Companies in the energy sector face a dilemma regarding how to communicate their environmental policies to the public. Communicating that environmental policies and activities are motivated by concern for the environment could elicit positive reactions, but may also lead to accusations of corporate greenwashingthe idea that companies deliberately frame their activities as 'green' in order to look environmentally friendly. The results of three experiments demonstrate that people easily suspect greenwashing when an energy company invests in environmental measures. Importantly, suspicions of corporate greenwashing are reduced by acknowledging economic motives instead of communicating environmental motives for such investments. Suspicion of strategic organizational behavior mediates the effect of communicated motive on perceived corporate greenwashing. This indirect effect occurs primarily among people who are not by nature very skeptical about organizational communications in general. These findings highlight the need to think carefully about how to communicate corporate environmental policies to the public.

Public trust in organizations that are involved in the management and use of new technologies affects lay judgments about the risks and benefits associated with these technologies. In turn, judgments about risks and benefits influence lay attitudes toward these technologies. The validity of this (indirect) effect of trust on lay attitudes toward new technologies, which is referred to as the causal chain account of trust, has up till now only been examined in correlational research. The two studies reported in this article used an experimental approach to more specifically test the causal chain account of trust in the context of carbon dioxide capture and storage technology (CCS). Complementing existing literature, the current studies explicitly distinguished between two different types of trust in organizations: competence-based trust (Study 1) and integrity-based trust (Study 2). In line with predictions, results showed that the organizational position regarding CCS implementation (pro versus con) more strongly affected people's risk and benefit perceptions and their subsequent acceptance of CCS when competence-based trust was high rather than low. In contrast, the organizational position had a greater impact on people's level of CCS acceptance when integrity-based trust was low rather than high.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The implementation of carbon dioxide capture and storage technology (CCS) is considered an important climate change mitigation strategy, but the viability of this technology will depend on public acceptance of CCS policy decisions. The results of three experiments with students as participants show that whether or not interest groups receive an opportunity to express their opinions in the decision-making process (i.e., group voice) affects acceptance of CCS policy decisions, with inferred trustworthiness of the decision maker mediating this effect. Decision-making procedures providing different interest groups with equal opportunities to voice their opinions instigate more trust in the decision maker and, in turn, lead to greater willingness to accept decisions compared to no-voice procedures (i.e., unilateral decision-making-Study 1) and unequal group-voice procedures (i.e., when one type of interest group receives voice, but another type of interest group does not-Study 2). Study 3 further shows that an individual's own level of knowledge about CCS moderates the desire for an opportunity for members of the general public to voice opinions in the decision-making process, inferred trustworthiness of decision makers, and policy acceptance. These results imply that people care about voice in decision-making even when they are not directly personally involved in the decision-making process. We conclude that people tend to use procedural information when deciding to accept or oppose policy decisions on political complex issues; hence, it is important that policymakers use fair group-voice procedures and that they communicate to the public how they arrive at their decisions.

No abstract

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is considered a potential climate change mitigation option, but public opposition may hamper its implementation. A quasi-experimental approach is used to examine whether 'not in my back yard' (NIMBY) sentiments can be anticipated at the initial stage when CO 2 storage locations have been selected and communicated to the public. Furthermore, the psychological structure of initial reactions to CO 2 storage plans is studied to ascertain the differences between people living in the direct vicinity of a proposed CO 2 storage location (i.e. onsite residents) and people who do not (i.e. offsite residents). The results indicate that initial reactions to local CCS plans are not necessarily dominated by NIMBY sentiments. For onsite residents as well as offsite residents, trust in government affects their judgements of the risks and benefits associated with CCS, which in turn affects their inclination to protest against CCS plans. Onsite residents' inclination to protest is affected by their perceptions of local safety risks, but this is less of a concern for offsite residents. The inclination to protest against CCS is unrelated to concern about climate change.Le captage et stockage de carbone (CSC) est considéré comme une option possible d'atténuation du changement climatique, mais l'opposition publique pourrait entraver sa mise en application. Une approche quasi-expérimentale est employée pour examiner si des sentiments de « pas dans ma cour » (« Not in my backyard -NIMBY ») pourraient être anticipés dans les stades initiaux, à l'étape de sélection des lieux de stockages de CO 2 et leur communication au public. Par ailleurs, la structure psychologique des premières réactions aux plans de stockage de CO 2 est étudiée de manière à déterminer la différence entre les personnes vivant à proximité des lieux de stockages proposés (c'est-à-dire résidents sur site) et les autres personnes ne vivant pas sur le site (c'est-à-dire résidents hors-site). Les résultats indiquent que les premières réactions aux projets CSC locaux ne sont pas nécessairement dominées par des sentiments « NIMBY ». L'opinion des résidents sur site comme pour les résidents hors-site sur les risques et bénéfices associés au CSC est influencée par leur confiance dans le gouvernement, qui à son tour influence ou non leur tendance à protester contre les projets de CSC. Les tendances protestataires des résidents sur site sont influencées par leur perception des risques de sécurité locale, mais ceux-ci constituent une moindre préoccupation pour les résidents hors-site. Les tendances protestataires au sujet du CSC ne sont pas liées aux préoccupations sur le changement climatique.Mots clés : Captage et stockage de carbone (CSC); mitigation du changement climatique; attitudes du public; confiance; « pas dans ma cour » (NIMBY); protestations; perceptions du risque