Determinants of Public Support for Eco-Social Policies: A Comparative Theoretical Framework

Abstract

Global warming and some climate change policies pose additional social risks that necessitate novel responses from the welfare state. Eco-social policies have significant potential to address these challenges, but their wide-scale adoption will depend, among other factors, on public support. In the current article, we theorise how public opinion about eco-social policies is likely to be influenced by a set of contextual and individual-level factors, as well as the perceived welfare deservingness of the target groups. Alongside contributing to the emerging body of literature on eco-social policies, this theoretical framework could help policymakers to anticipate the social groups that will support or oppose eco-social policy agendas and how some of the contradictions could be reduced through policy design.

Attitudes towards welfare and environmental policies and concerns: A matter of self-interest, personal capability, or beyond?

“…In line with the theoretical assumption of a socioeconomic divide between the welfare agenda and the environmental agenda (see Gugushvili and Otto, 2021), this article shows that individuals expressing welfare support seem to be located, in general, in the lower socioeconomic strata with lower incomes, educational attainment and occupational status, whereas individuals expressing environmental support seem to be located in the higher socioeconomic strata with higher incomes, educational attainment and occupational status. Following the self-interest argument, individuals expressing welfare support but less environmental support could be understood as having a personal interest in the welfare agenda but limited personal capabilities to engage in the environmental agenda due to lower socioeconomic status (see Calzada et al, 2014; Jæger, 2006).…”

The Effects of Social Protection and Social Cohesion on the Acceptability of Climate Change Mitigation Policies: What Do We (Not) Know in the Context of Low- and Middle-Income Countries?

“…One reason could be that eco-social policies are considered as less affordable compared to richer countries; citizens may think that governments and welfare states should prioritize socio-economic development, while the demand for environmental goods increases once more basic needs are met. (Otto and Gugushvili 2021;Jakobsson et al 2017). Similarly, high levels of poverty and inequality can generate demand for more redistribution; low-income individuals, hit by significant income deprivations in MICs, strongly prioritize social measures over environmental protection This is supported by the further result in Table 1 showing that that prioritizing poverty reduction has a negative correlation with support for climate policies, especially in MICs.…”

“…To explain this finding, Fritz and Koch (2019) found that the simultaneous support of welfare and climate policies follows welfare regime lines, in that such support is the highest among social-democratic countries; a negative relationship was found especially in ex-Soviet Union countries. Otto and Gugushvili (2021) argue that support for eco-social measures will be higher in more affluent countries, as the environment is a normal good (Fairbrother 2012). At the individual level, the endorsement of eco-social measures by low-income groups necessitates that the policies complement-rather than substitute-existing welfare benefits, and that public awareness of the highly unequal social effects of environmental problems is increased.…”

The shift towards an eco-welfare state: growing stronger together

“…The latter investigates the public’s perception of environmental and social policy and finds significant variation (Jakobsson, Muttarak, & Schoyen, 2017). In this vein, recent findings suggest that the generosity of the welfare state is associated with less environmental protection support, or vice versa (Parth & Vlandas, 2022), or that public support for welfare and climate change programs is split (Gugushvili & Otto, 2021).…”