Search

This article studies individual-level attitudes towards long-term investment policies using novel survey data for the case of Germany. Building on a budding literature on the relationship between environmental and social policy attitudes, our first contribution to research is to show that citizens, when prompted to think about their support for long-term investment policies, support welfare state related policies such as investments in education and pensions to a greater degree than non-welfare state issues such as public infrastructure investment or renewable energy. Citizens are most supportive of using present-day redistributive policies – in our case: increasing income taxes on the rich – in order to finance long-term investment. We also find evidence that political trust is positively associated with support for long-term investment policies, but in particular investments in education and renewables. Furthermore, our analysis reveals the importance of individual political ideology. These findings have implications for public demand for tackling the long-term issues faced by society today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental protection efforts commonly make use of two types of government interventions: command and control policies (C&C) and market-based instruments (MBIs). While MBIs are favored for their economic efficiency, visible prices on pollution may generate political backlash. We examine whether citizens are more likely to support policies that tend to obfuscate policy costs (C&C), as opposed to MBIs, which impose visible costs. Using conjoint experiments in Beijing and New Delhi, we examine support for 'policy bundles', including both C&C policies and MBIs, aimed at limiting air pollution from vehicles. In both cities, increasing fuel taxes (a MBI) reduces policy support. However, pledging revenue usage from fuel taxes to subsidize electric cars or public transport eliminates this negative effect. Furthermore, individuals with a lower evaluation of their government respond more negatively to MBIs. MBIs may be economically efficient, but are politically difficult unless policy-makers can offset visible costs through additional measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Policy processes are affected by how policymakers assess public support for a policy. But is public support for a given policy itself affected by characteristics of the policy process, such as cooperation or confrontation amongst policy actors? Specifically, if different branches of government hold conflicting positions on a given policy, do clashes affect public support for the policy? To address this question, we exploit an unexpected clash amongst the executive and judiciary in New Delhi, between survey waves, over exemptions for women in the context of the odd–even rule, a policy intervention to reduce air pollution from transportation. We find that public support for the contested policy was not undermined by the executive–judiciary clash. However, the clash polarised public opinion by gender, based upon the policy exemptions. Our findings shed new light on the broader question of how conflicts amongst different parts of government influence mass public policy preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]