits of homes which provide
on pro-environmental social behaviours sustainable production (Tukker et al 2010,
training to residents on conserving
behaviour change. This research explores measures that can be taken by different actors to support more beyond the traditional domain of the Tseng et al 2013, Lorek and Spangenberg
energy)
sustainable consumption and pro-environmental behaviour at an individual, social and systems level household environment and the citizen 2014, Stanikis 2012, Fedrigo and Hontelez
• Provision of practical activities as a consumer. This includes research 2010, Luo et al (2017) discusses this
(Suessbauer and Schaefer 2018). The link between public engagement and behaviour change within this (e.g. British Trust for Conservation into collective activism (Saunders et al in the context of individual behaviour
approach concerns the efficacy of various interventions in encouraging sustainable consumption and pro- Volunteers (BTCV) who support 2012), community activities, and also change, Alayon et al 2017 in the context
environmental behaviour. activities around sustainability the potential of interventions in the of social practice) and reflects on the
and connect this with addressing workplace environment (the latter is responsibilities of different actors (beyond
other challenges in the community, perceived to offer great potential for individual consumers), and economic
e.g. Global Action Plan’s Pollinator direct intervention, and has attracted implications (see debates on “green
Paths to encourage community considerable attention; see Ciorciralan growth”, “degrowth”, or “steady state”
Insights and debates to work might involve interventions that For example, interventions growers) 2017, Loverock 2010, Norton et al 2015, economies (Lorek
provide information about its benefits, designed around individual choice • Provision of physical artefacts/
around interventions as a or make other forms of transport more include: infrastructure (community
Smith and O’Sullivan 2012, Tudor et al
2008 and Young et al 2015 in Suessbauer
and Spangenberg 2014, Fedrigo and
Hontelex 2010).
way to understand public expensive than they currently are. On
• Laws and regulations to
financed renewable projects, and Schaefer 2018, Frezza et al 2019,
Another important consideration
engagement the second understanding this would be
eliminate and restrict choice (e.g.
ecovillages, cycle lanes, workplaces Suessbauer and Schaefer 2018). The
throughout this research is the issue
insufficient and further interventions installing showers and parking research also emphasises the importance
banning plastic bags) of spillover. Spillover is a psychological
This approach to public engagement would have to be made to ensure the spaces for bikers (Heisserer 2013 of systems of provision in supporting
as interventions is characterised by a person knew how to ride a bike (skills), • Fiscal and non-fiscal incentives concept used to describe impact of
in Suessbauer and Schaefer 2018), widespread transformations in behaviour.
fundamental theoretical divide on how to viewed themselves as the kind of person (e.g. environmental taxes, change in one behavioural area leading
farm to fork initiatives, smart grids, Interventions at this level have sometimes
understand individuals and the actions who would ride a bike (identity), that they emissions trading) to the probability of change in another
(for further examples see Ellen been niche (e.g. farmers markets, health
they engage in. On one side of this debate • Provision of information (e.g. area (Frezza et al 2019, Suessbauer and
had access to a bike, bike storage, cycle MacArthur Foundation (2016)) food shops) and research has considered
10:10; a global campaign that Schaefer 2018).
are social psychology and behavioural lanes or safe roads, a sufficiently local job • Provision of access to resources
economics models that focus on (artefacts, infrastructure) etc. seeks to persuade and support
(e.g. local trading schemes,
individual behaviour and choices as the individuals and organisations to
These two understandings have GardenShare projects (Buchs et al
unit of analysis. An alternative perspective, cut their emissions by 10% each
implications for the methods of 2011))
increasingly offered as a counterpoint year)
intervention. The levers available to elicit
to this, is the sociological approach that • Simplification and framing of
more sustainable behaviour are wide and
focuses on social practices (Corsni information (e.g. feedback on
diverse. Our understanding of human
et al 2019). The first sees pro or anti- energy consumption, metering)
behaviour will draw us to particular types
environmental behaviours (or more or less of interventions, for example measures • Changes to the physical
sustainable consumption) as the result of that seek to address individual choice, environment to guide choice
individuals making choices based on their or measures that seek to address wider (e.g. appliances designed for
knowledge, attitudes, values or beliefs. factors impacting people’s lives and sustainable behaviour)
The second sees our actions as explained behaviours (competencies, social change, • Changes to the default policy (e.g.
by social practices that are constructed, infrastructure or policy). The interventions opt-out green electricity offers or
reproduced and sustained by meanings can take radically different forms in terms smart grid trial)
(symbols, identity, norms, discourse), of how they are trying to bring about more • Use of social norms (e.g. social
skills (competencies) and materials sustainable behaviour (restricting, guiding, comparison billing feedback,
(technology, artefacts, infrastructure, the providing) and different actors will also smartphone apps to encourage
environment) (Buchs et al 2011). On the have different capacities to intervene (e.g. physical activity (Lehner et
first understanding encouraging more state, third sector, private sector (Beaston al 2016))
sustainable behaviour such as riding a bike et al 2020), schools, citizens/peers).
18 Centre for Public Impact Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 19
Research on the impact of spillover as a commonplace phenomenon is clear, and Gawel and lehmann (n.d)) (Nash et
has considered the capacity to foster the evidence is limited in explaining how al 2020). For example, a person is unlikely
consistent positive spillover to encourage spillover might take place or understanding to invest in a more sustainable fridge
more sustainable lifestyles (Nash et al how to intervene in a way that encourages apropos of nothing, but linking policy
2017, Muster et al 2011, Thogeresen and consistent spillover (although there is some interventions to moments of change such
Crompton 2009 in Frezza et al 2019). evidence linking consistent spillover with as moving house might be more effective.
Further research has focused on evidence self esteem and efficacy (Frezza et al 2018, In the research these moments have
of inconsistent spillover in which pro- Geiger et al 2017)) sometimes been described as a “window of
environmental behaviours in one area The understanding of individuals and opportunity” (Bamberg 2006), “moments
result in a deterioration of environmental actions they engage with also influences of change” (Thompson et al 2011) and
behaviours in other areas. This has been decisions around when to intervene. “critical moments” (Waitit et al 2012 and
found to happen in a subconscious way, but The research suggests that when you Burningham et al 2014 in Shirani et al
has also been linked to a more conscious intervene is as important as how you 2017). In a Review of the evidence on the Evaluation and limitations
process sometimes described as moral intervene. The evidence suggests that relationship between moments of change
licensing; a cognitive bias, which enables certain interventions will be most effective and food-related behaviours, Nash et al Tukker et al (2010) observe that while as the use of social practice are advocated
individuals to behave immorally without when paired with life changes that disrupt (2020) highlights evidence that transitions the relationship between consumer as a remedy to these limitations. The
threatening their self-image of being a existing habits (Verplanken and Wood carry different implications based on behaviours and their associated strength of the social practice approach
moral person (Tiefenbeck et al 2013, 2006). These moments of change may be factors such as culture, gender, income environmental impacts has reached a is its ability to serve as a diagnostic tool
Blanken et al 2015, Mullen and Monin biographical life course events (e.g. having and age and therefore interventions mature stage, the state of knowledge in explaining why it is difficult to change
2016 in Frezza et al 2019). For example a child, retirement, relationship transitions, targeting specific moments of change around the role of policy measures to behaviour. However more work needs to
people have described their take up of moving home (Foulds et al 2016), retiring should be tailored to specific groups. Nash stimulate sustainable lifestyles and forge be done to enable the framework to guide
recycling by way of justifying doing enough or serious illness) experienced by an et al (2020) acknowledges limitations in sustainable systems of consumption interventions (Corsini et al 2019, Frezza et
for the cause of sustainability, disregarding individual (both planned and unplanned) the evidence base, and argues this is an and production is far less certain. al 2019, Buchs et al 2011).
its other tenets related to diet or flying. or exogenous to the individual (e.g. sudden area in which further research is needed, The interventions to encourage more
It is also important to note that the
Summarising on the state of research on cultural or political change, the Review specifically in order to better understand sustainable consumption and behaviour
literature focuses on the efficacy of
spillover, Frezza et al (2018) observe that found recent explorations of the potential its implications for policy implementations vary radically, and the evidence on which
interventions. It is a separate question to
while the evidence of spillover existing impact of Covid-19, see Lidskog et al (2020) and interventions. these interventions are based also varies
ask what we should do and to consider
in nature and quality. It is generally
the power dynamics that exist. Given
accepted that a combination of diverse
the changes demanded in response
interventions aimed at different barriers
to climate change are significant, far-
(individual, social, economic, political) are
reaching and disruptive of current
necessary to address climate change.
lifestyles, it is reasonable to ask questions
On the theoretical underpinnings of of the legitimacy and rightness of the
this approach, the methods based on intervention. This entails thinking about
social psychology and behavioural who and how we should decide what
choice models, which focus on individual interventions should be used, what
behaviour and choices, have been subject desirable behaviour really is, who should
to particular criticism for their limitations be the target of behaviour change,
and assumptions. It is argued these and whether the interventions go far
interventions have limited impact, and enough. This literature tends to assume
the impact they are found to have in one these questions are known prior to the
context cannot be easily generalised intervention, and the evidence has less to
due to their failure to consider the wider say about how you answer them. These
complexity of human nature and the range are crucial questions as the evidence
of barriers and pressures acting upon it. suggests that failure to collaboratively
Furthermore it is suggested this approach engage those impacted by decisions can
places too much emphasis on individual produce resistance, it can result in poorly
consumer responsibility, neglecting the designed or damaging interventions with
responsibilities of governments and other unintended consequences, only delaying
actors. Developments in the literature such efforts to address climate change.20 Centre for Public Impact
III. Public engagement as a challenge of
collaboration
The third prominent cluster of research is centred on an understanding of public engagement as The precise design of deliberative mini-publics vary. Indeed if we consider recent cases
a challenge of collaboration. This development can be understood within the context of a wider described as “citizen assemblies” we can observe significant variation in recruitment
participatory turn across different sectors and disciplines which emphasises the importance of greater methods, design, decision-making mechanisms and links to policy. There is rich debate around
collaboration with the public. In this understanding, public engagement on climate change involves the the issues encountered by these deliberative mini publics; however it is helpful to highlight
creation of spaces in which the public are involved in decision making on climate policy, or involved in a some key considerations:
process of co-governance in the delivery of public goods and implementation of interventions to address
climate change. Implicit within these approaches is the assumption that public collaboration is necessary
• The purpose and authority of the deliberative illusion of meaningful participation. Where this happens,
to ensure action is optimal (the right thing to do, just) and legitimate (supported by those impacted,
spaces: The legitimacy and authority of mini-publics or is perceived to happen, the process can damage trust
inclusive). Research explores the potential mechanisms of collaboration and the conditions required to is ambiguous. They are representative, but they are not and undermine legitimacy. For example, there is a danger
support these processes. representing (citizens did not vote them in). They exist in that those who participate feel their voice has had no
tension with the democratic authority of representative impact and thus the process erodes public trust rather
democracy. This can be a productive tension that than building on it. There has been far less attention
enhances legitimacy, public engagement and decision in the research to the question of capacity, and what is
Insights and debates discussions around ‘just transitions’ to a in informed deliberative decision making.
making, or a negative tension that sets up competing required of organisations and bureaucracies to act on the
greener economy. Of particular interest, has been the
around collaboration as a use of deliberative mini-publics which legitimacies which undermine each other (Vandamme et recommendations of mini publics in response to complex
way to understand public Collaborating through the involve a representative microcosm of
al 2018). In practice this tension plays out in various ways, challenges such as climate change (See Boswell 2018
for example in determining whether there is sufficient discussion of deliberative bureaucracy).
engagement creation of deliberative spaces: the population (determined by varying
buy-in from decision makers to commission a climate
demographic and attitudinal criteria). • Relationship to wider public and existing movements:
Public engagement on climate change as There is a growing interest, in both assembly, through to its reception by the public, opinion There is an issue of wider engagement and awareness of
Deliberative mini-publics include citizen
collaboration is a nascent area of research research and practice, in the creation of leaders and decision makers (Boswell 2013). mini publics. Increasingly, mini publics are preceded by
juries, deliberative polls and citizen
and the evidence base is not as extensive. deliberative spaces to inform decision • Internal quality: this refers to the internal quality of wider engagement activities that lead subsequently on
assemblies. There has been a strong trend
However we highlight two prominent making and climate policy. A significant deliberative mini publics, such as whether the design to the deliberative process (see Camden, Brent, Leeds,
in recent years of applying these practices
contexts in which current research has strand of this literature is characterised and delivery of the mini-public is legitimate, inclusive, Newham), which can strengthen its legitimacy. There
in the context of the climate emergency
developed. The first concerns collaboration by a shared understanding and broad transparent and accountable, whether the conversations is also the broader question of legitimacy in relation to
and the transition to net-zero. Examples
as a deliberative space in which the public approach to collaboration rooted in meet the standards of good deliberation (e.g. respectful, overall public awareness i.e. the extent of awareness of
inform climate policy, while the second political science and deliberative include, the Irish Citizen Assembly not dominated by powerful groups) etc. There is the wider population to what a mini public constitutes,
concerns forms of co-governance to deliver democratic theory (see Dryzek 2010, (Devaney et al 2020), Climate Assembly increasing evidence that many mini publics successfully what its recommendations have been, and if/how they will
public goods. In addition we highlight Gutman and Thompson 1996, Habermas UK, the Citizens’ Convention on Climate address concerns around internal quality through inform policy making. Typically there is a negligible level
prominent literature which situates 1962, Habermas 1981). This approach in France, and at a local level Camden standards of design (e.g. stratified random sampling helps of awareness around all of these areas, which has been
the second discussion in the context seeks to create carefully structured (Cain and Moore 2019), Oxford, Newham ensure inclusion and diversity, independent oversight found to have implications for perceptions of legitimacy
of procedural justice and as integral to deliberative fora in which citizens engage (Mutual Gain 2020), Brent, Leeds, Kendal. helps ensure balance). Furthermore, researchers have and wider support (Boulianne 2018). Echoing the findings
also found that mini publics overcome problems of on communication, the often polarising nature of the
polarisation, various types of bias and domination by climate change debate would suggest the need for careful
powerful groups through careful design and facilitation and systematic communication around the processes
(Himmelroos and Christensen 2014, Gronlund et al 2015, of a mini public to ensure legitimacy (Boulianee 2018,
Gerber 2014, Farrar et al 2009). There are also emerging Raphael and Karpowitz 2013).
standards that seek to ensure high quality deliberation • Conditions of success and evaluation: Evaluating the
can be replicated in different cases (see the work of evidence on deliberative spaces is complex, but some
Involve). are clearly closer to the theoretical ideals of high quality
• Relationship to decision making: A key issue concerns deliberation than others. Experience suggests conditions
the willingness and capacity of decision making for success include entrepreneurial actors initiating the
organisations to respond to deliberative mini publics. In process, willingness and organisational capacity to act on
practice, mini publics may be entirely ignored by decision the recommendations from the deliberations, and strong
makers or the results may be cherry picked to give an engagement beyond the participants to the wider public.22 Centre for Public Impact Public engagement on meaningful behaviour change to achieve Net-Zero 23
This is a wide, diverse and nascent Evaluation and limitations
literature with ongoing debates
concerning the meaning and implications
The collaborative approaches describe in anticipation of an entrepreneurial actor
of procedural justice, including how
deeply complex processes, whether who will act on the recommendations
radical the mechanisms need to be
manifested as deliberative spaces provided by these approaches. This is
(affirmative or transformative, Galgoczi
informing decision making or spaces most evident in this last approach which
2020), the conditions required to enable
for empowering collaboration and co- relies on those in positions of power
Collaboration as co-governance in diffusion (Schot and Geels 2008). and adaptation processes are able to communities to have meaningful
participate in the process of decision- governance to achieve more just and and responsibility to open up decision
the delivery of public goods It is helpful to highlight two further related involvement in the process, and what role
making and delivery. equitable transitions. In addition to the making power to a wider circle. In addition
considerations emerging from the research. government and other authorities have
There is a second strand of literature on variety of design choices, and the different to having the will and capacity to open
The first concerns our understanding of Just Transition is an area informed in creating those conditions (for example
public engagement which concerns the conditions and contexts of application, up decision making, and successfully
how inclusive these forms of collaboration by international labour movements acting as stewards and facilitators).
study of collaboration as co-governance there are different approaches to testing creating meaningful collaboration, the
are; where these innovations take place, (Galgoczi 2020), and the disciplines Evaluating the evidence on just transition
in the delivery of public goods. For and evaluation. Different studies have organisation/government must have the
who takes part in them, and who is best of law and geography (Heffron and is complex, but the research has drawn
example, we may contrast a supermarket used different criteria and methods of capacity to respond to this new source
served by them. For example, Middlemiss McCauley 2018), and involves different out a number of lessons about conditions
delivering a range of organic products with operationalisation in evaluation. For of decision making and act effectively.
(2018 in Howard 2019) offers a critique of scholarly traditions of climate justice, of success including: the presence of
a community-supported organic vegetable example, some focus on the legitimacy There is an open question concerning
Transition Towns, observing that they are energy justice and environmental justice entrepreneurial actors in companies and
box; or an offshore wind farm operated of the internal process, some on the why this catalyst for change occurs when
seen to be run largely by white, middle (Heffron and McCauley 2018). It also civil society to act as a catalyst, antecedent
by a multinational utility company vs one evidence of impact and outcomes, others it does, and how it can be recreated at the
class volunteers who manage it to their addresses the three main pillars of conditions such as the strength of
locally financed by a renewable energy on their relationship to the wider system. scale needed to respond to the problem.
own advantage. Howard (2019) warns us justice: distributional, procedural and resources, networks and administrative
scheme. A wide range of grassroots This is not to say that we cannot learn It is possible that this is answered
against “universalising the social realm” restorative. The discussion of procedural capacity of the region, the degree
initiatives and community engagement lessons from this research, but rather by the literature, that if we just learn
and failing to consider internal and justice offers a potentially useful lens and quality of stakeholder and public
projects are studied in this literature, enough about good engagement practice
involvement, actions that strengthen and to highlight some of the challenges
addressing areas of housing, renewable external power dynamics acting on these through which to view collaboration. It and refine our methods (whether as
diversify the local economy and avoid encountered as we consider more
energy, food and alternative money. innovations. If these innovations tend to concerns setting a new infrastructure of communication, intervention, collaboration
take place only in certain well-resourced, incentivising unsustainable development. complex forms of engagement.
Examples include Transition Towns, local community engagement and involvement or another approach) then we will be
affluent areas, run by limited sections within environmental justice. This includes This approach is also helpful in creating the change needed. Alternatively,
organic food schemes, time banks, and
of the population with the outcomes long-term engagement processes with the highlighting a more fundamental it may involve another explanation beyond
Local Agenda 21 (Smith et al 2016, Seyfang
favouring those groups, there is likelihood affected community. In contrast to the challenge that arguably connects all of the the quality of public engagement, in
and Longhurst 2016 see also Kheerajit
that these bottom-up processes only serve more formally theorised understanding approaches reviewed which is the role of which case we need another theory of
and Flor 2013, Cumming and Norwood
to further exacerbate inequalities and of participation as deliberation presented power as a catalyst for change. Much of the change to explain this crucial element to
2012, Grassroots Innovations n.d). These
disadvantage. A related question concerns in deliberative democratic literature, the research on public engagement is written understanding what is needed.
developments can be understood as a
not just the conditions under which these just transition literature includes a more
collaborative or participatory approach
take place, but the role of government and expansive concept of participation and co-
to systems of provision. It is argued that
other organisations in supporting these governance including protest movements,
these bottom-up solutions can be more
conditions, or even acting as stewards or negotiations and deliberations, and most
responsive to the interests and values of
facilitators of these practices (specifically notably community-led schemes (Simcock
the communities involved. The research
in areas where these innovations are 2016 in McCauley and Heffron 2018).
tends to discuss these processes in terms
rare, where the conditions of success are
of strategic niche management and The Review found increasing interest
lacking, and where action is badly needed).
grassroots innovation, and it is thought and case studies illustrating efforts to
that sustainable development can be In consideration of these issues we achieve just transition including Lusatia
facilitated by creating niches (protected may benefit from developments in the in Germany (transitioning away from coal)
spaces that allow experimentation in the final area of literature considered in (Emden 2020a), Pittsburgh (Ahmad 2020,
co-evolution of technology, users practices this Review, which frames collaboration Gothenburg (Ahmad 2020), Alberta
and regulatory structures (Smith 2007, within the context of procedural justice (Cameron 2020), as well as agricultural
Dana et al 2019)). The argument is that if and as part of a wider movement towards transitions in the UK and Denmark
these niches are constructed appropriately a Just Transition. This framing explicitly (Emden 2020b) and waste management
they can act as building blocks for broader focuses our attention on ensuring the in the US (Gowda and Easterling (2000 in
societal change through innovation groups most vulnerable to climate change McCauley and Heffron 2018).You can also read
