IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7546-d1139516.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Are Differences in Perceptions about Climate Technologies between Experts and the Public?

Author

Listed:
  • Jaeryoung Song

    (Center for External Affairs and Policy Cooperation, National Institute of Green Technology, Jung-gu, Seoul 04554, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

The Korean government announced it was carbon-neutral in October 2021. In addition, as a follow-up, the government maintains related laws and systems and invests in facilitating research and technology development extensively. Government investment is ultimately the people’s taxes, and for laws and systems, the people’s support and interest are of importance. This study investigated carbon-neutral technologies of an expert group and the public, technology acceptance, and recommendation intention. The results of the study are as follows. First, the goodness-of-fit of the proposed model and its structure had a positive impact on technology acceptance (recommendation) intention. Second, the result of a multi-group comparative analysis of the impacts on the acceptance of carbon-neutral technologies by the public and experts was overall at an acceptable level. Third, as for perceptions about climate technologies among experts and the public, it was found that there were differences in effort expectancy, facilitating conditions, and network effects between the expert group and the public.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaeryoung Song, 2023. "What Are Differences in Perceptions about Climate Technologies between Experts and the Public?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7546-:d:1139516
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7546/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7546/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexa Spence & Wouter Poortinga & Nick Pidgeon, 2012. "The Psychological Distance of Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 957-972, June.
    2. Viswanath Venkatesh & Fred D. Davis, 2000. "A Theoretical Extension of the Technology Acceptance Model: Four Longitudinal Field Studies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 186-204, February.
    3. Broman Toft, Madeleine & Schuitema, Geertje & Thøgersen, John, 2014. "Responsible technology acceptance: Model development and application to consumer acceptance of Smart Grid technology," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 392-400.
    4. Fred D. Davis & Richard P. Bagozzi & Paul R. Warshaw, 1989. "User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 982-1003, August.
    5. Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1994. "Systems Competition and Network Effects," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 93-115, Spring.
    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. Jaeryoung Song & Joonho Yeo & Minsu Son, 2024. "Exploring Public Acceptance of Climate Technologies: A Study on Key Influences in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-16, October.

    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. Netsanet Haile & Jörn Altmann, 2016. "Structural analysis of value creation in software service platforms," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(2), pages 129-142, May.
    2. Hongping Yuan & Yu Yang & Xiaolong Xue, 2019. "Promoting Owners’ BIM Adoption Behaviors to Achieve Sustainable Project Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    3. Heesen, Florian & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "Technology Acceptance as Part of the Energy Performance Gap in Energy-Efficient Retrofitted Dwellings," FCN Working Papers 25/2014, E.ON Energy Research Center, Future Energy Consumer Needs and Behavior (FCN).
    4. Philippe Cohard, 2020. "Information Systems Values: A Study of the Intranet in Three French Higher Education Institutions," Post-Print hal-02987225, HAL.
    5. Melih Engin & Fatih Gürses, 2019. "Adoption of Hospital Information Systems in Public Hospitals in Turkey: An Analysis with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology Model," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(06), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Morosan, Cristian, 2016. "An empirical examination of U.S. travelers’ intentions to use biometric e-gates in airports," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 120-128.
    7. Tsung Teng Chen, 2012. "The development and empirical study of a literature review aiding system," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 92(1), pages 105-116, July.
    8. Abdesamad Zouine & Pierre Fenies, 2014. "The Critical Success Factors Of The ERP System Project: A Meta-Analysis Methodology," Post-Print hal-01419785, HAL.
    9. Debora Bettiga & Lucio Lamberti & Emanuele Lettieri, 2020. "Individuals’ adoption of smart technologies for preventive health care: a structural equation modeling approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 203-214, June.
    10. Chen-Yuan Chen & Bih-Yaw Shih & Shih-Hsien Yu, 2012. "Disaster prevention and reduction for exploring teachers’ technology acceptance using a virtual reality system and partial least squares techniques," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 62(3), pages 1217-1231, July.
    11. Paul Juinn Bing Tan, 2013. "Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, October.
    12. Fox, Stephen & Groesser, Stefan N., 2016. "Reframing the relevance of research to practice," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 457-465.
    13. Mäntymäki, Matti & Salo, Jari, 2013. "Purchasing behavior in social virtual worlds: An examination of Habbo Hotel," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 282-290.
    14. Cristopher Siegfried Kopplin, 2021. "Two heads are better than one: matchmaking tools in coworking spaces," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1045-1069, May.
    15. Ofir Turel & Catherine E. Connelly, 2012. "Team Spirit: The Influence of Psychological Collectivism on the Usage of E-Collaboration Tools," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 703-725, September.
    16. Joan Torrent-Sellens & Cristian Salazar-Concha & Pilar Ficapal-Cusí & Francesc Saigí-Rubió, 2021. "Using Digital Platforms to Promote Blood Donation: Motivational and Preliminary Evidence from Latin America and Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-17, April.
    17. Qianchun Dai & Kequn Cheng, 2022. "What Drives the Adoption of Agricultural Green Production Technologies? An Extension of TAM in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-18, November.
    18. Yuting Zhang & Xiaofen Yu & Ning Cai & Yong Li, 2020. "Analyzing the Employees’ New Media Use in the Energy Industry：The Role of Creative Self-Efficacy, Perceived Usefulness and Leaders’ Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-13, January.
    19. Cliff R. Kikawa & Charity Kiconco & Moses Agaba & Dimas Ntirampeba & Amos Ssematimba & Billy M. Kalema, 2022. "Social Media Marketing for Small and Medium Enterprise Performance in Uganda: A Structural Equation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, November.
    20. Garima Malik & A. Sajeevan Rao, 2019. "Extended expectation-confirmation model to predict continued usage of ODR/ride hailing apps: role of perceived value and self-efficacy," Information Technology & Tourism, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 461-482, December.

    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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7546-:d:1139516. 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.