Interview with Laura Sommer

Merle van den Akker
Sep 14
8 min read

Behavioural Science is a rapidly expanding field and everyday new research is being developed in academia, tested and implemented by practitioners in financial organisations, development agencies, government ‘nudge’ units and more. This interview is part of a series interviewing prominent people in the field. And in today's interview the answers are provided by Laura Sommer.

Laura is a behavioural scientist with a passion for sustainability—and a sharp eye for the gap between what we know and what we do. She is the co-founder of Green Nudges Consulting, a company that helps organizations, cities, and institutions apply behavioural science to drive real environmental impact. Rooted in insights from the world’s largest open-source Green Nudges platform, the consulting arm focuses on turning inspiration into action—through practical, ethical, and effective interventions. Laura also runs LKSommer, her solo consultancy for climate communication and behaviour change, and teaches science communication at the University of Bayreuth, where she specializes in climate change communication. Her mission: to remove psychological barriers, expand agency, and make green change not only possible, but irresistible.

Who or what got you into behavioural science?

It all started during my psychology bachelor's. I was fixated on one question: why do we know climate change is happening, yet we don’t act on it? That led me to pursue a master’s combining natural and social sciences with a climate focus. While working alongside biologists, economists, and geographers, I realized how different my psychological lens was. Eventually, I circled back to psychology—that’s where the answers might lie. I didn’t initially want to do a PhD; I was set on becoming a climate mitigation manager. But then a PhD project came along that blended psychology, climate change, and art. I had to take it. Three and a half years of researching climate change art and behaviour followed. While the art didn’t bridge the intention-action gap, it sparked my desire to apply this knowledge practically. That’s when I started freelancing and stumbled into behavioural science. Environmental psychology hadn’t exposed me to the COM-B model, EAST, or behavioural economics. I realised behavioural science provided the tools to move from theory to actual behaviour change. So, I rebranded myself and dove in. It’s the applied lens I needed all along—a bridge between academia and action.

What is the accomplishment you are proudest of as a behavioural scientist? And what would you still like to achieve?

I’m incredibly proud of co-curating the Pollution Pods art installation. It’s an immersive artwork that lets you experience air pollution from cities like Delhi or London by stepping into domes simulating the atmosphere. It toured globally, from WHO and TEDx events to climate summits. Seeing it come to life, working closely with the artist, and witnessing its ongoing impact was phenomenal. It brought abstract environmental issues into tangible, visceral experience.

Beyond that, I’m proud of stepping outside academia and building a role that blends behavioural science and sustainability. It wasn’t easy, especially convincing traditional consultancies that environmental psychology had value. But freelancing gave me the space to shape that path. Now, I want to grow the field in Germany. There’s such potential, but it’s underdeveloped compared to countries like the UK or Netherlands. Germans are cautious—historical sensitivities around manipulation and a slower embrace of innovation make behavioural science a tough sell. My long-term aim is to crack open that market. Through Green Nudges, we’re creating awareness and building networks. Over the next 5-10 years, I hope to see behavioural science recognised and used ethically here—to tackle real environmental issues, not just surface-level behaviour tweaks.

What are the greatest challenges being faced by behavioural science, right now?

In sustainability, one of the biggest challenges is being brought in to tweak surface-level behaviours instead of addressing the root causes. We get asked to nudge people to recycle more, but we’re not invited into conversations about overproduction or policy reform. It’s like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic—symbolic but ultimately ineffective. We need access to the bigger levers.

Another issue is the persistent belief that more information will change behaviour. It won’t. We need to move beyond awareness campaigns and into designing environments and systems that make sustainable behaviour the default.

Culturally, in places like Germany, behavioural science still struggles for acceptance. Historical sensitivities around manipulation mean people are wary. Combined with a cultural preference for the familiar over innovation, this slows adoption. Convincing stakeholders that behavioural science can be ethical, transparent, and effective takes time.

And within the field, we’re still too focused on quantitative methods like RCTs. They have value, but not every behaviour can be tested in controlled settings. We need more openness to qualitative research, systems thinking, and participatory methods. Complex problems demand more nuanced approaches.

How do you think behavioural science will develop (in the next 10 years)?

From my perspective—especially rooted in sustainability—I hope behavioural science continues shifting from theory-heavy awareness-raising to practical, structural change. Too often, we assume people need more information to act. But that’s rarely true. We need to design systems where sustainable behaviour becomes the default, not the uphill battle.

Take transport. In Barcelona, you can live comfortably without a car because the infrastructure supports it. In Athens, where I live, or in many other cities, that’s not the case. If we want sustainable behaviour to scale, we have to create environments that make the right choice the easy one. That means shaping policy, city planning, and public services with behavioural principles embedded.

We also need to be braver. Policymakers should be willing to absorb some initial resistance in order to build systems that truly serve both people and planet. Behavioural scientists can play a key role here, not just in designing interventions but in helping stakeholders understand and navigate backlash.

And finally, I think we’ll broaden our reach. Right now, behavioural science is concentrated in certain regions and sectors. Over the next 10 years, I hope we see more adoption in underrepresented countries and in domains like water use, waste, and urban development. If we stay adaptable and inclusive, the field will thrive—and make a real difference.

With all your experience, what skills would you say are needed to be a behavioural scientist? Are there any recommendations you would make?

Empathy is key. You have to deeply understand your target audience—what motivates them, what barriers they face, how they communicate. Without that, your interventions won’t land. You also need a logical, structured way of working—one that aligns theory and practice. It’s about identifying what’s valuable for your audience or client and delivering on that.

Another essential skill is understanding how to create value. In academia, we rarely think about clients. But in applied behavioural science, you have to. You need to ask: how does this help someone? What problem am I solving? That shift in mindset is huge and necessary. I had to learn it the hard way when I transitioned out of academia. Working with colleagues from marketing and digital innovation taught me a lot—especially about facilitation, client communication, and structuring work clearly.

Being able to work in interdisciplinary teams is also crucial. Most real-world problems aren’t behavioural science problems alone. Collaborating with people from other fields helps you approach challenges in more creative and practical ways. You don’t always agree, but that tension can generate richer outcomes.

What advice would you give to young behavioural scientists or those looking to progress into the field?

First, don’t obsess over job titles. You don’t need to be called a behavioural scientist to apply behavioural science. Focus instead on where you can use the principles effectively. Whether it's policy, design, sustainability, or something else—opportunities are everywhere if you can connect the dots.

Second, build experience through collaboration. Don’t treat others in the field as competition. Reach out, join projects, co-create. That’s how I gained much of my knowledge and credibility. Working together not only gives you exposure but teaches you what direction you actually want to pursue.

Third, use LinkedIn wisely. Create and share content, not just to promote yourself but to refine your own understanding. Every time I write about behavioural science, I learn something too. It’s a powerful way to clarify your thoughts and connect with others.

Fourth, consider the value you bring. What does your client, audience, or stakeholder need? That’s a mindset shift from academia where you rarely think about end users. In applied behavioural science, creating impact means creating value. Think through that lens.

Fifth, interdisciplinary fluency is a superpower. Most problems worth solving aren’t behavioural alone. The more you can collaborate with people from marketing, design, urban planning, etc., the better your work will be. Be open to different perspectives. They don’t dilute your work—they deepen it.

Lastly, trust the unconventional paths. I didn’t plan to become a behavioural scientist. I followed my interests and found ways to apply them. Your path doesn’t need to be linear to be meaningful. Stay curious, stay humble, and stay impact-focused.

What is your biggest frustration with the field as it stands?

My biggest frustration is the overemphasis on information. In sustainability, the go-to assumption is still: "People just need to understand the issue better." But behavioural science shows us that understanding isn’t enough. If it were, we’d all be living sustainably by now.

This mindset reduces everything to education and awareness campaigns. It ignores the structures, incentives, and systems that shape behaviour. We’re not going to recycle, eat better, or reduce water use just because we saw a poster or read a fact sheet. We need environments that make the sustainable choice easier, cheaper, and more appealing.

So my pet peeve is when behavioural scientists are brought in late, after the decisions are made, just to add a communication layer. We need to be involved earlier, when choices about infrastructure, incentives, and defaults are being made. Otherwise, we’re just rearranging the chairs again.

If I had the freedom and budget, I’d work on food waste and water use. These are two huge, overlooked areas where behavioural insights could have massive impact. The way we waste food is heartbreaking, both on a personal and systemic level. And with water scarcity intensifying—even in places like Germany—it’s urgent that we change how we value and use it.

Also, behavioural science needs to evolve in how it presents itself. We can’t just be about elegant experiments. We have to engage with messy, complex systems and be willing to tackle uncomfortable truths. That requires courage, humility, and adaptability.

We have so much potential, but only if we’re brave enough to go beyond surface-level tweaks. That’s where real impact lives—and that’s what keeps me going in this field.

If not a behavioural scientist, what else would you be?

Honestly, I’d probably be a homesteader. Chickens, goats, olive trees, and a vegetable garden—that kind of life deeply appeals to me. It’s not just escapism; it’s a reaction to the frustrations of working within systems that move too slowly to address climate change. Opting out of capitalism entirely and focusing on self-sufficiency has real allure. That said, more realistically, I might work in policy or communication—still trying to shape change from the inside. But if behavioural science stops making an impact, the pull of the homestead might win.

How do you apply behavioural science to your own life, if at all?

I do! Sometimes more effectively, sometimes less. I apply it to screen time management—structuring my environment so I’m more present with my kids. I use it to try and live healthier. And I definitely influence friends and family, even if it’s just recommending reusable coffee cups or giving menstrual cups as gifts. It’s never preachy—I just want to share tools that make sustainable choices easier. Behavioural science helps me understand my own triggers and motivations. It’s like having a meta-awareness of how to design for my future self. It doesn’t make me perfect, but it helps me be more intentional.

Who else would you recommend me to interview?

Three people come to mind. First, Laura de Molière—you’ve already interviewed her, but she’s a true role model. Her depth of experience combined with humility is inspiring. I also recommend Natalia Le Gal, who does incredible work especially in the transport space and I would love to collaborate with her one day. Lastly, check out Tam Hussey from the UK, who runs Halo by Design. She focuses on sustainability and employee engagement. These women all bring unique and powerful perspectives to the behavioural science space.

Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my questions Laura!

As I said before, this interview is part of a larger series which can also be found here on the blog. Make sure you don't miss any of those, nor any of the upcoming interviews!

Keep your eye on Money on the Mind!