Community-Based Social Marketing in Theory and Practice: Five Case Studies of Water Efficiency Programs in Canada

Abstract

Background: Community-based social marketing (CBSM) offers a pragmatic five-step approach to developing a program that fosters sustainable behaviour. However, how the CBSM theoretical framework has been implemented into practice remains largely under-evaluated. To help address this gap, Lynes et al. developed 21 benchmarks to assess CBSM programs. This research builds upon these benchmarks by using both the benchmarks and additional assessment criteria to assess five Canadian programs that have used CBSM principles. Focus: This paper is related to research and evaluation of community-based social marketing. Research Question: How has the CBSM theoretical framework been implemented in practice at the community level? Importance to the Social Marketing Field: By exploring how five Canadian programs have implemented CBSM, this paper enables practitioners to align their programs with CBSM principles more closely. It also contributes to the literature on CBSM effectiveness. Methods: Five qualitative case studies were assessed, each featuring a Canadian community program seeking to influence residential water efficiency behaviour. In order to systematically assess each program’s adherence to the CBSM theoretical framework, a CBSM benchmark assessment tool that proposes additional assessment criteria to Lynes et al.’s 21 benchmarks was developed. The assessment tool allowed for replicable benchmark assessments across multiple programs. Triangulation of data from both primary (survey and interview) and secondary (peer-reviewed literature, gray literature, and online reporting) data sources informed the assessment of each case study. Results: On average, over the five case studies, just over half of the 21 benchmark criteria were fully integrated into the programs, whereas just under a third were partially integrated, and approximately one fifth were not integrated at all. Recommendations for Research or Practice: While the benchmarks were fairly well integrated overall, this paper outlines several recommendations that programs may consider to improve alignment with the CBSM theoretical framework and benchmarks. Recommendations for future research to explore CBSM effectiveness are also made. Limitations: Lack of generalizability due to small sample size, unable to make assessments of programmatic success, and inherent limitations of the benchmark assessment tool.

The role of social marketing in achieving the planet sustainable development goals (SDGs)

“…First, benchmark criteria should be used as a guide for environmental social marketing program design, implementation, and evaluation. Lynes et al (2014) and Fries et al (2020) proposed a set of benchmark criteria to be used when designing and implementing environmental social marketing programs. These benchmark criteria (see Fig.…”

“…According to past evidence, assessing the extent of criteria used in social marketing programs is important because interventions are more likely to result in positive behavior change when more criteria are used and properly reported (Tkaczynski et al, 2020). Lynes et al (2014) and Fries et al (2020) proposed several benchmark criteria (see Fig. 1) based on the CBSM framework and the six benchmarks listed by Andreasen (2002).…”

Five psychological principles of codesigning conservation with (not for) communities

“…Environmental professionals have attempted to encourage community engagement in conservation for decades using the traditional carrot or stick method: either offering individuals an external incentive like money or social approval (the carrot) or implementing regulation to deter their action (the stick) (Chitra & Cetera, 2018 ; Kosloff & Trexler, 1987 ). While these tactics often do work to inspire one‐time behaviors like attending one meeting or installing eco‐friendly light bulbs (Fries et al, 2020 ), some of the more impactful environmental solutions do require an individual to engage in more than one action over time. Unfortunately, research has shown that the carrot or stick tactics often fail to inspire this kind of durable motivation for conservation (De Young, 1996 ) and instead lead individuals to lose steam in their progress toward project goals or revolt in ways that may seem unexpected against the project mission over time.…”

Private landowners perceive positive impacts to their land stewardship following involvement in a conservation research program

“…However, self‐reported measures allow researchers to gather data on behaviors that may be difficult to observe or that occur over a large timescale (Kormos & Gifford, 2014; Larson et al, 2015). Self‐reported measures are the most common methods for measuring conservation behavior engagement because they are unobtrusive (Fries et al, 2020), relatively easily to implement (Kormos & Gifford, 2014), and cost‐effective (Kormos & Gifford, 2014). Future research that has the capacity to measure conservation behaviors directly (e.g., direct observations, pre and post program participation surveys) may provide deeper insights into the impact of participation in a conservation research program on conservation behavior engagement (e.g., Crall et al, 2012).…”