scholarly journals Psychological Barriers to Bipartisan Public Support for Climate Policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 492-507 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leaf Van Boven ◽  
Phillip J. Ehret ◽  
David K. Sherman
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Political Polarization ◽  
The Political ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
Democrats And Republicans ◽  
Depth Interviews

Psychological scientists have the expertise—and arguably an obligation—to help understand the political polarization that impedes enactment of climate policy. Many explanations emphasize Republican skepticism about climate change. Yet results from national panel studies in 2014 and 2016 indicate that most Republicans believe in climate change, if not as strongly as Democrats. Political polarization over climate policy does not simply reflect that Democrats and Republicans disagree about climate change but that Democrats and Republicans disagree with each other. The results of a national panel experiment and of in-depth interviews with four former members of Congress suggest that Democrats and Republicans—both ordinary citizens and policymakers—support policies from their own party and reactively devalue policies from the opposing party. These partisan evaluations occur both for policies historically associated with liberal principles and politicians (cap-and-trade) and for policies associated with conservative principles and politicians (revenue-neutral carbon tax). People also exaggerate how much other Democrats and Republicans are swayed by partisanship. This foments false norms of partisan opposition that, in turn, influence people’s personal policy support. Correcting misperceived norms of opposition and decoupling policy evaluation from identity concerns would help overcome these seemingly insurmountable barriers to bipartisan support for climate policy.

scholarly journals Knowing Behavior Matters Doesn’t Hurt: The Effect of Individual Climate Behavior Messaging on Green Policy Support

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdurakhim Rakhimov ◽  
Erik Thulin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Behavior Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Individual Behavior ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Large Impact ◽  
Mitigation Potential ◽  
Green Policy ◽  
Personal Behavior

Promoting individual behavior change has been criticized as a strategy for addressing climate change due to its potential to diminish climate policy support. In a pre-registered study, we find that messages recommending the adoption of individual climate behaviors and highlighting their large impact do not affect support for a carbon tax. Programs that encourage personal behavior change with substantial mitigation potential offer complementary opportunities to policy without undermining its effectiveness.

scholarly journals A turbulent time: government sources post-2016 presidential election

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-142
Author(s):  
Alicia Kubas
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Academic Librarians ◽  
The Political ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Content Type ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Democrats And Republicans ◽  
Depth Interviews

Purpose Since the 2016 presidential election, hyper-partisanship has become a regular facet of the political landscape with Democrats and Republicans in increasing conflict. The purpose of this paper is to determine if perception of government sources related to trust and credibility has changed since the 2016 election and if the experiences and strategies of librarians who teach or consult about government information has changed in response to this environment. Design/methodology/approach A 24-question survey was distributed to garner qualitative and quantitative responses from librarians who teach or consult about government information in an academic environment. A total of 122 responses were used for analysis. Findings Academic librarians are seeing more concern from patrons about disappearing online government information and wider distrust of government information. Librarians also noticed that the political leanings of students color their perspective around government sources and that librarians also need to keep their political beliefs in check. Respondents emphasized a need for more government literacy and information literacy topics when discussing evaluation of government sources. Research limitations/implications The data collection only included responses from academic librarians. Further research could include in-depth interviews and look at experiences in various library types. Originality/value With the timeliness of this topic, there has not been an in-depth investigation into how the Trump administration has changed user trust and perception of government sources from the librarian’s point of view. This paper continues the conversation about how librarians can address the growing distrust of government information and give us insight into the effects of a turbulent political climate on government sources.

Morality, Emotions, and the Ideal Environmentalist: Toward A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Political Polarization

2021 ◽  
pp. 000276422110562
Author(s):  
Emily H. Kennedy ◽  
Parker Muzzerall
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Moral Worth ◽  
Washington State ◽  
Political Polarization ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Spectrum ◽  
Political Differences ◽  
Depth Interviews ◽  
The Ideal

Americans are politically polarized in their views on environmental protection, and scholars have identified structural and cultural drivers of this polarity. Missing from these theories is a consideration of the emotional dynamics at play in environmentally relevant interactions between liberals and conservatives. Based on analyses of in-depth interviews conducted with 63 politically and socioeconomically diverse residents of four communities in Washington State, we find evidence of important common ground across the political spectrum. Our participants voice support and respect for environmental protection and convey a shared image of an ideal environmentalist: a conscious, caring, and committed individual who seeks to reduce their personal environmental impact. We see political differences arise when our participants evaluate their own relationship with the environment against this ideal environmentalist. Liberals are more likely to align with or admire the ideal environmentalist and conservatives are more likely to challenge or denigrate the ideal. Emotions and competing claims for moral worth, we suggest, play a role in making these political differences polarizing.

scholarly journals The Consequences of Uncertainty: Climate Sensitivity and Economic Sensitivity to the Climate

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hassler ◽  
Per Krusell ◽  
Conny Olovsson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Climate Sensitivity ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Green Energy ◽  
Integrated Assessment Model ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Energy Sources ◽  
Negative Impacts

We construct an integrated assessment model with multiple energy sources—two fossil fuels and green energy—and use it to evaluate ranges of plausible estimates for the climate sensitivity, as well as for the sensitivity of the economy to climate change. Rather than focusing explicitly on uncertainty, we look at extreme scenarios defined by the upper and lower limits given in available studies in the literature. We compare optimal policy with laissez faire, and we point out the possible policy errors that could arise. By far the largest policy error arises when the climate policy is overly passive; overly zealous climate policy (i.e., a high carbon tax applied when climate change and its negative impacts on the economy are very limited) does not hurt the economy much as there is considerable substitutability between fossil and nonfossil energy sources.

Security in Climate Change Discourse: Analyzing the Divergence between US and EU Approaches to Policy

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarrod Hayes ◽  
Janelle Knox-Hayes
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Cultural Norms ◽  
Security Threat ◽  
Case Study Approach ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
The Us ◽  
Policy Construction

Why has Europe implemented a quite-proactive climate policy while the US has adopted a far less ambitious climate strategy? Does variation in security concerns or other factors better explain this difference in policy? Using a multimethod case study approach, the authors find that in the US, constructions of climate change as a security threat play an important role in developing public support. In Europe, leadership and opportunity discourses predominate. Other factors including centralization of governance, trust in the technocratic elite, and cultural norms contribute to the variation in policy construction.

scholarly journals Workers or Consumers: Who Pays for Low-Carbon Transition – Theoretical Analysis of Welfare Change in General Equilibrium Setting

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (55) ◽  
pp. 231-245
Author(s):  
Jan Witajewski-Baltvilks ◽  
Jakub Boratyński
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
General Equilibrium ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Second Step ◽  
Low Carbon ◽  
Sector Model ◽  
Consumer Prices ◽  
Welfare Change ◽  
Change Mitigation

Abstract Policies that are introduced to mitigate adverse consequences of climate change involve economic costs. For some households, these costs will materialise in the form of an increase in prices of consumption goods, whereas for others they will materialise in the form of falling productivity and wages. Disentangling these two effects is important in the light of the design of funds that aim to support the households that are negatively affected by climate policy. In this article, we study the effect of carbon tax on welfare through changes of consumer prices and wages in a general equilibrium setting. In the first step, we review the literature on ‘top-down’ models, which are used to evaluate the macroeconomic cost of climate policy. We find that these models usually do not account for loss of productivity of workers who must change their sector due to climate policy. In the second step, we develop a theoretical, micro-founded, two-sector model that explicitly accounts for the loss of productivity of workers. The compensation of climate-change mitigation costs would require allocation of separate funds for the affected consumers and workers.

scholarly journals Current surveys may underestimate climate change skepticism evidence from list experiments in Germany and the USA

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0251034
Author(s):  
Liam F. Beiser-McGrath ◽  
Thomas Bernauer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Public Concern ◽  
Public Opinion Surveys ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation Policy ◽  
The Usa

Strong public support is a prerequisite for ambitious and thus costly climate change mitigation policy, and strong public concern over climate change is a prerequisite for policy support. Why, then, do most public opinion surveys indicate rather high levels of concern and rather strong policy support, while de facto mitigation efforts in most countries remain far from ambitious? One possibility is that survey measures for public concern fail to fully reveal the true attitudes of citizens due to social desirability bias. In this paper, we implemented list-experiments in representative surveys in Germany and the United States (N = 3620 and 3640 respectively) to assess such potential bias. We find evidence that people systematically misreport, that is, understate their disbelief in human caused climate change. This misreporting is particularly strong amongst politically relevant subgroups. Individuals in the top 20% of the income distribution in the United States and supporters of conservative parties in Germany exhibit significantly higher climate change skepticism according to the list experiment, relative to conventional measures. While this does not definitively mean that climate skepticism is a widespread phenomenon in these countries, it does suggest that future research should reconsider how climate change concern is measured, and what subgroups of the population are more susceptible to misreporting and why. Our findings imply that public support for ambitious climate policy may be weaker than existing survey research suggests.

Human health impacts of climate change as a catalyst for public engagement

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 578-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassandra Pillay ◽  
Jeroen van den Bergh
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Health Impacts ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
Economic Costs ◽  
Content Type

Purpose This paper aims to clarify the relationship between climate change, its negative impacts on human health and its role in catalysing public engagement for climate policies. It aims to increase public support for climate-mitigation strategies by showing the medical case for negative climate-induced health impacts, the economic burden it entails and the public response to climate change that may be expected when health frames are used. Design/methodology/approach The paper reviews medical, economic and behavioural studies focusing on climate-induced health impacts, its economic costs and its potential for catalysing public engagement for climate policy. Findings The paper provides empirical insights about the various direct and indirect effects of climate change on human health which includes both physical impacts (infectious and non-infectious diseases) and non-physical impacts (mental disorders and reduced labour productivity). Extreme events such as storms, floods and droughts further seriously affect the health of many people, as they restrict food production and water supply. Economic damage costs of climate-induced health impacts are underestimated. Together, natural science, medical and economic studies warrant giving more attention to health in public debates on climate change. The more so as evidence of behavioural studies suggests that the use of health frames reinforces public concern for climate issues. Originality/value This paper argues that climate-induced health impacts and their economic costs should be given more serious attention in discussions about climate-mitigation strategies. They can augment public support for climate policy.

Australian energy reform plan faces roadblocks

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Tax ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Climate Change Policies ◽  
Consumer Prices ◽  
Reform Plan ◽  
The Government ◽  
Supplier Networks ◽  
Energy Reform

Subject Australian energy reform plans. Significance The government plans to offer discounted loans for power generation to ensure more reliable supplies and has not ruled out including coal-fuelled plants, after it released a new draft strategy for discussion on October 23. The main objective is reducing consumer prices. Impacts Efforts to break up wholesale supplier networks could lead to over-regulation and discourage new entrants. If it fails to respond to public support for climate change policies, Canberra risks alienating voters and business lobbies. If Labor forms a government, it could push for emission controls and a revived carbon tax.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document