1. STEPs to bridge the value- action gap in energy use: A community-based approach Changing behaviour via community approaches Andre MonizAnn Kolodeziejski Ellen van der Werff Fabio Iglesias Gretchen Nurse Katarina Polajnar Romina Rodela Coordinated by John Thogersen & Birgitta Gatersleben

2. Household energy use accounts for 56.6% of total energy use Potential for reduction is achievable at low-, no-, or negative-cost Households lack accurate accessible, and actionable information to achieve potential savings through their own steps (Gardner & Stern, 2008) Simple behaviors (e.g. turning down the thermostat) and one-time investments (e.g. upgrading insulation) can save up to 20% of total energy use Intro

3. Strategies for durable change According to De Young (1996), can be facilitated by: detailed procedural info –practical advices, problem awareness, info on others’ efforts feedback about one’s performance –increase collective efficacy, social and personal norms supportive social environment –group discussions, explicit decisions, block leaders MOST EFFECTIVE AND DURABLE

4. Problem description Background Combining community-based approach and individual interventions to durable change (McKenzie-Mohr, 2000) Senternovem experiences Value-action: value theory & self-perception Aims Reduce energy use Accept energy advisor Strengthening cohesion, self-efficacy & collective efficacy by community intervention Not only those active but the whole community Reduce the value-action gap by means of cueing Community and individual praise

5. Communities Linking community and individual approaches Cohesion Collective efficacy Empowerment Social norms Social networks: strong and weak ties

6. Value-Action Values and the value-action gap –Environmental values are present but latent (Schwartz,1992) –Activating these latent values – make salient Positive cueing –Self-perception theory (Bem, 1972). Used in social marketing. –Emphasis on positive behaviours –Re-interpretation of the self as being environmentally conscious (Cornelissen et al, 2008)

7. Hypotheses 1.Community intervention + positive cueing will make salient environmental values 2. The community intervention will Increase self-efficacy (empowerment), via social support and learning 3. Interaction effect: empowerment effect will be greater if we have pointed people’s attention to environmental values

8. Design No cueing Positive social cueing plus environmental cueing Positive social cueing Environmental based intervention (e.g., green space) XX Social, non- environmental intervention (e.g., playground) X No community intervention X

9. Manipulation 1.Community intervention: piggy back on existing schemes 2. Cueing: community-based praise - respected figure - praises community members for environmental or social achievements - Write a script: link community achievement with individual household energy behaviours - at major milestones - media and leaflet

10. Procedure Problem analyse the community Survey to random sample Community based intervention Praise stages Call to sign to energy advisor Survey to random sample Follow up: energy use and energy behaviours

11. Measurement Main DV: accept energy advisor Mediators –Community variables: Self-efficacy, cohesion, etc. Individual variables –Values, relative concerns (issue attention) –Energy consumption Manipulation checks –Trust, confidence, believable in the person giving info –Recall of information etc Demographics

12. Implications Strengthening adoption rate of individual interventions (energy advisor) by pairing with a community intervention Could be applied to any individual energy intervention Could be applied to any community