Energy Efficiency (2010) 3:19–31 DOI 10.1007/s12053-009-9058-6 ORIGINAL RESEARCH Lifestyle and energy consumption: a comparison of four collective communities in transition Jeremy Cohen & David Pearlmutter & Moshe Schwartz Received: 25 February 2009 /Accepted: 1 September 2009 /Published online: 17 September 2009 # Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2009 Abstract This study applies sociological analysis to Introduction energy consumption trends in four small kibbutzim in southern Israel, utilizing the history of these commu- Efforts to cope with the global energy dilemma have nities as a “natural experiment” for observing how most often focused on technological solutions relating these trends are affected by the transition from to both alternative energy production and increased collective to private community rules and norms. energy efficiency in buildings, vehicles, and applian- After normalizing for community size, the intensity of ces (Lutzenhiser 1993). While efficiency improve- electrical energy consumption was found to decrease ments have indeed been achieved, these gains tend to in the presence of changes that either (a) increase the be quickly offset by the rising demand for space and efficiency of indoor space use or (b) encourage mobility (Schipper 1996). Such patterns of consumer the active management of energy consumption. The activity can be conceptualized as lifestyle choices findings indicate that both components must be which critically impact a given society’s long-term present to achieve a sustained reduction in community energy sustainability. energy intensity and that such an outcome is affected Such lifestyle choices are facilitated by social by, but not dependent on, the community’s level of systems for provision and consumption since an privatization. It is proposed that the unique circum- individual’s behavior and resulting energy demand stances of the transitional kibbutz can shed light on are largely determined by the norms and expectations behavioral issues which are central to the efficiency of of the groups to which he/she belongs (Spaargaren energy consumption in society at large. 2000; Wilhite 2005; Hackett and Lutzenhiser 1991). The present study examines sociological factors Keywords Energy consumption . Kibbutz . Lifestyle associated with these norms and expectations, looking at changes in community structure, lifestyle, and energy consumption in four small communities. The communities studied are four neighboring kibbutz settlements in the hyper-arid Arava Valley of : : southern Israel. In their original form, kibbutzim J. Cohen D. Pearlmutter (*) M. Schwartz (plural of kibbutz) implemented fully collective J. Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research, Ben Gurion systems of production and consumption through University of the Negev, Sede-Boqer Campus 84990, Israel novel community institutions for work, governance, e-mail: [email protected] and childcare (Near 1992). Over several decades, the 20 Energy Efficiency (2010) 3:19–31 kibbutzim underwent gradual changes in organization determined through countless individual and collective and rules, prompted by social and economic pres- decisions of both producers and consumers, and these sures. More substantial changes, subsumed under the decisions are in turn affected by their socially con- label “privatization,” spread in the wake of the structed traditions (Wilhite and Lutzenhiser 1997). economic, political, and social crises that struck Thus, the energy requirements associated with long- the kibbutzim in the late1980s, weakening their distance commuting or energy-intensive air condition- umbrella organizations—which originally determined ing are largely beyond the control of the individual, collective norms for the individual communities even though they ultimately emerge from lifestyle (Ben-Rafael 1997; Russell et al. 2006;Snir2006). decisions (Spangenberg and Lorek 2002). These crises were partly precipitated by the vulnera- Under the special circumstances of the traditional bility of kibbutzim to changing circumstances since kibbutz, many lifestyle components (such as types of many were living beyond their means—even in terms housing and appliances, availability of public serv- of energy. As Gavron (2000) relates, “…electricity ices, personal spending allowance, etc.) are collec- was paid for by the collective, so members left their tively determined for all members. Thus, community air conditioners on all day in the summer and their membership may affect lifestyle in the kibbutz even heaters on all day in the winter” (p. 8). more than elsewhere. Between 1996 and 2005, the percentage of “privatized” kibbutzim—i.e., those which had Investigating changes in kibbutz energy consumption replaced egalitarian consumption by differential sala- ries—rose from 2% to 60% (Pavin 2006). New While continuously interacting with society at large, legislation differentiates between traditional or “com- every kibbutz is a micro-society with specific rules, munal kibbutzim” and recently privatized or norms, and institutions determining, often explicitly, “renewed kibbutzim” which have adopted some the physical and behavioral parameters of energy use. lifestyle changes (Manor 2004). While some kibbut- This point becomes clear when comparing the zim have gone beyond the “renewed kibbutz” stage, theoretical impact of community structure on energy becoming virtually indistinguishable from non- use in two ideal/typical kibbutzim: one that is highly kibbutz residential settlements in Israel, most kibbut- “collective” and the other highly “privatized.” The zim have maintained some distinctive community collective kibbutz provides individual members with organization and rules. Indeed, each kibbutz has standard household appliances and regulates housing pursued privatization in different fields and to a size. Most members regularly use public services in different extent. This differential process of change communal buildings, such as the dining hall and the in community organization creates the setting for a laundry, while such “service” branches provide em- “natural experiment” on the relationship between ployment for members on the kibbutz. This structure lifestyle and patterns of consumption—in this case, limits household energy consumption, and some of the energy consumption—an experiment which has energy loads are shifted to public spaces where social implications for broader society as well. norms may discourage excessive consumption by limiting “free rider” behavior (Abramitzky 2006; Olson 1965). Background The privatized kibbutz maximizes personal choice within the communal setting, with few institutional Community structure, lifestyle, and energy limitations on the physical determinants of individual consumption energy consumption. Houses are often larger, cars are more numerous, and household appliances are both Due to structural and institutional limitations, consum- larger and more varied. Many public buildings and ers are often prevented from fully acting upon their services operate on a charge-per-use system and are preferences. Building codes and development policies used less frequently by kibbutz members or perma- largely determine where people may choose to live and nent residents. Thus, the structure of such a kibbutz how their dwellings will be constructed. The power reduces energy use in public spaces while driving up, requirements of energy-using consumer items are at least potentially, demand within private homes— Energy Efficiency (2010) 3:19–31 21 though in this case a more direct price signal is private household (e.g., cooking, cleaning, eating, present, since dwellers are charged individually, as in socializing with neighbors) often occur in communal the larger society. With greater spending power, spaces. The upkeep and operation of these activities individuals may also be able to invest more in energy are accounted as kibbutz service branches—requiring efficiency measures than they would under a system manpower and capital though not necessarily gener- of collective provision. ating income. These communal services are partial Clearly, the two organizational structures have substitutes for energy-using activities that would different implications for energy consumption. It is not otherwise take place in the home, and therefore, clear, however, that one structure will be decisively “service branch” electricity use—including both more efficient than the other. To what extent, for households and communal buildings and services— example, are economies of scale counterbalanced by provides a useful overall estimate of the energy free ridership and waste, and how is this balance demand of kibbutz households. affected by peer pressure as opposed to economic The service branch concept, however, slightly incentives? As noted, each kibbutz has adopted its overcompensates for the substitution of the household own mix of changes and none has all of the qualities of by collective consumption, as it includes services that, either of the two ideal types. Yet by examining several in a different context, would be provided in the public kibbutzim whose community rules and norms have been or commercial realms. Thus, administrative functions, privatized to different extents, this study aims to shed libraries, social clubs, day care, and recreation areas light on two specific questions: would be omitted in a standard model of household energy use but are included in this case, as part of the 1. How does the transition from “more collective” to service