Explaining public support for net-zero climate policy instruments: Perceptions of distributive fairness under competing frames

被引:0
作者
Hoyle, Aaron [1 ]
Rhodes, Ekaterina [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Victoria, Sch Publ Adm, POB 1700 STN CSC, Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2, Canada
关键词
Policy support; Public opinion; Net-zero; Climate policy; Framing; Distributive fairness; PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE; CONSTRUAL-LEVEL; ACCEPTABILITY; JUSTICE; OPINION; VIEWS;
D O I
10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114644
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Understanding public support for net-zero climate policy instruments is crucial for policy implementation and durability. Using survey data from a Canadian sample (n = 2362), we examine support for six net-zero policies, focusing on the roles of distributive fairness, effectiveness, and message framing. Consistent with prior research, we find that fairness perceptions are the strongest predictor of support, followed by effectiveness, though fairness judgments vary across policies. Notably, opposition to a zero-emission vehicle mandate and to a lesser extent an electric appliance mandate rivaled that of a consumer carbon tax, challenging assumptions that regulatory policies face less resistance. Distributive fairness perceptions were most influenced by expected impacts on future generations, low-income households, and rural communities, while those who prioritize equality and need-based justice principles were less likely to view policies as fair. Finally, pro-policy message frames did not shift policy support when positioned against a competing anti-policy frame, adding to the evidence that compelling counter arguments can neutralize otherwise persuasive frames. These findings highlight the need for policymakers to integrate fairness considerations into policy design and communication strategies to enhance the long-term feasibility of net-zero policy instruments.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 88 条
[1]  
Adriaans J., 2022, MEAS INSTRUM SOC SCI, V4, P1, DOI DOI 10.1186/S42409-022-00040-3
[2]   Debating clean energy: Frames, counter frames, and audiences [J].
Aklin, Michael ;
Urpelainen, Johannes .
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS, 2013, 23 (05) :1225-1232
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2021, Canadas Net Zero Future Finding Our Way
[4]  
Ansolabehere S., 2014, Cheap and Clean: How Americans Think About Energy in the Age of Global Warming, DOI [10.7551/mitpress/9999.001.0001, DOI 10.7551/MITPRESS/9999.001.0001]
[5]   Framing climate change for effective communication: a systematic map [J].
Badullovich, N. ;
Grant, W. J. ;
Colvin, R. M. .
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2020, 15 (12)
[6]   Green Priorities: How economic frames affect perceptions of renewable energy in the United States [J].
Bayulgen, Oksan ;
Benegal, Salil .
ENERGY RESEARCH & SOCIAL SCIENCE, 2019, 47 :28-36
[7]   Do economic trade-offs matter in climate policy support? Survey evidence from the United Kingdom and Australia [J].
Bell, Christopher ;
Rhodes, Ekaterina ;
Long, Zoe ;
Salemi, Colette .
ENERGY POLICY, 2025, 197
[8]   Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws [J].
Bergquist, Magnus ;
Nilsson, Andreas ;
Harring, Niklas ;
Jagers, Sverker C. .
NATURE CLIMATE CHANGE, 2022, 12 (03) :235-+
[9]  
Bumann S., 2021, Review of Economics, V72, P213, DOI [10.1515/roe-2021-0046, DOI 10.1515/ROE-2021-0046]
[10]   Framing theory [J].
Chong, Dennis ;
Druckman, James N. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, 2007, 10 :103-126