Why are Energy Policies Acceptable and Effective?

By L. Steg, L. Dreijerink, W. Abrahamse. 2006

230 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0b94b78f6129bd95ac7b542f3d6b35a290fd544f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

In Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment

Citations in the corpus

Feeling Safe in the Dark (2014, background): “This can be problematic because these social costs are potentially vital in bolstering support for new policies (Steg et al., 2006).”
Public Preferences for Carbon Tax Attributes (2015, background): “Several studies indicate that how the revenue of an environmental tax is used matters, and earmarking the revenue increases public support (see e.g., Steg et al., 2006; Kallbekken and Aasen, 2010; Saelen and Kallbekken, 2011).”
The role of perceived effectiveness of policy measures in predicting recycling behaviour in Hong Kong (2014, background): “Steg et al. (2006; 2009) argued whether an effective policy can measure an increase in the attractiveness of a pro-environmental behaviour.”
Effectiveness, earmarking and labeling: testing the acceptability of carbon taxes with survey data (2017, background): “Pigouvian taxes are thus perceived at the same time as coercive and ineffective (Steg et al. 2006).”
Public acceptance for environmental taxes: Self-interest, environmental and distributional concerns (2011, result): “The result that earmarking the revenues would substantially increase support seems very robust and is confirmed by Dresner et al. (2006b), Hsu et al. (2008), Schade and Schlag (2003), Schuitema and Steg (2008), Steg et al. (2006) and Thalmann (2004).”
Promoting household energy conservation (2008, background): “when they stress purchasing energy-efficient appliances rather than showering less or turning down the thermostat), and when they are aimed at reducing energy use at home rather than for transport (Poortinga et al., 2003; Steg et al., 2006 ).”
Individual Factors Influencing Acceptability for Environmental Policies: A Review and Research Agenda (2020, background): “, push measures) are less acceptable may be indirect evidence that expectations about individual gains and losses is related to acceptability [59].”
Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour : An integrative review and research agenda (2009, background): “aimed at decreasing the attractiveness of environmentally harmful behaviour (Steg et al., 2006).”