part of my course text I just wrote about the difficulty in changing behavior in the context of climate change. Sorry, it's in English! In
developed countries
Behaviour change to address climate change is difficult because our societies are driven by the western economic model (based on consuming and growth) and are rooted in the dogma that growth and sustainable development are not compatible from an economic point of view..
For developed countries, collective thinking has been that a low carbon economy is a step back for our societies and could moves us back to the “Middle Age” (in a way) with a decrease in well-being and freedom.
From an economic point of view, costs of mitigation are seen as unaffordable for businesses in short term planning.
So there is a collective fear to move forward a low carbon economy, amplified by confusion and the fact that we are not directly affected today (no “here and now threat”).
These parameters explain why change is so difficult in developed countries.
But we have to recognize that some countries, especially in Europe but in some American States too, have already moved forward to address climate change with ambitious climate action plans. How has it been possible to change?
First of all, in Europe, there is no doubt about the reality of climate change beyond politicians, (from the right to the left side), media, middle class and businesses. Climate change is a fact, nobody argues about it, even though there is not a perception of an immediate risk. This is a big difference with what we can see here in the U.S..
Secondly, European countries have established sticks and carrots policies for mitigation that impacted strongly to change collective behaviour.
Carrots are under the form of tax credits or incentives for solar, wind, building insulation... assorted with the development of efficient public transportation (anywhere you are in Paris, you can find a metro station not further than 10 minutes walk at a good cost). And these positive incentives are not volatile: this is another difference with the U.S. as Catherine Barrett mentioned where volatility of incentives is a brake to mitigation initiatives.
Sticks are taxes on “big” cars, taxes to drive downtown in some cities (Stockholm, but in the same time you have highly efficient public tranportation including free bikes), a set of future taxes for businesses emitting CO2, carbon tax and of course the skyrocketing cost of oil (on which there are huge state taxes)…
As economy is a key driver in change, tools must address economy for a collective change.
Today, thanks to these sticks and carrots policies, Germany and Sweden and other European countries have collectively changed and made significant achievements on renewable energy and energy efficiency without loosing their competitiveness.
Same in some American States like California and Washington States but I do not know the details.
But there are a lot of steps ahead! And I don’ t talk about changing our behaviour with food (especially meat)!
Another point: education is key for the future of change: some countries already plan to teach sustainable development from elementary to university.
From an individual point of view, change is difficult because of many factors (cultural, values, economic…) that where extensively described by all of you. And only very few people can change by “ideology” alone even if they are well informed and convinced.
So I will give a few real life examples.
Carpooling is constraining: even if you are convinced in using less your car, it is uneasy to carpool because you loose some freedom by depending on others.
Public transportation: even if you want to use public transportation, it has to be convenient, time and cost-effective. For example here in DC this is a mess and very expensive if you do not live or work near the metro .
If you want to put solar panels on your roof, you generally want a return on your investment: it was not the case 5 years ago for photovoltaic panels even with European incentives. It is just beginning to be the case with Chinese panels because of the growing demand.
For individual change, there is also some assets and a question of household resources as some of you said.
To conclude, I would say that both economic incentives and education are efficient for behaviour change. Are they sufficient?
In developing countries
A majority of people in developing countries have the dream of the American way of life.
They aspire to live our “western citizens” with cars, big houses and all the facilities associated.
At the same time, they are already affected by climate change in addition to other developmental issues (demography, poverty, governance issues, access to water and energy…).
So change for them means:
Renouncing to the American way of life for their own people, which is hard, and explains part of the position of countries like Chinese and India in international negociations.
Coping and adapting with current and future climate change : they do not have the choice, it is a question of survival: change is here and now at the local level among people (we all have in mind examples we talked about in our first class), this is the real life example that “here and now” emergency makes people change individually and collectively.
Reinventing a new developmental model that does not exist today.
But what at their government level?
This week , I attended the SDN (Sustainable Development Network) at the World Bank in DC. The WBG has strongly been mandated by donor states to address climate change and sustainable development for future projects.
I could hear that in some developing countries, change is already at work at very high level of governments.
The World Bank local representative of East Asia said: “they know they can not go into the development path of developed countries even if it is a model. They are thinking about other ways of life without compromising developmental growth. These governments take immediate action to transform energy sector towards sustainability…”
A question: is it easier to renounce to something you have dreamt about but never experienced than to renounce to the unsustainable way of life we experience in the developed countries?
The ministry of Environment of Laos described how this country is implementing sustainability into development process, including climate change issues: keys are the creation of new agencies (Water Resources Services…), new laws, involvement of stakeholders, cooperation with regional countries (to share Mekong water resource for example…). A first draft of a National Plan for Climate Change was released last year addressing water, land, forest, energy efficiency of building and including poverty reduction program!. According to my understanding, all these changes operated in the last 2 or 3 years!
According to these examples, pressed by the emergency of climate change some Asian countries:
- know they have to change here and now,
- have the will to change and
- have already moved forward.
The economic drivers of change for these countries will be financial support and technology transfer form developed countries.
