Comparing public support for alternative climate policy designs: An experimental study

Abstract

Scholars have debated how specific policy designs may generate stronger positive or negative reactions from the public, especially with regard to public expectations regarding pricing-based policy designs compared to regulatory approaches. In this study, we report the results of a survey experiment on Virginia registered voters measuring public opinion toward a regulatory versus a pricing-based policy design, both of which were included in the state's 2020 Clean Economy Act. Our data confirm several hypotheses indicating that public support is no higher for a regulatory design than for a pricing-based design, and that perceptions of the key effects of both designs are also similar. These findings suggest that public opinion should not be presumed to favor regulatory over pricing-based policy designs, nor should assumptions about public preferences hinder efforts toward an “all of the above” strategy for mitigating climate change.