Factors Influencing the Acceptability of Energy Policies

Household energy use has significantly increased during the last decades. Since energy use is a major contributor to the greenhouse effect, many policies have been proposed to reduce household energy use. Such policies need public support, i.e., policies that are not acceptable can hardly be implemented. Environmental psychologists can contribute to the development of successful energy policies by examining which factors influence the acceptability of such policies. The acceptability of energy policies is not only dependent on individual characteristics, but also on characteristics of the specific policies. In this paper we discuss the results of a questionnaire study among 112 Dutch respondents in which it is examined which factors influence the acceptability of policies aimed at reducing household energy use. First, we examined which individual factors influence acceptability judgements, by examining to what extent the value-belief-norm theory (VBN theory; Stern, 2000) is helpful in explaining these judgements. Results reveal that acceptability of policies aimed at reducing household energy use is indeed especially dependent on personal norms. As expected, personal norms are stronger when respondents feel more responsible for energy-related problem. Moreover, as proposed by the VBN theory, respondents feel more responsible for energy-related problems as they are more aware of these problems. Finally as expected, problem awareness is dependent on environmental awareness, while environmental awareness is significantly related to general values. These results confirm the VBN theory. Second, we examined to what extent policy characteristics influence the acceptability of energy policies. We hypothesised that push measures aimed at increasing the costs of environmentally unsound behaviour will be less acceptable than pull measures aimed at decreasing the costs of pro-environmental behaviour. Second, we hypothesised that policies aimed at reducing direct energy use (i.e., the use of natural gas, electricity and motor fuels) are more acceptable that those aimed at reducing indirect energy use (i.e., energy use associated with the production, distribution and disposal of goods and services such as food products), since many people are not aware of indirect energy use associated with their consumption pattern. Third, we hypothesised that policies aimed at changing behaviour that require a one single action (such as buying energy-efficient appliances) will be more acceptable than policies that target behaviours that require repeated action (such as buying food). Fourth, we assumed that the acceptability of policies is dependent on the way the revenues are used. More specifically, we hypothesised that push measures will be most acceptable if the revenues are used within the energy domain rather than to benefit general public funds. All four hypotheses were confirmed. ReferenceStern, P.C. (2000). Towards a coherent theory of environmentally significant behaviour. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 407-424.