Under CopyrightBrunzema, IskaDütschke, ElisabethFlipo, AuroreAuroreFlipoRabourdin, SabineSabineRabourdinAlexander-Haw, AbigailAbigailAlexander-Haw2024-05-062024-05-062023https://publica.fraunhofer.de/handle/publica/467637https://doi.org/10.24406/publica-302910.24406/publica-3029This part of the work focuses on upscaling, and on the macro-analysis of structural variables and conditions behind the diffusion of sufficient lifestyles. To that end, we analyse the data collected in WP3 and in WP4 through a macro level perspective to identify and understand the structural drivers and social determinants that are at play in the diffusion processes of sufficient lifestyles and in the transformation of social norms and values in society. A comparative analysis is carried out between the six countries covered in WP3, so as to understand whether enablers and barriers are different depending on country (effects of cultural and national context). To that end, we investigate the macro frameworks and national contexts regarding sufficiency in each country. We first explore the different definitions of sufficiency as a concept in the countries covered. We then present the national and cultural specificities with regard to lifestyles and energy consumption, based on data and sources provided by the national partners. We then address the situation of the 2022-2023 winter regarding the energy crisis, especially with regard to the increase of energy prices and the policies implemented to mitigate them. Indeed, while not being in the proposal, the very peculiar situation in which the European countries were during that winter could not be overlooked. Then, an econometric analysis is conducted on the five European countries, based on quantitative data collected during T3.1. (the data from India was not ready for analysis yet at the moment of this task). Using multinomial models, we investigate the determinants of sufficient lifestyle in each country, taking into consideration social, economic and demographic characteristics (gender, age, occupational status, education, income, indicators of economic deprivation), but also place-related variables (location and type of housing), and attitudes (sufficiency orientation, environmental identity, policy support). We analyse the main determinants of the membership to each of the five groups determined in T3.1., based on the carbon footprint calculation and wellbeing index: the very sufficient group, the sufficient, the low carbon footprint and low wellbeing group, the average carbon footprint group, and the high carbon footprint group (except for France, where the wellbeing index was not operational due to an error in the translation process of the question, and thus where groups are based solely on the carbon footprint data). We then conduct cross-national analysis on the main variables: gender, affluence, age, education, housing type, and environmental awareness, so as to highlight the differences and commonalities between countries. The third part of the report is dedicated to the meso-level. We build on data and analysis performed in WP4 and provided by the WP4 leaders to expose the mesosocial determinants of sufficient lifestyles. We first present the main drivers and barriers of sufficiency to be found at the local level, derived from the analysis of the relationships between sufficiency initiatives and municipalities. We then present the effects of initiatives on sufficiency. The fourth part of the report focuses on the micro-level determinants of sufficiency and on the diffusion of innovation processes in energy sufficiency. In this section, we confront theories of innovation to the socio-anthropological fieldwork data collected during T3.2., to analyse how the narratives of participants in sufficiency initiatives about their adoption of new practices can inform those theories. We investigate the strategies and factors influencing the adoption of new behaviours. We then explore the inner complexity of lifestyles and the differing levels of engagement that can be found at the individual level among the four sectors covered (housing, nutrition, mobility, miscellaneous consumption), highlighting the fact that there are diverse degrees and diverse ways to be sufficient, rather than “a sufficient lifestyle”. Finally, we explore the levers and barriers to the diffusion of sufficient lifestyles, as derived from fieldwork data.enreport