Suddenly, the Prius is everywhere. You turn on the news, and there is another story of the long waiting lists at local Toyota dealers to buy a new Prius. One dealer holds a drawing every time a new batch of cars comes in to give someone the opportunity to buy one of the handful of hybrids that arrives.
So, why the sudden rush? The Prius has been out for years now. Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth is old news. So why aren't we all doing our part?
The answer lies in the way people trade off short-term and long-term goals. I discussed this issue once before in the context of addiction, but it comes up all over decision making behavior.
One of the most difficult things for people to do is to take an action in the present that doesn't feel like the most pleasurable one in order to satisfy a future goal. As a simple example of this, there was a brilliant study by George Loewenstein and Daniel Read. As payment for participating in a study, participants got a voucher for a movie rental. They could choose between a highbrow film that people felt they "should" see (e.g., Schindler's List) or a lowbrow comedy (e.g., Austin Powers). When the rental was for a movie they could pick up the following week, people overwhelmingly selected the highbrow film, consistent with their belief that they ought to see it. When the rental was for that night, however, they overwhelmingly went for the lowbrow comedy. That is, when they were actually in the situation in which they might have to see the film, they went with the immediate enjoyment. After all, the satisfaction in seeing a film like Schindler's List comes after you have watched it, and you have learned and experienced it.
Difficult decision cases happen when the option that is the right one in the long-run (seeing a highbrow movie or saving the environment) is not the most pleasurable one in the short-run. People want to do the best possible thing in the short-run, and so they often act against their long-term best interests. That is certainly the case with behaviors like smoking, and it also happens with actions to save the environment.
The Prius is a nice car. My neighbor has one, and he likes it. It isn't the biggest car, or the most powerful, but he doesn't fill the tank that often. So, why doesn't everyone have one? Well, in the short-term you have to give up something to own a Prius. There are cars that are more powerful, or carry more stuff, or are more luxurious. When it comes time to actually buy a car, those concerns often carry more weight than picking the car that is best for the environment. This is particularly true, because the car you drive will give pleasure to you, the driver. Saving the environment is a good that the whole society has to buy into. Your purchase of a Prius won't do much for the environment if nobody else joins in with you.
So it really took the spike in gas prices to start pushing more people toward the environment (and energy audits, and public transportation, and walking to the store). That is, until filling the gas tank really hurt in the here and now, it was hard to get most people to change their behavior. That is, until the option that is best in the long-term is also best in the short-term, it is hard to get people to change their behavior.
That is where we can learn from evolution and sex. Reproduction is a classic short-term/long-term tradeoff for complex animals. Back at the beginning of life on Earth, simple strands of DNA or single-celled animals just reproduced by splitting. Once organisms became complex, it took time to create a new one. Human mothers have to devote 9-months of effort to creating a new baby. So that means that conception happens 9 months before the baby is born. How are you going to get someone to drop whatever they are doing and make a baby that won't even materialize for 9 months (and will be a burden on resources for far longer). The only way to do it is to make the process of creating a baby the most pleasurable thing possible, so that people will be willing to drop whatever they are doing to pursue it. That is, nature aligned our short-term interests with our long-term interests.
In the end, if we want to change people's behavior to make their lives more environmentally sustainable, we're going to have to do the same thing. That is, people are always going to want to resolve short-term/long-term tradeoffs by doing the thing that is best in the short-term. So, if we want people to do what is best for the environment, we are going to have to make sure that the option that saves the environment is also the best thing to do in the short-term. So, in order to save the environment, we need to take a lesson from sex.
