IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Household perceptions of climate change and preferences for mitigation action: the case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in Australia

Author Info

  • Akter, Sonia
  • Bennett, Jeffrey W.

Abstract

The study aims to reveal Australian households’ perceptions of climate change and their preferences for climate change mitigation actions. A web-based survey was conducted in November 2008 in which about 600 New South Wales households were asked for their willingness to bear extra household expenditure to support the ‘Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS)’ as proposed by the Australian government. The Contingent Valuation Method (CVM), a widely used non-market valuation technique, was applied using the single bounded dichotomous choice elicitation format. Results of the study demonstrate that, currently, there is a positive demand for climate change mitigation action in Australia. The main motivation for this positive demand stems from a desire to avoid climate change. However, society’s willingness to pay (WTP) for climate change mitigation is shown to be significantly curbed by uncertainties regarding the extent of climate change and the effectiveness of climate change policy. Global cooperation (major greenhouse gas emitting countries implementing similar scheme) plays an important role in determining Australian households’ support for the CPRS. Only when cooperation is assumed, do the benefits of the CPRS, as estimated by respondents’ WTP, exceed its costs.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/47936
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society in its series 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia with number 47936.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aare09:47936
Contact details of provider: Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://www4.agr.gc.caEmail:


More information through EDIRC

Keywords: Contingent valuation; climate change; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme; willingness to pay; uncertainty; Australia;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Mary Riddel & W. Shaw, 2006. "A theoretically-consistent empirical model of non-expected utility: An application to nuclear-waste transport," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 131-150, March.
  2. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
  3. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F. & Levy, Alan & Russell, Matthew, 2001. "US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 917-925, September.
  4. John C. Whitehead & Glenn C. Blomquist & Richard C. Ready & Ju-Chin Huang, . "Construct Validity of Dichotomous and Polychotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Questions," Working Papers 9612, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
  5. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-19, November.
  6. Jones, Nikoleta & Sophoulis, Costas M. & Malesios, Chrisovaladis, 2008. "Economic valuation of coastal water quality and protest responses: A case study in Mitilini, Greece," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2478-2491, December.
  7. Jaeseung Lee & Trudy Cameron, 2008. "Popular Support for Climate Change Mitigation: Evidence from a General Population Mail Survey," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 223-248, October.
  8. Kahn, Barbara E & Sarin, Rakesh K, 1988. " Modeling Ambiguity in Decisions under Uncertainty," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 265-72, September.
  9. Ready Richard C. & Whitehead John C. & Blomquist Glenn C., 1995. "Contingent Valuation When Respondents Are Ambivalent," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 181-196, September.
  10. Richard C. Ready & Dayuan Hu, 1995. "Statistical Approaches to the Fat Tail Problem for Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(4), pages 491-499.
  11. Boyle, Kevin J. & Welsh, Michael P. & Bishop, Richard C., 1988. "Validation of empirical measures of welfare change: comment," MPRA Paper 31237, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  12. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 2005. "Individual option prices for climate change mitigation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 283-301, February.
  13. Silvia Banfi & Mehdi Farsi & Massimo Filippini & Martin Jakob, 2005. "Willingness to Pay for Energy-Saving Measures in Residential Buildings," CEPE Working paper series 05-41, CEPE Center for Energy Policy and Economics, ETH Zurich.
  14. R. K. Blamey & J. W. Bennett & M. D. Morrison, 1999. "Yea-Saying in Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(1), pages 126-141.
  15. Anna Alberini & Paolo Rosato & Alberto Longo & Valentina Zanatta, 2005. "Information and Willingness to Pay in a Contingent Valuation Study: The Value of S. Erasmo in the Lagoon of Venice," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 155-175.
  16. Dominika Parry Dziegielewska & Robert Mendelsohn, 2005. "Valuing Air Quality in Poland," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(2), pages 131-163, 02.
  17. Batley, S. L. & Colbourne, D. & Fleming, P. D. & Urwin, P., 2001. "Citizen versus consumer: challenges in the UK green power market," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 479-487, May.
  18. Macmillan, Douglas & Hanley, Nick & Buckland, Steve, 1996. "A Contingent Valuation Study of Uncertain Environmental Gains," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 43(5), pages 519-33, November.
  19. Berrens, Robert P. & Bohara, Alok K. & Jenkins-Smith, Hank C. & Silva, Carol L. & Weimer, David L., 2004. "Information and effort in contingent valuation surveys: application to global climate change using national internet samples," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 331-363, March.
  20. Bente Halvorsen, 1996. "Ordering effects in contingent valuation surveys," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(4), pages 485-499, December.
  21. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521744447 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

as in new window


Cited by:

  1. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Krupnick, Alan & Lampi, Elina & Lofgren, Asa & Qin, Ping & Chung, Susie & Sterner, Thomas, 2010. "Paying for Mitigation: A Multiple Country Study," Discussion Papers dp-10-12-efd, Resources For the Future.
  2. Shewmake, Sharon & Okrent, Abigail M. & Thabrew, Lanka & Vandenbergh, Michael, 2012. "Carbon Labeling for Consumer Food Goods," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124369, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  3. Johannes Diederich & Timo Goeschl, 2014. "Willingness to Pay for Voluntary Climate Action and Its Determinants: Field-Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(3), pages 405-429, March.
  4. Moinul Islam & Koji Kotani, 2015. "Perceptions to climatic changes and cooperative attitudes toward flood protection in Bangladesh," Working Papers SDES-2015-5, Kochi University of Technology, School of Economics and Management, revised Jan 2015.
  5. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett & Michael B. Ward, 2013. "Climate change scepticism and public support for mitigation: evidence from an Australian choice experiment," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-47, Monash University, Department of Economics.
  6. Alló, Maria & Loureiro, Maria L., 2014. "The role of social norms on preferences towards climate change policies: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 563-574.
  7. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo, 2011. "Willingness to Pay for Individual Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: Evidence from a Large Field Experiment," Working Papers 0517, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
  8. Acquah, H. de-Graft & Onumah, Edward E., 2011. "Farmers Perception and Adaptation to Climate Change: An Estimation of Willingness to Pay," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 3(4), December.
  9. Zachary A. Wendling & Shahzeen Z. Attari & Sanya R. Carley & Rachel M. Krause & David C. Warren & John A. Rupp & John D. Graham, 2013. "On the Importance of Strengthening Moderate Beliefs in Climate Science to Foster Support for Immediate Action," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 5(12), pages 5153-5170, December.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aare09:47936. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.