Putting the ‘social’ into social marketing: practices, norms and communities – the case of energy reduction

Social marketing is increasingly cited as an important component of the response to the behavioural demands of sustainability (Peattie and Peattie 2009; Institute for Government/Cabinet Office 2009), and in particular energy reduction (HM Government 2009). However, our paper starts from the observation that, while social marketing emphasises the use of marketing techniques for socially desirable outcomes, it often fails to capitalise upon the highly ‘social’ ways in which people think, learn and act. Based upon this premise, and referring to our own research, our objective is to discuss a number of ways in which the ‘social’ can be more fully emphasised in social marketing. While difficult to characterise, it is probably fair to say that most social marketing on the issue of energy reduction emphasises: the dynamics and problems associated with climate change; why energy reduction is important; and, tools with which people might learn about and reduce their own energy consumption; for instance, see the UK government Act on CO2 website (Department for Energy and Climate Change 2010). In doing so, such programmes appear to assume fairly linear causal relationships, at the level of the individual, between information, attitudes and behaviour, often based upon theory from psychology and behavioural economics. While these concerns and assumptions are not without value, our paper presents a number of ways in which such social marketing might be rendered both more ‘social’ and more effective. First, from the sociological perspective of practice theory, the analytical focus moves from individuals to social practices (such as cleaning or cooking), understood as linked arrays of: doings and sayings, material things and infrastructures, meanings, norms, and engagements (Schatzki 1996; Reckwitz 2002). As Warde (2005) points out, consumption is rooted in practices. This is particularly true of energy; people do not purposefully use energy but do so incidentally while pursuing taken-forgranted practices, consequently energy consumption is often invisible (Shove and Guy 2000). On the basis of such sensibilities, a number of novel objectives might emerge for social marketing, such as: to make visible and challenge energy consuming practices, and to highlight the energy consumption within practices via real time and retrospective energy consumption feedback (Darby 2006a; Fischer and Duscha 2009). Second, the social norm approach from social psychology has been widely and successfully used in social marketing campaigns to encourage a range of pro-environmental behaviours, including energy consumption (Schultz et al. 2007; Nolan et al. 2008; OPOWER website 2010; also see Rettie and Burchell 2010; CHARM website 2010). The social norm approach relies on the empirical observation that people tend to conform to norms, and uses marketing techniques to communicate the positive behaviour of others. This might take the form of comparative feedback about the energy consumption of other people or more general exemplary communications regarding the low energy practices of other people. In this way, the social norm approach has the potential to render social marketing more social by capitalising on the social nature of individual behaviour. In the CHARM research project, we employ a technologically sophisticated version of the social norm approach in the context of household energy consumption. At the same time, to better understand the dynamics of changes in energy consuming practices, the energy consumption data that we collect will be complemented by questionnaire, interview and focus group data. Finally, in future research designed to further reflect the very social ways in which people think, learn and act, we intend employ this novel social marketing approach within a more avowedly community context. Here, drawing on social learning theory, we note the extent to which learning happens in ways that are social, that is to say experiential, contextual and informal (Darby 2003; 2006b). In addition, drawing on community action research on energy, we emphasise the unique way in which community action provides these conditions (Schone 2009; Heiskanen et al. 2010), as well as the catalytic and synergistic potential of marketing and action among a range of relevant groups, institutions and individuals within the community (McKenzie-Mohr 2000). Finally, drawing on more general community action practice and theory (Butcher et al. 2007; Adger 2003), we also note the fundamental challenge to social marketing practitioners to act with rather than upon communities. In conclusion, our aim here is not to criticise the current social marketing on energy reduction, but to propose that recognition of the highly social ways in which people think, learn and act is worthy of more routine reflection not only in social marketing on energy, but more generally within the discipline and practice.