https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7941-0998
![Sample our Environment & Sustainability journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5935/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Environment-Sustainability.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Based on data from a representative survey among citizens in Germany during the first peak of the COVID-19 crisis, this paper empirically examines the acceptance of climate-oriented economic stimulus programmes and several further individual climate policy measures. On the basis of our descriptive analysis, we find no evidence that support for such policy measures in Germany is very different during the COVID-19 crisis, compared to before the crisis. However, our econometric analysis points to the relevance of economic concerns. For example, a perceived deterioration of the general economic situation due to the COVID-19 crisis (and thus sociotropic concerns) has a significantly negative effect on the acceptance of climate-oriented economic stimulus programmes. Our econometric analysis also reveals that ‘pocketbook’ or egotropic concerns are even more relevant since individuals with concerns about their personal economic situation due to the COVID-19 crisis are significantly less supportive of several individual climate policy measures, especially if these lead to higher costs in daily life and are thus directly financially unfavourable. In addition, an identification with socially oriented policy has a significantly positive effect on support for climate policy measures that are financially beneficial for socially underprivileged groups and a significantly negative effect on support for policy measures that are financially unfavourable for them. Our estimation results thus point to the importance of social aspects for the acceptance of climate-oriented policy measures. We also discuss several climate policy implications. For example, our estimation results suggest that individually perceived economic and financial concerns due to the COVID-19 crisis should be addressed and ideally reduced to increase public support of climate-oriented policy measures.
Key policy insights
We find no evidence that the acceptance of climate policy measures in Germany is very different during the COVID-19 crisis, compared to before the crisis.
Our empirical results are in line with the idea that economic downturns or crises can decrease the acceptance of climate-oriented policy measures among individuals with concerns about their personal economic situation.
Our empirical analysis also points to the relevance of social aspects for support for climate policy measures.
Therefore, general economic concerns due to the COVID-19 crisis should be addressed and ideally reduced to increase public support for climate-oriented policy measures.
In addition, successful climate policy should be socially oriented and should consider distribution effects.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 One important exception in this respect is the empirical analysis of Rhodes et al. (Citation2017), which also considers different types of climate policy measures.
2 However, the use of the data for all 1751 respondents leads to qualitatively very similar results. These results are available upon request.
3 The original questions and the corresponding response categories for all variables in this paper can be found in the (translated) questionnaire in the appendix.
4 We do not consider a simple one-dimensional indicator for political identification since it is possible that political orientations are interrelated, which cannot be captured by a simple left-wing (or left-green) and right-wing (or right-conservative) split, especially in Europe. In Germany, for example, the right-wing identification with conservative policy is often combined with an ecological and particularly with a liberal policy identification, which is in contrast to the often very sharp differences between (left-wing) liberals and (right-wing) conservatives in the USA.
5 For details about the questions and response categories for the NEP scale as well as for the multidimensional indicators for political orientation, see the questionnaire in the appendix.
6 In contrast, Leiserowitz (Citation2006) only considers one individual variable for negative feelings about climate change (‘holistic negative affect‘).
7 The correlation coefficients according to Spearman vary between 0.56 and 0.67, which are very similar to the values in Smith and Leiserowitz (Citation2014).
8 In fact, a strongly reliable comparison would only be possible on the basis of pooled cross-sectional data or even panel data (e.g. Mildenberger & Leiserowitz, Citation2017) that include exactly the same questions and answer categories over time. However, such datasets are unfortunately not available for Germany.
9 The exact question was as follows (translated from German) (see Infratest dimap, Citation2019): ‘The German government has decided on a package of measures to improve environmental and climate protection. Please indicate for the following measures whether they move in the right or wrong direction.’ The question distinguished between six measures, i.e. cheaper train journeys in long-distance transport, higher taxes for flights, public scrapping premium (‘Abwrackprämie’) for old oil heaters, a higher commuter allowance, a higher public buyer's premium for electric vehicles, and the introduction of a CO2 price for gasoline, diesel, heating oil, and natural gas.
10 The exact question was as follows (translated from German) (see Forschungsgruppe Wahlen, Citation2020): ‘In order to reduce the emission of pollutants, there are talks about a general speed limit on highways. Are you for a speed limit of 130 km/h, are you for a speed limit below 130 km/h, or are you against a general speed limit?’
11 In our survey, we also asked about support for specific coronavirus-related policy measures. For example, financial packages for employees (e.g. compensation for reduced working hours) and firms are supported by more than 83% of the respondents and even the closure of firms such as retail stores, service companies, or restaurants is widely supported by almost 60% of the respondents. Detailed results about the acceptance of different coronavirus-related policy measures are available upon request.
12 Interestingly, equivalised income as another individual economic variable is only weakly significantly correlated with support for two individual climate policy measures. With respect to the other three socio-economic variables, support for four climate-oriented policy measures by females is surprisingly significantly lower, while the pattern for ‘age’ and ‘higher educational degree’ is ambiguous.
13 Similarly, Ziegler (Citation2019) shows that ecological policy identification and a NEP scale have positive effects on the acceptance of financial support for the expansion of renewable energies.
14 The estimation results are not reported due to brevity, but available upon request.
15 According to Ziegler (Citation2020b), the inclusion of a NEP scale should be complemented by the inclusion of economic preferences such as risk and time preferences or trust (e.g. Falk et al., Citation2018) since omitted variables biases are possible otherwise. While the NEP scale is not a major variable in our empirical analysis, we have nevertheless also included several economic preferences in a robustness check. However, the estimation results for the NEP scale and especially for our main variables for economic concerns due to the COVID-19 crisis remain qualitatively almost identical.
16 However, in no single case across the three model specifications does a significantly positive effect of an explanatory variable change to a significantly negative effect.