Public Support for Climate Change Policy: Consistency in the Influence of Values and Attitudes Over Time and Across Specific Policy Alternatives

Abstract Background Policies which reduce affordability and availability of alcohol are known to be effective in reducing alcohol harms. Public support is important in policy decision making and implementation, and it may be possible to intervene to improve public support for alcohol policy measures. This systematic review aims to explore the effects of interventions to increase public support for evidence based policy measures in relation to either public health or climate change, and to examine underpinning theory and content of effective interventions.Methods The electronic search strategy was built around the constructs "public support or opinion", "health or climate change policies" and "interventions". Backward and forward searching was conducted, and authors of included papers contacted. Studies were included if they aimed to intervene to improve public support for public health or climate change policy measures, were controlled trials, and targeted the general public.Results Sixteen studies were included in this review, of which 13 had sufficient data for inclusion in meta analyses. The pooled effect estimates for continuous and binary data both show improvements in public support for policy measures as a result of evaluated interventions. The pooled standardised mean difference (n=8 studies) is 0.13 (95% C.I. 0.08-0.17), and the pooled odds ratio (n=5 studies) is 1.72 (95% C.I. 1.33-2.21). Careful attention to message framing, with or without narrative persuasion, appears particularly important content for efficacious interventions.Conclusion This systematic review demonstrates the efficacy of interventions to improve public support for public health policies.

Download Full-text

How Do Different Frames Affect Public Support for Climate Change Policy: Evidence from a Multi-Country Conjoint Study

10.31235/osf.io/372pk ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Niheer Dasandi ◽

Hilary Graham ◽

David Hudson ◽

Slava Jankin Mikhaylov ◽

Jennifer vanHeerde-Hudson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Public Support ◽

Climate Change Policy ◽

Mitigation Policy ◽

Individual Level ◽

Change Policy ◽

The Usa ◽

And Migration ◽

The Uk ◽

Mitigation Policies

This study tests the effects of different framings of climate change messages on public support for mitigation policy using conjoint survey experiments conducted in five countries: China, Germany, India, the UK, and the USA. We consider four different types of climate change frames: valence (positive vs. negative), theme (economic, environmental, health, and migration), scale (individual, community, country, and global), and timeframe (2050, 2030, now). The analysis also tests the effects of these different frames on individuals who are not concerned by the effects of climate change. Our results show a positive framing, in terms of the opportunities they provide, increases support for mitigation policies. We also find that an environmental and health framing of climate change increases public support for mitigation, while a migration framing reduces public support, and an economic framing has no effect. The results also show that framing climate change at a global level elicit greater public support for mitigation than at an individual level, and discussing the current impacts of climate change leads to greater support than future impacts. Our analysis also finds that a positive framing and a health framing of climate change also increase support for mitigation policies among those not concerned by the effects of climate change.

Download Full-text

The Science–Policy Interface as a Discourse Network: Finland’s Climate Change Policy 2002–2015

Politics and Governance ◽

10.17645/pag.v8i2.2603 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 200-214 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Anna Kukkonen ◽

Tuomas Ylä-Anttila

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Science Policy ◽

Climate Change Policy ◽

Mitigation Measures ◽

Change Policy ◽

Science Policy Interface ◽

Discourse Coalitions ◽

Scientific Arguments ◽

Over Time

In this article, we argue that the science–policy interface can be understood as a discourse network constituted by discursive interaction between scientific organizations and other actors that both use scientific arguments in conjunction with other policy arguments. We use discourse network analysis to investigate the climate change policy process in Finland between 2002 and 2015, focusing on the role of and relationships between scientific actors and arguments in the discourse networks. Our data consist of policy actors’ written testimonies on two law proposals, the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol (2002) and the enactment of the Finnish Climate Law (2015). Our results show that two competing discourse coalitions have influenced the development of climate change policy in the 2000s. In 2002, the dominant coalition was economic, prioritizing economic growth over climate change mitigation. In 2015, the climate coalition that argued for ambitious mitigation measures became dominant. The majority of scientific actors were part of the dominant economy coalition in 2002 and part of the dominant ecology coalition in 2015. The centrality of scientific arguments increased over time, and both discourse coalitions used them progressively more. These developments reflect the increasingly central position of science in Finnish climate policymaking. We contribute to the literature on the science–policy interface by operationalizing the interface as a set of connections in a discourse network and by showing how the analysis of discourse networks and their properties can help us understand the shifts in the role of science in policymaking over time.

Download Full-text

A Climate Backlash: Comparing Populist Parties’ Climate Policies in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden

The Journal of Environment & Development ◽

10.1177/10704965211027748 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 107049652110277

Author(s):

Antto Vihma ◽

Gunilla Reischl ◽

Astrid Nonbo Andersen

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Climate Policy ◽

Public Support ◽

Climate Change Policy ◽

The United States ◽

Party Competition ◽

Empirical Science ◽

Ideal Types ◽

Climate Policies ◽

Change Policy

The rise of authoritarian populism has disrupted the patterns of party competition in many Western societies. Related to this development, the current debates in the United States and European Union illustrate how empirical science on climate change may become intensely politicized, and all ambitious climate policies challenged in the contemporary political landscape. We set out an analytical framework with three ideal types of political strategies for opposing climate policies: climate science denialism, climate policy nationalism, and climate policy conservativism. Empirically, the article investigates populist resistance to ambitious climate change policy in the Nordic context, where countries have sought to assume global leadership in climate politics and have considerable public support for climate action. In an analysis of the evolving positions of populist parties in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden in recent elections, the article sheds light on the interconnection between populism and climate change policy.

Download Full-text

Climate Change Policy Alternatives

The Case for a Carbon Tax ◽

10.5822/978-1-61091-178-8_2 ◽

2011 ◽

pp. 13-24

Author(s):

Shi-Ling Hsu

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Climate Change Policy ◽

Policy Alternatives ◽

Change Policy

Download Full-text

Towards an understanding of when non-climate frames can generate public support for climate change policy

Environment and Behavior ◽

10.1177/0013916517713299 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 50 (7) ◽

pp. 781-806 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Benjamin J.A. Walker ◽

Tim Kurz ◽

Duncan Russel

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Climate Change ◽

Climate Policy ◽

Public Support ◽

Climate Change Policy ◽

Policy Study ◽

Policy Makers ◽

Car Use ◽

Change Policy ◽

Car Use Reduction

There is a growing tendency for policy makers to frame climate change action in terms of non-climate benefits, raising important empirical questions regarding the utility of such approaches. Across three studies we explore whether (and when) non-climate frames can lead to greater support for climate policy relative to climate frames. In Study 1 we framed a car-use reduction policy in relation to climate change or public health and showed that non-climate frames can stimulate greater support for climate policy. Study 2 explored frame relevance as a potential boundary condition to the efficacy of non-climate frames. Study 3 found that attempts to frame climate policy in relation to non-climate issues that affect participants personally can fail if that issue is not seen as being sufficiently relevant. We suggest that non-climate frames can be an effective tool in stimulating support for climate policy, however greater consideration of the key mechanisms is required.

Download Full-text

Copenhagen Agreement - A New Paradigm of Climate Problem Solving

Voprosy Ekonomiki ◽

10.32609/0042-8736-2010-9-115-132 ◽

2010 ◽

pp. 115-132 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

S. Agibalov ◽

A. Kokorin

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Energy Savings ◽

Global Climate ◽

Climate Change Policy ◽

New Order ◽

Paradigm Shifts ◽

New Paradigm ◽

Energy Efficiency Policy ◽

Policy Paradigm ◽

Change Policy

Copenhagen summit results could be called a failure. This is the failure of UN climate change policy management, but definitely the first step to a new order as well. The article reviews main characteristics of climate policy paradigm shifts. Russian interests in climate change policy and main threats are analyzed. Successful development and implementation of energy savings and energy efficiency policy are necessary and would sufficiently help solving the global climate change problem.

Download Full-text