Motivating Home Energy Action - CiteSeerX

2 downloads 147181 Views 911KB Size Report
Figure 11: Builder's decision-making process – example of imposed choice ...... be in a better position to develop energy saving technologies and actions that ...
Motivating Home Energy Action A handbook of what works

Michelle Shipworth April 2000 - for the Australian Greenhouse Office

Table of Contents

Table of Figures ________________________________________ 1 Table of Tables _________________________________________ 1 Why use this handbook? __________________________________ 1 What you can find in this handbook______________________________________________________________ 1 Outline of the handbook _________________________________________________________________ 1 Preview of the handbook – some tips for success _____________________________________________ 2 Need for the handbook________________________________________________________________________ 3 Environmental impact of home energy use __________________________________________________ 3 Need to notice people using energy in their homes____________________________________________ 4 Need to consider how best to motivate people _______________________________________________ 6 Need to make research accessible to policy makers ___________________________________________ 7 Need to involve technical and ‘people’ professionals ___________________________________________ 8 Limitations of this handbook ___________________________________________________________________ 9 Limited focus of academic research ________________________________________________________ 9 Different context to some earlier research __________________________________________________ 10 Limited Australian research______________________________________________________________ 11 Some tensions in this project ____________________________________________________________ 11

Understanding the householder _____________________________13 Why do we need to understand the householder? _________________________________________________ 13 Demographics ______________________________________________________________________________ 14 Number and size of households __________________________________________________________ 14 Aging population ______________________________________________________________________ 14 Income influences energy use ___________________________________________________________ 15 How householders interact with energy__________________________________________________________ 15 Householder actions that reduce energy use ________________________________________________ 15 Motivations to use & save energy_________________________________________________________ 17 Householders know little about their energy use _____________________________________________ 19 Householder energy needs ______________________________________________________________ 19 Energy needs–based market segments ____________________________________________________ 20 Social & cultural influences on home energy use __________________________________________________ 24 Social role of energy use________________________________________________________________ 24 The culture of the home ________________________________________________________________ 26 People don’t have buttons to push! _____________________________________________________________ 27

Always something new: monitor & evaluate ____________________29 Why monitoring & evaluation are vital ___________________________________________________________ 29

Motivating Householder Energy Action – Table of Contents

Improve program effectiveness using monitoring ____________________________________________ 29 Reduce program costs using monitoring ___________________________________________________ 31 Avoid costly mistakes __________________________________________________________________ 31 Develop our knowledge base with evaluation _______________________________________________ 32 What to monitor & evaluate ___________________________________________________________________ 32 Clarify monitoring & evaluation aims ______________________________________________________ 32 Quantitative measures of program impact __________________________________________________ 33 Qualitative indicators of program impact ___________________________________________________ 38 Program processes ____________________________________________________________________ 39 How to monitor & evaluate ___________________________________________________________________ 40 Use an appropriate method _____________________________________________________________ 40 Who to research ______________________________________________________________________ 43 Detailed interviews ____________________________________________________________________ 43 Group Discussion______________________________________________________________________ 43 Surveys _____________________________________________________________________________ 43 Small-scale controlled experiments________________________________________________________ 51 Computer models _____________________________________________________________________ 52 Choosing monitoring and evaluation strategies ______________________________________________ 52 Sharing the learning ___________________________________________________________________ 54

Information sometimes motivates ___________________________55 When to use an information strategy____________________________________________________________ 55 Information by itself rarely motivates action ________________________________________________ 55 Households to target with information _____________________________________________________ 56 Essential features of information strategies _______________________________________________________ 57 The qualities of information that motivates _________________________________________________ 57 Information that is noticed ______________________________________________________________ 58 Information that is evaluated favourably ___________________________________________________ 60 Information that is understood ___________________________________________________________ 61 Information that is remembered __________________________________________________________ 62 What to inform _____________________________________________________________________________ 63 Environmental reasons to save energy_____________________________________________________ 63 Energy costs - focus on LOSS not savings __________________________________________________ 63 Focus on a very specific energy action _____________________________________________________ 65 Make energy visible____________________________________________________________________ 65 Information strategies _______________________________________________________________________ 66 Choosing information strategies __________________________________________________________ 66 Media campaigns______________________________________________________________________ 67 Energy efficiency labels_________________________________________________________________ 68 Energy efficiency displays _______________________________________________________________ 70 Energy/Greenhouse audits ______________________________________________________________ 72 Give feedback on energy use ____________________________________________________________ 76 Workshops___________________________________________________________________________ 78 Demonstrating home energy action _______________________________________________________ 79 Use community groups to communicate ___________________________________________________ 80 Use social networks to communicate ______________________________________________________ 80 Monitoring and evaluating information programs __________________________________________________ 81

Motivating Householder Energy Action – Table of Contents

Money sometimes motivates ________________________________83 Clues that money is not enough________________________________________________________________ 83 Householders don’t see energy costs ______________________________________________________ 83 Money often does not motivate __________________________________________________________ 83 Energy efficiency investments may not be economical ________________________________________ 86 Essential features of financial incentives that motivate ______________________________________________ 86 Decide whether financial incentives will motivate! ____________________________________________ 86 Vital non-financial aspects of financial incentive strategies _____________________________________ 88 Some financial incentive strategies _____________________________________________________________ 90 Energy rate pricing ____________________________________________________________________ 90 Rebates & grants______________________________________________________________________ 91 Loans _______________________________________________________________________________ 92 Comprehensive installation programs______________________________________________________ 92 The case of rental housing ______________________________________________________________ 94 Monitoring & evaluating financial incentive strategies_______________________________________________ 94

Attitudes sometimes motivate ______________________________96 Link between attitudes & actions _______________________________________________________________ 96 When the attitude–action link is stronger___________________________________________________ 96 Remember the context _________________________________________________________________ 98 Do attitudes cause actions? _____________________________________________________________ 98 Only use attitude strategies when relevant!_________________________________________________ 99 Options for attitude strategies _________________________________________________________________ 99 Strong personal reminders – cognitive dissonance strategies ___________________________________ 99 Use action prompts ___________________________________________________________________ 101 Use “foot-in-the door” strategies ________________________________________________________ 102 Media campaigns_____________________________________________________________________ 103

People need people______________________________________106 Social & cultural influences on energy action_____________________________________________________ 106 Social interaction _____________________________________________________________________ 106 Social & cultural “norms” ______________________________________________________________ 106 Strategies that tap into our social needs ________________________________________________________ 109 Use regulations & strong social pressure with care __________________________________________ 109 Demonstrating energy action ___________________________________________________________ 109 Use demonstration households__________________________________________________________ 109 Use existing informal social networks_____________________________________________________ 110 Encourage public commitment to saving energy ____________________________________________ 110 Encourage "adaptive muddling" _________________________________________________________ 111 Make energy actions publicly visible ______________________________________________________ 111 Set up a competition between groups ____________________________________________________ 112 Use community groups to run energy action programs _______________________________________ 112 A successful combination of social strategies _______________________________________________ 113 Involve the community ________________________________________________________________ 114

Market transformation __________________________________115

Motivating Householder Energy Action – Table of Contents

The role for market transformation ____________________________________________________________ 115 Influences on the market for energy efficiency _____________________________________________ 115 Essential features of a market transformation approach____________________________________________ 117 Understand the social context___________________________________________________________ 117 Understand the market ________________________________________________________________ 118 Ensure quality _______________________________________________________________________ 123 Market transformation strategies ______________________________________________________________ 124 Key features of market transformation strategies ___________________________________________ 124 Energy efficiency labels________________________________________________________________ 124 Minimum energy efficiency standards ____________________________________________________ 125 Regulations _________________________________________________________________________ 126 Trials ______________________________________________________________________________ 127 Financial Incentives___________________________________________________________________ 127

Aiming for home energy action ____________________________129 Your plan_________________________________________________________________________________ 129 Why plan? __________________________________________________________________________ 129 What to plan ________________________________________________________________________ 130 Clarify aims & objectives _______________________________________________________________ 132 Put your own house in order _________________________________________________________________ 132 Attend to consistency & credibility _______________________________________________________ 132 Attend to organisational structure _______________________________________________________ 132 Develop a network of professional advisors ________________________________________________ 133 Form a community advisory committee ___________________________________________________ 134 Develop the energy action program____________________________________________________________ 134 Choose energy actions with the greatest opportunities _______________________________________ 134 Choose energy actions with long term potential ____________________________________________ 136 Choose households to focus on _________________________________________________________ 136 Develop a mixture of strategies _________________________________________________________ 137 Choose a monitoring strategy ___________________________________________________________ 137 Program schedule ____________________________________________________________________ 138 Training ____________________________________________________________________________ 138 Develop administrative systems _________________________________________________________ 138 Implement your energy action program ________________________________________________________ 139

References____________________________________________140

Table of Figures Figure 1: Home energy use as a technical and human system..........................................................................6 Figure 2: EPRI Residential Market Segments & Needs ................................................................................... 22 Figure 3: Monitoring and evaluation – a continuous adaptive management process ......................................... 31 Figure 4: Relationship between survey respondents and population of interest ................................................ 45 Figure 5: A survey response rate................................................................................................................. 45 Figure 6: Psychological and Social Factors in Energy Conservation Purchases .................................................. 58 Figure 7: Idea for insulation advertisement: ‘Are you losing your hard-earned dollars through your roof?’......... 65 Figure 8: Relationships between key players in the system of home energy use ............................................ 116 Figure 9: Distribution channels - example of major kitchen and laundry appliances ........................................ 119 Figure 10: Breakdown of purchasers, sources and destinations - example of residential refrigerators in Canada in 1978 .............................................................................................................................................. 120 Figure 11: Builder’s decision-making process – example of imposed choice purchases of kitchen & laundry appliances ...................................................................................................................................... 122 Figure 12: Foundation of a home energy program ...................................................................................... 131

Table of Tables Table 1: Downward and upward pressures on home energy use ......................................................................1 Table 2: Fuels used in Australian homes 1994 – percent and environmental impact ...........................................3 Table 3: Sources of household greenhouse gas emissions ...............................................................................4 Table 4: Hypothetical net impact of solar HWS rebate program...................................................................... 37 Table 5: Questions of interest to program evaluators and social researchers ................................................... 40 Table 6: Differences in method for investigating fridges vs. people................................................................. 41 Table 7: Importance of credibility for program effectiveness .......................................................................... 75 Table 8: Comparison of rebate schemes ...................................................................................................... 92 Table 9: Deciding when attitude strategies are relevant ................................................................................ 99 Table 10: Effectiveness of community groups conducting free home energy audits ........................................ 112

Why use this handbook?

What you can find in this handbook Outline of the handbook This handbook aims to: •

Show that home energy action is just as much about people as it is about technology.



Use social science insights about people to guide home energy action programs.

Without householders taking energy actions, we cannot reduce home energy use. One householder may buy an energy efficient fridge. Another may take shorter showers. Both are taking energy actions. We could try to avoid involving householders by regulating extensively. But regulations are unlikely to keep pace with changes in technology, households, and social expectations. Table 1, below, gives some idea of the social pressures pushing up home energy use. By themselves, energy efficient technologies and regulations are unlikely to significantly reduce home energy use. Downward pressures on home energy use

Upward pressures on home energy use

• •

• • •

home insulation regulations increasing efficiency of appliances

1

increasing size of homes smaller families!more households more appliances per household

Table 1: Downward and upward pressures on home energy use Home energy action programs need to motivate home energy users to take actions that will save energy in their homes. Social scientists have done a great deal of research into what motivates people to take energy actions. They have also studied social and cultural influences on householders’ energy use. This research is directly relevant to managers developing and guiding home energy action programs. However, the research would be inaccessible to most managers.

1

‘Between 1984 and 1994 the average size of newly constructed private houses has increased 15% to 192 square meters.’ (Australian Bureau of Statistics 1996, pp. 249-250)

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

2

This handbook makes relevant findings of social science research accessible to managers of home energy action programs. It shows how to improve the effectiveness of information, financial and attitude change strategies. It also proposes a new suite of strategies that have been shown to motivate home energy action.

Preview of the handbook – some tips for success This checklist was developed to help design and implement programs to draught-proof U.S. homes.2 Social and behavioural researchers developed it. The checklist gives a good idea of the kind of recommendations described in the handbook. Marketing conservation 1) Vivid information. Use concrete examples and demonstrations. 2) Personalized information. Use individually tailored recommendations. 3) Personal appeals. Use face-to-face interactions. 4) Credible sources. Use local organizations and individuals. 5) Observability. Use highly visible local demonstrations. 6) Social diffusion. Make use of friends and neighbours. 7) Market segmentation. Target information to specific clients 8) Market penetration. Use door-to-door canvassing. 9) Equity concerns. Reach the renting sector, those on low incomes, minorities, the elderly. Delivering conservation 1)

Convenience. Offer simple and easy sign-up procedures.

2)

Flexibility. Give consumer a choice of actions.

3)

Hard interventions. Install inexpensive conservation hardware.

4)

Quick results. Focus on rapid recognition of programme benefits.

5)

Active participation. Encourage do-it-yourself actions.

6)

Financial incentives. Offer loans, grants, rebates [under some circumstances]

7)

Mix of services. Coordinate various energy programme offerings.

8)

Quality control. Conduct follow-up inspections.

9)

Programme evaluation. Include evaluation in initial programme design.

10)

Consumption data. Use metering or utility bills in evaluation.3

2

The source literature refers to weatherizing programs. Weatherizing is the term used in the U.S. for draught-proofing a home. 3 Coltrane et al. 1986, p. 135

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

3

Need for the handbook Environmental impact of home energy use Some environmental impacts of home energy use are outlined in Table 2, below. There are clearly many environmental reasons for striving to reduce home energy use. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions related to home energy use is particularly germane in the context of global efforts to stem climate change. Table 2: Fuels used in Australian homes 1994 – percent and environmental impact Environmental impacts

4

Percent of each fuel type used in homes

Most of Australia: Greenhouse gases, acid rain, atmospheric pollution, land degradation, & ground-water pollution from mining & burning coal to make electricity. Tasmania: River & wetland degradation from hydroelectric dams.

48% Electricity

Greenhouse gases from burning natural gas.

35% Natural Gas

Land degradation, atmospheric pollution from harvesting & burning wood products.

5

14% Fuelwood

Greenhouse gases from burning. 3% LPG

Table 3, below, describes some of major sources of household activities that generate greenhouse gases, along with rough estimates of the level of emissions each activity produces. Home energy use is the household activity that contributes the most greenhouse gas emissions. Including a household activity in Table 3 is not meant to imply that households should assume full responsibility for the greenhouse gas emissions arising from that activity. A chain of actors – producers, service providers and consumers – influence the emissions related to these activities. Inclusion in the table merely indicates that householders are one target group for policies to reduce emissions related to those activities.

4 5

Based on Ramage 1997, p. 303. Energy Efficient Strategies 1999

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

4

Table 3: Sources of household greenhouse gas emissions Major Greenhouse Gases related to activity

Major sources of household greenhouse gas 7 6 emissions – rough 1990 figures in million tonnes of CO2 equivalent 8

CO2 – Carbon dioxide from burning fuels.

65 Home Energy Use

CO2 – Carbon dioxide from burning fuels.

50 Transport Energy Use

CH4 – Methane from livestock & rice farming. N2O – Nitrous oxide from fertlising soil.

20 Food

CH4 – Methane from landfills.

20 Waste

CO2 – Carbon dioxide from energy required to produce.

15

CO2 – Carbon dioxide from energy required to produce.

? Consumer Items

9

10

11

Building

12

Need to notice people using energy in their homes Assessments of the potential for reducing environmental damage routinely rest on analyses of ‘purely’ technical capacity. Such assessments are generally optimistic, confirming the view that any number of environmental targets could be achieved once intervening social barriers have been overcome. In this fairy tale world, abstract models of technological potential dominate. But technical potential which cannot be realised for a range of perfectly explicable sociotechnical reasons is not really technical potential, or at least it is not technical potential which is of any relevance in the race to reduce CO2 emissions.13 Very early research in the area [of household energy use] was guided by the singular assumption, derived from an engineering perspective that household energy consumption could easily be explained by physical variables such as climatic conditions, housing design, and the stock and efficiencies of

6

Excluding those attributable to landclearing as the figures are subject to large uncertainties. Rounded to the nearest 5 million tonnes CO2 equivalent to reflect the uncertainties in quantifying GGEs and conflating results from different studies using different methodologies. 8 Pears 1998 cites ~63.9mtCO2e for 1990 home energy use and fuelwood – based on Wilkenfeld 1996 and NGGI workbook. 9 Pears 1998 cites ~49.1mtCO2e for 1990 – based on Wilkenfeld 1996. 7

10

Based on the first Dutch study of its kind– Kramer et al. 1999. Each household’s food-related greenhouse gas emissions was approximately 2800kg CO2 equivalent in 1990. In 1995 there were on average 2.4 persons per household in the Netherlands – each person’s food-related greenhouse gas emissions was roughly 1100kg CO2 equivalent. In the absence of figures for Australia, let us assume each of 17 million people had food-related greenhouse gas emissions of 1100kg CO2 equivalent – total food-related greenhouse gas emissions for Australia for 1990 would be roughly 18.7 million tonnes CO2 equivalent. Based on the relative GGE intensity of different food products, Kramer et al. suggest households could reduce emissions by consuming more locally produced foods, less glasshouse produced food and less meat (substituting eggs, nuts and pulses). 11 Pears 1998 cites ~18.7mtCO2e for 1990 – based on Wilkenfeld 1996. 12 Pears 1998 cites ~15mtCO2e for 1990 – based on Lumb et al. 1996. 13 Shove 1999, p. 1110

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

5

appliances and vehicles. The assumption was embarrassed severely by a detailed five-year field study (Princeton University’s Twin Rivers Project) that has already become a classic among social science energy researchers. Townhouses in similar housing tracts, with similar square footage, number of rooms, and appliance packages and occupied by families of similar size and sociodemographic characteristics varied in energy use by as much as two-to-one…Because they clearly revealed the importance of life-styles to energy consumption practices, these findings stimulated detailed investigations of how life-styles shaped energy use, and paved the way for justifying the importance of social science research to a skeptical policy establishment dominated by an engineering orientation.14

People are part of the energy picture but many home energy conservation programs focus only on homes and appliances.15 The claim that conservation will make big reductions in our energy needs is premature. An implied assumption is that a conservation strategy would yield big pay-offs if everyone would only cooperate. But since everyone almost never cooperates with any national policy, this is not a strong foundation for an energy strategy.16

If an energy efficient technology is developed that does not fit the social milieu, it may not be adopted. It may be viewed as ugly or impractical – think of consumer responses to early compact fluorescent light globes and low flow showerheads. Sometimes households use energy efficient technologies ‘incorrectly’. In other words, in practice the technologies will not be energy efficient, even though they may be energy efficient in theory. Over the past decade, engineering has indeed produced a number of impressive energy-efficiency innovations (e.g. compact fluorescent bulbs, low-e windows), while few have been widely adopted.17 Achieving energy conservation is a twofold challenge, partly technical and partly human. The development of energy-conserving technologies is a necessary but insufficient step toward reduced energy consumption. Unless adopted by a significant segment of consumers, the impact of technical innovations will be negligible.18

Figure 1, below, graphically illustrates Home energy use as a technical and human system. Thinking about home energy use in this way is particularly important in Australia, as social scientists have only recently been involved in environmental policymaking. (A)lthough many national committees of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP) include social scientists (in Canada their coordinating committee is chaired by a social scientist) the Australian national committee decided not to incorporate social science research into its program…environmental problems in Australia were seen, and to a degree still are, as essentially natural scientific questions. Only relatively recently has there been a wider acknowledgement that environmental problems, while starting with a fundamental natural science base, are largely caused by human activities, they affect human beings, and they need to be resolved by humans. That essentially involves the social sciences.19

14

Rosa et al. 1988 pp. 160-61 Lutzenhiser & Shove 1999, Lutzenhiser 1993 16 Frieden 1981 in Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 17 Lutzenhiser 1992 pp.49-50 18 Costanzo et al. 1986, p.521 19 Harris 1993 pp. 5-6 15

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

6

Technical change

Social change

Household System

Physical

Dwelling behavior

Parameters

Human Demographic Biophysical Psychological

Energy Variables

Occupant behavior

Climatic system

Economic system

Cultural system

Environment Figure 1: Home energy use as a technical and human system20

Need to consider how best to motivate people Our intuition about how to motivate home energy action can be very wrong. For instance, home energy action programs often assume that householders will take an energy action if they receive information about why to save energy and how to save energy. This assumption is incorrect. This handbook explains when information can motivate, the features needed for a home energy information strategy to be successful, what type of information motivates and outlines a range of information strategies. To date, most efforts to “market” conservation have taken the form of large-scale information campaigns. These programs have relied on two vague theories of conservation behavior: the attitude model and the rational-economic model. The attitude model assumes that conservation behavior will follow automatically from favorable attitudes toward conservation. The rational-economic model assumes that people will perform conservation behaviors that are economically advantageous...Although both “theories” are intuitively reasonable, we believe that they underestimate the complexity of human behavior. 21

Other home energy action programs assume that householders will take an energy action if they receive a financial incentive. This handbook explains why money is often a poor motivator and why it even might discourage energy actions in the long run. It also explains features of financial incentives that do motivate and outlines a range of financial incentive options.

20 21

Hitchcock 1993 p.153 Costanzo et al. 1986, p.521

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

7

From the experience of the U.S. National Research Council’s Committee on the Behavioral and Social Aspects of Energy Consumption: Policies and programs intended to improve the energy efficiency of buildings in the United States have often had disappointing results. When the Residential Conservation Service program offered homeowners individualized energy information at low cost or even for free, the response was decidedly underwhelming. When conservation programs involve offers of loan subsidies for home weatherization22, few people take out loans, and the rate of participation has had much less to do with the size of the subsidy than with the way the programs are marketed and managed. Even when weatherization programs seem successful and they lead to the insulation of walls, the caulking of doors and windows, and the installation of energy-efficient furnaces, energy savings have not matched predictions. On the average, savings are somewhat less than predicted, but the variability is a bigger surprise: while savings for some buildings are double what was predicted, other buildings yield substantial increases in energy use.23

The 101 ways to keep Vic[toria] fit energy conservation campaign primarily produced and distributed educational booklets in eight community languages. Reviewers compared the program to three other Victorian-based ‘social change’ campaigns – Road Safety, Quit and Don’t be a Wally with water. Even though 101 ways to keep Vic fit was an expensive campaign, reviewers felt it was unsuccessful.24 There are some vital lessons here: •

Simply feeding information to home energy users usually has little impact on their actions. The actions of a home energy user are also influenced by their personalities, attitudes, previous actions, their income, the attitudes and actions of their friends and associates, and by the community and culture(s) they belong to.



Successful energy action programs cannot be built on assumptions about what motivates actions. We don’t make assumptions about which technical features will save energy in homes. We use recommendations based on research by technical energy specialists. Likewise, before choosing how to motivate action, we need recommendations based on research by social scientists.

We often struggle to understand the behaviour of those nearest and dearest to us. Men’s magazines proclaim the mystery of women’s behaviour. Women’s magazines puzzle over men’s behaviour. There’s an abundance of books to help parents understand the behaviour of their toddlers, children and teenagers. Almost as many books try to help us understand our parents, siblings and partners. If we struggle to understand the behaviour of our family, who we live with, the behaviour of strangers is likely to be even more perplexing! So it is puzzling that home energy action programs often seem to assume that it is easy to change the behaviour of total strangers. It isn’t!

Need to make research accessible to policy makers Energy analysts and program managers…quite reasonably ask “What work have social scientists done that might be of value in program planning and implementation?” We first point to a substantial body of theory and research focused directly on energy use and technology choice. It includes many studies of both routine consumption and energy conserving behavior that go well beyond familiar marketing

22

Weatherizing is the term used in the U.S. for draught-proofing a home. Stern et al. 1987 p. 339 24 Cosgrove et al. 1996 23

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

8

approaches (eg, market segmentation) to consider how people actually use energy, how they think about efficiency and how their lifestyles are shaped by cultural practices, social stratification systems, settlement patterns, organized market influences, and so forth.25

Since the 1970s, many researchers have investigated what motivates people to take action to reduce their home energy use. By 1980, there were already at least 600 consumer energy studies.26 Academic journals, conference proceedings and books contain a wealth of knowledge about how to motivate people to save energy in their homes. This knowledge is primarily generated from psychological and sociological research studies. It includes: •

anthropological-style research trying to understand how home energy users understand energy and appliances,



survey-style research into home energy consumers’ attitudes, reported behaviours etc., and



experimental research that tests home energy consumers’ responses to specific conservation program options.

Managers of home energy action programs are unlikely to have the time to find and read this academic literature. If they were not familiar with research methods used in psychology, sociology, and anthropology, they could easily misinterpret research findings. It is also easy to give too much weight to one study and forget to compare it to other research. This handbook: •

makes relevant academic research accessible for managers of home energy action programs,



summarises key reviews of what motivates people to save energy in their homes, and



shows how to motivate day-to-day energy actions, as well as householder purchasing actions.

Need to involve technical and ‘people’ professionals To succeed, energy action programs need the involvement of professionals who understand people, as well as professionals who understand energy. The one without the other will not succeed. Professionals who understand the ‘technical side’ of home energy use are essential to ensure that energy action programs target those areas with the most technical potential to save energy. These professionals know where energy is used in the ‘average’ home, the computer model home, and the ‘test’ home. Professionals who understand the ‘human side’ of home energy use are essential to ensure that strategies are used that will motivate people to take energy saving actions. These professionals know about the enormous variation in how real households use their homes and technologies and the implications of this for energy action strategies. They know that different sets of influences affect different people in different ways. They know how to

25 26

Lutzenhiser & Shove 1999 p. 218 McDougall et al. 1981

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

9

motivate people to take energy action and they know how we can improve our understanding of what motivates people. Professionals who understand the ‘human side’ are also better equipped to see the social and organisational forces that influence the development and ‘uptake’ of energy efficiency technologies.27 They can see where the ‘social’ potential to save energy lies. When research into the social and human influences on home energy use was in its infancy, social researchers assumed they knew which energy practices were significant to study. As a result, a great deal of research focused on how to motivate people to turn out lights, or other relatively ‘trivial’ energy actions. Social researchers now realise that, even though they interact with technology and energy everyday, they need the type of energy knowledge and insights that ‘technical’ professionals have. Likewise, even though they interact with people everyday, technical professionals do not have the type of knowledge and insights into people that social scientists do. (S)ocial science findings often appear obviousafter the fact. The findings seem that way because every culture develops sayings (aphorisms) to prepare us for common social eventualities. These aphorisms in time gain the ring of true wisdom. The problem is that one can use them after the fact to “explain” whatever happens. So, “absence makes the heart grow fonder,” but “out of sight, out of mind.” “There is no place like home,” but “the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.” “Think before you jump,” but “he who hesitates is lost.” Thus, no matter what direction social scientific findings take, a cultural aphorism can later “explain” them.28 (W)hat makes social scientists different from the rest of us? The most obvious difference is that social scientists have had specialized training. They have learned particular bodies of collected knowledge; they have learned special methods to test new ideas and gain new knowledge. Social scientists have also developed special ways of thinking about social life, of how to approach new problems, and what patterns to look for in new events.29

Both ‘technical’ and the ‘human’ professionals are essential to ensure that energy action programs target actions with the technical and the social potential to save energy.

Limitations of this handbook Limited focus of academic research Early studies tended to focus on curtailment activities rather than one-off efficiency improvements. 30 They often did not look at the long-term impact of energy action programs. Further, they often did not take into account cost effectiveness.31 Later studies have tried to overcome these limitations. There has been relatively little work into the social and cultural aspects of home energy use.

27

Shove 1999 Pettigrew 1996, p. 15. 29 Pettigrew 1996, p.1. 30 Stern 1992 31 McDougall et al. 1981 28

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

10

(W)e have little sense of how various cultures’ internal logics treat energy and technology. We need to understand just what energy, technology, the environment, money, family life, and membership mean in various subcultures. This understanding can only come through direct field contact.32

This understanding would help us develop strategies that fit into the real lives of people at home. It would help us develop strategies that work with their understandings of energy, environment and technology. We also know little about how appliances and technologies are incorporated into homes and families. This knowledge would help us develop energy efficient technologies that people readily accept and easily use efficiently. The need for further research is particularly acute in the case of market transformation (MT) approaches to energy efficiency. While a good deal is known about the behavior of markets in a general sense, the specific markets of greatest interest to energy planners (eg, markets for large buildings, houseing, lighting, home appliances, automobiles, industrial equipment, etc.) have received little systematic attention. A better knowledge of how these markets operate…is needed to support strategic MT interventions.33

We need to know how people understand appliance labels, and how buyers and sellers negotiate what they mean by “efficiency”.34 Without this knowledge, it is difficult to develop effective programs to influence technology choice. The process of negotiating house designwithin the family, within the homebuilding firm, between the family and homebuildergreatly influences the market for energy efficient homes. Learning about such processes would greatly improve our strategies for moving the market in a more energy efficient direction.

Different context to some earlier research Much of the early research cited – whether directly or indirectly – in this handbook was undertaken during the energy crisis of the 1970s. The context to those studies was35: •

a shortage of energy,



steep increases in energy prices,



questions about whether there was any energy crisis, and



concerns about who was to blame.

In the different energy context that prevails now, we cannot assume that what motivated action then will motivate action now. Nonetheless, most of the recommendations in the handbook should motivate action since: •

much of the research into ‘people and home energy use’ has drawn on more general social science ideas and research, and



more recent research tends to support most of the findings of the earlier research.

32

Lutzenhiser 1992, p. 56 Lutzenhiser & Shove 1999 p.219 34 Lutzenhiser & Shove 1999 35 Frieden & Baker 1983 33

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

11

Limited Australian research In Australia, it is only relatively recently that many social scientists have become closely involved in environmental issues. Instead, environmental questions have been seen as the province of natural scientists. During the 1970s and 1980s, social scientists that were asking environmental questions were often exposing the limitations of the prevailing thinking about imminent resource shortages. It was only in the late 1980s that many social scientists became convinced of the seriousness of environmental problems. Their focus, however, was primarily on ‘green issues’, rather than ‘brown issues’ such as energy use.36 A fairly large amount of social scientific research into water conservation has been conducted in Australia and published in academic journals.37 In comparison, there has been very little research into energy conservation in Australia. Almost none of this research has been undertaken by social scientists and published in academic journals. We cannot assume that Australians are motivated in the same way that North Americans and Europeans are. The social and cultural context is definitely different. Nonetheless, most of the recommendations in the handbook should motivate Australians to take action since: •

the findings of psychology studies into home energy use in Western countries tend to find that people are motivated in similar ways, and



the handbook emphasises the importance of exploring the social and cultural context of each program; it does not claim that the social and cultural context in Australia will be the same to that in North America or Europe – quite the contrary.

Some tensions in this project Recapping, this handbook has two main aims: 1. Show that home energy use and home energy action is just as much about people as it is about technology. 2. Use social science insights about people to guide home energy action policies and programs. However, the audience for this handbook will often be either: •

technical professionals, who have had leading roles in developing most of Australia’s home energy action programs, or



policy-makers, who have received home energy action advice primarily from technical professionals.

The conjunction of the aims and the audience results in some tensions in the handbook: 1. Need simplicity – in danger of oversimplification This handbook tries to summarise social science concepts and research methods relevant to managers of home energy action programs. It needs to be sufficiently succinct to be a useful policy and program development tool. However, it then risks

36 37

Harris 1993 Primarily by Geoffrey Syme and colleagues at CSIRO in Perth.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Why use this handbook?

12

not doing sufficient justice to the breadth and depth of relevant social science thinking. 2. Need ‘policy handles’ – in danger of attempting ‘predict & control’ Energy action policy-makers and their advisers are often used to thinking about technologies – which are somewhat predictable and controllable. We cannot confidently predict what humans will do, and cannot, or should not try to control them. This handbook tries to provide policy-makers with ‘strategies’ for motivating people to take energy action. It tries to avoid suggesting that it is possible to predict and control people.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Understanding the householder

Why do we need to understand the householder? As we discussed in the Outline of the handbook on page 1, to reduce the amount of energy used in homes, we need householders to take energy actions. Energy actions are: •

one-off energy actions – like installing insulation or buying an energy-efficient fridge, and



day-to-day energy actions – like taking shorter showers or turning off lights in unused rooms.

Understanding the householder is a key to successful home energy action programs. There are at least three reasons for this: 1. To motivate people, we need to understand them. In the section Need to consider how best to motivate people, on page 6, we discussed how difficult it is to motivate people to take home energy action. To know how to motivate people, we need to understand something about them and how they use energy. 2. To target energy actions that people will actually take, we need to understand them. Technologies and energy actions that are developed to save energy in homes save no energy until householders adopt them as planned. Some technologies and energy actions will appeal to householders and others will not. It is an uphill task to motivate householders to install and use unappealing technologies or take unappealing energy actions. We will have a better idea of which technologies and actions to select for home energy action programs if we try to understand householders. 3. To develop energy saving technologies and actions that will appeal to people, we need to understand them. As we have just discussed, not all technologies and energy actions appeal to householders. Further, unless householders adopt those technologies and actions, the innovations will save no energy in homes. Despite this, technologies are often developed paying little attention to whether householders will adopt them38. We will be in a better position to develop energy saving technologies and actions that will appeal if we try to understand householders.

38

Lutznehiser 1992

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

14

Demographics Some demographic changes have a big influence on home energy demands39: •

there is increasing variety in the composition of households and families,



smaller household size generally increases per capita energy use, as some energy uses are fixed regardless of household size,



more dual-income households increases time pressures for families, resulting in stronger preferences for labour-saving devices such as dishwashers,



post World War II ‘baby-boom’ has changed the age group structure in households, and



an increasing proportion of elderly householders may reduce per capita energy use, especially for transportation.40

Number and size of households Between 1911 and 1991 the number of people per household in Australia nearly halved.41 Between 1996 and 2021, the ABS expects the number of households to increase between 38% and 46%, even though they expect the population to grow just 24%. At the same time, average household size is expected to decline from 2.6 persons per household to about 2.2 to 2.3 persons per household. 42 The declines are related to the aging population, decreasing fertility, people having children later in life, and increasing family break-up. Increasing numbers of households results in increases in total home energy use. However, decreases in household size result in very little decrease in the energy used in each home. The size of a household naturally impacts on home energy use – larger households use more energy. Nonetheless, they do not use very much extra energy. Adding one person to an existing household increases total energy use a little. Creating a new household with one person in it increases total energy use much more.

Aging population The proportion of the Australian population aged 65 and over is expected to grow from 5% in 1996 to 7% in 2021.43 U.S. studies have found that older people are less willing to reduce the temperature that they heat their homes to than younger people are44. On the other hand, they tend to use less fuel for personal transport than younger people do.

39

Gellings 1994, National Research Council 1984 Zimmerman 1980 in National Research Council 1984 41 ABS 1996 42 ABS 1999a 43 ABS 1999a 44 Frieden & Baker 1983 40

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

15

In the U.S., parents tend to continue to occupy the family home after children have left that home.45 Thus older people are living in homes designed to accommodate far more people. About one-third of older Australians live in couple families without children and about one-third more live alone.46 These proportions are expected to increase as older people are assisted to live independently. In 1996 70% of older Australians lived in separate houses.47

Income influences energy use Low-income households often have the greatest need for improved energy efficiency, but the least ability to make capital investments. Low-income households can often not take advantage of tax-credits or rebates for purchasing energy efficient products. They will often change their lifestyles (e.g. reducing the temperature for heating) while higherincome households will purchase energy efficient products.48 Higher-income households tend to consume much more energy than lower income households do – both directly and indirectly through consuming goods and services.49 This is the case even though higher income households may live in more energy efficient homes and own more energy efficient appliances. Low-income households in the U.S. tend to live in old homes that are not insulated or weatherised. These homes offer the most potential for energy savings. They also offer the potential to lower the fuel bills and increase the comfort of low-income residents.50

How householders interact with energy Householder actions that reduce energy use Day-to-day energy actions—curtailments Many day-to-day energy actions (e.g. hot showers) are habitual. They are not under the conscious ‘control’ of householders – so it is difficult for householders to change how they act. However, ‘energy-conscious’ people are more likely to remember undertaking energy-related actions.51 Consequently, once householders have taken some energy actions and have become more energy-conscious, they are in a better position to change their habitual energy actions.

45

Lutzenhiser & Hackett 1993 ABS 1999a 47 ABS 1999b 48 Frieden & Baker 1983, 49 Lutzenhiser 1993 50 Brown & Berry 1995 51 Lutzenhiser 1993 46

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

16

One-off energy actions—efficiencies It can be easier to sustain energy savings from ‘one-off energy actions’, since they do not require ongoing energy saving activity52. For instance, once a heater thermostat is lowered, it does not require effort or attention for continued lower energy use. Likewise, once a new efficient refrigerator replaces an inefficient refrigerator, lower energy use will result. ‘Locked in’ energy savings would be especially important if the public became less concerned about environmental issues than they currently are.53 Efficiencies vary in cost and effort required: •

Low cost and low effort – e.g. installing a low flow showerhead.



Low cost and high effort – e.g. draught proofing one’s own home.



High cost and low effort – e.g. having a solar hot water service installed.



High cost and high effort – e.g. insulating one’s own home.

Link between curtailments & efficiencies Freedom from concern about energy has produced structural changes in energy-consuming equipment. Central heating and cooling systems, for example, allow people to move freely from one room to another without thinking about energy. But now when consumers are motivated to save energy, few people have the option of saving fuel by closing off unused rooms while retaining comfort in a smaller space.54

Homes carry through time the energy implications of choices made at the time of their construction. The heating and cooling technologies, construction techniques and materials, and social relations and expectations of the time all influenced the choice of home construction.55 The differences between Victorian-era terrraced houses, Californian bungalows and the open-plan houses popular in Australia today represent changes in social relations and expectations. They also fix particular patterns of energy consumption in place through time. High ceilings in the Victorian home, distance from bungalow to workplace, no doors to close between heated and unheated areas in the open-plan home all constrain future energy action options in those homes. Policies and programs targeting efficiency improvements today can impact curtailment options tomorrow. For instance, some home energy rating schemes assign little extra credit to a home where heated areas can be closed off from unheated areas. The schemes make the assumption that homes will be centrally heated. If these programs succeed, many Australians may find themselves living in ‘energy efficient’ homes without the option of heating and cooling only occupied rooms. This means that home energy action programs in future have less opportunity to target action on closing doors between heated and unheated rooms. This is of particular concern given demographic and lifestyle changes:

52

Kempton et al. 1992a Kempton et al. 1992a 54 National Research Council 1984 55 Lutzenhiser & Hackett 1993 53

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

17



The size of households is shrinking, so fewer rooms may be occupied at any given time. This provides opportunities to heat and cool only the occupied rooms.



Increasing numbers of people are working from home. This also provides opportunities to heat and cool only occupied rooms during working hours.

Programs should consider their options carefully before they forfeit future potential home energy savings.

Motivations to use & save energy Money Financial considerations have less impact on energy use than many policy-makers think. The cost of energy is not a great motivator for taking home energy action. Evidence of this is outlined in the section Clues that money is not enough, on page 83. In Australia, energy used in homes is relatively cheap. The proportion of household income spent on home energy use is on average less than 3%; it rarely exceeds 5%. In this context, the cost of energy is even less likely to motivate home energy action. Unfortunately, the up-front cost of taking an energy action is a motivator for not taking the energy action. Even when the total cost is less than the total financial savings, up-front costs still put householders off taking home energy actions. We should not jump to the immediate conclusion that financial incentives will solve this problem. The sections Essential features of financial incentives that motivate, on page 86 and Rebates & grants, on page 91, outline when financial incentives may motivate and how to structure financial incentives that do motivate. Self-esteem The actions that people take can be strongly motivated by their need for self-esteem. People who grew up in poverty may feel better about themselves when they behave as consumers. Not having to worry about waste may make them feel that they have “made it”. Consequently, people can associate conserving energy with being poor, or “freezing in the dark”. Energy conservation appeals, especially those that emphasise dollar savings, will turn away people who consume to boost their self-esteem. The term “energy efficiency” is unlikely to have negative connotations.56 Because people can feel negatively about “energy conservation”, this handbook suggests using terms with positive connotations, such as: •

energy action



energy efficiency



greenhouse action



energy star (for a household or householder doing an energy action)

56

Yates & Aronson 1983

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder



18

greenhouse star (for a household or householder doing a greenhouse action)

Choice & control People are happier and healthier when they feel they have some control over their lives. Even controlling relatively trivial matters can make people feel much better. One study showed that nursing home patients given some control over their daily routines were healthier and lived longer than those given no control. This principle has been used to encourage energy saving. In a study at Princeton University, residents were opposed to the installation of automatic day-night thermostats. The thermostat was redesigned such that residents could override it temporarily. The redesigned automatic day-night thermostats were much more appealing to residents. It does not matter whether or not the residents ever used the override mechanism. They felt in control of the system and this contributed to the appeal of the system.57 Similarly, people like to have choices in what they do. The issues of choice and control must be integrated into energy action programs. For instance, in the section Use “foot-inthe door” strategies on page 102, we explain the importance of giving the customer the choice of accompanying the auditor during an energy audit. That section also explains why it is important not to discourage enthusiasm for any worthwhile energy action - even if there are more effective (but less “sexy”) energy actions that could be done. It suggests ways to motivate further energy actions to follow the first action. A person is more likely to take environmental actions if they believe that they can bring about change through their own actions.58 Psychologists call this concept “locus of control”: •

People who believe that their actions can have no impact are considered to have an “external locus of control”—they believe that actions of powerful others (e.g. God, government) create change. These people are less likely to take environmental actions.



People who believe that their actions can have an impact are considered to have an “internal locus of control”—they are more likely to take environmental actions.

Energy action programs need to underline the positive impact that each person’s actions have. Nonetheless, there will be some people who are harder to convince to take energy actions – at least initially. Environmental concerns Individuals’ environmental concerns often have little direct impact on their actions. The section Link between attitudes & actions, on page 96, outlines some of the reasons for this. Nonetheless, there are some effective strategies that motivate home energy action by tapping into positive attitudes. They are outlined in detail in the section Options for attitude strategies, on page 99. All of these strategies help people make the link between their attitudes and their actions – in a positive way.

57 58

Yates & Aronson 1983 Hines et al. 1986/7

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

19

Householders know little about their energy use Householders may claim to be acting in an ‘economically rational’ fashion even when they do not have the necessary information to act in such a way. 59 Householders frequently cannot accurately estimate things such as the duration of their hot showers, or the size of their homes. This inattention to routine energy actions is understandable – householders must also attend to important long-term goals. People will answer questions about how they use energy in their homes even when they do not know the answer. Just because someone tells an interviewer that they spend five minutes in the shower does not mean that they actually spend five minutes in the shower. It does not even mean that they would have any idea how long they spend in the shower. I was convinced I spent about five minutes in the shower – until I took a stopwatch in with me! I was even more shocked on days when I washed my hair. Computing my average showering time took two weeks of timing my showers under different “showering scenarios”. The problem of people giving answers to which they cannot know the answer is discussed in more detail on page 48, in the section Beware self-reported action bias. People usually know the average dollar value of their utility bills. They do not usually know how many kWh of electricity or MJ of gas they use.60 If a household invests in insulation, but energy prices increase, the dollar value of their utility bills may go up, even though they are using less energy. This household may view their insulation as a wasted investment, even though their utility bills would have been much higher without the insulation. People do not usually know how many kWh or MJ they use per heating degree-day. The household may invest in insulation at the start of a very cold winter, use more energy than usual due to the cold winter, and again view their insulation as a wasted investment. In both cases the insulation is likely to financially benefit the householder. But in both cases, the average householder would have a great deal of difficulty seeing the energy and cost saving. The section Householders don’t see energy costs, on page 83, discusses this in more detail.

Householder energy needs People vary enormously in their use of appliances. A US study of room air conditioner use in 8 apartments found total air conditioner use during the whole of the cooling season varied between 2.5 hours and 1557 hours. The apartment using the air conditioner the least used 1.2kWh of ‘air conditioner’ electricity during the cooling season. The apartment using the air conditioner the most used 1048kWh of ‘air conditioner’ electricity over the same period. None of the apartments paid for their electricity use or for their air conditioners. The ‘high user’ apartment had, if anything, better thermal characteristics than the ‘low user’ apartment. During July (the hottest month), average room temperature for the high user was 24.9°C. Average room temperature for the low user was 28.6°C. This is a wider range in ‘comfort zones’ than is often suggested from laboratory studies.61

59

Lutzenhiser 1993 Stern 1992 61 Kempton et al. 1992b 60

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

20

Research by the US Electric Power Research Institute divides residential consumers electricity needs into two categories - personal benefits and consumer concerns62. Personal Benefits desired from energy use: •

Comfort - such as heating and cooling.



Convenience - such as that offered by microwave ovens.



High-tech enthusiasm - wanting the latest technological equipment.



Appearance - wanting the best appliances and/or those that look appealing.

Consumer Concerns about energy use: •

Energy conservation - important to most consumers - for cost reasons and to save electricity for future generations.



Personal control - some consumers don’t mind their energy use being modified by a utility, but some consumers mind a great deal and want complete personal control.



Safety - of appliances is seen as very important.



Search minimization - some consumers do not want to compare appliances - they do not want to compare prices or operating costs - if replacing an appliance, they will buy the same brand.



Task vs. area energy use - some consumers use lighting, heating and cooling only for the space they occupy - others use these services for a wider area.

Energy needs–based market segments Motivating home energy action is much easier if you know a little about the concerns and needs of the people you want to motivate. Knowing something of their concerns and needs means you can tailor home energy action programs: •

that will appeal to them, and



that they can easily act on.

Different target markets require different approaches for successful promotion of energy conservation. For instance: Efforts to sell efficiency solely on the basis of cost savings offer extremely weak inducements to status conscious buyers and builders.63 This non-profit educational organization initially offered free energy audits for businesses and stressed the importance of conservation for environmental reasons. The project staff soon discovered that ‘energy conservation’ presented a negative image to many businesses who feared compulsory restrictions on energy use. Once they determined that they were out of step with their target population, they changed their name to Enercon, began charging for services, and started using key phrases such as ‘energy management’, ‘cost-benefit’, ‘payback’, ‘cost avoidance’, and ‘return on investment’, and dropped words such as ‘conservation’ and ‘audit’ from their negotiations. Their effectiveness increased dramatically, with 85% of their negotiations leading to contracts for

62 63

Gellings 1994 Lutzenhiser 1994 p. 875

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

21

installation of energy management devices or development plans for in-house implementation, and they wee able to achieve energy savings averaging 36% for each business.64

The US Electric Power Research Institute conducted research into residential electricity consumers. They decided that six different ‘market segments’ can describe important distinguishing characteristics of different residential electricity consumers. 65 They found that the market segments do not correspond to demographic segments such as age, income or amount of energy used. These market segments are described in Figure 2, on page 22.

64 65

Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 138 Gellings 1994

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

EPRI Market Segment Pleasure Seekers

% of US consumers 21.5%

22

Needs Want benefits - comfort, convenience, high tech appearance. Concern for safety and personal control. Concern for cost and conservation. Less concern minimise appliance search - will compare appliances. Use energy in a task- specific way.

Appearance Conscious

18.4%

Want benefits - appearance and safety. Less concern for cost or conservation. Do not use energy in a task- specific way.

Lifestyle Simplifiers

16.9%

Less desire for benefits - comfort, convenience, tech & appearance. Less concern for personal control. Less concern to monitor energy use. Low income students or renters.

Resource Conservers

16.7%

Less concern for personal control. More concern costs and environment. Less concern to minimis appliance search - will compare appliances. Use energy in a task-specific way.

Hassle Avoiders

13.4%

Concern to minimise appliance search. Concern f personal control. Least concern for safety or cost.

Value Seekers

13.1%

Less desire for appearance. Less concern for safety. Less concern to minimise appliance search - will compare appliances. Most concerned to use conservation measures. Do not use energy in a task-specific way.

Figure 2: EPRI Residential Market Segments & Needs66 Classifying householders in this way is a useful starting point for thinking about people and their home energy use. It helps make the important points that: •

66

People are not all the same – they interact with energy in their homes in many different ways.

Adapted from Gellings 1994

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder



23

People do not just accomplish tasks using energy in their homes – they use energy to perform a broad range of cultural, social and psychological functions.

Thinking about the range of functions that people use energy for has implications for the design of home energy action programs: 1. Decisions on the design of energy-saving technologies. Early low-flow showerheads were unpopular. The many people who are unhappy ‘sacrificing’ comfort to save energy would be likely to form negative attitudes to about energy-saving technologies after personal unpleasant experience of ‘inadequate’ CFLs or low-flow showerheads. This is quite serious since attitudes formed through direct experience have a greater impact on actions than attitudes formed without direct experience (see Use “foot-in-the door” strategies on page 102). These people could then refrain from purchasing energy efficient technologies in the future. To avoid the problem of deterring future purchasers of energy-saving technologies, designs need to incorporate their preferences. 2. Decisions on which energy actions are most likely to be implemented by householders. I would contend that people with a technical background and/or strong environmental concerns are often responsible for developing home energy action programs. Further, I would contend that these people often have less concern for comfort, appearance, convenience and avoiding hassle than most other people do. Energy actions that seem easy to implement and economically rational to program developers can be distinctly unappealing to the majority of the public. An energy action (‘curtailment’ or ‘efficiency improvement’) saves no energy until it is taken. Programs need to focus on energy actions that many householders will take. 3. Decisions on how to motivate householders to take the energy actions. People are not all motivated in the same way. Programs need to develop a range of strategies for motivating home energy action. This classification is a thinking tool. For several reasons, the classification should not be used as the final word on how people interact with energy in their homes: 67 •

We should not expect that a person can be ‘classified’ into just one of the ‘market segments’.



We should not expect a person to ‘belong’ in the same ‘market segment’ all their lives.



We should not think that the classification includes all human dimensions of home energy use.



The classification does not say how the different ‘market segments’ came about – why people are different.



The classification does not explore or explain how social processes influence each ‘market segment’, or vise versa.

67

Lutzenhiser 1993

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder



24

The classification does not explore how changes over time might change our ‘market segment’ categories – e.g. how might the aging population change how we interact with energy in our homes.

Social & cultural influences on home energy use Social role of energy use Taking energy-saving actions can be socially risky. A study of undergraduate students in the southwest of the United States found that students felt that individuals using clotheslines to dry clothes were lower in status and poorer than individuals using clothes dryers. 68 They viewed men using clotheslines as less sexually attractive and more homosexual than men using clothes dryers. No campaigns had advocated using clotheslines to save energy, so the students were unlikely to think of clothesline use in environmental terms. On the other hand, campaigns had advocated using public transport to save energy. Nonetheless, students felt that individuals using a bus were lower in social status and less sexually attractive than individuals driving a car. People do not just accomplish tasks using energy in their homes – they use energy to ‘fit in’ with their society. In other words, they use energy to perform social or cultural services.69 The Victorian gas crisis in September 1998 shut down the state’s gas supply for two weeks. Many households were without hot water for a shower or bath. People were more horrified about this than they were about the lack of gas for cooking or for heating their homes. The airwaves and newspapers were filled with stories of people inventing new ways to produce their hot water for bathing, stoically adapting to cold showers or waterefficient bathing methods, or readjusting their personal sense of hygiene. The level of emotion that people attached to having their daily shower struck the media. Doctors issued reassurances that, for most people, a daily hot shower was not necessary. The need for a hot shower was not physical – it was social – as discussed in Australian ‘cultural energy services’, on page 107. It is not just our behaviours that are imbued with social significance. Items of hardware have collective meanings apart from their utilitarian significance. Appliances must conform to status expectations, and relative energy-efficiency is only one of many issues salient to social actors.70 Energy-using equipment is intimately involved in various forms of social life (ask a teenager about the meaning of a car, or a status-conscious landlord the meaning of a balcony clothesline). Houses, automobiles and appliances, for example, are central and meaningful in the lives of families, social networks, neighbourhoods and communities. Energy consumers receive information, approval, criticism, legitimacy, and status-confirmation through participation in these networks, and their hardware is routinely subject to social critique and regulation.71

68

Sadalla & Krull 1995 Wilhite et al. 1996 70 Lutzenhiser 1993 p. 264 71 Lutzenhiser 1992 p. 55 69

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

25

Social practices adapt to climates and technologies. On the evolution of air conditioning in homes: Traditional dwellings have long been cooled through the use of shade trees, solar-sensitive building orientation and subdivision layout, the use of thermal mass, large porches…As features such as porches suggest, people’s activity patterns, clothing, and other cultural practices have also been adapted to hot climates.72

Not only do technologies impact on social practices – cultural practices and social expectations impact on how different technologies are adopted. The same technology is adopted (or not) and used (or not) differently in different cultures. The section Social & cultural “norms”, on page 106, gives examples of how different cultures use the same technologies. The social and cultural dimension of energy use is critical to decisions on the design of home energy action programs: 1. Decisions on the design of energy-saving technologies. Early compact fluorescent light globes were unpopular. The section Social & cultural “norms”, on page 106, compares Norwegian and Japanese lighting requirements. Japanese living rooms are routinely lit with fluorescent light – not due to energy efficiency intentions. Norwegian living rooms are lit with a large number of incandescent bulbs.73 These completely different requirements relate to different ideas of what constitutes an appropriate ‘atmosphere’ to create at home. Culture influences our ideas of what lighting is appropriate for home use. Energy efficient technologies need to be designed appropriately for the cultural and social context. If they are not, they will not be purchased, or used, or used as intended. 2. Decisions on which energy actions have the most potential to save the most energy. The same energy-saving action will save different amounts of energy depending on the social and cultural context. For instance, in Australia low-flow showerheads have the potential to save a great deal of energy – because Australians shower a great deal and consider a hot shower to be vital. Trying to motivate Australians to reduce the number of showers they have is likely to be less successful. 3. Decisions on which energy actions are most likely to be implemented by householders. People will not adopt a behaviour or technology that is socially or culturally foreign to them. Energy actions must fit with their understanding of energy and their social and cultural needs. The 101 ways to keep Vic fit (energy conservation) campaign was interesting: the decision to translate its booklets into eight community languages was a recognition of the multicultural character of Australia. However, while the intention was laudable, the booklets were first written in English and within a Western cultural context, and then translated word for word into other languages.74

Programs need to understand how different cultures in the community understand and interact with energy. Program managers can then choose to focus on energy actions that householders will take.

72

Kempton & Lutzenhiser 1992 p. 172 Wilhite et al. 1996 74 Cosgrove et al. 1996 p.10 73

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

26

4. Decisions on how to motivate householders to take the energy actions. People are often motivated by social or cultural considerations: Ethnographic researchers have reported samples in which a significant amount of energy conservation took place, but with little evidence of economic calculation—persons instead responding to vague cultural values such as “reducing waste,” “being independent, ” or “making the house tight”. In these cases, energy-use and conservation were incorporated by households into their larger “home improvement” plans, and conservation measures were chosen on the basis of visibility to neighbors and visitors (although the investments selected were often among the least effective).75

Programs need to develop strategies that work with social and cultural motivators. The section Strategies that tap into our social needs, on page 109, suggests a number of these.

The culture of the home A Californian study explored why most people did not draught proof their homes, despite it being extremely cost effective.76 Experienced ethnographers77 found some complex reasons for this: •

Draught proofing is intangible and invisible. Even homeowners who wanted to do something about important global problems derived little satisfaction from ‘stuffing up the cracks’.



Homeowners did not think of draught proofing as home maintenance. Nor did they see it as a repair – nothing was broken. They also did not see draught proofing as a home improvement – in contrast with jobs like painting, it did not increase the home’s aesthetic or monetary value. Draught proofing was an ambiguous task. People usually avoid ambiguous things – so they avoided draught proofing.



If homeowners did not draught proof their homes within two years of moving in, they tended never to do it. In contrast, homeowners usually insulated their homes after they had lived in it for several years.



Younger homeowners, buying a home with the intention of ‘doing it up’, were much more likely to draught proof.



Homeowners expected draught proofing to be a dirty, unpleasant job.

In other words, householders’ actions are influenced by the way they feel about their home and the way they feel about doing different jobs in the home. Clues that money is not enough, on page 83, explains this ‘puzzling’ phenomenon in more detail. As specialists we may laugh at such behavior, but in the interests of further energy conservation in the country it behooves us to learn to work with the existing set of cultural values rather than to challenge them.78

75

Lutzenhiser 1993 p. 260 Wilk & Wilhite 1987 77 Ethnographic studies are intensive and open-ended. They ‘yield finely grained and detailed information that cannot be obtained through questionnaires, and they often provide unexpected insights and lead to productive new lines of inquiry’ (Wilk & Wilhite 1987 p. 52). ‘Ethnographic studies yield two levels of explanatory data. The first is the explanations offered by respondents for their actions in response to direct or indirect questioning. The second comprises synthetic explanations composed by ethnographers as interviews are dissected and analyzed. In this second stage the statements of the respondents are placed in a cultural context; deeper structures are sought behind the folk explanations’ (Wilk & Wilhite 1987 p. 57). 76

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

27

Cultural and social values are deeply held – they cannot and most likely should not be challenged by home energy action programs. Instead, program managers need to take the cultural and social values into account when developing a program. Middle-class Americans tend to identify closely with their houses; they focus much of their emotional life on home and family. An attack on the integrity of the house is easily translated emotionally into an oblique and indirect attack on the solidarity of the family.79

Australians are quite similar to North Americans in that regard. Programs can tap into Australians’ concerns to care for their homes – energy actions such as draught proofing and insulating can be portrayed as an extension of caring for one’s home. The illustration on the front of Insulating your home – an Energy Efficiency Victoria brochure – does exactly that. It shows insulation protecting the home and family from a vicious sun and nasty cold wind.

People don’t have buttons to push! When I talk to family and friends about my work, they often ask me what they should do to save energy in their homes. I can give them broad guidelines about which actions save the most energy in an average home. I cannot know which actions will save the most energy in their home. Aside from the issue of my not having sufficient technical training to calculate the exact impact of different energy actions, the potential for them to save energy depends on characteristics specific to their home: •

the macro and micro climatic context to their home,



the physical structure of their particular home,



the set of appliances and technologies particular to their home, and



how they use their homes and the technologies in them.

Even changing the physical structure alone does not always have the expected impact on energy use. Studies have found that, after installing ceiling insulation, many households save much less energy than predicted by computer models. Careful analysis indicated that ‘adding ceiling insulation increased the temperatures near the un-insulated walls and windows, so heat loss through these elements increased.’ 80 In other words, the computer models were not adequately simulating real world conditions. If it is hard to estimate the impact of changing the physical structure of the home, imagine how much more difficult it is to estimate the impact of strategies aimed at people: •

There is even more variation in the social and cultural contexts that people operate in than there is in the climatic contexts that homes ‘operate’ in.



The impact of different social and cultural contexts on home energy use has received far less research attention than the impact of climatic contexts on home energy use has.

78

Wilk & Wilhite 1987 p.67 Wilk & Wilhite 1987 p.64 80 Analysis by Alan Pears, Pears 2000, pers. comm. 14 May. 79

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Understanding the householder

28



There is even more variation in the psychological and social ‘make-up’ of people than there is in the physical structure of homes.



People can choose whether to take an energy action or not. Homes have no choice – they are acted on.



Until homes are acted on, they do not change. People change spontaneously.

Confronted with the complexity and unpredictability of people, one might be tempted to ignore them and concentrate on technologies and the physical structure of homes. This is not a strategy for a successful home energy action program. People choose whether to purchase, install and use energy saving technologies. People choose whether to draught proof homes. People choose whether to wear jumpers in heated rooms. People choose whether to vote for the governments that legislate for improved energy efficiency of homes and technologies. When I am asked how to motivate people to take home energy action, I can give broad guidelines about what motivates many people most of the time. I cannot, though, say what will motivate all people all of the time. Nor can I know for certain that these strategies will definitely have the expected impact. Our understanding of physical, technical, human and social influences on home energy use continues to improve. Home energy action programs themselves are part of the process of improving this understanding.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Always something new: monitor & evaluate

Why monitoring & evaluation are vital The benefits of program monitoring and evaluation are more likely to be realised when: •

Monitoring is integrated into the home energy action program from the outset.



The program managers and workers have a key role in deciding what to monitor and how to monitor it.



The monitoring strategy is decided on relatively early, such that program processes can be designed to facilitate easy monitoring.

Wherever possible, each energy action strategy chapter in this handbook is accompanied by a section on how to monitor and evaluate that type of strategy (e.g., information, financial incentives). General monitoring and evaluation tools are introduced in this chapter. The chapters on different energy action strategies then contain specific suggestions for which tools to use to monitor that strategy.

Improve program effectiveness using monitoring We recently spoke about the interacting influences on home energy use: •

climate,



the physical structure of the home,



appliances and technologies in the home, and



how homes and technologies are used, and how many people use them.

Each of these influences interacts with the others. As a result, we are never sure how home energy use will change. We also spoke of the difficulty of trying to predict how people will act, or of trying to predict how changing the physical structure of homes will impact on home energy use. Because of these uncertainties, it is impossible to design a ‘perfect’ home energy action program. Every program will be individual, providing opportunities to learn from the program as it proceeds. On top of this, households respond to home energy action programs. When they respond, they change the context for which the program was developed in the first place! The most important point is probably that human beings are continually responsive to interventionseven to the point of organizing to repeal some of them-so that it will never be possible to write a

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

30

cookbook for behavior change. It is absolutely essential to treat interventions as dynamic and to monitor and revise them continually.81

A successful home energy action program changes the actions of home energy users. This change makes the original program obsolete! New strategies will be needed to encourage more home energy actions. The U.S. State of Michigan runs a particularly successful Residential Conservation Service Program. 29% of eligible homes had home energy audits conducted during a seven-year period. Increased effectiveness and decreased costs were achieved by using on-going monitoring and evaluation.82 An “early feedback survey” in the Michigan Residential Conservation Service Program used a telephone survey to question non-participants in the program. One question asked respondents whether, now they had heard of the program, they would like to sign up for a home energy audit. Twenty-five percent of respondents said they would like to sign up. After this, several agencies experimented with direct telephone marketing and the technique was then adopted as the main marketing strategy.83 The successful Victorian-based Quit campaign built evaluation and monitoring into the program to redesign campaign methods and approaches as the campaign progressed. 84 In our judgment, it is a waste of resources to conduct field tests and evaluations of energy policies and programs merely to judge the projects against some criterion of efficacy, cost-benefit, or the like. While overall outcome measures sometimes have a useful purpose, it must be remembered that the purpose of a field trial is to improve future policies and programs, not just to judge the past. Observation should be aimed at aiding the learning process within a project and at gaining understanding of how the project can be adapted to other conditions…The overall goal should be to develop programs that are relatively self-regulating, rather than to find an ideal set of procedures.85

Figure 3: Monitoring and evaluation – a continuous adaptive management process, below, suggests viewing monitoring and evaluating as an integral part of program processes.

81

Stern 1993 p. 1898 Kushler 1989 83 Kushler 1989 p. 161 84 Cosgrove et al. 1996 85 National Research Council 1984 p. 193 82

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

31

Plan What is being planned? In what context?

Evaluate What do the results mean? If actual outcomes differ from the expected outcomes, why? What are the implications from the results?

Act What is happening? In what context?

Monitor What are the results of actions? In what context?

Figure 3: Monitoring and evaluation – a continuous adaptive management process86 Monitoring helps the manager to improve the success of their program and adapt it to changed circumstances.

Reduce program costs using monitoring Monitoring the program provides opportunities to reduce costs as the program progresses. The Michigan Residential Conservation Service Program saved $250,000 a year by changing paperwork requirements. This cost saving represented twice as much as the entire program evaluation cost: (T)he state plan for RCS required the distribution of lengthy lists of contractors and lending institutions to each audited customer, which they might contact in the process of implementing conservation measures. This requirement was regarded as burdensome, costly, and unnecessary by the utilities (which implement the program in the U.S.). Furthermore, the evaluation had discovered in an initial survey that experienced RCS auditors regarded the lists as the least important component in the audit out of 12 audit components assessed. Together, these factors let the evaluator to build into the major survey of RCS participants an assessment of the extent to which these lists were being used. The results from that survey indicated that, indeed, only 10–20% of audit recipients had used or planned to use the lists. Therefore the recommendation was made that these lists be distributed on a “request” rather than a mandatory basis.87

Avoid costly mistakes Unsuccessful programs can: •

waste financial and other resources,



fritter away opportunities to reduce the environmental impact of home energy use,



drain the commitment and enthusiasm of program managers and workers, and



diminish government and public support for future energy action programs.

86 87

Shindler et al. 1999 p. 22. Kushler 1989 p. 161

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

32

(T)he costs of not conducting field trials can be enormous…For example, federal and state conservation and solar tax credits were introduced—without field testing—to encourage investments that would otherwise not have been made. However, it was also possible, as some analysts argued, that the credits would merely provide a windfall for people who would have invested anyway…If the tax credits mainly produce a windfall, the "experiment" will have failed and will have been very costly for taxpayers. For all the above reasons, new policies should be recognized as experimental, and the best appropriate research methods should be used in field trials of new policies and programs before they are generally introduced.88

Develop our knowledge base with evaluation There are several ways that home energy action programs can improve our understanding of how to do them better: 1. Contribute to research knowledge. We have noted that our understanding of physical, technical, human and social influences on home energy use is continually improving. Energy action programs with carefully designed strategies and monitoring processes can contribute to research knowledge. 2. Ensure lessons learned are not lost as personnel move on. Many personnel running and managing a program will leave while it is still running. Regular monitoring should ensure that the insights of all involved are recorded. 3. Make “lessons learned” available to other program managers. Program managers need the opportunity to learn from each other: •

what strategies and processes were less successful in other programs – and the likely reasons for this, and



what strategies and processes were more successful in other programs – and the likely reasons for this.

Unless they share their findings of what did and didn’t work for them, other managers will not have the opportunity to learn from their experience. Workshops, conferences and newsgroups all provide opportunities to share “lessons learned”.

What to monitor & evaluate Clarify monitoring & evaluation aims Evaluations are a learning and communication tool. They help program managers: •

find out what worked, and why,



find out what didn’t work, and why,



communicate “lessons learned” to energy action program managers in other organisations,

88

National Research Council 1984 p. 192

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate



33

communicate “lessons learned” to their successors and present colleagues in their organisation,

An effective evaluation starts with an understanding of who will use the evaluation their audience: 1. Identify key "stakeholders" - those ‘who will use, will be affected by, or will have an interest in the program or the evaluation results.’89 For example,: (a)

those managing and running the energy action program,

(b) relevant managers, directors and/or counselors, (c)

other parties in the organisation with an interest in the outcome of the program,

(d) federal, state and local government departments, (e)

trade allies, such as appliance retailers, and

(f)

energy action program managers in other organisations.

2. Understand their information requirements. Each stakeholder has different information needs that evaluations can potentially meet, such as consumption data…end use data (e.g., appliance and equipment stocks…), operational data (e.g., how the customer uses the equipment and its controls), and customer data (e.g., attitudes, level of satisfaction, perceptions, and sources of information). The likelihood that evaluation results are used can be increased if these needs are addressed in the entire evaluation process: during the scoping period of the evaluation, while conducting the analysis, in describing the findings, and in disseminating the findings. This is particularly important as attribution of changes and reconciliation of results are unlikely to occur without the stakeholders’ agreement on methodologies and techniques used in the early phases of the project.90

These issues are particularly important to address in large organisations. Large numbers of people and many sections of an organisation can be involved. They all bring different perspectives and have different expectations of the evaluation process. Where there is a history of friction between stakeholders, clarifying objectives is also very important. The process of clarification can eventually improve cooperation between the parties. This cooperation is itself necessary for conducting an evaluation and using the findings.91 Effective communication is essential to eliminate any potential misunderstandings prior to the beginning of the evaluation, because it is difficult to change course once the evaluation process has begun and impossible after the report is released. Because the lines of communication in organizations are often weak or sometimes non-existent, the evaluator must be a negotiator and a diplomat, and evaluations must be flexible.92

Quantitative measures of program impact Some program impacts that can be quantitatively measured are: •

rate of participation in the program (e.g. number of people who claimed a rebate, obtained information, etc),



increase in sales of a new technology,

89

Vine 1994 p. 175 Vine 1994 p. 175 91 Kushler 1989 92 Vine 1994 p. 175 90

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate



net improvements in energy efficiency of buildings,



net energy savings for the program



average net energy savings for the program

34

Participants in the first U.S. evaluation conference in 1982 felt that: [T]he earliest program evaluation equated the success of a program with the number of participants or the engineering estimates of the amount of energy saved rather than with the evidence from billing data…93

It is easy to over- or under-estimate the effect of an energy action program: •

Changes in weather, energy prices and householder income can all affect energy use patterns.



Householders may participate in more than one energy action program. This makes it difficult to assess the individual impact of each program.



Participants in an energy action program may have chosen to participate. Self-selected participants can differ from other potential clients, making it difficult to extrapolate the results of one program. Later, evaluators developed more sophisticated weather-adjustment techniques from the weathernormalization methods used by load forecasters. Evaluators came to use standardized models…because the previous haphazard array of approaches used to evaluate retrofit programs made it impossible to compare savings from one program to another, or to aggregate the effects across programs. Thus, evaluators used regression and weather-adjustment techniques to avoid double counting and to ensure that any measured conservation effects were real and not artifacts of the data or the analysis technique.94

It can sometimes be impossible to directly measure the energy or GGE savings resulting from a program. The box below gives an example of the questions that must be answered in order to estimate the impact of a program.

93 94

Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 p. 416. Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 p. 416.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

35

Estimating the impact of a hypothetical free CFL program A program gives away a free compact fluorescent light bulb – CFL – to everyone who purchases an energy efficient fridge in June. To estimate the energy or greenhouse gas savings generated by the program, we would need to guestimate answers to the following questions: 1. How many CFLs were given away? 2. How many CFLs were actually installed in participants’ homes? 3. How many participants were “free riders” – would have bought a CFL anyway? 4. How many CFLs replaced: • 100W incandescent light bulbs? • 75W incandescent light bulbs? • 60W incandescent light bulbs? etc. • old CFLs? 5. Are the CFLs used more/less/same amount of time per day as the bulbs they replaced? 6. How many CFLs were removed before the end of their lives? 7. How many participants increased their use of other lights or technologies? 95 “Take-back” effect can be a problem for CFLs and low flow showerheads. 8. How many program participants decreased their use of other lights or technologies? CFL could act as a “foot-in-the-door” – see page 102. 9. How many program participants took further energy actions? CFL could act as a “foot-in-the-door” – see page 102. 10. How many non-program participants installed CFLs due to the program’s influence? 96 “Free drivers”—can be more than expected. 11. How many CFLs were replaced with another CFL at the end of their lives? 12. How many CFLs were replaced with incandescent bulbs at the end of their lives?

The emphasis in evaluation must be on the net impact of a program or policy. The net impact will be the changes in energy use or GGE that results from the program. Measuring gross changes in energy use or GGE, since program implementation can give a very misleading impression of program impact. These are some factors that can influence the gross changes in energy use or GGE. It is important to try to estimate their impact in order to get a clearer picture of the net impact of an energy action program97. Estimate baseline There is no point in setting targets without knowing where our starting point is. There is no point in aiming for 50% of homes to achieve five star energy ratings if 60% already achieve five stars. There is no point in aiming for a 10% reduction in home energy use if we don’t know what the present level of energy use is. Our starting point is our baseline. What baseline we measure depends on what we are aiming for. For instance, if we aim for an increase in the energy star rating of homes, we need to estimate the present energy star ratings of homes. This could be done using a combination of98: 95

Vine 1994 Vine 1994 97 Vine 1994 98 Vine 1994 96

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

36

1. examination of state and local building codes, 2. surveys, interviews and/or focus groups with building and design professionals, and 3. on-site inspections of new and existing construction. Estimate “free riders” and “free drivers” “Free riders” are: program participants who would have adopted program recommended actions regardless of the existence of the program.99

In other words, free riders cost the program, but do not contribute to program goals – they would have purchased the energy efficient product, or behaved in an energy efficient way regardless of whether or not the program existed. If a program aims simply to reward energy actions, free riders are not a problem. If, however, a program aims to reduce energy use or greenhouse gas emissions, free riders can be a significant problem. Sometimes nearly all program participants would have taken the energy action anyway: Customer surveys of different types of utility programs report free rider fractions ranging from 3 to 89% [emphasis added].100

Free riders should be excluded from estimates of the impact of a program. Strategies aimed at encouraging an increase in the numbers of energy efficient technologies installed need to minimise the number of “free riders”. A program may offer a $100 rebate to anyone purchasing a five-star or six-star energy rated fridge. If 1000 people purchase an energy efficient fridge and claim the $100 rebate, the program cost is $100,000 (not counting administration and advertising costs). If 900 people were going to purchase an energy efficient fridge anyway, the program only induced 100 people to purchase an energy efficient fridge. The program would have cost $100,000 and would have increased the number of energy efficient fridges by 100. That is a cost of $1,000 per fridge. We might not consider the program to be very cost effective. “Free drivers”: take energy efficiency actions recommended by…programs because of the program, but do not participate directly in the program.101

These people purchase the energy efficient product, or behave in an energy efficient way because of the influence of the program – but they do not directly participate in the program. They do not directly receive information, rebates etc. They may purchase a solar hot water service due to program publicity, but not claim the rebate. Free drivers should be included in estimates of the impact of a program. In a way, “free drivers” represent market transformation. Market transformation strategies are discussed on page 115. Table 4, below, gives the net impact for hypothetical rebate programs for solar hot water service (HWS). This shows how easy it can be to overstate or understate the impact of a 99

Vine 1994 p. 168 Vine 1994 p. 171 101 Vine 1994 p. 168 100

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

37

program. In scenarios A, B and C 120 solar HWS are purchased and 100 rebates are given. However, due to the impact of free riders and free drivers, scenario A has a net impact of 110, while scenario C has a net impact of only 30. Table 4: Hypothetical net impact of solar HWS rebate program Scenario

Number of solar HWS purchased Bought due to program Include in Net Impact

Would have bought anyway Exclude from Net Impact

Total purchased

Total rebates

Net impact

Claim rebate

Not claim rebate Free Drivers

Claim rebate Free Riders

Not claim rebate

A

90

20

10

0

120

100

110

B

50

10

50

10

120

100

60

C

30

0

70

20

120

100

30

A program is more likely to have free drivers when it has existed for many years and has high participation rates. Under these circumstances, it is especially important to estimate the impact of free drivers on the program. Social surveys can help to gauge whether nonparticipants have taken any energy actions as a result of the program.102 Estimate duration of energy action •

Technology lifespan may be shorter or longer than that claimed by manufacturers. Recent research suggests that actual lifespans of technologies in real settings can vary from lifespans estimated by manufacturers.103



Installation removal can dramatically affect program impact. This is a concern in commercial and industrial sectors because renovations and remodels occur so frequently. Nonetheless, it can also be significant in homes:



Another finding is that typically, certain measures in the residential sector are prone to removal by the occupants: e.g., low-flow showerheads, compact fluorescent bulbs, and door weatherstrips.104



Behaviour duration may be longer or shorter than expected. Homeowners asked to keep an “energy log” for just one month used less electricity than comparable homeowners for a year after the experiment ended.105 (More details are in the section Give feedback on energy use, on page 76.) On the other hand, action prompts decline in effectiveness over time as their novelty declines.106 (The section Use action prompts, on page 101, describes a device that blinks a light when the air conditioner is on even though the outside temperature is relatively cool.)

102

Vine 1994 Vine 1994 104 Vine 1994 p. 173 105 Pallak et al. 1980 in National Research Council 1984 106 De Young 1993 p. 496 103

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

38

Estimate impacts from the environment •

Weather is likely to impact on how much energy is used to heat and cool homes.



Daylight/daylength will impact on how much energy is used to light homes.

Estimate changes to energy consuming equipment •

Installation of additional equipment can obscure energy savings that should be attributed to a program.



Repair, replacement, removal or retrofit of existing equipment can exaggerate or obscure energy savings attributed to a program.

Estimate changes to the use of equipment •

Thermostat schedule and settings – these may change as a result of the program. In the U.S., the energy use of some low-income households actually increased after they participated in draught proofing programs.107 Some households increased the temperature on their heater thermostat after draught proofing – since they were then able to have a warmer home for little extra cost. On the other hand some Melbourne households decreased the temperature on their heater thermostat after installing insulation. Ceiling insulation increased radiant heating in the room, possibly resulting in householders being comfortable at lower thermostat settings.108



Hours of operation may change – for instance CFLs may be used for more hours per day than the incandescent bulbs they replaced.



Power disruptions – reductions in energy use due to power failures should be excluded from estimates of the program’s net impact.

Qualitative indicators of program impact Not all program impacts can be measured using numbers. Some important impacts can be measured qualitatively: Satisfaction with the program Program satisfaction is critical for determining the willingness of consumers to participate in future programs and for assisting the marketing of a program to others. Reasons for customer dissatisfaction include the following: (1) actual energy savings were lower than estimated energy savings; (2) actual payback levels were longer than estimated; (3) thermal comfort, aesthetics, and other indoor environmental conditions were less than desired; (4) rebate application process was burdensome and slow; and (5) interactions with…program staff were unfriendly and disruptive to work and home life.109

107

Brown & Berry 1995 pp. 729-730 Gas and Fuel Corp. survey – Pears 2000, pers. comm. 14 May. 109 Vine 1994 p. 174 108

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

39

Field staff and/or contractors should also be asked how satisfied they are with the program. Barriers to program participation There are some common reasons why people do not participate in home energy action programs: 110 •

they do not understand the program,



there are split incentives—the tenant and owner have different motivations,



they have difficulties computing energy savings,



they do not trust the vendors,



they lack maintenance skills, and



they have misconceptions about energy efficiency.

Customers, field staff and contractors and trade allies (e.g. appliance retailers) can all offer insights into barriers to program participation.

Program processes It is essential to measure the impact of an energy action program. It is just as important to understand the reasons for the success or lack of success. In other words, the program process needs to be clearly understood. Process evaluations explore whether daily operations and program administration could be more effective and/or more efficient. They examine:111

110 111



program marketing,



initial application and verification procedures,



how customer problems are resolved,



training – of staff, contractors and trade allies,



the use of contractors,



capability to specify, order, and install equipment,



appointment scheduling,



program reporting systems,



accounting and data-processing services,



customer follow-up,



customer satisfaction, and



program resources – staff, budget and expenses.

Vine 1994 Vine 1994, Gellings & Chamberlin 1993

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

40

The effectiveness of program processes must be monitored from the start of the program. This monitoring offers the potential to turn around unsuccessful strategies and fine tune successful ones.

How to monitor & evaluate Use an appropriate method Policy makers are interested in: •

to what extent past policies and programs achieved their aims, and



how future policies and programs could achieve their aims more effectively.

To answer these questions, policy makers and programmers monitor and evaluate their programs. Monitoring and evaluation is quite similar to social research. Program evaluators and social researchers all interested in answering the questions like those in Table 5, below. Table 5: Questions of interest to program evaluators and social researchers How?

Why?

Societies

How have communities, societies & cultures operated?

Why have communities, societies & cultures operated that way?

People

How have people acted?

Why have people acted that way?

Answering the ‘How?’ questions helps policy makers and program evaluators decide to what extent past policies and programs achieved their aims. Answering the ‘Why?’ questions helps policy makers and program evaluators decide what future policies and programs might work more effectively. They can improve policy and program effectiveness by taking into account the way that people act and societies, cultures and communities operate. Answering these questions is not straightforward, because:112 •

many factors influence people and their communities, societies and cultures,



different levels operate at the same time – e.g. individuals, local communities, cultures, political institutions all operate at the same time, and



the many factors and different levels interact with each other.

These kinds of issues also make it difficult to answer questions about physical phenomena, such as the thermal performance of a building or the energy efficiency of an appliance.

112

Pettigrew 1996

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

41

In addition, social researchers and program evaluators must take into account the influence their research might have on how people act or how they appear to act: 113 •

In the presence of researchers, people may act differently to how they usually act.



People influence how they present themselves to researchers.



People react to presentation of research findings and expectations for the future.

Consequently, our understanding of people and societies cannot be as precise as our understanding of buildings and appliances. Table 6, below, outlines some of the ways that investigating things is different to investigating people. These differences have implications for the methods we might use to investigate people and these implications are also outlined in the table. Table 6: Differences in method for investigating fridges vs. people Fridges – e.g. kWh per day of electricity

People – e.g. minutes per day showering

Choosing a method to investigate people

Direct observation usually possible.

Direct observation often not possible.

Methods using observation must consider ethical issues very carefully.

Experiments frequently used.

Experiments less frequently used.

Will give the same response regardless of the degree of anonymity.

May give different response depending on the degree of anonymity (e.g. mail, phone or face-toface survey).

Choose a method with an appropriate degree of anonymity for the topic.

Take into account the likely effect of how data was gathered.

Response not affected by the presence of other fridges.

Response can be affected by the presence of other people.

Choose context appropriate to research question.

Take into account the effect of other people.

Response not affected by social context.

Response may vary according to social context – e.g. office vs. home.

Choose context appropriate to research question.

Take into account the social context of responses.

Will give the same response to different researchers.

May give different response to different researchers – e.g. e.g. interviewer from AGO vs. a hospital.

Choose researchers least likely to inadvertently influence responses.

Will only give response when requisite information is readily available.

May give response even when requisite information is not readily available (e.g. do not monitor showering time).

Choose questions that respondents have readily available information on; choose methods not using questions.

Avoid techniques that assume responses are numerical & precise – e.g. mean.

Take likely inaccurate responses into account.

Will only give factual information.

Will give opinions.

Refer to previous work on the opinions of interest, as well as

Avoid techniques that assume responses are

Take into account that opinions can change quickly &

113

Analysing data on people

Interpreting results from people

Take into account non-controllable influencing factors.

May focus just on understanding social context. Take into account the effect of the researcher.

Pettigrew 1996, Foddy 1993

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate texts on how to elicit opinions.

numerical & precise – e.g. ‘mean’.

42 vary according to context, how they are measured & the type of data analysis.

Will only give responses when correct measuring instrument is used.

Will give responses even when inappropriate measuring instrument is used.

Develop measuring instruments (questions) with care – refer to previous relevant measures & texts on how develop new measures.

Take into account that data produced is not necessarily meaningful.

Will only give responses to clearly formulated questions.

Will give responses even when questions are not clearly formulated.

Develop questions with care – refer to texts on how to ask meaningful and useful questions.

Take into account that data produced is not necessarily meaningful.

Cannot give responses to questions not asked.

Can give responses to questions not asked.

May include opportunity for respondents’ ideas – e.g. ‘I take long showers to relax’.

Often explore ‘hidden’ social meaning in responses.

May produce ideas for future research – do showers fulfil psychological and/or social needs?

Social researchers have developed a wide range of methods that take into account the complexities involved in investigating people. Many of these methods are relevant to program evaluators. Social scientists can play a valuable role in program evaluation by using their expertise in the following areas: (1) survey questionnaires for measuring attitudes and behaviors; (2) designing sampling strategies for program evaluation; (3) creating experimental designs for studying, for example, different market delivery strategies or financial incentive mechanisms; (4) developing analytical models; (5) designing different measurement techniques for examining self-reported behavior; (6) utilizing innovative interviewing techniques and case studies; and (7) providing general insights on individual and program dynamics based on their work in the fields of sociology, psychology, anthropology, human ecology and economics.114

For instance, a comprehensive evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy’s $500 million p.a. Weatherization Program used the following methods: (1) bivariate and multivariate correlation analysis of the energy saved by individual dwellings and the average performance of different agencies, (2) statistical comparisons of the top and bottom quartiles of dwellings ranked by energy savings, (3) statistical comparisons of matched pairs of higher- and lower-saving agencies, and (4) qualitative case studies of 10 exemplary local agencies.115

Due to the complexities involved in social research and program evaluation, programmers and policy makers monitoring and evaluating their programs will usually need the advice of social researchers and/or program evaluators to develop and conduct effective monitoring and/or evaluation. Basic books on social research and program evaluation can also be helpful. A couple of good introductory books are: 114 115

Vine 1994 p. 167 Brown & Berry 1995 pp. 731

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate



Wadsworth, Yoland, Do it yourself social research (1st edition published in 1984 by Victorian Council of Social Service; 2nd edition published 1997 by Allen & Unwin)



Wadsworth, Yoland, Everyday Evaluation on the Run, (2nd edition published in 1997 by Allen & Unwin)

43

Who to research Program evaluators may be interested in the views of any or all of: •

householders who participated in the program,



householders who did not participate in the program,



manufacturers,



sales people,



service providers,



program staff, and



any program contractors.

Detailed interviews Detailed, open-ended interviews such as anthropologists conduct when trying to understand foreign cultures sometimes offer insights into behavior when it is not yet clear which behaviors or beliefs are most important to understand. For example, ethnographic interviews revealed that many people think of energy in budget-based units, such as dollars per month, rather than in energy units. This finding was a revelation to some analysts, who were designing information programs on the assumption that people would easily understand physical units. The Ethnographic approach is also useful for getting a first approximation to the decision processes of individuals or organizations.116

Very useful insights can be gained into psychological and social influences on program success by examining data for ‘hidden meanings’. This requires very careful application of relevant data analysis techniques to ensure that the researcher does not bias the results.

Group Discussion A trained leader directs a discussion among 10 or so members of a population whose response to a program element or product design is of interest. The participants’ comments are uses as a rough gauge of the reactions of the group they are presumed to represent.117

Group discussions, or focus groups, are a speedy way to gather data, though not necessarily cheaper than surveys. They are not as reliably representative as surveys can be. Nonetheless, discussion in the context of a group can encourage people to articulate their views on programs.

Surveys Surveys of energy users and other relevant populations, such as manufacturers, lenders, architects, and building owners, can give information about responses to new technologies, programs, and polices,

116 117

Stern et al. 1987 p. 341 Stern et al. 1987 p. 341

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

44

both before and after they are introduced. Surveys are particularly good for assessing qualitative variables such as awareness and trust of information or the attractiveness of a new technology or program…But surveys suffer from some generic limitations. Respondents may give socially acceptable rather than accurate responses. Surveys may fail to predict behavior because respondents’ answers are based on faulty memories of what they have done or because they are unable to predict what they will do. Unreliability increases when surveys are used to assess responses to a hypothetical situation (e.g. a planned information program) or to predict behaviors that involve many steps before completion (e.g. expensive investments in energy efficiency.118

Surveys are prone to response bias We conduct a survey to get information from a group of people. The group of people could be: •

all residents of Australia, or



all residents of Darwin, or



all council workers in Perth,



all surfers on Bondi Beach at 8am next Monday.

The group of people we are interested in are called the population of interest. We don’t usually have the time or money to get information from everyone in the population. Instead, we get the information from a sample of people in the population of interest. If the sample is carefully chosen119, the information the sample gives us will be fairly representative of the population we are interested in. This is a major reason for the popularity of surveys – we think they tell us something about the whole population of interest. A survey sample includes everyone who researchers try to contact to take part in the survey. A person is part of a survey sample if survey personnel: •

post them mail – it is irrelevant whether they receive the mail or reply to it,



dial their telephone number – it is irrelevant whether they answer and whether they choose to participate in the survey,



knock on their door – it is irrelevant whether they answer and whether they choose to participate.

Respondents are those people in the sample who were available and chose to respond to the survey. We use the information that respondents give us to draw conclusions about the population of interest. Figure 4, below, shows graphically the relationship between: •

the population of interest,



the sample we try to survey, and



the respondents to the survey.

118

Stern et al. 1987 p. 341 Several sampling methods are available – de Vaus 1995 (and earlier and later editions) outlines many. Surveys aiming to represent the whole population often use one of the probability-sampling methods.

119

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

45

Population

Sample Respondents

Figure 4: Relationship between survey respondents and population of interest The response rate is the percentage of the sample that responded to our survey. Figure 5, below, shows this graphically.

Respondents

Sample

%

Figure 5: A survey response rate Low response rates can occur where less than 50–75% of the sample respond to the survey. Low response rates are of great concern as they can result in a survey being unrepresentative. Often non-responders are different in crucial respects to responders (e.g. older, lower education, migrant background) and increasing the sample size does nothing to produce the correct proportions of various groups120 120

de Vaus 1995 p.73

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

46

Illustration of the importance of survey response rate Let us say we want to know whether Ballarat residents have seen an energy action advertisement on television. We use a telephone survey and telephone a thousand Ballarat homes on Saturday morning. One hundred people answer their telephones; they all respond to the survey and all one hundred have seen the advertisement. Our response rate is 10%. The other nine hundred people could have been: •

taking the children to the playground, or



shopping, or



mowing the lawn, or



having a lie-in, or



enjoying the annual Ballarat country show!

The other nine hundred people might be very different to our one hundred respondents. They might be too busy to watch much television. It is quite possible that none of them have seen the advertisement! To claim that a survey represents the population, we make a judgement on how many respondents we need. This decision is a trade-off between: •

the cost of getting information from more respondents, and



how certain we want to be that our survey is representative – we derive our level of certainty from the statistical techniques we use.121

We may decide that we need 400 respondents. Let us say there are two surveys: •

Survey A contacts 4000 people and 400 respond. The response rate is 10%.



Survey B contacts 500 people and 400 respond. The response rate is 80%.

Survey B is much more representative of the population than survey A, even though they both have 400 respondents. Simply increasing the number of people we contact does not solve our problem of response bias. We need to increase the percentage of people who respond. 122 Telephone surveys are often conducted in a way that greatly reduces response rates. Telephone survey companies say they expect a response rate of around 15%. Some even

121

More accurately, this relates to inferential statistics. The number of respondents impacts on how certain we are that our survey accurately reflects the whole population. Unless we surveyed the whole population, we are never 100% certain that our survey accurately reflects the population. Nonetheless, if we survey 1000 people, we are more confident that our survey accurately reflects the population than if we survey 100 people. Further, the type of statistic (e.g. mean, correlation etc.) we calculate impacts on how certain we are that our survey accurately reflects the whole population. This is because each type of statistic has a different sampling distribution. This means that the ‘optimum’ size of our respondent-pool varies according to what statistics we plan on calculating. [Confusingly, the number of respondents is also referred to as the sample size in statistics texts. This should not be confused with the sample of people we try to contact to do our survey.] 122 Dillman 1978 is particularly useful for improving survey response rates.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

47

claim that a higher response rate is impossible – this is not the case – it just takes longer and costs more. Surveys are sometimes reported without the response rate. This makes it impossible to judge how representative the survey really is. Even when the appropriate statistical technique is used, it does not tell us the whole story about how representative the survey results are. Anyone wanting their survey to be representative will want to maximise their survey’s response rate – Dillman (1978) is essential reading for them. De Vaus (1995, or other editions) summarises some of Dillman’s main points. It’s difficult to get meaningful answers to survey questions I want to measure the amount of electricity my fridge uses. On the back of an envelope, I design my own ruler. I use my ruler to measure the amount of ice in the freezer compartment of my fridge. I conclude that my fridge uses that much electricity. Hopefully the reader is: •

Horrified that I didn’t ask someone knowledgeable how to measure the amount of electricity my fridge uses.



Appalled that I didn’t read a basic text on measuring the amount of electricity that appliances use.



Amazed that I think a ruler can measure the amount of electricity my fridge uses.



Astonished that I think the amount of ice in my freezer has anything to do with the amount of electricity my fridge uses.

Unfortunately, quite a similar process is often used to develop questions for surveys. If little effort is spent on finding out how to ask relevant questions that give meaningful answers, the answers given will have little meaning. The survey will then be meaningless at best and misleading at worst. To be meaningful and useful, a survey’s questions must: •

measure what they are trying to measure – be valid, and



obtain the same results on different occasions – be reliable.

This is not as straightforward as it might seem. A significant Australian study of home energy use used an inappropriate and misleading method for measuring attitudes to home energy conservation.123 It used a measure appropriate for measuring attitudes to a program, not attitudes to home energy conservation. Moreover, the method was used incorrectly. The study should have measured a and b, and then multiplied them to produce c, the attitude. Instead the study measured b and c and multiplied them together to produce d – which did not measure attitudes to home energy conservation. It is easy to make mistakes like this – research is usually conducted under enormous time pressures. Nonetheless, mistakes can result in the misdirection of home energy action programs. 123

This study is discussed in depth in Shipworth 1998.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

48

It is not just complicated attitudes that are difficult to measure. (W)hen respondents in a Philadelphia study were re-interviewed eight to ten days after an initial interview, 10 per cent of the reported ages differed by one or more years between the interviews…If questions concerning such simple and apparently objective matters as ‘age’ elicit inaccurate data, one must wonder about the validity problems that might be associated with more threatening, more complex, or less well known issues.124

Developing survey questions is not straightforward. Surveys that will inform home energy action programs need advice from social researchers. They can help to ensure that survey questions measure what they aim to measure. Attitudes are chameleons People are adaptable and creative. The same person can be an effective office-worker, parent and Aussie-rules supporter. In each role they express their views differently. In different social situations, they may even feel differently about the same issue. A study asked people the same question (about establishing a casino in their community) at the start and at the end of an interview. Over 17% of respondents expressed a different attitude at the end of the interview to the attitude they expressed at the start. These are some potential reasons for the apparent changes in their attitude: •

The process of the interview could stimulate the respondent to think further on that topic and change their attitudes.



The respondent may change their attitudes, or modify the way they express them, to take account of their perception of the interviewer’s attitudes.125

Beware self-reported action bias Many householders report their heater thermostats being set at a lower temperature than they are actually set at.126 This does not surprise social researchers. They expect responses to questions to be subject to ‘social desirability response bias’ and frame questions or studies in ways to avoid this problem. The use of…actual consumption data has been found to be essential in evaluating programme effectiveness. The alternate, and much more common use of self-reported energy data is far less reliable, and often results in inflated savings estimates. One study of this phenomenon concluded that ‘no correlation [link] existed between reported household conservation actions and amount of energy actually saved in the households’. Such findings underscore the need to collect detailed and accurate consumption data from representative households in order to assess programme effectiveness.127

The unreliability of self-reported energy saving actions is underlined by an early Australian psychological study into home energy conservation: The study also found that self-reported behavior change and number of requests for additional conservation materials are not reliable indicators of actual conservation behavior.128

There are two main reasons for this bias:

124

Foddy 1993 pp. 2-3 – the study is by Palmer, cited by Deming, 1944. Foddy 1993 126 Lutzenhiser 1993 127 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 147 128 Kantola et al. p. 416 125

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

49

1. People tend to give socially desirable answers to questions. People over-report socially desirable behaviours and under-report undesirable behaviours.129 (P)ersons often report lower-than-actual thermostat settings, even when they know that their settings are being recorded.130

This ‘social desirability response bias’ is a problem even with mailed surveys, but an even greater problem with telephone and face-to-face interviews.131 2. People forget – especially everyday actions People often don’t know the ‘simple facts’ about their everyday behaviour.132 (P)ersons frequently cannot recall small events, nor can they estimate accurately the durations or volumes of consumption (e.g. of hot water use).133

However, people will usually give an answer when they are asked a question in an interview – even when they don’t know the answer or cannot give an accurate answer. The problem is exacerbated when respondents are not given the response option ‘don’t know’.134 Many surveys do not give this option. (P)ersons in modern cultures are expected to know consciously what they are doing. When asked to account for everyday knowledge and behavior that is neither routinely noted nor easily remembered, respondents often feel obliged to fill in the gaps with “normal accounts”accounts of what a person would “normally” do in the situationwhich can be used to intentionally hide deviance, or as a more innocent cover for lack of information.135

Surveys are extremely unlikely to give an accurate picture of everyday behaviours such as showering. Figures such as ‘average shower duration’ derived from surveys should be treated with great caution. Respondent diaries or activity logs give a more accurate picture – particularly if their generally low response rates are improved.136 Imprecise questions on behaviour muddy the swamp Questionnaires themselves frequently compound the difficulties associated with trying to get accurate information about respondents’ behaviours. Even common words such as ‘usually’, ‘generally’, ‘people’, ‘children’ and ‘weekday’ are interpreted differently by different respondents and respondents interpret them differently to how the researchers intended137. The significant Australian study of home energy use mentioned earlier used response choice options (choice of boxes to tick) including ‘often’, and ‘sometimes’ to measure respondents’ behaviour. 138 Further, the response option ‘sometimes’ was used in three different positions compared to other response options:

129

Foddy 1993 Lutzenhiser 1993, p. 261 131 de Vaus 1995 132 Oppenheim 1992, Foddy 1993 133 Lutzenhiser 1993, p. 261 134 Foddy 1993 135 Lutzenhiser 1993, p. 262 136 Lutzenhiser 1993, Mullaly 1998 137 Foddy 1993 138 This study is discussed in depth in Shipworth 1998 130

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate



In some questions it was in the second position out of three response options – a ‘score’ of 0.5 out of 1.



In some questions it was in the third position out of four response options – a ‘score’ of 0.3 out of 1.



In some questions it was in the third position out of three response options – a ‘score of 0 out of 1.

50

Even if respondents could remember everyday behaviours and tried to give unbiased accounts of their behaviours, questions like these make it impossible for them to give an accurate picture of their actions. People often do not know the reasons for their behaviour, particularly everyday behaviour.139 Nonetheless, they will give reasons for their behaviour. I use my fridge every day. That does not mean that I have the skills to ask useful technical questions about the energy it uses. Most people interact with other people everyday. That does not mean that they have the skills to ask meaningful social research questions. Developing questions for surveys requires: •

at least reading a basic book on how to conduct a survey – e.g. De Vaus 1995 (or any other edition), and



preferably reading texts on how to write survey questions – e.g. Foddy 1993, Oppenheim 1992, and



consulting social researchers.

People give inaccurate data on their homes Significant proportions of survey respondents misrepresent the size of their homes, the amount of insulation in their homes and the fuels they use.140 Respondents who are renting and/or on low-incomes are even more likely to give inaccurate information on the structure of their homes. Use appropriate statistics correctly Statistics that are appropriate for technical, economic and even psychological analysis are frequently inappropriate for survey analysis. The data for technical and economic analysis is usually continuous data – 5kWh is 4 more than 1kWh. Often the data from social surveys is ordinal-level data – ‘agree strongly’ is more than ‘agree a little’, but we cannot say by how much it is more. Also, often the data from social surveys is nominal-level data – ‘married’ is different from ‘unmarried’, but we cannot say that one is ‘more than’ the other.

139 140

Foddy 1993 Lutzenhiser 1993

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

51

There are different statistics for different levels of data. Many statistics appropriate for continuous data will give misleading results if they are applied to ordinal- or nominallevel data.141 Consequently, many statistics useful for technical and economic analysis will produce misleading results if they are applied to survey data. Psychological studies are often experimental. The statistics used are those appropriate for analysing the results of experiments. Usually survey data requires a different set of statistics. As with any statistics, it is important to screen the data before starting analysis. Data screening will include: •

minimising the effect of missing values, and



correcting for outliers.142

Statistical and social research advice are both needed to ensure that appropriate statistics are used correctly. This advice would ideally be found in a statistician with expertise in social research, or a social researcher with expertise in statistics. Ensure appropriate interpretation of results The trick in multivariate statistics is not in computation; that is easily done by a computer. The trick is to select reliable and valid measurements, choose the appropriate program, use it correctly and know how to interpret the output. Output from commercial computer programs, with their beautifully formatted tables, graphs, and matrices, can make garbage look like roses.143

This trick does not just apply to multivariate statistics – it applies to univariate and bivariate statistics also. In other words, the choice of what statistics to compute, and the interpretation of resulting figures is what gives the statistics their meaning. Interpretation requires an awareness of: •

the assumptions and limitations built into the particular statistics used, and



the findings and methods of other relevant studies.

Small-scale controlled experiments Carefully designed small-scale experiments can give a very reliable indication of which strategies have the most impact, and how much impact a program has. 144 Compared to implementing a program, small-scale experiments are inexpensive. They can be conducted as part of a planned pilot program. Care must be taken to design the pilot program as an experiment. For instance, a control or comparison group will be required. A key analytical issue confronting the evaluator is the determination of an appropriate control group. In educational, psychological, and medical studies, it is often possible to select individuals randomly into control and treatment groups. However, radomization of observations is usually not possible in the evaluation of energy-efficiency programs. Accordingly, without strict control over selecting the

141

Hutcheson & Sofroniou 1999. Argyrous 1996 and de Vaus 1995 are good basic texts for choosing statistics appropriate for analysing social survey data. 142 Vine 1994 143 Tabachnick & Fidell 1996 p. 6 144 Stern et al. 1987 p. 342

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

52

different study groups, many researchers balk at the term control group, preferring comparison or nonparticipant group.145

Ideally, the comparison group and participant group will have similar146: •

climates,



economic environments,



social, cultural and political contexts,



socio-demographics—income, education, household size, age, etc.,



home characteristics—dwelling size, dwelling age, appliances, etc.,



attitudes,



behaviour patterns, and



levels of energy use.

Ethical concerns may arise if some participants receive an incentive or disincentive that others do not receive. In such situations, juries comprised of members of the public have been used to help establish an incentive or disincentive structure that was fair.147 Social psychologists are particularly helpful in the design of small-scale experiments.

Computer models Computer models can help assess the likely outcome of policies where influencing factors can be quantified and the influencing process is well understood. 148 These conditions frequently do not hold for policies involving humans.

Choosing monitoring and evaluation strategies How to evaluate an energy action program also depends on: (1) the availability of expertise for conducting the evaluation; (2) the level of precision, risk, and uncertainty the key stakeholders are willing to accept; (3) the amount of financial resources available for conducting the evaluation; and (4) the incremental value of information gained in obtaining additional evaluation information. There is no absolute standard for when to be confident in study findings; acceptable precision levels depend on the conventions of the field of study. The costs of error, the costs of measurement, what is technically achievable given the available measurement tools, and finally, the tolerable level of uncertainty, all play a role in establishing reasonable and prudent standards.149

145

Vine 1994 p. 171 Vine 1994 147 Stern et al. 1987 148 Stern et al. 1987 149 Vine 1994 p. 170 146

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

53

Involving stakeholders Involving the stakeholders in designing the evaluation gives them a sense of “ownership” of the evaluation. The Michigan State Residential Conservation Service Program developed a “monthly reporting form” to be completed by each participating agency. The form was developed with the agencies so that they would not feel that the reporting structure was being imposed on them. Furthermore, the agency manager in charge of the program was required to sign each month’s reporting form. The form was designed such that it would grab agency attention each month. It was designed using communication principles—just one example of the integration of social science principles into the whole monitoring and evaluation process. Prominent sections asked for details of the aspects of the program that Michigan was most keen to focus agency attention on—number of audits and the number provided to low-income customers.150 Deciding what you want to know If the results of different agencies or contractors are to be monitored or evaluated together, it is important to establish consistent reporting frameworks. The "monthly reporting form" developed by the Michigan State Residential Conservation Service Program ensured consistency of reporting across several companies doing the home energy audits.151 Deciding how to find out what you want to know People with very little background in social research often conduct surveys, interviews and focus groups. Sometimes they undermine the credibility of their work by: 1. not considering which method suits their purposes best, 2. not finding out how to do it properly, 3. not finding out what previous work has been done on the topic, and 4. forgetting that they are communicating with people, not measuring kWh used by a fridge. This is not a text on how to do social research, so I shall simply say that conducting a survey, interviews, focus groups or experiments requires input from professional social researchers. Deciding what to do with the information If the results of different agencies or contractors are to be monitored or evaluated together, it is important to establish consistent reporting frameworks. 152

150

Kushler 1989 Kushler 1989 152 Kushler 1989 151

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Always something new: monitor & evaluate

54

Staff monitoring the Michigan State Residential Conservation Service Program developed methods for transforming the information they gathered into a graphic format. The information could then be disseminated within the organisation, as well as to relevant legislators.153 Communicating information graphically is much more effective, as we noted in the section Information that is noticed, on page 58.

Sharing the learning National governments can assume an important role in helping local agencies learn from one another. Such mechanisms include holding conferences, making research expertise available to localities to assess their own activities, and supporting travel and communication among local energy officials, among others. These mechanisms are needed to facilitate the spread of effective local innovations to other localities.154

153 154

Kushler 1989 National Research Council 1984 p. 203

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Information sometimes motivates

When to use an information strategy Information by itself rarely motivates action Information strategies provide information on one of the following: 1.

the nature of the environmental or energy problem, and/or

2.

behaviours and/or actions required to resolve the problem, and/or

3.

steps required to carry out the behaviour or action.155

Information strategies develop out of the assumption that people will undertake the necessary actions once they know what they should do, how they should do it and why they should do it.156 In the US, information programs were at the forefront of efforts following the first energy crisis of the 1970s. These programs aimed to educate consumers using energy audits and printed materials. Alone, education resulted in negligible energy savings. Even in combination with loan schemes, it was still ineffective. 157 By 1980 already over 90 separate studies had been conducted testing the impact of information programs on consumers home energy use.158 Research indicates that pamphlets, videos and other information services result in very little savings - possibly in the region of 0-2%.159 It is the effect of an information program that is important - not merely its existence. (A study) surreptitiously monitored 84 apartments for 12 days and then divided the apartments into four groups: a control group and three experimental groups receiving different types of information. The types of information consisted of (1) a typical pamphlet containing energy-saving tips distributed by the local utility company; (2) an informational-appeal letter designed to accentuate the negative consequences, both personal and social, of excessive electricity consumption for the economy and the environment (the letter also emphasized the individual’s personal responsibility for these effects); and (3) an informational condition designed to increase electricity consumption by emphasizing the benefits of consumption and claiming that any adverse effects could not be blamed on the individual consumer. Each form of information was presented in writing to each household with a reminder over the telephone…

155

De Young 1993 De Young 1993 157 Nadel & Geller 1996 158 McDougall et al. 1981 159 Collins et al. 1985 in Nadel & Geller 1996, McDougall et al. 1981, Stern et al. 1987 156

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

56

After the delivery of the information, the households were surreptitiously monitored for another 12 days. The results, a comparison of the before-and-after data, showed that none of the appeals had any effect at all on the consumers! As it happened, the Arab oil boycott of 1973-1974 hit about one year later. The entire country was virtually saturated with mass-media appeals for energy conservation. Curious, Heberlein rechecked the energy consumption of the same apartments. The same meters were again read each day for 25 days. Depressingly, even this all-out media campaign was apparently not effective. Comparisons between the 25 days recorded during that period and those a year earlier showed no differences.160

People rationalise their actions. They emphasise the positive aspects of their current actions and the negative aspects of alternatives they could have chosen. 161 People tend to ignore information that does not fit with their existing ideas.162 When they receive information that suggests they should change their actions, they tend to downgrade that information.163 The purpose of energy action information is usually to change the way that people are currently acting. This means that energy action information is often seen in a negative light—it may not be believed, and little importance may be assigned to it. This is a hurdle that energy action information must jump.

Households to target with information Programs aiming to increase the use of energy saving technologies should focus on those households most likely to install those technologies. People who own their own homes and have higher incomes are much more likely to purchase and install energy conserving devices than renters and low income householders. Having a household member that can do household repairs increases the likelihood of the household purchasing and installing energy conservation devices.164 This is partly because installation and maintenance costs are reduced for those households and partly because those people understand the technologies better. Programs can also try reaching other households by providing them with what they need.165 This could be free help with installation and maintenance, or the loan of a video that clearly demonstrates how to install and maintain a simple technology. Another option would be to give financial assistance to low-income households.

160

Cone & Hayes 1980 Costanzo et al. 1986. 162 Dennis et al. 1990 163 National Research Council 1984 164 Costanzo et al. 1986. 165 Costanzo et al. 1986. 161

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

57

Essential features of information strategies The qualities of information that motivates (W)hat matters is not so much the amount of information contained in a label, advertisement, or other message but getting the audience to pay attention and take the message seriously. This depends on the way the message is presented, the way information users interact with information sources, their trust in those sources, and the confirming or conflicting information that comes from friends and associates.166

All information strategies must use effective communication techniques. The following sections in this chapter explain why these techniques are vital for communicating anything to do with home energy actions. The following sections also explain the approach in more detail. Very briefly: 1) Use clear, concise and simple language. 2) Personalize information. 3) Make concrete recommendations. 4) Use credible and authoritative sources. 5) Tailor information to specific users.167

A social-psychological model of energy conservation purchasing behavior is illustrated in Figure 6, on page 58. It includes: "

"

psychological factors that influence a decision-maker’s information processing "

perceive the information

"

favourably evaluate the information

"

understand the information

"

remember the information

positional factors or characteristics of decision makers that influence their decision: "

disposable income to act on the information

"

home ownership

"

home repair skills

"

ownership of home technology

The psychological and positional factors interact.

166 167

Stern 1992 p. 1228 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 137

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

58

Pro-Conservation Information

Psychological Variables

Advocacy of Conservation (Diffusion to Others)

Perceive Favorably Evaluate Understand Seeking Additional Conservation Devices or Information

Remember No Conservation Occurs Positional Variables

Perceived Payoff From Device

Disposable Income Home Ownership Home Repair Skills Device Installation Own Home Technology

Purchase of Energy-Conserving Device

Figure 6: Psychological and Social Factors in Energy Conservation Purchases168

Information that is noticed It is not easy to gain people’s attention. People may avoid the hassle of having to change what they do now by simply ignoring information that asks them to change what they do now. Others find processing energy information is extremely difficult, so they avoid it. If

168

Costanzo et al. 1986, p.523

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

59

information arrives when a householder is busy, it will be ignored. If it is too detailed for their needs, it will be ignored.169 First, no matter how accurate or reliable the information is, if it is not presented in a form that the consumer can easily understand and will readily attend to, then it will fail to have any impact.170

People are more likely to notice information that is171: "

vivid ,

"

highly concrete, and

"

personalised.

The leaflets produced by Energy Efficiency Victoria are very vivid; the explanations and suggestions for action are concrete. Nonetheless, written information is less effective than information received through videos, community role models and personal contacts. 172 The lack of personalisation is one reason for utility bill inserts not being effective. One U.S. study found only 38% of householders said they always read bill inserts (59% said they sometimes did). Further, householders suggested the inserts were not of interest because the information, being general, may not apply to them. Energy saving information in bill inserts can also be repetitive; they add to the pile of information for householders to process and so reduce the attention paid to their message.173 Bland summaries of potential kilowatt-hour energy savings or dollar savings do not influence decision-makers. Case histories do influence decision-makers, even though they may be less representative than the summaries! (I)mpersonal data summaries, though accurate and efficient, have been shown to have less impact than more concrete information even when the more vivid information is less representative. Here is an example of what we mean: Let us suppose that you wish to buy a new car and have decided that on grounds of economy and longevity you want to purchase one of those solid, stalwart, middle-class Swedish cars−either a Volvo or a Saab. As a prudent and sensible buyer, you go to Consumer Reports, which informs you that the consensus of the readership is that the Volvo has the better repair record. Armed with this information, you decide to go and strike a bargain with the Volvo dealer before the week is out. In the interim, however, you go to a cocktail party where you announce this intention to an acquaintance. He reacts with disbelief and alarm: “A Volvo! You’ve got to be kidding. My brother-in-law had a Volvo. First that fancy fuel injection computer thing went out. 250 bucks. Next he started having trouble with the rear end. Had to replace it. Then the transmission and the clutch. Finally sold it three years later for junk.” (Nisbett, Borgida, Crandall, & Reed, 1976, p. 129) Rationally, your acquaintance’s story should have no more and no less impact than any one of the other several hundred individual repair records summarized in Consumer Reports. Assuming the Consumer Reports article was based on information from 900 car owners, then your acquaintance’s story just changes the data base from 900 to 901. If you are like most of the people who served as subjects in this kind of research, however, your acquaintance’s account will weigh much more heavily

169

National Research Council 1984 Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 437 171 Costanzo et al. 1986 172 Lutzenhiser 1993 173 Kempton & Layne 1994 170

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

60

in your imagination than those of hundreds of unknown persons summarized in the survey. Indeed it might be decisive. 174

Give decision-makers a real example of a similar household (income, home size, household size, etc) that reduced their energy use and the methods that they used. Other attention-grabbing ideas have been used: 175 •

A raffle run at a community fair offered much-needed furniture as a prize. To enter, residents had to consent to a home energy audit and answer three questions about energy. Once the auditor was in their homes, entrants became very interested in the home energy audit and saving energy.



A bingo game for senior citizens was a great success, especially in comparison with an energy information presentation session that bored and confused the senior citizens earlier on.



An “Energy Quiz Show” was also a great success with senior citizens.

Community groups are often in a better position to develop innovative communicative processes to reach selected target audiences. They are likely to have detailed knowledge and awareness of the needs, concerns and interests of the groups they serve. A home energy expert or program manager cannot be expected to have such detailed awareness of each and every residential target group. The section Use community groups to communicate, on page 80, has other pertinent ideas.

Information that is evaluated favourably The source of the message must be seen as trustworthy or credible, as well as expert.176 Governments can give conflicting messages that undercut their credibility. For instance, one arm of government might promote the purchase of solar hot water systems while another arm financially supports the coal industry. Such conflicting messages cannot be completely avoided, but can easily give the impression that government does not take energy efficiency seriously.177 Expertise is not enough: (A) pamphlet describing how to save energy in home air conditioning (was sent) to 1,000 households in metropolitan New York. Half the households received the information in a mailing from the local electric utility, the other half in a mailing from the state regulatory agency for utilities. The following month, households that had received pamphlets from the regulatory agency used about 8 percent less electricity than households that had received the identical pamphlets from the local electric utility company.178

Given that air conditioning is only part of a household’s electricity use, this is a considerable difference. The findings indicate the general point that energy utilities are often seen as untrustworthy.

174

Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 437 Coltrane et al. 1986 176 Costanzo et al. 1986 177 National Research Council 1984 178 Craig & McCann 1978 in National Research Council 1984 175

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

61

One group of householders may consider a particular organisation to be trustworthy while another does not. Earlier provision of detailed insulation information to households may have engendered trust among homeowners but distrust among renters who found the information irrelevant to their needs.179 For most consumers, a potential energy saving from installing an appliance or other energy-saving technology is just one issue to keep in mind when making a decision. Other factors considered are style, status, performance, safety, comfort and convenience.180 Money is important but not paramount for many people – see the sections Energy needs– based market segments, on page 20, and Clues that money is not enough, on page 83. Communicating information about a suite of benefits offered by an energy-saving technology may help to paint the technology in the best possible light. This also means that some energy saving technologies may be shunned by most consumers if they believe that the technology will reduce their status or convenience. Successful programs will: •

Take consumer’s concerns seriously.



Communicate information about a suite of benefits that the energy-saving technology will provide.

Information that is understood Obviously people need information communicated to them in their language – otherwise they simply cannot ‘take it in’. Likewise, people can only ‘take in’ information that is relevant to how they use energy and how they understand energy. Australia is composed of many cultures, and these may vary in: •

How they use energy – e.g. cooking a stir-fry in a wok would use much less energy than cooking a roast leg of lamb in the oven.



How they understand energy – e.g. people accustomed to seeing energy used ‘directly’ (e.g. burning wood for cooking) may visualise energy differently to people accustomed to seeing energy used ‘indirectly’ (e.g. turning an electric stove on).



The composition of the household – e.g. larger households are more energy efficient.

People need information relevant to how they use energy in their culture communicated to them in a way that fits into their culture’s understanding of homes, households and energy use. Even when people think they know about conservation programs, their knowledge can be very inaccurate. A 1985 study found that, while 72% of respondents claimed knowledge of a Solar Tax Credit, only 13% of respondents could provide concrete information about the program.181 Consumers often do not have the expertise to process and apply the information that is available to them.182 179

National Research Council 1984 Costanzo et al. 1986 181 Costanzo et al. 1986, pp.521-22 182 Sanstad & Howarth 1994 180

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

62

Consumers are often uncomfortable dealing with energy issues and find them confusing. This is hardly surprising given the invisibility of energy in our late twentieth-century lives. In-depth interviews with householders can give insights into how they understand their energy use and their technologies. These insights can help design information programs that build on existing knowledge and beliefs. It is very difficult to introduce completely new concepts to people and extremely difficult to change their beliefs, even using cogent arguments and credible information sources. It is much easier to design communication strategies that tap into existing knowledge and beliefs about energy and technologies. Most consumers find it very difficult to calculate whether an energy investment will be cost effective. They find it especially difficult when they have to “pull together” different pieces of cost information—such as appliance price, energy prices, inflation and the impact of tax credits.183 For instance, consumers often underestimate potential energy savings, as they usually don’t include the impact of increasing energy prices, or other ‘complicating’ factors.184 Successful programs will: •

Be sensitive ‘to the limits of a client’s desire or capacity to make complex decisions about an unfamiliar subject’.185



Address consumers’ concerns—and not dismiss their concerns or deride their energy knowledge. If consumers think turning compact fluorescent light globes on and off frequently will damage them, this concern should be addressed.



Integrate the information on costs for the consumer.

Insights into how householders understand their energy use and their technologies may also highlight areas where there are key misunderstandings that must be corrected if householders are to be motivated to take energy action. Remember that correcting energy misinformation will not necessarily result in energy action. Where the misunderstanding clearly seems to be inhibiting energy action, surveys can help estimate what proportion of people hold these key misconceptions. If a sizeable portion of the relevant population hold the misconception, it may be worth experimenting with strategies - seeing if they correct the misconception and result in energy action.

Information that is remembered People are more likely to remember something that fits with preexisting beliefs and motivations.186 It is harder for people to remember energy information if they are not interested in energy issues or if they believe saving energy is unimportant. To be remembered, information must be: "

clear,

"

specific, and

183

Yates & Aronson 1983 Costanzo et al. 1986 185 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 144 186 Costanzo et al. 1986 184

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

"

63

concrete. 187

Vague messages like ‘save energy’ are ineffective. Information that explains exactly what the decision-maker needs to do is effective. Indices like energy star ratings for appliances or litres per hundred kilometers for cars are also effective - they allow consumers to easily compare one appliance or car with another. Litres of petrol and kilometers traveled both have meaning for consumers. These measures are part of their day-to-day experience with their cars. Kilowatt-hours are not measures that are part of consumers’ day-to-day experience with their appliances, so it means very little to consumers to compare the kilowatt-hour usage of appliances. Star ratings are an ideal way to communicate this information.

What to inform Environmental reasons to save energy Information on the environmental importance of saving energy will not motivate many people to take energy actions: •

Many people believe their actions have no impact – see page 18. Information on the environmental importance of saving energy is very unlikely to motivate them to take energy actions.



General information on why to save energy leaves it to the individual to work out how to save energy. Most people do not have enough energy knowledge to know how to save energy in their homes – see page 19. Most people – at least initially – will not spend much time thinking about their home energy use.



Information by itself rarely motivates action – see page 55.



The section Link between attitudes & actions on page 96 outlines some of the reasons why people often do not act in accordance with their own beliefs.

Information on the environmental importance of saving energy may boost support for energy action programs. Suggestions for improving the success of such information programs is given in the sections Creating awareness of issues and actions, on page 68, and Use fear campaigns with great caution, on page 103.

Energy costs - focus on LOSS not savings Information about energy costs is not very likely to motivate householder action when energy prices are low. A small South Australian information program provides anecdotal evidence that people may actually use more energy once they are informed about the cost of running certain appliances, such as air conditioners.188 Energy used in Australian

187

Costanzo et al. 1986 Pears 2000, pers. comm., 14 March. The programs are run by Monica Oliphant. I note that this is anecdotal evidence as I am unaware of: a) whether the program has been conducted as a study, and, if so, b)

188

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

64

homes is fairly cheap – see the sections Money often does not motivate and Energy efficiency investments may not be economical, on pages 83 and 86. That said, the threat of loss motivates people much more than the promise of gain. (T)he amount of joy someone experiences when winning $100 is not equal to the consternation suffered when losing the same amount.189

Many people seem to put an enormous effort into avoiding “losing” $100 of their money to “the taxman”. Those same people seem to put much less effort into gaining another $100. Telling the consumer how much they can save by installing an energy saving device is like a promise of a gain or a win. It does not motivate much action. Instead, consumers should be told how much energy or money they are losing by not installing an energy saving device.190 The threat of this potential loss is more likely to motivate their action. Figure 7, below, gives an idea for an insulation advertisement.

the method used, and c) the exact nature of the findings. Without knowing at least these details, I cannot know how much significance to assign to the findings. 189 Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 438 190 Costanzo et al. 1986

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

65

$ $ $ $ $

Figure 7: Idea for insulation advertisement: ‘Are you losing your hard-earned dollars through your roof?’

Focus on a very specific energy action An experiment examined whether prompts had an effect on the number of lights left on in unoccupied rooms in a university. Signs asking people to turn out the lights had no effect - lights were still left on 95% of the time. Signs asking people to turn out the lights after 5pm resulted in lights being left on only 40% of the time.191

Make energy visible ‘(M)aterial progress over the last century has made…energy flows invisible to energy users.’192 Energy used by wood stoves was visible to householders - wood was chopped, stacked and burned to create heat. Energy used by coal-fired furnaces was less visible 191 192

Cone & Hayes 1980 National Research Council 1984

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

66

coal was delivered to households, but householders still fed it into a furnace. Energy used by oil-fired furnaces was even less visible - householders organised the occasional oil storage tank refill. Energy used in gas-fired heaters and electric heaters is almost ‘invisible’ to the householder. Displays that make ‘invisible’ energy use visible may help provide motives to save energy.193 Energy saving attributes of homes and technologies are also often invisible. Householders cannot see insulation and energy saving technology design, so they are less likely to believe they save energy. Building contractors report that it is easier to sell a new home with visible solar collectors on the roof than one with passive solar design, added insulation, or other less visible energy-conservation features, even though yet [sic] those conservation features are generally more cost-effective than active solar equipment.194

Reasons for highly visible energy saving technologies being more popular than less visible technologies are given on page 111 in the section Make energy actions publicly visible. Many of the information strategies that follow are designed to make energy, and energy efficiency, visible.

Information strategies Choosing information strategies Interviewing householders about how and where they obtain information on energyrelated decisions can be helpful. They can give some idea of the range of informationgathering processes and information sources that people use. They cannot tell us the proportion of householders that use a particular information-seeking process or the proportion of that use a particular information-source. People are often unaware of the ‘trivial’ details of their everyday actions. Even when they are aware of the details, they often cannot accurately recall them for an interview or survey – see the section Beware self-reported action bias on page 48. As a result, surveys often provide an inaccurate picture of energy actions. Experiments can give even more reliable information on which information strategies are likely to be successful.195 People need guidance on which energy actions to take first—they need to know which actions will have the greatest impact. If they are simply given a list of energy action options, people will take the easiest energy action or the one that is most visible.196 For instance, people might be most likely to make an effort to turn out lights that in unused rooms. If they do not save energy after they have made an effort, they start doubting the

193

Kempton et al. 1992a National Research Council 1984 195 Stern et al. 1987 196 Dennis et al. 1990 194

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

67

efficacy of other recommended energy actions and become less willing to try further energy actions.

Media campaigns Stimulating energy action Usually media campaigns are unsuccessful at encouraging people to take part in an energy action program. Utility and government efforts to promote conservation have relied on traditional marketing techniques with generally poor results. Even though direct mailings and bill inserts have been used extensively, these techniques typically generate response rates of less than 5% for conservation programmes.197 Public media campaigns have also been ineffective in generating clients for most conservation programmes. for instance, one early California Energy Extension Service (CEES) programme attempted to draw apartment owners and managers to two energy-efficiency workshops with 22 000 direct mail brochures, 12 000 inserts in trade magazines, display ads in seven local newspapers, multiple news releases and two half-hour public affairs radio shows. these combined efforts produced a disappointing 59 workshop participants out of 18 000 apartment owners in the area. Extensive and continuing programme evaluation enabled later CEES programmes to rely less on media campaigns and more on the use of existing social networks.198

Promoting energy conservation is not like promoting a brand of soap or toothpaste.199 Consumers don’t need to invest much time or money to purchase more soap or change brands. Television commercials are quite effective at inducing people to buy one brand of toothpaste over another, but they are strikingly less effective at inducing people to begin using toothpaste in the first place.200

Consequently promoting everyday products can be successful. On the other hand, consumers do need to invest much time and expense purchasing and installing most energy saving devices. They face many obstacles: - they lack experience with the technology and may be anxious about installing and maintaining it, they don’t know how efficient the device will be and they are inclined to postpone non-routine decisions. Although some high-technology devices are promoted through advertising (e.g. computers, videocassette recorders), these devices are time saving or recreational devices. A campaign on an issue that has immediate consequences usually has more success than a campaign on an issue with consequences in the future.201 This is significant for campaigns on ‘greenhouse’ issues – where the consequences are often seen to be in the future. Environmental campaigns are most often to do with changes which have long-term, diffuse and not immediately observable consequences. These features, however, were not adequately appreciated in the design of the environmental campaigns and their support structures.202

197

Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 136 Coltrane et al. 1986 pp. 136-137 199 Yates & Aronson 1983, Costanzo et al. 1986. 200 Yates & Aronson 1983, p. 439 201 Rogers & Story 1987 in Cosgrove et al. 1996 202 Cosgrove et al. 1996 p.10 198

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

68

Creating awareness of issues and actions Advertising is good, however, at creating awareness – of new technologies and the need for saving energy. If public awareness about energy issues is high, information is more likely to result in energy action.203 This is especially important in an environment where energy prices are low - in other words, the price of energy is not creating an awareness of energy issues. The review of four significant social change programs in Victoria found the 101 ways to keep Vic fit energy conservation campaign emphasised negative emotions, such as guilt, without giving a clear indication of required actions to alleviate those emotions. For instance: It’s a pity they aren’t more ‘earth proud’ as well. While they look after me [the house] they could do a lot more to care for the world around them. It’s just in small unthinking ways…It would help if they showed a little more imagination…204

While the Quit and Road Safety campaigns emphasised family values, 101 ways to keep Vic fit emphasised broader environmental responsibilities and guilt. The Quit and Road Safety campaigns emphasised behaviour change, but they did not blame individuals for their current sets of behaviour. Further, they did not rely solely on individuals to change their behaviour - they focussed also on changing the framework in which the behaviour took place. The Quit campaign recognised the impact of cigarette advertising on individuals and sought to reduce that impact. Advertising sets the scene for the campaign – it cannot constitute the campaign. An effective advertising campaign starts with a sound understanding of target groups: •

socio-economic characteristics,



personality traits,



social expectations,



cultural context,



social status, and



how they use different communicative media.205

When using media campaigns, remember: •

Use fear campaigns with great caution – see page 103.



Do not disparage the home or family – see The culture of the home on page 26.

Energy efficiency labels Here we discuss energy efficiency labels as an information tool—and how to make best use of this tool. Labels can also be Market transformation strategies. Their use in that context is discussed on page 124.

203

Kempton et al. 1992a in Cosgrove et al. 1996 p.10 205 Cosgrove et al. 1996 204

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

69

Choice of products to label Before starting an energy-efficiency labeling scheme for a new class of product, decide whether energy efficiency labels will motivate consumers to purchase the more energy efficient products. Some classes of products, like hot water services, are routinely purchased in ‘emergency situations’. In such situations, it is likely that energy efficiency is not considered to be an important criterion.206 Consequently, labeling such products may not have the desired effect. Such classes of product may be best handled using a ‘market transformation’ approach, discussed later (see page 115). If energy use is relatively insignificant for a class of products, energy efficiency labeling has little impact. The energy use may be insignificant (to consumers) in the light of purchase price, product features, or other criteria for choice. 207 Appliances such as refrigerators and dishwashers, which are purchased in non-emergency situations, offer greater potential for energy efficiency labeling schemes to impact on purchase decisions. In the US, labeling new homes has resulted in participation rates up to 40%.208 Potential energy savings of up to 25% are possible, according to engineering estimates. Products suitable for energy efficiency labeling schemes: •

are bought in non-emergency situations, and



use a significant amount of energy.

Strategies for effective labels Simply labeling appliances with the annual operating cost is ineffective. Clearly identifying energy efficient homes or appliances is effective.209 The electrical appliancelabeling scheme in Australia is a good example of highly effective labels. The label on a given appliance: •

graphically illustrates the energy efficiency of that appliance, and



illustrates the energy efficiency of that appliance relative to comparable appliances— this is very important to consumers.210

Prior to formal introduction, ratings and labels should be tested in field experiments to ensure that they have the desired impact on the target population.211

206

Stern et al. 1987 Colombier & Menanteau 1997 208 Nadel & Geller 1996 209 Nadel & Geller 1996 210 Colombier & Menanteau 1997 211 Stern et al. 1987 207

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

70

Successful labeling programs212: •

work with relevant manufacturers, dealers, salespeople, builders and real estate agents (possibly giving marketing assistance), and



incorporate extensive consumer education - including advertising - to create a demand for the efficient products.



ensure customers can easily find out which are the most energy efficient appliances. In Holland and Switzerland, consumers can access large databases to find out which products are most energy efficient. 213 Energy Efficiency Victoria employs a similar strategy—producing leaflets with appliance rankings on the basis of energy efficiency.

Energy efficiency displays Displays of energy efficient products, technologies and techniques can communicate: •

highly concrete information



in a very vivid manner.

Staff at the displays must be seen as trustworthy as well as expert. These are some ideas for increased effectiveness: •

Personalise information for the consumer as much as possible.



Emphasise the suite of benefits each energy-efficient product provides. Most consumers consider a broad range of factors – not just energy efficiency – when they are considering purchasing a new appliance or product. Only about half of all householders are interested in exploring energy efficiency – and nearly half of those are just as concerned about convenience and appearance as they are about energy efficiency. People need to know that an appliance, technology or building technique will fit into their lifestyles in every way.



Use consumer service staff who can communicate effectively. Most people think about energy in a very different way to the way that energy experts think about energy. Staff must be able to communicate with people in a way that makes sense to those people. Some technically trained people may find it difficult to communicate in a non-technical fashion; they may not even realise how many expert concepts they use – kWh, MJ, R-values, etc. It is easier for the few energy specialists to learn the energy language of ‘ordinary’ people than for the many ‘ordinary’ people to learn the language of the specialists! Energy specialists are also likely to be more motivated to learn the consumer’s energy language than the consumer is to learn the specialist’s language.



Use consumer interactions to improve our understanding of ‘ordinary’ people:

212 213



How they understand energy and energy efficiency.



Their concerns about energy and energy efficiency.

Stern 1992 Colombier & Menanteau 1997

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates



71

What terms they use to describe home energy use.

Display homes Remember that people who own their own homes and have higher incomes are more likely to purchase and install energy saving technologies. This group is an important target group for “display homes” – so the display homes must appeal to them. Some products, technologies and building techniques are unfamiliar to many consumers. The operation and effectiveness of these technologies and techniques can be effectively demonstrated through “display homes”. The technologies and techniques that are unfamiliar will vary over time. They might include: •

super insulation, and



double and triple glazing.

Technologies, techniques and energy savings must be made as concrete and visible as possible. Ideas include: •

cut-away walls for insulation, and



real-time energy use comparisons.

Hands-on activities can be effectively incorporated into display home operations. These activities can help to make the information vivid, concrete and personal. Some ideas for activities are:214 •

tours of the display home,



energy libraries,



audio-visual demonstrations—see Demonstrating home energy action on page 79,



workshops—see Workshops on page 78,



inspection of conservation work in progress,



new building design.

Personalised energy consultations could include:215 •

computer heat-loss analysis,



home energy audits—see Energy/Greenhouse audits, below,



help with designs for new buildings and renovations,



assistance for older people to weatherise their homes,



in-depth seminars for tradespeople.

In-store displays Less expensive and more familiar technologies can be effectively promoted through local retail outlets. Mobile displays are another outlet, including those at fairs.216 214 215

Coltrane et al. 1986 Coltrane et al. 1986

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

72

Remember that households where someone can do household repairs are more likely to purchase and install energy saving devices. These people are also more likely to frequent hardware stores. The section Idea for a hardware store audit, on page 76, suggests how these strategies can be designed to be effective.

Energy/Greenhouse audits Energy audits are particularly useful for identifying heating/ air conditioning system improvements, building envelope improvements, water heating improvements, and the applicability of renewable resource measures.217

During the 1980s, regulations in many US states meant that most US utilities offered energy audits. After six years, 7% of eligible US customers had participated.218 On page 103, the section Media campaigns in the chapter Attitudes sometimes motivate has suggestions for effective marketing—essential to boost participation rates. Households participating in the energy audits had energy savings of 3-5%.219 Unfortunately, it can be very difficult to accurately estimate potential energy savings through audits, partly because ‘actual savings depend on family behavior as well as thermal characteristics of the home’.220 Conducting an audit Remember that information received in face-to-face interaction does influence decisionmakers. While the information in the audit must be accurate, accuracy by itself is very unlikely to motivate home energy action. Simply giving the householder a computer summary of the likely energy savings from various retrofit actions is not likely to stimulate any action. Energy audits are more effective when they are vivid, concrete and personalised221: •

Invite the customer to accompany the auditor during the audit and help conduct the audit. See Use “foot-in-the door” strategies on page 102 for why this is so important. Involving the customer in energy actions is particularly valuable. People form favourable attitudes after direct experience that inspires actions consistent with those attitudes. Attitudes formed without direct experience are much less likely to inspire actions consistent with those attitudes.222 The energy auditor could involve the customer in installing a water-flow restricting device on a shower, or weatherstripping a window.223



Use the customer’s own bill to make a point about energy saving.

216

Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 p. 401 218 US Department of Energy 1987 in Nadel & Geller 1996 219 Hirst 1984 in Nadel & Geller 1996 220 Frieden & Baker 1983, p. 442 221 Yates & Aronson 1983, National Research Council 1984 222 De Young 1993 223 National Research Council 1984 217

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates



73

Show energy loss graphically. For instance, a “smoke stick” can be used to show heat loss out of a home. A “smoke stick” sprays a very fine, coloured powder. This powder flows on air currents and looks like smoke. When the smoke stick is operated below a window that has not been properly sealed, the “smoke” rushes along the path of the draft, clearly indicating when one is heating the out-of-doors in winter or drawing in heat from the outside in summer. Telling people that they are losing a certain percentage of home heat through the cracks around the windows is reasonable, but demonstrating the point by allowing the customer to watch the smoke pour out under doors and over window sills is far more compelling.224

This example shows how energy loss can be described vividly: (A)ssessors were trained to say: You know, if you were to add up all the cracks around and under these doors here, you’d have the equivalent of a hole the size of a football in your living room wall. Think for a moment about all the heat that would escape from a hole that size. That’s why I recommend you install weather-stripping…And your attic totally lacks insulation. We professionals call that a naked attic. It’s as if your home is facing winter not just without an overcoat, but without any clothing at all. Writing on the importance of presenting information vividly in home assessments, the authors state: ‘Psychologically, a crack is seen as minor, but a hole the size of a football feels disastrous.’ The fact that they encompass the same area is of interest to an engineer; but in the mind of the average homeowner, the football will loom larger than the cracks under the door. Similarly, insulation is something with which most people lack experience, but the idea of a naked attic in winter is something that forces attention and increases the probability of action.225



Give real examples of energy saving neighbours or other similar people who saved energy and money by using energy saving devices.



Give real examples of “superconservers”—households that save more energy than most do. The program may even arrange for people receiving audits to meet or talk to “superconservers”.226



Give choices of energy actions to take after the audit. See Choice & control on page 18 for why this is so important. Encouraging householders to make energy saving decisions themselves increases their commitment to saving energy. This increases the chances that they will actually do the energy saving action.227



Discuss all the recommendations with the customer, possibly using the customer’s utility bill. It is much less effective to just leave a summary of recommended actions with the customer.228 Address any concerns the consumer has: For instance, the Tennessee Valley Authority found that when auditors took the time to address elderly clients’ concerns over indoor air quality, programme participation and device installation increased.229



Talk about minimising financial loss230—the section Energy costs - focus on LOSS not savings, on page 63, explains that trying to minimise loss motivates people more

224

Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 438 McKenzie-Mohr 1994 p. 228—on a study by Gonzales et al. 226 National Research Council 1984 227 National Research Council 1984 228 National Research Council 1984 229 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 138 230 National Research Council 1984 225

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

74

than trying to maximise savings does. Use the customer’s own bill to show how much money they are losing each month/quarter by not taking the recommended energy actions. •

Give every opportunity to commit to taking an energy action. Householders are much more likely to take an energy action if they have committed to take it - especially if they know that the auditor will return to offer more assistance.231 (T)he householder might be asked: ‘When do you think you’ll have that weather-stripping completed?…I’ll give you a call around then, just to see how it’s coming along, and to see if you’re having any problems’.232

Remember that people post-hoc rationalise their decisions – particularly when committing to the decision was costly and the decision cannot be revoked. People remember the good arguments in favour of their final decision – but forget the poor arguments in favour of the alternatives. This is a good strategy to avoid continually reassessing one’s decisions. As a result of this ‘post-hoc rationalising’, once someone makes a small commitment in an area, they are more likely to make a larger commitment in the same area.233 Someone might commit to installing a shower flow restriction device – either by paying for it, or by making some other kind of commitment (e.g. at a social club). That person is then more likely to make a larger commitment, such as insulating a hot water unit. On the other hand, someone who does not make an energy saving commitment will rationalise his or her lack of effort. •

Provide a list of contractors—the list must be a short one or people will become overwhelmed. One option is to pick the top one, two or three names off the top of a “revolving” list of approved contractors.234 Quality control and conflict resolution mechanisms must be established for any work undertaken. This increases the credibility of the program, as well as ensuring that the “retrofits” actually save energy.235

The section Use “foot-in-the door” strategies, on page 102, has many more ideas for conducting an effective audit. Qualities needed in home energy auditors To be effective, an energy auditor needs: •

sound technical knowledge – to do the audit accurately,



strong communication skills – to communicate their knowledge effectively, and



credibility – to have their recommendations accepted by households.

231

Yates & Aronson 1983 McKenzie-Mohr 1994 p. 229—on a study by Gonzales et al. 233 Costanzo et al. 1986. 234 Coltrane et al. 1986 235 National Research Council 1984 232

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

75

An auditor who already has training in communication techniques will need technical training to be effective. On the other hand, an auditor who already has technical training will need training in communication techniques to be effective.236 On page 60 we noted that householders must believe that the source of information is trustworthy before they will evaluate the information favourably. Householders must believe the energy auditors are trustworthy. One study demonstrates particularly well just how important credibility is. It explored the response to a program offering free energy audits237. A county government ran the program, but a private company conducted the energy audits. Once an audit had been done on a home, the householder received free home insulation if they signed a ‘sharedsavings contract’ with the private company. This contract meant that the private company and the householder share the dollar savings that resulted from installing insulation. To explore the importance of credibility, households received one of three letters inviting them to request the free energy audit: 1. A letter on the private company’s letterhead, with no mention of the county government’s involvement. 2. A letter on the private company’s letterhead, mentioning the county government’s involvement. 3. A letter on the county government’s letterhead, signed by the chairman. Table 7: Importance of credibility for program effectiveness Households receiving letter on letterhead of: Private Company Not Mention County Government Requests for energy audits Shared-savings contracts signed

County Government

Mention County Government

6%

11%

31%

1.7%

2.7%

9.3%

In short, a letter from the County, for no additional cost, was five times as effective as a letter with the same information from the auditing and insulation company.238

For these reasons auditors are more likely to be effective if they (or their employer) cannot profit from the recommendations they make to households. A low credibility organisation, such as a utility, could join forces with a high-credibility organisation such as a community group to offer energy audits. In such an alliance, the community group would benefit from the resources and energy knowledge of the utility. The utility would benefit from the credibility of the community group.239

236

National Research Council 1984 Miller & Ford 1985 in Stern 1992 238 Stern 1992 p. 1228 239 National Research Council 1984 237

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

76

Community groups can be exceptionally effective and cost-effective home energy auditors. The section Use community groups to run energy action programs, on page 112, outlines their effectiveness in more detail. A phenomenally effective program using a combination of “social strategies” is described in A successful combination of social strategies, on page 113. A “Tupperware party” approach to undertaking energy audits and/or energy action demonstrations has been very effective.240 Idea for a hardware store audit Another approach to make energy audit programs more interactive is currently being used in Nebraska. Computer terminals set up in local hardware stores and lumber yards allow customers to get immediate feedback to a computerized energy audit. This approach gives the state a broad information base and gives the local store more business (Brown et al., 1986). The system uses local business people to explain the information and capitalizes on the consumer’s readiness to receive and act on information.241

A similar computerised energy or greenhouse audit could be run using hardware stores in Australia. Such a strategy would need to: •

Involve the customer in the audit – possibly inputting his or her own data into the computer.



Describe the household’s ‘excess’ energy use or ‘greenhouse emissions’ vividly and graphically – for instance ‘your house loses enough energy each year as it takes to drive to Darwin’.



Describe how a real household, similar to the customers’, drastically reduced their energy use and/or ‘greenhouse emissions’.



Give concrete recommendations on what actions will save the most energy or greenhouse gas emissions.



Give a choice of actions to take.



Ensure that the hardware store provides personal attention to program userspeople are far more likely to act if they receive personal advice and have computerised advice interpreted for them.



Ensure that the hardware store can help people translate the recommendations into action immediately – for instance, they can purchase a low-flow showerhead.



Use purchases of energy efficiency products as a ‘foot-in-the-door’ opportunity – see page 102. For instance, people purchasing energy efficient products could also be given a free ‘Energy Efficiency Star’ fridge magnet to encourage them to think of themselves as concerned about energy, and thus take more energy actions in future.

Give feedback on energy use People often do not know where most of their energy is used. They tend to think that visible energy consuming technologies (such as lights) consume more energy than less 240 241

National Research Council 1984 Dennis et al. 1990

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

77

visible technologies (such as a hot water service)242. They may also overestimate energy use related to socially significant events such as Christmas lights or Christmas dinner.243 This makes it difficult for them to develop energy saving strategies. They may make a great effort to turn off unused lights, only to find they save very little energy. Their failure would discourage further energy saving efforts - they feel it is not worth the effort.244 It is difficult for most people to accurately measure the impact of their energy saving efforts. Even if they know the difference in their energy cost from one year to the next, changes in weather and energy prices mean that the costs from year to year are not directly comparable. Or, consider groceries in a hypothetical store totally without price markings, billed via a monthly statement like ‘US$527 for 2362 food units in April’. How could grocery shoppers economize under such a billing regime? Prior qualitative research has shown that energy consumers encounter precisely these types of data analysis and evaluation problems. Energy conservers received no report on savings from past actions, which makes evaluation of energy savings very difficult. Failure to report achieved savings removes an incentive to further conservation measure and presumably impedes the diffusion of effective methods across households. 245

Feedback techniques are an attempt to inform people about what energy saving actions are saving them energy. Feedback can result in a 15-20% reduction in energy use - and as high as a 30% reduction when combined with incentives.246 Feedback could be in the form of247: "

digital readout devices indicating cents of energy used per day

"

daily or weekly readings of meters

"

bill information that itemizes energy use by category (e.g. lights)

"

more informative energy bills

Simply having people pay attention to their energy use seems to have an impact. Homeowners asked to keep an "energy log" for a month used 13% less electricity than comparable homeowners. Energy savings continued for a year after this experiment ended. The "energy log" kept by homeowners consisted simply of noting their appliance use twice daily and reading their electricity meters weekly.248 Households receiving more frequent electricity bills in Norway reduced their electricity use by about 8%. Norwegian households usually receive an electricity bill just once a year – in addition they receive three-monthly invoices for estimated electricity use. Some households received ‘more frequent bills and a graphic showing the current and previous year’s consumption’249 – in other words they received feedback on their electricity use. These households reduced their electricity use by about 10%.

242

Costanzo et al. 1986. Kempton & Layne 1994 244 National Research Council 1984 245 Kempton & Layne 1994 p. 857 246 Rosa et al. 1988, McDougall et al. 1981 247 Costanzo et al. 1986. 248 Pallak et al. 1980 in National Research Council 1984 249 Wilhite & Ling 1995 p. 147 243

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

78

Householders readily recall household events that may have contributed to unusual energy use.250 Thus, if they are supplied with energy use data of high quality, it is likely that they could put it to good use - if other important components are present. Nonetheless, feedback programs by themselves can achieve little energy savings.251 Feedback is most effective when: •

Householders have chosen quantitative goals for reducing their energy consumption.252



It clearly sets out the period covered, the amount of energy used and the cost.253



It compares energy use to a meaningful standard – for example to previous energy use in a similar period, or to the energy use of similar households.254



It is frequent.255



It is highly visible – for instance a simple and clear graphic.256



Energy costs are a large portion of the household budget.257



Clear instructions are given on how to save energy.258



There is less written information and more ‘ “humanized” information provided by video images, community role models, personal contacts with consumers’.259

One U.S. study suggests using utilities to produce high quality energy use data for householders - including weather adjustments.260 Households’ attitudes to their energy provider improve if they receive higher quality bills – for example, more frequent bills, with feedback, or energy saving tips.261

Workshops Workshops are likely to reach a much larger number of people if they are run as part of another meeting or workshop, for instance: •

A home maintenance or home improvement workshop run by a hardware store or adult education centre.



A local community group meeting – see also Use community groups to communicate, below.

250

Kempton & Layne 1994 McDougall et al. 1981 252 Costanzo et al. 1986 253 Costanzo et al. 1986, Van Raaij & Verhallen 1983 in Wilhite & Ling 1995 254 Midden et al. 1983 and Ammons 1956 in Wilhite & Ling 1995 255 Recommendations of Kempton in Wilhite & Ling 1995 256 Wilhite & Ling 1995 257 Costanzo et al. 1986 p. 526 258 McDougall et al. 1981, National Research Council 1984 259 Lutzenhiser 1993 p. 254 260 Kempton & Layne 1994 261 Wilhite & Ling 1995 251

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

79

Workshops offer the potential for hands-on learning. Workshops [for apartment block owners] are offered through existing apartment owners’ associations and include a number of marketing techniques suggested above, including: (1) exemplary case studies (for example, details of how an association member obtained energy savings); (2) concrete suggestions (for example, how to pass through costs under rent control or how to claim eneryg tax credits); and (3) vivid presentation of conservation technologies (for example, display boards with energy-efficient devices which are detached and passed around the room for inspection).262

Demonstrating home energy action We have already noted that videos and community role models are effective information disseminators, especially in comparison with written information.263 A study compared the energy use of two groups of people. The first group watched a video showing energy saving techniques. The second group received the same information - but they received it in writing. The group watching the video saved 20% more energy than the group receiving written information.264 One study found that homeowners who watched a video about efficient energy use in summer used 35% less electricity for cooling - and 16% less electricity overall.265 The twenty-minute video: showed a young couple..(demonstrating) the proper use of fans and natural ventilation in the evening; ways to shift the time or place of activities such as cooking and eating to decrease the need for air conditioning; dressing in lightweight clothing; and so forth. The script was carefully constructed to present energy efficiency as a positive action rather than emphasizing conservation.266

Videos showing the home energy action should267: •

use characters and locations appropriate for a specific target group,



show models learning how do the new action (e.g. examining a low flow showerhead, checking the tools they need),



show the action very clearly (e.g. removing an old showerhead and replacing with a new one),



defuse counterbeliefs and attitudes (e.g. show someone enjoying a shower under a low flow showerhead), and



show the effect of the action (e.g. show someone proudly showing off their home energy scorecard to a neighbour) .



Page 109, in the chapter People need people, has more information about the use of role models.

262

Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 138 Lutzenhiser 1993 264 Winett et al. in Stern 1992 265 Winett et al. in Yates & Aronson 1983 266 Winett et al. in National Research Council 1984 267 Yates & Aronson 1983 263

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

80

Use community groups to communicate Almost any organization that has the trust of the intended target population can add credibility to energy conservation efforts…For residential programmes, churches, civic groups, neighbourhood associations and senior citizen centres have been helpful in reaching people who might not otherwise have attended energy workshops. Most programmes find that combining energy conservation presentations with other regularly scheduled items works best, since by themselves energy conservation presentation tend to draw few people.268 Meeting individually with the leaders of multiple community organizations before making presentations to their memberships has been a particularly effective strategy.

As we noted in the section above, it is imperative that energy information disseminated by community groups be completely accurate. To that end, it can be useful to combine the expertise of energy experts together with the communication skills of community groups. On page 74, in the section Qualities needed in home energy auditors, we spoke about the potential for developing strategic alliances between different organisations with different energy action skills. In Australia, most states have “energy information centres” with extensive knowledge of effective energy actions. On the other hand, community groups and informal social networks offer avenues for that knowledge and information to be used. An effective energy information program could bring together the skills of “energy experts” and “community groups” to ensure that accurate energy information is communicated to householders effectively—so they notice it, favourably evaluate it, understand it, remember it and act on it.

Use social networks to communicate Information received from friends, family and colleagues is more likely to motivate action than information from impersonal sources.269 Peers can be more effective at training each other than specially trained experts.270 People are more likely to notice the information, evaluate it favourably, understand and remember it when they receive that information from people they know. Community groups spread information effectively, apparently because they are credible and use word-of-mouth.271 The U.S. study mentioned earlier found 70% of householders discussed their energy bills with other people - including regular consultations with friends and neighbours.272 Since people usually interact with others in a similar similarly situation to themselves (home ownership, income etc), they receive information relevant to their own circumstances and are in a position to act on that information. The importance of the ‘social reference group’ increases when the issue is complicated and unclear. Deciding about energy technology decisions is difficult for many people prices can fluctuate and competing information providers can confuse the issue. In a

268

Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 140 Yates & Aronson 1983, Costanzo et al. 1986, Cosgrove et al. 1996 270 Yates & Aronson 1983 271 Stern et al. 1987 272 Kempton & Layne 1994 269

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

81

situation like this, people seek information from those they know who are situated similarly to them. Information received through social networks is highly vivid and personal. Further, people are more likely to believe and trust their family and friends than a media source of information. For these reasons, social networks are very effective at motivating action on the basis of information received. Social networks act as models for action - they can demonstrate how to purchase, install and maintain energy saving technologies and how to behave in energy saving ways. During the 1930s, the (US) federal government sought to facilitate the adoption of improved agricultural equipment and practices. An initial attempt to persuade farmers took the form of informational pamphlets. This approach produced few results. A later attempt took the form of a demonstration project. Government consultants worked side by side with farmers on selected farms. This program was a tremendous success. The government-trained farmers served as models for other farmers. When friends and colleagues saw the results of the new methods (an improved harvest), the techniques and equipment spread rapidly.273

The section Social & cultural influences on energy action, on page 106, explains further about how people influence each other. For examples on how to use social networks to communicate energy information, see Use demonstration households, on page 109 and A successful combination of social strategies, on page 113. It is essential that the use of informal networks and community groups not compromise the accuracy of the energy information disseminated. Inaccurate information could motivate energy actions that save little energy. This is of concern for at least three reasons: •

Environmental—a key purpose of an energy action program is to decrease impacts on the environment.



Trust—if householders do not save energy, they will lose trust in the program and the program is likely to falter.



Stalled momentum—on page 102, the section Use “foot-in-the door” strategies explains that taking one small energy action leads to an increased likelihood of taking more energy actions. The reverse can happen. If people take energy actions that seem to have little effect, they are much less inclined to take further energy actions. They become harder to motivate in the future.

Monitoring and evaluating information programs In-depth interviews and surveys provide poor information on what householders have done differently as a result of an information program.274 Self-reported behaviours are frequently not reliable. Most people do not remember details of their habitual or frequent behaviours. Even more memorable behaviours, such as setting the thermostat temperature setting on a heater, are routinely misreported.275 It is better to obtain accurate information 273

Nisbett et al. 1976 in Costanzo et al. 1986 p. 527. Stern et al. 1987 275 ??KEMPTON?? 274

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Information sometimes motivates

82

on the actual consumption of energy prior to and after the information program. Comparing program participants with households not served by the program is an excellent way to assess the success of an information program. In-depth interviews and surveys can provide a good indication of non-energy outcomes, such as comfort, that may affect the program.276

276

Stern et al. 1987

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Money sometimes motivates

Clues that money is not enough Householders don’t see energy costs People overestimate the energy used by visible appliances, such as lights. 277 They underestimate the energy used by invisible appliances, such as hot water services. Nonetheless, it is often impossible for people to calculate the costs and benefits of an energy action.278 To make a purely ‘economically rational’ decision about an energy action, someone would need information on: •

the thermal characteristics of their home, and projected financial costs and benefits of altering those characteristics,



the impact of climate and weather on their past and likely future heating and cooling requirements,



the energy consumption of their present and potential future appliances under different conditions,



their own energy use behaviours – e.g. how much hot water they use, and



future energy price increases.

This information is usually not available to individual households. Moreover, this information is often unavailable to energy experts! It is impossible for people to act in an ‘economically rational’ fashion with respect to their home energy actions.

Money often does not motivate During the 1970s in the US, energy prices nearly quadrupled. However, the US Department of Energy estimates that, between 1972 and 1980, average energy use per household decreased only 1.5% per annum.279 Furthermore, most of the savings were not due to improvements in the energy efficiency of homes or purchases of energy efficient appliances. Most of the savings were due to householders changing their lifestyles.280 277

Lutznehiser 1993 Lutznehiser 1993 279 Frieden & Baker 1983 280 Frieden & Baker 1983 278

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

84

Opinion research at the time found people gave prices as a reason for changing their energy actions281. However, most householders did not undertake cost-effective energy investments. In a national survey in 1979, only 10% of households reported having insulated their attics; 6% reported having insulated their walls.282 A guide for consumers published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in 1975 estimated the cost of caulk and weatherstripping283 installed by the homeowner at between $75 and $105 per house. For areas like northern California, annual savings were estimated between $30 and $75, with a payback period of between one and 3.5 years.284

At the time, draught proofing was an extremely ‘economically rational’ home energy action. In addition, it was easy to do without professional help, the ‘technology’ was proven and the result improved comfort by reducing drafts. Despite all this, the vast majority of homeowners did not draught proof their homes.285 Experienced ethnographers in a Californian study found that householders’ actions were influenced by the way they feel about their home and the way they feel about doing different jobs in the home.286 They knew that it made economic ‘sense’ to draught proof their homes – but most people did not do it. The section The culture of the home, on page 26, explains their feelings in more detail. In 1983, shortly after the energy crisis, the wealthiest households in the western U.S. were spending 5% of net household income on energy; the poorest were spending 20% on energy.287 In Australia in 1993-94, households spent an average of only 2.8% of net household income on fuel and power (excluding vehicle fuel). This is less than the ‘average household’ spent on alcoholic beverages (2.9%). Even households on government pensions spent only 4.1% on fuel and power, while those living on superannuation spent 3.1%.288 In this context, households cannot be expected to engage in energy saving actions primarily for cost reasons. Remember the small South Australian information program discussed on page 63 – some people may use more energy once they know how much it costs to run appliances such as air conditioners.289

281

Frieden & Baker 1983 Frieden & Baker 1983 283 Weatherstripping doors and windows and caulking joints and cracks reduce air infiltration, which reduces heating and cooling requirements. In Australia, these actions are often referred to as ‘draught proofing’. 284 Wilk & Wilhite 1987 p. 53 285 ‘[B]etween 15 and 54 percent of surveyed households report some weatherization efforts, though in many cases the results fall far short of complete weatherstripping and caulking. It should be noted that most of these figures are for self-reported conservation measures, which tend to produce highly inflated percentages, as those questioned respond to the perceived expectations of the researchers (White et al 1983). It is likely that actual performance of weatherstripping and caulking is considerably below these estimates.’ (Wilk & Wilhite 1987 p. 53) 286 Wilk & Wilhite 1987 287 Lutzenhiser & Hackett 1993 288 ABS 2000 289 Pears 2000, pers. comm., 14 March. The programs are run by Monica Oliphant. I note that this is anecdotal evidence as I am unaware of: a) whether the program has been conducted as a study, and, if so, b) the method used, and c) the exact nature of the findings. Without knowing at least these details, I cannot know how much significance to assign to the findings. 282

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

85

We have noted that, in an U.S. study, where householders paid nothing for their electricity use, there was enormous variation in the level of air conditioner use (from 1.2kWh of ‘air conditioner’ electricity during the cooling season to 1048kWh).290 Another study of 500 apartments that were master-metered (not individually billed) found differences in energy consumption up to 300% between almost identical households.291 Clearly, energy costs are not the sole motivator of home energy actions. Even when energy price changes do influence energy actions, the degree of influence varies according to the context in which the energy price changes occur: The U.S. energy system responded very differently to the price shocks of 1973 and 1979. In both cases, the real price of energy increased around 50% in a 3- or 4-year period. But the economy increased its energy productivity (measured as dollars of output per unity of energy consumption) much more after the second shock than after the first. The difference was probably a result of multiple factors, including changed perceptions, increased foreign competition in energy-intensive industries, policy choices, development of new energy-efficient technology, and changes in industrial structure. These findings imply that price responsiveness, or elasticity, may be subject to external influence...292

In other words, the same energy price increase can have different impacts on energy actions in different contexts. Price is very far from the sole determinant of whether a household undertakes an energy action, even when the action is expensive. Whether or not a householder invests in an expensive energy efficiency measure has a great deal to do with whether their friends and associates have invested in that measure.293 Home energy efficiency improvements, along with other home improvements, are not just investments. Home improvements may enhance pleasure, convenience or status—features often associated with consumer items.294 Thus, when a homeowner considers reinsulating or replacing a working furnace, that choice is competing against unlike alternatives—another bathroom, a picture window, new living room furniture, and so forth. People do not usually weigh the potential value of the energy saved by one purchase against the pleasure, convenience, or status achievable by alternative purchases. People are not likely to treat energy efficiency strictly as investment when they are not likely to consider the alternatives to energy efficiency as investments.295

Other energy decisions are made under time pressures—hot water system replacement, for example. Under such circumstances, quick replacement is a higher priority than information search and energy efficiency.296 Price can make very little difference to whether householders undertake low-cost energy actions.

290

Kempton et al. 1992b Lutzenhiser 1993 292 Stern 1993 p. 1898 293 Stern 1992 294 National Research Council 1984 295 National Research Council 1984 pp. 61-62 296 National Research Council 1984 291

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

86

Energy efficiency investments may not be economical In the survey of households in the five southwest cities, mentioned earlier, people were asked to state the maximum amount of time they would be willing to wait in order to recover their investment in energy-saving equipment through reductions in their fuel bills. Those with incomes below $10,000 said they were willing to wait six months on average to recover an investment of $100 on home insulation…Those with higher incomes were willing to wait about one and one-half years on average for a $100 insulation investment to pay for itself…In a period of high inflation, when alternative lowrisk investments were offering returns of 14% or more, demanding a four- or five-year payback on an uncertain investment does not seem unreasonable. Yet the hopes of those that see a big potential in conservation usually rest on the assumption that people will invest for much lower returns.297

If energy actions were thought of as potential investments, householders would need to compare the return on an energy action to the return from investing elsewhere. Energy actions are quite ‘risky’ investments: •

For instance, installing insulation will often add little financial value to a home – it may add less value than it costs to install. In other words, energy action investments might not return the capital the householder put in to them in the first place.



The annual return on an energy investment is very uncertain. The energy savings depend on changes in energy prices, weather, household behaviour, etc.

Investors usually expect risky investments to give a much higher rate of return than safe investments do. If householders compared the potential return on energy actions with the potential return on other risky investments, they might conclude that their money is better invested elsewhere.

Essential features of financial incentives that motivate Decide whether financial incentives will motivate! Estimate the likely impact of a financial incentive strategy Firstly it is important to establish whether it is worthwhile to offer a financial incentive at all: The limited evidence suggests that incentives speed investment, but more needs to be known to see if the effect is large enough to justify particular incentive programs.298

Financial incentive strategies are ineffective if many or most of the people claiming the incentive would have taken the energy action even if the incentive were not available. Usually, the aim of a financial incentive strategy is to increase the number of people taking a particular energy action, such as installing a solar hot water service. A financial incentive strategy is very unlikely to aim explicitly to reward energy-efficiency aficionados! People who claim the financial incentive but would have taken the energy action anyway are ‘free-riders’. Low-income households are less likely to be ‘free riders’.

297 298

Frieden & Baker 1983, p. 443 Stern et al. 1987 p. 349

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

87

Financial incentive strategies can be ineffective if they result in people feeling they should only take energy efficiency actions if they are sufficiently financially remunerated. Such wholesale remuneration is unlikely to be financially viable. Financial incentive strategies are effective if they help transform the market for an energy-efficiency product. If they increase the size of the market for the product, costs of cost of production (per unit) may decrease, lowering the cost of the product, which may increase the market for the product. Thus, a virtuous circle can be set in motion from an initial impact on the price — ‘niche market’, to price decrease, market expansion, production cost decrease, etc. In support of this argument, one could mention the results obtained by the Danish programmes which, by multiplying sales by a factor of three, allowed an average drop in sale price from 50 to 20 $ between 1987 and 1991 (Mills, 1993).299

It can be difficult to establish the likely impact of a financial incentive strategy. Surveys give an inaccurate picture of the likely impact of a financial incentive.300 These are some reasons: •

It is difficult for someone to answer a question about how they would act in a hypothetical situation. When confronted with such a question, many people cannot bring to mind the full range of issues that impinge on their actions in real life.301



People over-report socially desirable behaviours and under-report undesirable behaviours.302 This ‘social desirability response bias’ is a problem even with mailed surveys, but an even greater problem with telephone and face-to-face interviews.303 When confronted with a hypothetical situation, people are very likely to report that they would act in the socially desirable way.

Small-scale experiments are a better way to establish how people might act when given an incentive to undertake an energy efficient action (such as purchase an energy efficient hot water service). They are also very helpful for choosing important non-financial aspects of the program, such as which organisation will have the most impact.304 For instance, a small-scale experiment could compare energy actions undertaken by people: 1. offered and receiving a free home energy audit, by auditors trained in energy communication techniques (see chapter on ‘information’) 2. offered and receiving a free home energy audit, by ‘regular’ energy auditors 3. offered and receiving nothing - acting as a control group. Know your market Households make energy action decisions under a variety of circumstances. Two key distinctions can be made:

299

Colombier & Menanteau 1997 p. 428 Stern et al. 1987 301 Foddy 1993 302 Foddy 1993 303 de Vaus 1995 304 Stern et al. 1987 300

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

88

1. Market–driven decisions. Householders are continually making decisions about appliance purchases and renovations. Strategies trying to improve the energy efficiency of those decisions should work with the existing market mechanisms. Trade allies are very important in these circumstances. Mechanisms need to encourage them to promote energy–efficient appliances and building practices. In this case, incentives need only cover additional costs associated with the energy–efficient appliance or renovation.305 2. Retrofit decisions. Householders are much less likely to spontaneously decide to retrofit their homes to be more energy–efficient. Strategies trying to increase the number of retrofits need to be much more proactive. If incentives are used, they can be more expensive than strategies for market–driven decisions.306 Even when the net financial benefit is the same, different types of financial incentives hold quite different levels of appeal for householders. For instance, grants for home insulation have been more successful than loan subsidies, even when the total financial benefit to the householder is the same.307 Use a financial incentive strategy as part of a long-term strategy When people receive a financial incentive for taking an energy saving action, they are likely to see the financial incentive as the reason for them taking the action. This means that they are less likely to see themselves as someone concerned about saving energy, and they may not be motivated to take any further energy actions. For more information on how this process works, see the section Use “foot-in-the door” strategies, on page 102. Furthermore, people may start to feel that they should only take an energy action if they receive a reward for it.308 If a financial incentive strategy is adopted, the strategy should include some element to encourage participants to think of themselves as energy savers. These are some ideas: 1. Award “Energy Star” or “GreenHouse Star” fridge magnets to all participants. Why this idea could work and how this idea could work is discussed in the section Use “foot-in-the door” strategies, on page 102. 2. Using a database of participants, occasionally mail out “Energy Star” newsletters. The newsletters should reinforce participants’ sense of themselves as “Energy Stars”, emphasise the value of each person’s contribution, give them the opportunity to describe their energy saving ideas or experiences, and provide information on other energy saving ideas and products.

Vital non-financial aspects of financial incentive strategies By 1980 already over 30 separate studies had been conducted testing the impact of incentives on consumers home energy use.309

305

Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 307 Stern 1992 308 De Young 1993 309 McDougall et al. 1981 306

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

89

Programs that are administered differently, but offer identical levels of monetary gain, have resulted in the most effective programs with participation levels ten times higher than the least effective programs. The non-financial factors that help to explain this enormous variation are310: •

promotion



simplicity



reliability



trust

These ‘non-financial’ aspects of financial incentive programs will not improve the success of programs offering weak incentives. But when a strong incentive is offered, the success of the program depends on the attention given to these ‘non-financial’ aspects.311 Promotion Consumers need frequent reminders about program benefits. They also need to know exactly what it is that they must do in order to benefit from the program. The information they need depends on what the program is for. It also depends on the process for claiming the benefit - e.g. produce receipts or electricity bills. When promoting a financial incentive program, remember that people are not just investors—most people are heavily influenced by preferences for comfort and convenience and by the social status associated with the technology or practice being promoted. Promotional strategies must take into account influences on the target group. A range of influences are outlined in the sections Energy needs–based market segments, on page 20, Social role of energy use, on page 24, and The culture of the home, on page 26. Many energy actions have a range of non-energy benefits. Front-loading washing machines ‘care for’ delicate clothes, reduce wear and tear on clothes, and use less water. Knowing which of these benefits appeals to which ‘market segments’ helps promote an appropriate suite of benefits to each target group. Simplicity Consumers respond best to programs that they can easily understand and participate in. ‘One-stop shops’ are much more successful than programs that separate these energy information, financial incentives, and contractor services. The financial incentive must be easy to collect.312 For instance, the Canadian Home Insulation Program was able to serve substantial numbers of lower income households by minimizing paperwork and not requiring energy audits.313

310

Stern 1993 Stern 1992 312 Stern 1992 313 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 144 311

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

90

Reliability A financial incentive program must “sell” a high quality product. Contractors related to the program and products recommended as part of the program must be high quality.314 (A) 1984 experiment in Minnesota demonstrates the importance of non-financial factors, particularly trust. Homeowners were offered a free energy audit, free installation of the recommended conservation measures, and a guarantee that from that time on, their monthly utility bills would decrease. A private energy service company planned to profit by collecting a portion of savings over the first 5 years produced by the energy improvements it installed, after which the (savings) would revert to the homeowner. The program attracted the interest of up to 20% of eligible households in only a few monthsa strong showing. But that was not the whole story.

Trust The county government conducted a small experiment in marketing, trying three ways of introducing the program to its audience: letters from the energy service company on its letterhead; the same letter with added mention that the county government was cosponsoring the program; and a substantially identical letter from the chairman of the county Board of Commissioners, which introduced the company as the county’s selected contractor. The letter from the county government was over five times as effective as the company’s letter that did not mention the government, both in encouraging energy audit and in getting contracts signed. The most likely explanation is trust: the letter from the county government provided much greater reassurance that the program was in the public interest, and the consumer’s.315 [italics added]

Face-to-face communication through social networks is an excellent way to enhance program effectiveness.

Some financial incentive strategies Energy rate pricing Energy rate structures that have been used include:316 •

Time-of-use rates—higher rates per unit during peak periods. Bear in mind, however: Heberlein and Warriner (1983) investigated the influence of increased costs during peak electricity usage periods…The three peak to nonpeak ratios per kilowatt hour were 2:1, 4:1, and 8:1…the priceratio system of billing for electricity used during peak periods produced a shift toward off-peak consumption, although the influence of the price-ratio magnitude was minimal…these authors concluded that the influence of commitment was three times greater than price ratio.317

Strategies to Encourage public commitment to saving energy are discussed on page 110. •

Inverted rates—higher rates per unit the more energy is used;



Seasonal rates—different rates per unit during different seasons;

314

Stern 1992 Stern 1993 p.1898 316 Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 317 Dwyer et al. 1993 p. 312 315

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

91



Promotional rates—to attract targeted customer groups;



Off-peak rates—lower rates per unit during off-peak times;



Conservation rates—for consumers meeting minimum energy–efficiency standards.

Energy rate pricing is fairly unlikely to be successful in Australia at present: •

Energy is extremely cheap – consumers are only likely to respond to an energy rate strategy if a very steep price hike was instituted.



Simply increasing energy prices is likely to be socially regressive. While households with higher incomes may purchase energy efficient appliances, poorer households are generally forced to curtail their behaviours.318



The energy utilities are not vertically integrated. If all of a power station’s energy generating capacity is being sold, a small increase in energy demand might only be met by developing more generating capacity. The cost of this development may far exceed the extra profit generated. In this circumstance, it would be in the interests of the utility to reduce energy demand to fit existing capacity. In Australia the companies generating energy are separate to the utilities selling energy to consumers. Consequently, there is no incentive for energy utilities to reduce energy demand to fit existing capacity.

Rebates & grants Rebates are usually more effective than loans.319 •

People find rebates easier to understand.



People generally prefer rebates to loans.



Rebates are easier to administer than loans.

Rebate programs can be costly. Offering rebates to dealers or manufacturers instead of consumers reduces costs.320 Low-income households historically have low “free-rider” rates.321 For that reason, they may be an important target group. However, loans can be more appealing for people without the capital to purchase energy efficiency improvements. The success of rebate programs varies widely - both in terms of participation rates and in terms of energy savings per participant household. By themselves, rebates are not very effective at motivating action on a package of energy saving measures – e.g. an energy audit recommendation. They are best used to promote specific types of energy efficient equipment – such as efficient lighting or refrigerators. Unsurprisingly, programs covering 100% of technology and installation costs have high participation rates, sometimes as high as 90% of targeted consumers.322 This type of program is very similar to Comprehensive installation programs, below. 318

Lutzenhiser & Hackett 1993 Nadel & Geller 1996 320 Nadel & Geller 1996 321 Vine 1994 319

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

92

A New York experiment compared the effectiveness of different types of rebate program. The rebate was for the 25% most efficient refrigerators. In different regions of New York, slightly different rebate programs were instituted. Researchers then compared the success of the different programs was. The results are presented in Table 8, below. Table 8: Comparison of rebate schemes323 Program components

participation rate (% of efficient fridge purchases)

None

15%

Information + Advertising

35%

Information + Advertising + US$35 rebate

49%

Information + Advertising + US$50 rebate

60%

Successful rebate programs have the following features: •

They give rebates for only the most energy efficient products (e.g. the top 25%).



They undertake extensive marketing campaigns.

Loans Loan schemes are often ineffective and are difficult to market, as they can be confusing. That said, 23% of eligible households participated in a 10-year Tennessee Home Weatherization program that provided 0% interest loans. However, the program combined: •

very attractive interest rates,



free energy audits, and



extensive advertising,



at a time of high interest in energy issues.324

Loan schemes can be an important mechanism for reaching consumers without the capital to invest in energy efficiency.

Comprehensive installation programs Comprehensive installation programs can achieve energy savings of 10-15% in participating households.325 They make it easy for consumers to install a package of energy saving measures by including features such as: •

an energy audit,



installing energy efficiency measures, and

322

Nadel & Geller 1996 Based on Kreitler et al. 1987 in Nadel & Geller 1996 324 Nadel et al. 1994 in Nadel & Geller 1996 325 Brown & White 1992 and Massachusetts Electricity Company 1991 in Nadel & Geller 1996 323

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates



93

financial assistance (loans or grants).

Like rebate programs, comprehensive installation programs can be expensive. There are a few options to reduce costs: •

Include only low-cost, but effective measures in the installations.



Use voluntary groups to help reach low-income households.



Undertake a comprehensive installation on a “demonstration household”. This relies on social networks ‘spreading the word’ about the benefits of the energy actions. The section Social & cultural influences on energy action, on page 106, outlines the reasons why social networks are significant motivators of home energy action. Pages 109 and 110 outline how to Use demonstration households and Use existing informal social networks.



Offer a comprehensive installation program as a prize. The prize could be targeted to low-income consumers, renters and/or those without household repair skills.

Comprehensive installation programs are useful for reaching low-income households.326 Further, low-income households are effectively reached with these programs.327 One such project, the Santa Monica Energy Fitness Program, was specifically designed to reach target groups such as renters, low-income households and senior citizens. Key programme elements include door-to-door canvassing, streamlined ‘generic’ audits for typical building types and immediate installation of free low-cost conservation devices such as water heater insulation jackets, hot water pipe insulation, low-flow shower heads and doorsweep weatherstripping.328

However, different programs have had very different levels of success. Since 1976, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has operated the largest residential energyconservation program in the nation…Approximately $500 million is spent annually in the U.S. to weatherize the homes of low-income households…Funds from DOE are allocated to State government agencies, which in turn provide grants to about 1100 local weatherization agencies. 329

A comprehensive evaluation of this program found enormous variation in the energy savings achieved. Some homes used 50% less energy after being weatherized. Others used more energy after being weatherized. Some local agencies achieved average energy savings of 30-40% per weatherized home. Others achieved no energy savings. Effective comprehensive installation programs must: •

offer high-quality comprehensive services that make it easy for customers to participate,



offer readily available financing, and



market the benefits personally to target consumers.

Households to focus on Of the 1100 local agencies delivering the $500 million per annum U.S. Department of Energy Weatherization Program, the agencies achieving the most energy savings per 326

Nadel & Geller 1996 Coltrane et al. 1986 328 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 146 329 Brown & Berry 1995 pp. 729-730 327

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

94

dwelling concentrated on very energy inefficient homes that were using large amounts of energy. These tended to be:330 •

single-family detached dwellings,



larger than average,



very leaky, and



older than average.

Actions to focus on The agencies concentrated on:331 •

insulating ceilings for the first time,



insulating walls, and “building envelopes”,



stopping air leaks, and



installing low-flow showerheads.

The case of rental housing As about 1/3 of US families lived in rental accommodation in the1970s, the Office of Technology Assessment explored how to improve energy efficiency in rental buildings. They conclude that, to motivate action: •

Landlords must feel that their existing or future rate of return is under threat. Remember that avoiding a potential financial loss motivates more than ensuring a potential gain – see page 63. Landlords may be financially motivated to make energy efficiency improvements if energy use is charged to the tenant.



Landlords need access to a service provider who they feel will undertake the improvements effectively.

If rental homes had home energy star ratings, landlords may feel it is in their interest to invest in energy efficiency – see pages 68 and 124.

Monitoring & evaluating financial incentive strategies Surveys and in-depth interviews can give insights into the effect of the non-financial features of the program. Both participants and non-participants can give useful feedback on: •

330 331

The credibility of the program’s sponsor.

Brown & Berry 1995 Brown & Berry 1995

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Money sometimes motivates

95



How they understand the scheme operates. Their understanding can be compared with the sponsor’s understanding. Confusion about the scheme can arise when a scheme is too complex or is not clearly promoted.



Whether they consider it is easy to take part in the scheme. Surveys reporting what investments people believe they would have made in the absence of an incentive must be interpreted with extreme caution. A more reliable approach is to compare people to whom an incentive was offered with people who did not have this incentive but were otherwise similar. This can be done by adding a comparison group to a program evaluation design. Because of self-selection of program participants, a comparison of eligible non-participants is less than satisfactory.332

Surveys and in-depth interviews are also useful for obtaining the views of program workers and others involved in the program – e.g. contractors, retailers, service providers, and manufacturers. They can provide feedback on: •

How easy the program is to explain to potential participants.



How easy the program is to administer.



Whether there is scope for improving the effectiveness or efficiency of the program’s processes.



How they understand the scheme operates. Their understanding can be compared with that of the participants, non-participants and the sponsor.

It is also important to try to measure the impact of a financial incentive strategy. Particular attention should be paid to estimating: •

the baseline – the situation before the strategy was introduced,



“free riders” – people who claimed the financial incentive, but would have taken the energy action anyway,



“free drivers” – people who did not claim the financial incentive, but took the energy action because of the program, and



the duration of the energy action.

Further details are in the section What to monitor & evaluate, on page 32.

332

Stern et al. 1987 p. 347

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Attitudes sometimes motivate

Link between attitudes & actions One of the paradoxes of the psychology of environmentalism is that citizens generally hold propreservation attitudes but routinely engage in environmentally unfriendly actions, such as driving to work instead of using public transportation.333 The attitude model rests on the assumption that attitudes cause behavior. Unfortunately, social science research has demonstrated that there is rarely a strong, direct, or consistent relationship between attitudes and subsequent action…people who cite conservation as the single most important strategy for improving our energy future are no more likely than others to engage in energy-conserving behaviors.334 (emphasis added)

By 1980 already over 200 separate studies had explored consumers’ attitudes to home energy use, and their reported home energy behaviours.335 Much of that research noted a weak relationship between conservation attitudes and behaviours. A weak association between environmental behaviours and attitudes was also found in a meta-analysis of 51 attitude–behaviour studies.336

When the attitude–action link is stronger 1. When attitudes and actions are measured “correctly”, the link is stronger. The section on Surveys, on page 43, outlines how difficult it can be to measure attitudes and actions. When these are measured imprecisely, the attitude-action link is weaker. 2. Specific attitudes are more relevant to energy action than general attitudes are. 337 An example of a specific attitude is “to stay healthy, you need a warm home”. You would expect this attitude to be quite strongly related to thermostat settings. You would not necessarily expect this attitude to be related to levels of insulation. Energy conservation studies often measure general attitudes. An example of a general attitude is “saving energy is important”. They are usually not closely related to energy actions or energy use. General attitudes are usually associated with relevant specific attitudes, though.338 You would expect the general attitude “saving energy is important” to be associated with the specific attitude “it is easy to save energy”. 333

Eagly & Kulesa 1997 p. 144 Costanzo et al. 1986, pp.521-22 335 McDougall et al. 1981 336 Hines et al. 1986/7 337 Stern 1992, Hines et al. 1986/7 338 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 334

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

97

3. Attitudes to taking a specific energy action are more relevant to that energy action than general attitudes are. 4. People who are less concerned about other people’s approval are more likely to act on their attitudes.339 5. Attitudes of all household members are relevant. Unsurprisingly, the attitudes of just one household member cannot account for the actions of all household members. Most studies only measure the attitudes of one householder. When the attitudes of two household heads are measured, the relationship between attitudes and actual energy use is much higher.340 6. Attitudes formed through direct experience are more relevant to energy action. 7. Attitudes are more related to actual energy actions than to self-reported actions. Selfreported actions are not as closely related to attitudes. 8. Attitudes are more related to low-cost energy actions than to high-cost actions. Attitudes are more closely related to taking energy actions when those actions use little time and money. Taking energy actions that use more time and/or money (e.g. insulating) are more closely related to “background factors” such as home ownership.341 9. Attitudes are more related to a composite of relevant actions than they are related to individual actions.342 Many home energy actions are relevant to attitudes to saving energy in the home. If we look at the link between just one action (e.g. length of hot showers) and attitudes, we do not get an accurate idea of whether there is a connection. Half the population might take long hot showers, even though they have positive energy-saving attitudes. The other half might take very short showers, but set the heater thermostat on high, even though they have positive energy-saving attitudes. The link between length of hot showers and attitudes will be weak and the link between heater thermostat temperature and attitudes will be weak. However, the link between all energy actions and attitudes is usually stronger. 10. A closer attitude-action link is found when appropriate statistics are used. Using statistics that are inappropriate for social research can give very misleading results. Use appropriate statistics correctly, on page 50, outlines this issue in more detail. Sometimes “inappropriate” statistics are used to give insights that more appropriate statistics cannot give. If “inappropriate” statistics are used, the findings must be interpreted very carefully. It is very easy to “over-interpret” findings. 11. A closer attitude-action link is found when the influence of other factors is taken into account. There are many other factors influencing home energy use—e.g., dwelling size. If these are not taken into account when calculating the relationship between attitudes and actions, it can seem as though there is no relationship between attitudes and

339

Lutzenhiser 1993 Seligman et al. 1979 and Becker et al. 1981 341 Stern 1992, Coltrane et al. 1986 342 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 340

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

98

actions. The relationship between attitudes and home energy use may only become apparent when the influence of other factors is controlled for.

Remember the context To fully understand the social psychology of environmental action, many other factors need to be considered, especially the relation of individual attitudes to organizational behavior, governmental policy, and social movements.343

People’s actions are not just influenced by their attitudes: •

Government policies and regulations support or hinder different kinds of actions.



The social context supports or hinders different kinds of actions – see Social & cultural influences on home energy use, on page 24.



Non-energy-efficiency aspects of the action – e.g. perceived pleasantness, significance and ‘action status’ relative to other actions – influences whether an action progresses off the ‘to do’ list and gets done.



Significant others support or hinder different kinds of actions.

Do attitudes cause actions? Most people support the idea that we should all save energy in our homes. Despite this, most people do not take home energy actions. They are not usually made aware of this discrepancy. When people do realise that their actions are inconsistent with their attitudes, they become uncomfortable. Psychologists call this cognitive dissonance. To feel comfortable again, people either: •

change their actions to be consistent with their attitudes, or



change their attitudes to be consistent with their actions.

Very often they change their attitudes, not their actions.344 In other words, they ‘justify’ their actions by forming new attitudes. People are more likely to change their attitudes to match their actions when: •

the attitude is not central to their sense of self, and/or



they do not feel they can ‘blame’ their actions on someone or something else – to justify their voluntary actions to themselves, they change their attitudes.345

The section Strong personal reminders – cognitive dissonance strategies, on page 99, outlines strategies for encouraging people to change their home energy actions to match their attitudes. The process of justifying our actions by changing our attitudes can also be useful for a home energy action program. A U.S. study of the effect of ‘time-of-day’ pricing found the randomly selected participants approved of the high peak period rates, shifted their consumption to off-peak periods and developed attitudes of social obligation to shift

343

Eagly & Kulesa 1997 p. 146 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 345 Kantola et al. 1984 344

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

99

energy consumption away from peak periods.346 The section Use “foot-in-the door” strategies, on page 102, outlines how to encourage people to see themselves as home energy savers.

Only use attitude strategies when relevant! Low-cost energy actions are influenced by attitudes. Energy actions that are expensive, or take a lot of effort, are less influenced by attitudes. They are more influenced by background factors, such as home ownership.347 Table 9: Deciding when attitude strategies are relevant

Attitudes relevant?

Energy action has low time or money cost

Energy action has high time or money cost

Gain public support for energy action policies

YES!

NO

YES!

Target attitudes: -

to taking the specific low-cost action

-

of several household members

Target attitudes: -

to energy action policies

Options for attitude strategies Attitudes that have been frequently and recently activated are more accessible…Heightened accessibility makes an attitude more likely to influence action…(when the attitude is) perceived as relevant to the behavior.348

All successful attitude strategies: •

Frequently remind people of the positive attitudes that they already hold.



Remind people that their attitudes are relevant to their actions.

Strong personal reminders – cognitive dissonance strategies In the section Do attitudes cause actions?, on page 98, we discussed the problem of cognitive dissonance. This is the uneasiness that people feel when they realise that they have acted contrary to their attitudes. In this situation, people try to reduce their uneasiness by changing either their attitudes or their actions. Often, instead of acting more consistently with their attitudes, people change their attitudes to suit the actions they have taken. Even so, people can be encouraged to change their actions instead of their attitudes.

346

Lutzenhiser 1993 p 258 Stern 1992; National Research Council 1984 348 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 pp. 143-144 347

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

100

Strong personal reminders: • •

tell people that there is a discrepancy between their attitudes and actions, so that they become uncomfortable about the discrepancy, and motivate them to change their actions.

An Australian cognitive dissonance experiment Kantola, Syme, and Campbell (1984) informed a group of Australian citizens that they consumed a large amount of electricity and reminded them that on an earlier survey they had indicated that citizens have a duty to save electricity. Similarly, Dickerson, Thibodeau, Aronson and Miller (1992) made a group of college students aware of their positive attitudes toward water conservation and of the wastefulness of their showering behavior (and also publicly committed them to taking shorter showers). In comparison to appropriate control treatments, the dissonance-inducing treatments used in these studies produced greater conservation of energy and water. The practical lesson from this research is that the potentially distressing discrepancies between people’s environmentally unfriendly behaviors and their pro-environmental attitudes are ordinarily not brought to mind in daily life. Psychologists can design inductions that do bring such discrepancies to mind, and the resulting discomfort can motivate behavioral change.349

The Australian experiment was conducted in Perth on people who owned air conditioners and used large amounts of electricity.350 The experimenters: •

asked them whether they felt individuals had a personal responsibility to save energy in their homes, and then (with their permission)



measured their electricity use.

They split the experimental group into subgroups: 1. A control group – who were thanked for their participation. 2. A tips-only group – who were given information on how to reduce electricity use. 3. A feedback and tips group – who were given the tips and informed that they were high electricity users. 4. A ‘dissonance’ group – who were given the tips, informed of their high electricity use, and informed that their high electricity use was inconsistent with their attitude that individuals had a personal responsibility to save energy in their homes. Four weeks later, the ‘dissonance’ group used about 10-15% less electricity than the ‘control’ group. After four weeks, the feedback group used almost the same amount of electricity as the ‘control’ group. The tips group used about 5-10% less electricity than the control group. The percentage savings given here are purposefully vague. One reason is that the experimenters do not report the percentage ‘savings’ – only the adjusted kilowatt-hours of electricity used by each sub-group.351 A second reason is so that we do not form

349

Eagly & Kulesa 1997 p. 145 Kantola et al. 1984 351 We might expect similar Perth households to reduce their electricity use by between 5% and 20%, if strategies like those given to the ‘dissonance’ group were used. This is based on a confidence level of 80% and assumes that the standard error for each of the sub-group means is the same as the ‘approximate 350

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

101

expectations of exact energy ‘savings’ we might achieve from similar home energy action strategies. This is one experiment on a small sample of the Perth population in a different energy context, nearly twenty years ago. The percentages are given simply to indicate that a similar strategy could have a fairly large impact on energy use. Components of a ‘strong personal reminder’ strategy Strong reminder, or cognitive dissonance strategies choose a group of households and: 1. Ask them whether they think individuals have a responsibility to save energy in their homes. 2. Measure their home energy use. 3. Establish which households: •

think that individuals have a responsibility to save energy in their homes, but still



use more energy than either ‘average’ or ‘energy efficient’ households of similar size.

4. For households with positive views but ‘high’ home energy use: •

Inform them of the discrepancy between their views and their home energy use.



Encourage them to make a commitment to a quantitative goal to reduce their home energy use. Public commitment is discussed further on page 110.



Give them ideas on how to save energy in their homes. Refer back to the section Essential features of information strategies, on page 57.



Allow them to choose the specific actions to focus on. The reasons for doing this are discussed on page 18.

Use action prompts Strategies that use prompts work on the assumption that people hold positive environmental or energy attitudes, but just need some help identifying what they should do, when and how.352 Prompts have been successfully used to reduce air conditioner use. A device blinked a light when the air conditioner was on and the outside temperature was 68°F (20°C) or cooler. The device reduced electricity consumption by more than 15%.353 Bear in mind, however: Prompts are notoriously untrustworthy. Their reliability declines as they lose their novelty.354

standard error’ noted by Kantola et al.. After four weeks, the ‘dissonance’ group used 12% less than the ‘control’ group. The ‘tips’ group used 8% less. The 80% confidence interval for the ‘tips’ group is 0%-16%. 352 De Young 1993 353 Cone & Hayes 1980 354 De Young 1993 p. 496

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

102

Use “foot-in-the door” strategies When people see themselves as acting freely in a certain way, they come to see themselves as believing in that sort of activity. If a person freely chooses to publicly commit to reducing their energy use by 20%, they start to see themselves as someone who believes in saving energy. Similarly, if they freely choose to invest time or money to save energy, they start to see themselves as someone who is very concerned about saving energy and keen on saving energy.355 As we mentioned in the section Conducting an audit, on page 72, the favourable attitudes that people form after direct experience inspires actions consistent with those attitudes. This is in contrast to attitudes formed without direct experience. Attitudes formed without direct experience are much less likely to inspire actions consistent with those attitudes, even when the attitudes are very favourable.356 These points emphasise the importance of motivating people to take a small energy action—further energy actions are likely to follow, especially with a little encouragement. Freedman and Fraser found that the percentage of people agreeing to an unsightly sign being put on their front lawn urging people to drive carefully increased dramatically (from 17% to 55%) if they had first been given the opportunity to sign a petition favoring safe driving… Consider the case of “Mr. X”, who is initially mildly interested in conservation but is not ready to retrofit his home. Suppose he agrees to have an energy audit to see if he can easily reduce his utility bill. The audit should be designed to encourage Mr. X to accompany her on her rounds so she can explain what she is looking for and why. As the audit progresses the auditor could enlist Mr. X’s aid in a number of ways. He could hold one end of a tape measure, read a meter, or work the smoke stick, for example. These behaviors are not of consequence in and of themselves, but they would provide Mr. X with a basis for thinking of himself as someone who is actively interested in energy conservation. (“If I’m not interested in energy conservation, why am I spending two hours actively helping this auditor track down heat leaks in my home?”) The beginning of a new self-perception would increase the likelihood that Mr. X would take some action, such as weather stripping his windows, as a result of the audit.357

On page 18 we spoke about the importance of householders feeling that they have some Choice & control over what they do and when they do it. Bearing this in mind, it is important that Mr. X chooses to accompany the auditor. If he feels he has no choice, he will feel that he is giving up his time because he has to. If he feels he is choosing to accompany the auditor, he will feel that he is giving up his time because he is concerned about saving energy.358 He will then feel more enthusiastic about the audit and about saving energy in general. He will be more likely to: •

Act on the advice in the audit.



Pay attention to energy information received in the future.



Undertake further energy actions.

People often show great enthusiasm for active solar technologies, but little enthusiasm for draught proofing or insulation, even when the “sexy” active solar technologies save less energy or greenhouse emissions. Their enthusiasm should not be discouraged, however.

355

Yates & Aronson 1983 De Young 1993 357 Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 441 358 Yates & Aronson 1983 356

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

103

This is because taking one energy action can lead to taking another, especially with a bit of encouragement. Another successful campaign distributed free flow-restricting showerhead inserts to households, along with a booklet on energy saving actions. Many households installed the flow restricting inserts and took other energy actions recommended in the booklet. This campaign was compared to two advertising campaigns that tried to increase the importance people assigned to energy efficiency when they bought appliances. The advertising campaigns used television, radio and magazines. They increased awareness, but had little impact on energy actions.359 Once a person has taken a small energy action, they are likely to take further energy actions. When a householder takes an energy action, they should be encouraged to think of themselves as concerned about saving energy. Here is an example of how to do it. An idea for Australian “Energy Stars” and “Greenhouse Stars” Australia uses vivid energy star rating labels to rate the energy efficiency of many appliances. These vivid labels could be used to stimulate further energy actions by the people who purchase energy efficient appliances. Someone who has purchased an energy efficient appliance can be encouraged to think of themselves as concerned about energy use. People buying an energy efficient appliance could be given a fridge magnet with a bright yellow star – imitating the energy efficiency stars used on Australian appliance labels – and the words “Energy Star” emblazoned on it. The intention of the “Energy Star” fridge magnet is to continually draw attention to the energy saving action the householder has already taken. This reminds them that they are very concerned about saving energy and can stimulate them to take further energy action.

The section Encourage public commitment to saving energy on page 110 outlines strategies similar to these “foot-in-the-door” strategies. Public commitment strategies also aim to encourage people to see themselves as concerned about saving energy.

Media campaigns Use fear campaigns with great caution Campaigns using fear should be used with great caution. It is possible for them to have unintended effects. Being fearful can either increase or decrease the level of effort someone puts into understanding a message. The effect of the fear depends on a variety of moderating issues. 360 Fear campaigns are more useful when people can reduce threat by taking specific action themselves. For instance, someone can reduce the threat of lung cancer by stopping smoking. One person’s actions have relatively little impact on the environment, though. A person is unlikely to feel that the “greenhouse” threat is reduced if they turn off their

359 360

Hutton in National Research Council 1984 Eagly & Kulesa 1997

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Attitudes sometimes motivate

104

heater. Fear messages in these circumstances can leave people feeling powerless and the message does not persuade.361 A review of media campaigns to save energy found ‘scare tactics and appeals to patriotism were much less effective than specific, useful information.’362 Fear campaigns can be successful if they encourage collective action to address the threat to the environment. Illustrating this approach, Hine and Gifford (1991) found that exposing participants to a fear-inducing antipollution editorial that included a visual slide presentation produced more commitment to engage in relevant social action and to donate money and time to an environmental organization than exposure to a message not accompanied by fear-arousing content.363

Strategies for successful media attitude campaigns Australians already hold very positive attitudes to saving energy. These positive attitudes can be used to motivate home energy action. If a media campaign is trying to change energy actions, it should: •

Target attitudes towards the action.364



Offer something for free—such as a water-flow-restricting device or an information booklet. See Use “foot-in-the door” strategies, above, for a campaign that used these in combination.



Suggest very specific energy saving actions to take.



Decide on a target group or groups to appeal to and develop a campaign that appeals to their concerns. Some people are more motivated to take energy actions to save money, some are more motivated by their own comfort, some gain satisfaction from saving energy. Homeowners and renters have very different concerns.365

361

Eagly & Kulesa 1997 National Research Council 1984 on Koster’s research 363 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 p. 142 364 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 365 National Research Council 1984 362

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Successful media attitude campaigns: •

Repeatedly expose the public to the message.



Point out that positive attitudes call for positive actions. (E)ffective persuasive appeals should not only activate attitudes but also argue that these attitudes call for environmentally responsible behaviors.366



Implement supporting policies. 367 For instance, the successful Victorian-based Quit campaign used a combination of regulation, information, education and persuasion. 368

366

Eagly & Kulesa 1997 p. 144 Eagly & Kulesa 1997 368 Cosgrove et al. 1996 367

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

106

People need people

Social & cultural influences on energy action Social interaction One study found that the best predictor of intention to purchase solar energy equipment was the number of acquaintances who owned solar equipment.369 In a study of the adoption of energy conservation equipment, Darley (1978) found that the adoption of a newly developed clock thermostat spread from the people who first used it to their friends, colleagues, and co-workers. The spread was along lines of communication, not through mere physical proximity; neighbors were not usually the next to try the new equipment.370

Reasons why social networks are so influential include371: •

They are seen as trustworthy – or ‘at the least, their biases and values are known, and can be taken into account’372.



Their actions serve as an experiment for friends and associates—who can monitor whether or not it produces results and act accordingly.



Information received from friends and associates is a vivid case study—it stands out, so it receives attention.



Friends and associates are likely to be similar to each other in socio-economic status—they are in a similar position to take energy actions.

Social reference groups are most important for middle- and upper-income households.373 Low-income groups seem to be more influenced by programs run by community groups.

Social & cultural “norms” The study of 500 ‘master-metered’ apartments mentioned earlier found that the low energy users did not have stronger energy conservation or environmental attitudes. Instead, the most important consumption differences seem to have been rooted in ethnic and other cultural differences in behavior and household organization.374

369

National Research Council 1984, Coltrane et al. 1986 National Research Council 1984 p. 67 371 National Research Council 1984 372 National Research Council 1984 p. 68 373 Coltrane et al. 1986 370

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

107

The two different apartment blocks consumed significantly different amounts of energy even though they were nearly identical socially and structurally. There appeared to be ‘locally evolving standards of behavior’ in the different neighbourhoods or communities.375 In Kyushu, Japan, air conditioners are increasingly used to cool homes in summer. While traditional buildings used natural ventilation, new buildings generally don’t. But this is not the only reason for the increased use of air conditioners. Instead: (A)rtificial cooling is becoming one of the indications of a socially appropriate indoor climate (one which guests expect and which they use to assess the status and well-being of the hosts). Those who already have an air conditioner are gradually extending the hours which they use them.376

Even though many Japanese think artificial cooling is unhealthy and air conditioners are unattractive, social pressures are resulting in more air conditioners being installed and used. (I)n Norway, space heat has an important symbolic value. It is used in combination with light to create what the Norwegians call koslighet (cosiness), a state of comfort which is virtually mandatory for Norwegian living rooms. It is important for a family to be cosy on a winter evening. When friends or relatives visit, an absence of a strong affirmation of cosiness constitutes a social disaster. It begins with a standard her er det godt (it is so cosy here) when a guest enters. At intervals throughout the evening, the guest reaffirms at regular intervals that vi koser oss (we are having a cosy experience). The strong social significance of cosiness causes overheating and overlighting as insurance against social failure. Cosiness has become what we call a cultural energy service, which we define as a set of energy use behaviours deeply rooted in the social, cultural and symbolic presentation of the home.377 Light is another important component of the Norwegian definition of a cosy home. In the living room, brightness is not the goal, but rather the effect which is created through a number of shaded floor and table lamps. The households in our Oslo sample had on average 9.6 light bulbs per living room, while the Japanese had on average 2.5…Small table lamps, reading lamps and spot-lamps have become as necessary a part of [Norwegian] home furnishings as a sofa or a painting.378

In contrast, the Japanese use ceiling fixtures and fluorescent lights in their living rooms. They prefer the atmosphere created by these lights. Another intriguing contrast concerns bathing habits. In this case it is the Japanese who have habits which are both culturally important and very energy intensive. The daily bathing routine, which has deep cultural roots, has persisted in the face of expensive energy…Our interviews would suggest that the routines surrounding the bath are likely to persist in the face of both information and higher energy prices.379

Australian ‘cultural energy services’ Cultural energy services aren’t just applicable to other nationalities. The following quotes highlight the social significance of hot showers to Australians. They are taken from a major Melbourne newspaper during the two weeks when Victoria’s gas supply was shut down after an explosion at the gas plant in September 1998.

374

Lutzenhiser 1993 p 258 Lutzenhiser 1993, p. 258 376 Wilhite et al. 1996, p. 798 377 Wilhite et al. 1996, p. 798 378 Wilhite et al. 1996, p. 799 379 Wilhite et al. 1996, p. 802 375

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

108

The gas crisis, caused by the explosion and fires at the Longford No.1 plant on Friday, has forced the closure of many manufacturing operations, created havoc in the restaurant and take-away food industries and left millions of Victorians enduring cold showers.380 ~~~ Of all the inconveniences to have flowed from Victoria’s gas crisis, there is one which stands out as having upset people the most. It’s not the loss of the gas cooker: people are resigned to eating salads, going out for pizza or even tackling the complexities of the microwave oven. The greatest trauma, it seems, has been the lack of hot water for showers and baths. The daily body wash, until relatively recently a luxury afforded to only the well-heeled, is now regarded as essential. “Somehow it has become a national obsession,”’ social historian Dr Janet McCalman said yesterday. Australians gradually became accustomed to bathing every day late last century, departing from the Anglo-Saxon tradition which placed no premium on the practice at all. Why Australians took to the water with such passion is uncertain, although the climate clearly had something to do with it. …..By the end of last century, most middle-class homes had their own bathing facilities of some sort, which also meant that cities in the dry continent faced enormous demands for water, leading to huge public water storage and supply projects. But washing was very much a class thing. The rich and even vaguely well-to-do washed, the poor did not. “One of the things about the poor was that they smelled,” Dr McCalman said. In a society where upward social mobility was a distinct possibility, people washed their way to respectability. “Cleanliness is part of the culture of respectability,” Dr McCalman said. “Personal cleanliness was the single most important sign of respectability, along with sobriety.” …Melbourne University psychologist Dr Jennifer Boldero said the daily wash had become “tied in with the norms of what we believe we should do”. 381 ~~~ Gas for cooking and hot water services was back flowing into more than 1.1million Victorian homes last night, but householders faced a continued ban on heating382.

In other words, at the end of the gas crisis, Victorian households were allowed to use gas to heat hot water for showers and baths, but they were not allowed to use gas to heat their homes. This was despite a cold snap at the beginning of spring. Home energy action programs that ignore social and cultural influences risk the program’s future success. Social and cultural influences impact on the type of energy actions that people will take and the type of strategies that will motivate action. Home energy action programs cannot change the culture that they operate in. Instead, they need to try to understand the culture so that appropriate energy actions and motivating strategies are selected.

380

The Age 29 Sep. 1998, p.? Schauble 1998, p.? 382 Shiel, 1998, p.? 381

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

109

Strategies that tap into our social needs Use regulations & strong social pressure with care Regulations and strong social pressure strategies must be used judiciously. If people feel very constrained in their actions, they can react by doing the opposite to what they are being told to do.383

Demonstrating energy action Aronson and O’Leary (1982-83) conducted a small demonstration project on the importance of modeling for energy conservation behavior. They observed shower-taking behavior in a university athletic field house. Introducing an obtrusive prompt into the men’s shower room (a large sign in the middle of the room instructing people to turn off the water while soaping up) resulted in a gain from 6% (control condition) to 19% in the requested behavior. When the researchers employed one student to serve as an appropriate model by turning off the water and soaping up whenever someone came in to use the facility, the number of people turning off the water to soap up climbed to 49%. When two people were simultaneously modeling the behavior, compliance rose to 67%.384

Further discussion of the informational aspect of demonstrating energy action can be found on page 78.

Use demonstration households We mentioned the study that found that the best predictor of intention to purchase solar energy equipment was the number of acquaintances who owned solar equipment. Successful “workshops” have been held in residents’ homes, with the host’s home insulated free of charge.385 Energy action programs could386: 1. choose a household that is highly visible and credible in the community,387 2. measure their base level of energy use, 3. conduct a home energy audit to determine which simple technologies to install, 4. help the householder install the technologies, 5. measure the subsequent level of energy use, and 6. encourage the householder to teach family, friends and acquaintances what they have learned.388 “Demonstration households” could be given cheap tools to help motivate the energy actions of others. For instance, they could be given small “smoke sticks” to demonstrate energy loss to friends and family. As well as motivating friends and family, this strategy 383

De Young 1993 Yates & Aronson 1983, p. 439; also National Research Council 1984 385 Coltrane et al. 1986 386 Darley & Beninger 1981 in Costanzo et al. 1986. 387 Yates & Aronson 1983 388 Yates & Aronson 1983 384

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

110

will motivate “demonstration householders” even more. This is because they see themselves teaching others about saving energy and increasingly “believe their own press”. They see themselves as someone concerned about saving energy and interested in saving energy.389 This strategy has also been used to motivate architects to design more energy efficient buildings. The Energy Office of Washington state found, for instance, that although many architects believed energy-efficient designs were good, the same architects were not using the new techniques in their own projects. The state found that most existing demonstration programs focused on building lowcost, low-profile government buildings or conducting workshops designed to teach energy-efficient design method. Young architects and engineers who were doing small projects were those most influenced by these workshops. To remedy this, the Washington Energy Office enlisted high-profile architects and builders and used highly publicized meetings between the governor, the builders, and the building owners in designing its Energy Edge program. The projects incorporated energy-efficient improvements into new privately funded, high-profile commercial buildings. The state provided each builder with technical assistance to improve the energy efficiency of their designs. The resulting designs had to exceed existing model conservation standards by 30% or more (Brown et al., 1986). If the recommended changes were adopted, the state would guarantee the additional costs of these changes if the projected energy savings were not realized. The Energy Edge program made energy-efficient design prestigious and a status symbol for new buildings. Smaller, lesser known developers indirectly disseminated the technology by imitating the program’s features. This program illustrates the way in which demonstration projects can be designed to capitalize on social diffusion and how they can stimulate the demand for information.390

Remember that social reference groups are most important for middle- and upper-income households—low-income groups are more influenced by programs run by community groups.

Use existing informal social networks As mentioned earlier, an U.S. study found 70% of householders discussed their energy bills with other people - including regular consultations with friends and neighbours.391 In California, the Energy Extension Service sponsored projects throughout the state that utilized a “tupperware party” approach to marketing conservation. Weatherization workshops conducted in this setting were not only warm and friendly, but turnouts were high and the opportunity for actual handson weatherization in a typical neighbourhood house spurred others to weatherize their own homes.392

Encourage public commitment to saving energy Public commitment strategies are similar to the “foot-in-the-door” strategies discussed on page 102. They aim to encourage people to see themselves as concerned about saving energy. (P)eople who volunteered to attempt to save energy were far more effective if they were informed that their names and intentions would be written up in a newspaper article. Their increased effectiveness continued for at least a year after they were informed that the article would not be published.393

389

Yates & Aronson 1983 Dennis et al. 1990 p. 1115 391 Kempton & Layne 1994 392 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 143 393 Yates & Aronson 1983 pp. 442-3 390

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

111

Although there has not been very much research into commitment strategies, they seem to be at least as successful at motivating energy action as financial incentives are. Furthermore, commitment strategies continue to have an effect long after the initial commitment was given.394

Encourage "adaptive muddling" When people see their role as necessary and important, they are more likely to modify their actions.395 “Adaptive muddling” involves giving people the opportunity to conduct their own explorations, rather than being in the midst of someone else’s large experiment. They are encouraged, even expected, to apply local or personal knowledge to a situation.396

Make energy actions publicly visible Installing a highly visible energy efficiency measure draws the attention of friends and neighbours. As outlined on page 110, people are likely to talk to friends and neighbours about their energy use and energy saving actions. The high visibility of solar hot water systems may account for some of their popularity with householders. Insulation, on the other hand, is much less visible - both to the householder and to their friends and neighbours. ‘One cannot easily point to a wall and announce to one’s neighbours, “See that wall? Inside there is some terrific insulation.”’397 There are two ways that insulation could be made more ‘visible’: 1. Householders installing insulation could receive a Home Energy Rating and a sign showing the number of energy stars their home is then entitled to. The sign should be suitable for installing on a letterbox or on the front of the home. 2. Householders installing insulation could be given an “Energy Star” or “Greenhouse Star” sign. The sign should be suitable for installing on a letterbox or on the front of the home. With both of these ideas it is imperative that the idea be explored with householders and the suppliers of insulation using in-depth interviews and/or focus groups. The exploration should seek views on whether such a sign would be appealing and, if so, what kind of sign would be appealing. This information could feed into the development of prototype signs. These prototypes should then be presented to householders and the suppliers of insulation - in interviews, focus groups or surveys - to assess which of the signs is most appealing. Again, remember that middle- and upper-income households are most influenced by social reference groups. Community programs can be more influential with low-income groups.

394

De Young 1993 De Young 1993 396 De Young 1993 p. 493 397 Yates & Aronson 1983 p. 441 395

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

112

Set up a competition between groups Social feedback can be more effective if it is also competitive. In a study in university college dormitories, feedback was given in one of two ways: •

Simple social feedback - each day graphs were displayed throughout the dormitory showing the percentage above or below usual energy use for the dorm.



Competitive social feedback - each day feedback was given for the dorm itself as well as for a paired competitor dorm on campus.

Simple social feedback had very little effect. Competitive social feedback resulted in about a 10% reduction in energy use398. These findings are in a short-term study on a university campus - but they do indicate the potential of competitions and social feedback.

Use community groups to run energy action programs A study compared the percentage of households reached by free home energy audit programs conducted by different groups.399 The programs were all run by utilities, but: 1. some utilities conducted audits themselves, 2. some utilities employed private companies to conduct the audits, and 3. some utilities employed community groups to conduct the audits. Table 10: Effectiveness of community groups conducting free home energy audits Home energy audits conducted by:

Audit Cost (compared to utility employees conducting the audit) Percentage of eligible homes that audits were conducted on

Utilities

Private Companies

Community Groups

1

1/2

1/3

4%

6%

15%

As can be seen from Table 10, above, community groups were nearly four times as successful as the utilities at reaching households, and their audits were nearly 70% cheaper than the utilities’ audits. Furthermore, state inspectors judged the energy audits conducted by the community groups to be of higher standard.400 The greater success of the community groups seems to be due to a combination of: •

their high credibility in the eyes of the householders,



their intensive, but low cost, marketing efforts, and



their concern to cut energy costs for households.

398

Cone & Hayes 1980 Polich 1984 in Stern 1992 400 Stern 1992 399

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

113

Community groups can offer a flexible mix of services to residents—e.g., loans, grants, and audits.401 Providing a “one-stop-shop” for residents considerably simplifies the process of choosing energy actions to take, and enables residents to easily choose several energy actions at once. Simple processes increase the chance that residents will take energy actions. Community groups are particularly effective at reaching low-income groups, minority groups and the elderly.402 They are less effective at reaching middle- and upper-income households. These households are more influenced by social reference groups—see Use demonstration households on page 109 and Make energy actions publicly visible on page 111.

A successful combination of social strategies An innovative combination of “social strategies” achieved phenomenal success: An average of almost 40% of all residents attend the energy-efficiency workshops, as opposed to the 3–5% average participation rates of most RCS [Residential Conservation Service] programmes. Since 1980 over 23 000 households have received information, training and weatherization at a cost of $80 per household, less than the cost of a typical RCS audit.403

The program, called the Neighborhood Energy Workshop (NEW), was based in Minneapolis. The program incorporated: 1. Careful planning—project areas were mapped out carefully and workshop procedures were standardised. 2. Community leaders—city council members, ministers, community organisation leaders, heads of schools, etc—were used to recruit “block inviter volunteers”. 3. “Block inviter volunteers” received training from project staff. Their task was to make face-to-face contact with a person from each household on their block and recruit residents to the workshops. The block inviters make verbal commitments to the Energy Office to secure a 50% turnout of block residents for a Saturday workday at a local church, school, or park.404

4. Educational meetings were held in the neighbourhoods on weeknights. These meetings taught participants how to cut energy losses in their buildings. A slideshow was shown, demonstrating how to locate sources of air leakage. 5. Workshops were held in the neighbourhoods on Saturdays. These workshops emphasised vivid, concrete information, backed up with hands-on experience with weatherising materials. At the Saturday workday, participants complete home energy surveys, receive free conservation devices and watch vivid demonstrations of device installations using scale models.405

6. Follow-up inspections ensured that the efficiency measures were correctly installed. They also helped householders who could not do their own work. It would also be 401

Coltrane et al. 1986 Coltrane et al. 1986 403 Coltrane et al. 1986 pp. 142-143 referring to Brummitt 1984 404 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 142 405 Coltrane et al. 1986 p. 142 402

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – People need people

114

expected that householders, knowing their work would be inspected, would be much more likely to follow through with installing the efficiency measures.

Involve the community Involving members of the community in planning and implementing home energy action programs has several benefits: •

Community members may help explain how ‘average’ people think about home energy use and the language they use to describe their energy use.



Community members can help decide on the most effective siting for physical program elements (e.g. greenhouse audit in a hardware store, energy efficiency displays).



Community members can provide contacts in the community for energy action strategies that use formal and informal community networks (e.g. energy audits run by community groups, energy efficiency demonstration households).

The home energy action program will need to consult a cross-section of the community, for instance: •

different ethnic groups,



low, medium and high income groups,



home owners, renters and landlords, and



different ages.



Involving community members in the actual development and delivery of the program will help ensure that:



local knowledge feeds into the choice of home energy actions and strategies, and



the community will trust the program.

To this end a community advisory panel could be convened early in the development of a home energy action program.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Market transformation

The role for market transformation Market transformation seeks to change the market for particular equipment and services so that efficient practices become the norm.406

Market transformation approaches can potentially (eventually) achieve 100% participation rates. They take a lot of work and coordination between diverse interests and have high establishment costs. However, they tend to be cost-effective in the long term.407 Unfortunately, ‘little research has been devoted to examining the impact of…market transformation’.408

Influences on the market for energy efficiency Householders are greatly influenced by actions of intermediaries and decisions of manufacturers.409 By the same token, householders’ actions influence the choices available to intermediaries and manufacturers. Figure 8, below, illustrates the Relationships between key players in the system of home energy use. The relationships between these players are influenced by the way that commercial and governmental networks operate – for instance, routine commercial practices and governmental regulations influence the relationships.

406

Nadel & Geller 1996, p. 290 Nadel & Geller 1996 408 Vine 1994 p. 174 409 National Research Council 1984 407

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

116

Householders consume energy: • directly - use goods & services (e.g. run the electric heater) • indirectly - choose goods & services (e.g. choose the heater & electricity)

Service Providers consume energy: • directly - use goods & services (e.g. turn on office lights) • indirectly - influence choice of goods & services Utilities, Finance Sector, Real Estate Agents, Designers, Retailers, Trades-people

Manufacturers consume energy: • directly - use goods & services (e.g. turn on machinery) • indirectly - choose goods to produce (e.g. heater designs) Home Builders, Energy Suppliers, Appliance Manufacturers

Social, Economic, Political & Legal Context Figure 8: Relationships between key players in the system of home energy use The preferences of householders, manufacturers and service providers do not necessarily coincide. One innovative cooling system may excite utilities, anti-CFC activists, environmental policy makers and design engineers, for example. But it may also represent unwanted change and risk to manufacturers with secure market niches, their installers, planning and zoning officials, appraisers and lenders.410 Market intermediaries are often motivated by problem-avoidance and risk-aversion, and are influenced by the competitive, contractual, and regulatory environments in which they must operate.411

Builders often make choices for the householder—installing heating and cooling equipment, hot water services, ovens and stoves and even washing machines, tumble dryers and refrigerators. Firms operating regionally or nationally may use standard designs and mass production techniques. It is easier for such firms to use heating and cooling appliances to deliver comfortable living temperatures rather than to design site and climate specific homes. Furthermore, they may lack expertise in energy-efficient design.412 To succeed in the market, an energy efficient product or service needs a consumer. Before a consumer can choose it, however, a manufacturer or service provider must first take the

410

Lutzenhiser 1994 p. 870 Lutzenhiser 1993 pp. 277 412 Lutzenhiser 1994 411

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

117

initiative and offer it.413 Legislated standards can help to ensure more energy efficiency products are readily available for consumers. Understanding exactly what people want from their technologies can facilitate the development of more energy efficient technologies. For instance, in some regions, people may use air conditioners primarily as dehumidifiers. Developing technologies to deliver primarily dehumidification rather than primarily temperature reduction offers the potential to have less environmental impact while still delivering what people want.414

Essential features of a market transformation approach Understand the social context Psychological models of technology diffusion (e.g. Rogers) are frequently used to explain the spread of technologies.415 These models emphasise the importance of the risk ‘profiles’ of individuals. ‘Early adopters’, with a penchant for experimentation, lead. Individuals curious about the technology follow them. Risk-averse ‘laggards’ bring up the rear. These models ignore the effect of different social and institutional contexts. People make decisions in a particular context. Different contexts result in different decisions. Building designers select, adopt, and adapt only those elements of technical knowledge which apply or which fit given the fine grained social, organisational, and economic circumstances of the moment. More than that, their first hand experiences of working within one or another context are cumulative…Interviews with real-life designers suggest that they do not have contextually disembodied technologies transferred upon them. Instead they acquire and develop knowledges which mesh with and which emerge out of local, culturally and temporally specific working environments.416 Present (building design) practice consequently represents a certain alignment of technical, organisational, and societal aspects. The appropriation or, more accurately, the co-evolution of new technologies takes place against the backdrop of this inter-connecting whole, that is against the backdrop of existing sociotechnical regimes. In this way, existing sociotechnical regimes set the scene for future development, sometimes favouring, sometimes constraining alternative courses of action.417

Analysing a specific social or organisational context can suggest ways to improve energy efficiency through re-configuring processes or relationships. For instance, ‘professional fees and relationships (could be) re-configured in such a way that architects and engineers had a common interest in avoiding the introduction of air conditioning’.418 Such analysis would require the involvement of people with skills of social/organisational analysis as well as energy/technical analysis.

413

National Research Council 1984 Kempton & Lutzenhiser 1992 415 Shove 1999 416 Shove 1999, p. 1108 417 Shove 1999, p. 1109 418 Shove 1999, p. 1110 414

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

118

Understand the market A market transformation approach tries to identify barriers to the widespread adoption of energy efficiency measures. It explores all levels - manufacturing, distribution and end users. It then develops strategies to overcome those market barriers.419 To be successful: …energy efficiency market transformation should be grounded in plausible theories of producer and consumer motivation, market structure, commercial network dynamics, and the cultural contexts of energy use.420

Information is needed about two main areas: "

Industry structure. The pertinent information includes not only the number and relative market shares of the manufacturers of a particular equipment type, but also the distribution channels through which the equipment flows from the manufacturer to the ultimate consumer. In addition, it is necessary to know the relative number of units flowing through each type of channel.

"

Decision-making process. The sequence of decisions which ultimately leads to an equipment purchase, together with the range of factors which influences each of these decisions, must be clearly understood if the policy maker is to determine where and when he can most effectively influence the decision making process. Different decision-making processes may be used by building firms of different sizes. The policy makers must also appreciate the composition of the decision-making unit, the person(s) within the firm responsible for the decision in question, and know whether the decision-making unit varies at different stages of the process.421

Different equipment categories are likely to have different industry structures and decision-making processes. Consequently, each equipment category must be considered separately.422 The following sections give examples of how to visualise the industry structure and decision-making processes for different equipment categories. Industry structure To illustrate the information inputs relevant to policy makers I have selected one of the three equipment categories—for detailed analysis. The distribution channels through which these appliances flow from manufacturer to end consumer are shown in [Figure 9].423

419

Nadel & Geller 1996 Lutzenhiser & Shove 1999 p. 218 421 Quelch 1980 p. 127 422 Quelch 1980 423 Quelch 1980 p. 128 420

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

Appliance manufacturers

Kitchen equipment specialists and builder supply houses

119

Builders

Consumers

Appliance retailers including wholesalers

Figure 9: Distribution channels - example of major kitchen and laundry appliances424 Refrigerator sales for the Canadian residential sector in 1978 are shown in [Figure 10 – page 120], disaggregated by type of purchase, tenure of dwelling, purchaser and purchase source. On the basis of such information, policy makers can rank the types of purchaser and the purchase source in terms of importance.425

This type of diagram could be produced for each major appliance category. The diagrams will help decide on: •

which purchasers should be targeted for each major appliance category, and



which suppliers should be targeted for each major appliance category.

424 425

Quelch 1980 p. 128 Quelch 1980 p. 128

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

Type of purchase

120

Tenure of dwelling

New housing units for owner occupancy

24%

Purchaser

Purchase source

Home Owner 20%

Retailers 20% Supply Houses

Purchases for installation in new housing units

4%

40% Builder 16%

16%

1% Manufacturers 15%

Existing housing units which are owner occupied

40%

Manufacturers 3% Supply Houses

New housing units for rent

1978 Canadian residential sector refrigerator sales

10%

Builder

Home Owner

Retailers

37%

37%

37% Manufacturers

Replacement purchases

0.5%

Builder/landlord 1%

60% Existing housing units which are rented

Supply Houses 0.5%

23% Landlord

Manufacturers 0.5%

22%

Retailers 21.5%

Figure 10: Breakdown of purchasers, sources and destinations - example of residential refrigerators in Canada in 1978426 Decision-making process for purchases Understanding the decision-making process for purchases helps: •

decide where in the decision-making process to focus energy action strategies,



decide how to ‘market’ a suite of benefits that an energy action can provide, and



develop energy actions and energy efficient technologies that will appeal to purchasers.

426

Quelch 1980 p. 129

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

121

(A) builder’s decision-making process for imposed choice purchases of major kitchen and laundry appliances entails five discrete decisions prior to the allocation of business: "

Selection of appliances to install, if any. Although installation of appliances is generally discretionary, the builder must be guided by what is expected in that segment of the market at which his new housing is aimed…

"

Choice of fuel…The market penetration of gas appliances is believed to be higher among individual consumer purchasers than among builder purchasers for two main reasons. First, gas models are more expensive than electric models, and this deters price sensitive builders. Second, some consumers are against gas due to perceived safety hazards. Builders do not want to deter potential purchasers or tenants by installing gas cookers when comparable electrical models are acceptable to all consumers…(B)uilders also pay attention to: the established local patterns of fuel selection; the trade-offs between original equipment and operating costs, particularly if they are builder-landlords; the ease of installation, availability of servicing, and convertibility to other fuels; incentives offered by competing utilities; and fuel requirements specified in provincial government building contracts.

"

Choice of equipment specifications. Depending upon the income bracket at which a new housing unit is aimed, the quality and features of installed appliances will vary. Unlike furnaces (heaters) and water heaters, appliances are highly visible to prospective purchasers and tenants of new housing units. They may, therefore, act as a surrogate for the quality and attractiveness of the entire dwelling…

"

Choice of source(s) of supply. The large builder who buys appliances in bulk quantities can obtain shipments at some discount direct from manufacturers. The builder commonly solicits bids from two or more manufacturers selected on the basis of prior experience, an existing relationship, or reputation for price, reliable performance, and prompt delivery…Smaller builders unable to obtain shipments direct from manufacturers arrange to be supplied through wholesale intermediaries such as kitchen equipment specialists and building merchants.

"

Choice of criteria for selecting supplier. The evidence of survey research suggests that, once equipment specifications are laid down, Canadian builders select appliances on the basis of price…There is no evidence that the comparative energy efficiency of alternative models is currently used by builders as a selection criterion. For the sake of administrative convenience, to ensure colour matching, and to maximize discounts, the large builder is likely to select just one manufacturer from whom to purchase all categories of appliances which are to be installed in a particular housing development.

Analysis of the decision-making process permits the policy maker to understand the relative importance of all members of the distribution channel in influencing the decision criteria used by builders when making imposed choice equipment pruchases [sic]. In addition, the points in the decision-making process can be identified at which policy makers might appropriately intervene to draw attention to energy efficiency as a decision criterion.427

This type of diagram would need to be produced for each major purchaser (e.g. builders, householders) for each major appliance category.

427

Quelch 1980 pp. 128-131

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

• Consumer expectations • Type of housing • Mortgage restrictions • Consumer preferences • Equipment costs • Operating costs • Installation & servicing • Fuel for space heating • Utility incentives • Government requirements • Convertibility to other fuels • Consumer preferences • Quality of housing • Product standards • Building codes

• Prior experience • Existing relationships • Supplier reputation

122

Determine which (if any) kitchen & laundry appliances to install & determine number required

Determine fuel (gas or electricity) as necessary

Determine equipment specifications (size, design, colour)

Determine possible sources of supply (kitchen equipment specialists, builder supply houses, wholesalers)

• After sales service • Availability • Brand name • Energy efficiency • Purchase price • Reliability • Warranty

Determine manufactures from which to solicit bids

Determine supplier selection criteria

Allocate business

Figure 11: Builder’s decision-making process – example of imposed choice purchases of kitchen & laundry appliances428 Surveys and in-depth interviews of householders, salespeople, dealers, manufacturers, builders and real estate agents can give some insights into factors influencing appliance and home purchase decisions. They can help identify design features attractive to purchasers and manufacturers. Responses to prototypes can help to narrow the range of options considered.429 Design options can be subjected to experimental trial by users to assess public acceptance in the same way they are subjected to engineering tests of their costs and efficiency of operation.430

428

Quelch 1980 p. 129 Stern et al. 1987 430 Stern et al. 1987 p. 351 429

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

123

Remember that surveys and interviews are of little help in deciding what impact a financial incentive might have – see the section Estimate the likely impact of a financial incentive strategy, on page 86. Many issues impact on peoples’ decisions, but when asked to predict how they will act, people can’t take all those issues into account. Instead, they tend to say they would act in a socially desirable way. For these reasons, surveys measuring consumers ‘willingness-to-pay’ for ‘environmentally friendly’ goods must be treated cautiously – particularly when conducted through telephone interviews.

Ensure quality There are two main reasons to ensure the quality of energy efficient technologies and strategies: •

Unacceptable energy efficient technologies and strategies will be adopted by fewer people and may be rejected after having been adopted. In other words, they will not achieve their theoretical energy efficiency gains.



Rejected energy efficient technologies and strategies will taint future technologies and strategies with the air of unacceptability. If someone has an unpleasant experience with a new energy efficient technology or energy action strategy, they are likely to form negative attitudes about the technology or strategy. Attitudes formed through direct experience inspire future action (see the section Use “foot-in-the door” strategies, on page 102). In other words, previous experience with unacceptable energy efficient technologies and strategies can lead to people not adopting future technologies and strategies.

Technologies and strategies need to: •

Perform their technical function properly – e.g. programs promoting home insulation must ensure that the installations are high quality.431



Be appropriate to the social and cultural context.



Meet the needs of different users. For instance, the needs and opinions of bankers, builders, real estate agents and homeowners may all be relevant to the success of a home energy rating scheme. The best time to find out users’ needs and opinions is while the new technology or strategy is being developed. Various methods can be employed: 432

431 432



In-depth interviews help to understand the context that technologies or strategies will be introduced into. For instance, knowing how a real estate agent or homebuyer usually evaluates a home would be useful to someone generating ideas for a home energy rating scheme. Knowing what householders and plumbers say to each other when discussing replacement of a defective hot water service would help someone generating ideas for encouraging energy efficient hot water service installations. In-depth interviews can also help to narrow down the list of strategy or technology options.



Focus groups and surveys help determine preferences between technology or strategy options.

Stern 1992 Stern et al. 1987

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation



124

Small-scale experiments, particularly in combination with in-depth interviews, help determine which technologies or strategies are likely to succeed in the marketplace. The experiments can closely mimic ‘real world’ situations and indepth interviews can help understand the reasons for technologies or strategies not being successful.

Social researchers can help developers of technologies understand the reasons consumers do or do not accept their product. They can suggest design amendments to increase product acceptability. Further, they can suggest design amendments that will increase the efficiency of the technology when used by ‘Joe Blow’ at home.433 ‘Joe Blow’ often uses technologies at home in ways that engineers do not expect – see the section Energy needs–based market segments, on page 20.

Market transformation strategies Key features of market transformation strategies Promote quality We have just discussed the importance of using high quality technologies and strategies in energy action programs. Technologies and strategies that are promoted as being of high quality are more likely to appeal to householders. Householders consider a broad range of factors in their decisions – not just energy efficiency. Emphasise a suite of benefits Programs should emphasise a suite of benefits that the technology or strategy will provide the householder with. For instance, it is important to ‘sell the idea’ that energy efficient homes are high quality homes.434 The energy star labeling scheme for Australian electrical appliances does this. The labeling scheme assigns more stars to energy efficient models. This suggests that models with more stars are of higher quality than less energy efficient models. Advertise Advertising usually improves the success of market transformation strategies.

Energy efficiency labels Using energy efficiency labels as an information strategy is outlined in the section Energy efficiency labels, on page 68. Here we will discuss the potential for labels to transform the market for energy efficient products.

433 434

Kempton et al. 1992a Lutzenhiser 1994

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

125

Labels can increase market pressure for efficiency 1. Labeling can have an important impact on the efficiency of appliances manufacturers offer for sale, regardless of the impact on consumer purchase decisions.435 Manufacturers may try to improve the efficiency of the appliances they offer. 2. Labeling can prompt builders to take energy efficiency into account when making appliance choices. Energy efficiency is usually not a factor for builders installing appliances. Nonetheless, a labeling scheme can increase consumers’ awareness of ‘energy efficiency as a purchase criterion’.436 This awareness may prompt builders to consider energy efficiency when deciding on appliances. 3. Rental accommodation could carry prominent energy efficiency labels or seals. This would enable potential tenants to assess potential energy savings when choosing accommodation.437 Labels can motivate further householder energy actions Energy efficiency labels do not just inform the purchaser about the relative efficiency of that technology. Visible energy efficiency labels also give a picture of the purchaser as someone concerned about saving energy. This can be a vital tool in encouraging further energy action - by the purchaser and by their friends and neighbours. Use “foot-in-the door” strategies on page 102 outlines why the purchaser is encouraged to undertake further energy actions. That section also has ideas for using energy efficiency labels to motivate further energy actions by the purchaser. People with energy efficient appliances with highly visible energy star rating labels can become defacto “demonstration households” to family and friends. Page 109 has ideas for using “demonstration households” in energy action programs.

Minimum energy efficiency standards In the section Energy efficiency labels, on page 68, we noted that consumers are unlikely to be influenced by energy-efficiency labels for: •

appliances purchased in high-stress situations – e.g. hot water services, and



appliances where the energy consumption is relatively small – e.g. televisions.



Even for those classes of products where energy labels generally are effective, the least efficient appliances can remain on the market. They can even claim a significant market share—purchasers who care mostly about pricee.g. low-income households and purchasers who will not use the products themselves.438 In these cases, minimum efficiency standards may be the most effective way to increase the efficiency of energy consuming technologies that are used.

435

McDougall et al. 1981, Quelch 1980 Quelch 1980 p. 134 437 Coltrane et al. 1986 438 Colombier & Menanteau 1997 436

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

126

Housing lasts a long time. Once built, it can be difficult and expensive to improve building energy efficiency or energy options.439 Consumers prefer product energy efficiency standards to restrictions in the form of energy price increases.440 Reduce negotiation deadlocks Manufacturers are often unenthusiastic about energy efficiency standards. They also generally have more information—about the technological potential of their products and the cost of adaptation—than policy makers do. Consequently, the process of negotiating energy efficiency standards is likely to be long and complex.441 These difficulties can be reduced by: •

defining the pace of progress from the start—introduce increasingly stringent regulations,



developing voluntary agreements that are backed up with regulatory action if targets are not met: By way of example, the approach chosen by the Swiss authorities in 1990 consisted of establishing, in agreement with manufacturers in the sector concerned, ‘target values’ (minimum energy efficiency) which 80–95% of the appliances on sale, depending on the product, would have to satisfy at an agreed date. If the target values are not met in the required proportions at the target date, the legislation provides for the introduction of statutory performance standards. Initially, however, the target values allow some room for manoeuvre to the manufacturers to make changes to the structure of the range.442

Regulations As we discussed in the section Use regulations & strong social pressure with care, on page 109, people may resent mandates or try to circumvent them.443 People often resent the feeling that they do not have control. This potential problem can be overcome: •

Ensure people support the regulation. For instance, in a high-income Melbourne municipality, nearly three quarters of the residents wanted their council to ensure new homes and major renovations received a home energy star rating.444



Develop efficiency measures that permit or enhance personal control. For instance, residents accepted an automatic day-night thermostat when the controls were modified to allow residents to temporarily override the systems445. Remember also that people often use appliances very efficiently when they have the opportunity to override automatic controls. The study of room air conditioner use mentioned earlier found most householders operated the units manually - they did not rely on the thermostat. Instead they operated them only when they felt the need to be cool - rather

439

National Research Council 1984 McDougall et al. 1981 441 Colombier & Menanteau 1997 442 Colombier & Menanteau 1997 p. 431 443 Kempton et al. 1992a, National Research Council 1984 444 Mullaly & Shipworth 1998 445 Becker et al. 1979 in National Research Council 1984 440

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

127

than simply when the room temperature rose above a pre-determined level.446 This resulted in substantially lower electricity use than if they had relied on the thermostat.

Trials (P)eople are more likely to adopt a new idea or technology if they can try it on a small scale without fully committing themselves to it…447

Trials can act in a similar way to the “foot-in-the-door” strategies discussed on page 102. When people see themselves acting in an energy efficient way, they view themselves as someone concerned about energy efficiency, and are likely to take further energy actions. Many businesses use “free trial” strategies to attract new customers. Here is an idea for a trial strategy. An idea for FREE trials of energy efficient washing machines The most energy efficient washing machines are front-loading machines. These machines have a small market share in Australia. Nonetheless, they offer many benefits other than energyefficiencyvery low water consumption, very gentle washing cycles and space-saving design. "

Choose ideal “demonstration households” – see page 109.

"

Offer the “demonstration households” free trials of energy efficient washing machines.

"

Emphasise the suite of environmental and personal benefits the machines provide – pages 17 and 20 outline some non-energy issues for householders.

"

Arrange to demonstrate the machines to friends & associates of the selected households.

Trials could be on a much smaller scale. Some examples are: •

Give away a low-cost energy efficiency product. For instance, Environment Victoria has given away free devices for restricting shower flow.



Encourage householders to take one low-cost, quick and easy energy action.

Effective trial strategies: •

must encourage participants to see themselves as concerned about saving energy,



can give people the opportunity to make their own discoveries – see the section Encourage "adaptive muddling", on page 111.

Financial Incentives Rebate strategies can be used to transform the market for an energy efficient technology or product. If price is the main obstacle to purchase, rebate strategies can increase demand. Expansion of the market for a product can reduce production costs due to economies of scale. This can reduce the product’s price, which increases the demand for the product.448 Under these circumstances, well implemented rebate schemes can be an effective tool for market transformation. The section Decide whether financial incentives will motivate! on page 86, also discusses these issues. 446

Kempton et al. 1992b National Research Council 1984 448 Colombier & Menanteau 1997 447

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – Market transformation

128

Financial incentive strategies may not motivate builders to purchase energy efficient appliances because appliance costs are a small proportion of total building costs. That said449: •

Tax credits are unlikely to be successful with builders because they would rely on the builders investing their time gathering information on alternatives. Firstly they would have to first identify energy efficient products. Secondly they would have to calculate their potential tax benefit from purchasing the energy efficient product. This is more complex than simply selecting appliances on the basis of cost. Builders often prefer tax credits, but they are unlikely to achieve their aim.



A graduated sales tax sends a clearer price signal to the builder, involving no extra work. Builders react less positively to a sales tax than to a tax credit, but sales taxes are likely to be more effective.

449

Quelch 1980

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Aiming for home energy action

Your plan Why plan? Reviewers of the 101 ways to keep Vic[toria] fit energy conservation campaign commented: 101 ways to keep Vic fit, while heavily funded, could be considered almost a model of how not to run a change campaign. 101 ways to keep Vic fit has foundered due to lack of clear direction, lack of careful targeting and segmentation strategies, lack of monitoring and lack of follow-up strategies.450 The past decade of utility experience in designing DSM [Demand–Side Management] programs has provided a track record from which we can begin to identify the hallmarks of successful program design. The best programs typically include the following elements: "

An initial design that provides a clear statement of program goals and objectives, and a discussion of broad program design and marketing issues;

"

A program marketing strategy that proceeds from an understanding of customer preferences and behavior, makes use of appropriate market segmentation schemes, and matches marketing methods to customer needs and market conditions;

"

An implementation plan that establishes effective managerial and administrative support structures, takes market and industry constraints into account, and creates a customer–friendly participation process that offers obvious and worthwhile benefits to the customer; and

"

A monitoring and evaluation process that provides useful feedback on program accomplishments without imposing unreasonable data collection procedures.451

Since 1976, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has operated the largest residential energyconservation program in the nation…Approximately $500 million is spent annually in the U.S. to weatherize the homes of low-income households…Funds from DOE are allocated to State government agencies, which in turn provide grants to about 1100 local weatherization agencies. 452

Ten “outstanding” agencies were selected to study in depth. These agencies achieved higher energy savings per dwelling than average, but had only average costs per dwelling. The most striking feature of the 10 case studies is that there are many different formulas for success. Each of the 10 successful agencies employs a unique combination of useful and innovative approaches.453

450

Cosgrove et al. 1996 p. 7 Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 pp. 381–382 452 Brown & Berry 1995 pp. 729-730 453 Brown & Berry 1995 451

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

130

What to plan Dynamism and determination are not enough to ensure the success of a home energy action program. Knowing how to make homes energy efficient is not enough either. Figure 12, below, outlines the Foundation of a home energy program -

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

131

Foundation of a home energy action program Understand program context Different managers bring different skills, interests and networks to their programs. The facilities and support available to one program will be different to those available to another. The concerns and motivations of one program’s target group will be different from those of another’s. Different target groups will have different stocks of housing and technology. Once the manager understands the program’s context, they can choose the most achievable and important aims and objectives for their program.

Focus on program aims Some programs confuse aims with strategies. If you want a program to reduce home energy use, don’t aim to provide information on saving energy - aim to reduce home energy use! Information is one strategy the program may use to reduce home energy use. A program may aim to ‘reduce total energy used in Ballarat homes by 10%’. Another may aim to ‘reduce average home energy use in Canberra by 20%’. A focus on program aims reduces the chances of making assumptions about what actions and strategies will make a difference.

Decide what actions to target To decide what actions to target, the manager needs a solid grounding in how to make homes energy efficient - otherwise they could target actions that make little difference to home energy use. They also need a solid grounding in how people interact with homes and technologies - otherwise they could target actions that people simply will not take. One objective could be ‘within two years, 10% of uninsulated homes will have ceiling insulation installed.’ Another could be ‘within one year, 20% of householders will have replaced at least one incandescent light globe with a compact fluorescent light globe.’

Decide on strategies to motivate home energy action The manager must decide how best to motivate people to take action. They need a solid grounding in what motivates people to take energy actions - otherwise they could use strategies that do not motivate home energy action. Different groups in society are motivated in different ways and different program aims and objectives will need different strategies to achieve them. Motivating householders to insulate their homes is quite different to motivating them to install a CFL.

Focus on monitoring A successful home energy action program changes the actions of home energy users. This change makes the original program obsolete! New strategies will be needed to encourage more home energy actions. An unsuccessful program can reduce support for future energy action programs and demoralise program managers - early diagnosis is needed! In practice, most programs will have both more and less successful aspects. Monitoring helps managers improve program success and adapt the program to changed circumstances.

Figure 12: Foundation of a home energy program

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

132

Programs that are not carefully developed and implemented can waste commitment, enthusiasm, time and money. This is not just exhausting for program managers. If huge efforts result in little gain, it exhausts the commitment of governments and the electorate to home energy action programs.

Clarify aims & objectives Decide what you want to achieve Goals and objectives do not lay out every procedure in minute detail but provide sufficient information to describe the program’s basic intent and structure. They describe the major tasks that the program must accomplish and the budget available for each.454

Set quantifiable targets Making public commitments to energy actions is just as effective for organisations as it is for individuals. In the section Encourage public commitment to saving energy, on page 110, we discuss commitment strategies. The highly successful State of Michigan Residential Conservation Service Program incorporated public commitment strategies. Agencies were asked to publicly commit to program goals.455

Put your own house in order Attend to consistency & credibility Any organisation marketing “green” products or services must strive for an impeccable environmental reputation.456 Organisations trying to motivate others to take energy actions must practice what they preach!

Attend to organisational structure The review of four significant social change programs in Victoria found that: Lack of organisational clarity and appropriate institutional structures seems to have left environmental campaigns vulnerable to pressures and to the effects of changes in political alignment. The link between clear purpose and organisational structure in countering resistance to change and pressures against success is a strong message from the success of the health campaigns.457

These clear structures and goals enabled the Quit campaigners to successfully counter strong pressures from the ‘tobacco lobby’ and the Road Safety campaigners to maintain funding in the face of a new government intent on spending reductions. Without clear organisational structures, lessons from the 101 ways to keep Vic fit energy conservation campaign have been lost.

454

Gellings & Chamberlin 1993 p.383 Kushler 1989 456 Polonsky 1995& Davis 1991 457 Cosgrove et al. 1996 p.9 455

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

133

The local agencies with the most success in delivering the U.S. Department of Energy Weatherization Program are agencies that organise and motivate their staff effectively. They have low staff turnover and consequently have a great deal of experience in the program. Contractors employed by these agencies also had low staff turnover and long experience weatherising homes.458 Organisations and staff involved in the successful Michigan Residential Conservation Service Program may have felt more comfortable undertaking extensive evaluations because the program was secure—there was a federal law requiring the existence of such a program and funding was stable and not tied to evaluation outcomes. Furthermore, the state had the power to manipulate incentives to the local agencies (utilities). These legal, regulatory and institutional foundations helped establish the conditions for honest, meaningful evaluations. 459 The Michigan program also benefited from progressive management: •

Management allowed an outside agency to conduct comprehensive program evaluation.



The evaluation manager was strongly committed to the evaluation being used— structuring the evaluation to provide useful information at every turn.



Great emphasis was placed on coordinating the efforts of all the organisations involved.460

Develop a network of professional advisors Managers developing home energy action programs will most likely need to consult both technical professionals and ‘people’ professionals. Sometimes technical researchers and advisers with little background in the social sciences comment on how to motivate home energy action. These opinions are sometimes accepted uncritically by policy-makers. Social scientists tend not to comment on how to improve the energy efficiency of a technology.461 Hopefully, if one did, policy-makers would ignore it if the social scientist did not have the necessary technical background and skills to comment. In the section Need to involve technical and ‘people’ professionals, on page 8, we outlined why both types of professionals are vital to the success of home energy action programs. Many social science perspectives help us understand home energy users, for instance: …psychological models of behavior, economic perspectives, attitudes, intentions, lifestyle theory, sociological theory, diffusion of innovation, group-influence models, and family decision making.462

458

Brown & Berry 1995 Kushler 1989 460 Kushler 1989 461 Here I exclude suggestions that are derived from research into how people interact with that technology. Awareness of how people interact with a technology can lead to suggestions for changing the technology so that it will be more energy-efficient in the everyday context in which it will operate. 462 McDougall et al. 1981 459

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

134

Some ‘people’ professionals helpful for the development and monitoring of home energy action programs are psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, historians, community and adult education specialists, and social marketing specialists.463

Form a community advisory committee Forming a community advisory committee early on in the development of the program is likely to improve program success. The section Involve the community, on page 114, outlines the reasons why.

Develop the energy action program Choose energy actions with the greatest opportunities 1. Technological change. These can be ‘lost opportunity’ situations—where there is a window of opportunity to improve the efficiency of a building, piece of equipment or set of appliances. They offer especially important potential for energy savings.464 A current example is the impending introduction of digital television in Australia.465 2. Climate. In the U.S., weatherising programs in cold and moderate climates have achieved higher energy savings per dwelling than programs in hot climates.466 Australia has enormous climatic variation. Some climatic regions may offer greater opportunity for reducing energy use through energy actions. 3. High energy users. Agencies that save the most energy per dwelling have tended to be those that focus on households using large amounts of energy.467 4. Householder appeal. In the U.S., Most homeowners prefer to invest in storm windows rather than in wall insulation, even when the latter is a better energy saver. Storm windows are attractive and reduce home upkeep.468

5. Actual—not theoretical—energy–saving potential. The theoretical energy–saving potential of a technology does not necessarily correspond to savings in practice: (a)

There is huge variety in how people use energy – see page 19. This means that it is hard to accurately estimate the impact of a technology on energy use. A hypothetical energy action program may promote replacing energy–inefficient air conditioners with very efficient air conditioners. If a household that uses an air conditioner frequently installs the very efficient air conditioner, it will save a great deal of energy. If a household that uses an air conditioner very

463

‘Marketing’ home energy actions is quite different to marketing toothpaste. Nadel & Geller 1996 465 Pears pers. comm. 466 Brown & Berry 1995 467 Brown & Berry 1995 468 Stern 1992 p. 1229 464

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

135

infrequently installs the very efficient air conditioner, it will save very little energy. (b) We know relatively little about how people use energy. For instance, we don’t know the average length of time an Australian spends in the shower. Nor do we know whether there is great variation around this average. Consequently, it is hard to estimate how much energy will be saved if a large proportion of Australians install low flow showerheads. (c)

It is even difficult to measure the impact of a program that has been running – see page Quantitative measures of program impact, on page 33.

Testing low flow showerheads (or other energy saving products or practices) in real world conditions would give a better indication of the real potential energy savings from a product or practice.469 Ethnographic (anthropological-style) methods would give reactions to a range of prototype products. Small-scale ‘field experiments’ would help assess the likely impact of a narrow range of prototype options. 6. Inter-organisational synergies. Some energy actions also provide non-energy benefitsthese may be of interest to non-energy organisations. In these circumstances, organisations wanting to motivate energy action can team up with relevant non-energy organisations. These are some examples: (a)

Water Water supply organisations may wish to reduce water used by households. “Green” groups may wish to ensure no more dams are built, or groundwater is replenished. Consequently, they may be interested in reducing hot water used for clothes washing, showers and baths. Even if these activities are not the most significant consumers of water, targeting them could constitute a “foot-in-thedoor” strategy to reduce water use – see page 102.

(b) Social welfare Social welfare organisations may wish to minimise energy costs for poor households. Consequently, they may be interested in motivating energy action by poor households. Health care cardholders receive discounts on their energy bills. The funding source for these discounts could provide funds for energy actions that reduce the energy used by health care cardholders. (c)

International aid International aid organisations may be concerned about the potential social consequences of climate change on less developed countries – e.g. sea level rise impacting Pacific Islanders, cyclones affecting Bangladesh. Consequently, they may be interested in motivating their supporters to take energy actions.

(d) Health Health organisations may be concerned about sedentary lifestyles and atmospheric pollution. Consequently, they may be interested in reducing car use – which is really outside the scope of this handbook.

469

Stern et al. 1987

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

136

Choose energy actions with long term potential Even though some energy actions save little energy in the short term, programs should not discourage householders from taking them. This is because, once someone takes an energy action, they start to see themselves as a person who is concerned about saving energy. They are then more likely to pay attention to energy information and take further energy actions. Programs can encourage this process – see Use “foot-in-the door” strategies on page 102. Some energy actions are more appealing to householders than others. For instance, solar hot water systems are seen as “sexy” - they are highly visible and dramatic. They appeal to householders. Some Australian homes could save more energy by installing insulation than they would by installing a solar hot water system. This would be the case for many Melbourne homes. As long as householders save energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions470, they should not be discouraged from installing a solar hot water system. Instead, householders installing solar hot water systems can be encouraged to think of themselves as “energy stars”. They would then be more inclined to pay attention to energy information, remember it, and take further energy actions.471 They may then install the insulation as well! While the short-term benefits of installing a solar hot water service may be less than the benefits of insulation, the medium term benefits may well be much greater.

Choose households to focus on We mentioned earlier the Victorian-based 101 ways to keep Vic[toria] fit energy conservation campaign. Researchers reviewing this campaign felt a key factor contributing to the lack of success of the campaign was the failure to understand important ‘market segments’, choose segments to target, and build the campaign around the chosen ‘segments’.472 On the other hand, the Quit campaign selected particular groups (e.g. young people) for targeted action - information and persuasion programs designed to appeal to those particular groups. Effective marketing requires: …understanding…customers, devising appropriate market segmentation schemes, and matching the marketing method to customer needs and market conditions.473

So, understand householders, decide which householders to target, and develop energy action strategies appropriate to those households. Remember that an energy action often has a range of energy and non-energy benefits. For instance, energy efficient washing machines, usually front-loaders, use less water and are gentle on clothes – some even do your ‘hand washing’. Compact fluorescent light globes don’t just save you energy; they reduce the time you spend changing light globes – particularly useful for hard-to-reach light fittings. For each target group and energy action

470

In Melbourne, switching from a gas hot water system to a solar-electric hot water system can increase greenhouse gas emissions. 471 Yates & Aronson 1983 472 Cosgrove et al. 1996 p. 7 473 Gellings & & Chamberlin 1993 p. 389

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

137

chosen, emphasise all the benefits the energy action will provide that that target group is interested in. Low income households In the U.S., low-income households are an important market segment. Although they tend to use much less energy than wealthier households do, they live in older, energy inefficient homes. On the other hand, in the U.S., many low-income households cannot take advantage of loan schemes, due to poor credit ratings and low incomes. Further, poorer households have a higher proportion of renters. 474 For all these reasons, lowincome households need different strategies to middle- and high-income households. Low-income households can be targeted with: 1. Rebates & grants – see page 92. 2. Loans – see page 92. 3. Comprehensive installation programs – see page 92. 4. Use community groups to run energy action programs – see page 112. 5. Programs aimed at the rental sector, e.g., energy efficiency labels for rental properties—see Energy efficiency labels on page 124.

Develop a mixture of strategies The successful Victorian-based Quit and Road Safety campaigns used a mixture of strategies. As well as motivating individuals to take action, they focussed on changing the framework in which individuals act – with regulations and advertisements.475 Using a mixture of strategies works because: •

People are different from each other. Different strategies will motivate different people.



People are complex. Different strategies will motivate the same person in different circumstances.



Combined strategies can result in energy actions becoming accepted and expected. This will motivate more people to take energy actions and make it easier for everyone to take energy actions.

Nonetheless, comprehensive programs do require more resources, coordination and administration.

Choose a monitoring strategy Monitoring strategies must be developed in tandem with the energy action strategies because: •

474 475

“Lessons learned” through monitoring will help fine-tune the program as it progresses.

Coltrane et al. 1986 Cosgrove et al. 1996

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

138



“Lessons learned” can be made available to help improve the effectiveness of other energy action programs.



Monitoring is less likely to be seen as a threat if it is built into the program design.

Different monitoring strategies are useful for different energy action strategies – some strategy chapters suggest how to monitor that type of energy action strategy. It is often worthwhile to use more than one monitoring method. For instance, small-scale experiments may suggest that a program does not have the intended effect. Detailed interviews with participants may shed light on why the strategies were not working. If an energy action program will run over several years, a pilot program should be designed in. Along with careful monitoring strategies, the pilot program will give vital feedback on whether the chosen strategies and program processes are effective at achieving program aims and objectives.

Program schedule The timing of different program elements may need to take into account industry lead times and the schedules of partner organisations.

Training •

The people who develop and run home energy action programs need to understand both technology and people – see Need to involve technical and ‘people’ professionals, on page 8. Often, though, these people will have formal education in either how to understand technology or how to understand people. In that case, they will need training and/or support in the area that they do not have training.



Everyone involved in the program will need familiarity with program goals, design, and key program components. Participants and potential participants frequently ask programmatic questions of anyone associated with the [organisation]. Therefore, every player should be able to answer some of the basic questions and feel comfortable about rerouting the inquiry if necessary.476



This will involve staff, contractors, community groups, trade allies and volunteers.

Develop administrative systems Early attention to administrative systems ensures the program can proceed smoothly. Administrative systems will be needed for: 477 •

Managing relationships with program participants.



Processing applications, where relevant.



Handling potential complaints.

476 477

Gellings & & Chamberlin 1993 p. 406 Gellings & & Chamberlin 1993

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action– Aiming for home energy action

139

Implement your energy action program Over to you!

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

References

Enthusiastic readers note—highlighted text indicates recommended reading.

Argyrous, George 1996, Statistics for Social Research, Macmillan Education, South Melbourne. Australian Bureau of Statistics 1996, Australians and the Environment, Cat. No. 4601.1, ABS, Canberra. Australian Bureau of Statistics 1999a, Household and Family Projections, Australia 1996 to 2021, Cat. No. 3236.0, ABS, Canberra. Australian Bureau of Statistics 1999b, Older People, Australia: A Social Report, Cat. No. 4109.0, ABS, Canberra. Australian Bureau of Statistics 2000, Australia Now - A Statistical Profile - Income and Welfare - Household expenditure (Unpublished data, 1993-94 Household Expenditure Survey) http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs%40.nsf/5e3ac7411e37881aca2568b0007afd16/d7ffbb4ad3a3d5fbca2 568a900154aa8!OpenDocument, 28 April. Becker, L. J., Seligman, C., Fazio, R. H. & Darley, J. M. 1981, ‘Relating Attitudes to Residential Energy Use’, Environment and Behavior, vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 590-609. Brown, Marilyn A. & Berry, Linda G. 1995, ‘Determinants of Program Effectiveness: Results of the National Weatherization Evaluation’, Energy, Vol. 20, No. 8, pp. 729-743. Colombier, Michel & Menanteau, Philippe 1997, ‘From energy labelling to performance standards: some methods of stimulating technical change to obtain greater energy efficiency’, Energy Policy, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 425-434. Coltrane, Scott, Archer, Dane & Aronson, Elliot 1986, The social-psychological foundations of successful energy conservation programmes’, Energy Policy, Vol. 14, No. 2, April, pp. 133-148. Cone, John D. & Hayes, Steven C. 1980, Environmental Problems/ Behavioral Solutions, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Monterey, California. [The Brooks/Cole Basic Concepts in Environment and Behavior Series: Series Editors: Irwin Altman, Daniel Stokols, Lawrence W. Wrightsman] Cosgrove, Laurie, Evans, David & Protacio, Perla 1996, ‘Environmental Change Campaigns’, PAPER (People and Physical Environment Research), Vol. 50, pp. 4-12. Costanzo, Mark, Archer, Dane, Aronson, Elliot & Pettigrew, Thomas 1986, ‘Energy Conservation Behavior: The Difficult Path From Information to Action’, American Psychologist, May, Vol. 41, No. 5, pp. 521-528. Davis, J. J. 1991 ‘A blueprint for green marketing’, The Journal of Business Strategy, July/August, pp. 14-17. Dennis, Michael L., Soderstrom, E. Jonathan, Koncinski, Walter S. & Cavanaugh, Betty 1990, ‘Effective Dissemination of Energy-Related Information: Applying Social Psychology and Evaluation Research’, American Psychologist, Vol. 45, No. 10, October, pp. 1109-1117. de Vaus, D. A. 1995, Surveys in social research, 4th ed., Allen & Unwin, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. De Young, Raymond 1993, ‘Changing Behavior and Making it Stick: The Conceptualization and Management of Conservation Behavior’, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 4, July, pp. 485-505. Dillman, D. A. 1978, Mail and Telephone Surveys: the total design method, Wiley, New York.

Motivating Home Energy Action – References

141

Dwyer, William O., Leeming, Frank C., Cobern, Melissa K. Porter, Bryan E. & Jackson, John Mark 1993, ‘Critical Review of Behavioral Interventions to Preserve the Environment: Research since 1980’, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 25, No. 3, May, pp. 275-321. Eagly, Alice H. & Kulesa, Patrick 1997, ‘Attitudes, Attitude Structure, and Resistance to Change: Implications for Persuasion on Environmental Issues’ in Bazerman, Max H., Messick, David M., Tenbrunsel, Ann E. & Wade-Benzoni, Kimberly A. (eds) Environment, Ethics, & Behavior: The Psychology of Environmental Valuation & Degradation, The New Lexington Press, San Fransisco. Energy Efficient Strategies 1999, Study of greenhouse gas emissions from the Australian residential building sector to 2010, Project for the Australian Greenhouse Office. Foddy, William 1993, Constructing questions for interviews and questionnaires: theory and practice in social research, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Frieden, Bernard J. & Baker, Kermit 1983, ‘The Market Needs Help: the disappointing record of home energy conservation’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 432-448. Gellings, Clark W. & Chamberlin, John H. 1993, Demand-Side Management Planning, The Fairmont Press Inc., Lilburn, GA, USA. Gellings, Clark W. 1994, Utility Marketing Strategies: Competition and the Economy, The Fairmont Press Inc., Lilburn, GA, USA. Harris, Stuart 1993, ‘Environment and sustainable development: an Australian social science perspective’, Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia Occasional Paper, Delivered at the 10th Biennial Symposium of the Association of Asian Social Science Research Councils in Manila, September. Hines, Jody M., Hungerford, Harold R. & Tomera, Audrey N. 1986/7, ‘Analysis and Synthesis of Research on Responsible Environmental Behavior: A Meta-Analysis’, The Journal of Environmental Education, Vol. 18, No. 2, Winter, pp. 1-8. Hitchcock, Guy 1993, ‘An integrated framework for energy use and behaviour in the domestic sector’, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 20, pp.151-157. Hutcheson, Graeme & Sofroniou, Nick 1999 The Multivariate Social Scientist, Sage Publications, London. Kantola, S. J., Syme, G. J., Campbell, N. A. 1984, ‘Cognitive Dissonance and Energy Conservation’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 69, No. 3, pp.416-421. Kempton, Willett, Darley, John M. & Stern, Paul C. 1992a, ‘Psychological Research for the New Energy Problems: Strategies and Opportunities’, American Psychologist, October, Vol. 47, No. 10, pp. 12131223. Kempton, Willett, Feuermann, Daniel & McGarity, Arthur E. 1992b, ‘”I always turn it on super”: user decisions about when and how to operate room air conditioners’, Energy and Buildings, Vol. 18, pp. 177-191. Kempton, Willett & Layne, Linda L. 1994, ‘The consumer’s energy analysis environment’, Energy Policy, Vol. 22, No. 10, pp. 857-866. Kempton, Willett & Lutzenhiser, Loren 1992, ‘Introduction’, Energy and Buildings, vol. 18, pp. 171-176. [Special issue on the social and cultural aspects of cooling.] Kramer, Klaas Jan, Moll, Henri C., Nonhebel, Sanderine & Wilting, Harry C. 1999, ‘Greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption’, Energy Policy, Vol. 27., pp. 203-216. Kushler, Martin G. 1989, ‘Use of Evaluation to Improve Energy Conservation Programs: A Review and Case Study’, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 45, No. 1, pp. 153-168. Lutzenhiser, Loren 1992, ‘A cultural model of household energy consumption’, Energy, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 4760. Lutzenhiser, Loren 1993, ‘Social and Behavioral Aspects of Energy Use’, Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, Vol. 18, pp. 247-289. Lutzenhiser, Loren 1994, ‘Innovation and organizational networks: Barriers to energy efficiency in the US housing industry’, Energy Policy, Vol. 22, No. 10, pp. 867-876.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – References

142

Lutzenhiser, Loren & Hackett, Bruce 1993, ‘Social Stratification and Environmental Degradation: Understanding Household CO2 Production’, Social Problems, Vol. 40, No. 1, February, pp. 50-73. Lutzenhiser, Loren & Shove, Elizabeth 1999, ‘Contracting knowledge: the organizational limits to interdisciplinary energy efficiency research and development in the US and the UK’, Energy Policy, Vol. 27, pp. 217-227. McKenzie-Mohr, Doug 1994, ‘Social Marketing for Sustainability: The case of residential energy conservation’, Futures, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 224-233. McDougall, Gordon H. G., Claxton, John D., Ritchie, J. R. Brent & Anderson, C. Dennis 1981, ‘Consumer Energy Research: A Review’, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 8, December, pp. 343-354. Mullaly, Cathy 1998, ‘Home energy use behaviour: a necessary component of successful local government home energy conservation (LGHEC) programs’, Energy Policy, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 1041-1052. Mullaly, Cathy & Shipworth, Michelle 1998, ‘Home energy conservation survey: implications for policy’, Proceedings of the 2nd Asia Pacific conference on Sustainable Energy and Environmental Technology – Challenges and Opportunities, 14-17 June, Gold Coast, University of Queensland, Brisbane. Nadel, Steven & Geller, Howard 1996 ‘Utility DSM: What have we learned? Where are we going?’, Energy Policy, Vol. 24, No. 4, pp. 289-302. National Research Council 1984, in Stern, Paul C. & Aronson, Elliot (eds) Energy Use: The Human Dimension, W.H. Freeman and Company, New York. [Committee on Behavioral and Social Aspects of Energy Consumption and Production, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council] Oppenheim, A. N. 1992, Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement (new edn.), Pinter Publishers, London. Pears, Alan 1998, Strategic study of household energy and greenhouse issues, A report for Environment Australia. Pettigrew, Thomas F. 1996, How to Think Like a Social Scientist, Harper Collins, New York. Polonsky, M. J. 1995, ‘Cleaning up green marketing claims: a practical checklist’ in Polonsky, M. J., MintuWimsatt, A. T. (eds) Environmental Marketing: Strategies, Practice, Theory and Research, The Haworth Press, New York. Quelch, John A. 1980, ‘Energy conservation policies for builders’ purchases of domestic appliances’, Energy Policy, Vol. 8, No. 2, June, pp. 125-137. Ramage, Janet 1997, Energy: A Guidebook, Oxford University Press, Oxford. Rosa, Eugene A., Machlis, Gary E. & Keating, Kenneth M. 1988, ‘Energy and Society’, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 14, pp. 149-172. Sadalla, Edward K. & Krull, Jennifer L. 1995, “Self-presentational barriers to resource conervation”, Environment and Behavior, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 328-353. Sanstad, Alan H. & Howarth, Richard B. 1994, ‘”Normal” markets, market imperfections and energy efficiency’, Energy Policy, Vol. 22, No. 10, pp.811-818. Schauble, John 1998, ‘The wash-up is that we’re not the yucky country’, The Age, 1 Oct., p.? Seligman, C., Kirss, M., Darley, J. M., Faxio, R. H., Becker, L. J. & Pryor, J. B. 1979, ‘Predicting Summer Energy Consumption from Homeowners’ Attitudes’, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 70-90. Shiel, Fergus 1998, ‘Cold snap: cook and wash to stay warm’, The Age, 10 Oct., p.? Shindler, Bruce, Cheek, Kristin Aldred, Stankey, George H. 1999, Monitoring and evaluating citizen-agency interactions: a framework for adaptive management, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Shipworth, Michelle 1998, Attitudes and Home Energy Conservation in a Melbourne Municipality, submitted as partial requirement for Master of Environmental Science, Graduate School of Environmental Science, Monash University, unpublished.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000

Motivating Home Energy Action – References

143

Shove, Elizabeth 1999, ‘Gaps, barriers and conceptual chasms: theories of technology transfer and energy in buildings’, Energy Policy, Vol. 26, No. 15, pp. 1105-1112. Stern, Paul C. 1992, ‘What Psychology Knows About Energy Conservation’ American Psychologist, Vol. 47, No. 10, October, pp. 1224-1232. Stern, Paul C. 1993, ‘A Second Environmental Science: Human-Environment Interactions’ Science Vol. 260, 25 June, pp. 1897-1899. Stern, Paul C., Aronson, Elliot, Darley, John M., Kempton, Willett, Hill, Daniel H., Hirst, Eric & Wilbanks, Thomas J. 1987 ‘Answering Behavioral Questions about Energy Efficiency in Buildings’, Energy, Vol. 12, No. 5, pp. 339-353. Tabachnick, Barbara G. & Fidell, Linda S. 1996, Using Multivariate Statistics, 3rd edn, Harper Collins College Publishers, New York. The Age 29 Sep. 1998, p.? Vine, Edward L. 1994, ‘The human dimension of program evaluation’, Energy, vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 165-178. Wilhite, Harold & Ling, Rich 1995, ‘Measured energy savings from a more informative energy bill’, Energy and Buildings Vol. 22, pp.145-155. Wilhite, Harold, Nakagami, Hidetoshi, Masuda, Takashi, Yamaga, Yukiko & Haneda, Hiroshi 1996, ‘A crosscultural analysis of household energy use behaviour in Japan and Norway’, Energy Policy, Vol. 24, No. 9, pp.795-803. Wilk, Richard R. & Wilhite, Harold 1987, ‘Why don’t people weatherize their homes?: an ethnographic solution’ in Kempton, Willett & Neiman, Max (eds) Energy Efficiency: Perspectives on Individual Behavior, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, DC. Yates, Suzanne M. & Aronson, Elliot 1983, ‘A Social Psychological Perspective on Energy Conservation in Residential Buildings’, American Psychologist, April, pp. 435-444.

Michelle Shipworth – Report to AGO – April 2000