Perceived fairness of personal carbon budgets: Evidence from a vignette experiment

Abstract

Personal carbon budgets have been discussed as a measure to reduce CO2 emissions, but can face resistance by the public, if perceived as unfair. One approach to increase fairness is social stratification, where carbon budgets are allocated based on individual circumstances. However, social stratification creates additional administrative costs, which are often overlooked by the public. This study investigates the perceived fairness of different designs of personal carbon budget schemes. Using a vignette experiment, respondents evaluate six scenarios that vary in allocation (equal vs. stratified) and amount of budget that can be traded, both before and after receiving information about the costs of stratification. By using a hierarchical Bayesian cumulative logit model, we find that on average scenarios with social stratification are perceived as fairer than equal allocation ones and that making respondents aware of the administrative cost of social stratification does not change the perceived fairness of carbon budgets.