Pathways to Progression? Participation Capacity, Perceptions of Inequality and Climate Policy Support

Public acceptance is pivotal for the success of societal decarbonization efforts. While existing research emphasizes the impact of concentrated costs of climate policy, this paper reframes distributive politics by shifting attention from who bears costs to who can access benefits and has feasible choices, that is, who can realistically act and benefit in climate policy. I conceptualize this as Teilhabemöglichkeit—i.e., citizens’ capacity to participate in the energy transition. Participation capacity encompasses feasible agency or access to benefits? Where participation routes are open, people have both private material gains and non-material rewards (efficacy, “doing one’s part”). Where routes are blocked—especially for renters or liquidity-constrained households—citizens face costs without agency, a configuration that increases perceptions of inequality, heightens perceived unfairness, and fosters opposition to climate policy. Overall,. I contend that the division cannot be solely attributed to income. In modern energy systems, so-called status quo advantages are intertwined with tenure (homeowner/renter), dwelling type (single-family/multi-unit), locality (urban/rural) or liquidity/credit constraints. I test this alternative mechanism leading to preferences to climate policy rollback or climate policy progression with a pilot study focusing on Germany. I address two main research questions: I first ask to what extent individual Teilhabemöglichkeit—measured both objectively and subjectively—predicts support for or opposition to climate policies in buildings, transportation, and electricity. Second, the study examines how these effects vary across social groups central to inequality in the transition: homeowners versus renters, single-family versus multi-unit dwellings, urban versus rural locations, and dependency on fossil fuels or long car commutes. The German pilot (N=1,000) field-tests a survey instrument that measures objective constraints (housing tenure, dwelling type); perceived participation capacity (eligibility, financing access); fairness and efficacy beliefs; and outcomes (policy support, rollback preferences). A policy vignette module varies participation attributes (e.g. renter eligibility, community energy options etc) to identify the causal leverage of design features on support. I am interested in the extent to which participation capacity influences policies support and rollback preferences, controlling for cost, ideology, trust and test how fairness and efficacy mediate the relationship. Conceptually, the pilot operationalizes Teilhabemöglichkeit as a distinct, policy-sensitive pathway from design to attitudes toward climate policy progression or backlash, complementing accounts that solely center on cost. Empirically, it delivers first evidence from Germany and will calibrate instruments for a larger cross-national study.