IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwkwp/2239.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technology will save the climate! Attitudes towards Norway's climate policy in four social groups

Author

Listed:
  • Nordø, Åsta Dyrnes
  • Andersen, Gisle
  • Merk, Christine

Abstract

The risk of opposition from the population increasingly plays a role in choosing the climate policy measures to achieve the objective to substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In Norway, there is a long-standing cross-party consensus that the development of new technologies will be crucial for solving climate challenges. Comparing public opinion surveys, Norwegians are significantly more convinced that new technology will solve problems induced by climate change, compared people in other European countries. A concrete example of such a technology is carbon capture and storage (CCS). Despite discussions about the costs of establishing the technology, there is a cross-party consensus in Norway that CCS is a good and suitable measure for reaching climate policy goals. In this article, we review the historical background that has led to this broad support in Nor-way. Furthermore, we look at how this has been expressed in the political parties' attitudes towards CCS. There has been a long standing consensus among all major parties that CCS should be developed and deployed. We argue that this lay the foundation for the societal support for CCS. We analyze data from the Norwegian Coordinated Online panels for research on DEMocracy and governance (KODEM) to examine the attitudes toward CCS among citizens and three functional elites, namely elected representatives, bureaucrats, and journalists. We find that CCS receives strong support in all four groups, but that citizens and elected representative are more skeptical compared to bureaucrats and journalists. However, when looking at the factors that influence the perception of CCS, the pattern is the same for all four groups. The more technology optimistic a person is, the more positively they tend to perceive CCS as a method to fight climate change. We also find that those who think the political efforts to reduce greenhouse gases are too great are less positive about CCS com-pared to those who think the efforts are appropriate or too small. Overall, the analysis indicates that all four societal groups are technology optimistic and characterized by the same attitudes toward climate change. We discuss the role of technology optimism in Norway's climate policy and the reasons for the high degree of political consensus across groups with different societal functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Nordø, Åsta Dyrnes & Andersen, Gisle & Merk, Christine, 2023. "Technology will save the climate! Attitudes towards Norway's climate policy in four social groups," Kiel Working Papers 2239, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwkwp:2239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/268865/1/KWP2239.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karlstrøm, Henrik & Ryghaug, Marianne, 2014. "Public attitudes towards renewable energy technologies in Norway. The role of party preferences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 656-663.
    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. Baharoon, Dhyia Aidroos & Rahman, Hasimah Abdul & Fadhl, Saeed Obaid, 2016. "Publics׳ knowledge, attitudes and behavioral toward the use of solar energy in Yemen power sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 498-515.
    2. Ho, Lip-Wah & Lie, Tek-Tjing & Leong, Paul TM & Clear, Tony, 2018. "Developing offshore wind farm siting criteria by using an international Delphi method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 53-67.
    3. Arndt, Christoph, 2023. "Climate change vs energy security? The conditional support for energy sources among Western Europeans," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    4. Jacob B. Rode & Peter H. Ditto, 2020. "Comparing the effects of a news article’s message and source on fracking attitudes in an experimental study," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(3), pages 255-269, September.
    5. Pratiwi, Santi & Juerges, Nataly, 2022. "Digital advocacy at the science-policy interface: Resolving land-use conflicts in conservation forests," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    6. Aune, Margrethe & Godbolt, Åsne Lund & Sørensen, Knut H. & Ryghaug, Marianne & Karlstrøm, Henrik & Næss, Robert, 2016. "Concerned consumption. Global warming changing household domestication of energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 290-297.
    7. Christian Krekel & Johannes Rode & Alexander Roth, 2023. "Do wind turbines have adverse health impacts," CEP Discussion Papers dp1950, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    8. Yu, H. & Reiner, D. & Chen, H. & Mi, Z., 2018. "A comparison of public preferences for different low-carbon energy technologies: Support for CCS, nuclear and wind energy in the United Kingdom," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1826, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    9. Pradipta Halder & Sari Havu-Nuutinen & Janne Pietarinen & Anas Zyadin & Paavo Pelkonen, 2014. "Subject Knowledge and Perceptions of Bioenergy among School Teachers in India: Results from a Survey," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Sunčana Slijepčević & Željka Kordej-De Villa, 2021. "Public Attitudes toward Renewable Energy in Croatia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-17, December.
    11. Spielhofer, R. & Thrash, T. & Hayek, U. Wissen & Grêt-Regamey, A. & Salak, B. & Grübel, J. & Schinazi, V.R., 2021. "Physiological and behavioral reactions to renewable energy systems in various landscape types," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    12. Ozcan, Mustafa, 2019. "Factors influencing the electricity generation preferences of Turkish citizens: Citizens' attitudes and policy recommendations in the context of climate change and environmental impact," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 381-393.
    13. Clulow, Z. & Ferguson, M. & Ashworth, P & Reiner, D., 2021. "Political ideology and public views of the energy transition in Australia and the UK," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2126, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    14. Magdeline Cleopatra Nondo, 2021. "Comparing Official and Public Attitudes towards Solar Energy in Botswana: The Case of Domestic Solar Water Heaters in Gaborone," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 5(10), pages 242-271, October.
    15. Fang, Xingming & Qu, Zitang & Sun, Chuanwang & Wu, Chengkuan & Wei, Jing, 2022. "Public attitude and policy selection of future energy sustainability in China: Evidence of the survey of the college students," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    16. Zhang, Dongcheng & Jiang, Hanchen & Qiang, Maoshan, 2023. "Public attitudes toward hydropower in China: The role of information provision and partisan identification," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    17. Wang, Jing & Li, Yazhou & Wu, Jianlin & Gu, Jibao & Xu, Shuo, 2020. "Environmental beliefs and public acceptance of nuclear energy in China: A moderated mediation analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    18. Kim, Philseo & Kim, Jihee & Yim, Man-Sung, 2020. "How deliberation changes public opinions on nuclear energy: South Korea's deliberation on closing nuclear reactors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 270(C).
    19. Kosorić, Vesna & Huang, Huajing & Tablada, Abel & Lau, Siu-Kit & Tan, Hugh T.W., 2019. "Survey on the social acceptance of the productive façade concept integrating photovoltaic and farming systems in high-rise public housing blocks in Singapore," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 197-214.
    20. Gabriela O. Chiciudean & Rezhen Harun & Felix H. Arion & Daniel I. Chiciudean & Camelia F. Oroian & Iulia C. Muresan, 2018. "A Critical Approach on Sustainable Renewable Energy Sources in Rural Area: Evidence from North-West Region of Romania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Climate policy; carbon capture; CCS; technology optimism; citizen-elite congruence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:ifwkwp:2239. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.html .

    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.