Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T00:38:46.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When Will People Pay to Pollute? Environmental Taxes, Political Trust and Experimental Evidence from Britain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2017

Malcolm Fairbrother
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents results from survey experiments investigating conditions under which Britons are willing to pay taxes on polluting activities. People are no more willing if revenues are hypothecated for spending on environmental protection, while making such taxes more relevant to people – by naming petrol and electricity as products to which they will apply – has a modestly negative effect. Public willingness increases sharply if people are told that new environmental taxes would be offset by cuts to other taxes, but political distrust appears to undermine much of this effect. Previous studies have argued that political trust shapes public opinion with respect to environmental and many other policies. But this article provides the first experimental evidence suggesting that the relationship is causal, at least for one specific facet: cynicism about public officials’ honesty and integrity. The results suggest a need to make confidence in the trustworthiness of public officials and their promises more central to conceptualizations of political trust.

Keywords

environmental taxespolitical trustsurvey experimentsmultilevel models
Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , April 2019 , pp. 661 - 682
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

School of Geographical Sciences, Cabot Institute, Centre for Multilevel Modelling, University of Bristol (email: [email protected]). This article was written in large part during a sabbatical funded by the University of Bristol’s Institute for Advanced Studies. The author thanks the Understanding Society team for running the Innovation Panel experiments presented here, and is grateful to Ben Fagan-Watson for providing access to the Green Fiscal Commission data and to reports about those data not otherwise available online. Audiences at Umeå University, Örebro University, the Institute for Futures Studies, Gothenburg University and Stockholm University provided useful comments. Björn Rönnerstrand was particularly helpful; so were two anonymous BJPS reviewers and the editor. See the online appendices, available at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123416000727, for the R code with which to replicate all analyses reported in the article, or http://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataverse/BJPolS. All data used in this article are publicly available from the UK Data Archive at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123416000727.

References

Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Konisky, David M.. 2014. Cheap and Clean: How Americans Think About Energy in the Age of Global Warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Baird, Julia. 2014. A Carbon Tax’s Ignoble End: Why Tony Abbott Axed Australia’s Carbon Tax. The New York Times, 24 July. Available from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/opinion/julia-baird-why-tony-abbott-axed-australias-carbon-tax.html.Google Scholar
Bechtel, Michael M., and Scheve, Kenneth F.. 2013. Mass Support for Global Climate Agreements Depends on Institutional Design. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110:13763–13768.Google Scholar
Bernauer, Thomas. 2013. Climate Change Politics. Annual Review of Political Science 16:421–448.Google Scholar
Bernauer, Thomas, and Gampfer, Robert. 2013. Effects of Civil Society Involvement on Popular Legitimacy of Global Environmental Governance. Global Environmental Change 23:439–449.Google Scholar
Bodea, Cristina, and LeBas, Adrienne. 2016. The Origins of Voluntary Compliance: Attitudes Toward Taxation in Urban Nigeria. British Journal of Political Science 46:215–238.Google Scholar
Bolden, Charles, and Sullivan, Kathryn. 2016. NASA, NOAA Analyses Reveal Record-Shattering Global Warm Temperatures in 2015, NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden’s Blog, posted on 20 January. Available from http://blogs.nasa.gov/bolden/2016/01/20/nasa-noaa-analyses-reveal-record-shattering-global-warm-temperatures-in-2015/.Google Scholar
Campbell, Andrea Louise. 2009. What Americans Think of Taxes. In The New Fiscal Sociology: Taxation in Comparative and Historical Perspective, edited by Isaac William Martin, Ajay K. Mehrotra and Monica Prasad, 48–67. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cao, Xun, Milner, Helen V., Prakash, Aseem, and Ward, Hugh. 2014. Research Frontiers in Comparative and International Environmental Politics: An Introduction. Comparative Political Studies 47:291–308.Google Scholar
Chartered Institute of Taxation. 2009. Green Tax Report, May.Google Scholar
Citrin, Jack, and Muste, Christopher. 1999. Trust in Government. Pp. 465–532 in Measures of Political Attitudes, edited by John P. Robinson, Phillip R. Shaver and Lawrence S. Wrightsman. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 2005. The Social Transformation of Trust in Government. International Review of Sociology/Revue Internationale de Sociologie 15:133–154.Google Scholar
Dancey, Logan. 2012. The Consequences of Political Cynicism: How Cynicism Shapes Citizens’ Reactions to Political Scandals. Political Behavior 34:411–423.Google Scholar
Dresner, Simon, Dunne, Louise, Clinch, Peter, and Beuermann, Christiane. 2006. Social and Political Responses to Ecological Tax Reform in Europe: An Introduction to the Special Issue. Energy Policy 34:895–904.Google Scholar
Duit, Andreas. 2010. Patterns of Environmental Collective Action: Some Cross-National Findings. Political Studies 59:900–920.Google Scholar
Dunlap, Riley E., and York, Richard. 2008. The Globalization of Environmental Concern and the Limits of the Postmaterialist Values Explanation: Evidence from Four Multinational Surveys. Sociological Quarterly 49:529–563.Google Scholar
Elgie, Stewart, and McClay, Jessica. 2013. BC’s Carbon Tax Shift is Working Well After Four Years (Attention Ottawa). Canadian Public Policy 39:S1–S10.Google Scholar
Ermisch, John, Gambetta, Diego, Laurie, Heather, Siedler, Thomas, and Uhrig, S. C. Noah. 2009. Measuring People’s Trust. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 172:749–769.Google Scholar
European Environment Agency. 2015. Climate Change: EU Shows Leadership Ahead of Paris with 23% Emissions Cut, Press Release | Media, Brussels, 20 October. Available from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5868_en.htm.Google Scholar
Eurostat. 2015. Environmental Tax Statistics. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Environmental_tax_statistics.Google Scholar
Fairbrother, Malcolm. 2013. Rich People, Poor People, and Environmental Concern: Evidence Across Nations and Time. European Sociological Review 29:910–922.Google Scholar
Farrell, Justin. 2016. Corporate Funding and Ideological Polarization About Climate Change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) 113:92–97.Google Scholar
Gill, Jeff. 1999. The Insignificance of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing. Political Research Quarterly 52:647–674.Google Scholar
Gough, Ian. 2011. Climate Change and Public Policy Futures. A Report Prepared for the British Academy. Available from www.britac.ac.uk/climate-change-and-public-policy-futures.Google Scholar
Green Fiscal Commission. 2007. Baseline Survey: Public Attitudes to Environmental Taxation, November. Available from http://www.greenfiscalcommission.org.uk/images/uploads/Results.pdf.Google Scholar
Green Fiscal Commission. 2009. Public Opinion on a Green Tax Shift. Briefing Paper Three. June. Available from http://www.greenfiscalcommission.org.uk/images/uploads/GFC_Briefing_3_Final.pdf.Google Scholar
Ipsos MORI. 2010. Experiment Earth? Report on a Public Dialogue on Geoengineering. Report on a public dialogue conducted for the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Available from www.nerc.ac.uk/about/whatwedo/engage/engagement/geoengineering/geoengineering-dialogue-final-report/.Google Scholar
Hadfield, Jarrod. 2010. MCMC Methods for Multi-Response Generalised Linear Mixed Models: The MCMCglmm R Package. Journal of Statistical Software 33:1–22.Google Scholar
Hammar, Henrik, and Jagers, Sverker C.. 2006. Can Trust in Politicians Explain Individuals’ Support for Climate Policy? The Case of CO2 Tax. Climate Policy 5:613–625.Google Scholar
Harring, Niklas. 2013. Understanding the Effects of Corruption and Political Trust on Willingness to Make Economic Sacrifices for Environmental Protection in a Cross-National Perspective. Social Science Quarterly 94:660–671.Google Scholar
Harrison, Kathryn. 2010. The Comparative Politics of Carbon Taxation. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 6:507–529.Google Scholar
Harrison, Kathryn. 2012. A Tale of Two Taxes: The Fate of Environmental Tax Reform in Canada. Review of Policy Research 29:383–407.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J. 2005. Why Trust Matters: Declining Political Trust and the Demise of American Liberalism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J., and Husser, Jason A.. 2012. How Trust Matters: The Changing Political Relevance of Political Trust. American Journal of Political Science 56:312–325.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J., and Rudolph, Thomas J.. 2008. Priming, Performance, and the Dynamics of Political Trust. Journal of Politics 70:498–512.Google Scholar
Hetherington, Marc J., and Rudolph, Thomas J.. 2015. Why Washington Won’t Work. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. 2011. Budget 2011 and Environmental Taxes. Sixth Report of Session 2010–2012. Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. Available from www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmenvaud/878/878.pdf.Google Scholar
Hsu, Shi-Ling. 2010. The Politics and Psychology of Gasoline Taxes: An Empirical Study. Widener Law Review 15:363–390.Google Scholar
Hsu, Shi-Ling, Walters, Joshua, and Purgas, Anthony. 2008. Pollution Tax Heuristics: An Empirical Study of Willingness to Pay Higher Gasoline Taxes. Energy Policy 36:3612–3619.Google Scholar
Jagers, Sverker C., and Hammar, Henrik. 2009. Environmental Taxation for Good and for Bad: The Efficiency and Legitimacy of Sweden’s Carbon Tax. Environmental Politics 18:218–237.Google Scholar
Kallbekkenn, Steffen, and Sælen, Håkon. 2011. Public Acceptance for Environmental Taxes: Self-Interest, Environmental and Distributional Concerns. Energy Policy 39:2966–2973.Google Scholar
Kaplowitz, Stan A., and McCright, Aaron M.. 2015. Effects of Policy Characteristics and Justifications on Acceptance of a Gasoline Tax Increase. Energy Policy 87:370–381.Google Scholar
Karl, Thomas R., Arguez, Anthony, Huang, Boyin, Lawrimore, Jay H., McMahon, James R., Menne, Matthew J., Peterson, Thomas C., Vose, Russell S., and Zhang, Huai-Min. 2015. Possible Artifacts of Data Biases in the Recent Global Surface Warming Hiatus. Science 348:1469–1472.Google Scholar
Keohane, Robert O. 2015. The Global Politics of Climate Change: Challenge for Political Science. PS: Political Science & Politics 49:19–26.Google Scholar
Kohlhaus, Michael, and Meyer, Bernd. 2005. Ecological Tax Reform in Germany: Economic and Political Analysis of an Evolving Policy. In Environmental Policymaking: Assessing the Use of Alternative Policy Instruments, edited by Michael T. Hatch, 125–150. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Konisky, David M., Milyo, Jeffrey, and Richardson, Lilliard E. Jr. 2008. Environmental Policy Attitudes: Issues, Geographical Scale, and Political Trust. Social Science Quarterly 89:1066–1085.Google Scholar
Levi, Margaret, and Stoker, Laura. 2000. Political Trust and Trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science 3:475–507.Google Scholar
Lorenzoni, Irene, Nicholson-Coleb, Sophie, and Whitmarsh, Lorraine. 2007. Barriers Perceived to Engaging with Climate Change Among the UK Public and their Policy Implications. Global Environmental Change 17:445–459.Google Scholar
Lubell, Mark. 2002. Environmental Activism as Collective Action. Environment and Behavior 34:431–454.Google Scholar
Maclucas, Neil. 2015. Swiss Voters Reject Initiative to Replace VAT System with Carbon Tax. The Wall Street Journal, 8 March. Available from www.wsj.com/articles/swiss-voters-reject-initiative-to-replace-vat-system-with-carbon-tax-1425822327.Google Scholar
McCaffery, Edward J., and Baron, Jonathan. 2006. Thinking About Tax. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 12:106–135.Google Scholar
McLaren, Lauren. 2011. Immigration and Trust in Politics in Britain. British Journal of Political Science 42:163–185.Google Scholar
Meyer, Reto, and Liebe, Ulf. 2010. Are the Affluent Prepared to Pay for the Planet? Explaining Willingness to Pay for Public and Quasi-Private Environmental Goods in Switzerland. Population and Environment 32:42–65.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur H. 1974. Political Issues and Trust in Government: 1964–1970. American Political Science Review 68:951–972.Google Scholar
Mirrlees, James, Adam, Stuart, Besley, Tim, Blundell, Richard, Bond, Stephen, Chote, Robert, Gammie, Malcolm, Johnson, Paul, Myles, Gareth, and Poterba, James. 2012. The Mirrlees Review: A Proposal for Systematic Tax Reform. National Tax Journal 65:655–684.Google Scholar
Mirrlees, James, Adam, Stuart, Besley, Timothy, Blundell, Richard, Bond, Stephen, Chote, Robert, Gammie, Malcolm, Johnson, Paul, Myles, Gareth, and Poterba, James. 2011. Tax by Design: The Mirrlees Review. Oxford: Oxford University Press for the Institute for Fiscal Studies.Google Scholar
Mutz, Diana C., and Pemantle, Robin. 2015. Standards for Experimental Research: Encouraging a Better Understanding of Experimental Methods. Journal of Experimental Political Science 2:192–215.Google Scholar
Naurin, Elin. 2011. Election Promises, Party Behaviour and Voter Perceptions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
OECD. 2010. Taxation, Innovation and the Environment. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Office for National Statistics. 2015. Environmental Taxes – 2014, 1 June. Available from www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_405555.pdf.Google Scholar
Parry, Ian W. H., Norregaard, John, and Heine, Dirk. 2012. Environmental Tax Reform: Principles from Theory and Practice. Annual Review of Resource Economics 4:101–283.Google Scholar
Pearson, Mark. 1995. The Political Economy of Implementing Environmental Taxes. International Tax and Public Finance 2:357–373.Google Scholar
Pulver, Simone. 2007. Making Sense of Corporate Environmentalism: An Environmental Contestation Approach to Analyzing the Causes and Consequences of the Climate Change Policy Split in the Oil Industry. Organization & Environment 20:44–83.Google Scholar
Rajah, Najma, and Smith, Stephen. 1994. Using Taxes to Price Externalities: Experiences in Western Europe. Annual Review of Energy and Environment 19:475–504.Google Scholar
Rockström, Johan, Steffen, Will, Noone, Kevin, Persson, Åsa, Chapin, F. Stuart III, Lambin, Eric F., Lenton, Timothy M., Scheffer, Marten, Folke, Carl, Schellnhuber, Hans Joachim, Nykvist, Björn, de Wit, Cynthia A., Hughes, Terry, van der Leeuw, Sander, Rodhe, Henning, Sörlin, Sverker, Snyder, Peter K., Costanza, Robert, Svedin, Uno, Falkenmark, Malin, Karlberg, Louise, Corell, Robert W., Fabry, Victoria J., Hansen, James, Walker, Brian, Liverman, Diana, Richardson, Katherine, Crutzen, Paul, and Foley, Jonathan A.. 2009. A Safe Operating Space for Humanity. Nature 461:472–475.Google Scholar
Rudolph, Thomas J. 2009. Political Trust, Ideology, and Public Support for Tax Cuts. Public Opinion Quarterly 73:144–158.Google Scholar
Rudolph, Thomas J., and Evans, Jillian. 2005. Political Trust, Ideology, and Public Support for Government Spending. American Journal of Political Science 49:660–671.Google Scholar
Schenk, Deborah H. 2011. Exploiting the Salience Bias in Designing Taxes. Yale Journal on Regulation 28:253–311.Google Scholar
Schmalensee, Richard, and Stavins, Robert N.. 2013. The SO2 Allowance Trading System: The Ironic History of a Grand Policy Experiment. Journal of Economic Perspectives 27:103–122.Google Scholar
Shwom, Rachael, Bidwell, David, Dan, Amy, and Dietz, Thomas. 2010. Understanding U.S. Public Support for Domestic Climate Change Policies. Global Environmental Change 20:472–482.Google Scholar
Smith, Louise. 2009. The Future for Green Taxes, House of Commons Library Research Paper No. 09/86, 1 December. Available from http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/RP09-86.Google Scholar
Stamatova, Stela, and Steurer, Anton. 2012. Environmental Taxes Account for 6.2% of All Revenues from Taxes and Social Contributions in the EU-27, Eurostat: Statistics in Focus No. 53/2012. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3433488/5585532/KS-SF-12-053-EN.PDF/829d40d8-5c3f-4ebd-8859-c424fdb946e8.Google Scholar
Thalmann, Philippe. 2004. The Public Acceptance of Green Taxes: 2 Million Voters Express Their Opinion. Public Choice 119:179–217.Google Scholar
Tietenberg, Tom H.. 2013. Reflections – Carbon Pricing in Practice. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 7:313–329.Google Scholar
Tingley, Dustin, and Tomz, Michael. 2014. Conditional Cooperation and Climate Change. Comparative Political Studies 47:344–368.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Kahneman, Daniel. 1974. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science 185:1124–1131.Google Scholar
Volkens, Andrea, Lehmann, Pola, Matthieß, Theres, Merz, Nicolas, Regel, Sven, and Werner, Annika. 2015. The Manifesto Data Collection. Manifesto Project, Version 2015a. Berlin: Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung. Available from https://manifesto-project.wzb.eu/datasets.Google Scholar
Ward, Hugh, and Cao, Xun. 2012. Domestic and International Influences on Green Taxation. Comparative Political Studies 45:1075–1103.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Fairbrother Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NT40NR
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Fairbrother supplementary material

Online Appendices

Download Fairbrother supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 221.6 KB