IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v19y2019i8p959-973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of reciprocity on public opinion of international climate treaties: experimental evidence from the US and China

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Stroik
  • D. Chakraborty
  • W. Ge
  • J. Boulter
  • E. Jamelske

Abstract

This study reports survey results of American and Chinese citizens administered to determine the effect of reciprocity and the absence of reciprocity on public support of international climate treaties. American and Chinese college students and adults were surveyed about their support for signing an international climate treaty including commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, conditional on the other country signing the same treaty or not. This study finds knowledge of other-country non-support on average decreases cooperative behaviour among all age groups in both the US and China. Knowledge of China’s support for the treaty is found on average to increase support among American adults, while having no noticeable effect on average support among American college students. Chinese citizens are found to not respond positively to reciprocity. Although not statistically significant at conventional significance levels, knowledge of the US’s support is found on average to decrease support among Chinese college students and adults.Key policy insights To increase support for international climate treaties, knowledge that another major emitter will sign the treaty does not unanimously increase domestic support.Knowing the other country will not sign the treaty decreases domestic support for signing an international climate treaty for both Americans and Chinese, relative to not being told about the other country’s decision to sign the treaty.Knowing China will sign an international climate treaty on average increases American adult support for signing the same treaty, while American college student support is unaffected.Although not statistically significant at conventional significance levels, knowing the US will sign an international climate treaty on average decreases Chinese support for signing the same treaty.Policy-makers pursuing increased international support of climate treaties by first getting support from countries with substantial historical emissions might deter international support if little attention to fairness concerns is given.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Stroik & D. Chakraborty & W. Ge & J. Boulter & E. Jamelske, 2019. "Effect of reciprocity on public opinion of international climate treaties: experimental evidence from the US and China," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 959-973, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:19:y:2019:i:8:p:959-973
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2019.1617666
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2019.1617666
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2019.1617666?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kiratli, Osman Sabri & Ertan, Sabri Arhan, 2023. "When to Not Respond in Kind? Individuals’ Expectations of the Future and Their Support for Reciprocity in Foreign Policy," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-1.
    2. Wei, Yigang & Gong, Ping & Zhang, Jianhong & Wang, Li, 2021. "Exploring public opinions on climate change policy in "Big Data Era"—A case study of the European Union Emission Trading System (EU-ETS) based on Twitter," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:19:y:2019:i:8:p:959-973. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.