Would more evidence create expert agreement on policies to halve the carbon footprint of consumers?

This article aims to investigate expert disagreement regarding sustainable consumption policies targeting household consumption in Finland, focusing on instruments designed to halve carbon footprints. Utilizing data from a Finnish policy Delphi study from 2022, the research gathered insights from 74 experts in sustainable consumption. We investigated 82 policy instruments aimed at reducing the carbon footprint of Finnish households that provoke disagreement among experts and explore the underlying reasons for such dissensus. Our findings indicate disagreement among experts concerning specific policy instruments. Despite deliberation, dissensus persists, influenced by various research paradigms and the implicit normativity of the topic of the Delphi. The analysis reveals that factors influencing expert opinion include varying interpretations of scientific evidence, different disciplinary perspectives, and the perceived importance of proposed policies. This research contributes to policy guidance of household consumption by addressing the difficulty of applying social science research in policymaking for sustainable consumption patterns. We advocate for co-produced evidence and collective reasoning in policymaking that emphasizes the need for context-sensitive approaches to societal change. By identifying areas of expert dissensus, the study proposes new pathways toward achieving consensus on effective policies to curb household consumption-based carbon emissions, thereby informing future efforts to create cohesive and ambitious strategies for reaching emissions reductions in consumption.