Environment-Economy and Health-Economy Trade-Offs? U.S. and India Public Opinion

• In Event: Assessing Environment-Economy Tradeoffs

Abstract

Policies to mitigate harms such as climate change and COVID-19 are often framed in opposition to economic growth. This perceived trade-off can be a barrier to effective policy action and can foster hostility towards mitigative efforts. Preferences regarding these trade-offs are likely to vary significantly within and across countries. To what extent do individuals in the U.S. and India agree with those trade-offs, and under what conditions do they support relevant policy interventions?

We compare public perceptions in the U.S. and India, two large countries that have been, and continue to be, impacted by extreme weather and COVID-19 but that vary in income level and historical and projected contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. We compare responses from an original survey with over 9,000 participants in India, run between April 2021-August 2021, and two waves of surveys with over 4,000 participants in the US, run between October 2020-November 2020 and March 2021-May 2021.

Most respondents prioritized the environment over the economy in both India (71%) and the U.S. (58-60%). However, most U.S. respondents prioritized public health measures over the economy (64-67%), while 32% prioritized public health in the India sample. In both contexts, we find that negative immediate experience with COVID-19 or extreme weather is associated with prioritization of the economy over public health or climate policy. Severe extreme weather impacts also increase support for compensating communities most affected by climate change but generally not for mitigation actions. On the other hand, we find that worry and attribution of extreme weather to climate change are important predictors of support for both compensation and mitigation efforts.

These findings highlight the importance of considering and shaping perceived short-term costs and benefits when introducing long-term mitigation policies, especially among those who may be suffering the economic impacts of a recent hazard. We leverage paired large-scale surveys across two countries that are critical actors in global governance of climate change and public health to contribute to our broader understanding of public opinion and perceived environment-economy and health-economy trade-offs. These findings have implications for the way that domestic public opinion could shape climate compensation and mitigation policies at national and global scales.

Authors

• Sara Constantino, Northeastern University

• Alicia Dailey Cooperman, George Washington University

• Dan Ziebarth, George Washington University