Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US
Motivated by ongoing partisan division in support of climate change policy, this paper investigates whether, among self-identifying liberals and conservatives, the mere presence of a non-transformative climate policy such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), lowers support for a renewable energy (RE...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
IOP Publishing
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | Environmental Research Letters |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acaf3c |
| _version_ | 1797747163625684992 |
|---|---|
| author | Thomas Marlow Kinga Makovi |
| author_facet | Thomas Marlow Kinga Makovi |
| author_sort | Thomas Marlow |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Motivated by ongoing partisan division in support of climate change policy, this paper investigates whether, among self-identifying liberals and conservatives, the mere presence of a non-transformative climate policy such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), lowers support for a renewable energy (RE) policy. To interrogate this question, we use a survey experiment asking 2374 respondents about their support for a RE policy when presented with the RE policy alone, and when presented alongside a CCS policy whose funding and implementation leverage independent funding sources. We find that among conservatives, the presence of a CCS policy lowers support for RE. Furthermore, despite the lack of apparent political party cues, when presented with the policy-pair, conservatives tend to view the RE policy in more partisan terms, specifically, less supported by Republicans. Additional experimental conditions with explicit party cues reinforce this interpretation. These findings suggest that the triggering of partisan perceptions even without explicit partisan cues—what we call political anchoring—might be a key impediment to bipartisan support of climate solutions in the U.S. context. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T15:48:07Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9beb6b222aa74d32a06ee141d8d33c9a |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1748-9326 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T15:48:07Z |
| publishDate | 2023-01-01 |
| publisher | IOP Publishing |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Environmental Research Letters |
| spelling | doaj.art-9beb6b222aa74d32a06ee141d8d33c9a2023-08-09T15:21:04ZengIOP PublishingEnvironmental Research Letters1748-93262023-01-0118202400210.1088/1748-9326/acaf3cNon-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the USThomas Marlow0https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3989-6775Kinga Makovi1https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4849-0606Center for Interacting Urban Networks (CITIES), New York University Abu Dhabi , Abu Dhabi, United Arab EmiratesCenter for Interacting Urban Networks (CITIES), New York University Abu Dhabi , Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates; Social Science Division, New York University Abu Dhabi , Abu Dhabi, United Arab EmiratesMotivated by ongoing partisan division in support of climate change policy, this paper investigates whether, among self-identifying liberals and conservatives, the mere presence of a non-transformative climate policy such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), lowers support for a renewable energy (RE) policy. To interrogate this question, we use a survey experiment asking 2374 respondents about their support for a RE policy when presented with the RE policy alone, and when presented alongside a CCS policy whose funding and implementation leverage independent funding sources. We find that among conservatives, the presence of a CCS policy lowers support for RE. Furthermore, despite the lack of apparent political party cues, when presented with the policy-pair, conservatives tend to view the RE policy in more partisan terms, specifically, less supported by Republicans. Additional experimental conditions with explicit party cues reinforce this interpretation. These findings suggest that the triggering of partisan perceptions even without explicit partisan cues—what we call political anchoring—might be a key impediment to bipartisan support of climate solutions in the U.S. context.https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acaf3cclimate policyclimate action delaypartisanshipsurvey experiment |
| spellingShingle | Thomas Marlow Kinga Makovi Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US Environmental Research Letters climate policy climate action delay partisanship survey experiment |
| title | Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US |
| title_full | Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US |
| title_fullStr | Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US |
| title_full_unstemmed | Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US |
| title_short | Non-transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the US |
| title_sort | non transformative climate policy options decrease conservative support for renewable energy in the us |
| topic | climate policy climate action delay partisanship survey experiment |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acaf3c |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT thomasmarlow nontransformativeclimatepolicyoptionsdecreaseconservativesupportforrenewableenergyintheus AT kingamakovi nontransformativeclimatepolicyoptionsdecreaseconservativesupportforrenewableenergyintheus |