Who is willing to pay for science? On the relationship between public perception of science and the attitude to public funding of science

Muñoz, Ana Patricia; Moreno, Carolina; Luján, José Luis

doi:10.1177/0963662510373813

Cited by 39 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2 If there is a positive perception of science, then there is also more support for its public funding. 7 In addition, favourable attitudes towards S&T and higher literacy both seem to be influenced by sociodemographics, with gender (male), age (younger), and education level (higher) being among the important variables. 6,8 In general, the correlation between scientific literacy and attitudes towards S&T has long been debated.…”

Section: Short Theoretical Review: Public Perceptions Of Science and mentioning

confidence: 99%

unique fingerprint? Factors influencing attitudes towards science and technology in South Africa

Guenther¹,

Weingart²

2016

S. Afr. J. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From an international perspective, research in the field of public attitudes towards science and technology has been conducted since the 1970s. A frequently proposed – and empirically supported – theory is that strong interest in and knowledge about science in a society is associated with more favourable attitudes towards science. This positive attitude in turn affects support for public funding of science. However, this research field is not without controversy, and for the South African population many questions remain unanswered. Initial research has not explored the factors that shape attitudes towards science and technology in detail. We re-analysed data from the Human Sciences Research Council to explore the above theory. Interestingly, for the South African population, higher levels of scientific literacy and use of information sources are associated with more promises but also more reservations towards science and technology. This is especially true for relatively young and educated survey respondents. In international comparison, South Africa shows a unique fingerprint to some extent, but also shares characteristics with industrially developing countries of Europe (such as Greece or Portugal). To understand the correlations better, future research should aim to examine the overall picture when investigating the diverse South African population more extensively.

show abstract

Section: Short Theoretical Review: Public Perceptions Of Science and mentioning

confidence: 99%

unique fingerprint? Factors influencing attitudes towards science and technology in South Africa

Guenther¹,

Weingart²

2016

S. Afr. J. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This preamble distinguished our survey from other previous studies on public understanding of science (Munoz et al. ), which typically present questions in the absence of preceding value judgments. The preamble was a crucial link to interpreting survey results, allowing us to assess whether respondents were willing to pay for monitoring based on stated benefits.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…); (3) prior knowledge of monitoring (Munoz et al. ); and (4) sociodemographic characteristics (USFWS , Van den Berg and Koole ). We present the results of a survey assessing residents’ and visitors’ WTP for long‐term ecological monitoring of a suite of physical and biological ecosystem components in Southeast Alaska.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used a discrete choice experiment designed to measure willingness to pay (WTP), the maximum amount an individual will pay for a good or service, for long-term monitoring of three pairs of coupled intermediate and final ecosystem services (oceanography and whales; climate and glaciers; stream temperature and salmon). We hypothesized that four factors have the potential to influence public perception of taxpayer-supported long-term ecological monitoring: (1) type of ecosystem service monitored (Miller et al 1998, Stankey andShindler 2006); (2) place of residence, as a proxy for place-based relationships of individuals to natural systems White 1996, Kim et al 2012); (3) prior knowledge of monitoring (Munoz et al 2012); and (4) sociodemographic characteristics (USFWS 1994, Van den Berg andKoole 2006). We present the results of a survey assessing residents' and visitors' WTP for long-term ecological monitoring of a suite of physical and biological ecosystem components in Southeast Alaska.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Public perception and valuation of long‐term ecological monitoring

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organizations tasked with implementing long‐term ecological monitoring programs often struggle to stay funded. Government agencies are typically the only entities with sufficient capacity and motivation to support long‐term scientific programs that generate data for environmental management and conservation. Taxpayers bear this funding burden, yet we know of no studies assessing public perception of government‐led long‐term monitoring. We present the results of a survey designed to assess willingness to pay (WTP) for the benefits resulting from long‐term ecological monitoring in Southeast Alaska for residents and visitors. We hypothesized that four factors have the potential to influence preferences for long‐term ecological monitoring: (1) type of ecosystem service monitored (intermediate vs. final); (2) place of residence; (3) prior knowledge of monitoring; and (4) sociodemographic characteristics. We defined final ecosystem services as ecosystem attributes that have clear relevance to human well‐being and intermediate ecosystem services as those required to produce final services. We found a greater WTP for programs monitoring intermediate ecosystem services, longer‐running programs, and programs covering a larger spatial extent. Respondents with higher income and conservative political preferences were more likely to choose no monitoring program at all (status quo), whereas respondents with previous knowledge of monitoring were generally more supportive of long‐term monitoring programs.

show abstract

“…The tacit theory is that some combination of interest and knowledge partially shapes attitudes about science and scientists and that, together, these shape outcomes such as support for science funding and science influence (e.g., Ho et al, 2011;Muñoz, Moreno, & Luján, 2012;Nisbet et al, 2002). The lack of organizing frameworks means that less than ideal data get collected.…”

Section: Additional General Challenges and Next Stepsmentioning

confidence: 98%

The State of Public Opinion Research on Attitudes and Understanding of Science and Technology

Besley

2013

Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a critical and global overview of current research into public opinion about science and technology (S&T). Although several sets of high-quality data exist, there remains a lack of international coordination and irregular release of new data in forms that can be widely used. The article highlights a range of key challenges that those involved in collecting and reporting public opinion data about S&T can address to provide society with a more comprehensive and more integrated picture of attitudes and understanding about S&T around the world.

show abstract

Who is willing to pay for science? On the relationship between public perception of science and the attitude to public funding of science

Cited by 39 publications

References 20 publications

unique fingerprint? Factors influencing attitudes towards science and technology in South Africa

unique fingerprint? Factors influencing attitudes towards science and technology in South Africa

Public perception and valuation of long‐term ecological monitoring

The State of Public Opinion Research on Attitudes and Understanding of Science and Technology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About