![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Scholars argue that reframing the relevance of energy policy in ways that connect to a broader coalition of Americans can create the level of public engagement needed for government action. Therefore, I consider (1) how emphasizing economic, environmental, or both economic and environmental benefits of solar energy affects support for solar energy policy in the United States and (2) does reframing solar energy as economic and environmental benefits increase support for solar policy regardless of one’s initial perceptions about solar? I examine support for solar policy for 1317 adults throughout the United States. Respondents were randomly assigned to one of four frames: no frame (control), economic benefit, environmental progress, or environment progress and economic benefit. Respondents who received policy questions framed as both economic and environmental benefits were more likely to support solar policy mandates than those in the control group. With respect to preferring to live in a home powered by solar energy (no mandate), being exposed to the economic benefit frame had a significant impact over having no frame. However, the framing effect of solar as an economic benefit was greater for those who had less than a very positive, preexisting perception of existing and future solar development.
KEYWORDS:
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Jessica A. Crowe
Jessica A. Crowe, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. Her current research includes studying the causal factors that lead to differing public perceptions of various sources of energy as well as how shale development affects different groups of people.