It is no surprise that there are political disagreements on climate protective measures. Parties differ in their assessment of which measures they consider to be effective, fair or economically acceptable. However, the question of whether climate change is mainly human-caused is not a matter of political preference, but a well-documented scientific fact. An international study involving researchers from the Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality" at the University of Konstanz now shows: Agreement with this fact does not just depend strongly on one's political orientation. In addition to this, the ideological divide among elected representatives is significantly wider than in the general population. On the political fringes, in particular, politicians' views diverge from those of their constituents.
After analyzing statements by 714 elected representatives and more than 18,000 residents of eight different countries, researchers concluded: "Politicians have significantly more polarized views on climate change. In concrete terms, this means that the difference between the positions of left- and right-wing representatives is almost three times greater than the difference between the views of left- and right-wing voters", explains Johannes Kotz, first author of the study and an academic staff member in the Department of Psychology at the University of Konstanz.
"Our results not only show that left- and right-wing representatives have different climate policy positions," adds Wolfgang Gaissmaier, professor of social psychology and a member of the Cluster of Excellence "The Politics of Inequality" at the University of Konstanz. "The differences begin with their assessments of the scientific basis. If even foundational facts are interpreted differently along political lines, this makes it more difficult to have a shared basis for political decisions."
For this reason, the findings also raise the question of political representation. Elected representatives should know the interests and preferences of their constituents – and translate these into political decisions. However, if the positions on the political fringes are more extreme than those of their constituents, this causes a gap in representation. "Views on climate change are not just abstract opinions that do not have political consequences. They are directly linked to whether or not one supports concrete measures", Johannes Kotz says. This is why it is particularly relevant that right-wing representatives are more sceptical of human-caused climate change than right-wing voters are. This additional gap can make it more difficult to implement climate policy.
Key facts
Communications Sustainability