In the energy transition literature (which studies how homes can move away from fossil fuel), researchers commonly refer to the so-called rational household. People in this household weigh costs and benefits and choose the most efficient option. However, as far as I can tell after four years of studying real households, the rational household is imaginary.
Home energy policy — which offers subsidies, information campaigns and savings calculators — is largely built for this fictional household: an ‘average household’ whose preferences are assumed to stand in for everyone’s. But no family actually lives in the average. So, in early 2024, my research team asked 2,200 Dutch household heads to complete 6 choice tasks, each with 2 hypothetical energy-efficiency investments and a ‘no change’ option.
The investments varied in cost, comfort, carbon savings, disruptions, payback period and policy support. We also measured how participants made decisions in tasks with real monetary payoffs that captured risk aversion, loss aversion and present bias (the tendency to overvalue immediate rewards). This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout Bryan, C.
J., Tipton, E. & Yeager, D. Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a heterogeneity revolution. Behav. 5, 980–989 (2021) Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar Nikoloski, M., Botzen, W.
W., Banerjee, S. & Blasch, J. Clustering Dutch citizens into behavioural phenotypes to understand green energy investment preferences. Lett. 255, 112566 (2025) Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands The author declares no competing interests.
The households that energy policy overlooks. Nat Rev Psychol (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-026-00633-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-026-00633-3
Extract — continue reading at the source.
