Author
Abstract
Adopting green transition policies is not politically acceptable or supported by all governments. This paper examines whether countries with a tradition of electoral democracy are more likely to adopt such policies, and whether this effect is impacted by the level of per capita income of an economy. The relationship is first explored theoretically and then empirically through a cross-country panel analysis over 1995–2020 for a wide variety of green policies and outcomes. The results suggest that it is difficult to refute the association of these outcomes with cumulative democratic experience, conditioned on the per capita income of an economy. Relatively rich democracies were more likely to adopt green policies from 1995 to 2020 than relatively poor democracies. High-income democracies could benefit from leading international collaboration and policy coordination to facilitate low-carbon transitions among all democracies. However, the post-2020 decline of democracy may affect efforts to green economies and coordinate policy.Policy highlightsThis paper examines whether countries with a tradition of electoral democracy are more likely to adopt green transition policies and whether this effect is impacted by a country’s level of per capita income.Cross-country panel analysis for a variety of green policy outcomes from 1995 to 2020 suggests that the association of democracy with these outcomes is conditioned on the per capita income level of a country.The implication is that relatively rich democracies were more likely to adopt green policies from 1995 to 2020 than relatively poor democracies.If relatively richer democracies are most likely to pursue green transition policies, then there may be mutual gains from international collaboration and policy coordination to facilitate such transitions.Richer democratic countries should also consider providing greater financial and technical assistance to support democratic emerging economies to ‘go green’.
Suggested Citation
Edward B. Barbier, 2026.
"Greenness and democracy,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 73-102, April.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:teepxx:v:15:y:2026:i:2:p:73-102
DOI: 10.1080/21606544.2026.2649131
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:teepxx:v:15:y:2026:i:2:p:73-102. 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/teep20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.