The role of justice concerns in the public perception of air pollution reduction programmes: A factorial survey experiment

• We study the impact of justice concerns on the social acceptance of air pollution reduction programmes. • To analyse the role of distributive, retributive, and participatory justice, we used a factorial survey experiment. • The results indicate support for an egalitarian approach to burden-sharing. • Respondents favour equality in fines for using inappropriate fuels, regardless of income. • We explore the impact of socio-economic variables on the heterogeneity of justice concerns. Modernization of heating systems is vital for cities struggling with severe air pollution linked to high mortality rates. For changes to be implemented effectively, any proposed recovery programmes must be considered fair and acceptable by the public. In this study, we examine individuals’ perceptions of air pollution reduction programmes in four cities in Poland, a country known for having some of the highest levels of air pollution in the European Union (EU). For this purpose, we use a factorial survey experiment (FSE) in which respondents evaluate fairness, acceptance, and their likelihood of signing a support or a protest petition with regard to policy scenarios with attributes addressing different justice dimensions (distributive, retributive, and participatory). The first three evaluations form a social acceptance index. We also investigate the impact that respondents’ socio-demographic characteristics, respiratory health, and attitudes toward altruistic punishment have on the acceptance and justice assessment of proposed changes. The results reveal that a lower, income-adjusted cost burden from an air pollution reduction programme is related to increased social acceptance. At the same time, respondents favour higher and equal fines for policy violations. This indicates a preference for an egalitarian approach (equitable distribution) to distributive justice and for equality in terms of retributive justice. Providing information about smog increases social acceptance, which highlights the importance of addressing basic pre-conditions for participatory justice. Further analysis indicates that respondents’ income, education, respiratory health, and attitudes toward altruistic punishment account for the differences in evaluations of the policy scenarios.