IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v141y2020ics0301421520302019.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Republicans and Democrats differ in why they support renewable energy

Author

Listed:
  • Gustafson, Abel
  • Goldberg, Matthew H.
  • Kotcher, John E.
  • Rosenthal, Seth A.
  • Maibach, Edward W.
  • Ballew, Matthew T.
  • Leiserowitz, Anthony

Abstract

Americans strongly support policies aimed at increasing the use of renewable energy. Prior research has found that, overall, support for renewable energy tends to be motivated primarily by people's perceptions that it creates economic benefits and reduces environmental harms. However, the extant research has not established how these motivations vary across political segments. Here we investigate (a) if and how Republicans and Democrats differ in their stated motivations for supporting a transition to renewable energy, and (b) what demographic and attitudinal variables best predict Republicans' and Democrats' support for renewable energy policies. Using a nationally representative sample of American registered voters, we found a consistent pattern across multiple methods of analysis: Republicans' (compared to Democrats') support for renewable energy is driven more by considerations of economic costs/benefits, whereas Democrats' (compared to Republicans') support is driven more by concern about global warming. These partisan differences hold significant implications for those who seek to effectively tailor policy and strategic communication to these political segments.

Suggested Citation

  • Gustafson, Abel & Goldberg, Matthew H. & Kotcher, John E. & Rosenthal, Seth A. & Maibach, Edward W. & Ballew, Matthew T. & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2020. "Republicans and Democrats differ in why they support renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:141:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520302019
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421520302019
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111448?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph E. Aldy & Matthew J. Kotchen & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2012. "Willingness to pay and political support for a US national clean energy standard," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(8), pages 596-599, August.
    2. Stoutenborough, James W. & Shi, Liu & Vedlitz, Arnold, 2015. "Probing public perceptions on energy: Support for a comparative, deep-probing survey design for complex issue domains," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 406-415.
    3. Olson-Hazboun, Shawn K. & Howe, Peter D. & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2018. "The influence of extractive activities on public support for renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 117-126.
    4. Klick, Holly & Smith, Eric R.A.N., 2010. "Public understanding of and support for wind power in the United States," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 1585-1591.
    5. Aldy, Joseph Edgar & Leiserowitz, Anthony A & Kotchen, Matthew J, 2012. "Willingness to Pay and Political Support for a U.S. National Clean Energy Standard," Scholarly Articles 8832942, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Robert Brulle, 2014. "Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(4), pages 681-694, February.
    7. Greenberg, Michael, 2009. "Energy sources, public policy, and public preferences: Analysis of US national and site-specific data," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3242-3249, August.
    8. Truelove, Heather Barnes, 2012. "Energy source perceptions and policy support: Image associations, emotional evaluations, and cognitive beliefs," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 478-489.
    9. Manley, Dawn K. & Hines, Valerie A. & Jordan, Matthew W. & Stoltz, Ronald E., 2013. "A survey of energy policy priorities in the United States: Energy supply security, economics, and the environment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 687-696.
    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. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014. "The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 937-948, May.
    12. Connie Roser-Renouf & Edward Maibach & Anthony Leiserowitz & Xiaoquan Zhao, 2014. "The genesis of climate change activism: from key beliefs to political action," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 163-178, July.
    13. Rintamäki, Tuomas & Siddiqui, Afzal S. & Salo, Ahti, 2017. "Does renewable energy generation decrease the volatility of electricity prices? An analysis of Denmark and Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 270-282.
    14. Rentschler, Jun E., 2013. "Oil price volatility, economic growth and the hedging role of renewable energy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6603, The World Bank.
    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. Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Christian Mumenthaler & Tobia Spampatti & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "Ideology as Filter: Motivated Information Processing and Decision-Making in the Energy Domain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Jasmina Nedevska, 2021. "An Attack on the Separation of Powers? Strategic Climate Litigation in the Eyes of U.S. Judges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-7, July.
    3. Serena Y. Kim & Koushik Ganesan & Princess Dickens & Soumya Panda, 2021. "Public Sentiment toward Solar Energy—Opinion Mining of Twitter Using a Transformer-Based Language Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-19, March.
    4. Robert Huang & Matthew E. Kahn, 2024. "Do Red States Have a Comparative Advantage in Generating Green Power?," Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(1), pages 200-238.
    5. Wimhurst, Joshua J. & Greene, J. Scott & Koch, Jennifer, 2023. "Predicting commercial wind farm site suitability in the conterminous United States using a logistic regression model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 352(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. Olson-Hazboun, Shawn K. & Howe, Peter D. & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2018. "The influence of extractive activities on public support for renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 117-126.
    2. Shawn Olson Hazboun & Hilary Schaffer Boudet, 2020. "Public Preferences in a Shifting Energy Future: Comparing Public Views of Eight Energy Sources in North America’s Pacific Northwest," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Jobin, Marilou & Siegrist, Michael, 2018. "We choose what we like – Affect as a driver of electricity portfolio choice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 736-747.
    4. Patrick Bayer & Federica Genovese, 2020. "Beliefs About Consequences from Climate Action Under Weak Climate Institutions: Sectors, Home Bias, and International Embeddedness," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(4), pages 28-50, Autumn.
    5. Bakkensen, Laura & Schuler, Paul, 2020. "A preference for power: Willingness to pay for energy reliability versus fuel type in Vietnam," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Buessing, Marric & Kriner, Douglas L., 2016. "Geographic proximity to coal plants and U.S. public support for extending the Production Tax Credit," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 299-307.
    7. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    8. Baral, Nabin & Rabotyagov, Sergey, 2017. "How much are wood-based cellulosic biofuels worth in the Pacific Northwest? Ex-ante and ex-post analysis of local people's willingness to pay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-106.
    9. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    10. Jarke-Neuert, Johannes & Perino, Grischa & Schwickert, Henrike, 2021. "Free-Riding for Future: Field Experimental Evidence of Strategic Substitutability in Climate Protest," SocArXiv sh6dm, Center for Open Science.
    11. Cousse, Julia, 2021. "Still in love with solar energy? Installation size, affect, and the social acceptance of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Sangiuliano, Stephen Joseph, 2017. "Turning of the tides: Assessing the international implementation of tidal current turbines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 971-989.
    13. Heeter, Jenny & Bird, Lori, 2013. "Including alternative resources in state renewable portfolio standards: Current design and implementation experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1388-1399.
    14. Sundt, Swantje & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "Consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity: A meta-analysis of the literature," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-8.
    15. Taylan G. Topcu & Konstantinos Triantis, 2022. "An ex-ante DEA method for representing contextual uncertainties and stakeholder risk preferences," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 309(1), pages 395-423, February.
    16. Soon, Jan-Jan & Ahmad, Siti-Aznor, 2015. "Willingly or grudgingly? A meta-analysis on the willingness-to-pay for renewable energy use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 877-887.
    17. Perlaviciute, Goda & Steg, Linda, 2014. "Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: Integrated review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 361-381.
    18. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: evidence from a choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112963, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes & Katherine M. Crosman, 2019. "Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 805-828, April.
    20. Joost Moor, 2022. "Prioritizing adaptation and mitigation in the climate movement: evidence from a cross-national protest survey of the Global Climate Strike, 2019," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 1-19, August.

    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:eee:enepol:v:141:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520302019. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.