What is your intention?
A study on energy community members’ background factors influencing the
efficiency behaviour
Georgiana van Broekhoven-Harjoghe
Master Thesis February, 2017
Radboud University Nijmegen MA Social and Political Sciences of the Environment
A study on energy community members’ background factors influencing the
efficiency behaviour
Colophon:
Date: February, 2017
Author: Georgiana van Broekhoven-Harjoghe Student number: 4513088
University: Radboud University Nijmegen Faculty: Nijmegen School of Management
Degree: MA Social and Political Sciences of the Environment
Course: Master Thesis
Internal supervisors: Dr. Sietske Veenman, Radboud University Nijmegen Dr. Mark Wiering, Radboud University Nijmegen External supervisor: Nicolle Lambrechts, Provincie Noord Brabant
Societies today are confronted with an enormous challenge as regards the efficient use of energy in the light of climate change, air pollution, etc. In the last years, numerous studies have focused on energy-related behaviour, mainly on individual behavioural change. However, energy communities wield far greater influence and decision-making power regarding long-term energy efficiency projects and their outcomes than do ordinary citizens taking individual actions. Hence, from the environmental psychology perspective, this paper responds to the following exploratory question: To what extent do energy
community members’ behavioural background (contextual and hedonic factors) influence the intention to engage in efficiency behaviour?
In line with the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Goal Framing Theory (GFT), this study focuses on human behaviour, paying attention to two important factors: background and hedonic behavioural factors. The TPB, which is designed to predict and explain human behaviour in a specific context, postulates the idea that behaviour represents an accumulation of factors or beliefs strong enough to determine one’s actions; in other words, people make reasoned choices. The TPB uses attitudes, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control to predict ‘intention’ with relatively high accuracy. The theory assumes that a person’s intention, when combined with perceived behavioural control and background factors, will help to predict behaviour. It is worth noting that the TPB does not consider hedonic factors as a freestanding variable and incorporates them into the attitude toward behaviour; this admission could place a limitation on the study at hand. However, as a result of the participant observation, it could be argued that hedonic factors can play an important role in guiding and shaping efficiency behaviour. Therefore, this will receive some attention when studying the efficiency behaviour of communities in the region of North -Brabant.
The GFT states that goals ’frame’ the way that people process information and act upon it. Moreover, hedonic factors are seen as a driving force behind a person’s behaviour in reaching a goal. The GFT may be interpreted, to a certain extent, as an extension of the TPB regarding goal framing, but with some emphasis on hedonic factors and their relevance to individuals’ attitude. Both the TPB and GFT
collectively contribute value and open up new possibilities for improved analysis of pro-environmental behaviour.
During the study at the NBPG, energy communities and their perceptions of energy efficiency were examined and quantified. Locally, energy communities organise themselves into small cooperatives, with the goal to adopt renewable energy technologies such as solar and wind energy technologies; thus they show a high level of commitment to environmental protection. The study has focused on two Brabant energy communities, namely Energy Community Udenhout and VET Vught, which represent the springboard for future behavioural and environmentally positive changes. Therefore, it is important to understand their behavioural characteristics and motivational scale. Results show that energy
communities tend to become centred on trust in their leader, cooperation and role within the
community, sustainability and life-style issues, as well as affects (affective feelings) for their families and future generations.
First of all, I would like to convey my gratitude to my dissertation supervisors Dr. Sietske Veenman and Dr. Mark Wiering in Radboud University for the many valuable consultations and their patience during this long period. I would also like to extend my thanks to my internship supervisor Mrs. Nicolle
Lambrechts, North Brabant Provincial Government, Energy and Innovation Team, who led me into the interesting field of energy communities and energy transition.
I owe a great debt to my respondents for sharing their time and knowledge with me in order to establish this study. Thank you!
Finally, I would like to thank my husband, Willem, for always supporting my decisions and encouraging me to follow my dreams, and my two lovely children, Willem Jr. and Kyra, for their unconditional love.
Happy reading!
Georgiana van Broekhoven-Harjoghe
Chapter 1 Introduction ... 1
1.1 Introduction ... 1
1.2 The context of the problem... 2
1.3 Research aim and questions ... 3
1.4 Defining energy efficient behaviour ... 4
1.5 Defining the energy community ... 5
1.6 Social and scientific relevance ... 5
Chapter 2 Theoretical framework ... 7
2.1 Introduction ... 7
2.2 Human behaviour and environmental issues ... 7
2.3 Theoretical setting ... 9
2.4 The Theory of Planned Behaviour ... 10
2.5 The Goal-Framing Theory (GFT) ... 11
2.6 The TPB and the GFT: collectively contributed value ... 12
2.7 Altering the TPB ... 13
2.8 Alternative approaches? ... 14
Chapter 3 Research design ... 16
3.1 Methodological approach ... 16
3.1.1 Are you from Venus or from Mars? ... 16
3.1.2 The case study approach ... 17
3.1.3 Case study selection ... 18
3.1.3.1 The first case study: energy community Udenhout ... 22
3.1.3.2 The second case study: energy community Vught ... 22
3.2 Research model ... 22
3.2.1 Background factors ... 23
3.2.1.1 Contextual factors ... 24
3.2.1.2 Hedonic factors... 25
3.2.2 Attitudes toward behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behaviour control ... 26
3.3 Data collection ... 26
3.4 Data analysis ... 30
Chapter 4 The efficiency behavioural portrait ... 31
4.1 Portrait of Energy Community Udenhout ... 31
4.1.1 General information ... 31
4.1.2 Goals and establishment ... 32
4.1.3 Administration and membership ... 33
4.1.4 Contextual factors ... 33
4.1.4.1 Psychological maturity ... 33
4.1.4.1.1 The individual ‘role’ ... 34
4.1.4.1.2 ‘The Cooperative brain’ ... 35
4.1.4.1.3 A short conclusion to psychological maturity ... 35
4.1.4.2 Trust ... 35
4.1.4.2.1 Trust in the leader ... 36
4.1.4.2.2 Trust in the community of Udenhout... 36
4.1.4.2.3 A short conclusion on trust ... 37
4.1.4.3 Social comparison and perceived risks ... 37
4.1.4.3.1 Sustainability ... 38
4.1.4.3.2 Lifestyle ... 38
4.1.4.3.3 A short conclusion on social comparison and perceived risk ... 39
4.1.5 Hedonic factors... 39
4.1.5.1 A short conclusion on hedonic factors ... 40
4.1.6 Attitudes toward behaviour ... 40
4.1.7 Subjective norms ... 41
4.1.8 Perceived behavioural control ... 41
4.1.9 Intention ... 42
4.1.10 A short conclusion on attitudes toward behaviour, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and intention ... 42
4.2 A portrait of Energy Cooperative Vught ... 42
4.2.1 General information ... 43
4.2.2 Goals and establishment ... 43
4.2.4.1.1 The individual ‘role’ ... 45
4.2.4.1.2 ‘The cooperative brain’ ... 46
4.2.4.1.3 A short conclusion on psychological maturity ... 47
4.2.4.2 Trust ... 47
4.2.4.2.1 Trust in the leader ... 47
4.2.4.2.2 Information ... 48
4.2.4.2.3 A short conclusion on trust ... 48
4.2.4.3 Social comparison and perceived risk ... 49
4.2.4.3.1 A short conclusion on social comparison and perceived risk ... 50
4.2.5 Hedonic factors... 50
4.2.5.1 A short conclusion to hedonic factors ... 51
4.2.6 Attitudes toward behaviour ... 51
4.2.7 Subjective norms ... 52
4.2.8 Perceived behavioural control ... 52
4.2.9 Intention ... 53
4.2.10 A short conclusion to attitudes toward behaviour, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and intention. ... 53
Chapter 5 Discussion section ... 54
5.1 Summarising the results ... 54
5.1.1 The first sub-question ... 54
5.1.1.1 E.C. Udenhout ... 55
5.1.1.2 VET Vught ... 57
5.1.2 The second sub-question ... 58
5.1.2.1 E.C. Udenhout ... 59
5.1.2.2 VET Vught ... 59
5.1.3 The main question ... 59
Chapter 6 Conclusion and reflection ... 62
6.1 Summarising the results ... 62
6.2 Reflection... 63
References... 65
TPB Theory of Planned Behaviour
GFT Goal-framing Theory
E.C. Udenhout Energy Community Udenhout VET Vught Vught Energy Transition
NBPG North Brabant Provincial Government
TRA Theory of Reasoned Action
CT-scans Computed Tomography scans
fMRI Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
UTT Unconscious Thought Theory
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1
Introduction
Human behaviour and its relevance in managing and shaping environmental issues has been the subject of many studies over recent decades. Since the early 1960s the interdisciplinary field of environmental psychology has emerged. This recognises the great significance of the physical context of human behaviour (Gifford, 2007). This was an important step in psychology because until then the external influencing factors of human behaviour, such as attitudes, social norms or influence by authorities, had been disregarded. The warning signals sounded by Rachel Carson in her book ‘Silent spring’ (1961), the activists’ movement Greenpeace and the Brundtland Report (1987) were also wakeup calls for
environmental psychologists.
During its first 40 years, environmental psychology developed from a discipline primarily concerned with proximate architecture such as interpersonal relations to one that is also greatly concerned with larger-scale issues such as the promotion of behavioural change and behavioural interventions (Gifford, 2007). Additionally, environmental psychology is concerned with developing frames in which to interpret new behavioural patterns and their effects on social and economic aspects of individuals within the context of sustainable development. A variety of environmental problems, such as global warming, urban air pollution, the efficient use of energy, water shortage, CO2 and environmental noise are rooted in human
behaviour and could be managed by changing the relevant behaviour patterns so as to reduce their environmental impact (Steg & Vlek, 2008).
Sustainable development is currently a contested concept in which renewable energy technology plays an important role, but still requires much research and practical development (Kemp et al., 2007). Considering renewable energy technology as an essential part of our sustainable future, and unlikely to go away (Gifford, 2007), people need to deal with it and to adapt to its challenges. Assuming that people have the motivation and the necessary skills, technology and innovation in the service of energy
efficiency and conservation can certainly contribute to environmental sustainability (Gifford, 2007). Moreover, the demands of achieving a sustainable future are both multiple and complex. Therefore, regional and local authorities, together with the commercial market and civil society, need to achieve an efficient use of energy in the name of sustainable development.
Despite the fact that the Netherlands is known for its path-breaking efforts in renewable energy sources and transition management framework (Laes et al., 2014), the North Brabant Provincial Government (NBPG) as the regional authority claims that there is a lack of public support for making the energy transition shorter and more durable. Moreover, the NBPG also claims there is a need to understand on what particular grounds the Brabant energy communities emerge and their ways of framing solar and wind renewable energy through behavioural changes. In essence, the NBPG have so far developed plans and strategies for encouraging energy-related behaviour. Indeed, the provincial target is a high one for the period between 2010 – 2020 and 2050, and an expeditious pace in executing renewable energy projects is preferable.
It is worth noting that for a complex process such as sustainable development and its management, individual human behaviour plays the key role. The assumption that people make judgements based not
only on the market information but also on their feelings (Greifeneder et al. 2011) can change the transition toward an efficient usage of energy. People are also capable of making decisions based not only on reason, but also on mood, emotions or beliefs.
When considering human behaviour as the element that either helps or hinders the environment, it becomes apparent that studies are necessary in order to determine the time scale for completing long- term energy projects.
1.2
The context of the problem
The NBPG is responsible for the Energy Agenda for the period 2010-2020. This represents a call for the unification of all the residents of Brabant, especially those who feel responsible for their actions and impact on the environment. Creating and supporting social networks seem to be, more than ever before, the basis for future behavioural and environmentally positive change.
This study has been undertaken in collaboration with the NBPG, which asserts that energy transition can be the driver behind successful long-term sustainable energy projects and economic and innovation opportunities within the region of North Brabant. Moreover, the NBPG at its intermediate level, and at the behest of European and local authorities, aims to change the present state of pro-environmental action in North Brabant to an accelerated implementation of climate objectives, thus creating a strong network around energy projects and energy cooperatives.
Moreover, the NBPG intends to empower individuals regarding long-term energy projects. The purpose is for people to seek out for themselves renewable energy sources suitable for their personal situations, to generate their own energy and to store it. In the context of energy transition and renewable energy technologies, the NBPG, through the Energy Agenda, has two objectives: energy efficiency and climate neutral organisations within the region of Brabant. Such targets demand that renewable wind and solar energy technologies be acknowledged on a large scale and that people accept these as standard energy sources and not merely as substitutes.
The number of cooperatives in North Brabant has been growing since 2010, reaching 941 in 2016, of which 33 are energy cooperatives (de Kuyper & Smulders, 2016, table 1). Considering their
professionalism and their social targets, these 33 energy cooperatives represent the springboard for change toward more energy-related behaviour within the province of North Brabant.
In the European context, the European Directive 2009/28 EC states that EU countries need to reach a 20% target for the overall share of energy renewable sources by 2020, and thus rational and sustainable investments are required in the renewable sector. In the context of European Directive 2009/28 EC and its challenges, the Netherlands is known for its pioneering role in launching the transition management framework toward energy renewables sources (Laes et al. 2014). The NBPG contributes to this goal and acknowledges that the Netherlands leads mainly in the conceptualization of the transition management framework rather than in renewable energy technologies and their public acceptance. The NBPG sees renewable energy sources as new opportunities to improve or even change the quality of life of individuals, and as the first steps toward social cohesion. Additionally, renewable energy sources could mean affordable and reliable energy sources, for both the citizens of Brabant as well as for
KvK sector 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
totaal 2015
01 Landbouw- en tuinbouw 1 0 0 0 1 0 17
02 Energie, water en milieu 0 0 5 8 10 6 33
03 Industrie 0 1 1 4 3 0 27 04 Bouw 3 3 1 6 4 0 27 05 Detailhandel 1 1 3 3 3 3 22 06 Groothandel 2 2 5 3 3 4 43 07 Logistiek 0 0 2 1 0 0 7 08 Horeca 0 0 1 1 0 0 7 09 ICT en Media 4 4 4 6 3 7 30 10 Cultuur, sport en recreatie 1 0 1 1 1 2 11 11 Gezondheid 7 1 8 7 24 14 73 12 Financiële instellingen 13 18 17 14 17 14 251 13 Zakelijke diensten 9 18 20 29 25 23 166 14 Overige 11 24 18 40 48 27 227 Eindtotaal 52 72 86 123 142 100 941
Table 1. Number of registered cooperatives in Brabant at December 31st, 2015 (Kuyper, H. & Smulders, M., 2016. Stand van zaken 2016. PON, Nederland)
Moving toward a sustainable future consistent with empowering people, as required by the NBPG Energy Agenda, depends upon how individuals comply with renewable energy technologies. In order to understand how compliance can be created and supported, the NBPG would like to formulate plans and to understand the driving forces behind the behaviour of members of Brabant’s energy cooperative by means of behavioural and motivational studies.
1.3
Research aim and questions
In this study, attention will be drawn to efficiency measures and behaviour change in the context of usage of renewable energy technologies such as wind and solar energy as a key tool in the fight against environmental issues such as climate change and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels. Moreover, the use of wind and solar energy technologies incorporates a broader set of benefits that go beyond climate change, such as lowering household energy bills, increasing comfort, reducing local air pollutants, etc. (Stavins, 2013).
NBPG acknowledges renewable energy sources as new chances to improve or even to change the quality of life of individuals in the region of North Brabant and as the first steps toward social cohesion. Also, and in the light of sustainability, renewable wind and solar energy sources could mean affordable and reliable energy sources, for both Brabant citizens and entrepreneurs.
To get a better understanding of energy community members’ behaviour, their perceptions on energy efficiency and their motivation, it is important to discover more about how their backgrounds have
contributed to influencing this behaviour. In order to gather this knowledge, the research goal is the following:
This research aims to help NBPG to get more insight into the contextual and hedonic behavioural background factors within the Brabant energy communities in the context of efficiency behaviour and of reaching the targets of Provincial Energy Agenda 2010-2050.
Considering the research goal, the main research question is:
To what extent do energy community members’ behavioural backgrounds (contextual and hedonic factors) influence the intention to engage in energy efficiency behaviour? In order to answer the main research question, two sub-questions are derived from it:
To what extent do energy community members’ backgrounds (contextual and hedonic factors) influence the attitude toward behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control, which are considered to be the antecedents of the intention to engage in energy efficiency behaviour?
To what extent can the attitude toward energy efficient behaviour, social norms and perceived behavioural control lead to the formation of the intention to engage in energy efficiency behaviour?
1.4
Defining energy efficient behaviour
In environmental psychology, energy-related behaviour is the label used for efficiency behaviour (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Efficiency behaviour is characterized by the use of new technologies closely related to energy efficiency, such as switching from a traditional fuel car to an electric one, or from an old heating device to a more efficient domestic central heating system (Steg & Vlek, 2009). As this type of behaviour requires investments that in the longer term can save costs, efficiency behaviour can be limited by individuals’ economic possibilities (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Moreover, efficiency behaviour is quite effective in reducing environmental impact (Steg & Vlek, 2009). Steg and Vlek’s (2009) definition of efficiency behaviour is not unique; other scholars have also investigated this subject.
Regarding human behaviour and energy use, Oikonomou et al. (2009) refer to two types of energy-related behaviour, namely efficiency and energy-saving behaviour. Additionally, Oikonomou et al. (2009) highlight that efficiency behaviour is related to specific technologies that reduce overall energy
consumption and produce a wide range of impact on one’s behaviour, while energy-saving behaviour is correlated with the conservation of energy. Energy-saving behaviour is also known as energy
conservation behaviour.
Noting that efficiency behaviour does not have a well-established definition, it was necessary to look for studies that might provide clarification on efficiency and conservation behaviour. Despite the fact that efficiency behaviour through the efficient usage of energy is related to energy-saving behaviour, the changes in behaviour are more radical in the case of the latter than in the former context. Moreover, the rational and hedonic factors, which are the antecedents of one’s behavioural changes used in this study, are applicable to efficiency behaviour, whereas energy conservation behaviour is directed toward
consumers’ sustainable behaviour based on rationality only (Ibtissem, 2010). The awareness of the danger of using up certain exhaustible resources, notably water, and the side effects of the excessive consumption of other resources such as fossilised energies, was at the origin of calls for conservation behaviour (Ibtissem, 2010). It is worth noting that efficiency behaviour in this study is analysed in the context of individuals as members of an energy community, and not as consumers, as in the case of conservation behaviour.
Equally important is that efficiency behaviour implies behavioural biases, such as affective feelings, while energy-saving measures only call for rationality; individuals are expected to act rationally when
implementing them. However, Tversky and Kahneman (1974) argue that individuals are not always rational; it is inherent in our cognitive architecture. Therefore, a range of background factors are taken into account when analysing efficiency behaviour.
1.5
Defining the energy community
The fact that individual actions are not the solution for improving and propagating pro-environmental behaviour and an efficient usage of energy anymore has led European and regional environmental politics to focus on the groups of individuals who share the same ideals about the environment. Thus community members need to speed up the environmental struggle.
For this study ‘energy community’ is defined as those groups of individuals involved in energy projects, that cooperate on wind and solar energy technologies, manifesting a high level of control, and deals with the efficient use of energy, as well as benefitting collectively from the outcome (Avelino et al., 2014). An energy community should also provide the launching framework for future sustainable actions in its region and influence, through different sustainable initiatives, its social surroundings.
1.6
Social and scientific relevance
The interaction between individuals and the environment has been debated for decades. Yet information on human behaviour is still needed in order to deal with sustainability and energy transition issues. In the face of a growing need for renewable energy, this study aims to contribute to the existing body of knowledge by taking a closer look at community members’ efficiency behaviour; the motivational core of communities that invest in solar and wind energy technologies in the region of North Brabant. In
addition, the results of this study could shed more light onto what efficiency behaviour means, and clarify some information that could overlap with another type of energy-related behaviour, namely conservation behaviour.
As shown in the NBPG Energy agenda, energy-related behaviour in the context of energy transition needs public support, not only for a smooth implementation of environmental requirements, but also for creating a stronger bond between people and their surroundings. More than ever, community members’ solidarity within an energy community is seen as the spark needed for future major changes in the energy transition. For this reason, Rauschmayer (2014) argues that energy communities can be seen as the way to transform a society.
There is a considerable body of work on human behaviour and energy efficiency issues, but specific information on efficiency behaviour and its prominence in environmental issues is not plentiful.
The relevance of this study lies in the fact that it stresses the importance of community and collaboration on solar and wind energy projects, and the position of behavioural background factors in energy
community members’ decision-making processes. As a result, for both policy and community members, more effective ways of understanding and analysing behavioural beliefs and efficiency behaviour may yet emerge.
Fehr and Fischbacher (2003) argue that human societies represent a major anomaly in the animal world, since individuals cooperate with genetically unrelated members in large networks. This is very common in our society where individuals not related genetically collaborate and frame common goals. This is the case of energy communities in North Brabant, where unrelated individuals share beliefs on
environmental issues, and use and promote the production of renewable energy, namely solar and wind energy. They also increase the standard of living in their region and promote social cohesion.
The result of this study will be made available to the NBPG, which is an adapter of innovative policy instruments for accelerating behavioural changes and energy transition. Moreover, the participants of this study will be informed of the findings, and could help to raise awareness of the efficient use of energy, of the role of renewables and to provide empirical information about efficiency behaviour. As the energy challenge of the twenty-first century begins with energy transition (Bridge et al., 2012) a factor that still needs to be addressed and evaluated, scientific activities on efficiency behaviour are required in order to understand people’s behaviour through the transition period, their goals, capacities and limitations.
Furthermore, studying efficiency behaviour through the lens of Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour and Lindenberg and Steg’s Goal-Framing Theory has been done very few times. The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) brought to light results more oriented toward consumers’ health behaviour and pro-environmental behaviour in general, but not, to the author’s knowledge, on energy-related and
efficiency behaviour. Goal-Framing Theory was also created in order to analyse behaviour and its impact on environmental issues, but that theory was not tested on efficiency behaviour. The findings of this study can be considered a brave attempt, yet weak in environmental psychology.
Chapter 2 Theoretical framework
2.1
Introduction
To be able to make a complete analysis of the efficiency behaviour of the members of North Brabant energy communities and their perspectives on renewable energy technology, great attention was given to the theoretical side of this study. This chapter consists of a short literature review on human
behaviour and its role in environmental issues in general. It also includes existing definitions of efficiency behaviour and energy communities, as well as explanatory notes on the TPB of Ajzen (1991) and the Goal-Framing Theory of Lindenberg and Steg (2007) and their collective value.
To choose the appropriate theories of environmental psychology was not easy, as the topic is still in its early stages of development and environmental psychologists are busy defining and investigating human behaviour in relation to the environment. Gifford (2002) stated that “the field is so young compared with biology and physics that it can be forgiven for not yet having spawned its own Darwin or Einstein”.
2.2
Human behaviour and environmental issues
On the subject of the influencing factors on individuals’ behaviour (particularly background factors) Linda Steg and Charles Vlek (2009) in their article “Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda” provide a review of the existing literature on environmental psychology and its role in pro-environmental behaviour. Steg and Vlek (2009) state in their study that environmental behaviour can be determined by motivational, contextual factors and by habitual behaviour. More importantly, they argue that there are scholars, such as Guagnano et al., (1995), Heath & Gifford (2002) and Stern et al. (1993, 1995) who have integrated concepts and variables from different theoretical frameworks, showing that behaviour results from multiple motivations.
In other studies on pro-environmental behaviour it was noticed that environmental psychology is associated with sustainable development. “Psychology of Sustainable Development” by Peter Schmuck and P. Westley Schultz (2002) deals with sustainable and non-sustainable behaviour and aims to provide psychological perspectives on why the human impact on the environment has become so severe. The authors believe that environmental psychologists need to study behaviours that significantly affect environmental quality, and that they need the capacity to develop frames for potentially new behavioural patterns and their effects.
Focusing on the reasons for individual differences in sustainable behaviour, Schultz presents a model for “inclusion with nature”. It is worth noting that this model describes how the inclusion of nature in the concept of self might lead to greater degrees of commitment to environmental protection (Schmuck & Schultz, 2002) and includes cognitive, affective and behavioural components. Schultz and Schmuck (2002) strongly believe that we all are part of the natural environment, and yet we seem to try all our lives to escape from nature.
Another relevant illustration of behaviour-sustainable development is given by Robert Gifford. In his article “Environmental Psychology and Sustainable Development: Expansion, Maturation and Challenges” Gifford (2007) sees new technology as an integrated part of our pro-environmental
behaviour. Since technology is very unlikely to go away (Gifford, 2007) people need to deal with it and to adapt to its challenges. This adaptation will also bring changes to their core beliefs and behaviour. Assuming that people have the motivation and the necessary skills, technology in the service of energy conservation, for example, can certainly contribute to environmental sustainability (Gifford, 2007). Regarding energy efficiency and pro-environmental behaviour, Ellen van Buren (2012) noticed that small changes in government policies encourage people to accept solar panels as a sustainable alternative to traditional energy suppliers. Subsidies can be considered as just one government method of motivating citizens to act pro-environmentally and to accept, and install, solar panels. Yet if subsidies or other fiscal incentive policies (e.g., VAT refunds) are seen as a reward (Kong, Lu & Wu, 2012), then according to Steg and Vlek (2009), rewards tend to have short-term effects only; in fact, only for as long as the reward is in place. Although this may be true, future research should explore the question of under which conditions rewards and/or penalties are effective, or when a combination of rewards and penalties is warranted (Steg & Vlek, 2009).
While searching for more specific studies on energy efficiency and pro-environmental behaviour I came across an interesting piece of qualitative research into 35 United States households on green lifestyles. Citizens involved in this experiment had made significant changes to their homes and lifestyles in order to be more environmentally responsible, and Woodruff et al. (2008) wanted to describe the motivations, practices and experiences of committed green individuals. In their study Woodruff et al. (2008) pay particular attention to personal background factors and core beliefs.
A highly diverse set of participants took part in this experiment and various motivations were discovered. One especially positive attitude toward their green home concerned respect for our planet, and
cultivating the desire to protect it. Many even considered themselves ‘stewards of the Earth’. The motivation for this belief has a quasi-religious aspect: environmental adaptation as a form of religious duty. Ethical responsibility is another factor that shapes belief in pro-environmental behaviour. This group of participants also identify themselves with other values such as health, social justice, personal development, responsibility for future generations and a desire to create a healthy physical environment for their children (Woodruff et al., 2008).
Motivations such as frugality, minimalism or “a new form of patriotism” (Woodruff et al., 2008) also play an important role in shaping beliefs. Through frugality many people want to promote new ways of living, incorporating a ‘do-it-yourself’ approach, or finding ingenious and practical methods of fulfilling the needs of daily living, to the detriment of mass production and consumerism. The new form of patriotism discovered in this experiment is expressed in the form of growing aversion toward dependence on foreign oil, which frequently leads to a focus on alternative energy (Woodruff et al., 2008).
It is important to mention that since this experiment was performed in USA, the participants were expected to share experiences, motivations and beliefs based on their American background, culture and civilization. An experiment such as this undertaken in any other European country might bring out quite different motivational factors.
2.3
Theoretical setting
This aim of this section is to provide some clarity to the choices of the theories. There are a number of conditions that theories must meet in order to form the rationale of this study, so that a fruitful basis for the analysis and the results can be attained.
First of all, since the field of environmental psychology is still new, a theory that has been previously applied to studies on human behaviour patterns was required. This would bring a measure of stability to this study; in a field in which environmental psychologists are still working with great caution. Moreover, the theory should stress the importance of human behaviour in relation to the environment, to
economic, social and personal dynamics, and should also embrace rationality. However, considering motivational factors as diversion factors for a specific behaviour, in this case efficiency behaviour, the theory most suitable also needed the potential to analyse the inevitable biases that occur in the behaviour. Equally important in selecting the theories was the possibility of an in-depth analysis of the behavioural background factors, which could be the root for behavioural changes, as well as the motivation for engaging in efficiency behaviour.
Considering the above arguments, the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TBP) (Ajzen, 1991) and the Goal-Framing Theory (GFT) were selected for the theoretical setting of this study.
Concerning the prospect that ‘there is nothing more practical than a good theory’ (Lewin, 1952), the TPB provides new ideas for understanding and conceptualising a situation, ideas which might provide new ways of dealing with the cross-overs between its psychological concepts. With this in mind, the TPB offers the chance to new researchers to focus on explaining how behavioural changes lead to efficiency behaviour. Regarding efficiency behaviour, the TPB takes as granted that people make planned, rational decisions and that behavioural changes are motivated by self-interest, in terms of social comparison and perceived risks (Oikonomou et al. 2009).
The second theoretical pillar, the Goal-Framing Theory, promotes new perspectives of analysing pro-environmental communities by stipulating a set of norms and values in relation to behaviour. One important element of this theory consists of the hedonistic goal-frame, which is considered to play an important role in maintaining the motivational behavioural pattern at a high level. Additionally, even if Goal-Framing Theory was elaborated for research on environmental issues that are strongly related to motivational factors, this theory has not been widely used. Applying GFT in the context of a complex analysis of efficiency behaviour represents a challenge; however, it provides substantial support to examining hedonic factors, and can open new ways of understanding human behaviour that is strongly related to environmental matters.
2.4
The Theory of Planned Behaviour
The TPB is one of the grand theories in terms of human behaviour and represents the starting point of various studies in the field of environmental psychology. Moreover, the TPB is designed to predict and explain human behaviour in a specific context. Numerous examples demonstrate the effectiveness of TPB: household recycling (Kaiser & Gutscher, 2003), the purchasing of energy-saving bulbs (Harland et al., 1999) and pro-environmental behaviour in general (Kaiser et al., 1999).
The first step toward the TPB was made in the 80s, when Ajzen and Fishbein phrased the Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA). Ajzen and Fishbein’s work was mainly focused on attitude issues, and the TRA argued that behavioural beliefs derived from attitudes toward behaviour and subjective norms, whereas behaviour is founded on rationality and volunteering.
Due to Ajzen’s prolonged research on human behaviour, it was noticed that individuals’ behaviour is not always voluntary and under control as predicted by the TRA, but deeply influenced by their perception of their own behaviour. For this reason, a new concept emerged, namely perceived behavioural control, which represents the commencement of Ajzen’s work on TPB.
The TPB postulates the ideas that human behaviour represents an accumulation of factors and beliefs strong enough to determine actions, and that individuals make reasoned choices (Ajzen, 1991). As a matter of fact, TPB argues that human behaviour is based on rationality. This is an important aspect of the TPB in this study, as its second theoretical pillar, the GFT, argues that individuals’ behaviour can be altered by hedonic factors, and therefore is not always rational or reasoned.
According to Ajzen (1991), the TPB centres on human behaviour from the perspective of behavioural beliefs, attitudes toward behaviour, subjective norms, and perceived control of the intention to behave in a specific way. Behavioural beliefs are considered to relate to the probability of a certain behaviour and the evaluation of its consequences, while attitude toward behaviour analyses the degree to which a person evaluates the benefits and constraints of his/her own performance. Ajzen (1991) argues that the analysis of one’s own performance can influence one’s behaviour; the more one reflects on possible actions, the more one can influence the actual performance in a negative or positive way. Using subjective norms, the TPB analyses behaviour in the social context, and how individuals would behave within a community with its own evaluation system. Since individuals’ affiliation to a community represents a basic aspect of being human (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2003), a self-analysis within the social context is not excluded and thus the interpretation of ‘important others’ is strongly influential in desirable behaviour.
The attitude toward behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control are psychological aspects and the antecedents of behavioural intention. Ajzen acknowledges that intention is subject to boundary conditions, such as the relationship of attitude toward behaviour, subjective norms and perceived behavioural control and intention, or relationship of intention and behaviour, such as the timing of measuring behaviour and volitional control (Kiriakidis, 2015). Moreover, information could play a role in determining one’s intention. However, Ajzen (2006) argues that although information in the form of behaviour-relevant beliefs is a central component of the theory, whether that information is correct or incorrect is immaterial. What matters is whether the information works for or against the behaviour.
Equally important for predicting behaviour are the background factors, i.e. contextual factors such as personality traits, social comparison and perceived risk, social factors such as education, age, gender, income, religion and culture, and external factors such as knowledge, media and intervention. As major determinants of behaviour (Ajzen, 2005) the TPB distinguishes between three types of background factors: personal, social and information related. Individuals have the capacity to act and react differently according to their basic behavioural characteristics, e.g. general attitude, personality traits, age, gender or income, and even more based on knowledge or experience. Ajzen (2005) explores the background factors as components of attitude toward behaviour, but he does not deny their direct influence on behaviour. He integrates some personal factors such as mood and emotions into
individuals’ attitude toward behaviour; therefore, there is no need for a separate analysis of background factors. This could have been a limitation for this study. Considering behaviour an observable response in a certain situation, Ajzen (2005) suggests that whether a given belief is affected by a particular
background factor or not is more of an empirical question. Complementary research on the TPB could investigate what types of background factors have a relevant influence on individuals’ behaviour. Moreover, the TPB argues that the effects produced by background factors on behavioural beliefs are the result of practical experience and observation, rather than a specific theory (Ajzen, 2006). In other words, each new study on background factors and on their relevance is welcome and adds value to the TPB. Although Ajzen (1980) recognises the importance of background factors such as emotions, mood or effected-related constructs in shaping one’s behaviour, he prefers to consider them external variables in order not to weaken the theory and to claim other variables for different behavioural domains (Ajzen & Fischbein, 1980). Thus, each researcher has the freedom to choose which components of behavioural domain are most suited for his/her research and to analyse their influence on individuals’ set of beliefs.
2.5
The Goal-Framing Theory (GFT)
The GFT of Lindenberg and Steg (2007) represents the second theoretical pillar of this study.
According to this theory, multiple motivations play a role in achieving a goal. With multiple motivations, Lindenberg and Steg refer to a sum of factors such as emotions, rules and resources which drive
individuals to engage in a specific behaviour in order to reach their goals.
The theory postulates that goals govern or ‘frame’ the way people process information and act upon it (Steg & Vlek, 2010). In fact, the GFT is to a degree built on the concepts of the Rational Choice Theory (RCT), according to which individuals’ behaviour is goal-oriented (Etienne, 2010). Another principle developed by the GFT is that of individuals having the capacity to anticipate and evaluate the
consequences of their behaviour and at the same time to choose a perspective that is the most likely to happen and satisfy their needs (Etienne, 2010). Furthermore, the GFT takes an important step in studying the processes of thought and acknowledges the connection between motivational factors and intentions.
Even if the GFT has its roots in the Rational Choice Theory, which states that individuals are rational persons and act driven by their rationality, it analyses individuals and their behaviour through the lens of hedonic motivation such as affective feelings. Thus engaging in a behaviour might have a reason, but
may not always be rational. In other words, reality is socially constructed (Bergen & Luckman, 1967) and individuals are able to form goals and act emotionally, i.e. in a context.
GFT deals with three general goal-frames: a hedonistic goal-frame ‘to feel better’, a gain-goal-frame ‘to guard and improve one’s resources’ and a normative goal-frame ‘to act appropriately’ (Steg & Vlek, 2008).
The hedonistic goal-frame is considered to be the strongest, and the one that plays an important role in maintaining the motivational pattern at a high level, exploring individuals as emotional human beings. Although multiple motivation and hedonic factors require more research, Lindenberg and Steg argue that motives such as (dis)pleasure and (lack of) stimulation are strongly connected with feelings of wellbeing (Etienne, 2010) and therefore affect the perception of (subsequent) behaviour and the way of framing an individual goal.
Attention in this study will be directed toward the hedonistic goal-frame, as emotions can become a strong regulator of human beings’ actions and can shape the way in which motives for behaviour are shaped.
2.6
The TPB and the GFT: collectively contributed value
In this study, the TPB and the GFT are regarded as a melange of concepts that provide the right support for investigating efficiency behaviour. While both theories are dealing with human behaviour and the importance of multiple motivations, the predictive validity of the TPB could be increased by considering key elements of the GFT (Abraham & Sheeran, 2003). Consistent with this idea, prior studies
demonstrate that the way in which goals are framed influences actions. Moreover, the increased significance of intentions is debatable, as the TPB proposes three psychological concepts: the attitudes toward behaviour, the subjective norms and the perceived control behaviour, without taking into account the role of longer-term goals in directing and making sense of everyday actions (Abraham & Sheeran, 2003). Focusing on the role of framing in achieving one’s goals, GFT might help researches to better understand the strength of attitudes, subjective norms and perceived controlled behaviour when predicting behaviour.
As individuals have multiple goals that are related to each other, reaching one single goal will not predict any regular behaviour. In other words, when referring to efficiency behaviour, the researcher has to keep in mind that the way individuals frame their idea of being environmentally friendly and supporting energy efficiency is part of a master goal, with a hierarchy of priorities. For example, individuals may choose to reduce their impact on the environment and prefer renewable energy technology to fossil fuel, while in fact their goal is to secure a return on investments. Thus the consideration that behaviour is closely related to goal-framing can have a considerable impact on the TPB and on the way behaviour is interpreted (Abraham & Sheeran, 2003).
A key aspect presented in both theories is hedonic motivation. While the TPB sees hedonic factors as external variables, the GFT introduces them as the main activator of hedonistic goal-framing. It is worth noting that TPB does not consider hedonic motivations as a freestanding variable, and incorporates them into behavioural beliefs and attitude; this admission could place a limitation on the study on hand. This is
where the GFT restores the balance in analysing hedonic factors and admits their importance when framing goals and triggering intentions. Within a hedonic goal-frame individuals would be expected to show efficiency behaviour due to a state of good.
It is important to realize that the TPB’s main assumption is that people mostly do what they intend to do; they are generally rational and their thinking is sound (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). But thinking that is not sound is usually caused by emotions such as fear, affection or hatred (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). So the GFT might to a certain extent be interpreted as an extension of the TPB regarding goal-framing, but with some emphasis on hedonic motivations and their relevance to attitudes and planned behaviour. Both the TPB and GFT collectively contribute value and open up new possibilities for improved analysis of pro-environmental behaviour.
2.7
Altering the TPB
Basing the theoretical framework of this study on the TPB and the GFT is well suited to analyse human behaviour, however, taking into account that this study focuses on a series of factors that articulate efficiency behaviour, both theoriesonly provide limited resources to examine this kind of behaviour. The collectively value of the TPB and the GFT consists of offering more possibilities to tackle efficiency behaviour.
Apparently the TPB is a theory that has all the ingredients necessary for a successful analysis of human behaviour. At least this is what has been shown in the previous studies based on TPB, such as: AIDS-related risk taking behaviour, charitable giving, controlled burning, coupon usage, drug and alcohol abuse, fast food consumption, moral behaviour, smoking cessation, violence control and women’s career issues (Ajzen, 2004). Absurdly, in the context of the TPB, the behaviours just mentioned would be
exhibited by individuals who behave rationally. However, one can argue that when discussing fast food consumption or charitable behaviour, individuals might be rational to a degree, in that they may decide upon the respective behaviour while taking pros and cons into account. But even so, individuals are integrated part of social dynamics that affect their way of thinking and daily activities to a lesser or greater extent. E.g. contextual or hedonic factors may influence individuals’ activities or behaviour. Hence, to consider that individuals only behave in a specific way because of rational considerations might help in simplifying the theory and its applicability, but not in finding the real cause of the respective behaviour.
Ajzen (1980) admits that the TPB does not rely on external variables that might influence individuals’ rationality, such as emotions or affect-related constructs, and he argues that this in itself strengthens the theory. To rely on emotions and feelings would weaken the theory; moreover, it would destroy the “simplicity” for which the TPB is famous (Reynolds, 1971). Still, Ajzen does not deny the presence of feelings in decisions related to behaviour, and he assumes that elements like mood and emotions are integrated parts of the attitude toward behaviour and might play a role there. On the subject as to how they might have an impact on attitude toward behaviour Ajzen mentions very few details; therefore, he leaves room for interpretation. However, this study can establish the fact that human behaviour is not always rational, and that behind each kind of behaviour there is a set of factors that rule it.
Taking into consideration that Ajzen defines the TPB as a simple but strong theory by giving no credit to hedonic factors such as affective feelings and mood and their impact on individuals’ decisions to behave in a specific way, defining efficiency behaviour as being the result of contextual and hedonic factors turned out to be a challenge. This because in this piece of research individuals’ behaviour is analysed from the perspective of environmental psychology, a new multidisciplinary field that still needs to spot its Darwin or Einstein (Gifford, 2007) and for which theories need to be adapted or (re)designed. For this reason, the TPB was altered by giving the contextual and hedonic factors their place as the articulators of behavioural beliefs, making it suitable for investigating efficiency behaviour.
Moreover, studies have tested the efficacy of the TPB by introducing external variables such as moral values and emotions. However, introducing external variables without another theoretical pillar to support their analysis has diluted the strength of the TPB (Knabe, 2009). For instance, Boyd and
Wandersman (1991) investigated moral values and behavioural beliefs and attitudes toward behaviour in condom use; they altered the TPB and discovered that mood and contextual factors shape the moral norms that influence the use of condoms, however there were difficulties in operationalising the external variable.
A number of studies have criticized the TBP for ignoring emotional determinants of behaviour (Conner & Armitage, 1998; Gibbons et al. 1998; van der Pligt & de Vries, 1998). The criticism is directed toward the TPB assumption that behaviour is always rational. Ajzen (2002) argues that emotions are considered background variables in the TPB and would be expected to influence intentions and behaviour through their impact on beliefs and attitude.
This study of efficiency behaviour admits the relevance of affective feelings in shaping behavioural beliefs, but at the same time does not underestimate the rational thinking of human beings.
The TPB does not offer possibilities to analyse the hedonic factors. Therefore, another theory should offer support in framing and analysing those factors. This is the GFT, which offers support in order to analyse affective feelings as background factors of efficiency behaviour by introducing the hedonistic goal-frame, a frame that states that hedonic factors play an important role in maintaining the motivational pattern at a high level, exploring individuals as emotional human beings.
While the GFT looks promising in the context of examining human behaviour and environmental issues, the TPB is a theory that is well-supported with empirical evidence, and it was used in more than 1,000 published studies in the last decade.
2.8
Alternative approaches?
Recent developments in theories on human behaviour and its impact on the environment are more targeted to an approach by social psychology and neuroscience. This kind of perspective could have provided a pallet of theoretical frameworks for this study as well, but very few would have fitted into the field of social sciences. Furthermore, the principles that would have guided this study and the techniques or processes that were used for data collection would have been different, namely self-reported scales and experiments based on brain scanning such as Computed Tomography scans (CT-scans) or Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI).
One of these theories would have been the Unconscious Thought Theory (UTT) by Dijksterhuis and Nordgren (2010). The theory is applicable to decision-making, impression formation, attitude formation and change, as well as problem solving and creativity. It distinguishes between two modes of thought: unconscious and conscious. Unconscious thought and conscious thought have different characteristics, and these different characteristics make each mode preferable under different circumstances. For instance, contrary to popular beliefs, decisions about simple issues can be better tackled by conscious thought, whereas decisions about complex matters can be better approached with unconscious thought (Dijksterhuis and Nordgren, 2010).
The UTT applied within environmental issues can reveal information about individuals’ decision-making process and the capacity to form expectancies, both of which influence individuals’ acceptance of renewable energy technology and efficiency behaviour. Also, using this theory, better ways can be found for governmental authorities to address environmental issues to the public and to transmit the right information to the right place and at the right time.
In a much broader spectrum, the UTT could have been used in conjunction with the TPB to form the theoretical setting of this study, as both theories focus on explaining various types of (environmental) behaviour, including attitudes, contextual factors and behavioural beliefs.
However, as this study is performed under the aegis of social science of the environment and not psychology, experiments such as CT-scans or fMRI would have an ambiguous position. Moreover, the purpose of this study is not to investigate individuals’ mental state or the pathological side of behaviour; this study focuses on how efficiency behaviour might affect the sustainable development and energy transition in the region of North Brabant. In addition, the experiments could cost both time and money, should be implemented under strict supervision, using manipulation and controlled testing to
understand causal processes, and previous arrangements must have been made with the NBPG. With the possible exception of social psychology, which is not the subject of this analysis, there are few examples of strictly experimental studies. Experimental research is commonly used in sciences such as sociology and psychology, physics, chemistry, biology and medicine.
Chapter 3 Research design
To answer the research question, “To what extent do energy community members’ behavioural
backgrounds (contextual and hedonic factors) influence the intention to engage in efficiency behaviour?” this study aims for additional insight into how efficiency behaviour occurs and its impact on energy community members’ intentions. This study means continuity in creating scientific evidence on the subject of energy-related behaviour, which is the label used for efficiency behaviour (Steg & Vlek, 2009), and for which, in order to understand deeper motives, desires and attitudes that characterise human behaviour under specific conditions, a qualitative approach is recommended. Moreover, this study seeks to e.g. find new methods of investigating human behaviour and environmental issues. Consequently, this study will explore GFT and TPB with qualitative research, a method which is not common (Renzi & Klobas, 2008).
This chapter will first explore the most suitable methodological approach, after which the conceptual model will be presented, together with its operationalisation, in order to convert the concepts into more tangible elements and to link them with the research question.
3.1
Methodological approach
To best explain the research methodology chosen to answer the research question, a short discussion is necessary. The choice of methodology should not be based on the researcher’s preferences for a given method or his/her understanding of the world, but on the preoccupation to address important questions concerning the nature of truth, certainty and objectivity in a given project (Moses & Knutsen, 2007). The first subsection elaborates on the philosophical viewpoint about the nature of knowledge, followed by the second subsection that examines some scholars’ work on efficiency and energy-related behaviour. The final subsection focuses on the case study approach and its relevance to this study.
3.1.1 Are you from Venus or from Mars?
There will always be more ways of investigating the truth about the real world, what matters is which perspective is adopted. In Gary Thomas’ book “How to do your research project” (2013) the author describes the methodological approaches using the question “What planet are you on?”. This funny, but meaningful question is explained by using two anecdotes.
“On Mars everyone counts everything and talks in numbers, but on Venus they don’t know what numbers are and they just talk to each other non-stop, everyone always asking each other about how they are and how they feel: How are you? What do you mean by that? Really? Tell me more. In fact, the Martians have a joke about Venusians: How many Venusians does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: 19 – one to change the bulb and 18 to share the experience. And the Venusians have a joke about the Martians: How many Martians does it take to change a light bulb? Answer: 0.83 plus or minus 0.4 depending on the mean palm size of the Martian cohort”.
As quite clearly exposed by Thomas (2013), there are two categories of researchers with two different ways of creating knowledge: Martians and the naturalism approach, and Venusians and the
constructivism approach.
According to naturalism, there is a real world out there that is independent of our senses. Moreover, naturalists assume that the real world exists whether human beings are there to observe it or not, and the truth is identified only when what it says corresponds to reality (Moses & Knutsen, 2007). Still, the question “what is reality” arises. Constructivists strongly believe that reality is socially constructed, and that each of us has the capacity to construct his/her own meaning about the world through his/her own senses. As a matter of fact, constructivism assumes that the way individuals experience and interpret reality is directly proportional to their social dynamics, (past) experience and information. Individuals’ constructions are not more or less “true”, in any absolute sense, but simply more or less informed and/or sophisticated (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). Therefore, the constructivist approach encourages the researcher to involve him/herself in the research context, talk to people in depth and attend to every nuance of their behaviour in order to understand them (Thomas, 2013).
Considering that the purpose of this study is to have a better grasp of energy community members’ behaviour, the analysis will focus on individuals’ ideas, thoughts and perceptions (Thomas, 2013) which might form the profile of efficiency behaviour. Thus, this study will approach a constructivist position. Starting by defining behaviour as “anything a person does in response to internal and external events, […] behaviours are physical events that occur in the body and are controlled by the brain” (Hobbs et al., 2011), this study intends to highlight the importance of rationality on one hand and affective feelings on the other hand in creating individuals’ own reality of environmental issues and the impact of their behaviour on energy efficiency matters. As became clear in the discussion on theories, efficiency behaviour is not always the result of a conscious act. Taking a close look at the definition of behaviour, one can notice that individuals’ behaviour is closely related to internal and external events; in other words, individuals configure their intention of engaging in efficiency behaviour under compliance with their internal feelings, thoughts and perceptions, external dynamics such as neighbours or close relatives and friends, and risks such as finances and investments.
3.1.2 The case study approach
The purpose of this study is to provide answers to the questions regarding efficiency behaviour through the application of scientific practices. There are multiple ways of obtaining scientific information, e.g. descriptive or analytical research, applied or fundamental research, or conceptual or empirical research, but seeing the human behaviour as the object of study, the qualitative approach appears to be the best suited (Kothari, 2004). Qualitative research is concerned with qualitative phenomena, mostly involving human behaviour and explanations as to why individuals are thinking or doing certain things under certain conditions. Moreover, qualitative research is recommended in order to understand deeper motives, desires and attitudes that characterise human behaviour under specific conditions.
This study is centred on efficiency behaviour, a behaviour triggered by specific feelings and rational factors that occurs under certain conditions such as within an energy community. Therefore, qualitative research is the best approach. Furthermore, the researchers who prefer qualitative research are
interested in gaining a rich and complex understanding of individuals’ experience, not in obtaining information that can be generalised to other larger groups (The four main approaches, 2009). Moreover, qualitative research enables the researcher to explore a subject through the theoretical lens, collecting data in textual form through participant observation, in-depth interviews or focus groups (The four main approaches, 2009).
Qualitative case study research is a recommended strategy when the researcher aims to obtain an in-depth analysis of efficiency behaviour within energy communities (Baxter & Jack, 2008). Moreover, case study research will give a better chance of understanding a contemporary phenomenon in a real-life context, providing detailed information through a wide range of data collection methods, such as semi-structured interviews and participant observation (Creswell, 2009). Additionally, case study research is one of the best methods of gathering information related to human behaviour and its impact on the environment, as it provides the possibility to focus on the theoretical concepts and their retrieval in one or a few cases.
The case study deals with two approaches: one proposed by Robert Stake (1995) and the other by Robert Yin (2003, 2006), both under the umbrella of constructivism. Both approaches thoroughly address the topic to be explored and the essence of the trend to be revealed. According to constructivists, reality is socially bounded, truth is relative and depends on one’s perspective (Baxter & Jack, 2008). One
advantage of using the case study method is that it offers the chance for close collaboration between the researcher and the participants, and enables the respondents to tell their stories and present their views of reality. Besides, the researcher can better understand respondents’ actions and behaviour.
According to Yin (2003), a case study approach is necessary whenever the focus of the analysis is to answer ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions or the researcher wants to cover contextual conditions because he/she believes they are relevant to the phenomenon and context. The present case study on energy communities combines these two conditions imposed by Yin (2003); ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions are relevant to understanding and analysing efficiency behaviour on one hand and the contextual conditions such as social comparison and perceived risk are pertinent for energy communities (phenomenon) and energy transition (context) on the other hand.
A case study can be explanatory, exploratory, descriptive, multiple or intrinsic. This study adopts multiple case studies because they allow to detect cross-overs (Baxter & Jack, 2008), but at the same time the results might not represent a generalised situation. Also according to Yin (2003), a multiple case study can be used to predict similar or contrasting results, but for predictable reasons. Moreover, the evidence from this type of study is considered robust and reliable, but at the same time such a study can be time consuming and expensive to conduct (Baxter & Jack, 2008).
3.1.3 Case study selection
Based on the above rationale two case studies have been chosen, namely the energy communities Vught and Udenhout.
The first reason for choosing the two energy communities is that North Brabant is one of the most innovative regions of the European Union, with a long history in social innovation. In addition, the 33
existing energy communities have authenticity in dealing with environmental matters and renewable energy technology, and a tendency toward social entrepreneurship.
The second reason for selecting the Vught and Udenhout energy communities is that they are placed in the context of energy transition and social innovation, and provide an example of how behavioural changes occur. Moreover, the Udenhout and Vught energy communities are positive examples of how to deal with the responsibility for future generations, climate change and energy efficiency, and there may be a great deal of information available on their contextual and hedonic factors.
The number of energy communities in North Brabant has been increasing since 2010, reaching 33 in 2016 (de Kuyper & Smulders, 2016). The NBPG Energy agenda for 2010-2020 pays special attention to energy reduction and climate neutral organisations, therefore this study focuses on energy communities that use renewable energy technologies such as photovoltaics, which employ solar panels, and wind energy.
A first screening of energy communities of North Brabant was performed, on one hand by collecting basic data from their websites, particularly looking for data related to the founding year and main activities, and on the other hand by searching for documentation that can be reviewed repeatedly. The outcome of the first screening was that Brabant’s energy cooperatives exhibit professionalism, are goal-oriented for managing environmental sustainability, and represent a springboard for changes toward efficiency behaviour. The founding year also played a role. The first impulse was to select the
communities that started at the beginning of 2010 for the case studies. One example is ‘Morgen Groene Energie’ energy community. But this community has already participated in related studies, so a new study would not have been relevant. Hence, it was decided to not pay special attention to the founding year of the energy communities but to focus on other features.
Even if this screening was meant to facilitate the researcher’s work of selecting the case studies, the effect was quite the opposite, as an abundance of information overlapped and made the selection more difficult. Moreover, behaviour changes are not discernible with the naked eye, and this made the research for this study quite challenging. Yin (2009) argues that the goal of the screening procedure is to ensure that the researcher identifies the final cases properly prior to formal data collection.
Therefore, a second screening round was performed, relying on several relevant criteria for either stratifying or reducing the number of energy communities (Yin, 2009). Firstly, meetings with different chairmen of energy communities such as Vught, Morgen Groene Energie, Breda DuurSaam, Udenhout, Duurzame Energie Haaren, Energie Port Peeland, SONenergie, Hilverstroom were scheduled. These are also energy communities that were interested in this study and in the benefits of knowing the
motivational factors of their own members. Also, these energy communities expand projects, among others, in the field of solar panels and wind energy.
Accordingly, the energy communities chosen as case studies should not be limited by the founding year, because their importance is related to their projects and impact, and not to their date of establishment. Moreover, their energy projects should highlight the citizens’ initiative toward a sustainable future and the energy transition management process must be led not by rationality alone, but also by feelings as information for behavioural changes. And finally, the existence of a framework for shaping the energy
community members’ sustainable behaviour was the most important element in selecting the case studies. Therefore, the energy community Udenhout and energy community Vught were chosen to be representative for this analysis (table 2). A criterion for these two energy communities to be researched is that they use tools to model and change human behaviour toward efficiency behaviour, but each of them in its own framework. In other words, it is interesting to research how different manners of approaching human behaviour with relation to renewables produce the same outcome, namely efficiency behaviour.
