Responsible Consumption: Scoping Paper in Support of Missions-Based Research and Innovation for the BWA Consortium

This scoping paper suggests systemic behavioural public policy experiments could have a substantial impact on transitioning to a reduced material footprint model of ‘responsible consumption’. Achieving this positive impact requires:
1. Careful problem definition to refine the focus for intervention with a clear line of sight between the intervention and impact on (publicly valued) outcomes
2. Prioritising transformative behavior changes over more incremental, but addressing a portfolio of both to hedge chances, via a ‘multi-level’ strategy connecting changes across scales.
3. Taking smart risks to make a difference, and therefore anticipating potentially upsetting incumbent interests, at least initially
4. Adopting a pro-actively participatory, transparent and co-design orientated approach to manage risks and realise opportunities

Problem definition: With a mission goal of “reduce per capita material footprint in Victoria by 15% by 2030”, our review of the evidence and interviews suggests a focus on behaviour changes related to durable items, for example e-waste and domestic hard rubbish – particularly items that contribute Australia’s large per capita footprint via consumption of metals and ores. Target behaviours would
include avoiding purchase of higher impact items, increasing use, and maintaining longevity. This focus would fit the approach outlined above and detailed in the paper.

Multi-level strategy: This could include building on past BWA collaborative work on ecolabels, exploring ways to boost purchase of suitable items, increase participation in sharing platforms and networks, supporting repair and reuse, while also generating feedback loops to powerful actors. There is also the opportunity to explore what motivations and values might extend ‘responsible consumption’ lifestyles from the relatively small proportion of early adopters, to mainstream, high consumption and impact groups – for example via understanding how different attitudes and values may motivate the same desired behaviours listed above (i.e. why do nearly 10,000 Melbournians, mainly women,
including a university lecturer, welfare recipient and CALD retiree all participate in ‘hard rubbish rescue’ Moreland for re-distribution and a charity auction, and could this happen in other council areas?).

Taking smart risks: A focus on multi-level changes and potentially gaining the attention of powerful interests can maximise the opportunity, and minimize the risks, by having a clear public value case, drawing on the four points above. For example – supporting repair cafes to highlight the repairability, or not, of common items to brand owners and their stakeholders; or disrupting the business models of waste industry companies harvesting commodity metals, plastics and cardboards from waste, instead of recirculating working items for re-use and sharing.

Pro-active participation and co-design: Involving a broad base of stakeholders in the development of the program, via the activities proposed below, can help achieve these goals. Linking community groups, charities, researchers, levels of government, and pro-active industry will all be important in this via stakeholder dialogues, and participation in the co-design bootcamp.