Effectiveness, earmarking and labeling: testing the acceptability of carbon taxes with survey data
By A. Baranzini, S. Carattini. 2017
213 citations recorded by the source corpus.
This paper analyzes the drivers of carbon taxes acceptability with survey data and a randomized labeling treatment. Based on a sample of more than 300 individuals, it assesses the effect on acceptability of specific policy designs and individuals’ perceptions of carbon taxes advantages and disadvantages. We find that the lack of perception of primary and ancillary benefits is one of the main barriers to the acceptability of carbon taxes. In addition, policy design matters for acceptability and in particular earmarking fiscal revenues for environmental purposes can lead to larger support. We also find an effect of labeling, comparing the wording “climate contribution” with “carbon tax”. We argue that proper policy design coupled with effective communication on the effects of carbon taxes may lead to a substantial improvement in acceptability.
Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0348e4b8ea77e5c7eaa5299cf1701063a872d0fa
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Economics and Econometrics
- Jessica F. Green
- S. Carattini
- A. Baranzini
- Stefan Drews
- Jeroen van den Bergh
- Sara Maestre-Andrés
- Jordi Roca
- Emilio Padilla
In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
- Jessica F. Green
- S. Carattini
- Jeroen van den Bergh
- Stefan Drews
- Sara Maestre-Andrés
- Jordi Roca
- Richard B. Howarth
- Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh
Citations in the corpus
- Carbon pricing in climate policy: seven reasons, complementary instruments, and political economy considerations (2017, background): “Since co-benefits can be reaped in the short term and be appropriated by the country that implements carbon pricing, drawing more public attention to them could increase its acceptability.(73,92,93) Carbon pricing may not be the best way to reduce local pollution, and other complementary policies pr”
- Does carbon pricing reduce emissions? A review of ex-post analyses (2021, background): “Indeed, most studies find that the public is more supportive of green investments than a tax-and-dividendpolicy (see e.g. Baranzini and Carattini 2017, Bergquist et al 2020, Douenne and Fabre 2020).”
- Perceived fairness and public acceptability of carbon pricing: a review of the literature (2019, background): “Impacts on poor households (fuel poverty) 14 (Baranzini et al., 2014; Baranzini and Carattini, 2017; Clinch and Dunne, 2006; Clinch et al., 2006; Dresner et al., 2006a; Dresner et al., 2006b; Harwatt et al., 2011; Kallbekken and Aasen, 2010; Kallbekken and Saelen, 2011; Kaplowitz and McCright,…”