IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/umc/wpaper/0811.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Environmental Policy Attitudes: Issues, Geographical Scale, and Political Trust

Author

Abstract

Objectives. This article examines environmental policy attitudes, focusing on the differences in preferences across issue type (i.e., pollution, resource preservation) and geographical scale (i.e., local, national, global). In addition, we study whether an individuals trust in government influences environmental policy attitudes. Methods. Analyzing data from the 2007 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, we estimate a series of OLS regression models to examine the publics environmental policy attitudes. Results. We find stronger public support for government action to address pollution issues than resources issues, and stronger support for local and national pollution abatement than dealing with global problems. We also find that Republicans and ideological conservatives are less likely to support further government effort to address the environment, and that more trusting individuals are more favorable to government action to address pollution and global issues. Conclusion. Environmental policy attitudes vary by the nature of the issue; however, political ideology and partisan affiliation are consistent predictors of preferences across issues, even when controlling for an individuals level of trust in government.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey Milyo & David M. Konisky & Lilliard E. Richardson, Jr., 2008. "Environmental Policy Attitudes: Issues, Geographical Scale, and Political Trust," Working Papers 0811, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
  • Handle: RePEc:umc:wpaper:0811
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://economics.missouri.edu/working-papers/2008/wp0811_milyo.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Johnson & Paul Brace & Kevin Arceneaux, 2005. "Public Opinion and Dynamic Representation in the American States: The Case of Environmental Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 86(1), pages 87-108.
    2. Thomas Dietz & Linda Kalof & Paul C. Stern, 2002. "Gender, Values, and Environmentalism," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 83(1), pages 353-364.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. David M. Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles H. Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    2. repec:spr:envpol:v:20:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s10018-017-0201-x is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Björn Kauder & Niklas Potrafke & Heinrich Ursprung, 2016. "Behavioral Determinants of Proclaimed Support for Environment Protection Policies," CESifo Working Paper Series 5993, CESifo Group Munich.
    4. Natalia Melgar & Irene Mussio & Maximo Rossi, 2013. "Environmental Concern and Behavior: Do Personal Attributes Matter?," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 0113, Department of Economics - dECON.
    5. David Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    6. Y. Farzin & Kelly Grogan, 2013. "Socioeconomic factors and water quality in California," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37, January.
    7. Edward H. Ip & Shyh-Huei Chen & Sara A. Quandt, 2016. "Analysis of Multiple Partially Ordered Responses to Belief Items with Don’t Know Option," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(2), pages 483-505, June.
    8. Grogan, Kelly A. & Goodhue, Rachael E., 2012. "Spatial Externalities of Pest Control Decisions in the California Citrus Industry," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-24, April.
    9. Dupont, Diane P. & Bateman, Ian J., 2012. "Political affiliation and willingness to pay: An examination of the nature of benefits and means of provision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 43-51.
    10. Tae- Yeoun Lee, 2012. "Determinants of willingness to pay for emissions reduction: a comparative study of Japan and South Korea," Chapters,in: Carbon Pricing, Growth and the Environment, chapter 13, pages 201-219 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Martinsson, Johan & Lundqvist, Lennart J. & Sundström, Aksel, 2011. "Energy saving in Swedish households. The (relative) importance of environmental attitudes," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5182-5191, September.
    12. Matthew B. Arbuckle & David M. Konisky, 2015. "The Role of Religion in Environmental Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1244-1263, November.
    13. John Evans & Justin Feng, 2013. "Conservative Protestantism and skepticism of scientists studying climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 121(4), pages 595-608, December.
    14. Ercolano, Salvatore & Gaeta, Giuseppe Lucio & Romano, Oriana, 2012. "Environmental fiscal reform and willingness to pay for the environment: an empirical analysis on European micro data," MPRA Paper 39680, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environment; NIMBY; Public Opinion; Political Economy;

    JEL classification:

    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • H1 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government

    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:umc:wpaper:0811. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Valerie Kulp) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/edumous.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.