a report from national surveys on energy and...

IntroductionThe last decade has seen dramatic shifts in how various levels of government in the United States respond to climate change. A decade ago, climate policy was largely driven by states and localities, in some cases working collaboratively on a regional basis. That began to shift between 2009 and 2016. During this time, federal engagement in attempting to reduce greenhouse gas emissions expanded, addressing the electricity, transportation, and energy production sectors, while at the very same time a number of states and localities backtracked on earlier commitments.

Yet another shift has occurred in the early stages of the Trump presidency, with aggressive executive branch efforts to reverse relatively new federal regulatory initiatives. The Administration has also hinted at attempts to constrain state authority in some key areas despite public declarations of support for the concept of cooperative federalism that devolves considerable latitude to states for policy design and implementation.

This latest federal pivot has been matched with pledges by many state and local leaders to sustain and expand their efforts to lead on climate mitigation, potentially filling any gaps led by federal level retreat. Ironically, states—and now local governments—are once more largely driving US climate policy as the intergovernmental odyssey continues on this issue.

In this chapter, we examine whether American public opinion about the proper role for various governmental levels to address climate change has shifted over the last decade. Using time-series data, we consider which levels of government Americans believe bear the responsibility to address climate change, and how urgently they believe that action is needed. We also report on whether they believe their state should act to address carbon emissions even if the federal government— or neighboring states—do not, and whether they support policies that allow states to set stricter carbon standards than those set at the federal level.

NSEE @10Since 2008, the University of Michigan and

Muhlenberg College have conducted the

National Surveys on Energy and Environment

(NSEE), a biannual national opinion survey on

energy and climate policy. To celebrate the

tenth anniversary of the survey, throughout

2018 NSEE will be releasing a series of reports

highlighting the breadth of topics we have

covered over the past decade. These reports

present time-series data on how American

attitudes about energy policy and climate

change have changed from 2008 to 2017, as

well as comparisons to Canadian opinion,

collected through a parallel survey conducted

by researchers at the University of Montreal.

You can find previous reports in this series at:

www.closup.umich.edu/nsee

Should State and Local Governments Address Climate Change? 10 Years of Climate Federalism in the NSEE

Issues in Energy and Environmental Policy Number 34 | March 2018

A Report from


University of Michigan

Authors Sarah B. Mills • Natalie B. Fitzpatrick • Barry G. Rabe • Christopher Borick • Erick Lachapelle

2 www.closup.umich.edu/nsee


Figure 1a. Responsibility of each level of government to act to reduce global warming, Fall 2017a

No responsibility

Not sure

41%

37%

19%

34%

35%

28%

52%

27%

17%

Federal (n=929)

Local (n=929)

State(n=929)

4% 4%3%

Some responsibility

A great deal ofresponsibility

Source: Fall 2017 NSEE. Survey data tables for all NSEE waves are available at http://closup.umich.edu/national-surveys-on-energy-and-environment

a Question text: “For each level of government that I mention please tell me if it has a great deal of responsibility, some responsibility, or no responsibility for taking actions to reduce global warming….…The Federal Government, … State Governments, … Local Governments.”

Americans Put Most Responsibility of Climate Action on Federal and State Governments, but Also See Role for CitiesA majority of Americans believe that all levels of government—federal, state, and local—bear at least some responsibility for taking actions to reduce global warming. There is variation, however, in terms of how much responsibility the public believes should be applied to each respective level of government.

In general, Americans place a greater burden for action on higher levels of government. In the Fall 2017 NSEE, a full majority of Americans (52%) say that the federal government bears a great deal of responsibility for acting on climate change. Only a plurality (41%) say the same about state governments, while only 34% say this about local governments such as cities and counties (see Figure 1a). While there are roughly the same proportion of Americans who see no role for federal (17%) and state (19%) governments, over a quarter (28%) say the same about local governments. Time-series data from the NSEE finds that this has been relatively consistent over time with no clear pattern of shifts in opinion (see Appendix A).

The same general pattern—of greater burden placed on higher levels of government—holds true regardless of political affiliation, though Democrats are significantly more likely to see a role for all levels of government than Republicans (see Figure 1b). In Fall 2017, a plurality of Democrats say a great deal of responsibility lies with each level of government: federal (69%), state (52%) and local (44%). Republicans are also more likely to say a great deal of responsibility lies with the federal government (30%) rather than state (22%) or local (17%) governments. However, at least one-third of Republicans say that each level of government bears no responsibility.

3


Figure 1b. Responsibility of each level of government to act to reduce global warming, Fall 2017, by political affiliationa

32%

37%

6%

32%

30%

6% 5%

33%

37%

22%

35%

32%

17%

46%

28%

44%

17%

29%

17%

36%

44%

36%

16%

50%52%

34%

10%

19%

69%

7%5% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3%

Republican Independent Democrat

Federal (n=270)

State(n=271)

Local(n=271)

Federal (n=266)

State(n=266)

Local(n=265)

Federal (n=217)

State(n=217)

Local(n=217)

No responsibility

Not sure

Some responsibility


Source: Fall 2017 NSEE

Report Highlight: Republican Reactions to Federal Emissions Plans

Though Republicans see a smaller role for governmental action on climate change than do Democrats, the NSEE

has found that a majority of Republicans support a number of federal climate policy proposals. In spring 2013, as the

EPA was considering its strategy for addressing climate change in the electricity sector, the NSEE found that 51% of

Republicans said they wanted their state to cooperate with the EPA in reducing emissions from industrial sources.²

Once the federal government under the Obama Administration officially announced details for its chosen approach—

the Clean Power Plan (CPP)—the NSEE asked specifically about it on two subsequent surveys. The Fall 2014 NSEE

found that 63% of Republicans—and 73% of all Americans—said they supported federal government regulations on

new power plants, while 60% of Republicans—and 67% of all Americans—said they supported the CPP.³ At that same

time, however, a majority (52%) of Republicans said that their state should delay creating a CPP compliance plan until

more is known about the plan. Shortly after the CPP was officially rolled out amid major national media coverage, the

Fall 2015 NSEE found 58% of Republicans wanted their state to submit its own emissions reduction plan to the federal

government (compared to 54% overall), while only 10% of Republicans preferred that their state refuse to submit a plan

and instead sue the federal government to attempt to delay or reverse the CPP (compared to 6% nationwide).4 Further

analysis of partisan attitudes toward the CPP and state policies to comply with it are available on the CLOSUP website at:

http://closup.umich.edu/files/ieep-nsee-2015-fall-clean-power-plan.pdf.



That Republicans see less of a role for governmental responsibility for acting to reduce climate change is likely the result of two factors. The largest factor is that those who believe climate change is primarily caused by human activity are more likely to see a greater role for each level of government in mitigating its effects (see Figure 2a), and there is much lower acceptance of anthropogenic climate change among Republicans than Democrats.4 However, even when one accounts for belief in climate change, Republicans consistently see a smaller role for government actors than do Democrats. For example, among those who attribute climate change primarily to human activity, 63% of Democrats and just 47% of Republicans believe the state government bears a great deal of responsibility to act (see Figure 2b). This NSEE finding is consistent with a large body of research finding higher Republican opposition to governmental action on a range of issues.

Figure 2a. Responsibility of each level of government to act to reduce global warming, by stance toward climate changea,b&c

35%

28%

5%

25%

18%

6% 5%

51%

32%

11%

52%

28%

9%

58%

36%

30%

19%

37%

21%

46%

35%

42%

21%

43%48%79% 62% 50%

47%

17%

32%

37%

11%

38%

57%

2%2%

5%1% 2% 1% 3% 1%

Climate is NOT changingClimate change caused by natural patternsClimate change caused by a combination of human activity and natural patterns

Federal (n=164)

State(n=163)

Local(n=164)

Climate change caused by human activity

Federal (n=326)

State(n=327)

Local(n=326)

Federal (n=106)

State(n=107)

Local(n=107)

Federal (n=170)

State(n=169)

Local(n=170)

No responsibility

Not sure

Some responsibility


4%1%

4%1%2%

Note: Stance toward climate change is a combination of belief in climate changeb and cause of climate changec

Figure 2b. Responsibility of state government to act to reduce global warming, by party affiliation and stance toward climate changed,b&c

Climate is NOT changingClimate change caused by natural patterns

Climate change caused by a combination of human

activity and natural patterns

Climate change caused by human activity

47%

42%

5%

31%

23%

4% 6%

42%

38%

19%

38%

28%

8%

58%

11%

30%

45%

65%

47%

40%

14%

55%63%

31%

4%1% 5%

Democrat(n= 140)

Republican (n=43)

Democrat(n= 42)

Republican (n=20)

Democrat (n=19)

Republican (n=26)

Democrat (n=21)

Republican (n=86)

No responsibility

Not sure

Some responsibility


Source: Fall 2017 NSEENote: Stance toward climate change is a combination of belief

in climate changeb and cause of climate changec

b Question text (belief in climate change): “From what you’ve read and heard, is there solid evidence that the average temperature on earth has been getting warmer over the past four decades?”

c Question text (cause of climate change): “Is the earth getting warmer because of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, or mostly because of natural patterns in the earth’s environment?” While asked as a two-option close-ended question (i.e., human activity or natural patterns), interviewers record when respondents volunteer that that climate change is a “combination of human activity and natural patterns.”

d Question text: “For each level of government that I mention please tell me if it has a great deal of responsibility, some responsibility, or no responsibility for taking actions to reduce global warming…. State Governments.”

5


Canada Corner : Perception of Government Roles in Addressing Global WarmingSince 2011, the Canadian Surveys on Energy and the Environment (CSEE) have served as a sister survey to the NSEE, fielding a number of identical questions in Canada. These surveys provide a unique comparative perspective on public attitudes toward climate change and energy issues in the United States and Canada. Comparison of these two energy-intensive, tightly integrated economies has revealed intriguing similarities and differences in the attitudes held by residents living in these neighboring federations over the years.

Like the United States, Canada is a highly decentralized federal system. The Canadian constitution grants numerous powers to the provinces that are relevant to climate policy, including in the areas of transportation, land use, and energy. This constitutional division of powers and the shared responsibility provinces have with the federal government for matters pertaining to the environment raises the question of which level of government should lead on climate action while also creating the potential for governments to shirk on their responsibilities. Since first rising on the government agenda in the late 1980s, subsequent federal governments in Canada have struggled to implement meaningful climate policies at the national level, a vacuum filled by several provincial governments that have implemented innovative climate policies – including carbon pricing – ahead of the federal government.

In this context, the January 2011 CSEE and September 2010 NSEE fielded a number of identical questions measuring the perceived roles and responsibilities of various levels of government in Canada and the United States in dealing with the problem of climate change. These surveys found that while Canadians (70%) and Americans (62%) largely agreed that sub-national governments should act to address climate change “if the federal government fails to address the issue…” Canadians were much more likely than Americans to attribute a great deal of responsibility to all levels of government (see figure below).

LocalState/ProvincialFederal

36%

52%

2%

37%

35%

5%

23%

42%

42%

13%

37%

29%

30%

9%

43%

22%

8%

24%

29%

65%

5%

Canada(n= 1,214)

United States (n=914)

Canada(n= 1,214)


Canada(n= 1,214)


No responsibility

Not sure/refused

Some responsibility


3% 5%2%

Question text: “For each level of government that I mention please tell me if it has a great deal of responsibility, some responsibility, or no responsibility for taking actions to reduce global warming….…The Federal Governments, … Provincial Governments, … Local Governments.”

Source: United States: Fall 2010 NSEE; Canada: 2011 CSEE

While Canadians’ placement of greater levels of responsibility on all levels of government to address climate change reflects core differences in Canadian and American political culture, the public in both countries tends to attribute greater responsibility to higher levels of government. Indeed, whereas a majority of Canadians (65%) and a plurality of Americans (43%) place “a great deal of responsibility” on the federal government, relatively fewer Canadians (42%) and Americans (29%) place the same level of responsibility on local governments. A greater discrepancy between the level of responsibility attributed across levels of government in Canada than in the US also reveals an interesting feature of Canadian public opinion; namely, a tendency to place a relatively larger burden on the federal, relative to other, levels of government.



Most Americans Think Urgent Government Action is Required, though the Level of Urgency Differs Among Some GroupsMost Americans want government action on climate change—and at all levels of government—but how urgent do they consider the problem to be? Over the course of the last decade, the NSEE has found roughly 70% of Americans who said they believe in climate change also said that the government must promptly act to address it (see Figure 3a). In Fall 2017, this measure hit a decadal high with 76% of American climate believers saying immediate action is required. It is unclear whether this is a blip in the data or is a reaction to federal steps to roll back climate commitments.

However, as with the question of which level of government bears responsibility to act, there are stark differences based on what the respondent believes is causing climate change (see Figure 3b). Among those who say climate change is caused by human activity, support for immediate action has been consistently high over the last decade and growing; in Fall 2017, a decade-high 93% of this group say immediate government action is required. By contrast, among those who believe climate change is primarily caused by natural patterns, less than half believe the government should act immediately. In Fall 2017, 42% of those who say climate change is caused by natural causes say that immediate action is required, a significant increase from a low of 24% in Spring 2012, but not as high as in Spring 2010 (46%).

To a lesser extent, there is divergence along political lines (see Figure 3c). Among Republicans who believe the earth is warming, roughly half have said that the government should act to address climate change immediately, including 55% who answered that way in Fall 2017. Among Democrats who say they believe the earth is warming, the number favoring immediate government action had hovered around 80%, but it registers in at a high of 88% in Fall 2017.

7


Figure 3a. Whether global warming requires immediate government actiona

No

66% 66%

25%

76%

18%25%

72%

17%

6%

67%

26%19%

10% 12% 7% 9% 9% 6%

70%

Fall 2017 (n=649)

Spring 2013 (n=542)

Spring 2012 (n=472)

Spring 2011 (n=400)

Spring 2010 (n=369)

Fall 2008 (n=435)

Yes

Not sure

Source: Fall 2008 – Fall 2017 NSEE wavesNote: This question was only asked of respondents who said there was evidence of global warming.

Figure 3b. Percentage that say “yes” global warming requires immediate government action, by cause of climate changee,c

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

10%

30%

50%

70%

90%

Human activity

Fall 2008 Spring 2010 Spring 2011 Spring 2012 Spring 2013 Fall 2017

A combination Natural patterns

Note: “No” and “not sure” responses not shown. Note: See Note 5 on page 13 for the sample size for each of the groups shown in the figure.

Figure 3c. Percentage that say “yes” global warming requires immediate government action, by party affiliatione

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

10%

30%

50%

70%

90%

Democrat


Independent Republican

Note: “No” and “not sure” responses not shown. Note: See Note 6 on page 13 for the sample size for each of the groups shown in the figure.

e Question text: “Do you or do you not think global warming requires immediate government action?”



A Majority of Americans Want Their State to Act on Climate even if the Federal Government—or their Neighbors—Don’t Given this sense of urgency that most Americans feel to address climate change, it is perhaps unsurprising that though Americans think the federal government has a greater responsibility to address climate change than other levels of government, they believe that states should step up if the federal government fails to act. While less than a majority of Americans (41%) think that their state has a great deal of responsibility to act to address climate change (recall Figure 1a), 65% say that if the federal government fails to address the issue of global warming, it is their state’s responsibility to do so (see Figure 4a). Time series NSEE data find that this number has remained consistent over time (see Appendix B). Furthermore, NSEE responses to this question follow the same basic trend of Democrats and those who attribute climate change to human causes more in support of states filling the federal void than Republicans and those who do not accept anthropogenic climate change (recall Figure 3b).

Those who feel the strongest about states having a responsibility to step up, though, are those who feel that their state has already felt the effects of climate change. In Fall 2017, 89% of those who strongly agree that their state has already been negatively affected by global warming think their state has a responsibility to act (see Figure 4b). By contrast, those who strongly disagree that their state has felt negative impacts are most likely to disagree (71%) that their state has a responsibility to act absent federal action, but even so, 26% do think their state should act.

State “We’re Still In” Pledges and a Moral Obligation to Act

American support for states to fill a federal void on climate action has recently played out on the international stage, as

many states—and even more cities—have pledged to uphold carbon reductions consistent with the Paris international

climate agreement after President Trump began the process to formally withdraw the U.S. from the pact.7

While the NSEE has not asked specifically about these “We’re Still In” pledges, prior NSEE surveys have found evidence

that a majority of Americans support the American involvement in international climate treaties and a significant—and

growing—majority believe the U.S. has a moral obligation to act. In Fall 2017, 70% of Americans say they agree with

the statement that “rich countries like the U.S. have a moral obligation to show international leadership by reducing

their greenhouse gas emissions.” This is up from 57% who agreed with the same statement when asked in Fall 2013.

Research Highlight: Americans (and Canadians, too) willing to act even ahead of other nations

The idea that Americans are willing to act on climate even if others don’t also plays out at an international level. An

experiment, run both in the US and Canada on the Fall 2013, aimed to understand if public support for international

climate action was contingent upon China also acting. The results, published in the journal COSMOS,8 found:

• Americans were less supportive of signing on to an international climate treaty than Canadians

• Support for international climate action in both Canada and the U.S. was not conditional on the actions of China

9


Figure 4a. Agree/disagree state has responsibility to act if federal government doesn’t, Fall 2017f

38%

41% 35%

25%

20%

10%

20%

16%

49%4%

20%

18%

34%

48%

36%

6%

17%

13%

31%24%

6% 15% 17%

5%3%3%4%

4%

4%5%5%

2%

36%

41%

32%

33%

12%

18%

39%

6%9%

Climate is NOT changing (n=168)

Climate change caused by

natural patterns (n=105)

Climate change caused by a

combination of human activity

and natural patterns (n=164)

Climate change caused by

human activity (n=327)

Republican (n=215)

Independent (n=265)

Democrat (n=271)

Overall (n=926)

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Not sure

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

Source: Fall 2017 NSEENote: Stance toward climate change is a combination

of belief in climate changeb and cause of climate changec

Figure 4b. Agree/disagree state has responsibility to act if federal government doesn’t, by agree/disagree state has already felt effects of climate changef,g

Strongly agree state has responsibility to act

Somewhat agree

23%

14%

10%

61%

12%

31%

18%

15%

54%

32%

12%

5%

3%

6%

2%

3%2%7%

72%

17%

Not sure

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree state has responsibility to act

Strongly disagree state has felt effects

(n=166)

Somewhat disagree (n=108)

Somewhat agree (n=308)

Strongly agree state has felt effects

(n=221)

Source: Fall 2017 NSEE

f Question text: “Please identify your level of agreement with the following statements. For each statement please indicate if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. If the federal government fails to address the issue of global warming it is my state’s responsibility to address the problem.”

g Question text (agree/disagree state has already felt effects of climate change): “Please identify your level of agreement with the following statements. For each statement please indicate if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. My state has already felt negative effects from global warming.”



Leaving climate action to the states may mean that some states choose to act while others do not. Some have suggested that this may lead to leakage across states, with more carbon-intensive industries relocating in states with lax regulations, putting states that enact regulations at an economic disadvantage. Others have observed that a state-led approach may instead foster a race to the top for clean energy jobs and investment.9 In fact, a majority of Americans have consistently said that their state should take action on climate change, regardless of what neighboring states choose to do. Time series data from the NSEE has found 50 to 60% of Americans disagree that their state should not adopt climate policies unless neighboring states adopt similar policies (see Figure 5). By contrast, roughly a third of Americans have agreed their state should not act ahead of its neighbors, a position most commonly held by those who do not think that climate change is occurring.

Figure 5. Agreement/disagreement that state should not act on climate if neighboring states don’t also acth

13%

22%

14%

23%

20%

31%

8%

26%

27%

28%

27%

32%

20%

15%

22%

38%

11%

22%

25%

34%

5% 8% 7% 12% 10%

Fall 2013 (n=942)

Spring 2013 (n=850)

Fall 2010 (n=914)

Fall 2009 (n=973)

Fall 2008 (n=597)

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Not sure

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

Source: Fall 2008 – Fall 2013 NSEE waves

h Question text: “Please identify your level of agreement with the following statements. For each statement please indicate if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. My state should not adopt anti-global warming policies unless its neighboring states also adopt similar policies.”

11


Americans Say States Should be Allowed to Set Stricter StandardsFor some energy and environmental policies, the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate the issue, and state governments—though often called upon to implement and enforce these policies—cannot set stricter standards. For other environmental policies, the federal regulations act as a floor, and states are given some latitude to enact stricter regulations.

When asked about this concept both in abstract terms and in a specific policy arena, the NSEE has consistently found that a majority of Americans support the idea of giving states discretion to set higher standards than the federal government. When the Fall 2009 and 2010 surveys asked whether the federal government should allow states to adopt stricter standards for greenhouse gas emissions, 75% and 64% respectively agreed (see Figure 6a). In Spring 2017, the NSEE asked Americans about a long-standing and prominent example of this policy—a provision of the Clean Air Act that allows California to seek a waiver to set stricter standards for vehicle emissions than those set for the rest of the country. A majority (56%) of Americans say they support that policy, but this is a smaller majority than for previous questions that provided generic descriptions of policies providing state latitude. Notably, there is not necessarily much additional opposition—an identical 30% opposed the vehicle waiver question as opposed the generic question in Fall 2010. Instead, there is a relatively high proportion of Americans (14%) who volunteered that they were unsure how they felt about these waivers.

Across these three surveys, the NSEE has also found significant differences based on the respondent’s stance on whether or not climate change is occurring (see Figure 6b). On both the 2009 and 2010 surveys with the more generic question text, over 80% of those who saw evidence of warming agreed that states should be allowed to exceed federal standards. By contrast, among those who said the earth is not warming, less than half supported such a policy. On the question of California vehicle waivers in Spring 2017, 65% of those who believe that there is evidence of global warming say they support the policy compared to just 36% of those who see no evidence of warming.

33%

31%

17%

31%

25%

12%

18%

13%

40%

35%

8%

6%11%

14%6%

Strongly support

Somewhat support

Not sure

Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

California Waiver

Spring 2017 (n=836)

Generic

Fall 2009 (n=973)

Fall 2010 (n=914)

Spring 2017Fall 2010Fall 2009

California WaiverGeneric

7%6%

43%

22%

35%

6%20%

38%

13%

37%

28%

10%11%

13%

21%

15%

15%

36%

14%14%

22%

27%

4%

32%38%

44%

41%

5%

Climate is changing (n=643)






4% 5%

Strongly support

Somewhat support

Not sure

Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

7%

Figure 6a. Support/opposition to allowing states to set stricter standards on emissions, by survey wavei

Figure 6b. Support/opposition to allowing states to set stricter standards on emissions, by survey wave based on belief in climate changei,b

Source: Fall 2009, Fall 2010, and Spring 2017 NSEE wavesNote: The response scale used for the Fall 2009 & Fall 2010 question was Strongly agree, Somewhat agree, Somewhat disagree, Strongly disagree.

i Question text (Fall 2009, Fall 2010): “Please identify your level of agreement with the following statements. For each statement please indicate if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. The federal government should allow state governments to adopt stricter standards for the emission of greenhouse gases than any federal standards.”

Question text (Spring 2017): “For the last 50 years, a federal law has given California the ability to set stricter standards for vehicle emissions than those set in Washington, DC. This has regularly resulted in California’s standard becoming the national one over time. Would you say you strongly support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose the policy that allows California to set stricter standards for vehicles?”



ConclusionOver the past decade, the NSEE has found that American attitudes toward governmental action to address climate change have remained relatively steady. A majority believe that the government has a responsibility to act immediately and that all levels of government—federal, state, and local—bear at least some responsibility to take action. Most Americans want their state to act to address climate change, even if the federal government or neighboring states don’t act, and most also support states being allowed to set stricter standards on carbon emissions than those set by the federal government, for example, on vehicle emissions. Future reports in this series will consider how American attitudes toward specific policies to address climate change—from putting a price on carbon, to mandating the use of renewable energy, to increasing the tax on gasoline—have evolved over time.

MethodsThe NSEE is a biannual telephone survey of a random sample of adult (age 18 and over) residents of the United States. The sample size, balance of landline and cell phone numbers, and response rate varies from wave to wave. Methodological details about each of the survey waves are available on the CLOSUP website: www.closup.umich.edu/nsee.

The CSEE have (to date) been conducted concurrently with the fall wave of the NSEE. Like the American surveys, the CSEE surveys use random digit dialing (RDD) of landline and cell phones to generate a probabilistic, nationally representative sample of adult (18 and over) residents of Canada. The sample size, balance of landline and cell phone completes, and response rates vary from wave to wave and have been compiled on the CLOSUP website: www.closup.umich.edu/nsee.

Funding, Financial Disclosure, and Research TransparencyFunding for the NSEE surveys to-date has been provided by general revenues of the University of Michigan Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy, and the Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion. The authors did not accept any stipend or supplemental income in the completion of the survey or the reports from this survey. The NSEE is committed to transparency in all facets of our work, including timely release and posting of data from each survey wave, including providing online access to NSEE survey instruments, data tables, and downloadable datasets.

AuthorsSarah B. Mills ([email protected]) is a Senior Project Manager in the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP)

in the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan.

Natalie B. Fitzpatrick ([email protected]) is a Research Area Specialist in the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP) in the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy at the University of Michigan.

Barry G. Rabe ([email protected]) is J. Ira and Nicki Harris Professor of Public Policy at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, and Director of CLOSUP.

Christopher Borick ([email protected]) is Professor of Political Science at Muhlenberg College and Director of the Muhlenberg Institute of Public Opinion.

Erick Lachapelle ([email protected]) is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Montreal.

13


Notes1. Question text: “The Environmental Protection Agency or EPA has begun to use clean air regulations to reduce large industrial

sources of greenhouse gases. These regulations are generally implemented in collaboration with states. How should your state respond to this new federal regulation? Should they cooperate with the EPA or refuse to cooperate with the EPA on the new clean air regulations?”

2. Question text and breakdowns by political party are available at the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP) website: http://closup.umich.edu/issues-in-energy-and-environmental-policy/18/public-support-for-regulation-of-power-plant-emissions-under-the-clean-power-plan/

3. Question text and breakdowns by political party are available at the CLOSUP website: http://closup.umich.edu/issues-in-energy-and-environmental-policy/27/american-attitudes-about-the-clean-power-plan-and-policies-for-compliance/

4. Borick, C., Rabe, B. G., & Mills, S. (2017, June 12). Trump’s global warming views remain elusive, but not those of Americans. Brookings Institution. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2017/06/12/trumps-global-warming-views-remain-elusive-but-not-those-of-americans/

5. The sample size (n) for each of the groups shown in Figure 3b is:


Human activity 146 153 159 172 230 326

A combination 184 111 149 216 232 164

Natural patterns 81 69 76 71 62 106

6. The sample size (n) for each of the groups shown in Figure 3c is:


Democrat 161 157 174 185 232 229

Independent 112 105 95 134 151 191

Republican 81 59 80 69 99 103

7. See, for example, the United States Climate Alliance (https://www.usclimatealliance.org/) or We Are Still In (https://www.wearestillin.com/)

8. Tvinnereim, E., Lachapelle, E., & Borick, C. (2016). Is support for international climate action conditional on perceptions of reciprocity? Evidence from survey experiments in Canada, the US, Norway, and Sweden. COSMOS 12, 43-55. Retrieved from http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0219607716500038

9. We will explore attitudes about whether Americans see state climate action as an economic opportunity or liability in a future report on renewable energy policy.



Appendix A

Responsibility of Federal, State, and Local governments for addressing climate change, by survey wave

Federal government

Fall 2008 (n=601)

Fall 2009 (n=980)

Fall 2010 (n=914)

Fall 2011 (n=886)

Fall 2012 (n=916)

Fall 2017 (n=929)

A great deal of responsibility 47% 55% 43% 42% 51% 52%

Some responsibility 32% 31% 29% 31% 22% 27%

No responsibility 16% 10% 22% 22% 21% 17%

Not sure 5% 4% 5% 4% 6% 4%

State government

Fall 2008 (n=601)

Fall 2009 (n=980)

Fall 2010 (n=914)

Fall 2011 (n=886)

Fall 2012 (n=916)

Fall 2017 (n=929)




Not sure 4% 4% 5% 4% 6% 3%

Local government

Fall 2008 (n=601)

Fall 2009 (n=980)

Fall 2010 (n=914)

Fall 2011 (n=886)

Fall 2012 (n=916)

Fall 2017 (n=929)




Not sure 5% 6% 5% 4% 6% 4%

Question text: “For each level of government that I mention please tell me if it has a great deal of responsibility, some responsibility, or no responsibility for taking actions to reduce global warming….

…The Federal Government, … State Governments, … Local Governments.”

15


Appendix B

Agree/disagree state has responsibility to act if federal government doesn’t, by survey wave

Fall 2008 (n=601)

Fall 2009 (n=969)

Fall 2010 (n=915)

Spring 2013 (n=848)

Fall 2013 (n=944)

Spring 2017 (n=837)

Fall 2017 (n=926)

Strongly Agree 41% 27% 27% 24% 19% 38% 32%

Somewhat Agree 28% 39% 37% 24% 31% 28% 33%

Somewhat Disagree 9% 16% 13% 18% 17% 13% 12%

Strongly Disagree 17% 11% 21% 27% 27% 15% 18%

Not Sure 5% 7% 3% 7% 6% 5% 5%

Question text: “Please identify your level of agreement with the following statements. For each statement please indicate if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. If the federal government

fails to address the issue of global warming it is my state’s responsibility to address the problem.”



Reports from National Surveys on Energy and EnvironmentCoal, Natural Gas, and Pipelines: 10 Years of Fossil Fuels in the NSEE (January 2018)

A Majority of Americans Support Net Energy Metering (September 2017)

Strong Public Support for State-level Policies to Address Climate Change (June 2017)

Moving the needle on American support for a carbon tax (March 2017)

Fewer Americans Doubt Global Warming is Occurring (August 2016)

American Views on Fracking (May 2016)

American Attitudes about the Clean Power Plan and Policies for Compliance (December 2015)

Acceptance of Global Warming Rising for Americans of all Religious Beliefs (November 2015)

Acceptance of Global Warming Among Americans Reaches Highest Level Since 2008 (October 2015)

Belief in Global Warming Among Americans Gradually Increases Following the Winter of 2015 (July 2015)

Cap-and-Trade Support Linked to Revenue Use (June 2015)

Widespread Public Support for Renewable Energy Mandates Despite Proposed Rollbacks (June 2015)

Acceptance of Global Warming Among Americans Moderately Increases in Late 2014 (February 2015)

Public Support for Regulation of Power Plant Emissions Under the Clean Power Plan (January 2015)

Public Opinion on Hydraulic Fracturing in the province of Quebec: A Comparison with Michigan and Pennsylvania (October 2014)

Public Perceptions of Shale Gas Extraction and Hydraulic Fracturing in New York and Pennsylvania (September 2014)

Public Views on a Carbon Tax Depend on the Proposed Use of Revenue (July 2014)

American Acceptance of Global Warming Retreats in Wake of Winter 2014 (June 2014)

Public Opinion on Climate Change and Support for Various Policy Instruments in Canada and the US (June 2014)

The Decline of Public Support for State Climate Change Policies: 2008-2013 (March 2014)

The Chilling Effect of Winter 2013 on American Acceptance of Global Warming (June 2013)

Public Opinion on Fracking: Perspectives from Michigan and Pennsylvania (May 2013)

NSEE Findings Report for Belief-Related Questions (March 2013)

NSEE Public Opinion on Climate Policy Options (December 2012)

All NSEE reports are available online at: http://closup.umich.edu/national-surveys-on-energy-and-environment/

17


University of Michigan

The Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy (CLOSUP), housed at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, conducts and supports applied policy research designed to inform state, local, and urban policy issues. Through integrated research, teaching, and outreach involving academic researchers, students, policymakers and practitioners, CLOSUP seeks to foster understanding of today’s state and local policy problems, and to find effective solutions to those problems.

web: www.closup.umich.eduemail: [email protected]: @closupphone: 734-647-4091

The Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion (MCIPO) was founded in 2001 with a mission to conduct scientific based research related to public opinion at the local, state and national level.

Since its founding the MCIPO has focused its attention on measuring the public’s views on electoral and public policy issues with a concentration on environmental and health matters. The MCIPO regularly partners with academic, governmental and non-profit entities with the goal of providing high quality measures of public opinion that can inform the development of public policy and improve the understanding of the attitudes, knowledge and beliefs of Americans.

Web: https://www.muhlenberg.edu/main/aboutus/polling/Email: [email protected]: 484-664-3066

Regents of the University of Michigan

Michael J. BehmGrand Blanc

Mark J. BernsteinAnn Arbor

Laurence B. DeitchBloomfield Hills

Shauna Ryder DiggsGrosse Pointe

Denise IllitchBingham Farms

Andrea Fischer NewmanAnn Arbor

Andrew C. RichnerGrosse Pointe Park

Katherine E. WhiteAnn Arbor

Mark S. Schlissel(ex officio)

a report from national surveys on energy and...

Documents