Changing behavior, at the corporate level as well as the individual level, will be key to solving our energy problems and reducing the world’s carbon footprint. (Often it’s the elephant in the room, sharing the sofa with energy conservation.)

Information alone isn’t going to accomplish the task, and a couple of events are coming up that look at this issue. One is the Behavior, Energy and Climate Change conference in Washington, D.C., Nov. 15–18 presented by ACEEE, Stanford’s Precourt Energy Efficiency Center and the University of California’s  California Institute for Energy and Environment. (I’ll be there, presenting on Thinkshift’s Credibility Quotient assessment tool in the poster session.) It will bring together industry, academics, policy makers and others to consider the latest research, pilot projects, and more.

One of the main speakers will be Doug McKenzie-Mohr, who’s also presenting a two-day workshop, “Fostering Sustainable Behavior,” Nov. 2–3 in Portland and Nov. 4–5 in San Francisco. McKenzie-Mohr literally wrote the book on the subject, available as a free download from his website (which is loaded with articles, case studies, and forums). Workshop info is on his site; registration is here. (Thanks to the Triple Pundit post by Deborah Fleischer for alerting me to the workshop and the book download.)

Do a survey about attitudes on any sustainability topic and it will get reported. And commented upon. And tweeted and retweeted. Everyone’s looking for insights on the cultural moment—or something that looks like insights because it has a number attached to it.

But what do surveys (about sustainability or anything else) really tell us? More and more I think, not as much about the people answering the survey as about the people constructing it. Case in point: a recent Rasmussen Reports survey finding that 47 percent of Americans reject the idea that they are selfish for putting economic concerns ahead of the fight against global warming.

What struck me was not the result—hardly a shock, since people don’t like to think of themselves as selfish—but the assumption behind the question: it’s the climate vs. the economy. This is a trope of anti-environmentalism, so perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising, but it’s particularly wrong-headed in this case, since multiple reputable examinations of the issue have found that not addressing climate change is far more costly than acting to curb it. When you know that, the question makes no sense.

Twenty-four percent said they weren’t sure—which reminded me that just about every time I’ve been surveyed, I’ve been asked at least one question I couldn’t answer. Not because I didn’t have an opinion on the issue, but because I rejected the premise of the question.

If you’re conducting a survey and want an honest read on what people are thinking, it’s essential to examine the assumptions behind your questions. Are you closing off the possibility of opinions that don’t conform to your perceptions? And when you’re evaluating survey data, it pays to think as carefully about the questions as you do about the answers. Whose opinion is being reflected here?