Research has shown that understanding the fundamental of public support for carbon emission reduction policies may undermine policy formulation and implementation, yet the direction of influence and the transmission mechanism remain unclear. Using data from using data from 1482 questionnaires conducted in Hangzhou, China, this paper has examined a comprehensive model of the factors and paths influencing public support for carbon emission reduction policies, and evaluated the determinants and predictors of policy support regarding individual psychological perceptions, social-contextual perceptions, and perceptions of policy features. The results show that the variables in both the individual psychological perception and social contextual perception dimensions have no significant effect on carbon tax, however, be important constructure in carbon trading; in the policy characteristics perception dimension, both variables have a significant positive effect on both carbon tax and carbon trading, and are also the strongest predictors of policy support for carbon policies. Further evidence suggests that future policies could be more acceptable to residents by strengthening their environmental values, social norms can further arouse residents’ social responsibility to care about climate, and whether the policy is effective or fair to help residents realize the importance of the policy as well as the need for their participation and willingness to dedicate themselves to the mitigation of climate change.

1. Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2013). Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(6), 1773–1785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.029
2. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191
3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
4. Bandura, A. (2002). Environmental sustainability by sociocognitive deceleration of population growth. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
5. Bandura, A. (2004). Health Promotion by Social Cognitive Means. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 143–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198104263660
6. Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 164–180.
7. Bergquist, M., Nilsson, A., & Schultz, W. P. (2019). A meta-analysis of field-experiments using social norms to promote pro-environmental behaviors. Global Environmental Change, 59, 101941.
8. Bolderdijk, J. W., Steg, L., Woerdman, E., et al. (2017). Understanding Effectiveness Skepticism. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 36(2), 348–361. https://doi.org/10.1509/jppm.16.118
9. Börjesson, M., Eliasson, J., & Hamilton, C. (2016). Why experience changes attitudes to congestion pricing: The case of Gothenburg. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 85, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.12.002
10. Börjesson, M., Eliasson, J., Hugosson, M. B., et al. (2012). The Stockholm congestion charges—5 years on. Effects, acceptability and lessons learnt. Transport Policy, 20, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2011.11.001
11. Börjesson, M., Hamilton, C. J., Näsman, P., et al. (2015). Factors driving public support for road congestion reduction policies: Congestion charging, free public transport and more roads in Stockholm, Helsinki and Lyon. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 78, 452–462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.06.008
12. Botrel, C. A., Rekker, S., Wade, B., et al. (2024). Understanding the lobbying actions taken by the Australian renewable energy industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 434, 139674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.139674
13. Chung, J. Y., Kyle, G. T., Petrick, J. F., et al. (2011). Fairness of prices, user fee policy and willingness to pay among visitors to a national forest. Tourism Management, 32(5), 1038–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.08.016
14. Cialdini, R. B., & Jacobson, R. P. (2021). Influences of social norms on climate change-related behaviors. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.01.005
15. Cialdini, R. B., Reno, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A focus theory of normative conduct: Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 1015–1026. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.1015
16. Clayton, S. (1998). Preference for Macrojustice Versus Microjustice in Environmental Decisions. Environment and Behavior, 30(2), 162–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916598302003
17. Clayton, S. (2000). New Ways of Thinking about Environmentalism: Models of Justice in the Environmental Debate. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 459–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00178
18. Crowley, K., Jayawardena, O. (2017). Energy disadvantage in Australia: policy obstacles and opportunities. Energy Procedia, 121, 284-291.
19. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629–636. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046408
20. Douenne, T., Fabre, A. (2020). French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies. Ecological Economics, 169, 106496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.08.029
21. Eid, R., Agag, G., & Shehawy, Y. M. (2020). Understanding Guests’ Intention to Visit Green Hotels. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 45(3), 494–528. https://doi.org/10.1177/1096348020947800
22. Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., & Ibanez, L. (2017). Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence. Ecological Economics, 140, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.017
23. Folger, R. (1996). Distributive and procedural justice: Multifaceted meanings and interrelations. Social Justice Research, 9(4), 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02196992
24. Geels, F. W. (2013). The impact of the financial–economic crisis on sustainability transitions: Financial investment, governance and public discourse. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 6, 67–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2012.11.004
25. Grazzini, L., Rodrigo, P., Aiello, G., et al. (2018). Loss or gain? The role of message framing in hotel guests’ recycling behaviour. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(11), 1944–1966. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1526294
26. Gross, J., & Vostroknutov, A. (2022). Why do people follow social norms? Current Opinion in Psychology, 44, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.016
27. Han, H., Hwang, J., & Lee, M. J. (2016). The value-belief-emotion-norm model: investigating customers’ eco-friendly behavior. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 34(5), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2016.1208790
28. Juvan, E., & Dolnicar, S. (2017). Drivers of pro-environmental tourist behaviours are not universal. Journal of Cleaner Production, 166, 879–890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.087
29. Kals, E., Russell, Y. (2001). Individual conceptions of justice and their potential for explaining proenvironmental decision making. Soc. Justice Res., 14 (4), 367-385. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014698528132
30. Kiatkawsin, K., & Han, H. (2017). Young travelers’ intention to behave pro-environmentally: Merging the value-belief-norm theory and the expectancy theory. Tourism Management, 59, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.06.018
31. Kim, J., Schmöcker, J. D., Fujii, S., et al. (2013). Attitudes towards road pricing and environmental taxation among US and UK students. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 48, 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.10.005
32. Kornilaki, M., Thomas, R., & Font, X. (2019). The sustainability behaviour of small firms in tourism: the role of self-efficacy and contextual constraints. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(1), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1561706
33. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2115-4
34. Ling, M., & Xu, L. (2021). How and when financial incentives crowd out pro-environmental motivation: A longitudinal quasi-experimental study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 78, 101715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101715
35. Ling, M., Xu, L., & Yang, H. (2023). The crowding out effect of financial incentives on conformity to pro-environmental social norms: a quasi-experiment on household recycling. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 67(13), 3359–3376. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2023.2223758
36. Locke, E. A., Frederick, E., Lee, C., et al. (1984). Effect of self-efficacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(2), 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.69.2.241
37. MacCoun, R. J. (2005). Voice, control, and belonging: The Double-Edged Sword of Procedural Fairness. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1(1), 171–201. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.1.041604.115958
38. 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://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1639490
39. Maestre-Andrés, S., Drews, S., Savin, I., et al. (2021). Carbon tax acceptability with information provision and mixed revenue uses. Nature Communications, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27380-8
40. Majeed, S., & Kim, W. G. (2022). A reflection of greenwashing practices in the hospitality industry: a scoping review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(3), 1125–1146. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijchm-04-2022-0495
41. Makki, A. M., Ozturk, A. B., & Singh, D. (2016). Role of risk, self-efficacy, and innovativeness on behavioral intentions for mobile payment systems in the restaurant industry. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 19(5), 454–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2016.1188646
42. Nyborg, K. (2018). Reciprocal climate negotiators. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 92, 707–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2017.08.008
43. Rasinski, K. A., Smith, T. W., & Zuckerbraun, S. (1994). Fairness Motivations and Tradeoffs Underlying Public Support for Government Environmental Spending in Nine Nations. Journal of Social Issues, 50(3), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1994.tb02426.x
44. Reese, G., & Jacob, L. (2015). Principles of environmental justice and pro-environmental action: A two-step process model of moral anger and responsibility to act. Environmental Science & Policy, 51, 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.03.011
45. Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In: Berkowitz, L. (editor). Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press, 10, 221-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5
46. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical testes in 20 countries. In: Zanna, M. (editor). Advances in experimental social psychology. Orland, FL: Academic Press, 25, 1-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6
47. Stern, P. C. (2000). New Environmental Theories: Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175
48. Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., et al. (1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: The case of environmental concern. Human Ecology Review, 6, 81-97.
49. Thøgersen, J. (2006). Norms for environmentally responsible behaviour: An extended taxonomy. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(4), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.09.004
50. Tyler, T. R., & Bies, R. J. (2015). Beyond Formal Procedures: The Interpersonal Context of Procedural Justice. Applied Social Psychology and Organizational Settings, 77–98. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315728377-4
51. van Buuren, S. (2018). Flexible Imputation of Missing Data, Second Edition. Chapman and Hall/CRC. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429492259
52. 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://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.018
53. Xu, L., Zhang, X., & Ling, M. (2018). Pro-environmental spillover under environmental appeals and monetary incentives: Evidence from an intervention study on household waste separation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 60, 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.10.003
54. Yan, H., & Chai, H. (2021). Consumers’ Intentions towards Green Hotels in China: An Empirical Study Based on Extended Norm Activation Model. Sustainability, 13(4), 2165. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042165