As climate services transition from pure data provision to tailored decision support systems, they require a mechanism to translate heterogeneous user needs into functional design. Despite the consensus on user-centeredness, systematic frameworks focusing on usability and uptake remain scarce. This study addresses this gap by developing prototypical Personas through a multi-stage co-creation approach. Based on quantitative survey data [n = 171], qualitative interviews [n = 23] and four focus group discussions, we identify key traits and selection criteria that categorize users not just by profession, but by their specific decision-making contexts and technical capabilities.Our results identify six distinct Personas – Spatial Planner (m), Manager for Climate Change Adaptation Model Regions (f), Actuary (f), Environmental Lobbyist (m), Tropical Medicine Specialist (f), Journalist (m) – that highlight distinct user requirements relevant for climate service design. Rather than representing every potential user, these Personas synthesize the most critical target groups and their requirements. Our findings reveal that while professional groups differ in their service usage, the primary determinant for design is not a user's profession, but their specific application context and interpretation needs.We show that different sectors often require similar products. While some users need easily accessible pre-processed information like ready-to-use maps, factsheets and text descriptions, others require data for custom interpretation and performing specific assessments. This study proposes the use of Personas as a strategic transition layer between scientific complexity and user-centricity. We discuss the potential of this approach to support the design of climate information that is not only scientifically robust but actionable.

There is high demand for reliable climate information. But which aspects are most crucial for the development of useful and usable climate services, i.e. provision of products and services besides pure data? Which implications can be derived for the next generation of Austrian climate scenarios? The project team of Use.AT provides 5 key recommendations, based on their research results.

With rising global temperatures, cities increasingly need to identify populations or areas that are vulnerable to urban heat waves; however, vulnerability assessments may run into ecological fallacy if data from different scales are misconstrued as equivalent. We assess the heat vulnerability of 1983 residents in Vienna by measuring heat impacts, exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity with mirrored indicators in the mapping paradigm (i.e. census tract data referring to the geographic regions where these residents live) and the surveying paradigm (i.e. survey data referring to the residents ' individual households). Results obtained in both paradigms diverge substantially: meteorological indicators of hot days and tropical nights are virtually unrelated to self -reported heat strain. Meteorological indicators are explained by mapping indicators (R 2 of 15 - 40 %), but mostly not by surveying indicators. Vice versa, experienced heat stress and subjective heat burden are mostly unassociated with mapping indicators but are partially explained by surveying indicators (R 2 of 2 - 4 %). The results suggest that the two paradigms do not capture the same components of vulnerability; this challenges whether studies conducted in the respective paradigms can complement and cross -validate each other. Policy interventions should first define which heat vulnerability outcome they target and then apply the paradigm that best captures the specific drivers of this outcome.

This paper takes a multi-perspective approach to understand drivers and barriers of climate action on the neighbourhood level in a selection of European neighbourhoods. The starting point for the analysis is the assumption that actions on the level of citizens to protect the climate are most motivating and promising, when conducted jointly within established social systems like neighbourhoods. The aim of this paper therefore is to identify most relevant factors that are associated with climate actions of individuals on the neighbourhood level. To do so, the paper outlines the multiple perspectives chosen for the analysis of drivers and barriers on the individual, collective, cultural, and socio-structural level. Based on this, a survey was designed to measure these aspects and implemented in nine European neighbourhoods (3 in Austria, 2 in Norway, 2 in Italy, 2 in Finland). The neighbourhoods were partly in rural communities (4) and partly in urban or semi-urban areas (5). In total, 1.084 answers were retained between summer 2022 and summer 2023. The impact of factors from the different perspectives on the self-reported number of implemented climate actions were tested in a structured, regression-based approach. The analyses show that intentions to act both on the individual and collective level impact the number of climate actions implemented by citizens living in the neighbourhood, but individual intentions are more important. In addition, local cultural aspects have an impact on climate action. Individual intentions to act are slightly less important in rural, than in semi/urban neighbourhoods. On the socio-structural level, males and households with younger children report fewer climate actions, whereas larger households in general and people with university degree report more. Intentions to act individually are mostly determined by perceived individual efficacy and attitudes, but also selected cultural and socio-structural factors. Collective intentions to act depend on the social capital in the neighbourhood and social norms, as well as selected socio-structural and cultural factors. Concluding, this paper emphasises that in order to understand, implement (and increase) the climate-related actions of citizens efficient, the individual, collective, cultural and socio-structural factors must be taken into account and that the level of neighbourhoods, where everyday action takes place, is a relevant unit of analysis to do so.

A holistic understanding of human behaviour is considered key for a successful fight against climate change and environmental degradation. In the pursuit of a holistic understanding, empirical research frequently applies the concept of "lifestyle". The concept, which plays a significant role in segmenting customers in the field of marketing, is increasingly used in the cross-domain analysis of behaviour in the field of sustainability. This increase is tied to the challenge that the meaning and operationalisation of the lifestyle concept are still highly fragmented after decades of empirical studies. While this methodological heterogeneity and pluralism of research traditions bring creativity and dynamic to the field, it makes the orientation and a comparison of studies challenging. Previous attempts to streamline lifestyle oriented research have often aimed for a single mode of operationalisation, but this does not meet the diversity of possible applications of the concept. Therefore, a better understanding of the field seems necessary. To fill this gap, we review the understanding and use of the “lifestyle” concept in 53 empirical studies in the field of sustainability and identify 12 variants of lifestyle related research, differing along three dimensions. According to our results, (I) lifestyle can either be used as a cause or as a consequence, (II) the analytical scope can be on a micro-, meso- or macro level, and (III) the behavioural scope can be either limited to a single behavioural domain or cover multiple domains. The three dimensions allow a mapping of existing and future empirical research using the “lifestyle” concept, improve the orientation in the field, facilitate the identification of relevant studies, and avoid imprecise comparisons due to methodological differences.

​This open access book discusses the contribution of sociology and survey research to climate research.

This chapter provides an overview of the theoretical approaches to environmental attitudes and behaviors. It includes a discussion of different scales and surveys used in other programs with a focus on this topic. Scales measuring general environmental behavior, just like items in surveys, tend to focus on behavioral intentions and are correlated with environmentally friendly attitudes. In contrast, emission-related behavior depends more on context and socio-demographic characteristics and is rarely asked in surveys. Gaps frequently occur between environmental attitudes and general behaviors—the value-action gap—and between environmental behaviors and the actual ecological consequences of actions—the behavior-impact gap. Finally, previous results and problems encountered in the validation of self-reports on environmental behavior are highlighted.

AbstractThis chapter presents the development of the survey in the underlying study in this book, a description of our sample, and the results of the validation efforts. Our survey includes variations of existing scales which have been used to measure climate-relevant behaviors within the areas of housing, mobility, diet, and consumption. We go beyond these existing questions, however, as we also include various new items and analyze the validity of existing and new questions. Based on our findings we recommend a set of questions for different significant areas of emissions, for example, asking about the distance traveled by car in the previous year, the number of short-haul and long-haul flights, and a question about the frequency of the consumption of particularly energy-intensive foods.

This chapter enhances the previous understanding of Energy Lifestyles by identifying groups with distinct patterns of energy behavior across six areas of life. In contrast to most previous studies, the identification of groups is exclusively conducted on the basis of behavior-related data, whereas the characterization of the groups follows in a second step using psychological and socio-demographic variables. This chapter explicitly considers the multidimensionality of behavior and provides a comprehensive overview of different Energy Lifestyles and their potential roles in energy transition. The finding that there are almost no “average users” points out that policy designs must go beyond average figures based on the national emission figures and need to focus on different Energy Lifestyles.

This chapter focuses on the question of why environmentally conscious individuals find it difficult to behave in a correspondingly eco-friendly way. This phenomenon is referred to in the literature as the “value-action gap.” In this study, the definition of this gap is further expanded by considering individual intention. The discrepancies between environmental values, intention, and behavior are explored in the context of two environmentally relevant behaviors—mobility and consumption—using qualitative interviews. Firstly, key structural and intrapersonal obstacles to pro-environmental behavior are identified. Secondly, individual needs and requirements for facilitating eco-friendly behavior are addressed. Finally, strategies and potentials for pro-environmental change in society are discussed.

The final chapter of this book summarizes the main insights from previous chapters and tests whether our approach is also applicable at an international level. Our international outlook shows that the five survey items, which capture more than three quarters of Austrian greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, also work well in other European countries. Similarly, the lifestyles identified in Chap. 10.1007/978-3-030-85796-7_6 are also present in other societies. Furthermore, this chapter shows that the prevalence of these lifestyles as well as the explanatory power of the models correlate with societal factors such as political institutions, affluence, environmental degradation, and socio-demographic characteristics. The final chapter closes with a brief consideration of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental attitudes and individual willingness to make sacrifices for the environment.

This chapter starts with an overview of the current national emission figures for Austria. Subsequently, the emissions of our respondents are presented in detail and contrasted with the number of national emissions. Since one goal of the study was to improve survey research in measuring environmentally significant behavior, questions are selected which allow a valid estimation of the total emissions caused by a person. We propose a set of five variables which capture around 77% of an individual’s total emissions. Furthermore, we are able to confirm that socio-demographic variables such as age, income, and residential area have a significant impact on an individual’s emission consumption.

AbstractTo enjoy a fulfilling life, a person needs six fundamental life requirements to be met. These six requirements or “life-areas” are housing, mobility, consumption of goods (e.g., clothing), diet, other activities (entertainment), and information. In the beginning of this chapter, a top-down estimate of Austrian consumption-based emissions in each life-area is presented. These are organized into segments that may be easily reduced by changing individual behavior and those segments that are fundamental aspects of our society. The remainder of this chapter discusses how to estimate the greenhouse gas (GHG) output. There is a trade-off between accuracy and level of detail, and the need to combine bottom-up survey results with the top-down national emissions inventory. How these trade-offs may be handled is demonstrated using a practical example.

Most studies that focus on heating-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions do so with either a focus on technical aspects or a focus on heating-related attitudes and behavior. Either way, they assign little attention to the influence of sociodemographic factors. However, if an integrated understanding of the sociological factors behind heating-related GHG emissions is to be developed, the interrelationship of sociologically relevant predictors, emission-relevant technological parameters, and impact indicators must be assessed. In this study, we analyzed the impact of sociodemographic variables and of the intention to use energy sustainably on technological dwelling characteristics and heating-related GHG emissions by applying linear and logistic regression models on data of 604 Austrian households. Our analyses show that not only the household size but also the composition (the specific numbers of adults and children living together) affect the emissions. We found not only that sociodemographic variables explain a considerable proportion of the variance in the available living space but also that there are relationships among occupants' sociodemographic data, their intentions, and technical characteristics of the dwellings in which they live.

ZusammenfassungKap. 11 hat gezeigt, dass es derzeit noch große Unsicherheiten darüber gibt, wie hoch tatsächlich der Beitrag des Tourismus zu den nationalen und internationalen Treibhausgasemissionen ist. Es ist jedoch gewiss, dass der Anteil bedeutend ist und, in Zusammenhang mit dem prognostizierten Wachstum des weltweiten Tourismus, wahrscheinlich weiter steigen wird. Daher stellt sich die Frage, wie die Emissionen der touristischen Aktivitäten gesenkt werden könnten. Im vorliegenden Kapitel wird berichtet, welche Verpflichtungen und Strategien es dazu aktuell auf politischer Ebene gibt, beginnend mit internationalen Verträgen, insbesondere dem Pariser Klimaschutzabkommen, und Vorgaben der Europäischen Union, bei denen Österreich sich verpflichtet hat, teilzunehmen. In weiterer Folge richtet sich das Augenmerk auf eine detaillierte Betrachtung und Bewertung der Klimaschutz‑, Klimawandelanpassungs- und Tourismusstrategien auf Bundesebene und in den einzelnen Bundesländern. Im Anschluss daran werden allgemein mögliche Maßnahmen und Potenziale besprochen. Schließlich wird unter dem Schlagwort „Paris Lifestyle“ diskutiert, welche Maßnahmen notwendig sind, um auf individueller Ebene zum Ziel eines CO2-armen bzw. -neutralen Tourismus beitragen zu können. Dazu werden auch Beispiele innovativer, emissionsarmer Angebote von Tourismusbetrieben und Destinationen vorgestellt.

The analytical framework presented herein is based on the identification of social groups with distinct patterns in their energy-relevant behaviour. This was achieved by clustering individuals according to their primary energy demands in six main areas of life. Due to the close relationship between energy-relevant behaviour and associated impacts, the suggested approach is considered better suited for the identification of groups with actual differences in their climate and energy-related behaviour than conventional approaches that cluster individuals based on their psychological or sociodemographic characteristics. Moreover, it is assumed that this focus on energy-relevant behaviour leads to a higher measuring equivalence in a country comparison or in a longitudinal setting. From an analytical point of view, the most significant benefit of the presented method over conventional lifestyle typologies is that all psychological, cultural and sociodemographic factors can be used as explanatory variables without resulting in circular reasoning. In terms of required data, the approach was designed around what could be collected by conventional survey methods. Variables such as energy use and emissions were calculated by the means of life cycle assessment (LCA) based on self-reported behaviour and equipment use.