IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v178y2025i2d10.1007_s10584-025-03859-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing climate policy around energy independence enhances acceptance and perceived effectiveness: evidence from a Finnish survey experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Sami Ahonen

    (University of Turku
    Finnish Meteorological Institute)

  • Mikko Leino

    (University of Turku)

  • Aino Tiihonen

    (University of Turku
    Tampere University)

Abstract

We investigated the impact of three justifications for implementing a road traffic emission trading system on policy acceptance and perceived effectiveness. One frame is based on increased energy independence from non-EU countries, another on potential economic benefits, and a third on ensuring efficient greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. The data utilized originated from an online survey experiment (n = 1504) administered in Finland in the spring of 2024. We found that the justification referring to energy independence marginally increased the acceptability of the policy, whereas the justifications appealing to potential economic benefits and effective emissions reductions did not. The energy independence frame particularly influences those who perceive climate change as a moderate risk. The results regarding perceived policy effectiveness are similar, indicating a strong association between these evaluations. It is likely that, at least in the Finnish context, the link between climate change mitigation efforts and energy independence has become more pronounced following the Russian attack on Ukraine.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:178:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-025-03859-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-025-03859-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-025-03859-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-025-03859-x?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. Attari, Shahzeen Z. & Schoen, Mary & Davidson, Cliff I. & DeKay, Michael L. & Bruine de Bruin, Wändi & Dawes, Robyn & Small, Mitchell J., 2009. "Preferences for change: Do individuals prefer voluntary actions, soft regulations, or hard regulations to decrease fossil fuel consumption?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1701-1710, April.
    2. Thomas Bernauer & Liam F. McGrath, 2016. "Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 680-683, July.
    3. Runar Brannlund & Lars Persson, 2012. "To tax, or not to tax: preferences for climate policy attributes," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 704-721, November.
    4. Jari Lyytimäki & Hanna-Liisa Kangas & Erkki Mervaala & Suvi Vikström, 2020. "Muted by a Crisis? COVID-19 and the Long-Term Evolution of Climate Change Newspaper Coverage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    5. Fredrik Carlsson & Christina Gravert & Olof Johansson-Stenman & Verena Kurz, 2021. "The Use of Green Nudges as an Environmental Policy Instrument," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 216-237.
    6. Charles S. Taber & Milton Lodge, 2006. "Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(3), pages 755-769, July.
    7. Xenias, Dimitrios & Whitmarsh, Lorraine, 2013. "Dimensions and determinants of expert and public attitudes to sustainable transport policies and technologies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 75-85.
    8. Michael D. Jones, 2014. "Cultural Characters and Climate Change: How Heroes Shape Our Perception of Climate Science," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(1), pages 1-39, March.
    9. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers, 2013. "Should We Trust in Values? Explaining Public Support for Pro-Environmental Taxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, January.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Kachi, Aya & Bernauer, Thomas & Gampfer, Robert, 2015. "Climate policy in hard times: Are the pessimists right?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 227-241.
    13. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath, 2022. "COVID-19 led to a decline in climate and environmental concern: evidence from UK panel data," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 1-11, October.
    14. 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.
    15. Rachel A. Howell & Stuart Capstick & Lorraine Whitmarsh, 2016. "Impacts of adaptation and responsibility framings on attitudes towards climate change mitigation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 445-461, June.
    16. Alexander W. Severson & Eric A. Coleman, 2015. "Moral Frames and Climate Change Policy Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1277-1290, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Habla, Wolfgang & Kokash, Kumai & Löfgren, Åsa & Straubinger, Anna & Ziegler, Andreas, 2024. "Self-interest and support of climate-related transport policy measures: An empirical analysis for citizens in Germany and Sweden," ZEW Discussion Papers 24-028, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Agneman, Gustav & Henriks, Sofia & Bäck, Hanna & Renström, Emma, 2024. "On the nexus between material and ideological determinants of climate policy support," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    3. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    4. 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).
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. Kitt, Shelby & Axsen, Jonn & Long, Zoe & Rhodes, Ekaterina, 2021. "The role of trust in citizen acceptance of climate policy: Comparing perceptions of government competence, integrity and value similarity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    8. 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.
    9. Laurent Ott & Mehdi Farsi & Sylvain Weber, 2021. "Beyond political divides: analyzing public opinion on carbon taxation in Switzerland," Chapters, in: Axel Franzen & Sebastian Mader (ed.), Research Handbook on Environmental Sociology, chapter 17, pages 313-339, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Odland, Severin & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Corbett, Meghan & Pardy, Aaron, 2023. "What policies do homeowners prefer for building decarbonization and why? An exploration of climate policy support in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    11. Groh, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2018. "On self-interested preferences for burden sharing rules: An econometric analysis for the costs of energy policy measures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 417-426.
    12. Zorzeta Bakaki & Thomas Bernauer, 2017. "Citizens show strong support for climate policy, but are they also willing to pay?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 15-26, November.
    13. Gevrek, Z.Eylem & Uyduranoglu, Ayse, 2015. "Public preferences for carbon tax attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 186-197.
    14. 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).
    15. 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.
    16. Alberini, Anna & Ščasný, Milan & Bigano, Andrea, 2018. "Policy- v. individual heterogeneity in the benefits of climate change mitigation: Evidence from a stated-preference survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 565-575.
    17. Mundaca, Luis & Wamsler, Christine, 2025. "Engaging high-income earners in climate action: Policy insights from survey experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    18. 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).
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:spr:climat:v:178:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-025-03859-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.