in

Large but diminishing effects of climate action nudges under rising costs


  • Jachimowicz, J. M., Duncan, S., Weber, E. U. & Johnson, E. J. When and why defaults influence decisions: a meta-analysis of default effects. Behav. Public Policy 3, 159–186 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mertens, S., Herberz, M., Hahnel, U. J. J. & Brosch, T. The effectiveness of nudging: a meta-analysis of choice architecture interventions across behavioral domains. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2107346118 (2022).

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Günther, S. A., Staake, T., Schöb, S. & Tiefenbeck, V. The behavioral response to a corporate carbon offset program: a field experiment on adverse effects and mitigation strategies. Glob. Environ. Change 64, 102123 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Johnson, E. J., Hershey, J., Meszaros, J. & Kunreuther, H. Framing, probability distortions, and insurance decisions. J. Risk Uncertain. 7, 35–51 (1993).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Thaler, R. H. & Benartzi, S. Save More TomorrowTM: using behavioral economics to increase employee saving. J. Polit. Econ. 112, S164–S187 (2004).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chapman, G. B., Li, M., Colby, H. & Yoon, H. Opting in vs opting out of influenza vaccination. JAMA 304, 43 (2010).

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Johnson, E. J. & Goldstein, D. Do defaults save lives? Science 302, 1338–1339 (2003).

    CAS 
    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Altmann, S., Falk, A., Heidhues, P., Jayaraman, R. & Teirlinck, M. Defaults and donations: evidence from a field experiment. Rev. Econ. Stat. 101, 808–826 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ebeling, F. & Lotz, S. Domestic uptake of green energy promoted by opt-out tariffs. Nat. Clim. Change 5, 868–871 (2015).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liebe, U., Gewinner, J. & Diekmann, A. Large and persistent effects of green energy defaults in the household and business sectors. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 576–585 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tiefenbeck, V. et al. Overcoming salience bias: how real-time feedback fosters resource conservation. Manag. Sci. 64, 1458–1476 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Allcott, H. Social norms and energy conservation. J. Public Econ. 95, 1082–1095 (2011).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hortaçsu, A., Madanizadeh, S. A. & Puller, S. L. Power to choose? An analysis of consumer inertia in the residential electricity market. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 9, 192–226 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Camilleri, A. R., Larrick, R. P., Hossain, S. & Patino-Echeverri, D. Consumers underestimate the emissions associated with food but are aided by labels. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 53–58 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sunstein, C. R. Green defaults can combat climate change. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 548–549 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Enke, B. et al. Cognitive Biases: Mistakes or Missing Stakes? NBER Working Paper No. 28650 (NBER, 2021). https://doi.org/10.3386/w28650

  • Kaiser, M., Bernauer, M., Sunstein, C. R. & Reisch, L. A. The power of green defaults: the impact of regional variation of opt-out tariffs on green energy demand in Germany. Ecol. Econ. 174, 106685 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cramton, P., MacKay, D. J. C., Ockenfels,A. & Stoft, S. (eds) Global Carbon Pricing: The Path to Climate Cooperation (MIT Press, 2017). https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10914.001.0001

  • Ghesla, C., Grieder, M. & Schubert, R. Nudging the poor and the rich—a field study on the distributional effects of green electricity defaults. Energy Econ. 86, 104616 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Smith, N. C., Goldstein, D. G. & Johnson, E. J. Choice without awareness: ethical and policy implications of defaults. J. Public Policy Mark. 32, 159–172 (2013).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Schubert, C. Green nudges: do they work? are they ethical? Ecol. Econ. 132, 329–342 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ambuehl, S., Bernheim, B. D. & Ockenfels, A. What motivates paternalism? An experimental study. Am. Econ. Rev. 111, 787–830 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mrkva, K., Posner, N. A., Reeck, C. & Johnson, E. J. Do nudges reduce disparities? Choice architecture compensates for low consumer knowledge. J. Mark. 85, 67–84 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     



  • Source link

    Friends, this isn’t the time to be complacent. If you are ready to fight for the soul of this nation, you can start by donating to elect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris by clicking the button below.

                                       

    Thank you so much for supporting Joe Biden’s Presidential campaign.

    What do you think?

    Written by Politixia

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published.

    Union boss Mick Lynch is a media star – and Labour has much to learn about why | Jeremy Gilbert

    Swara Bhasker calls Maharashtra political crisis ‘an unrelenting s**t show’; Simi Garewal says CM Uddhav Thackeray ‘has no greed for power’ | Hindi Movie News – Bollywood