[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i17p6071-d401750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Achieve a Healthier and More Sustainable Europe by 2040 According to the Public? Results of a Five-Country Questionnaire Survey

Author

Listed:
  • Iva Zvěřinová

    (Environment Centre, Charles University, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Vojtěch Máca

    (Environment Centre, Charles University, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Milan Ščasný

    (Environment Centre, Charles University, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Rosa Strube

    (Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production, 42107 Wuppertal, Germany)

  • Sibila Marques

    (Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), CIS-IUL, 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Diana Dubová

    (Environment Centre, Charles University, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Martin Kryl

    (Environment Centre, Charles University, 162 00 Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Daniela Craveiro

    (Instituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), CIS-IUL, 1649-026 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Timothy Taylor

    (European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro TR1 3HD, UK)

  • Aline Chiabai

    (Basque Centre for Climate Change, Biscaya, 48004 Pais Vasco, Spain)

  • Silvestre García de Jalón

    (Basque Centre for Climate Change, Biscaya, 48004 Pais Vasco, Spain)

Abstract
The aim of this paper is to understand public preferences for several future scenarios of achieving a healthier, more equitable and sustainable Europe, which differ in the way the society is organized (individualistically vs. collectively) and in the driving sector (public vs. private). To achieve this aim, we conducted a questionnaire survey using representative samples for five European countries in 2018. About three thousand respondents chose among the four scenarios presented within four different contexts (green spaces, active mobility, energy-efficient housing, food consumption) or none of them. A majority of people in the five European countries were ready to accept one of the scenarios. We found significant differences in preferences according to socioeconomic backgrounds and values of respondents. People above 35 years old, those who were less educated, and those in the lowest household income tertile were less supportive of all scenarios. The heterogeneity in preferences associated with differences in socioeconomic backgrounds was larger for the scenario in which society is organized individualistically and driven by the private sector. Smaller distinctions were found in case of the scenario in which society is organized collectively and is driven by the public sector. Departing from social psychological theories, we examine the role of altruistic, biospheric, egoistic, hedonic, and security values. People with stronger biospheric values were more likely to accept scenarios, particularly those which are driven by the public sector and where there is more collective organisation. Those with a more egoistic value orientation were more likely to have higher preferences for scenarios where the private sector had a dominant role. The policy implications, in terms of the selection and framing of policy measures to enhance public support, are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Iva Zvěřinová & Vojtěch Máca & Milan Ščasný & Rosa Strube & Sibila Marques & Diana Dubová & Martin Kryl & Daniela Craveiro & Timothy Taylor & Aline Chiabai & Silvestre García de Jalón, 2020. "How to Achieve a Healthier and More Sustainable Europe by 2040 According to the Public? Results of a Five-Country Questionnaire Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:17:p:6071-:d:401750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/17/6071/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/17/6071/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brannlund, Runar & Nordstrom, Jonas, 2004. "Carbon tax simulations using a household demand model," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 211-233, February.
    2. Kallbekken, Steffen & Sælen, Håkon, 2011. "Public acceptance for environmental taxes: Self-interest, environmental and distributional concerns," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2966-2973, May.
    3. Rosseel, Yves, 2012. "lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 48(i02).
    4. Stefan Drews & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2016. "What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 855-876, October.
    5. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett, 2011. "Household perceptions of climate change and preferences for mitigation action: the case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 417-436, December.
    6. Alberini, Anna & Bigano, Andrea & Ščasný, Milan & Zvěřinová, Iva, 2018. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: What Is the Willingness to Pay to Reduce CO2 Emissions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 171-185.
    7. Spiecker, Stephan & Weber, Christoph, 2014. "The future of the European electricity system and the impact of fluctuating renewable energy – A scenario analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 185-197.
    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. Meiai Chen & Eila Jeronen & Anming Wang, 2020. "What Lies Behind Teaching and Learning Green Chemistry to Promote Sustainability Education? A Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Patricia Vázquez-Villegas & Patricia Caratozzolo & Vianney Lara-Prieto & Jorge Membrillo-Hernández, 2023. "A Review on the Advances in Socially Oriented Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-15, November.
    3. Ingrid Stegeman & Alba Godfrey & Maria Romeo-Velilla & Ruth Bell & Brigit Staatsen & Nina van der Vliet & Hanneke Kruize & George Morris & Timothy Taylor & Rosa Strube & Kirsti Anthun & Monica Lillefj, 2020. "Encouraging and Enabling Lifestyles and Behaviours to Simultaneously Promote Environmental Sustainability, Health and Equity: Key Policy Messages from INHERIT," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-22, September.
    4. Bănică, Bianca & Patrício, Lia & Miguéis, Vera, 2024. "Citizen engagement with sustainable energy solutions - understanding the influence of perceived value on engagement behaviors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).

    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. Fanghella, Valeria & Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Schleich, Joachim, 2023. "What's in it for me? Self-interest and preferences for distribution of costs and benefits of energy efficiency policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    2. Hössinger, Reinhard & Peer, Stefanie & Juschten, Maria, 2023. "Give citizens a task: An innovative tool to compose policy bundles that reach the climate goal," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Lucia Rotaris & Alessandro Gardelli, 2018. "Carbon Tax acceptability: A comparative experimental analysis," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(1), pages 117-132.
    4. Faure, Corinne & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Schleich, Joachim & Tu, Gengyang & Whitmarsh, Lorraine & Whittle, Colin, 2022. "Household acceptability of energy efficiency policies in the European Union: Policy characteristics trade-offs and the role of trust in government and environmental identity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    6. Sterner, Thomas & Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Erik, 2024. "Economists and the climate," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Agneman, Gustav & Henriks, Sofia & Bäck, Hanna & Renström, Emma, 2024. "On the nexus between material and ideological determinants of climate policy support," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    8. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Jens Abildtrup & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel & Udo Mantau & Robert Mavsar & Davide Pettenella & Irina Prokofieva & Florian Schubert & Anne Stenger & Elsa Varela & Enrico Vidale & , 2024. "Preferences for climate change policies: the role of co-benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 110-128, January.
    10. Odland, Severin & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Corbett, Meghan & Pardy, Aaron, 2023. "What policies do homeowners prefer for building decarbonization and why? An exploration of climate policy support in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    11. Christian Oltra & Roser Sala & Sergi López-Asensio & Silvia Germán & Àlex Boso, 2021. "Individual-Level Determinants of the Public Acceptance of Policy Measures to Improve Urban Air Quality: The Case of the Barcelona Low Emission Zone," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, January.
    12. Kanberger, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2023. "On the preferences for an environmentally friendly and fair energy transition: A stated choice experiment for Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    13. Lipari, Francesca & Lázaro-Touza, Lara & Escribano, Gonzalo & Sánchez, Ángel & Antonioni, Alberto, 2024. "When the design of climate policy meets public acceptance: An adaptive multiplex network model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    14. McLaughlin, Craig & Elamer, Ahmed A. & Glen, Thomas & AlHares, Aws & Gaber, Hazem Rasheed, 2019. "Accounting society's acceptability of carbon taxes: Expectations and reality," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 302-311.
    15. Thomas Douenne & Adrien Fabre, 2019. "Can We Reconcile French People with the Carbon Tax? Disentangling Beliefs from Preferences," Policy Papers 2019.05, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    16. Sælen, Håkon Grøn & Aasen, Marianne, 2023. "Exploring public opposition and support across different climate policies: Poles apart?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    17. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    18. Sommer, Stephan & Mattauch, Linus & Pahle, Michael, 2022. "Supporting carbon taxes: The role of fairness," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    19. Weiner, Csaba & Muth, Dániel & Lakócai, Csaba, 2023. "A szén-dioxid-kibocsátást terhelő adó társadalmi elfogadottsága és a fizetési hajlandóság alakulása Magyarországon [Public acceptance of and willingness to pay for a tax on carbon-dioxide emissions," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1077-1107.
    20. Stefano Carattini & Simon Levin & Alessandro Tavoni, 2019. "Cooperation in the Climate Commons," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 227-247.

    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:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:17:p:6071-:d:401750. 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.