You can’t watch TV these days without being confronted with the way the environment is endangered. This is not to say everyone is on board. The state of the environment is a deeply divisive issue. Environmental groups of varying degrees of radicalism regularly protest what they see as dangerous environmental destruction or dire threats; environmental skeptic groups are no less vigorous, calling environmentalism a form of religious or political fanaticism; international meetings are held to attempt to reach agreement on measures to take; scientists and political pundits issue warnings, and less frequently denials; economists are divided on the economic impact of environmental issues, and much more. Few issues separate the political left and right as strongly as this one. If ever there was a controversial issue that could do with some light being shed on it, this is it. The Smart Vote is one way to illuminate the issues.
Fortunately the General Social Survey asks a number of environmentally relevant questions. I had a look at them all and using multiple regression analysis I assessed which factors play a significant independent role in determining attitudes toward a host of environmental issues. There are a large number of questions so I am not going to provide a table of regression results but will simply list those environmental issues that have a significant independent association with a particular factor included in the regression. The independent variables in each regression were – IQ, education level, log of personal income, gender, age, year of the survey and political ideology.
Let us start with political ideology.
Political Ideology and environmental attitudes
Below are the attitudes which were favored by conservatives relative to liberals in the USA.
- There are more important things in life than saving the environment.
- We worry too much about the environment.
- We worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Economic growth does not always harm the environment.
- Deny that almost everything we do harms the environment.
- Deny that the environment affects their everyday life.
- Deny that nuclear power is dangerous either for the environment or for their family.
- Deny that warming from climate change is dangerous for the environment.
- They are not opposed to eating genetically modified foods.
- Deny that economic progress depends on the state of the environment.
- America needs economic growth in order to protect the environment.
- The US isn’t doing too little to protect the environment.
- Americans are doing enough to protect the environment.
- Government spending on the environment should not increase.
- Spending on improving and protecting the environment is not too little.
- Do not do what they can to help the environment.
- Consider it too difficult for them to do something about the environment.
- Not willing to accept a cut in living standards to help the environment.
- Not willing to pay higher prices to help the environment.
- Not willing to pay higher taxes to help the environment.
- Has not given money to an environmental cause.
- Does not belong to an environmental group.
- Government is not responsible for making business less destructive to the environment.
- Government should not make laws for the protection of the environment, rather people and business should decide for themselves how to do so.
- International bodies should not enforce environmental protection.
- We don’t need international agreements for environmental problems.
- In order to get business to protect the environment they favor the use of education and the tax system to fines.
- In order to get people to protect the environment they favor using education over the tax system.
Conservatives don’t think environmental issues are problems that pose a danger to the environment, the economy or their family; nor do they think they justify greater expense, government interference or personal sacrifice. Liberals tend to take the opposite view.
Studies have found that scientific knowledge does not lead to a convergence of conservative and liberal environmental opinion – rather it further hardens and polarizes attitudes. Obviously values and motivated reasoning – and not facts - are driving opinion here, and the force of these values are very strong.
Gender and Environmental Issues
Like political ideology gender seems to play a strong role in attitudes to the environment. Specifically women favor the following attitudes relative to men.
- There are not more important things in life than saving the environment.
- We don’t worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Economic growth always harms the environment.
- Almost everything we do harms the environment.
- Nuclear power is dangerous for the environment and for their family.
- Warming from climate change is dangerous for the environment.
- Genetically engineered crops are dangerous for the environment.
- They are opposed to eating genetically modified foods.
- Economic progress depends on the state of the environment.
- Spending on improving and protecting the environment is too little.
- In order to get business to protect the environment they favor the use of fines or education to using the tax system.
This list is a lot shorter than the one for political ideology but nevertheless women are much more inclined than men to perceive danger to the environment from a wide variety of sources, and to think we ought to be worrying about them.
Age and Environmental Issues
Given that generational gaps exist on many issues and that environmental issues are relatively recent it would be surprising if age wasn’t related to environmental attitudes, and indeed age is associated with the following opinions on environmental issues.
- We worry too much about the environment.
- We worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Economic growth does not always harm the environment.
- Deny that almost everything we do harms the environment.
- The environment does affect their everyday life.
- Deny that nuclear power is dangerous either for the environment or for their family.
- Economic progress depends on the state of the environment.
- Government spending on the environment should not increase.
- Spending on improving and protecting the environment is not too little.
- Business and government do more for the environment than people.
- Do what they can to help the environment.
- Consider it too difficult for them to do something about the environment.
- International bodies should not enforce environmental protection.
- We do need international agreements for environmental problems.
- Poor countries should not have to do less than rich countries to help the environment.
- In order to get business to protect the environment they favor the use of education to fines or using the tax system.
- In order to get people to protect the environment they favor the use of education to fines or using the tax system.
The young are more likely to perceive of progress, growth and nuclear power harming the environment and to think we should worry more about it, spend more on it and rely more on international pressure – particularly on wealthy countries. However they are less likely to try to do their bit. They have more faith in the efficacy of financial incentives than education to change behavior. As is so often the case, age has a similar (but milder) effect on attitudes as conservatism. The effect however is independent to that of political ideology.
The Trend in Environmental Attitudes
Over time there has been an increasing trend in the US to endorse the following attitudes.
- We worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Economic growth does not always harm the environment.
- America needs economic growth in order to protect the environment.
- Government spending on the environment should not increase.
- Spending on improving and protecting the environment is too little.
- We can save the environment even if others aren’t doing the same.
- Do not do what they can to help the environment.
- Not willing to pay higher prices to help the environment.
- Not willing to pay higher taxes to help the environment.
- Does not belong to an environmental group.
- Government should not make laws for the protection of the environment but let people decide for themselves how to do so.
Attitudes toward the environment, except toward more non-governmental spending, are becoming more conservative. Note this does not apply to an increase in personal willingness to spend more.
Income and Environmental Issues
Income often affects attitudes but surprisingly very few attitudes toward the environment proved to be independently associated with income. They were as follows.
- There aren’t more important things in life than saving the environment.
- We don’t worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Deny that nuclear power is dangerous either for the environment or for their family.
- They know whether their way of living helps or harms the environment.
- Do not consider it too difficult for them to do something about the environment.
- Belong to an environmental group.
- Poor countries should not have to do less than rich countries to help the environment.
- Government should make laws for the protection of the environment and not let people decide for themselves how to do so.
- In order to get business to protect the environment they favor the use of the tax system rather than education.
The wealthy are more aware of their personal environmental impact and are more active in environmental causes - in spite of being less likely to see progress or nuclear power as environmental threats.
Education and Environmental Issues
Education is another variable that frequently relates to
attitudes and behavior. Achieving highest
qualifications is related to the following attitudes
- We don’t worry too much about the environment.
- We don’t worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Economic growth does not always harm the environment.
- Deny that almost everything we do harms the environment.
- Deny that nuclear power is dangerous either for the environment or for their family.
- Deny that warming from climate change is dangerous for the environment.
- Genetically modified crops are not dangerous for the environment.
- Do what they can to help the environment.
- Knows if their way of living helps or harms the environment.
- Don’t consider it too difficult for them to do something about the environment.
- Can save the environment even if others aren’t doing the same.
- They are willing to accept a cut in living standards to help the environment.
- They are willing to pay higher prices to help the environment.
- They are willing to pay higher taxes to help the environment.
- Has given money to an environmental cause.
- Belongs to an environmental group.
- Government should make laws for the protection of the environment and not allow people to decide for themselves how to do so.
- In order to get people to protect the environment they favor using the tax system rather than fines.
- In order to get business to protect the environment they favor the use of the tax system over education or fines.
The well educated are more environmentally concerned and active, and are more likely to trust legislation over voluntary action by the general public – in spite of being less likely to attribute environmental harm to economic growth, nuclear power, genetically modified crops, climate change, or to many other things humans do.
The Smart Vote and Environmental Issues
Finally we get to the light intelligence shines on these issues – independently of the other factors. The attitudes that were significantly associated with higher intelligence were the following.
- We don’t worry too much about the environment.
- We don’t worry too much about progress harming the environment.
- Economic growth does not always harm the environment.
- Deny that almost everything we do harms the environment.
- Deny that nuclear power is dangerous either for the environment or for their family.
- Genetically modified crops are not dangerous for the environment..
- They are not opposed to eating genetically modified foods.
- Deny that economic progress depends on the state of the environment.
- America doesn’t need economic growth in order to protect the environment.
- Americans are not doing enough to protect the environment.
- Government spending on the environment should increase.
- Spending on improving and protecting the environment is too little.
- Poor countries should not have to do less to help the environment.
- Don’t consider it too difficult for them to do something about the environment.
- We can save the environment even if others aren’t doing the same.
- Knows if the way they live helps or harms the environment.
- Willing to accept a cut in living standards to help the environment.
- Willing to pay higher taxes to help the environment.
- Government should make laws for the protection of the environment and not allow business to decide for itself how to do so.
- In order to get people to protect the environment they favor using the tax system over fines.
- Government does more for the environment than does business.
It’s more intelligent to reject most green hysterias but nevertheless be aware of one’s own environmental impact and be optimistic about effective personal action, and to consider the environment something to worry about and doing and spending more to protect and help – including accepting significant financial sacrifices. It’s smarter to think government does more for the environment than business, and that it should make laws for business to do more.
It’s also instructive to look at those attitudes toward environmental issues for which intelligence is irrelevant.
The following environmental attitudes are not associated with intelligence.
- The environment affects one’s everyday life or whether there are more important things in life than saving the environment.
- Government is responsible for making business less destructive of the environment and the US state does enough to help the environment.
- International agreements are needed to help the environment and international institutions should enforce the rules.
- The general population does more for the environment than either the government or business.
- There is no way to decide between government making laws or letting people decide for themselves how to help the environment.
- Education isn’t preferable to fines or using the tax system to motivate people or business to help the environment, and there isn’t anything to choose between fines and the tax system for motivating business either.
- Doing what one can to help the environment, joining environmental groups, donating money to environmental causes or paying higher prices.
It isn’t necessarily intelligent to consider the environment the most important thing in life, to believe that it impacts your personal life or to actually donate money or time to environmental causes. Furthermore intelligence doesn’t shed any light on whether it is any business of the US government, or an international institution, to be involved in environmental action and has little to say about how much the general population is doing for, or how they should be encouraged to help, the environment. Finally it sheds no light on whether or not climate change is an environmental threat.
In sum it’s stupid to accept green hysterias but still smart to favor more concern about, and action and spending on, the environment, but it isn’t necessarily smarter to make the environment your dominant concern or even do anything about it personally. While it’s smarter to think governments do the most for the environment it isn’t necessarily smarter to think governments or international bodies should be involved.
Overall Conclusion
It’s liberal to be indiscriminately green and conservative to be indiscriminately anti-green, and even though the youth are greener in attitude the conservative attitude is becoming more fashionable in the US. In spite of the lower classes being more prone to perceive various things as being environmentally threatening, environmentalism is an upper class concern – those with more education and money are better disposed toward it and more involved. It’s a girly bias to be scared of environmental threats and manly bias to dismiss them.
One can see clear bias operating with gender and ideology, and to a large extent one can detect the imprint of self interest with class i.e. education and income. Hopefully most of the bias and interest effects have been stripped out of the Smart Vote by including these variables in the regressions.
So what does the ‘unbiased and disinterested’ Smart Vote say about environmental issues? Well it doesn’t lend support to either extreme of the environmental controversy. It says simply that the smart thing is for more people (not necessarily everyone or governments) doing something, and spending more, to help and protect the environment, but it would be stupid if that action and advocacy took the form of repudiating or resisting technological and economic progress.
Seems reasonable to me.