Carbon tax acceptance in a polarized society: bridging the partisan divide over climate policy in the US

ABSTRACT

Political polarization in the US hinders bipartisan support for carbon taxes. Polarization operates unconsciously via implicit biases (implicit level), but it also arises when individuals consciously reflect on their political identity and beliefs (explicit level). We conducted two survey experiments with online panels of the US population to examine how irreconcilable Democrats’ and Republicans’ views on carbon taxes are. Study 1 compared measurements from an Implicit Association Test (implicit level) and stated beliefs (explicit level). Results show carbon tax fairness perceptions were already polarized at implicit level, but the main divergence in attitudes occurred at explicit level. Since explicit attitudes are considered easier to influence than implicit ones, Study 2 tested the extent to which message framing could influence this deliberated—explicit—polarization. We used different frames targeted at Democrats and Republicans to convey the idea that carbon tax support does not threaten partisans’ political identity. Framings further polarized responses, increasing Democrats’ but reducing Republicans’ policy support. We discuss implications for climate policy communication in relation to navigating identity-based polarization.

Policy Highlights

• Political polarization over climate policy in the US is driven by the interplay of affective and cognitive factors.

• Unconscious fairness perceptions about carbon taxes are already polarized. These differences amplify when Democrats and Republicans consciously report their perceptions.

• Identity-affirming framings that appeal to partisans’ concerns can influence carbon tax acceptance.

• Since Republicans may react negatively to climate policy communication, source credibility might be necessary to avoid backlash.

KEYWORDS:

• Political polarization
• carbon tax
• motivated reasoning
• framing
• policy support

Acknowledgements

We thank the team at the Chair of Management of Renewable Energies of the University of St. Gallen for their helpful comments on an early draft version of this paper.

Data statement

All data used in this article are available as an Open Science Framework permanent archive at: https://osf.io/mjxv9/?view_only = 27d2c3fc8b4c4b3fb1bc672cb630b5da.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Ethics

We obtained the ethical approval from the Ethics committee of the University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU (Approval number M10_2021_216), complying with all relevant regulations for research with human participants.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Fundación Emilio Soldevilla para la Investigación y el Desarrollo en Economía de la Empresa: [Grant Number 2020]; Hezkuntza, Hizkuntza Politika Eta Kultura Saila, Eusko Jaurlaritza: [Grant Number IT1731-22,PRE-2021-2-0037]; Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation: [Grant Number ECO2016-76348-R,PID2021-123686OB-I00 AEI/FEDER UE].