The role of framing in public support for direct air capture: A moral hazard survey experiment in the United States

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Energy Research & Social Science Pub Date : 2024-07-29 DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2024.103694
{"title":"The role of framing in public support for direct air capture: A moral hazard survey experiment in the United States","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2024.103694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Limiting global warming will likely require removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and keeping it out of the atmosphere by sequestering it. Public support is crucial for a rapid upscaling of carbon removal and sequestration. One central concern is that public support for these negative emissions technologies (NETs) could be hampered by a moral hazard: that NETs could undermine mitigation efforts and should thus be avoided. Building on previous research, we investigate four novel ways of framing the use of a form of carbon removal from the atmosphere that is currently of broad interest, direct air capture (DAC). We frame DAC use in terms of either necessity (DAC for limiting climate change being either <em>essential</em> or <em>dependent</em> on future mitigation) or temporality (DAC of either <em>past</em> or <em>future</em> emissions from the atmosphere). In a survey experiment with a nationally representative U.S. sample (<em>N</em> = 2891) we examined how these frames affect public support and risk perceptions in the U.S. for DAC, and the roles of prior awareness of DAC, climate change worry, and their interactions with the different frames. Frames differentially influenced support depending on prior awareness and climate change worry, higher levels of which were associated with more support for DAC (but also greater anticipated moral hazard) independent of the frames. Overall, framing only weakly affected public support, which was on average modest. These insights extend previous findings regarding the limited usefulness of moral hazard frames, but highlight the potential value of tailoring DAC messaging to different target audiences.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624002858/pdfft?md5=e112ed28dd28f4355766d2686363dc1f&pid=1-s2.0-S2214629624002858-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629624002858","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Limiting global warming will likely require removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and keeping it out of the atmosphere by sequestering it. Public support is crucial for a rapid upscaling of carbon removal and sequestration. One central concern is that public support for these negative emissions technologies (NETs) could be hampered by a moral hazard: that NETs could undermine mitigation efforts and should thus be avoided. Building on previous research, we investigate four novel ways of framing the use of a form of carbon removal from the atmosphere that is currently of broad interest, direct air capture (DAC). We frame DAC use in terms of either necessity (DAC for limiting climate change being either essential or dependent on future mitigation) or temporality (DAC of either past or future emissions from the atmosphere). In a survey experiment with a nationally representative U.S. sample (N = 2891) we examined how these frames affect public support and risk perceptions in the U.S. for DAC, and the roles of prior awareness of DAC, climate change worry, and their interactions with the different frames. Frames differentially influenced support depending on prior awareness and climate change worry, higher levels of which were associated with more support for DAC (but also greater anticipated moral hazard) independent of the frames. Overall, framing only weakly affected public support, which was on average modest. These insights extend previous findings regarding the limited usefulness of moral hazard frames, but highlight the potential value of tailoring DAC messaging to different target audiences.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
框架在公众支持直接捕获空气中的作用:美国道德风险调查实验
要限制全球变暖,可能需要清除大气中的二氧化碳,并通过封存二氧化碳使其远离大气。公众的支持对于迅速扩大碳清除和碳封存的规模至关重要。一个核心问题是,公众对这些负排放技术(NETs)的支持可能会受到道德风险的阻碍:NETs 可能会破坏减排努力,因此应该避免。在以往研究的基础上,我们研究了四种新的方法,来阐述目前广受关注的大气碳清除形式--直接空气捕集(DAC)的使用。我们从必要性(DAC 对限制气候变化至关重要或取决于未来的减缓措施)或时间性(DAC 从大气中去除过去或未来的排放物)两个方面来界定 DAC 的使用。在一项具有全国代表性的美国样本(N = 2891)调查实验中,我们研究了这些框架如何影响美国公众对 DAC 的支持和风险认知,以及对 DAC 的先前认知、气候变化担忧及其与不同框架的相互作用的作用。框架对支持率的影响取决于先前的认识和对气候变化的担忧,较高的先前认识和担忧水平与更多的 DAC 支持率相关(但也与更大的预期道德风险相关),而与框架无关。总体而言,框架对公众支持率的影响较弱,平均影响不大。这些见解扩展了之前关于道德风险框架作用有限的研究结果,但强调了针对不同目标受众定制发援会信息的潜在价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
期刊最新文献
Making space for environmental justice in renewable energy planning Large inequalities in climate mitigation scenarios are not supported by theories of distributive justice Embracing complexity: Microgrids and community engagement in Australia Policy mixes for net-zero energy transitions: Insights from energy sector integration in Germany Enablers or barriers: The multifaceted tales of power generation companies in China's energy transition
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1