Five Ways to Encourage Sustainable Consumer Behaviour鼓励可持续消费行为的五种方式

Before world leaders gathered in Scotland for the United Nations Climate Change Conference （COP26）， dunnhumby’s Senior Consumer Psychologist， Feroud Seeparsand， looked at how easy it is to apply behavioural science to encourage sustainable customer behaviour in the grocery sector.

在世界各国领导人齐聚苏格兰，参加第26届联合国气候变化大会（COP26）之前，消费者数据科学公司邓韩贝的高级消费者心理学家费鲁德·西帕尔桑德做了一项研究，指出了将行为科学应用于食品杂货业以鼓励可持续消费行为是何等容易。

These applications can be applied to almost any sustainable behaviour whether it be increasing recycling or decreasing food waste. What follows are my top five favourite applications of consumer psychology to help directly or indirectly lower carbon footprints.

行为科学适用于几乎一切可持续行为，无论是加大回收力度，还是减少食物浪费。以下是我最中意的五种应用消费者心理学，直接或间接帮助减少碳足迹的方式。

1. The classic social norm

1. 经典社会规范

In the UK， WRAP1 recently dem-onstrated how communicating social norms boosted an already high recycle rate by an additional 5%. In collabor-ation with Unilever’s Radox brand and retail pharmacist Boots， the nudge2 simply consisted of a sticker on shower gels that stated on front of pack “Most people recycle me” together with a recycle logo.

最近，英国的“废弃物与资源行动计划”组织展示了宣传社会规范何以将本已较高的回收率再提高5%。该组织与联合利华旗下品牌乐多适以及零售药店博姿合作，采用了简单的助推法。他们只是在沐浴露包装的正面贴了一张贴纸，上面注明“大多数人会回收我”，旁边再配上回收标识。

The test and control study also found in a post-trial survey that respondents claimed the reason for increased recycling was due to the message.

这项试验对照研究还在试验后的一次调查中发现，受访者称自己更注意回收利用就是受贴纸信息的影响。

2. Dynamic social norms

2. 动态社会规范

However， whilst recycle rates are already high in the UK， other behaviours are still a minority， like eating a meat-free lunch. How can a nudge work in this context？ A well-known US study， found that highlighting a trend may be enough to nudge customers to become a part of that trend.

然而，尽管英国的物品回收利用率已经很高了，其他可持续消费行为仍只见于少数人，比如吃无肉午餐。在这种情况下，助推法如何起效？美国一项著名的研究发现，强调某个趋势或许足以推动消费者参与其中。

When comparing a static social norms nudge （of “30% of Americans limit their meat consumption…”） to a dynamic norm （of “over the last five years， 30% of Americans have started to make an effort to limit their meat consumption”）， meatless lunches doubled in a university café. Meatless lunch orders in the dynamic norms condition were 34%， where for the static norms condition had 17% （the control group was 21%）.

相较于采用静态社会规范助推法（“30%的美国人控制肉类摄入……”），宣传动态规范（“30%的美国人在过去五年中已开始努力控制肉类摄入”）后，某大学食堂的无肉午餐销量增加了一倍。在宣传动态规范的情况下，无肉午餐的点单量占34%，而在宣传静态规范的情况下为17%（对照组为21%）。

In another university café （this time in Germany）， the dynamic norm message of “more and more customers are switching from to-go-cups to a sustain-able alternative. Be part of this movement and choose a reusable mug” was used to promote reusable alternatives by 17.3%. This was based on a pre and post intervention study， over a 14-week intervention period in one café.

另一家大学食堂（这次是在德国）宣传的动态规范信息是“越来越多的消费者正从咖啡外带杯转向可持续替代品，成为这一行动的一分子，选择可重复使用的马克杯”。这条信息将可重复使用替代品的使用率提高了17.3%。这是依据在单单一家食堂开展为期14周的介入前后对比研究而得出的结论。

3. Indulge me

3. 纵容性描述

Particular words provide certain associations. So describing a meat-free dish as “healthy”， may provide associations of being “less tasty” or “less satisfying”.

特定的词语让人产生特定的联想。因此，将无肉菜肴描述成“健康菜”，可能会让人联想到“不怎么好吃”或“不那么令人满意”。

In a test vs control study in a US university café study found that indulgent descriptive may be a better method than a healthy description. For example， “Twisted citrus-glazed carrots” was more likely to be selected from a menu when compared to “Carrots with sugar-free citrus dressing”. Likewise， “Dynamite chili and tangy lime-seasoned beets” fared better than “Lighter-choice beets with no added sugar”. Results found diners were 41% more motivated to choose an “indulgent vegetable” compared to its “healthy” alternative， even though there was no difference in the preparation. Whilst there are some customers who may be on the lookout for healthy options， clearly many are not.

在美国某大学食堂进行的一项试验对照研究发现，比起采用与健康有关的描述，采用纵容性描述更好。例如，与“无糖柑橘酱胡萝卜”相比，消费者更可能从菜单中选择“柑橘酱浇胡萝卜麻花”。同理，“爆辣酸橙甜菜”比“无糖轻食甜菜”更吃香。研究结果显示，尽管料理方式没有差异，与“健康”的蔬菜相比，食客更易选择“给人放纵之感的蔬菜”，购买这类蔬菜的积极性要高出41%。虽然部分消费者可能有意寻求健康的选择，但显然许多消费者并非如此。

4. Size matters

4. 分量很重要

Given customers are more able to regulate their consumption at the point of purchase than at the point of consumption why not simply downsize a portion at the point of purchase？ This can reduce both food waste and meat consumption at the same time.

既然比起食用时，消费者在购买时更能控制自己的消耗，那么为什么不干脆在购买阶段缩减分量呢？这可以同时减少食物浪费和肉类摄入。

Over a period of one month， a Belgian retail store was used as a test bed （against eight control stores）. The standdard size of sausage was 150g， the new smaller and healthier portion which met Belgian guidelines was 100g and another medium size of 125g was also introduced. The price per weight was kept the same for each size. Furthermore， the assortment was arranged horizontally from small to large. The receipts were collected from those who bought the relevant products.