ArticlePublisher preview available

Energy policy and public opinion: patterns, trends and future directions

IOP Publishing
Progress in Energy
Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract and Figures

This article analyzes patterns and trends in U.S public opinion about energy policy to understand which types of policy approaches Americans support and the individual-level determinants that are associated with those preferences. Specifically, we study data from three long-running surveys series—the National Surveys on Energy and Environment, the Climate Change in the American Mind survey and the Gallup Poll Social Series—which collectively provide a vast array of questions on energy policy, ranging from limits on extraction to promotion of clean energy to restrictions on fossil fuel use to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our analysis finds strong and temporally stable support for policies that promote renewable energy technologies, as well as policies that prioritize environmental protection over energy extraction. We additionally find that partisanship is the most important determinant of Americans’ energy policy preferences and that there is an increasing divide between Democrats and Republicans on energy policy. Our analysis does not show that Americans prefer particular policy instruments, but we do find that support declines for policies when their costs are made explicit and that these declines in support are similar in magnitude for Democrats and Republicans. We conclude the paper with directions for future research.
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Prog. Energy 2(2020) 032003 https://doi.org/10.1088/2516-1083/ab9592
Progress in Energy
Energy policy and public opinion: patterns, trends and future
RECEIVED
19 January 2020
REVISED
21 April 2020
ACC EPT ED FOR PUB LICATI ON
21 May 2020
PUBLISHED
28 July 2020
directions
Parrish Bergquist1,4, David M Konisky2and John Kotcher3,5
1McCourt School of Public Policy, Georgetown University, Washington DC, United States of America
2O’Neill School of Public and Environmental Affairs Indiana University, IN, United States of America
3Center for Climate Change Communication George Mason University, VA, United States of America
4Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, CT, United States of America
5Research Assistant Professor, Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University, VA, United States of America
E-mail: parrish.bergquist@yale.edu, dkonisky@indiana.edu and jkotcher@gmu.edu
Keywords: energy policy, climate change, public opinion, United States
Abstract
This article analyzes patterns and trends in U.S public opinion about energy policy to understand
which types of policy approaches Americans support and the individual-level determinants that
are associated with those preferences. Specifically, we study data from three long-running surveys
series—the National Surveys on Energy and Environment, the Climate Change in the American
Mind survey and the Gallup Poll Social Series—which collectively provide a vast array of questions
on energy policy, ranging from limits on extraction to promotion of clean energy to restrictions on
fossil fuel use to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our analysis finds strong and temporally stable
support for policies that promote renewable energy technologies, as well as policies that prioritize
environmental protection over energy extraction. We additionally find that partisanship is the most
important determinant of Americans’ energy policy preferences and that there is an increasing
divide between Democrats and Republicans on energy policy. Our analysis does not show that
Americans prefer particular policy instruments, but we do find that support declines for policies
when their costs are made explicit and that these declines in support are similar in magnitude for
Democrats and Republicans. We conclude the paper with directions for future research.
Introduction
An energy transition is underway across the world, as countries begin to shift their economies from reliance
on fossil fuels to cleaner, renewable energy sources. The adverse ecological and health effects of fossil fuel use
are well-established and provide reason enough for governments to hasten the transition to alternative
sources of energy. Recent scientific assessments about the urgency of climate change provide even more
impetus. According to a recent report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, to limit warming
to 1.5 C, the world will need to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 45% from 2010 levels by 2030 and
reach net zero emissions around 2050 (IPCC 2018). This will require drastically reducing fossil fuel
consumption and quickly deploying substitutes.
Despite the urgent need for action, the pace of the energy transition varies from country to country.
Scholars have argued that a country’s transition path depends on factors such as its resource endowment and
its specific economic, political and social circumstances (Aklin and Urpelainen 2018, Fouquet and Pearson
2012, Grubler, Wilson and Nemet 2016, Smil 2016, Sovacool 2016). An important factor shaping countries’
approaches to the energy transition is citizen demand. Citizens act as consumers and in democratic countries
as voters, and their preferences for different technologies can influence elected officials’ decisions about
which energy sources to promote (Ansolabehere and Konisky 2014, Karapin 2016, Druckman 2013). Yet,
despite the potential importance of public demand, there are surprisingly few studies in the scholarly
literature that explicitly study energy policy preferences. This is especially the case for the United States,
which is the context for this study.
To be sure, there is an extensive interdisciplinary literature studying Americans’ attitudes toward energy.
Some of this work dates back many decades, including seminal work in social psychology on perceptions of
© 2020 IOP Publishing Ltd
... Achieving these reductions will require broad popular support from the public. Yet, the perceived risk of climate change and the sense of urgency for an energy transition are both politically polarized, especially in the United States (3)(4)(5). Researchers identify resistance toward climate change mitigation efforts by those with conservative political ideology or political identities as leading barriers to concerted action on climate (6,7). ...
... In contrast, conservatives may actually reject sustainable practices and technologies when they are framed in overtly environmentalist terms (12)(13)(14). Further, when asked directly about their reasons for supporting renewable energy, Republicans emphasize economic costs and benefits (10) and their energy preferences may be more sensitive to price information than the preferences of Democrats (3). ...
... Few studies have directly examined how political identity relates to solar PV adoption. In surveys, Democrats report slightly greater support for policies that would expand renewables, including solar (3), but support is high across partisan lines (8). Surveys of adoption intention and interest in solar find mixed results, with some studies reporting no partisan difference (26), while others find political liberals more likely to express intention to adopt than conservatives (27). ...
Article
Full-text available
The perceived risk of climate change and the sense of urgency for an energy transition are both politically polarized, especially in the United States. Yet, we know relatively little about how political polarization affects consumer energy preferences and behaviors. Here, we use the case of residential solar photovoltaics (PV) in New York State to 1) measure the partisan gap in solar adoption rates and 2) test whether more favorable economics of solar PV mute the effect of political identity. Using household-level, longitudinal data that include nearly 63,000 completed residential PV projects, we find evidence of a partisan gap in PV adoption. Democratic homeowners are approximately 1.45 times as likely to adopt solar PV as Republican homeowners. Republicans’ rate of adoption is the lowest of all measured groups, behind Independents, unaffiliated voters, and homeowners not registered to vote. Crucially, however, Republicans in our sample appear to be the most attuned to the changing economics and financing options of solar PV. Our estimates suggest that 1) as homeowners’ electricity rate increases relative to its long-run average, the adoption gap between Democ-rats and Republicans narrows, 2) that Republican PV adopters obtain systems with higher expected economic value, and 3) Republicans take greater advantage of alternative financing models, like leases and power purchase agreements, especially when the upfront costs of solar are high. The results demonstrate that political identity affects consumers’ participation in the energy transition, but local context, including the local economics of solar, may mitigate the effect of personal politics.
... Despite multi-party support for a decarbonized energy future, there are significant political differences in energy resource preferences [14]. Democrats and liberals tend to favor renewable energy policies, while Republicans, Independents, and conservatives show less support for regulations on fossil fuels, and renewable energy implementation pricing [15], [16], [17]. Political orientation is a strong predictor of energy policy preferences, with party affiliation being the most significant factor [16], [18]. ...
... Democrats and liberals tend to favor renewable energy policies, while Republicans, Independents, and conservatives show less support for regulations on fossil fuels, and renewable energy implementation pricing [15], [16], [17]. Political orientation is a strong predictor of energy policy preferences, with party affiliation being the most significant factor [16], [18]. ...
... Examining the relationship between respondents' knowledge about energy dependence and their attitudes towards energy production and climate policies can show whether higher levels of knowledge correlate with greater support for RES and climate change mitigation efforts [18], [19], [20]. Finally, analyzing how recent experiences with extreme weather events and environmental issues influence public attitudes towards climate change and related policies and exploring differences in these impacts, may provide valuable insights for developing targeted and effective strategies to address public concerns and promote sustainable practices [21]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Public attitudes towards energy sources and climate change are increasingly complex. This paper explores Americans’ perceptions of energy sources including renewables, Electric Vehicles (EVs), government policies and climate change. A survey conducted by the Pew Research Center (PRC), comprising over 10,000 responses to 52 questions on energy sources and climate change, is analyzed. In this paper, we propose a data analysis framework that consists of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), cluster analysis and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to segment respondents and identify key variables. Furthermore, the Structural Equation Model (SEM) is created to examine relationships between latent and observed variables, using maximum likelihood estimation. The results validated the identified factors, with high loading on key variables indicating strong contributions to attitudes towards energy and climate policies.
Article
As energy resource prices are on the rise and the stability of energy supplies is increasingly challenged by the current geopolitical climate, it is essential to scrutinize the capability of households to adapt to the resulting circumstances by assessing the current and potential household energy supply and adapting solutions to energy consumption habits. The aim of the research is to study of the energy consumption behaviour of households in the Baltic States amidst a significant increase in prices. The research methods encompass the examination of literary sources, categorization, amalgamation, abstraction, and juxtaposition in the theoretical segment, as well as a case study focusing on energy consumers in Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Notably, the study presents a unique analysis of the unprecedented scenario of substantial price hikes across all energy usage categories in the region. An examination of individual responses concerning energy consumption illustrates a notable escalation in household expenditures on electricity and heating. Households are endeavouring to curtail energy expenses through various conservation techniques. A correlation between income levels and household energy consumption is evident.
Article
In recent years, there has been a growing recognition of energy efficiency as the ‘first fuel,’ seen as one of the most promising approaches for achieving climate change mitigation goals and enhancing energy security without compromising economic well‐being. However, meeting the standards of the IEA Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario demands a more thorough exploitation of economically viable energy efficiency potentials. The United States has a huge energy efficiency potential to cost‐effectively reduce its electricity use, but utilizing this potential requires proactive policymaking. Recent studies suggest that state policymaking increasingly responds to mass policy preferences, gradually shaping policy changes despite existing barriers. This underscores the importance of investigating public energy preferences. Given that energy preferences of the US citizens are significantly polarized due to ideological and identity‐driven beliefs about the existence and severity of climate change, understanding these preferences becomes even more vital. While there is plenty of literature on the merits and challenges of energy efficiency as well as on public preferences for various energy policies, there remains a noticeable research gap in the understanding of the public's specific preferences for energy efficiency policies especially in the American West. This study addresses this gap through a survey of 1804 randomly selected respondents across California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. It broadens the scope beyond political ideology to explore how environmental values, social identities, and policy literacy are associated with public support for energy efficiency policies in building and agricultural sectors.
Article
Full-text available
Despite the gravity of the climate threat, governments around the world have struggled to pass and implement climate policies. Today, politicians and advocates are championing a new idea: linking climate policy to other economic and social reforms. Will this approach generate greater public support for climate action? Here, we test this coalition-building strategy. Using two conjoint experiments on a representative sample of 2,476 Americans, we evaluate the marginal impact of 40 different climate, social, and economic policies on support for climate reforms. Overall, we find climate policy bundles that include social and economic reforms such as affordable housing, a $15 minimum wage, or a job guarantee increase US public support for climate mitigation. Clean energy standards, regardless of which technologies are included, also make climate policy more popular. Linking climate policy to economic and social issues is particularly effective at expanding climate policy support among people of color.
Article
Full-text available
The topics of climate change and renewable energy are often linked in policy discussions and scientific analysis, but public opinion on these topics exhibits both overlap and divergence. Although renewable energy has potentially broader acceptance than anthropogenic climate change, it can also face differently-based opposition. Analyses of US and regional surveys, including time series of repeated surveys in New Hampshire (2010–2018) and northeast Oregon (2011–2018), explore the social bases and trends of public views on both issues. Political divisions are prominent, although somewhat greater regarding climate change due to substantive differences and more partisan opposition. Regarding climate change and to a lesser extent renewable energy, political divisions tends to widen with education. There also are robust age and temporal effects: younger adults more often prioritize renewable energy development, and agree with scientists on the reality of anthropogenic climate change (ACC). Across all age groups and both regional series, support for renewable energy and recognition of ACC have been gradually rising. Contrary to widespread speculation, these trends have not visibly responded to events such as the US hurricanes of 2012, 2017 or 2018. Together with age-cohort replacement and the potential for changes in age-group voting participation, however, the gradual trends suggest that public pressure for action on these issues could grow.
Article
Full-text available
The main obstacle to making the transportation sector ecologically more sustainable is political feasibility. Effective policy-interventions usually encounter strong public opposition as they interfere in costly ways with people's daily lives, unveiling a dilemma between political feasibility and environmental policy effectiveness. Evidencing the existence of this dilemma, the literature on attitudes towards different policy instrument types maintains that so-called push measures are less supported by citizens than pull measures, and that market-based instruments tend to be less supported than non-market instruments. While these findings may uphold when considering single policy instruments, whether they continue to do so when considering policy-packages, that is, simultaneously implemented policy-interventions consisting of several policy instruments, remains unclear. To identify politically feasible and effective policy-packages aimed at greening the transportation sector we use choice experiments with representative samples of citizens from China, Germany, and the USA (N = 4'876). Contrary to existing literature, we find that public support does not necessarily depend on the instrument type but rather on specific policy design and is highly context dependent. Moreover, despite significant differences between the three country contexts considered, various combinations of policy measures appear to be both potentially effective and supported by most citizens. Altogether, these results suggest that carefully bundled policy-packages may allow governments to employ instruments that would not be politically feasible if introduced in isolation.
Book
Analysis of climate change policies focuses mainly on the prospects for international agreements or how climate policies should be designed. Yet effective domestic climate policies are essential to any global solution, and we know too little about how and why such policies are adopted. Political Opportunities for Climate Policy examines in depth the causes of effective climate policies in the United States, using a statistical analysis of all fifty states and long-term case studies of California, New York, and the federal government. Roger Karapin analyzes twenty-two episodes in which policies were adopted, blocked, or reversed. He shows that actors and events have positively affected climate policy making, despite the constraints presented by political institutions and powerful fossil fuel industries. Climate policy advocates have succeeded when they mobilized vigorously and astutely during windows of opportunity - which opened when events converged to raise both problem awareness and the political commitment to address them.
Article
While scholars have assessed the drivers of public views of electricity generation infrastructure, attention to transmission infrastructure has been limited. Moreover, economic benefits are often wielded to garner public support in siting debates, but questions remain about what shapes local perceptions of economic impacts. We examine how the symbolic content and geographic scale of place sentiments shape residents’ interpretations and evaluations of proposed transmission infrastructure projects as a threat or an opportunity. We draw from in-depth interviews with public officials, residents, landowners, and stakeholders in communities along the routes of two proposed energy transmission projects in the American Midwest. Symbolic meanings, including but not limited to those reflecting economic identities, inform interpretation of project impacts and evaluations of the projects as threats or opportunities. Place meanings at the local, state, and national scales also help define the values through which respondents evaluate the projects.
Article
Previous research documents that U.S. conservatives, and conservative white males in particular, tend to dismiss the threat of climate change more than others in the U.S. public. Other research indicates that higher education and income can each exacerbate the dismissive tendencies of the political Right. Bridging these lines of research, the present study examines the extent to which higher education and/or income moderate the ideological divide and the “conservative white male effect” on several climate change opinions, and whether these effects are mediated by an individualistic worldview (e.g., valuing individual liberty and limited government). Using nationally representative survey data of U.S. adults from 2008 to 2017 (N = 20,024), we find that across all beliefs, risk perceptions, and policy preferences examined, the ideological divide strengthens with both higher education and higher income. However, educational attainment plays a stronger role than income in polarizing the views of conservative white males. Further analyses support the hypothesis that differences in individualism partially explain the increased political polarization among more educated and higher-income adults, as well as greater dismissiveness among conservative white males relative to other demographic groups. These results highlight key moderators of opinion polarization, as well as ideological differences among conservatives, that are often overlooked in public discourse about climate change. Implications for climate change education and communication across demographic groups are considered.
Article
Support for renewable energy is often solicited by leveraging concern about environmental problems such as climate change. However, the environment – and especially climate change – is hyper-polarized amongst the American public, and non-environmental justifications for renewable energy may resonate more broadly. Using a 2016 mail survey of individuals living in five states in the Rocky Mountain region of the U.S., we examine predictors of public approval of renewable energy usage, approval of a 20% renewable portfolio standard policy, and agreement with seven frames for renewable energy, of which four referenced the environment and three did not. We build upon previous research by analyzing geographic variation in frame agreement and by testing a religious environmental stewardship and resource-conservation frame. Results indicate high approval renewable energy but mixed support for the policy measure. Respondents on average agreed with all seven renewable energy frames, with energy security and energy diversification receiving the most support. Of the four environmental frames, air pollution and resource conservation had the most support, and the religion and climate frames had the least. We note variation by state, particularly on support for the policy measure. Political ideology and belief in human-caused global warming were consistent predictors, though gender, residence in a metro county, neoliberal ideology, and state of residence were also important. Overall, our results echo other research indicating that non-climate-based frames for renewable energy are likely to garner broader public support, but we suggest that the significance of this finding is particularly important in certain political and geographical contexts.
Article
Public support is usually a precondition for the adoption and successful implementation of costly policies. We argue that such support is easier to achieve with policy-packages that incorporate primary and ancillary measures. We specifically distinguish command-and-control and market-based measures as primary measures and argue that the former will usually garner more public support than the latter given the low-visibility tendency of costs associated with command-and-control measures. Nevertheless, if included in a policy-package, ancillary measures are likely to increase public support by reducing negative effects of primary measures. Based on a choice experiment with a representative sample of 2,034 Swiss citizens, we assessed these arguments with respect to political efforts to reduce vehicle emissions. The empirical analysis supported the argument that policy-packaging affects public support positively, particularly generating more support when ancillary measures are added. Lastly, we ultimately observe that command-and-control measures obtain more public support than market-based instruments.
Article
In industrialised countries, emissions from fossil-fuelled vehicles show little sign of abatement, with citizens’ opposition to policy interventions arguably the key reason. To better understand the sources of public opinion towards particular types of policy instruments designed to reduce vehicle emissions, we focus on the perceived consequences of such instruments, notably the extent to which they are regarded as effective, fair, and unintrusive. Switzerland is the empirical focus because it lags behind neighbouring European countries. We assess public support for seven policy instruments, identified by existing literature and expert interviews. A survey-embedded experiment with a representative sample of 2,034 citizens provides support for the argument that policy instruments perceived as effective, fair, and unintrusive achieve higher levels of public support. These results may help policymakers design interventions that strike a balance between political feasibility and problem-solving effectiveness.
Article
Objectives This article examines the degree to which environmental concerns are influenced by race and ethnicity, and particularly whether significant differences exist among people of color and whites. Our objective is to clarify this uncertainty since previous studies have been limited by the timeframe and geographic scope of their data. Methods We analyze 15 years of nationally representative data from Gallup's General Poll Social Survey. Using a multitude of dependent variables that capture a range of environmental issues, we employ ordinal logistic regression models to understand environmental attitudes across race and ethnicity. Results We find that people of color are more concerned than whites about matters pertaining to environmental justice, and just as concerned about problems related to traditional environmentalism. Conclusions The results of this study contribute to our understanding of the individual‐level determinants of environmental attitudes, and provide insights into the attitudinal foundations of the modern‐day environmental justice movement.