BEHAVIOURAL

SCIENCE AND
ENVIRONMENTAL
MANAGEMENT

Module III
Introduction to Behavioral Economics & Nudge Theory

• The concept of 'nudging' was first explained in Nudge: Improving Decisions about
Health, Wealth and Happiness, a book by American academics Richard Thaler and
Cass Sunstein.
• “A nudge is … any attempt at influencing people’s judgment, choice or behaviour in
a predictable way (1) made possible because of cognitive biases in individual and
social decision-making posing barriers for people to perform rationally in their own
interest, and (2) working by making use of those biases as an integral part of such
attempts”.
 Nudge theory is based on a libertarian paternalist approach. Libertarian
paternalism contends that people should be free to do what they choose; but that
it is legitimate for people‘s behaviour to be influenced in a positive health
direction.
SOME PERTINENT QUESTIONS (Application & Use of
Nudging)
Q1. What knowledge and practical experiences about nudging exist in general
and in the field of consumption and the environment?
Q2. In which consumption domains and behavioural contexts is nudging most
efficient and effective?
Q3. What are the critical factors of success of nudging strategies?
Q4. In what way may nudging contribute to devising more successful policies
for sustainable consumption?
What is Nudging?
Rationale for Use of Nudging & Its Diversified application

• Success of strategies for solving problems of climate change, scarce

resources and negative environmental impacts increasingly depends on
whether changes in individual behaviour can and will supplement the
technical solutions available to date.

• A relatively new way to influence behaviour in a sustainable direction

without changing values of people is nudging. Nudging can be used to help
people make choices that are better for the environment or their health.
The importance of the behaviour change strategies is being recognised in
politics and among policy makers in diverse areas – from road safety to diet
and physical activity; from pension plans to private economy and from
littering to recycling.
Difference between Mainstream & Behavioural Sciences/
Behavioural Economics
• Mainstream economics, e.g. neoclassical economics, is based on the
assumption of the rational nature of human beings, i.e., the homo
economicus model of human behaviour. According to this logic, the
important incentives people react to are influenced by price and choice.
Behavioural sciences, drawing on insights from cognitive and social
psychology, stress that besides price and availability of options, behavioural
biases and the decision context also influence choices that people make,
often routinely. For a long time, the use of findings of behavioural sciences
in policy have been rather unsystematic (Shafir 2013). Behavioural
economics has “managed to bring the fields of applied social and cognitive
psychology into policy-making by relating it to economic questions”
(Kahneman 2013).
Context of Nudging
• Nudging has been used in many contexts, primarily in the US and UK,
although it has also been used in developing countries.
• They argue that most decisions people make are unconscious or irrational.
Therefore their behaviour can be manipulated by changing the way that
choices are presented to them. Governments should try to influence people's
behaviour to make their lives healthier as long as this doesn't involve coercion
or significant financial pressures. There is scope to use approaches that
harness the latest techniques of behavioural science to do this – nudging
people in the right direction rather than banning or restricting their choices.
'Nudges' may involve actions such as increasing the prominence of healthy
food in canteens, requiring people to opt out of rather than into organ donor
schemes or providing small incentives for people to act more healthily.
 What is Libertarian Paternalist Approach?

• Nudge theory is based on a libertarian paternalist approach. Libertarian

paternalism contends that people should be free to do what they choose; but
that it is legitimate for people‘s behaviour to be influenced in a positive health
direction to make their lives longer, healthier and better (i.e. paternalism
steering choices in ways that will improve their lives). This influencing process
is performed by choice architects, these are individuals or groups who organise
the context in which people make decisions, and whether they intend to do so
or not, influence people‘s behaviour. This approach gives people a nudge and
makes it easier for them to make healthy choices that will improve their lives,
whilst acknowledging their freedom not to do so.
• Nobel Prize winning economist Richard Thaler’s nudge theory has helped
workers beef up their retirement accounts to the tune of nearly $ 30 billion,
gotten people to eat more fruits and vegetables, and even helped men improve
their aim into Urinals.
• Nudge theory is based on the idea that small tweaks in “choice architecture” —
in other words, how choices are presented to consumers — can help steer
people toward decisions that will benefit them. A classic example is the Save
More Tomorrow program, which exploits people’s natural tendency to put off
saving for retirement and save far too little.
• The program gives “workers the option of committing themselves now to
increasing their savings rate later,” Thaler and co-author Shlomo Benartzi wrote.
Participants start by putting a small percentage of their paycheck (say 3%) into a
401(k), then automatically increase their savings rate every time they get a raise.
The program quadrupled savings rates at the three firms where it was first tried
in the late 1990s and early 2000s. One reason for its success: people’s innate
inertia. Few participants opted out, so the majority stayed enrolled in the
program.
Why are we interested in Nudging?

• There is a growing recognition that supply-side policies (directed at production) need

to be complemented by demand side strategies that could help individuals make better
decisions for themselves and society at large. Therefore, policy makers are becoming
increasingly interested in applications of behavioural sciences in different sectors and
types of policy making.
• Psychology, sociology, marketing and behavioural economics paint a picture of complex
human behaviour that is influenced by a diversity of factors, such as desires and needs,
social norms and values, infrastructural and institutional context, and economic and
political climate (Mont and Power 2013). There is also a growing practical knowledge on
how human behaviour is influenced through everyday practices at home (Shove and
Warde 2002), in the shopping context by retailers (Mont 2013) or at the community
and city level through commercial advertising and social marketing (McKenzie-Mohr
2011).
• Increasingly behavioural insights are being used in the design, implementation and
evaluation of policy instruments (Heiskanen et al. 2009; Wolff and Schönherr 2011).
USE OF NUDGES IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES
• There are relevant & significant experiences from the USA, the UK, EU,
Norway and Denmark. In the USA, nudging was institutionalised at the
Office of Regulatory Affairs which develops and oversees the
implementation of government- wide policies and reviews draft regulations
in several areas. In the UK, nudge was firmly institutionalised when the
Behavioural Insights Team (UK BIT) was established at the UK Cabinet Office
in 2010. In February 2014, the team was ‘spun out’ of government and set
up as a social purpose company but is still working primarily for the Cabinet
Office. Instead of establishing a governmental unit, Denmark has an active
non-profit organisation iNudgeYou outside the government that supports
the use of nudges in policy making. Similarly to Denmark, Norway has an
independent organisation promoting and supporting the use of nudges,
GreeNudge, which has produced a report on the potential for nudging in
Norway’s climate policy.
SOME SIMPLER EXAMPLES OF NUDGE(S)
ENFORCEMENT & NUDGING
• Instructing a small child to tidy his/her room.(E)
• Playing a 'room-tidying' game with the child. (N)
• Erecting signs saying 'no littering' and warning of fines.(E)
• Improving the availability and visibility of litter bins.(N)
• Joining a gym.(E) Using the stairs. (N)
• Counting calories. (E) Smaller plate. (N)
• Weekly food shop budgeting.(E) Use a basket instead of a trolley.(N)
EXAMPLES OF NUDGING
• BULLS EYE – CASE OF AMSTERDAM AIRPORT (Installation of small fly shaped
stickers in the Urinals, spillages reduced by 80%)
• CASE OF AMERICAN GROCERY STORE PAY & SAVE (By putting arrows on the
floor leading to fruit & veg aisles- 9 out of 10 customers were influenced)
• THE DECOY EFFECT ON THE MENU CARD (In an expensive restaurant-
choosing relatively less expensive dishes- what the restaurant does
deliberately)
• BIG BIN, LITTLE BIN (Case of UK- Regular waste, Recyclable waste & different
sized bins)
• ORGAN DONATION
• PAID TO QUIT (Case of Cigarette Smoking & Savings)
• SEE FOOD (A Case of Healthier food items in Cafeteria in Schools)

• SUPER DOWN SIZE ME (A Case of McDonalds’ in China)

• SOCIAL NORMS (With UK Taxpayers defaulting on Tax payments)

NUDGING “FOR GOOD” AS WELL AS “FOR BAD” ??
How Uber drivers are nudged to keep driving
• Uber drivers have seen this first-hand. Working with teams of scientists, the
company has developed nudge techniques that push drivers to work longer
hours, “sometimes at hours and locations that are less lucrative for them,”
according to a New York Times story that exposed how Uber and other gig
economy companies use behavioural science to maximize workers’ output.
• Uber uses an algorithm similar to Netflix’s NFLX, -2.28% auto play feature,
which automatically queues up the next episode of whatever series you’re
watching. Drivers are shown their next possible fare before they’re even
done dropping off their current rider, the Times reported.
• “We show drivers areas of high demand or incentivize them to drive more,”
an Uber spokesman told the Times. “But any driver can stop work literally
at the tap of a button — the decision whether or not to drive is 100 percent
theirs.” (The company did not respond to MarketWatch’s request for
comment.)
What Thaler himself says about what consumers can do
• Thaler’s favorite nudge — and one that he says has saved his life several times — is the
London street sign that reminds pedestrians which direction to look for oncoming double
decker busses, he told Reddit users in 2015.
• But he’s been frank about their less benevolent applications too. PROPER NUDGING
SHOULD BE GUIDED BY THREE PRINCIPLES, THALER HAS SAID. THEY SHOULD BE
TRANSPARENT, EASY TO OPT OUT OF, AND SHOULD IMPROVE THE PERSON’S WELFARE.
• He’s called out merchants who violate those principles, including a British newspaper that
automatically enrolled trial subscribers into long-term plans and made it hard to opt out,
and an airline that prompted passengers to buy expensive trip insurance if they wanted to
book their tickets online.
• “Many companies are nudging purely for their own profit and not in customers’ best
interests,” Thaler wrote in the New York Times in 2015. He urged consumers to be vigilant,
read the fine print, and give their business to companies that nudge for good, not bad.
• “As customers, we can help one another by resisting these come-ons. The more we turn
down questionable offers like trip insurance and scrutinize ‘one month’ trials, the less
incentive companies will have to use such schemes,” Thaler wrote. “Conversely, if customers
reward firms that act in our best interests, more such outfits will survive and flourish, and
the options available to us will improve.”
A Decision Map For Individuals Considering College
Enrolment
FOUR DIFFERENT TYPES OF NUDGES
• Nudging is about pushing people in a particular direction – getting them to
make some specific decisions – without depriving them of the freedom to
choose.
• Different nudges alter people’s behaviour in a predictable way without
restricting choices or significantly changing economic incentives. Nudging
can substitute or complement traditional policy instruments and offers a
different way of achieving policy targets.
• Provision of information.
• Changes in the physical environment.
• Use of a green default option.
• Use of social norms and regular feedback.
PROVISION FOR INFORMATION
• Nudging using the provision of information is the most predominant type of
nudge, often used in conjunction with changes in the default option. Providing
credible and accessible information that reduces the choice complexity is a
promising tool to increase pro-environmental choices.
• The literature review shows that most of the cases where information is used as
nudging target energy consumption and energy efficiency.
• The information-based nudges targeting energy consumption and energy
efficiency also, in general, show both quantifiable and significant impacts
(affecting energy consumption of +1% to -40%.
• Moreover, there is the provision of real-time information. For instance, using in-
house smart meters to display energy usage and provide transparency about
the impact of current energy use and prices provides interesting results in
terms of reducing energy consumption during peak hours
CHANGES IN THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
• Nudging through changes in the physical environment seems to be especially suitable
to influence behaviour in relation to waste sorting, waste recycling and decrease in
food waste. The literature review has not identified similar examples in energy
consumption and energy efficiency.
• The nudging cases and experiments that have been carried out in Nordic countries
also show that nudging through changes in the physical environment are of particular
focus in waste management, especially in targeting waste recycling and decrease of
food waste.
• The literature study has identified examples and experiments in Nordic countries
where they used nudging in the form of changes in the physical environment. An
experiment was conducted in order to reduce food waste in Norwegian hotels. The
experiment entailed reducing the size of the used dishes, which resulted in the waste
being reduced by almost 20%.
• The Swedish case concerned waste recycling and used nudging as changes in the
physical environment which, in the concrete case, meant introducing new sorting
equipment for better segregation of waste sources. This nudge was applied together
with provision of information and resulted in an increased food waste sorting of 44%–
49%.
CHANGES IN THE DEFAULT OPTIONS
• Changing the default to a green option can, for example, be used to promote
increased diffusion of green energy. When a consumer chooses the type of
electrical supply required – green electricity from renewable energy or
conventional electricity based on fossil fuels – the default is set to green
electricity. The consumer must actively opt out of the green default, and
actively opt in to conventional electricity supply. A number of examples and
tests from Germany show that a very large percentage of consumers choose or
remain in default in favour of green electricity.
• Changes in the default options are a promising type of nudge, though in the
literature review this type of nudge is exclusively applied to promoting
reductions in energy consumption and enhancing energy-efficient behaviour.
• Except for one case where the change in default is used to nudge towards
choosing a meat-free meal.
USE OF SOCIAL NORMS AND REGULAR FEEDBACK
• Social nudges in terms of using social norms through peer comparisons are
interesting because this type of nudge is applied across both energy and water
consumption as well as waste sorting.
• Related to energy consumption, a range of studies in the US, UK and Ireland have
documented that information provision in terms of social feedback combined
with frequent information on current energy consumption patterns can reduce
energy consumption by up to 7%.
• In water usage, the program Water Smart is estimated to have reduced water use
by 5% by a combination of feedback reports and peer comparisons.
• An example from Norway concerns waste sorting, where a tax to promote waste
sorting was introduced and, at the same time, social responsibility in relation to
waste. The result was an increase in both quantity and quality of waste sorting.
A STRONG CASE FOR NUDGING
• There is empirical evidence to suggest a strong case for using nudging to promote
more environmentally friendly behaviour in energy consumption, waste and
resource efficiency
• From the literature examined, a wide range of evidence is available on how
frequently nudging is applied, the prevalence of countries in which nudging have
been tested, the scale of the cases and experiments, and the associated impact.
Across all examined cases and experiments, most are US-based regardless of the
category of nudge applied. It is, however, possible to find examples of all four
categories of nudges in the Nordic countries*. The literature review also shows
that there is a predominance of cases and experiments where nudging is used to
influence behavioural patterns in relation to energy consumption and energy
efficiency (20 out of the 30 reviewed cases and experiments).
*(Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, including their associated territories (Greenland, the Faroe Islands
and the Åland Islands)
Two systems of human thinking – Intuitive(S1) & Reflexive (S2)
System 1 (Fast, intuitive)
• Regulates automatic behaviour
• Thinks fast
• Uncontrolled, unconscious,
effortless
• Relies on stereotypes
• Gives immediate responses to
frequent and familiar situations
• More prone to biases and
heuristics
• Examples: driving a car, brushing
teeth
System 2 (Slow, reflective)
• Regulates reflective behaviour
• Thinks slow
• Controlled, self-aware and
effortful
• Solves problems through
calculation and deliberation
• Takes well-thought out decisions
• Less prone to biases and heuristics
• Example: calculating a tip,
planning the day
Nudge theory applicable to Exercising & Having a Healthy
Body?
A Summary of Behavioural Science/Economics
Initiatives from Around The World
UNITED KINGDOM
The UK government has centralized their initiatives with the formation of the
Behavioural Insights Team (also called the “Nudge Unit). The Nudge Unit is a
standalone government unit that works with businesses, NGOs, and other
government departments to develop and test nudge interventions. Formed in 2010,
the team has conducted numerous experiments in areas such as energy usage, debt
and fraud, and charitable giving. Through their published reports and seminars, the
team has helped educate and disseminate knowledge throughout the UK
government on behavioural economics and its application in public policy. Since its
formation, the team has achieved much success with the team identifying various
behavioural interventions that would result in a cost savings of over £300 million,
and has exceeded its objective of achieving a 10-fold return on the cost of the
team17. Due to its success, the New South Wales and Australian government have
commissioned the team to assist them in applying behavioural economics to their
public policies18. Currently, the UK government is planning to privatize the Nudge
Unit, which will add commercial capacity and investment to the team and the
potential to generate revenue for the government and taxpayers
EVIDENCE FROM UNITED STATES
• Between 2009-2012, Cass Sunstein, currently a professor at the Harvard Law School and
co-author of Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness, was
appointed the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).
During his appointment, Sunstein spearheaded many nudge initiatives including the Smart
Disclosure initiative and the redesign of the USDA Food Pyramid and the Fuel Economy
label.
• Following the success of the Behavioural Insights Team, the US government has formed
the Social and Behavioural Science Team who will be working with various government
agencies to test and implement behavioural interventions. Currently, the team is working
on initiatives in the areas of childhood education (among low-income families), health
compliance, and domestic violence. The formation of the team is part of a broader
initiative to improve government efficiency and performance using evidence and
innovation. Government agencies are also being advised to consider applying behavioural
insights to help improve policy outcomes and lower operational costs. Other efforts to
incorporate behavioural economics into policy are dispersed across various government
departments. Most notably, the USDA established the Cornell Center for Behavioral
Economics in Child Nutrition Program with the goal of leading and disseminating research
in behavioural economics and child nutrition. The Department of Energy is also seeking to
establish its own behavioural science team. The Federal Trade Commission also uses
behavioural economics in its policy analysis and has participated in various behavioural
economics workshops and conferences.
DENMARK
• At the moment, Denmark does not have a centralized unit for behavioural
economics but several departments are part of the Danish Nudging Network.
The Danish Nudging Network is comprised of researchers, practitioners, and
policymakers who are interested in using behavioural science in public
policymaking27. The Network is also a part of iNudgeYou, a non-profit
organization that conducts research and organizes workshops and courses in
behavioural economics.
Other Countries
• It should be noted that agencies in Singapore, the European Union, Canada,
and other countries are also incorporating nudges and behavioural
economics into their policies and welfare programs.
Opower - Using Social Norms To Reduce Energy Usage
Country: United States
Policy Tools: Information, Choice Architecture
• Opower is a software company working with utility companies to provide
customers with information about their energy usage. The company
sends out home energy reports that provide energy conservation tips
and information about each household’s energy usage. Opower worked
with academic researchers to conduct large-scale randomized controlled
experiments to test the power of social norms in energy conservation. In
addition to providing tips and household energy information, the reports
compared each household’s energy to that of other households in the
area.
• Researchers found that the home energy reports reduced energy
consumption in the average household by over 2%. The cost of the
intervention averaged about 2.5 cents per kilowatt-hour and compared
favorably to other energy efficiency programs that have costs ranging
from 1.6 cents per kilowatt-hour to 6.4 cents per kilowatt-hour
Lazy Town – Encouraging Kids to Eat Healthier
Country: Iceland, United Kingdom (in progress)
Policy Tools: Information and Persuasion, Choice Architecture
• Lazy Town is an Icelandic TV show that motivates children to exercise and
eat healthier. Leveraging on its popularity, the show has launched several
health initiatives In partnership with the Icelandic government to
encourage healthier eating and exercise. In one initiative with a large
supermarket chain, fruits and vegetables were labelled “Sports Candy” –
the name Lazy Town uses for fruits and vegetables. The simple change in
naming led to a 22% increase in sales for the supermarket. Lazy Town
became mainstream in 1996 and since then, child obesity rates have
decreased among 9-year old children in Iceland.
• Following Lazy Town’s success, the Behavioural Insights Team and the
Department of Health have developed a partnership with Lazy Town and is
looking to develop similar initiatives in the United Kingdom. The initiative
will also incorporate behavioural insights and will be rolled out nationwide
Increasing Tax Repayment Rates - Country: United Kingdom
Policy Tools: Choice Architecture

• In the United Kingdom, it is estimated that fraud costs the economy about
£38.4 billion per year. In particular, about 10% of people do not pay their
self-assessed taxes on time.44 The Behavioural Insights Team partnered
with HM Revenue and Customs to conduct a series of trials to test the
effectiveness of various messages on self-assessed tax repayments. The
trials revealed that tax letters stating that the majority of individuals pay
their taxes on time and the importance of paying taxes, resulted in a 15%
increase in tax repayments compared to the control group letters.45 If these
tax letters were sent out to self-assessed tax debtors, it is estimated that
about £30 million of extra revenue could be generated for the government.
Where to nudge?
• “Nudge” interventions are most appropriate in what marketing
researchers call “low-involvement” decisions, i.e., ones that involve
little conscious deliberation, and also in high involvement decisions that
are complex or unfamiliar.
• However, it is not self-evident that nudges are likely to work (even in
principle) in the case of high-involvement decisions that are perceived
to have low complexity. Examples of such decisions where (at least
individual, one-off) nudges might not be effective could be the choice
of a car brand in the case of people who have high brand loyalty.
 How Nudges are Used?

• Policy makers can use nudging in two ways, 1) to counteract the negative
impact of other actors’ (e.g. business, media) attempts to subconsciously
influence human behaviour and thus reduce behaviour deemed undesirable
(e.g. consumption of fatty, salty and sugary food), and 2) to promote certain
behaviour and thus increase behaviour deemed desirable (e.g. Consumption of
healthy food) (Reisch and Oehler 2009).
Who Nudges?

• Businesses have a long tradition of applying diverse strategies similar to

nudge for shaping purchasing patterns and levels. Indeed, companies
have been pioneers in using insights from research on consumer
behaviour, including the latest developments in sensory techniques and
neuro-marketing, for developing communication strategies in shops,
marketing campaigns using different channels outside the in-store
environment and shaping buying behaviour through in-store space
layout and management. In the words of Vance Packard from the book
The Hidden Persuaders (Packard 1957/2007: 11): “…many of us are
being influenced and manipulated—far more than we realize— in the
patterns of our everyday lives. Large scale efforts are being made, often
 Traditional marketing vs. choice architecture and
nudge
Traditional marketing Choice architecture and nudge
• Aims to first of all maximise • Aims to first of all benefit people/
profits and benefits of businesses
consumers
• Focus on what needs to be sold,
not necessarily on the best • Focus on options that are best for
alternative for consumers people

• Reliance on marketing experts • leaving possibility for people to opt-in

(including behavioural experts) in or opt-out
corporate decision-making • Reliance on behavioural experts in the
process of policy planning
Policy tools to influence individual behaviour based on
(House of Lords 2011)
Regulation of the individual
Fiscal measures directed at the individual Non-regulatory and non-fiscal measures with
relation to the individual
• Eliminate and restrict choice Guide and enable choice Incentives and information
• Laws and regulations
• Fiscal incentives Non-fiscal incentives
Nudging
• Provision of Information
• Simplification and framing of information
• Changes to physical environment
• Changes to the default policy
• Use of social norms
Nudge in various consumption relevant domains

• Nudge might be a promising tool for advancing sustainable consumption

because nudge tools do not restrict consumer choice (Sunstein 2014a).
• So, in which consumptions domains has nudge proven to be most efficient
and effective?
• And what are the critical factors of success?
Nudge in various consumption relevant domains & Impacting CC

• ENERGY USE IN THE HOME -Decades of evidence suggest that people consistently under-invest in energy
efficiency, even from a private economic viewpoint – a phenomenon which is often referred to as the
“energy efficiency gap.”
• FOOD- Food production and consumption have major impacts on the environment. Agriculture is
responsible for 13% of all greenhouse gas emissions in Sweden (Naturvårdsverket 2014), and overall food
consumption represents about 25% of the climate impact of an average Swedish consumer (Röös 2012).
• PERSONAL TRANSPORT- Transportation is the area where facilitating “good behaviour” has been going on
for a long time, but where nudging as a concept has not been popularised yet. The transport sector alone is
responsible for up to 30% of household emissions and its impact is expected to grow in the future following
the annual growth of 1,3% in terms of passenger kilometres recorded in the period between 1995 and 2010
(EEA 2011).
What Research Says….(Use of Nudging for Pro-Environmental
Behaviour)
• The use of social norms has shown that offering peer comparisons in
combination with information on individual consumption patterns can be an
effective way of reducing resource use in the energy and water sectors. In the
pilot experiment, social norms provided the largest impact on donation
behaviour. The focus should be on situations where consumers have, or can
have, information for their own usage and are able to benchmark this usage
towards credible reference groups and encourage more energy-efficient
behaviour. Evidence from the pilot experiment suggests that a similar
approach could be used for waste sorting and recycling.
CONCLUSION
• Choice architecture and nudging are still relatively fledgling approaches to
behaviour change, especially in the world of policy and welfare. However,
the results demonstrated by early adopters like the UK have shown much
promise. Furthermore, general insights from behavioural economics are
being used in several countries to design traditional policy tools like
regulation. While choice architecture is not a panacea, it is a policy tool
that can be implemented at a low cost yet provide significant results. As
governments continue to deal with increasing resource constraints,
nudging might become an increasingly popular and effective toolkit.
• In our pilot field experiment, we compared the relative effects of three
different types of nudges on donation behaviour. The results indicate that
subtle interventions such as appealing to social norms or providing
information affect environmentally friendly behaviour in the context of
donations