Public attitudes toward water management and drought in Texas

This material is based upon research conducted by the Institute for Science, Technology and Public Policy in The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. This research was supported by Texas Sea Grant under Award No. NA10OAR4170099 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce; by the Texas A&M University Office of the Vice President for Research; and the Institute for Science, Technology and Public Policy. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Texas Sea Grant, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or the Department of Commerce.Water management in Texas is increasingly salient as the population grows, water supplies continue to be taxed and the planet continues to warm, resulting in more severe, widespread, and frequent droughts in the state. Public support, though, is often essential for governments to enact large-scale projects, like those that may be needed to tackle water management issues. Given the challenges facing the state of Texas, surprisingly few studies explore public attitudes, preferences, and risk assessments about water-related resource allocations. Will the public act to direct or limit the actions of its elected officials on water issues? Is the public ready to consider policies, regulations, and expenditures concerning the potential impacts of increased drought frequency on Texas water resources? We report the results of 2 public opinion surveys of the citizens of Texas that focused on water management and drought issues. We found that the public is willing to support government efforts to manage water, but not if these efforts negatively affect the environment or agriculture

Public Attitudes toward Water Management and Drought in the United States

The final publication is available at http://link.springer.comWater management is becoming increasingly salient as climate change continues to alter the environment, resulting in more severe and frequent droughts. To address water management issues, large-scale projects may be needed. However, public support is often a prerequisite for governments at all levels to enact such projects. Given the growing importance of these issues, there are few recent studies that explore public attitudes, preferences, and risk assessments about water-related resource allocations. Will the public act to constrain the actions of their elected officials? Is the public ready to begin considering policies, regulations, and expenditures that address the potential impacts of increased drought frequency on local, state and national water resources? This research reports the results of two national public opinion surveys in the United States that focused on water management and drought issues. The results indicate that the public is willing to support government efforts to manage water, but not if they negatively affect the environment or agriculture. This material is based upon research conducted by the Institute for Science, Technology and Public Policy in The Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. This research was supported by Texas Sea Grant under Award No. NA10OAR4170099 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce; by the Texas A&M University Office of the Vice President for Research; and the Institute for Science, Technology and Public Policy. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Texas Sea Grant, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or the Department of Commerce

What Butterfly Effect? The Contextual Differences in Public Perceptions of the Health Risk Posed by Climate Change

The definitive version is available at www.mdpi.com/journal/climate.Abstract: One of the most difficult aspects of persuading the public to support climate change policy is the lack of recognition that climate change will likely have a direct impact on an individual’s life. Anecdotal evidence and arguments within the media suggest that those who are skeptical of climate change are more likely to believe that the negative externalities associated with climate change will be experienced by others, and, therefore, are not a concern to that individual. This project examines public perceptions of the health risk posed by climate change. Using a large national public opinion survey of adults in the United States, respondents were asked to evaluate the health risk for themselves, their community, the United States, and the world. The results suggest that individuals evaluate the risk for each of these contexts differently. Statistical analyses are estimated to identify the determinants of each risk perception to identify their respective differences. The implications of these findings on support for climate change policy are discussed

The public’s levels of trust in US government agencies can often be very different to their trust in government in general

With the recent of exposure of intelligence gathering by government agencies, public trust in government has suffered yet another blow. But are the levels of public trust in government reflected by trust in specific agencies? Using the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as a case study, Scott E. Robinson, Xinsheng Liu, James W. Stoutenborough, and Arnold Vedlitz find that members of the public make judgments about the trustworthiness of individual agencies that can differ from their feelings of trust in government. They also find that those that pay closer attention to issues of homeland security trust the DHS to a greater extent

Scope of Conflict, Risk Perceptions, and River Restoration: Does the Expansion of the Scope of Conflict Reinforce or Remove Group Biases?

The interest group literature consistently notes that groups usually “sing with an upper class accent.” This bias tends to influence the policy proposals they advance. Meanwhile, the scope of conflict literature indicates that when the scope of conflict increases, greater representation follows. This creates a theoretical conundrum. If groups are biased, does an increase in the number of groups involved in an issue lead to greater representation, or greater bias? To examine this question, we compare risk perceptions associated with an ongoing river controversy between its stakeholders and the public. We pool two public opinion surveys, one of stakeholders and the other of the public, and compare perceptions of risk across eight dimensions. The results indicate that there is greater congruence between the public and stakeholders on issues of lesser complexity. However, when there is greater complexity, group expertise appears to bias their perceptions of the problem. This indicates that the expansion of the scope of conflict can remove or mitigate group bias from the policy debate. This research for the project described was supported by the Idaho EPSCoR Program through the State Board of Education under Grant No. AHRC41

Human Rights, Incentivizing Behaviors, and Security: Attitudes on Immigration Reform

The issue of immigration and immigration reform has been highly salient since President Trump announced his candidacy in 2015. Since becoming President, there have been several high profile controversies regarding immigration policy. This project seeks to understand attitudes toward immigration reform, in light of this heightened level of attention. Specifically, we examine the strength of social contact theory when held up against risk perceptions. Previous research shows that social contact between groups is a strong determinant of society’s attitudes towards different matters. Risk perception theory is less researched, but it shows to be important as well. It states that fear drives attitudes and will supersede every other factor, even morality theory. Media is being used as a control because it plays a substantial role in the believability of either theoretical perspective due to the media portrayal of these immigration policies.We are using these theoretical perspectives to analyze and help explain societal views on the immigration policies of the opposition to separating children from their parents at the border, building a wall, and offering citizenship to undocumented immigrants who serve the country through military service. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a survey of 317 students at a mid-sized state university. Preliminary results indicate that social contact does not hold up against risk perceptions when predicting immigration reform attitudes