Search

• Red meat consumption is very habituated in Norway. • The red meat habit is strongly reinforced by pro-meat social norms. • Red meat consumption is quite strongly influenced by beliefs in its wholesomeness. • Climate friendly personal norms influence red meat consumption to some extent. • These norms are rooted partly in social pressure, partly in personal values. Reducing emissions of greenhouse gases is facilitated by changes in several consumption activities, such as food choices. This paper examines factors explaining red meat consumption in Norway, especially the role of climate concerns. The paper adds to our knowledge as most existing analyses of (red) meat consumption focus on health and animal welfare issues. Moreover, it expands our understanding by drawing on perspectives from both institutional and social psychological theory, including variables emphasizing the social dynamics behind consumption decisions. The study is based on data from a survey of 2000 people aged 18 years or older conducted in 2018. The data are analyzed using structural equation modelling. We find that there is a strong pro-meat culture in Norway, currently rather weakly influenced by climate concerns – specifically, personal norms and social pressures focused on reducing climate impacts. Instead, habits, beliefs about the qualities of red meat (being tasteful, nutritious, healthy) and social norms supporting red meat consumption are the three most important factors explaining the variation observed. Gender and income also influence red meat consumption, but less than found in other studies. The paper discusses policy implications of these findings, including for taxation, point-of-sale information and communicative processes to support changes in the perceptions of what could be a new "normal" diet. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union (EU) and Norway have assessed the release of genetically modified organisms as commercial products quite differently. Of twenty-four notifications approved by the EU, Norway has approved four, rejected ten, and has ten pending. We analyse whether these differences could be explained by different value judgments. Three aspects of the formulation and implementation of the regulations are discussed: the effects to be prevented and encouraged, response to uncertainty and ignorance, and the burden of proof necessary. Norwegian rejections are found to be explicable by the combination of no real benefit to society, lack of scientific knowledge, and involved risks. EU approvals are based upon seeing no reason to believe that there will be any adverse effects on health and the environment. We conclude that problems arise when value conflicts are understood and treated solely as technical issues, as normal in the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses the dispute over nitrogen taxes in agriculture in Europe. Debate over nitrogen fertilizer taxes in Europe as empirical basis; Difficulties involved when introducing the logic of economic efficiency into environmental policy; Influence of disagreements over tax effects on the policy-making process; Vulnerability of environmental policy to confrontations across sectors of responsibility.

Integrated pest management (IPM) was introduced in the 1960s as a response to increasing pesticide use and has since evolved from being understood mainly as an economic issue to also including environmental and human health considerations. The EU has made IPM mandatory for all farmers through the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Directive (SUD). Using a mixed-methods approach, this paper examines how Norwegian cereal farmers have responded to this requirement. The qualitative results show that most farmers have an understanding of IPM that goes beyond economic considerations only. The quantitative results display that farmers' intrinsic motivation for IPM changed after introduction of the SUD. There is increased emphasis on using methods other than spraying, producing grain without traces of pesticides, and preventing pesticide resistance. Farmers' self-reported knowledge of IPM increased, and 41% of farmers stated that they use IPM to a greater extent than before the SUD was introduced. These results demonstrate that mandatory IPM requirements have been a successful strategy for increasing farmers use of IPM in Norway. Clearer IPM provisions and increased intrinsic motivation for IPM among farmers will, however, be important to reduce the risks from pesticides further. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More sustainable consumption is urgently called for but emerging very slowly at best. This paper contributes to the empirical foundation for understanding the role of norms in shaping, reinforcing, and changing consumption patterns. Drawing on institutional and social psychological theories and research, we investigate the development in normative influences on red meat consumption – a climate relevant behavior – over time. We apply cross lagged SEM analyses utilizing survey data from a representative sample of the Norwegian population the years 2019, 2020, and 2021. Red meat consumption is strongly supported by social norms in Norway but seems to be challenged by the societal attention to its negative climate impacts. Such attention may lead people to internalize norms for a climate-friendly diet and thus reduce their red-meat consumption. We find, however, that the influence of pro-climate mitigation norms on red meat consumption is weak and was further weakened in the 2020–21 period, during the Covid19 pandemic. An important question is whether and how policy measures can nurture pro-climate mitigation norms to reach a social "tipping point" regarding meat consumption. Implications for future research on norm dynamics are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We draw on institutional and ecological economics to understand the role of social preferences, institutional arrangements, and power dynamics in mobilizing or restraining ecosystem services and values in Norwegian forest governance. Specifically, we i) elicit local people's preferences over forest ecosystem services and values, ii) analyze how perceptions of forest values vary across stakeholders, and iii) examine how participation is enabled by institutional arrangements. Our data were collected from a survey (N = 1694) distributed in 10 rural municipalities and from interviews with Norwegian forest experts and stakeholders (N = 15). Four results are highlighted. First, most respondents rank ecosystem services that embody relational and intrinsic values (such as recreation and biodiversity) higher than services that primarily embody instrumental values (timber). Second, women and non-forest owners show higher appreciation for relational values than men and forest owners. Third, dominant value-articulating institutions, such as timber markets and cost-benefit analysis, favor utility, efficiency, and instrumental values. Finally, few participatory arenas for decision-making are available, and local people do not feel empowered in forest governance. Our findings indicate that Norwegian forest governance primarily empowers actors that emphasize instrumental values followed by those who emphasize intrinsic values, whereas relational values tend to be restrained. • We examine how institutional arrangements and power dynamics define the values coming forward in Norwegian forest governance. • Local people rank ecosystem services embodying relational and intrinsic values highest. • Women and non-forest owners show higher appreciation for relational values than men and forest owners. • Gender, forest ownership, and size of forest property are important markers of power in Norwegian of forest governance. • Existing institutions primarily mobilize instrumental values, and there are few participatory decision-making arenas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses two strategies to reduce the use of pesticides in grain production. We study Norwegian farmers' willingness to voluntarily forego income by reducing pesticide use as well as their responses to a doubling of the pesticide price (through increased pesticide taxes). We use mixed methods including an experiment, a survey and focus group discussions. The experiment shows that most farmers are willing to sacrifice some income to reduce environmental risks by using less pesticide. According to the survey, they are, at the same time, relatively insensitive to a 100% price increase on herbicides and fungicides. While the response to the price increase probably would have been stronger if differentiated between chemicals, our research indicates potential benefits from supporting voluntary action. Value orientations and agronomic conditions influence the stated responses in both circumstances. Respondents emphasizing environmental values are more willing to voluntarily reduce pesticide use and show a greater response to the economic incentive than farmers emphasizing economic outcome and issues such as clean fields. A hypothesized willingness to reduce pesticide use voluntarily to strengthen the reputation of the sector was, however, rejected. Farmers appear to have few alternatives to pesticides, but increased knowledge about the alternatives that do exist, seems able to promote some change. Our findings suggest that the extension service should put greater emphasis on these options, even if they may have negative effects on income., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)