Abstract
World society and decision makers are running out of time to implement measures on climate change mitigation and adaptation. Incomplete knowledge and vast challenges in communicating climate change are crucial factors in this problem. In order to increase people’s awareness of their role in climate change, highly specific communication strategies are necessary. Besides insufficient information on group-specific realities of life, existing strategies are often limited by the absence of quantitative data that could give decision makers the opportunity to estimate the potential and evaluate the success of communication measures. In order to meet these requirements, energy use and corresponding emissions must be analysed in relation to behavioural patterns and technology choices of relevant social groups. This perspective leads to a more detailed understanding of how energy use and the responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions are distributed within society. This paper presents an interdisciplinary approach for providing the required knowledge within a single research process and describes its most relevant features as compared to previous methods. We describe the empirical development of an impact based “Energy Lifestyle” typology for the Austrian society and describe the six identified groups in detail with special focus on the challenges that might evolve in group specific communication. Thereafter, we set the six Energy Lifestyles in context with the name-giving concept “Paris Lifestyle” and discuss its role for evaluating the succession towards the goals set out in the Paris Agreement.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
UNFCCC (2017).
- 2.
European Commission (2017).
- 3.
One factor that obviously limits the benefit from such models is the attitude-action gap, which is a common problem in research on environmental behaviour.
- 4.
Indirect energy demand or emissions based on a Lifecycle-Assessment of food, products and services is not covered by this Analysis.
References
Abrahamse W, Steg L (2009) How do socio-demographic and psychological factors relate to households’ direct and indirect energy use and savings? J Econ Psychol 30(5):711–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2009.05.006
Bacher J, Pöge A, Wenzig K (2010) Clusteranalyse. Gruyter, de Oldenbourg
Bohunovsky L, Grünberger S, Frühmann J, Hinterberger F (2011) Energieverbrauchsstile Datenbank zum Energieverbrauch österreichischer Haushalte: Erstellung und empirische Überprüfung. Endbericht
Bourdieu P (1987) Distinction: a social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press
Buchanan K, Russo R, Anderson B (2015) The question of energy reduction: the problem(s) with feedback. Energy Policy 77:89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.12.008
Hartmann P (1999) Lebensstilforschung. Darstellung, Kritik und Weiterentwicklung. Leske & Budrich
Hermann D (2004) Bilanz der empirischen Lebensstilforschung. KZfSS Kölner Z Soz Sozpsychol 56(1):153–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-004-0007-2
Hierzinger R, Herry M, Seisser O, Steinacher I, Wolf-Eberl S (2011) Energy styles. Klimagerechtes Leben der Zukunft—Energy Styles als Ansatzpunkt für effiziente Policy Interventions. Endbericht zum Projekt Energy Styles. Klima- und Energiefonds
Holden E (2004) Towards sustainable consumption: do green households have smaller ecological footprints? Int J Sustain Dev 7(1):44–58. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2004.004983
Hradil S (1987) Sozialstrukturanalyse in einer fortgeschrittenen Gesellschaft. Sozialstrukturanalyse in einer fortgeschrittenen Gesellschaft. Leverkusen: Leske + Budrich. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-97175-3
Johnson D, Horton E, Mulcahy R, Foth M (2017) Gamification and serious games within the domain of domestic energy consumption: a systematic review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 73(Suppl C):249–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.134
Johnson TP (1998) Approaches to equivalence in cross-cultural and cross-national survey research. In: Harkness J (ed) Cross-cultural survey equivalence, vol 3. Harkness, Janet, pp 1–40. Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-49730-6
Kaklamanou D, Jones CR, Webb TL, Walker SR (2015) Using public transport can make up for flying abroad on holiday. Environ Behav 47(2):184–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916513488784
Kuha J (2004) AIC and BIC. Soc Methods Res 33(2):188–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124103262065
Lüdtke (1996) Methodenprobleme der Lebensstilforschung. Probleme des Vergleichs empirischer Lebensstiltypologien und der Identifikation von Stilpionieren. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-99689-3_7
Meyer T (2001) Das Konzept der Lebensstile in der Sozialstrukturforschung—eine kritische Bilanz. Soz Welt 52(3):255–271. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40878354
Otte G (2005) Construction and test of an integrative lifestyle-typology for Germany. Z Soz 6:442–467
Poortinga W, Steg L, Vlek C (2004) Values, environmental concern, and environmental behavior. Environ Behav 36(1):70–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916503251466
Reusswig F (2002) Lebensstile und Naturorientierungen. Gesellschaftliche Naturbilder und Einstellungen zum Naturschutz. In: Rink D (ed) Soziologie und Ökologie, vol Lebensstile und Nachhaltigkeit. Konzepte, Befunde und Potentiale. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, pp 156–180
Schulze G (2005) Die Erlebnisgesellschaft. Kultursoziologie der Gegenwart. Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main
Spellerberg A (2001) Peter H. Hartmann: Lebensstilforschung. Darstellung, Kritik und Weiterentwicklung. KZfSS Kölner Z Soz Sozpsychol 53(1):170–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-001-0011-8
Tabi A (2013) Does pro-environmental behaviour affect carbon emissions? Energy Policy 63:972–981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.049
Tomlinson M (2003) Lifestyle and social class. Eur Sociol Rev 19(1):97–111. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/19.1.97
Online Sources
European Commission, 2050 low-carbon economy, viewed 28 Sept 2017, https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/strategies/2050_en
OECD-modified Income Scale, viewed 14 Sept 2017, http://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/OECD-Note-EquivalenceScales.pdf
UNFCCC (2017) The Paris agreement, viewed 28 Sept 2017. http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php
Acknowledgements
The work presented in this paper is part of the dissertation of Stephan Schwarzinger, who is the leading author regarding the identification of impact based lifestyle groups.
Finally, we would like to thank our colleagues at SERI (Sustainable Europe Research Institute) who provided the dataset used in our analysis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schwarzinger, S., Bird, D.N., Hadler, M. (2019). The “Paris Lifestyle”—Bridging the Gap Between Science and Communication by Analysing and Quantifying the Role of Target Groups for Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: An Interdisciplinary Approach. In: Leal Filho, W., Lackner, B., McGhie, H. (eds) Addressing the Challenges in Communicating Climate Change Across Various Audiences. Climate Change Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98294-6_23
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98294-6_23
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98293-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98294-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)