Understanding public opinion to design better climate policy instruments
Have you ever wondered what determines public opinion about climate change taxes and laws?
We’re proud to announce that Sverker Jagers, one of Sweden’s leading climate researchers (and our friend and partner!) had his article titled ‘Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws’ recently published in Nature Climate Change.
This is a major accomplishment for a researcher — Nature Climate Change is one of the world’s leading peer-reviewed scientific journals published by Nature Publishing Group covering all aspects of research on global warming, the current climate change, especially its effects.
His research provides valuable insights for climate change researchers, practitioners and policymakers to design better climate policy instruments.
To highlight this significant achievement, we interviewed Sverker to find out more about his research process and insights.
1. Why did you choose to do research in this area?
Over the past 20 years, an increasing number of researchers have realized the importance of determining what factors affect acceptance for various climate-related policy instruments, such as carbon taxes, fees and legislative instruments. This is because we need to understand these factors both to be able to explain why it is usually so difficult to implement them, why people tend to react strongly against them (c.f. the “Yellow Vest” movement in France in 2018) and in prolongation also how the policies can be designed and combined to avoid such negative reactions, and thus to enable the political system to take a firm grip on the climate crises. Thus, by now, we know that a number of factors are affecting peoples’ propensity to accept or not accept such policies. However, no one had tried to determine which of these factors matter most for the public opinion, which is another important building stone to have when designing policies that are as easy as possible to implement.
2. What do you hope to achieve from completing this research?
Simply put, our results can help decision-makers to develop the most feasible policies possible (if they chose to read and listen to our results, that is…:-)).
3. What are the main insights from your research?
The two factors primarily affecting the degree to which people accept a climate-related policy instrument is, whether they believe that it is fair (e.g., that it affects the right groups and in the right proportions) and effective (meaning that it has its intended effect on peoples’ climate-affecting behaviour). Also concern for the climate (whether you are worried or not) is another factor strongly affecting peoples’ acceptance.
4. Your research findings mention that climate change concern is positively related to public opinion - how does this affect governments and other decision makers?
It is important that politicians believe that they will gain support and acceptance for their intended political decisions. If not, they may not dare to suggest political interventions that would be beneficial for the climate. The more climate-concerned people become, the more likely that pro-climate political decisions will gain acceptance among the public. However, it is more complex than that. It is probably equally important that politicians understand the purposes of the policies and also that they have the skills to communicate these purposes (e.g., that the aim of an environmental tax is not to punish tax-payers, nor [at least primarily] to collect more money to the government, but to steer citizens’ and companies’ behaviors in a more pro-climate direction).
“However, it is more complex than that. It is probably equally important that politicians understand the purposes of the policies and also that they have the skills to communicate these purposes (e.g., that the aim of an environmental tax is not to punish tax-payers, nor [at least primarily] to collect more money to the government, but to steer citizens’ and companies’ behaviors in a more pro-climate direction).”
5. What did you enjoy the most about this research topic?
Two things. First, I am absolutely convinced that this kind of very applied social and behavioral science is very important and well-needed among decision-makers and it is satisfying to be able to contribute with our part of the larger picture. Second, this kind of research requires competencies from several disciplines – inter-disciplinary research - and the project clearly demonstrated that following that route, the whole of the study became larger than the sum of its parts.
6. What was most surprising discovery about this research study?
Nothing really surprised me, I think. But I found it particularly interesting that factors such as level of income and other sociodemographic aspects played a relatively small role in determining policy acceptance in our study.
7. In an ideal and perfect world, how would you like decision makers to respond to your research study?
By taking in our results and by thinking in line with and develop policy-packages, rather than trying to implement “pure” and so called “optimal” policy instruments (which would be the best in theory), because they are less likely to ever be implemented. By combining two or more policies and building policy packages (e.g., a climate tax combined with a dividend or a compensatory policy) increases the probability that ANY policy will be implemented, at all (and that is, in my view, far much better than having a non-implemented, yet in theory optimal, policy…).
Read the full paper here for more insights.