Economic Prescriptions and Public Responses to Climate Policy

Abstract

Public acceptability is one of the main barriers to the implementation of carbon taxes. Qualitative evidence based on a sample of individuals interviewed in Geneva, Switzerland, shows that the general public would not tackle climate change as economists suggest. The gap concerns not only the choice of climate policy's instruments (i.e. pull versus push measures), but also its specific design in the case of carbon taxes. In this respect, the gap is driven by a diffused perception of environmental ineffectiveness of carbon taxes, which goes hand in hand with distrust in the government and a strong demand for earmarking carbon tax revenues for environmental purposes. Our empirical findings are consistent with the recent literature on the public's preferences on environmental policy design and provide new evidence for the need to reconsider the conventional approach to economic instruments and environmental tax reforms. Reducing resistance to the implementation of Pigouvian taxes cannot abstract from providing effective responses to the concerns emphasized by the general public. Policy relevancePolicy design is key to improve acceptability of climate policy in general and of economic instruments in particular. Given the current understanding and perception of carbon taxes by the general public, there is a substantial trade-off between efficiency-and acceptability-enhancing use of revenues from carbon taxes. Earmarking revenues for environmental purposes clearly reduces perceived complexity and increases acceptability. The paper addresses this trade-off and, drawing on the Swiss experience, discusses how making financial and environmental benefits salient may improve the acceptability of carbon taxes. It also considers the implementation of climate policies directed towards voluntary efforts, which enjoy larger support by the general public.

Bridging the gap: the influence of information and education on acceptance of environmental taxes in Switzerland

“…Also, clearly mentioning the benefit of population redistribution (Budolfson et al 2021) as well as earmarking the revenue for environmental purposes, thus emphasising the costs and (often overlooked) benefits, might prove essential to gain societal support (e.g. Baranzini et al 2014). This item therefore combines multiple findings of previous studies by both earmarking the tax' environmental benefit and comprehensibly explaining its functioning.…”

“…Fear of negative impacts on low-income households is also a factor which leads to the rejection of green taxes (Carattini et al 2018, Fremstad andPaul 2019). Another issue is that people tend to believe that Pigouvian taxes are not effective (Baranzini et al 2014) because they have trouble understanding taxes in general (Ewald et al 2021) or seeing the true costs and benefits specifically (Steg et al 2006). People fear that governments only want to increase fiscal revenue and that environmental taxes do not discourage climate-harming behaviours after all (Carattini et al 2018).…”

İklim Değişikliği, Yoksullar ve Karbon Fiyatlandırması

“…Özellikle, fiyatlandırmadan elde edilen gelirin iklim değişikliği ile mücadelede geliştirilecek azaltım ve uyum projelerine harcanması, toplumun verdiği desteği artırmaktadır (Kocthen, Turk, ve Leiserowitz, 2017). Karbon vergisinden elde edilen gelir, çevreyi korumaya yönelik projelerin geliştirilmesinden ziyade başka amaçlar için kullanılırsa, hükümetlerin iklim değişikliği sorununun çözülmesi gereken acil bir sorun olduğu söylemindeki güvenirliliği toplum nezdinde kaybedilebilir (Baranzini, Caliskan, ve Carattini, 2014). Araştırmalar, elde edilen gelirin bütçeye doğrudan aktarılmasının toplum tarafından da en az tercih edilen seçenek olduğunu göstermektedirler (Gevrek ve Uyduranoglu, 2015;Uyduranoglu ve Ozturk, 2020).…”