DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE Environmentalism for whom? How perceived injustice shapes environmental beliefs & personal norms among the energy-poor By Rebekka de Jong Master’s Thesis: 30 Credits Programme: Master’s Programme in Political Science: Environmental Governance & Behavior Date: 26 May 2025 Supervisor: Birgitta Niklasson Words: 15.724 ABSTRACT This qualitative thesis explores the reasoning of people living in energy-poverty towards injustice and environmental behavior regarding energy policies. This thesis is an empirical study and deductively builds on the theory of the Value-Belief-Norm model by Stern et al. (1999). It introduced how injustice possibly influences the shaping of ascription of responsibility and a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally with inductive reasoning. Interviews were conducted in the Netherlands that studied the reasoning of energy-poor people related to the VBN model and implemented energy policies. The data indicated a positive association between perceived injustice in the energy policies and a decline in the ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally for the energy-poor, although further research is needed to confirm this data. Moreover, data illustrated that this occurs through the triggered variables anger and powerlessness. These variables may disrupt the causal relationship between beliefs and personal norms in the Value-Belief-Norm. This thesis confirms that energy-poor people perceive participation in the energy transition as unjust. In their view, governmental support mostly benefits richer households, which evidently marginalizes the energy-poor further. Perceiving injustice in one area could lead to disobedience in others, making it relevant to connect injustice to other research fields, such as environmental behavior. The results of this study help to achieve better inclusive policymaking and an equitable energy transition. Key words: VALUE-BELIEF-NORM MODEL / ENERGY-POVERTY / BELIEFS / RESPONSIBILITY / PERSONAL NORMS / MORAL OBLIGATION / PERCEPTIONS OF INJUSTICE - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. - 2 - 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. - 5 - 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .......................................................................................... - 7 - 2.1 Energy-poverty defined ........................................................................................................ - 7 - 2.2 The Value-Belief-Norm model .............................................................................................. - 8 - 2.3 Basis of the VBN model ..................................................................................................... - 10 - 2.4 Defining perceptions of injustice ........................................................................................ - 11 - 3. LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................... - 13 - 3.1 Beliefs [ascription of responsibility] ................................................................................... - 13 - 3.2 Personal norms [moral obligation to act pro-environmentally] ............................................ - 15 - 3.3 Perceptions of injustice....................................................................................................... - 16 - 3.4 Research contribution ......................................................................................................... - 17 - 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... - 18 - 4.1 Interviews .......................................................................................................................... - 19 - 4.2 Sampling ............................................................................................................................ - 20 - 4.3 Choice of context ............................................................................................................... - 22 - 4.4 Operationalization .............................................................................................................. - 23 - 4.5 Data analysis ...................................................................................................................... - 25 - 5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................................... - 27 - 5.1 Energy-poverty................................................................................................................... - 27 - 5.2 Beliefs [ascription of responsibility] ................................................................................... - 28 - 5.3 Personal norms [moral obligation to act pro-environmentally] ............................................ - 29 - 5.4 Perceptions of injustice....................................................................................................... - 31 - 5.5 Does perceived injustice shape beliefs and personal norms?................................................ - 33 - 5.6 Additional observations ...................................................................................................... - 37 - CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... - 37 - REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ - 40 - APPENDIX 1: Interviews ............................................................................................................ - 48 - APPENDIX 3: Interview guide .................................................................................................... - 51 - APPENDIX 4: Elaboration on visits ............................................................................................. - 53 - APPENDIX 5: E-mail organizations energy-poverty .................................................................... - 54 - APPENDIX 6: Press message ...................................................................................................... - 55 - - 3 - FIGURES Figure 1: VBN model; adapted with the inclusion of perceptions of injustice...............................….- 8 - Figure 2: VBN model; adapted with the inclusion of perceptions of injustice, triggered by powerlessness, anger, and unwanted dependency.……………………………………...…..………- 36 - TABLES Table 1: In-depth interviews…………………...……………………………………………..………-48- Table 2: Expert interviews…………………………………………………………….....…………...-49- Table 3: Unstructured interviews……………………………………...………………………..….…-49- - 4 - 1. INTRODUCTION Countries worldwide participate in the energy transition, aiming to fulfill their 2050 climate goals by decreasing their greenhouse gas emissions (EC, 2024). To achieve this, part of the responsibility lies with households to adjust their environmental behavior and improve their house sustainably to decrease their carbon footprint. Such actions burden different households disproportionally; low-income households frequently experience issues participating in the energy transition. There are limited subsidies available for low-income households. Additionally, they face barriers as they have limited time and often the lack of mental energy to search and apply for these options (Chapman & Okushima, 2019; Ebrahimigharehbaghi et al., 2019). This group of households is energy-poor, which is defined as ’the inability of certain households to acquire the energy services required to live a decent and healthy life’’ (Middlemiss & Gillard, 2015:147). Between 8% and 16% of citizens in the European Union (EU) live in energy-poverty (EC, 2024). Energy-poor people are often marginalized, have limited political power, and are underrepresented within politics (Patin & Stapper, 2025). Currently implemented energy policies and international political tensions might worsen energy-poverty in the future (TNO, 2025). Not only do low-income households disproportionally carry a large burden of the energy transition, they are also more likely to be excluded from governmental subsidies regarding the energy transition (Hanke et al., 2023). Research shows that people living in energy-poverty perceive the energy transition as unjust (Gregersen et al., 2025; Hanke et al., 2023). Moreover, the social marginalization they experience could lead to radical political polarization (Pfundmair et al., 2024). Perceived injustice leads to abnormal behavior, sometimes revealed in disobedience of the law (Jansma et al., 2024; Nadler, 2002), but also counterproductive behavior (Chory et al., 2017; Cohen-Charash & Mueller, 2007). In this context, environmental behavior may decline when injustice is experienced in the energy transition. This deserves attention as environmental behavior is an important aspect of the energy transition and climate goals cannot be reached without environmental behavior. Beliefs and personal norms are the biggest anticipators of environmental behavior, which is why understanding how perceived injustice influences these psychological components is essential (Poortinga et al., 2004; Steg et al., 2005). This research aims to study whether injustice functions as an external influence shaping beliefs and personal norms. More specifically, this thesis examines whether the energy-poor perceive - 5 - energy policies as unjust, which would influence the shape of people’s beliefs and personal norms. Within one’s beliefs, people's ascription of responsibility evolves, and within one’s personal norms, their moral obligation to act pro-environmentally arises. Using the Value- Belief-Norm model (Stern et al., 1999), this thesis aims to understand the connections between beliefs, personal norms, and perceived injustice inductively while still open to data-driven deductive explorations. This thesis contributes to the theory development of the Value-Belief- Norm model and a more inclusive energy transition by examining injustice in the energy policies. It is important to understand how perceived injustice possibly shapes people’s beliefs and norms, influencing their behavior towards the energy transition. Without this knowledge, policies that are perceived as unjust, unintentionally result in political dissociation, low participation in the energy transition, low sustainable behavior, and further marginalization of a part of society. The European Commission has obliged EU Member States to monitor their countries’ energy-poverty index. Even though this exact data is incomplete, the EU has recognized energy-poverty as a policy priority. The number of energy-poor people is large, and their reasoning is understudied (Middlemiss & Gillard, 2015). Therefore, more research is needed on this group related to the energy transition. Environmental behavior is often studied using the Value-Belief-Norm model, which outlines three steps to explain this behavior: values influence beliefs, which then activate personal norms that lead to environmental actions (Stern et al., 1999). This causal chain of variables1 has successfully predicted environmental behavior (Ibid). However, current studies do not address the reasoning of the energy-poor and how perceived injustice may shape environmental beliefs and personal norms. Additionally, this relationship has not been examined for any group within society. The way injustice impacts environmental behavior and the reasoning behind this among individuals is a significant gap in research that deserves further exploration. Particularly, since injustice may be one of the primary causes of environmental behavioral change, through modifications within one’s beliefs and personal norms. To contribute to the research fields of psychology, justice, and environmental behavior, the research question of this thesis is the following. 1 The concepts in this model are explained as variables following the previous work of the VBN model (Steg et al., 2005; Stern et al.,1999). - 6 - ‘’How does perceived injustice in energy policies influence the shaping of environmental beliefs and personal norms among energy-poor people in Western European countries?’’ This study is executed by conducting an interview study consisting of semi-structured in-depth interviews and unstructured interviews with people living in energy-poverty, as well as expert interviews who work on this topic. The collected empirical evidence suggests that the energy- poor perceive injustice in energy policies, which may influence the shaping of their beliefs and personal norms. Injustice, which triggers anger and powerlessness, could positively be associated with a decline in the ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro- environmentally for the energy-poor. In turn, environmental behavior could be limited if the personal norm variable, a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally, is not activated due to the passive ascription of responsibility. The thesis first discusses the theoretical framework for the reader to gain an understanding of the Value-Belief-Norm model, which this study is based on and seeks to contribute to. Then, this thesis discusses the literature review and the research gap. Afterwards, the methodological framework is presented. Lastly, the results are analyzed and discussed. 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK The theoretical framework describes how energy-poverty is commonly defined. Furthermore, it provides a general overview of the Value-Belief-Norm (VBN) model and its limitations. Then, this chapter describes how the VBN model, including perceptions of injustice, is examined. The primary focus lies on the belief variable ‘’ascription of responsibility’’ and the personal norm variable ‘’moral obligation to act pro-environmentally’’ and how the added variable, perceptions of injustice, possibly influences them. 2.1 Energy-poverty defined Energy-poverty, also known as fuel-poverty, has been sporadically researched since the 1970s, when the oil crisis in the Western world emerged as a result of the Yom-Kippur War and the Iranian Revolution (EC, 2024; Maxim et al., 2016; Vasseur & Marique, 2019). Apart from being researched, the energy-poverty has long remained unrecognized (EC, 2024). Energy-poverty causes financial stress, poor health, social deprivation, lack of emotional well-being, cold homes, and living dissatisfaction (Grossmann & Trubina, 2021; Guevara et al., 2022). Living in a cold home might result in feelings such as shame, loneliness, and exclusion (Ibid). Energy- - 7 - poverty is difficult to overcome because it is intertwined with climate change and societal, economic, and political developments (Lu & Ren, 2023; Middlemiss & Gillard, 2015). Energy-poverty has been redefined throughout the years. The definition used in this thesis is ‘’the inability of certain households to acquire the energy services required to live a decent and healthy life’’ (Middlemiss & Gillard, 2015:147). As concepts of energy-poverty are unclear and it is difficult to identify energy-poverty, it is estimated that between 8% and 16% of the citizens in the EU are energy-poor (EC, 2024). For the Global South, researchers analyze the accessibility of energy. Within the EU, researchers focus on observing the affordability and efficiency of households’ energy consumption. With affordability, one analyzes the lack of income and the low comfort that comes with this, while with efficiency, one observes the quality of the house that impacts energy consumption (Guevara et al., 2022). A household is energy- poor when one: (1) has a low income, (2) experiences high energy expenses, and (3) lives in an inefficient building (Lu & Ren, 2023). This thesis follows this description of energy-poverty. 2.2 The Value-Belief-Norm model Figure 1: VBN model; adapted with the inclusion of perceptions of injustice (Stern et al., 1999). Moral obligation to act pro- environmentally Perceptions of injustice The Value-Belief-Norm model is based on three theories that are combined into one comprehensive theory initially created to predict environmental activism: Schwartz’s Values Theory, the Norm Activation Model, and the New Environmental Paradigm (Stern et al., 1999). The VBN model consists of a causal chain of variables: three sets of values: (1) egoistic, (2) altruistic, and (3) biospheric, three sets of belief variables: (1) ecological worldview, (2) awareness of consequences, and (3) ascription of responsibility, and finally, the personal norm variable: a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally (Ibid). Each variable affects the next variable in the chain but can also directly affect a variable further down the chain (Steg & De - 8 - Groot, 2019, chapter 9). This thesis includes the independent variable perceptions of injustice into the VBN model and ultimately explores what role injustice plays in shaping the last two variables of the VBN chain: (1) ascription of responsibility (that arises from one’s beliefs) and (2) moral obligation to act pro-environmentally (that derives from one’s personal norms). It explores whether injustice might shape beliefs and personal norms in a way that would possibly limit their environmental behavior. The variable injustice is considered independent because this study assumed that injustice influences beliefs and personal norms in the model, not the other way around. Values The first variable in Figure 1 can be defined as ‘desirable trans‐situational goals, varying in importance, which serve as guiding principles in the life of a person or other social entity’ (Steg & De Groot, 2019, chapter 24:24). An individual has egoistic, biospheric, and/or altruistic values. Egoistic values involve weighing the costs and benefits of a situation to maximize individual outcomes. Altruistic values consider the welfare of other human beings, while biospheric values reflect on nonhuman beings in the biosphere (Steg et al., 2005). Research shows that people with more altruistic and biospheric values tend to behave more pro- environmentally compared to those with more egoistic values (De Groot & Steg, 2009). However, individuals with egoistic values may act sustainably when there is a benefit for them (ibid). Beliefs Beliefs can be defined as ‘general thoughts on certain issues or objects one is convinced are true’ (Steg & De Groot, 2019, chapter 9:93). The VBN model considers three variables that influence each other and ultimately activate personal norms. (1) Ecological worldview captures whether people believe humans are responsible for climate change and the general beliefs they hold about the relationship between humans and nature. (2) Awareness of consequences reflects how much individuals recognize how their actions negatively or positively impact the environment. (3) Ascription of responsibility measures the extent to which someone feels accountable for climate change. This can be described as ‘the belief or denial that one's own actions have contributed to or could alleviate those consequences’ (Stern et al., 1999:83). Personal norms are activated when individuals become aware of undesirable consequences affecting others. Moreover, one must acknowledge their ability to change for this activation to occur. - 9 - Personal norms Personal norms are defined as ’one’s feelings of moral obligation towards taking an action’’ (Gifford & Nilsson, 2014:148). From personal norms, the variable moral obligation to act pro- environmentally arises, which captures how much one feels obliged to engage in environmental behavior. This variable is activated through the previous variables and is jointly with ascription of responsibility the biggest indicator of environmental behavior (Steg et al., 2005). Therefore, this thesis focuses specifically on these two variables. 2.3 Basis of the VBN model Having introduced the basic structure of the VBN model, this paragraph provides a more extensive overview of the research that has been conducted using the model. The VBN model has been researched in various ways – per variable, as an entire causal chain, and with various extended variables. The model continues to provide positive results in predicting environmental behavior; however, on a limited scope (Brouns, 2019; Chen, 2015; Choi et al., 2015; Han et al., 2016; Pasquariello et al., 2024). The model has been tested in Western countries as well as Eastern countries and the Global South, which all argue the same: values, beliefs, and personal norms are important predictors for environmental behavior (Chen, 2015). The VBN model is tested with different kinds of extended variables to examine whether those variables influence environmental behavior as well, such as subjective norms and green trust (Choi et al, 2015), emotional reactions such as pride and guilt, (Han et al., 2016), collective norms and collective efficacy (Brouns, 2019), and green eating self-efficacy (Pasquariello et al. 2024). Environmental behavior appears to be positively related to all of those variables except subjective norms, which cannot predict environmental behavior. The groups being researched with the model are specific, such as cruise travelers (Han et al., 2016), hotel guests (Choi et al., 2015), or female students (Pasquariello et al., 2024). The VBN model has been used to predict various types of environmental behavior, such as activists’ behavior (Stern et al., 1999), green consumerism (Han et al., 2016; Lee & Park, 2013), actions for nature conservation (Povilionis, 2024), energy savings (Steg et al., 2015), green hotel visits (Choi et al., 2015), or sustainable food choices. (Pasquariello et al. 2024). The research shows that the VBN model is useful in predicting environmental actions. However, when actions are costly and time-consuming, actions depend less on personal values, beliefs, and personal norms and are therefore more difficult to predict with the VBN model (Steg et al., 2005). - 10 - This thesis is unique in the sense that the group of energy-poor has not been researched with the VBN model. Additionally, this study explores whether perceived injustice, which has not yet been related to this model, possibly shapes variables of the VBN model, which would consequently limit environmental behavior that might otherwise occur. Such a study has not yet been explored with the VBN model. Limitations of the VBN model Critiques of the VBN model are few, as the tests done with the model are consistent in results. However, criticism of the VBN model can be the following. Most of the conducted research with this model has been quantitative, only rarely is this model tested with qualitative methodologies such as in-depth interviews or focus groups (Lee & Park, 2013; Povilionis, 2024). This can be seen as a limitation of the VBN model, as the theory is based on different quantitative theories that rely on quick self-reports, which could be altered or influenced by respondents themselves without observing actual environmental actions or studying people’s reasoning behind those actions (Chen, 2015). Studying this model qualitatively helps to understand deeper reasoning in how values, beliefs, and personal norms are related, which could be argued to be missing in the current research with the VBN model. Using qualitative methods for the VBN model could show whether certain reasoning occurs that influences environmental behavior that has been overlooked in previous quantitative research. This thesis contributes to theory development on the VBN model because it explores for the first time how non-environmental behavior is argued psychologically related to injustice. Perceived injustice possibly disrupts the causal relation that the belief and personal norm variables have with each other within the VBN model. That this has not been explored yet could have led to misleading conclusions in previous studies with the VBN model. For instance, arguing that one does not have specific values, beliefs, and norms that lead to environmental behavior, while instead this occurred due to the perceived injustice that diminished environmental behavior. 2.4 Defining perceptions of injustice With a broader overview of the VBN model, this section elaborates why the variable perceptions of injustice is included in this study. Injustice is conceptualized as a psychological feeling one develops when one’s moral principles are violated, for instance, when one receives unequal treatment and their expectations have not been met (Zinni, 1995). It is an emotion that is evoked as a consequence when one’s values, beliefs, and personal norms are ignored. It can - 11 - also be seen as a worldview, where injustice evokes emotions such as fear and anger, which further amplifies the intenseness of injustice (Bührle & Kimmerle, 2021; Folger et al., 2005; Zinni, 1995). Injustice is difficult to measure as it is subjective and depends on one’s emotions and personal background. From previous personal experiences of injustice, people develop cognitive frameworks and beliefs about justice. Injustice shapes perceptions of how individuals view the world and politics (Chapman & Okushima, 2019; Middlemiss et al., 2023). The concept of unfairness relates closely to injustice. Because research regarding energy inequality uses the concept of injustice more than unfairness, this thesis continues with this as well (Colquitt & Rodell, 2015). Theoretically, justice is divided into three tenets: (1) distributional justice, which analyzes whether the benefits and burdens are distributed fairly, (2) procedural justice, which analyzes whether all citizens can participate politically and can join the collective decision-making and (3) recognitional justice, which analyzes how different groups are affected and helps everyone’s different needs equitably (Hanke et al., 2023; Liebe & Dobers, 2020). Providing individuals with a voice can instantly change attitudes, as it gives them recognition and opportunities to address systematic injustice (Rothmund et al., 2016). Perceived injustice affects people’s behavior as they will act in a way they otherwise would not. When people perceive unfairness in the workplace, they show higher levels of interpersonal counterproductive work behavior (Cohen-Charash & Mueller, 2007). When students perceive injustice in the classroom, they become less engaged in class (Chory et al., 2017). Moreover, perceiving the tax system as unfair can result in tax noncompliance for individuals (Bobek et al., 2024). Additionally, when individuals believe the law treats them or someone close to them unfairly, lawbreaking behaviors are more likely to occur, such as petty theft, traffic violations, or other civil disobedience (Jansma et al., 2024; Nadler, 2002). Citizens require a sense of justice in policymaking; the higher the perceived justice of a policy, the greater its acceptability (Gölz & Wedderhoff, 2018). The policymaking process appears more unjust when certain groups are excluded from decision-making (Huijts et al., 2012). Trust is a crucial factor in this dynamic; the more trust citizens have in their government, the more they perceive policymaking as just (Ibid). Theoretical contribution The above-mentioned research shows that perceived injustice can influence a behavioral change. However, current research focuses mainly on injustice as an outcome or consequence - 12 - of one’s beliefs and norms, instead of a cause of how beliefs and norms are shaped. How one’s reasoning explains the relationship between these variables can contribute to the academic fields of injustice and environmental psychology. Research within environmental psychology has not yet explored how injustice possibly shapes beliefs and personal norms. This thesis researches whether perceptions of injustice influence the shape of people’s beliefs [ascription of responsibility] and personal norms [moral obligation to act pro-environmentally] in the VBN model, which consequently would decline their environmental behavior. This study helps empirically in understanding how beliefs and personal norms are connected to injustice. This thesis aims to explore whether perceived injustice is a variable overlooked when researching why people act or do not act pro-environmentally, and consequently strengthens the theory of the VBN model. 3. LITERATURE REVIEW This literature review illustrates how the connection between people’s perceptions of injustice and their beliefs and personal norms is currently explored in research. Unlike studies that examine how beliefs and personal norms shape injustice, this thesis aims to explore injustice the other way around: whether perceived injustice shapes people’s beliefs and personal norms. When observing behavior, people see one’s beliefs and personal norms as the primary cause of behavior. However, this study aims to look at injustice as a cause, the underlying reason why people behave the way they do, while still acknowledging that other factors also play a role. This study helps to understand people’s reasoning for their behavior, it researches how reasonings of injustice shape beliefs and norms. While current evidence for this assumption is limited, related research indicates that injustice could influence beliefs and personal norms. The literature review presents previous research on (1) beliefs [ascription of responsibility], (2) personal norms [moral obligation to act pro- environmentally], and (3) perceptions of injustice and how these variables are intertwined. Lastly, this chapter discusses the current research gaps and the research contribution. 3.1 Beliefs [ascription of responsibility] Responsibility can be described as ‘’a relationship between an individual and society’’ (Bierhoff and Auhagen, 2001:1). One feels a psychological contract towards society that evokes a feeling of responsibility to act a certain way. Responsibility comes from a belief, which are ‘’general thoughts on certain issues or objects one is convinced are true’’ (Steg & De Groot, 2019, - 13 - chapter 9:93). The feeling of responsibility is influenced by one’s values and the awareness someone has about the consequences of their actions, values, worldviews and awareness of consequences (see Figure 1) (Stern et al., 1999). Previous psychological research shows that responsibility indicates concern for oneself, others, and society and a motivation to improve the world for them (Martin et al., 2024). Ascription of responsibility can be evoked in various ways. Having greater knowledge on a topic enhances one’s ascription of responsibility, as shown by a study on nursing students, which indicates that fourth-year students exhibit higher personal responsibility than first-year students (Ersoy & Ayaz-Alkaya, 2024). Furthermore, nursing students with more experience in case studies feel a greater sense of responsibility compared to their less experienced first-year nursing students (Ibid). This aligns with research demonstrating that individuals with higher education tend to possess a stronger sense of responsibility, likely due to their increased awareness of global issues such as climate change (Georghiou et al., 2019). Education also influences justice; the greater the knowledge someone has on climate change, the more they accept the energy transition, even when principles are considered unfair (Liebe & Dobers, 2020). Another factor that contributes to the ascription of responsibility is guilt. The more guilt one experiences, the more one will act on their feeling of responsibility (Kaiser & Shimoda, 1999). In the Global North, people engage more in environmental behavior when they feel responsible for causing climate change or are concerned about it (Bal et al., 2021; Steg et al., 2005). Moreover, some people feel a responsibility towards future generations, which is a motivation to act pro-environmentally (Syropoulos & Markowitz, 2024). The above-mentioned research exhibits how responsibility is influenced through various factors. Research is limited on how perceived injustice could influence and shape one’s beliefs or ascription of responsibility. Previous research has primarily examined how beliefs, under which ascription of responsibility falls, affect perceived injustice. Perceived injustice is shaped by personal experiences throughout one’s lifetime (Zinni, 1995). Someone with a stronger set of beliefs will have a stronger sense of injustice, for instance, in equality topics or climate issues (Ibid). Understanding how perceptions of injustice influence beliefs and the ascription of responsibility is important because this is a necessary mechanism for environmental behavior. When someone lacks the feeling of responsibility, this can be a barrier to environmental behavior (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2010). This suggests that through perceptions of injustice, one’s ascription of responsibility is reduced and could directly interrupt the willingness to act pro-environmentally. - 14 - Therefore, if perceptions of injustice diminish the ascription of responsibility, strong perceptions of injustice can be a barrier to environmental behavior. 3.2 Personal norms [moral obligation to act pro-environmentally] Beliefs, [ascription of responsibility], influence, and activate personal norms. Personal norms are defined as ‘’one’s feelings of moral obligation towards taking an action’’ (Gifford & Nilsson, 2014:148). Moral obligation is part of our identity, which is what we listen to when deciding what we believe is just, depending on the situation and the norms of this particular situation (Zinni, 1995). When deciding what kind of behavior to undertake, one will listen to their individual moral judgement process first, and only after this, a more conscious reasoning occurs (Nowakowska, 2025). A moral obligation can be seen as a social bond; one has to act a certain way to avoid threats that affect people or things that are dear to them, for instance save energy at home to limit the effects of climate change, regardless of the behavior of others (Steg et al., 2005). Moral obligation is something that is intuitively in one’s mind in their daily behavior, it consists of values that are deeply rooted in a person. From one’s values, worldviews, awareness of consequences, and ascription of responsibility, their personal norms are shaped (see Figure 1) (Stern et al., 1999). Personal norms reflect internalized values and the personal responsibility that comes with them. Previous research on personal norms is mostly focused on the effects of personal norms and the consequences of when those are violated. Previous psychological research illustrates that personal norms are a good predictor of prosocial behavior, specifically in areas such as economic behavior (Bašića & Verrina, 2024), recycling behavior (Bertoldo & Castro, 2016), and energy-saving behavior (De Groot & Steg, 2009; Van der Werff & Steg, 2014). Similar to not acting on the ascription of responsibility, not acting on personal norms generates guilt (Bertoldo & Castro, 2016). When one’s norms are violated, this evokes feelings of anger, disgust, and discontent, regardless of whether this affects oneself or others, which then again influences behavior (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2004; Li et al., 2022). Although research that connects perceptions of injustice to personal norms and a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally is limited, there is research that focuses on injustice shaping a moral obligation to act. A study in the Netherlands illustrates how people felt the moral obligation to protest against nuclear energy plans when learning about the few benefits and high perceived health risks (Huijts et al., 2012). People believed this implementation was unjust and reacted to the moral obligation they felt to act. When beliefs or norms one personally - 15 - identifies with get violated, a sense of injustice is evoked, together with a motivation for resistance and rebellion (Rothmund et al., 2016). Another example is the civil disobedience expressed by members of Extinction Rebellion. They communicated in a study that their norms were violated through the governmental actions regarding climate change, which they felt were unjust (Jansma et al., 2024). This again illustrates how norms shape injustice. Research shows that both personal as well as social norms influence one’s perceptions of injustice. Personal norms appear to have a stronger foundation, as they are shaped by deeply held values developed over time and especially during one’s childhood, while social norms change quickly, depending on which group one is in (Batzke & Ernst, 2024). Personal norms are stronger than social norms. Therefore, this thesis focuses solely on personal norms, as they play a more significant role in influencing environmental behavior (Karakislak et al., 2023). Research is limited regarding how perceptions of injustice shape personal norms and a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally. How injustice shapes norms is addressed in the following research. There is a positive correlation between children being treated unfairly by their teachers and bullying behavior in their adolescence (Lenzi et al., 2014). Children's social goals, which can be compared with social norms, are shaped within the classroom, and the unfair treatment they have had throughout their primary school teaches them that unfair and disrespectful behavior is accepted (Ibid). Although research on this causal relationship is limited, the above- mentioned research supports the relevance of exploring the aim of this thesis. Since personal norms are a significant predictor of environmental behavior, it is essential to examine the assumption that injustice may be a barrier to the activation of personal norms, ultimately affecting environmental behavior. As described in the theoretical framework, perceived injustice is a strong feeling that motivates abnormal behavior such as disobedience and counterproductive behavior. This gives reasons to believe that strong perceived injustice could influence one’s beliefs and personal norms. 3.3 Perceptions of injustice Studies have researched perceptions of justice within the energy transition, but focus mostly on theoretical injustice. This thesis contributes to research on injustice by focusing on how injustice influences people’s reasoning. More specifically, how injustice influences one’s beliefs and personal norms. Research in various European countries indicates that distributive, recognitional, and procedural injustice happen systematically (Gregersen et al., 2025; Hanke et al., 2023; Kerker et al., 2024; Liebe & Dobers, 2020). Households living in poverty demonstrate - 16 - openness and support for the energy transition, despite being excluded from its benefits. Others report feeling overburdened by the consequences that do not benefit them (Hanke et al., 2023). Households desire a voice in decision-making regarding their neighborhood and feel excluded, experiencing procedural injustice. People from low-income households have less ability to participate in politics, for instance, time to vote or stay updated with political events, and therefore their concerns and priorities are less likely to be discussed within the policymaking process (Si & Stephens, 2021). Moreover, distributional injustice is also felt as individuals wish to avoid harm done to the environment and advocate for fairer goods distribution in society. People living in energy-poverty have the highest energy costs relative to their income, putting a greater burden on them compared to middle- and high-income households (Hanke et al., 2023). Recognitional justice mostly occurs in areas where people rely on coal jobs that are expected to disappear, or in areas where wind turbines are planned, which can badly affect natural habitats and local biodiversity, where these decisions have been made without recognizing the position of residents (Kerker et al., 2024). These examples illustrate that energy-poor people are often experiencing injustice in the energy transition. This thesis studies whether these experiences influence the shaping of their beliefs and personal norms. With the previously mentioned research on injustice influencing beliefs and personal norms, there are enough reasons to further explore this assumption. 3.4 Research contribution Current research mainly explores how one’s beliefs and personal norms influence injustice. This thesis examines whether perceived injustice shapes beliefs and personal norms in a way that declines the ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally. It explores whether injustice influences behavioral change, instead of that one’s beliefs and personal norms are the root causes of how one acts, while acknowledging other factors that influence behavior as well. Researchers agree that the energy transition is unjust, but clear research on citizens' reasoning and how this affects their behavior is lacking (Kerker et al., 2024; Liebe & Dobers, 2020). The reasoning of the group of energy-poor is understudied and deserves more attention than it currently receives. Furthermore, this study can contribute to research on how perceived injustice shapes personal responsibility and personal norms of energy-poor people and the reasoning behind this. Additionally, as perceived injustice in one area may lead to disobedience in other areas, this research is relevant not only for energy policies but policies, justice and behavior in general. - 17 - This thesis brings the research fields of psychology, environmental behavior, and justice together and elaborates on the connection between these topics. Furthermore, this thesis contributes to theory development as it explores the VBN model further. How injustice influences environmental behavior and the reasoning behind this is currently a gap in research that deserves to be explored, particularly since injustice may be a cause of non-environmental behavior, triggered by unequally distributed policies. While this thesis focuses on how perceptions of injustice influence environmental beliefs and personal norms within the field of environmental behavior, it may also contribute new connections and ideas within the research field of justice. 4. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY To answer the research aim of whether perceived injustice influences the shape of beliefs and personal norms, the following research methodology is used. This chapter elaborates on the motivation for using interviews as a research methodology, describes the importance of the sampling process, and explains the country-specific research context. It continues to describe the operationalization and lastly explains the data analysis. This research question requires a qualitative research approach, as quantitative methods may fall short in capturing the lived experiences and everyday realities that are essential to this study (Bryman, 2012). The group of energy-poor people can be defined as a hard-to-reach population for which a qualitative methodology is more applicable (Halperin & Heath, 2020). This research is empirical as it aims to answer current perspectives of the energy-poor regarding energy policies related to their beliefs, norms, and justice. The research is also exploratory because this study examines new connections between the different research fields of justice, psychology, and environmental behavior and thus aims to observe relationships that have not been connected before (Bryman, 2012; Halperin & Heath, 2020). Regarding the epistemological considerations of this thesis, the study adopts an interpretive approach, aiming to gain knowledge by interpreting the meanings people give to their actions and trying to understand the behavior, however, not aiming to explain or predict it (Halperin & Heath, 2020). This thesis uses abductive reasoning, aiming to find a theoretical understanding of people and their use of language and perspectives of the world. It is primarily deductive as the VBN theory is used and explored, however, is open for inductive ideas and developments that might be explored in the data through the added variable injustice to the VBN model (Bryman, 2012). - 18 - 4.1 Interviews Data from interviews is widely used within political science because what people do, say, or think is important for the development of this research field empirically and theoretically (Halperin & Heath, 2020). This thesis uses three types interview approaches, consequently showing the experiences of the energy-poor from different perspectives, which will result in a more in-depth conclusion: (1) an in-depth semi-structured interview approach with people living in energy-poverty, (2) an expert interview approach with people working with the energy- poor, and (3) an unstructured interview approach with people living in extreme poverty, which often automatically includes they live energy-poverty as well. Elaborated information on the interview approaches can be found in Appendix 1. In-depth semi-structured interviews This research focuses on details and specific individual experiences, for which in-depth semi- structured interviews are a good methodology. The aim of using in-depth interviews is to explore emotions and thoughts through unforced conversations which create possibilities for alternatives and new ideas, which help develop the VBN model (Bryman, 2012; Lee & Park, 2013). In-depth semi-structured interviews focus on the meaning and context of the stories the interviewees are telling. By doing this, the study allows a more comprehensive approach that fits the explorative research aim of this thesis (Ibid). When interviewing, the researcher considered the characteristics of the interviewee. Some interviewees were extremely talkative, other were withdrawn and less open about their emotions. This did not mean they did not feel as much injustice as others but were considered as less vocal by the researcher. This should be considered while conducting in-depth interviews as it is important to let the interviewee speak about their individual experiences, while at the same time, staying on topic and gathering evidence relevant for this thesis. Expert interviews The expert interviews have been included in the methodology as a secondary perspective on the main in-depth interviews and unstructured interviews. The motivation to use expert interviews consists of several reasons. As trust is low for people in poverty in general, there is a chance that interviewees do not share as openly (Mani et al., 2013). Experts have spoken to more energy-poor people throughout their careers and therefore have a broader view on their reasoning than the researcher of this thesis. This methodology is included to give the analysis of this thesis more depth to fulfill the aim of a full coverage of all perspectives on energy- - 19 - poverty. Having experts in this field can explain their perspectives and experiences of the energy-poor, which helps to come to a more comprehensive conclusion that might be better to generalize. Statements of the main in-depth interviews can be explored further through the expert interviews. Furthermore, people living in poverty have difficulty with personal reflection. Possibly because of low education, but also living in a permanently stressful situation diminishes the possibility to rationally reflect on life (Expert interview 5; Mani et al., 2013). This aligns with Kahneman’s (Diener et al., 1999) concept of System 1 and System 2 thinking. System 1 refers to fast, automatic, and emotionally driven thinking. In contrast, System 2 involves slower, more deliberate, and rational thought processes (Ibid). People living in poverty often operate primarily in System 1 due to the constant stress and cognitive burden they experience, which limits their capacity for reflective, System 2 thinking (Mani et al., 2013). For this reason, expert interviews can make reflective assumptions for the energy-poor through their conversations. Unstructured interviews The unstructured interviews consist of visits to the Dutch Foodbank and the neighborhood café Het Vogelnest. People visiting these locations are living in extreme poverty, which most likely means that people live in energy-poverty as well. This is the extremely marginalized group that is difficult to reach and speak to (Patin & Stapper, 2025). This methodology is included because one-on-one in-depth interviews with this extreme poverty group are difficult to set up, which is possibly due to the lack of trust they have. Moreover, as they are not as included in society, the researcher cannot reach them easily. Unstructured interviews and group conversations seemed more approachable, easygoing, and informal. More information on the locations of the Foodbank and Het Vogelnest can be found in Appendix 4. 4.2 Sampling The three factors that are used in this thesis to identify the energy-poor are people who (1) have a low income, (2) experience high energy expenses, and (3) live in an inefficient building (Lu & Ren, 2023). Approaching people who are living in energy-poverty is sensitive. Some people do not know they belong to this category, others are ashamed of it, and most of all, they have little trust (Guevara et al., 2022; Expert Interview 1; 3; 4). All interviewees included in this analysis live in energy-poverty, although the levels of poverty varied. People within energy-poverty can be divided into three groups: (1) people living in - 20 - poverty who remain in poverty or ended up deeper into poverty due to the energy crisis, (2) people who used to hang just above the poverty line and are now placed in poverty due to the energy crisis, and (3) people from middle income groups who have been pushed close above the poverty line due to the energy crisis (Expert interviewee 4). The interviewees from the unstructured interviews are considered to belong in the first group, and the interviewees from the in-depth interviews are considered to belong in the last two groups. The material of the different interviews is distinct and complements each other. Altogether, the thesis is able to include all three groups of energy-poverty when analyzing the data. Even with the definition of three factors used to identify energy-poor people and the three groups of energy-poor, the sample group is broad and applies to various types of people. Therefore, this thesis uses maximum variation sampling, intending to interview as much variation as possible within this group of energy-poor people (Bryman, 2012). Maximum variation sampling is used in different aspects such as age, income, nationality, living situation, and social backgrounds. Although the sample size is small, through maximum variation sampling, the risk of overlooking experiences of the energy-poor is limited, so that this thesis can still generalize the conclusions to the population of the energy-poor. To reach maximum variation sampling, the interviews included two single mothers, young and middle-aged, three single men, two people with disabilities and a government allowance, one retired woman, one student, and three part-time workers. Five were men and three were women. The age variation was one woman between 20-30, two men between 30-40, two women and one man between 50-60, and two women between 60-70. Five interviewees were native Dutch, two were Turkish with Dutch as a second language, and one was Polish and did not have proficiency in Dutch. One interview was scheduled with a man of Arabic background, who during the interview left the online meeting, possibly due to the language barrier he experienced. Another interviewee turned out not to be energy-poor and is therefore not included in the analysis of this thesis. In-depth interviewees were found through personal networks, acquaintances who knew individuals experiencing energy-poverty, and through organizations such as the Foodbank and Humanitas, which work with people living in poverty. These organizations were contacted via email with a request to help connect with individuals they support; the email can be found in Appendix 5. Approximately 150 emails were sent to various organizations. Most declined to participate, as they felt the need to protect their clients or had concerns that their clients would not be interested. Language barriers were also mentioned, as many people living in energy- poverty are immigrants without proficiency in Dutch. A few organizations agreed to ask around - 21 - or requested a flyer to display, though this generated one response. Two news websites posted a press message with a request to participate that included an online form to participate in the interview, which can be found in Appendix 6. Two people replied like this, an expert in energy- poverty and someone who was energy-poor. Five expert interviews were conducted with professionals from different fields: a policymaker, a volunteer from Het Vogelnest, the chairman of the Foodbank in Zwijndrecht, a town in the Netherlands, a researcher from TNO, and a saleswoman from de Woonpas which is a company involved in providing sustainable innovations in houses of people in energy-poverty. The interviews with the policymaker and the volunteer from Het Vogelnest took place at Het Vogelnest, and the interview with the chairman from the Foodbank took place at the Foodbank. The interviews with the researcher and saleswomen took place online. Each expert was chosen because they interact with energy-poor people in a different context, through advising on poverty from a board perspective, providing voluntary community support, conducting research, working on poverty policy, and engaging with households directly. Their combined insights help with a broader understanding of the reasoning of energy-poor people from five different angles and perspectives. The experts were found by reaching out to them via email or by them reaching out to the researcher. The expert interviews lasted between 30 minutes and an hour. The unstructured interviews were a suggested method from the expert interviews. For the Food Bank, there has been one interview with a single mother between 30-40 years old, which lasted around 30 minutes. The interview took place at the Foodbank. For Het Vogelnest, the group conversation started with seven people around the table, although two soon left and one did not want to be included in this study. Therefore, four of the stories of the people from Het Vogelnest are included in the analysis of this thesis. The group conversation lasted around one and a half hour and took place at Het Vogelnest. 4.3 Choice of context To execute the research methodology in all Western European countries for this thesis is time- consuming and not feasible. Therefore, this thesis selected one country within Western Europe to conduct the interviews, the Netherlands. Recent research by the EC (2024) indicated that data on energy poverty in the Netherlands is similar to other Western European countries. Even though cultures do vary, this study assumes that how perceptions of injustice relate to beliefs and personal norms can be generalized from the Netherlands to other Western European - 22 - countries. Additionally, as most people in group are vulnerable and related to lower education (Mani et al., 2013), speaking in their mother tongue is most likely their preference; speaking English would make them possibly more uncomfortable. Therefore, executing this research in the mother country of the researcher is the most comfortable option for the researcher and the research group. On the other hand, the Netherlands is one of the Western countries that is prioritizing the energy transition with the fewest solutions for the group of the energy-poor (Mulder et al., 2023). The government of the Netherlands focuses on sustainable investments, which makes it harder for people to participate in the energy transition, while other countries, such as Spain, focus mainly on daily behavioral changes (Niamir et al., 2020). For this reason, it is more likely to find people experiencing injustice in the Netherlands as opposed to other Western European countries. This has to be taken into consideration when generalizing the study. Having a research focus on the Netherlands can give good insight into how the energy transition is experienced by a large group of energy-poor in a wealthy country. This assumption of this thesis might be more visible in the Netherlands and energy-poverty individuals might be easier to find. The conclusions of this thesis may then motivate elaborated research in more Western European countries. 4.4 Operationalization To explore the relation of the variables beliefs, personal norms, and perceived injustice, it is important to understand what it means to capture and recognize the variables when people speak about them. Based on previous quantitative and qualitative research of the VBN model and various research on injustice, the following operationalization is created (For ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act: Steg et al., 2005, who researched energy savings, and Lee & Park, 2013; Povilionis, 2024. For perceptions of injustice: Hanke et al., 2023; Liebe & Dobers, 2020). Ascription of responsibility To analyze the ascription of responsibility, Steg et al (2005) used three descriptions of this variable to capture whether someone experiences this belief. Previously, these descriptions have been used to identify beliefs in quantitative as well as qualitative research. The interviewee feels: 1. responsible for energy problems and/or energy waste. 2. a joint responsibility for global warming. - 23 - 3. responsible for contributing to energy solutions. Moral obligation to act pro-environmentally To analyze the moral obligation to act, Steg et al (2005) used three descriptions of this variable to capture whether someone experiences this belief. Previously, these descriptions have been used to identify personal norms in quantitative as well as qualitative research. The interviewee: 1. feels a moral obligation to save energy regardless of the behavior of others. 2. has intentions to buy sustainable products. 3. bears in mind the environment and nature in their daily behavior. Perceptions of injustice A sense of injustice can be analyzed by in-depth interviews, which give a more nuanced understanding of one’s perspectives on why one feels a sense of injustice (Colquitt & Rodell, 2015). Measuring the sense of injustice is delicate, as it is possible one lives in an unjust situation but does not feel injustice, therefore, one cannot assume others feel a sense of injustice before having captured it vocally. When exploring perceived injustice, one can observe multiple tenets of injustice. The following description will be analyzed to capture perceptions of injustice. The interviewee feels like: 1. Distributional injustice a. the benefits and burdens are not distributed fairly. (Burdens are: pollution or higher costs related to the energy transition & benefits are: access to affordable energy costs, clean air, or energy efficiency). 2. Procedural injustice a. they can’t politically participate in local or national level formats. b. they can’t join collective energy-related decision-making. 3. Recognitional injustice a. groups are not treated to their proportion (equitably). b. groups receive different levels of attention from society. c. either themselves or other groups are treated less important than others. Interview guide The interview guide (see Appendix 3) is divided into three sections. First, general background information is collected to decide whether the interviewee is indeed energy-poor. Afterwards, - 24 - their view on climate change and climate policies is discussed. Then, beliefs, personal responsibility, personal norms and a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally are discussed, and lastly, perceptions of injustice. As the interviews are semi-structured, most often the interview does not follow the order of the interview guide, or questions are asked differently, depending on the situation. After the interview, the above-mentioned operationalization helps understand the statements of the interviewees and what they feel captures ascription of responsibility, moral obligation to act pro-environmentally, and perceptions of injustice. 4.5 Data analysis The following section describes how the data analysis is conducted. Then, the analysis of the expert interviews as well as the unstructured interviews are explained. This is followed by the justification of the validity and reliability of this thesis. The section ends with the ethical considerations that are taken into account during the process of this research. In-depth semi-structured interviews The in-depth interviews were recorded and transcribed. The interviews lasted between 45 minutes and one hour and 15 minutes. For the main interviews, the Qualitative Data Analysis Software NVivo is used. NVivo helps to organize and analyze qualitative data (Hilal & Alabri, 2013). With NVivo, the transcribed interviews can be read thoroughly to find patterns in emotions, texts on beliefs and personal norms, perceptions of injustice, and reasons to believe these perceptions influence beliefs and personal norms. The data procedure consisted of coding by nodes, making queries, and finding patterns in the different interviews. The coding is mostly theory-driven but also data-driven, as codes were added when reading through the interview transcripts. A step-by-step plan about this procedure can be found in Appendix 2. Expert interviews and unstructured Interviews Expert- and unstructured interviews explained the perceptions of the in-depth interviews. Furthermore, they added elaborations by confirming the statements or presenting different reasonings through their perspectives on energy-poor people. This can result in more comprehensive conclusions. These interviews were not recorded, but relevant information and quotes were noted. - 25 - Validity and reliability The internal validity of this thesis is strong because it uses three types of interviews as methodology. The expert interviews give the thesis a more nuanced perspective on the group of energy-poor, and may give more depth to the analysis of this thesis. Furthermore, it improves the external validity as experts have a better overview of the energy-poor in the country. The operationalization is clear and concise on the steps taken for the data analysis. Therefore, the reliability of this thesis is sufficient. Ethical considerations When researching an explorative topic and a vulnerable group, ethical aspects have to be considered. First of all, it is important that the thesis is based on the true feelings of the energy- poor. Therefore, it is determined by the introduction of the interview and the examples given whether the interviewees are indeed energy-poor. This is decided according to the three aspects of energy-poor by Lu and Ren (2023). Because the research group is vulnerable, a conscious decision has been made to conduct anonymous interviews. Anonymizing the interviews was also motivated by the expectation that interviewees would speak more openly, knowing that their statements could not be traced back to them. The recording and transcription are done with the consent of the interviewees. To make sure the participants from the unstructured interviews did not feel forced to participate in the conversation, several strategies were used. For the visit to the Foodbank, the volunteer who checked in the visitors knew of the research and asked people she felt were most probable willing and open to participate in an interview. Regardless, one can still feel forced to participate due to a subconscious feeling of owing the Foodbank organization. However, due to the openness in the examples of the interviewee, it does not seem likely that this interview was forced. For the visit to Het Vogelnest, the volunteers were aware of the visit, as they suggested it themselves. The group interview was a natural and unforced conversation that ultimately discussed different topics, related to this thesis and unrelated. Prior to joining the table, it was clearly mentioned that the purpose was to interview whoever was willing and that they would be included in the research anonymously, if they agreed to sign the GDPR. To make sure interviewees did not go into the interview biased, the information they had prior was that this interview was about climate change, energy transition and energy policies. They knew that the research was specifically focused on people living in energy-poverty and the main - 26 - focus was their deeper reasoning, so people would specifically share how they were feeling. Perceptions of injustice were only brought up by themselves or later in the interview, to make sure this feeling was evoked by themselves instead of by the interviewer. 5. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS This chapter discusses the results of the research aiming to explore how injustice shapes beliefs and personal norms. The first section explains how people live in energy-poverty. Then, their reasoning on the ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally is described. After this, their perceptions of injustice are explored. This is concluded with an analysis of the role of perceptions of injustice concerning their influence on the shape of beliefs and personal norms. These are influenced by the data-driven concepts found in the interview transcript, the triggered variables anger and powerlessness. 5.1 Energy-poverty Discussing energy-poverty with the interviewees was relatively easy; all interviewees seemed open about their personal struggles with energy and money. The most common reaction to high energy expenses is to turn off the radiator completely (Expert interviewee 5). Interviewees exhibited this reaction, preferring to use a blanket and endure the cold rather than higher energy costs. Yeah, and a hot water bottle sounds cozy, but in the winter, there were also moments that I wish I didn’t need it 2 (Interviewee 5). At one point, I stopped using the radiator […] I think I could have regulated it, but for me it’s like, I can also wear a sweater (Interviewee 6). I spoke to people who heat up their house with petroleum. They’re aware of the health consequences but see no other way, they have debt and gas is too expensive (Expert interviewee 2). One interviewee had a muscle disease that required her to keep the radiator on a high temperature. Consequently, this forced her to limit her expenses in other areas, such as birthday presents for her grandchildren. ‘’For the birthday of my kids and grandkids, I have to get really creative. I can’t buy certain things that I normally would be able to do’’ (Interviewee 4). Energy expenses evoke stress, and two mothers saw no other choice but to ask their children for help 2 The quotes have been translated by the researcher from Dutch to English. - 27 - with paying the energy expenses. This evoked feelings of shame about being in such a situation. Furthermore, reactions of others evoked shame: ‘’Friends commented, I should only visit you during summer; in the winter, your house is way too cold’’ (Interviewee 5). 5.2 Beliefs [ascription of responsibility] The different aspects of ascription of responsibility that were mentioned by the interviewees were analyzed using the operationalization (see section 4.4.), consisting of: (1) feeling responsible for energy problems and/or energy waste, (2) feeling a joint responsibility for global warming, and (3) feeling responsible for contributing to energy solutions. Interviewees do feel a responsibility to save energy and aim to keep their energy waste as a minimum, although saving energy comes mainly from economic reasons. Interviewees describe how they showered less frequently and with colder water. They also spoke about insulating their house by using curtains and weather seals. ‘’The window is terribly designed, with single windows and holes between the glass and rotten wood. I always have the curtains quite closed so it holds back the wind’’ (Interviewee 2). When asked about who is responsible for global warming, interviewees mention that everyone has a responsibility in this. ‘’Everybody should contribute, I really believe that. The government, corporations, and us’’ (Interviewee 4). In addition, interviewees pointed out the larger responsibility of others, larger corporations, and the government. ‘’What about the larger countries and their waste, or the flats there [points to flats] that don’t do recycling; they just throw all their waste in the underground containers’’ (Vogelnest, Participant A). Interviewees did not necessarily feel a responsibility for participating in large energy solutions, such as driving an electric car or owning solar panels, as their financial capital limits their abilities to participate. However, they explain that they try to do whatever they can, such as influencing politics by voting and in this way contributing to the energy solutions. ‘’I do it through voting, that’s how I feel it. There I feel like I’m given an opportunity and that I take’’ (Interviewee 3). Other aspects interviewees shared regarding ascription of responsibility outside the operationalization was the care they have about the climate and global warming which evoked feelings of sadness and powerlessness. Mostly, because the problem of global warming is - 28 - significantly large, making their efforts seem useless. This is a feeling shared with many, regardless of living in poverty or not (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2010). Greater knowledge on the topic results in a greater feeling of responsibility (Georghiou et al., 2019). This can be aligned with statements made by interviewees. Interviewee 6 and Interviewee 8 seemed to have a large knowledge of climate change, which can be argued to be connected to their feeling of responsibility. This was noticeable through the choice of wording and how they would refer to their examples from newspapers, documentaries and more informative sources. On the question what emotions would be evoked when not acting on their ascription of responsibility, Interviewee 8 mentioned: ‘’I would not like it, actually, because I have knowledge on it, the consequences’’ (Interviewee 8). Interviewee 4 and Interviewee 7 seemed to misunderstand certain aspects of climate change and were more vocal on how responsibility lies elsewhere, or certain sustainability choices seemed to come with complications they did not want to take. Climate change? But the climate does that itself, right? (Interviewee 7). I don’t think it’s that bad, we will change into another world, another climate, but we will receive other things instead (Interviewee 4). Everything is getting more expensive, how can we keep on paying this [much]? I don’t understand it. The government has to get a hold on energy companies. And get rid of the taxes. (Interviewee 7). 5.3 Personal norms [moral obligation to act pro-environmentally] The operationalization (see section 4.4.) has been used to capture a moral obligation to act pro- environmentally, which is captured as, the interviewee: (1) feels a moral obligation to save energy regardless of the behavior of others, (2) has intentions to buy sustainable products, and (3) bears in mind the environment and nature in their daily behavior. Interviewees described that they feel a moral obligation to save energy regardless of the behavior of others, although their motivation comes primarily from economic reasons over environmental reasons. ‘’Also a bit the environment but my motivations [for environmental behavior] are mostly economic. […] To be honest, I’m not really active with it, I do follow the news you know, I do follow climate change’’ (Interviewee 5). Interviewees did not describe the wish or intention to buy sustainable products as pointed out in the second factor of the operationalization, instead they said: ‘’Saving money is the top - 29 - priority instead of climate change. If climate change was a priority I would have done things differently, for now my [sustainable] solutions are very passive’’ (Interviewee 2). When discussing bearing in mind the environment in their daily behavior, interviewees mention that they have been raised with these specific values and beliefs. ‘’For me, this is a lifestyle’’ (Interviewee 1). ‘’I do not know any different, I have always been this way’’ (Interviewee 4). ‘’I have been raised to not have such a luxurious life’’ (Interviewee 8). For others, environmental behavior is a more conscious current way of living: ‘’This is more consequential moral motivation; if I do this, I will be better in the future as I am part of the large being’’ (Interviewee 6). Interviewees expressed that they bear in mind the environment in their daily behavior, but primarily for economic reasons. Not owning a car and a dryer, buying second-hand clothing and furniture, or not taking an airplane are all behavior that comes from economic struggle. The economic concerns are their top priority, therefore, the third factor of the operationalization is less clearly captured. In addition to the operationalization, an approach to explore whether one feels the moral obligation to act pro-environmentally is to ask whether they would feel guilty when not acting pro-environmentally, as described in Bertoldo and Castro (2016), not acting on one’s personal norms generates guilt. ‘’It would not give me a good feeling no’’ (Interviewee 1). However, not all interviewees felt guilty. I’m not striving for big goals [for the environment], I have other priorities for myself. I’m not God, I cannot do everything. It is what the government should do and let’s be honest, they have other priorities. So why would I interfere in it? (Interviewee 3). Furthermore, there are examples of people who simply do not have enough money to act on their moral obligation to act pro-environmentally. In the town of Zwijndrecht, residents must pay to dispose of their trash in public bins, with no regard for income differences or personal circumstances. As a result, people in poorer neighborhoods often leave their trash beside the bins, creating environmental waste. ‘’Think about the mothers in poverty and all those baby poop diapers, that’s a lot of general trash to pay’’ (Foodbank, Participant A). This highlights the added challenges faced by people living in poverty. They might feel a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally, but cannot act on it due to their circumstances. This is a - 30 - small gesture that shows how certain classes in society cannot participate equally in climate actions. 5.4 Perceptions of injustice The operationalization (see section 4.4.) has been used to capture the three tenets of injustice: (1) distributional injustice, (2) recognitional injustice, and (3) procedural injustice. Interviewees are experiencing injustice regarding the current energy policies on different tenets and various intensities. Perceptions of injustice evoked several emotions: ‘’The lack of subsidies is just powerlessness, as well as irritation. So yeah, it gives stress, tension, irritation, and powerlessness’’ (Interviewee 5). Expert interviews included the energy-poor could feel intense grievances against the government and, due to this experienced frustration, the possibility of getting into more trouble (Expert interview 1 and 3). Interviewees perceived all three tenets of injustice as equally unjust. Although a difference could be noticed in what someone personally experienced and what was observed in the news or with acquaintances. Distributional injustice, where the benefits and burdens are not distributed fairly, is experienced by all groups of energy-poverty, by people with a low income, as well as by people with a middle income. ‘’The poorest people here are the largest victims while they have the least guilt in it [climate change]’’ (Interviewee 6). Examples were given that are perceived as unjust, such as how people are denied supplements when earning only a little more per month (Foodbank, Participant A; Interviewee 5; Interviewee 7). Interviewee 7, a recent widow who just receives above minimum wage mentioned: I am in a sector that I can never use funds, while I need to use a lot [of gas and electricity] for this house. They say, if you earn this much, you can pay it yourself. But they don’t look at the whole picture. I'm doing a training alongside my job to earn more money, but with that salary I no longer qualify for a subsidy—so what's the point? On the other hand, interviewees below minimum wage felt like they should receive more governmental help (Interviewee 1; Foodbank, Participant A; Vogelnest, Participants A, B, C, D). ‘’Yes, they laugh at that, they receive multiple governmental subsidies which they invest in new windows or making the house energy-neutral. But I, I can't do anything anyway, I rent.’’ (Interviewee 1). - 31 - Recognitional injustice, when one feels not being treated to their proportion, is experienced as well. I think that, to say it bluntly, we are at the very bottom of the pecking order (Interviewee 1). It depends on your capital, financial capital, cultural capital, and social capital – they are all pillars that make society view and treat you a certain way. (Interviewee 6). Why is the civil citizen always the victim? […] There is a double standard, this was always clear. For me, there’s just a bit of a class struggle. (Interviewee 8). The energy-poor perceive attention from the government as less compared to other groups of society (aligned with Hanke et al., 2023; Liebe & Dobers, 2020). Another frustration that comes with the energy policies is the struggle of finding what kind of supplements are available: ‘’I have to search for it all by myself ’’. (Interviewee 5). ‘’I heard about the first supplement from someone else here [The Food Bank], there is little publicity about it’’. (Foodbank, Participant A). Even though this information was online and on news websites, the lack of time and state of constant stress make it difficult for energy-poor people to find governmental benefits (Ebrahimigharehbaghi et al., 2019). They believe the government should invest more effort in helping them with their daily challenges and improving easier access to information. This is also visible for the international interviewee living in the Netherlands in the lack of English information regarding recent implemented policies. ‘’It is exhausting, I never know which form I need to use, there are so many quizzes and forms, if I don’t need to do it, I do not take action’’ (Interviewee 2). The difficulty in accessing and understanding government supplements makes it harder for internationals to benefit from government assistance in the same way that nationals can. These examples show that the group of energy-poor feels like they should receive recognition that they need more support and attention than they currently receive. The current situation makes energy-poor people feel unimportant and powerless which evokes frustration. ‘’I do not think the Dutch government has an interest in the energy transition, or it should benefit the big industries and the rich guys in the villas, but besides that, it does not interest them’’ (Interviewee 1). - 32 - Procedural injustice, when one feels unable to politically participate or join decision- making equitably, is personally experienced by interviewees. Although interviewees feel like they can politically participate, the influence they have feels limited. Interviewees do express some satisfaction with the procedures they can participate in, such as voting. I do what I can, I can vote, so I feel like I have opportunities and I take them (Interviewee 3). You still have to let your voice be heard, instead of feeling like you don’t have influence and just lay back (Interviewee 5). The interviewees from Het Vogelnest elaborated with example of their changing neighborhood without them being included or notified, while afterwards are asked for a positive picture for the social media of the municipality. They expressed frustration and feeling unimportant by new developments in the neighborhood they don’t need, instead of them being listened and receiving what they do need. ’’They do not talk to us [poor people]’’. (Vogelnest, Participant D). The lack of inclusion experienced by this group aligns with the research of Kerker et al (2024), decision-making done without the inclusion of the affected people. The feeling of procedural injustice is experienced not solely by people of poverty, but can be a common feeling for citizens in general. However, the feeling of marginalization within the group of energy-poor increases the feeling of procedural injustice: ‘’The more capital you have, the more benefits you get from the system and more opportunities to steer and influence’’ (Interviewee 6). 5.5 Does perceived injustice shape beliefs and personal norms? According to the VBN model, when one feels ascription of responsibility, this activates the causal relationship to a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally (Stern et al., 2005). This thesis examines the VBN model and includes the variable injustice, aiming to explore whether injustice influences the shaping of beliefs and personal norms. According to the VBN model, one has to express the ability to act on their ascription of responsibility, if not the variable would not be activated (Steg et al., 2005). All interviewees included in this section expressed this ability. This section shows that there is an association between perceived injustice and the possible modification of beliefs and personal norms through the two data-driven found variables, anger and powerlessness. They shape the ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally into a more passive form. - 33 - As described previously, interviewees express an ascription of responsibility. Interviewees also feel injustice. When feeling injustice, emotions such as anger and discontent are evoked (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2004; Li et al., 2022). On the question which emotions come up when thinking of the unequal energy policies, interviewees answer: ‘’Yes it affects me, it makes me angry’’ (Interviewee 8). ‘’I feel anger, yes’’ (Interviewee 6). ‘’Of course I’m angry, it frustrates me’’ (Interviewee 1). Injustice is experienced in the energy policies. Previous literature (Liebe & Dobers, 2020) explains that less knowledge on policies makes policies feel more unjust, however, the data of this thesis shows that all interviewees, regardless of their knowledge on climate change, experience energy policies as unjust. Interviewees express having the least guilt and responsibility in climate change and bearing the biggest burden. Therefore, it can be argued that their ascription of responsibility is lower due to the anger that is triggered through perceived injustice. Interviewees express their own responsibility but also mention that it should be a proportional ascription of responsibility to the amount of guilt one carries. Elaborated on by experts (1, 3, and 4), people living in poverty need most of their mental capacity for their day-to-day survival. A 17-year-old girl expressed the same: ‘’You should mention that we live to survive’’ (Vogelnest, Participant B). Nonetheless, they feel sadness when thinking of global warming, and have a daily intention to act pro-environmentally. That energy policies are not created to support them in the energy transition evokes anger, and in their view, clearly shows that environmentalism is only rewarded for richer income households. Interviewee 1 expressed the frustration he felt regarding Tesla owners receiving subsidies: ‘’I should get that subsidy, I don’t have children, I don’t have a car, I’m pretty environmentally friendly – why don’t I get that subsidy?’’ This situation fuels their anger and seems to weaken their ascription of responsibility, as the government takes part of their ability to act on their ascription of responsibility away by not implementing helpful policies. In addition to anger, perceived injustice triggers another variable. The lack of energy policies aimed at supporting the energy-poor, together with how little they can participate in the energy transition, triggers a feeling of powerlessness. You are dependent on so many things; you think you own an apartment, but no, you don’t. […] Powerlessness, thankfully not depressed, but you feel powerless, you cannot do anything (Interviewee 5). - 34 - I worry, because I don’t have control over it [energy expenses]. It just happens to me, and I cannot control it. It is powerlessness, yes powerless (Interviewee 3). So that [the government prioritizing corporations instead of citizens] makes you angry? Yes, angry, that is the consequence. And powerless of course (Interviewee 8). Initially, the perceived injustice motivates them to take action in response to their feelings: a complaint letter to the municipality and the homeowners association (Interviewee 5), and the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management (Interviewee 1), but all without receiving an answer or any impact. Trying to halt the increase in rent, without any effect (Interviewee 1). The lack of success in their actions raises the feeling of powerlessness that then lowers their ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally. There are fewer possibilities [to participate in the energy transition for low-income households], and I find that unjust. It’s not arranged well (Interviewee 5). I think I’m highly sensitive to power dynamics, so current governmental decision- making - yes, that really sets something off in me (Interviewee 1). The consequences of one’s inability to participate equally in the energy transition due to their poverty raise feelings of unwanted dependency (Expert Interview 4). People in poverty are dependent on the government, which decides whether they are eligible for certain subsidies. ‘’They [the municipality] might give me a 10-month extension to pay [council taxes], but there are so many bills I need to pay in 10 months, how can I do that?’’ (Foodbank, Participant A). The financial burdens Interviewee A experienced increased feelings of powerlessness, feeling trapped in a cycle of financial dependency on the government. ‘’I can’t decide things unfortunately, our government decides it for us’’ (Interviewee 4). As visualized in Figure 2, empirical evidence suggests that perceived injustice may shape ascription of responsibility through the triggered emotion of anger. The ascription of responsibility is potentially shaped in the sense that it lowers in value, and interviewees are less inclined to listen to their ascription of responsibility due to the injustice they experience with energy policies. This then disrupts the causal relationship to a moral obligation to act pro- environmentally. Injustice also triggers the feeling of powerlessness. It seems that through their failed actions and their unwanted dependency on the government, interviewees are more passive; however, how this relates to beliefs and personal norms is not evident in the data of this thesis. This thesis argues that there are indicators that suggest the beliefs and personal norms of energy-poor people who perceive the implemented energy policies as unjust could have the - 35 - potential to be shaped more passively, due to triggered emotions of anger and powerlessness. Injustice cannot be seen as the primary cause of non-environmental behavior, but research points to a possible connection where ascription of responsibility and a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally decline into a more passive form. Figure 2: VBN model; adapted with the inclusion of perceptions of injustice and the triggered variables anger and powerlessness (Stern et al., 1999). Nonetheless, not all interviewees feel that powerlessness results in being passive. One interviewee expresses the need to protest, whether it has an effect or not. Another interviewee expressed the feeling but added: ‘’I know the feeling, but I won’t let it influence me’’ (Interviewee 3). Overall, this data indicates a link between perceived injustice and a possible modification of beliefs [ascription of responsibility], and personal norms [moral obligation to act pro- environmentally] in relation to the energy policies created for the energy transition. Moreover, it shows how injustice triggers the variables anger and powerlessness, and may result in a decline of ascription of responsibility and a lesser tendency to listen to their moral obligation to act pro-environmentally. Based on this evidence, this study cannot confirm whether perceived injustice shapes beliefs and personal norms, but the data does suggest that the expected association between perceived injustice of the energy-poor and a weakened ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally occurs. Still, other aspects could have influenced this decline as well, which should be taken into account. - 36 - 5.6 Additional observations Alongside the aforementioned findings, the inductive methodology uncovered additional insights. Injustice can result in a distrust of the government and an overall negative perspective on policy implementation. Perceived injustice leads to distrust in the government. ‘’Our government is a little mess, everything is insecure’’ (Interviewee 4). ‘’On national level they don’t know what’s really going on‘’ (Interviewee 3). As mentioned in the literature review, trust is an important component for a smooth policy transition (Huijts et al., 2012). Building on this, previous negative experiences with the government shape how quickly people perceive injustice in other areas, influencing their overall trust and perception of the government (Middlemiss, 2023; Nadler, 2012). These feelings were evidently present for the people at Het Vogelnest, who expressed distrust towards the police, testified with examples of personally being treated badly, which shaded their entire perspective on the police as well as the government. Experts add that perceived injustice leads to intense grievances against the government, which can also contribute to public disobedience (Expert interview 1 & 3). This is an important sub-result that should be recognized, as it can come with large consequences. CONCLUSION This thesis studied the research question: ‘’How does perceived injustice in energy policies influence the shaping of environmental beliefs and personal norms among energy-poor people in Western European countries?’’ When energy-poor people perceive injustice in the energy policies, this triggers anger and powerlessness, which possibly declines their ascription of responsibility and disrupts the causal relation towards a moral obligation to act pro-environmentally. Anger and powerlessness are two variables that were data-driven concepts found in the interview transcripts. When asking experts whether they believe perceived injustice could reshape people’s beliefs and personal norms, all acknowledged such a modification. This confirms that the results of this study are seen through the perspectives of different experts in various areas within energy-poverty. The collected data does suggest that there is an association between perceived injustice and a decline in ascription of responsibility and moral obligation to act pro-environmentally, however, this cannot be confirmed within the scope of this thesis. Besides this, it should be considered that other factors could have contributed to the modifications of beliefs and personal norms as well. Therefore, further research should continue with the exploration of this connection. - 37 - While this thesis offers valuable insights into several research topics within political science and environmental psychology, certain limitations may have influenced the findings and should be considered when studying the results. This study is reliable and replicable; however, the smaller sample size of this study makes the external validity more difficult to ascertain. It is possible to observe similarities in Western European countries with this Dutch study because countries have parts of the same policies, such as subsidies for electric vehicles. The scope might differ in the Netherlands, but it gives a good insight into other Western European countries. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that the reasoning found in this thesis is unique to the Netherlands. As this is a hard-to-reach population, much effort went into finding interviewees. This limitation is also experienced by others (Expert interview 2). This study has to be researched over a longer period of time with more in-depth interviews to observe the variables extensively. Another limitation that should be taken into consideration is the language barrier. A part of the energy-poverty population are immigrants who are often not comfortable with English and Dutch. This language barrier should be taken into account when doing further research with the group of energy-poor people. Additionally, asking questions about people’s feelings on responsibility and personal norms may give people a feeling that they are forced to respond prosocially (De Groot & Steg, 2009). This has to be taken into consideration when analyzing the data, as this research is mostly based on self-reporting research, meaning bias and unintended prosocial responses have to be considered. However, the expert interviews used do limit part of this bias. It is important to acknowledge and recognize the influence perceived injustice has for both academic research as for policymaking. This explorative research contributes to previous unexplored ideas within the topics of justice, psychology, and environmental behavior. This thesis shows that to strengthen the VBN model, it should be considered to examine more external variables, such as injustice, that could possibly limit environmental behavior. Including variables that can easily be overlooked when studying environmental behavior contributes to the theory of the VBN model, as well as research on justice in connection with environmental behavior. This study introduced new variables that should be researched further. This thesis shows that from an energy-poverty perspective, the energy transition is unjust. Many people living in energy-poverty act pro-environmentally but are not acknowledged for their participation and are unable to equally participate in the energy transition. They are environmentalists in their daily behavior, however, they do not get recognized and rewarded for - 38 - it. Additionally, injustice in one area may lead to disobedience in other areas. This shows the importance of recognizing marginalized groups, and therefore, this research is relevant not only for energy policies but policies, justice, and behavior in general. This thesis demonstrates the relevance of considering the reasoning behind energy behavior when examining energy policies, as it could enhance political participation and a more inclusive energy transition. - 39 - REFERENCES Auhagen, A. & Bierhoff, H., (2001). Responsibility: The many faces of a social phenomenon. New York: Routledge, 2001. Bal, M., Stok, M., Bombaerts, G., Huijts, N., Schneider, P., Spahn, A. & Buskens, V. (2023) A fairway to fairness: Toward a richer conceptualization of fairness perceptions for just energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103213 . Bertoldo, R. & Castro, P. (2016) The outer influence inside us: Exploring the relation between social and personal norms, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2016.03.020. Bašić, Z. & Verrina, E. (2024). Personal norms — and not only social norms — shape economic behavior, Journal of Public Economics, Volume 239, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105255. Batzke, M. & Ernst, A. (2024). Distinguishing fast change in social norms and slow change in personal norms in cooperative decision-making. Front. Psychol. Sec. Personality and Social Psychology Volume 15 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1380341 Bobek, D., Hageman, A. & Hausserman, C. (2024). Are Fairness Perceptions Related to Moral Licensing Behavior? Evidence From Tax Compliance. Journal of Business Ethics https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05784-y. Brouns, L. (2019). Master Thesis. VBN THEORY REVISED - An exploratory study on the interplay of individual and collective factors in explaining sustainable behaviour. Utrecht University. Semantic Scholar. Bührle, H. & Kimmerle, J. (2021). Psychological Determinants of Collective Action for Climate Justice: Insights From Semi-Structured Interviews and Content Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.695365. Chapman, A. & Okushima, A. (2019). Engendering an inclusive low-carbon energy transition in Japan: Considering the perspectives and awareness of the energy-poor. Energy Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.111017. Chen, M. (2015). An examination of the value-belief-norm theory model in predicting pro- environmental behaviour in Taiwan: The value-belief-norm (VBN) theory model in predicting pro-environmental behaviour. Asian Journal of Social Psychology. 18. 10.1111/ajsp.12096. - 40 - Choi, H., Jang, J. & Jay, K. (2015). Application of the extended VBN theory to understand consumers' decisions about green hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 87- 95. 10.1016/j.ijhm.2015.08.004. Chory, R., M., Horan, S. M., & Houser, M., L. (2017). Justice in the Higher Education Classroom: Students’ Perceptions of Unfairness and Responses to Instructors. Innovative High Educationa. DOI:10.1007/s10755-017-9388-9. Cohen-Charash, Y. & Mueller, J., S. (2007). Does Perceived Unfairness Exacerbate or Mitigate Interpersonal Counterproductive Work Behaviors Related to Envy?. Journal of Applied Psychology. DOI:10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.666. Colquitt, J. A., & Rodell, J. B. (2015). Measuring justice and fairness. The Oxford handbook of justice in the workplace, 1, 187-202. De Groot, J & Steg, L. (2009). Morality and Prosocial Behavior: The Role of Awareness, Responsibility, and Norms in the Norm Activation Model. Journal of social psychology, 149(4), 425-449. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.149.4.425-449 Diener, E., Schwarz, N., & Kahneman, D. (1999). Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Ebrahimigharehbaghi et al., 2019. Unravelling Dutch homeowners' behaviour towards energy efficiency renovations: What drives and hinders their decision-making?. Energy Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.046. Ersoy, E & Sultan Ayaz-Alkaya, S. (2024) Academic self-efficacy, personal responsibility, and readiness for professional practice in nursing students: A descriptive and correlational design, Nurse Education Today, Volume 132, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2023.106007. European Commission (2024). Who is Energy Poor in the EU? JRC Working Papers on Taxation And Structural Reforms No 5/2024. Fehr E. & Fischbacher U. (2004). Third-party punishment and social norms. Evol Hum Behav 25:63–87. 10.1016/S1090-5138(04)00005-4 Folger, R., Cropanzano, R. & Goldman, B. (2005). What is the relationship between justice and morality? Handbook of Organizational Justice. - 41 - Georghiou, C., Shutt, M. and Costello, J. 2019. Do Human values lead to feeling a sense of responsibility for Climate Change in the UK?, Journal of Promotional Communications, 7 (2), 108-125. Gifford, R. & Nilsson, A. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology. Vol. 49, No. 3, 141–157, DOI:10.1002/ijop.12034. Gölz, S. & Wedderhoff, O. (2018) Explaining regional acceptance of the German energy transition by including trust in stakeholders and perception of fairness as socio-institutional factors, Energy Research & Social Science, Volume 43, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.05.026. Gregersen, T., Helliesen, M. & Jagers, S. (2025). “The Poor Are Hit the Hardest”— Norwegians' Perceptions of Climate (In)Justice. Scandinavian Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.70002 Grossmann, K. & Trubina, E., How the Concept of Dignity Is Relevant to the Study of Energy- Poverty and Energy Justice. Volume 3 – 2021 https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2021.644231 Guevara, Z., Tinoco, D., M., Silva, S. (2022) The theoretical peculiarities of energy-poverty research: a systematic literature review. Volume 105, 103274, ISSN 2214-6296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103274. Han, H., Jinsoo, H. & Myong, L. (2016). The value–belief–emotion–norm model: investigating customers’ eco-friendly behavior. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing. 1-18. 10.1080/10548408.2016.1208790. Hanke, F., Grossmann, K., & Sandmann, L., (2023) Excluded despite their support - The perspectives of energy-poor households on their participation in the German energy transition narrative, Energy Research & Social Science, Volume 104, 103259, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103259. Het Vogelnest (n.d.) Welkom bij Het Vogelnest! https://vogelnest.nl/ Hilal, A. & Alabri, S. (2013). Using NVivo for data analysis in qualitative research. International interdisciplinary journal of education, 2(2), 181-186. https://doi.org/10.12816/0002914 - 42 - Hoffman, J., Davies, M., Bauwens, T., Späth, P., Hajer, M., Arifi, B., Bazaz, A. & Swilling, M. (2021) Working to align energy transitions and social equity: An integrative framework linking institutional work, imaginaries and energy justice. Energy Research & Social Science 82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102317 Huijts, N., Molin, E. & Steg, L. (2011). Psychological factors influencing sustainable energy technology acceptance: A review-based comprehensive framework. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2011.08.018. Karakislak, I., Hildebrand, J. & Schweizer-Ries, P. (2023) Exploring the interaction between social norms and perceived justice of wind energy projects: a qualitative analysis, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 25:2, 155-168, DOI:10.1080/1523908X.2021.2020631 Jansma, A., Van den Bos, K. & De Graaf, B. (2024). How Climate Protesters Perceive Injustice and Justify Breaking the Law: Qualitative Interviews With Extinction Rebellion. Global Environmental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.5964/gep.11089 Joanes, T. (2019). Personal norms in a globalized world: Norm-activation processes and reduced clothing consumption, Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.191. Kaiser, E. & Shimoda, E. (1999). Responsibility as a predictor of ecological behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 19, Issue 3, https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1998.9123. Kerker, N., Kuhlmann, L. & Marg, S. (2024). Fair enough? Unraveling justice perspectives on Germany’s energy system transformation. Energy Research & Social Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103691. Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. (2010). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401 Lee, H. J., & Park, S. Y. (2013). Environmental orientation in going green: A qualitative approach to consumer psychology and sociocultural factors of green consumption. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science: Bridging Asia and the World, 23(3), 245- 262. https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2013.788366 Lenzi, M., Vieno, A., Gini, G., Pozzoli, T., Pastore, M., Santinello, M. & Elgar, F. (2014). Perceived Teacher Unfairness, Instrumental Goals, and Bullying Behavior in Early - 43 - Adolescence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Vol. 29(10) 1834 –1849. DOI:10.1177/0886260513511694. Li, X., Hou, M., He, Y. et al. People roar at the sight of injustice: evidences from moral emotions. Curr Psychol 42, 29868–29879 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04014- w Liebe, U., & Dobers, G, M., (2020) Measurement of Fairness Perceptions in Energy Transition Research: A Factorial Survey Approach. Sustainability. 12, 8084; doi:10.3390/su12198084. Lu, S., & Ren J., (2023). A comprehensive review on energy poverty: definition, measurement, socioeconomic impact and its alleviation for carbon neutrality. Environment, Development and Sustainability https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04143-7 Mani, A., Shafir, E. & Zhao, J. (2013). Poverty Impedes Cognitive Function. Science 341,976- 980 DOI:10.1126/science.1238041 Martin, G., Roswell, T. & Cosma, A. (2024) Exploring the relationships between worry about climate change, belief about personal responsibility, and mental wellbeing among adolescents and young adults, Wellbeing, Space and Society, Volume 6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wss.2024.100198. Maxim, A., Mihai, C., Apostoaie, C., Popescu, C., Istrate, C. & Bostan, I. (2016). Implications and Measurement of Energy-Poverty across the European Union. Sustainability 2016, 8, 483; doi:10.3390/su8050483. Mehleb, R., I., Kallis, G. & Zografos, C. (2021). A discourse analysis of yellow-vest resistance against carbon taxes. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.08.005. Middlemiss, L. & Gillard, R. (2015). Fuel poverty from the bottom-up: Characterising household energy vulnerability through the lived experience of the fuel-poor. Energy Research & Social Science 6 (2015) 146–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.02.001. Middlemiss, L., Snell, C., Morrison, E., Chzhen, Y., Owen, A., Kennedy, K., Theminimulle, S. & Carregha, T. (2023). Conceptualising socially inclusive environmental policy: a just transition to Net Zero. Social Policy & Society. 22:4, 763–783. doi:10.1017/S1474746423000180 - 44 - Mulder, P., Dalla Longa, F., & Straver, K. (2023) Energy-poverty in the Netherlands at the national and local level: A multi-dimensional spatial analysis. Energy Research & Social Science 96 (2023) 102892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102892 . Nadler, J. (2002) Flouting the Law: Does Perceived Injustice Provoke General Non- Compliance? Northwestern Law & Econ Research Paper No. 02-9, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.353745 Niamir, L., Ivanova, O., Filatova, T., Voinov, A. & Bressers, H. (2020) Demand-side solutions for climate mitigation: Bottom-up drivers of household energy behavior change in the Netherlands and Spain, Energy Research & Social Science, Volume 62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.101356. Nowakowska, I. (2025). Who Cares If Not Supposed To? Moral Foundations, Consideration of Immediate Consequences, and Mask-Wearing Intentions After Revocation of the Legal Obligation To Do So. Europe's Journal of Psychology, Vol. 21(1), 11–24, https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.12957. Pakpoura, A., Zeidib, I., Emamjomeha, M., Asefzadeha, S. & Pearsonc, H. (2013). Household waste behaviours among a community sample in Iran: An application of the theory of planned behaviour. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.028. Pasquariello, R., Bianchi, M., Mari, F. & Caso, D. (2024). Fostering local seasonality: An extended value-belief-norm model to understand sustainable food choices., Food Quality and Preference, Volume 120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105248 Patin, A., B. & Stapper, M. (2025). The discursive politics of marginalisation: an intersectional analysis of European just transition plans. Environmental Politics. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2025.2449637. Pink, T. (2009). Psychology & Philosophy. Chapter 6: Natural Law & the Theory of Moral Obligation. P97-114. ISBN: 978-1-4020-8581-9. Pfundmair, M., Wood, N.R., Hales, A. & Wesselmann, E.D. (2024) How social exclusion makes radicalism flourish: A review of empirical evidence. Journal of Social Issues, 341– 359. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12520 - 45 - Poortinga, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C. (2004) Values, Environmental Concern, and Environmental Behavior: A Study Into Houeshold Energy Use. Environment & Behavior, Vol. 36 No. 1, January 200470-93. DOI: 10.1177/0013916503251466 Povilionis, R. (2024), Application of VBN Theory in the National Park context: tailoring social marketing interventions to individuals' values and environmental worldview. Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy, 52nd, 119396 Rechtschaffen, C. (2003). Advancing Environmental Justice Norms, Bluebook 21st ed 37 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 95 Rothmund, T., Becker, J & Jost, J. (2016). The Psychology of Social Justice in Political Thought and Action. 10.1007/978-1-4939-3216-0_15. Si., Y & Stephens, J. C., (2021). Energy Justice Through Solar: Constructing and Engaging Low-Income Households. Volume 3 - 2021 https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2021.632020 Steg, L., Dreijerink, L. & Abrahamse, W. (2005) Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: A test of VBN theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology 25. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.003 Steg, L. & De Groot, J. (2019). Environmental Psychology. Chapter 22 Theories to explain environmental behavior. BPS Wiley. ISBN 9781119241041. Stern, P., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. & Kalof, L. (1999). A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism. Human Ecology Review, Vol. 6, 81-97 Society for Human https://www.jstor.org/stable/24707060 Syropoulos, S. & Markowitz, E. (2024) Responsibility towards future generations is a strong predictor of proenvironmental engagement, Journal of Environmental Psychology, Volume 93, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.102218 TNO (2024). Verhalen van mensen in energiearmoede. Kwalitatieve monitor 2024. R10989. Verhalen van mensen in energiearmoede | TNO. TNO (2025). Beleidsverkenning energiearmoede en de energietransitie. Energy & Materials Transition. R10382. Beleidsverkenning Energiearmoede en de Energietransitie - 46 - Van der Werff, E. & Steg, L. (2015). One model to predict them all: Predicting energy behaviours with the norm activation model. Energy Research & Social Science 6, 8–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2014.11.002 Vasseur, V. & Marique, A. (2019). Households’ Willingness to Adopt Technological and Behavioral Energy Savings Measures: An Empirical Study in The Netherlands. Energies. 12, 4294; doi:10.3390/en12224294. Verhoeven, P. S. (2015). Doing Research (4th edition). Boom Lemma. Voedselbank Nederland (2025, May 20) Homepage - Vereniging van Voedselbanken Nederland. https://voedselbankennederland.nl/ Zinni, F. P. (1995). The Sense of Injustice: The Effects of Situation, Beliefs, and Identity. Social Science Quarterly, 76(2), 419–437. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44072629 - 47 - APPENDIX 1: Interviews Table 1: In-depth interviews Gender Age Location Nationality Type of property Type of income Date of interview 1 Man 50-60 Limburg Dutch Rental Different jobs 13/03/2025 2 Women 20-30 Zuid-Holland Polish Rental Student 25/04/2025 3 Women 60-70 Groningen Dutch Rental Retired 27/03/2025 4 Women 50-60 Groningen Dutch Senior apartment Govt allowance 26/03/2025 5 Women 50-60 Zuid-Holland Turkish Owned Social worker 25/03/2025 6 Man 30-40 Zuid-Holland Dutch Rental Govt allowance 03/04/2025 7 Women 60-70 Zuid-Holland Turkish Owned Teacher 10/04/2025 8 Man 30-40 Zuid-Holland Dutch Rental Bike maker 15/04/2025 9 Women 50-60 Limburg Dutch Owned Mother 04/04/2025 10 Man 40-50 Utrecht Arabic - - 25/03/2025 Interview 9 did not seem to fully be energy poor, therefore I did not take this into the analyzes. Interview 10 left the online meeting after a few minutes and did not come back. - 48 - Table 2: Expert interviews Job Title Organization Interview date Main focus area 1 Policymaker Municipality Dordrecht 4/4/2025 Develops, coordinates, and implements strategies to reduce energy costs for low-income households. 2 Salesperson De Woonpas 11/3/2025 Advises homeowners on energy- (Collaborates with saving options, guiding them from municipalities to offer initial consultation to final agreement. homeowners accessible and affordable home sustainability solutions.) 3 Volunteer Het Vogelnest 4/4/2025 Engage in activities such as assisting in the community coffee bar and supporting neighborhood initiatives. 4 Researcher TNO 10/4/2025 Research on energy poverty 5 Chairman Voedselbank / Foodbank 10/4/2025 Leads the organization by launching Zwijndrecht initiatives to support vulnerable residents and overseeing strategic decisions. Table 3: Unstructured interviews Interviewees Interview data Voedselbank Participant A 10/4/2024 Vogelnest Participant A 11/4/2025 Vogelnest Participant B 11/4/2025 Vogelnest Participant C 11/4/2025 Vogelnest Participant D 11/4/2025 - 49 - APPENDIX 2: NVivo NVivo Qualitative Data Analysis: a step-by-step plan (Hilal & Alabri, 2013) 1. Import and organize data: importing all transcribed interviews into NVivo and organizing them by adding files with socioeconomic factors included. 2. Initial reading and coding: reading through the transcripts and creating the theory-driven codes that quotes can be included in. Creating extra data-driven codes for unexpected information in the transcripts. 3. Organize codes into themes: grouping similar codes into broader concept-driven parent nodes3 to start identifying the expected themes in NVivo. 4. Explore relationships between codes: using queries and coding frequency analysis to explore patterns and relationships between different themes or participant responses (focused on socioeconomic factors). 5. Interpret and report: interpret the data and conclusions made from NVivo to support the thesis analysis. As this study is mostly deductive, the step-by-step plan elaborates on how the previously thought of concepts drive the findings, with an open mind on how findings might suggest a different outcome to align with the inductive reasoning of this study. 3 E.g. Injustice is the parent node; distributional, recognitional, and procedural injustice are the children nodes. - 50 - APPENDIX 3: Interview guide 2 Days Before: Send GDPR and email with consent to record the meeting and inform the subject of the thesis again and about the anonymity of the interviewee. Introduction: First of all, thank you very much for participating in this research. My research focuses on energy policy and how this influences you. The interview will take approximately 45 minutes. The interview is anonymous; I may only mention details like your age, etc. There are no right or wrong answers. I am primarily interested in hearing your story and thoughts. You can always ask me to explain a question better or if I need to repeat anything. It’s important that we understand each other. You have received the email with the GDPR; do you have any questions about it? As agreed, the interview will be recorded. General Background: The first question is an introduction. • Can you briefly introduce yourself? • Can you tell me about your current living situation? • How are your energy costs? • To what extent do you feel that energy costs cause economic stress? • How does that affect you? How does it influence your life further? Energy: The Netherlands is trying to achieve its climate goals by participating in the energy transition and motivating people and households to do the same. This includes reducing emissions, stronger dikes, subsidizing industries to make them greener, and so on. • Is this something you think about? (How often or in what way?) • Are you aware of the energy goals in the Netherlands? • What do you think of the energy goals? • Are you trying to participate in these goals? (Can you give an example?) Responsibility: • What is your perception of climate change? • Do you feel responsible for climate change? • Why? Where does this come from? Can you tell me more about this? • Does this influence your behavior? (Can you give an example?) • How do you justify this argument? (Why is that, can you tell me more about it?) Personal Norms: It is often said that everyone should take responsibility for their actions that affect climate change and contribute their part. The government expects everyone to save energy and live more sustainably. • What do you think about this? • Do you think that governments, companies, or individuals should take more responsibility to address climate change? - 51 - • How does this affect your belief in acting in an environmentally friendly way? (Can you give an example?) Energy Policy: • What do you think about energy policy measures? • Do you think the government provides you with the necessary services to participate in the energy transition? • Is it fair that you are expected to participate in the energy transition when energy policy measures do not help you as much as they help others? • In what way do you find this unfair? • The distribution of costs/benefits / how decisions are made, and how you have an influence on decisions / how some groups need more help than others to feel the benefits. Do you experience all three kinds of injustice? • Does not acting as you would like for climate change give you a sense of guilt? Closing Questions: We are almost at the end of the interview. If you like, I can share my thesis with you at the end. • Is there anything else you would like to share? • Are there any questions you thought I would ask but haven't? • Do you know other people I can interview? • Do you have any questions about the research? • I wanted to come back to... I noticed that... what do you think about this or that? I’m still curious about that. - 52 - APPENDIX 4: Elaboration on visits What is the Foodbank? The Food Bank (Voedselbank) provides food for free to people who are temporarily unable to buy food for themselves. People have to sign up for the Food Bank and provide their income to make sure they are under a certain income (I think it has to be under €80 a week for one single person, different budget for people with kids. Then people can visit the Food Bank once a week and receive food for 3 or 4 days, varying between fresh food and canned food. The Food Bank helps around 180.000 people every week. (Voedselbank Nederland, 2025) What is the neigbhorhood café het Vogelnest? Het Vogelnest (the birdnest) is a neighborhood café created 9 years ago in a neighborhood of crime and poverty, intending to improve the neighborhood and turn this into a meeting point where people can ask for help and help each other out. (Het Vogelnest, n.d.) - 53 - APPENDIX 5: E-mail organizations energy-poverty Dear Sir/Madam, I am currently writing my thesis for my Master's in Environmental Governance & Behavior (political science and psychology) and I am researching energy poverty in the Netherlands. The aim of my research is to understand the psychological reasoning of people living in energy poverty when they think about sustainable behavior and whether feelings of injustice regarding climate policy play a role in this. In order to conduct this research, I am looking for participants who would be willing to share their experiences in an interview. I would like to get in touch with people who are currently experiencing energy poverty and are open to talking to me about this. I understand that it is not possible to provide contact details of your clients, but I was wondering if you or your organization has currently been in contact with people who are willing to speak openly about their situation who you can ask to possibly participate in this interview. The interviews will take approximately 40 minutes to 1 hour and can take place online or in real life. The interviews are of course confidential and completely anonymous, the answers will only be used for academic purposes. I would like to hear from you if there is a possibility to get in touch with suitable participants. If you need more information about my research or the setup of the interview, I would be happy to provide it. If you cannot help me with getting in touch with participants but you do have advice, I would like to hear that too. Thank you very much in advance! Kind regards, Rebekka de Jong - 54 - APPENDIX 6: Press message Do you want to help a student with research on sustainable behavior and energy poverty? Illustration © Pixabay Editorial Team February 28, 2025 – 2:34 PM Energy poverty is a topic that is appearing more often in the media. It refers to a situation in which people lack the resources to meet their basic energy needs, often due to financial hardship or poor housing conditions—a problem that occurs far more frequently than you realize. In the Netherlands, 1 in 13 households lives in energy poverty, yet the issue receives little attention from the government. Call for people experiencing energy poverty Rebekka de Jong is a student currently conducting research for her master’s thesis. She is looking to interview people who are affected by energy poverty. Her focus is on understanding how current energy policies affect people and how personal factors play a role in the thought process. Research through interviews Rebekka is looking for individuals willing to share their experiences and perspectives. The interview, which can take place by phone or online, will not only explore personal experiences but also how people view the influence of current policy on behavioral change related to sustainability. “The interview will remain anonymous and is only used for my thesis research. It can be conducted online or via a phone call and will take about 45 minutes,” Rebekka explains. If you know people who might experience energy poverty, or the above description sounds familiar to your own situation and you’re open to sharing more, Rebekka would love to get in touch for an interview. Feel free to share this message with them. Sign up Click [here] for the sign-up form to participate in an interview. Any sensitive personal information will not be shared or used in Rebekka’s research—it will only be used to contact you. - 55 -