IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v42y2022i1p136-164_7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are policymakers responsive to public demand in climate politics?

Author

Listed:
  • Schaffer, Lena Maria
  • Oehl, Bianca
  • Bernauer, Thomas

Abstract

Normative theories of democracy agree that public demand should be the main guide in policymaking. But positive theories and related empirical research disagree about the extent to which this holds true in reality. We address this debate with an empirical focus on climate change policy. Specifically, we are interested in whether observable variation in public demand for climate change mitigation can help explain variation in adopted national climate policies. Using our own data to approximate public demand, we estimate the responsiveness of policymakers to changes in public demand in six OECD countries from 1995 to 2010. We find that policymakers are responsive and react in predicted ways to variation in our opinion component of measured public demand, rather than to the mere salience of the climate issue. The effect of issue salience is strongest in combination with our opinion measure as this creates a scope for action. The results underscore the importance and usefulness of our concept and empirical measures for public demand, as well as of our disaggregated analysis of climate policy outputs in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Schaffer, Lena Maria & Oehl, Bianca & Bernauer, Thomas, 2022. "Are policymakers responsive to public demand in climate politics?," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(1), pages 136-164, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:1:p:136-164_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X21000088/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Montfort Simon, 2023. "Key predictors for climate policy support and political mobilization: The role of beliefs and preferences," PLOS Climate, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Theresa Wieland & Fabian Thiel, 2025. "Increasing individual-level climate mitigation action: the role of behavioral dimensions and inequality perceptions," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.
    3. Pelin Okutan & Emre N. Otay, 2025. "Climate Change Risk Perception, Adaptive Capacity and Psychological Distance in Urban Vulnerability: A District-Level Case Study in Istanbul, Türkiye," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-29, June.
    4. Hoppe, Janna & Tröndle, Tim & Patt, Anthony, 2025. "“I didn't like them from the beginning, and I hate them now.” Changes in attitudes towards electric vehicles and phase-out policies for conventional cars," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    5. Joshua F Inwald & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Christopher D Petsko, 2024. "Younger Americans are less politically polarized than older Americans about climate policies (but not about other policy domains)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-19, May.
    6. Cain, Bruce E. & Gerber, Elisabeth R. & Lee, Nathan & Miller, Susan, 2024. "Investing in the future of mobility: The role of US local governments in building EV infrastructure," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    7. Yantuan Yu & Ling Liu & Yayun Ren, 2025. "Effect of climate change adaptation on energy productivity: evidence from China," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 1-22, August.
    8. Indra Soysa & Espen Moe & Simen Rostad Saether, 2025. "Egalitarian governance and the green energy transition: an empirical test of 46 industrial economies, 1990–2020," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(7), pages 16983-17004, July.

    More about this item

    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:cup:jnlpup:v:42:y:2022:i:1:p:136-164_7. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    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.