Research on policy support or public acceptability of climate change policies is proliferating. There is, however, a great diversity in how these evaluative responses have been defined, operationalized, and measured across studies. In order to shed some light on this subject, we reviewed 118 studies published over the last 15 years aiming at measurement of policy acceptability, acceptance, support, and other responses to climate change mitigation policies. We found that conceptual vagueness and weak theoretical embedding are pervasive in the field, which leads to uncertainty over what is being measured, ambiguity of policy recommendations, and difficulties in comparing empirical results. In response, we propose a construct of policy attitudes as an overarching concept comprising the diversity of measures and constructs already in use. The purpose of the construct is to serve as a common basis for operationalization and survey design. In order to inform policy makers, researchers should be clear in how they formulate surveys with a focus on questions of importance to research and policy-making. Key policy insights

The present study examines the public acceptability of the EU’s future climate change mitigation policies. Using the discrete choice experiment, the authors elicit the preferences of approximately 4098 respondents from the Czech Republic, Poland, and UK for the GHG emission reduction policies that differ in four attributes: emission reduction target, burden sharing across the EU Member States, the distribution of costs within each country, and cost. The three specific reduction targets analysed correspond to the EU 2050 Roadmap and deep decarbonization policy (80% target), the climate-energy 2014 targets (40% target), and the status quo policy (20% target); each will result in a specific emission trajectory by 2050. The results reveal stark differences between the three countries. Czechs would be on average willing to pay around EUR 13 per household per month for the 40% GHG emission reductions by 2030 or EUR 17 for 80% reductions by 2050, and the citizens of the UK are willing to pay about EUR 45. Conversely, the mean willingness to pay (WTP) of Polish households for achieving more stringent targets is not statistically different from zero. The WTP for adopting policies to reach the 40% and 80% targets are not statistically different in any of the examined countries. However, it was found that the preferences in all three countries are highly heterogeneous. In addition, an insight is provided into the preferred characteristics of the future GHG emission reduction policies. Policy relevance A detailed understanding of the acceptability of climate mitigation policies among the general public is crucial for identifying the potential for improvements in their design. This study examines the public acceptability of the EU’s future mitigation policies. The authors elicit preferences of respondents from three EU countries for three different emission trajectories and reduction targets through policy packages that include several options to share the burden among the EU Member States and to distribute the costs among citizens of each country. Preferences are analysed for each attribute and the willingness-to-pay values for several alternative policy packages are derived. The authors believe that understanding public acceptability can help support the successful implementation of climate mitigation policies.

Current mobility patterns over-rely on transport modes that do not benefit sustainable and healthy lifestyles. To explore the potential for active mobility, we conducted a randomized experiment aimed at increasing regular commuter cycling in cities. In designing the experiment, we teamed up with developers of the “Cyclers” smartphone app to improve the effectiveness of the app by evaluating financial and non-financial motivational features. Participants in the experiment were recruited among new users of the app, and were randomly assigned to one of four different motivational treatments (smart gamification, two variants of a financial reward, and a combination of smart gamification and a financial reward) or a control group (no specific motivation). Our analysis suggests that people can be effectively motivated to engage in more frequent commuter cycling with incentives via a smartphone app. Offering small financial rewards seems to be more effective than smart gamification. A combination of both motivational treatments—smart gamification and financial rewards—may work the same or slightly better than financial rewards alone. We demonstrate that small financial rewards embedded in smartphone apps such as “Cyclers” can be effective in nudging people to commute by bike more often.

The world’s challenges of climate change, damage to ecosystems, and social and health inequalities require changes in human behaviours at every level of organisation, among governments, business, communities, and individuals. An important question is how behaviour change can be enabled and supported at the scale and speed required. The research reported in this paper describes important lessons for good practice in changing contexts to modify behaviours for a triple win for health, equity and environmental sustainability. Authors synthesised learning from qualitative, quantitative and cost benefit evaluations of 15 case studies conducted in 12 countries in Europe. The case studies address ways of living (green spaces and energy efficient housing), moving (active transport) and consuming (healthy and sustainable diets) that support the triple win. Ten lessons for good practice were identified. These include bringing a triple win mindset to policy and practice in planning interventions, with potential to improve environmental sustainability, health and equity at the same time. The lessons for good practice are intended to support governmental and non-governmental actors, practitioners and researchers planning to work across sectors to achieve mutual benefits for health and environmental sustainability and in particular to benefit poorer and more socio-economically disadvantaged groups.

Human consumption and activity are damaging the global ecosystem and the resources on which we rely for health, well-being and survival. The COVID-19 crisis is yet another manifestation of the urgent need to transition to more sustainable societies, further exposing the weaknesses in health systems and the injustice in our societies. It also underlines that many of the factors leading to environmental degradation, ill health and social and health inequities are interlinked. The current situation provides an unprecedented opportunity to invest in initiatives that address these common factors and encourage people to live more healthily and sustainably. Such initiatives can generate the positive feedback loops needed to change the systems and structures that shape our lives. INHERIT (January 2016–December 2019), an ambitious, multisectoral and transnational research project that involved 18 organisations across Europe, funded by the European Commission, explored such solutions. It identified, defined and analysed promising inter-sectoral policies, practices and approaches to simultaneously promote environmental sustainability, protect and promote health and contribute to health equity (the INHERIT “triple-win”) and that can encourage and enable people to live, move and consume more healthfully and sustainably. It also explored the facilitators and barriers to working across sectors and in public private cooperation. The insights were brought together in guidelines setting out how policy makers can help instigate and support local “triple-win” initiatives that influence behaviours as an approach to contributing to the change that is so urgently needed to stem environmental degradation and the interlinked threats to health and wellbeing. This article sets out this guidance, providing timely insights on how to “build back better” in the post pandemic era.