IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p6321-d821336.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Nudging Inspires Sustainable Behavior among Event Attendees: A Qualitative Analysis of Selected Music Festivals

Author

Listed:
  • Sören Bär

    (Department of Management & Business Studies, HMKW University for Media, Communication and Management, 13355 Berlin, Germany
    Faculty of Economics and Management Science, University of Leipzig, 04109 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Laura Korrmann

    (Marketing and Social Media, Feel Festival, 10243 Berlin, Germany)

  • Markus Kurscheidt

    (BaySpo—Bayreuth Center of Sport Science, University of Bayreuth, 95440 Bayreuth, Germany)

Abstract

This research answers the question of which nudges can be created to subtly influence event attendees in such a way that they contribute to the implementation of a green event. Using the qualitative content analysis according to Mayring, three music festivals were analyzed in detail with regard to their measures for ecological sustainability. All available online resources—in particular, the websites of the music festivals, blog entries, online newspaper articles and, also, observations during several personal visits—were used as sources of the qualitative data. A key result was the development of a model for nudges that can generally be used and implemented for events. The goals, the nudges developed and the possible measures with regard to ecological sustainability are defined in the areas of transport, garbage, electricity, gastronomy, sanitation and compensation of emissions. The more music festival participants already behave in an ecologically sustainable manner, the more others will join them. This can be exploited by using social nudges that consciously inspire group social dynamics. In order to be able to use nudging sensibly, organizers have to internalize that they act as decision-makers, which entails a great ethical and moral responsibility. Even inconspicuous nudges can be very effective.

Suggested Citation

  • Sören Bär & Laura Korrmann & Markus Kurscheidt, 2022. "How Nudging Inspires Sustainable Behavior among Event Attendees: A Qualitative Analysis of Selected Music Festivals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-26, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6321-:d:821336
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6321/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6321/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Knetsch, Jack L, 1989. "The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1277-1284, December.
    2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    3. Cass R. Sunstein, 2017. "Human Agency and Behavioral Economics," Palgrave Advances in Behavioral Economics, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-3-319-55807-3, February.
    4. Peter Scarborough & Paul Appleby & Anja Mizdrak & Adam Briggs & Ruth Travis & Kathryn Bradbury & Timothy Key, 2014. "Dietary greenhouse gas emissions of meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans in the UK," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 179-192, July.
    5. Cho, Yoon-Na & Thyroff, Anastasia & Rapert, Molly I. & Park, Seong-Yeon & Lee, Hyun Ju, 2013. "To be or not to be green: Exploring individualism and collectivism as antecedents of environmental behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(8), pages 1052-1059.
    6. Cass R. Sunstein & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    9. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-1348, December.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    11. Sunstein, Cass R., 2015. "Choosing Not to Choose: Understanding the Value of Choice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780190231699.
    12. Tversky, Amos & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Anomalies: Preference Reversals," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 201-211, Spring.
    13. Cass R. Sunstein, 2018. "Misconceptions about nudges," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(1), pages 61-67, March.
    14. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    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. Poonyawat Kusonwattana & Yogi Tri Prasetyo & Stefanus Vincent & Jefferson Christofelix & Aryadaksa Amudra & Hazel Juan Montgomery & Michael Nayat Young & Reny Nadlifatin & Satria Fadil Persada, 2022. "Determining Factors Affecting Behavioral Intention to Organize an Online Event during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-15, October.

    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. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    2. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    3. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    4. Eldar Shafir, 2003. "Context, conflict, weights, and identities: some psychological aspects of decision making," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    5. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    6. Domenico Colucci & Chiara Franco & Vincenzo Valori, 2021. "Endowment effects at different time scenarios: the role of ownership and possession," Discussion Papers 2021/279, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    7. D'Orlando, Fabio & Ferrante, Francesco, 2009. "The demand for job protection: Some clues from behavioural economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 104-114, January.
    8. D'Orlando, Fabio & Ferrante, Francesco, 2015. "The benefits of stabilization policies revisited," MPRA Paper 67321, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Mark J Hurlstone & Stephan Lewandowsky & Ben R Newell & Brittany Sewell, 2014. "The Effect of Framing and Normative Messages in Building Support for Climate Policies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Thomas M. Zellweger & Franz W. Kellermanns & James J. Chrisman & Jess H. Chua, 2012. "Family Control and Family Firm Valuation by Family CEOs: The Importance of Intentions for Transgenerational Control," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 851-868, June.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:3:p:293-298 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Delgado, Laura & Shealy, Tripp, 2018. "Opportunities for greater energy efficiency in government facilities by aligning decision structures with advances in behavioral science," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3952-3961.
    13. Xingrong Hou & Jianmin Zeng & Hong Chen & Li Su, 2019. "The endowment effect in the genes: An exploratory study," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(3), pages 293-298, May.
    14. Floris Heukelom, 2007. "Who are the Behavioral Economists and what do they say?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-020/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Satakhun Kosavinta & Donyaprueth Krairit & Do Ba Khang, 2017. "Decision making in the pre-development stage of residential development," Journal of Property Investment & Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 35(2), pages 160-183, March.
    16. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köhler, Katrin, 2016. "Exchange asymmetries for bads? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 231-241.
    17. Pavlo Blavatskyy & Ganna Pogrebna, 2010. "Endowment effects? “Even” with half a million on the table!," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 173-192, February.
    18. Ulrich Schmidt & Stefan Traub, 2009. "An Experimental Investigation of the Disparity Between WTA and WTP for Lotteries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 229-262, March.
    19. Anbarci, Nejat & Arin, K. Peren & Kuhlenkasper, Torben & Zenker, Christina, 2018. "Revisiting loss aversion: Evidence from professional tennis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-18.
    20. Fershtman, Chaim, 1996. "On the value of incumbency managerial reference points and loss aversion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 245-257, April.
    21. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.

    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:10:p:6321-:d:821336. 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.