This article reviews and evaluates the effectiveness of interventions aiming to encourage households to reduce energy consumption. Thirty-eight studies performed within the field of (applied) social and environmental psychology are reviewed, and categorized as involving either antecedent strategies (i.e. commitment, goal setting, information, modeling) or consequence strategies (i.e. feedback, rewards). Particular attention is given to the following evaluation criteria: ( 1) to what extent did the intervention result in behavioral changes and/or reductions in energy use, (2) were underlying behavioral determinants examined (e.g. knowledge, attitudes), ( 3) to what extent could effects be attributed to the interventions and, (4) were effects maintained over longer periods of time? Interestingly, most studies focus on voluntary behavior change, by changing individual knowledge and/or perceptions rather than changing contextual factors (i.e. pay-off structure) which may determine households' behavioral decisions. Interventions have been employed with varying degrees of success. Information tends to result in higher knowledge levels, but not necessarily in behavioral changes or energy savings. Rewards have effectively encouraged energy conservation, but with rather short-lived effects. Feedback has also proven its merits, in particular when given frequently. Some important issues cloud these conclusions, such as methodological problems. Also, little attention is given to actual environmental impact of energy savings. Often, an intervention's effectiveness is studied without examining underlying psychological determinants of energy use and energy savings. Also, it is not always clear whether effects were maintained over a longer period of time. Recommendations are given to further improve intervention planning and to enhance the effectiveness of interventions.

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

a b s t r a c tHouseholds constitute an important target group for energy conservation. They not only use energy in a direct way (gas, electricity and fuel) but also in an indirect way (embedded in the production, consumption and disposal of goods). During a period of five months (viz., October 2002-March 2003, direct and indirect energy use and direct and indirect energy savings of 189 Dutch households were monitored. The study examined the relative importance of socio-demographic variables and psychological variables in relation to household energy use and changes in energy use (viz., energy savings). For this purpose, variables from the theory of planned behavior [Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211] and the norm activation model [Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.). Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221-279). New York: Academic Press] were used. Results indicate that energy use is determined by socio-demographic variables, whereas changes in energy use, which may require some form of (cognitive) effort, appear to be related to psychological variables. The variables from the norm activation model were able to significantly add to the explanation of energy savings, over and above the variables from the theory of planned behavior. Also, different types of energy use and energy savings appeared to be related to different sets of determinants.

Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

In this multidisciplinary study, an Internet-based tool was used to encourage households (N ¼ 189) to reduce their direct (gas, electricity and fuel) and indirect energy use (embedded in the production, transportation and disposal of consumer goods). A combination of tailored information, goal setting (5%), and tailored feedback was used. The purpose of this study was to examine whether this combination of interventions would result in (i) changes in direct and indirect energy use, (ii) changes in energy-related behaviors, and (iii) changes in behavioral antecedents (i.e. knowledge). After 5 months, households exposed to the combination of interventions saved 5.1%, while households in the control group used 0.7% more energy. Households exposed to the interventions saved significantly more direct energy than households in the control group did. No difference in indirect energy savings emerged. Households exposed to the interventions adopted a number of energy-saving behaviors during the course of the study, whereas households in the control group did so to a lesser extent. Households exposed to the interventions had significantly higher knowledge levels of energy conservation than the control group had. It is argued that if the aim is to effectively encourage household energy conservation, it is necessary to examine changes in energy use, energy-related behaviors and behavioral antecedents.