1. Nudging consumers toward sustainable consumption Kristiina Aalto Eva Heiskanen National Consumer Research Centre

2. Agenda Framework: Nudge as an approach to shape sustainable consumption Data and methods: EUPOPP project and cases Sustainable Public Catering and Energy and Environmental Expert (not originally Nudge) Findings and discussion Potential and problems of Nudge?

3. Framework Consumption and the demand-side are important for reaching a sustainable economy potential for factor-4 improvements simply by changing demand/usage practices Consumption and demand-side are difficult to influence the sovereign consumer the unmanageable consumer routine and unreflective consumption

4. Nudge (Thaler & Sunstein) Many consumer decisions are made automatically and are subject to various biases libertarian paternalism: need to nudge people into the right direction (their own rational preferences) Consumer choices can be improved by better “choice architecture” i.e., by reorganizing the way choices are presented to the consumer Examples: fruit instead of cake in the ”impulse basket” near the cafeteria cashier display average electricity consumption of other households, smiley for those who use less than average

5. Data: Cases from the EUPOPP project EUPOPP: Policies to promote sustainable consumption (http://www.eupopp.net)http://www.eupopp.net Focus on analysing the impacts of SC policy strategies and instruments on consumption patterns 40 short case studies and 10 detailed ones of different kinds of policy instruments in Europe Two Finnish cases: Sustainable Public Catering Energy and Environmental Expert Interviews with stakeholders, consumer focus groups

6. Sustainable Public Catering Biases: familiarity, routine eating patterns Solution: weekly vegetarian day in public canteens (as one option to meet Council of State DoP on sustainable public procurement) -> direct experience of veg food may nudge people to use it more Results: slow implementation Helsinki school lunches: weekly veg day as of 2011 public debate but also appreciation ”makes life easier”

7. Energy & Environmental Expert Biases: Invisibility of energy use, poor communication between energy users and ’real’ experts Solution: Peer volunteers monitor energy use, analyse causes, give advice -> energy & environment socially visible in/near home Results: Variable, good savings (5%) in best houses Some cases of extremism/busybodyism among EEEs, e.g. ”saunas not in use this weekend”

8. Pros and cons of Nudge Shaping choice arhitectures can be effective but requires significant resources to ’tailor’ design everyday contexts Shaping choice architectures is fairly legitimate in some situations e.g. tradition of steering due to public health benefits communications and public engagement still necessary & helpful nudge can work once the goal is widely shared, means well justified and legitimate Paternalism vs. busybodyism? who is the choice architect? manipulation vs. help in meeting own goals?

9. Conclusions Nudge strategies are not totally new often used in social marketing etc., but often not consciously or systematically Works where choices are not made very consciously routine and ’autopilot’ types of everyday practices not amenable to cognitive interventions Nudge as an explicit policy instrument is between regulation and information more intrusive than information provision so requires more legitimation Choice architects need to be selected carefully when used in public policy transparency, alignment of public vs. personal goals…

10. Thanks! All comments welcome! eva.heiskanen@ncrc.fi