Sea Rotmann IEA DSM Task 24 workshop Subtask 2 case studies

Subtasks of Task XXIVsocial media and

Task XXIV

Dr Sea Rotmann, Operating Agent

Trondheim Expert workshop May 28, 2013

Closing the Loop - Behaviour Change in DSM: From Theory to Practice

IEA DSM TASK 24

Subtasks of Task XXIVsubtasks

5- Expert platform

1- Helicopter view of models,

frameworks, contexts, case

studies and evaluation

metrics

2- In depth

analysis in areas of

greatest need(buildings, transport,

SMEs, smart metering)

3- Evaluation tool

for stakeholders

4- Country-

specific project ideas, action

plans and pilot projects

Subtasks of Task XXIVsubtasks

5- Expert platform

1- Helicopter view of models,

frameworks, contexts, case

studies and evaluation

metrics

2- In depth

analysis in areas of

greatest need(buildings, transport,

SMEs, smart metering)

3- Evaluation tool

for stakeholders

4- Country-

specific project ideas, action

plans and pilot projects

2- In depth analysis in areas of

greatest need(buildings, transport, SMEs, smart

metering)

3

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVsubtask II -

case studies

Elaborate case description template

1. Description of the preparation, implementation and impact of the intervention (case)

A. Key words/tags (e.g. Energy policy; Efficient housing; Sustainable mobility; Sustainable consumption; Lifestyle; ….) B. Intervention: basic characteristics - Year, name, country, geographical scope, is it a project, programme or policy?- Available resources (people, money) - to get an idea of the scope and magnitude of the intervention- Who is involved in the preparation, implementation / monitoring and evaluation? How is the distribution of roles, tasks and responsibilities?- Contact details of person in charge/in the know, website or link to report, if available- list of evaluation materials, interviews taken etc. C. Context: (e.g. country level legislation, geography, social norms, tradition, technology, infrastructure, previous experience etc)- Context-specific issues that (may have) had an impact on the design and implementation of the intervention. - Context-specific issues that (may have) had an impact on the choice and and the use of the MoUD. Goals and focus on behaviour Goals, problems addressed, behaviours targeted and context addressed• What is the stated overall aim of the intervention? • What problem does the intervention address? (as stated by the intervention) • What goals in terms of behavioural changes are formulated? (according to this intervention) (eg reduce energy use, increase comfort and warmth, reduced GHGs, change

market, increase jobs etc) • Which target group (s) does the intervention aim at? What does the intervention focus on (try to use these categories): - Individual behaviours: (e.g. reduction of energy consumption at the individual level) - Social norms: (e.g. establishment of social norms) - Social practices: (e.g. addressing daily practices like washing, caring, cooking) - Institutional environment (e.g. improving collaboration stakeholders; policy)- Physical infrastructure & technology: (e.g. choice architecture, physical architecture, smart meters) Types of behaviour and lasting behaviours• Does the intervention/approach distinguish between different types of behaviour? (e.g. routine behaviours; one-off actions; conscious behaviours; or does it focus on

social practices?). • How does the intervention aim at persistence/lasting behavioural change (relevant in case of routine behavioural changes)

E. Monitoring and evaluation metricsWhat monitoring and evaluation metrics or key performance indicators have been used to evaluate the outcomes of the intervention? H. Main outcomes (up to ½ side A4): (successfulness of the intervention and other other impacts, effects and lessons) Outcomes and effects• To what extent has the intervention contributed to the intended behavioural changes?• What contextual variables and alternative explanations for the observed effects that are independent of the intervention) may have played a role (eg economic growth;

crisis; demographic trends; supporting policies / regulations) • What are the immediate effects, e.g. in terms of target range, number of participants etc? How is this measured? Are these incidental or structural?• What are the indirect effects? How is this measured? Are these incidental or structural?• Are there any unintended undesirable side effects of the intervention? Which ones? • Are there desirable side effects of the the intervention? Which ones? • What can be said about the cost-benefit distribution? (who beard the costs, who benefits)Success? To what extent can this intervention be regarded successful in affecting behavioural change? • Which elements of the intervention have proven effective? Which ones have not? • Under what conditions can the impact be optimized?• Is this intervention, or parts thereof, replicable elsewhere? Under what conditions?• To what extent have the original aims been achieved? To what extent have ex ante theoretical notions about how to achieve behavioural change

2. The underlying Models of Understanding (MoU)/Theories of Change (ToC) and other insights and how these have been used in the preparation, implementation and evaluation of the intervention

A. Summary of the MoU/ToC used and how it was used (up to ½ side A4) • What MoU/ToC or perspective(s) informed or inspired the intervention (ex-ante)?• Was this underlying perspective made explicit and if so, how/where? • Why was the MoU/ToC used? (e.g. prior experience, failure of p/p/p)• How was the model/theory chosen? (e.g. chance, on purpose)• Which elements of the MoU/ToC were used?

• in the design of the intervention• in the implementation of the intervention• in the evaluation of the intervention

• What other perpectives, assumptions, ideas informed the intervention? (can be common sense, experiential non-codified knowledge etc)

B. Definitions- Does the approach taken in the intervention provide a clear definition of ‘behaviour’ and/or ‘behavioural change’ that is based on any MoU/ToC?- What other relevant definitions are used – e.g. an intervention can also aim at enhanced knowledge and awareness, or learning (and to what extent is it based on the MoU/ToC?)- What is the focus of the used MoC/ToC (use following categories if possible: individual behaviours; social norms; social practices; institutional environment; physical infrastructure & technology )- What is the key mechanism behind behavioural change according to this MoU/ToC? Has the intervention taken this view as well?

E. Monitoring and evaluationWhich key issues need to be monitored and evaluated according to this MoU/ToC, and which indicators can be used to do this? • Who carried out the evaluation and what method has been used? Is this method in line with the MoU (or perspective) that informed the design of this intervention?

F. Conclusion:• What was the added value of using the the MoU/ToC for the intervention?• Could a similar intervention have been prepared and deployed without the theoretical input?• How can, or was, this model/theory (be) made practicable for DSM practitioners and policy makers? What elements are useful? Which ones are not and why not?• What were the most important lessons learnt concerning the use of the MoU in this case in bullet point?

3. Tweet summary Please provide a tweet in 140 characters, including #Task24 or #behaviourchange or the name of the MoU with a hashtag # (eg: #STS deals with interaction between technical systems and social life. Implications for tech development and deployment #Task24)

4

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVworked examples in Task 24

Domain/CountryCases and used theories/models

Netherlands New Zealand Switzerland Italy Austria Norway Sweden Belgium UK Other countries

Smart Metering/Feedback

Jouw Energie Moment

Theories/Models used:Expectancy Value TheoryDesign with IntentInterpretation for sustainable behaviour

Responses to Time Varying Prices for Electricity (Otago Uni)

Theories/Model used: Classical Economics and marketing

Smart Metering Zurich Pilot EWZ and EKZ

Theories/Model used: behavioural economics and social norms/comparisons

Time of Use Tariff

Theories/Models:Classical Economics

Die Energiejagd

Theories/Models:Shared learning,Social Norming,freezing/unfreezing

Demosteinkjer

Theories/Models:Theory of Planned Behaviour

Clockwise

Theories/Models:Constructivist Learning TheoryShared learning

Rettie, Ruth CHARM

Theories/Models used:social norms approachpractice theory

Spain (Juan Pablo Garçia): VERDIEM



Smart Metering EKT Dietikon

Theories/Model used: behavioural model of residential energy use by Raaij & Verhallenbehavioural economics and social norms/comparisons

!CO2 Management


Portugal (Joane Abreu): Smart meter feedback in North

Theories: Nudge, classical economics, moments of change


Munx Repower website

Theories/Model used: behavioural economics, social norming

US (Michela Beltracchi):Opower feedback programme

Models: Cialdini’s Social Norming

Retrofitting Blok voor Blok aanpak, retrofitting programme

Theories/models used:Behavioural economics

Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart

Theories/Models used: social marketing; social norms; classical economic; TPB

Swiss Building Retrofit Program

Models: Classical Economics

Retrofitting of Myhrenenga Housing

Theories: TPB

Building retrofits

Theories: Shared Learning

Retrofitting

2000 Watts Society (housing)

Models: Ethics, long-term visioning

SMEs De Groene Daad

Theory/model used: Nudge

EECA SME Crown Loans Scheme

Theory/model used: originally based on TPB; changed to social learning and social norm theories

Energy-Model and SME-Model from (EnAW)

Theories/Models used:Classical EconomicsSocial norm

Finnfjord

Theories: Leadership

Build4Change

Model: Nudge

Energy Cultures SMEs pilot

Model used: Energy CulturesMobility Het Nieuwe Rijden (the

New Driving)

Theories and models used: Psychology: Henry A Murray (1938) and the acceptability/availability model of behaviour by Rose (1990).

Active a2b

Theory/models used: Norm Activation TheoryElaboration Likelihood ModelStern’s Principles for InterveningTriandis TIBLewin’s Unfreezing/RefreezingMcKenzie-Mohr

2000 Watt on mobility

Models: Ethics, long-term visioning

Electric vehicles Nobil

Theories/Models used: TPB

Stockholm congestion tax

Models: activity based models

Chatterton & Wilson Framework

Combining individualistic (eg Triandis) and societal (Practice theory) approaches to help UK policymakers

Kevin Luten UrbanTrans (Australia)

Transport behaviour change based on BJ Fogg

Mobility

NZ Post Transport Driver behaviour training

Theory/models used: Value Action Gap Theory

Fuel consumption of newly purchased cars

Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and Norm-Activation Model (NAM)

Case studies collected for IEA DSM Task 24 in transport, building retrofits, SMEs and smart metering Note: Blue boxes denote government-led policies and programmes, green boxes denote business, research or community-led programmes and pilots

5


case studies

Subtask IV: Country-specific recommendations

6

subtask IV -country-specific recommendations

7


case studies

Individual behaviour

Social norm

Social Practice

Institutional environment

Physical environment (technology; infrastructure

Policy, legislation, regulation, requirements, emission levels, permits, (in)formal agreements etc. Economic instruments (subsidies; levies; fiscal measures; technology procurement etc)

+(blabla…)

+(blabla…

)

+(blabla…)

+(blabla…)

Information, communication, education (Labelling, certificates, emission-information, foodprints, marketing, eduction, campaigns etc.)

+(blabla…

)

+(blabla…)

7


case studies

Individual behaviour

Social norm

Social Practice

Institutional environment

Physical environment (technology; infrastructure

Policy, legislation, regulation, requirements, emission levels, permits, (in)formal agreements etc. Economic instruments (subsidies; levies; fiscal measures; technology procurement etc)

+(blabla…)

+(blabla…

)

+(blabla…)

+(blabla…)

Information, communication, education (Labelling, certificates, emission-information, foodprints, marketing, eduction, campaigns etc.)

+(blabla…

)

+(blabla…)

Cases Types of instrumenten:

- policy/legislative;

- economic

- information/communication

Types of instrumenten:


- economic


Types of instrumenten:


- economic


What does the intervention focus on:

- individual behaviour

- social norms

- social practices

- institutional aspects

- physical environment



- social norms

- social practices





- social norms

- social practices





- social norms

- social practices





- social norms

- social practices



Type of behaviour:

- routine

- concious behaviour

- one-shot behaviour

Type of behaviour:

- routine



Type of behaviour:

- routine



Cases

Pol icy/leg

economic information

Individual

behaviour

S o c i a l norm

Practice Institutional context

Physical context

routine concious behaviour

one-sho t behaviour

e . g . name

+ - + + + +

Subtasks of Task XXIVor?Full framework for characterising behaviours:

4 dimensions x 5 levels

Developed from Wilson and Chatterton (2011)

SCOPE! Discrete! Inter- Related! Bundled! Structuring! Lifestyle!

DOMAIN! Cognitive! Bodily! Tech-nological!

Institutional / Social!

Infra-structural!

What are the influences on the behaviour?

DURABILITY! One-off! Repeated! Dependent! Enduring! Norm-Setting!

What relationship does time have with the behaviour?

How does the behaviour relate to other behaviours?

ACTOR! Individual! Inter-Personal Network! Community! Segment/

Group! Population!

Who, or what is enacting the behaviour?

9


semi-structured interviews

1. What drove the project manager/initiator

2. How has the organisational culture affected design and implementation?

3. How have earlier experiences influenced the choice for a particular intervention, the design and implementation of it?

4. How have national, regional and local context factors been of influence on the choices made (for the intervention, the MoU, design and implementation).

5. How successful is the intervention? In what terms? How has this been assessed?

6. To what extent is it useful for replication? (which elements, where, what scale)

7. What preliminary ideas did the PM have with regard to (the need for) behavioural change and the mechanisms behind behavioural change?

8. What, if any, theories or insights did the PM draw upon? How were these insights translated into the project design?

9. How where these insights translated into the monitoring and evaluation approach?

10.What trade-offs have been made in terms of the scope of the project, elements addressed, and in terms of monitoring and evaluation

(e.g. what things that might have seemed logical to do, considering the choice for this particular approach and intervention, but was not done, and why?)

11.Have these MoU/ToC and (other) social scientific insights of use? Why and how (not)?

12.What practical barriers are there that hinder a proper use of existing social scientific insights?

13.What if they would not have used these insights as a basis, would that have been a problem? Why (not) ?

14.To what extent is the design an outcome of the choice of a particular MoU?

15.Do you think that this choice resulted in too little attention for other aspects? If so, for which ones? How did you resolve that?

16.What are the 3 most important lessons to be learned from this intervention?

10

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIV

First in-depth analysis

Austria

11

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIV€CO2 Management

www.grazer-ea.at

Haushaltskasse au!essern Wärmekosten senken Klimaschonend durchstarten

Tipps zumEnergiesparen

bei Strom | bei Wärme | bei Mobilität

4

WarumEnergiesparen?Geringere Kosten und ein nachhaltiger Beitrag zum Klimaschutz sind nur zwei von vielen guten Gründen, um seinen Energieverbrauch zu senken. Dabei gilt es, Energiepotenziale zu erkennen und Energiespartipps zu nutzen.

4


500 7.5006.5005.5004.5003.5002.5001.500

Stromverbrauch (kWh)

Hau

shal

tsgr

öße

ab

Bewertung desStromverbrauchsim Haushalt (kWh)

sehr e!zient verbesserungsfähig sehr ine!zient

11


www.grazer-ea.at




4


4


500 7.5006.5005.5004.5003.5002.5001.500


Hau

shal

tsgr

öße

ab



11


www.grazer-ea.at




4


4


500 7.5006.5005.5004.5003.5002.5001.500


Hau

shal

tsgr

öße

ab



13

Stand-by-Geräte

Geräte-bezeichnung

Stk.LeistungStand-by

(Watt)

Stand-by-Betrieb

(Std./Tag)

Stand-by-Stromverbrauch

(kWh/Jahr)

Stand-by-Stromkosten

(! im Jahr)

Meine Geräte

Stk. !/Jahr

Stand-by-Geräte im Vergleich

11


www.grazer-ea.at




4


4


500 7.5006.5005.5004.5003.5002.5001.500


Hau

shal

tsgr

öße

ab



13

Stand-by-Geräte

Geräte-bezeichnung

Stk.LeistungStand-by

(Watt)

Stand-by-Betrieb

(Std./Tag)

Stand-by-Stromverbrauch

(kWh/Jahr)

Stand-by-Stromkosten

(! im Jahr)

Meine Geräte

Stk. !/Jahr

Stand-by-Geräte im Vergleich

Beispiel Meine Kosten

12

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVDie Energiejagd

12

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVDie Energiejagd

13

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVAustria -

Die Energiejagd vs €CO2 Management

social approach individualistic approach

social norm (MoU)social learning (ToC)Freezing/unfreezing (ToC)

classical economics (MoU)

Gamification, competition, feedback, tailored advice, champions

Feedback, Advice & Incentive (iPod!)

Goal: CO2 savingsGoal: CO2 savings

Huge success Unexpected failure

14

Subtask I - Helicopter OverviewPremise for Task XXIVnext: Norway SMEs

Finnfjord

Subtasks of Task XXIVquestions or comments?

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Technology

Sea Rotmann IEA DSM Task 24 workshop Subtask 2 case studies