IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tut/cremwp/2023-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

In Gov we Trust : Are Trust and Political Ideology Important Factors of Public Acceptance for Environmental Policies?

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine Benjamin

    (Univ Rennes, CNRS, CREM - UMR 6211, F-35000 Rennes)

  • Sebastian Irigoyen

    (Univ Rennes, CNRS, CREM - UMR 6211, F-35000 Rennes)

  • David Masclet

    (Univ Rennes, CNRS, CREM - UMR 6211, F-35000 Rennes and CIRANO, Montreal Canada)

Abstract

Several environmental policies are efficient in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However these policies remain still very unpopular among the public and climate issues often provide ideal targets for populists who frame these issues as elite matters. In this current paper we attempt to answer the following question : are environmental issues a matter of elites? We conjecture that this is not necessarily the case but that there exists several factors that may refrain the poorest and less educated individuals from accepting environmental policies. The first explanation relies on the household’s budget constraint and the fact that high income and high educated individuals are in a better financial position to accept costly environmental policies. This explanation relates to the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs that stipulates that individuals must have fulfilled lower needs before addressing higher levels of needs such as environmental issues. The second explanation is that education may affect support of environmental policies indirectly by reducing ignorance and mistrust, which constitute key barriers to public acceptance of environmental policies. We ran an empirical analysis based on the data from the European Social Survey (2016). We find that higher educated and income individuals are more likely to favor most of environmental policies, suggesting that educational background play both a direct and an indirect role. We also find that both mistrust in institutions and right wing populism, as proxies of skepticism constitute important barriers to most of environmental policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine Benjamin & Sebastian Irigoyen & David Masclet, 2023. "In Gov we Trust : Are Trust and Political Ideology Important Factors of Public Acceptance for Environmental Policies?," Economics Working Paper Archive (University of Rennes & University of Caen) 2023-02, Center for Research in Economics and Management (CREM), University of Rennes, University of Caen and CNRS.
  • Handle: RePEc:tut:cremwp:2023-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ged.univ-rennes1.fr/nuxeo/site/esupversions/f7f0c1c3-4c5d-4e04-9e55-40863cee6bb4
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fairbrother, Malcolm, 2019. "When Will People Pay to Pollute? Environmental Taxes, Political Trust and Experimental Evidence from Britain," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 661-682, April.
    2. Rebecca Romsdahl & Gwendolyn Blue & Andrei Kirilenko, 2018. "Action on climate change requires deliberative framing at local governance level," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 277-287, August.
    3. Eckel, Catherine C & Grossman, Philip J, 1998. "Are Women Less Selfish Than Men? Evidence from Dictator Experiments," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(448), pages 726-735, May.
    4. George A. Akerlof, 2009. "How Human Psychology Drives the Economy and Why It Matters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1175-1175.
    5. John A. List & Daniel M. Sturm, 2006. "How Elections Matter: Theory and Evidence from Environmental Policy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1249-1281.
    6. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini, 2017. "Effectiveness, earmarking and labeling: testing the acceptability of carbon taxes with survey data," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(1), pages 197-227, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Jakobsson, C. & Fujii, S. & Gärling, T., 2000. "Determinants of private car users' acceptance of road pricing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 153-158, April.
    9. Algan, Yann & Beasley, Elizabeth & Cohen, Daniel & Foucault, Martial, 2018. "The rise of populism and the collapse of the left-right paradigm: Lessons from the 2017 French presidential election," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 1805, CEPREMAP.
    10. Erick Lachapelle & Christopher P. Borick & Barry Rabe, 2012. "Public Attitudes toward Climate Science and Climate Policy in Federal Systems: Canada and the United States Compared," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(3), pages 334-357, May.
    11. Poortinga, Wouter & Aoyagi, Midori & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2013. "Public perceptions of climate change and energy futures before and after the Fukushima accident: A comparison between Britain and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1204-1211.
    12. Z. Eylem Gevrek & Ayse Uyduranoglu, 2015. "Public Preferences for Carbon Tax Attributes," Working Paper Series of the Department of Economics, University of Konstanz 2015-15, Department of Economics, University of Konstanz.
    13. Satoshi Fujii & Tommy Gärling & Cecilia Jakobsson & Rong-Chang Jou, 2004. "A cross-country study of fairness and infringement on freedom as determinants of car owners' acceptance of road pricing," Transportation, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 285-295, August.
    14. Börjesson, Maria & Kristoffersson, Ida, 2015. "The Gothenburg congestion charge. Effects, design and politics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 134-146.
    15. Gleim, Mark R. & Smith, Jeffery S. & Andrews, Demetra & Cronin, J. Joseph, 2013. "Against the Green: A Multi-method Examination of the Barriers to Green Consumption," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 44-61.
    16. Simon Otjes & Tom Louwerse, 2015. "Populists in Parliament: Comparing Left-Wing and Right-Wing Populism in the Netherlands," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 63(1), pages 60-79, March.
    17. Yamazaki, Akio, 2017. "Jobs and climate policy: Evidence from British Columbia's revenue-neutral carbon tax," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 197-216.
    18. Sergei Guriev, 2018. "Economic Drivers of Populism," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 200-203, May.
    19. Rivers, Nicholas & Schaufele, Brandon, 2015. "Salience of carbon taxes in the gasoline market," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 23-36.
    20. Hsu, Shi-Ling & Walters, Joshua & Purgas, Anthony, 2008. "Pollution tax heuristics: An empirical study of willingness to pay higher gasoline taxes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 3612-3619, September.
    21. David Klenert & Linus Mattauch & Emmanuel Combet & Ottmar Edenhofer & Cameron Hepburn & Ryan Rafaty & Nicholas Stern, 2018. "Making carbon pricing work for citizens," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(8), pages 669-677, August.
    22. Murray, Brian & Rivers, Nicholas, 2015. "British Columbia’s revenue-neutral carbon tax: A review of the latest “grand experiment” in environmental policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 674-683.
    23. Gevrek, Z.Eylem & Uyduranoglu, Ayse, 2015. "Public preferences for carbon tax attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 186-197.
    24. Carl, Jeremy & Fedor, David, 2016. "Tracking global carbon revenues: A survey of carbon taxes versus cap-and-trade in the real world," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 50-77.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline, 2022. "Rendre acceptable la nécessaire taxation du carbone. Quelles pistes pour la France ?," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(1), pages 15-53.
    2. Stefano Carattini & Maria Carvalho & Sam Fankhauser, 2018. "Overcoming public resistance to carbon taxes," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(5), September.
    3. Douenne, Thomas & Fabre, Adrien, 2020. "French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    4. Hammerle, Mara & Best, Rohan & Crosby, Paul, 2021. "Public acceptance of carbon taxes in Australia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    5. Ewald, Jens & Sterner, Thomas & Sterner, Erik, 2022. "Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: Drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Laurent Ott & Mehdi Farsi & Sylvain Weber, 2021. "Beyond political divides: analyzing public opinion on carbon taxation in Switzerland," Chapters, in: Axel Franzen & Sebastian Mader (ed.), Research Handbook on Environmental Sociology, chapter 17, pages 313-339, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Andrea Baranzini & Stefano Carattini & Linda Tesauro, 2021. "Designing Effective and Acceptable Road Pricing Schemes: Evidence from the Geneva Congestion Charge," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 417-482, July.
    8. Sara Maestre-Andrés & Stefan Drews & Ivan Savin & Jeroen Bergh, 2021. "Carbon tax acceptability with information provision and mixed revenue uses," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-10, December.
    9. Umit, Resul & Schaffer, Lena Maria, 2020. "Attitudes towards carbon taxes across Europe: The role of perceived uncertainty and self-interest," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    10. Thiago Fonseca Morello & Luís Fernando Silva e Silva, 2023. "Garnering support for Pigouvian taxation with tax return: a lab experiment," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(2), pages 115-142, April.
    11. Rustico, Erica & Dimitrov, Stanko, 2022. "Environmental taxation: The impact of carbon tax policy commitment on technology choice and social welfare," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    12. Sverker C. Jagers & Erick Lachapelle & Johan Martinsson & Simon Matti, 2021. "Bridging the ideological gap? How fairness perceptions mediate the effect of revenue recycling on public support for carbon taxes in the United States, Canada and Germany," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(5), pages 529-554, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Sebastian Levi & Christian Flachsland & Michael Jakob, 2020. "Political Economy Determinants of Carbon Pricing," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(2), pages 128-156, May.
    15. Bourgeois, Cyril & Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan & Quirion, Philippe, 2021. "Lump-sum vs. energy-efficiency subsidy recycling of carbon tax revenue in the residential sector: A French assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    16. Lipari, Francesca & Lázaro-Touza, Lara & Escribano, Gonzalo & Sánchez, Ángel & Antonioni, Alberto, 2024. "When the design of climate policy meets public acceptance: An adaptive multiplex network model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    17. Filippo Maria D’Arcangelo & Ilai Levin & Alessia Pagani & Mauro Pisu & Åsa Johansson, 2022. "A framework to decarbonise the economy," OECD Economic Policy Papers 31, OECD Publishing.
    18. Dorband, Ira Irina & Jakob, Michael & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Steckel, Jan Christoph, 2019. "Poverty and distributional effects of carbon pricing in low- and middle-income countries – A global comparative analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 246-257.
    19. Thomas Douenne & Adrien Fabre, 2019. "Can We Reconcile French People with the Carbon Tax? Disentangling Beliefs from Preferences," Policy Papers 2019.05, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    20. Weiner, Csaba & Muth, Dániel & Lakócai, Csaba, 2023. "A szén-dioxid-kibocsátást terhelő adó társadalmi elfogadottsága és a fizetési hajlandóság alakulása Magyarországon [Public acceptance of and willingness to pay for a tax on carbon-dioxide emissions," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1077-1107.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public support; Environmental policies; trust; populism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • H12 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Crisis Management
    • D02 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Institutions: Design, Formation, Operations, and Impact
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:tut:cremwp:2023-02. 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: GERMAIN Lucie (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crmrefr.html .

    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.