Food production is associated with various environmental impacts and the production of meat is highlighted as a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. A transition toward plant-based and low-meat diets has thus been emphasised as an important contribution to reducing climate change. By combining results from a consumer survey, focus group interviews and an in-store field experiment, this article investigates whether Norwegian consumers are ready to make food choices based on what is environmentally sustainable. We ask how consumers perceive the environmental impacts of food consumption, whether they are willing and able to change their food consumption in a more climate-friendly direction, and what influences their perceptions and positions. The results show that there is uncertainty among consumers regarding what constitutes climate- or environmentally friendly food choices and that few consumers are motivated to change their food consumption patterns for climate- or environmental reasons. Consumers’ support to initiatives, such as eating less meat and increasing the prices of meat, are partly determined by the consumers’ existing value orientation and their existing consumption practices. Finally, we find that although providing information about the climate benefits of eating less meat has an effect on vegetable purchases, this does not seem to mobilise consumer action any more than the provision of information about the health benefits of eating less meat does. The article concludes that environmental policies aiming to transfer part of the responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to food consumers is being challenged by the fact that most consumers are still not ready to make food choices based on what is best for the climate or environment.

This study presents a detailed investigation of the prevalence of climate scepticism among the Norwegian public, and of what factors best explain it. We find that denial of climate change is not widespread in Norway, but that scepticism about its impact and seriousness are fairly common. Investigation of the explanatory factors is based on three dominant explanations of climate change, namely lack of knowledge and information, differences in values and world views and differences in practice. By utilizing public opinion data collected by TNS Gallup on behalf of SIFO in November 2011, we find that the variables for knowledge level, world-views and environmentally friendly practice are all statistically significant in the analysis, but that the respondents’ world-views are the strongest predictors of climate scepticism. Respondents with individualistic values and who voted for the Progress Party in the parliamentary election in 2009 are significantly more sceptical than others. We conclude that existing values and political ideology are important determinants of public attitudes towards climate change, and that this needs to be reflected in climate change communication. Marthe Hårvik Austgulen og Eivind Stø I denne artikkelen studerer vi utbredelsen av klimaskepsis i den norske befolkningen og undersøker hvilke faktorer som best kan forklare denne skepsisen. Vi finner at fornektelse av klimaendringene er lite utbredt, men at en betydelig andel av de spurte uttrykker skepsis når det gjelder klimaendringenes betydning og alvorlighetsgrad. For å undersøke hva som kan forklare denne klimaskepsisen tok vi utgangspunkt i tre dominerende forklaringer, nemlig mangel på kunnskap og informasjon, forskjeller i verdi- og verdenssyn og forskjeller i praksis. For å svare på spørsmålet benytter vi meningsmålingsdata som ble samlet inn av TNS Gallup på oppdrag fra SIFO i november 2011. Vi finner at kunnskapsnivå, verdenssyn og miljøvennlig praksis alle er statistisk signifikante variabler i analysen, men at respondentenes verdenssyn synes å forklare mest. Respondenter som preges av individualistiske verdier og som stemte på Fremskrittspartiet ved valget i 2009, er signifikant mer klimaskeptiske enn andre respondenter. Vi konkluderer med at eksisterende verdier og politisk ideologi har stor betydning for nordmenns holdninger til klimaendringer, og at dette må reflekteres i kommunikasjonen av klimaendringer til befolkningen.

EU consumer policy is a policy area that is receiving increased attention and is considered important for the proper functioning of the internal market. Yet, as with many other supranational policy areas, conflicting positions of the Member States have led to many compromises and rejections of EU-initiated proposals. By building on regime theory and previous research identifying consumer policy regimes, the aim with this article is to investigate potential patterns in countries’ preferences in EU consumer policy. With this, the article seeks both to contribute to the theoretical understanding of factors influencing Member States’ positions to EU consumer policy and to the debate on how future EU consumer policies should be designed and put into power. Differences in country and regime preferences are analysed using data collected through an open public consultation as part of the European Commission’s Fitness Check of European consumer and marketing law in 2016 and through interviews with key stakeholders in 2018. The results show that there are substantial differences between the regimes and that the level of harmonization of consumer and marketing law seems to be the most contested issue. Furthermore, the article points to several potential reasons for these differences between countries and regimes and recommends that future studies should be undertaken to generate deeper knowledge about the effects of these explanatory factors.