Briefing Paper: Accelerating Climate-Friendly Behaviour Change in Brighton and Hove

Accelerating Climate-Friendly Behaviour Change in Brighton and Hove

 Natasha Parker, with Maighsi Walker and Ric Francis

Key points

• Behaviour change is an essential element of action on climate change, requiring fundamental shifts in how we travel, power our homes, eat, and consume goods and services. Those responsible for the greatest share of emissions must change most and fastest, globally and locally.

• There are many barriers to behaviour change. High emission lifestyles are seen as aspirational. Change is also often seen as too expensive, too inconvenient, too difficult, or sometimes just too socially strange.

• But there are also positive reasons to change: improved health and wellbeing through cleaner air, more active lifestyles, warmer homes and healthier food. People who live more sustainably report higher well-being.

• Behaviour change interventions can create a world where sustainable choices are the easy, affordable, normal, and desirable default. By offering downstream, midstream and upstream options, they give people the capability, opportunity and motivation to change. There are practical examples to learn from – in the UK and overseas.

• A comprehensive behaviour change strategy for Brighton and Hove should identify key changes for a fair transition, assess upstream, midstream and downstream policies, build public understanding, and foster a sense of shared ownership.

1.       Why behaviour change?

Globally, nationally and locally, behaviour change is recognised as an essential element of action on climate change. Achieving significant emissions reduction requires fundamental shifts in how we live: how we travel, power our homes, eat, and consume goods and services. Simply telling people to make different choices rarely works. But well-designed targeted behavioural interventions using the latest behavioural science can make sustainable choices easier, more affordable, and more desirable.

The need is easy to see. If global warming is to be kept within 1.5C of warming, average global emissions per capita must fall from 7.9 tons today to 2-2.5 tons by 2030 and 0.7 tons by 2050. The International Energy Agency (IEA) stresses that behaviour change strategies must form an integral part of all emission reduction strategies in order to meet net zero targets.

The UK Committee on Climate Change agrees. It estimates that 62% of the necessary emissions reductions in the UK depend on people behaving differently. The biggest carbon reductions (53%) will come from the adoption of new technologies (electric vehicles, heat pumps, home energy-efficiency improvements), while 9% will depend on lifestyle changes including eating less red meat and dairy, more active travel, and less flying and driving.  For example, the CCC (2019) advises that a 35% cut in consumption of meat and dairy products will be needed for the UK to reach net zero by 2050. It also emphasises the need to reduce waste and encourage recycling.

Responsibility to reduce lifestyle emissions does not, however, fall equitably. The World Inequality Report 2022 demonstrates that the wealthiest 10% are responsible for 50% of global emissions, while the poorest 50% are responsible for just 12%. Oxfam (2024) report that, per capita, the global top 10% of income earners need to reduce their emission to about one-tenth their current levels by 2030 and the top 1% by a factor of 30. At the same time, the poorest 50% globally could increase by around three times their current level to reach better living standards. In Europe, the World Inequality Report shows that the bottom 50% of the population emits around 5 tonnes of per year per person, the middle 40% emit 10.5 tonnes, while the top 10% emit 27 tonnes. This pattern is seen in all regions of the world.

On the positive side, many of the lifestyle changes required to get to net zero can actually improve health and wellbeing through, for example, cleaner air, more active lifestyles, warmer homes and healthier food. An international analysis also found that people who live more sustainably tend to report higher wellbeing.  Psychologists believe this may be because many sustainable behaviours are good at fulfilling our psychological needs for a sense of competence (e.g. learning to fix and repair), feeling autonomous (e.g. whizzing past traffic jams on a bicycle), and feeling related to others (e.g. forming community energy groups). Highly materialistic lifestyles are associated with lower wellbeing.

2.       Understanding behaviour change

High emissions lifestyles are perceived as aspirational. Having a big house, a private car, flights to exotic holidays and disposable income to buy nice things are symbols of a successful life. Furthermore, fears about financial costs and impingement on personal freedoms can create backlash and hamper ambitious climate plans. Climate Action Against Disinformation have exposed how this is being weaponised by those who want to block climate action, and woven into new forms of climate denial that threaten to undermine public support for climate action.

When we think of ‘behaviour change’ we often think of people being told what they should do. But behaviour change does not mean simply asking people to make different choices within the current system. This rarely works to persuade more than a deeply committed few. Nor does it mean putting all the responsibilities onto individuals to reduce their own carbon footprints while letting governments and businesses off the hook.

We all live within systems where our choices are facilitated or constrained by that system. Even when we want to make the right sustainable choices we do not, because it is too expensive, too inconvenient, too difficult, or sometimes just too socially strange.

For example, a recent survey by Climate Outreach found that people are not convinced that heating your home with a heat pump will be as effective as heating it with a gas boiler, and are worried that the transition to heat pumps will be unfair to people ‘like them’.

The Behavioural Insights team undertook a ‘mystery shopper’ heat pump study to understand the barriers to adoption. Many barriers were highlighted. Of most significance were: (i) the high upfront costs; (ii) the high running costs, which mean investing upfront does not always pay off; (iii) the unlikelihood of being recommended a heat pump by seemingly sceptical boiler/heating engineers who are also still new to the technology; and (iv) the huge complexity and duration of the process, especially if needing to replace a gas boiler with any urgency - as most replacements occur in winter, when boilers are more likely to fail. They concluded that it will take a raft of policies to boost the adoption of heat pumps (see chapter 4 of the Behavioural Insights team report for a list of recommendations).

Building on findings like these, behaviour change interventions create a world where sustainable choices are the easy, affordable, normal, and desirable default. People need to have:

• The capability to do the behaviour (to know what to do and how to do it);

• The opportunity (the infrastructure to do the behaviour is there and it is the easy and affordable option); and the

• Motivation to do the behaviour (the behaviour is desirable, socially acceptable and perceived as beneficial to them and to society).

The UK Behavioural Insights Team describe 3 levels of behavioural interventions:

1.       Downstream interventions that target individuals directly. These interventions focus on educating, encouraging, or persuading individuals to make more sustainable choices. They involve giving individuals the information they need to make the right choices and communicating messages in a way that makes them more likely to do so.

Examples of downstream interventions include:

• Public awareness and information campaigns about sustainable behaviours.

• Providing guidance and tips on making sustainable choices.

• Using social norms to encourage green behaviours.

 2.     Midstream interventions aim to change the choice environment to make sustainable options more accessible, appealing, affordable, and socially acceptable. These interventions involve altering aspects of the choice environment and often utilise ‘nudging’ techniques.

                Examples of midstream interventions include:

• Making sustainable options more available and accessible, removing small barriers or ‘frictions’ that discourage green choices.

• Making sustainable choices the default option.

• Targeting interventions at timely moments of change or disruption, such as when people move home or start a new job.

 3.       Upstream interventions seek to change the system itself, addressing the underlying incentives, regulations, and infrastructure that shape both individual choices and the choice environment.

Examples of upstream interventions include:

• Aligning commercial incentives with Net Zero goals, such as through carbon pricing, subsidies for green technologies, or regulations that encourage sustainable business practices.

• Investing in infrastructure that enables sustainable choices, such as public transport, electric vehicle charging networks, and renewable energy generation.

• Promoting norms of leadership and institutional support for sustainability

Achieving Net Zero requires a holistic approach that combines interventions at all three levels (Table 1). Sometimes these interventions can only be implemented at a national level, but there is much that can be done at a local level by councils, businesses, and community organisations.

Table 1

Examples of downstream, midstream, and upstream behavioural interventions for different types of sustainable behaviours

For a comprehensive review of the downstream, midstream and upstream interventions to encourage energy, transport and food behaviours, see the Behavioural Insights Team guide for policy makers and businesses.

3.       Where to start?

When engaging the public to undertake new behaviours it is important to consider which behaviours will have the biggest impact on CO2 emissions, whilst also considering which they have the greatest capability to undertake.

In the UK, public concern about climate change is high, there is significant support for climate policies and an appreciation we all need to make change. In the 2020 Emissions Gap Report, Capstick and Khosla also suggest reframing the idea of affluence and progress, away from the accumulation of resources and towards wellbeing and the quality of life that can be achieved with lower emissions. Recent polling by Climate Barometer found that MPs severely underestimate the degree of public concern on climate change and public support for climate policy. For example, a recent report from the Climate Citizens Research group found that people are deeply concerned about climate change and understand changes are required, with 84% of people in the UK agreeing with the statement that ‘the way we live will have to change substantially to address climate change’.

At the same time, studies have demonstrated that most people tend strongly to under-estimate how much others care about climate, and how much they support stronger climate policies. This is called ‘Pluralistic ignorance‘ and it is important because it has been found to impede collective action on issues such as climate change. If people do not believe that their concern is shared by others, then they are less likely to act on their own concern. It is therefore important to keep communicating that climate action is popular and that most people are willing to make changes in their lives.

Personal carbon foot printing tools like WWF’s calculator can help people understand the size of their personal carbon footprint and compare it to others in their area. Personal carbon foot printing has been criticised by many in the climate community, with assertions that it was created by BP to shift blame and distract from more systemic action to reduce the use of fossil fuels. But leading behavioural psychologists argue it can still be a useful tool and can help people to:

• Understand the inequalities between people in communities and grasp the need for the wealthiest to make the greatest changes. Most people currently under-estimate the average footprints of the wealthiest and over-estimate the carbon footprints of the poorest. 

• Learn which actions they can take to have the biggest impact. Currently most people under-estimate the most impactful actions (like eating less meat) and over-estimate the impact of the least impactful actions (like recycling).

• Identify the behaviours that you do have control over and can choose to make changes in.  While there are many aspects of someone’s carbon footprint they cannot control, we do need people to make changes in the areas they can choose to.

• Motivate people to support climate policies as their awareness increases of impactful actions they do not have control of without systemic changes. Understanding the inequalities between the wealthiest and poorest may also build support for policies that target the wealthiest and have climate justice at their heart.

Communication is also key. Downstream interventions often involve communicating information to the public. How this is done can make a big difference to how it is received and acted upon. For example, Climate Outreach have a wealth of resources that range from how to tell a more ordinary climate story, to ‘getting people pumped about heat pumps’, and advice on how to talk to Loyal Nationals (a group who are most likely to be sympathetic to backlash narratives) about climate change. Key elements of effective communications include:

• Use clear, simple down to earth messages, avoiding technocratic jargon (e.g. talk about warmer well insulated homes rather than ‘retrofitting’).

• Emphasise the co-benefits of green choices (warmer homes, healthier food, UK energy security). Don’t try to ‘shame’ people into doing them. Make them seem like the attractive choice.

• Harness existing community values rather than forcing ‘green identities’ (e.g. ‘creating a better future for our children’ over ‘protecting the planet’). 

• Show green behaviours to be popular and normal (e.g. more people than ever are choosing plant-based meals). Using social norms in communications is one of the best evidenced methods of inspiring the spread of sustainable behaviours. Even high cost actions like installing solar panels have been shown to be socially contagious.

• Choose trusted messengers – the messenger is as important as the message. Use trusted leaders, celebrities and share stories from a diverse set of local residents so people can see ‘people like me’ taking the actions.

• Tap into community spirit and local pride – make people feel good about themselves for doing their bit to contribute. That they are not alone and we’re doing it together.

4.       Learning from the successes and challenges of communities engaged in climate action

When implementing behavioural interventions, it is of course vital regularly to evaluate the impact of them and learn what has and has not worked and how they can be improved. No intervention will work for everyone, and it will be important to understand who they did and did not persuade to change and why.

It is also helpful to learn from other cities. They can be a honeypot of inspiration for exciting new initiatives. Here are a few examples:

Planning: Assessing the opportunities

Kent County Council and Hampshire County Council undertook an exercise to identify the most significant opportunities to reduce carbon consumption whilst also considering the ease of the behaviour change and the level of influence they had over the behaviour.

Travel: ‘Nudging’ drivers towards public transport

An initiative in Sheffield used insights from behavioural economics to influence travel choices away from driving towards using more public transport. Sheffield offered bus information and a free citywide day ticket to people who had driven into the city centre, strategically encountering people who may have experienced frustration with driving, for example in busy car parks. Almost 60% of those who redeemed their ticket stated that they would have otherwise driven, suggesting that the intervention made public transport seem more appealing than driving.

Travel: Challenging social norms in Sweden

Tågskryt, a Swedish word that literally means ‘train brag’, that came out of The ‘flight shame’ movement in Sweden which used social norms to deter people from flying. A WWF survey showed that ‘23% of Swedes reduced their air travel in 2018 due to its impact’, presenting the influence of role models and creating collective meanings associated with sustainable behaviours.

Consumption: Dissuading high carbon lifestyles

Edinburgh banned advertisements for airlines, SUV’s, cruise lines and oil and gas companies. Polluting companies and arms manufacturers were also banned from sponsoring events in the city. This move not only prevents advertising messages of high carbon products reaching Edinburgh residents, but it also sends a strong signal to citizens that the council is taking its climate commitments seriously and shapes new social norms around high carbon consumption. The City of Edinburgh Council explained that reaching its climate targets ‘requires a shift in society’s perception of success, and the advertising industry has a key role to play in promoting low-carbon behaviours. Conversely, the promotion of high-carbon products is incompatible with net zero objectives.’

Similar bans have been implemented in Cambridge, Liverpool and Norwich.

Tapping into local pride

Liverpool staged a series of concerts in celebration of being named the world’s first UN Accelerator city for climate action. The concerts, featuring Massive Attack, IDLES and Nile Rodgers, featured a range of measures to reduce the carbon and waste footprint including: the entire event site being powered by 100% renewable electricity, a meat free arena, and the show to end before 10pm, to allow audiences to get public transport home. This event helped normalise sustainable behaviours by making them easy, the default option, and attractive by tapping into local cultural pride in their music scene. 

5.       Behaviour Change in Brighton and Hove

Brighton and Hove’s territorial emissions are currently 795,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent. Consumption emissions are of the order of 2.5 - 3 million tonnes (based on a national average of about 10 tonnes per capita). Transport and domestic energy use are the largest sources of territorial emissions in Brighton and Hove. The recently launched Decarbonisation Pathways Study details how energy systems will be transformed. Brighton and Hove residents will also need to be supported to reduce consumption emissions, adopting healthier diets with reduced meat and dairy consumption, driving less, reducing food waste, choosing products that last longer to improve resource efficiency, and increasing recycling rates.

Brighton and Hove has a strong commitment to reducing emissions and improving environmental impact, with numerous plans underway, for example the Carbon Neutral Programme, and a Circular Economy Action Plan which plans to make more efficient use of raw materials and minimise waste and pollution. There have been efforts to engage communities, such as the climate assembly and youth assembly held in 2020, embedding climate change into the education system, working with museums, and communicating opportunities for residents and organisations to cut their own carbon footprints. The Our City, Our World education programme informs and inspires schools, individuals and communities about sustainability challenges, and develops the skills needed to address local and global challenges.

The influence that social norms have on human behaviour presents a clear opportunity for creating sustainable change, and Brighton and Hove’s reputation as a ‘green’ city with a ‘culture of questioning the norm’ could be used to accelerate this change, with campaigns similar to the Swedish trend for train travel, focused on the sustainable behaviours to ‘brag’ about in Brighton and Hove.

At the same time, a 2024 research study carried out by Maighsi Walker found that while residents strongly believed in the reality of climate change, their concern was limited because of its psychological distance from their everyday lives. Participants expressed greater concern for tangible economic issues such as housing, interest rates, and daily costs, exemplified by one resident’s comment: ‘how much your pint of milk is costing’.

Scepticism toward renewable technologies was also evident. One participant remarked, ‘there is no infrastructure for the electric cars’, reflecting a common mistrust of the practical feasibility of climate initiatives. This scepticism was often linked to economic priorities, with another participant observing, ‘It’s like coming up with a new idea [electric car batteries] and not researching it…that’ll shut the people up, we’ve given them something, and now we’ll not have the money to fix the potholes’.

Social norms in Brighton and Hove were found to shape Brighton’s identity as a ‘green’ city, distinct from its political association with Green Party values. One resident noted, ‘we tend to do everything a bit differently to everyone else, don’t we’, while others highlighted sustainability practices, such as a strong vegetarian and vegan culture and the popularity of second-hand clothing.

This community network fosters collective action, with many residents believing their contributions can lead to meaningful change. As one participant stated, ‘we can make a big change if everybody does it’. Leveraging this network effect can be key to implementing successful behaviour-change interventions.

The Importance of a Fair Transition

Brighton is one of the UK’s most unequal cities and any carbon reduction plans must be perceived by the community as ‘fair’. The Leeds University carbon place calculator can be used to identify and target the areas with the largest potential for emissions reductions by showing estimates of the per person carbon footprints within Lower Super Output Areas in England. It compares their carbon footprint to the local authority area and national averages. The map below (Figure 1) shows that more affluent areas like Hove Park, Preston Park, and Withdean have carbon footprints far greater than the local average, whereas communities such as Mouslescoomb and Bevendean have emissions much lower than the local authority and national average.

Figure 1

Carbon Footprint rating by area, Brighton and Hove

Source: Leeds University Place Based Carbon Calculator carbon footprint map of Brighton and Hove. Darker red indicates higher emissions than the England average, darker blue indicated lower emissions than the national average.

If we compare Hove Park to Mouslecoomb and Bevendean (see Figures 2 and 3 below), we can see that Hove Park residents have carbon footprints far higher than the local and national average, at over 14,000 kg CO2e per person. They consume more gas and electricity, more goods and services, and far more flights. On the other hand, residents in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean have carbon footprints much lower than the local and national average, at just over 4,000 kg CO2e per person, around a third of their fellow citizens in Hove park. They are particularly consuming far fewer goods and services and taking fewer flights.

Figure 2

Per Capita Emissions in Hove Park

Source: Leeds University Place Based Carbon Calculator carbon footprint of Brighton and Hove.

Figure 3

Per Capita Emissions in Moulsecoomb and Bevendean

Source: Leeds University Place Based Carbon Calculator carbon footprint of Brighton and Hove.

This confirms that not everyone in Brighton and Hove will need to change their lifestyles to the same extent. Those with the largest footprints (typically the wealthiest) will need to make the most significant changes, particularly to take fewer flights, have more planet friendly diets, and reduce their consumption of high emission goods and services. Care must also be taken to ensure that the poorest reap the benefits from climate policies (e.g. warmer, well insulated homes with cheaper bills, access to healthy food, and affordable, reliable public transport).

6.       Recommendations for Brighton and Hove

In order to meet its carbon neutral targets, Brighton and Hove must support its residents to change their lifestyle to adopt new sustainable technologies (like heat pumps and EVs), drive and fly less, eat less meat and dairy, and reduce their consumption of high carbon goods. It must support the wealthiest with the highest footprints to make the greatest changes, while ensuring the poorest feel the benefits of the climate transition.

To avoid backlash, it is important to work with residents to understand their barriers and motivations to change and ensure that solutions feel inclusive, fair, equitable and relevant. There should be a commitment to ongoing dialogue and engagement with the public, designing and implementing climate policies with communities, and not forcing them upon them.

A comprehensive behaviour change strategy should be developed, in consultation with local residents, businesses and community organisations. It should:

• Prioritise the High-Impact Areas for Emissions Reductions, including consumption behaviours

Prioritising the three major sectors identified by UNEP for lifestyle emissions reductions - mobility, residential energy and food - will help Brighton and Hove to deliver meaningful progress toward its carbon-neutral target.

• Identify downstream, mid-stream and upstream interventions

Identify evidence-based behavioural science strategies to influence behaviours at each level – helping to make sustainable choices easier, more convenient, more affordable, more appealing and more social. Use downstream and mid-stream interventions for behaviours that residents have the capability to undertake now (with little infrastructure change required) while mapping out the upstream interventions required for those that need systemic changes to make them do-able.

• Address Inequities in Emissions Reductions

Brighton must tackle climate action in ways that are perceived as fair and equitable, addressing the disparity in emissions between affluent and lower-income areas. Use tools like the Leeds University Carbon Place Calculator to identify and target high-emission households for interventions. Simultaneously, support low-income households with measures such as subsidized energy efficiency upgrades, ensuring they also benefit from warmer homes and reduced energy costs.

Carbon calculators could help residents to understand their personal footprints – and the extent of their responsibility to make change.

• Build public understanding of key behaviours

Information is an essential building block to drive behaviour change and counter misinformation. Provide simple guidance on what actions can make the biggest difference and advice how to do them. Most people want to take action, but most do not actually know what steps would make the biggest difference and often do not know where to start.

• Foster a Sense of Shared Ownership

Create opportunities for individuals and groups to directly participate in climate solutions. Use cultural events and lean into local community pride to make climate action feel inclusive, fun, attractive and normal. Make sustainable actions visible and part of the local culture. Social contagion is one of the most powerful forces to spread sustainable behaviours.

• Communicate the benefits of sustainable lifestyles

Use clear, inclusive language that motivates people to want to be part of the movement of Brighton and Hove residents shifting towards sustainable lifestyles. Emphasise the co-benefits of living sustainably to health and happiness. Use the evidence of communication framings that have been shown to best resonate with different groups and work with trusted messengers to communicate them.

• Evaluate interventions regularly, learn and adapt

Implement a robust framework for evaluating the impact of policies and campaigns. Regularly review and refine strategies based on community feedback and measurable outcomes.

• Celebrate success

Regularly communicate the city’s progress toward its carbon-neutral goals, and highlight success stories to maintain public support.

__________________

Photo courtesy: https://www.pexels.com/search/cycling%20brighton/

Dr. Natasha Parker has a PhD in Environmental Psychology and previously worked as a Director for environmental NGO Global Action Plan.

Ric Francis graduated in Biological Sciences from Warwick University and has spent the last 30 years delivering software solutions to the international education sector. 

Maighsi Walker has a degree in Geography from the University of Sussex.

Perspective pieces are the responsibility of the authors, and do not commit Climate:Change in any way. Guest posts are published to explore issues or stimulate debate. Comments are welcome.