CSDE Affiliate Crystal Hall and co-authors published the research article, “How academics and policymakers can collaborate effectively: Lessons from using behavioral science to improve U.S. federal government policies,” in Behavioral Science & Policy published by Sage Journals. Various public programs and services are administered by the U.S. government. Creating these programs requires an understanding of the psychological processes that influence behavior. The authors of this article state that, “policymakers may collaborate with academics who have expertise in behavioral science to generate ideas for improving existing programs, procedures, or policies; to test existing programs; or to design wholly new programs that address societal problems. Such collaborations also enable academics to test new or established theories in real-world settings.” In this article, the authors draw on their collective experience in the U.S. Office of Evaluation Sciences where they studied federal programs to outline the core issues that make research collaborations between academics and policymakers challenging. They also offer advice on how to make these partnerships productive and beneficial.

CSDE Affiliate Ann Bostrom and Former Evans Visiting Scholar Daniel Sloot published a research article in Energy Research & Social Science titled, “The role of framing in public support for direct air capture: A moral hazard survey experiment in the United States.” Dr. Sloot and Dr. Bostrom explain that the key to limiting global warming will likely require “removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and keeping it out of the atmosphere by sequestering it.” There is a crucial need for public support for the rapid upscaling of carbon removal and sequestration. However, there has been a concern that public support for these negative emissions technologies (NETs) will be impeded by the moral hazard that these NETs could compromise mitigation efforts and therefore should be avoided. Building on previous research, Sloot and Bostrom investigate the effects of four novel ways of framing the use of direct air capture (DAC), a form of carbon removal from the atmosphere that is currently of broad interest. Findings suggest concern about moral hazard is overrated. Read the rest of their article to learn more. 

With the upcoming general election approaching, KUOW, Seattle’s NPR Station, sat down and talked with professionals to talk about the fact that, “Seattle voters will decide on the biggest property tax measure in the city’s history, the $1.5 billion transportation levy.” In the article, “When it comes to Seattle’s property tax levy, renters are not immune,” it is discussed that the levy would fund things like bridge repairs and bus lanes, and the fate of this may hinge on the city’s makeup of homeowners and renters. Within Seattle, the population is made up of 55% renters and 45% homeowners, which is relevant to this discussion because renters and homeowners tend to vote differently when it comes to property tax increases. Renters are more likely to approve of a property tax increase while homeowners are more likely to disapprove of the levy. What is the reasoning behind this? One answer is salience. CSDE Affiliate Isabelle Cohen, an economist who studies taxes, states that, “salience is the idea [that] you’re more aware of some taxes than others. If you’re a homeowner, you’re getting that bill from the county and you’re sort of saying, ‘Wow, this is what I’m paying.” Those who have paid off their mortgages are more aware of property taxes and renters are generally less aware of how property taxes are impacting their monthly rent. Dr. Cohen discusses the individual impacts on renters and homeowners, explains salience, and more. Read the rest of the article to learn more about the upcoming property tax vote.