Is an energy transition a rational choice? To answer this research question, this study analyzed the direct and indirect effects of political ideology and partisan support on the acceptance of solar energy by applying regression analysis and the moderation effect. The risk perception factor, energy factor, and political factor were set as the independent variables. The results showed that non-political variables such as perceived risk, perceived benefit, negative emotion, knowledge, trust, and energy insecurity influenced the acceptance of solar energy more than political variables. Negative emotion had the strongest negative effect on the acceptance. Second, support for the Moon jae-in government as a partisanship variable was associated with the acceptance of the solar energy. However, ideology had no effect on the acceptance. Third, support for the Moon Jae-in government had a positive direct effect on the acceptance and indirectly influenced it by ways of perceived benefits, trust, and negative emotion, which are key influencers of acceptance of solar energy. Progressive political ideology had no direct effect on acceptance, but indirectly suppressed the effect of negative emotion on solar energy acceptance. This study shows that partisanship, in terms of presidential support, has both direct and indirect effects on solar energy acceptance, whereas ideology has indirect effects. Given the important role of political variables, future research should focus more on various political variables, such as political leadership, preference for green politics, climate politics, and the polarization of political support as independent variables.
This study was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A5C2A02087244).Furthermore, the study reaffirms the importance of psychological and perceptual factors in shaping energy policy support. The strong influence of perceived risks and benefits, knowledge, and trust aligns with existing literature (e.g., Ref. [29]), emphasizing the critical role of these psychological perception dimensions in determining public acceptance of energy initiatives. This shows that, while political context and partisanship influence acceptance, the psychological dimensions of perception, such as risks, benefits, and emotions, remain important. Psychological risk perception paradigms and partisan attributes may be influential factors in shaping energy policies at different levels, with psychological risk perception paradigms playing a more fundamental role in determining support for or acceptance of policies based on the subjective risk or benefit perceptions.This study was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A5C2A02087244). This paper is a result of The Human Resources Development Project for HLW Management hosted by KORAD and MOTIE.The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:Seoyong Kim reports financial support was provided by The Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea. Sohee Kim reports financial support was provided by The Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea.This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A5C2A02087244). This paper is a result of The Human Resources Development Project for HLW Management hosted by KORAD and MOTIE.This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2021S1A5C2A02087244). This paper is a result of The Human Resources Development Project for HLW Management hosted by KORAD and MOTIE
