Public support for regulatory research on the potential ecological effects of RF-EMF

Regulatory agencies are increasingly required to make decisions about the deployment of infrastructure such as 5G mobile networks under conditions of scientific uncertainty, making ecological evidence relevant to innovation governance. This paper examines public preferences regarding how regulators should commission and fund research on potential ecological impacts of RF-EMF on non-human organisms under conditions of uncertainty, rather than evaluating biological outcomes. It provides evidence linking socio-cognitive factors and institutional trust to support for regulatory research and alternative funding arrangements. A discrete choice experiment involving a UK sample (n = 969) compares voluntary donations with compulsory taxation as mechanisms for financing ecological research on RF-EMF, varying the organism studied, the value framing, the research setting, and the required contribution. Respondents reject the status quo of no research, express stronger stated support for projects conducted in natural settings and for research framed in terms of human health and economic benefits, while showing greater stated support for research on plants and fungi than on animals. Although stated willingness to pay did not differ significantly between the donation- and taxation-based payment mechanisms, institutional trust, perceived fairness, and the perceived plausibility of the funding arrangements were significantly associated with stated support for regulatory research. Cognitive risk perceptions show the strongest association with perceived ecological risk, while affective and moral concerns add explanatory power. The findings show how socio-cognitive and institutional factors are associated with public support for regulatory evidence-building and contribute to a better understanding of the governance of 5G innovation under conditions of ecological uncertainty.