Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour is necessary to reduce CO2 emissions and limit global climate change. Many reviews and meta-analyses have been published examining the effectiveness of interventions to promote pro-environmental behaviour. Yet, it remains unclear which interventions are most effective, when and why. Because interventions are more likely to encourage pro-environmental behaviour when they target key determinants of the relevant behaviour, it is critical to understand which interventions target which determinants. We introduce a classification system that links six types of interventions to 13 determinants of environmental behaviour. Our classification enables a theory-based understanding of when and why interventions are effective (or not) in encouraging pro-environmental behaviour and provides guidelines to practitioners to select interventions that are most likely to change the key determinants of a specific target behaviour, and thus likely to be the most successful in changing behaviour in the given context.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to Nature and 55 other Nature journal
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $9.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
IPCC: Summary for Policymakers. in Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (eds Pörtner, H.-O. et al.) (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).
Clarke, L. et al. in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Shukla, P. R. et al.) Ch. 6 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).
Wynes, S. & Nicholas, K. A. The climate mitigation gap: education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 074024 (2017).
Steg, L. & Vlek, C. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. J. Environ. Psychol. 29, 309–317 (2009).
Hall, M. P., Lewis, N. A. & Ellsworth, P. C. Believing in climate change, but not behaving sustainably: evidence from a one-year longitudinal study. J. Environ. Psychol. 56, 55–62 (2018).
Steg, L. Limiting climate change requires research on climate action. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 759–761 (2018).
Karlin, B., Zinger, J. F. & Ford, R. The effects of feedback on energy conservation: a meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 141, 1205–1227 (2015).
Nisa, C. F., Belanger, J. J., Schumpe, B. M. & Faller, D. G. Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change. Nat. Commun. 10, 4545 (2019).
Composto, J. W. & Weber, E. U. Effectiveness of behavioural interventions to reduce household energy demand: a scoping review. Environ. Res. Lett. 17, 063005 (2022).
Mertens, S., Herberz, M., Hahnel, U. J. J. & Brosch, T. The effectiveness of nudging: a meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions across behavioral domains. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2107346118 (2022).
Andor, M. A. & Fels, K. M. Behavioral economics and energy conservation—a systematic review of non-price interventions and their causal effects. Ecol. Econ. 148, 178–210 (2018).
Delmas, M. A., Fischlein, M. & Asensio, O. I. Information strategies and energy conservation behavior: a meta-analysis of experimental studies from 1975 to 2012. Energy Policy 61, 729–739 (2013).
Varotto, A. & Spagnolli, A. Psychological strategies to promote household recycling: a systematic review with meta-analysis of validated field interventions. J. Environ. Psychol. 51, 168–188 (2017).
Schultz, P. W. Strategies for promoting proenvironmental behavior. Eur. Psychol. 19, 107–117 (2014).
Michie, S. et al. From theory-inspired to theory-based interventions: a protocol for developing and testing a methodology for linking behaviour change techniques to theoretical mechanisms of action. Ann. Behav. Med. 52, 501–512 (2018).
Geller, E. S. in Handbook of Environmental Psychology (eds Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A.) 525–540 (Wiley, 2002).
Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C. & Rothengatter, T. A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. J. Environ. Psychol. 25, 273–291 (2005).
Osbaldiston, R. & Schott, J. P. Environmental sustainability and behavioral science. Environ. Behav. 44, 257–299 (2011).
McCaul, K. D. & Kopp, J. T. Effects of goal setting and commitment on increasing metal recycling. J. Appl. Psychol. 67, 377–379 (1982).
Bamberg, S. & Möser, G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 27, 14–25 (2007).
Klöckner, C. A. A comprehensive model of the psychology of environmental behaviour—a meta-analysis. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 1028–1038 (2013).
Vesely, S. et al. Climate change action as a project of identity: eight meta-analyses. Glob. Environ. Change 70, 102322 (2021).
Schultz, P. W. in New Tools for Environmental Protection: Education, Information and Voluntary Measures (eds Dietz, T. & Stern, P. C.) 67–82 (National Academy Press, 2002).
Steg, L. & de Groot, J. I. M. (eds) Environmental Psychology: An Introduction 2nd edn (Wiley, 2018).
Ajzen, I. The theory of planned behaviour. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50, 179–211 (1991).
Rogers, R. W. in Social Psychophysiology: A Sourcebook (eds Cacioppo, B. L. & Petty, L. L.) 153–176 (Guildford, 1983).
Schwartz, S. H. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (ed. Berkowitz, L.) Vol. 10, 221–278 (Academic Press, 1977).
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A. & Kalof, L. A value–belief–norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Res. Hum. Ecol. 6, 81–97 (1999).
Stern, P. C. Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. J. Soc. Issues 56, 407–424 (2000).
Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R. & Kallgren, C. A. A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 58, 1015–1026 (1990).
Steg, L. Values, norms, and intrinsic motivation to act proenvironmentally. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 41, 277–292 (2016).
Schwartz, S. H. An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. Online Read. Psychol. Cult. 2, 11 (2012).
Dunlap, R. E. & Van Liere, K. D. The “New Environmental Paradigm”. J. Environ. Educ. 9, 10–19 (1978).
Stern, P. C., Dietz, T. & Guagnano, G. A. The New Ecological Paradigm in social–psychological context. Environ. Behav. 27, 723–743 (1995).
Brosch, T. & Steg, L. Leveraging emotion for sustainable action. One Earth 4, 1693–1703 (2021).
Onwezen, M. C., Antonides, G. & Bartels, J. The norm activation model: an exploration of the functions of anticipated pride and guilt in pro-environmental behaviour. J. Econ. Psychol. 39, 141–153 (2013).
Sjöberg, L. Emotions and risk perception. Risk Manage. 9, 223–237 (2007).
Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K. & Welch, N. Risk as feelings. Psychol. Bull. 127, 267–286 (2001).
Dang, H., Li, E. & Bruwer, J. Understanding climate change adaptive behaviour of farmers: an integrated conceptual framework. Int. J. Clim. Change Impacts Responses 3, 255–272 (2012).
Westcott, R., Ronan, K., Bambrick, H. & Taylor, M. Expanding protection motivation theory: investigating an application to animal owners and emergency responders in bushfire emergencies. BMC Psychol. 5, 13 (2017).
Taufik, D. & Venhoeven, L. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds Steg, L. & de Groot, J. I. M.) 189–197 (Wiley, 2018).
Shipley, N. J. & van Riper, C. J. Pride and guilt predict pro-environmental behavior: a meta-analysis of correlational and experimental evidence. J. Environ. Psychol. 79, 101753 (2022).
Ateş, H. Merging theory of planned behavior and value identity personal norm model to explain pro-environmental behaviors. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 24, 169–180 (2020).
van der Werff, E. & Steg, L. The psychology of participation and interest in smart energy systems: comparing the value–belief–norm theory and the value–identity–personal norm model. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 22, 107–114 (2016).
Ajibade, I. & Boateng, G. O. Predicting why people engage in pro-sustainable behaviors in Portland Oregon: the role of environmental self-identity, personal norm, and socio-demographics. J. Environ. Manage. 289, 112538 (2021).
Schuster, C., Goseberg, T., Arnold, J. & Sundermann, A. I share because of who I am: values, identities, norms, and attitudes explain sharing intentions. J. Soc. Psychol., https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2022.2044282 (2022).
Gatersleben, B. & van der Werff, E. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds Steg, L. & de Groot, J. I. M.) 198–206 (Wiley, 2018).
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Keizer, K. I am what I am, by looking past the present. Environ. Behav. 46, 626–657 (2013).
Whitmarsh, L. & O’Neill, S. Green identity, green living? The role of pro-environmental self-identity in determining consistency across diverse pro-environmental behaviours. J. Environ. Psychol. 30, 305–314 (2010).
van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Keizer, K. The value of environmental self-identity: the relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behaviour. J. Environ. Psychol. 34, 55–63 (2013).
Abrahamse, W. Encouraging Pro-environmental Behaviour: What Works, What Doesn’t, and Why (Academic Press, 2019).
Abrahamse, W. & Matthies, E. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds Steg, L. & de Groot, J. I. M.) 261–272 (Wiley, 2018).
Bolderdijk, J. W., Lehman, P. K. & Geller, E. S. in Environmental Psychology: An Introduction (eds Steg, L. & de Groot, J. I. M.) 273–282 (Wiley, 2018).
Grilli, G. & Curtis, J. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviours: a review of methods and approaches. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 135, 110039 (2021).
Schultz, P. W. & Kaiser, F. in The Oxford Handbook of Environmental and Conservation Psychology (ed. Clayton, S. D.) 556–580 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2012).
Blankenberg, A. & Alhusen, H. On the Determinants of Pro-environmental Behavior: A Literature Review and Guide for the Empirical Economist (University of Göttingen, Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research, 2019).
Bergquist, M., Nilsson, A., Harring, N. & Jagers, S. C. Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws. Nat. Clim. Change 12, 235–240 (2022).
Gifford, R. & Nilsson, A. Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: a review. Int J. Psychol. 49, 141–157 (2014).
Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R. & Tomera, A. N. Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: a meta-analysis. J. Environ. Educ. 18, 1–8 (1987).
Tobler, C., Visschers, V. H. M. & Siegrist, M. Consumers’ knowledge about climate change. Climatic Change 114, 189–209 (2012).
Kaiser, F. & Fuhrer, U. Ecological behavior’s dependency on different forms of knowledge. Appl. Psychol. 2003, 598–613 (2003).
Grothmann, T. & Patt, A. Adaptive capacity and human cognition: the process of individual adaptation to climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 15, 199–213 (2005).
Kothe, E. J. et al. Protection motivation theory and pro‐environmental behaviour: a systematic mapping review. Aust. J. Psychol. 71, 411–432 (2020).
Joshi, Y. & Rahman, Z. Factors affecting green purchase behaviour and future research directions. Int. Strateg. Manage. Rev. 3, 128–143 (2015).
Stankuniene, G., Streimikiene, D. & Kyriakopoulos, G. L. Systematic literature review on behavioral barriers of climate change mitigation in households. Sustainability 12, 7369 (2020).
Tilikidou, I. & Zotos, Y. Ecological consumer behaviour: review and suggestions for future research. Prospettive e Proposte Mediterranee Rivista di Economia, Agricoltura e Ambiente 1, 14–21 (1999).
Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ. Educ. Res. 8, 239–260 (2010).
de Groot, J. I. M. & Steg, L. Morality and prosocial behavior: the role of awareness, responsibility, and norms in the norm activation model. J. Soc. Psychol. 149, 425–449 (2009).
Delaroche, M. Adoption of conservation practices: what have we learned from two decades of social–psychological approaches? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 45, 25–35 (2020).
Hoffmann, C., Abraham, C., White, M. P., Ball, S. & Skippon, S. M. What cognitive mechanisms predict travel mode choice? A systematic review with meta-analysis. Transp. Rev. 37, 631–652 (2017).
Okumah, M., Martin-Ortega, J., Novo, P. & Chapman, P. J. Revisiting the determinants of pro-environmental behaviour to inform land management policy: a meta-analytic structural equation model application. Land 9, 135 (2020).
Schwartz, S. H. & Howard, J. A. in Altruism and Helping Behaviour (eds Rushton, J. P. & Sorrentino, R. M.) 189–211 (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1981).
Geiger, J. L., Steg, L., van der Werff, E. & Ünal, A. B. A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. J. Environ. Psychol. 64, 78–97 (2019).
Abrahamse, W. & Steg, L. Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: a meta-analysis. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 1773–1785 (2013).
Lokhorst, A. M., Werner, C., Staats, H., van Dijk, E. & Gale, J. L. Commitment and behavior change. Environ. Behav. 45, 3–34 (2011).
Cialdini, R. B. Influence: Science and Practice (HarperCollins, 2001).
Taufik, D., Bolderdijk, J. W. & Steg, L. Acting green elicits a literal warm glow. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 37–40 (2015).
van der Linden Warm glow is associated with low- but not high-cost sustainable behaviour. Nat. Sustain. 1, 28–30 (2018).
Turuga, R. M. R., Howart, R. B. & Borsuk, M. E. Pro-environmental behavior: rational choice meets moral motivation. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1185, 211–224 (2010).
Lin, M.-T., Zhu, D., Liu, C. & Kim, P. B. A meta-analysis of antecedents of pro-environmental behavioral intention of tourists and hospitality consumers. Tour. Manage. 93,104566 (2022).
Venhoeven, L. A., Bolderdijk, J. W. & Steg, L. Why acting environmentally-friendly feels good: exploring the role of self-image. Front. Psychol. 7, 1846 (2016).
Morren, M. & Grinstein, A. Explaining environmental behavior across borders: a meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 47, 91–106 (2016).
Carfora, V., Zeiske, N., van der Werff, E., Steg, L. & Catellani, P. Adding dynamic norm to environmental information in messages promoting the reduction of meat consumption. Environ. Commun., https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2062019 (2022).
Asensio, O. I. & Delmas, M. A. Nonprice incentives and energy conservation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E510–E515 (2015).
Bain Paul, G. et al. Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 154–157 (2015).
Grundy, E. A. C. et al. Interventions that influence animal-product consumption: a meta-review. Future Food 5,100111 (2022).
Farrow, K., Grolleau, G. & Ibanez, L. Social norms and pro-environmental behavior: a review of the evidence. Ecol. Econ. 140, 1–13 (2017).
Masson, T. & Fritsche, I. We need climate change mitigation and climate change mitigation needs the ‘we’: a state-of-the-art review of social identity effects motivating climate change action. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 42, 89–96 (2021).
Niemiec, R. M., Champine, V., Vaske, J. J. & Mertens, A. Does the impact of norms vary by type of norm and type of conservation behavior? A meta-analysis. Soc. Nat. Resour. 33, 1024–1040 (2020).
Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B. & Griskevicius, V. A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. J. Consum. Res. 35, 472–482 (2008).
Allcott, H. Social norms and energy conservation. J. Public Econ. 95, 1082–1095 (2011).
Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldberg, N. J. & Griskevicius, V. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18, 429–434 (2007).
Carrico, A. R. & Riemer, M. Motivating energy conservation in the workplace: an evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education. J. Environ. Psychol. 31, 1–13 (2011).
Siero, S., Boon, M., Kok, G. & Siero, F. Modification of driving behavior in a large transport organization: a field experiment. J. Appl. Psychol. 74, 417–423 (1989).
Mortensen, C. R. et al. Trending norms: a lever for encouraging behaviors performed by the minority. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 10, 201–210 (2017).
Sparkman, G. & Walton, G. M. Dynamic norms promote sustainable behavior, even if it is counternormative. Psychol. Sci. 28, 1663–1674 (2017).
Pettifor, H., Wilson, C., Axsen, J., Abrahamse, W. & Anable, J. Social influence in the global diffusion of alternative fuel vehicles—a meta-analysis. J. Transp. Geogr. 62, 247–261 (2017).
St John, F. A. V., Edwards-Jones, G. & Jones, J. P. G. Conservation and human behaviour: lessons from social psychology. Wildl. Res. 37, 658–667 (2010).
Thøgersen, J. The mediated influences of perceived norms on pro-environmental behavior. Rev. Econ. Polit. 124, 179–193 (2014).
Appelbaum, S. H. & Hare, A. Self-efficacy as a mediator of goal setting and performance: some human resource applications. J. Manage. Psychol. 11, 33–47 (1996).
Zhuang, W., Luo, X. & Riaz, M. U. On the factors influencing green purchase intention: a meta-analysis approach. Front. Psychol. 12, 644020 (2021).
Udall, A. M., Groot, J. I. M., Jong, S. B. & Shankar, A. How do I see myself? A systematic review of identities in pro‐environmental behaviour research. J. Consum. Behav. 19, 108–141 (2020).
Kahneman, D. Thinking Fast and Slow (Macmillan, 2011).
Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R. Nudge (Yale Univ. Press, 2008).
Inzlicht, M., Legault, L. & Teper, R. Exploring the mechanisms of self-control improvement. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23, 302–307 (2014).
Latham, G. P. & Locke, E. A. New developments in and directions for goal-setting research. Eur. Psychol. 12, 290–300 (2007).
Bolderdijk, J. W., Gorsira, M., Keizer, K. & Steg, L. Values determine the (in)effectiveness of informational interventions in promoting pro-environmental behavior. PLoS ONE 8, e83911 (2013).
Boomsma, C. & Steg, L. The effect of information and values on acceptability of reduced street lighting. J. Environ. Psychol. 39, 22–31 (2014).
van den Broek, K., Bolderdijk, J. W. & Steg, L. Individual differences in values determine the relative persuasiveness of biospheric, economic and combined appeals. J. Environ. Psychol. 53, 145–156 (2017).
Gromet, D. M., Kunreuther, H. & Larrick, R. P. Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 9314–9319 (2013).
Wolsko, C., Ariceaga, H. & Seiden, J. Red, white, and blue enough to be green: effects of moral framing on climate change attitudes and conservation behaviors. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 65, 7–19 (2016).
Laursen, B. & Faur, S. What does it mean to be susceptible to influence? A brief primer on peer conformity and developmental changes that affect it. Int. J. Behav. Dev. 46, 222–237 (2022).
Whitmarsh, L., Poortinga, W. & Capstick, S. Behaviour change to address climate change. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 42, 76–81 (2021).
Dietz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P. C. & Vandenbergh, M. P. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 18452–18456 (2009).
Steg, L., Keizer, K., Buunk, A. P. & Rothengatter, T. Applied Social Psychology (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2017).
Buunk, A. P., Dijkstra, P. & van Vught, M. Applying Social Psychology: From Problems to Solutions (Sage, 2021).
Stern, P. C., DIetz, T., Gardner, G. T., Gilligan, J. M. & Vandenbergh, M. P. Energy efficiency merits more than a nudge. Science 328, 308–309 (2010).
Mols, F., Haslam, S. A., Jetten, J. & Steffens, N. K. Why a nudge is not enough: a social identity critique of governance by stealth. Eur. J. Polit. Res. 54, 81–98 (2015).
Siegel, J. T., Navarro, M. A., Tan, C. N. & Hyde, M. K. Attitude–behavior consistency, the principle of compatibility, and organ donation: a classic innovation. Health Psychol. 33, 1084–1091 (2014).
van der Werff, E. & Steg, L. One model to predict them all: predicting energy behaviours with the norm activation model. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 6, 8–14 (2015).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information
Nature Human Behaviour thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
van Valkengoed, A.M., Abrahamse, W. & Steg, L. To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nat Hum Behav 6, 1482–1492 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01473-w