IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v42y2022i3p529-552_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Push, Pull, or Inform - an Empirical Taxonomy of Environmental Policy Support in Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Ejelöv, Emma
  • Harring, Niklas
  • Hansla, André
  • Jagers, Sverker
  • Nilsson, Andreas

Abstract

Research on environmental policy support utilises different categorisations of policies, for example, differentiating between policies assumed to be perceived as rewarding or punishing. Do citizens’ perception of environmental policies also lend itself to this categorisation? Based on an exhaustive sample of active policies in Sweden, this study presents a taxonomy of environmental policy support in Sweden. A fairly representative Swedish sample (N = 2911) rated the acceptability of 44 environmental policies. Exploratory factor analysis indicated that participants’ acceptability of policies forms three categories: push policies consisting of regulatory and market-based disincentives, pull policies consisting mainly of market-based incentives, and informational policies, such as ecolabeling. Sociodemographics had small but consistent effects on attitudes towards the three categories, while political ideology had a larger effect across the categories. This study indicates that current academic categorisations may not adequately capture laypeople’s perceptions, and discusses the importance of research on driving mechanisms behind the current taxonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ejelöv, Emma & Harring, Niklas & Hansla, André & Jagers, Sverker & Nilsson, Andreas, 2022. "Push, Pull, or Inform - an Empirical Taxonomy of Environmental Policy Support in Sweden," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(3), pages 529-552, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:3:p:529-552_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X21000271/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:3:p:529-552_6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.