Shifting echo chambers in US climate policy networks

Abstract

Although substantial attention has focused on efforts by the new Administration to block environmental policies, climate politics have been contentious in the US since well before the election of Donald Trump. In this paper, we extend previous work on empirical examinations of echo chambers in US climate politics using new data collected on the federal climate policy network in summer 2016. We test for the similarity and differences at two points in time in homophily and echo chambers using Exponential Random Graph Models (ERGM) to compare new findings from 2016 to previous work on data from 2010. We show that echo chambers continue to play a significant role in the network of information exchange among policy elites working on the issue of climate change. In contrast to previous findings where echo chambers centered on a binding international commitment to emission reductions, we find that the pre-existing echo chambers have almost completely disappeared and new structures have formed around one of the main components of the Obama Administration’s national climate policy: the Clean Power Plan. These results provide empirical evidence that science communication and policymaking at the elite level shift in relation to the policy instruments under consideration.

Echo chambers in climate science

“…Static models for each year are shown in figure 5. The 2010 and 2016 models are similar to those presented in previous papers [16,18]. Previous work also found new structures to form around the Clean Power Plan in 2016 [18].…”

“…The 2010 and 2016 models are similar to those presented in previous papers [16,18]. Previous work also found new structures to form around the Clean Power Plan in 2016 [18]. Since President Trump dismantled the Obama-era climate policy [33,34], respondents in the 2017 survey were not asked about this policy instrument.…”

“…Although we find clear evidence of echo chambers around the question of whether or not climate change is anthropogenic, it is possible that they are the product of the polarized political environment of 2017. As the political environment changes and a policy instrument is once again proposed to address the issue of climate change, previous research would suggest that the echo chambers will once again shift [18].…”

“…In contrast to the research on the climate countermovement, this study looks at information diffusion among policy actors engaged in climate decisionmaking in the US. Building on research that finds echo chambers-patterns of similarity regarding where policy actors get their expert information-in American climate politics [16, see also 17 for an example from Ireland] and that these echo chambers are focused on the relevant policy instrument under review at the time of the research [18], we provide evidence to demonstrate how echo chambers change over time. Specifically, this paper reports the results of analysis of how echo chambers in American climate politics have reoriented themselves around challenges to the science of climate change before and after the 2016 election.…”

The growth of climate change misinformation in US philanthropy: evidence from natural language processing

“…Concurrently, the scientific study of misinformation has also expanded in recent years in response to the large-scale diffusion of misinformation and false news across social media, news media, and government [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]. These two developments-philanthropy and misinformation-have converged most clearly around the issue of climate change, where scholars have identified an empirical relationship between industry-led political philanthropy and the large-scale production and diffusion of scientific misinformation about climate change [2,10,19,20].…”