The knowledge-action gap

and how to close it

What is the knowledge-action gap?

The knowledge-action gap occurs when there is a failure to turn well researched insights or personal awareness into actual execution. There is a disconnect between internal processes such as knowledge, values, and intentions, and one’s external behavior (Meyer et al., 2024; Knutti, 2019).

The knowledge-action gap is a universal concept that shows up in every single area of life. We know that eating healthy and getting eight hours of sleep are good for our health, but convenience and cravings often win. We know we should save money for the future, but a purchase that will provide instant gratification feels so much better in the moment.

However, this gap becomes especially wide when we look at the transition to sustainability. Companies and organizations may care about how they impact the environment but transitioning to sustainable practices often is far behind.

Figure 1: Own representation based on Knutti (2019)

Closing the knowledge action gap is not a simple task but it is essential. Knowledge and insights alone don’t change the status quo, the knowledge must be transformed into action in order to move from theory into practice.

We live in a society with more available information about climate change and sustainability than ever before, and yet CO2 emissions are still rising globally. If accumulating information is all it takes to solve the climate crisis, the top two lines (CO2 and temperature) would have started bending downward as the bottom line (# of scientific publications) skyrocketed. Instead, our knowledge increased exponentially, yet our behavior remains unchanged and as a result CO2 emissions and temperature continued to rise. 

If we know what should be done, why is it so difficult to put into practice?

This question - related to sustainability - was the starting point for Thinkubator back in 2021. Everything started with the mission to bridge the knowledge-action gap and bring about actual change on the ground. So let’s take a closer look.

Knowledge-deficit model and Lock-ins 

One common assumption is that if organizations are given enough information, they will naturally make better choices. This idea is called the "knowledge-deficit model," and it frequently fails because individual and collective behavior is much more complex than simply knowing the facts (Hochachka, 2024). Even when a company's leadership cares deeply about the environment, a major gap remains between their strategic green goals and their daily operations. Rather than a lack of willpower, organizations are held back by powerful "lock-ins" which are self-reinforcing loops that keep them trapped in business-as-usual operations (Siebenhüner et al., 2021). Siebenhüner et al. (2021) distinguish four dimensions of lock-in in the field of governance research: technologies and infrastructures, institutions, power relations, and individual/collective behavior. 

We translate these into three categories that organizations can act on directly, which bundle the financial and structural incentives behind their institutional and power-related dimensions: economic lock-ins, technical lock-ins and psychological lock-ins. To understand how these systemic barriers play out in the real world, let’s look at three examples:

• Economic Lock-In: A company’s capital might be tied up in legacy infrastructure - like a construction firm locked into traditional, high-carbon material supply chains - or long-term energy contracts that are simply too expensive to break without facing massive financial penalties.

  
  

• Technical Lock-In: High-speed spinning machines of clothing manufacturers are physically calibrated for the long, uniform fibers of virgin materials like cotton. Processing  mechanically recycled textiles, which consist of much shorter fibers leads to the threads continuously breaking under tension. The physical mechanics of the existing machinery cannot be adjusted, meaning the company cannot transition without completely replacing the machine. 

  
  

• Psychological Lock-In: A plant manager whose bonus depends on hitting this quarter's output numbers has little reason to pilot an unfamiliar, sustainable production method that might slow the line down while the team learns it, even if leadership fully supports the long-term goal. The rational move, given what actually gets measured and rewarded, is to keep running the process everyone already knows works.

How to break the lock-ins

Knowing these barriers exist can feel discouraging, but it actually gives us a roadmap. We cannot expect humans and organizations to break these loops through knowledge and willpower alone. Instead, we must actively dismantle these barriers and replace them with "sustainable lock-ins", systems that make the green choice the easiest, most natural path to take (Future Earth, 2024).

Here is how organizations can start shifting the system:

• Update the Rules of Success: To break the economic lock-in, companies must change how they measure progress. Instead of relying purely on short-term quarterly profit margins, forward-thinking organizations are adopting other metrics that value long-term resource efficiency,  drawing on frameworks like the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) or the European Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). 

• De-Risk the Green Choice: To overcome the technical lock-in of outdated machinery, we need to make transitioning easier. This means utilizing green financing instruments, from e.g. national retrofit grants and subsidies or the EU Innovation fund or creating industry partnerships to "de-risk" the cost of upgrading to clean technology, making it financially viable for companies to swap out their legacy equipment.

• Design for Human Nature: To ease the psychological lock-in of employee resistance, sustainability cannot feel like extra work. Organizations must design green workflows that fit seamlessly into existing daily routines, making the sustainable method the default option rather than a chore. 

By focusing on rewriting these internal systems, we take the burden off the individual and build organizations that are structurally designed to succeed.

From Footprint to Handprint  

Figure 2: own representation based on practicalsustainability.uk

A carbon footprint measures the greenhouse gas emissions generated by an individual, product, or organization, while a carbon handprint measures the positive impact of actions that help reduce emissions for others (Neste Oyj, n.d.). Shifting from focusing on our carbon footprint to considering our carbon handprint can help bridge the gap between knowledge and action.

When sustainability is framed only in terms of reducing harm, it can often feel overwhelming, leaving people wondering if their individual efforts really make a difference. In contrast, the concept of a carbon handprint emphasizes the positive impact our actions can have. Whether it's buying or designing a more sustainable product, encouraging others to adopt environmentally friendly processes and habits, reducing waste or choosing businesses with lower emissions as partners or suppliers, actions can create measurable benefits beyond ourselves.

This positive perspective can make climate action feel more achievable and meaningful, helping people recognize that their choices and behavior, especially at the workplace, contribute to a larger collective effort. By focusing not only on what we should stop doing but also on the positive change we are creating, sustainability becomes less about guilt and sacrifice and more about empowerment, optimism, and progress.

How Thinkubator closes the gap

Thinkubator started out in 2021 with the mission to close the knowledge-action gap in circular economy. Back then, we launched our first hands-on educational programs with the goal of decreasing climate-anxiety among participants. From 2021 to today, Thinkubator has developed into a Think Tank translating complex knowledge and expertise into concrete, actionable concepts. By operating across research, education, and consulting, we create a continuous loop where theory is tested for real-world economic and ecological viability. We don't just hand over knowledge; we help apply it. And from working hands-on with companies, we derive the pains and research questions we are working on - to dissolve barriers and accelerate the transition towards a climate-neutral, circular economy.

Written by Eva Volpe in July 2026 - Questions or feedback? 

Contact us anytime: office@thinkubator.earth