Difficult to think how you would test the claim: democracies are generally richer, and richer countries have different climate preferences and capabilities. Rich non-democracies also tend to be natural resource rich, which further shifts preferences
Abstracts from papers in @lfbeisermcgrath 's reading list (rl.talis.com/3/rhul/lists/9…) suggest democracies are better at making commitments to climate change and sometimes better at reducing emissions. So there you go.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In response to UCU's Marking and Assessment Boycott (MAB), my employer @RoyalHolloway has decided to implement emergency regulations which in my view seriously call into question the rigour of degrees awarded (1/7)
The regulations include allowing marks for a module to be scaled proportionately (you did 50% of the coursework; that counts for 100%) (2/7)
(cont.) to permit an unlimited number of "allow" outcomes for modules (previously used where sickness or other extenuating circumstances affected students' performance) (3/7)
Everyone knows the most fun way to watch the World Cup is to support the more democratic nation in each game. So here, thanks to @vdeminstitute data, is your group-by-group rundown! (1/n)
We start in Group A, where the Netherlands is clearly in pole position, and Qatar clearly in last place (2/n)
In Group B, England and Wales are in a dead heat (until and unless V-Dem produces estimates of sub-state democracy), with Iran placing last. (3/n)
MRP works by modelling responses as a function of different demographic and political characteristics, and then making predictions for different voter types (2/15)
It works well when responses can be accurately predicted by these characteristics, or when you have a stupidly large sample size (3/15)
Jeremy Pocklington said that ministers had ignored civil service advice concerning the £3.9bn Towns Fund, and had instead applied [ahem!] "their own qualitative assessment" (3/n)
The basis for the claim is that the proportion of mask-wearers who hate, resent or think badly of non-mask wearers (58%) is greater than the proportion of Remainers who think badly of Leavers (33%) (p. 11 of report) (2/n)
First problem with this: in order for something to be divisive, it's got to divide society, and the more evenly it divides society, the more divisive it is. But the (short) report doesn't show what % of the population wear a mask. (3/n)