Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”
Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.enpol.2017.03.002
复制
发表时间：
2017-06
期刊：
影响因子：
9
通讯作者：
Dino P. Christenson;Jillian L. Goldfarb;D. Kriner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dino P. Christenson;Jillian L. Goldfarb;D. Kriner
无论是在州还是在国家层面，公众舆论在形成有关水力压裂的政策辩论中都起着重要作用。然而，大多数美国人对这种改变了美国能源市场的有争议的做法知之甚少。我们在一项具有全国代表性的调查中进行了一项实验，研究了公民如何回应有关水力压裂的成本和收益的争论，并将其纳入他们的政策偏好。强调水力压裂技术经济效益的论点支持该技术；然而，如果再加上对水力压裂的环境成本的讨论，这些收益就完全被抵消了。此外，我们在如何处理这些信息中发现了党派动机推理的混合证据。那些对全球气候变化的党派依恋和先前存在的信念相冲突的个人，对有关水力压裂法的利弊的争论尤其敏感。我们的研究结果对关注能源和环境政策舆论党派分化的学者和政策制定者具有重要意义。
Public opinion plays an important role in shaping the policy debate over hydraulic fracturing at both the state and national level. However, most Americans report having little to no information about this controversial practice that has transformed the U.S. energy market. Employing an experiment embedded on a nationally representative survey, we examine how citizens respond to arguments concerning the costs and benefits of fracking, and incorporate them into their policy preferences. Arguments emphasizing the economic benefits of fracking bolster support for the technique; however, these gains are completely canceled if paired with a discussion of fracking's environmental costs. Additionally, we find mixed evidence of partisan motivated reasoning in how this information is processed. Individuals whose partisan attachments and preexisting beliefs about global climate change conflict are particularly responsive to arguments about the benefits and costs of fracking. Our results have important implications for scholars and policymakers concerned with partisan polarization in public opinion toward energy and environmental policy.