Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/260857 
Year of Publication: 
2022
Series/Report no.: 
CESifo Working Paper No. 9727
Publisher: 
Center for Economic Studies and ifo Institute (CESifo), Munich
Abstract: 
Climate change policies have been rising to the top of the global political agenda, but how should governments finance them? Public economists propose solutions based on economic theory, but their political feasibility depends on voters’ support, and ordinary households often neglect economic theory and have different views about efficiency and fairness. We design a large-scale information experiment to assess a representative population’s beliefs about alternative forms of financing. We randomly provide information about which groups contribute more to or benefit from climate change and compare the support for alternative financing schemes across informed and uninformed consumers. Informed consumers strongly support the introduction of a VAT-style CO2 tax after learning that the rich contribute more to climate change than the poor, but do not support increasing taxes on older people when learning that they also pollute more. Moreover, consumers who learn that certain populations, due to luck, gain economically from climate change strongly oppose redistribution from gainers to losers of climate change. Consumers also oppose financing policies to fight climate change via public debt, implying higher costs for future generations. Market-based solutions, such as private insurance for those exposed to climate-change risk, are strongly opposed across the board.
Subjects: 
climate policy
fiscal policy
taxation
expectations
inequality
JEL: 
D64
D84
D91
F38
H23
Q54
Document Type: 
Working Paper
Appears in Collections:

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.