Professor Colin Strong, smiling and has a grey beard wearing a grey scarf

January 28, 2025, by aczht

International Day of Clean Energy – Professor Colin Strong’s reflections

Colin Strong is a Professor of Practice and a Professor of Behavioural and Consumer Science at Nottingham University Business School, and the Global Lead for Behavioural Science at Ipsos. In recognition of the International Day of Clean Energy on 26 January 2025, Colin discusses the importance of understanding the fundamental changes in human behaviour to effectively transition to clean energy solutions.

Note: The thoughts here are his personal ones and do not reflect the position of his employers.

(* denotes further reading section at the end of the blog)

Hot air and heat pumps: Navigating clean energy

The International Day of Clean Energy on 26 January each year is dedicated to raising awareness and mobilising action towards a just and inclusive transition to clean energy sources. And for good reason: climate breakdown is causing catastrophic events like extreme heatwaves in Europe*, deadly floods in Pakistan*, and widespread wildfires in Australia and California*. These events are becoming more frequent and severe, threatening ecosystems, economies, and human lives worldwide. The need for clean energy is greater than ever, but progress is slow. For example, the UK government’s target of installing 600,000 domestic heat pumps a year by 2028 is challenging, with reports suggesting only 42,000 installed since January 2025.*

Risk society

Tackling the climate-related risks we live with today means first understanding how these risks differ from those we faced in the past. Sociologist Ulrich Beck tackled this in his landmark book, Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity*, where he outlines how modern industrial society is defined by how it produces, defines, and manages risks.

He argues that the ‘risk society’ has come about due to industrialisation, as it created a fundamentally different class of risk to those we are historically used to. During the ‘first modernity’ as Beck calls it, dangers came from the natural world, largely outside of human control – such as earthquakes, floods and famine. But these were increasingly managed and mitigated by the second wave of modernity and industrialisation.

However, with the mitigation of these old risks came new and different threats – global financial crisis, terrorism, global warming and air pollution – and these, Beck argues, are much more global, unpredictable and unmanageable, sitting outside conventional regulation and control approaches. He sees them as unpredictable and far-reaching, affecting different classes, regions, and even generations.

This means that they not only have an ‘unknown-ness’ concerning the size and scale of danger that may befall us but also have unpredictable and unmanageable qualities that are challenging some of the core foundations of how we understand the world.

So, what does this mean for clean energy solutions? Beck would suggest that as we perpetually cross the boundaries between what is considered to be known and the unknown then it is harder than ever for any institution to assert its authority. In the case of clean energy solutions, such as heat pumps, this means that the discussion of ‘what works’ is not simple one for any side to make as the argument is under constant negotiation.

From vertical to horizontal and then to diagonal

Against this backdrop, we can see the way trust dynamics are changing. Ipsos Veracity Index (2024) finds that professions like nurses (94% trust), doctors (88%), teachers (85%), and professors (85%) remain highly regarded—whilst politicians (11%), government ministers (15%), and advertising executives (18%) have much lower trust ratings. A reading of this could suggest that while certain “functional” or “front-line” roles are often seen as vital and relatively apolitical, trust in guidance coming from government or what might be considered image-driven professions is challenging.*

In its place, commentators suggest that ‘horizontal’ trust is emerging* where people instead rely on decentralised, self-directed engagement with knowledge and decision-making through peer networks, influencers, and decentralised communities. These horizontal networks can, of course, be hugely effective – from citizen science to peer-support networks for those with critical illnesses.

However, this transition also aligns with ‘diagonalist’ movements*, where rejection of traditional authority is blended with referencing ‘horizontal’ sources to navigate complex issues. If we combine this with the way that these types of networks can often lack clear standards for credibility, we have an emerging environment that can all too easily perpetuate confusion and mistrust. So, the Risk Society that Beck predicted has led to a complex and contested knowledge environment where traditional sources of expertise and guidance are not under pressure.

No wonder that against this wider backdrop, the government is concerned that there is ‘misinformation’ around heat pumps related to claims about their performance, cost, and environmental impact*. Common narratives suggest -counter to the expert position – that heat pumps are ineffective in colder climates, excessively noisy, prohibitively expensive, and incapable of significantly reducing carbon emissions. So there appears to be a growing ‘diagonal’ position – scepticism of traditional authority (in this case, governmental and expert advocacy for heat pumps) intersecting with narratives that claim to reflect a widespread negative experience of heat pump adoption.

What does this mean for how we move forward?

There are of course many positives about being in a world with democratised access to knowledge and participatory spaces that challenge entrenched power structures. On the other hand, when trust in legitimate expertise is sabotaged, alternative narratives all too often lack rigour.

To move forward, rather than simply considering how we communicate better, or nudge people to solutions, we need to understand the social dynamics of the knowledge environment we are working in. If we ignore the changing way in which people are referencing knowledge around them, then many of the actions we take to make the case for clean energy solutions will likely struggle to make an impact. This is where behavioural science has a valuable role to play. To this end, drawing on social scientists who have studied the nature of the way knowledge moves in today’s society have plenty to offer. Some key people working in this space are:

Betsy Paluk whose work on social norms* highlights that behaviour depends not only on imitation but also on actively interpreting the actions and identities of influential individuals within social networks. This parallels how ‘memes’ and ‘vibes’ * can quickly shape and shift social norms in the digital age. Paluk’s research underlines the argument that the traditional behaviour change approach may fail to capture modern social dynamics’ fluid and ephemeral nature.

Steve Sloman and Philip Fernbach have a wide array of insights* into the limitations of individual knowledge and the reliance on collective information. They argue that much of what we ‘know’ is distributed across social networks, and they emphasise our dependence on the collective knowledge of communities versus traditional behaviour change models often prioritise individual cognition. Consequently, if we are to account for modern social influences’ pervasive and collaborative nature, then we need to rethink the individualised nature of more traditional models of knowledge.

Daphna Oyserman’s research* on identity-based motivation focuses on how individuals affirm their social identities, continually shaping and reshaping them through their interactions and cultural contexts. This aligns with how horizontal communications and relationships serve as dynamic identity markers, prompting individuals to adopt and adapt behaviours to fit evolving social trends.

There are, of course, more, but the emerging patterns are clear – we need to focus on behavioural science research, which best explains the emerging knowledge dynamics of current environment and not rely on theories, models and frameworks developed for a different time.

Final thoughts

To achieve a transition to clean energy, it seems we must navigate the complexities of a complex knowledge environment. This means that governments, communities, and influencers need to actively build trust and engage with diverse beliefs inclusively. Behavioural science is not just about ‘nudge’ but provides a host of critical tools for engaging with social norms, identity-based motivation, and collective knowledge to find ways to arrive at collective sustainable behaviour.

By bridging the gaps between expertise, challenges to authority, and collaboration, there are surely ways here we can turn epistemic uncertainty into an opportunity for innovation and collective action, paving the way for a cleaner energy future.

Further reading:

Introduction

Extreme heatwaves in Europe 2023 – Wikipedia.org

Two Years After Deadly Floods Hit Pakistan, It’s Happening Again – nytimes.com

Wildfires in winter: What you need to know about the catastrophe unfolding in Los Angeles – climatecouncil.org.ua

UK government hires ‘nudge unit’ to help dispel heat pump myths – theguardian.com

Risk society

Risk Society – Towards a New Modernity– by Ulrich Beck 

From vertical to horizontal and then to diagonal 

Trust in politicians reaches its lowest score in 40 years – Ipsos.comx

Fungi Frameworks: Rethinking behaviour change in a meme world – Frontline BeSci.com

Diagonalism, the Cosmic Right and the Conspiracy Smoothie – bellacaledonia.org.uk 

What does this mean for how we move forward?

Bubbles as a catalyst of change by Betsy Paluk- Frontline BeSci

Fungi Frameworks: Rethinking behaviour change in a meme world – Frontline BeSci.com. Reference to Brat Summer by Charli XCX.

From me to we behavioural science by Steve Sloman and Philip Fernbach’s – frontlinebesci.com

Daphna Oyserman’s research

Posted in Uncategorized