隨著全球暖化的加劇，許多國家紛紛宣佈要在 2050 年前達到淨零碳排的目標， 在世界趨勢的脈絡發展下，台灣也在 2022 年推出了「2050 淨零排放路徑及策略」， 其中說明了未來台灣將先施行碳費政策，但詳細的碳費費率仍未擬定，也表示未來 有施行碳稅替代碳費的可能性。根據商業周刊與綠色和平的調查，有高達 70%的 企業對於目前政府所提供指引和相關資源表達擔憂，可見碳管理政策與企業之間 的認知仍有落差。在政策方面，「加稅減碳」為目前世界各國政府作為碳管理的主 要政策工具，企業與民眾對於碳稅/費的觀點與配合程度也將關鍵影響此政策的效 益，面對國際趨勢壓力以及國內的產業需求回應，政府的碳管理政策擬定仍須更長 遠且精細的制定。
本研究透過「台灣社會變遷基本調查計畫 2019 第七期第五次:科技與風險組」 之資料分析，並以「計劃行為理論 (TheoryofPlannedBehavior，TPB)」、「價值信 念規範理論(Theory of Value, Beliefs, and Norms, VBN)」之架構為基礎，梳理台灣 公民(2019 年問卷填答者、企業主、公務員、受僱員工)對於企業加稅減碳之觀 點與影響變項，期望能夠在政府政策規劃、企業的環境永續策略以及學術界的相關 研究提供佐證和參考。

With the intensification of global warming, many countries have announced their goals to “achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050”. In the context of this global trend, Taiwan also introduced the “Taiwan’s Pathway to Net-Zero Emissions in 2050” in 2022. This plan outlines that Taiwan will initially implement a carbon fee policy, although the specific carbon fee rates are yet to be announced. The possibility of adopting a carbon tax in place of the carbon fee is also mentioned. According to surveys conducted by Business Weekly and Greenpeace, up to 70% of businesses express concerns about the guidance and related resources provided by the current government, highlighting a gap in perception between carbon management policies and businesses. On the policy front, "taxing to reduce carbon emissions" is a primary tool utilised by governments worldwide for carbon management. The perspectives and cooperation levels of businesses and the public toward carbon taxes/fees will crucially impact the effectiveness of this policy. Faced with international pressure and responding to domestic industrial demands, the government's formulation of carbon management policies still requires more long-term and detailed planning.
This thesis analyzes data from the “2019 Taiwan Social Change Survey-Round 7, Year 5: Technology and Risk Society”. Based on the “Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)” and “Theory of Value, Beliefs, and Norms (VBN)” framework, this thesis aims to examine the viewpoints and influencing factors of Taiwanese citizens (2019 questionnaire respondents, business owners, civil servants, and employees) regarding corporate taxation for carbon reduction. The goal is to provide evidence and reference for government policy planning, corporate environmental sustainability strategies, and related academic research.

論文審定書 i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii
中文摘要 iii
Abstract iv
Table of Contentsv
List of Figures vii
List of Tables viii
1.Introduction1
1.1 Background1
1.2 Research questions and purposes14
2.Literature review15
2.1 The attitude of public’s perceptions of environmental tax15
2.2 Perceived behavioral control of public’s perceptions of carbon tax17
2.3 The Pro-environmental Behavior and Environmental Policy25
2.4 The Nuclear Acceptance and Climate Change Movement27
2.5 The demographic factors of the public’s acceptance of environmental tax29
2.6 Summary34
3.Theory and hypothesis37
3.1 Theory37
3.2 Hypothesis39
4.Research Methodology43
4.1 Methodology43
4.2 Framework45
4.3 Variable Definition45
5.Data Analysis and Findings51
5.1 Sample Descriptions51
5.2 Reliability and Validity Testing56
5.3 Correlation analysis58
5.4 Linear regression60
5.5 Summary65
6.Conclusion69
6.1 Summary and Research Limitations69
6.2 Policy and Future Research Suggestions70
References72

中文部分：
劉哲良（2022）。碳環境稅費的設計探討。經濟前瞻，(199)，119-125。
廖欽福（2018）。能源稅的美麗新世界-環境能源公課之課徵及其憲法界限。華岡法粹，(64)，113-181。
施文真（2012）。能源稅與碳稅之邊境稅調整措施——以 GATT/WTO 之合致性為主要討論對象。貿易政策論叢，157-220 。
陳汶津（2022）。對臺灣環境稅立法的幾點建議。中正財經法學，(24), 165-226.
李堅明（2019）。臺灣碳權交易與碳稅的未來。會計研究月刊，(408)，101-107.

英文部分：
Adaman, F.; Karalidotless, N.; Kumbarogˆlu, G.; Or, I.; Özkaynak, B.; Zenginobuz, Ü. What Determines Urban Households’ Willingness to Pay for CO2 Emission Reductions in Turkey: A Contingent Valuation Survey. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 689–698. https:// 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.10.042
Agrawal, A.W.; Dill, J.; Nixon, H. Green Transportation Taxes and Fees: A Survey of Public Preferences in California. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2010, 15, 189–196. https:// 10.1016/j.trd.2009.11.003
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control (pp. 11-39). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https:// 10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2
Alberini, A.; Šcˇasný, M.; Bigano, A. Policy- v. Individual Heterogeneity in the Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation: Evidence from a Stated-Preference Survey. Energy Policy 2018, 121, 565–575. https:// 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.07.008
Amdur, D.; Dale, D.; Borick, C.; Rabe, B.G. Individual Discount Rates and Climate Change: Is Discount Rate Associated with Support for a Carbon Tax? Clim. Chang. Econ. 2015, 6, 1–14. https:// 10.1142/S2010007815500189
Anser, M. K., Ahmad, M., Khan, M. A., Nassani, A. A., Askar, S. E., Zaman, K., ... & Kabbani, A. (2021). Progress in nuclear energy with carbon pricing to achieve environmental sustainability agenda: on the edge of one’s seat. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 28, 34328-34343. https:// 10.1007/s11356-021-12966-y
Bachus, K.; Van Ootegem, L.; Verhofstadt, E. ‘No Taxation without Hypothecation’: Towards an Improved Understanding of the Acceptability of an Environmental Tax Reform*. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2019, 21, 321–332. Action in the US. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 1–9. https:// 10.1080/1523908X.2019.1623654
Baranzini, A.; Carattini, S. Effectiveness, Earmarking and Labeling: Testing the Acceptability of Carbon Taxes with Survey Data. Environ. Econ. Policy Stud. 2016, 19, 197–227. https:// 10.1007/s10018-016-0144-7
Baranzini, A., Caliskan, M., & Carattini, S. (2014). Economic prescriptions and public responses to climate policy (pp. 1–19). CRAG Haute École de Gestion de Gèneve. https://10.2139/ssrn.2531615
Beiser-McGrath, L.F.; Bernauer, T. Could Revenue Recycling Make Effective Carbon Taxation Politically Feasible? Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, 1–9. https://10.1126/sciadv.aax3323
Bergquist, P., Mildenberger, M., & Stokes, L. C. (2020). Combining climate, economic, and social policy builds public support for climate action in the US. Environmental Research Letters, 15(5), 054019.https://10.2139/ssrn.3477525
Beuermann, C.; Santarius, T. Ecological Tax Reform in Germany: Handling Two Hot Potatoes at the Same Time. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 917–929. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.045
Bouman, T., Verschoor, M., Albers, C. J., Böhm, G., Fisher, S. D., Poortinga, W., ... & Steg, L. (2020). When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102061. https://10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102061
Brannlund, R., & Persson, L. (2012). To tax, or not to tax: Preferences for climate policy attributes. Climate Policy, 12, 704–721. https://10.1080/14693062.2012.675732
Bristow, A. L., Wardman, M., Zanni, A. M., & Chintakayala, P. K. (2010). Public acceptability of personal carbon trading and carbon tax. Ecological Economics, 69, 1824–1837. https://10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04.021
Birol, E.; Das, S. Estimating the Value of Improved Wastewater Treatment: The Case of River Ganga, India. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91, 2163–2171. https://10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.05.008
Bickerstaff, K., Lorenzoni, I., Pidgeon, N.F., Poortinga, W., Simmons, P., 2008. Reframing nuclear power in the UK energy debate: nuclear power, climate change mitigation and radioactive waste. Public Understanding of Science 17, 145–169. https://10.1177/0963662506066719
Brown, Z.S.; Johnstone, N. Better the Devil You Throw: Experience and Support for Pay-as-You-Throw Waste Charges. Environ. Sci. Policy 2014, 38, 132–142. https://10.1016/j.envsci.2013.11.007
Carattini, S., Baranzini, A., Thalmann, P., Varone, F., & Vöhringer, F. (2017). Green taxes in a post-Paris world: Are millions of nays inevitable? Environmental Resource Economics, 68, 97–128. https://10.1007/s10640-017-0133-8
Carson, R. T., Louviere, J. J., & Wei, E. (2010). Alternative Australian climate change plans: The public’s views. Energy Policy, 38, 902–911. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2009.10.041
Clinch, J. P., Dunne, L., & Dresner, S. (2006). Environmental and wider implications of political impediments to environmental tax reform. Energy Policy, 34, 960–970. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.048
Convery, F.; Dunne, L.; Joyce, D. Ireland’s Carbon Tax in the Context of the Fiscal Crisis. Cyprus Econ. Policy Rev. 2014, 8, 135–143. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.047
Copland, S. (2020). Anti-politics and global climate inaction: The case of the Australian carbon tax. Critical Sociology, 46(4-5), 623-641. https://10.1177/0896920519870230
Davidovic, D.; Harring, N.; Jagers, S.C. The Contingent Effects of Environmental Concern and Ideology: Institutional Context and People’s Willingness to Pay Environmental Taxes. Environ. Polit. 2019, 29, 674–696. https:// 10.1080/09644016.2019.1606882
Deng, Y., Wang, M., & Yousefpour, R. (2017). How do people's perceptions and climatic disaster experiences influence their daily behaviors regarding adaptation to climate change?—A case study among young generations. Science of the total environment, 581, 840-847. https://10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.022
Denstadli, J.M.; Veisten, K. The Flight Is Valuable Regardless of the Carbon Tax Scheme: A Case Study of Norwegian Leisure Air Travelers. Tour. Manag. 2020, 81, 1–12. https://10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104150
Deroubaix, J. F., & Lévèque, F. (2006). The rise and fall of French ecological tax reform: Social acceptability versus political feasibility in the energy tax implementation process. Energy Policy, 34, 940–949. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.047
Denstadli, J.M.; Veisten, K. The Flight Is Valuable Regardless of the Carbon Tax Scheme: A Case Study of Norwegian Leisure Air Travelers. Tour. Manag. 2020, 81, 1–12. https://10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104150
Douenne, T., & Fabre, A. (2020). French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies. Ecological Economics, 169, 106496. https://10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106496
Dresner, S., Dunne, L., Clinch, P., & Beuermann, C. (2006). Social and political responses to ecological tax reform in Europe: An introduction to the special issue. Energy Policy, 34, 895–904. https:// 10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.043
Dreyer, S.J.; Walker, I. Acceptance and Support of the Australian Carbon Policy. Soc. Justice Res. 2013, 26, 343–362. https://10.1007/s11211-013-0191-1
Duan, H.X.; Lü, Y.L.; Li, Y. Chinese Public’s Willingness to Pay for CO2 Emissions Reductions: A Case Study from Four Provinces/Cities. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. 2014, 5, 100–110. https://10.3724/SP.J.1248.2014.100
Dolšak, N.; Adolph, C.; Prakash, A. Policy Design and Public Support for Carbon Tax: Evidence from a 2018 US National Online Survey Experiment. Public Adm. 2020, 98, 905–921. https:// 10.1111/padm.12657
Dresner, S., Jackson, T., & Gilbert, N. (2006). History and social responses to environmental tax reform in the United Kingdom. Energy Policy, 34, 930–939. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.046
Eliasson, J., & Jonsson, L. (2011). The unexpected “yes”: Explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm. Transport Policy, 18(4), 636-647. https:// 10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.03.006
Fairbrother, M. When Will People Pay to Pollute? Environmental Taxes, Political Trust and Experimental Evidence from Britain. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 2017, 49, 661–682. https://10.1017/S0007123416000727
Feldman, L.; Hart, P.S. Climate Change as a Polarizing Cue: Framing Effects on Public Support for Low-Carbon Energy Policies. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2018, 51, 54–66. https:// 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.05.004
Frey, B. S., & Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(5), 589–611. https://10.1111/1467-6419.00150
Forsberg, C. W. (2009). Sustainability by combining nuclear, fossil, and renewable energy sources. Progress in Nuclear energy, 51(1), 192-200. https://10.1016/j.pnucene.2008.04.002
Gevrek, Z.E.; Uyduranoglu, A. Public Preferences for Carbon Tax Attributes. Ecol. Econ. 2015, 118, 186–197. https://10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.07.020
Grimsrud, K.M.; Lindhjem, H.; Sem, I.V.; Rosendahl, K.E. Public Acceptance and Willingness to Pay Cost-Effective Taxes on Red Meat and City Traffic in Norway. J. Environ. Econ. Policy 2019, 9, 251–268. https://10.1080/21606544.2019.1673213
Gungor, G., & Sari, R. (2022). Nuclear power and climate policy integration in developed and developing countries. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 169, 112839. https://10.1016/j.rser.2022.112839
Gupta, M. (2016). Willingness to pay for carbon tax: A study of Indian road passenger transport. Transport Policy, 45. https://10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.09.001
Hammar, H.; Jagers, S.C. What Is a Fair CO2 Tax Increase? On Fair Emission Reductions in the Transport Sector. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 61, 377–387. https://10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.03.004
Hammar, H.; Jagers, S.C. Can Trust in Politicians Explain Individuals’ Support for Climate Policy? The Case of CO2 Tax. Clim. Policy 2006, 5, 613–625. https://10.1080/14693062.2006.9685582
Heberlein, T. A. (2012). Navigating environmental attitudes. Oxford University Press. https://10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199773329.003.0004
Ho, J. C., Kao, S. F., Wang, J. D., Su, C. T., Lee, C. T. P., Chen, R. Y., ... & Chang, P. W. (2013). Risk perception, trust, and factors related to a planned new nuclear power plant in Taiwan after the 2011 Fukushima disaster. Journal of Radiological Protection, 33(4), 773. https://10.1088/0952-4746/33/4/773
Hsu, S., Walters, J., & Purgas, A. (2008). Pollution tax heuristics: An empirical study of willingness to pay higher gasoline taxes. Energy Policy, 36, 3612–3619. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2008.06.010
Hsu, S.-L. The Politics and Psychology of Gasoline Taxes: An Empirical Study. Widener Law Rev. 2010, 26, 363–390. Stockholm. Transp. Policy 2011, 18, 636–647. https://10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.05.004
IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. https:// 10.1017/CBO9781107415416.001
Kaplowitz, S. A., & McCright, A. M. (2015). Effects of policy characteristics and justifications on acceptance of a gasoline tax increase. Energy Policy, 87, 370–381. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2015.08.037
Kallbekken, S., & Aasen, M. (2010). The demand for earmarking: Results from a focus group study. Ecological Economics, 69, 2183–2190. https://10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.06.003
Kenny, J. Environmentalism Undercover: The Environmental Dimension of Public Support for Domestic Water Charges. Elect. Stud. 2019, 62, 1–11. https://10.1016/j.electstud.2019.102088
Kim, J.; Schmöcker, J.D.; Fujii, S.; Noland, R.B. Attitudes towards Road Pricing and Environmental Taxation among US and UK Students. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2013, 48, 50–62. https:// 10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.005
Kim, S.; Shin, W. Understanding American and Korean Students’ Support for Pro-Environmental Tax Policy: The Application of the Value–Belief–Norm Theory of Environmentalism. Environ. Commun. 2015, 11, 311–331. https://10.1080/17524032.2015.1088458
Klok, J., Larsen, A., Dahl, A., & Hansen, K. (2006). Ecological tax reform in Denmark: History and social acceptability. Energy Policy, 34, 905–916. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.044
Kotchen, M.J.; Turk, Z.M.; Leiserowitz, A.A. Public Willingness to Pay for a US Carbon Tax and Preferences for Spending the Revenue. Environ. Res. Lett. 2017, 12, 1–5. https://10.1088/1748-9326/aa822a
Lachapelle, E., Borick, C. P., & Rabe, B. (2012). Public attitudes toward climate science and climate policy in federal systems: Canada and the United States compared. Review of Policy Research, 29(3), 334–357. https://10.1111/j.1541-1338.2012.00563.x
Lee, C. T., Hashim, H., Ho, C. S., Van Fan, Y., & Klemeš, J. J. (2017). Sustaining the low-carbon emission development in Asia and beyond: Sustainable energy, water, transportation and low-carbon emission technology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 146, 1-13. https://10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.144
Levi, S. (2021). Why hate carbon taxes? machine learning evidence on the roles of personal responsibility, trust, revenue recycling, and other factors across 23 european countries. Energy Research & Social Science, 73, 101883. https://10.1016/j.erss.2020.101883
Lo, A. Y., Alexander, K. S., Proctor, W., & Ryan, A. (2013). Reciprocity as deliberative capacity: Lessons from a citizen’s deliberation on carbon pricing mechanisms in Australia. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 31, 444–459. https://10.1068/c11192
Long, Z.; Axsen, J.; Kitt, S. Public Support for Supply-Focused Transport Policies: Vehicle Emissions, Low-Carbon Fuels, and ZEV Sales Standards in Canada and California. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 141, 98–115. https://10.1016/j.tra.2020.08.008
Maestre-Andrés, S., Drews, S., & van den Bergh, J. (2019). Perceived fairness and public acceptability of carbon pricing: a review of the literature. Climate Policy, 19(9), 1186-1204. https://10.1080/14693062.2019.1639490
McLaughlin, C.; Elamer, A.A.; Glen, T.; AlHares, A.; Gaber, H.R. Accounting Society’s Acceptability of Carbon Taxes: Expectations and Reality. Energy Policy 2019, 131, 302–311. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2019.05.008
Mez, L. (2012). Nuclear energy–Any solution for sustainability and climate protection? Energy Policy, 48, 56-63. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.047
Migheli, M. Brown Parents, Green Dads: Gender, Children, and Environmental Taxes. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 180, 183–197. https://10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.01.094
Muhammad, I., Mohd Hasnu, N. N., & Ekins, P. (2021). Empirical Research of Public Acceptance on Environmental Tax: A Systematic Literature Review. Environments, 8(10), 109. https://10.3390/environments8100109
Nastis, S. A., & Mattas, K. (2018). Income elasticity of willingness-to-pay for a carbon tax in Greece. International Journal of Global Warming, 14(4), 510-524. https://10.1504/IJGW.2018.091511
Nilsson, A., Bergquist, M., & Schultz, W. P. (2017). Spillover effects in environmental behaviors, across time and context: a review and research agenda. Environmental Education Research, 23(4), 573-589. https://10.1080/13504622.2016.1250148
Organizational for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). Government at a Glance; Organizational for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2019. https://10.1787/pension_glance-2015-54-en
Owen, L., Edgar, L., Prince, S., & Doble, C. (2008). Personal carbon trading: Public acceptability. A Report to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Opinion Leader and Enviros Consulting. London: Defra. https://10.1108/nfs.2002.01732fab.006
Pidgeon, N.F., Lorenzoni, I., Poortinga, W., 2008. Climate change or nuclear power—No thanks! A quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain. Global Environmental Change 18, 69–85. https://10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.09.005
Poumadère, M., Bertoldo, R., & Samadi, J. (2011). Public perceptions and governance of controversial technologies to tackle climate change: nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, wind, and geoengineering. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2(5), 712-727. https://10.1002/wcc.134
Rhodes, E.; Axsen, J.; Jaccard, M. Exploring Citizen Support for Different Types of Climate Policy. Ecol. Econ. 2017, 137, 56–69. https://10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.02.027
Rosentrater, L.D.; Sælensminde, I.; Ekström, F.; Böhm, G.; Bostrom, A.; Hanss, D.; O’Connor, R.E. Efficacy Trade-Offs in Individuals’ Support for Climate Change Policies. Environ. Behav. 2013, 45, 935–970. https://10.1177/0013916512450510
Rotaris, L.; Danielis, R. The Willingness to Pay for a Carbon Tax in Italy. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2019, 67, 659–673. https://10.1016/j.trd.2019.01.001
Schlossberg, M., & Shuford, E. (2005). Delineating" public" and" participation" in PPGIS. https://10.4135/9781412953962.n165
Sommer, S., Mattauch, L., & Pahle, M. (2020). Supporting carbon taxes: The role of fairness (No. 873). Ruhr Economic Papers. https://10.2139/ssrn.3707644
Sonnberger, M., Ruddat, M., Arnold, A., Scheer, D., Poortinga, W., Böhm, G., ... & Tvinnereim, E. (2021). Climate concerned but anti-nuclear: Exploring (dis) approval of nuclear energy in four European countries. Energy Research & Social Science, 75, 102008. https://10.1016/j.erss.2021.102008
Tang, J. S., & Feng, J. Y. (2018). Residents’ disaster preparedness after the Meinong Taiwan earthquake: A test of protection motivation theory. International journal of environmental research and public health, 15(7), 1434. https://10.3390/ijerph15071434
Thalmann, P. (2004). The public acceptance of green taxes: 2 million voters express their opinion. Public Choice, 119(1-2), 179-217. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PUCH.0000024165.18082.db
Thøgersen, J., & Crompton, T. (2009). Simple and painless? The limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32, 141-163. https://10.1007/s10603-009-9101-1
Thøgersen, J., & Noblet, C. (2012). Does green consumerism increase the acceptance of wind power?. Energy Policy, 51, 854-862. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2012.09.044
Umit, R., & Schaffer, L. M. (2020). Attitudes towards carbon taxes across Europe: The role of perceived uncertainty and self-interest. Energy Policy, 140, 111385. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111385
Uyduranoglu, A.; Ozturk, S.S. Public Support for Carbon Taxation in Turkey: Drivers and Barriers. Clim. Policy 2020, 20, 1175–1191. https://10.1080/14693062.2020.1816887
Wicki, M.; Fesenfeld, L.; Bernauer, T. In Search of Politically Feasible Policy-Packages for Sustainable Passenger Transport: Insights from Choice Experiments in China, Germany, and the USA. Environ. Res. Lett. 2019, 14, 1–17. https://10.1088/1748-9326/ab30a2
Yang-Chih Fu (2020). 2019 Taiwan Social Change Survey (Round 7, Year 5): Technology and Risk Society (C00351_2). Available from Survey Research Data Archive, Academia Sinica.
Macovei, O. I. (2015). Determinants of consumers’ pro-environmental behavior–toward an integrated model. Journal of Danubian Studies and Research, 5(2). https://10.1515/erj-2014-0005
Noblet, C. L., & McCoy, S. K. (2018). Does one good turn deserve another? Evidence of domain-specific licensing in energy behavior. Environment and Behavior, 50(8), 839-863. https://10.1177/0013916517718022
Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 221-279). Academic Press. https://10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5
Sharpe, E. J., Perlaviciute, G., & Steg, L. (2021). Pro-environmental behaviour and support for environmental policy as expressions of pro-environmental motivation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 76, 101650. https://10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101650
Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., & Abrahamse, W. (2005). Factors influencing the acceptability of energy policies: A test of VBN theory. Journal of environmental psychology, 25(4), 415-425. https://10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.08.003
Stern, P. C. (2000). New environmental theories: toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of social issues, 56(3), 407-424. https://10.1111/0022-4537.00175
Werfel, S. H. (2017). Household behaviour crowds out support for climate change policy when sufficient progress is perceived. Nature Climate Change, 7(7), 512-515. https://10.1038/nclimate3316
Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2013). It is a moral issue: The relationship between environmental self-identity, obligation-based intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour. Global environmental change, 23(5), 1258-1265. https://10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.018
Visschers, V. H., Keller, C., & Siegrist, M. (2011). Climate change benefits and energy supply benefits as determinants of acceptance of nuclear power stations: Investigating an explanatory model. Energy policy, 39(6), 3621-3629. https://10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.064