The polarization of public concern about climate change in Norway

Marianne Aasen

Climate Policy, 2017, vol. 17, issue 2, 213-230

Abstract: This article contributes to the existing literature by investigating the importance of value orientations for the Norwegian public's climate change concern, by analysing data from a national Gallup Poll from 2003 to 2011. Logistic regressions were conducted to investigate the importance of individualistic and egalitarian values for climate concern, and whether the groups of different value orientations have polarized in their climate concern over time. Respondents who hold less individualistic values and those holding egalitarian values are found more likely to be concerned about climate change than are those holding individualistic and less egalitarian values. Furthermore, the analyses find polarization in climate concern in the period for both value orientations. Increased focus on policy instruments in the political debate may be one explanation for values being increasingly salient. Future research should focus on studying ways to formulate policies given variations in values. One way would be to develop solutions that have co-benefits across groups of different value orientations. However, not all mitigation policies have immediate co-benefits for everyone. Research on how changes in the institutional setting may enhance the logic of social responsibility seems crucial.Policy relevanceIt is an important social science contribution to increase our understanding of public positions on climate change for developing effective responses to this vexing problem. This study identifies polarization over time between subgroups of different value orientations in their climate change concern. This may have implications for policies, as political solutions may be increasingly dependent on the composition of political leadership. Society and politicians should look for mitigation policies that have co-benefits across groups of different value orientations when possible. However, not all mitigation policies have immediate co-benefits for everyone. One option then is to change the institutional settings from enhancing the logic of individual benefits to enhancing the logic of social benefits for behaviour crucial for mitigating climate change. Finally, narratives about a low-emitting society that are attractive for all groups of value orientations should be emphasized.

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2015.1094727 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:2:p:213-230

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/tcpo20

DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1094727

Access Statistics for this article

Climate Policy is currently edited by Professor Michael Grubb

More articles in Climate Policy from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().