How does culture influence low-carbon energy transitions? How can insights about cultural influences guide energy planners and policymakers trying to stimulate transitions, particularly at a time of rapid technological change? This Review examines the influence of culture on a selection of low-carbon technologies and behavioural practices that reflect different dimensions of sustainability. Based on a typology of low-carbon technology and behaviour, we explore the cultural dimensions of four specific cases: eco-driving, ridesharing, automated vehicles and whole-house retrofits. We conclude with recommendations for those seeking to analyse, understand, develop, demonstrate and deploy low-carbon innovations for sustainable energy transitions.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.25 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Stephenson, J. Sustainability cultures and energy research: an actor-centred interpretation of cultural theory. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 44, 242–249 (2018).
Stephenson, J. et al. The energy cultures framework: exploring the role of norms, practices and material culture in shaping energy behaviour in New Zealand. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 7, 117–123 (2015).
Sovacool, B. K. & Griffiths, S. The cultural barriers to a low-carbon future: a review of six mobility and energy transitions across 28 countries. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 119, 109569 (2020).
Sovacool, B. K. How long will it take? conceptualizing the temporal dynamics of energy transitions. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 13, 202–215 (2016).
International Energy Agency World Energy Outlook 2018 (OECD/IEA, 2018).
2019 World Energy Issues Monitor (World Energy Council, 2019).
BP Energy BP Energy Outlook: 2019 Edition (BP, 2019).
Fostering Effective Energy Transition (World Economic Forum, 2019).
Energy Perspectives 2018 (Equinor, 2018).
Geels, F., Schwanen, T., Sorrell, S., Jenkins, K. & Sovacool, B. K. Reducing energy demand through low carbon innovation: a sociotechnical transitions perspective and thirteen research debates. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 40, 23–35 (2018).
Sovacool, B. K., Lipson, M. & Chard, R. Temporality, vulnerability, and energy justice in household low carbon innovations. Energy Policy 128, 495–504 (2019).
Shove, E., Pantzar, M. & Watson, M. The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How It Changes (Sage Publishing, Ltd, 2012).
Reckwitz, A. Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing. Eur. J. Soc. Theory 5, 243–263 (2002).
Jessop, B. Institutional re(turns) and the strategic-relational approach. Environ. Plan. A 33, 1213–1235 (2001).
Balmaceda, M. et al. Energy materiality: a conceptual review of multi-disciplinary approaches. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 56, 101220 (2019).
Rahwan, I. et al. Machine behaviour. Nature 568, 477–486 (2019).
Boucher, J. L. in Sustainable Consumption, Promise or Myth: Case Studies from the Field (eds Boucher, J. L. & Heinonen, J.) 64–99 (Cambridge Scholars, 2019).
Miller, D. (ed.) Car Cultures (Berg Publishers, 2001).
Carrabine, E. & Longhurst, B. Consuming the car: anticipation, use and meaning in contemporary youth culture. Sociol. Rev. 50, 181–196 (2002).
Zavalko, A. Applying energy approach in the evaluation of eco-driving skill and eco-driving training of truck drivers. Transp. Res. D 62, 672–684 (2018).
Sivak, M. & Schoettle, B. Eco-driving: strategic, tactical, and operational decisions of the driver that influence vehicle fuel economy. Transp. Policy 22, 96–99 (2012).
Huang, Y. et al. Eco-driving technology for sustainable road transport: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 93, 596–609 (2018).
Lois, D., Wang, Y., Boggio-Marzet, A. & Monzon, A. Multivariate analysis of fuel consumption related to eco-driving: interaction of driving patterns and external factors. Transp. Res. D 72, 232–242 (2019).
Griskevicius, V., Tybur, J. M. & Van den Bergh, B. Going green to be seen: status, reputation, and conspicuous conservation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 98, 392–404 (2010).
Ashmore, D. P., Pojani, D., Thoreau, R., Christie, N. & Tyler, N. A. The symbolism of ‘eco cars’ across national cultures: potential implications for policy formulation and transfer. Transp. Res. D 63, 560–575 (2018).
Moeckli, J. & Lee, J. D. The Making of Driving Cultures (Univ. Iowa, 2007).
Hopkins, D. & Stephenson, J. Generation Y mobilities through the lens of energy cultures: a preliminary exploration of mobility cultures. J. Transp. Geogr. 38, 88–91 (2014).
Hopkins, D. & Stephenson, J. The replication and reduction of automobility: findings from Aotearoa, New Zealand. J. Transp. Geogr. 56, 92–101 (2016).
Kuipers, G. The rise and decline of national habitus: Dutch cycling culture and the shaping of national similarity. Eur. J. Soc. Theory 16, 17–35 (2013).
Stoffers, M. Cycling as heritage: representing the history of cycling in the Netherlands. J. Transp. Hist. 33, 92–114 (2012).
Atchley, P., Shi, J. & Yamamoto, T. Cultural foundations of safety culture: a comparison of traffic safety culture in China, Japan and the United States. Transp. Res. F 26, 317–325 (2012).
Ellison‐Potter, P., Bell, P. & Deffenbacher, J. The effects of trait driving anger, anonymity, and aggressive stimuli on aggressive driving behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 31, 431–443 (2001).
Gallus, J., Kirchner, U., Vogt, R. & Benter, T. Impact of driving style and road grade on gaseous exhaust emissions of passenger vehicles measured by a Portable Emission Measurement System (PEMS). Transp. Res. D 52, 215–226 (2017).
Faria, M. V., Duarte, G. O., Varella, R. A., Farias, T. L. & Baptista, P. C. Driving for decarbonization: assessing the energy, environmental, and economic benefits of less aggressive driving in Lisbon, Portugal. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 47, 113–127 (2019).
Driving More Efficiently (United States Department of Energy, accessed 10 December 2019); https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.jsp
Ellison, P. A., Govern, J. M., Petri, H. L. & Figler, M. H. Anonymity and Aggressive driving behavior: a field study. J. Soc. Behav. Pers. 10, 265–272 (1995).
Lupton, D. Monsters in metal cocoons: ‘road rage’ and cyborg bodies. Body Soc. 5, 57–72 (1999).
Cristea, M. et al. Extending the theory of planned behavior: the role of behavioral options and additional factors in predicting speed behavior. Transp. Res. F 21, 122–132 (2013).
Møller, M. & Haustein, S. Peer influence on speeding behaviour among male drivers aged 18 and 28. Accid. Anal. Prev. 64, 92–99 (2014).
Horvath, C., Lewis, I. & Watson, B. The beliefs which motivate young male and female drivers to speed: a comparison of low and high intenders. Accid. Anal. Prev. 45, 334–341 (2012).
Zhang, T. & Chan, A. The association between driving anger and driving outcomes: a meta-analysis of evidence from the past twenty years. Accid. Anal. Prev. 90, 50–62 (2016).
Zhang, X., Qu, X., Tao, D. & Xue, H. The association between sensation seeking and driving outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Accid. Anal. Prev. 123, 222–234 (2019).
de Waard, D., Dijksterhuis, C. & Brookhuis, K. A. Merging into heavy motorway traffic by young and elderly drivers. Accid. Anal. Prev. 41, 588–597 (2009).
Musselwhite, C. B. A. & Haddad, H. Exploring older drivers’ perceptions of driving. Eur. J. Ageing 7, 181–188 (2010).
Jain, J., Calvert, T., Clayton, B. & Parkhurst, G. Driver Attitudes and Behaviours Literature Review (Centre for Transport & Society, UWE Bristol, 2017).
Circella, G. & Alemi, F. in Advances in Transport Policy and Planning Vol. 1 (eds Shiftan, Y. & Kamargianni, M.) 119–144 (Academic Press, 2018).
Cai, H., Wang, X., Adriaens, P. & Xu, M. Environmental benefits of taxi ride sharing in Beijing. Energy 174, 503–508 (2019).
Chen, X., Zahiri, M. & Zhang, S. Understanding ridesplitting behavior of on-demand ride services: an ensemble learning approach. Transp. Res. C 76, 51–70 (2017).
Hertwich, E. G. et al. Material efficiency strategies to reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with buildings, vehicles, and electronics—a review. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 043004 (2019).
Axsen, J. & Sovacool, B. K. The roles of users in electric, shared, and automated mobility transitions. Transp. Res. D 71, 1–21 (2019).
Watanabe, C., Naveed, K., Neittaanmäki, P. & Fox, B. Consolidated challenge to social demand for resilient platforms - lessons from Uber’s global expansion. Technol. Soc. 48, 33–53 (2017).
Boyd, E. B. How Uber’s new deal will help it take control of the Middle East. Fast Company (26 March 2019).
Ghosh, S. & Thapar, A. Careem: Raising a Unicorn (Harvard Business School, 2017).
Davis, J., Vo, M. & Yang, A. Grab vs. Uber vs. Go-Jek: Digital Platform-based International Competition in South East Asia (INSEAD, 2018).
Yu, H. For some platforms, network effects are no match for local know-how. Harvard Business Review (26 July 2018).
Dajani, H. Emiratis get in the driving seat for Careem. The National (14 February 2019); https://go.nature.com/2x77wno
AFED Arab Environment: Sustainable Consumption. Annual Report of Arab Forum for Environment and Development, 2015 (Technical Publications, 2015).
Sovacool, B. K. & Axsen, J. Functional, symbolic and societal frames for automobility: implications for sustainability transitions. Transp. Res. A 118, 730–746 (2018).
Nielsen, J. R. et al. Of ‘white crows’ and ‘cash savers:’ a qualitative study of travel behavior and perceptions of ridesharing in Denmark. Transp. Res. A 78, 113–123 (2015).
SAE J3016A: Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles (SAE International, accessed 12 May 2017); http://standards.sae.org/j3016_201609/
Sprei, F. Disrupting mobility. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 37, 238–242 (2018).
Sperling, D., Pike, S. & Chase, R. in Three Revolutions: Steering Automated, Shared, and Electric Vehicles to a Better Future (ed. Sperling, D.) 1–20 (Island Press/Center for Resource Economics, 2018).
Milakis, D., van Arem, B. & van Wee, B. Policy and society related implications of automated driving: a review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intell. Transp. Syst. 21, 324–348 (2017).
Taiebat, M., Brown, A. L., Safford, H. R., Qu, S. & Xu, M. A. Review on energy, environmental, and sustainability implications of connected and automated vehicles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 11449–11465 (2018).
Marletto, G. Who will drive the transition to self-driving? A socio-technical analysis of the future impact of automated vehicles. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 139, 221–234 (2019).
Wadud, Z., MacKenzie, D. & Leiby, P. Help or hindrance? The travel, energy and carbon impacts of highly automated vehicles. Transp. Res. A 86, 1–18 (2016).
Liu, F., Zhao, F., Liu, Z. & Hao, H. Can autonomous vehicle reduce greenhouse gas emissions? A country-level evaluation. Energy Policy 132, 462–473 (2019).
Axsen, J. & Sovacool, B. K. The roles of users in electric, shared and automated mobility transitions. Transp. Res. D 71, 1–21 (2019).
Rolnick, D. et al. Tackling climate change with machine learning. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.05433 (2019).
Arbib, J. & Seba, T. Rethinking Transportation 2020-2030: The Disruption of Transportation and the Collapse of the Internal-Combustion Vehicle and Oil Industries (RethinkX, 2017).
Tennant, C., Stares, S. & Howard, S. Public discomfort at the prospect of autonomous vehicles: building on previous surveys to measure attitudes in 11 countries. Transp. Res. F 64, 98–118 (2019).
Gkartzonikas, C. & Gkritza, K. What have we learned? A review of stated preference and choice studies on autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. C 98, 323–337 (2019).
Hao, K. This is how AI bias really happens—and why it’s so hard to fix. MIT Technology Review (4 February 2019); https://go.nature.com/2xaxZjZ
Wilson, B., Hoffman, J. & Morgenstern, J. Predictive inequity in object detection. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.11097 (2019).
Rasouli, A. & Tsotsos, J. K. Autonomous vehicles that interact with pedestrians: a survey of theory and practice. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.11773 (2018).
Pele, M. et al. Cultural influence of social information use in pedestrian road-crossing behaviours. R. Soc. Open Sci 4, 160739 (2017).
Awad, E. et al. The Moral Machine experiment. Nature 563, 59–64 (2018).
2019 Autonomous Vehicles Readiness Index (KPMG, 2019).
Self-Driving Vehicles in an Urban Context (World Economic Forum and Boston Consulting Group, 2015).
Sanderson, D. Driverless cars risk being racist, new research suggests. The National (12 March 2019); https://go.nature.com/2Xe0Nmn
Hudson, J., Orviska, M. & Hunady, J. People’s attitudes to autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. A 121, 164–176 (2019).
Mannion, P. Vulnerable road user detection: state-of-the-art and open challenges. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.03601 (2019).
Jones, P., Li, X., Perisoglou, E. & Patterson, J. Five energy retrofit houses in South Wales. Energy Build. 154, 335–342 (2017).
Kerr, N., Gouldson, A. & Barrett, J. The rationale for energy efficiency policy: assessing the recognition of the multiple benefits of energy efficiency retrofit policy. Energy Policy 106, 212–221 (2017).
Brown, D., Sorrell, S. & Kivimaa, P. Worth the risk? An evaluation of alternative finance mechanisms for residential retrofit. Energy Policy 128, 418–430 (2019).
Satish, B. K. & Brennan, J. Understanding the energy use behaviour of British Indian households to shape optimised sustainable housing strategies in existing housing stock. Sustain. Cities Soc. 48, 101542 (2019).
Miller, W. et al. Involving occupants in net-zero-energy solar housing retrofits: an Australian sub-tropical case study. Solar Energy 159, 390–404 (2018).
Collins, M. & Curtis, J. An examination of the abandonment of applications for energy efficiency retrofit grants in Ireland. Energy Policy 100, 260–270 (2017).
Sunikka-Blank, M. & Galvin, R. Irrational homeowners? How aesthetics and heritage values influence thermal retrofit decisions in the United Kingdom. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11, 97–108 (2016).
Khalid, R. & Sunnika-Blank, M. Homely social practices, uncanny electricity demands. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 34, 122–131 (2017).
Wilhite, H. & Lutzenhiser, L. Social loading and sustainable consumption. Adv. Consum. Res. 26, 281–287 (1999).
Ryghaug, M. & Toftaker, M. A Transformative practice? Meaning, competence, and material aspects of driving electric cars in Norway. Nat. Cult. 9, 146–163 (2014).
Sagberg, F., Selpi, Piccinini, G. F. B. & Engström, J. A review of research on driving styles and road safety. Hum. Factors 57, 1248–1275 (2015).
Roberts, L. Outlining the Commercial Applications of Autonomous Vehicles (Lux Research, 2019).
How Uber Makes Money (CB Insights, 2018).
Hao, K. The three challenges keeping cars from being fully autonomous. MIT Technology Review (23 April 2019); https://go.nature.com/34dgQCp
Greenblatt, J. B. & Saxena, S. Autonomous taxis could greatly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions of US light-duty vehicles. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 860–863 (2015).
Bardazzi, R. & Pazienza, M. G. Switch off the light, please! Energy use, aging population and consumption habits. Energy Econ. 65, 161–171 (2017).
Dew, N., Aten, K. & Ferrer, G. How many admirals does it take to change a light bulb? Organizational innovation, energy efficiency, and the United States Navy’s battle over LED lighting. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 27, 57–67 (2017).
Norgaard, K. Nature, culture and the production of race. Section Culture: Newsletter of the ASA Culture Section Vol. 31 (2019); https://go.nature.com/2whidTS
Sovacool, B. K., Axsen, J. & Sorrell, S. Promoting novelty, rigor, and style in energy social science: towards codes of practice for appropriate methods and research design. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 45, 12–42 (2018).
Li, R., Crowe, J., Leifer, D., Zou, L. & Schoof, J. Beyond big data: social media challenges and opportunities for understanding social perception of energy. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 56, 101217 (2019).
Schumacher, E. F. Small Is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered 3rd edn (Vintage, 2011).
Panetta, K. A data and analytics leader’s guide to data literacy. Gartner (6 February 2019); https://go.nature.com/3bTNETj
IEA Digitalization & Energy (OECD/IEA, 2017).
Vinuesa, R. et al. The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. Nat. Commun. 11, 233 (2020).
Sovacool, B. K. What are we doing here? Analyzing fifteen years of energy scholarship and proposing a social science research agenda. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 1, 1–29 (2014).
Rasmussen, J. Risk management in a dynamic society: a modeling problem. Safe. Sci. 27, 183–213 (1997).
We acknowledge support from UK Research and Innovation through the Centre for Research into Energy Demand Solutions, grant reference no. EP/R035288/1. We thank the members of the Energy and Social Science Network (EASSN), and the Sustainability Transitions Research Network (STRN), for sharing studies to help build the evidence base for the Review. M. Jefferson and T. Fawcett also offered very helpful suggestions for improvement.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Sovacool, B.K., Griffiths, S. Culture and low-carbon energy transitions. Nat Sustain 3, 685–693 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0519-4
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (2021)
Words against injustices: A deep narrative analysis of energy cultures in poverty of Abuja, Mumbai and Rio de Janeiro
Energy Research & Social Science (2021)
Energy Research & Social Science (2020)