300
return to normal (Greer 2008). In contrast, predicaments have no solution; instead,
they must be endured. Society can respond, but even an effective response does not
eliminate the predicament. A useful response does not alter but rather accommodates the new situation. This is adaptation in a classic sense: to change behaviour
into new forms that better fit a new reality.
If we faced a problem (e.g. emergency, crisis) then we might be advised to
weather the storm until we ‘get back to normal’. However, even a functional
response to a predicament is unlikely to get us back; accommodation is about ‘getting to a new normal’. The new behavioural context is also different in another significant way. Responses will need to be broadly applied across one’s entire behaviour
pattern, then maintained and even expanded throughout a lifetime. Unfortunately,
society has little familiarity with the long-drawn-out behavioural planning and management needed to respond in this way. For while we know behaviours adequate for
addressing short-term challenges to health and well-being, there exists little guidance for behaviour change necessary for addressing a many decade- or century-long
predicament.
13.3.2 Changing Multiple Behaviours
Early conservation research focused on promoting one or a small suite of behaviours (Hamilton et al. 2018). We designed interventions to promote household recycling, mass transit use and water conservation (see, for instance, Geller et al. 1982).
Most early studies focused on either providing information (e.g. environmental education, enhancing procedural knowledge) or motivation (e.g. economic incentives,
token rewards). More recently, the focus has shifted to using social norms (e.g.
injunctive norms, declarative norms) and team-based interventions (e.g. eco-teams).
However, seldom was the focus on promoting clusters of behaviours. Other research
explored not how to promote a specific behaviour, but what we know about people
who already practice conservation behaviours. Research on long-term participants
in environmental stewardship programs report two consistent motivations: the
opportunity to do something meaningful to benefit the environment and the chance
to learn something new (Ryan and Grese 2005; Ryan et al. 2001).
Later, Stern and colleagues made sense out of the huge array of available behaviours by suggesting we concentrate on those with the greatest environmental significance (Gardner and Stern 2002; Stern 2000). This logic prioritised high-impact
behaviours, those with the highest achievable reduction in carbon emissions or
resource consumption. The choice is based not only on a behaviour’s technical
potential (i.e. degree of impact if adopted) but also upon the social scale of its adoption (i.e. realistic adoption rate across an extended time-scale; Stern 2011).
Unfortunately, this approach still easily defaults to the serial adoption of behaviours given the individual costs and efforts involved (e.g. upgrading heating systems, buying fuel-efficient vehicles). If circumstances allow us to be patient then we
benefit from their joint effects over time being significant (see Stern and Wolske’s
(2017) perspective on Wynes and Nicholas (2017)). Implementation principles are
R. De Young
return to normal (Greer 2008). In contrast, predicaments have no solution; instead,
they must be endured. Society can respond, but even an effective response does not
eliminate the predicament. A useful response does not alter but rather accommodates the new situation. This is adaptation in a classic sense: to change behaviour
into new forms that better fit a new reality.
If we faced a problem (e.g. emergency, crisis) then we might be advised to
weather the storm until we ‘get back to normal’. However, even a functional
response to a predicament is unlikely to get us back; accommodation is about ‘getting to a new normal’. The new behavioural context is also different in another significant way. Responses will need to be broadly applied across one’s entire behaviour
pattern, then maintained and even expanded throughout a lifetime. Unfortunately,
society has little familiarity with the long-drawn-out behavioural planning and management needed to respond in this way. For while we know behaviours adequate for
addressing short-term challenges to health and well-being, there exists little guidance for behaviour change necessary for addressing a many decade- or century-long
predicament.
13.3.2 Changing Multiple Behaviours
Early conservation research focused on promoting one or a small suite of behaviours (Hamilton et al. 2018). We designed interventions to promote household recycling, mass transit use and water conservation (see, for instance, Geller et al. 1982).
Most early studies focused on either providing information (e.g. environmental education, enhancing procedural knowledge) or motivation (e.g. economic incentives,
token rewards). More recently, the focus has shifted to using social norms (e.g.
injunctive norms, declarative norms) and team-based interventions (e.g. eco-teams).
However, seldom was the focus on promoting clusters of behaviours. Other research
explored not how to promote a specific behaviour, but what we know about people
who already practice conservation behaviours. Research on long-term participants
in environmental stewardship programs report two consistent motivations: the
opportunity to do something meaningful to benefit the environment and the chance
to learn something new (Ryan and Grese 2005; Ryan et al. 2001).
Later, Stern and colleagues made sense out of the huge array of available behaviours by suggesting we concentrate on those with the greatest environmental significance (Gardner and Stern 2002; Stern 2000). This logic prioritised high-impact
behaviours, those with the highest achievable reduction in carbon emissions or
resource consumption. The choice is based not only on a behaviour’s technical
potential (i.e. degree of impact if adopted) but also upon the social scale of its adoption (i.e. realistic adoption rate across an extended time-scale; Stern 2011).
Unfortunately, this approach still easily defaults to the serial adoption of behaviours given the individual costs and efforts involved (e.g. upgrading heating systems, buying fuel-efficient vehicles). If circumstances allow us to be patient then we
benefit from their joint effects over time being significant (see Stern and Wolske’s
(2017) perspective on Wynes and Nicholas (2017)). Implementation principles are
R. De Young