Understanding Local Policy Elites' Perceptions on the Benefits and Risks Associated with High-Voltage Power Line Installations in the State of Arkansas.

Recently, a controversial policy debate has arisen concerning the installation of high-voltage power lines in northwest Arkansas. While proponents argue that such an installation is inevitable to efficiently and reliably support the identified electric load in the region, opponents claim that the lines will degrade the natural environment and hamper the tourism-based local economy in affected regions, notably in Ozark Mountain areas. Of particular interest is to understand how local policy elites perceive the benefits and risks associated with such divisive proposals, which is critical for comprehending the formation and changes of related government policies. Based upon the dual process theory of judgment, this study systematically investigates the triadic relationships between (a) more profound personal value predispositions, (b) affects and feelings, and (c) perceived benefits and risks related to the proposed installation of high-voltage power lines among local policy elites in the state of Arkansas. In doing so, we analyze original data collected from a statewide Internet survey of 420 local leaders and key policymakers about their opinions on the related issues, while considering other factors claimed by previous literature to influence risk perceptions, including trust, knowledge level, and demographic characteristics. Analytical results suggest that grid-group cultural predispositions, as deeply held core values within local policy elites' individual belief systems, both directly and indirectly-through affective feelings-shape perceived utility associated with the installation of high-voltage power lines. We conclude this article by suggesting some practical considerations for better designing policy addressing controversial issues of this nature.