JRC B2 Seminar: ‘EU 1.5° Lifestyles: Policies and tools for mainstreaming 1.5° Lifestyles’ – Nadin Ozcelik

The IPCC concludes in their Special Report on Global Warming that limiting global temperature increase needs demand-side actions and lifestyle changes. Previous attempts to realise demand-side changes have been hampered by several factors: First, there is very limited quantitative data showing how much a proposed change in lifestyle would contribute to climate change mitigation. Thus, policy makers and citizens lack guidance to make informed choices. Second, there is still limited evidence of public acceptance of drastic changes. This has led to internationally uncoordinated policies and to policies that will very likely fall short on having sufficient impact. Third, policies have usually promoted changes of individual behaviour without addressing structural constraints or structural drivers of unsustainable lifestyles. This has led to policies that remain ineffective and frustrate citizens who wish to make positive lifestyle choices. We aim to address all three of the above issues, by connecting an analysis of individual lifestyle perspectives, on household level, with policies and socio-economic structures, on all levels from international to local. The analysis will be structured according to the emerging 1.5-degree lifestyles approach, which members of the consortium have helped to define. The advantage of a lifestyle-oriented approach is to link concrete transformations of lifestyle by individuals to transformations of the structural context by policies, economic, and societal institutions. This inclusive approach is original in terms of a research strategy. In practical terms, it is very promising as it offers concrete guidance and as it can be scaled to political, social, and economic capacities on regional to (supra-) national levels. We pursue our aims using quantitative and qualitative methods, country-level assessments and sector-based case studies, as well as innovative participatory formats and a broad range of communication methods.

Doctoral Seminar: Beatriz Rodríguez Salvador (UDC & University of Porto)



Traceability is a valuable tool for all the agents in the fishery value chain where consumers are at both ends. Consumers' perceptions often differ from those of experts and information campaigns are usually employed to increase consumers' knowledge and awareness. This study aims to provide an overview of consumer knowledge and associations to traceability, evaluate the need for traceable fishery products as perceived by consumers and the effect of information provision, according to their knowledge and socioeconomic characteristics and, finally, examine the perceived necessity of traceability functions based on consumers’ perceived necessity for traceability in fishery products. Results show consumers have a low level of knowledge on traceability and generally associate it to the origin and the entire process from fishing. Additionally, most consumers perceive traceability of fishery products as necessary but low pre-existing knowledge appears as a barrier. Additionally, a significant association between household type and perceived necessity was found. Consumers value traceability as a means to know the origin, the ingredients and verify that producer claims are true. Furthermore, traceability is important to allocate liability and manage a food crisis. These findings may have implications on the communication of information about traceability to consumer.

JRC B2 Seminar: Inequality and Growth: How Social Mobility Reshapes The Main Theoretical Channels - Ignacio Campomanes


This paper analyzes how the different mechanisms proposed to explain the inequality-growth relation are affected by the introduction of social mobility in a politico-economic environment with imperfect tax enforcement. I show that the direct negative effect of inequality on growth predicted by models of incomplete markets is especially pronounced in societies with low social mobility, while it is lessened in highly mobile economies. This is due the different effects of the increase in inequality on redistribution in each case. Conversely, in models where inequality favors economic growth because of investment indivisibilities or heterogeneity in marginal propensities to save among the population, the opposite result applies. Inequality is especially beneficial for economic growth when social mobility is low, as the compensating effect of redistribution is reduced. Finally, exogenous taxation costs modulate the previous findings depending on whether redistribution helps or retards economic growth. Conditional correlations of market inequality and economic growth across countries point to an important modulating effect of social mobility.