The Effect of Racial Resentment on Support for Domestic and International Climate Policy

Using data from the 2020 Cooperative Election Study, I investigate the relationship between feelings of racial resentment and approval of climate policy and explore how that relationship varies by type of agreement. I seek to extend an emerging literature that has demonstrated a link between racial attitudes and approval for climate policy by exploring how feelings of racial resentment shape public support for international climate cooperation. I find support for the linkage between heightened levels of racial resentment and reduced support for climate policy among those who identify as Republicans, Democrats, and independents. Additionally, for Republicans and independents, I find that the effect of racial resentment at reducing support for climate action is stronger when the climate action in question is U.S. involvement in an international agreement. My findings provide insight into the conditions that influence support for both domestic and international climate policy among members of the American public.Master of Art

Epistemic Communities and Public Support for the Paris Agreement on Climate Change

We study how informing the public about the views of international policy experts shapes public support for international cooperation. Using survey experiments, we test whether variation in levels of support among experts with differing types of domain-specific knowledge can shape public support for a recent and politically salient international treaty: the UNFCCC COP21 Paris Climate Agreement. Our results show that the public is, under certain conditions, deferential to the views of experts, with respondents reporting increasingly higher levels of support for the COP21 agreement as support among experts increased. In addition, we provide suggestive evidence that domain-specific expertise matters: When it comes to support for the COP21 agreement, the public is most sensitive to the views of climate scientists, while exposure to the views of international relations and international economics experts have less dramatic and less consistent effects. Despite these results, we find that it is exposing the public to information about opposition to a proposed treaty among members of relevant epistemic communities that has greatest and most consistent effects. Our findings thus provide new insight into the conditions under which epistemic communities can shape public support for particular policy alternatives

The Effect of In-group Preferences on Support for Climate Policy (PAP)

In this survey conducted on a representative sample of 1,500 American adults through the PoliSci in the Field at UNC (P-FUNC) survey, I field a 2x3 factorial experimental design independently varying both the scope (international or domestic) and the frame (harm, benefit or a control condition) of a hypothetical climate action in an effort to investigate public opinion of climate action

The Effect of In-group Preferences on Support for Domestic Climate Policy

Understanding the drivers of American public opinion about climate action is critical to passing legislation that can effectively combat the effects of climate change. In this proposal, I suggest and test, a pivotal role for feelings of racial resentment in influencing public support for domestic efforts to address climate change. I argue that perceptions of race serve as a lens for individuals with high levels of racial resentment to determine who deserves to benefit from policy action. The racial disparity in the effects of climate impacts, a renewed focus on environmental justice activism, and the connection between former President Obama and environmental policy has racialized climate policy. As a result of this racialization of climate policy, some individuals view non-white people as undeserving beneficiaries of climate policy lowering their own support for climate action. I will test the linkage between feelings of racial resentment and climate opinion through a survey experiment. Overall, I seek to provide new insight into the conditions that influence public support for climate policy among members of the American mass public

Institutional Cue-Giving and Persuasion: Enlisting the Military as Environmental Protector

We propose a novel approach to influencing public support for government action even when partisan elites are polarized on an issue. People trust and like some parts of government much more than others, and we argue that this trust and goodwill can serve as an important resource. Here, we look at the extent to which trust in the U.S. Military can be used as a tool for increasing support for climate change policy. Using a nationally representative survey experiment conducted on 1,500 Americans, we investigate whether people are more apt to embrace environmental spending and are more concerned about the effects of climate change when cued about the strategic importance that the military attaches to climate change. We expect a trusted and liked source can serve as an effective cue-giver, perhaps especially when it takes an unexpected position on an issue

The Mass Politics of Green Industrial Policy: Understanding Public Support for Climate-Friendly Tax Cuts

This survey experiment examines the breadth of public support for corporate tax cuts that are intended to facilitate the green energy transition. It studies the broad level of approval relative to other policies and examines preferences, particularly within politically relevant subgroups, when primed with domestic and international economic cues

Replication Data for: Assessing the Renaissance of Individuals in International Relations

The study of microfoundations, especially individuals, is enjoying something of a renaissance in international relations (IR) scholarship. Yet, this rise is harder to find in publication data. Using the Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) journal article database, we show that only 13.7% of IR articles in twelve leading journals employ the first image; this proportion remains roughly the same from 1980 through 2018. Interrogating the data, we show that this distribution does not stem from epistemological or methodological commitments, such as positivism, quantitative analysis, or formal modeling. We suggest several reasons for this apparent disjuncture between qualitative assessments of the rebirth of first image theorizing and the quantitative data which implies a slower, or perhaps more limited, return

replication_materials – Supplemental material for Epistemic Communities and Public Support for the Paris Agreement on Climate Change

Supplemental material, replication_materials for Epistemic Communities and Public Support for the Paris Agreement on Climate Change by Daniel Maliniak, Eric Parajon and Ryan Powers in Political Research Quarterly</p