IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v25y2025i8p1207-1221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The appeal of climate program framing depends on climate beliefs: a conjoint survey experiment among US agricultural producers

Author

Listed:
  • Lauren Hunt
  • Vicken Hillis

Abstract

Despite increasingly severe climate change impacts to US agriculture, a majority of agricultural producers are skeptical of anthropogenic climate change, limiting climate action in a sector with considerable potential for climate change adaptation and mitigation. Research has suggested that highlighting the co-benefits of climate action can increase climate change engagement, yet the efficacy of doing so has not been tested in climate skeptical agricultural communities. We first administered a conjoint survey experiment (n = 853) to test if agricultural producers prefer public climate change programs that emphasize climate co-benefits and then conducted a latent class analysis to measure how variation in climate perceptions affects program preference. Programs that emphasized co-benefits had higher levels of support overall; economic co-benefits elicited a stronger positive response to climate programs than social and environmental co-benefits. However, co-benefits framing was ineffective for the most climate skeptical producers. Conversely, the most climate concerned producers were strongly motivated by direct climate benefits, rather than co-benefits. Critically, our study illustrates the nuances of co-benefit efficacy to increase climate action among climate-skeptical populations. These results further our understanding of how climate co-benefits promote climate engagement and can be used to improve the design of climate programs.Despite evidence suggesting climate co-benefits can effectively promote climate policy support, the efficacy of climate co-benefits is moderated by climate beliefs.Economic co-benefits increased support for climate programs among US agricultural producers, even among those who are doubtful about climate change.Emphasis on the climate benefits of climate programs motivate those producers most alarmed by climate change while alienating most other segments.Regardless of climate beliefs, producers strongly supported market-based climate programs and programs with financial or technical assistance for carbon sequestration or carbon offset payments.Policymakers’ ability to engage climate skeptical populations in climate mitigation and adaptation may be improved through targeted campaign strategies using segmentation.

Suggested Citation

  • Lauren Hunt & Vicken Hillis, 2025. "The appeal of climate program framing depends on climate beliefs: a conjoint survey experiment among US agricultural producers," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(8), pages 1207-1221, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:25:y:2025:i:8:p:1207-1221
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2024.2447486
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2024.2447486
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2024.2447486?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

    for a different version of it.

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:25:y:2025:i:8:p:1207-1221. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.