Social norms subtly influence decisions, from daily routines to major life choices. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for both academic research and practical applications in policymaking, marketing, and social interventions. Social norms are particularly significant for environmental sustainability. Amidst climate change and environmental challenges, leveraging social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviour is promising. This article explores how social norms influence motivation, drive pro-environmental behaviour, and the theories behind norm nudging and activation.
Introduction
Social norms shape both individual and collective actions, influencing decisions from daily routines to major life events. Understanding social norms is important both for academic research and practical applications in policymaking and social interventions. Social norms are particularly relevant in the context of pressing global issues such as environmental sustainability. As the world grapples with climate change and other environmental challenges, leveraging social norms to encourage pro-environmental behaviour has emerged as a promising strategy.
Theories of norm activation are crucial for motivating behaviour change, highlighting how individuals become aware of social norms and feel a moral obligation to act accordingly. These theories suggest that people are more likely to engage in pro-social behaviours when they recognise their importance, believe their actions matter, and feel social expectations to behave in certain ways.
Norm nudging builds on this by designing interventions that steer people towards desirable behaviours through awareness of social norms and their positive impacts. For example, highlighting high recycling rates among neighbours can increase recycling by fostering a sense of community responsibility. By linking norm activation with nudging, we can create effective social interventions that promote both individual and collective action to address global challenges.
Motivating Behaviour Change with Social Norms
Theoretical Foundations
Social norms are generally categorised into two types: descriptive norms and injunctive norms. Descriptive norms refer to perceptions of what most people do in a given situation, while injunctive norms involve perceptions of what most people approve or disapprove of. These norms shape behaviour by providing a reference point for appropriate actions and by signalling potential social rewards or punishments.
Research has demonstrated that social norms significantly influence motivation and behaviour. Individuals are more likely to engage in behaviours that they perceive as common or socially approved. This influence is particularly strong in contexts where social rewards (e.g., approval, status) or punishments (e.g., disapproval, ostracism) are salient.
Empirical Evidence
Empirical studies consistently show the impact of social norms on motivation. Bouman and Steg (2019) found that individuals who perceive strong injunctive norms supporting climate action are more likely to engage in pro-environmental behaviours. Similarly, De Groot and Steg (2007) demonstrated that endorsement of altruistic and biospheric values, which align with pro-environmental norms, predicts higher engagement in environmental actions.
These findings are supported by numerous case studies. For example, Bouman et al.(2020) highlighted that community-led initiatives promoting visible pro-environmental behaviours can create a positive feedback loop, where increased visibility of norm adherence further reinforces the behaviour among community members.
Case Studies
One notable example from Germany involves a government and utility company programme designed to promote energy conservation. Households received detailed reports comparing their energy consumption to that of their neighbours, along with messages highlighting the social approval of energy-saving behaviours. This intervention resulted in significant reductions in energy use, underscoring the effectiveness of social norms in driving behaviour change (Allcott, 2011).
A detailed analysis of this programme reveals several key factors contributing to its success. Firstly, the reports leveraged descriptive norms by showing households that their neighbours were already engaging in energy-saving behaviours. This created a sense of social proof, encouraging others to follow suit. Additionally, the intervention used injunctive norms by framing energy-saving behaviours as socially approved and desirable, further motivating households to reduce their consumption.
Another example from Germany is the use of social norms in promoting recycling. Studies have shown that making recycling behaviour visible and highlighting social approval for recycling can significantly increase recycling rates. One successful initiative involved placing clear signage and visible recycling bins in public places, coupled with community campaigns that celebrated high recycling rates. These interventions leveraged both descriptive and injunctive norms to motivate behaviour change (Thøgersen, 2006).
Furthermore, a German campaign focused on reducing plastic use utilised social norm nudging effectively. The campaign included public commitments where citizens pledged to reduce plastic usage, and these pledges were visibly displayed in community centres and online platforms. This increased the visibility of pro-environmental actions and reinforced the social norm of reducing plastic consumption. The campaign also engaged local influencers and community leaders to model plastic-free behaviours, further legitimising and popularising these actions (Udalov et al., 2017).
These examples from Germany highlight how strategic use of social norms can lead to significant behavioural changes in energy conservation and recycling, supporting environmental sustainability efforts (Frey and Stutzer, 2006; Schultz et al., 2007).
Theories of Norm Activation
Several theories provide insights into the mechanisms of norm activation, essential for understanding how social norms can drive pro-environmental behaviour. The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), developed by Ajzen (1991), posits that behaviour is influenced by attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control. In this framework, subjective norms (akin to injunctive norms) play a crucial role in shaping intentions and behaviour. Similarly, the Norm Activation Model (NAM), developed by Schwartz (1977), emphasises the role of personal norms and the conditions under which they are activated. Both TPB and NAM highlight the importance of perceived social pressure and personal moral obligation in driving behaviour.
Norm activation involves several psychological mechanisms. Perceived social norms influence behaviour through intention formation, where individuals plan their actions based on what they believe others expect of them. This process is mediated by factors such as self-efficacy (belief in one’s ability to perform the behaviour) and outcome expectations (belief that the behaviour will lead to desired outcomes). Thøgersen (2008) noted that social norms often influence behaviour indirectly by shaping attitudes and beliefs. For example, observing others engaging in pro-environmental behaviour can enhance individuals’ belief in the effectiveness and social acceptability of such actions, thereby increasing their motivation to adopt similar behaviours.
Empirical studies, such as those by Bamberg and Möser (2007) and Thøgersen (2008), show that social norms significantly predict pro-environmental intentions and behaviours. Public health campaigns leverage these norms to promote smoking cessation, healthy eating, and vaccination by highlighting the prevalence and social approval of these behaviours.
Interventions that activate social norms can effectively promote pro-environmental behaviour. Public commitments to environmental actions, visible displays of norm adherence (e.g., using reusable bags), and social marketing campaigns highlighting community norms can all activate personal norms and motivate behaviour change. Schultz et al. (2007) demonstrated the effectiveness of norm-based interventions in a field experiment where households received feedback on their energy consumption relative to their neighbours. Households with above-average consumption reduced their usage significantly, illustrating the power of social comparison and norm activation.
Despite the potential of social norms to drive behaviour change, several barriers can impede their activation. One challenge is the “value-action gap”, where individuals’ stated environmental values do not always translate into action. This gap can arise from perceived high personal costs, lack of self-efficacy, or social and structural barriers. To overcome these barriers, interventions must address both the motivational and practical aspects of behaviour change. Providing tangible incentives, reducing perceived costs, and enhancing individuals’ belief in their ability to perform the desired behaviour can enhance the effectiveness of norm-based interventions.
Understanding and leveraging these theories of norm activation can significantly enhance efforts to promote pro-environmental behaviour, helping bridge the gap between environmental values and actions.
Schwartz’s Cognitive Decision Making Model
Schwartz’s cognitive decision-making model maps the process from the activation of a moral obligation to altruistic behaviour. According to Schwartz (1977), this process begins with the individual’s awareness of a need, which triggers the cognitive processes leading to norm activation. The individual then perceives potential actions to alleviate the need and recognises their ability to perform these actions effectively. Following this, the individual feels a sense of responsibility to help, influenced by social or personal norms. This leads to the construction of personal norms, where the individual scans their internalised values and norms to generate a feeling of moral obligation, experienced as a moral imperative to act.
Next, the individual assesses the costs and potential outcomes of their actions, balancing the moral imperative against personal costs or risks. If the costs are high, the individual may reassess the situation, potentially denying the severity of the need, their responsibility, or the relevance of the norm. If this reassessment leads to a renewed sense of obligation, the individual iterates through the earlier steps to strengthen their commitment to act. Finally, the individual decides to act or not to act based on the preceding cognitive and emotional processes. If the moral obligation is strong and defences are low, the individual is likely to engage in altruistic behaviour.
The Motivation-Opportunity-Ability (MOA) Model
The Motivation-Opportunity-Ability (MOA) model, developed by Ölander and Thøgersen (1995), provides a comprehensive framework for understanding consumer behaviour, particularly in the context of environmental protection. This model integrates three key components—motivation, opportunity, and ability—to explain pro-environmental actions.
In the MOA model, motivation encompasses the individual’s intention to perform a behaviour, influenced by attitudes, personal norms, and social norms. The stronger the motivation, the more likely the individual is to engage in the desired behaviour. Motivation is shaped by various factors, including personal values, perceived social expectations, and anticipated outcomes of the behaviour.
Opportunity refers to the external factors that facilitate or hinder the performance of a behaviour. This includes the availability of resources, situational constraints, and contextual factors that make it easier or more difficult to perform the behaviour. For instance, access to recycling facilities or public transport options can significantly influence an individual’s ability to engage in pro-environmental behaviours.
Ability involves the individual’s capacity to perform the behaviour, including skills, knowledge, and resources. Even if motivation and opportunity are present, a lack of ability can prevent the behaviour from occurring. Educational campaigns and skill-building initiatives can enhance individuals’ ability to engage in pro-environmental actions by providing them with the necessary knowledge and skills.
The MOA model posits that for a behaviour to occur, all three components—motivation, opportunity, and ability—must be present. A deficiency in any one of these components can impede the desired behaviour. This integrated approach helps identify specific barriers to pro-environmental behaviour and suggests targeted interventions to address these barriers.
Empirical studies have validated the MOA model’s effectiveness in predicting pro-environmental behaviour. Ölander and Thøgersen (1995) demonstrated that interventions targeting motivation, opportunity, and ability can significantly enhance pro-environmental actions. For example, providing information on the environmental impact of behaviours (motivation), ensuring convenient access to recycling facilities (opportunity), and educating individuals on proper recycling techniques (ability) collectively increase recycling rates.
Synthesis of the Models
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), the Norm Activation Model (NAM), and the Motivation-Opportunity-Ability (MOA) framework provide complementary insights into social norms’ influence on behaviour. TPB focuses on attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control. NAM highlights personal norms activated by awareness and responsibility. The MOA model combines these by emphasizing that motivation, opportunity, and ability must coexist for behaviour to occur. Together, TPB explains behavioural intentions, NAM details normative activation, and MOA addresses practical elements for action.
Social Norm Nudging
Nudging involves subtly guiding individuals’ choices without restricting their freedom to choose. Social norm nudging leverages the power of social norms to influence behaviour in a non-coercive manner, grounded in the idea that small changes in the environment can significantly impact behaviour.
Cristina Bicchieri’s “Norms in the Wild” provides crucial insights into how social norm nudging can affect behaviour change. Bicchieri (2017) emphasises that for nudges to be effective, they must align with individuals’ expectations about typical and appropriate behaviour within their social groups. She outlines several key principles for successful norm nudging:
Understanding the current norms and expectations within a community is essential, involving the identification of both descriptive norms (what people do) and injunctive norms (what people approve of). Messages should be carefully crafted to highlight positive behaviours that align with desired outcomes, making pro-environmental behaviour seem both common and approved by the majority. Increasing the visibility of pro-environmental actions and obtaining public commitments can reinforce norms, as seeing others engage in environmentally friendly behaviours makes people more likely to conform to these norms themselves. Providing feedback that compares individuals’ behaviours with those of their peers can leverage competitive instincts and encourage better compliance with pro-environmental norms. Engaging community leaders and influencers to endorse and model pro-environmental behaviours can amplify the impact of norm nudges, as social proof from respected figures can strengthen the perceived legitimacy and desirability of the targeted behaviours.
A well-known example of social norm nudging is the use of messages in hotels encouraging guests to reuse towels. By informing guests that most previous guests reused their towels, hotels significantly increased towel reuse rates. This intervention effectively used descriptive norms to nudge behaviour. In another study, Nolan et al. (2008) found that providing households with information about their neighbours’ energy-saving behaviours was more effective in reducing energy consumption than messages emphasising environmental or financial benefits. This finding underscores the power of social norms in driving behaviour change.
Ethical Considerations of Norm Nudging
Norm nudging can effectively influence behaviour but raises ethical concerns about autonomy and consent. It is crucial that individuals are aware of being nudged and understand the intentions behind interventions. Ethical nudging should promote genuinely beneficial behaviours, avoiding exploitation of cognitive biases for commercial or political gain. Transparency, fairness, and promoting the common good are essential for ethical nudging, respecting individuals’ agency while guiding them towards positive choices.
Actionable Recommendations
- Diagnose Norms and Craft Messages: Understand current community norms, identifying both descriptive and injunctive norms. Craft messages that highlight positive behaviours, making pro-environmental actions appear common and socially approved.
- Increase Visibility and Encourage Public Commitment: Enhance the visibility of pro-environmental actions and promote public commitments. Seeing others engage in these behaviours encourages wider adoption.
- Provide Normative Feedback and Use Social Comparison: Offer feedback that compares individuals’ behaviours to their peers. Highlighting discrepancies can motivate better compliance with pro-environmental norms.
- Engage Leaders and Influencers: Involve community leaders and influencers to endorse and model pro-environmental behaviours. Their support can strengthen the perceived legitimacy and desirability of these actions.
Conclusion
Social norms play a crucial role in shaping individual and collective behaviours, particularly in the context of environmental sustainability. Understanding and leveraging these norms can significantly enhance efforts to promote pro-environmental behaviour. Theories such as the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) and the Norm Activation Model (NAM) provide valuable insights into how social norms influence motivation and behaviour.
By strategically crafting messages that highlight positive behaviours, increasing the visibility of these actions, and leveraging social comparisons, practitioners can effectively activate and reinforce pro-environmental norms. Additionally, engaging community leaders and influencers can further enhance the impact of these interventions.
Despite the potential of social norms to drive behaviour change, barriers such as the “value-action gap” must be addressed. Providing tangible incentives, reducing perceived costs, and enhancing individuals’ belief in their ability to perform the desired behaviour can help bridge this gap. Ethical considerations are also paramount, ensuring that nudges respect individuals’ autonomy and promote genuinely beneficial behaviours.
In conclusion, social norms are powerful tools for driving pro-environmental behaviour. By understanding and applying the principles of norm activation, behaviour change practitioners can design effective interventions that contribute to a more sustainable and environmentally responsible society.
References
Ajzen, I. (1991), The theory of planned behavior, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Allcott, H. (2011), Social norms and energy conservation, Journal of Public Economics, 95(9-10), 1082-1095.
Bamberg, S., and G. Möser (2007), Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(1), 14-25.
Bicchieri, C. (2017), Norms in the Wild: How to Diagnose, Measure, and Change Social Norms, Oxford University Press
Biel, A., and J. Thøgersen (2007), Activation of social norms in social dilemmas: A review of the evidence and reflections on the implications for environmental behaviour, Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(1), 93-112.
Bouman, T. And L. Steg (2019), Motivating climate action: The role of human needs, in L. Steg and J. I. M. De Groot (Eds.), Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (2nd ed., pp. 345-354), Wiley-Blackwell
Bouman, T., L. Steg, and S. J. Zawadzki (2020), The value of what others value: When perceived environmental actions of others matter for pro-environmental behaviour, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 70, 101462.
De Groot, J. I. M., and L. Steg (2007), Morality and prosocial behavior: The role of awareness, responsibility, and norms in the norm activation model, The Journal of Social Psychology, 147(5), 425-447.
Frey, B. S., and A. Stutzer (2006), Environmental morale and motivation, In M. Boyer, Y. Robert, T. Markandya, and B. Roland-Holst (Eds.), Social Norms and Environmental Action: A Canadian Perspective (pp. 205-224), McGill-Queen’s University Press
Nolan, J. M., P. W. Schultz, R. B. Cialdini, N. J. Goldstein, and V. Griskevicius (2008), Normative social influence is underdetected, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(7), 913-923.
Schultz, P. W., J. M. Nolan, R. B. Cialdini, N. J. Goldstein, and V. Griskevicius (2007), The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms, Psychological Science, 18(5), 429-434.
Schwartz, S. H. (1977), Normative influences on altruism, In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221-279). Academic Press.
Thøgersen, J. (2006), Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: An extended taxonomy, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(4), 247-261.
Thøgersen, J. (2009), The motivational roots of norms for environmentally responsible behavior, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 31(4), 348-362.
Thøgersen, J. (2014), The mediated influences of perceived norms on pro-environmental behavior, Revue économique et politique, 124(2), 1-23.
Thøgersen, J., and F. Ölander (1995), Understanding of consumer behaviour as a prerequisite for environmental protection, Journal of Consumer Policy, 18(4), 345-385.
Udalov, V., J. Perret, and V. Vasseur, (2017), Environmental motivations behind individuals’ energy efficiency investments and daily energy-saving behaviour: Evidence from Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium, International Economics and Economic Policy, 14, 481–499.