Kallbekken Steffen, Sælen Håkon
CICERO Center for International Climate Research, P.O. Box 1129 Blindern, 0318 Oslo, Norway.
Transp Res D Transp Environ. 2021 Apr;93:102767. doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102767. Epub 2021 Mar 6.
An improved understanding of public support is essential to design effective and feasible climate policies for aviation. Our motivation is the contrast between high support for air travel restrictions responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and low support for restrictions to combat climate change. Can the same factors explain individuals' support for restrictive measures across two different problems? Using a survey, we find that largely the same factors explain support. Support increases with expected effectiveness, perceived threat and imminence of the problem, shorter expected duration of the measure, knowledge, and trust, while support decreases with expected negative consequences for self and the poor. When controlling for all perceptions, there is no significant residual difference in support depending on whether the measures address climate change or COVID-19. The level of support differs because COVID-19 is perceived as a more imminent threat, and because measures are expected to be shorter-lasting and more effective.
更好地理解公众支持对于制定有效的、可行的航空气候政策至关重要。我们的动机源于对新冠疫情期间航空旅行限制的高度支持与应对气候变化限制措施的低支持之间的反差。相同的因素能否解释个人对两个不同问题的限制措施的支持？通过一项调查，我们发现大致相同的因素能解释这种支持。支持程度会随着预期效果、感知到的问题威胁和紧迫性、措施预期持续时间缩短、知识水平以及信任度的提高而增加，而随着对自身和穷人预期负面影响的增加而降低。在控制所有认知因素后，无论措施是针对气候变化还是新冠疫情，支持度上都没有显著的残余差异。支持水平存在差异是因为新冠疫情被视为更紧迫的威胁，且措施预期持续时间更短、效果更显著。
