Periodic Reporting for period 2 - EU 1.5 Lifestyles (Policies and tools for mainstreaming 1.5° Lifestyles)
Reporting period: 2022-11-01 to 2024-04-30
To ensure a safe life on Earth, we need to ensure adherence to the Paris Agreement. The EU 1.5° Lifestyles project promotes the mainstreaming of 1.5° lifestyles in the EU to facilitate societal, economic, and political transformations in line with the 1.5°C limit, focusing on household/individual lifestyles and the structural factors that shape them and their impact on the environment.
Previous efforts to implement demand-side changes have been hampered by three key factors: 1) There was little quantitative data on climate mitigation impacts of different lifestyle options, with policymakers and citizens lacking information on which key measures to prioritise or how to make informed choices. 2) Limited evidence of the public acceptance of the necessary changes resulted in weak and uncoordinated policy strategies not commensurate with the scale and urgency of the needed transition. 3) Policies promoted changes in individual behaviour without addressing structural constraints, which were ineffective and frustrated citizens/other actors wanting to make a difference.
By addressing these three concerns, EU 1.5° Lifestyles highlights the importance of political acceptance for change, identifying the potential contributions of individuals and households, and clearly articulating where limited household activity requires policy intervention and structural changes - such as in welfare systems.
Previous efforts to implement demand-side changes have been hampered by three key factors: 1) There was little quantitative data on climate mitigation impacts of different lifestyle options, with policymakers and citizens lacking information on which key measures to prioritise or how to make informed choices. 2) Limited evidence of the public acceptance of the necessary changes resulted in weak and uncoordinated policy strategies not commensurate with the scale and urgency of the needed transition. 3) Policies promoted changes in individual behaviour without addressing structural constraints, which were ineffective and frustrated citizens/other actors wanting to make a difference.
By addressing these three concerns, EU 1.5° Lifestyles highlights the importance of political acceptance for change, identifying the potential contributions of individuals and households, and clearly articulating where limited household activity requires policy intervention and structural changes - such as in welfare systems.
EU 1.5° Lifestyles has met its objectives: to quantify country-specific reduction targets (all EU countries and three G20 Global South countries) and to qualitatively examine barriers, enablers, and acceptance of sustainable lifestyle options. The project’s approach centred five key pathways for understanding and transitioning to 1.5° lifestyles.
We quantified the climate and health impacts of lifestyle changes in WP1, identifying gaps in lifestyle carbon footprints, which were published in a peer-reviewed journal. We created future consumption portfolios for 1.5°C lifestyles, analysing lifestyle options and financial savings. Citizen preferences and rebound effects were taken into account. Next, we analysed and highlighted the dual benefits of lifestyle changes: mitigating climate change and improving health by reducing heat, cold and malnutrition-related diseases. This analysis assessed synergies and trade-offs to inform policy decisions and individual choices. Our findings show that for limiting warming to the Paris Agreement level by 2050 all lifestyle options have to be taken.
Secondly, we provided insights into citizens' attitudes, behaviours and preferences towards 1.5°C lifestyles. Developing a gamified approach via the Climate Puzzle, as part of the first Citizen Thinking Labs (CTL1) we gauged citizen’s views on lifestyle options, their acceptance, and policy measures. The results of CTL1 were analysed and formed the basis for the second round (CTL2), where a 1.5° lifestyles-vision was used to analyse the acceptability and likelihood of implementation of lifestyle options, as well as the policy measures proposed by participants.
Thirdly, we focused on understanding the structural constraints and drivers influencing sustainable lifestyle changes to inform policy interventions. We organised the first round of Stakeholder Thinking Labs (STL1) in five case study countries to gather perspectives on overcoming structural barriers. Task 3.4 extended this to the EU level with a successful EU Stakeholder Thinking Lab in Brussels, where the focus was on creating actor-coalitions and policy narratives for change. We then identified goals and responsibilities for structural change, as part of STL2s held in the case countries. These labs highlighted the main policy options and challenges for a 1.5° lifestyles-transformation.
Fourthly, we assessed potential rebound risks of lifestyle changes at the household level, through a literature review which mapped rebound effects in household consumption relevant to 1.5° lifestyles, and co-creation workshops in the five case countries, which provided qualitative insights into low-carbon lifestyles. Modified causal loop diagrams mapped the causes and effects of lifestyle changes, synthesised to provide an overview of how to mitigate rebounds and social risks at the household level.
Fifthly, we focused on the impact of lifestyle changes on economic and welfare systems, identifying twelve key policy initiatives essential for achieving the 1.5°C target through an extensive literature review. We then developed scenarios to provide insights into pathways towards the 1.5° goal. The Policy Delphi methodology was used to assess the desirability and feasibility of the identified policies and scenarios.
We also disseminated project research engaging with different audiences. Over 644 dissemination activities were carried out, with almost 10,000 visits to the central website. Social media platforms and newsletters were used to reach different audiences, and our published policy briefs targeted policymakers, with further workshops planned to engage them. Citizen engagement was achieved through Climate Puzzle workshops while media outreach, including press releases and appearances, further raised the project's visibility. Inclusion in other newsletters, academic publications, conference participation, and ongoing work on the MOOC were other key communication focuses during this period.
We quantified the climate and health impacts of lifestyle changes in WP1, identifying gaps in lifestyle carbon footprints, which were published in a peer-reviewed journal. We created future consumption portfolios for 1.5°C lifestyles, analysing lifestyle options and financial savings. Citizen preferences and rebound effects were taken into account. Next, we analysed and highlighted the dual benefits of lifestyle changes: mitigating climate change and improving health by reducing heat, cold and malnutrition-related diseases. This analysis assessed synergies and trade-offs to inform policy decisions and individual choices. Our findings show that for limiting warming to the Paris Agreement level by 2050 all lifestyle options have to be taken.
Secondly, we provided insights into citizens' attitudes, behaviours and preferences towards 1.5°C lifestyles. Developing a gamified approach via the Climate Puzzle, as part of the first Citizen Thinking Labs (CTL1) we gauged citizen’s views on lifestyle options, their acceptance, and policy measures. The results of CTL1 were analysed and formed the basis for the second round (CTL2), where a 1.5° lifestyles-vision was used to analyse the acceptability and likelihood of implementation of lifestyle options, as well as the policy measures proposed by participants.
Thirdly, we focused on understanding the structural constraints and drivers influencing sustainable lifestyle changes to inform policy interventions. We organised the first round of Stakeholder Thinking Labs (STL1) in five case study countries to gather perspectives on overcoming structural barriers. Task 3.4 extended this to the EU level with a successful EU Stakeholder Thinking Lab in Brussels, where the focus was on creating actor-coalitions and policy narratives for change. We then identified goals and responsibilities for structural change, as part of STL2s held in the case countries. These labs highlighted the main policy options and challenges for a 1.5° lifestyles-transformation.
Fourthly, we assessed potential rebound risks of lifestyle changes at the household level, through a literature review which mapped rebound effects in household consumption relevant to 1.5° lifestyles, and co-creation workshops in the five case countries, which provided qualitative insights into low-carbon lifestyles. Modified causal loop diagrams mapped the causes and effects of lifestyle changes, synthesised to provide an overview of how to mitigate rebounds and social risks at the household level.
Fifthly, we focused on the impact of lifestyle changes on economic and welfare systems, identifying twelve key policy initiatives essential for achieving the 1.5°C target through an extensive literature review. We then developed scenarios to provide insights into pathways towards the 1.5° goal. The Policy Delphi methodology was used to assess the desirability and feasibility of the identified policies and scenarios.
We also disseminated project research engaging with different audiences. Over 644 dissemination activities were carried out, with almost 10,000 visits to the central website. Social media platforms and newsletters were used to reach different audiences, and our published policy briefs targeted policymakers, with further workshops planned to engage them. Citizen engagement was achieved through Climate Puzzle workshops while media outreach, including press releases and appearances, further raised the project's visibility. Inclusion in other newsletters, academic publications, conference participation, and ongoing work on the MOOC were other key communication focuses during this period.
EU 1.5° Lifestyles has pushed beyond the state of the art in quantitative and qualitative, behavioural and structural analysis, on rebounds and sustainable welfare, as well as in dissemination, including practical guidance for citizens and policy makers.
We previously extended projections, considering changes at both the supply and demand sides, to multiple years, as well as modelling the health benefits of sustainable lifestyles quantitatively. We connected the quantitative analysis to strategies at the household level, to understand the acceptance of different options, and the limits of possible household action signalling necessary structural change. Through the thinking labs and puzzle game, we implemented innovative approaches for policy makers and citizens to co-design strategies for change. We developed comprehensive measures to reduce and mitigate rebounds and social risks associated with transformation, going beyond the status quo to understand necessary structural support for rebound-avoidance. In considering the interplay between social and business policies and climate goals, our Delphi policy-analysis revealed divergences in views on sustainable policies like job guarantees, wealth taxation, and income ceilings, with Member State divergence reflecting socio-politico-economic backgrounds. These must be considered for successful sustainability implementation, a novel and timely analysis so far missing.
Our tasks ahead focus on maximising outreach and engagement with diverse stakeholders and include: finalising the Synthesis Report; communicating key results in more than 12 policy, multi-stakeholder, and media outreach events in 5 case countries and EU-level; 4 webinars; the MOOC; carbon calculators for HU and LV; the Citizens' Guidebook; paper publications; and extensive work on the final project conference co-organised with SCORAI in Lund.
We previously extended projections, considering changes at both the supply and demand sides, to multiple years, as well as modelling the health benefits of sustainable lifestyles quantitatively. We connected the quantitative analysis to strategies at the household level, to understand the acceptance of different options, and the limits of possible household action signalling necessary structural change. Through the thinking labs and puzzle game, we implemented innovative approaches for policy makers and citizens to co-design strategies for change. We developed comprehensive measures to reduce and mitigate rebounds and social risks associated with transformation, going beyond the status quo to understand necessary structural support for rebound-avoidance. In considering the interplay between social and business policies and climate goals, our Delphi policy-analysis revealed divergences in views on sustainable policies like job guarantees, wealth taxation, and income ceilings, with Member State divergence reflecting socio-politico-economic backgrounds. These must be considered for successful sustainability implementation, a novel and timely analysis so far missing.
Our tasks ahead focus on maximising outreach and engagement with diverse stakeholders and include: finalising the Synthesis Report; communicating key results in more than 12 policy, multi-stakeholder, and media outreach events in 5 case countries and EU-level; 4 webinars; the MOOC; carbon calculators for HU and LV; the Citizens' Guidebook; paper publications; and extensive work on the final project conference co-organised with SCORAI in Lund.