Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
How Exposure to Policy Tools Transforms the Mechanisms Behind Public Acceptability and Acceptance: The Case of the Gothenburg Congestion Tax
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Social Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5491-8819
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Social Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7646-1813
Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg.
Number of Authors: 32017 (English)In: International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, ISSN 1556-8318, E-ISSN 1556-8334, Vol. 11, no 2, p. 109-119Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

An increasing body of literature suggests that acceptance of environmental policy instruments tends to change along with increased experience of the same. Among the more popular examples of this are the growing number of congestion-pricing initiatives emerging around the world; in several cases the acceptability of these projects among the public has been relatively low before implementation, but then acceptance has increased as experience of the project has grown. The question is just how, and in particular, why? I.e., what is it really that experience does to people's propensity to accept initially quite unpopular measures? In this article we analyze how the relationship between political trust, policy-specific beliefs and public support for policy tools is moderated or affected by people's personal experiences of those policy tools. On the basis of the experience of previous research, we test the way in which policy-specific beliefs, institutional trust and the legitimacy of the political decision-making process affect public attitudes toward a policy tool. In addition—and consistent with other studies—we expect these effects to be significantly reduced post-implementation, as people gain first-hand experience of a policy tool. More specifically, we theorize that the often emphasized process legitimacy is only valid as a factor driving support before implementation, and that the effect of general institutional trust is replaced by the level of trust specific to the implementing institutions after the introduction of the policy tool. We tested these hypotheses using a natural experiment; i.e., by studying public attitudes toward the introduction of congestion fees in the Swedish city of Gothenburg both before and after their introduction. By doing so, we were able to comprehensively analyze both the drivers behind public sentiments toward congestion charges and how these mechanisms transform as people are exposed to the costs and benefits of the policy tool in practice. Among other things, we found that with regard to fairness and environmental effectiveness, there is a clear symmetry in our results. The level of acceptance increased most noticeably among those who experienced that the environment was improved by the implemented tax, or that the system turned out to be fairer than expected. However, the opposite is also the case. Thus, among those experiencing that the environment was not improved, or that the system appeared to be less fair than expected, the level of acceptance decreased significantly after implementation. These results may have important policy implications.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2017. Vol. 11, no 2, p. 109-119
National Category
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)
Research subject
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-7158DOI: 10.1080/15568318.2016.1197348ISI: 000393654400005Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84996497404Local ID: 57c1c430-14bc-49f0-935b-fccb10fd3ef5OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-7158DiVA, id: diva2:980046
Note

Validerad; 2016; Nivå 2; 2016-11-21 (andbra)

Available from: 2016-09-29 Created: 2016-09-29 Last updated: 2018-11-15Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Jagers, SverkerMatti, Simon

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jagers, SverkerMatti, Simon
By organisation
Social Sciences
In the same journal
International Journal of Sustainable Transportation
Political Science (excluding Public Administration Studies and Globalisation Studies)

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 414 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf