IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v117y2018icp377-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What explains local policy elites’ preferences toward renewable energy/energy efficiency policy?

Author

Listed:
  • Tumlison, Creed
  • Button, Eric D.
  • Song, Geoboo
  • Kester, John

Abstract

In this paper, we attempt to identify individual-level determinants that shape renewable energy and energy efficiency (RE/EE) policy adoption decisions, utilizing the grid-group cultural theory (CT) mixed with rational choice perspectives. Through an analysis of data collected from a statewide survey of 420 local policy elites in more than 50 Arkansas cities in 2014, we found that cultural values – particularly those of egalitarianism and individualism – significantly influence RE/EE policy preferences, with egalitarians demonstrating higher support for RE/EE policies and individualists demonstrating lower levels of support. We further found that feasibility considerations – particularly economic and land use feasibility perceptions – significantly influence RE/EE policy preferences, with higher levels of perceived feasibility being associated with higher levels of support for RE/EE policies. However, feasibility perceptions were not strong enough to overcome the effects of cultural values, particularly for egalitarians and individualists. In sum, such feasibility considerations are present in policy elites’ related policy preference formation, but are constrained by their cultural value predispositions. We conclude by discussing various ramifications of our research findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Tumlison, Creed & Button, Eric D. & Song, Geoboo & Kester, John, 2018. "What explains local policy elites’ preferences toward renewable energy/energy efficiency policy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 377-386.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:117:y:2018:i:c:p:377-386
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.03.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421518301393
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.03.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ronald H. Coase, 2022. "The Market for Goods and the Market for Ideas," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 19(1), pages 166–175-1, March.
    2. West, J. & Bailey, I. & Winter, M., 2010. "Renewable energy policy and public perceptions of renewable energy: A cultural theory approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5739-5748, October.
    3. Boudet, Hilary & Clarke, Christopher & Bugden, Dylan & Maibach, Edward & Roser-Renouf, Connie & Leiserowitz, Anthony, 2014. "“Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 57-67.
    4. Kerr, Niall & Gouldson, Andy & Barrett, John, 2017. "The rationale for energy efficiency policy: Assessing the recognition of the multiple benefits of energy efficiency retrofit policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 212-221.
    5. van de Graaff, Shashi, 2016. "Understanding the nuclear controversy: An application of cultural theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 50-59.
    6. Joseph T. Ripberger & Geoboo Song & Matthew C. Nowlin & Michael D. Jones & Hank C. Jenkins-Smith, 2012. "Reconsidering the Relationship Between Cultural Theory, Political Ideology, and Political Knowledge," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 93(3), pages 713-731, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Carmen de la Cruz-Lovera & Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro & Esther Salmerón-Manzano & José-Luis de la Cruz-Fernández & Alberto-Jesus Perea-Moreno, 2019. "Date Seeds ( Phoenix dactylifera L. ) Valorization for Boilers in the Mediterranean Climate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, January.

    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. Rachael M. Moyer, 2022. "Images of controversy: Examining cognition of hydraulic fracturing among policy elites and the general public," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 441-467, July.
    2. Creed Tumlison & Geoboo Song, 2019. "Cultural Values, Trust, and Benefit‐Risk Perceptions of Hydraulic Fracturing: A Comparative Analysis of Policy Elites and the General Public," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 511-534, March.
    3. Axsen, Jonn, 2014. "Citizen acceptance of new fossil fuel infrastructure: Value theory and Canada׳s Northern Gateway Pipeline," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 255-265.
    4. Andrew Chapman & Timothy Fraser & Melanie Dennis, 2019. "Investigating Ties between Energy Policy and Social Equity Research: A Citation Network Analysis," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, April.
    5. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    6. Nelson, Jon P., 2001. "Advertising Bans, Monopoly, and Alcohol Demand: Testing for Substitution Effects Using Panel Data," Working Papers 1-01-1, Pennsylvania State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Julia Rothbauer & Gernot Sieg, 2013. "Public Service Broadcasting of Sport, Shows, and News to Mitigate Rational Ignorance," Journal of Media Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 21-40, March.
    8. Tanya Heikkila & Christopher M. Weible, 2017. "Unpacking the intensity of policy conflict: a study of Colorado’s oil and gas subsystem," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(2), pages 179-193, June.
    9. Tongyu Meng & Jamie Newth & Christine Woods, 2022. "Ethical Sensemaking in Impact Investing: Reasons and Motives in the Chinese Renewable Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 1091-1117, September.
    10. Jan K. Kazak & Joanna A. Kamińska & Rafał Madej & Marta Bochenkiewicz, 2020. "Where Renewable Energy Sources Funds are Invested? Spatial Analysis of Energy Production Potential and Public Support," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-26, October.
    11. Toke, David, 2011. "The UK offshore wind power programme: A sea-change in UK energy policy?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 526-534, February.
    12. Katherine Ball & Kirk Jalbert & Lisa Test, 2021. "Making the board: participatory game design for environmental action," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 12-22, March.
    13. Shahriyar Nasirov & Carlos Silva & Claudio A. Agostini, 2015. "Investors’ Perspectives on Barriers to the Deployment of Renewable Energy Sources in Chile," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.
    14. Wang Ning, 2018. "Law and the Economy: An Introduction to Coasian Law and Economics," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-13, December.
    15. Wojuola, Rosemary N. & Alant, Busisiwe P., 2019. "Sustainable development and energy education in Nigeria," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1366-1374.
    16. Michael D. Jones, 2014. "Cultural Characters and Climate Change: How Heroes Shape Our Perception of Climate Science," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(1), pages 1-39, March.
    17. Berggren, Niclas & Nilsson, Therese, 2016. "Tolerance in the United States: Does economic freedom transform racial, religious, political and sexual attitudes?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 45(S), pages 53-70.
    18. Octavian-Dragomir Jora & Matei Alexandru Apavaloaei & Mihai-Vladimir Topan & Tudor-Gherasim Smirna, 2022. "The Market for Ideas and Its Validation Filters: Scientific Truth, Economic Profit and Political Approval," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 24(Special16), pages 884-884, November.
    19. Auping, Willem L. & Pruyt, Erik & de Jong, Sijbren & Kwakkel, Jan H., 2016. "The geopolitical impact of the shale revolution: Exploring consequences on energy prices and rentier states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 390-399.
    20. Clarke, Christopher E. & Evensen, Darrick T.N., 2023. "Attention to news media coverage of unconventional oil/gas development impacts: Exploring psychological antecedents and effects on issue support," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).

    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:eee:enepol:v:117:y:2018:i:c:p:377-386. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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.