Balancing Act
Public support for Net Zero policies hinges on personal impacts
BALANCING ACT
Public support for net zero policies hinges on personal impacts
BALANCING ACT
Public support for net zero policies hinges on personal impacts
Framing policies in different ways changes support
People's understanding of net zero policies rests on the positive and negative impacts that they take into account when making judgements about them.
This survey asked the public how far they would support each of the policies when they were framed in different ways, to understand how people think about the pros and cons, and which arguments for or against are more persuasive. This provides valuable evidence for those engaging with the public about net zero policies. This includes indicating the importance of emphasising co-benefits, or indeed focusing on these benefits and promoting climate imperatives as the co-benefit, as well as engaging openly with the potential costs.
Positive and negative framings
Across the UK population on average, considering the positive personal impacts of a policy tends to boost support. Seven of the nine policies enjoy support from half or more of the UK public after people considered the positive impact and are supported more than opposed by most or all demographic groups. Overall, the majority still support enabling home energy efficiency and changing product pricing, even after considering negative personal impacts. Indeed, support for changing product pricing remains at a consistent level for both before and after considering the negative impact of the policy.
Across the UK population on average, considering the positive personal impacts of a policy tends to boost support.”
Unsurprisingly public support for net zero policies sees the greatest boost when people consider policies with positive impacts around potential cost savings. This is particularly the case with taxes on red meat and dairy, changing product pricing and EV subsidies. These policies see the largest increases versus initial support after considering positive cost impacts. The home energy efficiency policy is an outlier here, with the positive cost framing resulting in decreased levels of support (although it still enjoys majority support). However, this is a result of a higher proportion of people saying this impact is not applicable to them compared to other policies, rather than an increase in opposition. This may be because of the positive cost framing related to reduced mortgage costs, meaning it only applies to those who own their homes and have a mortgage. Considering positive impacts around convenience, such as it being easier to walk, cycle or wheel around a low-traffic neighbourhood, does also tend to lead to higher support, if more modestly.
Convenience has a greater role to play when looking at negative impacts, with:
- Frequent flyer levies, if taking an alternative to flying when travelling abroad that made your journey longer
- Phasing out gas boilers, if this meant making changes to the home such as replacing radiators
- Sustainable pensions, if this meant having to actively opt-out of a sustainable pension fund if that was not the type of fund you wanted to pay into
The drivers of net zero policy support
Groups that support all policies overall, regardless of whether the personal impact is positive or negative:
Educated to degree level or higher
Living in Affluent England (counties near to or around London like Surrey), business, education and heritage centres (larger cities throughout the UK of regional importance) and London Cosmopolitan (the 12 Inner London boroughs) areas
On the left of the political spectrum
A collectivist outlook on society
Worried about climate change
In general, support for policies after seeing the negative personal impacts is lower among:
Do not hold a degree
Social renters
The most income deprived
On the right of the political spectrum
Living in Services and Industrial Legacy areas (predominantly traditional mining areas like the Central Belt in Scotland, north of England and south Wales) and Urban Settlements (urban areas in England with younger populations and Newport in Wales)
An individualistic outlook on society
Not worried about climate change
In terms of age, the picture is mixed. Support is higher among younger people (under the age of 34) than older people (over the age of 55), regardless of the personal impact, for:
EV subsidies
Increasing vegetarian/vegan options in public food provisioning
Phasing out the sale of gas boilers
Ensuring access to sustainable pensions
Looking at older people, support is also lower among this group for three of these policies, regardless of personal impact (EV subsidies; gas boilers; and access to sustainable pensions). On the other hand, support is relatively lower among younger people than older people after considering the negative personal impacts of low traffic neighbourhoods, increasing vegetarian/vegan options, and supporting home energy efficiency improvements.
Factors affecting sustainable transport behaviour
The survey asked those who fly or drive what might encourage them to cut down on these behaviours to benefit the environment.
Among those who fly regularly (at least 2-3 times a year), it is clear that the cost and convenience of alternatives are important in encouraging behaviour change. As might be expected, frequent flyers are unlikely to change their behaviours if alternatives are more expensive or take longer. They would be more likely to fly less if they could save money on alternative modes of transport. However, when it comes to driving, behaviours may be harder to shift. Those who drive regularly (at least once a week) are divided on whether they would reduce the amount they drive even if there were cheaper alternatives available.
When it comes to driving, behaviours may be harder to shift. Those who drive regularly... are divided on whether they would reduce the amount they drive even if there were cheaper alternatives available
Who's on board with sustainable transport?
Those who are generally more likely to change their transport behaviours are from similar groups to those who are more supportive of net zero policies in general.
Those who are more likely to say they would change their behaviours are:
Under the age of 34
Educated to degree level or higher
Living in Business, Education, and Heritage Centres (larger cities throughout the UK of regional importance) and London Cosmopolitan (the 12 Inner London boroughs) areas
On the left of the political spectrum
Extremely or very worried about climate change
Those who are unlikely to do so tend to be:
Over the age of 55
Not worried about climate change
When specifically thinking about driving less, those living in rural areas are also less likely to change their behaviours. This may be due to a lack of a viable alternatives such as public transport where they live.
The power of positive messaging on net zero policies
As might be expected, talking about the potential positive impacts of net zero policies tends to boost public support for these policies, particularly where there may be a cost saving involved. This highlights the importance of talking about the co-benefits of climate action and net zero policies – perhaps even framing these as the primary benefit – to get the public behind them. This will be even more key when trying to encourage behaviour change, which may be tougher to shift. However, behaviour change also relies on removing frictions and barriers to change, which policy and decision makers must also remain mindful of. This is perhaps why we see a lower likelihood of changing driving behaviours among people in rural areas. In this case, individual behaviour change must also be enabled by providing viable, accessible alternatives for people, and engaging with their concerns about cost.
Individual behaviour change must also be enabled by providing viable, accessible alternatives for people, and engaging with their concerns about cost.”
