1. Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies Linda Steg, Lieke Dreijerink & Wokje Abrahamse Department of Psychology University of Groningen

3. Policy acceptance Stern (2000): acceptance of policies is a type of nonactivist behaviour in the public sphere that can be explained by behavioural models Acceptability dependent on individual characteristics and policy characteristics Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

4. Research questions Can acceptability of energy saving policies be explained by VBN theory? Which policy characteristics explain acceptability of energy saving policies? Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

5. VBN theory of environmentalism Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

6. Policy characteristics Acceptability of energy saving policies is dependent on various policy characteristics: Reward (pull) or punishment (push) One shot versus curtailment Direct versus indirect energy savings Revenue use: –Push more acceptable if revenues used in same domain –Pull more acceptable if financed from general funds Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

7. Questionnaire study Questionnaires and reply paid envelope distributed in the city of Groningen 112 respondents Response 39% Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

8. Questionnaire: VBN Short version of Schwartz’ value scale. Confirmative factor analysis, 3 scales: –Egoistic value orientation (4 items): α =.65 –Altruistic value orientation (4 items): α =.72 –Ecocentric value orientation (4 items): α =.83 Revised NEP (15 items): α =.73 Confirmative factor analysis, 3 scales: –Awareness of consequences (AC, 6 items): α =.75 –Ascription of responsibility (AR, 6 items): α =.80 –Personal norm (PN, 9 items): α =.84 Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

9. Questionnaire: policy characteristics Evaluate acceptability of 16 policy measures that systematically vary on the four policy characteristics Conjoint analysis: acceptability depend on (combination of) policy characteristics? Mean acceptability judgments used as dependent variable in regression analysis to test VBN theory; α =.90 Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

10. Definition of policy characteristics 1. Push: increase price environmentally unsound behaviour by 10% Pull: decrease prices of environmentally sound behaviour by 10% 2. One shot: buy energy efficient products Curtailment: use of products 3.Direct: use of electricity, natural gas, fuels Indirect: energy use for production, distribution and disposal of goods 4.Within domain: energy related Outside domain: general governmental funds Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

11. Examples of policy measures 1.Push – one shot - direct – within domain: Increase prices of appliances that are not energy efficient. Revenues are used to stimulate the development of energy efficient appliances 2. Pull – curtailment – indirect – outside domain: Reduce prices of local seasonal vegetables and fruit (not raised in hothouses). The subsidies are funded from general public funds. Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

12. Test VBN theory Background / Method / Results / Conclusion Acceptability Eco Altruistic Ego NEPACARPN β=.37β=.20β=.36 β=.50 β=-.12 β=-.08 β=.16 β=.25 β=.35 PN → Acceptability: R 2 =.29 NEP → AC: R 2 =.28 Values → NEP: R 2 =.25 AR → PN: R 2 =.32, incl. Eco R 2 =.49 AC → AR: R 2 =.21, incl. Eco R 2 =.29 IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

13. Conjoint analysis acceptability: main effects Background / Method / Results / Conclusion **

14. Conjoint analysis acceptability: interaction effect Background / Method / Results / Conclusion **

15. Conclusions: VBN theory VBN theory is suitable to explain acceptability of energy saving policies Test model fit with structural equation models (e.g., Lisrel, Amos) Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

16. Conclusions: policy characteristics Most hypotheses confirmed: –Pull more acceptable than push –One shot behaviour more acceptable than curtailment –Direct versus indirect energy use n.s. –Push measures more acceptable if revenues used in same domain, pull measures n.s. Background / Method / Results / Conclusion IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies

17. Conclusion Acceptability of energy savings policies depend on individual characteristics and policy characteristics IAPS 2004: Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies Background / Method / Results / Conclusion