There are signals that a social tipping point for climate policy is approaching, according to Reint Jan Renes, lecturer in psychology. Sustainable living has become a value for many. 'If citizens, companies, government and Europe start moving at the same time, they can hit each other like dominoes. Then it can happen very quickly in one go.' The behavioral scientist emphasizes that the government must show the urgency. He was very annoyed when Prime Minister Rutte said that there should be 'not too much climate' in the coalition agreement. This cabinet formation is the make or break for achieving the climate goals, Renes argues. Companies also have a key role. People do not consciously choose a climate-damaging product, but because it is the standard. Companies can help reverse these types of standards. Renes, founder of the RIVM's Corona Behavior Unit, finds the pandemic very educational. With corona, we think it's okay for the government to intervene and for everyone to help. 'Creating commitment from everyone in society for climate policy must become a much more central element.' Renes thinks the NVDE Open Energy Day on September 11 is a good idea: 'It helps if everyone can see with their own eyes how sustainable energy works.'
You are Lecturer in Psychology for a Sustainable City. What does that all mean?
'My research group at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences looks at the sustainable transition from behavioral science. Technological and economic solutions are nice, but ultimately you need people to accept the new techniques and be motivated to do something themselves. I find it very interesting what motivates and excites people, especially if it is linked to an issue at the core of society, such as climate or corona. From the RIVM's Corona Behavior Unit, I looked at how society can deal with such a major issue. I feel the same way about climate. This gives a great sense of purpose.'
How important is understanding the psychology of citizens in achieving the energy transition?
'Very important, of course. And that is increasingly seen. Since the 2020s, we have been mapping global warming and what changes are needed in technology and policy. We are now at the point where the solutions must be integrated into society. People are going to think something about it; they have to do something with it. What motivates people; where does resistance come from? We said for decades that at some point, after XNUMX, drastic measures would have to be taken. Back then it was still a general idea, which was not so emotionally charged. But now it is becoming concrete and close. We only have eight years left to achieve the Paris climate goals. Man comes into the picture with all facets. Policymakers and technicians are also experiencing this now. We can no longer handle the number of requests with our research group.'
A growing number of citizens are directly involved in the generation of sustainable energy, for example through energy cooperatives. And according to recent CBS figures, 28 percent of single-family owner-occupied homes now have solar panels on the roof. Does that make you hopeful?
'Yes, that is hopeful, and there is no other way than that we are going to see this now. Now that we have a compelling ambition and guidelines, the energy transition will also become more visible. You see it growing from district to district, also from the bottom up. Citizens set up initiatives themselves. Solar panels are gradually becoming the norm. Then people will say, gee, don't you have one yet? A lot of movement comes from the bottom up, from citizens to the government. They are social tipping points that touch each other. If more citizens get to work, the government will also feel freer to arrange things. That's how we all interact.'
You said earlier that only a 'social tipping point' can save us. What is that, and do you see any signs of it emerging?
'If citizens, companies, government and Europe start moving at the same time, they can hit each other like dominoes. Then it can happen very quickly in one go. It is nonsensical to ask who should start, the government or the citizen or the industry. These parties all need to constantly give each other extra pushes. I certainly see signs of such a social tipping point. For example, more and more people are considering reducing energy waste in their choices. That's starting to become a value. You see movement at many levels: in education, in consumer behavior, in the products that the industry produces. In the field of living, traveling, consuming. People do not consciously choose a climate-damaging product, but they do so because it is the standard. If I want oat milk in my coffee because it is more climate-friendly than dairy, then I have to say so. The industry can help reverse these types of standards. That helps. The sustainable alternative must offer little loss of comfort. Otherwise it requires a lot of willpower, such as with electric driving in the beginning. Then it becomes more difficult.'
What can the government do to promote such a social tipping point?
'The government has a strong facilitating role. Where the industry is still making a loss on sustainable alternatives, the government must make policy: subsidies, standards, regulation. The government is doing this more and more, but not enough. I still see some resistance from the government to take on this role. So far she has not expressed that she is happy to be able to do this. I think that's crazy. If the government has one task, it is to take care of the collective and the future. Citizens choose more based on the short term and their own interests. The government should be completely in love with the themes of sustainability and climate. I'm surprised I don't see that much anymore. Rutte even said that there should be 'not too much climate' in the coalition agreement. I find that an almost visionless statement. He has apparently lost what the government is for. The lack of sufficient government policy to achieve the climate goals is at odds with the way the government dealt with corona. There was a lot of focus on science. It makes sense to also do that with climate. There have been other IPCC reports, but this last one was even more alarming. After such a report with worldwide importance, the Dutch government should bring all scientists together and intervene firmly with their advice. That was possible with corona, it is now also possible with climate. And it must be done now, in this cabinet formation, not in four years' time.'
Is a payback period of about ten years important, or is it something else that convinces residents?
'The shorter payback period for heat pumps and insulation certainly helps. This reduces the barrier. But we are also growing towards a different default. It almost feels a bit strange if you don't have solar panels yet, and that will soon be the case with the heat pump. You will disadvantage yourself financially if you lag behind and you will also feel like 'the odd one out'. Just as it is now almost smart if you still smoke, against all policy. We are growing towards that point. We are not there yet with solar panels. People won't tell you if you don't have them. But that will happen.'
When are people prepared to take steps to make their homes more sustainable?
'I distinguish three elements. First, people must be motivated. They see usefulness and necessity, because it benefits them financially or because they see that climate policy is necessary. Second, they must see sufficient opportunity. Is it organized in such a way that it is easy to implement sustainability? And thirdly, they must have the capacity themselves. They must have time and knowledge to make choices. Those three elements work together.'
Where do you mainly see resistance? How could the NVDE and project developers best deal with this?
'I mainly see resistance where it becomes concrete. If people do not yet know where a wind turbine will be placed, many are positive about it. But if it breaks your existing status quo, questions arise: whether it is necessary and whether it cannot be done elsewhere. Uncertainty arises and people feel that they have little control over it. It is important to see exactly where the resistance comes from. What conversation is needed with this person? Does he not see the need? Or does he have specific concerns? If you only look at your own climate goals, it won't work. Sometimes this will slow down the process a bit at first, only to speed it up later. It is important to make people co-experts. You have to invite them to take in knowledge. Amsterdam does this with its citizens' council. It is helpful to break the process into smaller pieces. For example, first create a trial phase and give people more control. You can also simply push a project through, as the government did during the corona curfew. But in the case of climate policy, we still have to go through a twenty or thirty year process together. Citizens must be part owners of the process. We take a lot of time to develop technologies. But there is almost no innovation in the way we involve citizens. I think that's very strange. The usual practice is that an information evening is held and a 'road show' is held. But how do we get the conversation started and do we really give citizens a say? Many institutions do not have the competence and capacity for this on board. There are many technicians, accountants and policymakers, but there are no people who can think of creative forms of participation. We'll add that in just a moment. Yes, I think it is a gap in the market, although I wonder if the market is willing to pay for it. Corona was very educational. The pandemic is also a collective task. We all think it's okay that the government is intervening here. The energy transition is a challenge in slow motion, compared to corona. Creating commitment and ownership from everyone in society must become a much more central element.'
The participation of local residents in sustainable energy projects is growing and professionalizing. What do you think of that?
'That's nice and interesting. There is now a confetti of different forms in which participation becomes more professional. It would be good to jointly develop knowledge about which form fits where. This is a process that literally requires everyone's participation. We need to give everyone skin in the game. Just as we say in road safety that everyone should drive 100 km. Even though there are a few percent that don't. It must be the starting point.'
It doesn't work to point fingers, you regularly argue. Do you still often see that kind of communication in the energy transition?
'You see that people try to prevent it. But there are often sharp values underneath. You feel the moral superiority of those who don't fly and don't eat meat anymore. They are quickly tempted to call “that CO2emitters who are destroying the climate”. You have to be very aware of this and want to see the other person's perspective. Realize that they are not deliberately doing evil. I only had it myself when people in my street were laying the entire front garden full of large gray tiles, while South Limburg was flooded. “Are you crazy?” I thought at first. I had to make an effort, but then I could understand that it was a logical step for them. My brothers live in Twente, where eating meat is much more common than in my context. Who am I to attack them about it? The pointing finger is ingrained in the sustainability theme. But it does not work.'
Do you think that the government should be more coercive, with standards and pricing, instead of letting a lot depend on the motivation of citizens?
'By now yes. We have now reached the point where massaging is no longer enough. This means we will not achieve the 2030 climate goals. Without budgeting and pricing things won't happen fast enough. It happened the same way with smoking: sometimes more focus was placed on communication, sometimes more on the ban on smoking in certain places. Now it is time for stronger policies. Sometimes you see that a communication campaign is set up to cover the blood when there is still insufficient support for laws. But communication without regulatory support has little effect. Clear regulations, supported by communication, do work.'
The proceeds from the Energy Saving Agreement were disappointing. How do we get residents to save energy?
'That very much depends on the location. A mixed group of people live in the Indische neighborhood in Amsterdam. You literally have to take them by the hand, come to their home and make a concrete offer. In other parts of Amsterdam it is sufficient to give a few tips. You have to map out where the barrier is. Is there motivation, capacity and opportunity? If you don't bother to peel this away from your target group, you won't succeed. Commercial parties extensively research their target group, but this happens far too little with these types of issues.'
What should the Dutch Sustainable Energy Association pay particular attention to in the near future?
'From my perspective, the NVDE is an organization that is mainly effective in the background, among experts and politicians. Relatively few people see that. The Open Energy Day on September 11, for a broad audience, is a valuable exception. I would like it if the NVDE showed more actively the usefulness and necessity of the transition. That people think: wow, this club is making itself heard! When the insurance company Achmea announced that it is seriously concerned about weather extremes because the policies can no longer be maintained, it made a much more impression than if an activist club such as Extinction Rebellion would do that. At some point, KWF also started supporting anti-smoking activists. When the large, solid parties come out about the climate, it creates political urgency. They must support the lice, because they keep the big companies on their toes. The NVDE can contribute to this.'
How important is the current cabinet formation for the energy transition, and which issues need to be resolved quickly?
'Extremely important, especially just after the IPCC report, and just before the climate summit in Glasgow. There are only two terms of government left before 2030, the year in which we want to achieve far-reaching climate goals. If climate is now one of the many themes again and we are given another four-year postponement of a sufficient approach, then we will certainly not achieve the goals. It is urgent that concrete agreements are made now about budgeting, standards and pricing. We really need to put a price on climate.
I would love it if there was a cabinet that actually recognized, appointed and tackled the state of emergency. And also attaches consequences to your own actions. No more flying, no more meatballs after a lecture. The role model of politicians is important, in small and large steps. Compare it with corona: suppose the ministers call for social distancing, while everyone within their ministries works in close quarters. That would be a joke. The government must indicate the seriousness of the climate crisis. With a 'state of the union'-like press conference, like the Prime Minister held about corona. Then this country will change completely. I would love that.'
How sustainably do you live and travel?
'I haven't had my own car since 2011. I hardly eat meat anymore and less and less dairy. I'm moving to a smaller house. I think sustainability is very important. I would also like to experience for myself what you encounter if you want to live sustainably. I make it personal. When the TV calls asking if I want to come and talk about corona and behavior again, I say “No, just call me when it comes to climate”.'
