Public acceptability towards environmental policy measures: Value-matching appeals. Issue 61 (July 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Nilsson, Andreas; Hansla, André; Heiling, Joakim Malmborg; Bergstad, Cecilia Jakobsson; Martinsson, Johan
• Is Part Of: Environmental science & policy. Issue 61(2016:Jul.)
• Page Start: 176
• Page End: 184
• Publication Date: 2016-07
• Subjects: Environmental policy -- Environmental policy communication -- Values; Environmental policy -- Periodicals; Environmental sciences -- Periodicals; Environnement -- Politique gouvernementale -- Périodiques; Sciences de l'environnement -- Périodiques; Environmental policy; Environmental sciences; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 363.70561
• DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.04.013
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1462-9011

Abstract

Highlights: Provides a novel approach to successfully tailor environmental policy information to specific individual values. Illustrates the need for target group segmentation in public environmental policy communication. Attitudes towards type of argument (anthropocentric versus ecocentric) for the policy, was dependent on basic value priorities among the respondents. Few arguments had a more persuasive impact than many. Abstract: People's acceptability of environmental policy measures is vital for a successful implementation. Identifying how information concerning radical policy measures can be improved may increase support and generate more positive attitudes towards the policy. The effect of tailored information on acceptability towards implementing a proposed congestion charge was investigated by matching ecocentric arguments to biospherically value-oriented participants, and anthropocentric arguments to those who endorsed egoistic values. 627 respondents living in two small Swedish cities participated via a web-based survey. The results show that the single arguments (anthropocentric or ecocentric appeals) were evaluated more favourably than the combination of arguments (including both anthropocentric and ecocentric appeals). Strong biospheric and strong egoistic values were associated with positive and negative evaluations of the policy proposal, respectively. Finally, while respondents who endorsed egoistic values tended to be more positive towards the proposal after reading anthropocentric arguments (value match) than after reading pro-environmental arguments (value mismatch), the opposite effect was observed for respondents who did not endorse egoistic values. Our results suggest that tailoring information with regard to people's values would be effective in promoting positive attitudes towards important policy measures.