IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v170y2022i3d10.1007_s10584-021-03262-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clear consensus among international public for government action at COP26: patriotic and public health frames produce marginal gains in support

Author

Listed:
  • Tessa Buchanan

    (University of Cambridge)

  • James Ackland

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Sam Lloyd

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Sander Linden

    (University of Cambridge)

  • Lee de-Wit

    (University of Cambridge)

Abstract

This work surveys over 14,000 respondents in seven countries to assess support for government action to protect the environment, and for different policies at the 2021 UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in Glasgow. Baseline results reveal overwhelming support for action. At least nine out of ten respondents in six countries, and 79% in the USA, agree that all governments should do more. In each country, at least 50% of respondents express support for four policies: protecting wildlife; planting trees; spending more on clean technologies; and reducing the production of greenhouse gases over thirty years. A survey-experiment tests whether support changes when respondents are exposed to short texts framed in different ways. On average, exposure to a patriotism or public health text significantly raises support for action, albeit by only 1.6 and 1.3 percentage points respectively. On policies, exposure to either a public health text or a text based on current UN messaging increases support for tree planting by 2.3 and 2.9 percentage points respectively. These results suggest that international public opinion is overwhelmingly in favour of government action at COP26. They highlight policies that are likely to attract majority support, and suggest that message-framing can have a very small impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Tessa Buchanan & James Ackland & Sam Lloyd & Sander Linden & Lee de-Wit, 2022. "Clear consensus among international public for government action at COP26: patriotic and public health frames produce marginal gains in support," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 1-8, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:170:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-021-03262-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-021-03262-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-021-03262-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-021-03262-2?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. ., 2021. "Public policy response to the pandemic," Chapters, in: The Economics of COVID-19, chapter 4, pages 75-90, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. 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.
    3. Matthew H. Goldberg & Abel Gustafson & Seth A. Rosenthal & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2021. "Shifting Republican views on climate change through targeted advertising," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(7), pages 573-577, July.
    4. Sonya Sachdeva & Reihane Boghrati & Morteza Dehghani, 2019. "Testing the Influence of Purity-Based Interventions on Pro-environmental Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, March.
    5. Baobao Zhang & Sander van der Linden & Matto Mildenberger & Jennifer R. Marlon & Peter D. Howe & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2018. "Experimental effects of climate messages vary geographically," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(5), pages 370-374, May.
    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. Nisbett, Nicole & Spaiser, Viktoria, 2022. "The Moral Power of Youth Climate Activists - Transforming International Climate Politics?," SocArXiv 5zsra_v1, Center for Open Science.
    2. Nisbett, Nicole & Spaiser, Viktoria, 2022. "The Moral Power of Youth Climate Activists - Transforming International Climate Politics?," SocArXiv 5zsra, Center for Open Science.
    3. Philips, Abiodun S., 2023. "Institutional enforcement of environmental fiscal stance and energy stock markets performance: Evaluating for returns and risk among connected markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).

    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. A. K. Enamul Haque & Heman D. Lohano & Pranab Mukhopadhyay & Mani Nepal & Fathimath Shafeeqa & Shamen P. Vidanage, 2019. "NDC pledges of South Asia: are the stakeholders onboard?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(2), pages 237-244, July.
    2. Stefano Carattini & Andrea Baranzini & Philippe Thalmann & Frédéric Varone & Frank Vöhringer, 2017. "Green Taxes in a Post-Paris World: Are Millions of Nays Inevitable?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 97-128, September.
    3. Bo MacInnis & Jon Krosnick & Adina Abeles & Margaret Caldwell & Erin Prahler & Debbie Dunne, 2015. "The American public’s preference for preparation for the possible effects of global warming: impact of communication strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 128(1), pages 17-33, January.
    4. Tian, Jianchi & Li, Yang & Sun, Yan & Yang, Bo & Chen, Xuefeng, 2024. "Warming climate apathy to mitigate the disparity in climate policy support across distinct income strata," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    5. Ericson, Torgeir & Kjønstad, Bjørn Gunaketu & Barstad, Anders, 2014. "Mindfulness and sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 73-79.
    6. Shin-Cheng Yeh & Haw-Jeng Chiou & Ai-Wei Wu & Ho-Ching Lee & Homer C. Wu, 2019. "Diverged Preferences towards Sustainable Development Goals? A Comparison between Academia and the Communication Industry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-21, November.
    7. Samantha K. Stanley & Caroline Ng Tseung-Wong & Zoe Leviston & Iain Walker, 2021. "Acceptance of climate change and climate refugee policy in Australia and New Zealand: The case against political polarisation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Candice Howarth & Laurie Parsons, 2021. "Assembling a coalition of climate change narratives on UK climate action: a focus on the city, countryside, community and home," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Odou, Philippe & Schill, Marie, 2020. "How anticipated emotions shape behavioral intentions to fight climate change," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 243-253.
    10. Monika Pompeo & Nina Serdarevic, 2021. "Is information enough? The case of Republicans and climate change," Discussion Papers 2021-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    11. Rosalind Pidcock & Kate Heath & Lydia Messling & Susie Wang & Anna Pirani & Sarah Connors & Adam Corner & Christopher Shaw & Melissa Gomis, 2021. "Evaluating effective public engagement: local stories from a global network of IPCC scientists," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-22, October.
    12. Joshua Ettinger & Peter Walton & James Painter & Thomas DiBlasi, 2021. "Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Laurel Kruke & Gale M. Sinatra & Norbert Schwarz, 2024. "Should we change the term we use for “climate change”? Evidence from a national U.S. terminology experiment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(8), pages 1-21, August.
    14. Abdel Sater, Rita & Perona, Mathieu & huillery, elise & Chevallier, Coralie, 2021. "The effectiveness of personalised versus generic information in changing behaviour: Evidence from an indoor air quality experiment," SocArXiv kw3tn, Center for Open Science.
    15. Alexander A. Kaurov & Viktoria Cologna & Charlie Tyson & Naomi Oreskes, 2022. "Trends in American scientists’ political donations and implications for trust in science," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-8, December.
    16. Tristan J B Cann & Iain S Weaver & Hywel T P Williams, 2021. "Ideological biases in social sharing of online information about climate change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-25, April.
    17. Thomas Homer-Dixon & Manjana Milkoreit & Steven J. Mock & Tobias Schröder & Paul Thagard, 2014. "The Conceptual Structure of Social Disputes," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(1), pages 21582440145, March.
    18. Jerome Ballet & Damien Bazin & Emmanuel Petit, 2023. "The Ecology of Fear and Climate Change: A Pragmatist Point of View," Environmental Values, , vol. 32(1), pages 5-24, February.
    19. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014. "The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 937-948, May.
    20. Andrew M. Linke & Frank D. W. Witmer & John O’Loughlin, 2020. "Do people accurately report droughts? Comparison of instrument-measured and national survey data in Kenya," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1143-1160, October.

    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:spr:climat:v:170:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-021-03262-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.