Political Behaviour/Sociology

F09(b) - Green Politics, Climate Changes and Political Behaviour

Date: Jun 13 | Time: 08:30am to 10:00am | Location: 680 Sherbrooke St. West 1085

Chair/Président/Présidente : Ommar Abbasi (Windsor University)

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Go Murakami (Ritsumeikan University)

Industry Identity, Industry Sympathy, and Attitudes Towards Energy Transition: Melanee Thomas (University of Calgary), Lori Thorlakson (University of Alberta), Brooks DeCillia (Mount Royal University)
Abstract: Dominant industries can, when politicized, become a key part of regionalism and regional identity. This is most clear for individuals directly employed in that dominant industry. However, research also suggests that empathetic association can produce strong effects on public opinion and political behaviour as well. Drawing on political science research investigating status threat, polarized partisanship, identity politics, rural resentment and sympathy, we develop new measures of explicit identification with oil and gas for those working in that industry, as well as industry sympathy for those who are not employed in oil and gas. Using data from a population-based survey experiment, we identify which factors best predict industry identity and sympathy, and then identify the effects of that factor with other covariates on attitudes about energy transition from fossil fuels towards more renewable sources of energy. We argue that industry identity serves as a type of place-based resentment (PBR). In this sense, place-based resentment predicts attitudes to energy transition

“Burning Down A Burning House”: Bases of Support for Environmental Political Violence in Canada: Alexis Bibeau (University of Virginia), Alexandre Pelletier (Université Laval), Hubert Cadieux (Université Laval)
Abstract: The question of “what can be done” has plagued ecological movements in recent years as climate change has started to have direct consequences on citizens worldwide. The looming threat of an impending climate catastrophe has compelled certain social movements to adapt their strategies, sometimes resorting to tactics such as industrial sabotage, vandalism, property damage, and even targeted violence against individuals. Despite these evolving approaches, we know little about public tolerance, or the lack thereof, for more extreme militant political actions by ecological groups. There is also a shortage of knowledge regarding public attitudes toward politically motivated property destruction, including industrial sabotage. This paper investigates the factors underpinning public tolerance for ecologically motivated political actions involving property damage, destruction, and violence. Our research employs a unique survey featuring an original individual-level measure of ecological preoccupation. It assesses attitudes toward 13 militant political actions, ranging from relatively low-intensity actions like signing a petition to high-intensity activities like sabotaging a pipeline. Our study reveals four key findings. First, tolerance for militant actions varies across different age groups. Second, public tolerance is linked to the perceived "intensity" of the militant actions. Third, respondents' degree of environmental preoccupation constitutes a central determinant of their tolerance for such activities. Finally, respondents' attitudes toward disruptive and destructive political actions are influenced by their attributions of responsibility for climate change, whether to citizens, government entities, or enterprises. Based on these findings, we posit the existence of a critical threshold of "tolerance," beyond which respondents are less inclined to support certain types of militant actions, regardless of their level of ecological preoccupation. Our research, therefore, suggests that a strong commitment to addressing climate change does not necessarily lead respondents to forsake their dedication to nonviolent political methods.

Fairness and Green Jobs as an Energy Transition Accelerator: Alexandre Gajevic Sayegh (Université Laval), Catherine Ouellet (Université de Montréal), Hubert Cadieux (Université Laval)
Abstract: Hypothesis: This paper takes place at the intersection of climate policy, climate justice and public opinion. It answers the following question: can fairness and green jobs reduce the social and political tension surrounding climate policy implementation, and thereby accelerate the green economy transition in Canada? The central hypothesis of this paper is the following: the inclusion of fairness measures in the green economy transition – especially by targeting workers in the most affected sectors (e.g. those in oil and gas sectors in Alberta and Saskatchewan) – will impact the political acceptability of climate policy. Test and methodology: This paper formulates just transition measures and then relies on unique survey data to test whether they increase the social acceptability of climate policy. It focuses on two key policies: carbon pricing and a fossil fuel phase-out. A set of survey questions compare social support for these two policies in Canada (a) with and (b) without accompanying fairness provisions for workers, such as green jobs creation, support for retraining and support for relocation. These comparisons cast light on the potential role of fairness as an accelerating device for climate action. For its preliminary results, this paper uses an exclusive survey (n = 1,500) conducted by the firm Synopsis in Canada between August 10, 2022 and August 15, 2022. Preliminary results: From the survey data, we observed that fairness measures and green jobs both increase the support for a higher price on carbon and for a faster decrease in the production of oil and gas.