Reproduction Files

Research DescriptionThis repository accompanies the article<b> </b><b>"When More Isn't Always Better: Non-Monotone Preferences and the Synergy of Rebates and Earmarking in Carbon Tax Design." </b>It provides the data and documentation necessary to reproduce the core findings.ObjectiveThe study investigates <b>public acceptance of carbon tax reforms</b> in Austria, focusing on how <b>revenue use strategies, </b>specifically <b>lump-sum rebates</b> and <b>earmarking for public purposes, </b>shape support for carbon pricing. Unlike prior work, it allows for and identifies <b>non-monotonic preferences</b>, where <b>more is not always better</b> (e.g., larger rebates do not always increase support).Methodology Summary<b>Data Source</b>: Online survey with 1,216 participants (March–May 2022).<b>Design</b>: An <b>Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint (ACBC)</b> experiment implemented in <b>Lighthouse Studio</b> (Sawtooth Software).<b>Estimation</b>: <b>Hierarchical Bayesian</b> modeling to recover individual-level part-worth utilities.<b>Attributes Studied</b>:<b>Tax level</b> (0–125 €-cent per liter)<b>Lump-sum rebate</b> (€0–€300 annually)<b>Earmarking use of remaining tax revenue</b> (e.g., public transport, climate protection, general budget, etc.)Key FindingsA <b>moderate tax increase</b> (10–25 €-cent/liter) often gains <b>more support than no tax at all</b>.<b>€100</b> is the <b>most popular rebate amount</b>; support declines for both higher and lower values.Earmarking funds for <b>public transport</b> or <b>climate protection</b> is <b>crucial</b> to achieving majority support.Preferences are <b>non-monotonic</b> and <b>heterogeneous</b>, highlighting the importance of flexible estimation methods.Contact detailsFor questions, please contact [e-mail]