IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpd/articl/v3y2020i2jbpa.32.126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does city or state make a difference? The effects of policy framing on public attitude toward a solar energy program

Author

Listed:
  • Chien-shih Huang

    (Florida State University)

  • Ruowen Shen

    (Wichita State University)

Abstract

Replacing fossil fuel with solar photovoltaic (PV) technology is critical to the transition to renewable energy and thus a key feature of the contentious and often confusing policy debates surrounding climate change. Governments can frame such environmental issues in various ways, but consensus is lacking on whether economic or environmental benefits most effectively encourage pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors, such as supporting PV technology. In this study, we introduce a moderator—psychological distance between citizens and policy outcomes—to elaborate this relation. Based on the federalism literature, we suggest that different levels of government, as the policy implementers, represent a sense of distance. The construal level theory (CLT) is adopted, and we hypothesize that the congruency between psychological distance and the construal level of policy outcomes will increase policy support and willingness to pay for solar PV installation. The results of survey experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) offer partial support for our theoretical expectations and add new insights. Practical and theoretical implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Chien-shih Huang & Ruowen Shen, 2020. "Does city or state make a difference? The effects of policy framing on public attitude toward a solar energy program," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(2).
    • Handle: RePEc:bpd:articl:v:3:y:2020:i:2:jbpa.32.126
    DOI: 10.30636/jbpa.32.126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journal-bpa.org/index.php/jbpa/article/download/126/91
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30636/jbpa.32.126?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Economic vs non-material incentives for participation in an in-kind payments for ecosystem services program in Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 178-190.
    2. Aaron Deslatte, 2019. "A bayesian approach for behavioral public administration: Citizen assessments of local government sustainability performance," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 2(1).
    3. David M. Konisky & Jeffrey Milyo & Lilliard E. Richardson, 2008. "Environmental Policy Attitudes: Issues, Geographical Scale, and Political Trust," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1066-1085, December.
    4. Chong, Dennis & Druckman, James N., 2007. "Framing Public Opinion in Competitive Democracies," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 101(4), pages 637-655, November.
    5. Jennifer Wolak, 2016. "Core Values and Partisan Thinking about Devolution," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 46(4), pages 463-485.
    6. Levin, Irwin P. & Schneider, Sandra L. & Gaeth, Gary J., 1998. "All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 149-188, November.
    7. Nicholas Jacobs, 2017. "An Experimental Test of How Americans Think about Federalism," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 47(4), pages 572-598.
    8. Kallbekken, Steffen & Sælen, Håkon, 2011. "Public acceptance for environmental taxes: Self-interest, environmental and distributional concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2966-2973, May.
    9. Stefan Drews & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2016. "What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 855-876, October.
    10. Leah C. Stokes & Christopher Warshaw, 2017. "Renewable energy policy design and framing influence public support in the United States," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 2(8), pages 1-6, August.
    11. Kelly Goldsmith & George E. Newman & Ravi Dhar, 2016. "Mental representation changes the evaluation of green product benefits," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 847-850, September.
    12. J. W. Bolderdijk & L. Steg & E. S. Geller & P. K. Lehman & T. Postmes, 2013. "Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 413-416, April.
    13. Cindy D. Kam & Robert A. Mikos, 2007. "Do Citizens Care about Federalism? An Experimental Test," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(3), pages 589-624, November.
    14. Ostrom, Vincent & Tiebout, Charles M. & Warren, Robert, 1961. "The Organization of Government in Metropolitan Areas: A Theoretical Inquiry," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 831-842, December.
    15. David Konisky, 2011. "Public Preferences for Environmental Policy Responsibility," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 41(1), pages 76-100, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. McCarty, J. & Waibel, C. & Leow, S.W. & Schlueter, A., 2025. "Solar energy in the city: Data-driven review on urban photovoltaics," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emma Ejelöv & Andreas Nilsson, 2020. "Individual Factors Influencing Acceptability for Environmental Policies: A Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-14, March.
    2. Sami Ahonen & Mikko Leino & Aino Tiihonen, 2025. "Framing climate policy around energy independence enhances acceptance and perceived effectiveness: evidence from a Finnish survey experiment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 178(2), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Long, Zoe & Kitt, Shelby & Axsen, Jonn, 2021. "Who supports which low-carbon transport policies? Characterizing heterogeneity among Canadian citizens," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    4. Sterner, Thomas & Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Erik, 2024. "Economists and the climate," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. Hilary Byerly Flint & Paul Cada & Patricia A. Champ & Jamie Gomez & Danny Margoles & James R. Meldrum & Hannah Brenkert-Smith, 2022. "You vs. us: framing adaptation behavior in terms of private or social benefits," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Chad M. Baum & Christian Gross, 2017. "Sustainability policy as if people mattered: developing a framework for environmentally significant behavioral change," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 53-95, April.
    7. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    9. Long, Zoe & Axsen, Jonn & Kitt, Shelby, 2020. "Public support for supply-focused transport policies: Vehicle emissions, low-carbon fuels, and ZEV sales standards in Canada and California," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 98-115.
    10. Daniele Malerba, 2022. "The Effects of Social Protection and Social Cohesion on the Acceptability of Climate Change Mitigation Policies: What Do We (Not) Know in the Context of Low- and Middle-Income Countries?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(3), pages 1358-1382, June.
    11. Andreassen, Gøril L. & Kallbekken, Steffen & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2024. "Can policy packaging help overcome Pigouvian tax aversion? A lab experiment on combining taxes and subsidies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    12. Mundaca, Luis & Wamsler, Christine, 2025. "Engaging high-income earners in climate action: Policy insights from survey experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    13. Hilary Boudet & Chad Zanocco & Greg Stelmach & Mahmood Muttaqee & June Flora, 2021. "Public preferences for five electricity grid decarbonization policies in California," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(5), pages 510-528, September.
    14. Heinz, Nicolai & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Other-regarding preferences and pro-environmental behaviour: An interdisciplinary review of experimental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    15. Wesley Wehde & Matthew C Nowlin, 2021. "Public Attribution of Responsibility for Disaster Preparedness across Three Levels of Government and the Public: Lessons from a Survey of Residents of the U.S. South Atlantic and Gulf Coast," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 51(2), pages 212-237.
    16. Malcolm Fairbrother, 2022. "Public opinion about climate policies: A review and call for more studies of what people want," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 1(5), pages 1-14, May.
    17. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers & Simon Matti, 2017. "Public Support for Pro-Environmental Policy Measures: Examining the Impact of Personal Values and Ideology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, April.
    18. Hössinger, Reinhard & Peer, Stefanie & Juschten, Maria, 2023. "Give citizens a task: An innovative tool to compose policy bundles that reach the climate goal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Stefano Carattini & Simon Levin & Alessandro Tavoni, 2019. "Cooperation in the Climate Commons," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 227-247.
    20. Elke D. Groh & Andreas Ziegler, 2017. "On self-interested preferences for burden sharing rules: An econometric analysis for the costs of energy policy measures," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201754, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • Z00 - Other Special Topics - - General - - - General
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpd:articl:v:3:y:2020:i:2:jbpa.32.126. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sebastian Jilke The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Sebastian Jilke to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://journal-bpa.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.