Unsustainable ways of life and various patterns of consumptions (which are likely to
be anti-environment behaviours?) are key factors that challenges the conversation on
climate change.
⁃ ABC is a political and not just a theoretical position which hides the extent of unsustainable governance in economic institutions and way of life, and the extent to which
they can structure options and possibilities. (Change in the hand of government
rather than individuals? Maybe pressure groups?)
⁃ The relation between social theory and policy has potential for social science (actual
change) to make a much more extensive contribution to issues in climate change.
The ABC of climate-change policy
⁃ Issues of climate change has been framed in well establishing language of individual
behaviour and personal responsibilities when conceptualising social change. (Are
individuals/society creatures of habit and is change in their hands?)
⁃ The combination of ABC proposed by Stern generates a very clear agenda for effective policy. (pro-environmental behaviour)
⁃ Practical impact of common motivators are often compromised by equally common
barriers. (Qualification depending on each individual/society characteristics?)
⁃ Persuading individuals to live sustainably through behaviour-change programmes
will not address the bigger issue concerning which people need or thing they need
to live and consume.
⁃ The idea that desires and attitudes drive behaviour is ambiguous making it impossible to how the contours and environmental costs of daily life evolve.
Beyond the ABC: transitions and practices
⁃ Transition management has created a conversation in thinking seriously and systemically on how unsustainable lifestyles are reproduced and how they change.
⁃ Transitions toward sustainability does not depend on policy makers persuading individuals to make sacrifices. Instead, societal innovation is that in which rules of the
game disintegrate.
⁃ A variety of actors and roles that contribute to the governance of sustainability. (A
laissez-faire approach maybe?)
⁃ Meanings of normal and patterns of consumption associated requires constant reproduction.
⁃ Social theories of practice and social theories of behaviour can’t be merged together.
Paradigms, policies, and (ir)relevant social research
⁃ ABC is not just a theory of social change, its a template for intervention, locating citizens as consumers and decision makers as enablers who’s role is to induce people
to make pro-environmental decisions and deter from the opposite.
⁃ Self-fulfilling cycle of credibility
⁃ Government-led interventions deemed more effective as a driver of social change.
⁃ Real political interests at stake in framing environmental problems in terms of the
ABC. (Factors affecting in economy or a country?)
⁃ Although policy makers are highly selective in the models of change they draw, their
taste in social theory is arbitrary.
⁃ A move beyond the ABC would have to go along with the emergence of new trends
and styles of policy.
⁃ Policy intervention at the government level have the effect in shaping the future
whether they notice or not.
Strengths and weaknesses of paper
One of the prevailing strength was the vocalisation and comparison of theories of social
change and the extended list of references which was helpful in conceptualising and illustrating the topic of interest.
However, there was a couple scopes and aspects that Shove missed in regards to the paper, she brings all the focus of social change with less acknowledgment other aspects of
sustainability change that play a role in shaping policies and behaviours