TY - JOUR
T1 - Public acceptance of energy technologies
T2 - The effects of labeling, time, and heterogeneity in a discrete choice experiment
AU - Van Rijnsoever, Frank J.
AU - Van Mossel, Allard
AU - Broecks, Kevin P F
PY - 2015/1/1
Y1 - 2015/1/1
N2 - Public acceptance is crucial for successful implementation of energy technologies in society. However, studies that use the concept do so in diverse and often inconsistent ways. They also often limit themselves to specific technologies and do not account for the effects of labeling, time, and the heterogeneity of the general public, which may lead to a biased and incomplete understanding of public acceptance. This study first conceptualizes three forms of public acceptance: socio-political acceptance, market acceptance and community acceptance. It then relates the concept of socio-political acceptance to preference formation. Next, it uses two discrete choice experiments that were conducted in 2010 and 2012 to investigate these concerns. Our results show that public preferences for energy technologies are temporally stable, even in the face of exogenous shocks such as the Fukushima incident. Using mixed logit models, we further show that labeling has a profound influence on stated preferences. When technology labels are revealed, respondents favor renewable and natural gas technologies. When labels remain unobserved, nuclear energy and biomass take prominence. However, latent class models show that there are distinct classes of respondents, tied to specific socio-demographic characteristics that differ greatly in their sensitivity to labeling and in the temporal stability of their preferences. It follows that changes in public acceptance are not population-wide, but remain limited to specific sub-groups. We discuss the theoretical and policy implications of our findings and conclude that future studies and policy initiatives may overlook important insights if they disregard the effects of labels, time, and heterogeneity.
AB - Public acceptance is crucial for successful implementation of energy technologies in society. However, studies that use the concept do so in diverse and often inconsistent ways. They also often limit themselves to specific technologies and do not account for the effects of labeling, time, and the heterogeneity of the general public, which may lead to a biased and incomplete understanding of public acceptance. This study first conceptualizes three forms of public acceptance: socio-political acceptance, market acceptance and community acceptance. It then relates the concept of socio-political acceptance to preference formation. Next, it uses two discrete choice experiments that were conducted in 2010 and 2012 to investigate these concerns. Our results show that public preferences for energy technologies are temporally stable, even in the face of exogenous shocks such as the Fukushima incident. Using mixed logit models, we further show that labeling has a profound influence on stated preferences. When technology labels are revealed, respondents favor renewable and natural gas technologies. When labels remain unobserved, nuclear energy and biomass take prominence. However, latent class models show that there are distinct classes of respondents, tied to specific socio-demographic characteristics that differ greatly in their sensitivity to labeling and in the temporal stability of their preferences. It follows that changes in public acceptance are not population-wide, but remain limited to specific sub-groups. We discuss the theoretical and policy implications of our findings and conclude that future studies and policy initiatives may overlook important insights if they disregard the effects of labels, time, and heterogeneity.
KW - Discrete choice experiment
KW - Energy technologies
KW - Labeling
KW - Preference dynamics
KW - Public acceptance
KW - Socio-political acceptance
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84923773145&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.040
DO - 10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.040
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84923773145
SN - 1364-0321
VL - 45
SP - 817
EP - 829
JO - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
JF - Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
ER -