IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v114y2015icp227-241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate policy in hard times: Are the pessimists right?

Author

Listed:
  • Kachi, Aya
  • Bernauer, Thomas
  • Gampfer, Robert

Abstract

Conventional wisdom holds that the state of the economy has a strong impact on citizens' appetite for environmental policies, including climate policy. Assuming median voter preferences prevail, periods of economic prosperity are likely to be conducive, and economic downturns are likely to be detrimental to ambitious climate policy. Using original surveys in the United States and Germany, we engage in a critical re-assessment of this claim. The results show that, for the most part, individuals' perceptions of their own economic situations have no significant effect on their policy support. Negative perceptions of the national economic outlook reduce support for climate policy in the US, but not in Germany. However, the magnitude of this national economy effect in the US is small. On the other hand, individuals' climate risk perceptions consistently have a statistically significant and large effect across various model specifications, and interestingly, this pattern holds for the US, whose government is among the less ambitious in global climate policy, as well as Germany, which is among the frontrunners. Our study indicates that the state of the economy may not trump climate risk considerations as conventional wisdom claims.

Suggested Citation

  • Kachi, Aya & Bernauer, Thomas & Gampfer, Robert, 2015. "Climate policy in hard times: Are the pessimists right?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 227-241.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:114:y:2015:i:c:p:227-241
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915000865
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.03.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Keen & Benjamin Jones, 2009. "Climate Policy and the Recovery," IMF Staff Position Notes 2009/28, International Monetary Fund.
    2. Matthew E. Kahn & Matthew J. Kotchen, 2011. "Business Cycle Effects On Concern About Climate Change: The Chilling Effect Of Recession," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(03), pages 257-273.
    3. Ansolabehere, Stephen & Schaffner, Brian F., 2014. "Does Survey Mode Still Matter? Findings from a 2010 Multi-Mode Comparison," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 285-303, July.
    4. Thomas C. Brown & Patricia A. Champ & Richard C. Bishop & Daniel W. McCollum, 1996. "Which Response Format Reveals the Truth about Donations to a Public Good?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(2), pages 152-166.
    5. Page, Benjamin I. & Shapiro, Robert Y., 1983. "Effects of Public Opinion on Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 175-190, March.
    6. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    7. Robert Brulle & Jason Carmichael & J. Jenkins, 2012. "Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 169-188, September.
    8. Robert J. Blendon, 1997. "Bridging the Gap between the Public's and Economists' Views of the Economy," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 105-118, Summer.
    9. Gregory Poe & Jeremy Clark & Daniel Rondeau & William Schulze, 2002. "Provision Point Mechanisms and Field Validity Tests of Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(1), pages 105-131, September.
    10. Tjernström, E. & Tietenberg, T., 2008. "Do differences in attitudes explain differences in national climate change policies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 315-324, April.
    11. Thomas Bernauer & Robert Gampfer & Aya Kachi, 2014. "European unilateralism and involuntary burden-sharing in global climate politics: A public opinion perspective from the other side," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 132-151, March.
    12. Lax, Jeffrey R. & Phillips, Justin H., 2009. "Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 367-386, August.
    13. Stimson, James A. & Mackuen, Michael B. & Erikson, Robert S., 1995. "Dynamic Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 543-565, September.
    14. Pablo del Río González & Xavier Labandeira Villot, 2009. "Climate Change at Times of Economic Crisis," Economic Reports 05-09, FEDEA.
    15. Mr. Michael Keen & Benjamin Jones, 2009. "Climate Policy and the Recovery," IMF Staff Position Notes 2009/028, International Monetary Fund.
    16. Patricia Champ & Richard Bishop, 2001. "Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(4), pages 383-402, August.
    17. Teresa Myers & Matthew Nisbet & Edward Maibach & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2012. "A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(3), pages 1105-1112, August.
    18. James N. Druckman, 2013. "Stunted policy support," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(7), pages 617-617, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lackner, Teresa & Fierro, Luca Eduardo & Mellacher, Patrick, 2024. "Opinion Dynamics meet Agent-based Climate Economics: An Integrated Analysis of Carbon Taxation," OSF Preprints rdfze, Center for Open Science.
    2. Niklas Jakobsson & Raya Muttarak & Mi Ah Schoyen, 2018. "Dividing the pie in the eco-social state: Exploring the relationship between public support for environmental and welfare policies," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(2), pages 313-339, March.
    3. Drews, Stefan & Savin, Ivan & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M. & Villamayor-Tomás, Sergio, 2022. "Climate concern and policy acceptance before and after COVID-19," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    4. Sandra Ricart & Jorge Olcina & Antonio M. Rico, 2018. "Evaluating Public Attitudes and Farmers’ Beliefs towards Climate Change Adaptation: Awareness, Perception, and Populism at European Level," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    5. Andrew G. Meyer, 2022. "Do economic conditions affect climate change beliefs and support for climate action? Evidence from the US in the wake of the Great Recession," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 64-86, January.
    6. Panarello, Demetrio, 2021. "Economic insecurity, conservatism, and the crisis of environmentalism: 30 years of evidence," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    7. Agneman, Gustav & Henriks, Sofia & Bäck, Hanna & Renström, Emma, 2024. "On the nexus between material and ideological determinants of climate policy support," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    8. Mangani, Andrea, 2021. "When does print media address deforestation? A quantitative analysis of major newspapers from US, UK, and Australia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    9. Johnston, David W. & Knott, Rachel & Mendolia, Silvia, 2022. "Climate Change Salience, Economic Insecurity, and Support for Mitigation Policies," IZA Discussion Papers 15562, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Franca Buelow & Nicholas Cradock-Henry, 2018. "What You Sow Is What You Reap? (Dis-)Incentives for Adaptation Intentions in Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    11. Zorzeta Bakaki & Thomas Bernauer, 2017. "Citizens show strong support for climate policy, but are they also willing to pay?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 15-26, November.
    12. Nguyen, Quynh & Malesky, Edmund, 2021. "Fish or steel? New evidence on the environment-economy trade-off in developing Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    13. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath, 2022. "COVID-19 led to a decline in climate and environmental concern: evidence from UK panel data," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(3), pages 1-11, October.
    14. Habla, Wolfgang & Kokash, Kumai & Löfgren, Åsa & Straubinger, Anna & Ziegler, Andreas, 2024. "Self-interest and support of climate-related transport policy measures: An empirical analysis for citizens in Germany and Sweden," ZEW Discussion Papers 24-028, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    15. Brilé Anderson & Thomas Bernauer & Aya Kachi, 2019. "Does international pooling of authority affect the perceived legitimacy of global governance?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 661-683, December.
    16. Anderson, Brilé & Bernauer, Thomas, 2016. "How much carbon offsetting and where? Implications of efficiency, effectiveness, and ethicality considerations for public opinion formation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 387-395.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    2. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Jinkwon Lee & Uk Hwang, 2016. "Hypothetical Bias in Risk Preferences as a Driver of Hypothetical Bias in Willingness to Pay: Experimental Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 789-811, December.
    4. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers & Simon Matti, 2017. "Public Support for Pro-Environmental Policy Measures: Examining the Impact of Personal Values and Ideology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, April.
    5. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    6. Newell, Laurie W. & Swallow, Stephen K., 2013. "Real-payment choice experiments: Valuing forested wetlands and spatial attributes within a landscape context," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 37-47.
    7. Ana Bedate & Luis Herrero & José Sanz, 2009. "Economic valuation of a contemporary art museum: correction of hypothetical bias using a certainty question," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 33(3), pages 185-199, August.
    8. Schlapfer, Felix, 2006. "Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 415-429, May.
    9. Das, Chhandita & Anderson, Christopher M. & Swallow, Stephen K., 2006. "Incentive Compatible Mechanism Design for Discrete Choice Surveys," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21327, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Charles Sims, 2013. "Hypothetical Market Familiarity and the Disconnect Between Stated and Observed Values for Green Energy," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(1), pages 10-19.
    11. Robert Gampfer, 2016. "Minilateralism or the UNFCCC? The Political Feasibility of Climate Clubs," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(3), pages 62-88, August.
    12. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    13. Richard C. Ready & Patricia A. Champ & Jennifer L. Lawton, 2010. "Using Respondent Uncertainty to Mitigate Hypothetical Bias in a Stated Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 363-381.
    14. Svensson, Mikael, 2006. "The Value of a Statistical Life in Sweden Estimates from Two Studies using the "Certainty Approach" Calibration," Working Papers 2006:6, Örebro University, School of Business, revised 12 May 2009.
    15. Hiselius, Lena Winslott, 2005. "Preferences regarding road transports of hazardous materials using choice experiments - any sign of biases?," Working Papers 2005:30, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    16. Schlapfer, Felix & Roschewitz, Anna & Hanley, Nick, 2004. "Validation of stated preferences for public goods: a comparison of contingent valuation survey response and voting behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 1-16, November.
    17. Author-Name: Alan S. Blinder & Alan B. Krueger, 2004. "What Does the Public Know about Economic Policy, and How Does It Know It?," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 35(1), pages 327-397.
    18. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    19. Niklas Harring & Sverker C. Jagers, 2013. "Should We Trust in Values? Explaining Public Support for Pro-Environmental Taxes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, January.
    20. Christopher J Williams, 2016. "Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(3), pages 504-521, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:114:y:2015:i:c:p:227-241. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.