IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i13p7000-d585494.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Efficacy, Climate Change Beliefs, Ideology, and Public Water Policy Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Erika Allen Wolters

    (School of Public Policy, Oregon State University, 300 Bexell Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

  • Brent S. Steel

    (School of Public Policy, Oregon State University, 300 Bexell Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

Abstract

Water is an unpredictable and often overallocated resource in the American West, one that strains policy makers to come up with viable, and politically acceptable policies to mitigate water management concerns. While large federal reclamation projects once dominated western water management and provided ample water for large scale agricultural development as well as the urbanization of the West, water engineering alone is no longer sufficient or, in some cases, a politically acceptable policy option. As demand for water in the West increases with an ever-growing population, climate change is presenting a more challenging and potentially untenable, reality of even longer periods of drought and insufficient water quantity. The complexity of managing water resources under climate change conditions will require multifaceted and publicly acceptable strategies. This paper therefore examines water policy preferences of residents in four western states: Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho. Using a public survey conducted in these states in 2019, we examine preferences pertaining to infrastructural, education, incentives and regulation specifically examining levels of support for varying policies based on climate change and environmental efficacy beliefs as well as geography, demographic variables, and political ideology. Results show support for all water policies surveyed, with the exception of charging higher rates for water during the hottest part of summer. The most preferred water policies pertained to tax incentives. Some variation of support exists based on gender, education, environmental values, efficacy, state residency and belief in anthropogenic climate change.

Suggested Citation

  • Erika Allen Wolters & Brent S. Steel, 2021. "Environmental Efficacy, Climate Change Beliefs, Ideology, and Public Water Policy Preferences," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-17, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:13:p:7000-:d:585494
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/7000/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/13/7000/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Arbuckle & Lois Morton & Jon Hobbs, 2013. "Farmer beliefs and concerns about climate change and attitudes toward adaptation and mitigation: Evidence from Iowa," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 551-563, June.
    2. Taciano L. Milfont, 2012. "The Interplay Between Knowledge, Perceived Efficacy, and Concern About Global Warming and Climate Change: A One‐Year Longitudinal Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1003-1020, June.
    3. Eva Lieberherr & Olivia Odom Green, 2018. "Green Infrastructure through Citizen Stormwater Management: Policy Instruments, Participation and Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    4. Paul M. Kellstedt & Sammy Zahran & Arnold Vedlitz, 2008. "Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 113-126, February.
    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. Guan, Hong & Saadé, Raafat George & Liu, Hao, 2024. "Empirical analysis of Manager's perceptions towards aviation carbon emissions reduction," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    2. Mei Feng & Chu Chen & Jia Liu & Wei Jia, 2022. "Does Central Environmental Protection Inspector Improve Corporate Social Responsibility? Evidence from Chinese Listed Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Kristin B. Dobbin & Amanda L. Fencl & Gregory Pierce & Melissa Beresford & Silvia Gonzalez & Wendy Jepson, 2023. "Understanding perceived climate risks to household water supply and their implications for adaptation: evidence from California," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 1-20, April.

    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. Bader Alhafi Alotaibi & Azhar Abbas & Raza Ullah & Roshan K. Nayak & Muhammad I. Azeem & Hazem S. Kassem, 2021. "Climate Change Concerns of Saudi Arabian Farmers: The Drivers and Their Role in Perceived Capacity Building Needs for Adaptation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-22, November.
    2. Veysel Yilmaz & Pınar Guleç & Erkan Ari, 2023. "Impact of climate change information of university students in Turkey on responsibility and environmental behavior through awareness and perceived risk," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 7281-7297, July.
    3. Cecilia M. V. B. Almeida & Biagio F. Giannetti & Feni Agostinho & Gengyuan Liu & Zhifeng Yang, 2021. "What Are the Stimuli to Change to a Sustainable Post-COVID-19 Society?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Christel W. van Eck & Bob C. Mulder & Sander van der Linden, 2020. "Climate Change Risk Perceptions of Audiences in the Climate Change Blogosphere," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, September.
    5. Najam uz Zehra Gardezi & Brent S. Steel & Angela Lavado, 2020. "The Impact of Efficacy, Values, and Knowledge on Public Preferences Concerning Food–Water–Energy Policy Tradeoffs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-20, November.
    6. Meredith T. Niles & Margaret Brown & Robyn Dynes, 2016. "Farmer’s intended and actual adoption of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 277-295, March.
    7. Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes & Katherine M. Crosman, 2019. "Efficacy, Action, and Support for Reducing Climate Change Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(4), pages 805-828, April.
    8. Jing Shi & Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Michael Siegrist, 2015. "Public Perception of Climate Change: The Importance of Knowledge and Cultural Worldviews," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(12), pages 2183-2201, December.
    9. Katherine M. Crosman & Ann Bostrom & Adam L. Hayes, 2019. "Efficacy Foundations for Risk Communication: How People Think About Reducing the Risks of Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2329-2347, October.
    10. Meredith Niles & Margaret Brown & Robyn Dynes, 2016. "Farmer’s intended and actual adoption of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 277-295, March.
    11. Sedighe Pakmehr & Masoud Yazdanpanah & Masoud Baradaran, 2021. "Explaining farmers’ response to climate change-induced water stress through cognitive theory of stress: an Iranian perspective," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5776-5793, April.
    12. Ting Liu & Nick Shryane & Mark Elliot, 2022. "Attitudes to climate change risk: classification of and transitions in the UK population between 2012 and 2020," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    13. Emőke Kiss & Dániel Balla & András Donát Kovács, 2022. "Characteristics of Climate Concern—Attitudes and Personal Actions—A Case Study of Hungarian Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, April.
    14. Hussey, Lucia Kafui & Arku, Godwin, 2019. "Conceptualizations of climate-related health risks among health experts and the public in Ghana," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 40-50.
    15. Veysel Yilmaz & Yasemin Can, 2020. "Impact of knowledge, concern and awareness about global warming and global climatic change on environmental behavior," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6245-6260, October.
    16. Tai-Yi Yu & Tai-Kuei Yu, 2017. "The Moderating Effects of Students’ Personality Traits on Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intentions in Response to Climate Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, November.
    17. Zhihui Wang & Liangzhen Nie & Eila Jeronen & Lihua Xu & Meiai Chen, 2023. "Understanding the Environmentally Sustainable Behavior of Chinese University Students as Tourists: An Integrative Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-17, February.
    18. Huaiyuan Zhai & Mengjie Li & Shengyue Hao & Mingli Chen & Lingchen Kong, 2021. "How Does Metro Maintenance Staff’s Risk Perception Influence Safety Citizenship Behavior—The Mediating Role of Safety Attitude," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-20, May.
    19. Walter Leal Filho & Mark Mifsud & Petra Molthan-Hill & Gustavo J. Nagy & Lucas Veiga Ávila & Amanda Lange Salvia, 2019. "Climate Change Scepticism at Universities: A Global Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, May.
    20. Sejung Park, 2020. "How Celebrities’ Green Messages on Twitter Influence Public Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions to Mitigate Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, September.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:13:p:7000-:d:585494. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.