1

5th Lunch Workshop on Informational Governance at Wageningen University

Two RIVM Projects:

1) Interventions for Sustainable

Lifestyles

2) Expert Advice on Complex Issues

Thursday 13th of February 2014 | 12:00-13:00hrs

2

1. Introduction RIVM

2. Project 1: Interventions for Sustainable Lifestyles

Anna-Marie Schriel

3. Project 2: Expert Advice on Complex Issues Pita Spruijt

4. Discussion

RIVM an introduction How can we keep ourselves and our environment healthy? That is the challenge facing government authorities at all levels, from the local to the international (e.g. The Hague, EU, WHO). The National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) conducts research and provides advice to assist them. RIVM has a total of approximately 1,400 staff in this task. Based in Bilthoven, The Netherlands.

3

4

Project 1: Interventions for Sustainable Lifestyles Anna-Marie Schriel

Background

Main focus assignment: Food ● Less consumption ● Shift from animal to vegetable products ● Less food waste

6

Department of Sustainability • Strives for green, circulair economy • Looking for smarter ways of producing and consuming • Sustainability of household consumption in food, textiles and waste

Department of Sustainability

Request to RIVM

Project “Sustainable consumer behaviour”

7

• How to influence behaviour to a more sustainable consumer behaviour

Stage of the project ● Literature review completed ● Method: snowball and qualitative search of relevant literature (after 2000) ● First draft report ● This presentation: first, tentative findings

8

Influencing behavior (1) Most choices are not rational Multiple factors influence

9

individual behavior

attitudes & values

motivation

habits

awareness & perception

social influence

Influencing behavior (2) ● Sustainable behavior is often routine or habit ● People are not always receptive to information ● The gap between intention and actual behavior is often large ● Segmentation: behavior can be divided into different groups

Implications ● ‘traditional’ approach providing information alone, is not

sufficient/enough to change behavior ● There’s no single solution or approach

– different approaches for each, specific behavior feature – combination of approaches is an option – a different approach for each different segment or group

10

Systematically development Match the appropriate approach to desired behavior Used in the field of health promotion Main steps in intervention development 1. Analyse problem (problem definition) 2. Analyse specific features of behavior (behavior determinants) 3. Develope appropriate Intervention Deduction

11

Segmenting consumers Method used in the field of social marketing ● distinct consumer groups on

variables such as motivation, values or norms

● quantitative analysis led to the development of segmentation

Approach for segments 1. Reïnforce 2. Incentivise 3. Help 4. Less or no effort

12

Bron: Greenprint segmentation http://blog.thefuturescompany.com

1 2

3 4

Policy instruments

Innovative elements for sustainable consumer policy ● Collective actions: Anticipating on community building among consumers ● Adaptability: flexible and react quickly and dynamically to changes ● Provide detailed and up-to-date information ● Evidence base for effective approach to changing behavior ● Policy documentation: proper documentation of the implemented policies ● Analyzing sustainable policy instruments against the dimension:

– Creating green markets – Making Sustainable Consuming easy – Raising consumer awareness

13

Role government Connecting ● Local initiatives with each other or with top-down intervention ● Financiers and projects ● Exchange information and learn from each other ● Initiatives that can reinforce each other Catalyzing ● Remove or break barriers to make sustainable consuming easy ‘adapting laws or environment’ (facilitate)

14

Discussion Influencing behavior: allowed?

15

Project 2: Roles of Scientists as Policy Advisers on Complex Issues Pita Spruijt

RIVM PhD Project ● 2011-2014

● First Promotor: Erik Lebret (Utrecht University/ RIVM) ● Second Promotor: Arthur Petersen (IVM, Free University

Amsterdam/ PBL) ● Daily Supervisor: Anne Knol (Utrecht University/ RIVM) ● PhD Candidate: Pita Spruijt

● (Inter)national collaboration with other universities and research

institutes.

● Is paid from the Strategic Research Budget of the RIVM.

17

Background (1) Modern environmental health issues are:

– Complex, uncertain and/or ambiguous – Large-scale – Different stakeholders (scientists, policymakers etc.)

These issues permit differences among experts in the appraisal of risks:

– Seriousness – Preferred policy option – Responsibility (industry, government, citizens) – Willingness to pay

18

Background (2)

● Individual perspectives on risks partly depend on: – Knowledge base – Role (scientist, policymaker, citizen) – Personal values

● Examples of cases where perspectives differed: HPV vaccination, Mexican Flu, Q fever, EMF, CO2 capture and storage, etc.

● If perspectives differ then this could lead to endless debate about

new policies, the (non-)use of scientific knowledge, etc.

● This raises the question how experts interpret scientific uncertainty and how this affects their policy advice?

19

20

Background (3) What roles do scientists play when they advice about complex risks? The criteria proposed by Roger A. Pielke, Jr. (2007) for the different roles of scientists in policy and politics;

Is the decision context characterizedby both values consensus

and low uncertainty?

Connected topolicy

Reduce scope ofchoice?

Honest BrokerIssue AdvocatePure ScientistScience Arbiter

yes no

yes no yes no

Previous work (1)

To better understand the roles of scientists and eventually improve their policy advice we started a research project. Pilot study: Do different experts have different roles when interacting with policymakers about complex environmental health issues? Result: We found three distinct roles in each expert group; Particular matter and Electromagnetic fields experts. (see Spruijt, P. et al. (2013) "Different Roles and Viewpoints of Scientific Experts in Advising on Environmental Health Risks." Risk Analysis 33(10): 1844-1857)

21

Previous work (2) Literature study: Which factors influence the way scientific experts advice policymakers on complex issues? Challenging, because… - Interdisciplinary research field - Multitude of terminology - Hardly literature reviews available - Different types of literature (articles, books, essays)

=> Systematic meta-analysis is not possible => Narrative analysis difficult

Used approach - Structured online search - Snowball method - Scientometrics analysis Method to analyze scientific publications

22

Previous work (3) Co-citation analysis output

23

Previous work (4) Result:

24

Suggestions to improve ways in which experts (should) advise on

complex issues

Transparency in methods, assumptions, etc.

Professional attitude of humility

Public participation, democratizing science (i.e., stakeholder dialogues)

Precautionary principle

Explicating different points of view within the expert community

Factors that influence the role of an expert

Type of issue (level of uncertainty/complexity)

Type of knowledge of the expert

Core values of the expert

Organization in which the expert works

Context (position of science in society)

Changing beliefs of experts

(see Spruijt, P. et al. (2014) Roles of Scientists as Policy Advisers on Complex Issues: a Literature Review Environmental Science & Policy)

Current work - cases

● Instead of more theory, empirical research.

● Case studies – Improved version of pilot study

– Selected complex issues:

› Electromagnetic fields (EMF)

› Particulate matter (PM)

› Antibiotic resistance (AMR)

25

Current work - methods ● International expert consultation;

– Structured expert nominee selection process

– Online consultation in December 2013

– Data collection using POETQ (Q Method)

– 28 AMR, 31 PM, and 31 EMF experts participated

26

Current work – preliminary results

● We can discern 3-5 roles (i.e., factors) per issue ● There are different roles and they seem to be issue dependent

● We want to analyse the effect of these different roles on actual policy advice ⇒ need to analyse the qualitative data on policy advice

More will follow soon!

27

28

Questions? Suggestions? Thank you for your attention!

Contact: pita.spruijt@rivm.nl