Does Active Choosing Promote Green Energy Use? Experimental Evidence

47 Pages Posted: 30 Jun 2015 Last revised: 6 Oct 2016

Simon Hedlin

Harvard University; Columbia University

Cass R. Sunstein

Harvard Law School; Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS)

Date Written: July 4, 2015

Abstract

Many officials have been considering whether it is possible or desirable to use choice architecture to increase use of environmentally friendly (“green”) products and activities. The right approach could produce significant environmental benefits, including large reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and better air quality. This Article presents new data from an online experiment (N=1,245) in which participants were asked questions about hypothetical green energy programs. The central finding is that active choosing had larger effects than green energy defaults (automatic enrollment in green energy), apparently because of the interaction between people’s feelings of guilt and their feelings of reactance. This finding is driven principally by the fact that when green energy costs more, there is a significant increase in opt-outs from green defaults, whereas with active choosing, green energy retains considerable appeal even when it costs more.

More specifically, we report four principal findings. First, forcing participants to make an active choice between a green energy provider and a standard energy provider led to higher enrollment in the green program than did either green energy defaults or standard energy defaults. Second, active choosing caused participants to feel more guilty about not enrolling in the green energy program than did either green energy defaults or standard energy defaults; the level of guilt was positively related to the probability of enrolling. Third, respondents were less likely to approve of the green energy default than of the standard energy default, but only when green energy cost extra, which suggests reactance towards green defaults when enrollment means additional private costs. Fourth, respondents appeared to have inferred that green energy automatically would come at a higher cost and/or be of worse quality than less environmentally friendly energy.

These findings raise important questions both for future research and for policymaking. If they reflect real-world behavior, they suggest the potentially large effects of active choosing — perhaps larger, in some cases, than those of green energy defaults.

Keywords: default rules, green defaults, behavioral economics, forced choice, active choosing

JEL Classification: D03, D91, K32, Q20, Q40, Q50, Q58

Suggested Citation

Hedlin, Simon and Sunstein, Cass R., Does Active Choosing Promote Green Energy Use? Experimental Evidence (July 4, 2015). Ecology Law Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2016. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2624359 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2624359

Simon Hedlin

Harvard University ( email )

1875 Cambridge Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Columbia University ( email )

3022 Broadway
New York, NY 10027
United States

Cass R. Sunstein (Contact Author)

Harvard Law School ( email )

1575 Massachusetts Ave
Areeda Hall 225
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
617-496-2291 (Phone)

Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) ( email )

79 John F. Kennedy Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
593
rank
40,231
Abstract Views
4,928
PlumX