Exciting new research shows ways to defuse the “green backlash”

I have already written on outcry in my hometown of York, in the United Kingdom, when the council announced its intention to increase parking costs to discourage people from driving in our polluted streets. In case you ask yourself the question, the Council finally gave in to the opposition and made the increase in costs much less than it was originally wanted.

This is a good example of “green reaction” – the term given to the growing wave of opposition to pro -environmental policies in high -income countries. This often goes hand in hand with the increase in support for right-wing populist parties such as reform in the United Kingdom, which cynically wins and exploits it for an electoral gain. It works: the reform conducts recent surveys to ask British voters which party they plan to support in the next general elections.

This is not good news for the planet. Significant progress against climate change is impossible without government intervention, but such policies can become counterproductive when they open the door to anti-green parties. Research has shown that when right -wing populists have power in Europe, action on greenhouse gas emissions and transition to renewable energies slow down.

A recent study published in Climate change of natureHowever, suggests that there are ways to defuse green backlash. The researchers, led by Valentina Bosetti at the University of Bocconi in Milan, Italy, reviewed the literature on the green reaction to try to understand why this happens – and what can be done to mitigate it.

They found that disaffection with climatic policies has two deep causes: economic and cultural. The first concerns the costs imposed on voters by politicians, such as having to pay more to park near the city center. The latter reflects general and growing distrust of politicians and scientific elites. The two can seriously erode support for outgoing political parties who try to promulgate environmental policies and push certain people in the arms of the parties opposed to them, who are extremely right.

An enlightening case study involving the two types of grievances comes from Ontario, Canada, where in 2009, the provincial administration suppressed the power of communities to oppose its veto on new wind facilities. More than 50 campaign groups have emerged to protest, fearing the impact on the value of their properties. Despite the large popularity of wind energy in Ontario, this localized opposition seems to have balanced the next provincial elections. In October 2011, the outgoing Ontario Liberal Party lost its overall majority, including many of its defeats from the constituencies where there was an operational or proposed wind turbine. Similar upheavals against wind energy have been observed in Sweden and Germany.

Measures to encourage people to exchange internal combustion engine vehicles for electric vehicles have also caused declines of people who get lost – namely those in the conventional automotive sector. During the 2016 US elections, Donald Trump won an average of 3 percentage points in the counties who house car manufacturers. When the researchers interviewed workers, they quoted the threat of EV transition as a motivation to decide to support Trump.

It is a fairly depressing image: governments that try to do the right thing for the environment face a repression and end up watering their policies or losing power, generally replaced by parties who will not impose such policies or are not rejected by the need to do so.

He doesn’t have this way. There is probably not to reach those which are attracted to right -wing populism by cultural problems, but they will probably never form a majority. Economic grievances, however, can be assumed. Bosetti noted that opposition to wind energy, for example, melts when government subsidies are available, when tax revenues are infiltrated for local projects and when local jobs are created. The fear of job losses and the obsolescence of skills could be discussed by recycling people or by simply compensating them fairly, she suggests. It’s so simple.

In addition to all this, there is a large support but underestimated by policies that will produce a green transition. Researchers in the United States recently questioned adults about their attitude towards reducing food waste, eating less beef, installing solar and heat pumps at home, driving an EV and buying carbon offsets and have found many majorities in favor of each of them. But when they asked the same people how much they thought that others supported them, they found a huge gap between perception and reality. There is another message there for politicians: do not fear green policies because you have fallen into the same trap.

Back in York, the next local elections are in 2027. I expect parking costs to be a problem on the doorstep and will fear a green reaction to the polls.

Graham week

What I read

The pillars of the earth by Ken Follett.

What I look at

I look at the adaptation of the BBC of Dracula On Netflix in anticipation of my next vacation in Transylvania.

What do I work

An article for the Christmas number. Honestly.

Graham Lawton is editor at New scientist and author of Must not growl:: The surprising science of daily illnesses. You can follow him @grahamlawton