Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Maximizing the Efficiency of Greenhouse Gas Related Consumer Policy

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Consumer Policy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Consumer policy approaches regarding green products and solutions can be differentiated by their main focus. “Green positioning” is basically targeted at environmentally aware consumers, while “efficiency-focused positioning” concentrates on the efficiency gain of the product or solution, targeting the whole society, regardless of consumers' environmental awareness. The paper argues that the scope and total environmental benefit can be increased if green products or solutions are promoted in different ways, not only as “green” but also based on other arguments (like cost-efficiency, return on investment, etc.). The paper suggests a model for improving the efficiency of greenhouse gas (GHG)-related consumer policy. Based on the marginal social cost curve and the marginal private cost curve, different (green, yellow, and red) zones of action are identified. GHG mitigation options chosen from those zones are then evaluated with the help of profiling method, addressing the barriers to implementation. Profiling may help design an implementation strategy for the selected options and make consumer policy more effective and acceptable for mass market. Case study results show three different ways of positioning of GHG-related consumer policy in Hungary from 2000 and give practical examples of profiling, based on the latest marginal social cost curve and the contemporary energy saving policy of the state regarding the residential sector.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akaah, I. P., & Korgaonkar, P. K. (1988). A conjoint investigation of the relative importance of risk relievers in direct marketing. Journal of Advertising Research, 28(4), 38–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbuthnott, K. D. (2009). Education for sustainable development beyond attitude change. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 10, 152–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baden, S., Fairey, P., Waide, P., de T'serclaes, P., & Lautsen, J. (2006). Hurdling financial barriers to low energy buildings: Experiences from the USA and Europe on financial incentives and monetizing building energy savings in private investment decisions. Proceedings of 2006 ACEEE Summer Study of Energy Efficiency in Buildings. Washington: American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy.

  • Behr, R. L., & Iyengar, S. (1985). Television news, real world cues, and changes in the public agenda. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49, 38–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertoldi, P., & Bogdan, A. (2006a). Residential lighting consumption and saving potential in the enlarged EU. European Commission Directorate–General Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

  • Bertoldi, P., & Bogdan, A. (2006b). Electricity consumption and efficiency trends in the enlarged European Union—Status report 2006. European Commission Directorate–General Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

  • Bonaiuto, M., Breakwell, G. M., & Cano, I. (1996). Identity processes and environmental threat: The effects of nationalism and local identity upon perception of beach pollution. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 6, 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, J., Bedford, T., Hobson, G., Davies, G., & Harrison, C. M. (2003). (Un)sustainable consumption. In F. Berkhout, M. Leach, & I. Scoones (Eds.), Negotiating environmental change: New perspectives from social science (pp. 261–293). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • CEN Technical Committee 250 (2010). Eurocodes. http://eurocodes.jrc.ec.europa.eu/.

  • Crane, A., & Peattie, K. (1999). Has green marketing failed…or has it never really tried? Conference Proceedings of the 1999 Business Strategy and the Environment Conference, 16th–17th September. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds.

  • Creyts, Y., Derkach, A., Nyquist, S., Ostrowski, K., & Stephenson, J. (2007). U.S. greenhouse gas abatement mapping initiative. Washington, DC: McKinsey & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csutora, M., & Zilahy, G. (1998). Economic analysis of greenhouse gas mitigation options in Hungary. Ph.D. Conference. Budapest: Budapest University of Economic Sciences.

  • Davies, J., Foxall, G. R., & Pallister, J. (2002). Beyond the intention-behaviour mythology: An integrated model of recycling. Marketing theory, 2, 29–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, G. R., & Staelin, R. (1994). A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 119–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellen, P. S., Wiener, J. L., & Cobb-Walgren, C. (1991). The role of perceived consumer effectiveness in motivating environmentally conscious behaviors. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 10, 102–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2005). Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment, Special Eurobarometer 217. Brussels: European Commission.

  • European Commission. (2008). Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment, Special Eurobarometer 295. Brussels: European Commission.

  • European Commission. (2009). Energy policy factsheets for countries. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/doc/factsheets/country/hu/mix_hu_hu.pdf.

  • European Commission Joint Research Centre. (2009). PV status report: Research, solar cell production and market implementation of photovoltaics. Available at: http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/refsys/pdf/PV-Report2009.pdf.

  • Featherman, M. S., & Pavlou, P. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 59, 451–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fliegenschnee, M., & Schelakovsky, M. (1998). Umweltpsychologie und Umweltbildung: Einführung aus humanökologischer Sicht. Wien: Facultas Universitäts Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • GAP (Global Action Plan). (2008). EcoTeams evaluation report. Available at: http://www.globalactionplan.org.uk/upload/resource/GAP%20EcoTeams%20Evaluation%20Report%20June%2020081.pdf.

  • Government Decree of 1107/1999 (08.10) of the Hungarian Government. (1999). Magyar Közlöny 99/89, Budapest.

  • Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. M., & Tomera, A. N. (1986). Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible pro-environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinostroza, M., Cheng, C., Zhu, X., Fenhann, J., Figueres, C., & Avendano, F. (2007). Potentials and barriers for end-use energy efficiency under programmatic CDM. Working Paper No. 3, CD4CDM Working Paper Series. Roskilde: UNEP Risø Centre on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development. Available at: http://www.cd4cdm.org/Publications/pCDM&EE.pdf.

  • Hockerts, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2009). Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids—Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. CBS Working Paper Series. CBS Center for Corporate Social Responsibility. Available at: http://openarchive.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/10398/7122/wp%20cbscsr%202009-1.pdf?sequence=3.

  • Hofmeister-Tóth, Á., Kelemen, K., & Piskóti M. (2010). Changes in consumer behavior patterns in the light of sustainability. Conference Proceedings of Business and Economics Society International 2009 Conference, 15–19 July, Athen, pp 51–61.

  • IPCC. (1997). Workshop on mitigation and adaptation cost assessment. Denmark: IPCC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, C., Dürrenberger, G., Kastenholz, H., & Truffer, B. (1993). Determinants of environmental action with regard to climate change. Climate Change, 23, 193–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakob, M. (2006). Marginal costs and co-benefits of energy efficiency investments. The case of the Swiss residential sector. Energy Policy, 34, 172–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakob, M. (2007). The drivers of and barriers to energy efficiency in renovation decisions of single-family home-owners. CEPE Working Paper Series 07-56. Zürich: CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH.

  • Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • KSH. (2005). Housing conditions at the turn of the century. Budapest: KSH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labouze, E., Monier, V., Le Guern, Y., & Puyou, B. (2003). Study on environmental effects related to the lifecycle of products and services. Final Report version 2. Paris, France: European Commission, Directorate General Environment, Directorate A—Sustainable Development and Policy Support, BIO Intelligence Service/O2 France.

  • Marjainé Szerényi, Z., Zsóka, Á., & Széchy, A. (2009). Environmental education and pro-environmental consumer behaviour—Results of a university survey. Joint Actions on Climate Change Conference, 8–10 June, 2009, Aalborg, Denmark. Available at: http://gin.confex.com/gin/2009/webprogram/Paper2619.html.

  • Mishan, E. J., & Quah, E. (2007). Cost benefit analysis (5th ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll, H. C., Noorma, K., Kok, R., Engström, R., Throne-Holst, H., & Clark, C. (2006). Pursuing more sustainable consumption by analysing household metabolism in European countries and cities. In T. Jackson (Ed.), The Earthscan reader in sustainable consumption (pp. 67–87). UK: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nässén, J., & Holmberg, J. (2009). Quantifying the rebound effects of energy efficiency improvements and energy conserving behaviour in Sweden. Energy Efficiency, 2, 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemcsicsné Zsóka, Á. (2005). Consistency and gaps in pro-environmental organisational behaviour. Ph.D. dissertation. Budapest: Corvinus University of Budapest.

  • NEP. (2009). National Energy Saving Programme. Available in Hungarian at: http://eupalyazatiportal.hu/nemzeti_energiatakarekossagi_program_2009/.

  • Novikova, A., & Ürge-Vorsatz, D. (2007). Carbon dioxide mitigation potential in the Hungarian residential sector. Report on behalf of the Ministry of Environment and Water of the Republic of Hungary. Available at: http://3csep.ceu.hu/projects/carbon-dioxide-mitigation-potential-in-the-hungarian-residential-sector.

  • Paavola, J. (2007). Institutions and environmental governance: A reconceptualization. Ecological Economics, 63, 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peattie, K. (1999). In M. Charter & M. Polonsky (Eds.), Rethinking marketing: Shifting to a greener paradigm. In: Greener marketing. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard, H., & Biermayr, P. (2000). The rebound effect for space heating. Empirical evidence from Austria. Energy Policy, 38, 403–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robins, N., & Roberts, S. (2006). Making sense of sustainable consumption. In T. Jackson (Ed.), The Earthscan reader in sustainable consumption (pp. 39–50). UK: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roselius, T. (1971). Consumer rankings of risk reduction methods. Journal of Marketing, 35(1), 56–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubik, F., Scholl, G., Biedenkopf, K., Kalimo, H., Mohaupt, F., Söebech, Ó., et al. (2009). Innovative approaches in European sustainable consumption policies. Berlin: Schriftenreihe des IÖW 192/09.

  • Shove, E. (2003). Comfort, cleanliness and convenience: The social organization of normality. Oxford: Berg Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E., Watson, M., Hand, M., & Ingram, J. (2007). The design of everyday life, cultures of consumption series. USA: Berg Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., & Weber, E. U. (2002). Perception of risk posed by extreme events. The Conference on Risk Management Strategies in an Uncertain World, held in 12–13 April, 2002, Palisades, New York, pp 1–21.

  • Southerton, D., Chappells, H., & Van Vliet, B. (Eds.). (2004). Sustainable consumption: The implications of changing infrastructures of provision. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren, G. (2000). Lifestyles, consumption and the environment: The ecological modernisation of domestic consumption. In A. P. J. Mol & D. A. Sonnenfeld (Eds.), Ecological modernisation around the world: Perspectives and critical debates. London: Frank Cass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren, G. (2003). Sustainable consumption: A theoretical and environmental policy perspective. Society & Natural Resources, 16, 687–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spaargaren, G., & Martens, S. (2005). Globalisation and the role of citizen-consumers in environmental politics. In F. Vijen, K. Zooteman, & J. Pieters (Eds.), A handbook of globalisation and environmental policy: National government interventions in a global arena. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, N. (2008). The economics of climate change. The American Economic Review, 98, 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thøgersen, J. (2005). How may consumer policy empower consumers for sustainable lifestyles? Journal of Consumer Policy, 28, 143–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thøgersen, J., & Crompton, T. (2009). Simple and painless? The limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32, 141–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tukker, A., & Jansen, B. (2006). Environmental impacts of products. A detailed review of studies. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 10(3), 159–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ürge-Vorsatz, D., & Füle, M. (1999). Economics of greenhouse gas limitations. Hungary Country Study. Denmark: UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment and Riso National Laboratory.

  • van Raaij, W., & Verhallen, T. (1983). A behavioral model of residential energy use. Journal of Economic Psychology, 3(1), 39–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weidema, B. P., Suh, S., & Notten, P. (2006). Setting priorities within product-oriented environmental policy: The Danish perspectives. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 10, 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wesselink, B., & Deng, I. (2009). Sectoral emission reduction potentials and economic costs for climate change. London: ECOFYS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widegren, O. (1998). The new environmental paradigm and personal norms. Environment and Behavior, 30, 75–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Research Institute (2010). Global climate trends 2005. Available at: http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/data_tables/cli5_2005.pdf.

  • Wüstenhagen, R. (1998). Greening Goliaths vs. multiplying Davids, Pfade einer Coevolution ökologischer Massenmärkte und nachhaltiger Nischen. St. Gallen: IWÖ-HSG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zilahy, G. (2004). Organisational factors determining the implementation of cleaner production measures in the corporate sector. Journal of Cleaner Production, 12(4), 311–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zilahy, G., Nemcsicsné Zsóka, Á., Szeszler, Á., Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Markandya, A., & Hunt, A. (2000). The indirect costs and benefits of greenhouse gas limitation: Hungary case study. Handbook Reports. Denmark: UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment and Riso National Laboratory.

Download references

Acknowledgement

Our research activity has been supported by the Norwegian Financial Mechanism.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Economics and Technology, Institute of Environmental Science, Corvinus University of Budapest, Fővám tér 8, 1093, Budapest, Hungary

    Mária Csutora & Ágnes Zsóka

Authors
  1. Mária Csutora
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ágnes Zsóka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ágnes Zsóka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Csutora, M., Zsóka, Á. Maximizing the Efficiency of Greenhouse Gas Related Consumer Policy. J Consum Policy 34, 67–90 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-010-9147-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-010-9147-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation