Seeking common ground? Heterogeneous support for carbon pricing and climate policies across audience segments

IF 7.4 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Energy Research & Social Science Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-23 DOI:10.1016/j.erss.2025.103993
Jeroen Barrez
{"title":"Seeking common ground? Heterogeneous support for carbon pricing and climate policies across audience segments","authors":"Jeroen Barrez","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.103993","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Public resistance remains a significant barrier to implementing the ambitious climate policies that are needed to limit global warming below 2 degrees. While numerous studies have explored public support for climate policies in general, this paper advances the understanding by investigating whether (lack of) support towards carbon pricing and climate policies is concentrated among specific societal groups. A latent class analysis identifies five distinct audience segments in Belgium based on similar climate attitudes and behavioural intentions: the Alarmed (6.9 %), Concerned (38.3 %), Cautious (36.1 %), Disengaged (15.2 %), and Doubtful (3.6 %), and explores the characteristics of these segments. This research also highlights the heterogeneity in preferences across subgroups and shows that belonging to one segment strongly predicts support for climate policies. The Alarmed are most in favour of these policies, while the Doubtful show the least support. More importantly, this study provides novel insights into the acceptability of carbon pricing policies across these subgroups and reveals how revenue use can make carbon pricing acceptable to segments with more sceptical climate attitudes. More specifically, while environmental earmarking risks resulting in “preaching to the converted”, using revenues for non-climate policies such as reducing labour taxes could make carbon pricing acceptable among the Doubtful and Disengaged segments and lessen the risk of social unrest and contestation. More generally, this research shows that considering the heterogeneity of public preferences offers novel insights, and could ultimately help policymakers design and implement more effective carbon pricing and climate policies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"122 ","pages":"Article 103993"},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462962500074X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public resistance remains a significant barrier to implementing the ambitious climate policies that are needed to limit global warming below 2 degrees. While numerous studies have explored public support for climate policies in general, this paper advances the understanding by investigating whether (lack of) support towards carbon pricing and climate policies is concentrated among specific societal groups. A latent class analysis identifies five distinct audience segments in Belgium based on similar climate attitudes and behavioural intentions: the Alarmed (6.9 %), Concerned (38.3 %), Cautious (36.1 %), Disengaged (15.2 %), and Doubtful (3.6 %), and explores the characteristics of these segments. This research also highlights the heterogeneity in preferences across subgroups and shows that belonging to one segment strongly predicts support for climate policies. The Alarmed are most in favour of these policies, while the Doubtful show the least support. More importantly, this study provides novel insights into the acceptability of carbon pricing policies across these subgroups and reveals how revenue use can make carbon pricing acceptable to segments with more sceptical climate attitudes. More specifically, while environmental earmarking risks resulting in “preaching to the converted”, using revenues for non-climate policies such as reducing labour taxes could make carbon pricing acceptable among the Doubtful and Disengaged segments and lessen the risk of social unrest and contestation. More generally, this research shows that considering the heterogeneity of public preferences offers novel insights, and could ultimately help policymakers design and implement more effective carbon pricing and climate policies.
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
寻求共同点?不同受众群体对碳定价和气候政策的异质支持
公众的抵制仍然是实施雄心勃勃的气候政策的重大障碍,这些政策需要将全球变暖限制在2摄氏度以下。虽然许多研究都探讨了公众对气候政策的总体支持,但本文通过调查对碳定价和气候政策的支持(缺乏)是否集中在特定的社会群体中来推进这一理解。基于相似的气候态度和行为意图,潜在类别分析确定了比利时五个不同的受众群体:警惕(6.9%),关注(38.3%),谨慎(36.1%),脱离(15.2%)和怀疑(3.6%),并探讨了这些群体的特征。这项研究还强调了不同子群体偏好的异质性,表明属于某一群体强烈地预示着对气候政策的支持。警觉的人最赞成这些政策,而怀疑的人支持最少。更重要的是,这项研究提供了对这些子群体的碳定价政策可接受性的新见解,并揭示了收入使用如何使碳定价被对气候持怀疑态度的群体所接受。更具体地说,虽然环境专项拨款风险会导致“向皈依者说教”,但将收入用于减少劳动税等非气候政策,可能会使碳定价在持怀疑态度和不参与的群体中得到接受,并降低社会动荡和争议的风险。更广泛地说,这项研究表明,考虑公众偏好的异质性提供了新的见解,最终可以帮助决策者设计和实施更有效的碳定价和气候政策。
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
Beyond yes and no: Clustering public perceptions of wave energy on the West Coast of the United States Reclaiming the wind: Indigenous windmills in Iran and their lessons for renewable energy From tension to transformation in Dutch heat transitions: Leveraging time, transparency, and relationships “Might give some hope for the future”: Understanding young adults' support for offshore wind in coastal Australia Solving the puzzle of justice: How to bridge the normative and descriptive logics in energy justice
×
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:604180095
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