As I have been saying for a while, there isn't a bigger story in environmental politics right now than the Prince Edward Island Green Party. In the midst of an election right now and stand a very good chance of forming government in two weeks time...1/ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Prin…
And this is in a first past the post system. A green government would be the first for any electoral system and likely signals even more Green Party gains in Canada over the coming months. Why?... 2/
As the Green experience iterative rounds of electoral success across the country, more and more individuals begin to believe that electing local Green MPs/MLAs is a viable use of their vote. Reshapes public expectations about collective voting behaviors...3/
Thus, a strong Green showing in PEI can help Greens in the current Nanaimo by-election, which then sets the party up for substantial gains during the Fall federal election. 4/4
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Been reading more and more takes that climate bill failed because of shifting public opinion: e.g. the NYT "reported" this week (without empirical evidence!) that the public has soured on climate as the economy weakened. Nonsense. A short 🧵 1/
This zombie idea gets rehearsed every couple months. The central thesis: the public has a finite pool of worry, so when the economy goes downhill, they privilege immediate "economic" security over long-term climate concerns. But is climate opinion really structured this way? 2/
Not really. Evidence mostly suggests the public rewards walking and chewing gum at the same time on climate. And, to state the obvious, Manchin didn't kill the climate bill in response to public opinion, in WV or anywhere. 3/
New research in @NatureClimate w/ @erickUdeM, @ProfKHarrison and I. Stadelmann-Steffen. Two countries have set up carbon tax + rebates: Canada + Switzerland. Have these rebates increased public carbon pricing support, as advocates hope? Not really. 1/🧵 nature.com/articles/s4155…
2/ The politics of carbon pricing are challenging, as @leahstokes and I have written about in the @BostonReview and as I've discussed in my book Carbon Captured. Key problem: carbon taxes make salient policy costs while keeping benefits hidden.
3/ Rebates promise to change this political economy. Redistribute carbon tax revenue through lump-sum dividends and you create a visible benefit. This builds a political support coalition (people like getting money!) And it makes carbon tax progressive. A win-win?
Exciting news! @MichaelAklin and my new provocation is out in @GepJournal. We make a simple but far-reaching claim. **Empirically, climate politics is NOT primarily about collective action or free-riding**. A quick 🧵on why we've all been prisoners of the wrong dilemma 1/
For decades now, we've all assumed that free-riding is the binding constraint on global climate politics. Google "climate change" and "free-riding", and it generates 18000+ unique hits. Economists mince few words about this. Here's a Nordhaus quote for flavor: 2/
The logic of free-riding seems powerful. No country can solve climate change alone. But acting is costly. So every country wants to free-ride off of other country's action. But then no-one has an incentive to act. 3/
Will climate change change political behavior? In new @apsrjournal article, @chadhazlett and I find that experiencing a wildfire drives pro-environmental voting - but only in Democratic areas. Short 🧵 1/ cup.org/309PWte
The politics of climate change politics is tough. Leaders need to impose short-term policy costs to deliver long-term climate benefits. Today, the impacts of climate change are impacting Americans. Will this break the climate policymaking stalemate? 2/
Research is pretty mixed on this topic, as I recently reviewed with @peterdhowe, @mudfire and Brittany Shield in ERL. Also, most work focusses on public opinion, not on the ground political behavior 3/ iopscience.iop.org/article/10.108…
My new book Carbon Captured is out! In it, I explain differences across countries in the timing and substance of their climate reforms. A quick 🧵here on one of the book's key arguments - something I call the logic of "double representation" 1/
Often, we talk about climate change as a left-right thing. But this doesn't line up with empirical reality of climate policy debates in most countries. We can't understand climate politics without recognizing this. 2/
The basic idea: climate change became an object of political conflict beginning in the late 1980s as climate science developed. But across advanced economies, political parties and economic interest groups were already well established 3/
I can't pull my mind away from the horrifying loss of life and land in 🇦🇺. Climate politics in Oz have been insane for decades. (The insanity gets a full chapter in my book). Will these fires change anything? Can they undermine the climate skeptics in power? A short 🧵1/
On the surface of it, it's hard to be hopeful. Current PM Morrison refuses to acknowledge that climate change is happening and wants to expand coal production. Here he is, no joke, bringing a lump of it into the Australian parliament. 2/
Kind of like that time when Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe threw a snowball inside the US Senate to disprove climate change. It was snowing outside, you see. 3/