Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change

Claudia F. Nisa, Jocelyn Belanger, Birga M. Schumpe, Daiane G. Faller

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

No consensus exists regarding which are the most effective mechanisms to promote household action on climate change. We present a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comprising 3,092,678 observations, which estimates the effects of behavioural interventions holding other factors constant. Here we show that behavioural interventions promote climate change mitigation to a very small degree while the intervention lasts (d = −0.093 95% CI −0.160, −0.055), with no evidence of sustained positive effects once the intervention ends. With the exception of recycling, most household mitigation behaviours show a low behavioural plasticity. The intervention with the highest average effect size is choice architecture (nudges) but this strategy has been tested in a limited number of behaviours. Our results do not imply behavioural interventions are less effective than alternative strategies such as financial incentives or regulations, nor exclude the possibility that behavioural interventions could have stronger effects when used in combination with alternative strategies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number4545
JournalNature Communications
Volume10
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2019

Fingerprint

Climate Change
climate change
Climate change
Meta-Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Recycling
Testing
Plasticity
Motivation
Consensus
incentives
recycling
plastic properties
estimates

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Chemistry(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Physics and Astronomy(all)

Cite this

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change. / Nisa, Claudia F.; Belanger, Jocelyn; Schumpe, Birga M.; Faller, Daiane G.

In: Nature Communications, Vol. 10, No. 1, 4545, 01.12.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c73b25de118647ceab40b08764827796,
title = "Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change",
abstract = "No consensus exists regarding which are the most effective mechanisms to promote household action on climate change. We present a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comprising 3,092,678 observations, which estimates the effects of behavioural interventions holding other factors constant. Here we show that behavioural interventions promote climate change mitigation to a very small degree while the intervention lasts (d = −0.093 95{\%} CI −0.160, −0.055), with no evidence of sustained positive effects once the intervention ends. With the exception of recycling, most household mitigation behaviours show a low behavioural plasticity. The intervention with the highest average effect size is choice architecture (nudges) but this strategy has been tested in a limited number of behaviours. Our results do not imply behavioural interventions are less effective than alternative strategies such as financial incentives or regulations, nor exclude the possibility that behavioural interventions could have stronger effects when used in combination with alternative strategies.",
author = "Nisa, {Claudia F.} and Jocelyn Belanger and Schumpe, {Birga M.} and Faller, {Daiane G.}",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1038/s41467-019-12457-2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
journal = "Nature Communications",
issn = "2041-1723",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change

AU - Nisa, Claudia F.

AU - Belanger, Jocelyn

AU - Schumpe, Birga M.

AU - Faller, Daiane G.

PY - 2019/12/1

Y1 - 2019/12/1

N2 - No consensus exists regarding which are the most effective mechanisms to promote household action on climate change. We present a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comprising 3,092,678 observations, which estimates the effects of behavioural interventions holding other factors constant. Here we show that behavioural interventions promote climate change mitigation to a very small degree while the intervention lasts (d = −0.093 95% CI −0.160, −0.055), with no evidence of sustained positive effects once the intervention ends. With the exception of recycling, most household mitigation behaviours show a low behavioural plasticity. The intervention with the highest average effect size is choice architecture (nudges) but this strategy has been tested in a limited number of behaviours. Our results do not imply behavioural interventions are less effective than alternative strategies such as financial incentives or regulations, nor exclude the possibility that behavioural interventions could have stronger effects when used in combination with alternative strategies.

AB - No consensus exists regarding which are the most effective mechanisms to promote household action on climate change. We present a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comprising 3,092,678 observations, which estimates the effects of behavioural interventions holding other factors constant. Here we show that behavioural interventions promote climate change mitigation to a very small degree while the intervention lasts (d = −0.093 95% CI −0.160, −0.055), with no evidence of sustained positive effects once the intervention ends. With the exception of recycling, most household mitigation behaviours show a low behavioural plasticity. The intervention with the highest average effect size is choice architecture (nudges) but this strategy has been tested in a limited number of behaviours. Our results do not imply behavioural interventions are less effective than alternative strategies such as financial incentives or regulations, nor exclude the possibility that behavioural interventions could have stronger effects when used in combination with alternative strategies.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85072912154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85072912154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/s41467-019-12457-2

DO - 10.1038/s41467-019-12457-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 31586060

AN - SCOPUS:85072912154

VL - 10

JO - Nature Communications

JF - Nature Communications

SN - 2041-1723

IS - 1

M1 - 4545

ER -