A presentation at the BSA Climate Change Study Group event, “Energy, Climate and Society: Insights from Early Career Researchers” held on Thursday, 18 April 2013 at the University of Westminster.

1. Social networks &
energy efficiency
Social networks & adoption of household
energy efficiency innovations in 3 case study
communities
Dr Megan McMichael
UCL Energy Institute

2. Background
• PhD title
–“Social capital and the diffusion of energy-reducing innovations in UK
households” (April 2011)
•Reasons for research
–29% reduction in CO2 emissions from domestic sector by 2020
–Common belief that, inter alia, lack of knowledge is responsible for
slow change
• Literature
–Diffusion of innovations (adoption vs. non-adoption)
–Social capital (social networks / word of mouth)
–Human dimensions of household energy use
2

3. Case studies
• Scottish & Southern Energy (SSE) community trials
– Part of the Energy Demand Research Project (EDRP)
– Energy efficiency/smart meter interventions took place 2007-2009
– 3 villages/small town (one in each: England, Wales, & Scotland)
• The research
– Took place during end of EDRP trials:
• Questionnaires distributed in summer 2009
• Focus groups held in Autumn / Winter 2009/2010
– Main research question examined relationship between information-seeking
(from someone the respondent knew) & adopting an energy efficiency
innovation
– Innovations were grouped into 4 categories: Insulation & draught-proofing;
Visual displays of energy use (e.g. smart meters); Appliances, heating &
lighting; Behavioural changes
3

4. Summary of findings
• Respondents indicated they would be just as likely to ask someone they know
for information on energy efficiency as use media/organisations (i.e. 1/3 split
between the three choices).
4
• Significant relationships between information-seeking & adoption … but only
for certain innovations (e.g. smart meters), and in certain communities
• Roughly half of the people respondents sought information from were from
within the same community, but this was not significantly related to adoption
• For some innovations, respondents were more likely to adopt if they spoke to
more people
• Respondents in one community strongly preferred seeking information from
strong ties (family, friends); respondents in the other two communities sought
information from both strong and weak ties (acquaintances, neighbours,
colleagues)

5. Policy implications
• Variations mean that „blanket‟ approaches are not as effective as tailored
approaches
• Pre-assessment
• Tailoring approaches could be guided by the Energy Efficiency Resource
Generator
• Socio-demographics should be examined
• Policies should encourage the use of existing social networks, who can act as
„intermediaries‟, where possible.
• „Intermediaries‟ need more time than may be anticipated to establish projects
and disseminate a message.
• People may seek more information from social networks on innovations which
are not well-understood
5

6. Thank you!
Megan McMichael
UCL Energy Institute
m.mcmichael@ucl.ac.uk
6