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

2021年2月，德克萨斯州遭受了一系列罕见的冬季风暴袭击，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，德克萨斯州经历了类似的（虽然规模较小）事件，但在风暴之后没有做出实质性的改变/准备。该项目关注公众对最近的危机的反应，以了解公民对谁负责以及危机是否影响了他们的能源政策偏好。在危机发生后，PIs对德州人进行了多次调查，询问政策变化的成本、公众对不同能源部门的看法，以及政府应该在多大程度上参与监管市场。通过观察德州人将失败归咎于谁，他们支持哪些改革，以及经验和时间的流逝如何影响他们的偏好和看法，这项研究建立了对公民在危机和失败之后如何要求政府承担责任的理解。该项目还为政策制定者提供了即时的见解，突出了政策一致的领域和政府改革将获得更多/更少公众支持的时间“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不能导致政府采取行动。ppi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？观察到的对公众舆论的影响消散的速度有多快（如果有的话）？还有，是什么因素——无论是个人因素、人际因素还是环境因素——决定了人们的反应？pi在全州范围内对德州人进行了一系列的调查实验。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（如可再生能源）的指责，以及对监管政策的辩论。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8个月后对同一个人重复实验，该项目评估随着经济复苏、政策改变和信息传递的发展，任何影响是否会随着时间的推移而减弱（或增加）。这项研究为研究公众问责制的发展和演变提供了一个独特的机会。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值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.