Every day practices and knowledge. How to call whom for participation?

1. Every day practices and knowledge. How to call whom for participation? Inka Bormann

2. …howtobettercombinetalkandaction …alwaystheusualsuspects! …noideaofhowtobreachkillerphrases …they do not understandwhat I wishthemto do… …I don‘tknowwhythey do not participate

3. Preliminaries • Amongothers, wethinkthateducationandcommunicationarecrucialleveragepointstomoveahead on thepathtowards sustainable development • However, unilateral instructionorinformationismuchtoolessandunproductive; • itseemsan inconducivestartingpoint on thelong tour towardssustainabledevelopment

4. Preliminaries • Unfortunately, thecausalitybetweenknowledge, consciousnessandactionhas not beenproven. • Thus, we need alternative ways to think about how to support sustainable actions. • Objectivesofoursessionthismorning • shiftingawayfrom a view on deficitsin knowledgetowardsa view on resourcesembeded in practices • becomingawareofandvalue different needsandburdensofpeople – but typed! • discussingaboutleveragepointstodiversifymodesofcommunicationandparticipation in HEI

5. Outline • Relation betweenknowledgeandpractices • Heterogeneouspracticesandlifestyles • Inherentleveragepoints • Target-group appropriateoffers for participation

6. Outline • Relation betweenknowledgeandpractices • Heterogeneouspracticesandlifestyles • Inherentleveragepoints • Target-group appropriateoffers for participation • WHY • WHAT • HOW • CONCLUSIONS

7. WHYRelation betweenknowledgeandpractices • Instead …fromknowledgetoaction commmunicatingandteachingknowledgeconcerning (non) sustainable developmentissues actingsustainableineverydaylife

8. WHYRelation betweenknowledgeandpractices • Instead …toknowledgefromaction commmunicatingandteachingknowledgeconcerning (non) sustainable developmentissues becomingawareofimplictsustainable practices ineverydaylife

9. WHYRelation betweenknowledgeandpractices • Overviewoffindingsfromrepresentativestudyon environmental consciousnessin Germany, 2012 (N=2000; on behalf of Federal Environmental Agency) • fourrangesofaction(residing, housekeeping, mobility, purchasing) • typesofeverydaylifestyles • thoughts on specificoffersofcommunicationandeducation, incentives

10. WHYRelation betweenknowledgeandpractices • But whathas a German widerepresentativestudy on environmental consciousnessto do withmembersof HEI andwhatcanbegainedfromthisstudybyexpertsfrom all overtheworld? • Weassume, that at least someoftheseeverydaylife style types • aretobefoundamongthemembersof HEI. • Toknowofthesemightbeeye-openingconcerningtheintroductory • observations/problems…

11. WHAT Heterogeneouspracticesandlifestyles Mobility • Free drivingforfreecitizens? Purchaseofgroceries • Whatyouseeiswhatyouget? Housekeeping • Saving – not laterthan… now! Living • Myhomeismycastle…

12. WHATHeterogeneoustypesofeverydaylife(Otte 2004) • EstablishedConservatives(2%) EstablishedLiberals(10%) Reflectives (4%) high Conventionals (7%) • Adaptive Mainstream (26%) • Hedonists • (7%) middle Level of living/Living standard • Traditional Workers(10%) DomesticallyCentered(27%) • Entertainment Seekers(7%) low traditional/biographicalclosed partly modern/consolidated modern/open Modernity / biographical perspective

13. „Traditional workers“ (10%) • for ordinarypathsmainlythecarisused • above-average number of pedestrians • public transport is considered inconvenient • food is mainly purchased, if it meets functional criteria (price, durability etc.) • organicproductstooexpensive • scepticismabout Labels • dominanceof economy • criteria of sustainability are no motive for Home Organization • usually live in a rented apartment

14. „Adaptive mainstream“ (26%) • relatively large number of users of public transport • openness to the hiring of cars and taking traffic calming measures • food is chosen mainly by quality-conscious and ethical criteria • are willing to spend money for the occasional purchase of organic products • practice environmental protection (waste separation, reduction in heating energy, etc.) • interest in energy efficiency labels when making purchasing decisions of household appliances • live very common in condominiums, in a house of one’s own or aspire at ownership

15. „Reflectives“ (4%) • useof all transportation • coping with everyday family-life with children imaginable also without a car • often buy organic or fair trade products • grocery Shopping according to ethically quality-conscious or traditionally-conscious criteria • behave environmentally friendly in the everyday practices of housekeeping • consider this also in the future as very significant • usually live in spacious condominiums or houses • are conscious about the environmental impact of houses

16. HOW Inherentleveragepoints „traditional workers“ present-oriented and focused on their own capabilities and current requirements  e.g. through offers of further education poorly achieved  upgrading of the practiced low-threshold, unconscious and environmentally-friendly procedures  locallyenrootedsustainabilitymovements

17. HOWInherentleveragepoints „adaptive mainstream“ feasible, sensible dosed (environmental) measures which do not compete with other interests • institutionalparticipation in educationaloffers • to stress "Added value“, such as a part of company training • support of extrinsic motivation for eco-conscious practices, for example by financial (company) or fiscal incentives.

18. HOW Inherentleveragepoints „reflectives“ comprehensive, far-reaching decisions, selfless, sometimes “risky” measures, more flexible regarding the environment  target group of resource-saving and socially innovative measures (e.g. collaborative use of equipment)

19. Questions? Discussion! Thankyou! inka.bormann@fu-berlin.de