RAPID: The Public Response to the Texas Power Outage/Utilities Crisis

2021年2月，德克萨斯州遭遇了一系列罕见的冬季风暴，导致大范围停电，其他公用事业和服务中断，100多人死亡。10年前，德克萨斯州经历了一次类似的事件(尽管规模较小)，但在那次风暴之后，没有做出实质性的变化/准备。该项目的重点是公众对最近这场危机的反应，以了解公民对谁负有责任，以及危机是否影响了他们的能源政策偏好。PIs在危机后的多个时间点对德克萨斯州人进行了调查，询问了政策变化的成本、公众对不同能源行业的看法，以及关于政府应该在多大程度上参与市场监管的辩论。通过研究德克萨斯州人将失败归咎于谁，他们支持哪些改革，以及经历和时间的流逝如何影响偏好和看法，这项研究建立了对公民在危机和失败后如何追究政府责任的理解。该项目还为政策制定者提供了立竿见影的见解，突出了政策一致的领域，以及政府改革将获得更多/更少公众支持的临时“窗口”。这个项目的重点是公众对德克萨斯州停电的反应，以更好地理解为什么危机往往无法导致政府采取行动。私人投资总监考虑以下问题：公众将服务中断及其后果归咎于谁？在这样一场灾难之后，公众舆论的可塑性有多大？对公众舆论的任何观察到的影响消散的速度有多快(如果有的话)？那么，是什么因素--无论是个人的、人际的还是背景的--制约着人们的反应？PI对全州范围内具有代表性的德克萨斯人小组进行了一系列调查实验。这些实验的重点是关于基础设施投资的成本/收益争论，对某些能源部门(例如可再生能源)的指责，以及关于监管政策的辩论。通过进行调查实验，PI借鉴了以高内部和外部有效性为标志的设计传统。通过在危机发生两个月后和危机发生后8个月再次对相同的人进行实验，该项目评估了随着经济复苏、政策变化和信息传递的发展，任何影响是否会随着时间的推移而减弱(或增加)。这项研究提供了一个独特的机会来研究大众问责的发展和演变。这一奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

In February of 2021, Texas was hit by a series of rare winter storms that resulted in widespread power outages, the disruption of other utilities and services and over 100 deaths. Texas experienced a similar (though smaller-scale) event 10 years earlier, and yet no substantial changes/preparations were made in the wake of that storm. This project focuses on the public’s response to the recent crisis to learn about who citizens hold accountable and whether the crisis influenced their energy policy preferences. The PIs survey Texans at multiple points after the crisis, asking about, among other topics, the costs of policy changes, the public’s opinions on different energy sectors, and debates over how much the government should be involved in regulating markets. By looking at who Texans blame for the failure, what reforms they support, and how experiences and the passing of time affect preferences and perceptions, the study builds understandings of how citizens hold governments to account in the wake of crisis and failure. The project also provides immediate insights to policymakers, highlighting areas of policy agreement and temporal “windows” when governmental reforms are going to have more/less public support. This project focuses on the public’s responses to the Texas power outage to better understand why crises often fail to lead to governmental action. The PIs consider the following questions: Who does the public blame for service disruption and its consequences? How malleable is public opinion in the wake of such a disaster? How quickly (if at all) do any observed effects on public opinion dissipate? And, what factors – whether individual, interpersonal, or contextual – condition people’s responses? The PIs conduct a series of survey experiments with a statewide, representative panel of Texans. These experiments focus on cost/benefit arguments about investment in infrastructure, the blaming of certain energy sectors (e.g., renewables), and debates over regulatory policies. By conducting survey experiments, the PIs draw on a design tradition that is marked by both high internal and external validity. By repeating the experiments with the same individuals two months after the crisis and again 8 months after the crisis, the project evaluates whether any effects fade (or increase) over time as recovery takes place, policies are changed, and messaging evolves. The study presents a unique opportunity to study the development and evolution of accountability in a mass public.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.