Inequality, unequal treatment by the state, and public support for climate mitigation policies

Many scholars and commentators have posited that income inequality is making it more challenging to address climate change. The argument runs that people lower down the income distribution may be less willing to pay the costs associated with tackling climate change when they view society as highly unequal. In experimental work that informs people about rising income inequality in recent decades, however, the effect on policy preferences is often muted or non-existent—including on support for carbon taxation. We argue that the role of the state is crucial in order to unpack this puzzle. When the state is seen to have played a central role in rising inequalities, then the public find this unfair and become less supportive of bearing the large fiscal costs associated with climate mitigation policies. We test our argument by carrying out an information-provision experiment in the United Kingdom and the United States, drawing on quota-representative samples of around 4,000 respondents from each country. The paper aims to shed new light on the link between perceptions of inequality and support for climate mitigation policies. It also yields insights for politicians and policymakers about how to shore up broad-based public support for the climate mitigation policies in an era of high inequality.