IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v40y2020i4p599-625_4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can policy-packaging increase public support for costly policies? Insights from a choice experiment on policies against vehicle emissions

Author

Listed:
  • Wicki, Michael
  • Huber, Robert Alexander
  • Bernauer, Thomas

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Wicki, Michael & Huber, Robert Alexander & Bernauer, Thomas, 2020. "Can policy-packaging increase public support for costly policies? Insights from a choice experiment on policies against vehicle emissions," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(4), pages 599-625, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:40:y:2020:i:4:p:599-625_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X19000205/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Christian Oltra & Roser Sala & Sergi López-Asensio & Silvia Germán & Àlex Boso, 2021. "Individual-Level Determinants of the Public Acceptance of Policy Measures to Improve Urban Air Quality: The Case of the Barcelona Low Emission Zone," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, January.
    2. Daniele Malerba, 2022. "The Effects of Social Protection and Social Cohesion on the Acceptability of Climate Change Mitigation Policies: What Do We (Not) Know in the Context of Low- and Middle-Income Countries?," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(3), pages 1358-1382, June.
    3. Lichtin, Florian & Smith, E. Keith & Axhausen, Kay W. & Bernauer, Thomas, 2024. "How to design publicly acceptable road pricing? Experimental insights from Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    4. Habla, Wolfgang & Kokash, Kumai & Löfgren, Åsa & Straubinger, Anna & Ziegler, Andreas, 2024. "Self-interest and support of climate-related transport policy measures: An empirical analysis for citizens in Germany and Sweden," ZEW Discussion Papers 24-028, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Smith, E. Keith & Kolcava, Dennis, 2024. "Measuring Absolute and Relative Levels of Policy Support using Conjoint Choice Experiments," OSF Preprints 837ws, Center for Open Science.
    6. Ling, Maoliang & Liu, Chutian & Xu, Lin & Yang, Haimi, 2024. "Carrot and stick incentive policies for climate change mitigation: A survey experiment on crowding out of public support," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 223(C).
    7. Hössinger, Reinhard & Peer, Stefanie & Juschten, Maria, 2023. "Give citizens a task: An innovative tool to compose policy bundles that reach the climate goal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    8. Qiao Wang & Shiyun Chen & Hongtao Yi, 2024. "A Two-Stage Evaluation of China’s New Energy Industrial Policy Package," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-21, September.

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:40:y:2020:i:4:p:599-625_4. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.