Interventions Based on Social Norms Could Benefit From Considering Adversarial Information Environments: Comment on Constantino et al. (2022).

Abstract

In 1859, John Tyndall presented his findings to the Royal Society about a perfectly colorless and odorless gas, known as “carbonic acid,” that he had discovered to be nearly opaque to radiant heat despite being transparent to visible light. We now refer to carbonic acid as carbon dioxide (CO2), and before the end of the 19th century, a Swedish physicist had already identified its potential to alter the Earth’s climate as a result of the combustion of fossil fuels (Arrhenius, 1896). More than 120 years later, scientists continue to warn the world about the adverse effects of CO2 emissions (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2022), but to date the policy response has been inadequate, and we are on track to exceed purportedly “safe” global temperature increases (IPCC, 2022). There are many reasons for our collective failure to respond adequately to climate change, ranging from well-organized political opposition (Lewandowsky, 2021) to the inherent sociopsychological challenges posed by a problem that requires global collective action and large-scale behavior change by millions of people around the world (e.g., Smith & Mayer, 2018). The article by Constantino and colleagues focuses on the role of social norms in facilitating the widespread shift in behavioral practices that is required to deal with climate change. Humans are social animals and hence sensitive to perceived social norms: We tend to engage in behaviors on the basis of expectations of what others around us do or think what should be done. When those norms change, people’s behaviors also change. The key point made by Constantino and colleagues is that localized interventions can incentivize change in a subset of a population, creating minorities committed to a prosocial or proenvironmental nonnormative belief or behavior. The tendency to conform, in turn, leads others to adopt this nonnormative behavior, which begins to spread through social networks. Once a critical mass has adopted the nonnormative behavior, these social dynamics trigger abrupt, widespread, and nonlinear change, eventually tipping societies toward more sustainable equilibria (p. 51). Framed within this overarching approach, Constantino and colleagues provide admirably detailed insights into how those large-scale changes can be triggered through local interventions. An illustrative case involves the spread of solar panels across Germany during the early 2000s: It was initially observed that in communities in which a small group of early adaptors were in close proximity (e.g., in the same street), local cascades were triggered that relatively quickly created communities in which people without solar panels were in the minority. These local clusters, however, failed to spread into neighboring communities until policy makers launched a “100,000 Roofs” program that provided reduced-interest loans and other incentives to create bridges into neighboring communities to trigger further local cascades. By 2016, German citizens were generating more solar electricity per capita than any other country in the world. Constantino and colleagues argue that social norms can assist with several different aspects of the climatechange problem, ranging from social equity and power asymmetries (i.e., through norms around inclusivity, fairness, distributive justice) to culture and identity (e.g., norms relating to meat consumption may facilitate lifestyle changes) and unduly steep future discounting (i.e., through injunctive norms specifying what “ought” to be done). Constantino and colleagues also recognize the importance of abstract “meta” norms, such as the 1114132 PSIXXX10.1177/15291006221114132Lewandowsky, van der LindenPsychological Science in the Public Interest research-article2022