Download An Evidence Base Review of Public Attitudes to Climate Change

CONTRACT NO: PPRO 004/006/006
AN EVIDENCE BASE REVIEW OF PUBLIC ATTITUDES TO CLIMATE CHANGE AND TRANSPORT BEHAVIOUR
FINAL REPORT
by
Dr Jillian Anable
UK Energy Research Centre Transport topic leader
The Centre for Transport Policy
The Robert Gordon University
Dr Ben Lane
Ecolane Transport Consultancy Ltd
Dr Tanika Kelay
Environmental Psychology Research Group
University of Surrey
for
THE DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT
JULY 2006
Contents
CONTENTS
REPORT SUMMARY
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
4
INTRODUCTION
5
SECTION I: PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING
Chapter 1: Public understanding of climate change
11
Chapter 2: Attitudes to transport and climate change
33
SECTION II: THE LINK BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND BEHAVIOUR
Chapter 3: The attitude -behaviour gap
61
Chapter 4: Barriers to changing behaviour
82
SECTION III: CATALYSING TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR CHANGE
Chapter 5: Segmentation
119
Chapter 6: Interventions
136
SECTION IV: RESEARCH METHODS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Chapter 7: Research methods
164
Chapter 8: Evidence gaps and recommendations
177
REFERENCES
196
APPENDIX 1: Evidence review methodology
211
APPENDIX 2: Access database pro-forma
216
APPENDIX 3: Examples of novel research methods
218
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
1
Summary
SUMMARY
In September 2005, Dr Jillian Anable 1 together with Dr Ben Lane2 and Dr Tanika Kelay3 were
commissioned by the UK Department for Transport to undertake an Evidence base review of
public attitudes to climate change and travel behaviour. The overall objectives were to
improve the evidence base for policy decisions concerning:
1. How climate change knowledge and awareness relates to transport decision-making,
attitudes and behaviours amongst the public;
2. The nature and impact of interventions aimed at altering attitudes and behaviours in
relation to climate change issues;
3. The identification of research methods (including measures and data sources) pertinent to these issues. 4. The identification of evidence gaps worthy of further research.
A main conclusion concerning the state of the art is the three strands of this review (i)
attitudes (ii) climate change and (iii) travel behaviour have not been comprehensively
examined in any consistent, robust and integrated way to warrant a comprehensive analysis of
the links between them. Consequently, the review drew upon literature from environmental
psychology, public understanding of science, travel behaviour research, marketing and
sociology to achieve its aims.
The review used a search strategy designed to capture all aspects of travel behaviour
including the choice of all transport modes, car purchasing, the frequency and amount of
travel and support for transport policies. Only a small amount of literature emerged in relation
to attitudes to air travel and climate change. Consequently, understanding attitudes to and the
demand for air travel comprises a strong recommendation for further research. Self evidently,
the conclusions in this summary pertain almost exclusively to private surface passenger
transport.
The main findings for each of the three objectives were as follows:
1. There is only a weak link between knowledge and awareness of climate change on the
one hand and travel behaviour at the individual level on the other. Raising public
awareness of this link is necessary, particularly to galvanise support for carbon
abatement policy, but it is not sufficient to change behaviour on its own. In order to
effect change, many other factors need to be addressed – at the objective and
subjective and at the indiv idual and collective levels. These factors will be different
for different travel behaviours and for different people.
2. Transport policies can set out to change attitudes directly as a route to behaviour
change, or they can be indirect in that they aim to change behaviour first without
necessarily changing attitudes. This review concludes that a combination of each of
these types of measures is desirable. In addition, any travel behaviour change strategy
will be more effective if it targets change at the community level. Community Based
Social Marketing offers a strategic framework to transform markets and behaviours.
3. There is a need to engage the public in issues of transport and climate change using
deliberative methodologies to deviate from traditional ‘top down’ methods of
information provision. New forms of research and communication need to be twoway, explore formats for learning on all sides of the issue, have an iterative and
deliberative component and not necessarily strive to reach consensus.
4. Nine areas for further research were identified (R1 – R9).
1
The Centre for Transport Policy, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
Ecolane Transport Consultancy, Ltd., Bristol, UK.
3
Environmental Psychology Research Group, University of Surrey, UK.
2
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
2
Summary
The Structure of this report
Following the Introduction which sets out the main objectives of this review and methods
used to meet them, this report is divided into four sections, each with two chapters.
Section 1 reviews the (mainly quantitative) literature on public understanding, firstly of
climate change in general (Chapter 1) and secondly on the link between climate change and
transport behaviour (Chapter 2). Together these chapters address such issues as the degree of
sophistication of public knowledge of climate change, level of concern about the issues and
the degree to which this may or may not be translated into travel behaviour, car purchasing
and support for transport policies which attempt to influence the travel demand.
Section 2 investigates the link between this awareness and behaviour, firstly by looking to
socio-psychological theoretical literature to provide a framework for understanding this link
(Chapter 3), and secondly by looking at a series of potential barriers to behaviour change and
reviewing the evidence on how they apply in a travel context (Chapter 4). A typology of
barriers to travel behaviour is presented which incorporates subjective, objective, individual
and collective factors.
Section 3 focuses on behaviour change and how this can be catalysed in the light of the
evidence in the previous two sections. First, the case for greater market segmentation is made
to recognise that different people are motivated by different factors and are affected
differently by policy interventions (Chapter 5). Second, interventions to directly influence
behaviour through attitudes are contrasted with attempts to change behaviour without
purposely setting out to change attitudes. A case for Community Based Social Marketing is
made (Chapter 6).
Section 4 covers the quality of current research and makes recommendations for further work
in this area. First, a critique of dominant methodological approaches is conducted and
suggestions made for innovative and deliberative techniques that could be adopted in future
(Chapter 7). Finally, nine main areas are identified where evidence gaps are greatest and
research could be carried out to further our understanding and effect change in this area
(Chapter 8).
In addition, three annexes offer detail on the methodology for this review (Appendix 1), the
proforma used to assess the literature (Appendix 2) and examples of studies which have used
innovative methodological approaches to measure attitudes and travel behaviour (Appendix
3).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
3
Acknowledgements
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Birgitta Gatersleben (Environmental Research Group, University of Surrey) and Professor
Rita Marcella, The Robert Gordon University, have acted as advisors to this project and their
input has been extremely valuable.
Special thanks are also due to Laura Illingworth, Research Fellow at The Centre for Transport
Policy for her assistance with the sourcing and scoping of the literature for this review. We
would also like to thank Ann Nichol, librarian at Robert Gordon University for her assistance
with sourcing documents.
Much evidence for this review was generated from responses to various calls for information.
Thank you to everyone who contributed in this way. We are particularly grateful to those who
volunteered to be a reviewer as part of the methodology employed to systematically review
the literature. The following each reviewed a paper using a pro-forma provided to them:
• Stewart Barr, Exeter University
• Adrian Davis, Private Transport Consultant
• Patrick Devine-Wright, Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development, DeMontfort University
• Geoff Gardner, North Yorkshire County Council
• Maria Johansson, Lund University, Sweden
• Ann Jopson, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds
• Jane Palmer, Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford
• Stephen Potter, The Open University
• James Warren, The Open University
The research project was funded by the Department for Transport (DfT). The views expressed
in this project are those of the researchers and not necessarily those of the DfT.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
4
Introduction
INTRODUCTION
Background
Climate change is now centre-stage on the policy-making agenda. The Government has both
international and domestic commitments to reduce emissions. In 2004, the DfT adopted a
joint PSA target with DEFRA to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 12% below 1990 levels
in line with the UK’s Kyoto commitment and to move towards the UK’s domestic 20%
reduction in carbon dioxide emissions below 1990 levels by 2010. The 2003 Energy White
Paper accepts the need for deeper cuts of 60% by 2050 (DTI 2003).
Transport has a vital role to play in achieving these reduction targets. The transport sector
currently accounts for about a quarter of all UK carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions excluding
international aviation (DfT 2004) and is the sector in which energy use and emissions is rising
most rapidly. Indeed, it is the only sector where emissions are expected to be higher in 2020
than in 1990. To date, the CO2 emissions from increases in road traffic have been largely
offset by improvements in vehicle efficiency. However, in the future, further fuel efficiency
improvements are unlikely to keep pace. Consequently, road transport’s share of total UK
CO2 emissions could overtake the domestic, industry and service sectors and go on to erode
carbon savings expected from greater energy efficiency and renewable energy use (Foley and
Fergusson 2003).
Hence, if the requisite reductions in CO2 are to be achieved, the transport sector must play a
significant role. However, energy consumption in the transport sector cannot be achieved by
improvements in efficiency alone (Anable and Boardman 2005). Likewise, the Government’s
Transport Strategy cannot depend only on improving travel conditions and opportunities.
Rather, more fundamental behavioural changes are required which alter people’s aspirations,
motivations and ultimately their travel and lifestyle choices. With more or less coercive
policies such as national road pricing being, at best, a long way off, there is an urgent need to
understand and deliver what works4 in policy terms to encourage behaviour shifts to
contribute to transport energy reduction in the shorter as well as the longer term.
To achieve this objective requires an understanding of how public awareness of and attitudes
to climate change relate to transport behaviour and related decision-making by the public.
Most importantly, it requires specific understanding and ability to monitor how attitudes to
climate change issues translate into actual travel choices. The issues raised by this question
include the following:
• What evidence is there that awareness, misperceptions or knowledge of climate
change are linked to decision-making and action in the transport sphere?
• Could it even be that policies that aim to heighten awareness and knowledge in fact
run counter to the best available evidence?
• Is research able to provide objective answers to these complex policy questions?
Whatever the answers to these questions, it is clear that it makes sense to systematically and
rigorously assimilate what we know and determine how to evaluate interventions that are put
into place. As this review shows, the body of literature on attitudes to climate change and
travel behaviour is vast. This is particularly true (i) when the word ‘attitude’ is taken as a
catch-all phrase to conceptualise beliefs, values, perceptions, knowledge, awareness, opinions
and concerns, (ii) when climate change encompasses more general environmental concern and
4
When setting out the government’s modernising agenda, Tony Blair declared that what counts is what
works (Davies (ed.) 2000). The implication of this is that policymaking would be driven by evidence of
what is proven to be effective in addressing social problems and achieving desired outcomes.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
5
Introduction
perception of risk, and (iii) when travel behaviour is taken to include travel on, and between,
all modes of transport as well as car purchasing decisions and driving behaviour.
Less plentiful, however, are methodologically robust studies that link attitudes with actual
travel behaviour. Where the link is made, there may often be no attempt to understand how
this relationship depends on social groups or lifestyle. Most elusive of all are studies that
empirically examine changes in attitudes and behaviour before and after specific
interventions. To the extent that they exist, these latter studies form the core of this review
with the aim of providing an in-depth appraisal of what works on the ground for whom and
under what circumstances.
Aims and research questions
In September 2005, Dr Jillian Anable 5 together with Ben Lane6 and Tanika Kelay7 were
commissioned by the UK Department for Transport to undertake an Evidence base review of
public attitudes to climate change and travel behaviour. The overall objectives of the review
were to improve the evidence base for policy decisions concerning:
1. How climate change knowledge and awareness relates to transport decision-making,
attitudes and behaviours amongst the public;
2. The nature and impact of interventions aimed at altering attitudes and behaviours in
relation to climate change issues; and
3. The identification of research methods (including measures and data sources) that are
pertinent to these issues.
To achieve these aims, the project team has conducted a systematic assessment of the findings
of previous research that has investigated public perceptions of climate change and its link to
travel behaviour. It is hoped that the results presented in this report will provide cumulative
understanding about the successes and failures of previous initiatives distilled in practical
form. In particular, the review process aims to:
1. Take advantage of past experience and knowledge, not just for transferable lessons
about what works and what does not work, but why and in what contexts;
2. Make full use of research findings by placing them into context with other similar
studies and identifying strong messages;
3. Synthesise and draw conclusions regarding the state of knowledge both within and
outside the UK;
4. Identify and critically assess the value of the evidence based claims and their relationship to evidence based policy;
5. Distinguish between high and low quality research findings;
6. Inform decisions on the importance that should be attached to such interventions,
further research and evaluation methodologies.
As part of the review, and in response to key issues that have arisen during the reviewing
process, a number of research questions are addressed. These include:
• What are the public’s attitudes, understanding and knowledge of climate change and
relevant transport issues?
• How, if at all, do the attitudes and knowledge of climate change relate to travel
behaviour?
• Are travel behaviours amenable to change through the influence of attitudinal levers?
5
The Centre for Transport Policy, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, UK.
Ecolane Transport Consultancy, Ltd., Bristol, UK.
7
Environmental Psychology Research Group, University of Surrey, UK.
6
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
6
Introduction
• What target audiences are most amenable to changing their travel behaviour?
• What other types of interventions are effective in promoting pro-environmental travel
behaviours?
• What strategic methods should be employed to design effective travel interventions?
In addition to attempting to answer these research questions (summarised in Figure 1), and in
the light of findings reported, the evidence review also makes a number of recommendations
concerning future research.
Figure 1 Evidence review research questions
Current levels of
awareness of
transport and
climate change
How has this
awareness
influenced travel
behaviour?
How has this
changed in the
past decade?
Main messages
Which behaviours?
Which interventions?
Who?
How far will travel
behaviour change if
this awareness is
increased?
What are the
barriers and
levers?
Which
behaviours are
most malleable?
Which
interventions are
most effective?
How should impact
be evaluated and
monitored?
Who is most
likely to
change?
National and
international
National and local
Indicators and
methods of
measurement
Key priorities
for research
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
7
Introduction
Review methodology
This section gives a brief overview of the evidence review methodology used. A more
detailed account is given in Appendix 1.
Literature searches were initially based on comprehensive electronic searches of appropriate
databases as well as some searching of printed material. The data sources included: Internet
search engines, academic databases and discipline-specific databases. The data search process
also involved networking with experts active in the field. This not only helped to maximise
the chances of the review covering all the relevant literature, but also contributed up-to-date
knowledge and insights from work not yet published.
A set of inclusion/ exclusion criteria were initially agreed so as to decide what materials
would contribute to the analysis. In order to be included in the review, studies had to be one
of the following study types:
• An exploration of the relationships between climate change and travel attitudes and
behaviour (including theoretical and review articles);
• An evaluation of an intervention related to changing attitudes or travel behaviour;
• Research that identifies/ develops methods used to measure the impact of policy
interventions in this area.
Most importantly, however, the studies had to have as their main focus:
• Research on the existing relationship between attitudes towards climate change (and
other environmental issues) as related to transport and transport behaviour;
• Research on factors influencing attitudes towards climate change (and other environmental issues) as related to transport;
• Interventions aiming to change attitudes towards climate change (and other environmental issues) as related to transport;
• Interventions aiming to change the relationship between attitudes towards climate
change (and other environmental issues) as related to transport/ transport behaviour.
As the relationship between attitudes and behaviour is (according to existing research)
sometimes mediated by other psychological variables, such as moral norms, social norms,
and perceived behavioural control, these were also examined in the literature. The research
therefore also included:
• Research examining what other social psychological variables (such as moral and
social norms, perceived behavioural control, cognitive dissonance and social dilemma
etc) influence travel decisions;
• Initiatives aiming to change the travel decisions by altering these variables.
To maximise relevance to a 2006 context, the search limited information retrieval to material
conducted since 1995. A 10-year timescale was thought to be sufficient to include studies that
had included evaluations before and after interventions, whilst needing to be mindful of how
the situation has developed over time. The countries studied were limited to UK, Western
Europe, USA and Australasia as these countries deal with similar transport issues and share
many cultural values.
To record and analyse the research sourced by the review process, two databases were
constructed: one (in Endnote) to record the references found by the preliminary search – this
also included an initial rating of the relevance of the material for the purposes of the evidence
review; and a second (in Microsoft Access – a screen shot of which is shown in Appendix 2)
to assess in more detail a selected sample of the Endnote database.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
8
Introduction
The Access cell entries in these tabulations were composed mainly of text. This approach
represented a move from trying to capture the essence of the original studies via an ‘abstract/
summary’ (recorded in the Endnote file) to attempting to locate their key aspects and issues
on a ‘data matrix’ (in Access). In total, over 600 entries were made in the Endnote database
and around 60 studies were analysed in more detail within the Access database file.8
The Endnote file was used, first as a check of what data had been collected, and also to form
the review’s reference list and bibliography. The more data-rich Access database was used for
providing detailed findings for the evidence review report. It also allowed a check of the
appraisal process – a selection of experts in the field was invited to act as reviewers to check
the ratings as given by the project team. The reviewers used are listed in the
Acknowledgement section of this report.
8
Many of the references entered in the Endnote file are as listed in the Reference section of this report
– references shown in bold are those reviewed using the Access pro-forma.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
9
SECTION I:
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF CLIMATE
CHANGE AND TRANSPORT
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
10
1. Public understanding
1: PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF CLIMATE CHANGE
1.1
Aims of this chapter
• To assess the level of ‘knowledge’ the public have of climate change in general;
• To collate evidence on public acknowledgement of the urgency of climate change
and how it ranks in importance and concern;
• To understand whether people link their own activities to climate change and
feel a sense of personal responsibility for the issue.
1.2
Main findings
• The evidence suggests that recognition of the concept of climate change among the
UK population is exceptionally high, but a more sophisticated understanding appears
to be random and inconsistent.
• Strong lessons are being inferred about public understanding from crude survey
instruments which lack depth and the ability to elicit a true understanding of what
people really know and are motivated by with respect to climate change.
• We have very little true understanding of how people deal with the complexities of
the science of climate change, or how they might deal with it under different
information environments.
• The vast majority of the public claim to believe that climate change is happening, and
around two-thirds of the population are convinced that climate change is linked to
human activity. However, they are unclear about the detail.
• Many people are well informed about some of the causes of climate change. Indeed,
some research finds that most people possess quite detailed, although often random,
knowledge of the issue. However, the prevalence of common misconceptions points
to varying degrees of uncertainty about the causes of climate change.
• In general terms at least it may be easier for people to make the link between climate
change and transport’s use of fossil fuels than with the use of fuel in the home.
Around two thirds of the population identify transport as a cause of climate change
compared to a fifth identifying the use of gas and electricity in the home.
• Research shows that public concern regarding climate change is high. However, it is
unclear whether concern for climate change is currently rising or falling due to the
way the data has been collected.
• Although climate change generates concern it is not a ‘front-burner’ issue. Public
concern for climate change appears to be tempered by uncertainty about where and
when climate change will occur, the degree of change and by competition from other
issues of individual concern.
• Whilst the majority of the public do not regard climate change as an immediate threat
to themselves, but as a threat to future generations and ‘far away places’, some people
believe the threat is more immediate and already materialising.
• Although there are encouraging indications that people are acknowledging their own
contribution and responsibility towards climate change mitigation, they generally
place the onus on national (and global) institutions. Even the majority of those
already making changes believe their (own) efforts are making little difference.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
11
1. Public understanding
• When asked a direct question about ‘level of knowledge’ people believe themselves
to be only a little informed about climate change. Nevertheless, there is an apparent
keenness to be provided with more specific information.
1.3
Introduction
The questions raised by an evidence base review of attitudes to climate change and its
relationship to travel behaviour are the following: how detailed is public understanding of
environmental issues (including climate change), how accurate is the public’s knowledge of
the effect of mitigating actions, and to what extent can we rely on reported findings of
behavioural intent?
To answer these questions, this chapter will assimilate the evidence on the level and nature of
public knowledge and engagement with the issue of climate change. It will concentrate on
levels of awareness, knowledge and concern about climate change in general to provide vital
context for the more targeted discussion on the degree to which people make the link between
transport, their own travel behaviour and climate change – the subject of the following
chapter.
It should be noted that this is not intended to be a comprehensive compilation of all studies
completed on climate change and global warming perceptions. Because the results of these
studies are largely consistent, only the most robust studies, and those most relevant to the UK
context are noted. Where possible, the review has been limited to the most up to date
evidence, including drawing upon a comprehensive review of attitudes to climate change for
Futerra/ DEFRA by Darnton (2005) and by Hounsham (2006).
1.4
The quality of the evidence
It is appropriate for an evidence base review to begin by commenting on the quality of the
evidence.
A main weakness of the body of research in relation to attitudes to climate change more
generally and to transport issues in particular, is that data collection has been largely reliant
on quantitative techniques using closed-question formats. These take the form of both
relatively basic opinion polls and more or less substantive questionnaire surveys. The latter
are generally more robust as they tend to include a greater number of variables and contextual
information.
Whilst both types of surveys are undoubtedly useful, especially as a comparative tool to track
trends (across space and time), there are huge reservations (semantic and methodological)
about the meaningfulness of such findings (Darnton 2005). For example, it is generally
assumed that surveys overstate respondent concern and that some topics generate ‘socially
desirable’ responses (Lowe et al. 2005, Sterngold et al. 1994). Environmental concern is a
particular candidate for the exhibition of these problems. Indeed, Bord et al. (1998) point out
that the structure of most surveys on climate change itself serve to reinforce the perception
that the environment is a serious issue that demands concern from any ‘respectable citizen’.
Another major weakness is that surveys seldom put environmental concerns in the
comparative context of other social and personal problems. Where comparisons are made,
(such as in the British Social Attitudes Survey), while the majority may indicate a concern for
climate change, other issues frequently take precedence when juxtaposed against climate
change (Poortinga and Pidgeon 2003). Hence, strong lessons are being inferred about public
understanding from crude survey instruments which lack depth and the ability to elicit a true
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
12
1. Public understanding
understanding of what people really know and are motivated by with respect to climate
change.
Qualitative research is a much more appropriate tool for exploring the ways in which
something is understood. For example, Lorenzoni and Langford (2001) used an in-depth
mixed methodology approach among citizens of Norwich (UK) in an attempt to capture the
diversity of views on climate change 9 . They say:
The breadth of this approach allowed us not only to consider respondents’
present interests, concerns and beliefs, but also enabled us to investigate
peoples’ reaction to the role (in terms of responsibility and blame) of
individuals, markets and institutions in shaping the future’.
(Lorenzoni and Langford 2001)
Overall, qualitative data sources included in this review suggest either that the environment or
climate change do not surface spontaneously as an issue for concern, or when they do,
people’s understanding is mixed and full of uncertainty. The results from several qualitative
studies have been included in this section in an attempt to add depth to the questionnaire data.
It is also worth noting, regular assessment of public attitudes on general environmental
concern began in the 1970s. However, interest in and the inclusion of the specific issue of
climate change (or the enhanced greenhouse effect or global warming) is a relative latecomer
as a survey topic.
Surveys including climate change items surfaced in the early 1980s, intensified in the late
1980s, lessened in the 1990s and have re-intensified in the last few years. Survey questions
generally focus on some or all of: levels of awareness, actual knowledge, degrees of concern,
perceived risk, and willingness to pay or sacrifice to mitigate and adapt to potential negative
impacts .
Where transport has been studied in relation to climate change, it has tended to be included
amongst other behaviours, rather than being the stated focus of a survey. One main exception
to this is a purpose designed study by the Department for Transport on Attitudes to climate
change and the impact of transport (DfT/ ONS 2006), from which results have been reported
below.
1.5
Levels of understanding of climate change
It is possible for public understanding of climate change to extend over a vast range of ‘levels
of knowledge’, from the most basic level of recognising phrases such as ‘global warming’, to
understanding simple causal relationships, personal contribution to climate change, timescales
and the detailed inter-relationships of natural processes (Alexander Ballard & Associates
2005). Five ‘levels’ of knowledge and a crude estimation of where the public are currently
‘at’ are illustrated in Figure 1.1.
The majority of survey work in this area has measured the public’s basic level of awareness
and understanding (the top four levels on Figure 1.1). The evidence suggests that recognition
of the concept of climate change among the UK population is exceptionally high. In contrast,
awareness or acknowledgement of the seriousness, scale and urgency is extremely low
(Alexander Ballard & Associates 2005).
9
Further discussion of methodology in general and mixed methodologies in particular can be found in
Chapter 7.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
13
1. Public understanding
It is important to note that even when the evidence indicates that public awareness of climate
change is particularly high, a more sophisticated understanding appears to be random and
inconsistent. Whether or not this variability reflects inconsistencies in knowledge or, as some
commentators suggest, a tendency for respondents to align their answers on surveys with their
behaviour in order not to reflect themselves in a bad light, is unclear from the evidence so far.
Consequently, we have very little true understanding of how people deal with the
complexities of the science and policy choices implied by climate change, or how they might
deal with these under different information environments.
Figure 1.1 Levels of understanding of climate change
The next sections will examine each of these levels of knowledge in turn with respect to
climate change in general. Chapter 2 will go on to explore attitudes specifically in relation to
transport issues. The remaining chapters will explore whether public understanding needs to
progress to higher levels before any attempts to change behaviour will be effective, or
whether other influencing factors need to be addressed.
1.6
Awareness and belief in climate change
Awareness of climate change at a very basic level is exceptionally high in the UK and could
now be said to have become a ‘household term’.
General public attitudes are regularly assessed by DEFRA in their Survey of public attitudes
to quality of life and to the environment. These results are a useful barometer of public
concerns and knowledge levels. Surveys in 2001 (DEFRA 2002) and 2004 (BBC/ ICM 2004)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
14
1. Public understanding
showed that almost everyone (99% and 98% respectively) had heard of an issue known as
‘climate change’ or ‘global warming’ or ‘the greenhouse effect’10 . Indeed, it would appear
that more recent surveys have deemed it unnecessary to establish this ‘brand recognition’ type
of awareness (DfT/ONS 2006) by electing not to include a question on the familiarity with
these terms.11
A variety of surveys have included a question on ‘how convinced’ people are that the climate
is changing. The table below gives an overview of some of this data:
Table 1.1 Percentage agreeing that the ‘climate is changing’
Author
Date
Sample size
Agreeing
Disagreeing
2001*
3736
(England)
85%
13%
2002
4,119
(Scotland)
89%
5%
2004
988
(Wales)
84%
3%
BBC News Online/ ICM:
Climate Change Poll
2004
1007
(UK)
-
4%
Poortinga et al..:
Public Perceptions of Nuclear Power,
Climate Change and Energy Options
2005
1491
(England)
91%
4%
DEFRA:
Survey of public attitudes to QoL and
the environment
Scottish Executive:
Public attitudes to the environment in
Scotland
Bibbings/ WCC:
Climate Concern: Attitudes to climate
change and wind farms in Wales
*published 2002
As with the questions on recognition of the term ‘climate change’ or similar, it should be
noted that a high level of belief in climate change can be dated back at least as far as early
2001 and has been relatively stable. These results are corroborated by other surveys such as
MORI’s ( MORI/ Reader’s Digest 2001) finding that nearly three-quarters of the 2089 people
surveyed disagreed with the statement ‘global warming is a load of hot air’. It would appear,
therefore, a minority (of around 10%) remain sceptical that the world’s climate is changing
(due to natural or man made forces).
However, it should be noted that a Brook Lyndhurst study found a significant minority (24%)
agree more generally that environmental degradation has been exaggerated. Having also
carried out a comprehensive review of the literature in this area, Darnton (2005) points out
this ‘sceptical’ segment is likely to reject messages involving terms relating to climate change
and that these individuals tend to be in their late fifties, or older.
10
Where past surveys ask about these terms separately, more of the public have said they are aware of
either ‘global warming’ or ‘the greenhouse effect’ than are aware of ‘climate change’. Climate change
was the least recognized of the terms in 2003 (see Darnton). However, it is possible that this is no
longer the case as ‘climate change’ has had prolific exposure in the media, on television documentaries
and in Hollywood with the film The Day After Tomorrow). However, recent surveys have tended not to
explicitly measure term recognition.
11
To recognise the significance of this position, it is useful to put this in context: only 26% said they
had heard of biodiversity and only 34% sustainable development (DEFRA 2002).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
15
1. Public understanding
It may be true that the public have a high level of recognition of the term climate change and
claim on surveys they believe the climate is changing. However, Darnton reminds us:
For the purposes of policymakers and other parties interested in engaging the
public in climate change issues, the data concerning levels of public belief in
climate change per se are of limited value. Much more pertinent are questions
asking the public whether they believe that human actions contribute to climate
change.
(Darnton 2005)
The following sections reveal the degree to which the evidence suggests public understanding
runs deeper than basic recognition of the terminology and the extent to which climate change
is deemed to be the result of human activity, including their own.
1.7
Basic knowledge of the causes of climate change
This section summarises the evidence about public knowledge on the second tier of the
‘knowledge ladder’ (Figure 1.1) of the basic causal relationships: e.g. that using fossil fuels
contributes to climate change, that driving cars uses fossil fuels, that planting trees can be
helpful.
Notwithstanding the overwhelming evidence in this review (discussed in later sections) that
there is only a weak and indirect link between knowledge of climate change and behaviour
change, most commentators agree that increasing public knowledge of the contributors to
climate change is still worthwhile (see Chapter 3 for a discussion). Many argue that if people
are not even aware of the basic mechanisms of climate change, it can be hard to raise it as a
policy goal with any legitimacy (Alexander Ballard & Associates 2005, Bibbings/ WCC
2004; Lowe et al. 2005). Without basic awareness of the causal relationships, people are also
less likely to respond appropriately.
However, climate change has all the characteristics of an issue that is difficult to understand.
It is a complex issue characterized by substantial uncertainty (Bord et al. 1998; Lorenzoni and
Langford 2001). The causes of climate change reside in diverse human activities emitting
multiple greenhouse gases that, in turn, interact with natural processes to have effects widely
distributed over space and time. Global climate change is far removed from direct experience
and whilst temperature and rainfall variations and weather extremes of various types can be
experienced at an individual level, global warming cannot.
Although it may be unrealistic to expect lay people to think about climate change like
atmospheric scientists or policy analysts, this represents an important element in relation to
effective policy making and it is therefore necessary to understand ‘where the public are at’
on this issue.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
16
1. Public understanding
1.7.1
Belief that climate change is linked to human activity
Several of the quantitative surveys reviewed include a question on the human link to climate
change. The results are summarised in Table 1.2:
Table 1.2 Percentage agreeing that climate change is mainly linked to human activity
Author
Date
Sample size
Agreeing
DEFRA:
Survey of public attitudes to QoL and the
environment
2001*
3736
(England)
71%
BBC News Online/ ICM:
Climate Change Poll
2004
1007
(UK)
64%
Bibbings/ WCC:
Climate Concern: Attitudes to climate change
and wind farms in Wales
2004
988
(Wales)
59%
* published 2002
In contrast to the evidence suggesting that over 80% of people believe that climate change is
happening, the data in Table 1.2 suggest that around two-thirds of the population are
convinced, at least in the abstract, that climate change is linked to human activity.
These results are indicative of the uncertainty felt by the public about the causes of climate
change. The uncertainty is particularly reflected in the proportion of ‘don’t know’ respondents
to the question about the human contribution. In the largest survey, the DEFRA ‘Quality of
Life (QoL) Survey’, 71% of respondents agreed that climate change was ‘mainly due to
human activities’ (DEFRA 2002). However, 13% of respondents said it was not mainly due to
human activities, and 16% of respondents said they did not know. In the two most recent
surveys to ask a similar question, the proportion making the link to human activities was
slightly smaller: 64% of respondents to the BBC / ICM (2004) poll identified ‘man-made
causes’ as contributing to climate change. In the Welsh survey, the margin was narrower still,
with 59% of respondents disagreeing with the statement ‘climate change is not caused by
human activity’.
1.7.2
Knowledge of the main contributors to climate change
(Knowledge of the contribution of transport to climate change will be discussed in detail in
Chapter 2.)
Further evidence on the public understanding of this issue has concentrated on asking the
public about the links between specific human behaviours and climate change in order to
gauge their level of understanding of the causes. The evidence on this is mixed.
Key studies into the ways in which laypeople perceive climate change have found that the
majority of the public are able to identify some of the main causes of climate change – indeed,
some research finds that most people possess quite detailed knowledge of the issue. However,
in general there also appears to be some confusion of the issues (Bord et al. 1998; Lorenzoni
and Langford 2001; DEFRA 2002; Lowe et al.. 2005; Poortinga and Pidgeon 2003).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
17
1. Public understanding
Once again, Darnton was able to summarise this inconsistency in the public’s apparent
knowledge as measured in quantitative surveys:
On balance, these quantitative data suggest that most of the public does see a
link between human behaviour and climate change, but if this is the case, then it
must also follow that the link is made more as an act of faith than from a keen
understanding of the factors driving climate change.
(Darnton 2005)
In 2001, DEFRA found that public knowledge of contributors to climate change had markedly
improved since earlier surveys (DEFRA 2002). As shown in Figure 1.2, over the period 1993
to 2001, the DEFRA results show a discernable increase in the percentage of respondents
attributing climate change to a large number of factors. Regarding the causes of climate
change, in 2001 nearly three quarters of respondents cite the destruction of forests as a
contributor to climate change. The majority of respondents also correctly recognise carbon
dioxide emissions (71%), emissions from transport (65%) and emissions from power
stations (56%) as causes.
Figure 1.2 Knowledge of major factors contributing to climate change (DEFRA 2002)
Use of mobile phones*
Use of gas and electr cty in
homes
Use of gas and electr cty by
industry
Emissions from power
stat ons
2001
1996/7
1993
Emiss ons from transport
The hole in the ozone layer*
Carbon d oxide emiss ons
Destruction of forests
* not a cause of
climate change
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
% of respondents
In a Welsh survey (Bibbings/ WCC 2004), the cause of climate change with which most
people identified was burning fossil fuels (71%); then cutting down trees (58%), followed by
car use (55%) (Figure 1.3). An additional option, ‘none of these’, was also given to
respondents. This was chosen by a small number – between 1% and 6% of each demographic
group, 3% overall.
These results are particularly interesting, as they appear to contradict the responses made by
the public on the generic question about the contribution of human activity to climate change.
For instance, in the Welsh survey, only 59% of respondents had previously said they believed
that climate change was caused by human activity and yet 71% of respondents linked
‘burning fossil fuels for energy’ to climate change. The proportion who opted not to answer or
answered that they did not know (12%) would appear to point to varying degrees of
uncertainty about climate change among the Welsh public, with very few dismissing outright
the possibility of human contribution when asked in this way. What these surveys cannot tell
us, however, is the extent to which people may align their answers on surveys with their
behaviour in order not to reflect themselves in a bad light.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
18
1. Public understanding
Figure 1.3: Percentage of respondents answering ‘which of these activities contribute to
climate change?’ (Bibbings 2004)
In particular, both of these sets of results show the link is not always made to the energy use
that creates emissions. The DEFRA figures show that, although fossil fuel use (and power
stations) is recognised as a primary contributor to increased levels of greenhouse gases and
thus to global warming, only 28% think that the use of gas and electricity by industry is a
contributor and only 20% of respondents seem to be aware that household energy use
contributes to climate change. Darnton (2005) suggests that these figures show that
respondents seem more inclined to associate activities with climate change which are both
large-scale and not undertaken by individuals. He corroborates this with evidence from a
qualitative research project carried out for DEFRA12 , which showed that respondents believe
that the large-scale nature of climate change must be caused by large-scale ‘actors’ such as
power stations in particular. In addition, respondents often fail to associate household energy
use with burning fossil fuels and emitting greenhouse gases. It would appear from this set of
evidence that people do not easily make the leap from electricity used in the home to
electricity generated by power stations.
Figure 1.2 and to some extent 1.3 offer some evidence that transport behaviour holds an
advantage over domestic energy use in terms of people connecting it to their own individual
behaviour. Similarly, in a qualitative study using focus groups, the Sustainable Development
Commission found that householders were more likely to associate environmental issues with
recycling or transport issues and did not spontaneously cite domestic energy as potentially
harming the environment by increasing CO2 emissions (SDC 2005).
However, not all accounts of lay understanding have found the public to be as uncertain about
the issues. In contrast to the figures above, results from a recent monthly omnibus survey for
the Energy Savings Trust (EST) showed that almost two-thirds of respondents indicated that
they were ‘aware of the link between climate change and my home energy use’ (Abelman
2006 13 ). It may be that the focus of this survey on individual energy savings served to
introduce some bias in the results compared to the more generic questions included in the
DEFRA survey.
12
Climate Change Campaign Creative Proposals Evaluation, One World Communications for the COI
and the DETR, May 1998
13
nationally representative sample of 2,000
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
19
1. Public understanding
For a specific study of lay perceptions in Norwich, we can look to Lorenzoni and Langford
(2001) who analysed 200 questionnaires using a factor analysis during the summer of 2000.
Once again, contrary to the interpretation of the findings above, the findings of this study
showed most individuals possessed detailed knowledge of the issue. According to their views
of climate change, respondents were able to differentiate among various institutions,
organisations and governmental levels with regards to responsibility to lessen the impacts of
climate change, including the need for individual behavioural and lifestyle changes. However,
neither of these studies were able to indicate what this ‘awareness’ actually consists of and
how salient it is at the point of consumption.
In spite of these apparent contradictions, there is consistent evidence of common mis­
conceptions regarding the causes of climate change. For example, both quantitative and
qualitative surveys show that the majority of the public erroneously believes that the hole in
the ozone layer contributes to climate change (DEFRA 2002 (Figure 1.2); Scottish Executive
2002; Poortinga et al. 2006; Lane 2000). In the prompted question in the DEFRA 2002
survey, the hole in the ozone layer was identified as a cause by more than two-thirds of the
respondents (69%) –slightly more than the proportion who correctly identified transport
(65%). What is more, this misconception has increased over the decade along with the
emergence of a second ‘incorrect’ reason, the use of mobile phones. Similarly, in the 2004
Climate Change Poll for the BBC, 29% of respondents to a question about the leading causes
of climate change identified ‘aerosol cans’ (BBC/ ICM 2004). These findings emphasise the
point that, although knowledgeable in many ways, the public tends to be confused about the
detailed causes of climate change.
1.8
Level of concern and urgency regarding climate change
The quantitative data allow a comparison of ‘concern’ or ‘worry’ to be made across the
previous decade or longer (Table 1.3). The DEFRA survey is conducted at regular intervals
(1986/ 1993/ 1997/ 2001) over which time the development of concern regarding climate
change can be observed. In addition, the Bibbings/ WCC (2004), Poortinga et al. (2006,
carried out in 2005)) and DfT/ONS (2006, carried out in 2005 14 ) surveys add further detail to
the temporal development of these issues. A survey that concentrated solely on car buyers is
also included in the Table for comparison (DfT 2003).
From Table 1.3, comparing the most recent DfT/ ONS survey with the DEFRA survey in
2001, it could be concluded that, whilst the combined level of those who are ‘very worried’
and ‘fairly worried’ has not changed appreciably from 2001 to 2006 (80% compared to 77%),
the level of those ‘very worried’ has varied significantly over the period 1989 to 2006
(DEFRA 2002; DfT/ ONS 2006). However it is unclear whether concern for climate change is
currently rising or falling – generalisations cannot be made due to the way the data has been
collected (see notes under Table 1.3 which show changes in question wording). At most, the
results show apparent fluctuations in concern about climate change and it is unclear why this
should be.
14
DfT included questions on the Office for National Statistics Omnibus survey. This is a random
probability survey of adults aged 16 and over living in private households in England, Wales and
Scotland. The sample in 2005 was 1,217 face to face interviews.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
20
1. Public understanding
Table 1.3 The degree of concern or worry that climate change poses
Fairly
Very
Total
Author
Date
concerned concerned
Sample size
or worried or worried
1989
44%
DEFRA:
1993
35%
Survey of public attitudes to QoL and
1996/7
35%
the environment1
3,736
2001
46%
34%
(England)
Scottish Executive:
1991
42%
Public attitudes to the environment in
4,119
2002
25%
42%
Scotland2
(Scotland)
DFT:
435
34%
49%
2003
Assessing the Impact of Graduated
(UK car
Vehicle Excise Duty report3
buyers only)
Bibbings/ WCC:
988
2004
24%
42%
Climate Concern: Attitudes to climate
(Wales)
4
change and wind farms in Wales
Poortinga et al..
1,491
Public Perceptions of Nuclear Power,
2005
44%
38%
(UK)
Climate Change and Energy Options
5
in Britain
DfT/ ONS
1,252
2005
29%
48%
Attitudes to Climate Change and the
(UK)
impact of transport6
1. How worried do you feel personally about each issue? (climate change+21 others listed)
2. How worried do you personally feel about each of these issues? (Global warming by greenhouse effect + 21others listed)
3. In general, how concerned, if at all, are you about the environmental impact that car CO2
emissions have on global warming?
4. How concerned are you about climate change generally?
5. How concerned, if at all, are you about each of the following issues? (Climate change,
sometimes referred to as global warming + 16 other issues
6. How concerned are you about climate change?
It would appear from the figures in Table 1.3 that many of the attitudes of private car buyers
to the environment are similar to those of the general public. This similarity can be seen in the
responses to a MORI survey conducted as part of the Assessing the Impact of Graduated
Vehicle Excise Duty report (DfT 2003). This shows that most new car buyers display concern
regarding the environmental impact that car CO 2 emissions have on global warming with
women being slightly more likely than men to be concerned about this impact.
Reservations about methodology aside, there is some evidence to suggest that concern about
climate change may be on the increase. In 2005, the Sustainable Development Commission
held a two-day landmark event to engage 120 consumers from across the social spectrum in
exploring their aspirations for the future (SDC 2005). Climate change emerged unprompted as
a source of anxiety and concern. In addition, in Communicating Sustainability, Futerra15
(2005) claim that public awareness and concern about environmental and social issues is
growing, although it is unclear what evidence is used to substantiate this claim. They cite the
fact that the world has become increasingly transparent, due largely to the mass media and the
rise of new information technologies and note that:
15
Experts in developing communication strategies on sustainability and climate change for the likes of
DEFRA and UNEP.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
21
1. Public understanding
The impacts of our consumption patterns are no longer vague and invisible.
People are beginning to understand the effect they are having on this world –
our only home – and that they have a responsibility to look after it.
(Futerra 2005)
Overall, it is impossible to conclude whether concern is rising or falling. What does emerge
clearly from the SDC Roundtable is that consumers feel locked into the systems and norms
around them and are looking to Government to lead from the front and instigate change (see
also Abelman 2006). Feelings of responsibility and control will be discussed in Section 1.9
below.
1.8.1
Level of urgency regarding climate change
Although there is very high awareness of the concept of climate change, and a high level of
concern, the great majority of the population do not appreciate the urgency of climate change.
As revealed by the perceived urgency, public concern for climate change appears to be
tempered by uncertainty about whether and when climate change will occur, the degree of
change and by competition from other seemingly more relevant issues of individual concern
(Lowe et al. 2005; Lorenzoni and Pidgeon 2005; Poortinga and Pidgeon 2003).
The qualitative and quantitative findings included here support the conclusion that awareness
of the seriousness, scale and urgency of climate change is moderate, and not as high as
expressed concern. Lorenzoni and Pidgeon (2005) label this the perception- attitude gap, as
distinct from the attitude-behaviour gap (the subject of Chapter 4). In general, the public sees
the consequences of climate change as something affecting other countries and future
generations, rather than themselves. Consequently the dominant belief is that climate change
presents a non-urgent threat (Darnton 2005). This ‘immediacy effect’ may hinder the
practical implementation of proactive responses to climate change (Lorenzoni and Langford
2001).
In focus groups carried out on the issue of sustainable lifestyles (Bedford et al. 2004), there
was little to suggest that group members viewed the need for lifestyle sustainability with any
degree of immediacy. In addition, qualitative work by Lowe et al. (2005) showed that when
asked whether participants felt they will be directly impacted by climate change, most
participants said they would not, either because climate does not impact their day-to-day life
or because of the ability of humans to adapt. What is more, the realisation that future
generations may suffer did not provoke a great deal of concern, rather a feeling that future
generations will be able to better cope with the altered conditions.
The quantitative data reflects this moderate level of urgency (see Table 1.4). For instance, a
Guardian/ ICM (2005) poll showed that 40% of the public believe that climate change is
already a threat, whereas a larger number (49%) believe that it will be more of a threat to
future generations. Similarly, in a recent BBC/ICM poll (2004) , 43% of respondents felt that
climate change would have ‘not very much effect’ and 9% ‘no effect at all’ on them
personally; although 48% of respondents felt it would have an effect on them personally. The
DEFRA Quality of Life Survey found that 44% of respondents identified ‘climate change’ and
related processes as the ‘environmental trend or issue which would cause most concern in
about 20 years time’ (interestingly, ‘traffic’ was selected by more respondents – 52% – than
was ‘climate change’ and its processes).
The figures in Table 1.4 suggest that there is a general consensus that future generations are
more likely to be impacted by climate change. The evidence shows the majority of the public
regard climate change as only a remote threat to themselves.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
22
1. Public understanding
Table 1.4 Indicators of belief in the urgency of climate change
Belief in urgency/ threat
Lack of urgency/ threat
Climate change already a
Climate change a threat to
Guardian. ICM June 21 2005
threat
future generations
(1005 telephone)
2005
40%
49%
BBC News Online/ ICM:
The UK will be affected a
The UK will be affected a lot
Climate Change Poll*
little
2004
47%
43%
Would have a lot/ quite a lot
Would not have much/ no
BBC News Online/ ICM:
effect on them personally
effect on them personally
Climate Change Poll*
2004
48%
52%
Climate change could have
Bibbings/ WCC:
Climate change could have
serious consequences for our
Climate Concern: Attitudes
serious consequences for our
way of life in Wales” –
to climate change and wind
way of life in Wales” – agree
disagree
farms in Wales
66%
5%
2004
As will be discussed in Chapter 4, this lack of urgency has profound implications for the
degree to which knowledge and attitudes are translated into behaviour change. The issue of
‘urgency’ has also been studied in at least one empirical exercise studying preference for the
car and public transport for commuting. Joireman et al. (2004) found that short-term
individual interests are at odds with long term collective interests. They concluded that
awareness of the environmental impact of cars and feelings of personal obligation may be
insufficient without concern for the future. Among commuters who believed that commuting
by car harms the environment, only those also scoring high on ‘consideration of future
consequences’ expressed a preference for public transport.
This perception of remoteness is also confirmed in terms of people’s belief in the
geographical distribution of the impacts of climate change, and global warming in particular.
In general, the impacts are regarded as being both more apparent and more worrying in
connection with the world than in connection with Britain. In the BBC/ICM Climate Change
Poll, respondents were asked to select ‘the most important issues’ facing Britain, and the
world, today. In terms of the issues facing Britain, climate change was deemed one of the
least important of the seven issues mentioned (health and crime came top). However, in terms
of the issues facing the world, climate change was one of the ‘most important issues’
(BBC/ICM 2004).
Nevertheless, there is a growing belief that the climate close to home is being affected by
climate change and that concern about these issues is on the increase. Lorenzoni and Langford
(2001) ask whether in general people still think of climate change as ‘freak weather events’ or
whether they believe that these may be a prelude of changes still to come, over which humans
may have some control. Qualitative research has revealed that there is a widely held
perception that the climate is already changing. This was linked to peoples’ own direct
experiences of weather-related phenomena, and also to the recognition of worldwide climate
events (Lowe et al. 2005).
This is backed up by other studies where two thirds of respondents blame the UK floods of
2000/1 on climate change (DEFRA 2002). Respondents most commonly suggest changes in
weather (50%), flooding from rainfall (44%), higher temperatures (34%) and sea-level rise/
coastal flooding (34%), as future effects of climate change. Only 4% of respondents think that
there are no effects.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
23
1. Public understanding
Lowe et al. (2005) suggest this indicates that there is an ‘internalisation of climate change,
that people have identified evidence of the phenomenon, and verifies sensitivity and
awareness of a changing climate.’ A participant of their focus groups captured this growing
feeling:
Icebergs are breaking off and floating into the sea and ice shelves are breaking
off and floating out. I think there is evidence and in my own lifetime I have seen
changes in the seasons, the seasons don’t seem to be as distinct now.
(Male focus group participant, Lowe et al. 2005)
In a comprehensive study on public perceptions of nuclear power, climate change and energy
options in Britain, Poortinga et al. (2006) reports that 77% either agree or strongly agree that
there are risks to people in Britain from climate change. Also, in Wales very few people
believed that climate change would definitely not have serious consequences. Respondents
were asked the extent to which they agreed with the statement ‘climate change could have
serious consequences for our way of life in Wales’. Overall, around one-third (31%) agreed
strongly, and an additional one-third (35%) agreed slightly. Only 5% disagreed either slightly
or strongly with the statement. However, Bibbings/ WCC (2004) suggests the fact that a
higher proportion agreed slightly than agreed strongly, as well as the proportion who opted
not to say either way (29%), would appear to be yet another indicator of uncertainty about
climate change.
Despite the strong indications of the psychological ‘distancing effects’ which members of the
public seem to use when made to discuss climate change, Darnton (2005) agrees that
messages suggesting climate change is bringing other people’s weather over here, and causing
greater ‘unpredictability’ and more ‘extreme weather’ events in Britain, resonate with public
attitudes. In many ways these findings support those of earlier studies (Bord et al. 1988;
Kempton 1991) who found a moderate baseline concern for climate change among a public
whose interest and motivation could be heightened temporarily by either direct experience of
climate extremes or other events capturing the public imagination, such as government
speeches, media coverage, and major Hollywood films.
To summarise the evidence regarding how aware the public are of the urgency and scale of
the issues, it is apparent that whilst the majority of the public do not regard climate change as
an immediate threat to themselves, but as a threat to future generations and ‘far away places’,
evidently some people believe that threats closer to home are already materialising and are a
serious consideration for the future. The question remains whether this recognition is a ‘front
of the mind’ issue and can be tapped to encourage behaviour change.
1.8.2
Is climate change a ‘front of the mind’ issue?
The question of whether the public is concerned about climate change overall is less pertinent
with respect to assessing the potential link between attitudes and behaviour than how
important climate change is relative to other personal, social or even other environmental
issues. In other words, we know people say they are concerned about climate change when
asked in surveys, but in a real decision making context, are other things likely to be more
important?
There are a variety of quantitative surveys reporting a ‘ranking’ of climate change relative to
a number of other environmental or other social or personal concerns. These surveys are very
difficult to compare directly because of the different items included and question wording etc.
Overall, it appears that, although climate change generates concern, it is not a ‘front-burner’
issue. This is significant as the most prominent attitudes are more likely, though not
guaranteed, to motivate behaviour.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
24
1. Public understanding
A troubling aspect of much of the reported survey data is that when climate change questions
are included in lists of other environmental and social problems, global warming tends to
reflect low concern and support relative to the other issues. This is important as it has been
argued that people who do not consider climate change a ‘priority’ issue will only support
measures which entail little or no change in their lifestyles (Bord et al. 1998). As salient
attitudes are more likely to direct behaviour, Bord points out:
Given the tendency for people to indicate concern and support for most issues
presented in surveys, the relatively low standing of global warming raises
questions about the depth, or salience, of th ese attitudes.
(Bord et al. 1998)
In the DEFRA (2002) survey, respondents are asked how concerned they are regarding a set
of twenty environmental issues. The five issues causing most concern to the general public
are (in order): disposal of hazardous waste; effects of livestock methods (e.g. BSE);16
pollution in rivers; pollution in bathing waters and beaches; and traffic exhaust fumes.
Climate change is joint 9th on the list. Domestic issues are generally regarded as of more
concern than global issues such as: ozone layer depletion; tropical forest destruction; climate
change; and acid rain (DEFRA 2002). However, when asked to indicate how important each
of the 15 Headline Indicators of Quality of Life (including indicators such as health,
education, crime and air pollution) was to them personally, ‘climate change’ came out 13th
(with 52% of respondents saying it was ‘very important’). Road traffic was ranked 9th.
Likewise, in the most recent poll reviewed for this study (Guardian, 22nd February 2006),
when asked what the top priorities should be for Government, improvements to the health
service (71%) and education (50%) scored highest on the list of priorities, with 28% choosing
tackling climate change (Figure 1.4). Interestingly, climate change ‘scored’ equal to fighting
terrorism. The only issue to attract a lower level of support was ‘making the economy grow
better’ (16%).
Figure 1.4 Ranking of priorities for Government (Guardian/ONS 2006; N=1,256 adults)
Guardian/ ONS Poll (Feb 2006): Which of the following things do you
think should be top priorities for Government?
Improving the Health Service
Improving education
Acting to tackle climate change
Fighting the terror threat
Making the economy grow
better
None of these
Don't know
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
% respondents
This is interesting as surveys conducted a year or so earlier claimed that support for climate
change had been eroded by terrorism. For instance in a 2004 MORI poll (The day after
tomorrow), terrorism comes top by some margin by a factor of almost 2:1 (48% vs. 25%).
16
Issues related to BSE are likely to cause less concern in 2006 compared to 2001.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
25
1. Public understanding
MORI claim that before ‘9/11’, the environment was seen as the most important global
problem – 33% of Britain’s cited environment as one of two or three most important problems
facing the world. In another poll in 2004 (BBC/ ICM 2004), climate change ranked 6th after
health, crime, education, terrorism and poverty and immigration – last of all the issues
presented. When asked to identify the most important issues facing Britain today, only 53%
cited climate change. However, when asked to rate the same issues on a global scale, climate
change rated slightly higher (64% cited it) – but still second last of all the issues presented.
In a large-scale survey of public attitudes towards science, risk and forms of governance
Poortinga and Pidgeon (2003) demonstrate differential concern amongst issues including
climate change. Based on 1,547 face-to face interviews, conducted in the summer of 2002 for
the University of East Anglia by MORI, the main purpose of the survey was to make a
comparison between public perceptions of five risk cases that all raise prominent public
policy questions within British society today. These included: climate change, radiation from
mobile phones, radioactive waste, genetically modified food, and genetic testing. Although all
of the issues (including the risk cases) were to some extent important to people, in relative
terms the risk cases were generally less important than most of the other personal and social
issues. Indeed, four of the five risk cases, including climate change, were amongst the least
important of the issues. Only radioactive waste as a risk case was higher, being in the middle
of the overall rankings of importance. Moreover, the most important issues were mainly
personal (such as health, partner and family, and personal safety). Social issues (like
population growth, world poverty, and human rights) were ranked of less importance, with
religion the least important.
1.9
Acknowledgement of personal contribution to climate change
The next rung on the ‘knowledge ladder’ pertains to recognition of individual contribution to
climate change as a more direct precursor to behaviour change.
Given the differences in opinion among respondents on the importance of climate change and
the influence of human activities, it was not surprising that both focus groups and
questionnaire responses manifested a diversity of views on the need for behavioural change
and the role of individuals in limiting the impacts of climate change.
Referring back to Figure 1.2, it is notable that several of the behaviours that are less likely to
be identified as linked to climate change are those that the public are also least prepared to
address in their own lifestyles. One interpretation is that many respondents have not even
thought about the possible environmental impacts of their actions. Alternatively, it can be
suggested that relatively low proportions of the public link certain behaviours to climate
change when invited to do so because they are unwilling to change those behaviours (Darnton
2005; Bibbings/ WCC 2004). This suggests a deliberate under-reporting of knowledge.
Indeed, considering the matter of car use, researchers in an early study for the DETR on
climate change (cited in Darnton 2005) 17 concluded that “behind the bluster and denial”
nearly all respondents were aware of the environmental impacts of their car use. It is true that
the evidence would suggest that many respondents have in fact made the links between their
behaviours and climate change, but are reluctant to recognise these links explicitly.
Certainly, some of the evidence makes pessimistic reading on this issue by appearing to point
to people’s unwillingness to recognise the impacts of their own behaviour. Indeed, a BBC/
ICM (2004) poll reported that just 10% believe climate change would be best tackled by
17
One World Communications (1998) Climate Change Campaign Creative Proposals Evaluation for
the COI and the DETR, May 1998.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
26
1. Public understanding
individuals, and barely half (52%) think that changing their own behaviour would have any
impact on climate change.
Nevertheless, there are some encouraging findings to show that people are beginning to
acknowledge their personal responsibility to change behaviour. For instance, Lowe et al.
(2005), albeit conducting research after the film ‘The day after tomorrow’, found that less
than 5% of their respondents agreed with the statement ‘I will do nothing, there is no point’.
More than two thirds (67%) of respondents believed that everybody (including them), is
responsible for climate change. The authors conclude that overall, respondents
overwhelmingly acknowledge their part in the problem and welcomed measures to make a
difference. However, as others have recognised, respondents are not necessarily going to
make it easy for governments to change their behaviour (Bibbings/ WCC 2004; Channel 4
News (2005)).
Likewise, Rose et al. (2005) show that out of a range of seven answers asking about
responsibility for climate change, over 53% of respondents chose ‘we are all individually
responsible’ (Figure 1.5). In this survey, only one other choice made it into ‘double figures’
and that is ‘governments and the laws they pass’. It is notable that there are very few ‘don’t
knows’ or ‘none of these’ and that the ‘no one, it is just natural change’ is at around 10%.
The authors conclude that, given this pattern, it is possible to assume that the majority of the
population (by a slim margin) are willing to change their behaviours based on ‘climate
change’. However, accepting responsibility and willingness to change are not necessarily the
same thing, as will be discussed in later chapters.
Figure 1.5 Recognition of individual responsibility for climate change
(Rose et al. 2005; N=>1,000)
Rose et al (2005): There are many factors that are responsible for
climate change. Out of the following list, who do you think is the most
responsible for climate change?
we are all responsible
governments and the laws
they pass
oil companies
people who drive big cars
no one, it is just natural
change
none of these
dont know
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
% of respondents
Other quantitative and qualitative research has shown that whilst people acknowledge their
own moral duty to contribute towards mitigating climate change, they generally feel they are
not able to engage in behavioural change unless enabled to do so by institutions with wide
ranging powers (Bickerstaff et al. 2006). In a study by Poortinga et al. (2005), respondents
attributed responsibility for change at the global (32%) and national (39%) levels – and only
very marginally with individuals and families (8%) or environmental groups (4%). Lorenzoni
and Langford (2001) also observed among focus group participants in Norwich (UK) a
feeling that the obligation to act should fall upon politicians who are seen as having a wider
scope for action than individuals. More encouragingly, in the survey for Channel 4, although
three quarters thought the Government was responsible for tackling climate change, a similar
number identified individual action as important.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
27
1. Public understanding
One explanation for the tension between national and individual responsibility is the oftenreported ‘helplessness’ of individuals to instigate change, a pervasive theme in the evidence
reviewed. Indeed, the common perception that climate change is a problem of international
dimensions is often used by respondents to support their position that it would be useless for
them personally to take action to tackle climate change on an individual basis. The notion of
‘efficacy’, ‘agency’ or ‘locus of control’ will be discussed further in Chapter 4. Essentially,
these terms capture the sentiment that it can be difficult to picture the environmental impact
of switching on a kettle to make a cup of tea when the main messages that we hear through
the media focus on the global consequences of energy use. Even the significant proportion of
people already making efforts to protect the environment does not believe their efforts are
making any difference.
I can’t really believe that it will do much for the world by turning lights off or the
TV off.
(Female participant, SDC 2005)
The result is that on average only 19% of those in a European-wide survey who stated that
they are making efforts to protect the environment actually believe that their efforts have an
impact (TNS 2005). Specifically, when further questioned regarding the impact of their
actions, more than half of the 85% of respondents who stated that they are making efforts do
not believe that their efforts have an impact as long as others including citizens (30%) or
corporations and industry (27%) do not do the same. When individual countries are examined,
interestingly, the UK comprises far fewer ‘convinced’ people (stating that they often or
sometimes make efforts and who are convinced their efforts are having an impact), coming
fourth from the bottom of the table of 25 European countries. The Netherlands is at the top of
this table with 39% of people ‘convinced’ versus 9% in the UK.
Although convinced climate change is beginning to be seen as an issue of common
responsibility, Lowe et al. (2005) also note that whilst this response may seem ‘encouragingly
altruistic’, claiming that ‘everyone has responsibility’ can also be viewed as a means of
evading individual actions in a ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ situation. Similarly to the findings
of Bord et al. (1998), in which survey respondents endorsed the idea of driving less and
cutting their own energy consumption in other ways but were sceptical that their fellow
citizens would do likewise, Lowe et al.’s focus group respondents recognised the economic
basis for other people’s inaction, suggesting individuals are locked into a particular lifestyle
which is governed by financial inducements and constraints.
By way of summarising the range of evidence regarding interests, levels of knowledge,
concerns and responsibility taken by individuals, Lorenzoni and Langford (2001) found
respondents’ perspectives on climate change could be subdivided into four separate groups
(Figure 1.5): (1) those denying that humans affect the climate, feeling that climate change is
not important; (2) those that doubt the human influence upon the climate but feel climate
change is important; (3) an uninterested group who felt that humans do affect climate change
but it is of no overall importance; and (4) an engaged group who believed humans do affect
climate and climate change is important.
These opinions were also found to be framed by the perceived validity of climate projections
in the light of scientific uncertainty and perceived efficacy. Of those people whose views fell
in the Denying, Uninterested and Doubting groups, most did not see the need to alter their
behaviour. On the other hand, many respondents whose views were categorised as Engaging
had already adopted or were willing to adopt lifestyle changes. This typology has resonance
with the discussion on segmentation in Chapter 5.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
28
1. Public understanding
Figure 1.6 A typology of individual perspectives on climate change
(Lorenzoni and Langford 2001)
1.10 Awareness of science and complexity
The final rung of the knowledge ladder refers to a more sophisticated understanding of the
science and systemic structure of climate change. This includes, for instance, why it is that
reducing emissions significantly still results in increasing CO2 levels and continued warming,
the difference between incremental and abrupt climate change, positive feedback within
global climate systems, and delays between carbon emissions and temperature rise. It also
includes an appreciation of the scientific process and dealing with uncertainties and apparent
contradictions in the evidence.
However, little research at this level has been conducted regarding these issues; this despite
some commentators alluding to their importance. For example, Alexander Ballard &
Associates (2005) claim this sophisticated level of knowledge provides an intellectual basis to
the urgency regarding climate change. They suggest that, at a minimum, policy makers need
this level of understanding and journalists need it to hold them to account. It is also at this
level that strategically useful points for intervention become apparent. Others go further and
argue that awareness of the consequences of climate change (although not necessarily a
detailed scientific understanding) is necessary for environmental action, and programmes of
public action which link the general environmental problem of climate change with the
specific issue of carbon emissions from specific behaviours are needed (Seacrest et al. 2000).
1.11 How knowledgeable do people feel they are?
It has been demonstrated in the previous sections that awareness of climate change is very
high but understanding of the causes of climate change is mixed, especially in relation to the
link between specific individual behaviours and carbon dioxide emissions. However, although
most members of the public claim to have heard of climate change and the majority express
concern about the issues, it is interesting to understand how well informed the public believe
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
29
1. Public understanding
themselves to be about climate change and how much more information they say they need or
want.
On the whole, the evidence suggests that when asked a direct question about ‘level of
knowledge’ people believe themselves to know only ‘a little’ about climate change. An
example of this is the BBC poll which asked: How much, if anything, would you say you know
about global warming/ climate change?, to which 23% answered a lot, 58% a little and 2%
said they had never heard of it (BBC/ ICM 2004). Of course, definition and interpretation of
‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ is open to significant interpretation.
However, there is still an apparent keenness to be provided with more information,
particularly when that information is about specific solutions rather than about the issues
generally. Hounsham (2006) recently completed a comprehensive review of the literature,
including his own survey of 645 people, on how to persuade people to be ‘environmentally
friendly’. He asked for reasons why people are not doing more and 38% of the sample said ‘I
don’t know what to do’. This was the second most popular answer after ‘I don’t have time’
(57%) and more popular than ‘action by me won’t make a difference’ (20%) (Figure 1.7). The
common reasons given underline the perception that being green is time consuming,
expensive and futile without a combined effort from everybody. The majority (81%) say that
more advice on experts from what to do is required and 74% said more information on
environmental threats and problems.
Figure 1.7 Reasons for not being ‘more environmentally friendly’ (Hounsham 2006)
Hounsham 2006: What are the reasons that stop you from doing more
[to be environmentally friendly]?
I don't know what to do
I don't have time
Others around me arent
doing anything
Action by me won't make a
difference
‘None of these/ I dont
know’ – therefore just
intertia
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Responses on a variety of surveys reflect a feeling of not being aware of the opportunities in
their daily lives to individually implement change (Lowe et al. 2005; Bibbings/ WCC 2004).
This admission of ‘ignorance’ is interesting. As mentioned above, one explanation may be the
deliberate intent to appear uninformed and profess the need for more information as a reason
to delay action and remove themselves from being susceptible to accusations of knowing
under-involvement. This is a trend that Darnton (2005) calls ‘overclaiming’ and believes can
lead to apparent inconsistencies between levels of self reported awareness and knowledge in
survey results.
As mentioned elsewhere in this review, it can be misleading to compare across surveys when
question formats, context and sampling is different. Nevertheless, on the issue of how well
informed people think they are and how much more information they say they need, such
comparative analysis is an interesting exercise in itself – if only to show how difficult it is to
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
30
1. Public understanding
accurately gauge the public’s informational requirements and interest from questionnaire
surveys. Table 1.5 summarises the results to a variety of different questions on this topic.
Table 1.5 Opinions on how well informed people believe themselves to be
Questions about wanting more information about Agree strongly/
climate change/ environment generally
quite strongly
Hounsham
I want more information on environmental threats
74%
2006
and problems
Poortinga et al.
I need more information to form an opinion about
62%
2006
climate change
Eurobarometer
I want to know more about the environmental
37%
2005
problems themselves
Agree strongly/
Questions about feeling informed
quite strongly
Hounsham
I don’t know what to do (to be environmentally
38%
2006
friendly)
I don’t feel well informed about what I could
Brook Lyndhurst
12%
personally do to become more environmentally
2004
friendly
Agree strongly/
Questions about wanting more advice
quite strongly
Hounsham
I want more advice on what to do
81%
2006
Eurobarometer
I would like to know more about solutions to
78%
2005
environmental problems
Firstly, it is difficult to draw conclusions from this evidence about whether people themselves
would like more information about climate change generally. There is nothing to lose for
people to respond positively to this on a questionnaire survey (overclaiming), and the chances
are that the figures in the top half of Table 1.5, though inconclusive in themselves (from 37%
to 62%), are inflated and subject to inconsistency for this reason. This is an example of where
other forms of research using participatory methods will better develop understanding about
the type of information people would appreciate about the science of climate change.
Secondly, as regards specific information about what to do about climate change, the
evidence also appears confused. It seems that even those who say they know what to do
would still like more information. Indeed, it could be the case that the more informed
someone is the more engaged they are about the issue of climate change and the more likely
they are to respond positively to the idea of receiving further information. These people have
already moved off the bottom ‘rung’ of the stages of change ladder (later described in Chapter
3). This would partly explain the difference in the bottom half of Table 1.5. For instance,
Hounsham’s questions show that (only) 38% say they do not know what to do, but still 81%
would like more information.
However, the Brook Lyndhurst study (Bad Habits, Hard Choices) presents a different picture
of how informed people feel in the first place. The study asked 1,015 adults: Do you feel
reasonably well informed about what you personally could do to be more environmentally
friendly?, and four out of five of them said yes, they do feel well informed, including two in
five (40%) who ‘strongly’ agree. In contrast, only a small minority of around one in ten
disagree (12%) (Brook Lyndhurst 2004). The authors suggest this means that:
A lack of awareness per se may not be a significant barrier to sustainable
behaviour, since most people – including those not currently engaged – already feel
informed at least to some degree.
(Brook Lyndhurst 2004)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
31
1. Public understanding
The Brook Lyndhurst study also concludes that most people can identify at least some of the
specific actions – drive less, switch off the lights, recycle more – that would make a
difference. For instance, two-thirds identify making fewer journeys by car as ‘making a lot of
difference’ (see also Figure 1.2), turning appliances completely off rather than to standby
(52%), and buying energy efficient light bulbs (50%).
Chapter 2 will look in more detail at what travel behaviours and solutions people link to
climate change as well the emerging evidence on what people say they are prepared to do in
terms of altering their behaviour.
1.12 Evidence gaps and research recommendations
The evidence presented above has shown that there is a solid foundation of knowledge being
created among the population, although significant areas of confusion, ambivalence and
potential ‘denial’ are still worryingly prominent. Other than this evidence, little information
exists on lay belief and understanding of the subject and what the challenges and
consequences of providing the information with scientifically sophisticated material in a
deliberative and participatory way might be. Questionnaire surveys also mask the inherent
diversity in awareness and opinion among the population (see Chapter 5 on segmentation).
Therefore, we need to be cautious about the evidence that currently exists about public
understanding of climate change. Due to the weaknesses in the ways in which data has
primarily been collected so far, we have only a superficial understanding of the way in which
people do or could engage with the issues.
The evidence gaps and research recommendations are discussed in Chapter 8. The main
recommendations to emerge from the evidence in this chapter is:
R1: Understanding how to engage with the public.
Chapters 1 and 2 illustrate the extent to which research has relied on relatively
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
superficial quantitative data to elicit rather complex and heterogeneous attitudes
about climate change. Whilst this evidence is useful in other ways, it does not
provide the basis on which to develop an understanding of public engagement
with climate change issues in order to devise targeted and inspiring campaign
strategies and interventions.
The best way of gaining a more intelligent, rich and meaningful understanding of
knowledge is to use participatory methods which engage people in a dialogue
about the scientific and policy issues surrounding climate change, offering
information in a variety of formats to the public and interpreting their response.
This may include using novel, mixed and truly interdisciplinary techniques such as
presenting scientific scenarios (with social and economic components) and
information on alternative futures within citizens’ panels or deliberative opinion
polling (Chapter 7 provides more detail on ‘deliberative techniques’). The idea
would be to gauge emotional responses, measure relevance and concerns and to
build on this process in an iterative, non-intrusive manner.
Delving deeper into public knowledge on this issue will provide a baseline for
further research and some evidence on which to base subsequent campaigns.
Deliberative
Immediate
Priority:
Responsibility:
High
DfT
The use of deliberative methodologies is discussed in Chapter 7 and the preceding chapters
will debate in more detail the degree to which it matters what level of knowledge the public
acquire on this issue. For now, we attempt to continue to assimilate the evidence on just how
sophisticated the public awareness is on the link between transport and climate change.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
32
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
2: ATTITUDES TO TRANSPORT AND CLIMATE
CHANGE
2.1
Aims of this chapter
• To assess the level of ‘knowledge’ the public have of the link between transport
and climate change in general and more detailed understanding of alternative
fuels and vehicles, emissions and climate change;
• To summarise the evidence on the apparent influence of this knowledge on car
purchasing decisions;
• To provide an overview of public support for transport policy to tackle climate
change and the potential for modal shift as measured in opinion surveys;
2.2
Main findings
• Around half the population acknowledge car use in general as a cause of climate
change. When it comes to flying, however, the evidence suggests a lower awareness
of its contribution, albe it perceptible at about one third. Both, however, are seen to be
a significant source of ‘pollution’.
• The public consider cars and vans to be the largest transport contributors to UK
climate change overall, but view flying as the most harmful for specific journeys.
• The evidence base on attitudes to flying is extremely patchy.
• Traffic, air pollution and climate change are the environmental issues of most concern
for the future, but are not particularly strong current concerns.
• Scant research exists on the depth of public knowledge about vehicle emissions. It is
known that visible emissions are of more concern than CO2 emissions and air quality
is of more concern than climate change.
• Most of the public seem confused by the term ‘carbon’. Also, the relationship
between fuel use and vehicle emissions is only very generally (if at all) understood by
most drivers. In particular, fuel efficiency seems to fall into a conceptual blind spot
with regard to minimising the environmental impact of car use.
• Many think unleaded petrol is ‘green’ and that the higher visibility of diesel
emissions means it is not always the ‘green’ choice.
• Whereas some studies show drivers are well aware of the range of cleaner fuels and
vehicles being commercially developed, more open-ended surveys suggest a less
realistic view of alternative fuel/ technology types. Furthermore, a number of (mostly
negative) misconceptions are attributed to cleaner fuels and technologies.
• The evidence suggests the public are not yet convinced the state’s role should be
more than enabling, although there are signs of an increasing acceptance of
interventions to limit individuals’ emissions.
• The level of support for government action against climate change diminishes
significantly with respect to policies to tackle emissions from transport. There is also
evidence to suggest that this lack of acceptance may be deepening.
• It is clear that ‘willingness to pay’ research needs to be carried out in a way that
engages people with the issues of climate change and possible policy options.
Although only limited research exists to date, there is reason to believe that the
introduction of information on environmental and policy trade-offs can galvanise
support for policies to manage the demand for travel.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
33
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
2.3
Introduction
The previous chapter concluded that most people possess enough knowledge about climate
change to mean they can identify some specific individual activities that contribute to the
phenomena. Although there is some evidence to show that people find it most difficult to
make the connection between domestic energy use and climate change, transport activity may
hold an advantage in that it is more easily linked to fossil fuel consumption and emissions.
This chapter discusses the extent to which the public has a more in-depth understanding of the
link between transport and greenhouse gas emissions other than merely its aggregate
contribution to climate change.
2.4
Knowledge of transport’s contribution to climate change
Once again, the evidence with respect to the public understanding of the role of transport is
largely quantitative. The data presented in Figures 1.2 and 1.3 (in Chapter 1) from the
DEFRA (2002) and Bibbings/ WCC (2004) surveys show that transport/ road transport is
identified as a cause of climate change by more than half of respondents. These figures are
corroborated by other quantitative surveys reviewed (some of which disaggregate road and air
travel), as summarised in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Percentage agreeing car travel/ air travel is a contributor to climate change
Road
Air
Source
Date
Sample size
Transport
Travel
Scottish Executive:
4,119
2002
52%
30%
Public attitudes to the environment in
(Scotland)
Scotland
Bibbings/ WCC:
988
2004
55%
35%
Climate Concern: Attitudes to climate
(Wales)
change and wind farms in Wales
Transport in general
DEFRA
Survey of public attitudes to QoL and
the environment
2001*
3,736
(England)
65%
BBC News Online/ ICM:
Climate Change Poll
2004
1,007
(UK)
67%
*published in 2002
The contribution attributed to car use is not a long way below recognition of the other main
causes (destruction of forests and carbon dioxide emissions) and is an encouraging statistic.
However, Bibbings (2004) suggests that this relatively low ‘identification’ of car travel could
be attributed to some (unknowable) extent to ‘wilful ignorance’ in order to avoid facing up to
the need for change.
As Table 1.2 shows, only one third identify air travel as a cause of climate change.
Considering air travel specifically, Bibbing’s survey of attitudes to climate change in Wales
concluded that:
Most people are unaware they are contributing to climate change when they take
a flight, or they are unwilling to acknowledge air travel as something which can
be damaging.
(Bibbings/ WCC 2004)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
34
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
However, a questionnaire survey conduced in 2005 by Rose et al. (2005) suggests that the
awareness is reasonably high. They asked: How much do you think that pollution from
aircraft contributes to climate change? The answers from 1,000 representative adults were as
shown in Table 2.2. In this survey, therefore, only 18% of people did not think that it was a
high or moderate source of climate change-causing pollution.
Table 2.2 Perception of the contribution of aviation to climate change (Rose et al. 2005)
Contribution of aviation to climate change
Percentage
Very much
17%
Quite a lot
34%
Somewhat
27%
Not very much
15%
Not at all
3%
Likewise, results for the Department for Transport (2002) obtained a more positive picture of
the public’s knowledge of the contribution of air travel. When asked Do you think that air
travel harms the environment? 62% of respondents thought air travel did harm the
environment, 22% did not, and 17% said they did not know. However, the key difference with
this study is the contribution to ‘environmental damage’, not purely climate change. In this
case, therefore, respondents could be thinking of other forms of pollution including noise
pollution and non-carbon emissions. Indeed, when asked an open-ended question In what way
do you think that air travel harms the environment?, the most common answer given was
‘pollution’ (87%). ‘Noise’ was mentioned by nearly half of respondents (46%). Far smaller
proportions specifically mentioned greenhouse gases/ carbon dioxide (15%) or climate
change/ global warming (12%).
This suggests that, as regards air travel, the figures suggest a lower public acknowledgement
but perceptible awareness of the contribution of flying to climate change. It is however, seen
to be a significant source of ‘pollution’.
Some of the most detailed evidence on the degree to which the public link transport and
climate change comes from the DfT/ ONS (2006) survey Attitudes to climate change and the
impact of transport. Respondents were asked to consider a journey from London to Edinburgh
and which ways of making this journey would make the most and least contribution to climate
change. They were then asked for their opinion on what forms of transport were major
contributors to climate change in general in this country.
When asked to consider a specific journey, such as from London to Edinburgh, the majority
of respondents (69%) said that travelling by train would contribute the least to climate
change. Travelling by plane (44%) or by car (38%) were the methods most likely to be
considered as making the biggest contribution to climate change. When asked to consider the
overall impact of different forms of transport to climate change in this country, cars and vans/
lorries were the most commonly selected forms of transport, with around three quarters
selecting each of these (Figure 2.1). Planes and buses/ coaches were the next most commonly
mentioned forms of transport at just under 60%.
Therefore, whereas the public consider flying the most harmful modes of travel for specific
journeys the public seems to be able to make the distinction that the overall impact of cars and
vans is higher overall. These figures suggest that public perceptions are reasonably accurate in
their assessment.18
18
Estimates of carbon dioxide emissions from various modes of transport in the UK for 2003 show
passenger cars to contribute most (19.8 million tonnes), followed by light duty vehicles/ heavy goods
vehicles (11.6) and international and domestic aviation (8.7) (TSGB 2005).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
35
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
Figure 2.1 Views on the most polluting forms of transport (DfT/ONS 2006)
It should be noted, however, that other evidence shows that any more detailed knowledge (or
interest) than the comparative impact of different modes may be quite limited. For instance, in
qualitative work for the DfT (2004), respondents generally had little idea or concern about
how railways impact on the environment. When prompted they state that, compared to cars,
trains are less polluting and more environmentally friendly.
In the DfT/ ONS (2006) survey, respondents who were ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ concerned about
climate change had similar views on the role of different transport modes in contributing to
climate change. Those who were ‘not very’ or ‘not at all’ concerned were less likely to
consider most of the modes as major contributors to climate change. The only exception to
this was for buses where the groups did not significantly differ. The perception that buses and
coaches are responsible for as much as air travel and are almost as significant as van and car
travel is the most notable ‘inaccuracy’ in the 2006 data.
There is very little other in-depth evidence on the public perception of the link between
specific modes of transport and the environment/ climate change.
2.5
‘Pollution’ versus climate change
This review did not set out to examine the literature on the public understanding of
‘environment’ and nor has it done so. However, it is clear from the evidence reviewed that
most of the public think about human environmental impacts, including climate change, in
terms of ‘pollution’, pollution being a concept associated with traffic and road congestion.
There may, therefore, be some value in linking these concepts in order to generate concern
and support.
Some of the qualitative evidence gives a detailed ins ight into this aspect of public
understanding. In an open-response question to all those who thought the world’s climate was
changing, Poortinga et al. (2006) asked what might be causing climate change. The most
popular response (mentioned by 39% of those who thought the world’s climate was changing)
was the very general notion of ‘air pollution’ as a cause of climate change.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
36
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
Bord et al. (1998) concur that this ‘pollution model’ guides perceptions of global warming
and claim this to be a universal phenomena. In six countries, an open-ended question asking
for the causes of global warming elicited a response of ‘pollution’ by between 28% and 41%
depending on country of origin. Although ‘pollution’ includes carbon emissions, these figures
are also consistent with the evidence shown in the previous chapter that people associate
causes of climate change with other scientific issues such as the ‘ozone layer’ (more
commonly linked causally with CFC’s and aerosols).
Another aspect of this popular conception is that, although ‘pollution’ is associated with
traffic and road congestion, it is also often associated with industry, factories and power
stations that are believed to have the biggest environmental impacts (Bibbings/ WCC 2004).
Although not setting out to examine the issue of climate change, qualitative work carried out
for the report Attitudes to transport issues in England (DfT 2004) showed there is little
consciousness of the environmental impact of road users. Environmental concerns regarding
transport did not arise spontaneously. However, when prompted, cars were thought to have
the biggest impact on the environment, through fuel emissions, congestion and air pollution.
Indeed, the level of general concern for traffic and transport-related environmental impacts in
relation to climate change is of particular interest. Of the impacts surveyed in the DEFRA
Attitudes to quality of life study (2002), transport related concerns are ranked fifth (traffic
exhaust fumes and smog), ninth (climate change) and thirteenth (traffic congestion) as
compared to another thirteen environmental issues. While the concern for transport related
issues may not seem high, when asked what environmental trends or issues cause the most
concern for the future, the ranking order markedly changes. The environmental issues of most
concern in 20 years time are: traffic (congestion, fumes, noise); air pollution; climate change;
and water pollution. If responses about concern for climate change are combined with concern
expressed about its potential effects (i.e. worse weather, sea level rise) then 44% consider it is
an issue of concern for the future, making it the second placed future concern.
Other studies show that traffic is often cited as a most pressing current environmental issue
for the local environment. The Welsh study is revealing as this study collected both
quantitative and qualitative data in relation to climate change (Bibbings/ WCC 2004). The
quantitative data showed that just over half identified car travel as a contributor to climate
change and the qualitative evidence showed that traffic was identified as a major problem for
the local environment. However, the latest British Social Attitudes Survey (published
December 200519 - Park et al. 2005) reminds us that congestion is by no means the only issue
of public concern over urban traffic as slightly more people (58%) say exhaust fumes are a
serious concern to them than mention congestion (54%). These results prompted Peter Jones
(editor of the transport chapter for the la test BSA publication) to say:
If the Government wants to bring in unpopular measures like congestion
charging to reduce traffic, they need to use all the arguments at their disposal,
and not just those concerned with congestion. In particular, they should bear in
mind that air quality is just as important an issue as congestion to the public.
(Jones in Parks et al. 2005)
It would be reasonable to add ‘climate change’ alongside congestion to Peter Jones’
argument. For instance, as is the case for the UK population as a whole, for car buyers vehicle
emissions, whether they affect air quality or climate change, are the environmental
consequences of cars of most concern (see Figure 2.2) (DfT 2003). In total, around 70% of
19
Summary of the results available at
http://www.natcen.ac.uk/natcen/pages/news_and_media_docs/BSA_22nd_Report_Press_release.pdf
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
37
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
car buyers are concerned with the impact of car emissions in one form or another (combining
those mentioning air quality and/or greenhouse gas emissions).
Figure 2.2 Environmental consequences of driving a car of most concern (DfT 2003)
Similarly, the TRI/ECI (2000) report notes that, although the respondents within the study
Choosing cleaner cars were aware that car use results in serious environmental impacts, these
were predominantly understood as attributable to visible elements of the exhaust (i.e. fumes
and particulates rather than carbon dioxide). This finding is one that is confirmed by a number
of other studies and shows that environmental impacts are usually viewed in local terms (e.g.
pollution in the high street, combustion products settling on washin g, asthma in children)
rather than global effects (such as climate change).
While emissions of some air pollutants have generally gone down and the
nation’s overall air quality has improved over the past 30 years, much of that
progress has been in eliminating obvious pollution and sources… Many of the
pollutants that are literally invisible, such as ozone, have been reduced far
less, and as understanding of the health effects of air pollution has advanced,
it has become clear that much of the nation still faces major air pollution
problems.
(American Lung Association 2000, quoted in Kurani 2002)
Darnton (2005) notes that in this way ‘pollution’ can span both ‘local’ ‘and ‘global’
environmental concerns, although its breadth can also mean vagueness in the context of
climate change. For instance, in the Welsh study (Bibbings/ WCC 2004) nearly all
respondents associated traffic with air pollution, but few went on to link that pollution to
climate change. Lorenzoni and Langford (2001) assert that there may be some value in
linking different environmental issues to obtain a more holistic picture. Also, Kempton (1997)
argues that the pollution model is not entirely inaccurate as applied to global warming and
may be valuable in the sense that it generates concern and support.
Kelay et al. (2001) demonstrated that public estimates of the causes and consequences of air
pollution are not unlike scientific accounts, thus providing the “missing links” in existing
research. This has major theoretical implications for risk research, bridging what we
researchers perceive to be the widening “knowledge-gap” or “gulf of understanding” between
experts and the public and offers a valuable insight into how scientific information should be
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
38
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
communicated to the public. Kempton (1997) also notes, however, that these inaccuracies in
lay understanding can lead to significant errors in judgment when applied to global climate
change that could affect policy in important ways. In addition, Darnton suggests there is
evidence of some fatigue among the public in response to the term ‘environment’ in its global
sense, their having heard it used by the media and others over many years. Bord et al. (1998)
suggest that whether these issues and errors have any real implication for environmental
policy decisions is a question for future research.
2.6
Knowledge of vehicle emissions and environmental impacts
The evidence regarding the public’s understanding of which behaviours cause climate change
(Figure 1.2) reveals that around two thirds of the public do identify carbon dioxide as causing
climate change. This contrasts with quantitative research by MORI in 2002 (cited in MORI
2004), which indicated that more than two thirds of the population were unable to name the
gas that most contributes to global warming. Whilst carbon dioxide was the most commonly
mentioned by 30% of the respondents, 20% (correctly) cited chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).
Darnton (2005) also notes that most of the public seem confused when confronted with the
term ‘carbon’ in the context of environmental impacts and suggests that the evidence points to
very low levels of understanding of carbon dioxide’s role in climate change. This is
particularly the case with respect to carbon as a measure of human impacts.
Darnton’s review of the evidence showed that in qualitative research, people tend to think
first of carbon monoxide and that the whole topic of ‘carbon’ and ‘carbon dioxide’ seems
seldom to be spontaneously mentioned by respondents in research studies. He suggests that
this means those who would encourage the public to ‘cut their carbon emissions’ or to ‘live
low-carbon lifestyles’ must recognise they are starting from a low base in terms of public
understanding.
Although only a very small amount of research has been conducted in the UK to identify the
depth of public knowledge of vehicle emissions, one study, the Public understanding of the
environmental impact of road transport, has investigated this issue in a pilot study20 (Lane
2000). In response to the open-question Can you name any of the substances present in petrol
or diesel exhaust fumes?, more than 20 substances are named, with 95% of replies giving at
least one constituent (Figure 2.3). Three emissions are reported significantly more often than
others; carbon monoxide (CO), lead/lead oxides (Pb), and carbon dioxide (CO2 ).
Consistent with Darnton’s conclusions (above), the research paper points out that carbon
monoxide is the emission most often reported and suggests this is because its presence is
more easily understood (partial oxidation of carbon-based fuel) than that of compounds that
result from secondary reactions (such as NOx and ozone) or impurities in the fuel (sulphur).
Lane (2000) also suggests that the dangers of carbon monoxide are also widely public ised in
non-transport contexts, including maintenance of household gas appliances to avoid carbon
monoxide poisoning. Perhaps more encouragingly than the MORI and Darnton evidence cited
above, the paper notes that carbon dioxide is widely reported by respondents as a result of
educational campaigns and high media coverage, which have focused on CFCs and CO2 as
the main gases responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect.
20
Sample size of 400 self-selecting respondents; open-style questionnaire.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
39
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
Figure 2.3 Percentage who can name any of the substances present in petrol/diesel
exhaust fumes (Lane 2000)21
Link between ‘mpg’ and CO 2
As reported in the report Consumer attitudes to low carbon and fuel-efficient passenger cars
commissioned by the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership (LowCVP) (Lane 2005), a particular
issue investigated by a number of studies is car buyers’ understanding of the link between fuel
economy and emissions of carbon dioxide. The report on Comparative colour-coded labels
for passenger cars asserts that consumers of all types have a very low knowledge base
regarding the impacts of low carbon and fuel-efficient vehicles.
The relationship between inputs [fuel] and outputs [emissions] is only very
generally – if at all – understood by most drivers.
(DfT 2003)
This issue was investigated in some depth by the TRI/ ECI (2000) study Choosing cleaner
cars which asked respondents the question: ‘What is the most effective way to reduce carbon
dioxide?’, providing several response categories (see Table 2.3). Less than a third correctly
chose the ‘burn less fuel’ option. The study suggests that:
Fuel efficiency seems to fall into a conceptual blind spot with regard to
minimising the environmental impact of car use. The set of beliefs described,
whilst internally consistent, may be leading to the view that inefficient fuel use
need not cause environmental problems so long as the exhaust is cleaned up.
Consequently, individuals who would otherwise be motivated to minimise their
(global) environmental impacts through buying an efficient car are discouraged
from doing so because the connections between wasteful fuel use, carbon dioxide
production and climate change are not made.
(TRI/ECI 2000)
Table 2.3 What is the most effective way to reduce carbon dioxide? (TCI/ECI 2000)
Clean up exhausts and
Burn less
Plant trees
Other
Don’t know
industrial pollution
fuel
18%
45%
27%
2%
8%
21
The study was conducted in 2000 at a time when leaded fuels were still in the process of being
phased out. It is likely that lead would be reported less often in 2005, as leaded petrol has not been
widely available for 5 years in the UK.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
40
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
2.6.1
Impacts of vehicle emissions
Lane (2000) also investigates public understanding of the effects of vehicle emissions. In
response to the question What effects do any of these emissions have on humans or the
environment?, respondents give a large number of responses, including (in order): human
respiration/ breathing problems (42%), specific reference to asthma (36%), global warming
(24%), impairment of intellectual development (especially of children) (19%), lead pollution
(19%), ozone (predominantly stratospheric ozone depletion) (17%), acid rain (16%), and
carbon monoxide poisoning (12%).
Almost 70% of respondents mention at least one respiratory effect. The high reporting of
global warming also confirms that it is an issue that is widely acknowledged by the general
public. The fact that respiratory effects are reported more than global warming is another
indication that people often refer to the experience of their immediate environment (in this
case poor air quality) in preference to accepting more abstract scientific knowledge (e.g. the
enhanced greenhouse effect).
The study draws attention to a particular response that differs from accepted scientific fact. Of
the responses that mention ozone, the vast majority refer to depletion of the ozone layer.22 The
conclusion is that the scientific community and the public perceive the ozone problem from
completely different perspectives. Whereas the public is aware of ozone depletion within the
stratosphere, it seems few are aware of the environmental and health issues relating to the
toxicity of ground-level (tropospheric) ozone. If this is indeed the case on a national scale, it
would need to be borne in mind in the design of educational material concerning vehicle ­
related pollution.
2.7
Knowledge of conventional vehicle fuels and technologies
The research by Lane (2000) explores the level of public understanding of cleaner
conventional vehicle technologies. In response to the question Do you know of any changes to
the design of road vehicles in the last decade that have reduced pollution from vehicle
exhausts?, 92% could name at least one improvement in vehicle design. Only two replies are
reported by more than 10%: the introduction of the catalytic converter (79%) and the use of
unleaded fuel (21%). This means that the catalytic converter is by far the most widely known
technical development employed to reduce the impact of vehicle emissions.
However, only one-fifth of respondents volunteer a change in emissions associated with the
use of a catalyst, and only around 10% name a substance that is reduced according to
accepted measurement. CO is reported most often, in this case by more than twice the number
that mention any other emission reduction. A typical response being the comment: (a catalytic
converter) converts carbon monoxide (some of it) into carbon dioxide. Lead is thought by
some to have been reduced, which suggests this response is prompted by the belief that
catalytic converters are able to remove lead (filters out heavy metals). These findings seem to
contradict those of an earlier report that concluded that nearly three-quarters of drivers were
aware of what a converter does (Lex 1990). However, as we have seen elsewhere in this
report, the apparent contradiction may be explained by the difference between surveying
reported awareness and actual knowledge.
This low knowledge level regarding conventional vehicle technologies is also generally noted
in the Comparative colour-coded labels for passenger cars report that states:
22
Stratospheric ozone depletion.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
41
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
There is a limited understanding of how cars need to be improved to make them
more environmentally friendly.
(DfT 2003, cited in Lane 2005)
The same report also makes some observation regarding perceptions of petrol versus diesel
with an environmental perspective (DfT 2003). It notes that petrol is preferred for being
cleaner to handle, cheaper and quieter (and not for performance). In addition, the higher
visibility of diesel emissions, coupled for some with a reluctance to handle the fuel, means
that diesel is it not always the ‘green’ choice. Many think that unleaded petrol is ‘green’ and
do not see an environmental benefit in buying diesel. On the other hand, diesel owners are
motivated by the cost of fuel and lower depreciation, lower fuel consumption (miles per
gallon) and durability. Any environmental benefit of diesel cars (often disputed by some
petrol drivers) is a bonus, not a deciding factor in their purchase/use.
2.8
Knowledge of low carbon vehicle fuels and technologies
While ‘low carbon’ cars (defined as = 100g/km CO2 ) currently represent less than 0.1% of
UK car sales, the situation has the potential to change dramatically (DfT 2002; SMMT 2006).
This is being driven by a growing awareness of the environmental costs of road transport,
ever tightening European vehicle emission standards and by an increasing number of
commercially available cleaner car fuels and technologies.23 The Government is supporting
this transition and has set the target that low carbon cars should represent 10% of all car sales
by 2012 (DfT 2002).
However, as Kurani (2002) notes, the market is ever changing and many buyers have limited
knowledge of low carbon vehicle options and even the most popular models of conventional
vehicles. Given this potential for rapid growth combined with the growing international
importance of transport emissions, it is perhaps surprising that only a relatively small amount
of research has been conducted regarding the attitudes of car buyers to low carbon/fuel­
efficient cars.
The Consumer attitudes to low carbon and fuel-efficient passenger cars report by the
LowCVP cites one of the few detailed studies by the North American Transportation Energy
Survey that compiles the findings of studies that assess the US public’s knowledge and
opinions of the environment, oil supply and alternative vehicles (DoE 2002; cited in Lane
2005). Although the study focuses on the US market, it is instructive to see the level of detail
the research methodology provides.
A survey detailed within the report asks a US car buyer sample the open-ended question:
What fuel will most likely replace gasoline and diesel when they become too expensive to use
in cars and trucks’. The respondents name electric (33%), solar (12%), alcohol (11%) and
natural gas (6%) and hydrogen (3%) as fuels that will replace conventional fuels when they
become too expensive or run out. (Note that ‘don’t know/none’ category accounts for 25%).
A second study asks the closed question: Consider a future date when gasoline is no longer
available. Which of the following do you think would be the best fuel for use in personal
vehicles: electricity, ethanol, or hydrogen? Americans choose electricity (52%) over ethanol
(21%) and hydrogen (15%) as the best fuel to use in personal vehicles when gasoline is no
longer available. (Note that ‘don’t know’ category accounts for 12%).
23
In the UK, these include the cleaner fuels: biodiesel, bioethanol, natural gas and liquefied petroleum
gas; and two vehicle technologies: battery-electric and hybrid-electric cars.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
42
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
Respondents are then asked to give reasons for their answers enabling a deeper investigation
of the attitudes held. The primary reasons given are:
• Electricity because of environmental benefits (cleaner/ less polluting) and its availability;
• Ethanol due to its availability [in the US];
• Hydrogen due to the availability of gas, along with environmental advantages.
The DoE report also assesses le vels of awareness of petrol-hybrid cars (at a time when two
hybrid electric vehicles were available in the US; the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight). In
response to the question: How much have you heard about this [hybrid] technology: a great
deal, some, very little, or nothing?, some American drivers show that they are aware of hybrid
electric vehicles (‘A great deal’ 10%; ‘Some’ 33%). However, a majority know ‘very little
(30%) or ‘nothing’ (26%) about hybrid electric vehicles.
A more recent US survey by JD Power and Associates (also cited in the LowCVP report)
focuses on consumer awareness of hybrid electric and clean diesel vehicle technologies (JD
Power 2004; cited in Lane 2005). From this it would appear that awareness of hybrid
technology may have increased. This study’s report summary states that over 75% of US car
buyers are aware of hybrid technology and 40% have some awareness of cleaner diesel engine
options.
According to the JD Power report summary, the attributes of clean diesels that are most
attractive to consumers include: high fuel economy, high torque and proven technology. The
attributes that most concern consumers are availability of repair and service locations. For
hybrids, the attributes attractive to consumers are: high fuel economy and environmental
credentials. The attributes of hybrids that most worry potential consumers are higher
maintenance costs, reliability and life of the battery pack, acceleration performance and
availability of the power-train in a desired vehicle. Owners of hybrid vehicles only tend to
worry about battery pack life and availability issues (implying that acceleration, maintenance
and reliability concerns are reduced with familiarity with the vehicle).
In the UK, similar research of equivalent detail is hard to find. However, one pertinent study
(discussed in the LowCVP report) that provides some insight into consumer attitudes to new
vehicle fuels and technologies is the MBA research project Consumer acceptance of new fuels
and vehicle technologies conducted for Shell (Shell 2004; cited in Lane 2005). This study
focuses on the emerging UK private car and fleet markets for the following fuel technologies:
LPG, CNG, fuel cell, hydrogen, ethanol (E85), bio-fuels, gas-to-liquids, and hybrids.
Figure 2.4: With which of the following car fuel technologies are you familiar?
(Shell 2004; cited in Lane 2005)
83
Liquefied Petroleum Gas
55
Hybrid-Electric Vehicle
38
Fuel Cell
29
Hydrogen
23
Ethanol
19
Bio-Diesel / Bio Gasoline
14
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
4
GasTo Liquids
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
%
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
43
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
The Shell study includes a consumer survey of 120 UK car owners and over 100 MBA
Students and Shell employees. The results (shown in Figure 2.4) reveal high familiarity with
LPG and hybrids, moderate awareness of fuel cell, hydrogen and ethanol and low familiarity
with bio-fuels, CNG and gas to liquid fuels. Participants are also asked to indicate which of
these fuels they would be most likely to use. Their responses (in order) are: LPG (33%),
hybrid (26%), fuel cell (15%), bio-fuel (8%), CNG (6%), gas-to-liquids (5%), hydrogen (4%)
and ethanol (4%).
Of particular interest to this evidence review is that the findings of the consumer survey
reveal a large number of (mostly negative) misconceptions are attributed to new vehicle fuels
and technologies. A selection of these misconceptions is shown in Table 2.4 below. The
research team note some uncertainties and misconceptions regarding petrol-hybrids, some
polarisation regarding bio-fuels and LPG, a negative perception by a majority of consumers
regarding CNG and very positive emotional feelings towards hydrogen although the fuel is
seen as non-sustainable (doubts are expressed regarding renewable production).
Table 2.4 Qualities attributed to new vehicle fuels and technologies by consumers
Fuel-technology
Positive attributes
Negative attributes (selection)
option
(selection)
Liquefied petroleum
gas
Already available
Cars can be converted to LPG
Better for the environment
Cheap fuel
No local filling station
Expensive to convert cars
It can be very dangerous
Vehicle price,
Not much vehicle choice
Limited range, worse performance due
to weight
Need a special recharge point
Environmental benefits not significant
Hydrogen can be unpredictable
Expensive
Less range
Hybrid electric
Better for environment
Cheaper to run
Hydrogen fuel cell
Clean and efficient
Totally clean in use
Biodiesel/ bioethanol
Better for the air
Works similar to existing
transport
Move in the right direction
Poor availability
No positive tax incentives as yet
Very little advantage over conventional
fuel
Compressed natural
gas
Natural
Limited resources
Dangerous
Price
Source: Shell 2004; cited in Lane 2005
Although the consumer survey sample was small and not fully representative of all UK car
buyers, the Shell study is one of the most comprehensive surveys conducted in the UK to date
regarding new vehicle technologies. The study therefore provides valuable insights into what
is an under-researched field. One limitation of the study is its use of closed questions – other
more open-ended surveys have shown that the general public are more likely to mention more
‘futuristic’ technologies than those that appear in Figure 2.4, ones that are not being
considered for commercial production. For example, solar-powered cars are second in the list
of technologies reported in by the DoE study 24 (DoE 2002). A similar response has also been
recorded from a UK audience25 (Lane 2000). What these surveys may be detecting is evidence
of successful advertising campaigns. In the UK study, some respondents refer to the car as
24
In response to the question: Which Fuel Will Replace Gasoline and Diesel?
The question asked: …Do you know of any other types of alternative fuels or vehicles that are being considered for use on British roads? (Lane 2000).
25
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
44
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
shown on Honda adverts (on UK television from 1996), which used the Dream Solar Car to
promote the Honda Prelude.
2.8.1
The use of hydrogen as a vehicle fuel
A review of more detailed studies that have looked specifically at hydrogen technology in
relation to transport contradict some of the Shell findings (e.g. in relation to safety and the
importance of ‘greenness’). The main findings of nine studies on hydrogen that were
reviewed reveal some common themes. These are as follows:
Regarding knowledge of hydrogen:
• Knowledge of hydrogen among the general public is very limited in the UK as well as
many other European countries (Hynet 2004);
• Less than half of London resident respondents had heard of hydrogen as a fuel for
transport (O’Garra et al. 2004) although a survey of London taxi drivers showed that half
of those interviewed had heard of fuel cells (Mourato et al. 2003);
• In London only 20% of bus users and 15% of non-users were aware of the H 2
demonstration buses (O’Garra 2005);
• However, in Berlin, 61% of interviewees new about hydrogen vehicles when asked about
them and 17% mentioned hydrogen as an energy carrier (Dinse 1999);
• Nine out of ten passengers asked on-board a hydrogen bus had no clear idea about how a
hydrogen fuel cell bus worked (VAG Nurnberg 2001).
Regarding attitudes, acceptance and intention to use hydrogen:
• One third are clearly in favour of the introduction of hydrogen technologies (O’Garra et
al. 2004);
• Contrary to many authors’ expectations, safety is generally not a concern among
respondents (Haraldsson et al. 2006; O’Garra 2005; Mourato et al. 2003 Altmann,
Schmidt et al. 2003);
• People are generally positive towards fuel cell buses and feel safe with the technology
(Haraldsson 2006) and unprompted negative associations were less frequent than
expected. Indeed, when asked about hydrogen, interviewees mentioned positive
associations (alternative fuel, clean) marginally more frequency than negative
associations (bomb, toxic) (O’Garra 2005);
• It was shown that hydrogen awareness is related to gender, age, education and
environmental knowledge and O’Garra (2005) therefore conclude that information needs
to be presented differentia lly in order to best reach the community it intends to inform;
• Acceptability is associated with prior knowledge (O’Garra 2005); Lossen et al. 2003) as
well as high general environmental consciousness, car ownership and education (Lossen
et al. 2003), values, wants and perception, which are in turn affected by social
background and experience (Schulte et al. 2004);
• Price and performance of the technology were perceived by the authors as key influences
on the decisions to purchase cleaner vehicles (Haraldsson 2006); Altmann, Schmidt et al.
2003). All the studies reviewed show that environmental concern has a weaker influence
on willingness to pay for cleaner transport than price and performance;
• Although the environment is rated as an important factor, 64% of the bus passengers were
not willing to pay a higher fee if more fuel cell buses were to be used (Haraldsson 2006).
This result is opposed to that of the AcceptH2 project, where 75% of the respondents
were willing to pay an additional fare.
In summary, the level of public awareness of low carbon vehicles can be summarised as low
to moderate – with a very low detailed knowledge and understanding of how low carbon
vehicles actually work. There are also strong indications that stable misconceptions are
present at all levels – as most misconceptions appear to involve negative attributes, there is an
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
45
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
opportunity here for these to be removed. Generally, the public have mixed attitudes towards
cleaner fuels and vehicles, the level depending strongly on the option in question.
Interestingly, in their desk review, Altmann and Schulte et al. (2003) note that studies based
solely on attitudes tend to reveal very positive attitudes towards cleaner transport, in contrast
with experimental and preference studies which show lower acceptance levels.
It should be noted, however, that the majority of these studies comprised questionnaire
surveys of bus users or city residents with the exception of O’Garra et al (2004) which also
carried out some preliminary focus group work. Qualitative studies would be more
appropriate to gauge emotive aspects and levels of concern about new technologies.
Therefore, this review concludes that further research is required to identify the public’s level
of knowledge in key areas and to understand the type of information that people want and
need – only then will it be possible to begin to engage the public with new technologies in a
way that may begin to fundamentally alter norms and buying behaviour.
2.9 The influence of knowledge of climate change on car
purchasing
Evidence discussed in the Consumer attitudes to low carbon and fuel-efficient passenger cars
report by LowCVP (including the 2003 DfT Impact of Graduated Vehicle Excise Duty study)
suggests that the decision-making process for UK private car purchases is predominantly
driven by financial and performance considerations including: price, fuel consumption,
comfort, size, practicality and reliability (Lane 2005).
Despite the public concerns regarding the environment, these issues play little part in carpurchasing process (pre-, during and post-purchase) and are among the least important
considerations for new car buyers. Although fuel economy is reported to be important during
the early stages of the car purchasing process, these concerns tend not to get translated into
action. For instance, many motorists using fuel consumption as a first order proxy for
environmental and economic impacts but the importance attached to it drops off nearer to the
purchasing decision. It would appear that the process of cognitive dissonance is activated to
relegate fuel economy in importance in order to legitimise higher order preferences such as
costs, performance, image, reliability and safety. One reason for this may be that motorists
have little understanding of the relationship between fuel use and emissions and experience
cognitive difficulty in calculating fuel costs when presented with fuel price and fuel economy
information. There is also some evidence that the issue gains more importance after the
purchase has been made in that motorists can express dissatisfaction once they own a vehicle
if it does not live up to expectations on fuel economy. Although the situation may improve
with the introduction of the new car energy label (which includes ‘mpg’ information), the
literature suggests that non-environmental factors will continue to dominate the car purchase
process (Table 2.5).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
46
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
Table 2.5 What factors were/will be important in deciding what car to buy?
Most important (10% -30%)
Price
MPG/ Fuel consumption
Size/Practicality
Reliability
Comfort
Safety
Running costs
Style/Appearance
5% -10%
Least important (<5%)
Performance/Power
Image/Style
Brand name
Insurance costs
Engine size
Equipment levels
Depreciation
Personal experience
Sales Package
Dealership
Environment
Vehicle Emissions
Road tax
Recommendation
Alternative fuel
Source: DfT 2003; cited in Lane 2005.
From a number of sources, the LowCVP review showed that motorists use fuel consumption
as a proxy for both environmental impacts and vehicle costs (Lane 2005). However, as
reported previously, not only does the evidence suggest that car buyers have little
understanding of the relationship between fuel use and emissions, it also suggests that they
are largely unaware that fuel costs form only a minor portion of overall car costs (RAC 2004).
This presents a paradox in consideration of the (apparently high) importance attached to fuel
economy in the mind of the consumer (see its position in Table 2.6). In fact, although this is
reported as a key decision factor for private buyers, one study notes that:
For most [car buyers], little effort is expended in comparisons of fuel consumption during the decision-making process (TRI/ECI 2000).
Reasons proposed by the LowCVP report to explain this apparent contradiction include the
observation that, although car buyers accept that fuel economy is broadly dependent on car
size, many assume that there is little difference in fuel economy between cars within a class
(e.g. within diesels, superminis, etc).26 A second important reason is the cognitive difficulty
motorists have in calculating fuel costs when presented with fuel price and fuel economy
information. The effect of this is that motorists are limited in the comparisons they are able to
make between models on a (running) cost basis. In a qualitative study of motorists conducted
for the DfT, Bonsall et al. (2006) note that:
The 'cost of fuel per mile' driven was seen as an abstract concept. Respondents
could not suggest a cost of fuel per mile for their car. Similarly, respondents
were usually unaware of the number of miles to the gallon for their car. They did
not see this as an important measure.
(Bonsall et al. 2006)
Other reasons for the low importance attributed to fuel economy information (in practice)
include the findings that some consumers consider fuel economy as an aspect of car design
that can only be achieved by compromising performance and safety, while many have little
confidence in published fuel economy data.
Kurani (2002) provides a thorough review of social marketing and social science approaches
to Marketing Clean and Efficient Vehicles (discussed further in Chapter 6). In a US context,
he berates the small amount of advertising [that] is aimed at educating consumers about fuel
economy, reduced emissions, or other benefits these cars might offer and believes the public
need to be given information about why such vehicles are important, rather than relying solely
26
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders has calculated that if the lowest CO2 emitting
vehicles in each segment were used, average CO2 emissions would fall by 30% [16].
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
47
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
on regulation and consumers to make better choices. He cites research undertaken by Traeger
(2001), who observed:
When shopping for a new vehicle, people rank good gas mileage only slightly
higher than cup holders.... But after they buy the car, gas mileage becomes a
customer satisfaction issue. People always want better gas mileage ...They resent
spending money on gas.
(Traeger 2001, cited in Kurani 2002, p13)
Although not always a true reflection of environmental impact, the evidence reviewed would
suggest that, at certain stages of market development, fuel economy provides a particularly
useful marketing tool for promoting low carbon cars, one that is more effective than
promoting a vehicle’s ‘green’ credentials (Adamson 2003).
Providing energy information to promote more fuel-efficient vehicles (via the new car label)
will be discussed from a different perspective in Chapter 6.
2.10 Support for transport policy to tackle climate change
If we accept the general hypothesis that the public are largely aware of (at least some) broad
measures they could take to mitigate carbon emissions, it remains to collate the evidence on
how the public appear to react to this awareness. In terms of climate change, individual action
can take two forms: (i) whether to support government initiatives to mitigate and ameliorate;
and (ii) whether to alter one’s own lifestyle so as to contribute less to greenhouse gases.
Hence, the following questions remain:
• How does this awareness translate into an acceptance of transport interventions by
government?
• How does this awareness translate into a stated willingness to change travel behaviour?
• What are the signs that this willingness is translating into travel behaviour change
already?
In summary, the evidence reviewed suggests that the public are not yet convinced that the
state’s role should be more than enabling although there may be signs of an increasing
acceptance of interventions to limit individuals’ emissions. When it comes to transport issues,
acceptance is even lower and attitudes are much more resistant. However, the evidence is
once again reliant on quantitative surveys, often using telephone interviews, which are less
suited to eliciting complex attitudes on fairness and trade-offs.
A telephone survey by Brook Lyndhurst (2004) sheds some light on the divisiveness of this
issue. More than one in three (38%) think that government does not have the right to require
people to behave in a more sustainable way, including close to one in five (18%) who
‘strongly’ take this position (Figure 2.5). However, almost half (48%) believe the
Government does have the right to intervene in this way, including a significant minority of
one in four (24%) who do so ‘strongly’.
The evidence nevertheless, shows that the issue of government intervention appears less
contentious in respect of specific incentives. This study found that almost three quarters of the
public (73%) believe variable VAT charging for electrical appliances on the grounds of
energy efficiency is fair, while a similar proportion (70%) think the same is true of ‘reward’
points for people who buy environmentally-friendly products. Perhaps more surprisingly, this
survey also revealed that the public’s perception of fairness extends to potential measures that
are more punitive in their application. For example, two in three people (67%) consider it fair
that the government ban any food product that damages the environment even if this increases
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
48
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
the price of food. Similarly, 58% think that variable waste charging – where those who
recycle pay less council tax and those who do not pay more – is fair.
Figure 2.5 Support for government intervention on the environment
(Brook Lyndhurst 2004)
A recent Guardian/ ICM poll in February 2006 revealed a widespread willingness to make
personal sacrifices to tackle the threat of climate change. The majority of people (63%)
approved of a green tax to discourage behaviour that harms the environment, while 34% said
they would not accept such price rises. The poll reveals that people would (reportedly) be
willing to spend an average of £331 to make their homes more environmentally friendly, even
if the move brought them no direct cost saving. Only 16% said they would not pay anything,
with 32% willing to invest over £100 and 8% more than £1,000.
These surveys concur with analysis by Bord et al. (1998) who show that US surveys since
1973 have portrayed a public willing to spend more on environmental problems in general.
However, both the Brook Lyndhurst and the Guardian surveys are based on telephone
interviews and therefore need to be treated with some caution.
2.10.1 Support for interventions targeting car use
Although surveys such as these overwhelmingly indicate a (reported) public willingness to
pay and sacrifice for environmental goals, this support has limits – most notably when it
comes to the defence of driving privileges. In the context of climate change, it is clear that the
level of support for government action diminishes significantly with respect to policies to
tackle emissions from transport.
For example, the Welsh survey by Bibbings/ WCC (2004) asked respondents which of their
behaviours they would be willing to adapt in order to tackle climate change: travel behaviours
(by car and by air) were the behaviours which fewest respondents were willing to change.
Likewise, the Brook Lyndhurst study (2004) emphasised that the only potential policy
measure explored as part of this study that was roundly perceived to be unfair was the fuel
duty escalator. Sixty eight per cent consider it unfair, including as many as 40% who think it
‘very unfair’. Although there is also a ‘silent’ and rarely acknowledged minority of 29% who
buck the trend, it has to be acknowledged, however, that this issue remains highly problematic
for sustainable development.
When surveys have concentrated only on transport policies, results have shown that support
can be high for potential Government actions that would reduce the environmental impacts of
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
49
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
car driving, but respondents are less supportive of actions that would directly affect them
financially. For instance, DEFRA (2002) found that support for measures to encourage people
to purchase more environmentally friendly cars was consistently high (around 90%), and the
majority (78%) would even support tightening MOT testing for emissions standards. Fifty
three per cent of respondents even agreed with the proposition that drivers’ access to certain
roads should be ‘restricted at times when air pollution levels are high’. However, support for
pricing mechanisms was much lower.
The recent DfT/ ONS (2006) survey showed this clearly: the most popular financial
mechanism is congestion charging (26%), but only 12% support a tax on petrol and 15% on
flying. Support for these pricing options still did not rise above 25% even amongst those
expressing highest concern for climate change (see Figure 2.6).
Figure 2.6 Which if any of the following policies would you support? (DfT/ONS 2006)
Support for policies
increase tax on petrol
increase the cost of flying
charge motorists to enter
towns and cities
spend more on improving rail
services
spend more on improving bus
services
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
% respondents
The DfT survey results were almost exactly replicated by the latest British Social Attitudes
Survey (published December 200527 – Park et al. 2005). Once again, the most popular
financial ‘stick’ is congestion charging. Just over a quarter of people (28%) support a
hypothetical peak time charge of £2 to drive through towns outside London. It is notable that
although many more oppose such charges than support them, support for congestion charging
is higher among drivers than non drivers (30% compared to 23%). More than half the
respondents felt that such charges would make them use their cars less28 . By contrast, only 6%
would support a policy of doubling the price of petrol over the next 10 years. In addition, only
12% agreed in more general terms that car users should pay higher taxes for the sake of the
environment, and this support has been falling over the years (from 20% in 1997).
Therefore, contrary to the apparent increasing willingness, as expressed in surveys, of people
to make sacrifices for environmental goals in general, transport appears to be the least
acceptable area of policy for the public to make sacrifices with respect to tackling climate
change Furthermore, within transport, financial penalties are the least supported. Indeed,
some of the evidence may suggest that this lack of acceptance may be deepening. This is
apparent from a series of MORI polls carried out for the Commission for Integrated Transport
(CfIT) over the first few years of this decade (CfIT 2001 & 2002). In 2002, over half of the
public (53%) said they were unwilling to pay higher taxes for improvements in the transport
27
Summary of the results available at
http://www natcen.ac.uk/natcen/pages/news_and_media_docs/BSA_22nd_Report_Press_release.pdf
28
It is unclear whether this question was restricted to car users only.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
50
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
system as a whole, while just 30% are willing to do so. This is a marked decline from the 39%
and 42% who were willing to pay in 2001 and 1999 respectively. However, once again, these
results must be treated with caution as this survey was based on a quota sample and not
designed to measure trends.
In comparison to these figures demonstrating any opposition, a slightly larger proportion of
the population seem willing to accept that car users should not have ‘free reign’. At least two
recent large-scale surveys have asked whether people should be allowed to use their car as
much as they like even if it causes damage to the environment. This was put to respondents in
two recent surveys (DfT/ ONS 2006 (UK wide) and Duddleston et al. 2005 (Scotland)). The
results show that only around 50% feel they are able to disagree with this statement. This
evidently means, however, that half of the population either agree or are ambivalent on this
point.
Table 2.6 Response to people should be allowed to use their car as much as they like
even if it causes damage to the environment
Agree
Disagree
DfT/ ONS (2006)
30%
41%
Duddleston et al. (2005)
23%
55%
It is not possible to offer definitive conclusions as to whether support for punitive measures
for transport is rising or falling due to the way the data has been collected. In particular, when
viewing the above statistics regarding public support/ resistance, it is necessary to take into
account the transport, as well as the research, context – for example, support for pricing
mechanisms increases considerably when the revenues raised are earmarked for re-investment
in infrastructure (see Lyons et al. 2004 for a review). Although this review did not look in
detail at the literature on willingness to pay, an excellent study by Macmillan (2005) on how
opinions are formed when people are entered into a dialogue about the issues shows that the
people appear willing to pay more, and that this willingness is more ‘stable’ once this
dialogue has taken place (see Appendix 3 for more detail on this study).
The implication is that, in designing carbon mitigation policies, more detailed ‘willingness to
pay’ research needs to be carried out in a way that engages people about the issues of climate
change and the tradeoffs involved (i) with respect to the environment and (ii) with respect to
the opportunity cost and hypothecation opportunities that could be embraced by Government.
2.10.2 Support for interventions targeting air travel
Many aspects of the recent phenomenal growth in air travel and the consequences for climate
change are rife for further research. Some key documents leading up to the Government’s Air
Transport White Paper (Dec 2003) discussed the components of demand 29 , quantitative
estimation of the link between aviation and global warming and its social and economic
effects30 . Other documents have also attempted to unpick the forecasts in air traffic growth31 .
However, beyond analysis of who is flying where and when and some analysis of demand
elasticities in monetary terms, we have very little understanding of the real motivations for the
changing patterns of travel. For instance, we have little comprehension about whether recent
behavioural trends have become entrenched, thus already creating a degree of ‘air
29
DfT 2003 AWTP Passenger Forecasts: Additional Analysis
http://www/dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_031861.pdf
30
DfT 2004 Aviation and Global Warming
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_031850.pdf
31
CAA 2005 The demand for outbound leisure and its key drivers
http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/5/Elasticity%20Study.pdf
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
51
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
dependence’ and therefore how easily these trends could be reversed through behavioural or
fiscal interventions to curb demand. It follows, therefore, that our understanding of the public
knowledge of the link between air travel and climate change and the decision making process
with respect to flying is also low.
Chapter 1 cited evidence to suggest that, in comparison to car travel, more people are unaware
they are contributing to climate change when they take a flight, or they at least are unwilling
to acknowledge air travel as something that can be damaging (Bibbings/ WCC 2004). This
may suggest that it will be more difficult to apply demand management to air travel than car
use. However, the evidence on this issue is incomplete and it is difficult (from the evidence)
to come to a firm view on the support or otherwise for a tax on aviation. For this review, three
questionnaire surveys and one opinion poll were identified as having elicited opinion on air
travel, its environmental impacts and support for policies to mitigate these impacts. These
were:
• DfT/ ONS (2006)
• Guardian Opinion Poll (2005)
• EU report of public consultation ‘Reducing the climate change impact of aviation’
(EUDGE 2005)
• DfT (2002) Attitudes to Air Travel
The DfT/ ONS (2006) survey reported above (Figure 2.6) suggests marginally greater support
for a tax on aviation than fuel – but support still only stands at 15% of the population. For this
survey, respondents were left to choose from a list of policies those they would support.
However, as Cairns and Newson (forthcoming) note it should be highlighted that the list of
options included both positively and negatively worded policy measures, and the two positive
policy measures (‘spend more improving rail services’, and ‘spend more on improving bus
services’) were the only measures to receive significant support (69% of respondents in both
cases). Respondents were also presented with two statements and asked to select the statement
that came closest to their own views. The statements were “air travel should be limited for
the sake of the environment” and “limiting air travel would be too damaging to the
economy”. The statement that limiting air travel would be too damaging to the economy was
selected by 55%, whilst 39% selected the statement that air travel should be limited for the
sake of the environment. Levels of support for limiting air travel for the sake of the
environment were higher amongst those reporting themselves to be very or fairly concerned
about climate change.
A poll for the Guardian last year asked: As aircraft add to pollution, do you agree or disagree
that there should be a tax added to airline flights to deter people flying? Although the
majority still opposed such a tax (61%), asking the question in this way more than doubled
the support for this policy. Of course, how much this is merely a product of sample bias (the
way the question was asked may have engendered a degree of social pressure to respond in a
certain way), and how much this is a true reflection of how support could be galvanised if the
links to climate change were discussed, it is impossible to say.
Widespread recognition and acceptance that the climate impacts of aviation need to be
addressed was found in an EU wide internet questionnaire of 5,564 individuals in 2005
(EUDGE). The questionnaire was made available in English, German and French and was
aimed at the general public. However, as participation in the survey was voluntary it is likely
to be biased towards those who are particularly concerned or better informed about aviation
issues (see Cairns and Newson (forthcoming) for a review of this survey). The responses
included those living near airports and those working for the aviation industry. The majority
of responses were from the UK, Germany, Belgium and France. The questionnaire elicited the
level of agreement with a number of potential policy objectives to tackle the climate impacts
of aviation and found there was widespread support:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
52
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
• 95% (rather or fully) agreed that the air transport sector should be included in efforts
to mitigate climate change
• 85% (rather or fully) agreed the cost of climate change impact should be included in
the cost of transport
Respondents were also asked about the extent of their agreement or disagreement with a
number of opinion statements. Responses were as follows:
• Increasing the price of air transport would be acceptable if it is necessary to reduce
aviation's impact on the climate . (86% fully or rather agreed)
• Increasing the price of air transport should be avoided as it could have an effect on
jobs and growth . (79% fully or rather disagreed)
• Increasing the price of air transport should be avoided as fewer people could afford
to fly. (79% fully or rather disagreed)
• Increasing the price of air transport would be acceptable since it would affect
‘frequent flyers’ most. (70% fully or rather agreed).
When asked what any revenue from tax on air travel should be used for, 86% of respondents
said that it should be used to reduce environmental impacts, 26% said it should be used to
fund development aid, 16% suggested that it should be used for general public funding
purposes and only 8% suggested that it should be transferred to the aviation industry. (Note
that respondents were allowed to tick more than one box.). It is also interesting that, despite
the self-selection bias of the survey described above, 55% of respondents did not feel well
informed about the climate change impacts of air transport. Interestingly, 54% stated that
comparisons between emissions per passenger of different airlines on a given route would
greatly influence how often, where and with what airline they chose to fly (see Chapter 6 for a
discussion on the issue of ‘feedback’).
Although a little dated now 32 , in 2002 the DfT carried out a UK wide survey dedicated to air
travel33 (although not dedicated to air travel and the environment). The questions were
worded to introduce some context about the environmental implications of flying and issues
associated with meeting any increase in demand. Some interesting findings emerged.
Respondents were asked how much they agreed or disagreed that people should be able to
travel by plane as much as they like, and then asked again with different environmental
impacts attached. Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with each of the following
statements:
a) People should be able to travel by plane as much as they like;
b) People should be able to travel by plane as much as they like, even if this harms the environment;
c) People should be able to travel by plane as much as they like, provided government acted to limit the harm done to the environment;
d) People should be able to travel by plane as much as they like, even if new terminals or runways are needed to meet the demand;
e) Building new terminals or runways to enable people to travel by plane as much as they like is acceptable if environmental costs are included in the cost of flights.
Asking the questions in this way produced interesting results, and is once again an indicator
of potential increases in public engagement once a dialogue about environmental and policy
tradeoffs is opened (see Figure 2.7). Most significantly, agreement that people should be able
to travel by plane as much as they like fell significantly when the idea that it harms the
environment was taken into account, or if new terminals or runways were needed. However, it
32
The Department for Transport will be updating these figures from 2006 by including a battery of questions on aviation in its Omnibus survey.
33
Use of Omnibus survey: 1,850 randomly selected UK adults.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
53
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
increased again if the environmental impacts were either limited by the Government or added
to the cost of flights.
Figure 2.7 Freedom to fly versus environmental impacts (DfT 2002)
The acceptance of environmental costs being added to the cost of flights was then examined.
To set the scene, respondents were firstly asked whether they thought air travel harmed the
environment, and if so in what way. They were then told that although it does harm the
environment, the cost is not included in the price of flights. They were asked how acceptable
they would find it if the cost of flights went up by different amounts (5%, 10% and 15%) to
cover environmental costs. Examples of the additional costs were given.
In contrast to the levels of support for an aviation tax reported above, providing this context
meant that 79% said they would find an increase of 5% either ‘very’ (28%) or ‘fairly’ (51%)
acceptable, and 21% would not find it acceptable. Fifty per cent would find an increase of
10% acceptable, and a quarter would find an increase of 15% acceptable.
Therefore, although only limited research exists to date, there is reason to believe that the
introduction of information on environmental and policy trade-offs can galvanise support for
policies to limit the environmental harm caused by air travel. Indeed, since May 2005, when
the latest DfT survey was carried out, there has been considerably more media coverage about
aviation’s climate change impacts. It is possible, therefore, that the British public has already
become more engaged with respect to their flying habits and the impact on carbon emissions
and the climate (Cairns and Newson (forthcoming)). No examples were found of qualitative
or more participatory attempts to research these issues and this forms the core of
recommendation R2 on aviation.
2.11 The prospects for modal shift
It is impossible here to provide an accurate assessment of just how large the gap is between
public awareness of climate change, stated intention and actual behaviour change. To infer
this by comparing different survey data measuring different aspects of understanding, intent
and reported behaviour would be misleading. The fact that there is an attitude-behaviour gap
is no secret, and studies that have set out to examine it will be discussed in the next chapter.
Here we briefly present some figures to give an indication of how wide this gap may be.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
54
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
Firstly, it seems reasonable to suggest from the evidence that a significant minority of the
population express a desire to lead a ‘greener’ lifestyle, and more still seem prepared to
undertake some distinct activities that lessen their impact on the environment. Some surveys
suggest a ‘huge’ majority (85%) claim they would be prepared to change the way they live in
order to lessen the impact of climate change (BBC/ ICM 2004). Others indicate around a
quarter of the population express a desire to live a greener lifestyle or would be spurred on by
warnings that the planet faced serious environmental problems (Abelman 2006, MORI 2001).
As the data in the last section indicated, however, preparedness to change travel patterns does
not command the same level of expressed desire, willingness or demonstrated levels of other
behaviour change. All the evidence consistently shows that of those who say they would be
prepared to change for the sake of climate change, more are prepared to do things in their
household to reduce than are prepared to affect their transport habits. Some examples in the
literature include:
• A study conducted in the Netherlands of nine household consumption behaviours and
their relationship to the perceived quality of life found that reducing car use was the
behaviour change that fewest households felt it was possible for them to undertake.
(Gatersleben and Vlek 1998, cited in Darnton 2004b);
• A BBC/ ICM poll found that 96% say they would be prepared to recycle more, 92% to
spend more money insulating the house; 68% use the car less (BBC/ ICM 2004);
• In the latest Guardian poll (Guardian 2006), 83% said they had turned the heating down;
75% had installed low energy light bulbs, whereas 25% had cycled at least one journey
instead of using the car and 24% said they had decided against a holiday that involved
flying. However, with respect to this latter point, the question wording does not include
‘for environmental reasons’.
This is despite the fact that concern for traffic -related environmental problems are higher than
for other consequences of consumption (such as waste and household energy use) and
awareness of the link between their action, fossil fuel use and climate change is also higher
for travel activity. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that given higher concern for traffic
related problems and the greater awareness of the link between travel and fossil fuel use and
climate change than with some other individual activities, the attitude-behaviour gap is wider
for travel behaviour than for other behaviours.
Despite this differential between in-house activities and travel behaviour – the stated intention
to change travel (e.g. 68% saying they would be prepared to use their car less) and a quarter
of people claiming to have forgone a flight abroad for holiday, are the figures that need to be
examined more closely as they offer some real encouragement that travel behaviour is indeed
malleable.
Indeed, it would appear that there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that a given
proportion of car use reduction is achievable by determined application of known methods
and within current lifestyles. Moreover, further changes could be achieved if these lifestyle
‘boundaries’ are stretched by a supportive policy environment. The evidence can tentatively
be interpreted as suggesting that something in the order of 20-30% may be a reasonable
assessment (Goodwin et al. 2004).
Consistently, across a whole variety of types of survey, including empirically measured
changes in actual behaviour that have taken place without the use of new technologies, there
is a core figure of around 20% of people who either express a willingness to change or have
already changed behaviour, and a further 20-40% who have some propensity to change
behaviour. For example:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
55
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
• The RAC Car Dependence report suggested that about 20%+ of car trips are not cardependent at all, and another 20%+ are attracted to good alternatives and relatively
susceptible to policy intervention (Goodwin et al. 1995);
• In recent study for DfT on smarter measures (workplace travel plans, school travel plans,
car sharing schemes etc.) a fairly consistent average 18% mode shift is reported from the
implementation of travel planning (Cairns et al. 2004);
• A comprehensive study on reallocating road capacity found that an average 18% of traffic
‘disappeared’ from the network after roads had been closed (Cairns et al. 2002);
• Congestion charging in London has seen car use in the zone and the surrounding network
reduced by 15-25% (Livingstone 2004);
• The most recent DfT/ ONS study (2006) found 18% said they might reduce their car use a
lot (30% of regular car users). Overall, 59% said they might reduce their car use to some
extent due to concerns about climate change;
• The series of surveys of levels of travel awareness in 2001, 2003 and 2005 commissioned
by the Scottish Executive (Duddleston et al. 2005) shows a generally positive picture of
the prospects for modal shift in Scotland:
- 22% of drivers agree that it would be easy for them to reduce their car use;
- 43% of drivers agree that reducing their car use would make them ‘feel good’;
- 61% would like to reduce their car use but feel constrained by the lack of practical
alternatives to meet their current transport needs;
- Segmentation suggests that at least 40% of the population have a high propensity to
switch modes (see Chapter 5); and
• Studies of attitudes to travel and different modes of transport have consistently shown that
around 30% of people are willing to reduce their car use if good quality alternatives
existed (Anable 2005; Stradling 2006).
It would be false to end the second chapter by citing only that evidence which suggests that
climate change awareness is leading to travel behaviour change or any other behaviour
change. Indeed, the vast majority of the evidence claims that is not the case. Even with homebased, non-travel behaviours, the vast majority of the population are not yet habitually
undertaking these actions and there is a ‘hard core’ of the population who are particularly
resistant to the shift towards sustainable lifestyles. Brook Lyndhurst (2004) notes that while
there has been some progress on specific individual lifestyles (e.g. recycling paper and glass),
very few people are systematically undertaking an integrated range of sustainable behaviours.
Nevertheless, the evidence does suggest there is scope for catalysing more sustainable
behaviours if, once the right ‘intelligence’ has been gathered (through dialogue/consultation)
to understand the precursors to behaviour change, a targeted strategy including information,
incentives, penalties and infrastructures is put in place.
2.12 Can attitudes to transport and climate change be modelled?
This review did not set out to discuss the implications of its findings on the economic and
behavioural modelling processes which are integral to transport planning by central and local
government and researchers alike. Nevertheless, models, such as the National Transport
Model and associated cost benefit appraisal frameworks, underpin transport investment and
planning decisions and it is therefore important to reflect whether there is sufficient evidence,
in the right for mat, on attitudes to transport and climate change which can be incorporated
into these processes.
There exists a long standing debate on how and whether ‘non-rational’, more elusive concepts
such as environmental concern can be incorporated into transport models. There seems to be
two inter-related issues debated in the literature (i) whether behaviour choice can be more
accurately modelled and forecast by incorporating values or proxy variables for non-monetary
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
56
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
attributes of choices and (ii) how to enable choices between different ways of promoting
human welfare (e.g. different transport policies) to be made on a consistent basis (cost benefit
analysis). The main thrust of this research is the establishment of the full social costs of road
transport as a basis for efficient pricing in the transport sector and the extension of the scope
of social cost benefit analysis for improved decision making in project appraisal (See DfT
undated; Litman 1995; ECMT 1998; Maddison et al 1996).
The first example includes issues such as whether models forecasting travel behaviour choice,
such as the UK National Transport Model34 can represent realistic consumer decision
behaviour of choosing between newer low-emission vehicle technologies and conventional
technologies. A review of the literature on car purchasing behaviour taking place in 2006 is
assessing whether an EU wide transport and environmental assessment model (TREMOVE
www.tremove.org) can better model car purchasing behaviour. This study is asking whether
there is a particular environmental parameter that is an available and realistic proxy for
environmental considerations. However, preliminary findings are sceptical that one can be
found 35 .
For both the modelling of consumer behaviour and for cost benefit analysis, economists have
sought to express a wide range of human and environmental impacts and preferences in terms
of monetary equivalents, using various techniques. The literature reflects the attempts to
develop instruments by which value can be properly measured (Litman 1995; ECMT 1998;
Maddison et al 1996). The most commonly used of those techniques is an approach based on
the observed willingness to pay (WTP) for various non-market benefits (and costs). The basic
strategy of the WTP calculus is to arrive at a money measure of the net welfare change for
each individual that is brought about by the project under consideration, and then to sum
these36 . Indeed, environmental valuation through techniques such as Contingent Valuation
(CV) has become increasingly integral to environmental decision-making at the project and
policy level (Macmillan 2005). In the last few years there has also been an increasing interest
and application of Stated Preference (SP) methods. In these studies, quasi-markets based on
route, mode or locational choice have been established to determine the influence of
environmental factors in decision making between discrete alternatives. In contrast to the CV
approach, where WTP is obtained directly from individual responses, SP experiments involve
an indirect approach where the derivation of WTP is achieved through discrete choice models
estimated from the experimental data (Ortuzar et al 1999).
However, as will be discussed in Chapter 7 and Appendix 3 (see the example methodology of
Macmillan 2005), although WTP using CV has made remarkable progress in the last 30 years,
with many thousands of studies now completed across the globe, it is still regarded by many
in the policy and academic communities as a somewhat narrow and unsatisfactory approach
(Macmillan 2005). Doubts focus on the reliability and validity, especially when dealing with
uncertain and complex environmental changes, as well as the validity of using WTP from an
ethical perspective and the importance of well-informed respondents.
With respect to transport and climate change, this review did not find evidence of adequate
research into the value that people place on climate change as a result of the impacts caused
by individual transport choices or wider impacts of transport policy. To some extent this may
be due to such literature slipping through the net of this review. However, the uncertainty
revealed in the first two chapters of this review about people’s attitudes to climate change
34
See http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft econappr/documents/divisionhomepage/030708 hcsp
Results of an expert workshop on the topic can be found at:
http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/env/tremove/library?l=/workshop_environmental&vm=detailed&s
b=Title
36
See DfT literature on Multi-modal transport investment appraisal available at:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft econappr/documents/pdf/dft econappr pdf 504897.pdf
35
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
57
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
suggests that more research will be required to first understand this uncertainty. In addition,
there are well documented doubts generally surrounding the use of the instruments typically
used to value non-monetary effects. These suggest that the main weakness of the most used
techniques are the use of one-way and one-off surveys that do not give respondents time to
collate and consider information in order to make a judgement. This is consistent with a main
conclusion of this review that participatory, deliberative approaches need to be used to elicit
views, including willingness to pay, on the complex issue of climate change.
2.13 Evidence gaps and recommendations
The evidence gaps and research recommendations are discussed in Chapter 8. The main
recommendations to emerge from the evidence in this chapter are:
R1: Understanding how to engage with the public.
Chapters 1 and 2 illustrate the extent to which research has relied on relatively
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
superficial quantitative data to elicit rather complex and heterogeneous attitudes
about climate change. Whilst this evidence is useful in other ways, it does not
provide the basis on which to develop an understanding of public engagement
with climate change issues in order to devise targeted and inspiring campaign
strategies and interventions.
The best way of gaining a more intelligent, rich and meaningful understanding of
knowledge is to use participatory methods which engage people in a dialogue
about the scientific and policy issues surrounding climate change, offering
information in a variety of formats to the public and interpreting their response.
This may include using novel, mixed and truly interdisciplinary techniques such as
presenting scientific scenarios (with social and economic components ) and
information on alternative futures within citizens’ panels or deliberative opinion
polling (Chapter 7 provides more detail on ‘deliberative techniques’). The idea
would be to gauge emotional responses, measure relevance and concerns and to
build on this process in an iterative, non-intrusive manner.
Delving deeper into public knowledge on this issue will provide a baseline for
further research and some evidence on which to base subsequent campaigns.
Deliberative
Immediate
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Priority:
Responsibility:
High
DfT
58
2: Attitudes to Transport and Climate Change
R2: Understanding the demand for air travel.
Whilst data exists on the socio-demographic composition of the phenomenal
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
recent and projected growth in air passenger demand, there is poor understanding
of the underlying motivations of this travel and the degree to which ‘air
dependence’ is leading to hard to reverse patterns of travel. It follows that our
understanding of public knowledge of the link between air travel and climate
change and the decision making process with respect to flying, is also very low.
As a baseline for more participatory approaches, and the other recommendations
in this review, a national study of air travellers could be completed through focus
groups and quantitative surveys. Existing data sets need to be collated and data
gaps identified. Qualitative research should precede quantitative data collection to
identify the main drivers of demand and to inform subsequent quantitative
methods to identify the main market segments and their respective demand
elasticities.
This research should provide a baseline understanding of the main drivers of the
demand for flying and the size and nature of the attitude-behaviour gap for this
type of travel.
Review + Deliberative
Immediate
Priority:
Responsibility:
High
DfT
R8: Trade -offs and policy acceptance
Chapters 2 and 4 presents evidence in the area of climate change and behavioural
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
research that demonstrates public acceptability can be a major barrier to policy
delivery especially where there is a potential tension between, on the one hand, an
agenda of encouraging ‘personal responsibility’ and, on the other hand, of the
shaping of personal behaviour by the state. It seems that to resolve this, it is vital
there is wide understanding by the affected parties of the need for policies and any
compensating individual or societal benefits associated with changing behaviour.
Research to investigate notions of public acceptability of specific policies could
apply a participatory approach and a two-way process of information exchange
which allows trade offs to be explored and matches demand for information by the
public with its supply. The willingness to pay (Chapter 7; Appendix 3) will be one
aspect of this investigation of trade-offs, but through the use of a dynamic process
where feedback loops and preference formation can be examined and the
interrelationships between notions of fairness, trust, free rider issues, causal
responsibility and effectiveness and any other issues to emerge can be understood.
Exploring acceptability using participatory, staged approaches that allow the
dynamics of preference formation to be explored will strengthen the link between
communication and policy, offer a more sophisticated approach to policy delivery
and be vital to the success of policies to reduce carbon from the transport sector.
High
Deliberative
Priority:
Following
DfT + research council
Responsibility:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
59
SECTION II:
THE LINK BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND
BEHAVIOUR
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
60
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
3: THE ATTITUDE-BEHAVIOUR GAP
Aims of this chapter
• To review the growing body of literature covering those frameworks and
theories that can be used to examine the attitude -behaviour link.
• To introduce a typology of attitude -behaviour theories at three levels:
individual, interpersonal and community, plus stages of change theories.
• To identify current and potential future applications of each theory to travel
behaviour research and a list of relevant barriers or precursors to behaviour
that feature strongly in the various theories discussed.
Main findings
• The Deficit model (which assumes that if only people knew more about connections
between their own behaviour and environmental outcomes, they would act proenvironmentally) is untenable.
• Whilst economic measures are clearly important, attempting to predict people’s
behaviour on purely economic grounds (Ratio nal Choice theory) is rarely adequate.
• Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour is by far the most common and influential
theory used to explore the attitude-behaviour gap for innumerable behaviours in the
social, environmental, and health psychology fields.
• Although the strength of the Theory of Planned Behaviour is its simplicity and wide
applicability, the theory has typically been used to examine behaviours pertaining to
simple binary choices. The theory is therefore too simplistic for a study of travel
behaviour and climate change.
• Schwartz’s Norm Activation Theory (NAT) and Stern’s Value Belief Norm Theory
(VBN) attempt to explain the psychological processes (including the role of values)
giving rise to altruistic/ pro-environmental behaviours.
• The review suggests that all the attitude-behaviour models discussed (TPB, NAT,
VBN) and their constructs are complementary, each offering a unique insight into the
attitude-action gap with respect to travel choice.
• The review notes some influences on travel modal choice are not accounted for by
any of the accepted models. These include: affective evaluations (freedom and status),
social-symbolic motives (self-identity) and habitual behaviours.
• Research centred on the individual usually ignores the interactive relationship of
behaviour in its social, cultural and economic dimension, thereby missing the
possibility to fully understand crucial determinants of behaviour.
• Sociological theories (that stress the interpersonal environment) offer key insights of
the attitude-behaviour link and account for the role of social factors, affective factors,
habitual, imitative and learned behaviours.
• Community theories of behaviour (such as Social Capital and Diffusion of Innovation
theories) suggest that behaviour change can often be more effectively influenced by
focusing on the community/network level.
• Stages of Change models (e.g. Transtheoretical and Systems theories) can track the
transition from anti- to pro-environmental behaviour. Dynamic systems models can
also identify feedback mechanisms that inhibit behavioural change, and explain the
chaotic nature of change of self-referencing systems.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
61
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
3.3
Introduction
The evidence review has so far revealed that awareness of climate change in the UK, whilst
not particularly sophisticated, is reasonably high. This includes the link (at the conceptual
level) between transport and climate change. For policy purposes, however, what people think
is less pertinent than what they do. For instance, people say they want to protect the
environment, that clean air is important to them and that they are aware of the emissions
produced by travelling in their car. Yet few consider emissions or fuel economy when they
buy a vehicle. It is the translation of awareness and concern into action that is most pressing.
As Bord et al. (1998) put it: are they ‘walking the walk’ or simply ‘talking the talk ’?
There does appear to be a paradox that the high levels of concern about climate change (and
the environment) can exist alongside the failure of large-scale public awareness campaigns to
induce lasting changes in pro-environmental behaviour. This section, therefore, explores the
question of why knowledge and attitudes (with respect to climate change and transport) often
fail to be translated into action to mitigate its effects – this is the infamous attitude-behaviour
gap.37
To achieve this, this section will review the growing body of literature covering those
frameworks and theories that can be used to examine the attitude-behaviour link. These
theories come from a number of disciplines including socio-psychology, marketing and
economics. As with previous chapters, this is not a comprehensive overview of the evidence –
in this case, of individual, interpersonal and community level theories of behaviour change.
Instead, the theories included for review in this chapter have been chosen either because they
appear frequently in the travel behaviour change literature, or they have emerged in the
course of the literature search as having potentially useful application in the examination of
attitudes to climate change and travel behaviour. This is particularly true of theories with an
interpersonal or community focus that offer invaluable insights into social networks and the
dynamics of community structures, but are as yet rarely applied in the study of travel choice.
One output of this chapter is the identification of a list of barriers or precursors to behaviour
change that feature strongly in the various theories discussed – these are worthy of further
examinatio n in order to understand the attitude-travel behaviour gap. These will be examined
in more detail together with their policy implications in Chapter 4.
3.4
The attitude-behaviour gap
The attitude-behaviour gap could be described as one of the greatest challenges facing the
public climate change agenda – and is true of all attempts to influence individual behaviour,
not only travel. Reducing the emissions of carbon from the transport sector will require far
reaching technological as well as behavioural shifts (Banister and Hickman 2006; Anable and
Boardman 2005; Bristow et al. 2004). However, the motivators of human behaviour and the
barriers to behavioural change are extremely complex. In this regard, the real difficulty
perhaps lies in our expectation that there should be a consistency between attitudes and
behaviour.
With respect to influencing travel choices and closing this gap, the big question is: does it
actually matter whether people have a detailed knowledge of the causes and consequences of
climate change? It would appear that there are two opposing views on the importance of
information in general with respect to its role in closing the attitude-behaviour gap:
37
Also known as the ‘attitude-action’ or ‘value-action’ gap.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
62
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
(i) Those that believe that if only people are informed and knowledgeable, they will
act in accordance with this new knowledge (termed the ‘deficit model’);
(ii) Those that believe that information is a necessary but not sufficient ingredient to
encourage individual action. Advocates of this belief recognise the need to
understand behaviour change from a number of different perspectives
(anthropological, socio-psychological and economic) and at a number of different
levels in society and strive for a more civic or deliberative ideal of public
engagement. The evidence review suggests that this view is the emerging
consensus.
It should be said that there are also some who believe regardless of how well engaged the
public is with the issue of climate change, the potential for change is small, particularly with
respect to travel behaviour (Kurani 2002, Owens 2000, Alexander Ballard & Associates
2005). They believe the disconnect between the awareness of, and concern for, climate
change is predictable and even inevitable. This is because of the objective constraints on the
freedom to act, the level of complexity involved in comparing alternative behaviours, and a
lack of real behavioural options mean that people are unable to choose behaviours in
accordance with their pro-environmental beliefs.
Hence, an understanding of the different roles played by knowledge, attitudes and behaviour
lies in an appreciation of the factors that modify them. These include objective situational
factors such as the existence of transport infrastructure including alternative fuels and vehicles
and the economic and regulatory environment. Equally important are the more subjective
psychological factors that include: values, self identify, locus of control (efficacy), awareness
of the environmental consequences, moral norms, issues of trust and cognitive dissonance.
What makes psychological factors of particular interest is that, not only do they influence
behaviour directly, they also mediate the more objective situational factors. For example, it is
often how consumers perceive the economic environment that influences their behaviour
rather than the actual costs (Potter and Lane, in press).
In order to fully understand the role of these factors, it is instructive to place them in
established socio-psychological models. Fortunately, there is a large body of existing
literature that describes a plethora of theories and experimentation relating to attitudes to
behaviour. These offer a sophisticated set of approaches. However, much of the application of
this theory to answer questions such as why do people act environmentally? and what are the
barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? has been centred on domestic behaviours (e.g.
home energy use, composting and recycling). Until quite recently, transport energy use has
been relatively ignored by psychologists and sociologists and, likewise, transport researchers
and practitioners have not taken advantage of insights offered by these disciplines.
Nevertheless, not only are there valuable lessons to be learnt from the application of these
theories to other behaviours, psychological and sociological attitude studies are becoming
more prevalent in the study of travel behaviour.
As part of the evidence review, the authors have reviewed some of this relevant literature, to
give an indication of the broader research findings that have informed current theory and
practice in the area of pro-environmental behaviour change. This is a field of study that spans
many decades, covers many different behaviours and is the subject of a growing body of
research. Although this review is by definition incomplete, the following section discusses the
most influential and commonly used frameworks that have been developed to explain the
attitude-behaviour gap. These have been selected to provide context to the closer examination
of specific barriers that exist to converting climate change awareness into less carbon
intensive travel behaviour by individuals – the subject of Chapter 4.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
63
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
3.5
A typology of attitude-behaviour theories
Given that there is no ‘grand unified theory’ of behaviour change, numerous theoretical
frameworks have been developed to explain the disconnect between the possession of proenvironmental attitudes and pro-environmental behaviour. Nevertheless, although many
hundreds of studies have been undertaken, no definitive explanation has been found:
This indicates that the question of what shapes pro-environmental behaviour is
such a complex one that it cannot be visualised through one single framework or
diagram.
(Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002)
In his review of the state of knowledge on Personal responsibility and changing behaviour
for the Cabinet Office, Halpern et al. (2004) offers a useful typology of frameworks and
models that can be of use in thinking through the approaches to behaviour change. Halpern
considers these theories as necessarily operating at a number of different levels, namely:
• Individual level theories – describing the behaviour of individuals (incorporating
values, attitudes, beliefs, social norms and intentions);
• Interpersonal level theories – describing the relationship between individuals (trust,
social networks); and
• Community level theories – stressing the dynamics of community structures or
institutions (societal norms and culture, communications and the media).
Despite the fact that some of the most innovative and successful attempts at changing travel
behaviour using largely voluntary, information-based tools have been at the social/
organisational/ community level (such as workplace travel plans and car clubs), the main
focus of pro-environmental travel behaviour research has been conducted at the individual
level. There is some evidence that more community-led approaches can be advantageous in
the long-term – this is due in part to the fact that the changed behaviour of individuals and
communities interact, thereby establishing new social norms (Halpern et al. 2004). Chapter 6
will discuss community-based social marketing methods that adopt a more ecological
approach by distributing information at each of the three levels identified above and adopting
an incremental and staged approach to change – this approach draws upon many of the
principles and lessons learnt from the empirical research now reviewed.
For a thorough and enlightening discussion of many different types of theory in more detail
than can be afforded here, see Jackson 2005 and Halpern et al. 2004, and specifically in
relation to travel behaviour, Wall 2006. The remainder of this chapter will review the
following theories:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Table 3.1 Theories reviewed in this chapter
Individual Level
Interpersonal Level
Community/Network Level
The deficit model
6. Triandis’ theory of
8. Social capital theory
interpersonal behaviour
Rational choice theory
9. Diffusion of innovations
7.
Social
learning
theory
The theory of planned
behaviour
Norm activation theory
Values-beliefs-norms
theory
Stages of Change Models
10. Transtheoretical model (TTM)
11. Systems theory
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
64
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
3.6
Individual level theories
Individual level theories focus on understanding behaviour by looking at the influences and
processes involved in individuals’ decision-making. They differ according to the degree to
which they incorporate internal and external influences including wider social processes and
opportunity to act (situational constraints and habit). Some of the key models that have been
developed that feature strongly in the evidence review are now outlined.
3.6.1
The Deficit model
Individual level theory
Deficit model
(Burgess et al. 1998)
•
•
•
Main constructs
Knowledge
Attitudes
Behaviour
Description
Rationalist model of public
understanding based on the linear
progression of knowledge leading to
awareness/ concern (attitudes), which in
turn is assumed to link to behaviour.
The oldest and simplest models were based on the linear progression of environmental
knowledge leading to environmental awareness and concern (environmental attitudes), which
in turn were thought to lead to pro-environmental behaviour (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002).
These are the rationalist deficit models of public understanding already described:
Figure 3.1 Linear ‘deficit’ model of pro-environme ntal behaviour
(Source: Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002)
The aforementioned attitude-behaviour gap has been the source of much puzzlement to policy
makers (and the focus of much research by academics). In the absence of a more sophisticated
level of understanding of the factors influencing behaviour, the fact that people claim to be
exercised about issues such as climate change but seem reluctant to turn that concern into
meaningful action, has led to the instinctive reaction among policy makers to try and bridge
the gap by providing more information (Owens 2000). This assumes a deficit framework.
The assumption is that if only people knew and understood more about connections between
their own behaviour and a range of environmental threats, they would act in a more
sustainable way (e.g. insulate their lofts, cycle to work, recycle more domestic waste), thus
responding more rationally to the risks. Indeed, the majority of behaviour change
programmes, particularly large-scale awareness campaigns such as ‘Save It’ in the late 1970s
and ‘Are You Doing Your Bit?’ launched in 1998, begin with this assumption.
Similarly, in the light of these assumptions, the rationale behind public participation can be to
replace ignorant protest with enlightened acceptance in order to dampen local opposition to a
given initiative (Devine-Wright 2004). In addition, the most pervasive information ‘provider’
– the media – is relevant to this discussion. Owens notes that advocates of the deficit model
believe:
… if only some way could be found of dealing with an ill-informed and
mischievous media that scientific facts and objectivity will eventually win the
day.
(Owens 2000)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
65
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
Although not necessarily labelled as such, the deficit model has been the predominant
approach in behaviour change programmes thus far, and continues to be so. Devine-Wright
(2004) recently employed thematic content analysis in a study of policy makers involved in
the implementation of renewable energy initiatives, and showed that a majority of
interviewees represented human behaviour in a 'deficit' manner: they viewed inaction as either
a consequence of a lack of information, appropriate technologies or economic incentives. This
is in spite of the fact that the interviewees acknowledged the attitude-behaviour gap and the
limitations of the deficit model. He concludes:
… current UK government schemes simply reinforce an information deficit
model of human behaviour and fail to change representations of the customer
towards a more complex 'sustainable' or 'citizenship' model of human
behaviour associated with a participatory rather than managed approach to
the demand side.
(Devine-Wright 2004)
Having said that, the shortcomings of this approach have been discussed in detail in recent
Government evidence base reviews in preparation for the development of the UK Climate
Change Communications Initiative38 (Collins et al. 2003; Futerra 2005; Darnton 2005;
Halpern et al. 2004; Jackson 2005). In a recent comprehensive review of the literature and
consultation with experts on how to motivate ‘green’ behaviour, Hounsham (2006) concludes
that we should expect very little from the provision of information alone. On the basis of his
evidence review, he offers the following synopsis:
Unfortunately, most of the lifestyle decisions we seek to influence are not
determined mainly by rational consideration of the facts, but by emotions,
habits, personal preferences, fashions, social norms, personal morals and
values, peer pressure and other intangibles.
(Hounsham 2006)
Consistent with this and bemoaning the superficiality of most questionnaire survey research,
Rose et al. (2005) assert that it is essential to understand how people respond when a
messenger asks them to take action, or when they are told about a problem or solution, and to
design campaigns to meet these psychological responses. As noted by Eden, attitudes and
behaviour are “…intimately dependent on … interpretation of the issues”, rather than
presentation of the ‘facts’ (Eden 1996).
All the authors cited are referring here to a huge body of research indicating that what drives
behaviours, and attitudes, are a whole variety of psychological, social, objective and
subjective factors. Some of this is reviewed below and in Chapter 4. The shortcomings of the
deficit model are further discussed in Chapter 7.
3.6.2
Rational choice theory
Individual level theory
Linear (economic) model
(various)
•
•
•
Main constructs
Costs and benefits
Knowledge
Behaviour
Description
The simplest theories see people as
rational economic actors, assessing
costs and benefits, seeking to
maximising welfare and making
perfectly informed decisions.
This theory views people as rational economic actors (rational choice theory), who, faced
with a decision, assess the costs and benefits of the available options, with the aim of
maximising their welfare (Halpern et al. 2004). The classic tools of government (price
38
http://www.climatechallenge.gov.uk/downloads/communicating_climate_change.pdf
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
66
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
signals, information and legal punishment) follow from this model and have formed the basis
for much government action to manage transport demand. Policy instruments such as fuel and
road pricing, internalization of external social and environmental costs, and improved
information provision, have been envisaged and/or implemented in order to lead individuals
to modify their travel behaviour. Thus far, however, the results of the policies have been
mixed, and they have notably failed to curb the growth in CO2 emissions and land use for
transport infrastructure (Kurani 2002).
However, whilst economic measures are clearly very important (and sometimes effective),
attempting to predict people’s behaviour on purely economic grounds is rarely adequate
(Halpern et al. 2004, Kurani 2002). This is because the assumptions of this model are rarely
met in three important respects: (i) often there are large gaps in the information available to
individuals (and the state) which means that they cannot weigh up costs and benefits
definitively; (ii) human cognition and motivation are different to simple desire to maximise
economic utility and they do not follow a linear decision making process; and (iii) the
textbook rational man model tends to neglect the wider social ‘ecology’ in which people live.
For example, peer pressure can be a hugely important determinant of behaviour. Indeed,
despite the overwhelming emphasis in travel behaviour research on economic factors, their
interplay with complex social, infrastructural and psychological factors are only poorly
understood.
3.6.3
Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)
Individual level theory
Theory of planned
behaviour
(Ajzen 1991)
•
•
•
•
Main constructs
Attitude toward the behaviour
Perceived behavioural control
Subjective norm
Behavioural intention
Description
Rational choice theory predicting
that intention is the key determinant
of behaviour. Attitudes are
combined with social norms and
perceived control and influence
intention.
Psychology has borrowed from rational choice theory. Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour
(TPB) is by far the most common and influential theory used to explore the attitude-behaviour
gap for innumerable behaviours in the social, environmental, and health psychology fields
(for a recent review see Armitage and Conner 2001). Indeed, it is striking just how often the
TPB is mentioned (or implied) in the literature on environmental behaviours, even if it is not
actually used.
The theory predicts that attitudes do not determine behaviour directly. Rather, combined with
social norms and perceptions of control, attitudes influence behavioural intentions. According
to the TPB, intention is the key determinant of behaviour (see Figure 3.2). The TPB proposes
that intention is determined by three components:
1. Attitude – the degree to which an individual has a positive or negative evaluation of
performing a particular act;
2. Subjective norm (or social norm) – a person’s perception that ‘significant others’ think they
should perform the behaviour in question;
3. Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC) – is the belief about how feasible it is to perform a
particular behaviour. In Figure 3.2, the dashed arrow leading directly to behaviour indicates
that, where PBC accurately reflects factors affecting control, it can directly influence
behaviour.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
67
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
Figure 3.2 The Theory of Planned Behaviour
(Source: Ajzen, 1991) 39
Within the framework of TPB, attitudes and norms are assumed to be determined by salient
beliefs, a valuation of each belief, and a summation of some product of beliefs and their
value. Thus ‘the ultimate determinants’ of any behaviour are beliefs. Both positive and
negative beliefs are weighted (by the individual), and then summed to yield an overall
attitude, subjective norm and level of perception of control.
According to the theory, beliefs themselves are strongly influenced by a person’s values and
are dependent to some degree on knowledge— facts or things believed to be factual. This
knowledge may also determine which beliefs are salient and establish the value of the beliefs.
This helps to explain why knowledge alone does not necessarily lead to a change in
behaviour. As Barr notes:
From the perspective of environmental policy, [the TPB] represents the
discrepancy between an individual’s aspirations and their actions, or from a
more sceptical position, the difference between rhetoric and reality.
(Barr 2004)
The TPB has several advantages to offer a study of travel mode choice which aims to explore
the pivotal role of conflicting objectives and the effect of subjective and objective constraints.
For example, TPB:
• Assesses the effects of belief in a structured way, and allows for the possibility that a
traveller may have ‘mixed emotions’ about choosing a particular mode, such as when a
choice of mode requires extra ‘effort’ on the part of the traveller (Stradling 2001);
• Facilitates the clarification of the distinctions between different types of beliefs and their
respective roles (Ajzen 1991). Normative beliefs, for example, have been absent from the
majority of travel behaviour research;
• Provides an immediate explanation as to why efforts to estimate relationships between
attitudes and behaviour often show only (at best) a slight correlation – they may be
ignoring social norms that also shape behavioural intention or perceptions of a persons
own ability to perform a behaviour;
• Captures the tenet that attitudes may be based on incorrect beliefs (or mis-conceptions) –
another important factor in influencing travel mode choice;
39
Available at: http://www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~aizen/tpb.diag.html
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
68
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
• Highlights the importance of subjective norms – the perceived beliefs of others – as well
as individual attitudes and characteristics, and therefore provides a conceptual link to
interpersonal and community theories of behaviour change (Halpern et al. 2004).
Because the TPB has been used extensively to study a broad variety of behaviours there
exists in the socio-psychology literature a wide body of evidence evaluating and criticising
the theory. The majority of these criticisms are especially applicable in a travel behaviour
context because there are numerous confounding factors when attempting to predict travel
behaviour from attitudes. Some examples are as follows:
• Criticism of the expectancy value approach that suggests systematic decision making
based on rational assessment of outcome beliefs (Armitage et al. 1999);
• Inflexibility of the framework to account for the range of alternative variables that are
considered to influence both behavioural intention and behaviour;
• Travel is often habitual and thus removed from rational-choice (e.g. Aarts and
Dijksterhuis, 2000);
• The need to extend the TPB to take account of the social context of decision making and
variables such as moral norm (Armitage and Conner 2001; Ouellette & Wood 1998;
Stradling and Parker 1996; Parker et al. 1995; Eagly and Chaiken 1993; and in a travel
context: Forward 1994) and 1998; Bamberg and Schmidt 1998; Verplanken et al. 1994
and 1997; Aarts and Dijksterhuis 2000);
• The difficulties of identifying which beliefs are salient (Carbonell et al. 1996);
• Cognitive dissonance40 and its effects on the power of the analysis (Van Vugt et al.
1996a);
• Many attempts to explain modal choice, preference and/ or acceptance of transport
policies now examine a wider range of motives than instrumental concerns alone (e.g.
notions of excitement and feelings of status) (Handy, Weston and Mokhtarian, 2005;
Steg, 2005; Anable and Gatersleben 2005; Wall 2006).
Importantly, with respect to assessing the attitudes to climate change and travel behaviour,
the TPB may be particularly inappropriate. The TPB states that attitudes are based on beliefs
and beliefs are about a particular object. The great difficulty with climate change is the
ambiguity of the object in this case. Is climate change conceptualised as ‘pollution’? Is it sea
level rise? Is it local or global? In most studies measuring attitudes to climate change, this is
an attitude object that has been forced on the respondent by researchers, but which may, or
may not, make sense to them. The same issues apply to the measurement of attitudes to the
environment. What is more, the constructs in the model are measured in a variety of different
ways making it very difficult to compare across results.
These criticisms together infer that the TPB may be too simplistic for a study of travel
behaviour and climate change – the theory has typically been used to examine behaviours
pertaining to simple binary choices. It can be argued that travel choices are more complex,
especially given that these behaviours can become habitual (see Chapter 4).
40
Cognitive dissonance is the process whereby people tend to over-exaggerate the importance of
attributes and favour attitudes that support the decision they have already made (Van Vugt et al. 1996).
Whilst the variables remain valid indicators of intention, the artificial exaggeration or understatement
of certain variables reduces the power of the analysis. In the context of travel, for example, Van Vugt et
al. (1996) analysed the introduction of the first car pool lane in Europe. Their results concluded that the
intervention failed because the solo drivers increased the importance of attributes related to driving
alone, e.g. flexibility, and decreased the importance of attributes related to car pooling such as lower
costs.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
69
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
However, in support of TPB is its simplicity, structure and applicability , which are also its
attraction. The theory is also used by many researchers to model more complex behaviours
(Armitage and Conner 2001). Generally, researchers have concluded that although the
mediating factors between general attitudes and specific behaviours are complex, predicting
behaviour from attitude and cognitive predispositions is viable and can be informative in
identifying where and how to try out strategies for changing behaviour (Hamid and Cheng
1995). Since the TPB has received extensive support in the attitude and behavioural
literature, several researchers have refined and enhanced its explanatory and predictive
validity. Being able to draw upon this empirical insight and adapt the theory accordingly is
an argument in favour, not against its use. Hence, the TPB provides a useful starting point
for environmental researchers examining the attitude-behaviour discrepancy as it is possible
to add components from other models to improve its accuracy.
3.6.4
Norm Activation Theory (NAT) and Value Belief Norm Theory (VBM)
Individual level theory
Norm Activation Theory
(Schwartz 1977)
Value Belief Norm
Theory
(Stern et al. 1999)
•
•
•
Main constructs
Awareness of consequences
Responsibility denial
Personal norm
•
•
•
•
Awareness of consequences
Ascription of responsibility
Personal norm
Personal values
Description
Normative self-expectations (moral
or personal norms) are the
immediate antecedent of altruistic
acts and are activated by awareness
of the consequences and feelings of
responsibility.
Developed by substituting NAT’s
‘responsibility denial’ for ‘ascription
of responsibility’ and adding in
personal values.
Schwartz’s Norm Activation Theory (NAT) was proposed to explain the psychological
processes giving rise to altruistic/ environmental behaviours (Schwartz 1977). In this theory,
normative self-expectations (moral or personal norms – PN) are the immediate antecedent of
altruistic acts and are activated by awareness of the consequences and feelings of
responsibility. Stern et al. (1999) developed this theory by substituting ‘responsibility denial’
for ‘ascription of responsibility’ (AR) and adding in values to form the Value Belief Norm
Theory (VBN).
Many studies examine these concerns using Schwartz’s NAT, which proposes that some
behaviours (termed ‘altruistic’) are performed for others’ benefit. When an individual values
another’s welfare, believes that their own actions have consequences for another (awareness
of consequences – AC) and feels personal responsibility for those consequences (ascription of
responsibility – AR), they will feel moral obligation to protect that welfare. This normative
self-expectation is captured by the PN construct, which is altruistic behaviour’s immediate
psychological antecedent.
In the VBN, environmental behaviour is linked to values through a causal chain of
intermediate variables. According to this model, an individual’s propensity to act in a proenvironmental manner is based on the extent to which that individual’s actions have
consequences for things they value (i.e. the self, others, and biosphere). Every person has all
three orientations but in different strengths (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002).
The model has a hierarchical character. That is, values are seen as causally antecedent to
worldviews, more specific beliefs and attitudes including AC and AR, and, ultimately,
behaviour. It is argued that values and worldviews act as filters for new information so that
congruent attitudes and beliefs (i.e. concern about specific environmental problems or
attitudes toward certain behaviours) are more likely to emerge (Poortinga et al. 2004). These
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
70
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
specific attitudes and beliefs then determine environmental behaviour. The framework
describes a series of causal stages as illustrated in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.3 Schematic model of variables in the Value -Belief-Norm theory as applied to
environmentalism,
(source: Devine-Wright 2004)
The VBN model therefore extends its causal chain back as far as values. Acts of
environmental citizenship are rooted in stable, deeply held personal values and the adoption
of a worldview that recognizes limits to growth, disadvantages of science and technology and
the rights of the natural environment (Devine-Wright 2004). Values and worldviews differ in
the sense that values are situation-transcending beliefs about what is important in life,
whereas worldviews are general beliefs related to a specific domain of life (Poortinga et al.
2004). Many have used the New Environmental Paradigm scale (NEP) to measure these
values in the context of environmentally responsible behaviour (Dunlap and Van Liere 1978;
Dunlap et al. 2000). The NEP is aimed at measuring people’s views on the humanenvironment relationship. As such, NEP can be considered as a worldview on the
vulnerability of the environment to human interference (Poortinga et al. 2002) and is
commonly used to measure general environmental concern.
Flowing from this is a layer of beliefs concerning individual awareness of the negative human
and environmental consequences about which action could or should be taken. In the context
of this review, this is likely to be an awareness of climate change or air pollution. If
awareness is present, the individual ascribes personal responsibility to themselves to act to
remedy the situation and the person feels a sense of moral obligation to act. This in turn leads
to pro-environmental behaviours (such as environmental ‘citizenship’ or ‘activism’).
If awareness of consequences is necessary for environmental action, then programmes of
public education serving to link the general environmental problem of climate change with
the specific issue of carbon emissions from transport are necessary. However, it is clear (as
Chapter 2 showed) that many members of the public still do not link household energy
consumption with the wider problem of climate change.
The advantages/ disadvantages of the VBN approach can be seen in relation to the Theory of
Planned Behaviour. Differences between VBN and the TPB include:
• The VBN emphasises altruism – in the VBN, benefits to others are prioritised over selfinterest. The TPB, however, stresses personal utility. Although attitudes in the TPB may
capture beliefs that a behaviour is positive because it benefits others, these are not
assumed to be necessary for action;
• VBN focuses on internal normative and moral influences (PN), while the TPB focuses on
external ones (SN);
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
71
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
• The TPB captures perceived control over behaviour (and, by implication, perceptions of
context), but VBN does not; and
• The TPB includes the behavioural intention construct, while NAT does not.
After completing an extensive literature review concerning the application of psychological
theory to commuting behaviour, Wall concludes that there is benefit in developing a model
incorporating constructs from each (Wall 2006) and suggests it is beneficial to see NAT/
VBN, the TPB and their constructs as complementary. Each captures different motives and
together they account for various altruistic and self-interested concerns. Wall also notes,
however, that travel psychology studies find some influences on modal choice that are not
accounted for by either the NAT/VBN or the TPB; most notably, affective evaluations
(emotions such as freedom and status), social-symbolic motives (self identity) and habitual
behaviours.
3.7
Interpersonal behavioural theories
As Wall reminds us, in addressing individuals’ attitudes to travel, we seem to be swimming
against a strong pro-driving tide at a societal level (Wall 2006). Taking an interpersonal
perspective reminds us that the immediate antecedents of individuals’ travel behaviour are
part of a larger causal process and forces us to ask where people’s attitudes originate and how
they relate to shared representations of travel.
Sociological theories stress the interpersonal environment including: social networks, social
support, role models and mentoring (Halpern et al. 2004). The key insight of these theories is
that behaviour change can often be more effectively influenced by focusing, not just on the
individual, but on shared ideas and the relationships between the individual and those around
them. Overemphasis on individual behaviour change (with a focus on the cognitive level) has
undermined the overall research capacity to understand the complexities of travel behaviour.
Research centred on the individual usually ignores the interactive relationship of behaviour in
its social, cultural and economic dimension, thereby missing the possibility to fully
understand crucial determinants of behaviour.
A main difference between individual and social models is the latter’s aim at changes at the
community level. Sociological theories assert that society is broken up into smaller
subcultures and it is the members of one’s immediate surroundings, the peer group, that has
the most significant influence on behaviour. According to this perspective, efforts to change
behaviour depend on the development of strategies to enlist community mobilisation thereby
modifying the norms of the peer network. This issue will be discussed in more detail in
Section 6.
3.7.1
Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (TIB)
Interpersonal theory
Triandis’ theory of
interpersonal behaviour
Triandis (1977)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Main constructs
Attitudes
Social factors
Affect
Habit
Intention
Facilitating conditions
Description
Intentions are immediate
antecedents of behaviour - but
crucially habits also mediate
behaviour. Both of these influences
are moderated by ‘facilitating
conditions’ (contextual factors).
Although not a true interpersonal theory (as the TIB still deals with individual level decision
making), this framework recognises the key role played both by social factors and by
contextual factors in forming intentions (Jackson 2005). As in many of the other individual
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
72
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
level models, intentions are immediate antecedents of behaviour but crucially habits also
mediate behaviour. Both of these influences are moderate d by ‘facilitating conditions’
(contextual factors).
Figure 3.4 Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour
(source: Jackson 2005)
Social factors include norms, roles and self -concept. Norms are social rules about what should
and should not be done. Roles are “sets of behaviours that are considered appropriate for
persons holding particular positions in a group” (Triandis 1977, cited in Jackson 2005). Self ­
concept refers to the idea that one has of oneself, the goals that it is appropriate for that kind
of person to pursue, and the behaviours that this kind of person does or does not engage in.
Jackson describes these elements of the TIB as drawing from social psychological theories of
self and identity and supported by the insights of social identity theory. These are vital areas
for exploration in relation to mode choice (see Chapter 4).
Jackson (2005) is able to summarise this model as follows:
...my behaviour in any particular situation is, according to Triandis, a function
partly of what I intend, partly of my habitual responses, and partly of the
situational constraints and conditions under which I operate. My intentions in
their turn are influenced by social, normative and affective factors as well as by
rational deliberations. I am neither fully deliberative, in Triandis’ model, nor
fully automatic. I am neither fully autonomous nor entirely social. My
behaviours are influenced by my moral beliefs, but the impact of these is
moderated both by my emotional drives and my cognitive limitations.
(Jackson 2005)
The TIB model unusually includes an explicit role for affective factors on behavioural
intentions (see Section 4.5.8). Again these are very relevant for car use and travel behaviour.
Emotional responses to a decision are distinct from rational- instrumental evaluations of
consequences, and may include both positive and negative emotional responses of varying
strengths.
Although common in other domains (e.g. Kingston et al. 2004 cited in Wall 2006 in the
context of medical practice), the TIB has have not contributed to cumulative understanding
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
73
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
environmentally oriented behaviours to the same extent as the NAT/ VBM or the TPB. This is
surprising as the framework includes notions of habit, self identity, affective/ emotional
response, and situationa l constraints - all of which are omitted from the more commonly
applied TPB and VBN models and all of which are extremely relevant in the travel context.
Jackson (2005) suggests this is partly due to its complexity.
Bamberg and Schmidt (2003) compared Triandis’ (1977) theory of interpersonal behaviour
with NAT and the TPB in terms of its ability to explain travel mode choice. Bamberg and
Schmidt found that the TIP had much greater explanatory power than the other two models. In
particular, role beliefs had a stronger effect than social norms and habit had the strongest
influence on self reported modal choice.
No other applications of this model to travel behaviour have been found in the literature used
for this review.
3.7.2
Social learning theory (SLT)
Interpersonal theory
Social learning theory
(Bandura 1986)
•
•
•
•
•
Main constructs
Learned behaviour
Modelled behaviour
Self-efficacy
Skill & competency
Outcome expectancies
Description
Rewards or punishments influence
the likelihood that a person will
perform a particular behaviour in a
given situation. People can learn by
observing others, in addition to
learning by participating.
Individuals are most likely to model
behaviour observed by others they
identify with
Social learning theory emphasizes the importance of observing and modelling the behaviours,
attitudes, and emotional reactions of others. This theory focuses on skill and competency, and
emphasises the importance of enhancing a person’s behavioural capability and selfconfidence (Halpern et al. 2004). The main premise of Bandura’s theory is that, in addition to
our own direct experience, we learn by observing others around us, including our parents, our
peers and those portrayed through the media, and modelling our behaviour on what they do
(Jackson 2005).
Social learning theory explains human behaviour in terms of continuous reciprocal interaction
between cognitive, behavioural, an environmental influences. Behaviour can be influenced
simply by conveying knowledge and skills. In a travel context, this would, for example,
knowing what public transport is available for a given journey, how often it runs, how much it
costs and exactly how to use it.
Self -efficacy is a key concept in the theory, and refers to a person’s confidence in their ability
to take action and to persist with that action. There are several ways to increase self-efficacy:
• Setting small, incremental goals;
• Behavioural contracting – by using a formalized process to establish goals and specify
rewards (reinforcement); and
• Monitoring and reinforcement – feedback from self-monitoring or record-keeping
reinforcement, for example rewarding progress.
As discussed in Section 3.6.1, policy-makers have traditionally placed a high emphasis and
expectation on information provision and the ability of persuasion to achieve goals that are in
the public interest. But, as was also suggested, these methods are ineffective on their own.
The application of social learning theory offers a more effective way of achieving behavioural
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
74
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
change through trial and error, observing what others do, and observing how others respond to
one’s own behaviour.
Social learning is a powerful avenue for effective travel behaviour change. Jackson suggests
that the potential applications of social learning theory for pro-environmental behaviours are
legion. Modelling behaviour on others plays a key role in the establishment and maintenance
of social norms. For example, people learn and remember how, where and when to put out the
recycling as much from observations of those around them as by information from the
council. Identity-related buying behaviours (e.g. clothes, cars, appliances) are influenced by
those on whom identity is modelled and by those from whom a person is hoping to distinguish
themselves. Jackson suggests the promotion of sustainable behaviours would benefit from the
use of influential role models and stealth marketing of pro-social messages.
Social learning theory comprises the principles behind individualised marketing/ travel
blending (DfT 2001 and 2005; Ampt 2003). Halpern et al. (2004) uses individualised
marketing as an example of a face-to-face, interpersonal approach that is a highly effective
strategy (see Chapter 6 for a discussion of individualised marketing).
3.7.3
Other interpersonal level theories
Halpern et al. (2004), Jackson (2005) and Wall (2006) make reference to additional
interpersonal theories. House’s (1981) Social Networks and Support theory; Kelly and
Thibaut’s (1978) Social Influence and Interpersonal Communication theory; Moscovici’s
(2000) Social Representations theory, Breakwell’s (1993) Identity Process theory, and
Giddens’ (1990) work on trust have all been suggested as being potentially useful in the area
of pro-environmental behaviour. What these theories all have in common is a reminder that
the immediate antecedents of individuals’ travel behaviour are part of a larger causal process
and that it is necessary to question where people’s attitudes originate and how they relate to
shared representations of travel. Notions of the car in expressing self-identity and modelling
oneself on others, together with affective notions of freedom and control may be deeply
ingrained in UK society and, as such, could hinder any attempt to reduce car use and promote
alternatives (Wall 2006).
3.8
Community theories of behaviour
These theories are based on understanding how groups, organisations, social institutions and
communities function. Kurani (2002) provides useful insights as to why community
engagement is particularly effective at changing attitudes and behaviours and notes that much
of the Diffusion of Innovation literature concerns itself with the movement of information
through social networks (i.e. communities). Community centred theories will now be
discussed – and issues pertinent to encouraging pro-environmental behaviours at the
community level will be discussed in detail in Chapter 6.
3.8.1
Social capital theory
Community level theory
Social Capital Theory
(Bourdieu 1986; Coleman
1988; Putman 1995)
•
•
•
•
•
Main constructs
Networks
Norms
Values and informal sanctions
Perception of trust
Social proof
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Description
Social capital has been defined as
the connections and relationships
among and between individuals.
These consist of the networks,
norms, relationships, values and
informal sanctions that shape
society’s social interactions.
75
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
Social capital has been defined as the connections and relationships among and between
individuals (Gray et al. 2006). These relationships consist of the networks, norms,
relationships, values and informal sanctions that shape the quantity and co-operative quality
of a society’s social interactions (Halpern et al. 2004). Typical measures of social capital are
the perception of trust and participation in organizations such as political parties, clubs, trade
unions, and church and women’s organizations. Variations in social capital can help explain
variations in key policy outcomes, including economic performance, crime, education, health,
and even the efficacy of governments. Halpern offers social proof as a related phenomenon,
which hinges on how people look to those around them – including strangers – for guidance
as to how to behave. The behaviour of others provides us clues about the prevalent social
norms and with evidence about how we should act.
The concept of social capital has been used by numerous authors to investigate various topics.
As yet, however, little attention has been paid to its relationship with travel. Gray et al. (2006)
have applied the concept to mobility and social exclusion. They suggest that the maintenance
of social capital and associated networks within and between communities largely depends on
mobility, but that local social networks are being undermined as a result of growing car
ownership and use. In light of this, strong local social capital appears important in conferring
mobility on certain social groups, especially those without access to a car.
3.8.2
Diffusion of innovations (DOI)
Community level theory
Diffusion of Innovations
Rogers and Everett (1995)
•
•
•
•
Main constructs
The innovation
Its communication
The social system
Time
Description
New products, services, behaviours
and ideas diffuse through a social
network or through the media over
time.
Diffusion of Innovations (DoI) theory is concerned with the manner in which new ideas,
products and social practices spread within a society or from one society to another (Halpern
et al. 2004). According to DoI theory, there are four essential elements: the innovation, its
communication, the social system and time. People’s exposure to a new idea, which takes
place within a social network or through the media, will determine the rate at which various
people adopt a new behaviour.
The DoI theory uses several concepts relevant to a transport context:
• Relative advantage – refers to the degree to which an innovation is seen as better than the
idea, practice, programme, or product it replaces shapes whether it is adopted. In transport
policy it might be preferable specifically to position some activities (such as walking or
cycling short journeys) as better than current practices (such as depending on the car). By
doing this clear choices would be presented for individuals on whether to continue with
an inferior activity or commence a superior one;
• Compatibility – refers to the degree to which an innovation is consistent and compatible
with values, habits, experience and needs of potential adopters shapes whether a new
behaviour is adopted. For example, cycling might be encouraged by equipping offices and
places of work with the appropriate facilities to cater for cyclists – such as showers, safe
storage areas and places to change (Halpern et al. 2004);
• Complexity – refers to how people are more likely to be attracted by innovations that are
easy to understand and/ or use. Transport policy and the shift to public transport might be
enhanced if there was a one-stop advice service for multi-modal public transport journeys
which allowed people a very quick and easy insight into journey routes, times and
booking (Halpern et al. 2004).
Applying the DoI theory to the adoption of low carbon vehicles, Lane and Potter (in press),
highlight the importance of examining the total process of: consideration, adoption, use,
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
76
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
consolidation and/ or rejection of new products when identifying the factors that encourage
consumers to purchase low carbon cars. It also shows that, to reap their potential
environmental benefits, it is clearly not enough to persuade consumers to buy low carbon
vehicles – they have to be able to use them effectively. Lane and Potter identify four key
‘hotspot’ adoption drivers and barriers that are a mixture of relatively general considerations,
such as the importance of quality and price in purchase decisions, plus new factors relevant to
low carbon products – these include the importance of specific technical qualities and design
features, integration between different domestic energy technologies and the effect of
energy/fuel consumption feedback on usage behaviour.
3.9 Stages of Change Models
3.9.1 Transtheoretical model (TTM)
Multi-level Theory
Transtheoretical Model
(Prochaska and Di
Clemente 1983)
•
•
•
•
•
Main constructs
Pre-contemplation
Contemplation
Preparation
Action
Maintenance
Description
People’s attempt to change is
viewed as a process of increasing
readiness. People move through five
stages when attempting to change a
behaviour: pre-contemplation,
contemplation, preparation, action
and maintenance
The individualistic theories described so far were not designed to explain behaviour change
over time (Wall 2006). The TTM is a framework with an explicit temporal dimension.
According to the TTM, people’s attempt to change is viewed as a process of increasing
readiness (see Figure 3.5) from pre-contemplation, to contemplation, preparation, action and
finally to maintenance. Although a simple interpretation of the TTM suggests that change is
linear, practitioners note that people often cycle through stages and may never reach action or
maintenance.
Although originally a theory at the level of the individual, TTM can be applied at the
organisational level to show how organisations progress from one stage to the next. Indeed,
this model has influenced methods of social marketing (see Chapter 6) that gradually build
people’s willingness to take on large-scale changes. Social marketers also stress the
importance of a durable relationship – based on trust – which will enhance confidence to
change rather than a one-off intervention (Halpern et al. 2004)
The TTM model is widely applied in public health including for smoking cessation, exercise,
low fat diet, etc. It has been described as a general explanatory model of intentional
behaviour change (Nigg et al. 1999, cited in Wall 2006). Despite this generality, the TTM has
rarely been applied to environmentally significant behaviour. Its strength is in the recognition
of the gradual nature of change and the fact that individuals (and organisations) progress in
stages and not in a single massive step. Its disadvantage is that it does not provide guidance
on how to progress people from one stage to another.
Examples of the application of the stages of change model include:
• Applied to car and bicycle commuters, Gatersleben (2003) found that attitudes to cycling
became more favourable and perceptions of personal barriers (e.g. fitness) became less
apparent as people moved from pre-contemplation towards maintenance. She found no
significant differences in perceptions of external barriers to cycling (e.g. weather)
between people at different stages;
• Duddleston et al. (2005), includes questions pertaining to each stage in a Scotland-wide
study of travel awareness. They conclude that, although travel behaviour has not changed
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
77
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
between the three survey periods (2001-2005), the continuing increase in levels of travel
awareness – rising familiarity with climate change and congestion charging, bus lanes and
Park & Ride, car sharing and LPG - is consistent with an increase in the number of car
users in Scotland moving from pre-contemplation (‘I’m not even thinking about
changing’) to contemplation (‘It’s something I’m going to have to consider’);
• The widely applied Tapestry project developed by the University of Westminster as part
of a European Union initiative, uses a seven-stage model for travel behaviour change.
This model (shown schematically in Figure 3.5) shows the process each individual/
organisation must go through before reaching an habitual change in travel behaviour; (see
also Potter and Lane 2004 for a discussion)
• Beatty et al. (2002) models driver’s willingness to reduce their car use as measured near
the beginning and end of 2000 (pre- and post- fuel crisis). They concluded that there had
been a lot of change – in both directions regarding willingness to reduce car use. Whilst
the fuel crisis had led some to become much more aware (and dissatisfied) with their
dependence on the car, others had made some drivers realise the lack of satisfactory
alternatives to the car.
Figure 3.5 Tapestry model of behaviour change 41
3.9.2 Systems theory
Multi-level theory
Systems theory
•
•
•
Main constructs
Individual elements
High degree of connectedness
between elements (complexity)
Self-referencing systems
Description
Systems theory is an
interdisciplinary field which
studies relationships of systems as
a whole. It can explain the (often
counter-intuitive) nature of change
within complex systems.
Although not normally associated with travel research, Systems Theory is increasingly
applied in a wide variety of contexts to understand the nature of change within complex
systems. In particular, systems in which there is a large degree of interaction between
41
http://home.wmin.ac.uk/transport/projects/tapestry htm
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
78
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
individual elements are often likely to behave in unpredictable (chaotic ) ways. Given the
complexity of travel behaviour, both at the individual and collective level, and the mutual
influence of individual behaviours (e.g. through private and social norms), it seems likely that
Systems Theory may be able to offer some insights in to existing travel behaviours and
intervention strategies.
One simple example in the literature that (implicitly) uses one element of Systems Theory is a
research paper by Golob and Hensher (1998) who show that public transport use and solodriving are self-sustaining because attitudes that are consistent with a modal choice are
reinforced by the mode chosen. The aspect of Systems Theory in this case is the observation
that feedback loops can re-enforce attitudes and patterns of behaviour. Golob and Hensher
draw the conclusion that any intervention strategy, therefore, needs to take into account the
reinforcing nature of existing travel attitudes and behaviours – the aim should be to design
interventions that can disrupt existing feedback loops and then establish new patterns of
attitudes and behaviours. The positive message offered by this systems approach is that, if
environmentally detrimental feedback loops can be broken, change will proceed at a faster
than expected rate, once the initial barrier has been overcome.
Cairns et al. (2004) provide an example of a virtuous circle that can be understood in terms of
systems approach. In the Smarter Choices report they note that the safety benefits of
encouraging more children to cycle have also been highlighted by a number of commentators
as, in general, higher levels of cycling which seem to result (counter intuitively) in lower
accident rates. They cite the case of the Netherlands where the level of cycle traffic increased
by 30% between 1980 and 1990, yet annual cyclists’ deaths fell. In York, too, where there has
been consistent investment in traffic calming and cycling infrastructure, a 10-year period has
seen casualties reduced by 30%, while peak-hour cycling has increased by 10%. They also
cite Wardlaw (2002) who has compared cycling statistics from the UK with France, Denmark,
Germany and the Netherlands, and concludes that cycling gets safer as it becomes more
popular, and that there is no known example in recent decades when an increase in cycling
has led to an increase in cycle deaths. An international survey of travel by 10-14 year olds,
using comparable data from eight countries has also shown that higher levels of cycling
amongst this age group are linked with fewer accidents per kilometre cycled (Christie et al.
2004, cited by Cairns et al. 2004).
Lastly, based on a number of attitude-behaviour theories, Lane and Potter (in press) have
attempted to graphically represent the role of feedback loops in a model of car purchasing
behaviour (with focus on the adoption of low carbon vehicles) (see Figure 3.6).
Figure 3.6 Factors influencing car-buyer behaviour (Lane and Potter, in press)
Feedback
Situational factors
Theory of Planned Behaviour Model
Values
Beliefs
Attitudes
Intention
Values -Beliefs-Norms Model
Values
Beliefs
Vehicle attributes/application + infrastructure
Car-buyer
behaviour
Economic + regulatory environment
Norms
Habit
Past behaviours
Psychological factors
Feedback
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
79
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
3.10 Evidence gaps and research recommendations
The evidence reviewed in this chapter on the theories of behaviour change and their
application to travel behaviour research has provided a rich interpretation as to why attitudes
are not readily translated into behaviour. In contrast to the rather simplistic deficit model that
has traditionally characterized discussions of this relationship, this analysis highlights the
complex and interacting nature of the knowledge – attitude – action interface. The evidence
has also shown that there is no one unifying theory; that none of the theorie s outlined are
sufficient on their own to explain the links between attitude and behaviour, and that behaviour
change needs to be attended to at a variety of levels in society in order to have wide ranging
and long term effect.
The review has also demonstrated that the application of these theories to travel behaviour has
so far been ad hoc and the state of the art is currently immature. Chapter 7 discusses some of
the weaknesses in the way in which data has predominantly been collected in order to
ascertain the size and nature of the travel attitude-behaviour gap. These weaknesses include
the over reliance on closed questions, relying on a narrow conceptualisation of ‘attitude’ and
inferring causality from cross-sectional data relying on self-reported measures of behaviour.
These weaknesses and inconsistencies in how and what constructs are measured in travel
behaviour surveys mean that it is very difficult to compare results between studies.
Hence, there is wide scope for new insights into individual and societal processes of change
with respect to car purchasing, mode choice, journey frequency and the interaction between
other lifestyle choices and travel. In particular, we need to establish the relative importance of
the barriers and precursors to changing travel behaviour. This can only be done by employing
deliberative methods of investigation (Chapter 7). The next chapter will look more
specifically at the potential role of some of the factors that can affect the link between
attitudes and behaviour that may be strong contenders for further exploration using some of
these methods. Hence, the main recommendation to emerge most strongly from this chapter
is:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
80
3. The attitude-behaviour gap
R4: Barriers to changing travel behaviour
Research is required to develop our understanding of the barriers to travel
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
behaviour change and their relative importance and interaction. Chapters 3 and 4
drew upon social-psychological theory to identify such barriers (and drivers).
These included subjective and objective as well as individual and collective
barriers. A typology was offered, with the caveat that the barriers themselves and
the interactions between them required further in-depth research to understand
how they worked for specific types of travel behaviours and for different people.
The idea will be to utilise methodologies that allow the public to express in their
terms the important barriers to change. The aim is to get closer to the question we
are not yet able to answer with any real authority: how does the u nderstanding of
climate change/ environmental impact affect public attitudes, choices and travel
related behaviour and what are the opportunities to influence this behaviour? To
do this, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of which issues are
important to the public, their relative importance and the magnitude of effect they
will have for different types of travel behaviour for different people. In addition,
further understanding is necessary to illuminate the two-directional causal chain:
(i) how does each barrier affect behaviour? and (ii) how can it be influenced?
Projects using action research or innovative qualitative techniques such as Qsorting (Appendix 3) could be set up to address all four types of barrier (Chapter
4) and their relative imp ortance and interaction. This would draw on socialpsychological insights into the nature of those barriers and motivations and
constraints on behaviour. In addition, studies should be capable of addressing the
deeper levels of learning such as cognitive dissonance and social networks.
This research should further our understanding of why attitudes in all their guises
do not always translate into actions. It should uncover deeper insights into the
emotions that need to be pulled on to change attitudes and influence behaviour in
preparation for more targeted, community level social marketing campaigns (R7).
High
Review + Qualitative
Priority:
Following
DfT/ Research Council
Responsibility:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
81
4. Barriers to change
4: BARRIERS TO BEHAVIOUR CHANGE
4.1
Aims of this chapter
• To examine those variables that have been found to modify the relationship
between stated intention and action (both positively and negatively) specifically
in relation to a variety of travel choices (mode choice, car purchasing,
acceptance of policies). This will include collective and individual together with
subjective and objective factors.
• To draw upon the previous discussion on theoretical frameworks to suggest a
typology of possible barriers to travel behaviour change as a way of clarifying
and organising them.
• To take each barrier in turn (without attempting to be comprehensive) and
present any empirical evidence of its role in relation to transport choice and the
potential for tackling this barrier through policy.
4.2
Main findings
• The review has found conclusive evidence from a variety of diverse disciplinary
sources that if raising awareness about climate change is to link with travel behaviour,
other barriers need to be overcome first.
• Barriers apply either at the personal or at the collective level and may consist of either
subjective or objective factors. This suggests a four-quadrant framework. However,
the interactions between them are complex and any attempt to categorise or model
these barriers will inevitably be simplistic.
• Individual subjective factors include: values; frames; moral norms/ sense of
responsibility; perceived behavioural control; self efficacy/ agency/ locus of control;
denial; instrumental attitudes; affective attitudes; identity and status.
• Individual objective factors include: knowledge/ awareness of consequences and habit
(as well as personal resource constraints).
• Collective subjective factors include: social dilemmas; group cultures/ shared norms;
trust in others and in government.
• Collective objective factors include: contextual/ situational factors; the media as well
as the nature of the climate change problem itself.
• No single barrier or type of barrier is most important or more important than another.
Instead, objective and subjective factors interact. If the external constraints are too
great, people will become discouraged no matter how pro-environmental they are in
themselves. People simply may not be able to act.
• Likewise, no matter how favourable the external circumstances, some powerful
psychological and normative barriers to behaviour will prevent these from being
realised. The literature suggests that self identity is one of the least understood of
these factors.
• Barriers differ for different types of travel behaviour, for different segments of the
population, as well as how they interact and their dynamic feedback effects. These all
remain important priorities for further research.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
82
4. Barriers to change
4.3
Introduction
The previous chapter presented a number of conceptual theories used to try and understand
the attitude-behaviour gap. This introduced a variety of socio-psychological factors that
influence (pro-environmental) behaviour. The main conclusion was that, regardless of the
theoretical framework applied, information and attitudes are consistently shown to rarely lead
directly to behaviour. Instead, they are mediated by a number of different factors,
psychological, social and situational at a variety of levels in society. The review indicated that
many other things besides attitudes need to change before behaviour is influenced.
This chapter will examine those variables that have been found to modify the relationship
between stated intention and action (both positively and negatively) specifically in relation to
a variety of travel behaviours (e.g. mode choice, car purchasing, acceptance of policies). This
will include external factors (e.g. institutional, economic, social and cultural) and internal
factors (e.g. pro-environmental knowledge, awareness, values, attitudes, emotion, locus of
control, responsibilities and priorities).
The purpose of this chapter is not to provide a definitive list of the precursors to travel
behaviour change. In any case, barriers differ for different types of travel behaviour, for
different segments of the population, how they interact and their dynamic feedback effects
and these all remain important priorities for further research. Nevertheless, this analysis aims
to illuminate this complex field and highlight the need to target behaviour change at a number
of different levels – structural, social and psychological. In addition, this chapter aims to
identify those barriers that, with careful management, may offer opportunities for behavioural
change.
4.4
TYPOLOGY OF BARRIERS TO CHANGE
The evidence presented in the previous chapter showed conclusively that if awareness raising
is to link with behaviour, other barriers need to be overcome. As Professor Ekins suggests:
Even if successful in their immediate objectives, whether [awareness raising]
policies actually succeed in changing behaviour will depend on whether they are
sufficient to overcome the numerous barriers to change that exist at many
different levels, and in different ways for different issues. The barriers may be
institutional or infrastructural, related to social norms or expectations, derive
from existing habits, lifestyles or preferences, or reflect shortages of time or
money, or other priorities. A single barrier of any of these kinds may be enough
to prevent a public policy from having its desired effect and, if the policy
includes a sanction for not changing behaviour, may generate political
opposition so that it cannot be implemented.
(Ekins 2003)
As Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) admit (and following on from the issues raised on Chapter
3), developing a behavioural model that attempts to incorporate all the factors behind travel
behaviour might “neither be feasible or useful”. This is particularly the case if we consider the
diversity of actions encompassed by the term ‘travel behaviour’.
Thus, instead of proposing a model of travel behaviour change, we suggest a typology of
barriers as a way of clarifying and organising the possible barriers to behaviour change. The
typology presents these barriers at a number of different inter-dependent levels of analysis
that, while not aiming to be comprehensive, stresses the importance of psychological factors
and of context. These barriers apply either at the personal or at the collective level and may
consist of either subjective issues or objective factors. This suggests a four-quadrant
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
83
4. Barriers to change
framework – one such as the following based on Wilber’s four quadrant structure. A version
of this is used by Alexander Ballard and Associates (2005) when looking at how local
authorities can stimulate and support behaviour change in response to climate change.
Table 4.1 A Typology of barriers to travel behaviour change*
INDIVIDUAL SUBJECTIVE
INDIVIDUAL OBJECTIVE
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Values
Frames
Moral norms / sense of responsibility
Perceived behavioural control
Self efficacy/ agency/ locus of control
Denial
Instrumental attitudes
Affective attitudes
Identity and status
•
•
•
•
Knowledge/ Awareness of consequences
Habit
Personal capabilities**
Actual resource constraints**
COLLECTIVE SUBJECTIVE
•
•
•
Social dilemmas
Group cultures/ shared norms
Trust in others and in government
COLLECTIVE OBJECTIVE
•
•
•
Contextual/ Situational factors
Communication and the media
The nature of the climate change
problem
*Based on Ken Wilber’s four-quadrant structure (Wilber 2000), cited in Alexander Ballard and Associates (2005).
**Not discussed in this review
Wilbur’s framework has been adapted for this review. Although a number of authors have
influenced its development, such a typology needs to be grounded in further research that
takes place specific ally in the travel context and, with the link between transport and climate
change as focus, incorporate any relevant issues. Thus, there are number of caveats to this
structure that must be noted before proceeding with this review:
• This is not a definitive framework and needs to be the subject of further, participatory
research to clarify these barriers and the interactions between them;
• These barriers will be different for different behaviours – mode choice, travel
reduction or car purchasing, and different for different people;
• Some influences seem to fit into multiple categories – this difficulty in defining and
delimiting the different factors is due to the fact that most are broadly and vaguely
defined, interrelated, and often do not have clear boundaries. Although this
complicates the task of classifying them, it reflects the acknowledged interaction
between the individual and the collective or the person and environment;
• Social and cultural factors are placed in the group of collective factors even though it
might be argued that they can be seen as a separate category which overlaps with
internal and external factors (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002).
Most importantly, it must be considered that these factors are not independent of one another
but rather they interact. For example, in many choice situations attitudes have been argued to
be an important explanation for why a certain behaviour is carried out for the first time it
occurs (Garvill et al. 2003). However, the behaviour is evaluated less over time and attitudes
gradually diminish in importance in favour of habitual behaviour (Triandis 1977; Ouellette
and Wood 1998; Gärling et al. 1997). A similar type of interaction has been found between
contextual factors and attitude (Guagnano et al. 1995).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
84
4. Barriers to change
4.5
Individual Subjective factors
4.5.1
Values
The concept of values has something to offer over and above the concept of attitudes. Proenvironmental behaviour may well arise from values that transcend self-interest. Values are
typically conceptualized as important life goals or standards that serve as guiding principles in
life and are responsible for shaping much of our intrinsic motivation (Rokeach 1973).
Definitions of the value construct are numerous. All agree that a value is essentially an
‘enduring belief’ about behaviours or end states (e.g. freedom, happiness, security) which the
individual strives to attain (Rokeach 1973; Gärling et al. 1989). As such, they may provide a
basis for the formation of attitudes and act as guidelines for behaviour.
Values differ from attitudes because they are not tied to specific situations or objects. They
transcend situations by providing a general frame of reference and representing abstract
ideals. Values are more stable over time (and more difficult to influence) than attitudes
because they are more central to an individual’s cognitive system (Rokeach 1973). On the
other hand, attitudes are always an evaluation (good, bad or indifferent) of a specific object or
behaviour.
Ajzen (2001) did not include values in the TPB (see Chapter 3) as it suggests that global
attitudes are poor predictors of specific behaviour. According to the TPB, whether related
specifically to the behaviour in question, or to global values of life, values are background
factors that should influence behaviour only indirectly by guiding a person’s beliefs and
attitudes. Better predictors of behaviour, the theory contends, are obtained by examining more
immediately antecedent behavioural commitments and intentions.
However, others believe that because of their centrality to an individual’s cognitive structure,
values are important predictors of behaviour (Gärling et al. 1989). A strong value-orientation
may lead someone to seek information selectively according to general criteria about what is
or what is not important in life. This process causes information to become meaningful,
salient, and interesting, and determines the development of beliefs about the consequences
that will guide action. In this way, values may provide a ‘social amplifier’ or filter for
information (Stern and Dietz 1994). For example, someone who values economic
development above other social goals may be especially likely to accept information
suggesting that environmental protection will compromise economic growth.
According to Schwartz (1992), in any culture values fall along two dimensions. Firstly, the
‘self enhancement-self transcendence’ dimension reflects the distinction between values
oriented toward the pursuit of self interest and values related to a concern for the welfare of
others. The second dimension, ‘openness to change - conservatism’ indicates the degree to
which individuals are motivated towards independent action and willing to challenge
themselves (intellectually and emotionally) (Banks 1998). Using these dimensions, 10
‘motivational’ types were derived by Schwartz. These are shown in Figure 4.1.
If this theory is valid (and it is certainly plausible), we cannot assume that people will
interpret the same evidence in the same way and we should expect that people have different
perspectives about the state of the world and their role in it. For example, Alexander Ballard
and Associates (2005) assert that if this is the case, then there would be no point in trying to
advocate emissions trading (an individualist or commercial proposal) from the perspective of
the risk to the biosphere (an egalitarian position); it would be better to argue it as a way of
making lots of money. Although many motivational types are contrary, they all have useful
lessons to offer to change management. This has resonance with the discussion on
segmentation in Chapter 5 and ‘framing’ (see Section 4.5.2).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
85
4. Barriers to change
Figure 4.1 Schwartz’s value orientations
SELF-TRANSCENDENCE
Benevolence
Self Direction
Tradition
Conformity
Stimulation
Security
CONSERVATISM
OPENNESS TO CHANGE
Universalism
Hedonism
Achievement
Power
SELF-ENHANCEMENT
(Adapted from Banks 1998)
Continuing the theme of values, Owens suggests that lay people have a non-specific mental
model of environmental risks (Owens 2000, citing Kempton et al. 1995). This means climate
change, for example, may not be seen as a discrete problem, scientifically and physically
defined, but as part of a wider concern about humanity's exploitative relationship with nature,
and about global equity and fairness. This perception may result from a moral value structure
manifesting itself in a general feeling that anthropogenic environmental changes result from
human behaviour that is not `right' (ibid.). Owens concludes:
Whether or not people `act locally' may depend less upon their ability to
distinguish between the greenhouse effect and tropospheric ozone depletion (to
take a much-cited example), … than on the strength of this more general
underlying concern.
(Owens 2000)
Such findings are important, because people are unlikely to support policies aimed at solving
what they do not see to be the (moral) problem, or to act on information about it.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
The role of personal values in influencing pro-environmental behaviour is gaining increasing
attention relative to other solutions such as monetary incentives and punitive sanctions (Stern
and Dietz 1994; Karp 1996; Shultz and Zeleney 1999; The Frameworks Institute 2002; Rose
et al. 2005). In relation to environmental problems, which often arise from a conflict between
individual and collective interests, values may play an important role (Axelrod and Lehman
2003; Karp 1996). However, in regard to environmental values, results have been somewhat
mixed.
There is compelling evidence that individuals who hold positive orientations towards the
environment in general are more likely to act in more appropriate ways. For instance,
experimental work on social dilemmas has shown that value orientations are good predictors
of willingness to co-operate to overcome social dilemmas. Van Vugt et al. (1995) and Van
Lange et al. (1998) applied this in the context of the decision to commute by car or by public
transport, and provided a framework in which it is possible to understand how individuals
with differing social value orientations may behave in a real life social dilemma. Pro-social
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
86
4. Barriers to change
individuals were found to evaluate interdependent situations in terms of collective welfare
whereas pro-self individuals evaluate situations in terms of their own well-being and such
factors as flexibility. Accordingly, pro-socials primarily construed travel behaviour as an
environmental issue whereas pro-selves primarily construe it as an accessibility issue.
Collins and Chambers (2005) found that pro-social values demonstrate stronger preference for
public transport (rather than commuting by car) than pro-selves. They also found that
perceived behavioural control (see Section 4.5.4) and consideration of future consequences
are also important, with situational factors such as cost being important for the formation of
preferences rather than actual behaviour.
On the other hand, Joireman et al. (2001) found that although when looking at willingness to
fund improvements in public transport, pro-socials responded more to the perceived fairness
of the plan, while pro-selves responded more to the plan's effectiveness in reducing
congestion. Pro-socials do not appear to be more sensitive than pro-selves to the perceived
environmental impact of cars. Joireman (2005) asks: Why are pro-socials not more sensitive
than pro-selves to the perceived environmental impact of cars? If not pro-socials, then who
might be especially sensitive to the perceived environmental impact of cars? Joireman finds
that social value orientation is unrelated to commuting preferences – more important than a
pro-social orientation is future orientation (i.e. preferences for distribution of outcomes to self
and others).
How can this barrier be overcome?
In marketing, it is suggested that values are powerful signifiers of purchasing behaviour
possibly surpassing the contribution of other major constructs such as attitudes (Karp 1996).
The consumption of a product can express or fulfil a certain value. For example, persons
placing excitement or security as important are likely to have a different set of preferred
products and services. Likewise, Bedford et al. (2004) observes that groups within socie ty
place value on goods and services in different ways (Karp 1996). Those with more
materialistic values will derive much of their satisfaction of life from their possessions,
whereas other groups with so called ‘post-material’ values may derive satisfaction simply
from feeling that they have been helpful by changing their lifestyles (De Young 2000; Stern
and Dietz 1994).
If this is true, it may be possible to predict preferences in everyday activities, including mode
choice, from knowledge of a person’s values (Gärling et al. 1989). Understanding the current
lifestyles of certain groups, and what has meaning for them, is therefore crucial for facilitating
change (Bedford et al. 2004).
4.5.2
Frames
The notion of ‘frames’ is related to values. Frames are the deeply held worldviews and
assumptions that people hold. They help determine how we interpret, classify, accept or reject
new information. Rose describes them as:
Think of a frame as a... story in your head that allows you to make sense of new
information... These frames embody your values and beliefs. And it is through
these that you interpret the... world around you and find your place within it.
When new information is received it is assigned to a pre-existing frame. The
frame will then determine your interpretation of the information... If the facts
don’t fit the frame, it’s the facts that are rejected, not the frame.
(Rose et al. cited in Hounsham 2006)
This idea led to the development of the ‘strategic frame analysis’ pioneered by the
Frameworks Institute in the US. Tapping into years of research on how people think and
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
87
4. Barriers to change
communicate, this approach emphasises the following factors that must be taken into account
when communicating social issues:
• People use mental shortcuts to make sense of the world;
• Incoming information provides cues about where to “file” it mentally;
• People get most information about public affairs from the news media which, over time, creates a framework of expectation, or a dominant frame;
• Over time, we develop habits of thought and expectation and configure incoming
information to conform to this frame.
(The Frameworks Institute 2002)
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
To our knowledge, there has been no specific research completed on frames with respect to
travel behaviour. (Although the IPPR are currently (end 2005/ beginning 2006) undertaking
some research along these lines in their Public Engagement project.) Research is therefore
needed to deconstruct the dominant frames of reference amongst the public.
How can this barrier be overcome?
Understanding the dominant frames of reference amongst the public can help us to frame or
reframe issues in such a way as to code them with meaning so that they can be effectively
interpreted according to existing beliefs. Again, Rose is able to offer some clarification:
We need to understand the dominant frames that are currently being used to
categorise and interpret... messages, and where these frames are inappropriate
as triggers of positive response, to replace them with others.
(Rose et al. cited in Hounsham 2006)
Once again, segmentation is relevant here. Rose et al. go on to suggest that:
The same actions can often be ‘sold’ to people with different needs, so long as
they are sold very differently. A hybrid car, for example, might appeal to a
‘pioneer’ to help her achieve one planet living. A ‘prospector’ would want one
because they are fashionable.
(Rose et al. cited in Hounsham 2006)
The use of frames in designing effective intervention strategies will be discussed in more
detail in Chapter 6.
4.5.3
Moral norms/ personal responsibility
In his Norm-Activation theory (Chapter 3), Schwartz defines moral norms (often referred to
as personal norms) as self-expectations that are based on internalised values that manifest
themselves in feelings of obligation to engage in behaviour. They are distinct from attitudes:
“Whereas other attitudinal concepts refer to evaluations based on material,
social, and or psychological pay-offs, personal norms focus exclusively on the
evaluation of acts in terms of their moral worth to the self.”
(Schwartz and Howard 1984, cited in Harland et al. 1999)
Moral norms prescribe that certain behaviours are inherently right or wrong, regardless of
their personal or social consequences. They have an autonomous influence over the behaviour
and in this sense they function much like habits (Banks 1998). They are also distinct from
social norms:
What distinguishes personal norms from social norms is that sanctions attached
to personal norms are tied to the self -concept, [whereas those tied to social
norms are anchored in a social group]. Anticipation of or actual conformity to
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
88
4. Barriers to change
self -expectation results in pride, enhanced self esteem, security or other
favourable self evaluations.
(Schwartz 1977).
Hence moral norms are feelings that are generated in the absence of persuasion or
expectation, although perceived expectations of significant others (social norms) can function
to intensify moral obligation.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Bedford et al. (2004) claims that, although there is a level of resistance to adopting
sustainable lifestyles from her focus group participants, the message that environmental
change is the responsibility of all appears to have been accepted. All groups acknowledged
that they needed to play a part, although some individual group members maintained that they
would not take voluntary action.
Previous studies have shown that the addition of moral norm to the TPB leads to better
explanations of intentions and behaviours involving a moral dimension (Harland et al. 1999;
Manstead and Parker 1995). The literature also shows that non-selfish concerns can also
direct travel behaviour:
• Wall (2006) found that those intending to reduce their car use, moral concerns were
more important than personal utility or awareness of consequences. The extent to
which moral concerns affected intentions was, however, partially determined by
perceived control (see Section 4.5.4) over behaviour. Where no alternative to car use
was perceived, feelings of responsibility and obligation for cutting car use were
insufficient to motivate changes in intentions;
• Similarly, Anable (2005) showed that a high level of perceived obligation (combined
with a low level of perceived behavioural barriers) will coincide with reduced driving
frequency;
• Nordlund and Garvill (2003), Bamberg and Schmidt (2003), Harland et al. (1999) all
found personal norm had significant effects on intentions to use non-car modes and
on self-reported use of such modes;
• In Germany, Klöckner and Matthies (2004) report that personal norm was the only
significant predictor of self-reported commuting mode when entered into a regression
analysis alongside social norms and driving habit.
Other studies mention ascription of responsibility. The evidence on the effect of this variable
is mixed. Although some studies on environmental behaviour have empirically differentiated
feelings of personal responsibility and obligation, others have been unable to do so.
Wall (2006) found that in his qualitative survey of travel by staff and students to a university
campus, participants did not distinguish obligation from responsibility. These concepts
seemed to be interchangeable. There seemed to be two types of commuter; those who
characterised travel as moral behaviour and those who did not. He concludes that when efforts
are made to encourage drivers to switch modes, appeals to responsibility and obligation may
not engage the latter group. Moreover, while there was an association between presenting
travel as a moral issue and talking about reducing one’s driving, some participants maintained
that car use was necessary regardless of moral concerns. This further underlines the apparent
importance of perceived control (see Section 4.5.4).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
89
4. Barriers to change
How can this barrier be overcome?
In his theory of activation of altruistic norms, Schwartz (1977) believed that moral norms
become activated by an ascription of individual responsibility to bring about or prevent
consequences of actions.
In a review of personal responsibility and behaviour change, Halpern et al. (2004) suggests
the issue of personal responsibility is emphasised in the literature as a key variable in
implementing successful services and in achieving behaviour change. He believes there are
strong moral and political arguments for protecting and enhancing personal responsibility and
that most of the dominant traditions of social and political thought in the UK value
individuals’ and communities’ ability to take control and act in their own best interests as
goods in themselves. He shows evidence from the British Social Attitudes Survey which
suggests that UK public attitudes have shifted towards a greater emphasis on personal
responsibility. Other things being equal, they see it as better for governments to empower
citizens as much as possible rather than making decisions on their behalf.
Devine-Wright (2004) suggests the concepts of carbon citizenship may be useful ways of
helping to create an ‘imagined community’ in which all sections of society are empowered to
take equitable responsibility for the environmental consequences of their actions.
Environmental citizenship involves recognition that self interested behaviour will not always
protect or sustain public goods such as the environment (see RICS 2005 for a discussion).
4.5.4
Perceived Behavioural Control (PBC)
As a core component of the TPB, perceived behavioural control (PBC) was introduced in
Chapter 3. This refers to a person’s perception about his or her own capability, whether it be
resources (e.g. availability of public transport) or skills, to perform an act. Although taken to
be a proxy for actual control, an individual’s beliefs in what they can do are seen as important
determinants of what they will do. As such, PBC is of greater psychological interest than
actual control as it focuses on the anticipated costs involved in expressing a particular
behaviour (Ajzen and Driver 1992; Tanner 1999). This perception often leads to people
overestimating the inconvenience of behaving sustainably.
According to Ajzen (2001), perceived control over performance of a behaviour is now a
central feature of attitude-behaviour theories. It is a pivotal component of the TPB since there
is a direct link between perceived control and behaviour; even strong motivations may not
influence behaviour if people perceive that the action is – for whatever reason – too difficult
to perform.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
If people perceive no choice but to drive, information about its consequences is unlikely to
influence their behaviour. Studies often report that people feel low control over their modal
choice (e.g. DfT 2003, cited in Wall 2006). PBC moderates the effect of personal norms on
intentions and may affect the extent to which any of the influences actually directs travel
behaviour (Wall 2006). The distinction between PBC and context is unclear. If it is indeed
true that there is no choice, this is a collective and objective structural constraint (as described
in Section 4.8.1). However, many contextual conditions must be interpreted and the extent to
which any is seen as an incentive or barrier to using a particular mode probably depends on
the strength of other motives (Salomon and Mokhtarian 1997, cited in Wall 2006). For
example, someone who enjoys walking may be willing to endure worse weather than
someone who does not share this affective motivation.
Many studies, whether explicitly referring to perceived behavioural control or not, examine
the perceived difficulty and/ or possibility of performing particular actions (e.g. using non-car
modes). Harland et al. (1999), for example, measured perceived behavioural control based on
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
90
4. Barriers to change
one item asking the extent to which respondents thought it likely that they could use non-car
modes. PBC had a stronger influence on intentions than attitudes, personal or social norms
and was also the most influential predictor of self-reported travel behaviour. Wall (2006)
found in his study of travel to university by staff and students that the extent to which moral
concerns affected intentions was partially determined by perceived control over behaviour.
Tanner (1999, cited in Wall 2006) produced a scale measuring perceived barriers to reducing
car use from seven yes/ no items asking whether certain conditions applied to respondents
(e.g. “need to transport materials”). Although there are some questions over the validity of
this scale as a pure measure of PBC, this variable had a stronger effect on self-reported
driving frequency than any other predictor. Forward (1998) analysed the choice of walking
and cycling according to the TPB and found perceived behavioural control to be important.
However, a measure of habit, using past behaviour, was found to be the greatest predictor of
behaviour. Finally, Klöckner and Matthies (2004) found that respondents think of work trips
as being under low personal control.
However, PBC does not always predict modal choice (e.g. Hunecke et. al., 2001). There are
several possible reasons for this. Hunecke studied a relatively ‘easy’ behaviour – the effects
of handing out free tickets on mode choice. Hence, perceived control may depend on journey
type (e.g. commuting or leisure), perceptions of local public transport, participants’ personal
capabilities and/ or different views of what is possible in a given context (Wall 2006).
How can this barrier be overcome?
Perceived behavioural control encapsulates the notion of a 'perception gap' between what
travel options people think is open to them and what is really on offer. Specific ‘mis­
perceptions’ occur – in particular in relation to the time it takes to travel and the comparative
cost of certain modes. Investigating travel time, Fujii et. al. (2001 cited in Wall 2006) found
that drivers who more frequently commuted by car overestimated commuting time by public
transport to a larger extent than did drivers who commuted less frequently by car. They report
that: if high-frequency drivers use public transport at least once, their overestimates of public
transport commute time are corrected, leading to an increase in the frequency of public
transport use. Again, this underlines the importance of perceived context. If perceptions
change, behaviour change may follow.
This is where the difference between abstract knowledge of the issues (such as climate
change) and concrete, procedural knowledge of action strategies comes in (Barr 2004, Anable
2005; Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). The latter type of information directly targets perceived
control beliefs by informing an individual about the opportunities available regarding other
typical control barriers such as time and cost. It is however true that how receptive people are
to this information is dependent on many other factors included in this chapter.
It is relevant to mention personalised journey planning/ individualised marketing at this point
(DfT 2001 and 2005; Cairns et al. 2004; Ampt 2003) (See Chapter 6 for a discussion). These
interventions are created on the premise that many people who do not use public transport (or
make journeys on foot or by cycle) have a perception of those modes that is worse than the
actual 'service level'. As such, these interventions aim to tackle PBC directly by ‘measuring’
these beliefs in households and providing targeted information about these service levels.
Although PBC has been measured in relation to travel behaviour, few have examined the
beliefs underlying PBC in order to show why people do or do not feel control over their travel
behaviour. This would be an interesting research focus.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
91
4. Barriers to change
4.5.5
Self Efficacy/ Agency/ Locus of control
This construct is an aspect of perceived control in that it incorporates a notion of perceived
belief about what can be achieved. A variety of terms capture essentially the same meaning:
• Self -efficacy – refers to a person’s confidence in their ability to take action and to
persist with that action. Bandura (1986) noted the advantages of greater self-efficacy
include higher motivation in the face of obstacles and better chances of persisting
over time. Self efficacy was introduced in Chapter 3 in relation to Bandura’s Social
Learning Theory;
• Locus of control - people with a strong internal locus of control believe that their
actions can bring about change. People with an external locus of control feel that their
actions are insignificant, and feel that change can only be brought about by powerful
others. Such people are much less likely to act ecologically (Kollmuss and Agyman
2002);
• Agency – the ability to find a response that seems personally meaningful in the face of
these immense and often intractable issues. This is vital in ‘unlocking the door to
awareness’ (Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005).
Studies have shown that individuals are more likely to engage in environmentally less
damaging behaviour when they believe they have the capability to help solve environmental
problems through their behaviour (Axelrod and Lehman 1993, Grob 1995).
Climate change is said to come within people’s sphere of concern, but not within their
perceived sphere of influence (Hounsham 2006; Collins et al. 2003). Research suggests
strongly that many people are subconsciously aware of the seriousness of climate change, but
that they suppress this awareness (Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005). This is because
they see the situation as being so huge and complex that they have no agency. This means that
people's inclination to attend to information about the environment is reduced as they do not
feel capable of influencing events associated with that information.
In her investigation of sustainable lifestyles using focus groups, Bedford et al. (2004) found
environmental information was mainly picked up through the media. However, as the media
usually presents problems, not solutions, this form of information had a cumulative effect on
respondents, who felt environmental problems were numerous and unstoppable.
As we saw in Chapter 1, lay knowledge of climate change often positions the problem at
national or global scales where ascription of personal responsibility for dealing with the
problem has been perceived as fruitless (Devine-Wright 2004). Bibbings reminds us:
As climate change becomes more current in the media, the problem may end up
seeming so enormous that people will retreat into apathy, concluding that there
is little point in them doing anything about it, especially at the household level
when individual actions can seem so insignificant.
(Bibbings/ WCC 2004)
For instance, each family can directly influence around 10 tonnes of carbon emissions. Yet at
a global level, reductions of approaching four billion tonnes per annum are required to
stabilise atmospheric CO2 at a level considered at all safe. It is therefore a small wonder that
people feel that they lack agency (Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005). In light of this, in
many circumstances, people may be right to think that, in the absence of more radical change,
what individuals do will make little difference, and are therefore rational in their ascription of
prime responsibility to governments and other institutions (Owens 2000).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
92
4. Barriers to change
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Steg and Sievers (2000) reported that individuals who believed they could have an effect on
the environment by reducing their car use, used other modes of transport more often than
those who believed such efforts are futile. (See also ‘social dilemma’ below)
How can this barrier be overcome?
The challenge to overcome this barrier is considerable. Any awareness programme needs to
increase agency or it will fail (Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005). This is despite the
fact that in reality, there is little room for increased self-efficacy – no matter how much one
individual tries, the effects on the environment will be negligible. So is there ever any way of
promoting individual contributions to the problem?
The literature suggests there are several ways to increase self-efficacy: These centre on the
following principles:
• Feedback from self-monitoring or record keeping reduces scepticism about one's
ability to achieve a behaviour change, thus increasing self-efficacy. Bedford et al.
(2004) found her focus group respondents wanted to know how effective sustainable
behaviours really were, and felt they were under informed. In the absence of such
feedback, most respondents assumed no progress had been made towards
sustainability. Individual marketing programmes directly address this issue of
feedback and it is claimed to be one of the most successful elements of such schemes
(see Chapter 6). Alexander Ballard (2005) notes that people do not trust generalised
claims – e.g. that low energy bulbs will pay for themselves several times over. They
want proof, or the word of someone they trust who has that proof. Moreover, people
do not get information in a form that encourages change (e.g. quarterly electricity
bills or annual MOT certificates);
• Reinforcement - self-efficacy can also be built through reinforcement, for example
rewarding progress (Halpern et al. 2004);
• The ‘right sort of information’ - creating the ability for people to understand a
problem in their own terms and therefore deciding for themselves to do something
about it. There is a case for transforming the ‘threat’ of climate change in ways that
engage meaningful action by the many. The focus here is on what currently engages
the many, rather than on what the few believe the many should be engaged by
(Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005);
• Setting small, incremental goals – the Are You Doing Your Bit? campaign tackled this
by telling people what they could do and personalising environmental problems until
they seemed small enough to solve;
• Tapping in to personal norms - to uncover the emotional reasons for doing your bit –
that the true reward is not the effect on the environment but how it makes you feel;
• ‘Green on balance’ – Hounsham (2006) believes a sense of every little counts the ‘I
can’t do everything, so I’ll do nothing’ reaction can be dealt with convincingly by
presenting a ‘green on balance’ framework for personal living. The message that
needs to come through is ‘don’t worry if you cant do everything, just do what you
can’;
• Creating a critical mass - finding a way of getting a critical number of people to act –
through social networks (see Section 6). This makes individual action much easier
and more meaningful;
• Action by government - developing a context that supports individual action and
makes it count is crucial. Since agency is so important, action by institutions such as
governments is therefore essential if individuals are to be expected to act themselves.
They can offer large programmes that can indeed offer meaningful agency to many.
Unless the barrier of self-efficacy/ agency can be addressed, several authors suggest that more
information could make things worse. Alexander Ballard (2005) asserts that more information
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
93
4. Barriers to change
increases (individuals’) experience of the barriers, and so decreases perceptions of agency,
thereby further reducing the capacity to receive information. Research has shown that people
feel overwhelmed by shocking images and although it heightens their concern, it also reduces
their self-efficacy to take action and lessen these events through personal action (NicholsonCole, 2004, Petts et al., 2004; both cited in Lowe et al. 2005). Similarly, drawing attention to
someone’s attitude-action gap can le ad to them amending their attitudes rather than their
actions (this is the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance).
4.5.6
Denial
Denial is a concept very rarely measured in relation to studies of environmental behaviour,
yet it is acknowledged as being a common reaction to issues such as climate change.
Psychologists distinguish between different defence mechanisms. These include denial,
rational distancing, apathy, and delegation (Kollmuss and Ageyman 2002). Denial is the
refusal to accept reality. It is related to issues of cognitive dissonance and efficacy.
Denial of a danger is a well-documented response to stress… First, the facts are
denied, then their relevance, then their urgency, then the need to act. Denial “is
inevitably disadvantageous in the long run because it isolates the person from a
reality which is unlikely to go away and may get progressively worse if ignored.
(Breakwell 1986, cited in Wall 2006)
As Wall (2006) notes, this could hardly be more apt to the problem of climate change.
Many authors talk of the ‘emotional’ responses to climate change – fear, guilt and distress
(Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002; Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005). These authors
believe the primary emotional reactions we experience when exposed to environmental
degradation are distressing and this will lead to secondary psychological responses aimed at
relieving us from these negative feelings – and preventing us from behaving ‘pro­
environmentally’.
Although Chapter 1 demonstrated that only around 10% of the UK population say they do not
believe climate change is taking place (by natural or human causes), the evidence on the
attitude-behaviour gap suggests many more are emotionally distancing themselves from the
problem and refusing to acknowledge it. In September 2005, George Marshall of the Climate
Outreach and Information Network42 presented a talk in Oxford discussing exactly this idea of
denial and climate change. He titled the talk: Sleepwalking into disaster – Are we in a state of
denial about climate change? He claims that we feel small and powerless in the face of this
huge and daunting problem (see ‘efficacy’ above) and we prefer not to mention it, especially
when there are such powerful pressures to conform to the high consumption culture.
Denial is also a collective subjective concept with respect to our typology. Marshall cites
Professor Cohen, who notes:
Societies that are confronted with a collective moral responsibility for human
rights abuses invariably adopt forms of collective denial, which he defin es as a
simultaneous state of knowing and not knowing - knowledge of climate change
challenges our sense of personal and moral responsibility, and our identity as
moral beings.
(Cohen 2000, cited in Marshall 2005)
One outcome of denial is delegation – one means of removing feelings of guilt. The person
who delegates refuses to accept any personal responsibility and blames others for
42
http://coinet.org.uk/
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
94
4. Barriers to change
environmental destruction (e.g. industry, multi-nationals, the political establishment). This
was evident from the data presented in Chapter 1.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
There are few examples in the literature reviewed here on explicit measurements of denial –
however, these may exist in the literature on perceptions of risk not covered by this review.
Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) set out some hypotheses related to this concept. They
hypothesised that people who have emotionally distanced themselves are less likely to engage
in pro-environmental behaviour, because their internal motivation to do so is much weaker.
Such a person might still perform some pro-environmental actions out of a feeling of moral
obligation but is very unlikely to become very proactive. A person might stop informing
himself or herself about environmental issues and focus on different aspects of life. Also, they
believe that if a person has a strong feeling that he or she cannot change the situation (see
efficacy), he or she will very likely retreat into apathy, resignation, and sarcasm. Apathy and
resignation are often the result of a person feeling pain, sadness, anger, and helplessness
simultaneously.
Lowe et al. (2005) studied the concept of denial by looking at the relationship between the
communication of severe impact events in a ‘shock’ format and their impact on behaviour.
After a screening of the Hollywood film The Day after Tomorrow, the participants felt more
concerned but felt more distanced, less likely to be impacted and confused about what to do.
The authors suggest this reflects that people experienced denial and disbelief. They also found
that people with a strong belief in growth and technological solutions are less willing to
engage in pro-environmental behaviours that require changes.
4.5.7
Instrumental attitudes
Hounsham (2006) asserts that we should:
Stop pretending environment is the only issue that should matter to people.
(Hounsham 2006)
The evidence suggests that people do not generally engage in environmentally friendly
behaviour, except in relatively painless ways. Few take actions that entail personal
inconvenience, let alone those that involve changes to their lifestyle (Owens 2000).
Researchers distinguish between primary motives (motives that let us engage in a whole set of
behaviours) and selective motives (the motives that influence a specific action). The latter
tend to be more immediate and evolve around ones own needs – like convenience and saving
time and money – e.g. should I bike to work today, even though it rains, or do I drive?
(Kollmuss and Ageyman 2002).
Attitudes relating to selective motives such as time, cost, convenience are known as
instrumental attitudes. In the case of travel behaviour, much work has been done with respect
to time and cost as barriers to mode choice. These motives are often more intense and ‘front
of mind’ (e.g. I will drive to work because it is cheaper) and will override the primary
motives. Closely related to motives are beliefs (such as perceived behavioural control), which
refer to the information (the knowledge) a person has about a person, object, or issue.
Motivation is shaped by intensity and direction (which determines which behaviour is chosen
from all the possible options) (Kollmuss and Ageyman 2002). Instrumental motives are
important because they are often the most salient when travel choices are being made. This is
related to the idea of ‘heuristics’ and ‘saticficing’; the idea that individuals are limited in how
much information they can process. In order to increase the usability of information, they
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
95
4. Barriers to change
combine bits of information into ‘chunks’, and employ decision rules, to make choices faster
and more easily (Halpern et al. 2004). Alternatives are chosen that satisfy our aspiration level
and hence we match the present situation with regularities or earlier experience (Biel 2004).
Diekmann and Preisendoerfer (1992, cited in Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002) explain the
discrepancy between environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behaviour by using a
low-cost/ high-cost model (Figure 4.2). They propose that people choose the proenvironmental behaviours that demand the least cost – cost being defined in a broad
psychological sense that includes the time and effort needed to undertake a pro-environmental
behaviour.
Figure 4.2 Low-cost high-cost model of pro-environmental behaviour
(Diekmann and Preisendoerfer 1992, cited in Kollmuss and Ageyman 2002)
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
In the literature on travel behaviour, cost is the most researched instrumental factor. Indeed,
instrumental evaluations of different behaviours (e.g. travelling by different modes) are the
basis of rational-choice models which have dominated travel behaviour studies until relatively
recently. Although much recent travel psychology research has also examined other motives
(see affective attitudes below), instrumental evaluations remain a key focus (Wall 2006).
In the DEFRA (2001) survey on attitudes to the environment, of respondents who said they
were cutting down use of electricity/ gas or using their car less, most claimed that this was
due to cost or other reasons rather than for environmental reasons. In addition, of respondents
who had cut down on the use of a car for short journeys, only 17% cited to help the
environment as a reason.
The same findings are found in qualitative surveys. Wall (2006) presents a discourse analysis
of discussion about travel to a university campus by staff and students. He notes the most
common discourse presented was the car as the most practical travel mode, particularly
because of its convenience, flexibility, reliability and speed. These evaluations were often
given as reasons for car commuting. Negative views of public transport were also common
and were part of this same discourse.
More generally, Diekmann and Preisendoerfer (1992) tested their low-high cost model and
showed environmental attitude and low-cost pro-environmental behaviour (e.g. recycling) to
correlate significantly. They concluded that people who care about the environment tend to
engage in activities such as recycling but do not necessary engage in activities that are more
costly and inconvenient such as driving less. In other words, a positive environmental attitude
is more likely to directly influence low-cost pro-environmental behaviour.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
96
4. Barriers to change
How can this barrier be overcome?
There seem to be two aspects to the policy response to the importance of cost with respect to
travel behaviour: (i) cost signals; and (ii) emphasising tangible, personal, close-to-home
benefits from environmental actions for individuals.
Where socially or environmentally sustainable goods and behaviours cost more, are less
efficient or inconvenient, it becomes irrational for the individual to participate in
sustainability on a voluntary basis. Conversely, any sustainable alternative that is cheaper,
more efficient and convenient to undertake may encourage use, regardless of the individual’s
social or environmental concerns (Bedford et al. 2004). Therefore, research continues to
underline the impossibility of sustainable mobility without efficient price signals (see
discussion in Chapter 6).
However, various authors conclude that economic disincentives for car use may not always be
effective in promoting modal switch because people often already feel that they use their cars
as little as possible (Jakobsson, Fujii and Gärling 2002). Hunecke et al. (2001) therefore
suggest that lowering the price of non-car modes may encourage modal switch more than
raising the cost of driving. Salomon and Mokhtarian (1997) make a further important
observation about financial costs when discussing factors influencing switching from driving
to other modes: the previously sunk cost invested in the automobile often presents a barrier to
change (cited in Wall 2006)
If ‘cost’ is expanded to include other aspects of ‘effort’, it should also be considered that
consumers are only likely to adopt products designed for ease and convenience of use. Lane
and Potter (in press) complain that too often, pioneering low carbon products are engineering
led and require users to adapt to the product’s technical requirements, rather than designing
the product for the user. They cite a LowCVP study that notes the example of a UK
Government department that, after switching to using liquefied petroleum gas, returned to
using conventional vehicles as a result of maintenance difficulties and lack of experienced
technicians 43 . They claim such legacies seriously affect the diffusion of eco-products out of an
initial niche into the mass-market.
Halpern et al. (2004) cites evidence that shows people attribute value (cost) to things
differently depending on whether they are gaining or losing them. He says loss tends to be felt
more keenly than gain (Kahneman et al. 1990 cited in Halpern). This is congruent with claims
that behaviour changes need to offer an immediate incentive to an individual that they would
perceive as improving their own quality of life (i.e. answer the question what’s in it for me?)
(Bedford et al. 2004). Hounsham believes every environmental action should carry a personal
incentive or reward and we should press for non-sustainable behaviours to carry price
penalties or other disincentives. He says:
The common response of environmentalists has been to preach more frugal
lifestyle but even a top salesman couldn’t really sell sacrifice. Less is hardly ever
seen as more.
(Hounsham 2006)
It has been suggested by Collins et al. (2003) that one reason Are you doing your bit? failed
was because it did not address issues of price and convenience. However, others believe the
amounts to be saved by performing a ‘green’ behaviour are frequently too small and the
number of years of payback too great to provide any real incentive to break old habits and
forge new ones (Hounsham 2006). Perhaps instead, he says
43
House of Commons Transport Committee. Cars of the future. Seventeenth Report of Session 2003­
04, Volume 1. London: The Stationery Office, November 2004.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
97
4. Barriers to change
We need to work towards legitimising and broadening the appeal of green
behaviours by wrapping up environment with the other four main families of
visionary causes: prosperous, comfortable lives; peaceful, safe communities;
social justice; and physical, mental and spiritual well being. Calls for Ethical
Living, Smart Living and Safe Living could, in this way, ring multiple bells in
people’s minds rather than just one…
(Hounsham 2006)
4.5.8
Affective attitudes
Affective factors refer to the feelings associated with travelling, such as stress, excitement,
pleasure, boredom and control (Anable and Gatersleben 2005). To date, the majority of
studies on travel mode choice appear to be based on the assumption that travel is a cost to be
minimised and decisions are based on weighing the instrumental costs and benefits of various
travel options. However, various authors suggest that travel has a positive utility of its own
which is not necessarily related to reaching a destination (Anable and Gatersleben 2005;
Mokhtarian and Salomon 2001; Steg, Vlek and Slotegraaf 2001).
Even when travel is related to a destination (directed travel), people do not necessarily
minimise their travel time or always choose the most cost efficient mode or route (in terms of
time, money and effort) to travel to certain destinations. Other aspects related to the actual
driving experience (e.g. the thrill of driving) or to experiences en route (e.g. enjoying the
scenery, listening to music) may also play an important role (Steg, Vlek and Slotegraaf 2001;
Stradling et al. 2000; Gärling 1998). In their study Desperately seeking sustainability, the
National Consumer Council (NCC 2005) also recognise that some travel decisions are made
at an emotional level:
Consumers believe that government and industry have an important role in
taking unsustainable products off the market… Cars are a notable exception to
the general support for phasing out unsustainable products. Many consumers
feel a more personal bond with their cars than with other products and for
them… sustainability would not be a consideration.
(NCC 2005)
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Research into affective motives for travel is in its infancy and is not necessarily picked up by
research that is based on the most commonly used theories such as the Theory of Planned
Behaviour (Chapter 3). Nevertheless, attention has begun to focus on non-instrumental
benefits of driving in particular, with Steg and Uneken (2002 cited in Wall 2006) proposing
that people buy and drive cars simply because they like to, and not (only) because they have a
real utilitarian need. Also, Steg, Vlek and Slotegraaf (2001) suggest that while instrumental
considerations such as time and cost do influence travel behaviour, motives having to do with
affect and symbolic functions (including self-presentation, social comparison and emotions
experienced while travelling) are also important.
Overall, there are mixed findings concerning affective influences on travel. This may be
partly due to methodological differences between studies (Wall 2006). Steg, Vlek and
Slotegraaf (2001) found that the relative importance of affective and instrumental motives
depended on how they were measured. People may not express enjoyment of driving if they
think that others disapprove, preferring to emphasise its instrumental functions. However,
when the survey’s purpose is less obvious, people rate driving’s affective aspects more
positively.
In qualitative interviews, Wall (2006) found people offered various non-instrumental reasons
for choosing particular travel modes. These ranged from ‘fun’ to enjoyment of exercising a
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
98
4. Barriers to change
skill. Notably, drivers did not characterise commuting as ‘fun’ (perhaps related to the view
that it is stressful), while users of other modes did use this term to describe their journeys.
However, the research found privacy to be one non-instrumental evaluation on which
alternative modes have difficulty competing.
This distinction between different travel modes, including walking and cycling, was made by
Anable and Gatersleben (2005). They distinguished affective from social (or symbolic)
aspects (e.g. feelings of superiority) and examined the relative importance of these for work
and leisure journeys by different travel modes. The results show that for work journeys,
respondents tend to attach more importance to instrumental aspects and especially to
convenience than to affective factors. For leisure journeys, however, respondents appear to
attach almost equal importance to instrumental and affective aspects, particularly flexibility,
convenience, relaxation, a sense of freedom and ‘no stress’. The data for both the work and
leisure studies shows that for car users, alternative transport modes are inferior on the salient
attributes such as convenience and flexibility. This is even though car users rate modes such
as walking and cycling as performing well, if not better, on less important attributes such as
the environment, health and even excitement. Nevertheless, for those who cycle and walk
regularly, satisfaction with their own travel mode as measured by the gap between importance
and performance on salient attributes is better than for those who mostly use the car.
In conclusion, it can be said that affective experiences do appear to influence modal choice.
Pleasure, stress, control, excitement and privacy have all been identified as relevant,
supporting the argument that rational-choice theory’s instrumental focus ignores some
important motives for travel (Steg and Uneken, 2002). Indeed, Wall (2006) suggests affect
may be particularly pertinent to travel, but less important for other pro-environmental
behaviours. Poortinga et al. (2003) concur with this assertion – and note that domestic and
transport energy use depend on different motivational variables.
How can this barrier be overcome?
Primarily, more research needs to be undertaken to understand the role of affective motives in
travel mode choice. Once these are better understood, and although what people enjoy is a
matter of personal preference, it may be possible for policy-makers to use the ‘fun’ of non-car
modes as a lever to encourage people out of their cars (Wall 2006). On the other hand, they
may struggle to convince drivers to relinquish their privacy.
4.5.9
Self-identify and image
Identity theory proposes that our sense of self is constituted through our interaction with
others and that we define ourselves through our similarity or difference to others. The
establishment of self-image through the consumption of goods and lifestyles has become an
increasingly critical component in defining self-identity.
This is directly relevant to our understanding of the relationship between attitudes to climate
change and mode or vehicle choice. It is proposed that self-identity will act on behaviour
independently of attitudes and norms. In other words, if a person becomes more involved in
the role, say as a car driver, their attitudes will become less and less important in determining
their intention to choose a particular travel mode thus potentially widening the gap between
environmental consciousness and behaviour.
Despite the fact that the car has long been recognised as far more than a means of getting
from one place to another, empirical evidence of the relevance of self image and identity is
practically non existent in transport studies. Hounsham (2006) also recognises this omission
from transport studies. He says people go by car because they want to and that:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
99
4. Barriers to change
We have misunderstood what consumer goods actually mean to people, ignoring
their connections with personal identity, esteem and belonging. ‘Nowhere have
we got things more wrong than understanding car use ... the car is less about
transport and more about a sense of freedom, perceived convenience and
personal identity.
(Hounsham 2006)
Just as the deficit model is being increasingly rejected in studies of environmental behaviour,
there has been increasing realisation in the field of marketing that purchasing decisions are
rarely rational and linear but are more often opportunistic and emotional impulses, based on
cultural cues and wider trends (Collins et al. 2003). Consequently there is a growing emphasis
on ‘brand’ and the need to create an identity that resonates with the consumer.
Wall suggests that the omission of the identity construct from many attempts to understand
the attitude-behaviour gap in transport studies may help to explain why rational-choice
modelling, including models such as Value Beliefs Norms, often does not seem to give
sufficient explanations of car use.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Self identity theory has not been applied to travel behaviour despite acknowledgement of the
role of image and that sustainable lifestyles need to be positioned as socially desirable if they
are to be adopted by the public at large (Bedford et al. 2004; National Consumer Council
2005).
For all travel behaviour, there has been some attempt at looking at social norms by applying,
for example, the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to the study of individual mode choice.
However, the TPB has a more restrictive normative component which deals with the
relatively narrow expectations about what others think is the right thing to do – this fails to
reflect the way individuals view themselves in society with respect to specific behaviours.
Travel behaviour is influenced by interacting with, not just reacting to, the social world (Wall
2006). Self identity addresses this wider social context in that it embraces the links that
individuals make to identifiable social characteristics or categories and is relevant for all
travel behaviours, not just car purchasing.
Indeed, questions of identity are largely outside many of the most commonly applied
individual level theories (described in Chapter 3). Triandis’ interpersonal theory supports the
self concept which draws on theories of self identity. Social learning theory allows for
behaviour to be influenced by those on whom identity is modelled and by those from whom a
person is hoping to distinguish themselves. As discussed in Chapter 3, these theories have
hardly been applied to the study of travel mode choice. What is more, there are ‘bespoke’
identity theories such as Breakwell’s (1993) identity process theory that could provide new
insights in travel psychology, which has yet to be applied in this field. This theory emphasizes
feelings of competence and control as contributors to a positive self identity (Wall 2006). In
addition, this theory proposes that: (i) people strive for self-esteem; (ii) people strive for
continuity of identity; and (iii) people like to be distinctive, but not too distinctive.
Lane and Potter (in press) concur with this in their observations that some drivers like to
advertise their ‘green’ credentials by using a highly observable eco-product. From interviews
with owners of ‘alternative’ vehicles, whereas the Toyota Prius owner wanted a ‘normal’
looking vehicle, discussions with users of the G-WIZ battery electric car reveal a readiness to
be noticed as being a driver of a different, more environmentally friendly vehicle. They draw
attention to the importance (and role) of the car as a status symbol, one that has important
implications for promoting cleaner cars.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
100
4. Barriers to change
Ellaway et. al. (2003, cited in Wall 2006) compared car and public transport commuters on
several variables, including whether they felt that others would like to use their mode and
whether that mode made them feel that they were “doing well in life”. Controlling for age and
social class, drivers had significantly higher scores than public transport users, suggesting that
driving conferred greater status.
Although Golob and Hensher (1998) did not use a specific theory to study attitudes to the
environment in relation to commuting behaviour, they measured the variable ‘car as a status
symbol’ and found those who see their car as a status symbol are less likely to view traffic
congestion as a problem. These people in turn are more likely to be solo-drivers, are less
likely to be willing to reduce their car commuting and thus are more likely to see their car as a
status symbol. This means that the attitudinal constructs associated with car status and the
choice of solo-driving are reinforcing. This feedback loop is discussed further in Chapter 6
and illustrates that certain attitudes can lead to stable, non-environmental behaviours, which
are self-sustaining.
Steg, Vlek and Slotegraaf (2001) investigated whether symbolic aspects of driving (relating to
self-presentation and social role) could be differentiated from affective and instrumental ones.
Three methods (similarity sort, Q-sort and semantic -differentials – discussed in Chapter 7)
showed that evaluations of these three aspects were distinct. Wall (2006) notes that this work
raises the possibility that symbolic functions (e.g. feeling that driving a car is sporty and
adventurous) may satisfy the need to express yourself and your social position. While Steg et
al. offer no evidence for this generic ‘need’, they suggest that people use artefacts not only for
instrumental reasons, but also because artefacts project the user’s personality, reinforcing
sense of self and showing this desired self to others. On the issue that the evidence is difficult
to measure on this variable, Steg, Vlek and Slotegraaf (2001) offer an intriguing observation:
Who would easily be aware and admit that driving a car contributes to one’s
feelings of power and territorial instinct? People rather keep saying that it’s all
a matter of time and money.
(Steg, Vlek and Slotegraaf 2001)
In Car use: lust or must? Steg (2005) applies Dittmar’s (1992) theory of material possessions
associated with ‘subjectively experienced feeling’ to examine car commuting motives. Steg
finds that car use not only fulfils instrumental functions, but also important symbolic and
affective functions. This is especially true for frequent drivers, respondents with a positive car
attitude, male and younger respondents.
There is also some empirical evidence on the role of advertising (with respect to self-image).
This is largely in relation to vehicle choice as opposed vehicle use (Wright and Egan 2000).
These studies have typically been concerned with ‘reception’ – how the material is read and
how the symbolism ‘plays’ to the reader. The subject position of the reader is often viewed as
being defined by the text/ image and the reader’s role is relatively passive. However, in
consumption theory, the reader is regarded as having a more active role in the process. Rather
than merely absorbing a discourse, there is a dialogue between the image and the consumer in
relation to the meanings attributed to that product, its communication of allegiance to certain
ideals and how the product may position the individual in respect to other social groups.
How can this barrier be overcome?
Examining the ways in which individuals view themselves in society with respect to different
travel behaviours could enrich our understanding of how people are empowered to reposition
themselves within social groups that communicate allegiance to certain ‘green’ ideals.
Evidence of the role of identity as a precursor to travel choice needs to move away from the
anecdotal to the empirical in order to answer the following kinds of questions:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
101
4. Barriers to change
• What are the symbolic meanings attached to cars, buses, bikes etc?
• Which prejudices/ cultural stereotypes discourage people from using the bus? Which of
these prejudices are most amenable to change?
• Is the habitual nature of some travel behaviour more closely related to attitudinal
assessment of their utility (including contribution to environmental goals) or self-identity?
• How effective is bus advertising/ car advertising in influencing uptake and to what extent
are private manufacturers and bus/ train operators attempting to shape identities and
symbolic meanings?
• How is public transport portrayed in non-advertising images (e.g. in soap operas/ films/
books) and how are the associations being created?
• Is the effect of identity stronger for some people than others?
• How can climate change and green travel be made ‘trendy’?
• How can transport policies be packaged (possibly with other lifestyle/ consumption
choices) so as to develop ‘brands’ of behaviours that people will identify with and see as a
‘must have’?
In spite of the dearth of empirical evidence to provide a detailed understanding of the role of
identity with respect to the choice of all travel modes, the evidence that exists suggests that
the status of low carbon cars and alternatives to the car needs to be improved. Answering the
above questions will aid the development of new communications strategies to create a desire
to act sustainably. Hounsham (2006) suggests that branding will involve:
… packages of environmentally friendly behaviours that people will identify
with, find attractive, see as a must-have, and above all like, just as they identify
with a favourite brand in a supermarket….The way forward to gaining big takeup of green behaviours might be to sell ‘green’ as a brand to buy into, rather
than a framework of advice or set of instructions or even exhortations.
(Hounsham 2006)
4.6
Individual objective factors
4.6.1
Knowledge
Scientif ic understanding of climate change and awareness of the consequences of travel
behaviour on climate change comprise elements of ‘objective’ knowledge (notwithstanding
the subjective processes of trust, denial, and other interpretive processes). As discussed in
Chapter 3 in relation to the deficit model, it is often proposed that moral norms, intention and
behaviour are activated when someone is in receipt of this knowledge. Since beliefs represent
the information that people have about their world, be it right or wrong, it has been asserted
that factual knowledge about environmental issues is a necessary precondition to
environmental attitude (Kaiser et al. 1999).
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
The idea that the failure to catalyse behaviour change can be explained purely in terms of an
information deficit and public misunderstandings has been widely criticised. Behavioural
experts point to a substantial body of social-scientific research demonstrating that barriers to
behaviour are more various than a lack of information and understanding – these barriers are
indeed the subject of this chapter (Petts 2005; Devine Wright 2004; Collins et al. 2003;
Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002; Owens 2000).
A distinction needs to be made, however, between abstract knowledge of the issues and,
concrete, procedural knowledge of action strategies (Anable 2005; Barr 2004; Walton et al.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
102
4. Barriers to change
2004; Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). Whilst both types are deemed necessary, and whilst
abstract knowledge may ‘sensitise’ people to the issues, information on what to do and how to
do it is always necessary.
From a more empirical and theoretical perspective, objective knowledge and awareness of
consequences seems to have little effect on behaviour in the absence of personal norm/ moral
obligation (Wall 2006). In other words, people might have the knowledge, but without a
moral imperative to do something with it, it will not necessarily lead to behaviour change
Even when moral norms are present, this may be insufficient without concern for the future
(Joireman et al. 2004). Joireman showed that preference for public transport was higher
among commuters who believed that commuting by car harms the environment only among
those scoring high on ‘consideration of future consequences’. In other words, short term
individual interests are at odds with long term collective interests.
However, one study showed that methods to get individuals to change their behaviour may
need to provide information which actively engages citizens in questioning their own
environmental assumptions. Koens (2004) showed that only people with prior knowledge of a
policy (climate offsets) would engage in a reassessment of their intentions.
The evidence does suggest that awareness of consequences, even without strong moral norms,
can increase the support for policies designed to mitigating climate change (Nillson and
Kuller 2000)
How can this barrier be overcome?
All these studies are simply reinforcing the notion that other factors are necessary alongside
the provision of information for information to have any effect on behaviour
This research has acknowledged the potential for systemic change from a centralised, top
down approach to a more decentralised system of information delivery and public
engagement. Further evidence and a discussion of the most effective interventions which
include an element of information provision are discussed in Chapter 6.
4.6.2
Habit
The obstacles encountered in efforts to influence travel mode choice are often attributed to
ingrained habits that are difficult to change (Aarts et al. 1998; Garvill et al. 2003). It is
essential to understand the degree to which travel behaviour is habitual in order to assess the
extent to which behavioural choice is preceded by deliberate decisions and the formation of
attitudes and intentions. The possibility that travel choices are not deliberate can explain the
weak link between attitudes and behaviour. What is more, the failure for most of the theories
outlined in Chapter 3 to take habitual processes into account means they may have limited
application to travel behaviour.
Theorising about how habits are acquired and what constitutes ‘habituation’ has a long
tradition in behaviour research (see Forward 1994 for a review). Charng et al. (1988) defined
habit as the semi-automatic performance of a well-learned behaviour. Hull (1943, cited in
Bamberg et al. 2001) defined habit as responses controlled by environmental stimuli. To this
extent, habits have been placed in our individual objective category for the purposes of this
review in that they are subconscious and can be triggered by external conditions - the
implication being that the deliberation of travel mode alternatives is reduced or eliminated as
habits are automatically triggered by situational cues (Verplanken and Faes 1999).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
103
4. Barriers to change
When a choice is habitual, new information that might result in a reassessment of the
available alternatives is not taken into account and thus does not influence the choice (Garvill
et al. 2003). This implies that:
Attitudes are better predictors of behaviour if the habit is weak, whereas attitude
has less influence on the behaviour if a habit is strong.
(Garvill et al. 2003)
Consequently, under certain circumstances, an individual’s action is not constrained by
objective conditions preventing a certain travel mode from being used, but rather the fact that
a particular alternative did not occur to him or her.
As long as behaviours are performed in constant contexts, the intention to perform a wellpracticed activity may not be accessible to conscious awareness. Unless people are reminded
about their recently formed intention to perform a new behaviour, the intention to perform the
habitual behaviour may be triggered more or less automatically. Not only will people be less
attentive to information targeted at the well practiced behaviour – even if people are mindful
of this information and form and intention to perform a new behaviour, this intention will be
‘in conflict’ with the old habit (Biel 2004).
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Models such as Triandis’ interpersonal theory have been almost absent from studies of travel
(see Chapter 3). This is despite the fact that Triandis (1977) proposed that attitudes and
intentions may cause action when the behaviour is new but when the same behaviour is
repeated, habit grows stronger and the effect of intention loses its significance – and this
would seem to be particularly applicable to travel mode choice. Bamberg and Schmidt (2003)
tested exactly this and found in the prediction of self-reported car use, one variable of the
Triandis model—car use habit—significantly increased the predictive power of the Ajzen
model.
The most common way to operationalise habitual strength is through measures of selfreported frequency of past behaviour (Garvill et al. 2003). When added to the analysis of
travel mode choice this measure is typically found to significantly improve the prediction of
later behaviour over and above the effects of intention, norms and perceived behavioural
control (Forward 1998; Klöckner and Matthies 2004). As Bamberg (2001) explains, it is
generally concluded from such findings that the behaviour in question is at least in part under
the direct control of the ‘stimulus situation’ rather than being completely reasoned in nature.
Several others make similar assertions (e.g. Fujii et. al. 2001; Gatersleben and Uzzell 2000).
Aarts and Dijksterhuis (2000) propose that habits provide strong associations between goals
(e.g. going to the supermarket) and actions (e.g. using a bike). These associations develop as a
result of frequent and consistent choices made to attain a certain goal (e.g. always use a bike
to go to the supermarket). Because of these associations, the habitual choice or action is
automatically activated upon activation of the relevant goal (Wall 2006).
An alternative approach to assessing the role of habit has been developed by Verplanken et al.
(1994) (see also Verplanken et al. 1998). In their study, the purpose was to increase the
awareness of the travel mode choice in order to break a general car habit. They found that,
when an established habit existed, such as using a car for everyday travel, activation of the
goal was all that was required for a choice of travel mode. By inducing a more deliberate
decision process (i.e. reducing habit), more attention was paid to contextual factors such as
the weather, distance, time, cargo and available alternatives and their consequences. Hence,
the role of habit was revealed and the relationship between intention and behaviour was
increased (Garvill et al. 2003).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
104
4. Barriers to change
Matthies et al (2002) purport to have found empirical evidence that improving public
transport may not break driving habits because habitual drivers do not seek new information
about alternatives. Also, Klöckner and Matthies (2004) suggest that trips to work are so
frequent and routine that the process of norm-activation is totally blocked if habit strength is
high (cited in Wall 2006). Wall (citing Aarts and Dijksterhuis 2000; Staats 2003) notes that
conscious processes like norm activation and intention formation can apparently occur despite
habits, but habits can lessen the influence of these processes on behaviour.
Similarly, Garvill et al. (2003) studied the effect of increased awareness of travel mode on the
relations between attitudes and car use. The findings of the research experiment suggest that
the treatment of the experimental group affected the travel choice process so that it became
less based on general habit. The results also clearly show that participants in the experimental
group with a strong car habit (as assessed with self-reported past car use) decreased their
number of car trips while participants in the control group with a strong habit did not. In other
words, increasing the awareness of travel mode choice did not change the general car attitude
or the general car habit. However, the treatment resulted in a decrease in car use among
subjects with a strong car habit. It seems reasonable to assume that the subjects in the
experimental group with a strong car habit in some cases realized that the car was not the best
alternative when forced to consider the contextual factors for each planned trip chain and to
consider possible alternatives to the car. In these situatio ns, their choice might have been
influenced by the specific contextual factors and perhaps by more situation-specific attitudes,
which could explain why the correlation between car attitude and car use did not increase.
Verplanken et al. (1998) draw a distinction between deliberate choice and habitual choice
which are seen as reflections of different parallel processes (controlled vs. automatic) – and
note that the induction of a deliberate choice process does not influence habitual choice.
Therefore, taking into account Garvill et al.’s main behavioural finding (that the treatment
resulted in a decrease in car use among subjects with a strong car habit), it could be said that
the deliberate choice engineered by the experiment interrupted the habitual behaviour of the
subject to the extent that alternative travel modes were considered and, in some cases, chosen.
In conclusion, the findings generally suggest that habit has a relatively strong influence on
modal choice which lessens the effects of conscious psychological motivations. Kurani (2002)
suggests that even the car purchase decision can be dominated by routines and efficient, leasteffort information seeking. It therefore seems useful to try to account for habits when
explaining travel behaviour and perhaps especially commuting, as this is an ideal example of
a routine behaviour (Klöckner and Matthies, 2004 cited in Wall 2006).
How can this barrier be overcome?
The evidence suggests that policy interventions must find ways to break habitual response. It
also suggests that several conditions have to be fulfilled for a transition to new and more
environmentally benign habits. However, even highly motivated people may find it difficult
to break habits. Moreover, people who have established strong habits are less likely to attend
to information targeted at the well-practiced behaviour. Hence the intention to behave in an
environmentally friendly manner is difficult to achieve.
4,7
Collective subjective factors
4.7.1
Social dilemmas
Pro-environmental behaviour in general, and choice of transport mode in particular, can be
viewed as a social dilemma – a conflict between self interest and what is good for society at
large (Gärling 1998; Gärling and Sandberg 1997; Van Vugt et al. 1995). The social dilemma
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
105
4. Barriers to change
concept is common in the literature reviewed here and helps to explain how and why factors
discussed in this chapter influence travel behaviour.
In travel terms, the dilemma is usually seen as arising from tension between the (perceived)
individual benefits of driving and its societal costs: pollution, congestion and accidents (e.g.
Fujii et. al., 2001; Nilsson and Küller, 2000). If one person tries to address these problems by
not driving, they may suffer reduced utility while others continue to benefit from the car’s
convenience, flexibility and so on. However, if everyone stopped driving the benefits to
society would be large and in the long-term everybody would be better off. People recognise
this and are understandably reluctant to change behaviour unless they think that others will do
likewise.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Steg and Vlek (1997) found that participants evaluated their car use as ‘a (societal) problem’,
but thought their own car use was ‘hardly a problem’ for society. This means that the
potential influence of awareness of the consequences (of car use) as an important prerequisite
for creating public support for measures aimed at reducing car use is eroded.
Gatersleben and Uzzell (2001) found that only 24% of their sample agreed that others would
“voluntarily reduce their car use”. A later study (Gatersleben and Uzzell, 2003) found that
only 13% of local policy-makers believed that residents would willingly drive less, although
81% of policy-makers believed that residents could do so. Tertoolen et al. (1998) found that
people must believe that others will co-operate in order to overcome social dilemmas and use
their car less.
Joireman et al. (2004) looked at preference for commuting to work by car or by public
transport within an expanded social dilemma framework (i.e. one that recognises the
importance of both social and temporal concerns). They found that the conception of social
dilemmas as conflicts between individual and collective interests is too simplistic, as people
who score high on ‘consideration of future consequences’ are less likely to drive than those
who value immediate gains. Hence increased awareness of climate change and transport
might only influence travel behaviour when allied with a concern for long-term consequences.
How can this barrier be overcome?
What then could foster co-operation in social dilemmas? Among the factors that have been
shown to yield positive effects are a larger pay-off, communication among group members,
reduced social and environmental uncertainty, self efficacy and social norms (Biel 1999).
This dilemma has its solution embedded in social learning and network theory. For instance,
Giddens (1990 cited in Wall 2006) argues that modern society undermines kinship and
community ties and that trust (relating to general confidence in others) has been eroded
because individuals have little contact with many parties on whom their welfare depends. In
the context of this review, the interest is in people’s confidence that others will reduce their
car use.
Ultimately, this barrier can only be avoided by arranging things so that everyone is pretty sure
that everyone else will make the green choice. This implies that the use of legislation that
pushes everyone equally in a more sustainable direction might be welcomed as a way out of
the social dilemma. Indeed, Brook Lyndhurst (2005) found their respondents were looking for
a strong lead from central government and believe that more, obvious government
interventions would be a fair way of improving the situation. However, Hounsham (2006)
believes this only to be true as long as it is perceived to be appropriate and fairly applied
across society.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
106
4. Barriers to change
4.7.2
Group cultures and norms
Whether or not people adopt a new behaviour is also influenced by what others do. If many
around us practice a certain behaviour, this serves as a clue to proper behaviour (Biel 2004;
Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). The mere fact that others continue to commute by car may
silence one’s conscious for doing the same.
By and la rge people are conformist- they look to the wider values to set their
own moral compass. People take the general lack of response to climate change
as the norm and the basis for their own position.
(Marshall 2005)
Relating directly to the social dilemma phenomena is the tendency to use the lack of action by
others to validate ones own inactivity. This is termed the ‘bystander effect’ in which blame is
apportioned to others. Lowe et al. (2005) describe this as a form of mass paralysis that occurs
when people are confronted en masse with something that demands their intervention.
Everyone is waiting for someone else to do something. The evil twist to the bystander effect
is that the more people who are witnesses, the less the chance that any of them will do
anything.
In the case of climate change, we are almost all bystanders- after all over 80% of
people say that climate change is a major threat. That's a crowd of 40 million
people in Britain alone waiting for someone to take responsibility.
(Lowe et al. 2005)
The South blames the north, cyclists blame drivers, activists blame oil companies
and almost everyone blames George Bush.
(Marshall and Lynas, 2003 cited in Lowe et al. 2005).
Bedford et al. (2004) points to the values that society puts on increased consumption in order
to achieve the highest possible quality of life. She blames the fact that environmentalism has
become entwined with images of denial such as not driving a car and using less water, and
that this is out of line with what society considers to be normal. She believes that those who
do willingly undertake environmental actions are perceived as “pious, hair-shirted, sandalwearing hippies”.
These negative connotations ensure that people continue to distance themselves from
‘abnormal’ environmental stereotypes. This has obvious linkages with self identity. The main
distinction between identity and social norms, however, is that these normative beliefs pertain
to what people believe is normal behaviour and the perceived social pressure surrounding an
act (e.g. the perception that driving is disapproved of). In contrast, the identity construct
pertains to how far people want to conform to this normality and present themselves in the
face of this social pressure. Therefore these are two distinct approaches to social motives (and
as such are treated separately in this review).
Social cues have particular relevance in the context of climate change. Alexander Ballard and
Associates (2005) suggest that groups recognise risk and construe appropriate responses very
differently to individuals. They say that beyond individual habits, what is seen as important
enough to warrant action is strongly defined by membership of groups. This limits the
capacity of individuals to conceive of different approaches, let alone carry them out. In other
words, attitudes to climate change can relate to a general societal norm (everyone should do
something about it; or the market/ technology will sort it out), while behaviour rests with
specific individual responsibility (my action will not make any difference (Stoll-Kleemann
2001).
Outside travel behaviour, norms have been studied fairly extensively. In a study on household
recycling behaviour, Barr found the acceptance of a norm for recycling was the largest
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
107
4. Barriers to change
predictor of behavioural intention. He concluded that certain environmental actions, such as
recycling, have become socially accepted, that is to say, attitudinally normative.
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Evidence regarding social norms and travel behaviour is somewhat mixed (Wall 2006). In
Germany, Hunecke et al. (2001) found that social norms influenced self-reported modal
choice, but Klöckner and Matthies (2004) found no such effect when norms were measured
alongside personal norm and driv ing habit. This may not be surprising if social norms are
defined as what people perceive others expect of them, they could be captured by
measurements of moral norm (Schwartz 1977 cited in Wall 2006). However, Schwartz (Ibid.)
notes that sometimes there are conflicting social norms around an issue. In such situations,
people may perceive social norms that conflict with their personal norms and measuring these
social norms might add to explained variance in behaviour (Wall 2006). Indeed, Harland et al.
(1999) showed that personal and social norms can simultaneously exert significant effects on
car use intentions. In addition, in a situation where peer pressure is high (e.g. student
environment), Bamberg and Schmidt (2003) found that social norm had a significant
influence on self-reported modal choice while personal norms did not.
Alexander Ballard and Associates also draw attention to the importance of social norms at a
community scale. They cite a group of Norwegian researchers who undertook a study to
identify predictors of environmentally responsible behaviour (Olli et al. 2001). They found
that by far the most important predictor of environmental behaviour was participation in
environmental networks. They summarised their main finding as follows:
Social participation in environmental networks was more important than any of
the other correlates of environmental behaviour (its effect being) roughly equal
to respondents’ environmental attitudes or the whole battery of
sociodemographics.
(Olli et al. 2001, cited in Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005)
Rose 2005, reminds us about the Save the Whale campaigns in the 1970s which, he says,
acted as a powerful social definer. To be against whaling meant you signed up to a vague idea
that the world needed saving, when most people thought it was perfectly ok. Yet today, he
claims, environmental concern is normed and unremarkable. Moreover, although he
acknowledges its difficulty, he believes that, like the current move against SUVs, ‘no flying’
has the potential to emerge as just such a distinction:
A prediction then. It will become fashionable, if it isn't already, not to fly. Realtravel, meeting real places and real people will become 'the' way to take your
holiday. Like Slow Food only less Italian. If this takes off, so to speak, the
repercussions for the politics of air travel and climate could be considerable.
One of the great unspoken political certainties will become unglued - we can't
act against air travel because ‘we all do it so much’. We may still be doing it but
once it's an undesirable habit, then negotiating alternatives - in fuels or systems
or taxation, will become a whole lot easier.
(Rose 2005)
In conclusion, there is evidence of various social influences on travel and it would appear that
social norms merit distinct and thorough examination alongside personal norms. Taken
together, values, attitudes and beliefs about consequences may not suffice for behaviour
change. Among other factors, rules or norms about proper behaviour could be a vital
supplement in order to understand how to promote sustainable travel patterns.
We should not be greatly surprised to find ...that cultural rules and social
networks had a greater influence on translating underlying concern into
environmental action than the availability of detailed scientific information.
(Owens 2000)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
108
4. Barriers to change
How can this barrier be overcome?
Bedford et al. (2004) believes that for environmental attitudes to be converted into action,
there needs to be a programme of normalisation and an attempt to engage all members of
society in more resource-efficient behaviours. Likewise, Hounsham (2006) believes the
solution to overcoming the bystander effect lies in the creation of bandwagon
environmentalism with a sense of joining in, or missing out if you do not. This is a common
theme in the literature. Halpern (2005) describes this as the potential effectiveness of seeking
behavioural change not only through a focus on individual persuasion, but through an
ecological approach – one that focuses on changing the behaviour of significant figures
around the individual (such as parents and peers) to make gradual changes to wider social
norms (see also Bedford et al. 2004).
All this points to the need to focus persuasion efforts at the interpersonal and the community
levels as well as the individual level (see Chapters 3 and 6). Several authors therefore
conclude that change efforts are more effective, and last longer, if they are directed at the
group level and if people work together. To be effective and acceptable , Halpern (2005)
concludes his review by suggesting that behaviour change approaches need to be built around
co-production and a sense of partnership between state, individuals and communities.
Alexander Ballard and Associates (2005) believe that working through networks not only
potentially develops agency but also provides a weight watchers effect to reinforce wavering
motivation. They suggest that behaviour change at the community level may be somewhat
slower but is likely ultimately to be deeper. They also cite network theory as reassuring us
that it is completely unnecessary to reach everybody directly if we wish to stimulate largescale behavioural change of the type that is needed.
Collins et al. (2003) believe that new forms of communication should facilitate this process.
Efforts to design community based social marketing campaigns are founded on this premise
and are discussed further in Chapter 6.
4.7.3
Trust
Social dilemmas and efficacy beliefs relate to people’s trust in other people to change their
travel behaviour so as not to disadvantage oneself or ‘free-ride’. In the context of climate
change, the issue of trust also emerges in relation to the information provider and the official
institutions seeking to motivate support for climate change mitigation.
The evidence suggests that information on climate change was often felt to be untrustworthy,
and confusing, particularly when it comes from government and this limits people’s
willingness to attend to information from these sources. Fuelling this mistrust is a sense of
inconsistency and ineffectiveness of government action on the issue of climate change. This
can even lead to feelings of betrayal:
Lay people may not understand the complexities of the science [of climate
change] (it is unrealistic to expect that everyone should) but they are aware of
commercial imperatives, sceptical about politics, and distrustful of the
competence and impartiality of regulatory frameworks.
(Owens 2000)
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
This review has not revealed any specific evidence relation to trust in information and
government action on climate change and transport. However, researchers have found that
scepticism of the political forces implementing environmental policy is likely to be one
barrier to general increases in pro-environmental travel behaviour (Barr 2004).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
109
4. Barriers to change
Alexander Ballard and Associates (2005) found in discussion groups about climate change in
general that the public did not know who to trust, as government (locally and nationally),
business and even NGOs were all perceived to be putting across subjective viewpoints, based
on what was best for them rather than the public. In the absence of objective information, the
report concludes, the rational view is to get on with life regardless.
Lowe et al. (2005) found evidence of the fact that the ‘who’ that is giving the information is
important to the public. A number of respondents and focus group participants explained that
if the film The day after tomorrow had been made by a more authoritative, trusted group
(such as the BBC), then the message would have been interpreted differently.
In the US, Dietz et al. (in press) investigated preferences for climate change mitigation
policies and factors contributing to higher leve ls of policy support using a questionnaire
survey in Michigan. The findings indicate that trust is one of the most significant predictors of
policy support – trust in government agencies does not itself relate to support, but greater trust
in environmental scientists and environmental groups and less trust in industry is associated
with stronger support. The paper suggests that this relationship between trust and climate
change policies merits further attention among researchers and points to the important role
environmental groups can play in enhancing public support for policies to mitigate the effects
of climate change.
In the field of risk research, Poortinga and Pidgeon (2003) found that trust plays an important
role in the acceptability and communication of risks. In focus groups, they found there were
some relative differences in trust assigned to various information sources. ?On average,
consumer rights and environmental organisations, friends and family, doctors, as well as
scientists working for environmental organisations and scientists working for universities
were trusted the most in each of the five risk cases. The le ast trusted information sources were
the national government and the European Union, together with relevant businesses and
industries relevant to each risk issue, as well as scientists working for these industries.
How can this barrier be overcome?
Without trust, it will be difficult for the government to promote lifestyle change with any
success. Acknowledging and partially assuaging public distrust is one thing; tackling its root
causes is quite another.
Many authors advocate the use of more relevant or ‘trusted messengers’ in order to improve
credibility and legitimacy in the communication of climate change to lay audiences (Lowe et
al. 2005; Hounsham 2006; Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005). Some organisations
appear to often be better placed to change attitudes and behaviours than others. Therefore
information on transport and climate change would be best received if it came from a trusted
source (independent of government) that acknowledged areas of debate on key issues before
recommending a consensus view (Alexander Ballard and Associates 2005).
A corollary of the findings on scepticism of government to set an example is the urgent need
for more conspicuous and purposeful policy commitments by central government towards
sustainability objectives, if serious independent action by members of the public is to be
stimulated.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
110
4. Barriers to change
4.8
Collective objective factors
4.8.1
Contextual/ structural factors
An examination of external collective constraints is outside the remit of this evidence base
review44 . These include the commonly used ‘PESTLE’ of corporate strategy: political,
economic (taxation policy), social (wider culture), technological (including transport
infrastructure), legal (e.g. speed limits) and environmental blockages to change (Alexander
Ballard & Associates 2005).
Nevertheless, objective and subjective factors interact. If the external constraints are too great,
people will become discouraged no matter how pro-environmental they are in themselves.
People simply may not be able to act.
Indeed, in the literature review on the attitude-behaviour gap, constraints termed variously as:
contextual, structural, situational, institutional barriers have all emerged as an extremely
important consideration, if not the most important in some cases. In essence, even if people
were fully aware of the causes and solutions to climate change and its linkages to their own
travel behaviour, were prepared to prioritise environmental values and constantly thought
about them, it may simply be that people cannot choose behaviours because of a lack of real
behavioural options (Kurani 2002).
The converse is also true. There are examples in the literature where the external provision of
facilities can bring about behaviour change regardless of positive attitudes being in place
(Barr 2004).
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
It is a given that people cannot be expected to change their travel behaviour without
infrastructure. It is also true that, for the purposes of this review, the most interesting question
is why, under those circumstances where there is travel choice, do people differ in the extent
to which they exercise this choice in line with their expressed concern for climate change?
Nevertheless, with respect to a review of the evidence of the link between attitudes and
behaviour, it is important to stress the neglect of consideration of contextual issues in the
literature. So often studies in this area conclude that there is a weak link between attitudes and
behaviour, or even behavioural intention, without having controlled for access to travel
options or other external factors. A possible exception to this is in relation to costs (see
section 4.5.7 above). However, even the interaction between cost, perceived cost, income and
environmental attitude is not fully understood. Indeed, Wall sums up this issue:
Most studies of physical environments’ effect on travel measure perceived
barriers rather than objective contextual features and those that take objective
measures rarely examine perceptions.
(Wall 2006)
In this review, the main evidence on the relative importance and relationship between
psychological and situational factors in predicting mode choice was supplied by Collins and
Chambers (2005). These findings suggest that the relationship between situational and
psychological factors on commuter-mode choice is likely to be interactional in nature with
environmental beliefs being affected by situational constraints. They also conclude that the
relative importance of psychological versus situational factors in determining pro­
44
As are individual objective constraints which influence most people’s travel behaviour in the same
way in that they are more-or-less non-negotiable (Wall 2006). Factors such as having a driving licence
and access to a car or bicycle will have a definitive influence on modal choice. Without a licence one
cannot (legally) drive and without a bicycle one cannot cycle.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
111
4. Barriers to change
environmental behaviour is dependent on the particular behaviour – i.e. attitudinal factors will
be stronger predictors of low-constraint pro-environmental behaviours (i.e., cheap or easy
behaviours) than of high-constraint behaviours (e.g. expensive or highly inconvenient
behaviours).
If objective situational factors are considered within the study of travel choice, they are
invariably introduced in the form of subjectively perceived environment (such as perceived
behavioural control), which does not record the objective but only the perceived scope of
action). This is important as personal characteristics often mediate contextual influences on
behaviour. Indeed, in his review of the literature on this issue, Wall (2006) found contextual
conditions alone are poor predictors of behaviour, as individuals in similar objective
situations may have different subjective perceptions or attitudes towards these factors, and
therefore different responses (quoting Salomon & Mokhtarian 1997). He also cites Handy et
al. (2005) who found this when investigating whether US participants drove out of choice or
necessity. They conclude that what appears to be a question of choice to an observer may be
perceived as a matter of necessity by the individual. Finding an objective way to make such
distinctions may simply be impossible. Similarly, Gatersleben (2003) notes, some people
willingly cycle in rain or over long distances. The extent to which anyone voluntarily does so
probably depends on other psychological characteristics. If somebody enjoys cycling or
values its environmental benefits, they may ride regardless of barriers. This is likely to be true
of any mode, with more effort being made to overcome barriers where there is strong internal
motivation.
Therefore, people might characterise the same situation in different ways. Thus, it is useful to
measure both PBC and ‘objective’ context. Another fascinating area is the degree to which
people’s perceptions of factors such as service levels, time it takes to travel by various modes
and comparative costs are based in (objective) reality. Wall (2006) suggests that, given
sufficient resources, studies could compare perceived and objective context. Gatersleben, Steg
and Vlek (2002) took this approach to household energy use, comparing perceived and actual
energy consumption and reporting that respondents who indicate they behave more proenvironmentally do not necessarily use less energy (cited in Wall 2006). It would be
interesting to see whether there is a similar mismatch between perception of factors
facilitating or inhibiting use of different travel modes and the actual context in which people
travel.
How can this barrier be overcome?
This evidence would suggest that unless policies are sensitive to the everyday contexts in
which individual intentions and actions are constrained by institutions, appeals to change
travel behaviour are unlikely to produce the desired effects.
Because the external context (laws, infrastructure, etc) is so crucial, and because
each person’s contribution to the problem is typically so tiny in relation to the
issue, this means that programmes must find a way to address context in a way
that the individual finds meaningful if change is to last.
(Alexander Ballard & Associates 2005)
People who successfully lead programmes for change in this area need to be able to recognise
and address such contextual factors.
4.8.2
Media/ communications
A general consensus emerged from the evidence review that the general public garners most
of its knowledge about the science and the politics of climate change from the mass media
(Ungar 2000; Bedford et al. 2004; Lowe et al. 2005; Hounsham 2006). Many authors argue
that people have been misled by newspaper reports that tend to give equal weight to both
sides of the climate change debate (ibid.) and that overall, the role of the media is significant
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
112
4. Barriers to change
in the public’s cognition and perception of climate change issues (Lowe et al. 2005). The
media also tends to present problems and not solutions thus reinforcing people’s feelings of
futility and fatalism in the issue.
The evidence suggests that an examination of media coverage may be crucial to
understanding how and why concern for transport and climate change issues develops and
fluctuates. Qualitative analysis in the literature has revealed that environmental information
was mainly picked up through the media, and this left respondents with glimpses of particular
issues before the media agenda moved on to another item (Lowe et al. 2005; Bedford et al.
2004). This form of information had a cumulative effect on respondents, who felt
environmental problems were numerous and that climate change is uncertain, controversial,
far off in the future and out of the public’s hands. Individuals are left with overwhelmingly
frightening images of potentially disastrous impacts, no clear sense of how to impact on this
scenario for the future and therefore no way to direct urgency into remedial action (Lowe et
al. 2005). In addition, the media presents substantial internal contradictions and mixed
messages – serious narratives on climate change juxtaposed against advertisements for air
travel – promoting the very thing that is supposed to be so irresponsible.
This is a minor reflection of a far wider, more profound and sustained
disconnection at all levels of society between the seriousness of the threat of
climate change and the action that we take in response.
(Marshall 2005)
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Despite the importance of the media, there is an evident research gap in analysis of the
media’s impact on transport issues in general and in relation to climate change in particular.
Because the news media are a key source of information for almost every societal issue, there
is scope to improve significantly our understanding of how scientific information on transport
and climate change takes shape in the national and local news media and how this information
is noticed, interpreted and used by the public (Tim Ryley, pers. comm. 200645 ).
The entire study of mass communications is based on the premise that the media does have a
significant effect upon opinions and attitudes. However, there has not been a research project
concerning the links between transport, climate change and the media which has looked at
both the content of the messages, the way they are received and the impact on their audience.
In general, media analysis has tended to focus on the influence of the media on health issues
from the perspective of social amplification. Where the media has been studied in the context
of environmental public opinion, this has tended to ignore the content of media messages, and
has instead focused heavily on the volume of messages as key to understanding how media
may influence environmental attitudes.
The concept of ‘media literacy’ may also be of interest here46 . Media literacy is a central
aspect of promoting the educated and active citizen by enabling people to use the
opportunities of media. This concept does not try to protect citizens from the media, but to
educate them to use it in a reflective, sensible and efficient way. This has connections to the
theme running through recent evidence and commentary in this area on the need to empower
people through information and two-way communication.
45
Dr Tim Ryley is a lecturer in air transport management and transport and business management at
Loughborough University. He has written about the media coverage of the Edinburgh congestion
charge (Ryley 2005).
46
See http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/medlitpub/medlitpubrss/medialit_audit/..
Ofcom’s definition of media literacy, developed after formal consultation with stakeholders, is ‘the
ability to access, understand and create communications in a variety of contexts’. Media literacy gives
people the confidence and knowledge to get the most out of the many media platforms that now exist.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
113
4. Barriers to change
Mass communications research is focused on the impact of media on society; examining not
only what issues the media choose to cover and why, but also how coverage impacts public
attitudes. Mass media coverage of climate change could have substantial political and policy
consequences if media constructions of meaning lead to a shared set of misconceptions
among lay audiences and impacts public concern.
How can this barrier be overcome?
Understanding this will be significant and extremely useful in the policy-making process. If
public understanding of this issue is built on a potentially fickle storytelling process that can
easily be driven in any direction—then politically based policy and regulatory strategies that
rely on an authority located in public opinion could be seriously misinformed. However, if a
clear understanding is developed about how public understanding forms and evolves from
narratives in the news environment then this research may suggest a potentially powerful
means for capturing this process to aid effective policy making (Trumbo 2000).
A study of media portrayal of transport and climate change and audience response would
involve a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods. Tracking the newspaper response
over a medium-term timescale (two years) will enable an analysis of how the coverage has
changed and to detect any differences in the ways in which stakeholders use the media for
their own ends. Links to policy announcements and press releases will enable the detection of
whether media coverage has an effect on the formulation of policy.
There is scope for developing analysis of the communications messages relating to transport
issues, beyond simplistic textual analysis to quantify and understand in more detail the nature
of the positive and negative arguments presented (Ryley 2006. pers. comm). This could
involve the use of semiotics to analyse the dominant frames embedded within the coverage
and to explore the wider cultural and symbolic arenas that may affect public opinion. Indeed,
there are three major divisions within traditional mass media research. They are: research into
the audience of a given communications message or medium; research enabling study of the
language, logic and layout of communications messages; and research into the impact of mass
communications (ibid.). All three divisions ultimately look at the effect of the media
influencing (and changing) opinions and attitudes of those receiving the communications.
4.8.3
The nature of the climate change problem
A discussion of how to motivate people to change their behaviour in response to climate
change cannot ignore the nature of the problem itself as a potential barrier to motivation and
action. In essence, communicating a complex issue such as climate change to multiple publics
can pose difficulties.
Our cognitive limitations to understanding environmental degradation seriously
compromise our emotional engagement and our willingness to act.
(Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002)
Some of the most detailed commentary on this issue for this review came from George
Marshall of the Climate Change Information Network. He proposes climate change
challenges the whole ethical basis of society:
Everything that was good before becomes bad. It’s a good thing to fly to your
frie nd’s wedding in New York, but what we understand now from climate change
is that it’s also a bad thing. It’s a good thing to light the streets at night, but now
it’s also a bad thing.
(Marshall 2005)
Marshall believes there is no one single component of climate change that makes it hard for
people to respond to. Instead, it has a particular and unique quality, and every single one of
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
114
4. Barriers to change
its aspects lines up with the areas in which we are least psychologically enabled to take
action. He identifies the following factors which function as psychological blindspots that we
have become adapted to ignore:
• Climate change is slow to develop, with its greatest impacts in the future.
• Humans are less capable of dealing with threats that are ... in the future with drawn
out and uncertain impacts and with complex causality.
• It has complex and diffuse causality and even more complex and uncertain impacts.
• Most people on earth contribute to it and everyone will be affected by it, but there is
no clear causal relationship between an agent and a victim.
• We are especially poor at dealing with threats that do not have clear external cause or
a clear enemy or are of our own making.
Although this is increasingly not the case, even in Western Europe, because the effects of
climate change are not immediately tangible, the information about the consequences has to
be translated into understandable, perceivable information (language, pictures, graphs) Kurani
2002). Most of the time this information will further our intellectual understanding without
making a link to our emotional involvement (ibid.). Ungar (2000) contrasts this with the
ozone hole. In a thought-provoking essay centring on the concept of a “knowledge-ignorance
paradox” that may underlie climate’s current status as an issue in limbo, he puts forward a
hypothesis as to why the ozone hole was capable of engendering some public understanding
and concern, while climate change has failed to do so. He says the ozone threat encouraged
the acquisition of knowledge because it resonated with easy-to-understand bridging
metaphors derived from the popular culture. It also engendered a hot crisis - that is, it
provided a sense of immediate and concrete risk with everyday relevance. Climate change
fails at both of these criteria and remains in a public limbo (Trumbo 2000).
What is the evidence in relation to travel behaviour?
Most of the evidence in this area, though not specifically in relation to transport, centres on
peoples perception of the (lack of) urgency of climate change. This evidence has already been
reviewed in Chapter 1. In particular, qualitative studies seem to pick up a sense that the public
is unaware that the opportunity for lifestyles to be made sustainable is a finite one (Bedford et
al. 2004). Margaret Beckett the then Rt Hon Secretary of State, seemed to be aware of this
tendency in her speech at the launch of the UK Climate Change Initiative:
If there is one thing that the initiative that we are launching today needs to do, it
is to convey the truth that not only can each of us have a role in tackling climate
change, but that we must have a role.
(Margaret Beckett47 , Dec 2005)
How can this barrier be overcome?
Ultimately it is not possible to take the uncertainty out of the issue or change any of the other
characteristics of climate change as an issue. All of these observations about the nature of the
climate change issue, however, have ramifications for how we communicate the issues and
engage the public. Moser and Dilling (2004) report the way in which an incomplete
understanding of climate change amongst the lay public can lead to overwhelming and
frightening images of potentially disastrous impacts. When you are just exposed to reports
and frightening images, the response is one of fear – and fear is a lousy motivator – so is guilt
(Hounsham 2006). Therefore, policy response should incorporate campaigns which aim to
dispel the green image of negativity and doom and instead focus on positiv ity, optimism and
human ingenuity (ibid.). We have to stop using shock or guilt tactics and avoid the temptation
to exaggerate or go beyond science (Hounsham 2006; Rose 2005).
47
Available at http://www.climatechallenge.gov.uk/news/news001 html
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
115
4. Barriers to change
4.9 Evidence gaps and research recommendations
This chapter has been pivotal to this evidence review in that it has outlined a complex array of
factors which need to be considered and addressed in research and policy in order for there to
be any meaningful link between travel behaviour and carbon mitigation either in the minds of
the public or in terms of action on the ground.
As such, all the research recommendations outlined in Chapter 8 emanate from this
discussion. The next chapter discusses the need to move away from an aggregate analysis of
the barriers and begin to examine how they differ for different segments in the population. In
addition, the following research recommendations are most relevant to this chapter:
R4: Barriers to changing travel behaviour
Research is required to develop our understanding of the barriers to travel
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
behaviour change and their relative importance and interaction. Chapters 3 and 4
drew upon social-psychological theory to identify such barriers (and drivers).
These included subjective and objective as well as individual and collective
barriers. A typology was offered, with the caveat that the barriers themselves and
the interactions between them required further in-depth research to understand
how they worked for specific types of travel behaviours and for different people.
The idea will be to utilise methodologies that allow the public to express in their
terms the important barriers to change. The aim is to get closer to the question we
are not yet able to answer with any real authority: how does the u nderstanding of
climate change/ environmental impact affect public attitudes, choices and travel
related behaviour and what are the opportunities to influence this behaviour? To
do this, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of which issues are
important to the public, their relative importance and the magnitude of effect they
will have for different types of travel behaviour for different people. In addition,
further understanding is necessary to illuminate the two-directional causal chain:
(i) how does each barrier affect behaviour? and (ii) how can it be influenced?
Projects using action research or innovative qualitative techniques such as Qsorting (Appendix 3) could be set up to address all four types of barrier (Chapter
4) and their relative importance and interaction. This would draw on socialpsychological insights into the nature of those barriers and motivations and
constraints on behaviour. In addition, studies should be capable of addressing the
deeper levels of learning such as cognitive dissonance and social networks.
This research should further our understanding of why attitudes in all their guises
do not always translate into actions. It should uncover deeper insights into the
emotions that need to be pulled on to change attitudes and influence behaviour in
preparation for more targeted, community level social marketing campaigns (R7).
High
Review + Qualitative
Priority:
Following
DfT/ Research Council
Responsibility:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
116
4. Barriers to change
R3: Media
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
R5: Identity
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
.
Chapters 1 and 2 identified the misconceptions surrounding the issue of climate
change and Chapters 3 and 4 outlined the importance of social norms and feelings
of self efficacy in relation to local, national and global problems. Because the
news media are a key source of information for almost every societal issue, there
is an evident research gap in analysis of the media’s impact on transport issues in
general and in relation to transport and climate change in particular. Research
needs to improve significantly our understanding of how scientific information on
transport and climate change takes shape in the national and local news media and
how this information is noticed, interpreted and used by the public.
There is scope for developing analysis of the communications messages relating to
transport issues beyond simplistic textual analysis to quantify and understand the
nature of the positive and negative arguments presented. This could involve the
use of semiotics to analyse the dominant frames embedded within the coverage
and to explore the wider cultural and symbolic arenas that may affect public
opinion. Indeed, there are three major divisions within traditional mass media
research. They are: research into the audience of a given communications message
or medium; research enabling study of the language, logic and layout of
communications messages; and research into the impact of mass communications.
All three divisions ultimately look at the effect of the media influencing (and
changing) opinions and attitudes of those receiving the communications.
If a clear understanding is developed about how public understanding evolves
from narratives in the news then this research may suggest a potentially powerful
means for capturing this process to aid effective policy making.
Qualitative + Deliberative
Immediate
Priority:
Responsibility:
High
DfT/ Research Council
Chapter 4 concluded that, despite the fact that the car has long been recognised as
far more than a means of getting from one place to another, empirical evidence of
the relevance of self image and identity is practically non existent in transport
studies. Examining the ways in which individuals view themselves in society with
respect to different travel behaviours could enrich our understanding of how to
empower people to reposition themselves within social groups which
communicate allegiance to certain ‘green’ ideals. Evidence of the role of identity
as a precursor to travel choice must move away from the anecdotal to the
empirical to understand the nature and the role of symbolic meanings attached to
cars, buses, bikes etc and to reveal the extent to which green travel is contrary to
the image that some people wish to represent.
This will involve the development of innovative qualitative techniques to enable
research to tap into meanings attached to various forms of travel. This will involve
the application of a range of disciplinary approaches from semiotics, marketing
and social psychology. The central technique will likely use a variety of images to
elicit information on how individuals see the stereotypical image of, say, a bus
user compared to how they see themselves and the degree to which certain themes
are culturally prominent and malleable.
Understanding the role of identity will aid our understanding of the relationship
between attitudes to climate change and mode or vehicle choice. This will
illuminate one of the most difficult ‘barriers’ to behaviour change and assist
attempts to make climate change and green travel ‘trendy’.
High
Qualitative/ value based
Priority:
surveys (psychometrics)
Following
Research Council
Responsibility:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
117
SECTION III:
CATALYSING BEHAVIOUR CHANGE
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
118
5. Segmentation
5: SEGMENTATION
5.1
Aims of this chapter
• To define segmentation and understand its applicability to travel behaviour
research.
• To illustrate the main methodologies used to segment the market.
• To provide examples of where segmentation has been carried out with different
degrees of detail in a travel context.
• To assess the evidence on the degree to which attitudes to climate change and
travel differ among certain types of people and/ or certain types of travel
behaviour.
• To discuss the implications for research and policy.
5.2
Main findings
• There is a general consensus that a staged and targeted strategy of travel behaviour
change is likely to be more effective than a ‘one size fits all’ approach. However,
research on how best to define target groups of travellers is in its infancy.
• Behaviourally-based interventions can be significantly more cost-effective than
traditional service delivery, and targeting resources can enhance this efficiency.
Segmentation allows a much richer assessment of resource requirements.
• Segmentation research starts from the premise that there is little point in addressing
the average consumer, (or in this context, the average level of car dependence or
attitudes to climate change). Instead, different people must be treated in different
ways because they are motivated by different factors, experience different
impediments to change and are affected in different ways by policy.
• The same behaviour can take place for different reasons and the same attitudes can
lead to different behaviours.
• Segmentation allows easy wins to be targeted and will add value to existing
programmes. The greatest potential for behaviour change is often at the margins, and
this is invariably ignored in the design of transport policy.
• Travel behaviour research has almost exclusively applied a priori methods of
segmentation based on age, income or some aspect of travel behaviour (high car user
vs. low user). However, such segments are not necessarily homogenous in terms of
motivation and attitudes are increasingly transcending demographic lines.
• The most informative and policy relevant segmentation studies use post-hoc research
based on psychographic measurements to systematically analyse combinations of
factors and define new categories of users. These are interpretable in terms of their
attitudinal and aspirational profiles and their potential modal switchability .
• In the transport sector there have been very few attempts to define distinct mobility
segments in a systematic and psychologically meaningful sense.
• Segmentation can be criticised for usually being cross-sectional and not modelling
any process of social change. To address this, studies could be designed with the
intention of developing an understanding over time of how the segments evolve in
response to normative and contextual developments with respect to travel and climate
change.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
119
5. Segmentation
5.3
Introduction
The previous chapters have demonstrated that public opinion on climate change and transport
is a very complex tapestry. However, so far, this evidence review has discussed public
attitudes to climate change and the barriers to travel behaviour change in the aggregate . Little
attempt has been made to establish how these attitudes or impediments to behaviour may be
distributed across different types of travel behaviour and different subgroups in the
population.
Failing to discuss these differences is not a product of the lack of importance expressed in the
literature to the need to target campaigns and interventions to particular groups or individuals.
Indeed, the fact that the public is by no means homogenous in its knowledge, motivations and
propensity to buy low carbon vehicles or use alternatives is a well acknowledged proposition.
Instead, the lack of discussion so far is a reflection of the fact that research on how best to
define target groups of car purchasers and travellers is in its infancy.
There is a general consensus in the literature that a staged and targeted strategy of travel
behaviour change is likely to be more effective than a ‘one size fits all’ approach (Hounsham
2006; Lorenzoni and Pidgeon 2005; Ampt 2003; Anable 2005).
Opinion polls tend to mask the diversity inherent within populations. Thus, it is
becoming clear that there is no single unique ‘public’ view on climate change as
individuals within society express a spectrum of opinions on one issue. Thus it is
more appropriate to consider multiple ‘publics’ within a society, manifesting
differences among the most commonly held views. Thus, more detailed studies on
national samples serve to highlight more complex public attitudes towards
climate change.
(Lorenzoni and Pidgeon 2005)
Driven as they are by different needs, people in different groups behave differently, think
differently, perceive or experience different barriers and are motivated by different things
(Rose et al. 2005). The attitude-behaviour gap discussed in Chapters 3 and 4 will be larger for
some groups than for others. Individuals may even have the same behavioural profile, but will
have different reasons or motivations for undertaking that behaviour and will respond only to
a proposition which works “on their terms” (Rose et al. 2005; Anable 2003 and 2005).
Consequently, efforts to encourage and support travel behaviour change need to be
specifically tailored depending on the action in question and the audience. These efforts at
persuasion and intervention may or may not benefit from information relating to climate
change depending on the target group.
This chapter will review the evidence on the need for proper national research on the
variations in motivations and barriers to ‘low carbon’ travel amongst the public to establish a
robust evidence base as a prerequisite to the design of direct and indirect interventions in this
area (to be outlined in the next chapter). Examples of the application of segmentation to travel
or related behaviours will also be discussed.
5.4
Segmentation - rationale
The design of deliverable and effective transport policy aimed at reducing the energy intensity
of individual travel activity needs to ask the following sorts of questions:
• What is the potential for behaviour change?
• What is the potential impact of the behaviour change?
• What are the barriers specific to this behaviour change?
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
120
5. Segmentation
•
What resources are required to overcome this barrier? (Jackson 2005)
In order to assess the potential for behaviour change, it is necessary to identify the malleable
behaviours and understand who the people are that may react to certain messages and
interventions. This requires an understanding of the characteristics and size of the various
segments in the population most likely to respond to these policies. The greatest potential for
behaviour change is often at the margins, and this is invariably ignored in the design of
transport policy.
In order to assess the potential impact, this understanding needs to be combined with an
assessment of the degree to which people will adapt their behaviour, how behaviour change
occurs, how long they are likely to sustain this change and the knock on effects (e.g. possible
rebound effects) of this change. This requires a detailed understanding of the motivations for
behaviour change of each group, what the behaviour change is likely to consist of and any
complementary or counterproductive reactions amongst certain groups.
In order to assess the barriers to change, an appreciation of the different barriers that exist for
different people is necessary. These barriers are individual and collective, objective and
subjective as outlined in Chapter 4 of this report. This requires identifying the unique
combination of actual or subjective obstacles for each segment in the population, or each type
of behaviour or organisation of interest. By drawing on socio-psychological insights into the
nature of those barriers and the way in which people’s behaviours are motivated and
constrained, interventions can be targeted very specifically towards them.
In order to assess the resource requirements, answers to the above three questions are
required. Some segments will comprise ‘quick wins’ for policy and if mobilised may be
achieve ‘sufficient’ behaviour change in policy terms. The targeting of subsequent sectors
with different barriers may entail greater resources. Behaviourally-based interventions can be
significantly more cost-effective than traditional service delivery (Halpern et al. 2004), and
targeting resources can enhance this efficiency. Segmentation allows a much richer and
accurate assessment of these resource requirements.
As Jackson (2005) reminds us, and as Chapter 4 demonstrated, the sheer complexity of human
behaviours and motivations makes it very hard to predict with certainty what the impacts of
policy interventions on people’s behaviours are going to be. Therefore answers to the above
questions are never simple. However, segmenting the population allows the barriers, the
drivers and the potential for change to be identified in a much more systematic way in
preparation for more targeted interventions (such as community based social marketing
campaigns discussed in Chapter 6).
Altogether, a nationwide segmentation study into the socio-psychological motivators of travel
behaviour will establish a robust evidence base for policy interventions aimed at behavioural
change in this area. Jackson calls this the ‘consumer proofing’ of policy optio ns.
5.5
Segmentation – definition
Segmentation is a key concept in market research. The basic proposition of market
segmentation is that in any given population, whatever the organisational setting, there exists
a variety of sub-groups that are relative ly homogenous in terms of certain essential
characteristics. Much of marketing theory is based on the suggestion that there are distinct
patterns of consumption associated with relatively stable ‘lifestyle’ groups leading to similar
world views, systems of evaluation, and consumption practices. Their survey methods start
from the premise that there is little point in addressing the average consumer, (or in this
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
121
5. Segmentation
context, the average level of car dependence or attitudes to climate change). Instead different
people must be treated in different ways because they are motivated by different factors and
are affected in different ways by policy.
In the empirical study of consumers, the term has been used for over half a century, originally
proposed by Smith (1956) who recognised the potential for segmentation to bring a degree of
order into marketing studies. He defined the concept as follows:
Market segmentation involves viewing a heterogeneous market as a number of
smaller homogenous markets in response to differing preferences attributable to
the desires of consumers for more precise satisfaction in their varying wants.
(cited in Wedel and Kamakura 1998)
Essentially, therefore, segmentation, from both a marketing and a research perspective, is
simply the act of defining meaningful sub-groups of individuals or objects (Hair et al. 1998;
Wedel and Kamakura 1998). At its core it is about reducing the number of entities being dealt
with into a manageable number of groups that are mutually exclusive and share well defined
characteristics. Once groups are identified, it is possible to make predictions about their
responses to various situations, marketing strategies and types of policy, to allow more
creative and better-targeted policies to emerge.
5.6
Segmentation – methodology
Whilst the fundamental definition of segmentation goes largely undisputed, the variety of
methods used to achieve this end means that, in reality, the term ‘segmentation’ encompasses
a variety of approaches48 . These approaches can be classified into two broad categories:
1. a-priori – this approach involves selecting certain groups from a population in advance of
data collection based on known characteristics and declaring them as ‘segments’. The
predefined characteristics may be based on past research, common sense, or simply ‘gut
instinct’. Such bases include socio-demographic classifications such as age or income, or
for example, in the context of travel behaviour, ‘high awareness’ versus ‘low awareness’,
bus users versus non-users. Groups can be derived without the use of statistical analysis.
The needs, preferences or behaviours of each group are then examined to identify
similarities and differences.
2. post-hoc – this approach requires empirical investigation using some form of multivariate
statistic al analysis to identify segments (Green and Krieger 1995). Respondents are
clustered according to their similarity on multivariate profiles on any number of
combinations of variables. These may include various mixtures of, for example,
attitudinal, behavioural or personality characteristics. Most importantly, beyond the initial
choice of which variables to use as the base, the segments are determined by the data, not
the researcher, and the number of clusters and their relative size is not known until the
process has been completed.
The extent to which ‘segmentation’ has been used in travel behaviour research depends on
which of the two definitions (a-priori and post-hoc) is used. In essence, segmentation
schemes traditionally used in transport planning are most often based on pre-defined key
socio-demographic variables such as income, gender and car ownership, or behavioural
characteristics such as frequency of use of a mode (e.g. ‘high user’ versus ‘low user’)49 . This
involves the discrimination and interpretation among groups of people defined by their
48
For an informative and up to date reference text covering all aspects of segmentation, see Wedel and Kamakura (1998).
49
References are not provided here as, effectively, this broad definition applies to most studies of mode choice and travel behaviour.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
122
5. Segmentation
membership in various a-priori categories without multivariate analysis. This includes the use
of tools such as 2- or 3-way cross-tabulations or other descriptive statistical analyses to
examine the association between the attributes 50 of trip makers and their mode choice
decisions.
After they have been defined, predictive methods such as regression analysis are often used to
describe the relationships between segment membership and sets of independent variables.
Similarly, in mode choice modelling, it is common to allow the parameters to vary across
segments with the idea that individuals in the different groups place differential importance
on the attributes of the behaviour or product to which the choice model applies.
However, this conventional approach to segmentation is inherently partial as sub-groups
distinguished by a-priori means are not necessarily homogenous. In searching through the
population for measures which will distinguish between ‘high users’ or ‘low users’,
‘intenders’ from ‘non-intenders’, ‘high income’ groups from ‘low income’ groups and so on,
the researcher is essentially considering the averaged responses of what may be highly
divergent groups (Hensher 1976). If the assumption of homogeneity is imposed when, in fact,
there is heterogeneity, erroneous or biased conclusions will emerge. For example, without
distinguishing disparate segments, the resulting analysis may entirely miss some important
relationships because they are finding average relationships that balance out to statistical
insignificance across the whole sample. In the extreme cases, when one segment of the target
group (e.g. bus users) is above average on a particular attribute and another segment is below
average, merging the two segments into one target group can make this group appear to be no
different from the remainder of the population. This can lead to a set of attributes such as, for
example, environmental concern, being identified as insignificantly related to behaviour,
whereas, in reality, for a certain sub-group, environmental concern may be substantially
related to the actions of these individuals.
Thus, without examining these differences and distinguishing between disparate segments
with different attitudes and motivations, the resulting analysis or models may entirely miss
important relationships between, for example, attitudes and behaviour. In other words, the
attitude-behaviour gap with respect to climate change awareness may be much smaller for
some than for others.
In order to fully understand the nature of influences on mode choice (the why rather than the
what), a large number of explanatory variables must be investigated simultaneously and
systematically. As Chapter 4 demonstrated, respondents may or may not use alternative
modes for any number of reasons. A realistic analysis, therefore, recognises both the
multiplicity of factors and the fact that combinations of factors are different for different
people. These combinations of factors may be shaped by the attitudes, psychological make-up
and worldview of the individuals.
Again, travel behaviour research lags behind standard market research in recognising that
socio-psychological and lifestyle factors provide a vital and richer perspective on systems of
evaluation, outlook, resistance to change and the complexity of the decision making process.
50
These attributes may also include attitudinal variables. See for example Stokes and Taylor (1995)
who selected a range of ‘concern’ and policy items and cross tabulated them by a range of likely
characteristics to look for the differences between the various subgroups; Curtis and Headicar (1997)
identified ‘segments’ based on their combined responses to those who had considered change and those
who considered it practical to change; and Stradling (2001) who cross-tabulated desire to change with
intention to change. Another approach is to use composite scale measures to look at the means scores
for sub-groups (Taylor and Brook 1998).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
123
5. Segmentation
Marketing does not have a single primary social science approach. It has developed out of the
perspectives of several disciplines, including economics, psychology, sociology, and
anthropology and each of these disciplines has particular theories and sensibilities about the
nature of human behaviour and historical processes (Kurani 2002).
Psychographic segmentation, or psychodemographics, provides an understanding by
incorporating a whole array of ‘measures of the mind’, and is widely applied in the field of
marketing (Gunter and Furnham 1992). This is (usually) a survey based statistical process and
includes such universes of construct as attitudes, activit ies, opinions, perceptions and
personality. As such, psychographics may be viewed as the practical application of
behavioural and social sciences to market research, evolving from the convergence of
motivational and personality research in psychoanalysis and clinical psychology (Waddell
2000).
Few empirical studies using psychographics have been reported in published travel research51 .
Yet, as Chapter 4 demonstrated, the study of mode choice could benefit from the
incorporation of these approaches and perspectives on behaviour. Instead, because of the
relative ease with which socio-demographic information is collected, this type of
segmentation is still one of the most common applied to transport. It is becoming clear,
however, that conventional a-priori population segments are increasingly unable to predict
and explain behaviours. With the ‘flattening’ of social classes and diversity in the population,
people are making conscious choices about their lifestyles that cut across previous social
categories (Redmond 2000; STIMULUS 1999). This change has meant that it is often no
longer possible to launch a product or an idea by prescribing in advance the target audience,
its lifestyle, media purchasing behaviours and personal motivations. This therefore calls for
new variables to explain human behaviour of all kinds. To this end, psychographic
information can put ‘flesh on demographic bones’ (Wells 1975).
More specifically, in studies of mode choice, new categories of users are needed which are
interpretable in terms of their attitudinal and aspirational profiles and their potential modal
switchability. Such classifications do not necessarily require groups to vary in terms of their
current behaviour, but, at the very least, they need to demonstrate differences in the extent to
which they are willing to try to change behaviour and the motives behind this potential to
change. Only when such groups are analysed and validated can targeted and responsive
mobility management policy be designed. This is the premise upon which segmentation is
advocated in this chapter of the evidence base review.
It is argued, therefore, that in order to understand the complexities of travel decision making
and its relationship to vital issues such as the public understanding of climate change,
analytical procedures are required that avoid the definition of groups across only a narrow set
of variables but, instead, simultaneously and systematically deal with combinations of large
numbers of explanatory variables across a-priori classifications. This necessitates post –hoc
methods that allow the data to ‘speak for itself’ by generating natural associations of people in
the sample using a multivariate statistical technique, such as cluster analysis.
Cluster analysis is the multivariate statistical technique most often used to carry out
segmentation. Consistent with the above typology, whilst segmentation can be carried out
without the use of cluster analysis, or indeed any statistical analysis, cluster analysis is
51
The term ‘lifestyle’ is widely referred to in the literature on travel behaviour but generally in a very
informal sense, usually relating to socio-demographic classifications (Kunert 1994; Lu and Pas 1999;
Lyons et al. 2002). Of the examples of psychographic approaches in travel behaviour, Redmond 2000.
TCRP 1998 and Stopher 1977 are amongst the few that exist, despite the large time ‘gap’ between
these pieces of work. However, the technique is widely used in leisure and tourisms studies (for
example Plog 1994).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
124
5. Segmentation
synonymous with segmentation 52 . The underlying definition of cluster analysis mimics the
goals of market segmentation: to identify groups of respondents in a way that minimises the
distances within a group whilst simultaneously maximising the distance between groups (Hair
et al. 1998). Cluster analysis is a purely empirical method of classification because it makes
no prior assumption about important differences in the population (beyond the measurements
upon which it is based).
However, once again, cluster analysis is rarely used in travel behaviour research, or indeed
many other areas of examination of environmental behaviours.
The following sections of this chapter will outline some examples, using various degrees of
sophistication, of where segmentation has been applied in a travel context and what we know
about how different segments of the population react to information about climate change.
5.7
Demographic segments and travel behaviour
As has been noted, in travel forecasting and analysis, travel behaviour is generally modelled
as a function of demographic characteristics and where segmentation has been used in travel
behaviour research, population sub-groups have invariably been derived a-priori from various
economic and personal characteristics. The general supposition is that there are variations in
travel demand that are determined by household characteristics such as family size and
composition, income and occupation.
It is beyond the scope of this review to provide a detailed analysis of the degree to which
awareness of climate change and travel behaviour differs across these different demographic
segments – particularly as the empirical research does not report consistent findings.
Nevertheless, a synopsis of this evidence is presented here.
Age is possibly one of the most often cited distinguishing factors. However, the evidence on
this aspect is confused. Many studies find younger people to exhibit greater environmental
consciousness. For instance, Brook Lyndhurst (2005) found the young and old to have
different attitudes and behaviour profiles and will therefore require very different kinds of
help to become sustainable consumers. They found the young (aged 18-25 years) and old
(over 65 years) to share the feeling they are reasonably well informed about what they
personally could do to help protect and improve the environment. By and large, however, the
survey reveals a picture in which younger people believe that the environment is being
harmed by human activity and there are many actions that individuals could take to address
the problem, but they do not get around to doing anything. Older people, on the other hand,
are less convinced by the environmental case, but are much more likely, across a range of
behaviours, to be acting in a more environment-friendly way. They go on to explain these
patterns in terms of two main elements: generational effects and cohort effects.
These generational effects (time and resources of different age groups) are
augmented by a powerful cohort effect. The current cohort of older people grew
up during or immediately after the Second World War, and the experience of
austerity has profoundly influenced their view on the use of resources. Today’s
young people, by contrast, are completely steeped in the contemporary capitalist
culture of consumerism, and – amongst other things – find the idea of re-using or
repairing things difficult to fathom.
(Brook Lyndhurst 2004)
52
Cluster analysis is used in disciplines as diverse as psychology, biology, economics, engineering and
business. It originated in the biological sciences, where it was developed to provide taxonomies of
animal and plant species (Wedel and Kamakura (1998)). A comprehensive review of the application of
cluster analysis in market research is provided by Arabie and Hubert (1994).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
125
5. Segmentation
In summary, therefore, young people are more likely to think we are damaging the
environment in the abstract, but are less likely to behave in a sustainable way in practice. In
contrast, even though older age groups are less likely to think we are damaging the
environment, they nonetheless seem more likely to adopt sustainable patterns of behaviour.
This evidence may contradict other empirical research suggesting younger people exhibit less
concern (Dietz et al. in press; DfT/ ONS 2006; Corrigan 2003). This may be due to their more
optimistic outlook and the fact that quantitative surveys do not pick up relative concern – i.e.
that the young people are concerned, but other issues take priority. Corrigan (2003) found the
youth of today appropriately understand the effects of increased car use and recognise the
need for a reduced dependence on the car. It further suggests, however, students see less
opportunity for this change until they are their parents’ age.
Gender is one of the demographic factors found to influence environmental attitude and proenvironmental behaviour the most (see Polk 2004 for a review). Kollmuss and Agyeman
(2002) claim women usually have a less extensive environmental knowledge than men but
they are more emotionally engaged, show more concern about environmental destruction,
believe less in technological solutions, and are more willing to change (they cite
Fliegenschnee & Schelakovsky 1998; Lehmann 1999). This greater emotional reaction to
environmental problems is what leads to greater engagement in pro-environmental behaviour
(ibid.).
There are, however, alternative explanations. For example, a study carried out into the
impacts of an individualised marketing pilot scheme in Leeds, UK found there was a greater
concern for the environment amongst women and yet a larger proportion of men said they
were willing to reduce their car use (Jopson 2000). The study author suggests the lower
behavioural intention displayed by women, despite their higher concern, might be due to
women being more concerned about personal safety and the perceived difficulties of
travelling by other modes with small children. Nevertheless, overall, UK women use buses
more than men (DfT 2005).
Education may be another important factor, although possibly not nearly to the same extent as
30 years ago (Rose 2004; Dietz et al. in press). In essence, the longer the education, the more
extensive is the knowledge about environmental issues (Stead 2005). However, more
education does not necessarily mean increased pro-environmental behaviour. Interestingly,
Kollmuss and Ageyman (2002) cite a study in which driving correlates negatively with
environmental attitude. This means that people drive more the more they care about the
environment. The authors believe this seemingly contradictory result can be explained when
influences on environmental attitudes are explored. The more educated and affluent the
people in the study were, the more likely that they had a deeper environmental knowledge and
a heightened sense of environmental awareness. At the same time, more affluent people
tended to be more mobile, in other words, travel more. Indeed other studies have found low
earners and non-professionals are less likely to drive and more likely to use public transport
(e.g. Exley & Christie 2002, cited in Wall 2006; also see Darnton (2004a, 2004b) for a review
of the literature with respect to a whole raft of ‘environmental’ behaviours).
Similarly, Golob and Hensher’s (1998) study of car commuting in Australia and attitudes to
greenhouse gas emissions found individuals with a strong environmental commitment are
more likely to be female, from smaller households with fewer cars, be either under 30 years
old or over 50 years old, have higher household income and be highly educated. However, in
this case their inclusion of a measurement of ‘status’ illuminated the findings. For instance,
with respect to the interaction between characteristics such as education and concern, women
are likely to view the car as a status symbol, and this attitude is conducive to choice of solo
driving.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
126
5. Segmentation
It would appear, therefore, there is evidence to suggest that environmental concern and the
use of different travel modes is related to socio-economic position. This is not entirely
unreasonable of course as socio-demographics can also be considered a measure of objective
constraints. Socio-structural factors affect people’s resources and opportunities for expressing
their attitudes in behaviour. In addition, it is important to understand implications for
changing market profile – ageing populations increasing affluence, work life balance etc.
Nevertheless, there is also evidence to suggest that attitudes and values are increasingly
transcending traditional socio-economic boundaries and will not be as useful in the
explanation and prediction of intention as psychometric variables could be (Anable 2004;
Rose 2004). Inconsistencies between findings on demographic links to behaviour are
increasingly common as attitudes such as environmental concern become more widely held in
society so that personal characteristics can explain increasingly minor variations in attitudes.
The following section will outline some studies which have studied travel behaviour or
general environmentalism using psychographic variables rather than underlying social
characteristics.
5.8
Examples of statistical segmentation
One of the most comprehensive guides to market segmentation for public transport has been
prepared by the US Transit Co-operative Research Programme of the Transportation Research
Board (TCRP 1998). This report looks at traditional methods of segmentation, using socio­
economic data, as well as needs-based segmentation and approaches based on analysing
attitudes to public transport. The report outlines a step by step approach to how to research
and define market segments using a variety of techniques. These include:
• looking at existing socio-economic data and geographical data
• product usage segmentation
• using information on how passengers use public transport
• psychographic segmentation
• benefit segmentation (what sort of benefits people seek)
Similarly, a European project (MOTIF – Market Oriented Transport in Focus 53 ) investigated
how best to match mobility demand with public transport supply (MOTIF 2000). It set out
three main strategies for defining market segments:
• Socio-economic or the user with a variant being phase of life
• Socio-economic criteria combined with factors such as journey purpose, frequency of
public transport use and certain quality aspects of the journey from the supplier point
of view (e.g. stop distance, seat availability, number of transfers)
• Individual beliefs and attitudes, which influence mobility behaviour and the way in
which transport choices are evaluated
The findings of MOTIF seem to confirm that using socio-economic criteria to identify market
segments is not very effective, as the variations in important factors across different groups is
not very defined.
Socio-demographic variables are not exclusively used as the basis for defining distinct
segments. Davies et al. (1997) used the idea of target groups to identify groups of cyclists
based on attitudes to this mode of travel. This study identified a typology of cyclists from
53
Cited in Tapestry ‘State of the Art Review’ (undated) CD Rom supplied by Transport Studies Group,
University of Westminster.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
127
5. Segmentation
survey based data (‘fair weather’; ‘lifestyle’; ‘practical’ and ‘idealist’) and concluded that
segmenting on the basis of attitudes enables preconceptions of image, status and constraints to
be identified in each group. Jensen (1999) used qualitative data from in-depth interviews to
identify six mobility types. These included three car-driving segments (‘passionate’,
‘everyday’ and ‘leisure time car drivers’) and three cycling or public transport segments
(‘users of the heart’, ‘users of convenience’ and ‘users of necessity’). Jensen points out that
the identification of these segments offers various starting points for policy. Pas and Huber
(1992) demonstrated the usefulness of market segmentation analysis for transport services by
identifying a number of potential segments with similar attitudes towards the attributes of
each transport mode. This research pointed to the complexity of the travel market and the
practical advantages of delineating segments of the population according to the benefits they
desire and expect from using various modes of transport.
These ‘segmentation’ studies do not use systematic statistical segmentation techniques using
attitudinal and psychographic variables that have been theoretically derived. There is even
less evidence of this in the published literature, although Redmond (2000) compared cluster
analysis solutions derived either from lifestyle or personality variables measured using
attitude scales and confirmed using factor analysis. Both sets of variables were found to offer
different but equally useful insights into travel behaviour, particularly orientations towards the
intrinsic value of travel itself. Similarly, Götz (2003) uses the concept of ‘mobility styles’ by
adapting methods used in attitudinal and lifestyle research. He defines five segments (‘the
traditional domestic’; ‘reckless car fans’; ‘the status oriented automobilists’; ‘the traditional
nature lovers’; ‘the ecologically resolute’). Götz claims that environmental effects such as
CO2 emissions can be calculated according to specific target groups.
One of the most comprehensive applications of psychographic segmentation to travel
behaviour has been Anable (2005). In the first application of her method, a detailed attitudinal
questionnaire was administered to 1,000 National Trust visitors, with a 66% response rate.
The survey used an expanded version of the Theory of Planned Behaviour (see Chapter 3)
incorporating moral norms, identity, habit and contextual constraints to design psychographic
scales relating to travel and environmental issues. Both factor analysis and cluster analysis
were performed on the data in order to find groups of people with similar attitudes, values and
propensity to use modes of transport other than the car.
The resulting segmentation provides a straightforward, yet sophisticated means of viewing the
complexity of peoples’ orientation toward the environment and travel, albeit in a leisure
context. Six distinct psychographic groups were extracted, each with varying degrees of mode
switching potential. Each group represents a unique combination of preferences, worldviews
and attitudes, indicating that different groups need to be serviced in different ways to optimise
the chance of influencing mode choice behaviour. Socio-demographic factors had little
bearing on the travel profiles of the segments, suggesting that attitudes largely cut across
personal characteristics. The most important distinguishing factors were perceived
behavio ural control, moral norms, psychological attachment to the car (including viewing the
car as a status symbol and habitual behaviour). It therefore identifies which participants may
be most susceptible to travel behaviour change, identifies some factors which may be
considered indicative of susceptibility to reduce car use or the main obstacles to change, and
that this process is likely to be incremental.
Anable’s findings help to explain why those with differing attitudes and motivations may still
make the same travel choices - that the same behaviour can take place for different reasons
and that the same attitudes can lead to different behaviours. The analysis demonstrates that
commonly used a priori classifications used to segment populations based on demographic
variables or simple behavioural measures may oversimplify the structure of the market.
Moreover, the study demonstrates the utility of cluster analysis to provide a way of extracting
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
128
5. Segmentation
naturally occurring, relatively homogenous and meaningful groups to be used in designing
targeted ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ transport policies.
This method was refined and applied two years later to a Scotland-wide survey of Travel
Awareness (Duddleston et al. 2005). From her original comprehensive but lengthy attitude
survey using psychometric testing (preceded by qualitative research) she was able to
statistically identify 19 core attitude statements that could be reliably used to identify
segments using a sufficiently rich set of psychological variables54 . The original six segments
emerged plus an additional non-car segment. These segments are illustrated in Figure 5.1:
Figure 5.1: Anable’s seven travel segments
Public Perceptions of Travel Awareness (Anable 2005)
Die Hard Drivers (20%)
Malcontented Motorists (18%)
Aspiring Environmentalists (16%)
Car Complacents (20%)
Car Aspirers (9%)
Car Sceptics (9%)
Reluctant Riders (7%)
Overall, the analysis illustrated that at least 40% of the population have a high propensity to
switch modes, albeit for different reasons. This implies that future travel campaigns should
not use ‘one size fits all’ messages, but should instead target certain sectors’ motivations and
perceptions such as the stress of driving, the desire to be less dependent on the car and the
feelings of altruism that can be felt by some people when they use their cars less. Anable
suggests the most sensible strategy looks to be to concentrate resources and campaign
messages on those segments that are most likely to change behaviour (e.g. the Malcontented
Motorists) and to accept that some people are very unlikely to change (e.g. Die Hard Drivers).
The segmentation suggests that it would not be worth trying to encourage those people who
do not currently use alternatives at all and have no intention of using them (e.g. Die Hard
Drivers). Instead it may be more productive to (i) encourage those who already use alternative
modes (e.g. Aspiring Environmentalists) to use them a little more, (ii) encourage those who
express a willingness to reduce car travel (e.g. Malcontented Motorists) to begin to
experiment with alternative modes perhaps by providing assistance and encouragement in
choosing another way and (iii) endeavour to raise the level of travel awareness of those with
currently unrealised potential for ‘switchability’ (e.g. Car Complacents). In order to target this
information most effectively, the attitudinal data would be coupled with further information
54
These questions are available from the author on request.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
129
5. Segmentation
relating to such things as geographical distribution of the segments and the types of
information most typically accessed.
Two other detailed segmentation studies have emerged from the review as worthy of
highlighting. Neither are specifically related to travel behaviour, but both have climate change
and the stimulation of pro-environmental behaviour as their foundation.
Firstly, The Energy Saving Trust (EST) has undertaken some detailed market research into
energy consumption behaviour in the UK with the aim of developing a pioneering
communications strategy. Using a combination of attitudinal and socio-demographic
variables, a segmentation study has identified ten fine grained segments according to where
they live and their energy consumption behaviour and attitudes. These segments are
reproduced from Abelman in Figure 5.2. The model has been used to analyse information on
behaviours and attitudes of the public towards energy saving and the environment, collected
on monthly omnibus surveys since August 2005 (Abelman 2006).
From this we are immediately able to see the breadth of opinion and potential for action in the
UK with respect to low carbon energy behaviour. In the aggregate, it would appear from the
research that there is only a marginal willingness in the population for people to make a
personal contribution to saving energy, although the interest in the purchasing of greener
vehicles is somewhat higher. Nevertheless, some segments do think about the energy they
use. The segmentation allows us to see the proportion of the population who are most likely to
do this and how the motivations for potentially saving energy (money saving or concern for
the environment) differ between groups. These results are assisting the EST in designing
campaigns which portray images of alternative desirable lifestyles. Most importantly, unlike
Anable’s more academic approach to segmentation, the inclusion of socio-demographic
factors (based on postcode) means that we know who to target, with which kinds of message
and where they are located.
Figure 5.2: The Energy Sav ing Trust’s energy consumption segments (Abelman 2006)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
130
5. Segmentation
Secondly, a group of UK based communication, campaign and marketing strategists (Rose et
al. 2005; Dade 2005) have developed an approach to data collection and analysis which
divides the population according to the psychological model: the ‘hierarchy of needs’
developed by Maslow. Rose et al. believe the two related aspects of communications to be
framing and psychological segmentation. The first concerns discovering the ‘frames’ people
use to recognise and make sense of issues (see Chapter 4). The second is the subject of this
chapter and concerns how segments of the population with differing psychological needs must
be addressed differently if they are to agree to take action.
Rose et al.55 commissioned a nationally representative telephone survey of over 1,000 adults,
who were asked a number of questions about climate change, environmental issues, and their
political identity. They were also asked ten questions about their lives which enabled
segmentation into 12 ‘Value Modes’ groups, within three broad psychological motivational
groups. They say:
As this system segments people according not to their lifestyle or shopping
behaviour, class or wealth, but by psychological needs, it is directly relevant to
campaigns, which stand or fall on motivation.
(Rose et al. 2005)
Maslowian psychology identifies three main sets of needs, matching the three main groups
found in Rose et al.’s research:
• Security or ‘sustenance’ needs (needs for belonging, identity, security/ safety): people
for whom these needs are dominant, are the Settlers (21% of UK population)
• Esteem or ‘outer directed’ needs (the need for esteem of others and self esteem):
people for whom these needs are dominant, are the Prospectors (44%)
• Inner-directed needs (needs such as an ethical basis for life, self exploration, finding
meaning in life, discovering new truths) – the Pioneers (35%)
Rose et al. claim their findings demonstrate that many assumptions about what will convince
‘the public’ of the need to act on climate change are misconceived. In this segmentation, each
group has very different emotional needs and has very different attitudes towards risk.
However, their needs define the ways in which they will take action, how they respond to
propositions, and how communications will work or may even be counterproductive. For
instance, faced with a call to change behaviour, such as drive your car less, each group will
respond according to whether it meets their needs or whether it makes sense. Table 5.1
summarises some of the characteristics and responses of each of the three segments:
By way of an example, Rose et al. cite some American applications of this research and show
that it has been the pioneers who instigated the take up of hybrid vehicles in the US, but after
celebrities started to purchase them, they went from a ‘deep green’ niche model to a fashion
icon. The market is therefore now being fuelled by prospectors.
This is a useful and persuasive study and illustrates the potential of a fined grained
segmentation to identify different campaign strategies and predict the response from broad
sectors of the population. It must be noted, however, that the identification of only three broad
population groups is potentia lly a little simplistic. Anable, for example, also segmented on the
basis of values. Despite their opposite car owner behavioural profiles, she found both the
Aspiring Environmentalists and the Die Hard Drivers to score the same with respect to values
capturing the desire for power and status. Her conclusion was that other motives (such as
altruistic motives) dictated how each group translated these values into action. For instance,
the Aspiring Environmentalists are happy to set the trend in terms of new consumption
55
Through Cultural Dynamics Strategy and Marketing (www.campaignstrategy.org)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
131
5. Segmentation
patterns and being an example to others. The Die Hard Drivers, on the other hand, expressed
power and status through the acquiring and displaying symbols of success (i.e. their car).
Table 5.1: The motivations and responses of Rose et al.’s motivational segments
Settlers
Prospectors
Pioneers
Overall
tend to look backwards,
to yesterday (which
was better) and dislike
anything new or
different as this
threatens identity,
belonging, security
prospectors
In the case of climate
change:
that’s not a problem
unless it immediately
affects my family, my
local area, my identity,
my traditions
someone should do
something about it
(leaders of the system,
not me, at least not
until everyone else is)
If they decide it is a
problem worthy of
action, their responses
would be:
When offered a
‘solution’ by others,
for example a
technology change
such as a solar panel,
they might react
something like this:
5.9
I’d rather not change
(but if everyone else is
doing it and it’s normal
and it’s done with
people like me, ok)
live in the now, for
today, and seek
rewards in terms of
fashion, status, success,
achievement and
recognition, and are
unconcerned with
belonging, security or
identity because they
have that already
that’s not a problem
unless it affects my
prospects for
achievement and
success
we should organise
(preferably via well
known high status
brand, be that political,
social or commercial –
in the system)
I’m not taking up
causes or things that
may not work but if it’s
in fashion, it’s for me
(if it helps me look
successful)
look forwards, both in
time and to new
horizons: they like
change, discovery, the
unknown so long as it
is ethically acceptable
but are unworried about
status because they
have already met those
needs
it’s a problem
I’ll do it myself (hang
the consequences, I’ll
change things if I have
to, even the system –
i.e. these are the natural
activists)
if it’s for the good of
the planet, or has an
ethical imperative, we
must do it
Policy applications
Segmentation is the cornerstone of any travel behaviour change programme, regardless of
whether that programme is attempting to change behaviour by changing attitudes first or not
(see the distinction between indirect and direct interventions in the next chapter). It will allow
easy wins to be targeted and will add value to existing programmes.
Section 5.4 demonstrated that segmentation is not a purely academic exercise. When
combined with data on actual behaviour and socio-demographic variables, it can allow a more
systematic analysis of the potential for behaviour change, the potential scope and impact of
this change, the barriers to change and the resources required to overcome them. Indeed,
where travel behaviour change campaigns have had some success, such as with a variety of
‘smarter choice’ measures (Cairns et al. 2004), segmentation would provide insights into the
people who have been motivated to change so far, who are the next likely ‘easy wins’ and
how to more efficiently encourage these people to change. It will also provide a more robust
assessment of the potential for these measures to reduce car use than has been possible so far.
Segmentation is a necessary precursor to research recommendations R7 (Testing community
based social marketing) and R8 (Acceptance/ Trade-offs) in order that specific marketing
messages can be designed and to galvanise support for specific interventions. Meaningful and
robust segmentation data will allow the DfT to add value and find its ‘niche’ among the
sometimes complementary and sometimes competing campaigns to inform and motivate the
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
132
5. Segmentation
public on sustainable issues. Once designed, the instrument can be promoted for use at a
variety of organisational and campaign levels.
One of the main criticisms of segmentation analysis, however, is that it is a cross-sectional
technique and does not model any process of social change. In other words, segmentation
research shows the landscape at the moment but provides little understanding of how to move
people on (Kurani 2002). Segments based on current behaviour or even purely on attitudes
may not be an effective strategy in itself. This is because, as we have seen elsewhere in this
report, recognition of the negative impacts of car use on the environment do not necessarily
result in a willingness to change behaviour or actual behaviour change.
This does not have to be the case, however, particularly if the segments are based on
motivations and if the data collection and analysis has a theoretical underpinning which offers
an understanding of social networks and stages of change (see Chapter 3). The Energy Saving
Trust has carried out its segmentation strategy within the overall umbrella of its
communications and market transformation approach of taking people and organisations
through various stages: awareness, acquisition, conversion, retention (Abelman 2006).
Likewise, a Stages of Change approach was attempted by the Scotland-wide study using
Anable’s method (Duddleston et al. 2005). This study included questions on the stages of
change in its survey (Table 5.2) and in so doing was able to say (i) which segments were at
which stage on the ‘ladder’ and (ii) which motivations were responsible for placing them on
that ‘rung’ and which ones were most likely to move them on.
Table 5.2: Questions on Stages of Change included in Duddleston et al. (2005)
Which of the following statements most closely describes you?
Stage of change
Question
Pre-contemplation
I have not tried to reduce the amount I use my car over the past 12
months and I am not thinking of doing so in the next 6 months
Contemplation
I have not tried to reduce the amount I use my car over the last 12
months, but I am thinking of doing so over the next 6 months.
Preparation
I have already tried to reduce my car use in small ways over the
last 12 months and I am planning now to use my car less over the
next 6 months.
Action
I have tried to use my car less over the last 12 months and I will be
trying to reduce it even more over the next 6 months.
Maintenance
I have already reduced my car use as much as I can and I am now
trying to keep it that way
Don’t know/ can’t say
Nevertheless, there is very little understanding of how segments might be expected to change.
Will the aim of policy be to move people between segments or will it be to transform the
characteristics and motivations of existing ones? However, given the dearth of even basic
‘snapshot’ segmentation studies, even asking these questions, let alone attempting to find the
answers, is ‘running before we can walk’.
5.10 Evidence gaps and research recommendations
The examples presented above go some way to developing our understanding of how attitudes
and behaviour differ across groups. However, there is only a very basic understanding of how
knowledge of and attitudes to climate change is different according to different sub-groups in
the population. Similarly, there is only a very basic understanding of how the strength of the
link between knowledge, attitudes and travel behaviour may vary between these groups.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
133
5. Segmentation
The most informative and policy relevant segmentation studies use research based
sophisticated statistical techniques and psychographic measurements to systematically
analyse combinations of factors and define such groups of consumers. Psychographic
measurement is a survey-based, statistical process that identifies clusters of values, consumer
tastes, and identities in a population and is best applied once background research grounded in
social theory has been carried out (e.g. R4 and R5).
In the transport sector there have been very few attempts to define distinct mobility segments
in a systematic and psychologically meaningful sense. Where segmentation takes place, it is
invariably based on pre-defined key socio-demographic variables such as income, gender and
car ownership, or behavioural characteristics such as frequency of use of a transport mode.
However, the evidence presented suggests that attitudes and norms can transcend traditional
socio-economic boundaries, and that different people may use the same mode for different
reasons. Thus a more sophisticated approach to identifying segments is necessary to capture a
meaningful disaggregation of the public on the basis of motivation.
Where more sophisticated attempts to segment the market have been attempted, these have
been applied to small unrepresentative sample sizes, have been based on an ‘ad hoc’ set of
variables assumed to be important or have lacked contextual information to allow a true
assessment of the potential to catalyse behaviour in each group.
Hence, once greater understanding of the most important psychological and contextual
influences has been developed by recommendations R1, R2, R4 and R5, sophisticated
segmentation techniques can be applied to the travelling public drawing upon commercial
marketing techniques and psychometric/ value based methodologies.
R6: Segmentation
The review clearly shows the strategic advantage of identifying population
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
segments for designing effective interventions. Chapter 5 reviews the limited
research that has so far been done using sophisticated segmentation techniques.
This suggests a staged and targeted strategy is likely to be more effective that a
‘one size fits all’ approach.
This research will need to rely on input from marketing and communication
specialists in addition to specialists in the measurement of complex psychological
constructs and their statistical interpretation. In addition, the segmentation study
should be adequately resourced in order to develop a robust instrument to be used
to monitor progress of interventions at a variety of different scales and over the
long term. This may involve pre-testing and experimenting with a variety of
questioning techniques. Meaningful segments for the purpose of designing
targeted campaign messages and behavioural interventions will only be discovered
once an instrument has been designed to measure the most important factors
motivating behaviour. Consequently, the segmentation study will only be as good
as the variables measured in the survey instrument. This element of the research
programme will therefore need to follow on from the previous research
recommendations which provide a deeper understanding of the antecedents of
travel choice and the ‘frames’ people use to make sense of issues such as climate
change. Segmentation can be criticised for usually being cross-sectional and not
modelling any process of social change. To address this, studies could be designed
with the intention of developing an understanding over time of how the segments
evolve in response to normative and contextual developments with respect to
travel and climate change.
A large-scale segmentation study would aid an understanding of the most
important factors motivating travel behaviour in different groups for different
behaviours and across different geographical scales in the UK.
Value based surveys
(psychometrics)
Following
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Priority:
High
Responsibility:
DfT
134
5. Segmentation
This discussion on segmentation could be taken further to embrace the different motivators
and barriers for different people in relation to different environmental actions. The rationale
for this is that value priorities and motivations are not displayed in a stable order across
situations (Dietz et al. in press). For instance, although thoughts about the environment may
be alerted when throwing away refuse, or possibly even when buying a car, this association is
less likely to come to mind when destined for a foreign holiday (Bedford et al. 2004).
This review did not set out to look at whole lifestyle approaches to behaviour change and nor
did it do so. Had it done so, it may have discovered more evidence on the links between travel
and other aspects of lifestyle. As it is, there is very little research to report in this review. The
authors are aware that such a holistic approach has links to research being carried out on
carbon footprinting, personal carbon allowances (Fawcett 2005) and sustainability lifestyle
indicators (Bedford et al. 2004) and a review of how travel behaviour is being ‘treated’
alongside other behaviours would be worth while.
R9: Lifestyle
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
Climate change demands that people examine their lifestyles, of which travel is
one component. The fascinating, and as yet unanswered question, is the extent to
which the link between attitudes and behaviour differs across different behaviours.
This poses a number of interesting questions:
• Which behaviours are easiest to change? It would appear from the
evidence that people find it more difficult to make the link between
household energy use and climate change than between their travel
behaviour and climate change. Yet, travel behaviour seems to be a harder
nut to crack. Why is this and what are the implications for policy?
• If we focus on other individual or household level behaviours, will travel
follow, or does it require separate treatment? If so, how and why is it
different? Are at least some of the barriers to change the same for the
different behaviours in order that generic campaigns and policies can be
designed?
• To what extent do people consider the sustainability of the whole range
of their travel behaviours? How prevalent is the concept of a personal
carbon balance in respect of transport? What influence does awareness of
climate change impact in one area - eg air travel - have in respect of other
transport decisions?
• What are the potential unintended behaviour changes or rebound effects?
Might carbon savings from one activity (e.g. domestic energy saving) be
‘spent’ on another (e.g. travel abroad)? Could this mean there are real
difficulties with attempts to change behaviour through market forces
unless a comprehensive solution can be identified and negotiated?
This evidence base review did not set out to answer these questions specifically
and a review of the literature, with a focus on travel behaviour, in relation to
broader lifestyle issues is recommended. Following from this, specific issues
could be explored using deliberative approaches – particularly to explore aspects
such as personal carbon trading and how information about comparative energy
and carbon use may be received.
An evidence base review on the issue of travel and lifestyle will provide a
foundation upon which to identify priorities for further understanding.
Review + Deliberative
Immediate (review) +
Following
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Priority:
Responsibility:
Medium
Cross departmental +
Research Councils
135
6. Interventions
6: INTERVENTIONS
Aims of this chapter
• To define interventions as either: ‘direct’ – those that address the attitudes of the
target audience with the aim of modifying behaviour; or ‘indirect’ – those that
aim to change behaviour without necessarily changing the attitudes of the
audience concerned.
• To ascertain in what situations ‘direct’ and/or ‘indirect’ interventions should be
used to most effectively promote pro-environmental travel behaviour.
• To introduce the concept of Community-based Social Marketing and
demonstrate its application to travel behaviour change management.
Main findings
• Although information provision is usually necessary to change behaviour through the
mediation of attitudes and intentions, it is rarely sufficient in itself to encourage proenvironmental behaviours.
• There is evidence that some pro-environmental behaviours including travel can be
changed without necessarily first changing attitudes or intentions.
• Any behaviour change campaign needs to take account of how messages are received
and interpreted by a target audience.
• If a communication strategy can be arranged to meet the psychological needs and
motivations of the target audience, then it stands the best chance of being effective.
• Social Marketing offers a strategic framework to organise the application of social
science to the problem of transforming markets and behaviours.
• There has been little application of Social Marketing techniques to address travel
behaviour at the community level. In the field of travel behaviour, Social Marketing
has mainly been applied to individualised marketing strategies.
• There is a growing body of evidence that shows that engaging communities rather
than individuals can increase the level of engagement and can be more effective in
diffusing pro-environmental practices.
• Existing research and experience therefore provides compelling evidence that social
marketing at the community level is a productive approach. This is what is known as
Community-Based Social Marketing.
• While persuading communities to change their behaviours may be more challenging
than securing an individual response, the resulting changes in behaviour are likely to
be more profound and longer lasting.
• Not only do efforts to promote pro-environmental behaviours have to overcome a
large number of psychological and social barriers, they have to account for, and
capitalise on the complexity of modern lifestyles and social networks.
• This chapter recommends the development and application of small-scale pilot(s) of
community-based social marketing strategies based on specific knowledge, attitudes
or values around ‘case study’ issues such as car purchasing or a local travel issue.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
136
6. Interventions
6.3
Direct versus indirect interventions
Within the context of this evidence review, interventions designed to change travel behaviour
can be one of two types.
1. First they can be direct in the sense that they address the attitudes of the target
audience directly with the aim of modifying travel behaviour through attitudinal
change. Information campaigns such as Are You Doing Your Bit? and Choose
Another Way are examples of direct interventions.
2. Second, they can be indirect in that they aim to change behaviour without necessarily
changing the attitudes of the audience concerned. Indirect interventions include the
large range of existing tax instruments and price signals that operate within the
existing attitudinal framework. These measures may also have other functions – e.g.
the raising of revenue.
The way in which each type of intervention changes behaviour in relation to attitude change is
shown in Figure 6.1. Examples of each policy, as covered in this chapter are also provided.
Figure 6.1 Direct and indirect intervention typology
In practice there may be a degree of interaction between direct and indirect interventions. For
example, an information campaign may improve the support for and increase the
effectiveness of a new tax measure. Indeed, (as will be presented later in this chapter) there is
good evidence to believe that for many, particularly controversial policies, information
campaigns are essential if their implementation is to be successful. Conversely, indirect
measures such as a new method of taxation or a new facility or service may lead in the longterm to a change in attitudes. For example, there is some evidence that the introduction of
road-side waste collection schemes changed attitudes to recycling after behaviour was
changed (Barr 2004).
To set a context for the later discussion, it is interesting to note the role of direct and indirect
interventions within the range of transport policy initiatives widely described as ‘soft’
measures – i.e. those that usually seek to give better information and opportunities which
affect the free choices made by individuals, mostly by attractive, relatively uncontroversial,
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
137
6. Interventions
and relatively cheap improvements (Cairns et al. 2004). Soft measures include: workplace/
school/ personal travel plans; travel awareness campaigns; public transport information and
marketing; individualised travel marketing; car clubs and car sharing schemes; and
teleworking, teleconferencing and home shopping.
Initially, it might appear that soft factors are synonymous with direct interventions. Although
it is the case that some soft measures (e.g. travel awareness campaigns, public transport
information) are pure direct interventions, others (such as travel plans) are actually a mix of
direct and indirect interventions as defined in this report. For example, a fully implemented
school travel plan may involve the provision of information and the introduction of new
infrastructure such as dedicated cycle lanes and an enhanced bus service. Furthermore, the
emphasis given to measures within a travel plan will change over time - for example, within a
typical workplace travel plan, initial measures are largely just information whereas later
measures include a set of enhanced incentives and disincentive including the provision of new
travel services (Potter and Lane 2004).
The recent report ‘Smarter Choices – Changing the Way We Travel’ provides valuable
evidence of the potential impact of soft factors (Cairns et al. 2004). The report concludes that
public transport information and marketing measures can lead to increases in bus use, with
evidence suggesting that it can cause patronage increases from service improvements to
double. To date, public and private sector investment in marketing efforts have helped to
deliver citywide increases in bus use of 1.5%-5% a year, when combined with other
improvements. The report also notes that personalised travel planning initiatives typically
report reductions in car use of 7%-15% in urban areas, and 2%-6% in rural and smaller urban
areas.
The Smarter Choices report notes that travel awareness campaigns vary in nature, from
relatively general campaigns to closely targeted intensive approaches (discussed in detail in
Section 6.4.1). Both types report evidence of car use reductions, although intensive
approaches tend to achieve higher levels of individual change. Many campaigns are now
focusing on the positive health benefits from alternative transport policies. The report also
notes that travel awareness campaigns are often used to win support for, and perhaps
intensify, other specific initiatives.
6.4
Direct interventions
Although there is little direct evidence of the effect of climate change campaigns on travel
behaviour, several environmental and travel awareness/ information campaigns have been
assessed regarding their effectiveness in reaching an audience, and leading to more
sustainable behaviours. This section aims to assess the effectiveness of travel information
campaigns, to what extent they focus on environmental and/or climate change issues, and to
what degree they lead (if at all) to more sustainable travel behaviours.
As discussed in the previous section, the general conclusion reached by a large number of
practitioners and academics is that information provision is often necessary, but rarely
sufficient to encourage pro-environmental behaviours (Eden 1996; Nilsson and Kuller 2000;
Collins et al. 2003; Ampt 2003; Hagman 2003; Cairns et al. 2004; Seethaler and Rose 2005;
DEFRA 2005; Bibbings/ WCC 2004; and Dietz et al. in press). A consensus also exists that,
to be effective, providing information should form part of an orchestrated campaign designed
to change behaviour:
Information does not necessarily lead to increased awareness, and increased
awareness does not necessarily lead to action. Information provision, whether
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
138
6. Interventions
through advertisements, leaflets or labelling, must be backed up by other
approaches.
(Demos and Green Alliance 2003, cited in DEFRA 2005)
In a mixed-method study relating specifically to attitudes to climate change in Wales,
Bibbings concludes:
The provision of information is only a foundation block for encouraging
behavioural change. It is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition. Current
research on communicating sustainability is clear that information, on its own,
will only change consumer behaviour in a few exceptional cases.
(Bibbings/ WCC 2004)
Evidence reviewed by Collins et al. (2003) looks at how the provision of information and
marketing can help achieve environmental goals. Based on existing research and three case
studies (UK environmental awareness campaigns; Irish PlasTax on plastic bags; and the UK
eat 'five-a-day' fruit and vegetable campaign), the report concludes that, done in isolation,
providing information is rarely effective in effecting behavioural change. Collins et al. (2003)
conclude that to be successful, providing information needs to be accompanied by other
measures implemented in parallel including: the required infrastructure to enable actual
change; effective incentives and disincentives (i.e. economic instruments)56 and a perceived
fairness (a guarantee that the majority cannot free-ride on the individual sacrifices of a few).
Citing Tertoolen et al. (1998), Seethaler and Rose (2005) also observe that providing
environmental and economic information can even have a negative impact on proenvironmental travel behaviour, indicating the presence of reactance and cognitive dissonance
effects triggered by travel behaviour change campaigns. Ampt (2003) also cites Tertoolen et
al. (1998) in warning about possible unintended consequences of providing information. In a
study investigating the psychological resistance of attempts to reduce car use, Tertoolen et al.
(1998) observed that when people are given information about their travel, those that have no
understanding of a way to change their behaviour instead change their attitudes (‘travelling by
car is not that bad after all’). The New Economics Foundation also warn that, in relation to
climate change, policy makers should note that too much information or choice can be
counterproductive and that care should be taken to ensure that targeted individuals are not
‘bombarded’ with information or regulations (NEF 2005).
There is a considerable weight of evidence, therefore, that the information deficit approach to
public understanding and action is inadequate. This is supported by studies collecting
empirical data using theoretical frameworks outline in Chapter 3.
However, having established the limitations of information-only and awareness-raising
campaigns, it should be stressed that good quality information is usually necessary (though
not sufficient) to promote pro-environmental behaviour. One example is the ending of the UK
fuel duty escalator in 2001 following the ‘fuel protests’ in 2000. It has been argued by some
commentators that this policy failed due to not being backed up with adequate information:
Even in the fuel protests in 2000, the Government failed even to mention the
environment at all as a reason why fuel should not be cheaper.
(Transport 2000 undated).
56
The example given to support this position is the case of the Euro 0.15 Irish PlasTax on plastic bags;
by introducing the tax along side a coordinated advertising/ information campaign involving several
agencies, the number of plastic bags has reduced by 90%.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
139
6. Interventions
Hence, none of the authors included in this review advocate that attempts to further
understanding of environmental risks or their relationship with individual behavioural activity
should be abandoned. Owens sums up the reasoning for this as follows:
Not only is there a crucial, and continuing, role for natural science, but on the
whole it is preferable to be informed than to be ignorant, even if behavioural
change does not necessarily follow.
(Owens 2000)
Indeed, there is a general consensus that knowledge is important in its own right. That without
the foundation of basic scientific understanding people will not even be aware that there is a
need for change (Bibbings/ WCC 2004), may have difficulty relating climate change policy
options such as carbon taxes to climate change mitigation (Stoll-Kleemann et al. 2001) and
without basic awareness of the causal relationships – e.g. that it is helpful for us to avoid
flying or to use our cars less – may not be aware of the opportunities to act and respond
appropriately (Alexander Ballard 2005). It is suggested that misperceptions and a lack of
awareness are likely to:
Inhibit the public’s ability to participate meaningfully in democratic discussions
of the issue, to understand how their own actions affect the climate and to fully
and accurately appreciate how climate change will affect our future.
(Seacrest et al., 2000 cited in Lowe et al. 2005).
In his review of the evidence, Darnton concluded that, in addition to making people aware of
the links between specific behaviours and climate change, there is another clear motive for
clear and authoritative information:
[Such information will] limit the extent to which a large section of the public can
keep telling themselves that some of their behaviours are not contributing to
climate change.
(Darnton 2005)
Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) make the further point that, even if knowledge is not
necessary in making the first move to action, it is not enough to just change behaviour as
these can revert. Attitudes, shaped by knowledge, need to change in addition to ensure lasting
behaviour change.
Other authors suggest that, in addition to individual action, effective government action on
climate change is unlikely if people are not convinced of the case for such action (Lowe et al.
2005; Kurani 2002; Bord 1998). In other words, even if the correlation between information,
knowledge and individual behavioural response is weak, accurate understanding correlates
significantly with support for initiatives to mitigate global climate change.
Finally, a distinction needs to be made between ‘abstract’ knowledge of the issues and
concrete, procedural knowledge of action strategies (Anable 2005; Barr 2004, Kollmuss and
Agyeman 2002). Whilst both types are deemed necessary, and whilst abstract knowledge may
‘sensitise’ people to the issues, information on what to do and how to do it is always
necessary.
6.4.1
Travel Awareness Campaigns
As noted by Cairns et al. (2004), travel awareness campaigns use a wide range of media
aimed at improving general public understanding of problems resulting from transport
choices, and what options are available for behavioural change. The campaigns stem from
experience of and longer established use of campaigns applied to road safety (notably drink-
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
140
6. Interventions
driving and seat belts); and other social issues such as smoking, drinking, suicide, domestic
violence, literacy, health and citizenship.
One of the largest UK travel awareness campaigns has been the Are you doing your bit?
campaign. This was launched in 1998 by DETR with the aim of encouraging small but
significant pro-environmental behaviours. The first year of activity focused on energy saving,
transport and air quality issues, and achieved measurable consumer recognition using national
women's press and consumer interest magazines. In 1999/ 2000, the campaign focused on TV
and radio commercials, using celebrities carrying out small, environmentally friendly actions
in slightly incongruous situations (Cairns et al. 2004).
In the UK, other major national travel awareness campaigns include:
• TravelWise – membership of over 120 local authorities, health authorities and/ or
passenger transport executives;
• Learn to Let Go – a national travel awareness campaign launched by the Scottish
Executive in 2001, supported by bus and rail operators. Known since 2003 as the Choose
Another Way campaign;
• In Town Without My Car – EU annual events based on the concept of closing town centre
streets to cars and other traffic in order for people to enjoy walking, cycling, street
theatre, live music, dancing, public art and children's play areas;
• Bike Week – UK cycling events held in June very year with over 2003, 1,000 local
cycling events and rides were promoted, including Bike2Work which was promoted by
more than 90 employers and workplace bicycle user groups; and
• Walk to school week – UK 'walk to school week', takes place over two weeks, one in May
and one in October.
In assessing the general effects of local travel awareness campaigns on car use, the Smarter
Choices report estimates that localised travel awareness campaigns typically reach 20%-40%
of residents. They conclude that surveys and traffic counts indicate that well-judged
campaigns can have an effect on the attitudes and intentions of those targeted, and that car
use, walking, cycling and public transport use can change in locations where both travel
awareness campaigns and other initiatives have been pursued (Cairns et al. 2004).
A more detailed assessment of the effectiveness of a specific travel campaign is given by the
report Public Perceptions of Travel Awareness that examines the levels of awareness of travel
and transport issues/ initiatives and changes in travel behaviour in Scotland over the period
2001 to 2004 (Duddleston et al. 2005). Based on a series of large-scale interview surveys, an
assessment was made of the reach and impact of a number of travel choice issues including
two travel awareness campaigns (Learn to Let Go and Choose Another Way).
Regarding these travel campaigns, the study found that 4% of those surveyed knew either a
great deal or a fair amount about Choose Another Way and 8% knew a little (Duddleston et al.
2005). Just over three quarters of all respondents had never heard of these campaigns and 8%
had heard of them but knew no detail. Just over a third (39%) of those with some knowledge
of Choose Another Way said the campaign had encouraged them to consider their travel
arrangements. Therefore around 8% of the Scottish population has considered switching
travel modes due to this particular campaign. Bearing in mind that even this figure may be an
overestimate due to survey bias, this seems quite a low rate of return.
The study also showed that ‘total travel awareness’ improved significantly during the period
of the surveys and included a significant decrease in the proportion of drivers who have
‘never heard of’ the ten common initiatives (walking buses, TravelWise, LPG fuel etc)
(Duddleston et al. 2005). In particular, a significant improvement in recognition of the terms
congestion charging and climate change was seen for both drivers and non-drivers (e.g.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
141
6. Interventions
percentage who had not heard of climate change: drivers 27% to 4%; non-drivers 52% to
14%). However, although travel awareness increased in Scotland over the period 2001-04,
travel behaviour did not significantly change , the level of car use remaining the same with
64% adults travelling by car/van as a driver or passenger ‘most days’ (Duddleston 2005).
That little or no change in actual travel behaviour was found is consistent with the evidence
reviewed by Collins et al. (2003) (already discussed). This position is supported by the case
study of a sustained campaign to promote walking and cycling in York, UK analysed by the
Smarter Choices report (Cairns et al. 2004). In assessing the success of the scheme to date,
the City’s Mobility Management team are of the opinion that, although the travel awareness
campaign is contributing to reductions in traffic, it is certainly not the sole cause.
Furthermore, the travel campaign is only one part of a package of policies including parking
restraint, the public transport strategy, effective land use planning (to ensure that travelling
distances are realistic for walking and cycling), as well as ‘hard’ measures, such as cycle
routes and pedestrian improvements.
Reflecting on the impact of the Are You Doing Your Bit? information-based awareness
campaign, Bedford et al. (2004) cites evaluative research conducted for the DETR that finds
advertising activity alone is unlikely to change behaviours. What is additionally required is
the removal of barriers to action (perceived or actual), the provision of requisite
infrastructure, the use of incentive mechanisms and changing of attitudes (Chapter 4). It can
be argued that while Are You Doing Your Bit? succeeded in identifying a few simple actions
that were relatively easy to do, there was very little reason for people to actually do them,
there being no incentives/ penalties for compliance/ non-compliance. While there was some
focus on personal benefits from the actions suggested, they were relatively minor and
unconvincing. As a result (negative) efficacy beliefs prevailed. Bedford et al. (2004) go on to
cite the conclusion drawn by the House of Commons Environmental Select Committee that
the campaign had been inadequate in bringing about behaviour change. A conclusion
supported by Hounsham (2006) in the recent report Painting the Town Green.
Individualised marketing campaigns are discussed in Section 6.6.2.
6.4.2
Workplace Travel Plans
The emergence of UK travel plans during the last decade also provides a useful insight
regarding the role of information in promoting travel behavioural change. Whereas the most
successful fully implemented workplace travel plans typically result in at least a 20%
reduction in journeys made by car (Cairns et al. 2004), this level of reduction is only attained
by the best and most consistently applied travel plans. In practice, travel plan implementation
progresses slowly with measures being introduced in stages – hence organisations take time to
fully integrate travel plans with their core activities. In one evaluation study, Potter et al.
(2004) note that five categories characterise the level of integration of a travel plan within an
organisation. In qualitative terms, these stages can be characterised as follows:
1 Emergent – information provision only;
2 Accepting – easy win initiatives, awareness raising;
3 Resourced – staff/ pupil engagement, specific incentives introduced;
4 Committed – integrated package of incentives and disincentives introduced;
5 Fully engaged – travel plan/ measures integrated with core activities.
These five stages (having resonance with the Stages of Change model presented in Chapter 3)
are useful in assessing an organisation’s level of engagement, and highlighting the barriers
that need to be overcome as an organisation progresses towards being fully engaged with the
travel plan process. They also illustrate that the barriers faced in making the transition
between these stages of integration are different. Of particular interest to the evidence review
is that, as Figure 6.2 shows, information provision is typically a starting point for the
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
142
6. Interventions
workplace travel plan process, and although a necessary initial stage, is not usually capable of
delivering the maximum benefits without a comprehensive package of incentive and
disincentive measures.
Figure 6.2 Typical stages of a UK workplace travel plan (Potter and Lane 2004)
Vehicle
Trip
Reduction
(%)
Culture
20
Commitment
15
10
Cost/
resources
Managerial
Acceptance
5
0
Largely just
information
Low cost
Travel
Plan – car
share etc
Incentives
Travel Plan
Incentives &
Disincentives
Travel Plan
Enhanced
Incentives &
Disincentives
Travel Plan
Note: although this is a typical progression for workplace travel, all organisations are different and progress in
different ways over different timescales.
6.4.3
Energy Labels
I like to recycle bottles and tins, and would like to carry this through with the car... I
bought a washing machine because it had a low environmental impact. I’d do the same
for a car
(Male participant; DfT 2003)
Since 1995, colour-coded ‘energy labels’ on consumer goods have been mandatory on all
‘white goods’ in the EU – these show an item’s relative energy consumption using a scale that
ranges from A (the most efficient) to G (the least efficient). The initial assessments of the
impact of the introduction of the labels in conjunction with other measures have been positive
and show a significant shift to the adoption of more efficient goods.
In one study, Boardman (2004b) compares sales of cold appliances in 56 Scottish HydroElectric showrooms. In 1994, before any form of intervention, no consideration was given to
energy efficiency by the manufacturers or in retail showrooms, nor was there a test procedure
to identify the differences between models. In 1995, following the introduction of labelling
and an initiative by Scottish Hydro-Electric (including the provision of more efficient models
and energy-education of retail staff), sales figures showed an 11% improvement in energy
efficiency. However, it should be noted that this improvement was not due to labelling alone
and would not have occurred had it not been for the high-level corporate concern and
involvement.
The effect of energy labels are two-fold – on one hand they inform the consumer, on the other
they stimulate innovation as manufacturers anticipate the market transformation. It is
therefore difficult from such studies to ascertain how much shift occurs solely from the
consumer information provision. To place the above (11%) figure in context, following the
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
143
6. Interventions
introduction of mandatory EC minimum standards for cold appliances, a 15% improvement in
energy efficiency was achieved over a 15-month period (Jan 1999 – March 2000) (Boardman
2004b).
As noted by Boardman (2004b), the effectiveness of the label depends upon several
interacting factors that include the level of compliance (what proportion of models in the shop
are correctly labelled) and the importance attributed by consumers to energy efficiency.
Boardman’s results show a good correlation between the combined measures of ‘compliance’
and ‘importance’ with the label’s level of influence on purchasing decisions. In the UK, three
years after introduction, even though compliance was high, the general public was not as
aware in 1997 of the importance of energy efficiency. Therefore, the label had a limited
influence: only 24% of households reported that it had influenced their purchase. By contrast,
in Denmark, where compliance and importance were at their highest, 56% of households
reported that the label had influenced their decisions.
For a successful energy label programme, Boardman (2006 pers. comm.) makes the following
recommendations:
• 100% market coverage is required – every appliance in the category has to have one;
• Labels must be understandable and attractive (i.e. bright and colourful);
• Labels should be seen as an essential pre-cursor to other policies (e.g. minimum
standards) and need to be part of integrated approach;
• When introduced to a new appliance category, the ‘average’ in the market has to be
around the bottom of the A-G scale to give the market room to grow;
• A 10-15 year timescale is necessary for their full benefit to be realised.
In July 2005 a new ‘green’ car-label was introduced in the UK to enhance the pre-existing
statutory fuel economy label. This uses the A to G style rating first adopted by ‘white goods’
to rate the car’s carbon dioxide emissions using categories similar to those for graduated
Vehicle Excise Duty. As of June 2006 (11 months after introduction), a monitoring study
conducted by LowCVP found the level of consumer awareness (people who have recently
bought or are about to buy a car) of the car-label was only 29%/40% (unprompted/prompted)
and the level of full compliance (labels displayed on all cars in showrooms) was only 55%
(Murray 2006). Although the awareness and use of the label is likely to increase over time, in
the light of the previous discussion regarding compliance and importance attributed to energy
labels, this is likely to limit the effectiveness of the early stages of the car label scheme.
Although it remains to be seen whether the new car-labelling scheme will be effective in the
longer term, the initial monitoring suggests a growing interest in the label. While less than a
third were aware (unprompted) of the label’s existence, when questioned 64% of those
surveyed indicated that they considered the label an important source of information (Murray
2006). While there is no current incentive for sales staff to promote fuel-efficient models per
se, 18% of those in the survey utilised the label ‘extensively’ with a further 54% using it in a
limited manner when interacting with potential customers. However, it remains to be seen
whether this growing interest in the label will translate to increased sales of cars with lower
carbon emissions.
6.4.4
Energy use feedback
The use of energy-use feedback also provides an approach to reduce environmental impact
through the provision of information. One example is the use of domestic real-time energy
meters that inform households about electricity and gas consumption and carbon dioxide
emissions. This information can be provided through an interactive meter, as occurs in some
parts of Northern Ireland where a KeyPad can be interrogated about levels of consumption
and expenditure. Other measures include putting the information on the normal electricity or
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
144
6. Interventions
gas bill, as a bar chart that shows consumption over time, or in other formats. A review of 38
feedback studies carried out over a period of 25 years showed savings ranging from 5% to
20% (Boardman and Darby 2000).
Of particular interest is that in many of the cases studied by Boardman and Darby, the
householders were not given additional energy efficiency advice, they spontaneously became
interested and knew what to do to conserve energy. Boardman (2004a) suggests that the
lesson may be that we just need to be informed and motivated, and then we will act. Given
that energy is invisible (in a domestic context), providing energy information is therefore
viewed by Boardman as an essential pre-requisite.
The question remains whether these observed benefits can be transferred to travel behaviour,
given the myriad of barriers outlined in Chapter 4. The evidence that feedback may produce
similar beneficial effect has been observed in cars that show the driver the efficiency with
which they are driving. One example is the use of in-car fuel economy meters that inform the
driver of the rate of fuel consumption, which (used in conjunction with specialist training in
fuel efficient driving) can influence driving behaviour The Swiss EcoDrive (1999) scheme
has demonstrated that the potential benefits of the use of fuel meters and driver training can
include a reduction in average fuel consumption of 5%-15%. In one particular programme,
more than 7,000 drivers from 150 companies were trained with the following benefits:
• Fuel savings of over 6% (with associated cost savings);
• Fewer accidents (35% fewer accidents, 28% fewer driver induced accidents);
• Reduced emissions (50% CO, 31% CH, 23% NOx);
• Improved driver motivation and corporate image.
In the UK, Cousins (2006) provides additional evidence of the behavioural impact of in-car
fuel economy meters. In a collaborative experiment (EU Save Programme) between Cranfield
and Trinity College Dublin, a vehicle trip computer was designed that could display cost and
‘mpg’ information (see Figure 6.3). This was then fitted to ten cars in Dublin owned by car
commuters who had an alternative mode of commute, and ten cars in Luton whose drivers
either commuted to London or used their car for the school run.
Figure 6.3 Autostar on-board vehicle trip computer display (Cousins 2006)
The devices were programmed with total (marginal) travel cost per mile and the trip computer
showed travel cost for each journey. A speed function showed digital speed but also had a
visual alarm to show over-speeding above a user set threshold (e.g. 70 mph). A ‘stopwatch’
function showed elapsed driving time. A ‘mpg’ function showed ‘kinetic’ fuel consumption
that calculated an instantaneous fuel consumption that also reflected the loss of kinetic energy
from braking.
Apart from a 16% drop in off-peak journeys in the Dublin area, there was no measured
reduction in trip making or any short-term change in other trip characteristics. However one
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
145
6. Interventions
conclusion from the study was that drivers and their families liked having the instruments in
their cars and that novel instruments do offer some potential leverage to reduce CO2 from
driving. The total time spent driving was one of the surprising outputs to the drivers who
underestimated this by 40%. The most significant effect was that 20% of the participants
reported buying smaller more fuel-efficient cars when contacted after the experiment. One
other major finding was that driving costs continued to be equated to fuel costs which, the
authors concluded, can be viewed as a social construction of travel car costs.
6.4.5
Carbon offset services
Although a relatively new public and business service, the option to purchase carbon offsets is
now available in the UK through companies such as Climate Care (set up in 1998) and the
CarbonNeutral Company. These services are directed at offsetting domestic, business and
transport emissions impacts including car use, public transport and air travel. One of the most
prestigious newcomers to this sector is British Airways who, in conjunction with Climate
Care, include an offset option to their website customers (DEFRA 2005). As part of the
Sustainable Aviation coalition launched in 2005, the UK aviation industry has made a
commitment to evaluate carbon offset initiatives for air travellers by the end of 2006.
Although it is too early to gauge the level of uptake for UK carbon offset services, figures
from Climate Care show (for all energy applications) an eight-fold increase in sales over the
period 2005-06, with a ratio of business to private customers of 2:1 (Morton 2006).
From a more theoretical perspective, Koens (2004) has conducted a study concerning carbonoffset services available to airline passengers in the Netherlands. This finds that, after
analysing reasons about the value of protection of nature and the environment, the intention to
pay climate offset was greater for people with prior knowledge of the carbon-offset option
than for those who were unaware of the scheme (prior to the participating in the survey).
Furthermore, for people with prior knowledge of the climate-offset option, the change in
intention after analysing reasons was accompanied by a change in personal norm and attitude
(no changes in intention, attitude or personal norms were found for those without prior
knowledge). The (general) implication is that, despite the weak link between knowledge and
pro-environmental behaviour, knowledge must be an operand in establishing environmental
concern and should not be neglected.
6.5
Indirect interventions
Having established that information is necessary but not sufficient to modify attitudes and/ or
behaviours, Jackson (2005) notes that some behaviour is not mediated by attitudes at all and
suggests that: behaviours can be changed without necessarily changing attitudes first.
In the context of sustainable development, Darnton (2004) terms this behaviour change
without attitude change as ‘unintentional sustainability’.
A particularly clear example of this effect is shown by Barr (2004) in a study of recycling
behaviour in Exeter, UK. His findings provide evidence that recycling behaviour is dominated
by service availability (the main situational factor), awareness and knowledge of that service
and the perceptions of convenience, which all indirectly reinforce the awareness that
recycling is a normative, if not expected, socially desirable action. Although the findings do
suggest a weak causal link between attitudes, intentions and behaviour, this link is not as
important as normative factors. Furthermore, the study shows that the recycling behaviour is
not based on deeply held values, concerns or notions of moral obligation or responsibility, but
rather is activated when appropriate service levels are in place, which in turn influence
individuals' perceptions of recycling as normative activity.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
146
6. Interventions
Extrapolating beyond recycling (and beyond the claims of the paper), the main findings
suggest that the factors influencing behavioural intentions are somewhat different to those
affecting actual behaviour (although there is a moderate link between the two) (Barr 2004).
The implication is that, to be effective, interventions should directly address behaviour and
need not necessarily focus on changing attitudes or intentions. Indeed measures that only
increase intentions are unlikely to be the most effective interventions. In particular, the study
concludes that, although raising levels of general awareness (through the provision of
information and education) may well enhance levels of stated concern (although these levels
are saturated in many cases), the effective transformation of behaviour is much more likely if
situational factors are also improved (access to adequate pro-environmental services and
infrastructure) along with sufficient support given to engendering new social norms.
The remainder of this section looks at a selection of measures that have been used to
encourage more sustainable travel behaviours, and which may, as an indirect consequence,
lead to the transformation of attitudes.
6.5.1
Vehicle fuel excise duty
Although originally introduced as a revenue raising mechanism, fuel duty has also been
increasingly used for demand management. Recognition of this role came to prominence in
the UK through the introduction of the ‘fuel duty escalator’57 , which was employed as a price
signal for helping to reduce traffic and CO2 emissions.
According to the UKERC Transport and CO 2 Working Paper, during the 1990s, the policy of
increasing fuel tax counteracted falls in the underlying price of oil and apparently contributed
to a significant slowing of traffic growth over about two years, despite strong economic
growth during this period (Anable and Boardman 2005). The increases in duties between
1996 and 1999 are estimated to have produced significant annual carbon savings of between 1
and 2.5 MtC. Analysis cited in a paper by Glaister at Imperial College, London (2001) shows
that assuming a longer term traffic price elasticity of -0.3, this rise would be expected to
reduce traffic by about 7 % below trend over the two and half years or an average of 2.8% per
year. This is of the same order as the increase that would be expected as a result of economic
growth.
Glaister’s research also concluded that both long and short-term effects of petrol prices on
traffic levels tend to be less than their effects on the volume of fuel burned. A 10% increase in
the price of fuel will cause the volume of traffic to fall by 1.5% in the short run and by 3% in
the long run but the equivalent long run fuel consumption saving figure is 7%. Raising fuel
prices is therefore more effective in reducing the quantity of fuel used than in reducing the
volume of traffic. Therefore, increasing fuel price could provide an incentive for the purchase
and consequently the production of more fuel-efficient vehicles. This analysis, however,
emphasises the price of fuel and neglects the importance of information provision and
retailing issues.
Although the use of fuel duty as a demand reduction measure can be considered successful
from an environmental (and therefore climate change) perspective, the public acceptability of
the escalator was severely tested during the oil price increases of 2000 and 2001. Indeed, the
negative publicity from the UK ‘Fuel Protests’ in September 2000 means that it is highly
57
This was introduced in 1993 when fuel duty was increased by 10% with a subsequent 3% annual
increase above inflation, rising to 5% in 1995. The new Labour Government increased this to 6% in
1997. The fuel duty escalator was removed in November 2001 with no duty rise beyond the automatic
inflation rise of 2p per litre. In 2002, all road fuel duty was frozen (no inflation rise); in 2003 it rose in
line with inflation and since 2004 road fuel duty has been frozen (Anable and Boardman 2005).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
147
6. Interventions
unlikely that any government will again use (fossil) fuel duty as a price mechanism for
reducing traffic and CO2 emissions for the foreseeable future. As a result, the current
Government’s policy is committed to keeping fuel duty levels roughly the same in real terms
in the period to 2010.
That said, vehicle fuel duty differentials continue to be used to promote the uptake of cleaner
fuels (and vehicles). For example, the introduction of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) has been
driven, in most part, by the low duty rates levied on gaseous fuels – the fuel duty benefit is
around 40p per litre when compared to petrol. The successful introduction of Ultra Low
Sulphur Petrol (ULSP) and Diesel (ULSD) fuels was also assisted through the use of lower
fuel duties (typically 1p-2p per litre below other blends). A further 0.5p per litre differential is
intended to promote the switch to ‘sulphur-free’ fuels, well ahead of the EU 2009 deadline.
6.5.2
Company car taxation 58
In April 2002, the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced a new system of company car tax
designed to provide financial incentives for employers and company car drivers to choose
cars which produce lower levels of CO2 emission. It also aims to encourage car
manufacturers to develop greener cars (IR 2004). The objectives of the new system also
included the reduction in traffic and congestion by reducing unnecessary business miles of
company cars. The new charge on the benefit of a company car is based on a percentage of
the list price of the car, the percentage being determined by the car’s CO 2 emissions
(replacing the old system which used the list price and mileage to calculate tax payable).
The introduction of the new company car tax system has already had a measurable effect on
the use and range of conventional cars within the company car fleet. To date, the number of
business miles has reduced by over 300 million mile s per year and the average CO2 emissions
of new company cars is estimated to be around 15g/ km lower (in 2004) as a direct result of
company car tax reform (IR 2004; HM Revenue and Customs 2006). The overall effect has
been to reduce the annual emissions of carbon from the company car fleet by around 0.2-0.3
MtC (projected to reduce by 0.35-0.65 MtC/ year by 2010).
The reduction of the average CO2 emissions of new company cars has been assisted by the
increase in the market-share of diesel company cars. Since 1999, there has been a significant
increase in the level of company diesel sales to the extent that diesel cars now represent over
40% of company fleets (SMMT 2006). Most commentators attribute this increase directly to
the reform in the system of company car taxation that occurred in 2002.
Following the reform of company car taxation in 2002, a detailed attitudinal survey of fleet
managers by the HM Revenue and Customs reveals that over half have changed their policies
towards CO2 emissions (driven by tax reductions rather than environmental concern) and
around 60% of company car drivers who are given a choice of vehicle are influenced by the
reform, as a result choosing cars with lower CO2 emissions (IR 2004; HM Revenue and
Customs 2006). Since the reform, the main priority for employees has switched from getting
the best car specification for a given price limit to (in order): minimising their company car
tax liability; getting the best car for a given price; and the physical suitability of the car for
family or work use (IR 2004). However, still only around 10% of company car drivers
consider the environment a very important issue when choosing a company car (Lex 2001).
Furthermore, a significant switch to alternative fuel/ technology company cars has not
occurred.
58
Companies buy about half of the new cars sold each year and because a significant proportion of the
second-hand car market consists of ex-company cars there is potential for significant long-term
environmental benefits from company car tax.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
148
6. Interventions
One unintended consequence of the reform in company car tax has been the increase in
employees taking alternative forms of remuneration in place of a company car. In a very real
sense, there is a degree of policy ‘leakage’ as, rather than acquire a company car under the
new system of company car tax, employees are circumventing what has been a very
successful tax reform. The second report on the Evaluation of company car tax reform
suggests that the perceived and real impacts of the reform is the biggest single reason cited by
employers and employees for opting out of company cars (HM Revenue and Customs 2006).
This trend is important as it reveals a strong driver in the decision-making process – it appears
that (in addition to other factors) there is some resistance to being ‘forced’ to purchase cars
with lower emissions. The evidence suggests that a significant proportion of employees are
choosing not to have a company car so that they can, once again, have freer reign in their
choice of vehicle.
6.5.3
Graduated vehicle excise duty
The UK was the first country in Europe to introduce an explicit CO2 basis for taxation on
vehicle ownership through the introduction of Graduated Vehicle Excise Duty (VED)
introduced in 2001. Since then, new cars with CO2 emissions below pre-defined levels have
benefited from a reduced VED tariff – motorists under the new system can save around £110
in VED each year by choosing the most efficient and least polluting cars (Anable and
Boardman 2005).
However, according to the quantitative survey Assessing the Impact of Graduated Vehicle
Excise Duty (DfT 2004), at current band differentials, VED (and therefore environmental
issues) play little part in the process and are among the least important factors feeding into the
new-car buying decision process. To be an important factor in the car buying process, the
research suggests that band differentials have to be significantly increased if VED is to be
effective in influencing vehicle -purchasing decisions (or road tax replaced by a new tax).
The DfT survey notes that one reason for the negligible impact of graduated VED is the
public’s low knowledge of how road tax is calculated – almost half of new car buyers do not
know how this tax is calculated, the majority of those that do give an answer believing that it
is still calculated using the previous method according to engine size and only 14% correctly
identifying that it is based on the CO 2 emissions of the vehicle. However, there is the
possibility that knowledge about the CO2 emissions for particular vehicle models will
improve since the introduction of the car label in 2005.
Regarding future band differentials, the findings of the DfT survey (2004) suggest that: with a
differential of £50 a third of private car buyers would change to a lower emission model in
order to benefit from the cost saving; at £150 over half (55%) of private car buyers would
change; and at £300, 72% would change. Those most likely to respond to higher differentials
are younger car buyers (18-24 years), those of lower social class, buyers of smaller sized
engine vehicle (below 1.6cc) and persons with more concern for the environment. The core
who would not choose a different car at any differential up to £300 are typically older, of a
higher social class, own or intend to buy a larger sized engine vehicle and unsurprisingly have
less concern for the environment.
6.6
Community based social marketing
The expert-led, command-and-control approach to public influencing which
came to the fore in wartime propaganda, and persisted in public awareness
campaigns until the 1970s and 1980s, is no longer adequate for the complex,
diverse and individualised society of [today].
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
149
6. Interventions
(Collins et al. 2003)
As the evidence already reviewed clearly shows, providing information is necessary but not
sufficient to guarantee behavioural change. Any campaign must also take account of how
messages are received and interpreted by a target audience. As highlighted by Rose et al.
(2005), to communicate effectively, it is essential to understand what ‘opinions’ or ‘attitudes’
really mean in terms of what people may actually do when a messenger asks them to take
action, or how they will respond when they are told about a problem or solution. This requires
careful preparation and a detailed understanding of the psychological, social and situational
factors influencing the target behaviour. Furthermore, (as discussed in Chapter 5) promotional
campaigns will usually benefit by targeting specific audience segments and must account for
behavioural motivators and barriers (Chapter 4). In essence, therefore, a successful
behavioural change campaign will use techniques more commonly associated with marketing.
This section provides an overview of the evidence from the literature review that shows how
the principles of marketing need to be used to design an effective strategy to promote proenvironmental travel and other behaviours.
6.6.1
Social Marketing
Chapter 4 notes that, not only do efforts to promote pro-environmental behaviours have to
overcome a large number of inter-related psychological and social barriers, they have to
account for, and capitalise on the complexity of modern lifestyles and social networks.
Concurring with this, Collins et al. (2003) suggest that public influencing must be based on
sustained, consistent campaigning, going well beyond the provision of information.
Promotional strategies must engage and motivate, by building green brands, involving
companies, voluntary organizations and community networks, and link to government policy
and legislation.
Rose et al. (2005) concur with this approach and make the point in Climate Change
Communications that, as campaigns are intended to bring about behavioural change, they
need to examine the psychological needs and motivations that determine behaviours. If a
communication strategy can be arranged to meet these needs, then it stands the best chance of
being effective. A pilot study conducted by the team of ‘communication, campaign and
marketing strategists’, shows that it is possible to get a very detailed picture of people and
their motivations in relation to possible campaign calls, through looking at psychological
segments of the population rather than across the population as a whole. This they achieve by
using a value-based targeting approach that categorises individuals according to their
motivational orientation (see Chapter 5 on Segmentation).
As explained by Kurani (2002), social marketing offers a framework to organize the
application of social science to the problem of transforming markets and behaviours. Most of
its early applications were in the fields of public health and education. It is inspired by
conventional marketing, but is focused primarily on behaviour change rather than market
choices. It focuses on benefits that accrue to the consumer-citizen to whom the behaviour is
marketed, rather than on the benefits to the producer of any product or service. Marketing in
general utilizes several models and precepts from the social sciences. Social marketing further
refines and advances the application of social science through its explicit treatment of
research as integral to the marketing process, and most importantly through its stated goal of
benefiting individuals and their social groups. As we mentioned in the discussion of
sociology, social marketing itself can be viewed as a social process in which new values and
behaviours are developed. Kurani also cites Andreasen’s definition of social marketing as:
… the application of commercial marketing technologies to the analysis,
planning, execution, and evaluation of programs designed to influence the
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
150
6. Interventions
voluntary behaviour of target audiences in order to improve their personal
welfare and that of their society.
(Andreasen 1995; cited in Kurani 2002)
Social marketing is already a well-established approach with a highly developed set of
techniques designed to foster change. One of its most well known proponents is the Canadian
Dr Doug McKenzie -Mohr, an Environmental Psychologist who has, for more than a decade,
practiced the social marketing approach with much success.59 The company McKenzie -Mohr
Associates has done much to develop a broad international community of social marketers.
In contrast to conventional approaches, … social marketing has been shown
to be very effective at bringing about behaviour change. Its effectiveness is due
to its pragmatic approach. This approach involves: identifying barriers to a
sustainable behaviour, designing a strategy that utilizes behaviour change
tools, piloting the strategy with a small segment of a community, and finally,
evaluating the impact of the program once it has been implemented across a
community.
(McKenzie-Mohr 2006)
Kurani (2002) notes that Andreasen (1995) offers a six stage, recursive model of the social
marketing process. His model defines and emphasizes the role of research in designing,
monitoring, and modifying a social marketing campaign. A modification of his illustration of
these six steps is shown in Figure 6.4. The six steps are as follows
1. Listening: Background analysis, especially of customers, but perhaps also of competitors;
2. Planning: Setting mission, objectives, and goals; defining marketing strategy;
3. Structuring: Establishing a marketing organization, procedures, benchmarks, and
feedback mechanisms to carry out the strategy;
4. Pre-testing: Testing key elements;
5. Implementing: Putting the strategy into effect; and
6. Monitoring: Tracking program progress, adjusting strategy and tactics as necessary.
Stages 1, 4, and 6 are stages during which research is conducted. Social marketing, at this
micro-level, aims to change behavioural choices through education, persuasion, and
marketing. Its initial goals are to understand current behaviour, decision processes, beliefs,
intentions, and preferences, i.e. listening. Then, social marketing must investigate and design
the best ways to change decisions i.e. planning, structuring, and pre-testing. Next, the
program is implemented. Finally, social marketing must install a monitoring program, to
study the impact of marketing efforts over a long period of time, and provide information to
modify messages, media, and strategies as required.
59
Over 100 case studies detailing the work of McKenzie-Mohr Associates are available from the
company’s website www.cbsm.com.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
151
6. Interventions
Figure 6.4 Andreasen’s six stages of social marketing (Kurani 2002)
Ampt (2003) concurs with the stages involved and notes that social marketing approaches
usually begin by conducting a situational analysis of the internal and external environment
and of the ‘consumer’. This assists in the segmentation of the market and the targeting
strategy. Further research is then needed to define the problem, the barriers to change and
how they interact, to set objectives for the program, and to inform the formulation of the
marketing strategy. The elements of the social marketing mix are then developed and pre­
tested, before being imple mented. According to Ampt, social marketing is designed to bring
about voluntary behaviour change in communities by having or devising ‘products’ that will
influence behaviour change. These ‘products’ are devised by the marketer in response to an
analysis of market segments and offered to people as part of an exchange arrangement.
The report by Kurani goes on to observe that social marketing can act at two levels: at a
micro-level, as one of the three types of actions – marketing, education and law; and at a
macro-level, social marketing provides the framework to organize all three types of activities.
As described by Marks:
The strategies and methods of social marketing include: segmentation of the
public; targeting of critical segments; tailoring interventions to the reality of
each segment; and the designing a marketing mix that optimally influences the
segment members…Thus, social marketing is the mechanism for configuring a
social marketing intervention.
Secondly, at macro-level, the very same social marketing strategies and methods
can be used to configure the overall mix of the three approaches [education,
marketing, and law] in behavioural management efforts. Thus, social marketing
is also a mechanism for configuring the whole behavioural management mix of
educational, marketing and legal interventions.
(Marks 1998, cited in Kurani 2002)
According to Kurani, social marketing, therefore, provides an overall framework with which
to manage behaviour change. It provides a structure and strategy for choosing the mix of
messages, media, and methods (education, marketing, and law). It is also one important
method with which to influence behaviour.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
152
6. Interventions
6.6.2
Community-based Social Marketing (CBSM)
At one level, pro-environmental behavioural change can be thought of as a
transition of social norms
(Jackson 2005)
There is a growing body of evidence that shows that engaging communities rather than
individuals can increase the level of engagement and can be more effective in diffusing proenvironmental practices (Ampt 2003; McKenzie -Mohr and Smith 1999; Kurani 2002; Collins
et al. 2003; Jackson 2005). This approach also takes account of, and capitalises on, how
communities interrelate and self-organise with regard to their values, beliefs, attitudes and
behaviours. It is after all no accident that those individuals with the most sustainable lifestyles
are often part of tight networks or distinct communities at one level removed from ‘normal’
society (Lipp and van den Akker 2004). Jackson (2005) also notes that the process of
‘unfreezing’ existing (unsustainable) behaviours is most effective when it is carried out within
a supportive community. Indeed, the importance of community-based social change is a key
lesson arising from his review Motivating Sustainable Consumption (Jackson 2005).
Existing research and experience provides compelling evidence that social marketing at the
community level is a productive approach. This is what is known as community-based social
marketing. In the words of McKenzie -Mohr and Smith (1999):
Community-based social marketing draws heavily on research in social
psychology which indicates that initiatives to promote behaviour change are
often most effective when they are carried out at the community level and involve
direct contact with people. The emergence of community-based social marketing
over the last several years can be traced to a growing understanding that
conventional social marketing, which often relies heavily on media advertising,
can be effective in creating public awareness and understanding of issues related
to sustainability, but is limited in its ability to foster behaviour change.
(McKenzie -Mohr and Smith 1999; cited in Kurani 2002)
Note that although CBSM may not be suited to promoting all products/ services, it is
particularly useful in fostering pro-environmental actions (such as travel behaviour) where a
degree of collective action is required.
Kurani (2002) provides useful insights as to why community engagement is particularly
effective at changing attitudes and behaviours and notes that much of the Diffusion of
Innovation literature concerns itself with the movement of information through social
networks (i.e. communities). Parallels are also drawn between the role of a change agent
charged with introducing an innovation into a social network, and the fact that CBSM relies
on direct personal contact. This position is supported by Jackson (2005) who observes that
‘discursive consciousness’ (where issues are thought about and discussed with others) has
been shown to be important for engendering lasting sustainable behaviour change.
Communities can be addressed at many scales, and as noted by Kurani (2002), the definition
of a particular ‘community’ depending both on the attitude/ action being explored and the
community’s shared values. Focusing on the smallest communal unit, and citing Shipworth
(2000) and Steer Davies Gleave (2003), Ampt (2003) suggests several practical reasons why a
household-based approach to reach individuals is an important part of a travel behavioural
change program:
• Household inter-dependencies mean that reducing car kilometres by ‘activity sharing’ is
often made easier (Could you please pay the phone bill at the post office while you’re
shopping next door?);
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
153
6. Interventions
• Household members can often provide easy car-sharing schemes (Can you drop me at
Mary’s place on your way to work?);
• Household members can provide peer support and peer pressure for change (‘Hey Dad,
are you too lazy to walk to the shop?’, ‘Shall we share a ride to the party?’);
• Households are made up of people with different interests and, as such, provide diffusion
catalysts into different households (via organisations such as schools, workplaces, interest
group, etc.).
In the UK, the emergence of community Car Clubs (located within residential communities)
provides a good example of CBSM in action. Whether initiated from inside or outside the
community, Meaton and Low (2003) note the importance of community dynamics in the
success of Car Club development. In particular they identify the importance of Car Club
champions embedded within the community to act as ‘change agents’. They also contend that
such champions need to be able to tap into the social capital and use and develop the social
networks within their community. Although still at a niche service, the experience to date
supports the notion that only in communities in which there is dynamic involvement (e.g.
catalysed by a champion) have Car Clubs been successfully formed. It is likely that the future
success and expansion of UK Car Clubs is heavily dependent on community involvement.
In general, Ampt (2003) identifies social networks as a robust mechanism for the diffusion of
pro-environmental ideas, solutions and behaviours. While persuading communities to change
their behaviours may be more challenging than securing individual responses, strategies that
require households to diffuse the message both between households and ultimately across
communities are likely to be more sustainable than those that do not. Ampt also cites Stern et
al. (1987) in making the point that the most effective way of diffusing a message is by word
of mouth – this is because when a person tells someone about what they are doing, they are
not only reinforcing their own behaviour in the process, but also giving a level of commitment
(also known as implementation-intention – see Bamberg 2002).
Mirroring Andreasen’s six-stage process for social marketing, Ampt (2003) notes the cycle of
‘continuous improvement’ that characterise the community’s experience of the social
marketing process. These are:
• Planning – Communities themselves need to establish their particular priorities and plan
the actions they will take, based on the best information available to them about options,
possible outcomes, risks and benefits etc. Planning also needs to include measurement
activities, consideration of What will count as success? This planning stage is
fundamental to developing the ‘ownership’ that will enable the program to succeed and
become long lasting;
• Doing – Implementation must engage people actively, whether at the individual,
household or neighbourhood level. The actions we take for ourselves, rather than being
passive recipients of the actions of others, are the ones that become imprinted and built
upon in our future behaviour;
• Checking – Measuring outcomes provides critical opportunities for learning and
empowerment. Again, community members need to be actively engaged in these research
processes, with expert help from outside seen as resources to the community’s effort
rather than drivers of change;
• Reviewing – Evaluation of actions taken and renewed planning for the next stage
completes the cycle. While external advice and assistance may be invaluable, the
emphasis is on local and personal responsibility. In travel behaviour change projects, the
community development approach has been concentrated at the individual as well as the
community level and is seen as helping people to help themselves. This means that the
first step in any interchange is listening to see what problems or issues people may have
and then working with them to find a solution. This means that in many cases the problem
they solve (e.g. losing weight by walking more), while possibly addressing the decision-
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
154
6. Interventions
maker’s goal (e.g. to reduce congestion or emissions) may not be seen by the individual
as having anything to do with this goal.
6.6.3
An example of CBSM: CarbonNeutral Newcastle
CarbonNeutral Newcastle (CNN) is an organisation whose general aim is to deliver
sustainable development to the city of Newcastle -upon-Tyne with a particular aim of
understanding what actions will motivate people to adopt carbon neutral lifestyles. To achieve
this, it hopes to identify approaches that will engage citizens, and assist with the design of an
effective targeted carbon-neutral campaign (Sale Owen 2005). CNN’s recent report Public
attitudes to climate change provides insight into the different attitudinal subgroups and
societal sectors within the city, attitudes to local sustainability, the level of current actions to
combat climate change, behavioural change motivations, lifestyle choices, barriers to change,
and most acceptable carbon reduction programmes for each audience. The focus groups and
face-to-face interviews that generated the findings of the report can be seen as part of as an
initial phase of a CBSM process – in Andreasen’s terms, the listening phase.
The focus groups and interviews reveal that the vast majority of participants accept that the
climate is changing and many of them see this as a local and relevant current issue. That said,
climate change and air quality is ranked joint 5th in terms of relative importance out of the 13
environmental issues listed, the most pressing environmental issues being litter/ fly-tipping
followed by recycling. Although the groups show no great sense of urgency with regard to
climate change, CNN conclude that there is substantial scope to move people along the
spectrum of boosting personal concern about the issue. Interestingly, rather than focus on
raising the public knowledge of climate change, the organisation takes the position that it is
preferable to accept a level of ‘untidiness’ in how people think and focus the attention on
improving behaviours.
CNN observe that, perceived as a global issue, participants report feelings of
disempowerment, pessimism and cynicism, particularly when the subject is discussed in a
group, the discussion revealing a highly volatile set of views, attitudes and morale regarding
the subject of limiting climate change. The facilitators note a surprising level of honesty when
talking about their personal laziness, greed and disinclination to change (most acute for those
with family at home and empty nesters). More encouraging is that just over a quarter still felt
that they personally can have some, or even a large, influence on limiting climate change.
Many people are looking for role models and leadership on this issue, and will accept a level
of compulsion. However, CNN recognise that morale and empowerment is fragile and easily
undermined by mixed messages and lack of leadership by local and national government. In
particular, the local authority was seen to have an important leadership role.
CNN note that there is a ‘web of barriers’ and ‘switch offs’ that could present something of a
minefield for marketers aiming to change behaviour. In particular, scientific and policy
contradictions and inconsistencies are found to be very de-motivating and lead to cynicism
and disbelief regarding the importance of personal climate change action. Other barriers range
from basic ignorance regarding climate change facts and the actions to reduce emissions,
through barriers of cost and effort/ inconvenience involved, to an unwillingness to give up a
comfortable lifestyle (car and flight usage in particular), and a feeling of climate change as a
problem too difficult to address. There is also some hostility to implication of ‘guilt’ that
participants were using too much energy.
I don’t think it’s selfish driving a car, I think it’s convenient.
(Male, 30-45yrs, BC1)
More positively, there is clear evidence of many motivators including self-interest (saving
money) and altruistic ones (caring for the planet, for future generations). The key motivating
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
155
6. Interventions
factors are simplicity, convenience, tangible/ visible benefits and understanding the climate
problem. These various factors are found to apply across the board, even cutting though belief
in climate change and concern about climate change. Thus, financial savings (reduced energy
bills, Council tax discounts, etc) are also cited by many who believe strongly in climate
change.
Although around 80% of participants claim to be acting sustainably in many (if small) ways
(including turning the heating down, investing in insulation, energy efficient white goods,
energy efficiency light bulbs, etc), it was noted that there is much greater resistance to
transport related actions, which (in the words of CNN) presents a ‘thorny issue’ for
marketers promoting behaviour change. Although in the group discussions people are quite
prepared to make token efforts (such as walking to the local shop), many would not
contemplate changing their car use radically. Moreover, many are committed to use of their
car usage and were unable to envisage managing without a vehicle. Furthermore, although
over half of car owners claim to have reduced their car use in favour of walking, cycling and
public transport, almost a quarter are not prepared to consider alternatives, and a third were
not prepared to consider using public transport (the services of which was not viewed
favourably). Nevertheless, to look at this more positively, three quarters are prepared to at
least consider alternative modes.
Significantly, there is also across the board resistance to cutting back on the number of flights,
or compensating for them. For many participants, holidays are the highlight of the year and
going abroad (to warmer destinations) is expected. Indeed, almost 80% of those who had
taken a flight within the last twelve months are not prepared to cut back on flights, (including
those who were more environmentally inclined).
Nevertheless, it must be said that the consultation methods used to date could possibly benefit
from an increased use of deliberate techniques moving beyond the less fluid interview and
focus group approaches. (This issue will be discussed in Chapter 7.) This process would
include innovative techniques to evaluate issues of public acceptance and the lifestyle,
environmental and policy tradeoffs they are willing to support.
6.6.4
Principles of effective social marketing
Campaigns for sustainable behaviour change should employ a wide arrange of
tools, including policy instruments, infrastructure provision, and information
provision; a targeted approach observing difference between subgroups should
be adopted.
(Darnton on behalf of DEFRA 2004 cited in DEFRA 2005)
Much recent research has identified the key principles that need to be included within a social
marketing strategy aimed at promoting more sustainable behaviours (Kurani 2002; Ampt
2003; Collins et al. 2003; Hounsham 2005; DEFRA 200;, Rose et al. 200;, Futerra 2005;
Jackson 2005). There are several approaches that draw to differing degrees on the findings of
psychology, sociology, anthropology and cultural studies. Although a wide range of
terminologies is employed, the approaches essentially convey the same overall message,
albeit with different emphases.
This section discusses a number of key issues that appear regularly within the literature
surveyed as part of this evidence review. The principles discussed are often inter-related and
by no means form an exhaustive list. However, the issues raised are useful in understanding
the added value that the social marketing approach, if conducted well, can offer. Note that the
issues all take place within the social marketing process that was discussed previously and as
summarised in Andreasen’s recursive diagram (see Figure 6.4).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
156
6. Interventions
The principles are now discussed under five overarching thematic headings as used in
DEFRA’s recent sustainable development strategy document Securing the Future (DEFRA
2005), which provide a useful way to structure the discussion of the key issues necessary for
successful social marketing. The five themes are Enabling, Engaging, Encouraging,
Exemplifying and Catalysing. These are shown schematically in Figure 6.5.
Figure 6.5: Sustainable Development Strategy (DEFRA 2005)
Enabling
This allows people to make responsible choices by providing them with education, skills and
information and by making those choices easily accessible alternatives through the provision
of suitable infrastructure. According to DEFRA (2005), in some cases (which correspond to
the easy wins), enabling may be all that is needed to foster pro-environmental behaviours.
Citing Kotler and Zaltman (1971), Ampt (2003) notes that social marketing shares the
exchange component of generic marketing 60 . In the context of voluntary behaviour change,
social marketers have to offer people something that they really want. This involves giving
people not only the option(s) to change, but also an understanding that there is a wide range of
choices for change (over both the short- and long-term). Ampt also stresses the importance of
providing some options that have quick results – by giving people a number of alternatives,
people are likely to choose something that they know will be quick for them; and also longterm options for change as some ‘late adopters’ may be unable change in the short-term but
need to be included in the process. Hence, in a behaviour change program, providing
opportunities for choice are essential.
Although, as discussed earlier, information provision alone is rarely sufficient to encourage
pro-environmental behaviours, providing information is a key element of engagement. In the
context of travel awareness campaigns, Cairns et al. (2004) argue that people often do not
have enough information or understanding of available choices. They also point out that
60
In this context, an exchange is transfer of resources or values between two parties.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
157
6. Interventions
marketing pro-environmental behaviours often have counter effects of significant commercial
advertising campaigns – especially those by car manufacturers aimed at selling cars and
encourage their wider use.
Collins et al. (2003) remind social marketers of the need to communicate creatively and learn
from commercial marketing techniques to win hearts and minds as well as educate public
about 'facts'. They note that, although Government often relies on conventional
communication channels (such as television advertising), other routes are often more
effective. Examples of creative communication cited include the ‘guerrilla marketing’
approach of UK agency Cake, which painted a whole street red to celebrate Barbie’s birthday,
the sponsorship of particular programmes (e.g. Volvo’s sponsorship of ER), and Greenpeace’s
protest messaging on city billboards. Although, providing information through conventional
advertising still has an important role to play, more creative communication models can create
a ‘buzz’ through word of mouth – far more potent than any direct communication.
One issue often overlooked by conventional campaign approaches is the issue of ‘framing’.
Rose et al. (2005) introduce the term in an attempt to understand how received messages are
translated into behaviours. Framing takes account, not only of how messages are interpreted
by recipients (Eden 1996), but also of the context in which they are issued, transmitted and
received. An example provided by Rose et al. is that, whereas climate change is framed as a
‘difficult, complex, and intractable’ problem, almost half the UK population are averse to
taking risks (such as trying to tackle an almost insoluble problem), and over a fifth (defined
by Rose et al. as ‘Settlers’ – see Chapter 5) shy away from anything ‘global’. They contend
that the UK Government’s repeated characterisation of climate change as a terribly difficult
problem with international dimensions, has the immediate effect of signalling to most of the
population that they cannot play any role in a solution. This is compounded by exhortations to
individual action, a frame incompatible with collaboration.
Taking account of how messages are framed links with two crucial issues regarding the
effectiveness of information campaigns. First it reduces the risk that the information given
will produce behavioural resistance due to either information overload (NEF 2005) or due to
the triggering of cognitive dissonance (Seethaler and Rose (2005)). Second, it reminds social
marketers of the need to match the message with the audience. In other words, it highlights
the importance of market segmentation (see Chapter 5).
Engaging
This involves the target audience from the outset. Research shows that when people develop
strategies/ policies jointly with the change agency (an approach known as co-production),
they take more responsibility for their actions and are more likely to change behaviours
(Halpern et al. 2004; DEFRA 2005). The issue is also raised by Ampt (2003) who notes
(citing Lefebvre and Flora 1988, and Andreasen 1995) that social marketing requires a usercentred orientation in which the users/ consumers are active participant in the change process.
The social marketer seeks to build a relationship with target individuals/ communities over
time.
As mentioned by DEFRA (2005), the methods used to engage target audiences are crucial in
moving beyond a superficial marketer-audience relationship. One example is the use of public
deliberative forums that allow more in-depth discussion about options than a questionnaire
survey or a focus group. This approach advocated by many agencies (including the DEFRA,
the Sustainable Development Research Network and the ippr) allows discussion between
people who have strong and conflicting views and/ or are experts in their field. As described
by Kurani (2002), within a deliberative framework:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
158
6. Interventions
People are not simply passive targets for marketers; rather they are empowered
to participate in the processes such as technology development, policy formation,
and marketing… These modifications emphasize that the organization and the
market do not exist apart, but exist within a framework in which they are
collaborators.
(Kurani 2002)
According to Saward (undated), a deliberative process ideally features three structural
characteristics. Firstly, it brings relevant expertise to bear on a problem. Secondly, it provides
reasons and explanations for conclusions or recommendations. And, thirdly, there must be
transparency and publicity for the process. In order to be democratic, the process must be
inclusive of affected interests; must ensure equality of access to the dialogue or process; and
must work to enhance the freedom of expression of participants. A deliberative process
possessing these features can induce a range of desired effects:
• to enhance the acceptability of outputs to specified audiences of stakeholders.
• to achieve the active endorsement of stakeholders who are brought into the
deliberation and become advocates for its policy recommendations or outcomes.
• the development of credibility in the eyes of wider audiences of the public and
politicians.
• the achievability of recommendations that are accepted by stakeholders and local
communities.
This again raises the issue that engagement at the community level is more valuable in the
long-term than only addressing the individual. As discussed previously, this approach also
takes account of, and capitalises on, how communities interrelate and self-organise with
regard to their values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours. As noted by Jackson (2005) the
process of ‘unfreezing’ existing (unsustainable) behaviours is most effective when it is carried
out within a supportive community. To enhance the diffusion of information and behavioural
change through community networks, Collins et al. (2003) advocate the adoption of a systems
approach. They identify one task of the social marketer to identify and communicate with
those persons in a community who have the most connections and influencing power. Collins
et al. (2003) illustrate this point by citing the work of Seth Godin, author of Unleashing the
Idea Virus, who terms these individuals (or ‘network hubs’) as ‘sneezers’:
Sneezers are at the core of any idea virus. Sneezers are the ones who when they
tell ten or 20 people, people believe them.
(Godin; cited in Collins et al. 2003)
Encouraging
This refers to the use of information, education, incentives, penalties and the law to
encourage, and where necessary, enforce behaviour change.
Stead (2004) notes that European public attitudes about the effectiveness of different transport
policy options are remarkably similar across the EU. Pull measures are generally perceived to
be more effective than push measures, in line with the findings from a variety of other studies
across Europe. It seems that public concerns about the urban environment are not strongly
related to opinions about the effectiveness of different policy options. In addition, there is
little relation between perceived policy effectiveness and policy implementation in practice:
policies considered as the most effective by the public are not always the ones that have been
most widely implemented. It is widely agreed that measures to address transport problems
will only be made more publicly acceptable if they are part of a package of measures that
includes both push and pull measures and/ or if the revenue from these push measures is
hypothecated. A key conclusion is that hearts and minds need to be won over to the idea of
taking individual/ community action and that the social, political and/ or economic climate
has to change if the general public are to be convinced about the need to take action.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
159
6. Interventions
Kurani (2002) cites Rothschild (1999) who has developed a framework to guide the selection
of what he classifies as the three means of social marketing – education, incentives 61 and law.
This is based on the principle that in democratic societies less coercive means are preferred to
more coercive, and a model of information processing in which motivation, opportunity, and
ability affect citizen’s level of processing and provide guidance for selecting effective tactics.
Rothschild makes the following definitions: ‘motivation’ is goal-directed arousal –
individuals are motivated to behave in a specified manner when they believe their self-interest
will be served; ‘opportunity’ is a measure of the behavioural context – are there choices that
can be made within the existing context to engage in the desired behaviour?; and ‘ability’ is a
measure of the individual’s skills or proficiencies at solving problems.
With these definitions, the cells in Figure 6.6 summarise behavioural disposition and the
preferred or required means to promote the desired behaviour. For example, a person who has
the motivation, opportunity, and ability to engage in a behaviour (cell 1) may only require
some information (education) to prompt them to engage in it. A person who is not motivated
to engage in a behaviour, but has both the opportunity and ability (cell 3) may not engage in
the behaviour unless the force of law is brought to bear on them. It is likely that different
people will be in different cells of the table, even with respect to the same behaviour.
Figure 6.6 Social marketing methods matched to behavioural disposition (Kurani 2002)
Exemplification
This means setting an example and ensuring consistency. Hounsham (2006) notes that, for
widespread behavioural change to occur, environmental organisations, councils, governments
must all follow their own advice. Even though the message to the public may be that they do
not have to do everything so long as they do something, if they are to be convinced, those
who represent and promote green values should aim to be a good example across a whole
range of lifestyle behaviours.
This issue links with the findings of Dietz et al. (in press) that indicate that trust is one of the
most significant predictors of policy support, and although trust in government agencies does
not itself relate to support, greater trust in environmental scientists and environmental groups
and less trust in industry is associated with stronger support. Their research suggests that this
relationship between trust and climate change policies merits further attention among
researchers and points to the important role environmental groups can play in enhancing
public support for policies to mitigate the effects of climate change.
Collins et al. (2003) also highlight the need for consistency in policy making and maintain
that public influencing should be seen as complementary to other policies, not as a strategy in
its own right. They maintain that, as people recognise the need for collective action on certain
61
Rothschild uses the term ‘marketing’.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
160
6. Interventions
issues, they are reluctant to change their behaviour unless they think that others will do
likewise. They report findings from the Eurobarometer survey that shows that Europeans
favour an active attitude but, at the same time, want their action to be part of a wider
solidarity . In practice, this means that public information campaigns to encourage greener
behaviour are very unlikely to be effective in isolation, without other government policies to
back them up.
Collins et al. (2003) suggest that the failure of the UK’s Are You Doing Your Bit campaign to
change behaviour stemmed from the lack of linkages to other policies. Encouraging ‘good’
behaviour may only be effective if the correspondingly ‘bad’ behaviour is tackled, through
legislation or fiscal measures. This position is complimented by Jackson (2005) who observes
that inconsistency between policies undermines their public value.
Catalysing
This is required if the package of policies is still not enough to stimulate sufficient
behavioural change. The need to check that polic ies are working is one of the central elements
of social marketing and is why the process as described by Andersen is iterative (see Figure
6.4). One reason this stage is important is that behavioural change is often a chaotic process
(in the mathematical sense), the outcomes of which are often unpredictable. The methods
employed must therefore be dynamic and reflexive.
For example, research by Golob and Hensher (1998) shows that public transport use and solodriving are self-sustaining because attitudes that are consistent with a modal choice are
reinforced by the mode chosen. Given that reinforcing feedback loops are characteristic of a
chaotic system, the behavioural change process is one of moving from the existing to a new
stable state (known as an attractor in chaos theory). Therefore, any intervention strategy
needs to take into account the reinforcing nature of existing travel attitudes and behaviours.
This can be achieved by designing interventions that can disrupt existing feedback loops and
then establish new patterns of attitudes and behaviours. The positive message is that, if
environmentally detrimental feedback loops can be broken, change will proceed at a faster
than expected rate, once the initial barrier has been overcome.
Research by Garvill (2003) finds that, habitual car use can be disrupted by getting car users to
reflect on the contextual conditions for a specific trip so as to raise their awareness of why the
car has been (habitually) selected in favour of alternative, more sustainable modes. With
appropriate situational factors (i.e. availability of alternatives), and sufficient information
(about the alternatives), this in itself can lead in some cases to car users opting for non-car
modes for specific journeys.
Stoll-Kleemann (2001) also highlights the importance of checking that policies avoid
unforeseen consequences. Policies proposed by experts or insider analysts, but without the
sensitivity of appreciating the cultural frameworks that may reinforce existing prejudices, may
go terribly wrong when it comes to political proposals such as carbon taxes, energy levies,
restrictions on driving or tough regulatory requirements for energy efficiency or ins ulation of
commercial and residential property. The research suggests a level of sophistication and
cohesion in socio-psychological reactions that will prove difficult to alter, unless very wideranging policy responses are integrated over a prolonged period of time. Reorganising
knowledge, changing social identification, appealing to self-image and enabling constructive
adaptation may all have to be involved if attitudes and behaviour towards climate change are
to resonate in a coherent manner.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
161
6. Interventions
Evidence gaps and recommendations
The evidence gaps and research recommendations are discussed in Chapter 8. The main
recommendations to emerge from the evidence in this chapter are:
R7: Testing community based social marketing
Social marketing is a set of tools based on social-psychological theories designed
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
to advance social causes by applying commercial marketing techniques to develop
a form of dialogue and build trust with the public. There has been little application
of Social Marketing techniques to address travel behaviour at the community
level. In the field of travel behaviour, Social Marketing has mainly been applied to
individualised marketing strategies. Chapter 6 shows that a key element in
successful social marketing strategies is an adequate piloting and testing stage.
This research would aim to establish a robust evidence base for policy
interventions aimed at behavioural change by constructing a strategy which
removes as many of the barriers to the selected behaviour as possible within a
limited allocation of resources.
This research should also be informed by community based social marketing
campaigns used for a variety of purposes other than travel. The research could
develop small-scale pilot(s) of community-based social marketing strategies based
on specific knowledge, attitudes or values around ‘case study’ issues such as car
purchasing or a local travel issue. Focus groups, in-depth interviews, participant
observation, and surveys are used in a pre-test - post-test control group design.
The research will draw on the lessons learnt from previous social-psychological
insights in order to examine some of the implications of these cognitive processes
for social marketing techniques and to identify the role of participatory problemsolving and community based social marketing applied to the issue of climate
change and travel behaviour.
High
Qualitative/ action research
Priority:
Following
DfT + cross departmental
Responsibility:
R8: Trade -offs and policy acceptance
Chapters 2 and 4 presents evidence in the area of climate change and behavioural
Summary:
Methodology:
How will this
fill the
evidence gap?
Method:
Timing:
research that demonstrates public acceptability can be a major barrier to policy
delivery especially where there is a potential tension between, on the one hand, an
agenda of encouraging ‘personal responsibility’ and, on the other hand, of the
shaping of personal behaviour by the state. It seems that to resolve this, it is vital
there is wide understanding by the affected parties of the need for policies and any
compensating individual or societal benefits associated with changing behaviour.
Research to investigate notions of public acceptability of specific policies could
apply a participatory approach and a two-way process of information exchange
which allows trade offs to be explored and matches demand for information by the
public with its supply. The willingness to pay (Chapter 7; Appendix 3) will be one
aspect of this investigation of trade-offs, but through the use of a dynamic process
where feedback loops and preference formation can be examined and the
interrelationships between notions of fairness, trust, free rider issues, causal
responsibility and effectiveness and any other issues to emerge can be understood.
Exploring acceptability using participatory, staged approaches that allow the
dynamics of preference formation to be explored will strengthen the link between
communication and policy, offer a more sophisticated approach to policy delivery
and be vital to the success of policies to reduce carbon from the transport sector.
High
Deliberative
Priority:
Following
DfT + research council
Responsibility:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
162
SECTION IV:
RESEARCH METHODS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
163
7. Research methodologies
7: RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES
7.1
Aims of this chapter
• Provide commentary on the quality of the evidence in relation to specific
problems areas and weaknesses in existing data.
• Suggest methodologies that may be usefully applied in the future to study the
links between attitudes to climate change and travel behaviour.
• Provide examples from the literature of the application of innovative
methodologies to the study of travel behaviour or related areas of research.
7.2
Main Findings
• The three strands of this review (i) attitudes (ii) climate change and (iii) travel
behaviour have not been comprehensively examined in any methodologically
robust, consistent or integrated manner in order to warrant a fully comprehensive
analysis of the link between them.
• Eight major weaknesses have been found in the evidence reviewed for this report
1. Reliance on superficial understanding from quantitative methods.
2. Inconsistent and narrow use of the concept ‘attitude’.
3. Assumption of a linear link between knowledge, attitudes and behaviour.
4. Assumption on a causal link between attitudes and behaviour.
5. Measurement of attitudes in a vacuum divorced from context and external
influences.
6. Focus on individual behaviour and a narrow theoretical underpinning.
7. Mono-disciplinary nature of the research.
8. Lack of attention to holistic and lifestyle issues.
• A main conclusion of this evidence base review, is the need to engage the public
using deliberative methodologies in order to deviate from traditional ‘top down’
methods of information provision. There is increasing recognition of these
methods in the DfT, being applied, for example, recently to a study of the public
acceptability of road pricing.
• New forms of research and communication need to be two-way, explore formats
for learning on all sides of the issue, have a deliberative component and not
necessarily strive to reach consensus. Deliberation is also more than a mere
discussion of the issues as emphasis must be given to the results and decisions that
arise from the process
• New methods need to take account of ‘where people are at’, their capacity for
absorbing information and what they want to know, not what we think they ought
to know.
• In the area of transport and climate change, there are few examples of the use of
deliberative methodologies to engage with the public on these issues or elicit their
understandings. However, some steps have been taken to qualitatively engage with
the public in more far reaching ways. These include the use of mapping exercises
in conjunction with GIS, scenario modelling and Q-sorts.
•
Genuine engagement of the public through deliberative methods presents a
profound challenge (Owens 2000). In particular, these methods cannot remove
contextual constraints on travel behaviour where they currently exist. Further
critical appraisal is necessary to assess the merits of these techniques as applied to
travel behaviour.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
164
7. Research methodologies
7.3
The state of the evidence so far
This review has examined over 100 studies on the attitudes to climate change and travel
behaviour in order to understand the link between information, knowledge , attitudes and
travel choices. A main conclusion to emerge is that the three strands of this review (i)
attitudes (ii) climate change and (iii) travel behaviour have not been comprehensively
examined in any methodologically robust, consistent or integrated manner in order to warrant
a fully comprehensive analysis of the link between them.
Many of the studies featured are conceptually based review articles that reflect the fact that
researchers are still struggling to conceptualise the inherently complex ways in which
transport activities interact with natural processes that define the climate change problem.
This is exemplified in the fact that there are some fundamental weaknesses with the nature of
the evidence that does exist.
Eight key issues have emerged from this review with respect to the quality of the evidence on
the link between attitudes to climate change and travel. These are taken in turn below.
7.3.1
Relianc e on superficial understanding from quantitative methods
Although conventional quantitative surveys provide a useful overview of mass public opinion,
it should be borne in mind that the survey as a research instrument is based upon closed
questions. We suggest that, although survey-based approaches may be useful in certain
sectors, there is an inherent problem in applying them to the topic of climate change. These
methods do not allow for a more in depth understanding of motivations and psychological
processes.
As stated by Lorenzoni and Langford (2001), due to its nature, climate change is a very
complex issue for people to deal with. Given that the public might hold a variety of
conceptions as to what ‘climate change’ is there is a risk that researchers are imposing their
own conceptions on to the public, thus resulting in misleading and erroneous findings.
There is also the risk of socially desirable responses on questionnaires, and in focus group
discussions and interviews. Although her study did not address the question directly, Steg
(2005) suggests that people might not be willing to admit that using a car fulfils many
symbolic and affective functions… car drivers are inclined to justify and rationalise their
behaviour.
Therefore, given the over reliance in this area of research on the survey based instrument, in
some cases strong lessons are being inferred about public understanding of climate change
from badly phrased questions which are more a reflection of what the researcher believes to
be important.
7.3.2
Inconsistent and narrow use of the concept ‘attitude’
The strength of the link between attitudes and behaviour is dependent on what aspect of
attitudes is being measured and which methods have been used to measure them. In particular,
we should be wary of the following:
• ‘Attitude’ is often used as a catch all term.
• Yet, “attitudes” can have a variety of meanings, which will vary amongst different
researchers from referring, to beliefs, values, personal and social norms.
• The evidence suggests that all these different constructs need to be measured (among
others – see Chapter 4), but inconsistencies in the way in which constructs are
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
165
7. Research methodologies
defined, together with methodological differences, mean that it is very difficult to
compare between studies.
• Attitudes are often measured at the level of general concepts; their predictive power is
improved if measured with regard to specific behaviour.
What is more, even where the attitude concept is broadened out, most datasets cannot resolve
the question of what drives respondents’ attitudes about climate change and travel in the first
place. Because the real-world state of global warming science and transport’s relationship
with it is the same for all respondents, perceptions of differing levels of urgency, trust,
efficacy and so forth must be influenced by other factors, including variations in familiarity
with the science, political ideology, values and past experience which all seem to play some
role in influencing these opinions.
7.3.3
Assumption of a linear link between knowledge, attitudes and behaviour
Climate change and transport is a ‘young’ and disjointed area of research. Much of the
research featured in this review stems from travel behaviour research, which examines the
travel habits of people, entailing information on travel patterns, public attitudes to transport
and potential for changing existing travel behaviour. At the localised level, these types of
studies can be effective.
However, where attempts are made to study attitudes to climate change in conjunction with
transport, a large proportion of studies assume a ‘linear’ link between attitudes and transport
without adequate consideration and measurement of other psychological and contextual
factors that may shape behaviour and the dynamic interrelationships between them (see the
discussion on the ‘deficit model’ in Chapter 3).
Firstly, in reality these relationships are far from linear. Secondly, it is possible that the
direction of causality is varied – i.e. that attitudes change in line with behaviour. It could be
expected that relationships exist in both directions and that, in reality, attitudes will shape
mode choice behaviour over time and experience will in turn shape attitudes. Golob and
Hensher (1998) explain the complexity by regarding intention as a ‘special kind’ of attitude
that is positioned between attitudes and behaviour in terms of causal relationships. Their
diagrammatical representation of the potential relationships is a helpful illustration:
Figure 7.1: The mutual caus ality between attitudes, intention behaviour
Attitudes
Intention
Behaviour
Source: Golob and Hensher 1998
The authors claim that in order to fully understand the relationship between attitudes towards
travel and the environment and mode choice behaviour it is necessary to test which of the
causal relationships represented by the arrows are the strongest. Chapters 3 and 4 introduced
the multitude of factors that potentially moderate the linkages shown in this diagram.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
166
7. Research methodologies
7.3.4
Assumption of a causal link between attitudes and behaviour
Even where attempts are made to measure a more complex array of antecedents to behaviour
such as values or norms, survey based research cannot in itself show conclusively that aspects
of value orientations, beliefs or attitudes predic t or cause mode choice intention or behaviour.
There are two main reasons for this:
1. Reliance on measures of self -reported behaviour or intention
2. Lack of before/ after analysis
In the first instance, it is self evident that it is not possible to determine the link between
attitudes and behaviour if these things are not measured adequately. It is rare for actual
objective measurements of behaviour to be taken alongside attitudes. Instead, most studies
rely on respondents’ self reports of behaviour or on the use of intention or willingness to
change as a proxy for behaviour. Indeed, if the initial speculative measurements of ‘public
attitudes to climate change’ are used statistically against ‘willingness to change behaviour’,
any inferences regarding causality are open to question. In other words, we must,
acknowledge that the psychological motives may be expressed in surveys as post hoc
justifications for behaviour, rather than prior explanations (Wall 2006).
In the context of travel behaviour research these types of limitations have been noted to a
small extent. For instance, Hagman (2003) recognized that when responding to formal
surveys many people may state that it is necessary to reduce car traffic because of its
environmental impact, whereas in reality few people take such actions. Hagman suggests that
although such types of apparent paradoxical findings are often explained on the basis of lack
of knowledge, attitudes, routinisation and social dilemmas, they may actually emanate from
the methods used to elicit public views in the first place.
Secondly, even if behaviour were adequately measured, cross-sectional studies can merely
show that psychological factors and mode choice are inter-related, and that some constructs
have greater association with behaviour for some people than for others. Therefore, because
the evidence has rarely adopted experimental or ‘before and after’ designs which would avoid
this problem if carried out using appropriate controls, the evidence is still unclear as to the
extent to which attitudes shape behaviour and vice versa.
7.3.5
Attitudes are normally measured in a vacuum
In order to fully appreciate the link between attitudes and behaviour both internal and external
influences on change need to be taken into account as well as the context in which the
questions are posed. Therefore a further problem associated with the sole use of conventional
surveys is that they invariably tend to measure attitudes in isolation from other factors (e.g.
contextual issues) which may be equally, if not more, important.
7.3.6
Focus on individual behaviour and a narrow theoretical underpinning
Chapters 3 and 4 explained why it is important to attend to behaviour at different levels in
society – individual, interpersonal and community. However, most research in this area has
focussed on localised individual travel behaviour. Consequently, where theory is used to
study travel behaviour – and this is still the exception - only individual theories have tended to
be tested, particularly social cognitive models such as the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Such
findings should not be interpreted within the context of collective attitudes and behaviour, nor
within the context of climate change.
The problem is typified by a dearth of studies about the dynamics of household level decision
making, few studies on local community schemes such as car clubs and WTPs in terms of the
social network analysis and a paucity of studies looking at social norms and networks.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
167
7. Research methodologies
Academics and policy developers alike would benefit from reconceptualising the problem in a
holistic manner, in order to reflect the reality of the situation – that behaviour change is
required on such a large scale and therefore behaviour of individuals must be examined as
part of a collective.
7.3.7
Mono-disciplinary nature of research
One major criticism regarding existing research is that researchers often fail to conceptualise
the relationships between the activities of individuals in relation to the environment in any
holistic manner. Indeed, most existing research is mono-disciplinary in nature. Whilst it is the
case that more sub-disciplines such as psychology and sociology are beginning to work on
issues of travel behaviour change, there is still very little integration between broader
disciplinary traditions. In addition, the current status of dialogue between the natural and
social sciences seems to suggest that ‘never the twain shall meet’. The social sciences often
seem to consider social responses to climate change in isolation from the scientific ‘reality’.
Although, conceptualising a holistic framework is no easy task, given the uncertain status of
scientific findings, failure to take into account the reciprocal links between the environment
and society may explain the breadth of the gap in existing research that needs to be addressed.
7.3.8
Lack of attention to holistic and lifestyle issues
There have been few attempts to establish sets of indicators that permit the drawing together
of data from the different agencies and allow all agencies access to statistics that reveal the
current levels of impact from contemporary lifestyles. Only this type of co-ordinated
approach will reveal the most important aspects of consumption and behaviour that need to be
addressed to increase lifestyle sustainability.
In order to suggest suitable alternatives to existing approaches, we turn our attention to the
mature and growing body of knowledge in social and interdisciplinary research that offers a
more sophisticated approach to eliciting public values, attitudes and willingness to change
behaviour, which remains largely untapped by many policymakers.
7.4
The need for deliberative methods
A main conclusion of this evidence base review is the need to engage the public using
deliberative methodologies in order to deviate from traditional ‘top down’ methods. This
conclusion is grounded in the broad and clear consensus in the literature, including that from
the public policy sector. The rationale is that for the travelling public to take personal
responsibility for carbon emissions, alter their travel patterns, support and positively engage
with new technologies, and personally benefit from such changes, fundamentally different
and more interactive forms of communication will need to be employed. These need to be
able to take account of the extent and kind of knowledge the public have (Owens 2000). In
other words, there is a need to foster better relations between science and wider society, as
opposed to focusing on how public misconceptions or how public opinions differ from
established scientific criteria.
However, in some ways, advocating ‘public engagement’ is nothing new. Owens (2000)
reminds us that in the quest for sustainability, it has become commonplace to claim that the
public should be engaged in debates about environmental risk and policy. She cites the UK
strategy for sustainable development which sees public involvement as essential (DETR,
1999) and a report on environmental standards by the Royal Commission on Environmental
Pollution which asserted that better ways need to be developed for articulating people's
values and taking them into account from the earliest stage (RCEP, 1998).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
168
7. Research methodologies
What is coming through clearly in the more recent literature, however, is the need for a twoway dialogue between decision makers and the public about climate change that is less
prescriptive about the direction of information flow and explores new formats for learning on
all sides of the issue (Abelson et al. 2003).
Abelson et al. state that deliberative methods have typically been incorporated in public
policy decision making through citizens’ juries, planning cells, deliberative polling, consensus
conferences and citizens’ panels (see Section 7.5). Common to all is a deliberative component
where participants are provided with information about the issue being considered and are
encouraged to discuss and challenge the information and consider each others’ views before
making a final decision or recommendation for action. They are not merely mechanisms for
achieving greater understanding or even consensus (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). Instead,
they are seen as a significant, even essential ingredient in the development of more responsive
forms of decision making capable of accounting for the diversity of values and opinions
within societies (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002; Devine-Wright 2004; Abelson et al. 2003).
Indeed, there is an emergent consensus, for example, that:
Environmental values are not necessarily preformed or fixed, waiting to be
revealed or articulated, but “emerge out of debate, discussion and challenge, as
[people] encounter new facts, insights and judgements contributed by others'.
(Owens 2000)
Abelson et al. (2001) provide a précis of deliberative methods, particularly with regards to
What are deliberative methods and why have they become so popular?:
• Deliberation can occur with others or as an individual process.
• It is the act of considering different points of view and coming to a reasoned decision
that distinguishes deliberation from the group activity.
• To most deliberation theorists and practitioners, however, deliberation within a group
has become the defining feature of this set of methods.
• Collective discussion is viewed as the critical element of deliberation, one that allows
individuals to listen, understand, potentially persuade and ultimately come to more
reasoned, informed and public -spirited decisions.
• As a social process, authentic deliberation relies on persuasion to induce participants’
reflection on and altering of views.
• Deliberation is more than merely a discussion of the issues. Emphasis is also given to
the decision that arises from the discussion process, and the process by which that
decision comes about.
A crucial feature of this ‘civic’ model is that people are able to question assumptions about
the character of environmental issues and the scientific understanding upon which analysis is
based. In this way, public perspectives might help not only to identify or implement solutions
but to define, or reframe, what the problems actually are (Owens 2000). The methods would
allow awareness of climate change to take place with respect for people’s capacity to take it in
(Alexander Ballard 2005). Capturing this rationale, Hounsham says:
There is no point in trying to take people to the top story of a building when
we’re struggling to get them off the ground floor.
(Hounsham 2006)
He identifies a number of requirements for this new approach:
• Moving from a modus operandi of information provision and rational argument to
methods aimed at touching emotions, stimulating resonance, inspiring and creating
desire.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
169
7. Research methodologies
• Taking people from where they are, rather than where we’d like them to be.
• Moving away from exhortation and a pedestal ‘I know best’ attitude to create real
dialogue.
• Taking people on a shared journey, not exhorting them to do things.
• Intelligently reaching out to people with the help of psychologists, sociologists and
even advertising creatives.
• Recognising that one size does not fit all and that we must present our messages in
terms that make sense to particular types of people.
(Hounsham 2006)
It has been beyond the scope of this review to delve into the literature on carbon citizenship,
co-production and social capital62 . Nevertheless, it is worth noting that aspirations for
deliberative and inclusive forms of public engagement have emerged in parallel with a widely
perceived need for a new political culture, in which:
… people ... think of themselves as active citizens, willing, able and equipped to
have an influence in public life and with the critical capacities to weigh evidence
before speaking and acting.
(Advisory Group on Citizenship 1998, cited in Owens 2000).
We will now go on to outline some of the more innovative and deliberative methodologies
that have been or could be applied to the public understanding of transport and climate
change.
7.5
Improving the quality of the evidence
In the area of transport and climate change, there are few examples of the use of deliberative
methodologies to engage with the public on these issues or elicit their understandings.
However, some steps have been taken to qualitatively engage with the public in more far
reaching ways. Some of the more innovative techniques to appear in this review have adopted
the following principles and techniques.
7.5.1
Open ended questioning techniques
Although based on ‘one way’ survey instruments, the use of open-ended questions can
improve survey-based methods to some, albeit limited, extent. The main motivations for using
open-ended questions are (i) when the types of responses are unknown prior to the survey;
and (ii) when more in-depth responses are required, one that can add richness to a simple yes/
no or tick-box type answer. Lane (2000) uses this approach in the Public understanding of the
environmental impact of road transport pilot study. It should be noted, however, that this
approach is no substitute for qualitative methods and good questionnaire development
preceded by qualitative methods and pilot testing, which could avoid the need for such
questions.
Nevertheless, one example of the richness of open-style questioning is provided by Hagman
(2003, see below). In this (interview) study, when describing the advantages of car use, car
users mentioned: freedom, independence from others, convenience, flexibility, time saved,
security. The researcher notes that, although these arguments are familiar, what is most
important is how they are presented. The results show that, whereas the views regarding the
advantages of car use are gained through personal experience and are concrete, the picture car
users get of the (polarized and politicised) debates on environment problems caused by car
62
see Halpern et al. 2004 for a discussion
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
170
7. Research methodologies
use is diffuse and divergent. Knowledge about risks, thus, is generalised and decontextualised,
in contrast to the knowledge about the use-values, which is contextual and personal.
7.5.2
Integrative approaches
Recent moves towards genuine interdisciplinarity are best exemplified by research carried out
at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research63 , which brings together expertise from
the natural and social sciences in order to develop sustainable responses to climate change
through inter-disciplinary research and dialogue. In researching public perceptions to climate
change for example, they lead the field through the cross-application of concepts between the
societal and environmental realms in order to reflect their reciprocal nature. Lorenzoni and
Langford (2001) encapsulate this by stating that, the causes of climate change reside in
diverse human activities emitting multiple greenhouse gases that, in turn, interact with natural
processes (see Appendix 3).
7.5.3
Multi-method approaches
Other examples of best practice in the field involve undertaking quantitative and qualitative
approaches as part of the same research programme. Such approaches avoid much of the
over-reliance on superficial understanding from quantitative methods cited above. Where
multiple approaches are used, qualitative findings are typically used as a precursor to inform
quantitative studies (e.g. items raised in focus group discussions are later used in
questionnaires). However, the Lorenzoni and Langford example below shows in the context
of research on climate change, the reverse case is also applicable in that questionnaires are
useful in providing a peripheral overview, whilst consequent in-depth discussions can be used
to ‘tap’ further into the underlying basis for such views, related psychological processes and
consequent motivations and actions. An ideal scenario would be the use of qualitative
research before and after the quantitative survey is administered.
7.5.4 Scenario testing, Visual aids and mapping exercises
Respondents can be presented with the consequences of climate change in the form of
scenarios for the future as a basis for uncovering current perceptions about an issue,
generating discussion, introducing the idea of trade offs (e.g. inter-generational, geographical,
environmental and policy trade-offs) and stimulating behaviour change. Scenario testing as
well as other approaches to discussion can be aided by the use of computer models, visual
aids and mapping exercises even using GIS (see Stoll-Kleeman et al. 2001 and Kelay 2004
below).
7.5.5 Q sorting
Q-sorting can be characterized as a process whereby a person is presented with a set of
statements about some topic, often numerous and overlapping, and is asked to rank order
them into ‘piles’ from their individual point of view, along a continuum according to some
preference, judgement or feeling about them. The statements are matters of opinion (not fact)
and the fact that the Q-sorter is ranking the statements from his or her own point of view
renders this a subjective process. Studies using surveys and questionnaires often use
categories that the investigator imposes on the responses. Q sorting on the other hand
determines ones that are used by the respondents, often informed by prior qualitative research
(van Exel and de Graaf 2005). Q sorting is often distinguished from ‘R-type’ rational decision
making (van Exel et al. 2004).
63
http://www.tyndall.ac.uk/index.shtml
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
171
7. Research methodologies
A basic principle of the Q-sort technique is that items are evaluated relative to each other.
This is usually accomplished by providing the items on cards which the subject lays out and
sorts into horizontally ordered category piles. Many items can be sorted quickly with this
approach (e.g. 60-90 items).
The individual rankings are subject to factor analysis, and the resulting factors, inasmuch as
they have arisen from individual subjectivities, indicate segments of subjectivity which exist.
Since the interest of Q-methodology is in the nature of the segments and the extent to which
they are similar or dissimilar, the issue of large sample sizes, so fundamental to most social
research, is rendered relatively unimportant. In other words, whereas a questionnaire enables
a large number of people to be given a small number of tests, Q sorting gives a small number
of people a large number of test-items.
In this way, Q sorting can be very helpful in exploring tastes, preferences, sentiments, motives
and goals and the parts of personality that are of great influence on behaviour, but which often
remain largely unexplored.
7.5.6
Citizens Juries and other deliberative methods
As inferred in Section 7.4, deliberative methods can be contrasted with the most common
quantitative and qualitative methods for representing the public’s views: the questionnaire
survey and the focus group. Their main component - decision making of lay public reached
after receiving information about the issue from multiple points of view and extensive
opportunity for deliberation – means the conclusion is arguably of greater validity than when
an instantaneous response is obtained from thousands of uninformed citizens in a poll. Unlike
questionnaire surveys, polls or focus groups, these are designed to allow participants to
represent their own views directly to policy makers. In addition, unlike conventional methods,
they offer methods of ‘action research’64 with high potential for methodological transparency,
participatory deliberation and subsequent citizen advocacy (Wakeford 2002).
64
Action research is the process by which practitioners attempt to study their problems scientifically in
order to guide, correct, and evaluate their decisions and actions (Alexander Ballard & Associates
2005).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
172
7. Research methodologies
Figure 7.2: Forms of participation used in local authorities in 2001 and planned for 2002
Source: ODPM (2002); Base = 216 responding authorities
There is a growing inventory of deliberative methods. Some of them have become relatively
widespread (although sometimes controversial) methods of action research. The Office of the
Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) undertook a review of participatory methods used in local
authorities in 2001 and compared this to a similar survey undertaken in 1997. Figure 7.2
shows the results according to a whole spectrum of types of method – from the traditional to
the more innovative and deliberative techniques. The survey reveals a marked increase in the
take-up of some innovative approaches, particularly interactive websites, citizens’ panels and
focus groups, since 1997. In contrast, the use of referendums and citizens’ juries is very
unusual in local authorities – only 10% of authorities used referendums and 6% used citizens’
juries to engage the public in 2001.
There is a large body of literature, often going in to great detail about the potential for each
method, but usually failing to provide examples to illustrate their utility. Also, it seems clear
from the evidence, that whilst a number of discrete methods can be defined ‘on paper’, in
reality the boundary seems blurred between the usage and definition of some of these
techniques. For instance, what may be labelled a citizens jury in reality barely deviates from a
top down information providing exercise. The greatest criticisms are directed at what happens
afterwards and whether the conclusions of the process are followed through by the sponsoring
organisation.
Some of these methods are outlined in Table 7.1, together with a brief sketch of their
advantages and disadvantages. The table has been itself compiled from some reviews of
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
173
7. Research methodologies
deliberative methods, namely: Abelson et al. (2001); Cabinet Office (undated) 65 and COSLA
(1998).
Table 7.1: Forms of deliberative methodology
Description
Strengths
Weaknesses
- Similar to focus groups
- Participants reconvene more
than once having had time to
read information, debate with
others outside the group and
refine their views
- Group of 12-20 randomly
selected citizens recruited to
best ‘represent’ the community
- Meet over several days
- Independent facilitators
- ‘Jurors’ hear evidence from
‘experts’ and cross examine
them
- Debate and form opinions
after having access to full
information and time to argue/
discuss issues with their peers
- Not forced to reach a
consensus
- Good for enabling
participants to continue their
discussion and develop their
thinking between meetings
- No explicit ‘expert’ input and
chance for public to challenge
them
- Consideration of policy
issues known to be
controversial
- Time for deliberation
Promote a culture of
citizenship
- Provide a range of informed
views on an issue
- Helps to identify solutions
- can take account of
complexity, minority opinions
and new ideas
- Good for creating innovative
solutions
- Allows policy makers to get
in depth understanding of
public perceptions
Consensus
conference
- Panel of ca. 10-20 lay people
- put questions about an issue to
experts, listen to answers and
then come to a consensus
- Results reported at a press
conference
Research
Citizens
panels
- Made up of 500 – 5000 people
- Views are sought regularly
using a variety of methods –
surveys, interviews, focus
groups
- A proportion of the panel is
replaced over time
- Strong educational
component
- Good for public
consideration of issues of
ethical, scientific
technological or
environmental concern
involving lots of detailed
evidence
- Monitoring of public
opinion on different issues –
trend data to monitor impacts
of policies
- Comparisons of different
social groups
- Grounding for other
research
- Often used as a tool of
consultation rather than
research
- Can still be ‘top down’
provision of information which
tend to attract ‘the usual
suspects’
- Heavily reliant on:
* representativeness of 12 or
so citizens
* the way the question is
worded – can restrict discussion
and may be more a tool for
consultation
*the evidence presented to
reflect the issues and not bias
outcomes
- Only good when not used as
one-off symbolic attempt as
part of a public relations
exercise
- Need to be fair, representative
and transparent
- can be expensive
- Multiple conferences may be
needed to ensure that broad,
representative opinions are
sought
User panels/
groups
- Smaller group that meets
several times a year to consider
and discuss issues
Reconvening
Groups
Citizens
Juries
- Can effect two way dialogue
and a sounding board for new
approaches
- Early identification of
emerging problems
- People benefit from
discussion within groups but
also from discussing issues
- Conventional survey
techniques do not engage
people fully
- Attrition can be a problem
affecting representativeness
- Under-representation of hard
to reach groups
- Limitations with new policy
areas where community opinion
not yet formed
- Attrition
- Often limited to ‘users’
- Over time participants may be
prone to sympathise with
decision makers
65
Cabinet Office (undated) Viewmaker: A policy makers guide to public involvement available at
www.policyhub.co.uk
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
174
7. Research methodologies
Deliberative
polls
7.6
- Builds on the opinion poll by
incorporating element of
deliberation
- public arrive at modified view
after hearing views of others
e.g. after a public hearing
- Vary in amount of time given
to deliberation
- Involves larger numbers than
citizens juries + less time
- Measures what public would
think if it were informed about
an issue
with family and friends
outside of the panel
- Large representative sample
- Provides insights into public
opinions and how people
come to decisions
- Seeks informed opinions
- Can monitor over time
- Does not force people to
reach consensus
- Useful insights into public
opinion
- ensuring representativeness
difficult
- not suited for issues where
public not at all knowledgeable
Evidence gaps and recommendations
The evidence gaps and research recommendations specific to attitudes to climate change and
transport are discussed in the following chapter. Each of these recommend the use of some of
the more innovative methodologies outlined in this chapter in order to gather a more in depth
understanding of public attitudes, to understand how these differ according to context,
prevalent barriers and population subgroup, and to thoroughly conduct the ‘listening’ phase of
community based social marketing initiatives as outlined in Chapter 6.
Before doing this, however, it is worth noting some warnings from the literature about the
degree to which the potential for deliberative methodologies to engage the public may or may
not come to fruition. Owens (2000) in particular has some strong warnings to make in this
regard. She warns that genuine engagement of the public through deliberative and
inclusionary procedures present a profound challenge which, if not met, could be dangerously
counterproductive. Acknowledging the fact that experimentation with deliberative fora is
providing valuable insights and there are good reasons to persevere with them, she states:
We should not delude ourselves that redesigning process will be sufficient for full
realisation of the civic model.
(Owens 2000)
In other words, there is more to it than including ‘add on’ deliberative engagement to the
policy making or event the research process. Her main concern is as follows:
At times it seems as if the restless search for new procedures has become a
substitute for confronting the failure of existing institutions (such as voting,
communicating with policymakers, or becoming involved where apertu res exist,
for example in the planning process).
(Owens 2000)
In addition, Owens points to the danger of new practices being just as much about
legitimation as the ones they seek to replace. Most importantly, she reminds us that
deliberation per se cannot remove contextual constraints on the capacity for action. Such
things as land use patterns and the cultural norms of mobility are not amenable to simple
fixes. In constrained circumstances such as this she says:
… deliberation may be no more successful than top-down information, though it
may be better at revealing constraints and might point to possibilities for
removing them, thus enhancing capacity in particular local contexts.
(Owens 2000)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
175
7. Research methodologies
Hence, the nature, practice, scope and products of deliberation demand further critical
appraisal to address these issues and judge their effectiveness and ‘success’. In particular, the
minimal application thus far in a transport research context means there is huge scope for
innovation and shifts in our understanding in this area.
Nine main evidence gaps and research recommendations resulted from this review in an
attempt to address current weaknesses in the data and develop a programme of truly
deliberative research in the field of travel studies. These are outlined in the following chapter.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
176
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
8: EVIDENCE GAPS AND RESEARCH
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following areas have emerged from this review as set out in the previous seven chapters
as priorities for further examination. Together they will develop a greater understanding of
public levels of knowledge and emotional engagement in the issue of climate change, the
precursors to travel behaviour change and how to engage with and motivate the public.
The evidence gaps and research recommendations are presented as nine distinct themes.
However, there is some overlap between them and it is important that they are not considered
in isolation from one another. In particular, some of the later themes (e.g. R7) rely on the
lessons learnt in previous recommendations in order to achieve their stated aims.
The nine recommendations are as follows:
R1. Understanding how to engage with the public
R2. Understanding the demand for air travel
R3. Understanding how the media influences public opinion
R4. Understanding the barriers to travel behaviour change
R5. Understanding identity
R6. Segmenting the market for travel
R7. Testing community based social marketing
R8. Trade -offs and policy acceptance
R9. Understanding mobility in the context of sustainable lifestyles
Table 8.1 summarises these recommendations.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
177
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
Table 8.1: Summary of Research Recommendations
Evidence gap
1 Public
Engagement
2. Air travel
3. Media
4. Barriers to
changing
behaviour
5. Identity
6. Segmentation
7. Social
marketing
8. Trade-offs and
policy acceptance
9. Lifestyle
Specific Issues
Understanding
knowledge of climate
change and transport
using participatory
methods. To inform all.
Establishing a baseline
understanding of air
travel demand,
knowledge of climate
change, attitudes and
barriers to behaviour
change.
Study of media portrayal
of transport and climate
change and impact on
public knowledge.
Identify individual and
collective subjective and
objective barriers to
behaviour, their relative
importance, how they
interact and how they can
be resolved. To inform
R6
Applying self identity
theory to various travel
behaviours including car
purchase and use, bus
use, cycling etc. to
understand how to
promote esteem and
belonging and make
green travel ‘trendy’.
Using previous findings
to design a value based
survey instrument on
which to segment the
population into
motivational groups.
Identify easy wins and
marketing messages to
inform R7.
Pre-test elements of
community based social
marketing campaigns
Involving people in the
development of specific
interventions including
trade-off research
How is travel different
from other behaviours?
Do attitudes transfer
across behaviours? If we
focus on other
behaviours, will transport
follow? Are there
negative rebound effects
between behaviours?
How engage the public
on sustainable lifestyles?
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Method
Deliberative
Priority
High
Timing
Immediate
Responsibility
DfT
Review +
Deliberative
High
Immediate
DfT
Qualitative/
Deliberative
High
Immediate
DfT/ Research
Council
Review +
qualitative
High
Following
DfT/ Research
Council
Qualitative/
Value based
surveys
(psychometrics)
Medium
Following
Research
Council
Value based
surveys
(psychometrics)
High
Following
DfT
Qualitative/
Action research
High
Following
DfT (+ cross
departmental)
Deliberative
High
Following
DfT/ Research
Council
Review +
deliberative
Medium
Immediate
(review) +
following
Cross
Departmental/
Research
Council
178
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R1 Understanding how to engage with the public
The issue
The evidence suggests that we need to be cautious about the information that currently exists
about public knowledge on climate change and transport. Due to the weaknesses in the
evidence outlined above, we have a superficial understanding of what people know about
climate change. In particular, we are unclear about what people understand about the
relationship between climate change and transport, how important these issues really are to
people, how trusting people are of sources of information, how it ranks among other issues,
how they perceive the link to their own travel behaviour (including car purchasing) and what
they believe to be potential behavioural or technological solutions to the problems.
The evidence so far
There is virtually no research on scientific understanding and transport policy. The focus of
research on climate change/ environment and travel has been on attitudes, and there has been
comparatively little focus on knowledge. Studies of information provision try and measure the
change in attitudes it produces even if they admit that this happens via a change in knowledge
– there is very little information about knowledge proper as opposed to information and
attitudes. The results of this evidence review point to the clear importance of knowledge as a
determinant of attitudes toward climate change and transport. However, in contrast to the
rather simplistic deficit model that has traditionally characterized discussions of this
relationship, this analysis highlights the complex and interacting nature of the knowledge—
attitude interface.
Where knowledge or attitudes are measured, the assumption has often been that there is a
linear relationship with behaviour. However, this review suggests that this is a weak,
complex, non-linear relationship and information on climate change must be ‘framed’ and
delivered in certain ways alongside other actions to have any (albeit likely indirect) role in
catalysing behaviour change. Knowledge is however important because it touches emotions,
stimulates resonance, inspires and fosters acceptance, understanding and desire. However, we
need to establish the relative importance of barriers/ precursors to changing travel behaviour
and this can only be done by using participatory methods of investigation. Thus, both
knowledge and behaviour need to be studied in detail.
The evidence also suggests that information collection and provision needs to move away
from exhortation and a pedestal ‘I know best’ approach to create real dialogue with people
using methods aimed at touching emotions and stimulating resonance. In doing so, it is
necessary to bear in mind that ‘what we might think the public ought to care about is
irrelevant: we must begin from what they do care about’’, paying attention to the cognitive,
behavioural and social sciences on how people think, learn, communicate and behave. This
will illustrate the importance of the state of mind of the receiver and how any given bit of
information may trigger different reactions in different people. In addition, the literature on
the public understanding of science asserts that trust and respect need to be generated; they
cannot be taken for granted or imposed from above, whether in science or any other type of
social activity. It is worth noting also that the House of Lords Select Committee on Science
and Technology’s calls for true public engagement, involvement and two-way dialogue have
lead to shifts in other policy sectors. They recognise that the public in tandem with any
technical comprehension of a scientific topic, also relies on both trust and social values in
forming an opinion, and also recognise the need to engage with the public in an open,
transparent and accountable manner.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
179
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
Findings suggest that many assumptions about what will convince ‘the public’ of the need to
act on climate change are misconceived. For instance, climate change is often framed as a
difficult, complex intractable problem and this has the immediate effect of signalling to most
of the population that they cannot play any role in this. Furthermore, this frame is
incompatible with the individual action frame (e.g. through campaigns such as Are You
Doing Your Bit?). Therefore, preparatory research should be conducted as part of the design
of any information-based campaign regarding the impact and interaction of how the messages
are ‘framed’ (Rose et al. 2005).
Recommendations for further research
Whilst quantitative surveys are useful in other ways, current data collection in this area does
not provide the basis on which to develop an understanding of public engagement with
climate change issues in order to devise campaign strategies and interventions. The best way
of gaining a more intelligent, rich and meaningful understanding of knowledge is to use
participatory methods which engage people in a dialogue about the scientific and policy
issues surrounding climate change, offering information in a variety of formats to the public
and interpreting their response. This may include using novel, mixed and truly
interdisciplinary techniques such as presenting scientific scenarios (with social and economic
components) and information on alternative futures within citizens’ panels or deliberative
opinion polling. The idea would be to gauge emotional responses, measure relevance and
concerns and to build on this process in an iterative, non-intrusive manner. Delving deeper
into public knowledge on this issue will provide a baseline for further research and some
evidence on which to base subsequent campaigns.
Purpose and Priority
Research is needed to deconstruct the dominant frames of reference with respect to transport
and climate change and to uncover deeper insights into the information needs and emotional
reactions experienced among the public.
Priority
High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Immediate
Responsibility
DfT
180
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R2 Understanding the demand for air travel
The Issue
Carbon emissions from UK domestic and international air travel are forecast to increase by
between 16 and 18 MtC by 2030, so that by 2030 aviation emissions alone could account for
up to a quarter of the UK’s total emissions. Despite this, surprisingly little data exists about
the composition of the phenomenal recent and projected growth in air passenger demand
beyond trend and forecast data about the demographic composition of who is flying. It
follows that our understanding of public knowledge of the link between air travel and climate
change and the decision making process with respect to flying, is also very low.
The evidence so far
There is clear evidence that price affects the demand for flying and has fuelled the growth in
air travel, particularly among wealthier people. However, we do not yet understand whether
new segments of the population are beginning to travel by air, or whether the demand is
comprised predominantly of the same people flying more frequently. We also have little
comprehension about whether recent behavioural trends have already become entrenched,
thus already creating a degree of ‘air dependence’ and therefore how easily these trends could
be reversed through behavioural or fiscal interventions to curb demand.
Recommendations for further research
As a baseline for more participatory approaches and the other recommendations in this
review, a national study of air travellers could be completed through focus groups and
quantitative surveys. Existing data sets need to be collated and data gaps identified.
Qualitative research should precede quantitative data collection in order to identify the main
drivers of demand and to inform subsequent quantitative methods in order to identify the main
market segments and their respective demand elasticities.
The survey instruments could be designed to be able to answer the following kinds of
questions:
• Who is flying, how often, where to?
• Are particular demographics important? (e.g. the growth of rich ‘pensioners’)?
• What factors are currently fuelling the demand for air travel?
• What aspirations do those who do and do not currently fly have for future air travel?
• How have people’s expectations of flying changed business and leisure patterns and
lifestyles?
• What do people understand about aviation’s impact on climate change and how does this
information resonate with the public?
• How does knowledge and concern about aviation’s contribution to climate change rank in
terms of other concerns and factors influencing air travel?
• Do issues such as carbon-offsetting and emissions trading have any resonance with the
public?
• How do travellers make decisions to fly and what is the attitude-behaviour link with
regard to air travel? Which attitudes are most important?
• What are the market segments (value based) and what is fuelling the demand in each
segment?
• What are the price elasticities in each segment?
• How easily can these trends be reversed with behavioural and fiscal interventions?
• What trade-offs are people prepared to make to maintain their ‘right’ to an ‘annual
holiday abroad’? Do these trade -offs change once people become more informed about
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
181
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
the environmental implications of air travel? Do these trade-offs change under different
scenarios of revenue hypothecation’ from the taxation of air travel?
Priority
High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Immediate
Responsibility
DfT
182
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R3 Understanding how the media influences public opinion
The Issue
There is an evident research gap in analysis of the media’s impact on transport issues in
general and in relation to transport and climate change in particular. Because the news media
are a key source of information for almost every societal issue, research needs to be done to
improve significantly our understanding of how scientific information on transport and
climate change takes shape in the national and local news media and how this information is
noticed, interpreted and used by the public.
Mass communications research is focused on the impact of media on society: examining not
only what issues the media choose to cover and why, but also how coverage impacts public
attitudes. Mass media coverage of climate change could have substantial political and policy
consequences if media constructions of meaning lead to a shared set of misconceptions
among lay audiences and impacts public concern.
Understanding this will be significant and extremely useful in the policy-making process. If
public understanding of this issue is built on a potentially fickle storytelling process that can
easily be driven in any direction—then politically based policy and regulatory strategies that
rely on an authority located in public opinion could be seriously misinformed. However, if a
clear understanding is developed about how public understanding forms and evolves from
narratives in the news environment then this research may suggest a potentially powerful
means for capturing this process to aid effective policy making (Trumbo 2000).
The evidence so far
The entire study of mass communications is based on the premise that the media does have
significant effects upon opinions and attitudes. However, there has not been a research project
concerning the links between transport, climate change and the media which has looked at
both the content of the messages, the way they are received and the impact on their audience.
In general, media analysis has tended to focus on the influence of the media on health issues
from the perspective of social amplification. Where the media has been studied in the context
of environmental public opinion, this has tended to ignore the content of media messages, and
has instead focused heavily on the volume of messages as key to understanding how media
may influence environmental attitudes.
Nevertheless, the evidence suggests that an examination of media coverage may be crucial to
understanding how and why concern for transport and climate change issues develops and
fluctuates. Qualitative analysis in the literature has revealed that environmental information
was mainly picked up through the media, and this left respondents with glimpses of particular
issues before the media agenda moved on to another item. This form of information had a
cumulative effect on respondents, who felt environmental problems were numerous and that
climate change is uncertain, controversial, far off in the future and out of the public’s hands.
Individuals are left with overwhelmingly frightening images of potentially disastrous impacts,
no clear sense of how to avert this potentially dark future and therefore no way to direct
urgency into remedial action. In addition, the media presents substantial internal
contradictions and mixed messages – serious narratives on climate change juxtaposed against
advertisements for air travel – promoting the very thing that is supposed to be so
irresponsible. This is a minor reflection of a far wider, more profound and sustained
disconnection at all levels of society between the seriousness of the threat of climate change
and the action that we take in response (Marshall 2005).
The concept of ‘media literacy’ may also be of interest here. Media literacy is a central aspect
of promoting the educated and active citizen by enabling people to use the opportunities of
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
183
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
media. This concept does not try to protect citizens from the media, but to educate them to use
it in a reflective, sensible and efficient way. This has connections to the theme running
through recent evidence and commentary in this area on the need to empower people through
information and two-way communication.
Recommendations for further research
A study of media portrayal of transport and climate change and audience response would
involve a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods. Tracking the newspaper response
over a medium-term timescale (two years) will enable an analysis of how the coverage has
changed and to detect any differences in the ways in which stakeholders use the media for
their own ends. Links to policy announcements and press releases will enable the detection of
whether media coverage has an effect on the formulation of policy.
There is scope for developing analysis of the communications messages relating to transport
issues, beyond simplistic textual analysis to quantify and understand in more detail the nature
of the positive and negative arguments presented. This could involve the use of semiotics to
analyse the dominant frames embedded within the coverage and to explore the wider cultural
and symbolic arenas that may affect public opinion. Indeed, there are three major divisions
within traditional mass media research. They are: research into the audience of a given
communications message or medium; research enabling study of the language, logic and
layout of communications messages; and research into the impact of mass communications.
All three divisions ultimately look at the effect of the media influencing (and changing)
opinions and attitudes of those receiving the communications.
Purpose and Priority
Developing understanding about how public understanding forms and evolves from narratives
about transport and climate change could enable a potentially powerful means for capturing
this process to aid effective policy making.
Priority
High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Immediate
Responsibility
DfT/ Research Council
184
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R4 Understanding the barriers to travel behaviour change
The Issue
This review provides a flavour of the numerous theoretical frameworks that have been
developed to explain the gap between the possession of knowledge about climate change and
environmental awareness, and travel behaviour. However, although many hundreds of studies
have been undertaken, especially in the broader field of pro-environmental behaviour,
relatively few insights have been proffered in the context we are concerned with and
definitive explanations for the attitude-action gap have not been found.
It is not the presumption of this research recommendation that a programme of work can be
designed to understand all the complexities of travel choice and provide any definitive
explanation of the attitude-behaviour relationship. Nevertheless, a programme could be
designed that tries to discover and deconstruct the barriers to behaviour change. Indeed, our
recommendations are designed to yield such a response: by engaging the public in a dialogue
on the issues of travel behaviour in relation to climate change, to identify several types of
barriers. This first step would therefore yield information about barriers pertaining to each
type of travel behaviour. Such an understanding would underpin the design of social
marketing and participatory approaches (R7). The deliberative nature of the research avoids
structures imposed by researchers, and involves the public in priority setting.
The aim is to get closer to the question that we are not yet able to answer with any real
authority: how does the understanding of climate change/ environmental impact affect public
attitudes, choices and travel related behaviour and what are the opportunities to influence this
behaviour? To do this, it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of which issues are
important to the public, their relative importance and the magnitude of effect they will have
for different types of travel behaviour for different people. In addition, further understanding
is necessary to illuminate the two-directional causal chain: (i) how does each barrier affect
behaviour? and (ii) how can it be influenced?
The evidence so far
The evidence suggests that the attitude-behaviour gap can be wider in relation to travel
behaviour compared to other green behaviours. Whilst some lessons are transferable from
these other behaviours, travel requires its own systematic programme of research to begin to
identify the psychological, cognitive, economic and structural precursors to behaviour change.
In addition, various types of travel behaviour are different from each other and too often
research which elicits attitudes to ‘travel’ will ignore this delineation.
Some of the traditional explanations for why action lags behind seem to be less valid than
previously thought (e.g. that people do not believe in climate change). Therefore, research
must explore both what is stopping people taking action and if at least a significant minority
are willing to act (the evidence suggests around 30% of people are ready to act now), how the
transition can be supported.
Each of the individual studies on travel behaviour change tends to investigate a narrow set of
barriers. Nevertheless, taken as a whole, it is possible that we have a good idea of what the
barriers are. However, there are few attempts to understand the contextual and causal
influences on behaviour and the relative importance of barriers, their interaction and how the
resources needed to overcome them.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
185
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
Recommendations for further research
The idea will be to utilise methodologies that allow the public to identify and express what the
important barriers to change are. However, it is clear from the evidence that these are
complex and it is worth reviewing this literature to ensure comprehensive results of any
investigation.
In the main report we present a typology of barriers to travel behaviour change which draws
upon scientifically relevant insights into how humans act and choose, in addition to
incorporating contextual and causal influences of behaviour. These are (i) personal subjective
(e.g. values, worldviews, assumptions, efficacy beliefs66 ) (ii) collective subjective (e.g. group
cultures and social norms) (iii) personal objective (e.g. knowledge, socio-demographics) and
(iv) collective objective (e.g. institutional, economic). Projects could be set up with the
potential to address all four types of barrier (and possibly others) and their relative importance
and interaction. This would draw on social-psychological insights into the nature of those
barriers and the way in which people’s behaviours are motivated and constrained. In addition,
studies should be capable of addressing the deeper levels of learning such as cognitive
dissonance and social networks. This research should further our understanding of why
attitudes in all their guises do not always translate into actions and uncover deeper insights
into the emotions that need to be considered and addressed in order to change attitudes and
influence behaviour in preparation for more targeted, community level social marketing
campaigns (R7).
The first phase of this project should aim to develop a description of the factors that determine
travel behaviour and how they interact and should, therefore, prove to be a valuable tool for
policy making. It is likely to be necessary to develop several models to reflect the fact that
travel behaviour encompasses a variety of types of activity from car purchasing, mode choice
and journey frequency. The barriers will likely differ also for different segments in the
population and this is the focus of R6. A second phase, using action research projects or
innovative qualitative techniques such as Q-sorting could test the findings and refine
understanding of the relative importance and interaction of the barriers.
Purpose and Priority
To develop an understanding of the barriers to behaviour change and their relative importance
and interaction to inform the segmentation (R6) and social marketing (R7) research projects.
Priority
High
66
Timing
Following
Responsibility
DfT/ Research Council
Social identity is the also important and is the subject of #5.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
186
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R5 Understanding identity
The issue
Despite the fact that the car has long been recognised as far more than a means of getting
from one place to another, empirical evidence of the relevance of self image and identity is
practically non existent in transport studies. Identity theory proposes that our sense of self is
constituted through our interaction with others and that we define ourselves by defining our
similarity or difference to others and membership of groups. The establishment of self image
through the consumption of goods and lifestyles has become an increasingly critical
component in defining self identity.
This is directly relevant to our understanding of the relationship between attitudes to climate
change and mode or vehicle choice. It is proposed that self identity will act on behaviour
independently of attitudes and norms. In other words, if a person becomes more involved in
the role, say as a car driver, their attitudes will become less and less important in determining
their intention to choose a particular travel mode thus potentially widening the gap between
climate change consciousness and behaviour.
The evidence so far:
Self identity theory has not been applied to travel behaviour despite acknowledgement of the
role of image and that sustainable lifestyles need to be positioned as socially desirable if they
are to be adopted by the public at large.
There is some empirical evidence on the role of advertising, largely in relation to vehicle
choice as opposed vehicle use. These studies have typically been concerned with ‘reception’ –
how the material is read and how the symbolism ‘plays’ to the reader. The subject position of
the reader is viewed as being defined by the text/ image and the reader’s role is relatively
passive. However, in consumption theory, the reader is regarded as having a more active role
in the process. Rather than merely absorbing a discourse, there is a dialogue between the
image and the consumer in relation to the meanings attributed to that product, its
communication of allegiance to certain ideals and how the product may position the
individual in respect to other social groups.
For all travel behaviour, there has been some attempt at looking at social norms by applying,
for example, the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to the study of individual mode choice.
However, the TPB has a more restrictive normative component which deals with narrower
expectations about what others think is the right thing to do. This fails to reflect the way
individuals view themselves in society with respect to specific behaviours. Self identity
addresses the wider social context in that it embraces the links that individuals make to
identifiable social characteristics or categories and is relevant for all travel behaviours, not
just car purchasing.
Identity theory has been applied to other pro-environmental behaviours and has been found to
exert a strong and independent effect on the study of green consumerism. Habitual
performance of some green behaviours have been less related to attitudes about the utility of
these behaviours and more closely linked to self identity and their role in communicating
personal, social and cultural meaning.
Recommendation for further research
Examining the ways in which individuals view themselves in society with respect to different
travel behaviours could enrich our understanding of how people could be empowered to
reposit ion themselves within social groups which communicate allegiance to certain ‘green’
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
187
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
ideals. Evidence of the role of identity as a precursor to travel choice must move away from
the anecdotal to the empirical in order to answer the following kinds of questions:
• What are the symbolic meanings attached to cars, buses, bikes etc?
• Which prejudices/ cultural stereotypes discourage people from using the bus? Which
of these prejudices are most amenable to change?
• Which cultural resources do people draw on to make use of what they see?
• To what extent is green travel contrary to the image that some people wish to represent?
• Is the habitual nature of some travel behaviour more closely related to attitudinal
assessment of their utility (including contribution to environmental goals) or self
identity?
• How effective is bus advertising/ car advertising in influencing uptake and to what
extent are private manufacturers and bus/ train operators attempting to shape
identities and symbolic meanings?
• How is public transport portrayed in non-advertising images (e.g. in soap operas/
films/ books) and how are the associations being created?
• Is the effect of identity stronger for some people than others?
• How can climate change and green travel be made ‘trendy’?
• How can transport policies be packaged (possibly with other lifestyle/ consumption
choices) so as to develop ‘brands’ of behaviours that people will identify with and see
as a ‘must have’ (link to R9)?
Answering such questions will involve the development of innovative qualitative techniques
which enable research to tap into meanings which are attached to various forms of travel. This
will involve the application of a range of disciplinary approaches from semiotics, marketing
and social psychology. The central technique will likely use a variety of images to elicit
information on how individuals see the stereotypical image of, say, a bus user compared to
how they see themselves and the degree to which certain themes are culturally prominent and
malleable.
Purpose and Priority
To aid the development of new communications strategies (see R7) which create a desire to
act sustainably by promoting identities that resonate by provoking esteem and belonging.
Priority
High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Immediate
Responsibility
Research Council
188
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R6 Segmenting the market for travel
The issue
The review clearly shows the strategic advantage of identifying population segments for
designing effective interventions. This suggests a staged and targeted strategy is likely to be
more effective than a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Driven as they are by different needs, people
in different groups behave differently, think differently, perceive or experience different
barriers and are motivated by different things. Individuals may even have the same
behavioural profile, but will have different reasons or motivations for undertaking that
behaviour and will respond only to a proposition which works “on their terms”.
Consequently, efforts to encourage and support travel behaviour change need to be
specifically tailored depending on the action in question and the audience. These efforts at
persuasion and intervention may or may not benefit from information relating to climate
change depending on the target group.
The following excerpt captures emerging thinking on this issue:
Motivating messages need to hit an emotional cord. People are busy. They resist
change. In order to get their attention and support for change, you have to
connect with people by plugging into their belief systems. Not trying to rewire it
...It is not necessary to be inaccurate or to dumb down issues, but it’s essential to
engage people’s passion ... you need to reach people emotionally first and then
educate them. Hearts first, and then minds’.
(Fenton Communications, 2001)
Despite acknowledging the need to segment the market and tailor messages, there is only a
very basic understanding of how knowledge of and attitudes to climate change differs
between groups in the population and how the strength of the link between knowledge,
attitudes and travel behaviour may vary between these groups. Where travel behaviour change
campaigns have had some success, such as with a variety of ‘smarter choice’ measures,
segmentation would provide insights into the people who have been motivated to change so
far, who are the next likely ‘easy wins’ and how to more efficiently encourage these people to
change. It will also provide a more robust assessment of the potential for these measures to
reduce car use than has been possible so far.
Hence, once greater understanding of the most important psychological and contextual
influences has been developed by recommendations R1, R2, R4 and R5, sophisticated
segmentation techniques can be applied to the travelling public drawing upon commercial
marketing techniques and psychometric/ value based methodologies.
The evidence so far
Commercial market segmentation techniques start from the premise that there is little point in
addressing the average consumer, or in this context, the average bus user or average level of
car dependence. Instead, different people must be treated in different ways because they are
motivated by different factors. In the commercial marketing sector, it is standard practice to
distinguish homogenous groups of customers who can be targeted in the same manner
because they have similar needs and preferences. Often, sophisticated statistical techniques
and psychographic measurements are used to systematically analyse combinations of factors
and define such groups of consumers. Psychographic measurement is a survey-based,
statistical process that identifies clusters of values, consumer tastes, and identities in a
population and is best applied once background research grounded in social theory has been
carried out (e.g. R4 and R5).
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
189
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
In the transport sector there have been very few attempts to define distinct mobility segments
in a systematic and psychologically meaningful sense. Where segmentation takes place, it is
invariably based on pre-defined key socio-demographic variables such as income, gender and
car ownership, or behavioural characteristics such as frequency of use of a transport mode.
However, the evidence suggests that attitudes and norms can transcend traditional socio­
economic boundaries, and that different people may use the same mode for different reasons.
Thus a more sophisticated approach to identifying segments is necessary to capture a
meaningful disaggregation of the public on the basis of motivation.
Where more sophisticated attempts to segment the market have been attempted, these have
either been applied to small unrepresentative sample sizes, been based on an ‘ad hoc’ set of
variables assumed to be important or lacked contextual information to allow a true assessment
of the potential to catalyse behaviour in each group.
Recommendation for further research
A large scale segmentation study needs to be administered which results in an understanding
of the most important factors motivating travel behaviour in different groups for different
behaviours and across different geographical scales in the UK.
Meaningful segments for the purpose of designing targeted campaign messages and
behavioural interventions will only be discovered once an instrument has been designed to
measure the most important factors motivating behaviour. Consequently, the segmentation
study will only be as good as the variables measured in the survey instrument. This element of
the research programme will therefore need to follow on from the previous research
recommendations which will provide a deeper understanding of the antecedents of travel
choice and the ‘frames’ people use to recognise and make sense of issues such as climate
change.
This research will need to rely on input from marketing and communication specialists in
addition to specialists in the measurement of complex psychological constructs and their
statistical interpretation. In addition, the segmentation study should be adequately resourced
in order to develop a robust instrument to be used to monitor progress of interventions at a
variety of different scales and over the long term. This may involve pre-testing and
experimenting with a variety of questioning techniques. A criticism of segmentation is that it
is usually cross-sectional and does not model any process of social change. Therefore, any
study could be designed with the intention of developing an understanding over time of how
the segments evolve in response to normative and contextual developments with respect to
travel and climate change.
Purpose and Priority
Segmentation is the cornerstone of any travel behaviour change programme, regardless of
whether that programme is attempting to change behaviour by changing attitudes first or not.
It will allow easy wins to be targeted and will add value to existing programmes such as
Smarter Choices. Se gmentation is a necessary precursor to recommendations R7 and R8 in
order that specific marketing messages can be designed to galvanise acceptance of specific
interventions. Meaningful and robust segmentation data will allow the DfT to add value and
find its ‘niche’ among the sometimes complementary and sometimes competing campaigns to
inform and motivate the public on sustainable issues. Once designed, the instrument can be
promoted for use at a variety of organisational and campaign levels.
Priority
Very High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Following
Responsibility
DfT
190
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R7 Testing community based social marketing
The Issue
Social Marketing (SM) and its extension, Community-Based Social Marketing (CBSM), is a
set of tools based on social psychological theories designed to advance social causes by
applying commercial-marketing techniques to develop a form of dialogue and build trust with
the public. CBSM draws heavily on research in social psychology which indicates that
initiatives to promote behaviour change are often most effective when they are carried out at
the community level and involve direct contact with people .
The approach emphasises that consumer or target audiences should be the focus of the
planning, strategising, and implementation of a marketing programme. Invoking
“community” implies the movement of information through social networks and means that
there is less reliance on media advertising in order to create public awareness and
understanding of the issues. The approach also implies implementation of a strategy in
partnership with all social institutions so that truly sustainable behaviour patterns can be
achieved through a wide consensus between all the stakeholders. The changed behaviour of
individuals and changed environment interact, gradually establishin g new social norms.
The evidence suggests that the strength of social marketing is its foundation in the real needs
of the public, such that campaigns start from where the public is, and work with them back to
the agenda that is being pursued. This is a new approach to travel behaviour change offering
people multiple tools, based on their key values and differs from past approaches that have
usually focussed first on the policy-makers' key goals - to reduce emissions or congestion.
This recommendation therefore continues the theme which runs through these
recommendations of the development of deliberative and inclusionary processes to promote
travel behaviour change. As such, it draws together and builds upon all the recommendations
that precede it in order to investigate the development of an holistic, participatory, community
level based strategy to motivate travel behaviour change.
The evidence so far
There has been little focus on social marketing and travel. Indeed, in the field of travel
behaviour change the theory of social marketing has been applied to individualised marketing
strategies.
Unlike much of the literature in the area of travel behaviour change, which focuses on
individual theories of behaviour change, CBSM focuses more on social and ecological
theories, albeit drawing upon individual social cognitive models for planning the approach.
Social marketing techniques have been widely used in the field of public health and the
evidence indicates that the approach has been successful in transcending the gap between
knowledge to action that has characterised many local environmental and sustainability
projects to date. The upsurge in the popularity of such methods specifically for sustainability
appears to be based on the recognition that environmental campaigns that relied solely on
providing information have had little effect in changing public behaviours. There appears to
be a consensus in the literature that the primary advantage of social marketing is that it starts
with people’s behaviour and works backward to select a particular tactic suited for that
behaviour.
All the literature on social marketing emphasises the need for a campaign to be thoroughly
planned. More concise messages to the right target audiences, a road map leading to success
and a clear idea of what is to be done with the results, are all required. Tim Jackson outlines
six stages to the design of any social networking campaign:
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
191
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
1) Listening: background analysis, especially of “customers,” but perhaps also of
competitors. (see recommendations R1 - R6)
2) Planning: setting mission, objectives, and goals; defining marketing strategy
3) Structuring: establishing a marketing organization, procedures, benchmarks, and
feedback mechanisms to carry out the strategy
4) Pretesting: testing key elements
5) Implementing: putting the strategy into effect
6) Monitoring: Tracking program progress, adjusting strategy and tactics as necessary
Stages 1, 4, and 6 are stages during which research is conducted. The important aspect of the
design stage is to target interventions very specifically towards the barriers which have been
identified previously (R4), drawing on social-psychological insights into the nature of those
barriers and the way in which people’s behaviours are motivated and constrained in order to
devise ways of overcoming the barriers and promoting the desired behaviours. The idea,
however, that markets can be segmented remains central to this approach and will have been
covered by R6.
Recommendations for further research
A key element in successful social marketing strategies is an adequate piloting and
testing stage. This research would aim to establish a robust evidence base for policy
interventions aimed at behavioural change by constructing a strategy which removes as many
of the barriers to the selected behaviour as possible within a limited allocation of resources.
The research will draw on the lessons learnt from previous social-psychological insights in
order to examine some of the implications of these cognitive processes for social marketing
techniques and to identify the role of participatory problem-solving and community based
social marketing applied to the issue of climate change and travel behaviour. This research
should also be informed by community based social marketing campaigns used for a variety
of purposes other than travel.
The research could develop small-scale pilot(s) of community-based social marketing
strategies based on specific knowledge, attitudes or values around ‘case study’ issues such as
car purchasing or a local travel issue. Focus groups, in-depth interviews, participant
observation, and surveys are used in a pre-test and post-test control group design.
Purpose and Priority
The sheer complexity of human behaviours and motivations makes it very hard to predict with
certainty what the impacts of policy interventions on people’s behaviours are going to be. In
this context, the ‘consumer-proofing’ of policy mechanisms and social marketing strategies
achieves an over-riding importance. The elements of the social marketing mix will be
developed and pre-tested, to identify strategies and tactics before being implemented on a
wider scale.
Priority
High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Following
Responsibility
DfT + cross departmental
192
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R8 Trade offs and policy acceptance
The Issue
A central assertion of the work that helped to inform DEFRA’s recent Climate Change
communications initiative is that: ‘communications in the absence of policy’ would
precipitate the failure of any climate change communications campaign right from the start’
(Futerra). Hence, the public engagement ethos being supported throughout this review needs
to be closely linked with interventions that catalyse behaviour and provide the opportunity for
travel behaviour change.
However, the evidence in the area of climate change and behavioural research demonstrates
that public acceptability can be a major barrier to policy delivery especially where there is a
potential tension between, on the one hand, an agenda of encouraging ‘personal
responsibility’ and, on the other hand, of the shaping of the determinants of personal
behaviour by the state. Indeed, it is the case that policy can fail to be implemented because of
real or perceived lack of participation and support by the affected parties.
It seems that to resolve this, in many cases it is vital that there is wide understanding by the
affected parties of the need for any policies focused on behaviour change. Consistent with the
other recommendations in this review, however, galvanising this understanding is not simply
a matter of ‘correcting’ misperceptions that are deemed to be undermining the acceptability of
a given policy. To be effective, a policy needs to empower and give choices, whilst at the
same time setting the default to be in the best interests of individuals and the wider public
interest. In many cases this can only be achieved by building this twin approach around a
sense of partnership between state and individual.
Social marketing is one mechanism to do so. This recommendation for further research
specifically applies the community based social marketing approach to specific interventions
aimed at changing behaviour such as the widening of VED bands or automated in car speed
limiters, and enlisting the public in the process of policy formation. This will include, in
particular, a two-way process of information in order to investigate (i) the trade-offs
(including willingness to pay) that the public are willing to make before and after receiving
information about different scenarios and (ii) the trade offs the public understand are
necessary for the government to undertake in order to achieve agreed outcomes. It may be that
opening a dialog about fairness, penalties and rewards, consistency, the free rider issue and
potential tradeoffs by using deliberative techniques will aid understanding of how to package
policies in this area.
The evidence so far
Much of the evidence in relation to the transport sector and climate change suggests that
achieving cuts in carbon in this sector cannot be achieved by technology alone. To achieve the
necessary behaviour change, it will be necessary to increase the cost of travel in addition to
introducing certain restrictions such as speed and ultimately possibly to cap emissions using
personal carbon allowances.
The evidence also suggests that achieving public consensus is likely to be the greatest barrier
to policy delivery. However, whilst travel research has spent time investigating acceptability
in the past, it has devoted time to fairly crude measurements of acceptability, assuming that
people’s preferences are already well formed, in an attempt to find correlates with behaviour.
In particular, research in this area with respect to travel behaviour has concentrated on the
‘willingness to pay ’ (WTP) through techniques such as Contingent Valuation (CV). This has
primarily used a survey-based approach to judge individual preferences for specific projects
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
193
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
and policies. However, CV administered using in-person interviews, telephone surveys or
self-administered mail questionna ires involve a brief ‘one-off’ and ‘one-way’ communication
with respondents who are expected to assimilate information about an environmental good
(which they may have no prior knowledge of), search their memory for other pertinent
information, integrate this into a judgement about their WTP based on their preferences and
income, and communicate this judgement to the interviewer (Macmillan 2005).
Recommendations for further research
It is possible to employ more dynamic ways of eliciting this information in a way that
understands the decision making process and the social context of decision making. Once
again, such approaches draw on the emerging literature on deliberative group-based
approaches. One such study in this area (not travel) found that higher levels of information
provision help participants develop preferences that are more resilient to negative or biased
information; that different people require different amounts of information; and that WTP will
change if participants are given time to thin k and research their preferences. Macmillan
(2005) used participatory methods and called his method the ‘CV market stall’ approach.
Other research in this area has found that notions of fairness, consistency between policies
and trust in government have an important role to play in developing public acceptability. For
example, survey participants have been found willing to do their bit, but desired enforcement
of equity in efforts. In addition, findings indicate that acceptability is not necessarily closely
related to the likely effectiveness of a policy (again, the public view is complex). This is
something that merits further examination in the context of travel behaviour interventions,
particularly with respect to the multiple possible outcomes of a given policy (air quality;
congestion, climate change, accident reduction etc).
It is recommended that research is designed to investigate notions of public acceptability of
specific policies by applying a participatory approach that allows trade offs to be explored and
that can match demand for information by the public with its supply. The willingness to pay
will be one aspect of this investigation of trade-offs, but through the use of a dynamic process
where feedback loops and preference formation can be examined and the inter-relationships
between notions of fairness, trust, free rider issues, causal responsibility and effectiveness and
any other issues to emerge can be understood.
Purpose and priority
Exploring acceptability using participatory, staged approaches that allow the dynamics of
preference formation to be explored will strengthen the link between communication and
policy, offer a more sophisticated approach to policy delivery and be vital to the success of
policies to reduce carbon from the transport sector.
Priority
High
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Following
Responsibility
DfT/ Research Council
194
8. Evidence gaps and recommendations
R9 Lifestyles
The Issue
The discussion on segmentation could be taken further to embrace the different motivators
and barriers for different people in relation to different environmental actions. The rationale
for this is that value priorities and motivations are not displayed in a stable order across
situations (Dietz et al. in press). For instance, although thoughts about the environment may
be alerted when throwing away refuse, or possibly even when buying a car, this association is
less likely to come to mind when destined for a foreign holiday (Bedford et al. 2004).
The evidence so far
This review did not set out to look at whole lifestyle approaches to behaviour change and nor
did it do so. Had it done so, it may have discovered more evidence on the links between travel
and other aspects of lifestyle. As it is, there is very little research to report in this review. The
authors are aware that such a holistic approach has links to research being carried out on
carbon footprinting, personal carbon allowances (Fawcett 2005) and sustainability lifestyle
indicators (Bedford et al. 2004) and a review of how travel behaviour is being ‘treated’
alongside other behaviours would be worth while. Nevertheless, the questions listed below are
important ones.
Recommendations for further research
Climate change demands that people examine their lifestyles, of which travel is one
component. The fascinating, and as yet unanswered question, is the extent to which the link
between attitudes and behaviour differs across different behaviours. This poses a number of
interesting questions:
• Which behaviours are easiest to change? It would appear from the evidence that
people find it more difficult to make the link between household energy use and
climate change than between their travel behaviour and climate change? Yet, travel
behaviour seems to be a harder nut to crack. Why is this and what are the implications
for policy?
• If we focus on other individual or household level behaviours, will travel follow, or
does it require separate treatment? If so, how and why is it different? Are at least
some of the barriers to change the same for the different behaviours in order that
generic campaigns and policies can be designed?
• To what extent do people consider the sustainability of the whole range of their travel
behaviours? How prevalent is the concept of a personal carbon balance in respect of
transport? What influence does awareness of climate change impact in one area - eg
air travel - have in respect of other transport decisions?
• What are the potential unintended behaviour changes or rebound effects? Might
carbon savings from one activity (e.g. domestic energy saving) be ‘spent’ on another
(e.g. travel abroad)? Could this mean that there are real difficulties with attempts to
change behaviour through market forces unless a comprehensive solution can be
identified and negotiated?
Priority
Medium
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
Timing
Immediate (review) +
following
Responsibility
Cross Departmental +
Research Council
195
References
REFERENCES
References in bold are those reviewed using the Access pro-forma. Other references have
been used to substantiate the evidence where necessary.
AARTS, H. & DIJKSTERHUIS, A. (2000) The automatic activation of goal-directed
behaviour: the case of travel habit Journal of Environmental Psychology, 20, 75-82.
AARTS, H., VERPLANKEN, B. AND VAN KNIPPENBERG, A (1998) Predicting
behaviour from actions in the past: repeated decision making or a matter of habit?
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1356-1375.
ABELMAN, J. (2006) Influencing public attitudes and behaviour in the energy and transport
sectors powerpoint presentation to CfIT Climate Change working group 14th
February 2006 Energy Savings Trust.
ADAMSON K-A. An examination of consumer demand in the secondary niche
market for fuel cell vehicles in Europe. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy 2003; 28:771-780.
AJZEN, I. (1991) The Theory of Planned Behaviour. Organisational Behaviour and Human
Decision Processes 50.
AJZEN, I. (2001) Nature and operation of attitudes. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 27-58.
AJZEN, I. & DRIVER, B. L. (1991) Prediction of leisure participation from behavioural,
normative and control beliefs: an application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour.
Journal of Leisure Sciences, 13, 185-204.
ALEXANDER BALLARD & ASSOCIATES (2005) How can local authorities stimulate
& support behavioural change in response to climate change? A report for
Hampshire County Council undertaken as part of the ESPACE project
September 2004 – May 2005 Volume 1: Main report.
ALTMANN, M., SCHMIDT, P., MOURATO, S. & O'GARRA, T. (2003) Analysis and
Comparisons of Existing Studies. WP3 of Public Acceptance of Hydrogen Transport
Technologies. European Commission Fifth Framework Project AcceptH2.
AMPT, E. (2003) Sustainable Development through Voluntary Behaviour Change.
Adelaide, Australia, Steer Davies Gleave.
ANABLE, J. (2005) 'Complacent Car Addicts' or 'Aspiring Environmentalists'?
Identifying travel behaviour segments using attitude theory. Transport Policy, 12,
65-78.
ANABLE, J. & GATERSLEBEN, B. (2005) All work and no play? The role of instrumental
and affective factors in work and leisure journeys by different travel modes.
Transportation Research Part A, 39, 163-181.
ARABIE, P. & HUBERT, L. (1994) Cluster Analysis in marketing research. IN BAGOZZI,
R. P. (Ed.) Advanced Methods in Marketing Research Blackwell and Company,
Oxford.
ARMITAGE, C. J. & CONNER, M. (2001) Efficacy of the Theory of Planned Behaviour.
British Journal of Social Psychology 40, 471-500.
AXELROD, L. J. & LEHMAN, D. R. (1993) Responding to environmental concerns: what
factors guide individual action? . Journal of Environmental Psychology 13.
BAMBERG, S. (1999) Explaining and Changing Car Drivers Behaviour: a psychological
approach paper presented to the ECODRIVE conference Graz, Austria,
September 1999
BAMBERG, S. (2001) The promotion of new behaviour by forming an implementation
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
196
References
intention - results from field experiment in the domain of travel mode choice. Journal
of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 1903-1922
BAMBERG, S. (2002) Implementation intention versus monetary incentive comparing
the effects of interventions to promote the purchase of organically produced
food. Journal of Economic Psychology, 23, 573-587.
BAMBERG, S., AJZEN, I., & SCHMIDT, P. (2001) Choice of travel mode in the theory of
planned behavior: The roles of past behavior, habit and reasoned action. Basic and
Applied Social Psychology, 4.
BAMBERG, S. & SCHMIDT, P. (1998) Changing travel mode choice as rational choice:
results from a longitudinal intervention study. Rationality and Society 10, 223-252.
BAMBERG, S. & SCHMIDT, P. (2003) Incentives, morality or habit? Predicting Students’
Car Use for University Routes With the Models of Ajzen, Schwartz, and Triandis.
Environment and Behavior, 35, 264 - 285.
BANDURA, A. (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive
Theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall..
BANKS, N. (1998) Cultural Values and the Adoption of Energy Efficient Technologies
unpublished PhD. Thesis, University of Oxford
BARR, S. (2004) Are we all environmentalists now? Rhetoric and reality in
environmental action. Geoforum, 35, 231-249.
BBC / ICM (2004) Climate Change Poll. published on BBC News Online Kirby, A Britain
Unsure of Climate Costs 29th July 2004.
BEATTY, S., MEADOWS, M. & WHITE, D. (2002) Stages of change in drivers
willingness to reduce car use before and during the UK fuel crisis. IN LYONS,
G. & CHATTERJEE, K. (Eds.) Transport Lessons from the Fuel Tax Protests.
Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot, United Kingdom.
BEDFORD, T., JONES, P. & WALKER, H. (2004) “Every little bit helps…”
Overcoming the challenges to researching, promoting and implementing
sustainable lifestyles - summary report. published by Centre for Sustainable
Development, University of Westminster.
BERK, R. A. & FOVELL, R. G. (1999) Public Perceptions of Climate Change: A
`Willingness to Pay' Assessment. Climatic Change, 41, 413-446.
BIBBINGS, J. & WCC (2004) Climate Concern: Attitudes to climate change and
windfarms in Wales. Friends of the Earth Cmyru and The Welsh Consumer
Council (WCC) and funded by the Countryside Council for Wales.
BICKERSTAFF, K., SIMMONS, P. & PIDGEON, N. (2004) Public perceptions of risk,
science and governance: Main findings of a qualitative study of five risk cases.
Working paper. Centre for Environmental Risk. University of East Anglia, Norwich.
BIEL, A. (2004) From habitual to value-guided environmental behaviour, and back again.
BIEL, A., VON BORGSTEDE, C. & DAHLSTRAND, U. (1999) Norm perception and
cooperation in large scale social dilemmas IN FODDY, M., SMITHSON, M.,
SCHNEIDER, S. & HOGG, M. (Eds.) Resolving social dilemmas: Dynamic,
structural, and intergroup aspects. . Psychology Press--New York--NY--US
BOARDMAN, B. (2004a) Achieving energy efficiency through product policy: the UK
experience. Environmental Science & Policy, 7, 165-176.
BOARDMAN, B. (2004b) New directions for household energy efficiency: evidence from the
UK. Energy Policy, 32, 1921-1933.
BOARDMAN B. AND DARBY S. (2000) Effective Advice: energy efficiency and the
disadvantaged. A report for the Electricity Association. Environmental Change
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
197
References
Institute, University of Oxford.
BORD, R. J., FISHER, A. & O’CONNOR, R. E. (1998) Public perceptions of global
warming: United States and international perspectives. Climate Research, 11, 75­
84.
BONSALL P., V. STONE, J. STEWART AND M. DIX (2006) Consumer Behaviour and
Pricing Structures: Final Report on Qualitative Research. Report by ITS, BMRB and
MVA on behalf of Department for Transport. Research Project R104.
BOURDIEU, P. (1986) The Forms of Capital IN BARON, S., FIELD, J. AND SCHULLER,
T. (Ed.) Social Capital - Critical Perspectives., Oxford University Press.
BROOK LYNDHURST (2004) Bad Habits and Hard Choices: In search of sustainable
lifestyles.
BURGESS, J., HARRISON, C. & FILIUS, P. (1998) Environmental communication and the
cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning A, 30, 1455­
1460.
CAIRNS, S., ATKINS, S. & GOODWIN, P. (2002) Disappearing Traffic, the story so far.
Municipal Engineer 151.
CAIRNS, S. and NEWSON, C. (forthcoming) Predict and Decide (II): The potential of
economic policy to address aviation-related climate change report for the UK Energy
Research Centre
CAIRNS, S., SLOMAN, L., NEWSON, C., ANABLE, J., KIRKBRIDE, A. & GOODWIN,
P. (2004) Smarter Choices - Changing the way we travel Department for Transport.
CARBONELL, V. E., GIMENO, P. T. & CENTELLES, F. C. (1996) An alternative
methodological approach to assessing the Theory of Reasoned Action when applied
to drinking-driving intention. IN ROTHENGATTER , T. & CARBONELL, V. E.
(Eds.).
CARRIGAN, L. (2003) The Car Versus Sustainable Transportation: A Case Study of Youth
Attitudes, Values and Behaviours at PCVS. Dept. of Geography, Trent University.
CfIT (2001) The CfIT report 2001: Public attitudes to transport in England (MORI). The
Commission for Integrated Transport London UK,.
CfIT (2002) The CfIT report 2002: public attitudes to transport in England (MORI). The
Commission for Integrated Transport.
CHARNG, H. W., PILIAIVIN, J. A. & CALLERO, P. L. (1988) Role Identity and reasoned
action in the prediction of repeated behaviour Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 303­
317.
COLEMAN, J. (1988) Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital American Journal of
Sociology, 94 Supplement S95-S120. University of Chicago.
COLLINS, C. M. & CHAMBERS, S. M. (2005) Psychological and situational influences
on commuter-transport-mode choice Environment and Behavior, 37, 640-661.
COLLINS, J., THOMS, G., WILLIS, R. & WILSDON, J. (2003) Carrots, Sticks and
Sermons: Influencing Public Behaviour for Environmental Goals report for
Defra in partnership with Demos & Green Alliance.
COSLA (1998) Focusing on citizens: a guide to approaches and methods.
COUSINS, S. (2006) New dashboard instruments inform CO2 policies for new vehicles; Low
Carbon Road Transport Challenge report. Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, London,
June 2006.
CURTIS, C. & HEADICAR, P. (1997) Targeting travel awareness campaigns: Which
individuals are more likely to switch from car to other transport for the journey
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
198
References
to work? Transport Policy, 4, 57-65.
DADE, P. (2005) Values And Voter Survey 2005: Part 1 Mapping pychological change in the
UK. Cultural Dynamics Strategy And Marketing Ltd And Campaign Strategy Ltd
DADE, P. (2005) Values and Voters Survey 2005: Part 3: What This Could Mean For Social
Causes And British Political Life. Cultural Dynamics Strategy and Marketing Ltd
And Campaign Strategy Ltd.
DARNTON, A. (2004) The Impact of Sustainable Development on Public Behaviour Report
1 of Desk Research commissioned by COI on behalf of DEFRA.
DARNTON, A. (2004a) Summaries of Sources Report 3 of Desk Research commissioned by
COI on behalf of DEFRA.
DARNTON, A. (2004b) Driving Public Behaviours for Sustainable Lifestyles Report 2 of
Desk Research commissioned by COI on behalf of DEFRA.
DARNTON, A. (2005) Appendix 1: Andrew Darnton Research. FUTERRA Sustainability
Communications Ltd prepared for: Climate Change Communications Working
Group.
DAVIES, D. G., HALLIDAY, M. E., MAYES, M. & POCKOCK, R. C. (1997) Attitudes to
cycling - a qualitative study and conceptual framework TRL ref. 266
DE YOUNG, R. (2000) New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Expanding and
Evaluating Motives for Environmentally Responsible Behavior. Journal of Social
Issues, 56.
DEFRA (2002) Survey of Public Attitudes to Quality of Life and to the Environment: 2001.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs London UK
DEFRA (2005) Changing Behaviour through Policy Making. Department for
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK.
DEFRA (2005) Changing Public Attitudes to Climate Change. Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs,London, UK.
DEFRA (2005) UK Sustainable Development Strategy: Chapter 2: Helping people make
better choices. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK.
DEFRA (2005) Your guide to communicating climate change. Department for Environment,
Food and Rural Affairs, London, UK.
DEVINE-WRIGHT, P. (2004) Towards Zero-Carbon: citizenship, responsibility and the
public acceptability of sustainable energy technologies. IN BUCKLE, C. (Ed.)
Solar Energy Society UK section of the International Solar Energy Society.
London,.
DfT (2001) A review of the effectiveness of personalised journey planning techniques.
Department for Transport, London, UK.
DfT (2002) Attitudes to air travel. Department for Transport
DfT (2002) Powering Future Vehicles. The Government Strategy, Department for Transport,
London, UK.
DfT (2003) Attitudes to walking and cycling. Department for Transport, London, UK.
DfT (2003) Comparative colour-coded labels for passenger cars. Department for Transport,
London, UK.
DfT (2004) Assessing the Impact of Graduated Vehicle Excise Duty - Qualitative
Report., Department for Transport, March 2004.
DfT (2004) Assessing the Impact of Graduated Vehicle Excise Duty - Quantitative
report. Department for Transport, London, UK.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
199
References
DfT (2004) Attitudes to Transport Issues in England. Department for Transport, London, UK.
DfT (2004) Transport Statistics Great Britain Department for Transport, London, UK.
DfT (2005) Focus on personal travel. Department for Transport, London, UK.
DfT (2005) Personalised travel planning: evaluation of 14 pilots part funded by DfT.
Department for Transport, London, UK.
DfT undated Multi-modal transport appraisal investment available at:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft econappr/documents/pdf/dft econappr pdf
_504897.pdf
DfT/ ONS (2006) Attitudes to climate change and the impact of transport. The
Department for Transport, London, UK.
DIETZ, T., DAN, A. & SHWOM, R. (in press) Social Psychological and Social
Structural Influences on Climate Change Mitigation Policy Support. Social
Science Quarterly.
DINSE (2000) Hydrogen vehicles and their ambience – an analysis of the technical, political
and social dimensions
DOE (2002) Transportation Energy Survey Data Book 1.1. Compiled for the US Department
of Energy under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725), May 2002, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, US.
DTI (2003) Our Energy Future . Creating a Low Carbon Economy. Energy White Paper.
Department of Trade and Industry availa ble at
http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/whitepaper/index.shtml.
DUDDLESTON, A., STRADLING, S. & ANABLE, J. (2005) Public Perceptions of
Travel Awareness - Phase 3. Scottish Executive Transport Research Series.
DUNLAP, R., VAN LIERE, K., MERTIG, A., CATTON JR., W. AND HOWELL, R. (2000)
Measuring Endorsement of the New Ecological Paradigm: A Revised NEP Scale.
Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-441.
DUNLAP, R. & VAN LIERE, K. (1978) The New Environmental Paradigm: A proposed
measuring instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Environmental Education,
9, 10-18.
EAGLY, A. H. & CHAIKEN, S. (1993) The Psychology of Attitudes Harcourt Brace
Javanocovich, Fort Worth, Florida.
ECMT (1998) Efficient Transport for Europe: Policies for Internalisation of External Costs.
European Conference of Ministers of Transport, Paris.
EDEN, S. (1996) Public participation in environmental policy: considering scientific, counter
scientific and non scientific contributions. Public Understanding of Science, 5, 183­
204.
EKINS, P. (2003) An introduction to the ESRC new opportunities programme Environment
and human behaviour available at http://www.psi.org.uk/ehb/introduction.html.
EU DIRECTORATE-GENERAL ENVIRONMENT (EUDGE) (2005) Reducing the Climate
Change Impact of Aviation, Report of a consultation undertaken between 11 March
and 6 May 2005 in preparation for a Communication from the Commission to the
Council and European Parliament.
FAWCETT, T (2005) Personal Carbon Allowances Background document L for the 40%
House report Tina Fawcett, Environmental Change Institute University of Oxford
available at
http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/pdfdownload/energy/40house/background doc l.pdf
FOLEY, J. & FERGUSSON, M. (2003) Putting the Brakes on Climate Change: A policy
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
200
References
report on road transport and climate change, ippr London.
FORWARD, S. E. (1994) Theoretical Models of Attitudes and the Prediction of Driver's
Behaviour. Uppsala Psychological Reports 343. Uppsala University, Sweden
FORWARD, S. E. (1998) Behavioural Factors Affecting Modal Choice: ADONIS Swedish
National Road and Transport Research Inst..
FUJII, S. & GARLING, T. (2003) Application of attitude theory for improved predictive
accuracy of stated preference methods in travel demand analysis. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 37, 389-402.
FUJII, S., GÄRLING, T. & KITAMURA, R. (2001) Changes in Drivers’ Perceptions and Use
of Public Transport During a Freeway Closure: effects of temporary structural change
on cooperation in a real-life social dilemma. Environment and Behavior, 33, 796-808.
FUTERRA (2005) Appendix 3: Measurement. FUTERRA Sustainability Communications
Ltd prepared for: Climate Change Communications Working Group.
FUTERRA (2005) Appendix Four: Creative Ideas – Decision-making Criteria and Process.
FUTERRA Sustainability Communications Ltd prepared for: Climate Change
Communications Working Group.
FUTERRA (2005) Communicating Sustainability: How to produce effective public
campaigns. UNEP.
FUTERRA (2005) Recommendations to DEFRA: UK Communications Strategy on Climate
Change. FUTERRA Sustainability Communications Ltd prepared for: Climate
Change Communications Working Group.
FUTERRA (2005) Rules of the game: Principles of Climate Change Communications.
FUTERRA Sustainability Communications Ltd prepared for: Climate Change
Communications Working Group.
FUTERRA (2005) Short list of the recommendations. FUTERRA Sustainability
Communications Ltd prepared for: Climate Change Communications Working
Group.
GÄRLING, T. (1998) Behavioural Assumptions overlooked in travel choice modelling IN
ORTUZAR, J. D., HENSCHER, D. A. & JARA-DIAZ, S. (Eds.) Travel Behaviour
Research: Updating the State of Play Elsevier Science, Netherlands.
GARLING, T., GILLHOLM, R. & GARLING, A. (1998) Reintroducing attitude theory in
travel behavior research: The validity of an interactive interview procedure to predict
car use. Transportation, 25, 129-146.
GÄRLING, T., KARLSSON, J. & SELART, M. (1997) Influences of the past on choices of
the future. IN RANYARD, R., CROZIER, R. & SVENSON, O. (Eds.).
GÄRLING, T., LINDBERG, R. & MONTGOMEREY, H. (1989) Beliefs about attainment of
life satisfaction as determinants of preferences for everyday activities. IN
GRUNERT, K. G. & OELANDER, F. (Eds.) Understanding Economic Behaviour.
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
GÄRLING, T. & SANDBERG, L. (1997) A commons-dilemma approach to households'
intentions to change their travel behaviour. IN STOPHER, P. & LEE-GOSSELIN, M.
(Eds.) Understanding Travel Behaviour in an Era of Change Pergamon-Elsevier,
Oxford.
GARVILL, J., MARELL, A. & NORDLUND, A. (2003) Effects of increased awareness
on choice of travel mode. Transportation, 30, 63-79.
GATERSLEBEN, B. (2003) On yer bike for a healthy commute. IN HENDRICK, L.,
JAGER, W. & STEG, L. (Eds.) Human Decision Making and Environmental
Perception: Liber Amicorum for Charles Vlek. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
201
References
Groningen.
GATERSLEBEN, B. & UZZELL, D. (2000) The Risk Perception of Transport-Generated Air
Pollution. Iatss Research, 24, 30-38.
GATERSLEBEN, B. & UZZELL, D. (2000) Transport problems and sustainable solutions in
Guildford: The Residents' Perspectives. University of Surrey.
GATERSLEBEN, B. & UZZELL, D. (2001) Transport in Guilford: Collective Problems,
Collective Solutions. Guilford: Guilford Borough Council and University of Surrey.
GATERSLEBEN, B. & UZZELL, D. (2003) Local Transport Problems and Possible
Solutions: comparing perceptions of residents, elected members, officers and
organisations. Local Environment, 8, 387-406.
GATERSLEBEN, B. & VLEK, C. (1998) Household Consumption, Quality of Life and
Environmental Impacts. Green Households. Noorman & Schoot-Uiterkamp.
GOLOB, T. F. & HENSHER, D. A. (1998) Greenhouse gas emissions and Australian
commuters' attitudes and behavior concerning abatement policies and personal
involvement. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 3, 1­
18.
GOODWIN, P. et al (1995) Car Dependence. RAC Foundation for Motoring and the
Environment, London.
GOODWIN P, C. S., DARGAY, J., HANLY, M., PARKHURST G., STOKES G., &
VYTHOULKAS, P. (2004) Changing Travel Behaviour, conference proceedings.
ESRC Transport Studies Unit, University College London.
GÖTZ, K. (2003) A research concept for mobility styles. 10th International Association of
Travel Behaviour Research tri-annual conference. Lucerne 10-15 August.
GRAY, D., SHAW, J. & FARRINGTON, J. (2006) Community transport, social capital and
social exclusion in rural areas. Area.
GREEN, P. E. & KRIEGER, A. M. (1995) Alternative approaches to cluster based market
segmentation. Journal of the Market Research Society, 37, 221-239.
GROB, A. (1995) A structural model of environmental attitudes and behaviour. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 15, 209-220.
GUAGNANO, G. A., STERN, P. C. & DIETZ, T. (1995) Influences on attitude-behaviour
relationships: a natural experiment with curbside recycling Environment and
Behavior, 27, 699-718.
GUARDIAN/ ICM (2006) Most Britons willing to pay green taxes to save the environment.
Guardian February 22nd 2006.
GUARDIAN/ICM (2005) Guardian Opinion Polls. ICM Research Limited.
GUNTER, B. & FURNHAM, A. (1992) Consumer Profiles: An Introduction to
Psychographics, Routledge, London.
HAGMAN, O. (2003) Mobilizing meanings of mobility: car users' constructions of the
goods and bads of car use. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and
Environment, 8, 1-9.
HAIR, J., ANDERSON, R., TATHAM, R. & BLACK, W. (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis
Prentice Hall: New Jersey.
HAMID, P. N. & CHENG, S. T. (1995) Predicting anti-pollution behaviour: the role of molar
behavioural intentions, past behaviour and loss of control Environment and Behavior,
27, 679-698.
HANDY, S., WESTON, L. & MOKHTARIAN, P. (2005) Driving by choice or necessity.
Transportation Research Part A, 39, 183-208.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
202
References
HALPERN, D., BATES, C., MULGAN, G., ALDRIDGE, S., BEALES, G. &
HEATHFIELD, A. (2004) Personal Responsibility and Changing Behaviour: the
state of knowledge and its implications for public policy. Cabinet Office, Prime
Minister's Strategy Unit.
HARALDSSON, K., FOLKESSON, A., SAXE, M. & ALVFORS, P. (2006) A first report on
the attitude towards hydrogen fuel cell buses in Stockholm. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy, 31, 317-325.
HARLAND, P., STAATS,H AND WILKE,H.A.M (1999) Explaining pro-environmental
intentions and behaviour by personal norms and the Theory of Planned Behaviour.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29.
HENSHER, D. A. (1976) Market Segmentation as a mechanism in allowing for variability of
traveller behaviour. Transportation Research Part A, 5.
HOUNSHAM, S. (2006) Painting the town green: how to persuade people to be
environmentally friendly. sponsored by First and Green-engage.
HUNECKE, M., BLOBAUM, A., MATTHIES, E. & HOGER, R. (2001) Responsibility
and Environment: Ecological Norm Orientation and External Factors in the
Domain of Travel Mode Choice Behavior Environment and Behavior, 33, 830­
853.
HAYDEN, R., et al (2005) Marketing, Communications and Public Education Topic Team
Report for the California 2010 Hydrogen Highway Network
IR (2004) Report of the Evaluation of Company Car Tax Reform. Inland Revenue.
JACKSON, T (2005) Motivating Sustainable Consumption: a review of evidence on
consumer behaviour and behaviour change a report to the Sustainable
Development Research Network
JAKOBSSON, C., FUJI, S. AND GÄRLING, T. (2002) Effects of economic disincentives
on private car use. Transportation Research A, 29, 349-370.
JENSEN, M. (1999) Passion and heart in transport -- a sociological analysis on transport
behaviour. Transport Policy, 6, 19-33.
JOIREMAN, J. A., VAN LANGE, P. A. M. & VAN VUGT, M. (2004) Who Cares about
the Environmental Impact of Cars?: Those with an Eye toward the Future.
Environment and Behavior, 36, 187-206.
JOIREMAN, J. A., VAN LANGE, P. A. M., VAN VUGT, M., WOOD, A., VANDER
LEEST, T. & LAMBERT, C. (2001) Structural solutions to social dilemmas: A field
study on commuters' willingness to fund improvements in public transit Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 31, 504-526.
JOPSON, A. F. (2000) Can psychology help reduce car use? UTSG, 5-7 January 2000,
University of Liverpool.
KAISER, F. G., WOLFING, S. & FUHRER, U. (1999) Environmental attitude and ecological
behaviour Journal of En vironmental Psychology, 19, 1-19.
KARP, D. G. (1996) Values and their effect on pro-environmental behaviour. Environment
and Behavior, 28, 111-133.
KASEMIR, B., GASSMANN, F., LIENIN, S. F., JAEGER, C. C. & WOKAUN, A.
(2002) Public-driven Response to Global Environmental Change. IN TOLBA, M.
K. (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change Chichester, John Wiley
& Sons, Ltd.
KELAY, T. (2004) Integrating Scientific and Lay Accounts of Air Pollution PhD Thesis.
University of Surrey, UK.
KELAY, T., UZZELL, D. L., GATERLEBEN, B., HUGHES, S. J. & HELLAWELL, E. E.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
203
References
(2001) Integrating scientific and lay accounts of air pollution. Air Pollution, 9, 23-34.
KEMPTON, W. (1991) Lay perspectives on global climate change. Global Environmental
Change, 1, 183-20.
KEMPTON, W. (1997) How the public views climate change. Environment.
KLÖCKNER, C. & MATTHIES, E. (2004) How habits interfere with norm-directed
behaviour: A normative decision-making model for travel mode choice. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 24, 319-327.
KOENS, J. F. (2004) Increasing pro-environmental behaviour: how can analyzing
reasons contribute? Study of the effects of analysing reasons on the intention to
use climate compensation and its determinants? Netherlands. Utrecht?
KOLLMUSS, A & AGYEMAN, J (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act
environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour?
Environmental Education Research, 8 (3), 239-260
KUNERT, U. (1994) Weekly mobility of lifestyle groups Transportation Research Part A,
21.
KURANI, K. S. & TURRENTINE, T. S. (2002) Marketing Clean and Efficient Vehicles:
A Review of Social Marketing and Social Science Approaches. UCD-ITS-RR-02­
01. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis.
LANE, B. (2000) Public understanding of the environmental impact of road transport.
Public Understand. Sci., 9, 1-10.
LANE, B. (2005) Car buyer research report: Consumer attitudes to low carbon and
fuel-efficient passenger cars Final Report - Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership
(LowCvP) March 2005
LANE, B. & POTTER, S. (in press) Attitudinal factors influencing the adoption of low
carbon and fuel-efficient cars: exploring the consumer attitude gap.
LEX (1990) Lex Report on Motoring. Lex Service PLC, UK.
LEX (2001) The Lex Vehicle Leasing 2001 Report on Company Motoring Lex Vehicle
Leasing, available at http://www.lvl.co.uk..
LITMAN, T. (1995) Transportation cost analysis: techniques, estimates and implications.
Working Paper, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, BC.
LIVINGSTONE, K. (2004) The Challenge of Driving Through Change: Introducing
Congestion Charging in Central London. Planning Theory and Practice, 5, 486.
LORENZONI, I. & LANGFORD, I. H. (2001) Climate Change Now and in the Future:
A Mixed Methodological Study of Public Perceptions in Norwich (UK). CSERGE
Working Paper ECM 01-05.
LORENZONI, I. & PIDGEON, N. (2005) Defining Dangers of Climate Change and
Individual Behaviour: Closing the Gap. Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change
Exeter, 1-3 February 2005, Hadley Centre and Met Office.
LOSSEN ET AL (2003) Factors influencing the market success of vehicles powered by
Hydrogen
LOWE, T., BROWN, K., DESSAI, S., DE FRANCA DORIA, M., HAYNES, K. &
VINCENT, K. (2005) Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public
perceptions of climate change. Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research
Working Paper 72.
LU, X. & PAS, E. (1999) Socio-demographics, activity participation and travel behaviour
Transportation Research A 33, 1-18.
LYONS, G., DUDLEY, G., SLATER, E. & PARKHURST, G. (2004) Evidence Base
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
204
References
Review: Attitudes to Road Pricing. Final Report to the Department for Transport.
Centre for Transport and Society, University of the West of England.
MACMILLAN, D. C. (2005) New Approaches to Environmental Valuation ESRC
Research Report.
MADDISON, D., PEARCE, D., JOHANSSON, O., CALTHROP, E., LITMAN, T. AND
VERHOEF, E. (1996) The True Cost of Road Transport. Earthscan Publications,
London.
MANSTEAD, A. S. R. & PARKER, D. (1995) Evaluating and extending the Theory of
Planned Behaviour. IN STROEBE, W. & HEWSTONE, M. (Eds.) European Review
of Social Psychology John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.
MARSHALL, G. (2005) Sleepwalking into disaster - Are we in a state of denial about CC?
Perspectives on Climate Change. Oxford, Climate Outreach and Information
Network (COIN)
MATTHIES, E., KUHN, S. & KLOCKNER, C. A. (2002) Travel mode choice of women ­
The result of limitation, ecological norm, or weak habit? Environment and Behavior,
34, 163-177.
MCKENZIE-MOHR, D. A. W. S. (1999) Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to
Community-Based Social Marketing. Canada, New Society Publishers: British
Columbia.
MCKENZIE-MOHR D. A. W. S. (2006) McKenzie -Mohr Associates website. URL:
www.cbsm.com.
MEATON, J. & LOW, C. (2003) Car Club Development: The Role of Local Champions.
World Transport Policy & Practice,, 9, 32-40.
MOKHTARIAN, P. L. & SALOMON, I. (2001) How derived is the demand for travel? Some
conceptual and measurement considerations. . Transportation Research A, 35, 695­
719.
MORI (2004) The Day After Tomorrow: Public Opinion on Climate Change. MORI Social
Research Institute, London.
MORI/ READER'S DIGEST (2001) Your Environment Matters. Reader's Digest, June.
MOSER, S.C. & DILLING, L. (2004) Making climate hot: communicating the urgency and
challenge of global climate change. Environment, 46, 32-47
MOTIF (2000) Market Oriented Transport in Focus. Final Report.
MOURATO, S., SAYNOR, B. & HART, D. (2004) Greening London's Black Cabs: a
Study of Driver's Preferences for Fuel Cell Taxis Energy Policy, 32, 685-696.
MURRAY J. (2006) Roll-out, awareness and impact of the colour-coded fuel economy label
one year on. Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership Annual Conference, London, June
2006.
NCC (2005) Desperately Seeking Sustainability. National Consumer Council
NEIMEYER, S., PETTS, J. & HOBSON, K. (2005) Rapid Climate Change and Society:
Assessing Responses and Thresholds. Risk Analysis, 25.
NEW ECONOMICS FOUNDATION (2005) Behavioural Economics: Seven indicators
for policy makers. Theoretical New Economics.
NILSSON, M. & KULLER, R. (2000) Travel behaviour and environmental concern
Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 5, 211-234.
NORDLUND, A. M. & GARVILL, J. (2002) Value Structures Behind Proenvironmental
Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34, 740-756.
NORDLUND, A. M. & GARVILL, J. (2003) Effects of values, problem awareness, and
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
205
References
personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 23, 339-347.
NORTON, A. & LEAMAN, J. (2004) The Day After Tomorrow - Public Opinion on Climate
Change. MORI Social Research Institute (same as MORI 2004).
ODPM (2002) Public Participation in Local Government: a survey of local authorities. Office
of the Deputy Primeminister.
O'GARRA, T. (2005) AcceptH2 Full Analysis Report: Comparative Analysis of the Impact of
the Hydrogen Bus Trials on Public Awareness, Attitudes and Preferences: a
Comparative Study of Four Cities Study in the framework of the ACCEPTH2 project
www.accepth2.com Public Acceptance of Hydrogen Transport Technologies.
O'GARRA, T., MOURATO, S. & PEARSON, P. (2004) Analysing awareness and
acceptability of hydrogen vehicles: A London case study. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy.
OLLI ET AL (2001) Correlates of Environmental Behaviors: Bringing Back Social Context
Environment and Behaviour, 33.
OPINION LEADER RESEARCH (2004) Lewisham Citizens’ Jury Findings from the
Lewisham Citizens’ Jury To what extent should the car fit in to Lewisham's future
transport plan. Report to Lewisham Council.
ORTÚZAR, J. DE D., CIFUENTES, L.A., AND WILLIAM, H.C.W.L. (1999) On the
Valuation of Transport Externalities: Application of Willingness-to-Pay Methods in
Less Developed Countries Journal of Transport Economics and Policy November
1999
OUELLETTE, J. A. & WOOD, W. (1998) Habit and Intention in everyday life: the multiple
process by which past behaviour predicts future behaviour Psychological Bulletin,
124, 54-74.
OWENS, S. (2000) Commentary: Engaging the public: information and deliberation in
environmental policy Environment and Planning A, 32, 1141-1148
PARKANY, E (2004) Are attitudes important in travel choices? Presented at the
Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, January 2004
PARKER, D., MANSTEAD, S. R. & STRADLING, S. G. (1995) Extending the Theory of
Planned Behaviour: the role of the personal norm. British Journal of Social
Psychology 34, 127-137.
PAS, E. & HUBER, J. C. (1992) Market Segmentation Analysis of potential rail travellers.
Transportation Research A, 19.
PETTS, J. (2005) Predicting Thresholds of Social Behavioural Responses to Rapid Climate
Change. ESRC Environment and Human Behaviour Programme.
PLOG, S. C. (1994) Developing and Using Psychographics in Tourism Research. IN
RITCHIE, J. R. B. & GOELDNER, L. R. (Eds.) Travel, Tourism and Hospitality
Research: A Handbook for Managers and Researchers New York, John Wiley and
Sons.
POLK, M. (2004) The influence of gender on daily car use and on willingness to reduce car
use in Sweden. Journal of Transport Geography, 12, 185-195.
POORTINGA, W., STEG, L., & VLEK, C. (2002) Environmental risk concern and
preferences for energy-saving measures. . Environment and Behavior, 34, 455-478.
POORTINGA, W. & PIDGEON, N. (2003) Public Perceptions of Risk, Science and
Governance: Main findings of a British survey of five risk cases. Centre for
Environmental Risk, University of East Anglia.
POORTINGA, W., PIDGEON, N. & LORENZONI, I. (2006) Public Perceptions of
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
206
References
Nuclear Power, Climate Change and Energy Options in Britain: Summary
Findings of a Survey Conducted during October and November 2005.
Understanding Risk Working Paper 06-02. Norwich: Centre for Environmental
Risk.
POORTINGA, W., STEG, L., VLEK, C. & WIERSMA, G. (2003) Household preferences for
energy-saving measures: A conjoint analysis Journal of Economic Psychology, 24,
49-64.
POORTINGA, W., STEG., L. & VLEK, C. (2004) Values, Environmental Concern, and
Environmental Behavior: A Study Into Household Energy Use Environment &
Behavior, 36, 70-94.
POTTER, S. & LANE, B. (2004) Travel plan coordinators training study pack. Transport for
London, London.
PROCHASKA, J. O. & DICLEMENTE, C. C. (1983) Stages and Processes of Self-Change of
Smoking: Toward an Integrative Model of Change. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 51, 390-95.
PUTNAM, R. (1995) Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital. Journal of
Democracy, 6, 65-78.
RAC (2004) RAC Report on Motoring.
REDMOND, L. (2000) Identifying and analysing travel-related attitudinal, personality and
lifestyle clusters in the San Francisco Bay Area MSc thesis published as report no.
UCD-ITS-RR-OO-8 Institute of Transport Studies, University of California, Davis.
RICS (2005) Environmental citizenship: towards sustainable development SDRN, RICS Fibre
(Findings in build and rural environment).
ROBBINS, T. (2006) What is the real price of cheap air travel? The Observer newspaper,
26th January 2006.
ROGERS, E. M. & EVERETT (1995) Diffusion of innovations.
ROKEACH, M. (1973) The Nature of Human Values, ROM, San Francisco.
ROSE, C. (2004) A Tool For Motivation Based Communication Strategy.
ROSE, C. (2005) Campaign Strategy Newsletter No 18, 3 October 2005: Air Travel and
Climate Change.
ROSE, C., DADE, P., GALLIE, N. & SCOTT, J. (2005) Climate Change
Communications – Dipping A Toe Into Public Motivation.
RYLEY, T. (2005) Transport and the media: lessons from the Edinburgh congestion charging
proposals. Proc. Universities Transport Study Group 37th annual conference, Bristol,
5-7 January 2005. (unpublished).
SALE OWEN (2005) Public attitudes to climate change, motivators and barriers to
action: Newcastle and the North East - Executive Summary from Research
Report. Carbon Neutral Newcastle.
SALOMON, I. & MOKHTARIAN, P. L. (1997 ) Coping with congestion: Understanding the
gap between policy assumptions and behavior Transportation Research Part D ­
Transport and Environment, 2, 107-123.
SCHULTE, I., HART, D. & VAN DER VORST, R. (2004) Issues affecting the acceptance of
hydrogen fuel. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 29, 677-685.
SCHULTZ, W. P. & ZELEZNY, L. (1999) Values as predictors of environmental attitudes:
evidence for consistency across 14 countries. . Journal of Environmental Psychology,
19, 255-265.
SCHWARTZ, S. (1977) Normative influences on altruism. IN (ED.), L. B. (Ed.) Advances in
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
207
References
Experimental Social Psychology10. New York: Academic Press.
SCHWARTZ, S. H. (1992) Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical
advances and empirical tests in twenty countries Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 1-65.
SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE (2002) Public Attitudes to the Environment in Scotland. Social
Research Unit.
SDC (SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION) (2005) Seeing the Light:
Microgeneration brings energy to life.
SEACREST, S., KUZELKA, R. & LEONARD, R. (2000) Global Climate Change and Public
Perception: The Challenge of Translation. Journal of the American Water resources
Association, 36, 253-263.
SEETHALER, R. & ROSE, G. (2005) Using the six principles of persuasion to promote
travel behaviour change: Findings of a TravelSmart pilot test. 28th Australasian
Transport Research Forum.
SMMT (2006) UK New Car Registrations by CO2 Performance. 2006 Annual Report.
STEAD, D. (2004) Public opinions about the acceptability and effectiveness of transport
policies. Paper presented at the STELLA Focus Group 4 meeting, 25-27 March
2004, Brussels.
STEAD, D. (2005) Transport and Energy Consumption: Shifting attitudes, actions and
intentions. Annual Conference of the Royal Geographical Society and Institute of
British Geographers. 31 August - 2 September, London.
STEG, L. (2005) Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives
for car use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39, 147-162.
STEG, L. & SIEVERS, I. (2000) Cultural theory and individual perceptions of environmental
risks Environment and Behavior,, 32, 250-269.
STEG, L. & VLEK, C. (1997) The role of problem awareness in willingness-to-change car
use and in evaluating relevant policy measures. IN ROTHENGATTER, T. &
CARBONELL VAYA, E. (Eds.) Traffic and Transport Psychology. Oxford:
Pergamon.
STEG, L., VLEK, C. & SLOTEGRAAF, G. (2001) Instrumental-reasoned and symbolic ­
affective motives for using a motor car. Transportation Research Part F Traffic
Psychology and Behaviour, 4, 151-169.
STERN, P. C. & DIETZ, T. (1994) The value basis of environmental concern Journal of
Social Issues 50, 65-84.
STERN, P. C., DIETZ, T., ABEL, T., GUAGNANO, G. A. & KALOF, L. (1999) A Value­
Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of
Environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6.
STERNGOLD, A., WARLAND, R. H. & HERRMAN, R. A. (1994) Do Surveys Overstate
Public Concerns? Public Opinion Quarterly, 58, 255-263.
STIMULUS (1999) Segmentation for transportation markets using latent user psychological
structures Final Consolidated Progress Report Project funded by the European
Commission under the Transport RTD programme of the 4th Framework Programme
Contract No. RO-97_SC 2161.
STOKES, G. & TAYLOR, B. (1995) The public acceptability of sustainable transport
policies: findings from the British Social Attitudes survey. TSU ref. 842
STOLL-KLEEMANN, S., O'RIORDAN, T. & JAEGER, C. C. (2001) The psychology of
denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus
groups. Global Environmental Change.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
208
References
STOPHER, P. R. (1977) On the application of psychologic al measurement techniques to
travel demand estimation. Environment and Behavior, 9, 67-80.
STRADLING, S. (2006) Moving around: some aspects of the psychology of transport.
Foresight Intelligent Infrastructure Systems Project.
STRADLING, S. G. (2001) Measuring individual car dependence. 33rd Universities
Transport Studies Group Annual Conference Oxford.
STRADLING, S. G., MEADOWS, M. L. & BEATTY, S. (2000) Identity and independence:
two dimensions of driver autonomy CCTP International Conference on Traffic and
Transport Psychology. Bern.
STRADLING, S. G. & PARKER, D. (1996) Extending the Theory of Planned Behaviour: the
role of personal norm, instrumental beliefs and affective beliefs in predicting driving
violations. IN ROTHENGATTER, T. & CARBONELL, V. E. (Eds.).
TANNER, C. (1999) Constraints on environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental
Psychology 19, 145-157.
TAYLOR, B. & BROOK, L. (1998) Public Attitudes to transport issues: findings from the
British social attitudes surveys. IN D.BANISTER (Ed.), E&FN Spon.
TCRP (1998) A Handbook using market segmentation to increase transit ridership. Report 36.
Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Transportation Research Board,
National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington DC.
TERTOOLEN, G., VAN KREVELD, D. & VERSTRATEN, B. (1998) Psychological
resistance against attempts to reduce private car use. Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice, 32, 171-181.
THE FRAMEWORKS INSTITUTE (2002) Framing Public Issues - Toolkit.
TNS Social Opinio n (2005) The attitudes of European citizens towards environment - Special
Eurobarometer available at:
file:///H:/DFTPCC/SS2/europabaromter%20new%20report%20on%20environemtneb
s 217 en.pdf
TRI/ECI (2000) Choosing Cleaner Cars: The Role of Labels and Guides. Final report on
Vehicle Environmental Rating Schemes. Transport Research Institute, Napier
University and Environmental Change Institute, University of Oxford. ISSN 1472­
5789.
TSBB (2005) Transport Statistics Great Britain available at:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft transstats/documents/sectionhomepage/dft
transstats page.hcsp
TRIANDIS, H. (1977) Interpersonal Behavior, Monterey: Brooks and Cole.
TRUMBO, C. W. & SHANAHAN, J. (2000) Social research on climate change: Where we
have been, where we are, and where we might go Public Understand. Sci., 9, 199­
204.
UNGAR, S. (2000) Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: climate change versus the
ozone hole. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 297-312.
VAG Nurnberg (2001) Survey of the Passengers of the MAN Hydrogen Fuel Cell Bus
VAN EXEL, J. & DE GRAAF, G. (2005) Q methodology: A sneak preview. Erasmus MC,
Institute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA), Department of Health Policy
& Management (BMG).
VAN EXEL, J., DE GRAAF, G. & RIETVELD, P. (2004) Getting from A to B: Operant
Approaches to Travel Decision Making. Journal of the International Society for the
Scientific Study of Subjectivity, 27.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
209
References
VAN LANGE, P. A. M., VAN VUGT, M., MEERTENS, R. M. & RUITER, R. (1998) A
social dilemma analysis of commuting preferences. The role of social value
orientation and trust. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 769-820.
VANVUGT, M., MEERTENS, R. M. & VAN LANGE, P. A. M. (1995) Car versus public
transportation - the role of social value orientations in a real life social dilemma.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 258-278.
VANVUGT, M., VAN LANGE, P. A. M. & MEERTENS, R. M. (1996) Commuting by car
or public transportation - a social dilemma analysis of travel mode judgments.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 373-395.
VERPLANKEN, B., AARTS, H., VAN KNIPPENBERG, A. & MOONEN, A. (1998) Habit
versus planned behaviour: a field experiment. British Journal of Social Psychology
37, 111-128.
VERPLANKEN, B., AARTS, H., VAN KNIPPENBERG, A. & VAN KNIPPENBERG, C.
(1994) Attitude versus general habit: Antecedents of travel mode choice. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 24, pp285-300.
VERPLANKEN, B. & FAES, S. (1999) Good intentions, bad habits, and effects of forming
implementation intentions on healthy eating European Journal of Social Psychology,
29, 591-604.
WADDELL, P. (2000) Towards a behavioural integration of land use and transportation
modelling. International Association of Travel Behaviour Research tri-annual
conference. Gold Coast, Australia
WAKEFORD, T. (2002) Citizens Juries: a radical alternative for social research. Social
Research Update, University of Surrey, Department of Sociology, 37, Summer 2002.
WALL, R. (2005) Psychological and Contextual Influences on Travel Mode Choice for
Commuting unpublished PhD thesis Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development
De Montfort University
WALTON, D., THOMAS, J. A. & DRAVITZKI, V. (2004) Commuters' concern for the
environment and knowledge of the effects of vehicle emissions. Transportation
Research. Part D: Transport and Environment, 9, 335-340
WEDEL, M. & KAMAKURA, W. A. (1998) Market Segmentation: Conceptual and
Methodological Foundations Kluwer Academic Publishers.
WELLS, W. (1975) Psychographics: a critical review. Journal of Market Research, 12, 196­
312.
WRIGHT, C. C. & EGAN, J. (2000) De-marketing the car. Transport Policy, 7, 287-94.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
210
Appendix 1
APPENDIX 1: EVIDENCE REVIEW METHODOLOGY
The methodology adopted by this review process aims to meet, as closely as time and
resources allowed over a five month period, the standards of a systematic review. These
standards include (Boaz et al. 2002):
1. Focusing on answering specific questions;
2. Using protocols to guide the review process;
3. Seeking to identify as much of the relevant research as possible;
4. Appraising the quality of the research included in the review;
5. Synthesising the research findings in the studies included; and
6. Updating in order to remain relevant.
Protocols to guide the review process were set up at the start of the project to systematise the
data search and data gathering process. In addition, the methodology included an appraisal
stage whereby material was rated for its research quality and relevance to the central research
questions. Although the review cannot claim to be totally comprehensive, the authors are of
the opinion that the review conducted is one of the most thorough assessments of attitudes
and behaviours relating to climate change and travel.
Development of Search Criteria
References were retrieved from a number of data sources (see below) using a variety of terms
related to the three components of the terms of reference of this project. They included at least
one of the core keywords/ terms: ‘climate change’; ‘attitudes’; and ‘transport’. A set of other
relevant keywords was also used in combination with these core terms.
The success of this review was to some degree dependent on the ability of the project team to
identify every possible terminological variant of the concepts in question. Deriving the search
terms involved reading key papers and talking to experts in the field, as well as small-scale
trial-and-error searches. Whilst it was necessary to use a range of terms that were as specific
as possible, the keywords were not restricted to specific technical terms. Table 1 shows the
search keywords that were identified. In order to construct a logical relationship among these
research terms and to avoid running searches unnecessarily with overlapping search terms,
Boolean search terms (‘and’, ‘or’, ‘not’) were used.
Table 1 Main keywords used in the evidence searches
1. CLIMATE
CHANGE
2. TRANSPORT
3. ATTITUDES
4. INTERVENTIONS
5. OTHER
Global warming
Carbon + emissions
Carbon dioxide +
emissions
Greenhouse gas +
emissions
Environment
Environmental
impacts
Pollution
Energy use
Sustainable
development
Travel
Transportation
Traffic
Mode choice
Car use
Cycling
Walking
Bus use/ travel
Commuting
Jny to work/ school
Car purchasing/
choice
Driving
Car dependence
Congestion
Green behaviour
Beliefs
Values
Opinion
Concern
Perception(s)
Risk assessment/
perception
Knowledge
Awareness
(Public)
understanding
Motivations
Intentions
Moral norms
Efficacy
Attitude theory
Social groups
Segmentation
Target groups/ market
Awareness campaigns
Public education
Persuasive
communication
Social marketing
Policy evaluation
Cost effectiveness
Information
Cognitive
dissonance
Perceived
behavioural
control
Social/
commons
dilemma
Status
Image
Habit
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
211
Appendix 1
Materials/ Data Sources
For this project, the searches were initially (though not exclusively) based on comprehensive
electronic searche s of appropriate databases as well as some searching of print material. The
data sources included:
• Internet Search Engines – Google, Google Scholar;
• General, largely academic, databases – Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts
(ASSIA); Social Science Citation Index; Sociological Abstracts; International
Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ESRC Data Archive/ Regard/ ESRC
Society Today; Bath Information and Data Services (BIDS); CORDIS; UK Official
Publications (UKOP); Index to Theses; SIGLE (International System for Grey
Literature); British Library or the Library of Congress; LGA research; NOD (Dutch
Research Database); Policy Library;
• Discipline-specific databases – DfT Research Database; TRIS (Transportation
Research Information Services) (TRB USA); University of Nottingham Online
Planning Resources; Online TDM Encyclopaedia; Australian Transport Index
(ATRI); Acompline and Urbaline Geobase; ITRD (International Transport Research
Documentation); Transport Database [SilverPlatter WebSPIRS 5.0], University of
Michigen; Psychlit/ PsychInfo.
Information retrieval for reviewing was not limited to only searching online bibliographical
databases. The data search also involved networking with experts active in the field. This not
only helped to maximise the chances of the review covering all the relevant literature, but also
contributed up-to-date knowledge and insights from work not yet published. (A selection of
researchers in the field was also invited to act as reviewers to check the appraisal process as
detailed in the Acknowledgements to this report.)
Other sources of data/ material/ information included:
• Grey literature in addition to that found electronically through SIGLE, theses
databases and research funders’ databases. This includes conference abstracts and
work in progress to find unpublished research;
• Table of contents of specific journals (as not all appear in search engines/ databases);
• Practitioner journals (e.g. Local Transport Today) – these may report on the knowledge and insights of practitioners operating in associated fields;
• Hard copies acquired as photocopies or loans, often from the British Library’s
Document Supply Centre (DSC) where necessary;
• Call for information on networks: UTSG; LowCVP; MindsinMotion; SDRN to
produce a snowballing effect to individuals, academia, NGOs and consultancies.
A set of inclusion/ exclusion criteria were initially agreed so as to decide what materials
would contribute to the analysis. In order to be included in the review, studies had to be one
of the following study types:
• An exploration of the relationships between climate change and travel attitudes and
behaviour (including theoretical and review articles);
• An evaluation of an intervention related to changing attitudes or travel behaviour;
• Research that identifies/ develops methods used to measure the impact of policy
interventions in this area.
As such, the studies included: evaluative, descriptive, analytical, diagnostic, theoretical and
prescriptive research objectives, designs and methodologies. Specifically, such studies
comprised an evidence base to policy in all stages of the policy cycle - in shaping agendas, in
defining issues, in identifying options, in making choices of action, in delivering them and in
monitoring their impact and outcomes; systematic (evidence based) reviews, qualitative or
quantitative studies; and data at the local, national or international level.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
212
Appendix 1
Most importantly, however, the studies had to have as their main focus:
• Research on the existing relationship between attitudes towards climate change (and
other environmental issues) as related to transport and transport behaviour;
• Research on factors influencing attitudes towards climate change (and other environmental issues) as related to transport;
• Interventions aiming to change attitudes towards climate change (and other environmental issues) as related to transport;
• Interventions aiming to change the relationship between attitudes towards climate
change (and other environmental issues) as related to transport and transport
behaviour.
As far as the researchers were aware (at the start of the review process) there had been little
research within psychology focussing specifically on these issues. However, it was known
that there had been attitudinal research of other behaviours. These findings were not always,
however, applicable for transport issues. For instance, it had been suggested that the
relationship between environmental attitudes and behaviour is stronger for easy low cost
behaviours such a recycling, whereas this relationship is much weaker for complex, high-cost
behaviours such as car use. Moreover, research had shown that although people with a more
positive environmental attitude were more likely to report a variety of pro-environmental
behaviours, this appears to be unrelated to their actual environmental impact (Gatersleben et
al. 2002). At the start of the project, it was thought worth examining the extent to which
lessons learned in relation to other environmental behaviour issues could be transferred to the
transport sector. The literature review therefore also included a review of other behaviours
where transport had been studied alongside these behaviours.
Also, as the relationship between attitudes and behaviour is (according to existing research)
sometimes mediated by other psychological variables, such as moral norms, social norms,
and perceived behavioural control, these were also examined in the literature. It was
considered important to examine how these variables influence travel behaviour and, in
particular, investigate how these variables are related to environmental attitudes and how they
might mediate the relationship between environmental attitudes and transport behaviour. The
research therefore also included:
• Research examining what other social psychological variables (such as moral and
social norms, perceived behavioural control, cognitive dissonance and social dilemma
etc.) influence travel decisions;
• Initiatives aiming to change the travel decisions by altering these variables.
Although not excluded, less emphasis was initially given to research such as:
• Research looking at general environmental awareness or general environmental
attitudes (not related to transport or other specific behaviours);
• Research focussing on behaviour change strategies other than attitude change.
Indeed, the issue of whether interventions that change behaviour by addressing attitudes
directly, or those that avoid influencing attitudes and act on behaviours directly, are the most
effective at encouraging pro-environmental behaviours, emerged as an important issue of the
review.
Geographical Scope and Timescale
To maximise relevance to a 2006 context, the search limited information retrieval to material
produced since 1995. A 10-year timescale was thought to be sufficient to include studies that
had included before and after evaluations of interventions, whilst needing to be mindful of
how the situation has developed over time. The countries studied were limited to UK,
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
213
Appendix 1
Western Europe, USA and Australasia as these countries deal with similar transport issues
and share many cultural values. However, the different cultural contexts and institutional and
accessibility issues were taken into account when evaluating the research.
Development of Appraisal Criteria
During the first weeks of the project, a framework for assessing the credibility, rigour and
relevance of individual research studies was created by the research team. The framework
identified a set of transparent principles around which to frame and structure appraisal
questions that were asked of a piece of work in order to critically assess its quality and
strength (in relation to the evidence review). This process rated studies according to the
following criteria :
• How relevant is the study to the evidence review?
• Was a clear and answerable question asked?
• Were the populations and subgroups studied clearly reported?
• How representative is this of the population that concerns the review?
• How reliable/ how well founded is the study (theoretically, empirically)?
• Has the link between attitudes and behaviour been made? Can a causal inference be
inferred?
In addition, given that the research methods themselves were identified at the start of the
review process as an important issue, the methodological robustness of the reviewed material
was assessed according to the following criteria :
• The appropriateness of research design;
• Well defined terminology;
• Sample size and composition, and selection bias in the achieved sample;
• Use of appropriate statistical tests and adequate reporting of the statistics;
• Appropriate use of qualitative coding/ analysis techniques;
• Piloting of the method;
• Use of control groups;
• Examination of non-users of a transport mode as well as users;
• Generalisability of the findings;
• Was it a before and after study?
• Appropriate theoretical basis;
• As well as finding a correlational relationship, does the study establish what aspects
of interventions are causally responsible for a prescribed set of outcomes?
• The extent to which situational/ contextual factors were examined alongside attitudes?
• Who funded the research? Does the journal in which this study was published have
any known publication bias?
The development of an appraisal framework ensured consistency in the evaluation of the
numerous studies as did the documenting and organisation procedures described below.
Conflicting studies were also assessed as to the comparability of their methodology, sample,
geographical coverage, type of intervention being studied and range of factors measured – in
many cases, conflicting results were viewed in a positive light, as this highlighted contentious
issues.
Documentation and organisational procedures
Two databases were constructed: one (in Endnote) to record the references found by the
preliminary search – this also included an initial rating of the relevance of the material for the
purposes of the evidence review based mainly on the abstracts (where available); and a
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
214
Appendix 1
second (in Microsoft Access) to assess in more detail a selected sample of the Endnote
database.
The Access database (a screen shot of which is shown in Appendix 2) recorded the following
information (where applicable):
1. Document details, including: project title; document title; reference details; web
address; sponsors; contact details; country/ region/ city covered;
2. Assessment of relevance and quality;
3. Document coverage, including for example: key topics covered; intervention types;
type of evidence provided; keywords used; and survey details;
4. Key information including: synopsis; objectives; methods; findings/ conclusions;
strengths/ weaknesses; policy implications.
The Access cell entries in these tabulations were composed mainly of text. This approach
represented a move from trying to capture the essence of the original studies via an ‘abstract/
summary’ (recorded in the Endnote file) to attempting to locate their key aspects and issues
on a ‘data matrix’ (in Access). In total, over 600 entries were made in the Endnote database
and around 60 studies were analysed in more detail within the Access database file.67
The Endnote file was used, first as a check of what data had been collected, and also to form
the review’s reference list and bibliography. The more data-rich Access database was used for
providing detailed findings for the evidence review report. It also allowed a check of the
appraisal process – a selection of experts in the field was invited to act as reviewers to check
the ratings as given by the project team. The reviewers used are listed in the
Acknowledgement section of the final report.
67
Many of the references entered in the Endnote file are as listed in the Reference section of this report.
References shown in bold are those reviewed using the Access pro-forma.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
215
Appendix 2
APPENDIX 2: ACCESS DATABASE PRO-FORMA
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
216
Appendix 2
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
217
Appendix 3
APPENDIX 3: EXAMPLES OF NOVEL RESEARCH
METHODS
Given that the overall emphasis on data-collection has focussed upon quantitative survey
designs, relatively few novel techniques have been developed in the context of public
attitudes towards transport and climate change. Notable exceptions include the use of
mapping exercises in conjunction with GIS, scenario modelling and Q-sorts.
Hagman (2003)
Mobilizing meanings of mobility: car users' constructions of the goods and bads of car use
•
•
Method
Semi -structured interviews with
30 car users in Sweden
based on Science and
Technology Studies
•
•
•
Innovativeness
Interdisciplinary
Analysis paid attention to how
people talk about car use
Concluded that in order to
understand the advantages and
disadvantages of car use, the
focus should not be on what
people say, but on how
arguments are presented to the
interviewer
Hagman’s (2003) work explored how people talked about the positive and negative aspects of car
use in interview situations. In particular the study considered how they justified their car use at a
time when car use is increasingly problematic. He found that people ‘construct’ their conceptions
and ideas about the advantages and disadvantages of car use in a myriad of ways; whilst the
advantages of car use are based largely upon valid personal experiences, disadvantages tend to be
discussed in a broader, more contextual manner. Hagman’s approach is based upon Science and
Technology Studies (STS). This interdisciplinary field is dedicated to understanding the ways in
which science and society impact upon society, through the application of sociological and
ethnographic approaches. Bickerstaff et al. (2004) found a similar effect within focus group
discussions on environmental issues and energy generation and use. Participants recognised the
societal necessity of energy but the secondary effects (pollution, climate change) were viewed by
most individuals as inconveniences allowing enjoyment of modern living standards. Thus
individuals tended to frame their discourses around the benefits (and necessities) of energy supplies
rather than the negative impacts of climate change. In drawing attention to the ways in which
individuals construct and present their beliefs and arguments, these contributions provide a
refreshing alternative to traditional approaches to attempt to tap into public beliefs and values.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
218
Appendix 3
Stoll Kleeman et al. (2001)
The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss
focus groups
•
•
•
•
Method
integrated assessment (IA) focus
groups met several times
stimuli from computer models
respondents asked to construct
collages
use of scenarios
•
•
•
Innovativeness
participants given time to
assess information about
consequences of climate
change
integrative and deliberative
interdisciplinary
In recognition of the fact that previous researchers have struggled to apply integrative methodologies to
the study of climate change, and distinguish between causes, consequences and potential solutions
regarding climate change, Stoll-Kleemann et al. (2001) applied integrated assessment (IA) focus
groups, in which participants are provided with stimuli from computer models and presented with
models of possible consequences of climate change (see also Kasemir et al. 2002 about this method).
Within such methodologies groups meet several times in order to advance a more in-depth discussion.
For example five meetings lasting 2 ½ hours in duration are quite typical. The design of StollKleemann et al.’s study is very interactive in nature, whereby they asked one half of participants to
construct collages to represent how they thought their region would look 30 years into the future, based
on the understanding that energy use continued at the existing rate. The other half were asked to put
together a collage based on a scenario of drastic energy reduction e.g. the understanding that energy use
was reduced by 30-50% in comparison with the present. The groups then presented the collages to one
another and discussed them.
Stoll Kleemen concludes his paper with a discussion about how this methodology could be expanded:
• A further technique is to encourage citizens to tell stories through which they can caringly
address their dissonances and denials.
• Yet another approach is the application of sensitive intuitive interviewing of community
leaders so that they can work considerately through their own social networks to enable their
communities to address these underlying contradictions.
• There is a huge potential to combine integrated assessments and interactive story telling in
schools, community forums, and even possibly in petrol stations, to enable people sensitively
to create a more civic minded approach to their responsibilities in dealing with climate
futures.
• In this way feelings of a new social identity and more accommodative lifestyles may begin to
appear.
• This could form the basis for more general social acceptance of the pricing and regulatory
policies necessary to meet the objective of tolerable climate change.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
219
Appendix 3
Lorenzoni and Langford (2001)
Climate Change Now and in the Future: A Mixed Methodological Study of Public
Perceptions in Norwich (UK)
Method
•
•
•
•
Large scale questionnaire
Analytical focus groups
Segmentation into four groups
Visual aids and scenarios
Innovativeness
•
•
•
Mixed methodology
Quantitative before qualitative
Participants allocated to groups
on basis of quantitative
segmentation to improve group
dynamics
In an attempt to capture the diversity of views on climate change, Lorenzoni and Langford applied an
in-depth mixed methodology approach to explore perceptions of climate change among citizens of
Norwich (UK). In their own words, the breadth of their approach allowed them not only to consider
respondents’ present interests, concerns and beliefs, but also enabled us to investigate peoples’
reaction to the role (in terms of responsibility and blame) of individuals, markets and institutions in
shaping the future.
A large scale questionnaire was used to capture: attitudes to life and environmental issues; personal
views on climate change; measures on climate change; trust and responsibility. This was specifically
designed to be followed by discussions on climate change as it was decided that quantitative statistical
techniques based on the survey data would not provide enough depth regarding the underlying
motivations of respondents in stating their attitudes or opinions.
Participants for the four focus groups were allocated according to how their opinions were classified
from the questionnaire. This ensured some degree of homogeneity, thereby improving group dynamics.
Four dimensions were identified: the extent to which climate change was deemed as (un)important, and
whether human activities do (not) affect the climate 68 . These are outlined in Chapter 1 of this review,
but are repeated here to illustrate this method:
1. Denying: humans do not affect the climate and climate change not important
2. Doubting: human do not affect the climate but climate change important
3. Uninterested: humans do affect the climate but climate change not important
4. Engaging: humans do affect the climate and climate change important
The format of the focus group protocol was divided into two sections: (i) involving general impressions
on climate change (importance and expectations, responsibility and blame, action and behaviour, longterm relevance of climate change, informational requirements); (ii) concerned with how society and the
economy could develop in the next fifty years in relation to climate change. Here, visual aids were used
to keep the participants engaged and focused:
Storylines of possible future scenarios in the 2050’s: socio-economic scenario’s; specific to
East Anglia; based on available guidelines for the region
Pictorial representations of possible climate outcomes in 50 years’ time: temperature;
precipitation changes; seasonal changes
The methodology demonstrates that eliciting public perceptions of climate change is not quite as simple
as devising a set of questions and presenting them to the public. Lorenzoni and Langford’s study
demonstrates that a certain degree of ‘groundwork’ should be undertaken by researchers in order to
determine:
a) what environmental aspects of climate change should be explored
b) what social aspects of climate change should be explored
c) what types of participants should be allocated to focus groups
d) how information presented to participants should be as contextually and factually relevant as
possible
68
The authors strongly highlight that these four classifications are relative rather than absolute, since they are derived from the
available data.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
220
Appendix 3
Kelay (2004)
Integrating Scientific and Lay Accounts of Air Pollution
•
•
•
Method
Questionnaire to understand lay
understandings of air pollution
In-depth interviews using
mapping exercises
Analysis using GIS
•
•
•
Innovativeness
Mixed methodology
Integration of science and lay
understanding
Demonstrated sophistication of
lay knowledge
In the context of localised traffic-generated air pollution, Kelay developed a novel methodology to
capture and represent public understandings and later compare them to scientific finding. This study
applied a multi-method approach by utilising a combination of nomothetic and ideographic 69
approaches to address lay understandings of traffic -generated air pollution. Whilst survey data provided
a peripheral overview of perceptions of air pollution, in-depth interviews and mapping exercises
demonstrated that the public had their own lay understandings of key scientific principles such as air
pollution dispersion and other environmental processes.
Kelay asked participants to complete mapping exercises in interview sessions, in order to represent
whether they thought air pollution was high, medium or low (see Figure 7.3). This method allowed lay
participants to provide their own appraisals of air pollution severity as well as spatial evaluations and
an evaluation of whether spatial evaluations and perceptions were multiple or unique to individuals.
Engagement in the activity allowed the public to discuss the subject in some detail, in terms of causes,
consequences and implications of air pollution, often acknowledging their own roles as car users, and
thus allowed their tacit knowledge to become more explicit. If residents did not think there was an air
pollution problem they completed the exercise accordingly and vice-versa. The analytical capabilities
of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) were used to represent the mapping exercise data. Also, in
an unprecedented manner in air pollution research, this robust interdisciplinary methodology allowed
Kelay to compare whether public perceptions were comparable with scientifically-generated modelled
predictions of air pollution in order to identify congruence or incongruence.
The results showed that understandings of air pollution are tacit; by employing alternative
methodological approaches she demonstrated that the public display a comprehensive understanding of
what air pollution is, despite the fact that they have been in receipt of little formal knowledge about the
issue. She argued that the survey approach alone would have failed to demonstrate the fact that the
residents of a local area possess their own tacit form of lay knowledge about the traffic – air pollution –
health relationship. Thus, whilst both methods are useful in their own right, use of nomothetic methods
such as questionnaires may only represent the ‘tip of the iceberg’, as they alone may not fully capture
the richness and detail of public understandings about environmental issues, whilst the sole use of
idiographic methods such as in-depth interviews runs the potential risk of reporting only atypical cases.
Indeed, recent research on risk-related issues has also recognised the merits of providing a combination
of methodologies, since they provide a more comprehensive overview (Poortinga et al., 2004).
With regards to social scientific research on air pollution, it is clear from existing empirical evidence
that researchers have struggled to properly gauge public understandings, since findings have been
varied and at best contradictory, often due to the ways in which questions are phrased in surveys. Kelay
argued that, to ask people directly whether they think air pollution is a problem may serve to propel the
issue. Furthermore, she recognised that surveys tend to focus on ‘deficiencies’ in public knowledge.
69
nomothetic sciences seek ‘to establish abstract general laws for indefinitely repeatable events and processes’;
and the ideographic which ‘aims to understand the unique and non-recurrent’. In the study of psychology ,
idiographic describes the study of the individual, whereas nomothetic is more the study of a cohort of individuals.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiographic)
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
221
Appendix 3
Figure 7.3: Example of a completed mapping exercise
Source: Kelay, 2004
Steg, Vlek and Slotengraaf (2001)
Instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affectiv e motives for using a motor car
•
•
•
•
Method
Group interviews
Conventional self reported
questionnaires
Q methodology
Similarity sorting
•
•
Innovativeness
Comparison of methods
Investigation of symbolic affective motives
Steg et al. (2001) compared three methods in order to examine which ones best investigated the relative
importance of instrumental-reasoned and symbolic-affective motives for car use. The three methods
differed in the extent to which the purpose of the task was apparent to the participants. The tasks were:
(1) a similarity sorting of car-use episodes, (2) a Q-sorting following attractiveness of car-use episodes,
and (3) a semantic-differential (questionnaire) method for evaluating (un)attractive aspects of car use.
The similarity sorting and the Q-method asked respondents to order 32 episodes of car use with respect
to their attractiveness. In both examples sophisticated statistical techniques were applied to the datasets
to derive factor-loadings in order to examine which dimensions were most important.
Comparing their results with those from conventional self-report measures, they argue that
conventional studies tend to emphasize instrumental-reasoned motives for car use, because respondents
tend to rationalise and justify their behaviour and to give socially desirable answers. Their Q study
demonstrated that this bias can be avoided to some extent by limiting the explicit information
participants receive about the purpose of the evaluation. Symbolic-affective motives then play a much
more significant role in evaluating the attractiveness of car use.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
222
Appendix 3
Niemeyer et al. (2005) Rapid Climate Change and Society: Assessing Responses and Thresholds
•
•
•
Method
individual interviews
Q methodology
Climate change scenarios
•
•
Innovativeness
integrative and deliberative
interdisciplinary mix of natural
plus social science
Niemayer et al. also take an alternative approach to represent individuals’ views of rapid climate
change using Q methodology designed to differentiate between the different subjective positions people
endorse. Niemeyer et al. suggest that thresholds of rapid climate change - such as extreme heating and
cooling - may instigate different responses from individuals. Responses were elicited in the format of
individual interviews, during which four climate change scenarios were put to individuals. The four
climate change scenarios were: Status Quo, Warming, Heating and Cooling, the development of which
relied on the application of scientific climate change principles.
For each scenario, participants were asked to carry out a policy-ranking exercise, in which climate
change featured amongst seven other public policy issues, and a Q methodology, whereby participants
were presented with a set of statements about climate change in each scenario (opinion not fact) and
asked to rank-order them. In the study, separate ‘sorts’ were obtained from each participant in relation
to the four climate change scenarios. The process of sorting involved allocating printed cards
containing the statements according to a scale of how strongly the participants agreed or disagreed.
The results indicate a difference in response according to the severity of the climate changes expected
in each scenario and whether warming or cooling was the focus. For example, there was an initially
adaptive response to climate warming followed by a shift to maladaptation as the magnitude of change
increases. Beyond this threshold, trust in collective action and institutions was diminished, negatively
impacting adaptive capacity. Climate cooling invoked a qualitatively different response, although this
may be a product of individuals being primed for warming because it has dominated public discourse.
The authors claim the analysis of subjectivity revealed potential for maladaptive human responses,
constituting a dangerous or rapid climate threshold within the social sphere.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
223
Appendix 3
van Excel et al. (2004)
Getting from A to B: Operant Approaches to Travel Decision Making
•
•
Method
Q methodology
Segmentation into four groups
•
Innovativeness
Investigation of subjective
motives for car use
This study used Q methodology to allow travellers themselves to identify the most relevant subjective
influences on their travel behaviour when embarking on medium-distance travel (30-100 kilometres, or
about 20-60 miles). The authors set out to investigate how the role of standard economic cost/ benefit
motives used in transport research compares to that of motives that are not economic, quantifiable, or
compensatory, (such as freedom, culture, status, and personal and social norms). The underlying
objectives were to distinguish between reasoned and inert travel decision making and to use the aspects
that are of importance to travellers who exercise choice – not researchers. The overall aim was to
identify policies likely to succeed in reducing the need for travel or promoting modal shift from car to
public transport.
In total, 39 people (car users and non car owners) participated in the study and were provided with the
question: To what extent do you agree with the following statements concerning car and public
transport as travel alternatives for middle-distance trips (30-100 kilometres)? Participants were asked
to read through all of the statements carefully, and to begin with a rough sorting while reading, by
dividing the statements into three piles: 1) generally agree, 2) disagree, and 3) neutral, doubtful, or
undecided, and to record the number of statements in each pile. Next, they were asked to rank order the
statements according to the research question from -4 to +4 (most disagree to most agree).
After sorting, participants were asked to explain why they selected the statements they placed under
“-4” and “+4.” Four operant approaches to medium-distance travel decisions were found: (1) choice
travellers who use the car as a dominant alternative; (2) choice travellers with a car preference; (3)
choice travellers with a public transport preference; and (4) conscious car-dependent travellers.
The findings showed travel costs were found to be practically irrelevant for travel behaviour, as were
environmental issues for all segments. The basic purpose of travel — getting from point A to point B,
did not emerge as important or distinguishing in any factor. The most controversial issue appears to be
the car itself, on issues like need, convenience, dependence, habituation, and superiority. The authors
claim their results underline the potential contribution of Q methodological studies to transport policy
making. They say it would be essential to sensible policy making to know something about the relative
proportions of four segments in a target population.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
224
Appendix 3
Opinion Leader Research (2004)
Lewisham Citizens’ Jury Findings from the Lewisham Citizens’ Jury To what extent
should the car fit in to Lewisham's future transport plan?
•
Method
Citizens Jury
•
Innovativeness
Deliberative
‘Jurors’ in Lewisham spent 2 ½ days deliberating issues around transport in the Borough. Fifteen
members of the public were chosen at random using the electoral register and recruited to match the
demographic of the local area. The objective was designed to contribute to London Borough of
Lewisham’s understanding of the public’s perspectives on transport policy, in relation to the car. They
were interested in using the jury's findings to raise the debate in the community about how the impact
of the car can be balanced against other road use. The London Borough of Lewisham was keen to
measure the public’s attitude to increased or decreased restrictions on car use within the Borough.
During the Jury there was one briefing session and two witness sessions in which Jurors listened to
short presentations on a number of options for them to decide which they believed would be the best
way forward. The witnesses were then asked questions to help clarify the key issues. The agenda was
designed to allow for the Jury to work in plenary sessions, small break out groups, pairs and
individually to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to fully contribute to the process. The
pendulum scale was used for residents to determine what level of restrictions, if any, should be placed
on the car. One was used to denote the car having free reign, with no restrictions, and 10 was the
opposite, with maximum available restrictions throughout for car users (e.g. 20mph, congestion
charging, CPZ) The results below demonstrate how the Juror’s opinions shifted over the course of the
Jury.
Figure 7.4: Pendulum scale used in the Lewisham citizen’s jury trial
The results showed
• The importance of achieving a workable balance between all road users was a common theme.
• The majority of jurors identified that currently the balance is too much in favour of the car, and
that this should be redressed in the future, so that other users – pedestrians, cyclists, bus users, can
benefit.
• The apparent reasonableness and workability of restrictions was a common theme for many drivers
within the jury. Applying existing traffic measures in a more flexible way (timed bus lanes, timed
bollards etc) emerged as a popular solution, which would help to redress the balance.
• The importance of encouraging the public to make use of alternatives to the car. The need to
provide better communication and information to members of the public concerning these
alternatives emerged strongly.
• Jurors identified that the issue is about more than transport, such as the attractiveness of an area,
about what it’s like to live in, about a sense of community – these things all relate to how people
feel about getting out of their cars.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
225
Appendix 3
Macmillan (2005)
New Approaches to Environmental Valuation
•
•
•
Method
Contingent valuation
Participatory fora
Comparison of methods
•
Innovativeness
Evaluation of methods to
engage the public and
monetary and non-monetary
evaluation of the environment
Estimates of willingness to pay (WTP) for non-market goods and services including transport are
usually administered using interviews, telephone surveys or self-administered mail questionnaires.
Macmillan claims these forms of data collection involve a brief ‘one-off’ and ‘one-way’
communication during which respondents are expected to assimilate information about an
environmental good (which they may have no prior knowledge of), search their memory for other
pertinent information, integrate this into a judgement about their WTP based on their preferences and
income, and communicate this judgement to the interviewer. He says this has led to persistent concerns
about the validity of using WTP from an ethical perspective and fundamental questions about reliability
and validity, especially when dealing with uncertain and complex environmental changes such as
climate warming.
Instead, Macmillan uses participatory fora that allow participants to research and communicate their
preferences, assessing their willingness to pay at various stages. He engaged citizens in environmental
decisions using a ‘CV market stall’ approach. This involved expert workshops and value juries to help
people decide how much they really value the resource change in question, especially when they have
little prior experience of 'trading' in the goods.
The experimental approach involved a sample of approximately 165 people recruited via email from
businesses and residential areas in north-east Scotland in the summer of 2003. Each participant was
allocated to one of three treatments described in Figure 7.5. The experimental design allows individual
WTP for each project to be tracked over a period of six weeks in response to information, time to think
and, in the case of Treatment C, moderated group deliberations. Specific tests can also be made for
information effects (Treatment A v B/C), and group deliberation effects (using the “market stall”
approach) independent of information effects (Treatment C v Treamtent B). Further supporting
evidence for these effects was als o obtained from a detailed feedback questionnaire by phone of
approximately 100 participants.
Figure 7.5: Macmillan’s experimental treatments
The clear finding was that mean WTP increases in all treatments in consecutive rounds of valuation. In
other words, the research suggests that CV is a more dynamic process than previously imagined. There
is strong evidence that WTP will change if participants are given time to think and research their
preferences. A feedback exercise indicates that participants are using the time between valuation
rounds to further research their preferences, gather more information and deliberate. Macmillan asserts
that taken together, these findings contradict the conventional assumption in CV research that
preferences already are well formed and can be reported accurately in a one-off interview or mail shot.
He suggests further research priorities include identifying cost-effective ways to scale up results from
the group based deliberative approach to the population level possibly through the Internet.
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
226
Appendix 3
Anable, J; Lane, B and Kelay, T (2006)
227