IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v129y2019icp853-860.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How projected electricity price and personal values influence support for a 50% renewable energy target in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Phillips, Keri L.
  • Hine, Donald W.
  • Phillips, Wendy J.

Abstract

This study investigated how projected electricity prices and personal values influence public support for a 50% renewable energy target (RET) in Australia. In an online experiment, 404 participants rated their support for a 50% RET across eight projected increases in their quarterly power bills. Multi-level modelling indicated that: (1) support for the 50% RET fell as the projected price of electricity increased, (2) although participants with low self-enhancement values and high self-transcendent values were most supportive of the 50% RET, these value-based differences disappeared as projected electricity prices increased. Implications of these findings for energy policy design are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Phillips, Keri L. & Hine, Donald W. & Phillips, Wendy J., 2019. "How projected electricity price and personal values influence support for a 50% renewable energy target in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 853-860.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:853-860
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.064
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519301545
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.064?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. Aldy, Joseph Edgar & Leiserowitz, Anthony A & Kotchen, Matthew J, 2012. "Willingness to Pay and Political Support for a U.S. National Clean Energy Standard," Scholarly Articles 8832942, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Hobman, Elizabeth V. & Frederiks, Elisha R. & Stenner, Karen & Meikle, Sarah, 2016. "Uptake and usage of cost-reflective electricity pricing: Insights from psychology and behavioural economics," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 455-467.
    3. Bessette, Douglas L. & Arvai, Joseph L., 2018. "Engaging attribute tradeoffs in clean energy portfolio development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 221-229.
    4. Paul C. Stern & Benjamin K. Sovacool & Thomas Dietz, 2016. "Towards a science of climate and energy choices," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 547-555, June.
    5. Butler, C. & Demski, C. & Parkhill, K. & Pidgeon, N. & Spence, A., 2015. "Public values for energy futures: Framing, indeterminacy and policy making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 665-672.
    6. Joseph E. Aldy & Matthew J. Kotchen & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2012. "Willingness to pay and political support for a US national clean energy standard," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(8), pages 596-599, August.
    7. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
    8. Schuitema, Geertje & Steg, Linda & Forward, Sonja, 2010. "Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 99-109, February.
    9. Judith I. M. de Groot & Linda Steg & Wouter Poortinga, 2013. "Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 307-317, February.
    10. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    11. Demski, Christina & Evensen, Darrick & Pidgeon, Nick & Spence, Alexa, 2017. "Public prioritisation of energy affordability in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 404-409.
    12. C. P. Weaver & S. Mooney & D. Allen & N. Beller-Simms & T. Fish & A. E. Grambsch & W. Hohenstein & K. Jacobs & M. A. Kenney & M. A. Lane & L. Langner & E. Larson & D. L. McGinnis & R. H. Moss & L. G. , 2014. "From global change science to action with social sciences," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(8), pages 656-659, August.
    13. Jacobson, Mark Z. & Delucchi, Mark A., 2011. "Providing all global energy with wind, water, and solar power, Part I: Technologies, energy resources, quantities and areas of infrastructure, and materials," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1154-1169, March.
    14. Heide Hackmann & Susanne C. Moser & Asuncion Lera St. Clair, 2014. "The social heart of global environmental change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(8), pages 653-655, August.
    15. Perlaviciute, G. & Steg, L., 2015. "The influence of values on evaluations of energy alternatives," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 259-267.
    16. Bidwell, David, 2013. "The role of values in public beliefs and attitudes towards commercial wind energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 189-199.
    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. Hojnik, Jana & Ruzzier, Mitja & Fabri, Stephanie & Klopčič, Alenka Lena, 2021. "What you give is what you get: Willingness to pay for green energy," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 733-746.

    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. Goda Perlaviciute & Linda Steg & Nadja Contzen & Sabine Roeser & Nicole Huijts, 2018. "Emotional Responses to Energy Projects: Insights for Responsible Decision Making in a Sustainable Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-12, July.
    2. Perlaviciute, Goda & Steg, Linda, 2014. "Contextual and psychological factors shaping evaluations and acceptability of energy alternatives: Integrated review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 361-381.
    3. Andrew B. Moynihan & Geertje Schuitema, 2020. "Values Influence Public Acceptability of Geoengineering Technologies Via Self-Identities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-33, June.
    4. Seoyong Kim & Jae Eun Lee & Donggeun Kim, 2019. "Searching for the Next New Energy in Energy Transition: Comparing the Impacts of Economic Incentives on Local Acceptance of Fossil Fuels, Renewable, and Nuclear Energies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-32, April.
    5. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    6. Baral, Nabin & Rabotyagov, Sergey, 2017. "How much are wood-based cellulosic biofuels worth in the Pacific Northwest? Ex-ante and ex-post analysis of local people's willingness to pay," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 99-106.
    7. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    8. Jarke-Neuert, Johannes & Perino, Grischa & Schwickert, Henrike, 2021. "Free-Riding for Future: Field Experimental Evidence of Strategic Substitutability in Climate Protest," SocArXiv sh6dm, Center for Open Science.
    9. Jens Abildtrup & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel & Udo Mantau & Robert Mavsar & Davide Pettenella & Irina Prokofieva & Florian Schubert & Anne Stenger & Elsa Varela & Enrico Vidale & , 2024. "Preferences for climate change policies: the role of co-benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 110-128, January.
    10. Tiezzi, Silvia & Xiao, Erte, 2016. "Time delay, complexity and support for taxation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 117-141.
    11. Sangiuliano, Stephen Joseph, 2017. "Turning of the tides: Assessing the international implementation of tidal current turbines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 971-989.
    12. Heeter, Jenny & Bird, Lori, 2013. "Including alternative resources in state renewable portfolio standards: Current design and implementation experience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1388-1399.
    13. Sundt, Swantje & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "Consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity: A meta-analysis of the literature," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-8.
    14. Taylan G. Topcu & Konstantinos Triantis, 2022. "An ex-ante DEA method for representing contextual uncertainties and stakeholder risk preferences," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 309(1), pages 395-423, February.
    15. Soon, Jan-Jan & Ahmad, Siti-Aznor, 2015. "Willingly or grudgingly? A meta-analysis on the willingness-to-pay for renewable energy use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 877-887.
    16. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: evidence from a choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112963, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Ruef, Franziska & Ejderyan, Olivier, 2021. "Rowing, steering or anchoring? Public values for geothermal energy governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    18. Faber, Isaac & Lane, William & Pak, Wayne & Prakel, Mary & Rocha, Cheyne & Farr, John V., 2014. "Micro-energy markets: The role of a consumer preference pricing strategy on microgrid energy investment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 567-575.
    19. Aklin, Michaël & Bayer, Patrick & Harish, S.P. & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2013. "Understanding environmental policy preferences: New evidence from Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 28-36.
    20. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo, 2017. "Does Mitigation Begin At Home?," Working Papers 0634, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.

    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:129:y:2019:i:c:p:853-860. 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.