IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/2hez9.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public Preference Formation Towards Sustainable Global Supply Chains Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Kolcava, Dennis
  • Smith, E. Keith
  • Bernauer, Thomas

Abstract

Effectively governing environmental and social externalities throughout the global economy poses challenges for democratic policy-makers in the court of public opinion. Following the median voter model, as the stringency of policy proposals increases, support rises amongst some citizens and falls amongst others. We argue informational disclosure-based governance presents a potential strategy to mitigate this zero-sum logic as citizens discount policy costs while expecting substantive benefits. We focus on political efforts to increase sustainability throughout global supply chains, drawing on two original survey experiments with representative samples in the 12 largest high-income importing economies (N=24,000). Indeed, at higher levels of policy stringency, citizens expect greater benefits than costs. Further, we find that expected benefits are more strongly associated with support than costs. Lastly, we note how policy stringency promotes convergence of expected benefits across the political ideological spectrum. Hence, our findings provide insights into public preference formation towards the globalization-sustainability nexus.

Suggested Citation

  • Kolcava, Dennis & Smith, E. Keith & Bernauer, Thomas, 2022. "Public Preference Formation Towards Sustainable Global Supply Chains Policy," OSF Preprints 2hez9, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:2hez9
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/2hez9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6373c61c78caac004d4f7b1b/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/2hez9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greg Distelhorst & Richard M. Locke, 2018. "Does Compliance Pay? Social Standards and Firm‐Level Trade," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 695-711, July.
    2. E. Keith Smith & Adam Mayer, 2019. "Anomalous Anglophones? Contours of free market ideology, political polarization, and climate change attitudes in English-speaking countries, Western European and post-Communist states," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 17-34, January.
    3. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    4. Roulin, Nicolas, 2015. "Don't Throw the Baby Out With the Bathwater: Comparing Data Quality of Crowdsourcing, Online Panels, and Student Samples," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 190-196, June.
    5. Matto Mildenberger & Erick Lachapelle & Kathryn Harrison & Isabelle Stadelmann-Steffen, 2022. "Limited evidence that carbon tax rebates have increased public support for carbon pricing," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 12(2), pages 121-122, February.
    6. Frank Biermann & Thomas Hickmann & Carole-Anne Sénit & Marianne Beisheim & Steven Bernstein & Pamela Chasek & Leonie Grob & Rakhyun E. Kim & Louis J. Kotzé & Måns Nilsson & Andrea Ordóñez Llanos & Chu, 2022. "Scientific evidence on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(9), pages 795-800, September.
    7. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Layna Mosley & Robert Galantucci, 2019. "Protecting Workers Abroad and Industries at Home: Rights-based Conditionality in Trade Preference Programs," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(5), pages 1253-1282, May.
    8. Edmund J. Malesky & Layna Mosley, 2018. "Chains of Love? Global Production and the Firm‐Level Diffusion of Labor Standards," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 712-728, July.
    9. Michael Pahle & Dallas Burtraw & Christian Flachsland & Nina Kelsey & Eric Biber & Jonas Meckling & Ottmar Edenhofer & John Zysman, 2018. "Sequencing to ratchet up climate policy stringency," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 8(10), pages 861-867, October.
    10. Virginia Haufler, 2010. "Disclosure as Governance: The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and Resource Management in the Developing World," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(3), pages 53-73, August.
    11. Dani Rodrik, 2021. "Why Does Globalization Fuel Populism? Economics, Culture, and the Rise of Right-Wing Populism," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 133-170, August.
    12. Richard Williams, 2012. "Using the margins command to estimate and interpret adjusted predictions and marginal effects," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 12(2), pages 308-331, June.
    13. Matto Mildenberger & Erick Lachapelle & Kathryn Harrison & Isabelle Stadelmann-Steffen, 2022. "Limited impacts of carbon tax rebate programmes on public support for carbon pricing," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 12(2), pages 141-147, February.
    14. McDonnell, Mary-Hunter & King, Brayden & Soule, Sarah A., 2015. "A Dynamic Process Model of Private Politics: Activist Targeting and Corporate Receptivity to Social Challenges," Research Papers 3319, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Rhodes, Ekaterina & Axsen, Jonn & Jaccard, Mark, 2017. "Exploring Citizen Support for Different Types of Climate Policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 56-69.
    16. Malhotra, Neil & Monin, Benoãžt & Tomz, Michael, 2019. "Does Private Regulation Preempt Public Regulation?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 19-37, February.
    17. Jorge Sellare & Jan Börner & Fritz Brugger & Rachael Garrett & Isabel Günther & Eva-Marie Meemken & Edoardo Maria Pelli & Linda Steinhübel & David Wuepper, 2022. "Six research priorities to support corporate due-diligence policies," Nature, Nature, vol. 606(7916), pages 861-863, June.
    18. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Danny Taufik & Jan Willem Bolderdijk & Linda Steg, 2015. "Acting green elicits a literal warm glow," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 37-40, January.
    20. Michael Bechtel & Thomas Bernauer & Reto Meyer, 2012. "The green side of protectionism: Environmental concerns and three facets of trade policy preferences," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 837-866.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. E. Keith Smith & Dennis Kolcava & Thomas Bernauer, 2024. "Stringent sustainability regulations for global supply chains are supported across middle-income democracies," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Céline Carrère & Marcelo Olarreaga & Damian Raess, 2022. "Labor clauses in trade agreements: Hidden protectionism?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 453-483, July.
    3. Pitkänen, Atte & von Wright, Tuuli & Kaseva, Janne & Kahiluoto, Helena, 2022. "Distributional fairness of personal carbon trading," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    4. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    5. Sebastian Levi & Christian Flachsland & Michael Jakob, 2020. "Political Economy Determinants of Carbon Pricing," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(2), pages 128-156, May.
    6. Odland, Severin & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Corbett, Meghan & Pardy, Aaron, 2023. "What policies do homeowners prefer for building decarbonization and why? An exploration of climate policy support in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Klymak, Margaryta, 2023. "The trade effects of information provision about forced and child labor," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    8. Janne Tukiainen & Sebastian Blesse & Albrecht Bohne & Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Jan Jäässkeläinen & Ari Luukinen & Antti Sieppi, 2021. "What Are the Priorities of Bureaucrats? Evidence from Conjoint Experiments with Procurement Officials," EconPol Working Paper 63, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    9. Michael J. Frith, 2021. "Analysing conjoint experiments in Stata: the conjoint command," London Stata Conference 2021 14, Stata Users Group.
    10. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & McCollum, David, 2022. "Which “second-best” climate policies are best? Simulating cost-effective policy mixes for passenger vehicles," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Anne-Marie Jeannet & Tobias Heidland & Martin Ruhs, 2021. "What asylum and refugee policies do Europeans want? Evidence from a cross-national conjoint experiment," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 353-376, September.
    12. Chu, Haoran & Liu, Sixiao, 2021. "Light at the end of the tunnel: Influence of vaccine availability and vaccination intention on people’s consideration of the COVID-19 vaccine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    13. Rudolph, Lukas & Freitag, Markus & Thurner, Paul, 2021. "The Comparative Legitimacy of Arms Exports - A Conjoint Experiment in Germany and France," SocArXiv r73pv, Center for Open Science.
    14. Blayac, Thierry & Dubois, Dimitri & Duchêne, Sébastien & Nguyen-Van, Phu & Ventelou, Bruno & Willinger, Marc, 2022. "What drives the acceptability of restrictive health policies: An experimental assessment of individual preferences for anti-COVID 19 strategies," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    15. Lim, Sijeong & Dolsak, Nives & Prakash, Aseem & Tanaka, Seiki, 2022. "Distributional concerns and public opinion: EV subsidies in the U.S. and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    16. Raess, Damian & Wagner, Patrick, 2022. "South to north investment linkages and decent work in Brazil," Papers 1382, World Trade Institute.
    17. KASUYA Yuko & MIWA Hirofumi & ONO Yoshikuni, 2022. "Why are There More Women in the Upper House?," Discussion papers 22094, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    18. Xavier Fernández-i-Marín & Carolin H Rapp & Christian Adam & Oliver James & Anita Manatschal, 2021. "Discrimination against mobile European Union citizens before and during the first COVID-19 lockdown: Evidence from a conjoint experiment in Germany," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(4), pages 741-761, December.
    19. IGARASHI Akira & MIWA Hirofumi & ONO Yoshikuni, 2022. "How Do Racial Cues Affect Attitudes toward Immigrants in a Racially Homogeneous Country? Evidence from a survey experiment in Japan," Discussion papers 22091, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    20. Nicolas Schmid & Leonore Haelg & Sebastian Sewerin & Tobias S. Schmidt & Irina Simmen, 2021. "Governing complex societal problems: The impact of private on public regulation through technological change," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 840-855, July.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:2hez9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.