IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v156y2021ics0301421521002603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Bingsheng
  • Xu, Yinghua
  • Yang, Yang
  • Lu, Shijian

Abstract

Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage (CCUS) is regarded as a promising approach to mitigate global warming. Public acceptance plays a key role in the decision whether it could be adopted widely. The study develops a behavior model to predict the public acceptance of CCUS based on the ABC (Affect, Behavior, and Cognition) model of attitudes. A survey of public in China shows that public cognition has a significant effect on public acceptance. Perceived benefits have a higher indirect effect than perceived risks. Meanwhile, trust moderates the relationship between public cognition and perceived risks/benefits. And the relationship between perceived benefits and acceptance is intensified when the fairness is high. This study explores the internal mechanism between public cognition and public acceptance, such knowledge would allow policymakers to develop more targeted interventions aimed at enhancing public acceptance of CCUS.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Bingsheng & Xu, Yinghua & Yang, Yang & Lu, Shijian, 2021. "How public cognition influences public acceptance of CCUS in China: Based on the ABC (affect, behavior, and cognition) model of attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:156:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521002603
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112390
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421521002603
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112390?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. Ortwin Renn & Christina Benighaus, 2013. "Perception of technological risk: insights from research and lessons for risk communication and management," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3-4), pages 293-313, April.
    2. Pellizzone, Anna & Allansdottir, Agnes & De Franco, Roberto & Muttoni, Giovanni & Manzella, Adele, 2015. "Exploring public engagement with geothermal energy in southern Italy: A case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-11.
    3. Lynn A. Maguire & E. Allan Lind, 2003. "Public participation in environmental decisions: stakeholders, authorities and procedural justice," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(2), pages 133-148.
    4. Christian Oltra & Roser Sala & Àlex Boso, 2012. "The influence of information on individuals' reactions to CCS technologies: results from experimental online survey research," Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 2(3), pages 209-215, June.
    5. Qi, Wen-Hui & Qi, Ming-Liang & Ji, Ya-Min, 2020. "The effect path of public communication on public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    6. Visschers, Vivianne H.M. & Siegrist, Michael, 2012. "Fair play in energy policy decisions: Procedural fairness, outcome fairness and acceptance of the decision to rebuild nuclear power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 292-300.
    7. Fan, Jing-Li & Wei, Shijie & Yang, Lin & Wang, Hang & Zhong, Ping & Zhang, Xian, 2019. "Comparison of the LCOE between coal-fired power plants with CCS and main low-carbon generation technologies: Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 143-155.
    8. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    9. Lauren A. Fleishman & Wändi Bruine De Bruin & M. Granger Morgan, 2010. "Informed Public Preferences for Electricity Portfolios with CCS and Other Low‐Carbon Technologies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1399-1410, September.
    10. Duan, Hongxia, 2010. "The public perspective of carbon capture and storage for CO2 emission reductions in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5281-5289, September.
    11. Bidwell, David, 2013. "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 189-199.
    12. Bart W. Terwel & Fieke Harinck & Naomi Ellemers & Dancker D. L. Daamen, 2009. "Competence‐Based and Integrity‐Based Trust as Predictors of Acceptance of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (CCS)," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(8), pages 1129-1140, August.
    13. Michael Siegrist, 2000. "The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(2), pages 195-204, April.
    14. Bart W. Terwel, 2015. "Public participation under conditions of distrust: invited commentary on 'Effective risk communication and CCS: The road to success in Europe'," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 692-694, June.
    15. Carmel Anderson & Jacki Schirmer & Norman Abjorensen, 2012. "Exploring CCS community acceptance and public participation from a human and social capital perspective," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 687-706, August.
    16. Chung, Ji-Bum & Kim, Eun-Sung, 2018. "Public perception of energy transition in Korea: Nuclear power, climate change, and party preference," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 137-144.
    17. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    18. Fan, Jing-Li & Shen, Shuo & Wei, Shi-Jie & Xu, Mao & Zhang, Xian, 2020. "Near-term CO2 storage potential for coal-fired power plants in China: A county-level source-sink matching assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    19. 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.
    20. Gross, Catherine, 2007. "Community perspectives of wind energy in Australia: The application of a justice and community fairness framework to increase social acceptance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2727-2736, May.
    21. Bo Xu & Qie Sun & Ronald Wennersten & Nils Brandt, 2014. "An Analysis of China's Carbon Dioxide Mitigation Target," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(2), pages 113-121, March.
    22. Judith I. M. De Groot & Linda Steg, 2010. "Morality and Nuclear Energy: Perceptions of Risks and Benefits, Personal Norms, and Willingness to Take Action Related to Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(9), pages 1363-1373, September.
    23. van Alphen, Klaas & van Voorst tot Voorst, Quirine & Hekkert, Marko P. & Smits, Ruud E.H.M., 2007. "Societal acceptance of carbon capture and storage technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4368-4380, August.
    24. Fan, Jing-Li & Xu, Mao & Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian, 2019. "Benefit evaluation of investment in CCS retrofitting of coal-fired power plants and PV power plants in China based on real options," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    25. Minh Ha-Duong & Ana Sofia Campos & Alain Nadaï, 2007. "A survey on the public perception of CCS in France," Working Papers hal-00866557, HAL.
    26. Martinez Caro, Laura & Martinez Garcia, Jose Antonio, 2007. "Cognitive-affective model of consumer satisfaction. An exploratory study within the framework of a sporting event," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 108-114, February.
    27. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & McAlinden, Karl J., 2016. "The effect of trust on people's acceptance of CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies: Evidence from a survey in the People's Republic of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 69-79.
    28. Hamawand, Ihsan & Yusaf, Talal & Hamawand, Sara G., 2013. "Coal seam gas and associated water: A review paper," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 550-560.
    29. Huijts, Nicole M.A. & Midden, Cees J.H. & Meijnders, Anneloes L., 2007. "Social acceptance of carbon dioxide storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2780-2789, May.
    30. Lee, Joo Suk & Choi, Eun Chul, 2018. "CO2 leakage environmental damage cost – A CCS project in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 753-758.
    31. Ali Siddiq Alhakami & Paul Slovic, 1994. "A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1085-1096, December.
    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. Zhang, Z.X. & Xu, H.J., 2023. "Thermodynamic modeling on multi-stage vacuum-pressure swing adsorption (VPSA) for direct air carbon capture with extreme dilute carbon dioxide," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    2. Dongdong Song & Tong Jiang & Chuanping Rao, 2022. "Review of Policy Framework for the Development of Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Xu Wang & Xiang Su & Ke Bi, 2023. "Achieving Synergies of Carbon Emission Reduction, Cost Savings, and Asset Investments in China’s Industrial Sector: Towards Sustainable Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Jingjing Xie & Yujiao Xian & Guowei Jia, 2023. "An investigation into the public acceptance in China of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1-22, June.
    5. Hurlbert, Margot & Osazuwa-Peters, Mac, 2023. "Carbon capture and storage in Saskatchewan: An analysis of communicative practices in a contested technology," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    6. Liu, W. & Lin, Y.C. & Jiang, L. & Ji, Y. & Yong, J.Y. & Zhang, X.J., 2022. "Thermodynamic exploration of two-stage vacuum-pressure swing adsorption for carbon dioxide capture," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    7. Charli Sitinjak & Sitinjak Ebennezer & Józef Ober, 2023. "Exploring Public Attitudes and Acceptance of CCUS Technologies in JABODETABEK: A Cross-Sectional Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-15, May.

    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. Yang, Lin & Zhang, Xian & McAlinden, Karl J., 2016. "The effect of trust on people's acceptance of CCS (carbon capture and storage) technologies: Evidence from a survey in the People's Republic of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 69-79.
    2. L׳Orange Seigo, Selma & Dohle, Simone & Siegrist, Michael, 2014. "Public perception of carbon capture and storage (CCS): A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 848-863.
    3. Moon, Won-Ki & Kahlor, Lee Ann & Olson, Hilary Clement, 2020. "Understanding public support for carbon capture and storage policy: The roles of social capital, stakeholder perceptions, and perceived risk/benefit of technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    4. Carola Braun & Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch & Katrin Rehdanz & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "Public perception of climate engineering and carbon capture and storage in Germany: survey evidence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 471-484, April.
    5. Kânoğlu-Özkan, Dilge Güldehen & Soytaş, Uğur, 2022. "The social acceptance of shale gas development: Evidence from Turkey," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PC).
    6. 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.
    7. Carola Braun, 2017. "Not in My Backyard: CCS Sites and Public Perception of CCS," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2264-2275, December.
    8. Guanghui Hou & Tong Chen & Ke Ma & Zhiming Liao & Hongmei Xia & Tianzeng Yao, 2019. "Improving Social Acceptance of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in China: Role of Place Attachment, Trust, and Fairness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-22, March.
    9. Nuortimo, Kalle & Härkönen, Janne, 2018. "Opinion mining approach to study media-image of energy production. Implications to public acceptance and market deployment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 210-217.
    10. Chen, Zheng-Ao & Li, Qi & Liu, Lan-Cui & Zhang, Xian & Kuang, Liping & Jia, Li & Liu, Guizhen, 2015. "A large national survey of public perceptions of CCS technology in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 366-377.
    11. Christine Merk & Gert Pönitzsch, 2017. "The Role of Affect in Attitude Formation toward New Technologies: The Case of Stratospheric Aerosol Injection," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(12), pages 2289-2304, December.
    12. Jingjing Xie & Yujiao Xian & Guowei Jia, 2023. "An investigation into the public acceptance in China of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1-22, June.
    13. Arning, K. & Offermann-van Heek, J. & Ziefle, M., 2021. "What drives public acceptance of sustainable CO2-derived building materials? A conjoint-analysis of eco-benefits vs. health concerns," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    14. Farid Karimi, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perceptions of Decarbonised Energy System: Insights into Patterns of Behaviour," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, November.
    15. McComas, Katherine A. & Lu, Hang & Keranen, Katie M. & Furtney, Maria A. & Song, Hwansuck, 2016. "Public perceptions and acceptance of induced earthquakes related to energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 27-32.
    16. Mueller, Christoph Emanuel, 2020. "Examining the inter-relationships between procedural fairness, trust in actors, risk expectations, perceived benefits, and attitudes towards power grid expansion projects," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    17. Seungkook Roh & Hae-Gyung Geong, 2021. "Extending the Coverage of the Trust–Acceptability Model: The Negative Effect of Trust in Government on Nuclear Power Acceptance in South Korea under a Nuclear Phase-Out Policy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, June.
    18. Longji Hu & Rongjin Liu & Wei Zhang & Tian Zhang, 2020. "The Effects of Epistemic Trust and Social Trust on Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Food: An Empirical Study from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-20, October.
    19. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    20. Knoblauch, Theresa A.K. & Trutnevyte, Evelina & Stauffacher, Michael, 2019. "Siting deep geothermal energy: Acceptance of various risk and benefit scenarios in a Swiss-German cross-national study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 807-816.

    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:156:y:2021:i:c:s0301421521002603. 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.