Existing technologies, institutions, and behavioral norms together act to constrain the rate and magnitude of carbon emissions reductions in the coming decades. The inertia of carbon emissions due to such mutually reinforcing physical, economic, and social constraints is referred to as carbon lock-in. Carbon lock-in is a special case of path dependency, which is common in the evolution of complex systems. However, carbon lock-in is particularly prone to entrenchment given the large capital costs, long infrastructure lifetimes, and interrelationships between the socioeconomic and technical systems involved. Further, the urgency of efforts to avoid dangerous climate change exacerbates the liability of even small lock-in risks. Although carbon lock-in has been recognized for years, efforts to characterize the types and causes of carbon lock-in, or to quantitatively assess and evaluate its policy implications, have been limited and scattered across a number of different disciplines. This systematic review of the literature synthesizes what is known about the types and causes of carbon lock-in, including the scale, magnitude, and longevity of the effects, and policy implications. We identify three main types of carbon lock-in and describe how they coevolve: () infrastructural and technological, () institutional, and () behavioral. Although each type of lock-in has its own set of processes, all three are tightly intertwined and contribute to the inertia of carbon emissions. We outline the conditions, opportunities, and strategies for fostering transitions toward less-carbon-intensive emissions trajectories. We conclude by proposing a carbon lock-in research agenda that can help bridge the gaps between science, knowledge, and policy-making.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Raupach MR, Davis SJ, Peters GP, Andrew RM, Canadell JG. 1.  et al. 2014. Sharing a quota on cumulative carbon emissions. Nat. Clim. Change 4:10873–79 [Google Scholar]
  2. Rogelj J, Luderer G, Pietzcker RC, Kriegler E, Schaeffer M. 2.  et al. 2015. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5°C. Nat. Clim. Change 5:6519–27 [Google Scholar]
  3. Smil V. 3.  2010. Energy Transitions: History, Requirements, Prospects Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger
  4. Unruh GC, Carrillo-Hermosilla J. 4.  2006. Globalizing carbon lock-in. Energy Policy 34:101185–97 [Google Scholar]
  5. Foxon TJ.5.  2003. Inducing Innovation for a Low Carbon Future: Drivers, Barriers and Policies London: Carbon Trust
  6. 6. Int. Energy Agency 2014. Key World Energy Statistics 2014 Paris: Int. Energy Agency
  7. 7. Int. Panel Clim. Chang 2013. Climate Change 2013—The Physical Science Basis New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  8. Unruh GC.8.  2000. Understanding carbon lock-in. Energy Policy 28:817–30 [Google Scholar]
  9. Unruh GC.9.  2002. Escaping carbon lock-in. Energy Policy 30:317–25 [Google Scholar]
  10. Modi V, McDade S, Lallement D, Saghir J. 10.  2005. Energy Services for the Millennium Development Goals Washington, DC: World Bank and U.N. Dev. Program.
  11. Seto KC, Dhakal S, Blanco H, Delgado GC, Dewar D. 11.  et al. 2014. Human settlements, infrastructure, and spatial planning. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change; Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change O Edenhofer, R Pichs-Madruga, Y Sokona, S Kadner, K Seyboth et al. chap. 12 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  12. Williamson OE.12.  1981. The economics of organization: the transaction cost approach. Am. J. Sociol. 87(3):548 [Google Scholar]
  13. Ha-Duong M, Grubb MJ, Hourcade J-C. 13.  1997. Influence of socioeconomic inertia and uncertainty on optimal CO2-emission abatement. Nature 390:6657270–73 [Google Scholar]
  14. Kolstad CD.14.  1996. Fundamental irreversibilities in stock externalities. J. Public Econ. 60:2221–33 [Google Scholar]
  15. Calvin K, Patel P, Fawcett A, Clarke L, Fisher-Vanden K. 15.  et al. 2009. The distribution and magnitude of emissions mitigation costs in climate stabilization under less than perfect international cooperation: SGM results. Energy Econ. 31:Suppl. 2S187–97 [Google Scholar]
  16. Jaccard M, Rivers N. 16.  2007. Heterogeneous capital stocks and the optimal timing for CO2 abatement. Resour. Energy Econ. 29:11–16 [Google Scholar]
  17. Shalizi Z, Lecocq F. 17.  2009. Climate change and the economics of targeted mitigation in sectors with long-lived capital stock Policy Res. Work. Pap. 5063, World Bank, Nancy, France
  18. Davis SJ, Caldeira K, Matthews HD. 18.  2010. Future CO2 emissions and climate change from existing energy infrastructure. Science 329:59971330–33 [Google Scholar]
  19. Davis SJ, Socolow RH. 19.  2014. Commitment accounting of CO2 emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 9:884018 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dixit A.20.  1992. Investment and hysteresis. J. Econ. Perspect: 1986–1998. 6:1107–32 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kramer GJ, Haigh M. 21.  2009. No quick switch to low-carbon energy. Nature 462:7273568–69 [Google Scholar]
  22. Bertram C, Johnson N, Luderer G, Riahi K, Isaac M, Eom J. 22.  2015. Carbon lock-in through capital stock inertia associated with weak near-term climate policies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90:Part A62–72 [Google Scholar]
  23. Caldecott B, McDaniels J. 23.  2014. Stranded generation assets: implications for European capacity mechanisms, energy markets and climate policy Stranded Assets Program. Work. Pap., Smith Sch. Enterpr. Environ., Univ. Oxford, Oxford, UK
  24. Johnson N, Krey V, McCollum DL, Rao S, Riahi K, Rogelj J. 24.  2015. Stranded on a low-carbon planet: implications of climate policy for the phase-out of coal-based power plants. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90:Part A89–102 [Google Scholar]
  25. Rozenberg J, Davis SJ, Narloch U, Hallegatte S. 25.  2015. Climate constraints on the carbon intensity of economic growth. Environ. Res. Lett. 10095006 [Google Scholar]
  26. Shearer C, Ghio N, Myllyvirta L, Nace T. 26.  2015. Boom and Bust: Tracking The Global Coal Plant Pipeline San Francisco/Oakland, CA: CoalSwarm/Sierra Club
  27. 27. Sierra Club 2012. Locked-In: The Financial Risks of New Coal-Fired Power Plants in Today's Volatile International Coal Market Oakland, CA: Sierra Club
  28. Erickson P, Kartha S, Michael L, Tempest K. 28.  2015. Assessing carbon lock-in. Environ. Res. Lett. 10:1–7 [Google Scholar]
  29. Plumer B.29.  2015. Solar power still needs to get much cheaper. Are perovskites the answer? Vox. http://www.vox.com/2015/7/1/8877305/perovskite-solar-power
  30. Power Past Coal, Earthjustice, Sierra Club. 30.  2012. Permitting coal export terminals in the pacific northwest: An overview of regulations and the political context. San Francisco/Oakland, CA: Earthjustice/Sierra Club
  31. McGlade C, Ekins P. 31.  2015. The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2°C. Nature 517:7533187–90 [Google Scholar]
  32. Clark VR, Herzog HJ. 32.  2014. Can “stranded” fossil fuel reserves drive CCS deployment?. Energy Procedia 63:7261–71 [Google Scholar]
  33. Matthews HD. 33.  2014. A growing commitment to future CO2 emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 9:11111001 [Google Scholar]
  34. 34. World Resources Institute 2015. Draft recommendations onCalculating and reporting the potential ghg emissions from fossil fuel reserves.” Rep., World Res. Inst., Washington, DC. http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/potential_emissions_draft_methodology.pdf [Google Scholar]
  35. Erickson P, Lazarus M. 35.  2015. Global emissions: New oil investments boost carbon lock-in. Nature 526:757143–43 [Google Scholar]
  36. Peters GP, Andrew RM, Solomon S, Friedlingstein P. 36.  2015. Measuring a fair and ambitious climate agreement using cumulative emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 10:10105004 [Google Scholar]
  37. Banister D, Watson S, Wood C. 37.  1997. Sustainable cities: transport, energy, and urban form. Environ. Plan. B 24:1125–43 [Google Scholar]
  38. Makido Y, Dhakal S, Yamagata Y. 38.  2012. Relationship between urban form and CO2 emissions: evidence from fifty Japanese cities. Urban Clim. 2:55–67 [Google Scholar]
  39. Guivarch C, Hallegatte S. 39.  2011. Existing infrastructure and the 2°C target. Clim. Change 109:3–4801–5 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lucon O, Ürge-Vorsatz D, Zain Ahmed A, Akbari H, Bertoldi P. 40.  et al. 2014. Buildings. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change; Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change O Edenhofer, R Pichs-Madruga, Y Sokona, S Kadner, K Seyboth et al. chap. 9 New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  41. Ramesh T, Prakash R, Shukla KK. 41.  2010. Life cycle energy analysis of buildings: an overview. Energy Build. 42:101592–1600 [Google Scholar]
  42. Sartori I, Hestnes AG. 42.  2007. Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: a review article. Energy Build. 39:3249–57 [Google Scholar]
  43. Fernandez JE.43.  2004. Designing diverse lifetimes for evolving buildings. Environmental Diversity in Architecture K Steemers, MA Steane 65–83 Taylor & Francis [Google Scholar]
  44. North DC.44.  1990. Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  45. Mahoney J, Thelen K. 45.  2010. A theory of gradual institutional change. Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power J Mahoney, K Thelen 1–38 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  46. Ebbinghaus B.46.  2005. Can path dependence explain institutional change? Two approaches applied to welfare state reform MPIfG Disc. Pap. 05/2, Max Planck Inst. Study Soc., Cologne, Germ.
  47. Hosli MO, Dörfler T. 47.  2015. The United Nations Security Council: the challenge of reform. Rising Powers and Multilateral Institutions D Lesage, T van de Graaf 135–52 New York: Palgrave Macmillan [Google Scholar]
  48. Pierson P.48.  2000. Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 94:2251–67 [Google Scholar]
  49. Jacobsson S, Lauber V. 49.  2006. The politics and policy of energy system transformation: explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology. Energy Policy 34:256–76 [Google Scholar]
  50. Klitkou A, Bolwig S, Hansen T, Wessberg N. 50.  2015. The role of lock-in mechanisms in transition processes: the case of energy for road transport. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 16:22–37 [Google Scholar]
  51. Olson M.51.  1965. The logic of collective action: public goods and the theory of groups Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
  52. Könnölä T, Unruh GC, Carrillo-Hermosilla J. 52.  2006. Prospective voluntary agreements for escaping techno-institutional lock-in. Ecol. Econ. 57:239–52 [Google Scholar]
  53. Foxon TJ.53.  2012. Managing the transition towards sustainable regimes: a co-evolutionary approach. Creating a Sustainable Economy: An Institutional and Evolutionary Approach to Environmental Policy G Marletto 115–31 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  54. Cowan R.54.  1990. Nuclear power reactors: a study in technological lock-in. J. Econ. Hist. 50:3541–67 [Google Scholar]
  55. Thelen K.55.  1999. Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2:369–404 [Google Scholar]
  56. Kingdon JW.56.  2003. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies New York: Longman, 2nd ed..
  57. Notteboom T, De Langen P, Jacobs W. 57.  2013. Institutional plasticity and path dependence in seaports: interactions between institutions, port governance reforms and port authority routines. J. Transp. Geogr. 27:26–35 [Google Scholar]
  58. Strambach S.58.  2010. Path dependence and path plasticity: The co-evolution of institutions and innovation—the German customized business software industry. Handbook for Evolutionary Economic Geography RA Boschma, R Martin 406–31 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar [Google Scholar]
  59. Barnes W, Gartland M, Stack M. 59.  2004. Old habits die hard: path dependency and behavioral lock-in. J. Econ. Issues 38:2371–77 [Google Scholar]
  60. Cook E.60.  1982. The role of history in the acceptance of nuclear power. Soc. Sci. Q. 63:13–15 [Google Scholar]
  61. Carrington D.61.  2015. Renewable energy outstrips coal for first time in UK electricity mix. The GuardianSep. 24
  62. Neslen A.62.  2015. Wind power generates 140% of Denmark's electricity demand. The Guardian Jul. 10
  63. Stenzel T, Frenzel A. 63.  2008. Regulating technological change: the strategic reactions of utility companies towards subsidy policies in the German, Spanish and UK electricity markets. Energy Policy 36:72645–57 [Google Scholar]
  64. Hardin G.64.  1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:38591243–48 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ostrom E.65.  1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  66. Johnstone N, Haščič I, Popp D. 66.  2010. Renewable energy policies and technological innovation: evidence based on patent counts. Environ. Resour. Econ. 45:1133–55 [Google Scholar]
  67. Kammen DM.67.  2006. The rise of renewable energy. Sci. Am. 295:384–93 [Google Scholar]
  68. Margolis RM, Kammen DM. 68.  1999. Underinvestment: the energy technology and R&D policy challenge. Science 285:5428690–92 [Google Scholar]
  69. Lund PD.69.  2009. Effects of energy policies on industry expansion in renewable energy. Renew. Energy 34:153–64 [Google Scholar]
  70. 70. Frankfurt Sch. UNEP Cent./BNEF 2016. Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2016 Frankfurt, Germ.: Frankfurt Sch. UNEP Cent./BNEF
  71. Woerdman E.71.  2004. The Institutional Economics of Market-Based Climate Policy Amsterdam: Elsevier
  72. John W.72.  1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
  73. Berkhout F.73.  2002. Technological regimes, path dependency and the environment. Glob. Environ. Change 12:1–4 [Google Scholar]
  74. Esty DC.74.  1994. Greening the GATT: Trade, Environment, and the Future Washington, DC: Int. Inst. Econ.
  75. Hicks RL, Parks BC, Roberts JT, Tierney MJ. 75.  2008. Greening Aid? Understanding the Environmental Impact of Development Assistance Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
  76. Wade R.76.  1997. Greening the World Bank: the struggle over the environment, 1970–1985. The World Bank: Its First Half-Century D Kapur, JP Lewis, R Webb 611–734 Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. Press [Google Scholar]
  77. Lauber V, Jacobsson S. 77.  2015. The politics and economics of constructing, contesting, and restricting socio-political space for renewables: the German renewable energy act. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 34:256–76 [Google Scholar]
  78. Schimschar S, Blok K, Boermans T, Hermelink A. 78.  2011. Germany's path towards nearly zero-energy buildings—enabling the greenhouse gas mitigation potential in the building stock. Energy Policy 39(6):3346–60 [Google Scholar]
  79. Weiss J, Dunkelberg E, Vogelpohl T. 79.  2012. Improving policy instruments to better tap into homeowner refurbishment potential: lessons learned from a case study in Germany. Energy Policy 44:406–15 [Google Scholar]
  80. Inglehart RM.80.  1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
  81. Inglehart RM.81.  1995. Public support for environmental protection: the impact of objective problems and subjective values in 43 societies. Polit. Sci. Polit. 27:157–71 [Google Scholar]
  82. Steinberg PF.82.  2015. Who Rules the Earth? How Social Rules Shape Our Planet and Our Lives Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
  83. Haas PM.83.  1992. Banning chlorofluorocarbons. Int. Organ. 46:1187–224 [Google Scholar]
  84. Garcia-Johnson R.84.  2000. Exporting Environmentalism: U.S. Multinational Chemical Corporations in Brazil and Mexico Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  85. Thaler RH, Sunstein CR. 85.  2008. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press
  86. Miller D.86.  1998. Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
  87. Nickles S.87.  2002. “Preserving women”: refrigerator design as social process in the 1930s. Technol. Cult. 43:4693–727 [Google Scholar]
  88. Jaffe AB, Stavins RN. 88.  1994. The energy-efficiency gap: What does it mean?. Energy Policy 22:10804–10 [Google Scholar]
  89. Marechal K, Lazaric N. 89.  2010. Overcoming inertia: insights from evolutionary economics into improved energy and climate policies. Clim. Policy 10:1103–19 [Google Scholar]
  90. O'Rourke D, Lollo N. 90.  2015. Transforming consumption: from decoupling, to behavior change, to system changes for sustainable consumption. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 40:233–59 [Google Scholar]
  91. Ajzen I.91.  1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process 50:179–211 [Google Scholar]
  92. Ajzen I, Fishbein M. 92.  1977. Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychol. Bull. 84:5888–918 [Google Scholar]
  93. Klöckner CA, Blöbaum A. 93.  2010. A comprehensive action determination model: toward a broader understanding of ecological behaviour using the example of travel mode choice. J. Environ. Psychol. 30(4):574–86 [Google Scholar]
  94. Lally P, van Jaarsveld CHM, Potts HWW, Wardle J. 94.  2010. How are habits formed: modelling habit formation in the real world. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 40:6998–1009 [Google Scholar]
  95. Neal DT, Wood W, Labrecque JS, Lally P. 95.  2012. How do habits guide behavior? Perceived and actual triggers of habits in daily life. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 48:2492–98 [Google Scholar]
  96. de Vries P, Aarts H, Midden CJH. 96.  2011. Changing simple energy-related consumer behaviors: how the enactment of intentions is thwarted by acting and non-acting habits. Environ. Behav. 43:5612–33 [Google Scholar]
  97. Ouellette JA, Wood W. 97.  1998. Habit and intention in everyday life: the multiple processes by which past behavior predicts future behavior. Psychol. Bull. 124:154 [Google Scholar]
  98. Page N, Page M. 98.  2014. Climate change: time to do something different. Front. Psychol. 5:1–15 [Google Scholar]
  99. Girod B, van Vuuren DP, de Vries B. 99.  2013. Influence of travel behavior on global CO2 emissions. Transp. Res. Part Policy Pract. 50:183–97 [Google Scholar]
  100. Aarts H, Verplanken B, Van Knippenberg A. 100.  1997. Habit and information use in travel mode choices. Acta Psychol. 96:1–21–14 [Google Scholar]
  101. Gardner B.101.  2009. Modelling motivation and habit in stable travel mode contexts. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 12:168–76 [Google Scholar]
  102. Danner UN, Aarts H, de Vries NK. 102.  2008. Habit versus intention in the prediction of future behaviour: the role of frequency, context stability and mental accessibility of past behaviour. Br. J. Soc. Psychol 47:Part 2245–65 [Google Scholar]
  103. Brette O, Buhler T, Lazaric N, Mar K, Brette O. 103.  et al. 2014. Reconsidering the nature and effects of habits in urban transportation behavior Work. Pap. 2014-10, Groupe Rech. Droit Econ. Gest., Cent. Natl. Rech. Sci., Nice, Fr.
  104. Donald IJ, Cooper SR, Conchie SM. 104.  2014. An extended theory of planned behaviour model of the psychological factors affecting commuters’ transport mode use. J. Environ. Psychol. 40:39–48 [Google Scholar]
  105. Graham-Rowe E, Skippon S, Gardner B, Abraham C. 105.  2011. Can we reduce car use and, if so, how? A review of available evidence. Transp. Res. Part Policy Pract. 45:5401–18 [Google Scholar]
  106. Kurz T, Gardner B, Verplanken B, Abraham C. 106.  2015. Habitual behaviors or patterns of practice? Explaining and changing repetitive climate-relevant actions. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 6:1113–28 [Google Scholar]
  107. Verplanken B.107.  2010. Engaging the Public with Climate Change New York: Routledge
  108. Verplanken B, Walker I, Davis A, Jurasek M. 108.  2008. Context change and travel mode choice: combining the habit discontinuity and self-activation hypotheses. J. Environ. Psychol. 28:2121–27 [Google Scholar]
  109. Bamberg S.109.  2006. Is a residential relocation a good opportunity to change people's travel behavior? Results from a theory-driven intervention study. Environ. Behav. 38:6820–40 [Google Scholar]
  110. Maréchal K.110.  2010. Not irrational but habitual: the importance of “behavioural lock-in” in energy consumption. Ecol. Econ. 69:51104–14 [Google Scholar]
  111. Fujii S.111.  2003. What does a one-month free bus ticket do to habitual drivers? An experimental analysis of habit and attitude change. Transportation 30:181–95 [Google Scholar]
  112. Thøgersen J, Møller B. 112.  2008. Breaking car use habits: the effectiveness of a free one-month travelcard. Transportation 35:3329–45 [Google Scholar]
  113. Lee TM, Markowitz EM, Howe PD, Ko C-Y, Leiserowitz AA. 113.  2015. Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world. Nat. Clim. Change 5:111014–20 [Google Scholar]
  114. Swim JCS, Doherty T, Gifford R, Howard G, Reser J. 114.  et al. 2009. Psychology and Global Climate Change: Addressing a Multi-Faceted Phenomenon and Set of Challenges; a Report by the American Psychological Association Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
  115. Gifford R.115.  2011. The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. Am. Psychol. 66:4290–302 [Google Scholar]
  116. Chorus CG.116.  2014. Risk aversion, regret aversion and travel choice inertia: an experimental study. Transp. Plan. Technol. 37:4321–32 [Google Scholar]
  117. Chorus CG, Dellaert B. 117.  2012. Travel choice inertia: the joint role of risk aversion and learning. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 46:1139–55 [Google Scholar]
  118. Gazheli A, Antal M, van den Bergh J. 118.  2015. The behavioral basis of policies fostering long-run transitions: stakeholders, limited rationality and social context. Futures 69:14–30 [Google Scholar]
  119. Selinger E, Whyte K. 119.  2011. Is there a right way to nudge? The practice and ethics of choice architecture. Sociol. Compass5 10:923–35 [Google Scholar]
  120. Shove E.120.  2010. Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change. Environ. Plan. A 42:61273–85 [Google Scholar]
  121. Shove E, Pantzar M. 121.  2005. Consumers, producers and practices: understanding the invention and reinvention of Nordic walking. J. Consum. Cult. 5:143–64 [Google Scholar]
  122. Geels FW, Schot J. 122.  2010. The dynamics of transitions: a socio-technical perspective. Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change J Grin, J Rotmans, J Schot, part I London: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  123. Elzen B, Wieczorek A. 123.  2005. Transitions towards sustainability through system innovation. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 72:6651–61 [Google Scholar]
  124. Shove E, Pantzar M, Watson M. 124.  2012. The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How It Changes London: Sage
  125. Norgaard KM.125.  2011. Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  126. Burch S.126.  2010. Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia, Canada. Glob. Environ. Change 20:2287–97 [Google Scholar]
  127. Sahakian M, Wilhite H. 127.  2013. Making practice theory practicable: towards more sustainable forms of consumption. J. Consum. Cult. 14:125–44 [Google Scholar]
  128. Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V. 128.  2007. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18:5429–34 [Google Scholar]
  129. Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ. 129.  2004. Social influence: compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55:1591–621 [Google Scholar]
  130. Shove E, Walker G. 130.  2014. What is energy for? Social practice and energy demand. Theory Cult. Soc. 31:541–58 [Google Scholar]
  131. Watson M.131.  2013. Building future systems of velomobility. Sustainable Practices: Social Theory and Climate Change E Shove, N Spurling 117–31 Oxford, UK: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  132. Shove E, Walker G, Brown S. 132.  2014. Material culture, room temperature and the social organisation of thermal energy. J. Mater. Cult. 19:2113–24 [Google Scholar]
  133. Jackson T.133.  2005. Motivating sustainable consumption. Sustain. Dev. Res. Netw. 29:30 [Google Scholar]
  134. Evans D, McMeekin A, Southerton D. 134.  2012. Sustainable consumption, behaviour change policies and theories of practice. The Habits of Consumption A Warde, D Southerton 113–29 Helsinki: Hels. Coll. Adv. Stud. [Google Scholar]
  135. Burch S.135.  2011. Sustainable development paths: investigating the roots of local policy responses to climate change. Sustain. Dev. 19:3176–88 [Google Scholar]
  136. Spaargaren G.136.  2011. Theories of practices: agency, technology, and culture. Glob. Environ. Change 21:3813–22 [Google Scholar]
  137. Watson M.137.  2012. How theories of practice can inform transition to a decarbonised transport system. J. Transp. Geogr. 24:488–96 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error