IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i9p5308-d804144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unpacking the Psychosocial Dimension of Decarbonization between Change and Stability: A Systematic Review in the Social Science Literature

Author

Listed:
  • Fulvio Biddau

    (Department of Philosophy, Sociology, Education, and Applied Psychology, University of Padua, 35122 Padova, Italy)

  • Sonia Brondi

    (Department of Philosophy and Cultural Heritage, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, 30123 Venezia, Italy)

  • Paolo Francesco Cottone

    (Department of Philosophy, Sociology, Education, and Applied Psychology, University of Padua, 35122 Padova, Italy)

Abstract

This paper provides a systematic overview of the psychosocial contribution to decarbonization studies and critically discusses current trends. Following the PRISMA protocol, we reviewed 404 articles informing how socio-psychological processes affect decarbonization, and vice versa, and highlighting research gaps and biases. Contrary to criticisms about methodological individualism and reductionism of socio-psychological research on sustainability, the review illustrates that the field is equally attentive to psychosocial processes operating at different levels, including the individual (e.g., attitudes, stress, environmental concerns), community (e.g., collective identity, justice, sense of place), and socio-cultural levels (e.g., social norms, values, memory). However, evidence shows some problematic trends in the literature: (i) A bias toward specific agents and geographies, which overlooks mesoscale actors (e.g., media, unions, NGOs) and developing and eastern countries; (ii) instrumental and normative views of transitions, which coincide with a prevailing focus on cognitive processes and a selective bias toward technologies, policies, places, and natural resources conceived as instrumental to decarbonization. This also emphasizes how biophysical processes, people–nature relationships, and the role of emotions in understanding the psychology of agents and decarbonization processes are almost absent; (iii) a research gaze normatively oriented toward the future, which risks neglecting continuity–discontinuity dynamics and the timing and pace of transitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Fulvio Biddau & Sonia Brondi & Paolo Francesco Cottone, 2022. "Unpacking the Psychosocial Dimension of Decarbonization between Change and Stability: A Systematic Review in the Social Science Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-28, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5308-:d:804144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5308/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/9/5308/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    2. J. C. Ryan & S. Mellish & B. R. Busque & C. A. Litchfield, 2019. "Enhancing the impact of conservation marketing using psychology: a research agenda," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(4), pages 442-448, December.
    3. Fortes, Patrícia & Alvarenga, António & Seixas, Júlia & Rodrigues, Sofia, 2015. "Long-term energy scenarios: Bridging the gap between socio-economic storylines and energy modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 161-178.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Nadine Marshall & Neil Adger & Simon Attwood & Katrina Brown & Charles Crissman & Christopher Cvitanovic & Cassandra De Young & Margaret Gooch & Craig James & Sabine Jessen & Dave Johnson & Paul Marsh, 2017. "Empirically derived guidance for social scientists to influence environmental policy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-9, March.
    6. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    7. Stephen Zehr, 2015. "The sociology of global climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 129-150, March.
    8. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    9. Sarrica, Mauro & Biddau, Fulvio & Brondi, Sonia & Cottone, Paolo & Mazzara, Bruno M., 2018. "A multi-scale examination of public discourse on energy sustainability in Italy: Empirical evidence and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 444-454.
    10. Rok Črešnar & Zlatko Nedelko, 2020. "Understanding Future Leaders: How Are Personal Values of Generations Y and Z Tailored to Leadership in Industry 4.0?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-19, May.
    11. Daniel Rosenbloom & Adrian Rinscheid, 2020. "Deliberate decline: An emerging frontier for the study and practice of decarbonization," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    12. Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Nash, Nick & Upham, Paul & Lloyd, Alyson & Verdon, James P. & Kendall, J.-Michael, 2015. "UK public perceptions of shale gas hydraulic fracturing: The role of audience, message and contextual factors on risk perceptions and policy support," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 419-430.
    13. Paul C. Stern, 2014. "Energy: We need all hands on deck," Nature, Nature, vol. 513(7516), pages 33-33, September.
    14. Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2014. "Diversity: Energy studies need social science," Nature, Nature, vol. 511(7511), pages 529-530, July.
    15. Robin Smale & Sanneke Kloppenburg, 2020. "Platforms in Power: Householder Perspectives on the Social, Environmental and Economic Challenges of Energy Platforms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    16. Aghaei Chadegani, Arezoo & Salehi, Hadi & Md Yunus, Melor & Farhadi, Hadi & Fooladi, Masood & Farhadi, Maryam & Ale Ebrahim, Nader, 2013. "A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases," MPRA Paper 46898, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Mar 2013.
    17. Jessica K. Breadsell & Joshua J. Byrne & Gregory M. Morrison, 2019. "Household Energy and Water Practices Change Post-Occupancy in an Australian Low-Carbon Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.
    18. Susan Clayton & Patrick Devine-Wright & Paul C. Stern & Lorraine Whitmarsh & Amanda Carrico & Linda Steg & Janet Swim & Mirilia Bonnes, 2015. "Psychological research and global climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(7), pages 640-646, July.
    19. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    20. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Batel, Susana & Aas, Oystein & Sovacool, Benjamin & Labelle, Michael Carnegie & Ruud, Audun, 2017. "A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 27-31.
    21. Nicola Stocco & Francesco Gardona & Fulvio Biddau & Paolo Francesco Cottone, 2021. "Learning Processes and Agency in the Decarbonization Context: A Systematic Review through a Cultural Psychology Point of View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-31, September.
    22. Geoff A. Wilson, 2014. "Community resilience: path dependency, lock-in effects and transitional ruptures," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 1-26, January.
    23. Jing Hou & Bo Hou, 2019. "Farmers’ Adoption of Low-Carbon Agriculture in China: An Extended Theory of the Planned Behavior Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-20, March.
    24. Ruey-Chyn Tsaur & Yi-Hsuan Lin, 2018. "Exploring the Consumer Attitude of Building-Attached Photovoltaic Equipment Using Revised Technology Acceptance Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    25. Phelan, Anna (Anya) & Jacobs, Sander, 2016. "Facing the true cost of fracking; social externalities and the role of integrated valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 348-358.
    26. Smith, Adrian & Voß, Jan-Peter & Grin, John, 2010. "Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 435-448, May.
    27. Nick Pidgeon, 2012. "Climate Change Risk Perception and Communication: Addressing a Critical Moment?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 951-956, June.
    28. Bridge, Gavin & Bouzarovski, Stefan & Bradshaw, Michael & Eyre, Nick, 2013. "Geographies of energy transition: Space, place and the low-carbon economy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 331-340.
    29. Marco Bagliani & Egidio Dansero & Matteo Puttilli, 2010. "Territory and energy sustainability: the challenge of renewable energy sources," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(4), pages 457-472.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alex W. J. Cheng & Harry F. Lee, 2022. "Energy Transition towards Sustainable Development: Perspective of Individuals’ Engagement Amid Transition Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-16, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2022. "Beyond the triangle of renewable energy acceptance: The five dimensions of domestic hydrogen acceptance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 324(C).
    2. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    3. Ammar AL-Ashmori & Shuib Bin Basri & P. D. D. Dominic & Luiz Fernando Capretz & Amgad Muneer & Abdullateef Oluwagbemiga Balogun & Abdul Rehman Gilal & Rao Faizan Ali, 2022. "Classifications of Sustainable Factors in Blockchain Adoption: A Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-30, April.
    4. Noblet, Caroline L. & Teisl, Mario F. & Evans, Keith & Anderson, Mark W. & McCoy, Shannon & Cervone, Edmund, 2015. "Public preferences for investments in renewable energy production and energy efficiency," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 177-186.
    5. Sarrica, Mauro & Biddau, Fulvio & Brondi, Sonia & Cottone, Paolo & Mazzara, Bruno M., 2018. "A multi-scale examination of public discourse on energy sustainability in Italy: Empirical evidence and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 444-454.
    6. Massimiliano M. Pellegrini & Riccardo Rialti & Giacomo Marzi & Andrea Caputo, 2020. "Sport entrepreneurship: A synthesis of existing literature and future perspectives," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 795-826, September.
    7. Jen Shang & Rachel Croson, 2009. "A Field Experiment in Charitable Contribution: The Impact of Social Information on the Voluntary Provision of Public Goods," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(540), pages 1422-1439, October.
    8. Xie, Zongjie & Hall, Jeremy & McCarthy, Ian P. & Skitmore, Martin & Shen, Liyin, 2016. "Standardization efforts: The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search processes and innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 69-78.
    9. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Anantharama, Nandini & Kallies, Anne, 2021. "Electricity market transitions in Australia: Evidence using model-based clustering," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. Kuokkanen, A. & Nurmi, A. & Mikkilä, M. & Kuisma, M. & Kahiluoto, H. & Linnanen, L., 2018. "Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1513-1522.
    11. José Alberto Martínez-González & Eduardo Parra-López & Almudena Barrientos-Báez, 2021. "Young Consumers’ Intention to Participate in the Sharing Economy: An Integrated Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Sherrington, Chris & Bartley, Justin & Moran, Dominic, 2008. "Farm-level constraints on the domestic supply of perennial energy crops in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 2504-2512, July.
    13. Moradi, Afsaneh & Vagnoni, Emidia, 2018. "A multi-level perspective analysis of urban mobility system dynamics: What are the future transition pathways?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 231-243.
    14. Broto, Vanesa Castán, 2017. "Energy landscapes and urban trajectories towards sustainability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 755-764.
    15. Gordon, Joel A. & Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Nabavi, Seyed Ali, 2023. "Price promises, trust deficits and energy justice: Public perceptions of hydrogen homes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    16. Solomon Akele Abebe, 2023. "Refugee entrepreneurship: systematic and thematic analyses and a research agenda," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 315-350, January.
    17. Julsrud, Dr. Tom Erik & Krogstad, Dr. Julie Runde, 2020. "Is there enough trust for the smart city? exploring acceptance for use of mobile phone data in oslo and tallinn," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    18. Kejia Yang & Johan Schot & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Shaping the Directionality of Sustainability Transitions: The Diverging Development Patterns of Solar PV in Two Chinese Provinces," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-14, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Houser, Daniel & List, John A. & Piovesan, Marco & Samek, Anya & Winter, Joachim, 2016. "Dishonesty: From parents to children," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 242-254.
    20. van den Buuse, Daniel & Kolk, Ans, 2019. "An exploration of smart city approaches by international ICT firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 220-234.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:9:p:5308-:d:804144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.