| 1. |
- Karlin, Beth, et al.
(författare)
-
Process matters : Assessing the use of behavioural science methods in applied behavioural programmes
- 2022
-
Ingår i: ECEEE 2022 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency : Agents of Change - Agents of Change. - 1653-7025 .- 2001-7960. - 9789198827002 ; , s. 541-549
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Behavioural science methods have significant potential to help policy makers, practitioners and energy programme managers design, implement and evaluate behavioural campaigns addressing hard-to-reach (HTR) energy users. But when facing budget and logistic constraints, how many real-life programmes actually follow through? How are behavioural science methods actually applied in a real-world setting? This paper presents a scientific process for behaviour change programmes - the “Building Blocks of Behaviour Change” - and analyses 19 case studies from seven countries to see how many are actually utilising these methods in practice. The case studies focus specifically on HTR energy users and the authors also share their perspectives in feasibility and acceptability of utilising such a process in their work. We found that most programmes utilised some behavioural science research methods, but few followed a full scientific “best practice” process. Limitations of this study include selection bias (the case studies for analysis were chosen by country experts), design issues and some missing data in the cases with regards to exact methods employed. But it is the first study of its kind, to our knowledge, that takes a look at the extent of how scientific methods are being applied in the real world with HTR energy users. Based on this comparative analysis of the cases and feedback from the case study authors, we present recommendations on how programmes can continue to realistically integrate best practice methods into their programmes while also meeting budget, competency, and timeline constraints.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mundaca, Luis, et al.
(författare)
-
Hard-to-reach energy users : An ex-post cross-country assessment of behavioural-oriented interventions
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Energy Research and Social Science. - 2214-6296. ; 104
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Hard-to-reach (HTR) energy users encompass individuals who are physically difficult to reach, underserved, or challenging to engage and motivate in demand-side energy programmes. Given a mix of societal challenges (e.g. inequity, energy poverty, decarbonisation, the COVID-19 pandemic), HTR energy users are receiving increasing attention. However, there is a lack of knowledge on the performance of interventions that target (explicitly or implicitly) HTR energy users, particularly from a behaviour change perspective. Our study addresses this knowledge gap, and aims to provide a systematic ex-post comparative cross-country assessment of nineteen case studies, implemented in eight countries. From a methodological point of view, our study explores and tests the usefulness of applying the ‘Building Blocks of Behaviour Change’ (BBBC) in assessing the extent to which interventions employ design and implementation practices that are known to drive behaviour change. Our findings reveal that interventions perform well with respect to the Audience, Behaviour, and Delivery building blocks, but show room for improvement in the Content and Evaluate blocks. Assessing the BBBC framework reveals promising results in terms of credibility, confirmability, transferability, and reliability; however, limitations and uncertainties are also present. Considering the exploratory methodological nature of our study, the results highlight numerous context-specific factors that frame our findings and the suitability of the research approach. We underscore that greater attention must be paid to both the integration of behavioural science methods into HTR interventions, and the systematic analysis of heterogeneity in future HTR-related energy research.
|
|
| 3. |
- Rotmann, Sea, et al.
(författare)
-
To what extent has COVID-19 impacted hard-to-reach energy audiences?
- 2021
-
Ingår i: eceee Summer Study Proceedings. - 9789198387896 ; , s. 355-355
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Energy users who don’t participate in efficiency and conservation programmes despite ongoing outreach are often referred to as ‘Hard-to-Reach’ (HTR). These individuals or organisations can include, e.g., low income or vulnerable households; renters; and small businesses. More effectively engaging HTR audiences is key to ensuring everyone benefits equitably from low-carbon energy transitions and related (policy) interventions. This is even more so the case in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ongoing implications for energy use and affordability for the most vulnerable (and newly-vulnerable) members of our society.Within this context, the main purpose of this paper is to explore the extent to which HTR energy audiences have been impacted by COVID-19. Our primary method for this work was a comprehensive, critical literature review and a compilation of official statistics. We also collected survey, interview and focus group data during 2020 COVID-19 pandemic responses in the U.S., UK, NZ and Sweden. The geographical scope is determined by a 3-year project focusing on HTR energy users and implemented in partnership with the User-Centred Energy Systems Technology Collaboration Programme (Users TCP) by the International Energy Agency (IEA). Key findings we highlight and discuss in this paper:● Sweden has taken a different approach to manage COVID-19, yet when it comes to mobility, declines in demand (~25%) have shown relatively similar patterns to countries with stricter measures. ● In the UK, energy debt is growing due to higher domestic consumption arising from lockdown measures and the reduced income of many households. Most households (72%) have increased their energy (monthly gas and electricity bills are up £32) use. In response, 36% are turning thermostats down and 27% limiting lighting.● In the U.S., a survey of 1,000 energy customers found that more than 50% are using more energy, and monitoring their energy use less; 15% reported postponing a utility bill. ● NZ’s model COVID-19 “elimination” response has included housing, financial support, and specific energy payments to date, though unhealthy and unaffordable housing remains a major issue.Whereas the pandemic has exacerbated several elements of the HTR policy discourse (e.g. impacts on vulnerable and/or low-income households), our findings also reveal several opportunities and critical aspects for policy makers, researchers and utilities to identify and engage HTR energy users.
|
|
