Public support for climate policy depends not only on economic costs but also on perceptions of fairness, whether elites are exempt from sharing the burdens of climate action, and government credibility, according to a new study.
A new paper by Centre for Sustainability Research Associate Théodore Tallent, published in the American Political Science Review, demonstrates that “symbolic climate policies”, as they are called in the study, can significantly increase public support for ambitious climate action. The study, which Tallent published with co-authors Malo Jan and Luis Sattelmayer, shows that when symbolic measures accompany more costly but effective policies, citizens are more likely to view the costly policies as fair and legitimate.
The authors define symbolic policies as those that send meaningful signals to the public without having a substantial material impact, i.e. in terms of costs or the number of people they affect. In the climate context, this could include measures such as requiring government officials to travel by train rather than by plane or restricting private-jet use. While these actions do little to reduce emissions, they signal that addressing climate change is a collective project with shared responsibility, including for political and economic elites.
Using a mixed-methods study combining survey experiments and qualitative interviews in France, the researchers find that support for costly measures such as carbon taxes or lower highway speed limits increases when these measures are paired with symbolic policies. For instance, in one experiment with over 2,600 respondents, people were asked their opinion on lowering the motorway speed limit to 110 km/h, a highly divisive proposal. When this measure was presented alone, respondents' opinions were split almost evenly between favourable and unfavourable. However, support jumped from 49% to 75% when respondents were told that ministers would restrict their own travel, and to 74% when told that private jets would be banned for the wealthy. Respondents exposed to symbolic signals also reported stronger perceptions of fairness and government credibility and more positive assessments of elites.
This paper challenges the idea that public support for climate policy depends mainly on material compensation for those who bear the costs. Instead, it highlights the political importance of meaning, messaging, and perceived fairness in climate governance. Underscoring the relevance of this research for current academic and policy debates, the paper was featured in Nature Climate Change's research highlights.
Read the full paper here.
The Hertie School is not responsible for any content linked or referred to from these pages. Views expressed by the author/interviewee may not necessarily reflect the views and values of the Hertie School.
More about our expert
- Théodore Tallent, Research Associate