* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download An Evidence Base Review of Public Attitudes to Climate Change
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Heaven and Earth (book) wikipedia , lookup
Climate sensitivity wikipedia , lookup
Soon and Baliunas controversy wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Climate resilience wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
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