Last week I wrote about pitfalls in influencing climate behavior by the government. This week the question: what could work? The British Behavioral Insights Team (BIT) delivered last year a report on this question, commissioned by the government. In it, the BIT researchers analyzed 87 case studies in which governments had influenced the behavior of citizens. Together with a panel of eleven British behavioral scientists, they also set out principles for interventions.
In their report, the researchers use the image of a river.
- At the end of the river (downstream) helps the government to understand the climate crisis and take action. You are encouraging individuals to swim against the current of the river.
half way down the river (midstream) you take care of adapting the context in which people make decisions. You make it as easy as possible to do the right things. You create a counter current in the river, making it logical and easy to swim the other way.
- At the origin of the river (upstream) is about changing the system. You influence the climate decisions of companies, markets and institutions. You shift the course of the river, so that a different context and different individual behavior are created downstream.
What kind of interventions should you consider?
- Examples of downstream interventions are: encouraging individual action (such as turning down the thermostat), telling a clear story about the necessity and benefits of climate action, developing support for climate policy.
- With midstream interventions you should think of: offering the climate-friendly options as standard options together with providers of housing, food, transport and energy and/or making those choices more visible, easier and cheaper.
Typical upstream interventions are: financial incentives and laws that ensure that products and services become climate neutral, and that set a good example as a government itself.
According to the BIT, the government should do more than just downstream interventions, aimed at the individual citizen. It is precisely the context in which citizens make decisions and the system in which that context arises that must be tackled.
Again the river metaphor: it is not enough to shout from the shore that people should swim differently, as a government you have to change the flow and course of the river.
And where do you start? Many behavioral scientists, including Nobel laureate Richard Thaler, have insisted for years that prizes are essential. Pollution must become expensive and greening must become cheap. It is bizarre and painful that in this area the river is still flowing at high speed in the wrong direction.
An elegant way to tackle this and create support is to introduce CO2-pricing and climate income (carbon fee and dividend; I wrote about it here before. That means: seriously high levies on polluting products and services and returning this money – everyone the same amount – to citizens. He who pollutes a lot makes a loss, he who pollutes little makes a profit. Effective, transparent and fair.
Ben Tiggelaar writes weekly about personal leadership, work and management.
A version of this article also appeared in the newspaper of 16 July 2022